The Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) — founded by US Senator Sam Nunn and CNN founder Ted Turner — describes itself as “a non-profit, non-partisan organization” tool for assessing the security of the world’s deadliest materials with a mission to strengthen global security by reducing the risk of use and preventing the spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

It assesses the contribution of 24 states in five categories: (a) Quantities and Sites, (b) Security and Control Measures, (c) Global Norms, (d) Domestic Commitments and Capacity, and (e) Risk Environment.

Earlier, on January 14 NTI released its report, a unique assessment of nuclear material security conditions among 176 countries, developed with Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Following the reports released in 2012 and 2014, this time round the year it has been released and will leave you surprised due to low ranking of Pakistan despite its efforts to improve its security and safety of weapons, which implies weak regulations and bias been followed in the report.

Now take a look at how well are the two nuclear neighbors taking care of their nuclear material. The NTI 2016 Nuclear Security Index ranks 24 countries that possess “one kilogram or more of weapons-usable nuclear materials” both India and Pakistan fall into this category.

Notably, in the nuclear security Index, Indian ranking on nuclear materials security has been improved placing Pakistan at position 22 and India coming out at 21 regarding the likelihood of nuclear material being stolen. This likelihood of position comes out while ignoring the efforts taken by Pakistan for their security and control measures; compliance to global norms; capacity to keep them safe; and their risk environments.

In this collection of global indices, Pakistan has been at the bottom last number in ranking for nuclear weapon useable material. To put records straight, this criterion ignores Pakistan’s stellar role in for On-site physical protection, control and accounting procedure, physical security during transportation as Pakistan has a 30,000 strong, trained and dedicated nuclear security force. Interestingly, it is difficult to empirically measure how effective material control is unless theft, pilferage or sabotage are reported. Not a single such incident has ever been reported in Pakistan.

Meanwhile, the duplicity for blaming Pakistan internationally can be judged as Pakistan is labelled as the most dangerous country given its battlefield nuclear weapons, and so-called unstable domestic and internal environment.

Whereas, in this self-abnegation frame, the NTI index interestingly reflects a different story and acknowledges that Pakistan’s domestic commitments and capacity to prevent the theft of nuclear materials are fairly good in the region. Pakistan did more since 2012 to boost protection of its atomic-bomb fuel than any other nuclear-armed country implementing best practices.

Now a question arises that how has India fared in the 2016 Index for nuclear security? The same India, where the situation is highly alarming and it seems that all the realities are conveniently swept under the carpet. And also the shocking aspect of Daily Mail’s reports highlights that some Indian nuclear scientists are reportedly assisting Naxal rebels to learn to utilise and transport uranium. Isn’t it a serious concern to think of, if and only if they are working on civilian nuclear technology? The international community will have to dig in as to what extent their nuclear weapons and sites are secured.

The quasi NGO’s index makes one further wonder as United States scored overall 11th position. Furthermore, U.S. scored 1st position for its actual security and control system taken on-site whilst ignoring the breach done by a group of anti-nuclear activists and The Nun Who Broke into the Nuclear Sanctum. It’s clear that the United States needs to do more to uphold the solemn responsibility of making certain that their nuclear weapons and materials are effectively secured through ratifying two major international conventions on nuclear security.

Arguably, it seems that the global nuclear security is as strong as the weakest link in the chain which deserves a more realistic assessment and is nothing more than only a patchwork of agreements, guidelines and multilateral engagement mechanisms. The third nuclear security summit is going to be held in Netherlands in March 2016, where countries will optimistically commence commitments toward safeguarding nuclear facilities and destroying more stocks.

Hassan Kurdmihan, an Iranian cleric, preacher and director of religious institutions in Tehran and Karaj, has been arrested by Iranian authorities for guiding the attack on the Saudi embassy in Tehran.

ILNA reports that according to Mohammadreza Mohseni Sani, a member of Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Affairs Commission, Kurdmihan was involved in the attack on the Saudi embassy.

Kurdmihan had been in Syria and, according to Mohseni Sani, he was arrested upon his return to Iran.

Kurdmihan is linked to Ansar Hezbollah and is often referred to as the “young preacher” who established several religious committees in Tehran neighbourhoods.

Mohseni Sani said a number of institutions have supported Kurdmihan but he refused to name any particular office.

The spokesman for the judiciary also announced today that an arrest was made in connection with the attack on the Saudi embassy.

The judiciary added that 100 people have been arrested so far in connection with the attacks on Saudi diplomatic buildings and some have been released.

Spending by governments in response to the influx of refugees to Europe could prove to be a stimulus for the economy, European Central Bank (ECB) President Mario Draghi told participants at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2016.

“One driver of the economy, which still hasn’t deployed its effect, is the probable increasing government expenditure to cope with the refugees,” Draghi said. “For Europe, the refugees are a challenge and an opportunity. Our society will change, in which direction one can only guess. The government expenditure needed to cope with this challenge could be a large stimulus to growth.”

