By Aygun Badalova

Growing demand and slower than previously expected non-OPEC supply growth will eliminate the existing oversupply and lead to a more balanced market, which, in turn, will provide support to oil prices, OPEC said in its World Oil Outlook (WOO), published on December 23.

OPEC forecasts oil prices to reach $70 a barrel by 2020.

In the Outlook OPEC Reference Basket (ORB) is assumed to average $55 a barrel during 2015 and to resume an upward trend in both the medium – and long-term. ORB is expected to reach $80 a barrel by 2020.

The price of the ORB in real terms is assumed to rise from more than $70 a barrel in 2020 to $95 a barrel in 2040.

While the average price of the OPEC Reference Basket during the first half of 2014 was over $100 a barrel, it dropped to less than $60 a barrel in December 2014 and has averaged close to $53 a barrel in the first nine months of 2015.

Global oil prices plunged from about $108 in the first half of 2014 to below $40 currently due to glut in markets.

OPEC members failed to reach an agreement on production ceiling on Dec. 4.

As an integral component of security studies, military reforms define the various dimensions of a country’s strategic calculus. This strategic calculus entails countries’ perceived national interests and an assessment of their security environment. As such, a reorganization in the military set-up bears a direct causal relationship with the operational doctrine of the armed forces. However, when this restructuring is undertaken by an emerging power with communist political ethos, military reforms additionally serve to reflect the country’s approach towards the existing world order. Furthermore, due to the intrinsic association between military power and political narrative in such countries, changes in the institutional structure of the armed forces underscore the evolving dynamics of civil-military or party-military relations.

On November 26, China unveiled its plans to reform its armed forces by 2020 by reorganizing the current military administration structure and command system. In addition to advancing PLA’s operational capabilities, the proposed reforms are patterned along the ongoing process of centralization of State authority under Xi Jinping as the central theme of China’s emerging political landscape. Inherent to this process is a template of civil-military relationship with its thrust upon establishing ‘absolute leadership’ of the Party as the principle statute of China’s political edifice. Therefore, the present reforms need to be studied as marking a significant event in this systemic progression.

Though the maxim of the Party’s control over the armed forces was enshrined by Mao in China’s political doctrine, the principle has received renewed traction under Xi Jinping. This reassertion is manifested through persistent calls to the PLA to maintain “correct political direction,” and an ever increasing emphasis upon the importance of “regulating power within the military”. Intricately linked to these developments is the much-debated anti-corruption campaign of the current leadership.

The process towards restructuring the PLA began with the creation of the Small Leading Group for deepening Reform of National Defence and Military in March, 2014. Established as a sub-committee of the Central Military Commission (CMC), the group is chaired by Xi Jinping. The strategic vision of this body and its orientation towards reinforcing political supremacy over the armed forces is contained in its declared goal of building an army “that obeys the Party’s command, is capable of winning battles and has a sound work style”. The proposed reforms strive to achieve this mandate by yet again proclaiming CCP’s complete authority over the military.

With the fall of several high ranking “tigers”, Xi’s anti-corruption campaign has launched a covert attack upon the patron-protégé syndicates that define the contours of China’s political structure. As such, the campaign has generated much turbulence within the Chinese military echelons. Signs of a simmering conflict had first surfaced during Xi Jinping’s visit to India in September, 2014. On being asked about the ongoing incursions in the Chumar sector by the PLA, the all-powerful President is believed to have expressed complete ignorance.

Moreover, in a meeting convened upon Xi’s return to Beijing, the military was ordered to “follow the instructions of President Xi Jinping”. It is pertinent to note here that in March 2014, Gen. Xu Caihou was placed under investigation for corruption. As a former Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission, Xu was the first high-ranking PLA official to get implicated under the anti-corruption campaign. The apparent link between these events points towards the growing unrest in the military against Xi’s moves. Though not overtly stated, the issue of internal resistance to the reforms was implicit in Xi’s assertion that “high-ranking military officials must take the lead to support the reform and defend the authority of the central leadership”.

To further strengthen the anti-corruption drive, the reforms propose to establish a new discipline inspection commission within the CMC. Along with this, the CMC will also have an audit office and a political and legal affairs commission. In March 2014, CMC had taken over the auditing office of the PLA. The move followed the prosecution of Gu Junshan, former deputy head of the General Logistics Department on corruption charges. With the creation of institutional mechanisms that supervise all aspects of PLA’s administrative and command structure, CMC is fast emerging as a tactical ground for Xi to consolidate his hold over the military.

Towards the operational dimension of military planning, the reforms stress upon creating a centralized administrative and command structure with CMC at the apex. The proposal also envisages establishing a joint command center to strengthen PLA’s joint warfare capabilities. Though the details of the plan have not been spelt out, a reading of China’s recent military discourse indicates towards the increasing importance of the Air Force, and Navy in China’s joint-warfare strategy. As authoritative documents, this emphasis appears markedly pronounced in the country’s defense white papers from 2004 onward.

In addition to this, the reforms plan to restructure and subsequently regroup the existing military regions (MRs) into battle zone commands. These battle zone commands too would operate under the direct supervision of the CMC. Hence, under the new system, a three-tier “CMC-battle zone commands-troops” command and administrative system would be established. Interestingly, the reforms propose to streamline the CMC itself, and expand the decision making powers of the lower level authorities. These moves can be interpreted as being directed towards establishing a direct interface between the CMC and the ground-level stratums of the PLA, and thereby diluting the authority of military commanders.

At the strategic level, the reforms posit an increasing offensive orientation of the Chinese military. The reforms were cited by Xi Jinping as “a sure path to strong military, and a call of the time to realize the Chinese dream as well as a strong military dream.” Interestingly, the 2014 defense white paper also describes a strong military as a component of the ‘Chinese dream’. As a poetic formulation of China’s perceived national interests, and its conceptualization of the idea of ‘territoriality’, ‘Chinese Dream’ is a strategy with realpolitik interests at its core.

It is against this backdrop that the association between ‘Chinese Dream’ and ‘Military Dream’ assumes significance. Moreover, the official media presented the reforms as a natural extension of China’s increasing stature at the global political arena and declared that, “An army which decisively carries out such a large-scale reform will be bound to step forward when our national interests are violated. Therefore, this renewal of China’s armed forces reform is also a silent declaration against the backdrop of an increasingly complicated international security situation.” This emphasis upon military power as the primary element of foreign policy construct constitutes the basic tenet of realism, and hence is a statement by China regarding its global ambitions.

Skype might not be the video-calling king for much longer as WhatsApp has emerged as a serious contender to its throne.

The Facebook-owned messaging app is introducing the feature to iOS devices as part of its next update, Digital Spy said citing German website Macerkopf.

Users will be able to make and receive video calls over a WiFi or data connection, and switch between their front and rear cameras mid-chat.

The report also claims that WhatsApp is on the verge of introducing chat head tabs so users can jump between conversations faster, but it is unclear whether this will be part of the same update.

Video calls and chat heads are logical new additions for WhatsApp, given that parent company Facebook’s Messenger service already has them.

The iOS update has been tipped to land in the coming weeks, with the new features expected to come to Android users at a later date.

By Elena M*

On December 14, the Saudis announced the formation of a 34-state Islamic military coalition to fight terrorism. Saudi defense minister Prince Mohammed said, “Today, every Islamic country is fighting terrorism individually…. The new alliance emanates from the keenness of the Muslim world to fight this disease, which affected the Islamic world first, before the international community as a whole.”

According to the press, the headquarters and a joint command center will be based in Riyadh. Its purpose will be to coordinate and support military operations to fight terrorism and develop necessary programs and mechanisms to support these efforts.

The new coalition is composed of 34 countries and is led by Saudi Arabia. The 34 states are Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE, Pakistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Turkey, Chad, Togo, Tunisia, Djibouti, Senegal, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Gabon, Guinea, Palestine, the Comoros, Qatar, Côte d’Ivoire, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Maldives,Mali, Malaysia, Egypt, Morocco, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria and Yemen.

According to the news reports, “The formation of the coalition coincides with the Custodian of the two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz granting the President of Yemen Abd Rabbu Mansur Hadi’s request for a seven-day ceasefire, starting from today, which also coincides with the beginning of Yemeni talks to end the crisis.”

Saudi Arabia continues to assert its position as leader of the Sunni Islamic world. The Saudis apparently have called in lots of markers in order to pull together the Sunni Muslim states.

While the target of the new alliance is terrorism, the terrorists are not identified. One of the more obvious and immediate targets would be the Sinai militants who have defied the best efforts of the Egyptian Army since June 2014, when President al-Sisi came to office.

Recent experience indicates that the leaders of most member states would agree that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is a terrorist organization, but sometimes even that is not clear. Most also would accept that al Qaeda or at least some of its franchises are not terrorist organizations. Some accuse Israel of using terror against Palestinians.

The formation of a Sunni military coalition could be understood as an early preparation for an eventual showdown with the Iranians or possibly even with Israel. The Saudis and Gulf States also have bought arms for their own forces and for Egypt that have no relevance to counter-terror operations, but do enhance conventional force capabilities for a general war.

Israel will be highly suspicious of and vigilant about this new military coalition. One of the nightmare scenarios for Israel always has been the possibility that its Muslim enemies would overcome their chronic bickering to form a unified, effective pan- Muslim military organization.

It is far too early to judge the direction or effectiveness of the new coalition, but the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen has drawn commitments of soldiers from more countries than seemed likely nine months ago. In the context of the new coalition, the Saudi-led Yemen operation stands out as a rehearsal for managing a much larger coalition for a much larger fight.

As a side note, the Saudi press description of Yemen President Hadi’s proposal for a ceasefire to coincide with peace talks makes Hadi appear to be a supplicant whose request was granted.

About the author:
*Elena M., Intelligence Analyst

Source:
This article was published by Modern Diplomacy

By Manoj Joshi*

The winter session of Parliament is coming to a close with little to show for it. Expectations that it would see the passage of the pathbreaker Goods & Service Tax (GST) Bill have been belied.

Now, at best, this week will see the passage of some other Bills, though not the one relating to GST.

Not surprisingly the Treasury Benches and the Opposition are blaming each other for the situation. The Congress had appeared to allow its passage and has since back-tracked because it felt that the National Herald case was being revived at the instance of the government.

Whatever truth there is in that charge, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) must take the major share of the blame for two reasons.

First, during the 2009-2014 period, it strenuously opposed the GST Bill on specious grounds.

Second, and perhaps more important, the onus is on the BJP government to run the government and Parliament and its failure to do so. Its belligerence and confrontational style are undermining its own government.

At the end of the day, the task of shepherding support for the Bill lies with the ruling party. Elections divide and electoral defeat bruises the ego of the Opposition. The ruling party must reach out to the Opposition and through the process of negotiation and compromise generate a consensus on an issue and push it through Parliament.

Gresham’s law seems to have been adapted by Parliament where good parliamentary practices are being replaced by the bad. So, the Congress parliamentary playbook is simply a mirror image of the BJP’s during 2004-2014.

There are structural issues where the ‘winner takes all’ approach of our election process seems to also prevail in Parliament. In a recent article in Mint, Jessica Seddon has argued that the Opposition has little procedural room to do anything other than what it was doing.

Parliament represents the politics of our times. And these are a bitter, no-holds-barred affair. It is not surprising that this is reflected in the two Houses.

Take, for example, the BJP versus Congress struggle. Statements made by Narendra Modi and the BJP of their desire to create a “Congress-mukt Bharat” (Congress-free India) are part of this. This is fine as election rhetoric, but when it is carried over, as it seems now, into the everyday relationship between the ruling party and the Opposition, it becomes a zero-sum game which is bad for democracy.

Since 1990, parties have alternated in power – and because they do so, it is important for them to maintain a working relationship when one or the other is out of power.

On the other hand, what we see is that a losing party (take the BJP in 2009 and the Congress in 2014) shell-shocked by defeat can throw one long, unseemly tantrum on the floor of Parliament.

Statesmen

When leaders understand this, they are called statesmen. And in the Indian context the last one seems to have been Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The best example of his abilities come not so much from his dealings with the Opposition, but Pakistan.

This was the man who pushed through the nuclear tests and then reached out to Pakistan through his 1999 Lahore visit, where he made it a point to visit the Minar-e-Pakistan. This was just about the time that the Pakistan Army double-cross was taking place across the Kargil heights.

At the end of that year, an Indian Airlines aircraft was hijacked by Pakistan-based terrorists, compelling his government to release three of their compatriots. Yet Vajpayee did not give up.

He tried again through the Agra summit of 2001 to make peace with Pakistan. The failure of the summit, the attack on Parliament House and Operation Parakram kept India-Pakistan tensions high through 2002. But in 2003, Vajpayee was back in reaching out to Islamabad and finally the breakthrough came in January 2004 and launched off a period of entente that only ended with Pervez Musharraf’s overthrow.

What was striking about Vajpayee’s handling of an adversary country was the clarity of his vision encapsulated in his statement that “You can change friends, but not neighbours”, as well as his decisive leadership.

Peace with the neighbour was not an option, but a compulsion. What seems to be missing in Modi’s approach to both Pakistan and the Congress, is a generosity of vision.

Despite his electoral achievement, his inclination is to give no quarter to those designated as adversaries. Political generosity is not a unilateral process, but one based on “enlightened self- interest.”

Modi comes from a political tradition which emphasises the politics of resentment. One part of Modi seems to want to break with it and emphasise social reform and economic growth, the factors that won him the 2014 election.

Unfortunately, the attraction of the dark side remains powerful.

*The writer is a Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Delhi and Contributing Fellow, Mail Today

Courtesy: Mail Today, December 21, 2015

What we have learned thus far in our international investigation of the Gülen organization is that there is a predominant culture of fear and intimidation. Whistleblowers who come forward face enormous risk to their personal safety, security, reputation, and economic wellbeing. The Gülenists are not only known to operate an extensive internal surveillance wing, including spying on their members’ personal computers and social media, but have also penetrated the highest levels of the Turkish police and judiciary, allowing them nearly limitless power to pursue false criminal cases against opponents.

In this context, we currently find ourselves assisting a number of whistleblowers in multiple countries on both sides of the Atlantic, who have forward to leak information about the alleged criminal activities of the network who are also facing threats to their safety from the Gülenists.

In one such case, a whistleblower in a European country has provided critical information to our global investigation about the Gülen organization’s alleged criminal activities, however he now finds himself at risk of deportation back to Turkey – where he would be ruthlessly targeted for persecution by the Gülenists, most likely beginning with his arrest on trumped up charges followed by a false conviction and imprisonment.

We cannot allow courageous whistleblowers like this individual to face such consequences. He has put himself and his family at grave risk in order to come forward with the truth. Without fear or favour he has stood up against the controversial Gülen movement and exposed the criminal activity in which they have engaged. This individual, who has given years of service to Hizmet, was immediately branded as an “enemy” as soon as it was known that they shared details regarding the systematic corruption and organised criminal activity. Having received direct threats, he now fears for his life and safety and that of his family.

Having defended a wide variety of whistleblowers and other victims of abuses of power over the course of my career, from Thailand to Zimbabwe, what pains me most is to see an individual who steps forward on principle to uncover criminal activity to be treated prejudicially, to be further threatened and dissuaded from causing such an inconvenience by those who prefer not to disrupt the status quo. Whistleblowers who are exposed to very serious harm and danger for the information they are willing to share, rightfully deserve the full protection of the state. International law is clear on the fact that people like this individual should be entitled to a protection by law that is of a higher standard, as they risk their own safety to expose abuse and crime that harms us all.

Yet, today this whistleblower stands alone, abandoned by the Western nation where he sought refuge. I find it incomprehensible and greatly alarming that a studious, hardworking and dignified man like him should be deported to a country where it is near certain he faces retribution from what is known in Turkey as a parallel state.

This whistleblower is highly deserving of protection, but his deportation would sadly be seen as a strongly negative signal to other whistleblowers within Gülen’s multinational network that there are dire consequences for telling the truth. It is my hope that we can continue to encourage them to come forward by highlighting and denouncing Gülen movement’s thuggish and threatening behaviour, which is completely unacceptable and discrediting for an organization that presents itself as tolerant and peaceful.

By Sanket Sudhir Kulkarni*

In the last one month, two significant developments have brought the TAPI project back into the lime light. Reportedly, Dragon Oil evinced interest in participating in the TAPI project’s pipeline construction1. This is a major breakthrough for this ambitious, multilateral project that was facing the prospect of a silent burial a few months ago due to the absence of any leader for the consortium. But with Dragon Oil’s participation, construction of the proposed project can be expected to move ahead with full speed2.

Following closely on the heels of this development, the four nations who have invested in the project participated in a ground-breaking ceremony in Ashgabat to commence pipeline construction3. But, despite the progress made in the last few weeks, the project still faces certain commercial constraints that have the potential to stall the pipeline construction. Foremost among these revolves around gas pricing concerns, primarily of India and Pakistan.

As per recent reports in The Economic Times on November 9, 2015, India apparently is not happy about the unit price of gas quoted by Turkmenistan and is hoping to re-negotiate the issue4. Couple of years ago, similar concerns associated with gas prices for TAPI pipeline project were echoed by the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, an Islamabad based think tank5. It will be interesting to see how the Turkmen government responds to this fresh Indian move on gas price negotiations. For the continued sustenance of this project, it would be imperative for the Turkmen government to show some degree of flexibility on gas pricing. If that does not happen, it will perhaps force India to reconsider its participation in the project.

The reasons are quite simple. Recent geo-political developments in India’s neighbourhood have come as a blessing in disguise for its energy diplomacy. Such improved circumstances in India’s neighbourhood imply that it has multiple alternatives to source its gas supplies6. It has been argued that as a result of US-Iran deal on nuclear issues, India should look towards Iran for satiating its natural gas demand from Iran through a deep sea pipeline7. Hence some of the stalled energy projects, whose fate seemed to have been sealed earlier, may receive renewed attention from policy planners in New Delhi.

With India being relatively immune to external geopolitical pressure, the sole factor that might influence its decision making in joining natural gas projects will be commercial considerations. In the last one year quite a few energy options have opened up for India. For example, the LNG deal with Australia, opening of Iran’s energy sector and prospects of shale gas imports from United States are some options that have the potential to satisfy India’s gas demand in the coming years.

What these options have essentially done is infuse an element of comfort into natural gas decision making in India, providing options that suit its commercial interests. This also means that certain projects which were signed earlier primarily based on geopolitical constraints and relatively limited natural gas supply sources globally may perhaps be re-visited. The current Indian effort to re-negotiate gas prices must therefore be seen in this context.

So the ball is now in Turkmenistan’s court. The Turkmens will be faced with an option to either show flexibility on gas pricing or continue to insist on current prices. If they do not show flexibility on gas price negotiations, then it would compel India and other major consumers to take a fresh look at their participation in the project. Such a development will have serious consequences for Turkmenistan’s gas export policy and in turn its economy.