Commenting on the US Federal Reserve Bank’s decision at the end of last year to raise interest rates, Draghi called the decision “appropriate, given the recovery cycle of the US economy.” The change in monetary policy “was patently communicated and flawlessly executed,” he added. The ECB chief explained that the differing monetary policies in Europe and the US reflect their different positions in their respective recovery cycles.

“The US is more advanced, so it is entirely natural that monetary policies differ and that they will be on a divergent path for a while,” Draghi said.

On Greece, Draghi observed that the situation has improved. “The Greek government has made much progress in undertaking reforms and fiscal consolidation,” although more work is required in financial-sector reforms and addressing non-performing loans, among other areas. Added Draghi: “Speed is of the essence. The sooner this is concluded, the sooner the Greek economy will get back to a normal situation.”

Asked about the strength of the European Union and the zeal for deeper integration, Draghi told participants that the early proponents of the European project did not anticipate a linear process that would be without bumps.

“All European leaders are trying to drive their people closer to the common European interest in a way that is respectful of democracy,” Draghi said. “What is always true with a crisis is that there can’t be a purely elitist process, but it has to be democratic. That is why after a crisis is resolved, the democracies are stronger and the common journey to an ever closer union is continued.”

By Skand Tayal*

The January 6, 2016 ‘thermonuclear’ test by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) is the fourth in the series of nuclear tests beginning in 2006 in that reclusive country’s consistent quest to attain credible deterrence against the United States of America.

In his long New Year message, the young supreme leader Kim Jong Un (KJU) had warned that “if aggressors dare to provoke us, even to a slight degree, we will never tolerate it, and respond resolutely with a merciless sacred war of justice, a great war for national reunification.” Keeping the world in no doubt about the identity of his country’s perceived enemy, KJU declared: “The United States has persisted in ignoring our just demand for replacing the Armistice Agreement with a separate pact to remove the danger of war, ease tension and create a powerful environment in the Korean peninsula. Instead, it has clung to its anachronistic policy hostile towards the DPRK, escalating the tension and egging its vassal forces on to stage a ‘human rights’ racket against the country.”

Three days after the test, a commentary published in the official North Korean news agency, KCNA, noted that, “History proves that powerful nuclear deterrence serves as the strongest treasured sword for frustrating outsiders’ aggression.” The commentary concluded that both Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi had made the mistake of yielding to Western pressure led by the United States which were bent on regime change. It also forcefully restated DPRK’s oft-repeated position that asking North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons was as pointless as “wishing to see the sky fall”.

Simultaneously, in pursuit of its goal to have a full range of delivery systems, on January 9, 2016, North Korea claimed to have successfully tested a submarine-launched missile. In May 2015 also Pyongyang had announced that it had successfully tested a Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM). However, South Korean experts had treated this claim with considerable scepticism.

Whether the most recent North Korean test was that of a Hydrogen Bomb will be known after a while, but the objective was miniaturisation of the system so that the nuclear weapon can be mounted on a missile. North Korea has made it known that it wants recognition by the world community as a nuclear weapon power and no amount of external pressure would force it to pause in that quest.

Global Reaction

The UN Security Council condemned the nuclear test, declared that it is a ‘clear violation’ of its previous resolutions, and pledged to pursue new sanctions against North Korea. USA, South Korea and Japan have “agreed to work together to forge a united and strong international response to North Korea’s reckless behaviour.”

Cheong Wa Dae, the South Korean President’s ‘Blue House’, exhorted the international community that it “must make sure that North Korea pays the corresponding price” for the nuclear test. South Korea has also limited entry to the Kaesong Industrial Region in North Korea, which houses 123 South Korean Companies employing approximately 53,000 North Korean workers and about 800 South Koreans.

In an angry reaction, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that the test was “a serious threat to (Japan’s) security and absolutely cannot be tolerated.” He assured the Diet that Japan would deal with the situation firmly in co-operation with the UN Security Council. Abe hinted at some unilateral measures “unique to our nation.” These measures could include strengthening of the anti-missile defence systems protecting Japan from a North Korean attack.

In line with statements issued after the previous tests, India’s official spokesman said on the day of the test that “(it is) a matter of deep concern that DPRK has again acted in violation of its international commitments…. Our concern about proliferation links between North East Asia and our neighbourhood are well known.”

Addressing the proliferation related concerns, a DPRK official statement on 15 January assured that North Korea will not provide anyone with its nuclear weapons, transfer related technology or use its bombs ‘recklessly’. The statement added that the country will arm itself with the ability to attack and retaliate with nuclear bombs and the US should “get used to North Korea as a nuclear armed state.”

China’s Reaction

Reacting to the nuclear test, Secretary of State John Kerry had urged China to end its “business as usual” approach towards North Korea. But China washed its hands off the problem, with its spokesperson Hua Chunying observing that “China is not the cause and crux of the Korean nuclear issue, nor is it the key to resolving the problem.” Nevertheless, the fact remains that only China is in a position to apply some credible pressure on North Korea since 88 per cent of North Korea’s foreign trade is with China. According to the South Koreans, China has been applying the existing UN sanctions against North Korea faithfully and the export of about 900 dual-use items has been prohibited to that country.

In the midst of heightened rhetoric, on January 11, 2016, China called for “all relevant parties” to exercise restraint, referring to the flight of a nuclear capable US B-52 Bomber over South Korea and South Korea’s resumption of anti-Pyongyang loudspeaker broadcasts.

China is comfortable with strategic ambiguity about the nuclear status of North Korea. But the insistence of an open declaration by the North of its Nuclear Weapon Power status would disrupt its strategic calculations in the region as the response from Japan could upset the regional power equation.

On January 13, in her New Year address to the nation, South Korean President Park Geun Hye sought to pressure China to join the efforts for UN Security Council action imposing harsher sanctions against North Korea. She said, “Unless its strong will is translated into actual necessary steps, we can not prevent (North Korea’s) fifth and sixth nuclear tests, and can not secure genuine peace and stability on the peninsula. I am sure China is well aware of this.” Seoul expects China to do more to denuclearise North Korea particularly in view of the rapidly warming ROK-China relations.

North Korea’s Approach towards South Korea

In the midst of heightened tensions, there are signs that North Korea is working with the aim of driving a wedge between the United States and South Korea, for which it is pursuing two independent policies – one of nuclearisation and acceptance as a nuclear weapons power, and the second of not upsetting the apple cart with South Korea and continue with the current policy of no peace – no war.

In his New Year address before the latest test, KJU referred to the inter-Korean high level emergency contact in August 2015 and said, “In the future, too, we will make strenuous efforts to develop inter-Korean talks and improve bilateral relations.” He advised “….if (South Korea) is sincere about improving inter-Korean relations and reunifying the country peacefully, the South Korean authorities must not seek pointless confrontation of systems…..”

It may be recalled that in early August 2015 there was a landmine explosion on the Southern side of the demilitarized zone (DMZ) which injured a ROK soldier. South Korea accused the North of planting fresh landmines in violation of the 1953 Armistice and, in retaliation, resumed anti-North cross-border propaganda through high volume loudspeakers. These loudspeaker broadcasts had been under suspension for the previous eleven years. North Korea reacted strongly giving the South a 48 hour ultimatum to stop the propaganda. But before the deadline came on 22 August, the North proposed a high level emergency meeting at Panmunjom in the DMZ. After marathon talks spread over three days, a six-point joint communiqué was issued which inter-alia included:

1. North Korea’s ‘regret’ over the injuries to a South Korean soldier from the landmine.
2. The North lifted its ‘quasi-state’ of war.
3. Agreement on reunion of families on the occasion of ‘Chuseok’ – harvest festival – on 27 September. And,
4. Suspension of South Korean loudspeaker broadcasts.

A significant outcome of this dialogue was that about 250 aged South Koreans travelled to the North for a 3-day family reunion at Mount Kumgang resort in the North. This emotional get together happened after a gap of five years. Since the agreement about family reunions reached at the first-ever Summit between the leaders of the two countries in 2000, about 19,000 Koreans have met their family members separated during the 1950-53 Korean War.

South Korea had also stopped its loudspeaker broadcasts against the North, which were being belted out from 11 locations along the DMZ. The high decibel broadcasts include K-Pop, News and criticism of the North and can be heard up to more than 10 kilometres inside North Korea. After the January 6 nuclear test, the South Koreans have resumed these broadcasts, which would infuriate the North.

Conclusion

Analysing the events of the past one year, it would be fair to conclude that Kim Jong Un has firm control over all the levers of power in North Korea, including the military. The reclusive country would continue on the course set by Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il, pursuing a policy of ‘Military First’, the ‘Juche’ concept of self-reliance and seeking effective nuclear strike capability against the United States. The peninsula would continue to be divided as neither side is keen on unification despite their public protestations in favour of reuniting the long-divided country. The paramount objective of the DPRK leadership continues to be the survival of the regime and its politico-economic system, and it is unlikely to allow tensions with South Korea or the United States to come to a point that would lead to hostilities. However, a vicious war of words would go on! The world, at large, is also likely to gradually get reconciled to a de facto nuclear DPRK.

*Skand Tayal is a former Ambassador of India to the Republic of South Korea.

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India. Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://idsa.in/idsacomments/north-korean-nuclear-test_stayal_220116

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden on Saturday said that the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) is a threat to Turkey like Islamic State, condemning the Kurdish militants as “a terror group plain and simple,” AFP reports.