As reported in the press, Turkmenistan which currently relies on Chinese markets for its gas exports, sees the TAPI project as an opportunity to sell its gas to South Asia8. So if the project doesn’t take off, it will force Turkmenistan to remain dependent on China. Can Turkmenistan afford dependency on China? To cite the example of Myanmar, Bertil Lintner observed that over-dependence on China posed serious political and social challenges for the military-led government in Myanmar9. If one goes by this experience, then continued dependence on China will also not augur well for the Turkmen government in the long run. Hence, to avoid this, it will be imperative for Turkmenistan’s government to demonstrate some flexibility on commercial issues.

On its part it will also be pertinent for the Indian government to handle the situation delicately. At no point of time should the Turkmens be pushed to the wall during gas pricing negotiations. Noted scholar Michael Tanchum argues that the TAPI pipeline provides India with substantial strategic presence in Central Asia10. Therefore, it would be practical for India to overlook certain commercial constraints for larger strategic goals in Central Asia.

At this juncture India needs to make up its mind on whether it would be ready to commit itself to the project in the event of Turkmenistan’s refusal to accommodate India’s concerns on gas pricing. In the meantime, India must do its own bit. As has been argued earlier, it would imperative for New Delhi to ensure timely implementation of investment commitments promised by Prime Minister Modi during his trip to Ashgabat11. This will go a long way in strengthening its position vis-à-vis Turkmenistan while negotiating on gas pricing issues. The sustenance of the TAPI project would be contingent upon each side’s ability to accommodate the concerns of different stakeholders in the project. Only time will tell if the projects’ stakeholders can demonstrate such an attitude. It is indeed necessary for them to overcome the minor constraints and see the gains to be made from the fruition of the project.

*The writer is a PhD Scholar at National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India.

• 1. Kedar Grandhi , “UAE’s Dragon Oil to invest in $10bn pipeline from Turkmenistan to India”, International Business Times, November 23, 2015, accessed on December 23, 2015.
• 2. Michael Tanchum, ”A Fillip for the TAPI Pipeline”, The Diplomat, December 03, 2015, at http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/a-fillip-for-the-tapi-pipeline/, accessed on December 20, 2015.
• 3. “Afghanistan, Pakistan, India join Turkmenistan in breaking ground on gas pipeline”, The Hindu, December 13, 2015, accessed on December 20, 2015.
• 4. Sanjeev Choudhary, “India to renegotiate TAPI gas prices”‘, November 09, 2015, The Economic Times, accessed on December 18, 2015.
• 5. Arshad H Abbasi , Fareeha Mehmood, Ayesha Wasti, Maha Kamal , Fatima Zohra, “Rethinking Pakistan’s Energy Equation Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline”, Sustainable Policy Development Institute, Islamabad, Policy Brief, 2013.
• 6. See n. 4
• 7. Shebonti Ray Dadwal, “Re-Calibrating Indo-Iran Energy Ties”, IDSA Comment, November 10, 2015, accessed on December 18, 2015.
• 8. Sanjeev Choudhary, “After Chevron, ExxonMobil lose interest; private energy firm to head consortium to build India’s gas pipeline”, The Economic Times, April 01, 2015, accessed on December 29, 2015
• 9. Bertil Lintner, ‘China behind Myanmar’s course shift’, Asia Times , October 19, 2011, accessed on December 20, 2015
• 10. See n.2
• 11. Sanket Sudhir, ”Energy Diplomacy gets fresh Impetus”, The Pioneer, July 25, 2015, accessed on December 20, 2015

Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/key-to-tapis-success_skulkarni_231215

By Liz Fuller

(RFE/RL) — Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili, 33, announced his resignation on December 23, without revealing his motives for doing so.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas says Israel is an “apartheid” regime that has occupied Palestinian lands and has been forcing Palestinian people into exile for decades.

In his Christmas message released on Wednesday, Abbas also said Tel Aviv was continuing to “consolidate an apartheid regime by accelerating policies that destroy the two-state solution,” adding that it is taking over Palestinian territories in order to expand illegal settlements and erect separation barriers.

“This Christmas comes during a particularly difficult period, when international intervention is desperately needed to protect the Palestinian people. Extremist Israeli settlers continue to attack Palestinians, including their mosques and churches, through acts of vandalism and terror,” he further noted.

He also said that due to the Israeli occupation, the twin cities of East al-Quds (Jerusalem) and Bethlehem have been separated for the first time in over 2000 years of Christianity, resulting in “incalculable damage” to the society, culture, and economy of Palestine.

“There can be no Palestinian State without East Jerusalem as its capital, reunited with Bethlehem and the rest of Palestine,” he further added.

The Palestinian president also congratulated all Palestinian people “on the Holy Occasion of Christmas,” and expressed hope a day comes when they would be free in their homeland.

Original article

John Bolton is a tarnished character. The once United States Ambassador to the United Nations is now promoted as a ‘scholar’ in the pro-Israel lobby group, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

Bolton is not a peacemaker, nor, in his defense, did he ever try to appear as if one. When he was appointed as the US Ambassador to the UN by George W. Bush, his stint lasted for only one year, starting August 2005. His time in this position was marked with discord and conflict. He stole the limelight with such statements as “The (UN) Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost ten stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.”

When the Iraq war failed to achieve any of its objectives, thus signaling an American retreat in the Middle East, neo-conservative politicians like Bolton retreated to their right-wing, neo-conservative institutions. Those who did not have one, established an organization of their own and began issuing press releases at random, hailing Israel at times, and chastising their President, Barack Obama, for one thing or another.

When the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ took place, neocons, like Bolton, saw in it an opportunity, but one that was difficult to discern. On one hand, they understood little of the mechanisms that propelled popular actions, for they are used to operate at the highest level of power with total disconnect from the people. On the other hand, it was clear for them from the start that Obama was taking no chances by stepping back into a Middle East quagmire that was originally designed by his predecessor.

Unable to affect much change in the region, as they once envisioned under the leadership of the likes of Richard Perle and his Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the neocons mounted a strategy predicated mostly on discrediting their administration’s lack of strategy.

In a sense the ‘Arab Spring’ invigorated the neocons, but also reminded them of their political impotence. Gone were the days of concocting foreign policies from neo-conservative think tanks such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), the Center for Security Policy (CSP) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), of which, among others, Perle is an active member.

In fact, Perle is quite a cherished member of the American Enterprise Institute, where Bolton often mounts his occasional articles in mainstream US media, offering a ‘vision’ regarding how to take on Iran, how to reform Arab states and how to redraw the map of the Middle East in ways that are conducive to US foreign policy interests.

The latest of such intellectual charges by Bolton was published in the New York Times on November 24. Under the title, “To Defeat ISIS, Create a Sunni State,” he theorized once more, raging against “Obama’s ineffective efforts” to destroy ISIS and demanding, instead, a “clear view shared by NATO allies.” The main drive behind his logic is that once ISIS is destroyed, the region that the militant group designated as a ‘state’ should be turned into a Sunni state, which, as a working title he called “Sunni-Stan.”

Bolton’s reasoning is as predictable as it is arrogant. It is predictable in the sense that, like other neocon initiatives in the past, it has no respect for the wishes of the people of the Middle East. His arguments are constructed upon the same world view that sees conflict as an opportunity, and warring nations as pawns in a larger game, aimed at subduing people to achieve ‘security’ and ‘stability’ for the US and its supposed allies.

It is also arrogant for the obvious reason that he believes the world should be designed to fit the narrow, self-serving and often violent visions of failed politicians like himself, who, alas, has access to the US’s most respected newspapers.

Bolton’s conceit has completely blinded him to the failures of the Bush administration and the entire collapse of the neo-conservative’s intellectual discourse during, and following the Iraq war. On the contrary, he is asking to repeat exactly what went wrong in Iraq.

“As we did in Iraq with the 2006 ‘Anbar Awakening,’ the counter-insurgency operation that dislodged Al Qaeda from its stronghold in that Iraqi province, we and our allies must empower viable Sunni leaders, including tribal authorities, who prize their existing social structure,” he wrote.

Only an unreasonable person cannot appreciate how the sectarian seed that the US has sowed in Iraq, based on the recommendations of the likes of Bolton, has resulted in the disfiguring of the Iraqi nation. This massive tampering with the social, cultural, religious and political fabric of society – by first empowering the Shia, oppressing the Sunni, then turning the Sunnis against one another, and so forth – has paved the way for unity among various Sunni groups, which ultimately formed ISIS.

It is the grand experimentations of Bolton and his peers that made ISIS the ‘state’ that it is today, which he is proposing to replace with yet another sectarian state, thus slicing up two Arab countries that were once the seats of the two most prominent Caliphate civilizations in history, the Abbasid and the Umayyad.

But for what purpose and at what price? If meddling at a relatively small scale has turned the Middle East into a perpetual inferno, and roped in regional and international rivals into a war that seems to be in constant expansion, one can only imagine what such a large scale reconfiguration of the region could lead to; and for what? So that Bolton can ensure the complete dismantling of the region in favor of Israel and that a buffer state can be established to block the Iranian influence in Syria and Lebanon? So that his country could gain access to more oil supplies? So that Russia’s attempt at having a stake in the future Middle East would be thwarted?

Whatever it is, the neo-conservatives should never be allowed access to the Middle East discourse, and their visions, those of doom and destruction, should remain confined to their ever mushrooming think tanks.

True, it is the perpetual war and horrific rivalries in the Middle East that have finally empowered the neocons to stage a comeback; but considering the damage that these groups have already done, one is certain that no good can possibly come from Bolton and his clique.

By Hussam Al-Mayman

Americans residing in Saudi Arabia have denounced Republican front runner Donald Trump for his anti-Muslim remarks.

Trump has called for a ban on Muslims coming to the US and proposed mass deportations of Muslims, singling Muslims out for surveillance, closing mosques and even forcing American Muslims to register as part of a national database and carry special identification.

Arab News reached out to Americans residing in Saudi Arabia, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, to get their views regarding the latest storm of Islamophobic remarks made by the Trump.

Hudaifah Alamreeki, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, thinks it is very sad that the American people have allowed politicians to turn politics into a circus.

He added: “America itself was founded on liberty and justice for all and also based on freedom of religion as the first settlers escaped from religious persecution in England. We have to be very careful as Trump is proposing the same solutions to the American people as Hitler did to the Germans.”

David McCarthy, of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, said: “Donald Trump does not represent the majority of Americans and his views are unconstitutional. America is a diverse country of immigrants and that’s what makes America strong. As an American, I welcome all people to my country.”

John Oberlin of Massillon, Ohio, thinks that Trump’s comments are the latest proof of the intellectual and ethical bankruptcy of both the leading US parties. One party is unconstitutionally coercing citizens into contracts, via the Affordable Care Act. The other is fronting a candidate that proposes barring immigrants based on religion — another clearly unconstitutional proposition.

“I’d advise Americans and those following US politics to stop feeding the beast, turn off the mainstream media, read more history and philosophy and research and support more principled parties such as the Libertarian Party or the Green Party,” added Oberlin.

Oberlin said: “In a holistic sense, Trump’s comments are raising a national discourse that has provoked a particular thought process in the minds of Americans, on which prior to this many of them may have never reflected deeply.”

“Considering other historical challenges to the US constitutional ideal (such as African slavery, sexist and racist voting rules, Japanese internment camps, anti-Communist witch hunts, and other discriminatory policies), I feel fairly confident that Americans will raise their level of consciousness once again and stand on the side of liberty. Now, in most parts of the country, there’s no serious problem if someone is a Japanese female voting member of the communist party married to a black woman. People will certainly disagree with her choices, but I think in general the law would protect these choices,” Oberlin explained.

Goldie AlJuaid, from Tucson, Arizona, said: “Donald Trump has proven that the fabric that made America great is deteriorating. Not only by the fact that he doesn’t respect the constitutional rights of American citizens but by the fact that there appear to be many who agree with denying rights to fellow citizens. I must admit, it is very eye opening.”

AlJuad added: “I am American, born in the US and my family has been ranching and farming the land for well over 400 years. According to Trump and his followers, I am one of those people (Muslim) that need to be identified as a danger. He has planted seeds of hatred and we know others share his views. It makes me feel unsafe even in my own home.”

She concluded by adding, “As in Christianity, Islam has many different sects. Catholic, Mormon, Baptist — if asked, they all claim to represent Christianity. They do not represent each other. Daesh does not represent me! Islam has many sects just like Christianity. I’m not one of ‘those people’.”

Earlier this month President Barrack Obama addressed the nation in the wake of the tragic San Bernardino killings in a speech which concluded by saying: “Muslim Americans are our friends and neighbors, our coworkers, our sports heroes, and yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country. We have to remember that.”

The First Amendment to the US constitution prohibits the creation of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press and interfering with the right to peaceably gather.

The UN Human Rights Council Special Session on preventing further deterioration of the human rights situation in Burundi has well highlighted the dangers. The difficulties of restoring order are strong. More basic reconciliation is even more difficult. The Expert Mission is unlikely to discover new elements. Thus we must watch the situation closely and see what means to bridge building are possible.

By Rene Wadlow*

On 17th December 2015, the UN Human Rights Council held a Special Session on preventing further deterioration of the human rights situation in Burundi. A Special Session is the “highest profile” measure that the Human Rights Council has to highlight a dangerous situation and to call attention to a need for action. The Council in a consensus resolution called upon the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, to dispatch urgently an Expert Mission to Burundi “to document human rights violations, with a view to preventing the future deteriorations of the human rights situation.” As the High Commissioner already has a field office in Burundi, the Expert Mission is unlikely to uncover any information that is not already known by the field office of arbitrary arrests, targeted assassinations, and excessive use of force by the security forces. However the added prestige of a specially-designated Expert Mission may facilitate some bridge-building among hostile groups that regular UN secretariat members can not undertake.

The one-day Special Session brought together the highest profile persons of the UN and the African Union human rights and conflict resolution teams. In addition to the High Commissioner, there was Adama Dieng, the UN Secretary-General Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and Ms Aiska Laraba Abdullahi, the Commissioner for Political Affairs of the African Union. Adama Dieng of Senegal is a colleague of long date having represented the International Commission of Jurists for many years. He is a fine specialist of African issues. Dieng, as many others like myself, who were active in the lead up to the 1994 Rwandan genocide and were unable to prevent it, is worried that events in Burundi, although different, could lead to the same results of inter-ethnic violence. Although the conflict in Burundi is a conflict for power among a small group of persons already in authority and their armed factions, there can be a manipulation of ethnicity and violence can slip out of control of the “mafia chiefs”. Already some of the language being used is similar to that used before the Rwanda genocide, but there are not the systematic calls to destroy the “other” that Radio Milles Collines used in Rwanda.

This struggle for power among a host of different actors can take on an ethnic character as it did in Rwanda. The factions prey on the desperation and poverty, especially of the young, to compete for influence. The most visible faction is that of the President Pierre Nkurunziza who has been in power since 2005 at the end of a 1993-2005 “civil war” in which some 300,000 persons were killed and a million persons displaced or became refugees to neighboring countries. Around Nkurunziza, there is a small group of persons who have gained economically and have helped set up armed security forces to protect their gains. They support the President, but some think that they could do just as well as President. There is no common ideology and no loyalty beyond self-interest.

After 2005, there has been relative peace but no real socio-economic development. A few, by their relations to the President, have gained economically, but the country as a whole has stagnated. As a new generation of persons who did not know directly of the violence of the 1990s comes on the scene, they ask “what is in it for us?” The competing factions are not well defined. In addition to the political party of the President, there are 17 political parties in opposition.

In such a situation of division and armed conflict, what can be done by the UN secretariat or those of us who represent non-governmental organizations? Burundi has no strong outside friends. The only voice at the Special Session that fully supported the government of Burundi was that of Egypt. Egypt, which has its own human rights problems, would not go to the barricades to prevent a Special Session but did stress that the Burundian government “was closely monitoring the situation and the challenges it faced”. The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea thought that there should not have been a Special Session at all and that “any attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of a country under the pretext of human rights should not be justified as this infringed upon the UN Charter and relevant rules of the UN, as well as the principles of independence and territorial integrity of Member States Politicization , selectivity, and double standards in the field of human rights should be put to an end immediately.” — A speech that it will reuse, no doubt, in its own defense. The Holy See was the only State to stress the need to prevent arms trafficking, but did not develop what the Catholic Church might be able to do for conflict resolution locally.

For lack of time, and because most relevant ideas had been expressed, the representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) did not speak. Yet it may be only NGOs, especially the Catholic and Protestant churches, who are in a position to build bridges among the factions. It is very unlikely that the United Nations or the African Union will send in military troops. There were many calls by government representatives for “dialogue” among the factions, but few suggestions on how such a dialogue could be created. Nor was there much emphasis on the possible results of such dialogues. Sharing the wealth among a few more “mafia chiefs” might bring a momentary halt to armed violence but will not change the situation in a fundamental way.

Churches may be the only civil society groups able to build bridges though for the moment, it is not clear that churches are organized to play this role. The majority of the population is Catholic, but there is a small dynamic Protestant movement. The churches to some extent cut across the ethnic divides, but it is not clear that the youth who are most active in the protests and the victims of violence, are motivated by the churches.

The Special Session has well highlighted the dangers. The difficulties of restoring order are strong. More basic reconciliation is even more difficult. The Expert Mission is unlikely to discover new elements. Thus we must watch the situation closely and see what means to bridge building are possible.

*Rene Wadlow is President and a Representative to the United Nations, Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.

By Dr. S. Chandrasekharan

On 20th December, the Nepal Cabinet finally decided to move for constitutional amendments supposedly to please the marginalised communities including the Madhes groups. The Deputy Prime Minister Kamal Thapa called up his Indian counterpart to inform her of the good news the same night. India was delighted.

Everyone appears to be happy except the affected Madhes groups who are now left to fend for themselves without knowing what had hit them!

The Cabinet Decisions:

On 20th afternoon, PM Oli’s cabinet decided to move for constitutional amendments and described it in a “three point” road map. This included

• The Government declaring its commitment to participation in the State Organs on the basis of proportionate inclusion and the delineation of electoral constituencies on the basis of the population besides ensuring of at least one constituency in each district.
• Appropriate constitutional arrangement will be made through political consensus regarding the boundaries of the federal units by addressing the concerns of the agitating parties.
• A mechanism will be formed to redress the concerns and a report will be submitted within three months. A solution will be sought through talks on other demands including those related to citizenship.

Soon after Kamal Thapa’s call, India issued a formal statement welcoming the developments as positive that will help create the basis for a resolution of the current impasse in Nepal. India also urged all the Nepali political groups to find a satisfactory solution.

The issues relating to delineation of electoral constituencies and the inclusive and proportionate participation was already conceded soon after the announcement of the new constitution by the Sushil Koirala led Government.

The addition is the third one- of a high level political mechanism to consider the delineation of boundaries of the federal units through a consensus with a report to be given within three months.

The third point is as vague as it could be and it looks like a play of words to save the faces of all the stake holders- most probably the three main political parties and India too.