“IS is not the only existential threat to the people of Turkey, the PKK is equally a threat and we are aware of that.. it is a terror group plain and simple and what they continue to do is absolutely outrageous,” Biden said after talks with Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu in Istanbul.

Biden on Fridaystrongly criticized Turkey for failing to set the right “example” on freedom of expression, following the imprisonment of journalists and investigation of academics who criticized government policy, AFP reports.

“When the media are intimidated or imprisoned for critical reporting… and more than 1,000 academics are accused of treason simply by signing a petition, that’s not the kind of example that needs to be set,” Biden said at a meeting with civil society representatives in Istanbul.

By Fatih Karimov

Iran is holding talks with the US to re-launch direct flights between the two countries, Abbas Akhoundi, the Iranian Minister of Road and Urban Development said.

Iran Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has started negotiations with the US on the issue, Akhoundi said, Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported Jan. 24.

Referring to the negotiations on direct Iran-US flights, Farhad Parvaresh, Chairman and Managing Director of Iran Air, the Iranian flag carrier said that daily flights to New York used to take place before the 1979 Islamic Revolution and they will hopefully get resumed in near future.

Following the implementation of the nuclear deal in Jan. 16 Iran is now looking into the possibility of resuming direct flights to the United States in light of the removal of sanctions that have prohibited the country from doing so.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani pledged at the 68th session of the UN general assembly in New York in 2013 to facilitate travel to homeland for Iranian expatriates residing in the US.

The US, and Los Angeles in particular, is home to hundreds of thousands of Iranian expatriates.

Travelers between Iran and the US currently have to change flights in a third country, usually in Europe or the Persian Gulf states.

By Joshua Kucera

Russia has reached out to the Taliban in Afghanistan in what senior officials say is an effort to cooperate with them in the fight against ISIS in that country. The strategy would be shift for the Kremlin, which has largely portrayed the Taliban as just as much of a threat as ISIS.

The Kremlin’s special envoy to Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, said in an interview with Interfax last month that Russian interests “objectively coincide” with those of the Taliban in the fight against ISIS, and that Moscow has channels for information sharing with the Taliban. “The Taliban now for the most part act like a national liberation movement. For them the Americans are occupiers, who illegally occupy their homeland and threaten their cultural and religious traditions,” Kabulov said.

The Taliban, for its part, denied that any contacts with Russia had taken place:

On Wednesday 23rd December 2015 some media outlets published a report quoting the Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov as saying that they have talked to or established lines of communication with the Islamic Emirate regarding the threat of so called Daesh in Afghanistan.

The Islamic Emirate has made and will continue to make contacts with many regional countries to bring an end to the American invasion of our country and we consider this our legitimate right.

But we do not see a need for receiving aid from anyone concerning so called Daesh and neither have we contacted nor talked with anyone about this issue.

At the same time, Moscow has explored expanding arms sales or provisions to the Afghan government. Kabulov said this month that Russia would be sending a shipment of small arms to Kabul in February.

The notion of cooperating, in whatever form, with the Taliban against ISIS would represent a shift. Russian officials have consistently equated the Taliban with ISIS. A military exercise by the Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization in May, for example, drilled against a scenario of a Taliban invasion of Central Asia. “The threat from Afghanstan persists, connected with the presence of Taliban and other armed groups not controlled by Kabul, on the southern vector of the CSTO area of responsibility,” CSTO General Secretary Nikolay Bordyuzha said at the time. Bordyuzha claimed that there were some members of ISIS alongside the Taliban forces, “which can’t but be cause for concern in the heads of the CSTO member states.”

The single-minded focus on ISIS also makes little sense since, by all accounts, that group’s presence in Afghanistan is very small, and what exists is concentrated in the south. Even the normally Kremlin-friendly Russian analyst Alexander Knyazev was skeptical about the ISIS (also known as Daesh) threat to Central Asia. “The problem of ‘dealing with the Daesh threat in fact doesn’t exist,” he said in an interview this month with the Tajikistan newspaper Asia Plus. “The scale of Daesh’s influence in Afghanistan, expressed by any public sources, must be reduced by several orders of magnitude if we want to understand the reality.”

American Central Asia analyst Noah Tucker, in another interview with Asia Plus this week, also expressed confusion at Russia’s strategy: “[I]n Syria and now potentially in Afghanistan the Russian government is doing exactly the thing it criticizes the US and NATO so much for doing – intervening in a foreign conflict. If NATO intervention in these conflicts won’t fix them (and I agree that it hasn’t), I don’t understand how Russia could genuinely believe that their own intervention will.”

Russia’s new approach to the Taliban also is raising eyebrows in the ex-Soviet Central Asian republics. While the Taliban threat to Central Asia is still likely not grave, it is greater than the entirely fictitious ISIS threat. Taliban forces have kidnapped Tajikistan border guards and clashed with Turkmenistan border guards.

“Tajikistan and other Central Asian countries also must have their own interests and protect them,” wrote Asia Plus in a recent commentary. “First of all, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan should think about how to protect their traditional anti-Taliban partners, especially Tajiks, Uzbeks and Turkmens. They should think about what to do in order to protect their own interests during the upcoming clash of powers in Afghanistan.”

Global unemployment is set to experience continuing high rates, warns a recent International Labor Organization (ILO) report, that notes chronic vulnerable employment in many emerging and developing economies are still deeply affecting the world of work.

The final figure for unemployment in 2015 is estimated to stand at 197.1 million and in 2016 is forecast to rise by about 2.3 million to reach 199.4 million. An additional 1.1 million jobless will likely be added to the global tally in 2017, according to the ILO’s World Employment and Social Outlook – Trends 2016 (WESO).

“The significant slowdown in emerging economies coupled with a sharp decline in commodity prices is having a dramatic effect on the world of work,” said ILO Director-General Guy Ryder.

“Many working women and men are having to accept low paid jobs, both in emerging and developing economies and also, increasingly in developed countries. And despite a drop in the number of unemployed in some EU countries and the US, too many people are still jobless. We need to take urgent action to boost the number of decent work opportunities or we risk intensified social tensions,” he added.

In 2015, total global unemployment stood at 197.1 million – 27 million higher than the pre-crisis level of 2007.

Emerging economies worst hit

The unemployment rate for developed economies decreased from 7.1 per cent in 2014 to 6.7 per cent in 2015. In most cases, however, these improvements were not sufficient to eliminate the jobs gap that emerged as a result of the global financial crisis.

Moreover, the employment outlook has now weakened in emerging and developing economies, notably in Brazil, China and oil-producing countries.

“The unstable economic environment associated with volatile capital flows, still dysfunctional financial markets and the shortage of global demand continue to affect enterprises and deter investment and job creation,” said Raymond Torres, Director of the ILO Research Department.

“In addition, policy-makers need to focus more on strengthening employment policies and tackling excessive inequalities. There is much evidence that well-designed labor market and social policies are essential for boosting economic growth and addressing the jobs crisis and almost eight years after the start of the global crisis, a strengthening of that policy approach is urgently needed,” adds Torres.

The authors of the WESO also document the fact that job quality remains a major challenge. While there has been a decrease in poverty rates, the rate of decline in the number of working poor in developing economies has slowed and vulnerable employment still accounts for over 46 per cent of total employment globally, affecting nearly 1.5 billion people.

Vulnerable employment is particularly high in emerging and developing economies, hitting between half and three-quarters of the employed population in those groups of countries, respectively, with peaks in Southern Asia (74 per cent) and sub-Saharan Africa (70 per cent).

Tackling informal employment

Meanwhile, the report shows that informal employment – as a percentage of non-agricultural employment – exceeds 50 per cent in half of the developing and emerging countries with comparable data. In one-third of these countries, it affects over 65 per cent of workers.

“The lack of decent jobs leads people to turn to informal employment, which is typically characterized by low productivity, low pay and no social protection. This needs to change. Responding urgently and vigorously to the scale of the global jobs challenge is key to successful implementation of the United Nations’ newly adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” Ryder said.

By Ahmad Shah*

Women activists in the southeastern province of Khost complain that they being excluded from communal occasions, accusing local officials of having no interest in anything more than a token female presence at public events.

This lack of representation extended to important consultative meetings, said Kamila Akbari, the head of a women’s capacity building organisation in Khost.

She said that when the president visited the province a few months ago, only male representatives were invited to meet him.

“As far as I know, the governor of Khost and the tribal leaders raised issues people face in the province, but there was no woman there to present gender concerns in Khost to the president,” she continued, adding sarcastically, “No-one provided any information to the president about the problems faced by women in Khost, so I think that the president might have thought that the people of Khost are very good and behave perfectly towards women and respect all their rights.”

Khost activist Zohra Jalal noted the example of a video conference call the president held with the Khost governor and other public figures earlier in 2015 to discuss challenges facing the province.

Women were neither invited to attend the meeting nor were any issues related to gender equality raised in the event, she continued.

This meant that women who voted in the presidential elections last year now felt betrayed.

“The president has forgotten us, and he hasn’t asked the former governor what kinds of problems the women of Khost face,” Jalal said.

Nadia Bawari, head of the local women’s union, added, “Unfortunately, I have to say that there is a great deal of discrimination towards women in Khost.”

Social affairs expert Ershad Raghand said that any meeting that did not include women was a waste of time.

“Half of human society is missing in such gatherings as well as in their conclusions. [Women’s] needs, problems, and opinions remain unsaid.”

Women in the province have long complained that they are shut out of public life. Only a tiny proportion of civil servants are female, despite attempts to introduce positive discrimination into local government hiring practices.

According to official figures, just 240 women work in government offices in Khost province, compared with close to 8,000 men. Six more women work with the Afghan military there.