We know that it took eight long years to draft a constitution and that too without any consensus. It was promulgated without consultations or approval of representatives of over forty percent of the population.

If we go by past history when an elusive consensus was not possible for the new constitution even after eight long years, it is very doubtful whether any report could emerge within three months as mandated by the cabinet. What is more- a political consensus can only be a theoretical possibility and nothing else.

Reaction of Madhes Groups:

The UDMF groups representing the agitating Madhes Groups that met on 22nd December rejected the proposals though they kept the door open for further talks. They said that the proposal did not address the 11 point demands of the Madhes Groups that were conceded by the earlier government. The three point road map did not consider the issues of equal citizenship and linguistic rights that were the main basis of demands of the groups. The bottom line of delineation of boundaries of the federal was also left vague with an undefined political mechanism that is supposed take care of the concerns of the Madhes groups.

The UDMF group pointed out that a day after the meeting, Prime Minister Oli in a meeting in Jhapa declared that Jhapa, Morang and Sunsari will not be split. It looked as if Oli wanted to jump the gun in briefing the High level mechanism to be formed by the government not to split the three of the five disputed districts (the other two are Kailali and Kanchanpur in the west).

The Madhes Groups appear to be very disappointed with the developments. What is offered now is not different from what was conceded by the Koirala government when the amendment to the constitution including the draft was ready to be moved. It was the change of the government and the obstinacy of Oli’s government that delayed the amendments. Meanwhile many lives were unfortunately lost since the promulgation.

The Indian welcome of the amendments was also surprising as nothing has changed in the narrative and even the “political mechanism” was suggested by the Nepali Congress leadership in their talks with the agitating groups much earlier and rejected by the agitating groups.

Terai Continues to be Tense

Many areas in Madhes continue to be tense. There is a three-day curfew in Rautahat after one youth was killed by Police firing. Two other districts- Birgunj (Parsa?) and Sarlahi have serious law and order problems.

The attitude of the Police has also not changed and they continue to be harsh in dealing with the agitators. The firing incident at Gaur resulting in the death of one youth was avoidable.

One should recall the statement of the spokesperson of UNHCR in end November that urged the Nepali authorities to follow international standards on use of force, respect dissenting voices and engage them with “meaningful, inclusive and an open dialogue”- unfortunately these steps have not been taken and more lives have been lost, she said.

Conclusion

• The Madhes population and particularly the Madhesi leaders must have felt let down by the new government of Nepal led by UML chief K.P. Oli.
• If the package now offered with amendments for meeting two of the demands of the agitating groups with a very vague assurance of the third one- viz delineation of the federal boundaries was the final stand of the government, then there was no need for an agitation that involved disruption of normal life both in Terai and Kathmandu valley and resulting loss of life of over fifty persons in the agitation so far. There was no need for talks either.
• Prime Minister Oli has stuck to his ground and has not conceded anything despite the agitation. It is doubtful whether he would allow any further concession -High level mechanism not withstanding or by any other means. His mind set could be gauged by his speech at Jhapa after the cabinet meeting where in a public meeting he assured the people that there will be no split up of the three eastern districts.
• Madhesi leaders are said to be disappointed. Had it not been for India’s indirect support to their perceived just cause, the agitation would not have dragged on for over hundred days. The resultant deaths and economic deprivation were avoidable. Here is a lesson for Terains too- to keep united and not depend on any external sources for support. For India- Indian interests are more important than the Terain interests and those in Madhes should by now have realised it.

Firstly, it is important to introduce the basic definitions and features of the creative economy approach. There is no consensus in literature around the definition of creative economies and creative industries. Scholarly interest in the creative economy arose quite recently, shifting the topic from a marginal position into the centre of various analyses and statistics. Despite the definitional and taxonomical issues, in general the creative economy concerns the activities that generate or exploit knowledge or information.

An issue compounding the difficulty to define the creative economy and creative industries lies in the “grey zone” between the border of cultural and creative industries and traditional manufacturing, which allows for the blending of artistic imagination with handcrafted knowledge, creating unique products of renown. However, there is consensus around the importance of the creative economy. Over the period 2000-2005, trade in creative goods and services increased at an average annual rate of 8.7%. World exports of creative products were $424.4 billion in 2005 as compared to $227.5 billion in 1996. Creative services in particular enjoyed an export growth of 8.8 % annually between 1996 and 2005 (UNCTAD, 2008).

The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport defines the creative industries as “those industries which have their origin in individual creativity, skill and talent and which have a potential for wealth and job creation through the generation and exploitation of intellectual property” (DCMS 2001, p. 4)” The British website for creative industries adds to the above mentioned definition that the creative industries encompass the following sub-fields: advertising, architecture, arts & culture, craft, design, fashion, games, music, publishing, tech, TV and film. There is no consensus around the appropriateness of categorizing gastronomy and engineering within the creative economy.

A strong interest in creative economy comes from the United Nations. UNESCO, in its “Understanding the Creative Industries” brief, states that creative and cultural industries make up the Creative Economy. Creative industries include cultural industries, such as printing, publishing, multimedia, crafts etc, and all artistic productions. One of the most common definition of cultural industries describes them as “industries which combine the creation, production and commercialization of creative contents which are intangible and cultural in nature.”

According to UNCTAD Creative Economy Report 2013, the creative economy, term popularized in 2001, designates various kinds of industries from arts to technology, as creativity can extend beyond the cultural domain. There is consensus around the individual elements of the Creative Economy. Sports, arts, literature, zoos, museums are possible fields of the Creative Economy.

UNCTAD acknowledge the significance of the creative economy, as its Creative Economy program testifies. Edna Dos Santos Duisenberg founded the program in 2004, aimed at assisting governments in policy-making and driving technical cooperation in developing countries concerning the creative economy. The Creative Economy programme launched by UNCTAD aims at combining development with innovation and creativity to create different trajectories leading to development.

The program goes beyond the merely “economic”, limited to basic indicators, view of development, by promoting a holistic approach to it, which takes into account social and non-strictly numerable factors as (but not limited to): cultural identities, social disparities, economic ambitions and technological disadvantages, which are of paramount importance in today’s globalized world. In fact, it is necessary to consider the changes brought about by globalization and connectivity, making cultural identities more fluid or accentuated, accentuating or levelling social disparities, and modifying cultural production. Indeed, the Creative Economy is vital to stimulate development, but also to reinforce cultural identity and diversity. Overall, it is a “powerful transformative force”, generating income and employment, thus fuelling sustainable development. It has the potential to enhance the prestige of the place where it originates and its identity. It is usually environmentally friendly and employs high skilled workers.

The ideas of creative economy found an interesting “application” during the recent EXPO in Milan. The UK Pavilion for the international exhibition is an example of the British interest – and also investment” – in the creative economy and has won the International Prize for Best Pavilion Architecture. The Pavilion meant to recreate the structure of a beehive, underlining the importance of bees in global food production. The creative industries in the UK provide over 1,808,000 jobs and generate 76.9bn£ a year to the UK economy (Creative Industries UK), contributing to output more than hospitality, utilities, agriculture, fisheries and forestry, but still significantly less than retail and manufacturing. Within the creative industries sector in the UK, the three largest sub-sectors are design, publishing, and television and radio, accounting for around 75% of revenues and 50% of employment. Also the EU is engaging with the creative economy on the institutional level. The EU has established a Commission for cultural and creative industries to promote innovation in education, professional mobility of artists, so that they have access to more markets and audiences, and financing schemes also at the EU level (Imprese culturali e creative in Italia).

In any case, it is important to underline the role of creative-economy related activities for developing and less developed countries which, due to the very nature of such activities, can capitalize strongly on them since that they offer a different way to development not strictly linked to “classical” models of industrial development. Linking again with activity of UNCTAD, their Creative Economy Programme has found empirical application in numerous Third World countries.

In Mali in 2004 a creative economy model was designed and applied to the Festival sur le Niger, which blended the use of locally sourced products to stimulate local economy, the promotion of local culture, and the facilitation of interactions to enhance social cohesion. Other successful governments that have focussed on creative industries are Latin American states, which have undertaken a review of the creative industries. The Inter-American Development Bank has defined Latin American countries as the Orange Economy, namely a “group of linked activities through which ideas are transformed into cultural goods and services whose value is determined by intellectual property”.

In Colombia, for instance, there is the Guide for Regional Mapping of the Creative Industries, providing a methodology to study the creative industries. In Africa, similarly, the Observatory of Cultural Policies in Africa, set up in 2002 with the support of UNESCO, the African Union, the New York-based Institute of Cultural Enterprise and the Ford Foundation researches creative industries in the continent. It is a potentially good sign that developing continents show a moderate enthusiasm in the creative economy, which can foster growth, while it is surprising that highly developed countries roughly neglect the area.

The program functions thanks to the involvement of other international actors in addition to UNCTAD. The UNESCO’s mandate is to encourage countries to invest in creative industries and develop them. Other international stakeholders are the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and international organisations such as the Inter-American Development Bank, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the EU’s Education, Audiovisual and Cultural Executive Agency.

However, it is important to note that the program has encountered numerous obstacles. There is general scepticism over the utility of the Creative Economy, made up of small start-ups, which may be more a liability than an asset, due to alleged inefficiency. In fact, some governments remain to be convinced of the potential the Creative Economy offers and they need to overcome their uneasiness in allocating funds to the creative economy. Indeed, the critical factors for Creative Economy development is financing, in addition to intermediaries, actors, intellectual property rights, distribution networks, technical and entrepreneurial skills (see Creative Economy 2013 Report). For instance, in Africa creative resources are underutilized. The creative industries are among the most dynamic sector in world trade and should be able to benefit from other sectors such as tourism, which is mutually linked to the creative economy. Also, intellectual property rights and technology play a central role in the Creative Economy, to stimulate production, consumption, dissemination of cultural contents and developing countries should be able to capitalize on them.