Civil society activist Naat Bibi said that this exclusion extended to local celebrations as well as political meetings.

She highlighted the festivities held each year on August 20 to mark Independence Day and the defeat of the British army in a landmark 1880 battle.

These were attended by thousands of men, but women had little involvement and only a handful of female representatives were invited to the official ceremonies, Bibi said. This was particularly galling as it was a female folk hero who played a central in the decisive battle the celebrations commemorate.

“Malalai of Helmand had the major role in independence,’ she said, explaining that this young Pashtun woman had carried the Afghan flag and rallied the troops as they fought in the battle of Maiwand, before she was mortally wounded.

“However, the men have forgotten this. They still discriminate against us. But why? are we not from this homeland? Don’t we have rights? What does the law say? Not inviting women to these gatherings is a cruel response to the sacrifice made by Malalai.”

Mubarez Mohammad Zadran, the spokesman of the Khost governor, said such allegations were without foundation.

“Every week, the head of the provincial department of women’s affairs, along with other departmental heads, meet with the governor and share information on the development and problems of the women of Khost,” he said.

The two female members of the provincial council also held monthly meetings with the governor, Zadran said, adding that the governor’s door was always open if women had problems they wanted to raise with him.

Malalai Wali, head of the department of women’s affairs in Khost, also said that she was invited to events.

“If female members of civil society are not invited to the meetings, this is not the responsibility of the department of women’s affairs,” she continued.

However, the dozens of female activists working in Khost say that the token presence of women official at official meetings was not enough.

“Women are seen as having no value in this society,” said provincial council member Waghma Arzo. “People still have this belief that women were created to stay inside the home and men to work outside the house.”

“I am upset with the authorities,” she continued. “They ensure the support of young men in every gathering, however young women…are neither invited to meetings nor supported by anyone. Isn’t this evidence of biased behaviour?”

Women also complain that tribal leaders also exclude women from decision-making processes, even when they are directly relevant to their lives.

Khost resident Rahima noted that several huge tribal gatherings had been held to decide on restricting or eliminating the payment of dowries.

These sums are often so large that young men must delay their marriage for years and some never marry at all.

Not a single female representative was invited to these gatherings, she continued, which meant that the rulings on the dowry were bound to fail.

Mothers insisted on the payment of a hefty pride price, she added, “so they violate those tribal decisions”.

Zeba Barakzai, head of the Khost branch of the Afghan Women’s Network, said that her organisation’s central office was very keen for her to participate in high-profile events and so raise awareness about gender equality issues. The problem is that she was not invited, Barakzai explained.

“Our administration wants a monthly report about meetings held by the women’s network, the problems and issues we recorded, and in how many events have we participated. However, no one invites us to the events and so we are unable to report back.”

Bostan Walizai, head of the Civil Society and Human Rights Organisation in the province, was also concerned.

“Women’s insignificant representation in Khost government offices, men not valuing women and low capacity have led to women being denied even more rights,” he said.

Legal expert Najibullah Alokhail said that gender equality was, in theory, enshrined in Afghan law.

He compared female participation in social affairs with a bird in flight.

“Man and woman are like the wings of the bird; if one wing of the bird is missing, it will never be able to fly. Similarly, the development of society without women’s participation is impossible.”

This report was produced under IWPR’s Promoting Human Rights and Good Governance in Afghanistan initiative, funded by the European Union Delegation to Afghanistan and published at IWPR’s ARR Issue 533.

Assimilation of migrants can be measured in various ways, one such measure being their access to the homeownership market. This column argues that the evolution of homeownership rates of immigrants is a complex process, with important selection effects. In France, the homeownership rate among northern African immigrants lags behind not only that of natives, but also southern European immigrants. A possible reason is discrimination against northern African immigrants not only on the labour market, but also on the credit and housing markets.

By Laurent Gobillon and Matthieu Solignac*

The capacity of European countries to assimilate immigrants has been much debated recently due to large inflows of migrants and refugees. Assimilation of immigrants can be measured across many dimensions, and a particular emphasis has been put on evaluating their success on the labour market (Borjas 2014). Another meaningful marker of assimilation is the access of immigrants to the homeownership market. Indeed, homeownership is considered as a sign of economic success and a profitable investment. Moreover, owned dwellings are often located in neighbourhoods providing green amenities, good quality schools, safety and peer effects with educated families (Dietz and Haurin 2003). The gap in homeownership rate between natives and immigrants is often large – around 20 percentage points in the US – and it does not disappear over time (Borjas 2002).

Whether this long-lasting gap reflects specific difficulties for immigrants to access homeownership is an important policy concern, as such difficulties could justify a policy intervention. However, this gap could also result from differences in behaviour, with immigrants choosing different strategies on the housing market that do not involve homeownership. This is particularly true if they do not want to stay in their host country and plan to emigrate.

Why a lower homeownership rate for immigrants?

Several factors have been put forward to explain the gap in homeownership rates between natives and immigrants, the most obvious one being the lower level of endowments of many immigrant groups. The inability to speak the language of the host country is a significant barrier (Painter and Yu 2010). Moreover, some immigrants are less likely to benefit from family transfers to secure the down payment when taking a loan. Lower education can prevent immigrants to get highly paid jobs and accumulate wealth to purchase a home. Even if they own a foreign diploma, their credentials might not be recognised in the host country and they may suffer from discrimination on the labour market (Altonji and Blank 1999, Bertrand and Mullainathan 2004).

Immigrants can also have a lower access to the housing and credit markets. They lack information on these markets and they may suffer from discrimination affecting not only the screening of housing units (Yinger 1986) but also the type of mortgage and insurance made available to them (Ross and Tootell 2004). Even if some immigrants access homeownership, they may be more vulnerable to adverse economic shocks that could make them default on their mortgage and force them to resell their dwelling (Bayer et al. 2015).

Immigrants’ location choice also influences their access to homeownership, since both the proportion of owned dwellings and housing prices vary across cities. Ethnic neighbourhoods could favour homeownership as they can help avoid discrimination. They can also support an ethnic secondary housing market, and they can provide specific amenities and information on the housing market (Flippen 2010, Finnigan 2015). Time spent in the host country can be beneficial, since it allows the acquisition of a local diploma, the learning of the host language and the gathering of information on the labour, housing, and credit markets. It also facilitates wealth accumulation and marriage with natives who can contribute to down payment.

Finally, staying in the rental sector can be a choice for some immigrants who prefer to make financial transfers to their family in their home country or accumulate wealth to purchase a dwelling in their home country after return migration.

Explaining differences in the evolution of homeownership rates

How disparities in homeownership rates between natives and immigrants evolve over decades has been mostly studied using repeated cross-section approaches with an emphasis on cohort methods (Myers and Lee 1998, Sinning 2010). However, for immigrants, the evolution of the homeownership rate not only reflects changes in access to homeownership, but also selection effects with exits and entries into the host country of individuals with specific resources and preferences. Therefore, the access to homeownership of immigrants can only be investigated using data that follow individuals over time.

In a new paper (Gobillon and Solignac 2015), we study the dynamics of homeownership for immigrants in France using a large longitudinal dataset that follows individuals over time from 1975 to 1999. We assess the impact of entries and exits on the homeownership rate of immigrants, and we analyse the evolution of the difference in homeownership rates between natives and immigrants for cohorts of individuals over that period. In particular, we quantify the role of individual, family, and location characteristics, and their effects on this evolution.

Figure 1. Homeownership rates of natives and immigrants

As shown by Figure 1, the homeownership rates of natives and immigrants have increased over the period. The difference in homeownership rates between the two groups is large at around 15 points in 1975 and it has only slightly decreased by 1.4 points over the period. Figure 1 also shows that there is some heterogeneity across immigrant groups. Indeed, there is long-lasting large gap in homeownership rates between natives and north African immigrants, at around 35 points. By contrast, the gap between natives and southern European immigrants, while rather large in 1975, has vanished over time. These stylised facts mask important composition effects.

In particular, there are ingoing and outgoing flows that modify the immigrant population on the territory and affect the homeownership rates.

Figure 2. Homeownership rates of immigrant stayers, entrants and leavers

Figure 2 shows that immigrant entrants and leavers have much lower homeownership rates than stayers. Interestingly, when focusing on the individuals staying in France over the entire 1975-1999 period, trends in homeownership rates are different from those observed for the overall population as can be seen from Figure 3.

The gap in homeownership rates between native and immigrant stayers is smaller, but it increases by 3 points over the period. The gap between native and north African stayers grows larger and southern European stayers never catch up with native stayers.

Entrants into the territory have a large negative effect on the evolution of immigrant homeownership rates. Although they have on average a better education than immigrants living in metropolitan France from 1975 to 1999, they are also younger and at an earlier stage in the wealth accumulation process. Moreover, they locate themselves in larger cities where the homeownership rate is lower.

Figure 3. Homeownership rates of native and immigrant stayers

Additionally, the effects of their characteristics are lower than those of stayers. For instance, the effect of age on the propensity to be homeowner is lower. A possible explanation is that time is needed to enjoy the benefits from settling in France. By contrast, immigrants leaving France have a positive effect on the evolution of immigrant homeownership rates because they leave while having low access to homeownership. This can result from a residential strategy that involves remaining a renter before returning to the home country or moving to an alternative country. Nevertheless, the effect of leavers on the evolution of immigrant homeownership rates is only one third that of entrants.