Special thanks to Ms. Marianna Griffini

India’s Afghan Policy has largely been focussed on bilateral engagement with Afghanistan characterized by its enhanced role in reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts and dependence on American military strategy.

New Delhi has taken up a proactive role in terms of projecting its soft-power image by contributing in the areas of infrastructure, health, education and capacity building. India’s interest in building transport corridors and investing in energy projects also aims at gaining access to the Central Asian energy resources. Its support in critical socio-economic areas has earned good will of Afghans. Many opinion polls suggest that India is one of the favorite countries for the Afghans.

However, India’s enhanced soft-power image does not increase its abilities to shape Afghan situation following the American withdrawal. India entered into strategic partnership agreement with Afghanistan in 2011 and raised the possibility that it might train, equip and build the capacity of the Afghan army in order to stabilize Afghanistan.

Accordingly, the previous Afghan President Hamid Karzai sent a wish list of military requirements that Afghanistan wanted to procure from India and the proposal was cold shouldered by the then Indian leadership in order not to antagonize Pakistan and lose the momentum of ongoing peace initiatives with it. The Indian government under Modi’s leadership has expressed its willingness to supply four Russian-made helicopters to the Afghan army but that is not enough to ensure stability in Afghanistan with the dwindling American military assistance. In the absence of a military footprint in Afghanistan and ability to effectively project hard power beyond its borders, India’s Afghan policy is likely to suffer unless compensated by robust regional engagement.

In reality, India was unable to expand its soft-power resources to the larger region in so far as it failed to evolve and engage other countries surrounding Afghanistan around common views and ways of fighting terrorism and ensuring a stable and peaceful Afghanistan. India’s over-dependence on American military strategy is largely responsible for its predicament. India failed to observe how the Central Asian strategy of the US ever since the Soviet disintegration did not co-opt Indian interests. The US considered the Taliban a stabilizing force in Afghanistan which could help it secure a pipeline bypassing Russia and Iran and thereby could end their possible monopoly over oil supplies. It is not far-fetched to believe that the Americans would not have taken on the Taliban if the latter had not turned away from the US orbit of influence.

Surprisingly, both the Ministry of External Affairs and the Ministry of Defense of India in their annual report 1995-96 referred nowhere to the American complicity in destabilizing Afghanistan and expressed concerns over the Pakistani role in sabotaging peace in Afghanistan by propping up and assisting the Taliban.

India was quick to support the US-led War on Terror in the hope that there would an all out war against terrorism. However, differences surfaced soon as the Obama Administration narrowed down the threat to Al Qaeda and expressed American support for engaging good Taliban in the reconciliation process. Moreover, the Af-Pak strategy of the Administration ensured enormous American aid for Pakistan not only to fight terrorism but to maintain its territorial integrity as well.

The underlying weakness of India’s Afghan policy began to unravel itself when it became clear that despite American reservations over Pakistan’s role as a credible partner in fighting terrorism, the latter continued to receive enormous ‘war aid’ from the US. The reason can be found in geopolitics in so far as Pakistan is considered instrumental in promoting the American interests in Afghanistan and Central Asia. The American project of ‘Greater Central Asia’ places Afghanistan and Pakistan in the Central Asian geopolitics. While India is considered important to contain China and is a part of American Asia-Pacific strategy.

Over the years, India’s dependence on the American war strategies in Afghanistan prevented it from seriously engaging itself with Iran and Russia on the Afghan issue although their partnership has been the key to India’s successful role in Afghanistan and Central Asia. Iran and Russia share common stakes in the stability of Afghanistan and share concerns like the rise of Sunni fundamentalism and drug-trafficking. Central Asia is considered to be the strategic backyard of Russia.

Any Indian strategy to expand influence beyond Afghanistan into Central Asia has to depend on Russia. However, Indian leadership failed to convince the Russian leadership how critical their partnership is to secure a stable Afghanistan and realize their common objectives. Second, New Delhi did not take serious steps to alleviate Moscow’s concerns as regards its closeness to Washington. Moscow expressed its concerns about Washington getting an increasing share in defense acquisitions by New Delhi. To India’s further disadvantage, Russia moved closer to Pakistan and described the latter as its ‘closest partner’ taking additional care not to mention any linkage between Pakistan and terrorism. Moreover, Moscow promised Islamabad to supply advanced Sukhoi 35 fighters and MI 35 attack helicopters.

Similarly, it was through Iran that India secured connectivity to Afghanistan and with Iranian assistance developed Chabahar port and constructed 218 Km long Zaranj-Delaram road in the remote south-western Afghanistan to secure access to Central Asia. However, there was palpable American pressure behind India’s vote against Iran’s nuclear program and India backed three US – supported resolutions against Iran in the International Atomic Energy Agency and enforced UN Security Council sanctions against Tehran. As per the documents disclosed by Wikileaks, at a time when nuclear deal was being negotiated between India and the US, the latter had tried to pressure India over its ties with Iran and even objected to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Delhi, saying it would give “platform for an enemy of the US”.

India’s inability to push the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline project under American pressure affected Iran-India bilateral relationship. Over the years, Iran has inched closer towards Pakistan and there are bilateral discussions on trade, energy and security. Islamabad has kept itself away from Saudi-Iranian sectarian conflicts like in Yemen crisis to keep the momentum of relationship going.

Lack of efforts from the Indian side at engaging China on Afghan issues bilaterally or multilaterally on the ground that both share common concerns in the rise of Islamic radicalism given Islamic insurgency in Kashmir and Xinjiang respectively despite territorial disputes and prevailing trust-deficit on both sides could only push China towards the easiest option of seeking Pakistani assistance to address its concerns and enhance its influence in Afghanistan. It is irony that while India and China bilaterally engage each other and discuss various bilateral issues regardless of the outcomes, there is hardly any engagement on the broader regional issues or at the multilateral forums.

Indian withdrawal from IPI pipeline has induced Pakistan to go for Iran-Pakistan pipeline with Chinese assistance. This pipeline is an integral part of the China-Pakistan-Economic-Corridor project and China’s ambitious Silk Road Economic Belt initiative. China has incorporated a growing interest in enhancing connectivity with Iran through land and sea using Pakistan as a bridge. Iran, on the other hand, seeks greater economic integration with Pakistan and China as Pakistan is emerging as a market for Iranian energy resources while China is already the largest importer of Iranian oil.

Russia has also seen advantages in the Chinese initiative of ‘one belt one road’ working as a complementary to its own plan for a ‘Eurasia Union’. Both Iran and Russia have become silent partners to Chinese-Pakistani initiatives on hosting peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban. Pakistan’s centrality to the Chinese project and to the Iranian and Russian outreach to China in geopolitical terms despite the question whether it can be a credible partner in implementing the project given its dubious records of assisting radical Islamic groups fostering instability points to India’s failure in formulating a coherent and consistent policy towards the regional powers.

The Iranian nuclear deal with P5+1 opening the door for lifting of western sanctions has released fresh energy into Indo-Iranian relationship. India is keen to start an undersea pipeline project that would supply Iranian gas to India bypassing Pakistan. It assumes importance given uncertainties of other pipeline projects like TAPI. Similarly, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his visit to Turkmenistan proposed a land-sea route through Iran for the supply of Turkmen gas to India. India has also efforts to secure the Iran-Oman-India pipeline.

On 23rd December 2015, Modi left for Russia on a two-day visit and after reaching there Modi said to a Russian news agency that Russia will remain India’s “principal partner” in defense sector. India and Russia are expected to sign a number of pacts related to defense and nuclear energy. Russia is likely to be the leading partner in joint research, development and production of advanced defense systems under Modi’s Make in India initiative. All these steps towards courting Iran and Russia can be viewed as important correctives for India’s past mistakes. However, it is to be seen how seriously and consistently India engages these countries and actualizes these projects preventing the relations from cooling off again. India’s engagement with these countries in these important areas will also have a definitive impact on the level of their cooperation on Afghan issues as they have similar concerns. It will also take much steam out of the Chinese-Pakistani diplomatic maneuverings in Afghanistan. India needs to simultaneously engage China on Afghan issues as there is a convergence of interests in several areas of like economic, technical and cultural which would not only help stabilize Afghanistan but would benefit each of them.

India must have begun to realize that over-reliance on extra-territorial great powers cannot address its security concerns in the region as their role in the region is contingent upon their geopolitical interests and convenience of actualizing them. India’s foreign policy focus on great powers and bilateralism needs to give way to engagement of regional powers and multilateralism. India’s engagement with other regional powers must be based on the ground that a secured Afghanistan is in the interest of all and competing strategy for securing spheres of influence would lead to a power vacuum eventually to be filled up by non-state actors as dangerous as ISIS.

It is difficult to manage properly the diverse types of employees in an organization for achieving the goal of the organization within the limited resources and time. So, we need to employ competent employees in all levels in the organization with a view to aligning employees as per organization types and mode of business and its goal. Organization, methods and the process of implementation, strategic process analysis and development are also the crucial factor in obtaining better performance and stability of the organization. Besides, employee satisfaction and harmonious relations among employees in a favorable workplace environment are also to be considered carefully for the interest of the organization.

Moreover, there are various factors that contribute to the rising workplace diversity in the organization or company. These may be increasing numbers of immigrants, company mergers and joint ventures in different countries, increased engagement of business consultants and temporary employees, international business competition and the idea of globalization, which has transformed the world into a global village. Globalization has occurred because of a combination of factors such as improved infrastructure, advancements in technology. Infrastructure have not only provided cheaper means of communication and travel but have also revolutionized the speed in businesses communication around the world. Domestic companies are also spreading their operations to new countries across the globe in search of new markets or outsourcing some aspects of their production process through various strategies of business expansion.

Managing employees of different cultural diversity, through the integration of appropriate strategies plays a very vital and key role in improving the competitive advantage of the business in the competitive market. Globalization calls for specific approaches that promote harmonious working relationships within increasingly culturally diverse workplaces. Hansen (2002) observes that workplace diversity is critical to the existence of businesses and identifying key strategies to ensure harmonious working relationships among culturally diverse employees is integral to the survival of any business. Diversity in this case means the differences between individuals based on their culture, education, socio-economic situation, skill and traditions which influence their perceptions, values and beliefs in the working situation. Nowadays, there is increased pressure on human resource departments to integrate culturally diverse employees, while at the same time maintaining high levels of motivation among the divergent group of employees.

As felt among the main issue in a culturally diverse workforce is creating synergy, teamwork and one cohesive atmosphere made up of the various cultural groups within the workplace (Hansen, 2002). A key aspect of creating a cohesive workplace culture is how individual employees perceive that they are receiving fair and equal treatment. Identifying employee perception of fairness begins by evaluating current employee benefits and assessing specific suggestions that are appealing to a diverse workforce. Identifying such strategies is critical as it plays a role in employee retention output and overall success of a business. Dissatisfied employees who feel they are not being treated equally especially pertaining to their culture, may have low levels of motivation and their output may not meaningfully impact the overall successful performance of the business that needs stability and harmonious atmosphere.

Identifying the most suitable and effective strategy in managing a culturally diverse workforce in a manner we should create cohesiveness and harmony, increase employee satisfaction and maximize their output within the company by effective use of existing employees. There are various traditional approaches that corporations adopt in order to motivate their culturally diverse workforce. These are such as benefit plans insurance, training and retraining, retirement programs and re-employment opportunity.

As it has been felt that traditional approaches are no longer pertinent to raising harmony in a culturally diverse workforce in the enterprise or company. To this end, it is required to frame strategies that will not only ensure that each employee feels valued and treated properly at the workplace, but will create employee loyalty to the company and motivate them to increase their output as per direction. These strategies can retain employees; companies loose their experienced employees to those corporations that maintains better strategies in handling cultural diversity and ensuring employee satisfaction with the proper employee value.

Offering benefits for employees

Approving the various needs of culturally diverse employees, companies may offer benefits that are flexible according to the specific needs of individual employees. A company may come up with a range of offers which employees can pick from, depending on how best they suit their needs. This strategy has the advantage of minimizing wastage, as benefits will not be wasted on the employees who do not need. Giving employees benefits that they do not need has no additional value to the company as the benefits will have no motivational effect (Bohlander & Snell, 2007).

Renowned companies come with offers like, a benefits package that consists of vacation, health insurance and sick leave or financial opportunities for target achievement. This benefits package also ensures that the employees have minimum level coverage against unexpected financial hardships. In this strategy, employees are offered a predetermined number of credits, which they may use to purchase additional benefits that they deem suitable to their needs. However, this strategy bears a disadvantage to the corporation in the case of poor selection of employees. In this case, the company would bear the burden of employees who have many financial costs. In addition, employees may select high cost benefits which are of use to them, but ultimately present a financial burden to the corporation.

This strategy must be analyzed carefully by the company before settling up a particular benefit plan. The strategy selected must be beneficial to the company and to the employees as well. The strategy should be comprehensive enough that can address most of the employees, if not all issues pertaining to cultural diversity, and at the same time protects the interests of the company and overall profitability. The overall diversity management strategy should give the company a competitive edge on the global scale and boost its ability to recruit and retain employees, in addition to attaining the ability to adjust to the evolving and increasingly culturally diverse workforce.

There were many approaches that used in the past, to manage a culturally diverse workforce, which have proved to be redundant, if not ultimately disastrous in terms of maintaining harmonious working relationship with employees and overall company performance. An example shows, when a leading insurance company in California US, gave its leading salespersons tickets to a Christmas event being held in a local church. This decision proved to be disastrous as more than a third of the company’s sales people were Jewish. Such as strategy, though aimed at rewarding hardworking employees, was not culturally sensitive, which lead to boycotts and resignations of employees and within six months, this mistake had cost the company more than one million dollars (Tahmincioglu, 2004). So, choose carefully the approach that would suit to all types and diversified employees.

The importance of careful evaluation before deciding on a specific strategy that creates harmony in a culturally diverse workforce should be shown during planing the strategy. The selected approaches should match the needs of the diversified workforce as how catastrophic it might be for the company in the event of a mismatch. To arrive at the most suitable and comprehensive strategy for dealing with cultural diversity at the workforce, we need to consider various diversified groups to boost their motivation and ensure that they experience fair treatment in their workplaces.

Various studies have revealed that people from different cultures and backgrounds have different ways of acquiring knowledge, skill, conduct, pattern of behavior and if this factor is not integrated in the new-employee training manuals, then the immigrants will not know what was intended of them, and their work experience and output may become inappropriate and redundant. Companies should consider that conventional approaches to employee training may not be suitable for the a workforce of culturally diverse and the knowledge and information deemed as crucial for the traditional employee may not be so for immigrant workers.

Further, the training of new-employees should include topics that educate the workforce about the specific, particularly those that to which the new employees belong. Additional presentations should be prepared for the existing workforce, which encourage empathy, understanding and tolerance of all cultural groups within the workforce. The training should aim at ensuring that all employees have cultural competence and are able to relate with colleagues from other cultures, with a sufficient amount of respect and empathy. Being culturally competent will ensure that employees understand how to communicate with individuals from different cultures, as some cultures are regarded as high context cultures while others are low context cultures as were seen in various MNCs.

It is really critical in human nature that how people from different cultures communicate, and how their way of communication is bound to influence the communicative process within the workplace. It is shown iun many cases that individuals from high context cultures are often misunderstood by those from low context cultures. Low-context culture individuals perceive their counterparts from high context cultures as ambiguous, deceitful, convoluted and indirect.

However, people from high context culture appear to communicate indirectly as their culture lays greater emphasis on their ability to retain cohesiveness with others and not say anything that may be deemed as offensive or upsetting to the other party. In this context, high context culture will not say anything that appears offensive, making low context colleagues perceive their indirectness as deceit in many situations.

Communicating more directly by high-context colleagues, may aggravate employee relationships when some individual feel that their colleagues are not treating them properly, or they are being insensitive to their feelings. In this connection, training in cultural competence and development will ensure that the workforce has the basic idea of how individuals from different cultures perceive situations and their ways of communicating and acquiring meaning from communication. This will ultimately lead to increased harmony, cohesiveness and employee satisfaction at the work place So, this types of training and motivation in all levels can ensure a harmonious atmosphere within the organization for longer stability and raising solidarity among diversified employees.

Need-based strategies and approaches are also carefully considered by the multinational corporations operating in various parts of the world use to accommodate the culture of the local workforce, and how to integrate it with the wider operation of the whole company. While companies expand business to new territories or other countries heir businesses have been operated in the spirit of globalization, they frequently encounter diverse cultures and cultural practices in different countries that may not be particularly suited to their operational direction of the business.

Based on the above discussion cultural aspects in the organizations must be accommodated and integrated into the company vision and employee-cohesion strategy if the organization/company expects to put any meaningful impact and realize its goals within that particular cultural setting in the organization as a whole. Aspects of culture that multinationals are faced which include employee work ethics based on culture, religion, among other factors. It is also equally prevails that Local conglomerates and MNCs are encountering these difficult situation in different ways and on different issues existing in the cultures of diversifies employees. Due importance should be given to this crucial factor in achieving convenient workplace relations, longer stability and better performance in the future.

Mohammad Mosaddek Hussain

India Positive becaus…that’s the truth. Despite the world beyond its borders pitted against the largest democracy and a sea of dissidents within, threatening to derail the process, India continues to surge ahead in the myriad indices that matter to the ‘developed’ world.

Today, armed with a 5,000-year-old culture five times older the English language, India is the world’s third largest when it comes to Purchasing Power Parity and has the world’s third largest army. India possesses the oldest mantra of all times…the Middle Path that was evolved by Gautam Buddha 2,500 years ago and the Ram Rajya concept symbolic of the softening of a king’s otherwise-unrelenting stand. Little wonder then, that India remains Positive.

The inevitable induction of Narendra Damodardas Modi as India’s leader with an overwhelming never-before-registered majority was fought tooth and nail by a parallel force that works with stealth and speed through Non-Governmental networks professing to “address” issues as seemingly innocuous “yet crucial” as “climate change”; an “unbiased media” powered by Politicians yet run by “Journalists” now being flayed as “presstitutes” and “paid media”; and Sections across the world whose interests are directly subverted by the ‘Make In India’ campaign.

Real Growth vs Tolerance Tattle

The Tolerance Tattle was inevitable. With the Indian economy picking up in the second quarter ended September 2015 and growing at 7.4 per cent during the quarter on the back of strong growth in manufacturing, trade, hotels, transport & communication services, there had to be a hurdle.

So, on September 28t, 2015, when a mob attacked and killed 52-year-old Mohammad Akhlaq Saifi, it was turned into an issue of national importance that had direct and dire relevance to the surge of “Intolerance” in India. Indian scholar, academician and former vice-chancellor of Kannada University in Hampi, Malleshappa Madivalappa Kalburgi’s murder on August 30th 2015 triggered a spurt of protests among nondescript writers across India, returning their Sahitya Akademi awards.

That Kalburgi had faced death threats previously and had demanded security from the ruling Indian National Congress government of Karnataka but was not provided with it initially, was conveniently lost on the protestors who seemed to have a single-minded agenda – to flay the State for “Intolerance” in general and Narendra Modi at the helm of affairs, in particular, for failing to “personally apologise” for the murder. Ironically, despite being finally provided security, Kalburgi had “requested the police to have them removed in August 2015,” just before his killing. It was an obvious lapse of personal judgement and a crime against the State committed at worst. Blaming the nation’s Prime Minister is so pedestrian a charge.

Also, predictably, nobody in the “Free Media” wrote about Kalburgi’s murder with the objectivity so closely associated with the calling but instead reported with utter glee, byte by byte, about how ‘Ho’, ‘Ho hum’ and so forth went on to “Return the award,” to “Protest the Intolerance” in India.

The Centre has been more than willing for a CBI inquiry in the Dabholkar (Killed in August 2013 before the BJP came to power in Maharashtra or at the Centre) or the Kalburgi murder revealing a more-than-ever tolerant approach.
Ironically, when the United States of America “Refused a visa” to Narendra Modi despite being a democratically elected Chief Minister of a state in the world’s largest democracy, nobody flayed the US for being ‘Intolerant’ or “Returned their own visas” or “Cancelled” them, to “Protest an act of Intolerance,” against India. Neither did any self-respecting Indian in India or living beyond, in the United States of America do that.

Investigators probing the Burdwan blast and the Mujahideen Bangladesh terror network in West Bengal identified four operatives who “trained recruits at Simulia and Lalgola Madrasas” in Burdwan and Murshidabad districts. In a symbolic-seeming retributive retort, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, “refused financial assistance to Madrasas.” The Unaided Madrasah Bachao Committee has planned a stir against the Mamata Banerjee government. And, India is “Intolerant”?

Attacks On Muslims On Rise In USA

In the United States of America, a FBI report says hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise. While number of hate crimes against Muslims is relatively small, it has gone up over the last year, according to new data the FBI released.
Hate crimes in all other categories went down; attacks on Muslims bucked the trend. In 2014, of the 1,092 reported hate crimes related to anti-religious sentiment, 16.3 percent were anti-Muslim—a total of 154 incidents and 184 victims. In contrast, in 2013, there were 135 reported anti-Muslim incidents with 167 victims. That said, the United States of America continues to look “Tolerant”.

Said It Like Only Aamir ‘Khan’

Aamir Khan’s bashing in social media and beyond for his comment: “Kiran (his wife) and I have lived all our lives in India. For the first time, she said, should we move out of India… She fears for her child, she fears about what the atmosphere around us will be,” in an interaction at the Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism ceremony organised by The Indian Express was a given considering Aamir Khan’s penchant for melodrama and proclivity towards drawing mileage out of a populist Satyameva Jayate.

Why, his fears of “Intolerance” were even struck down by all-season Modi-baiter All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) president Asaduddin Owaisi who said, “I would have never said what Aamir said. We have seen numerous riots but still we continue to live here as it’s our country. We will not succumb to nonsense talks.”

Ahimsa Holds The Key

‘Tolerance’, as a term itself, seems patronising. When used in description, it indicates that the entity has a higher standing and an authority by law or position through which it ‘chooses’ to tolerate another different from itself, despite its stark discrepancies and allows it to co-exist. It accords a sense of propriety and political correctness when instead it should be replaced with Ahimsa, as Mahatma Gandhi preferred.

Ahimsa in all forms, action and thought, puts all on par with each other ensuring an equality of treatment that comes from within and isn’t forced by law.

By Fatih Karimo

The first joint coordination meeting between National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC) and the Russian state-owned gas giant Gazprom was held in Tehran Dec. 23.

Alexander Medvedev, Gazprom’s deputy chief executive, who is heading a 25-member delegation to Tehran, met with Hamid Reza Araqi, managing-director of the National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC) to discuss the mutual cooperation capacities, the oil ministry’s official SHANA news agency reported.

Enjoying huge gas reserves, both Iran and Russia can follow joint purposes in terms of supplying gas to the world, Araqi said.

The NIGC and Gazprom can cooperate and exchange experience in various fields including construction of gas pipelines, gas storage, gas compressor stations and CNG as well as the construction of gas refineries.

Medvedev, for his turn, praised Iran’s decision for offering new model of oil and gas contracts called IPC (Iran’s Petroleum Contracts), which was introduced during a two-day conference last month aimed at luring foreign investment to develop the country’s ageing petroleum industry.

He also announced that Gazprom is ready to transfer its experiences to Iran in various gas sectors.

Gazprom is interested in signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) based on initial agreements between the two companies, Medvedev said, forecasting that the document will be signed in next year.

Gazprom and the NIGC plan to discuss grounds for agreements including engineering, implementation, operations, trade and research, according to Azizollah Ramazani, the NIGC manager for International Affairs.

The two parties will hold several rounds of talks to review cooperation areas under five committees, Ramazani said.

Islamic Republic possesses the world’s largest proven natural gas reserves, at 34 trillion cubic meters, or 18 percent of the world’s total proven reserves.

Turkey is suffering from a wave of cyber-attacks on financial and government websites which intensified over Christmas, reportedly resulting in the temporary disruption of credit card transactions.

A video released this week and attributed to Anonymous vowed retribution for Ankara’s alleged ties with ISIS.

The attacks on Turkish servers have been persistent in recent weeks, but on Christmas day Turkish banks suffered a website outage and reportedly saw sporadic disruption to credit card transactions. Isbank, Garanti and Ziraat Bank were among the targets, local media reported.

It is hard to determine where these attacks are coming from, with detailed work it will be understood whether these attacks are carried out by hackers or by certain groups” said the Minister of Communications Binali Yildrim.

The DDoS attacks on Turkey’s “.tr” domain, Yildrim said were “serious” as they include domains of ministries, banks, and the military. The ministry asked Ankara’s Middle East Technical University (ODTU), which operates the “.tr” domain to step up security measures. ODTU’s analysis said that the attacks are coming from “organized sources” outside Turkey.

Turkish Telecom, in a statement to Hurriyet daily, said that they are now on “24/7 defense” as they acknowledged facing “thousands of attacks.” Most Turkish institutions use Turk Telekom as their service provider.

The attacks are serious,” a spokesman for internet provider Turk Telekom, Onur Oz, told Reuters. “But the target is not Turk Telekom. Instead, banks and public institutions are under heavy attack.”

The banking sector is one of the fastest growing areas of online services in Turkey and equates roughly to 1.5-2 billion transactions daily, according to Hurriyet. More than 85 percent of daily banking transactions in Turkey are carried out on digital platforms.

“These attacks began two weeks ago but have intensified over the past two days,” said Burak Atakani, a network specialist from Istanbul Technical University.

Some Turkish media outlets have speculated that the cyber-attacks might have been launched by Russia in retaliation to the downing of a Russian bomber by a Turkish fighter jet late in November over Syrian airspace.

Meanwhile in a video, released this week allegedly by hacktivist collective Anonymous, hackers promised to take on the Turkish government over its alleged shady deals with Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorist organization. Anonymous especially threatened to bombard the banking sector.

“Turkey is supporting Daesh [the Arabic name for IS] by buying oil from them, and hospitalizing their fighters. We won’t accept that [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan, the leader of Turkey, will help [IS] any longer,” says a video message from the group. “We will continue attacking your internet, your root DNS, your banks and take your government sites down. After the root DNS, we will start to hit your airports, military assets and private state connections. We will destroy your critical banking infrastructure.”

Special Cyber government security units within the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (ICTA) and the Telecommunications Directorate (TIB) have been deployed to stop the attacks.

“Turkey is not in a position to be powerless in the face of these attacks,” said Customs and Trade Minister, Bulent Tufenkci. “I think that we’ll have necessary response.”

The Vatican has approved a locally elected bishop in southwestern China, sources told ucanews.com.

Sources in southwestern Sichuan province said the Holy See approved the appointment of Bishop-designate Tang Yuange of Chengdu in October, shortly after a six-member Vatican delegation visited Beijing to meet with Chinese officials.

“The news is now known by all priests and many Catholics,” a local source, who asked not to be named, told ucanews.com, adding that the ordination will take place in 2016.

The election and Vatican approval is seen a test case for Vatican-China relations regarding Beijing’s “democratic principle” for the church in China, which calls for bishops to be elected by government-selected voters comprised of clergy and nonclergy.

Father Tang’s election in May 2014 came suddenly and surprised many church observers. It was the first election since Pope Francis assumed the papacy in 2013 and just a month before China resumed talks with the Vatican. Observers then regarded it a test for the Vatican.

China Church commentator Father Bernando Cervellera said Beijing’s proposal to the Vatican calls for the Holy See to recognize all open bishops, including those who are excommunicated.

The suggested process is for bishop candidates to be democratically elected. The Vatican is then asked to approve appointments of the government-sanctioned bishops’ conferences, or offer a veto. If Beijing finds the Vatican’s justifications for a veto to be insufficient, the appointment will proceed anyway, Father Cervellera said.

“What Cervellera said is very true,” a Chinese researcher, who declined to be named, told ucanews.com. “This is always what Beijing demands and the Vatican has to show its sincerity to resolve problems to have talks continue.”