Interestingly, the effects of characteristics on homeownership for native and immigrant stayers have evolved in favour of immigrants, which is consistent with steps towards assimilation. There are important differences between immigrant groups, since the effects of characteristics on homeownership have evolved in a more favourable way for southern Europeans, suggesting assimilation, but have changed in a detrimental way for north Africans. Moreover, among renters accessing homeownership during the period, north Africans end up living in newly owned dwellings that have fewer rooms per person than those of natives and that are located in municipalities where the unemployment rate is much higher.

Conclusion

Our work shows that the evolution of homeownership rates of immigrants is a complex process because the immigrant population is constituted of various waves of immigrants, with some succeeding well and purchasing a home while others are unable to access homeownership. There are also important selection effects with exits and entries of immigrants into the territory. This occurs because immigrant entrants and leavers have different propensities to be a homeowner than immigrant stayers.

We find that in France, northern African immigrants lag behind not only natives but also southern European immigrants, for whom the results point at significant steps towards assimilation. These disparities can be explained by differences in individual characteristics across groups, and by differences in the effects of these characteristics on accessing homeownership. A possible reason is the existence of discrimination against northern African immigrants not only on the labour market, but also on the credit and housing markets. Additional studies are needed to assess on which markets discriminations are significant as they can justify targeted anti-discrimination policies.

*About the authors:
Laurent Gobillon, CNRS Senior Researcher, Paris School of Economics; Research Fellow, IZA and CEPR

Matthieu Solignac, Postdoctoral fellow at the Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania

References:
Altonji, J and R Blank (1999), “Race and gender in the labor market”, In Orley Ashenfelter and David Card (eds.) Handbook of Labor Economics,Volume 3, Part C, book chapter: Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press, 3143–3259.

Bayer, P, F Ferreira, and S Ross (2015), “The Vulnerability of Minority Homeowners in the Housing Boom and Bust”, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Forthcoming.

Bertrand, M and S Mullainathan (2004), “Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination”, The American Economic Review, 94(4):991–1013.

Borjas, G (2002), “Homeownership in the immigrant population”, Journal of Urban Economics, 52:448–476.

Borjas, G (2014), Immigration Economics, Harvard University Press, 296 p.

Dietz, R and D Haurin (2003), “The social and private micro-level consequences of homeownership”, Journal of Urban Economics, 54(3):401–450.

Finnigan, R (2015), “Racial Segregation, Minority Population Chance, and Minority Homeownership, 1980-2010”, Working Paper, University of California at Davis.

Flippen, C (2010), “The spatial dynamics of stratification: Metropolitan context, population redistribution, and black and Hispanic homeownership”, Demography, 47(4):845–868.

Gobillon, L and M Solignac (2015), “The homeownership of immigrants in France: selection effects related to international migration flows”, CEPR Working Paper 10975.

Myers, D and S Lee (1998), “Immigration Trajectories into Homeownership: A Temporal Analysis of Residential Assimilation”, International Migration Review, 32(3):593–625.

Painter, G and Z Yu (2010), “Immigrants and Housing Markets in Mid-Size Metropolitan Areas”, International Migration Review, 44(2):442–476.

Ross, S and G Tootell (2004), “Redlining, the community reinvestment act, and private mortgage insurance, Journal of Urban Economics”, Journal of Urban Economics, 55(1):278–297.

Sinning, M (2010), “Homeownership and Economic Performance of Immigrants in Germany”, Urban Studies, 47(2):387–409.

Yinger, J (1986), “Measuring Racial Discrimination with Fair Housing Audits: Caught in the Act”, The American Economic Review, 56(5):881–893.

On Jan.14, Guatemala inaugurated a new president who will govern until 2020. Jimmy Morales, 46, swore to uphold the law and to govern as president with “patriotic love.” That same day, the Congress that was newly elected on September 6 also took office.

Morales, from the National Convergence Front (FCN), won the runoff election in Oct. 25 with 67 percent of the vote, while Sandra Torres, from the National Unity of Hope (UNE), received 33 percent of votes. Morales’s victory is seen as a vote of protest against widespread corruption in the country, which forced the resignation of former president Otto Perez Molina (2012-2015) on Sept. 2. Perez Molina is currently imprisoned.

“Thank you God for the privilege you have given me to serve my people,” were Morales’s first words after swearing in to office. He is a conservative and deeply religious comedian. “There is no magic. Let’s stop resigning ourselves to pessimism. A new Guatemala is possible and worthwhile.”

Morales emphasized that he will attack, with the support of the citizens, corruption and poverty — which affects nearly 60 percent of the 16.7 million people in Guatemala — as well as improve health services and education, among other policies.

“I am sure that we do not want to wake up to see the dinosaur of corruption, nor the traditional way of doing politics, or the feuds of those who make a living by dividing us Guatemalans,” added the president.

In a hearing with Morales the day after his inauguration, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Alicia Bárcena, suggested spearheading “a new model of economic development that promotes social inclusion and helps fight poverty.”

“This model must be based on a policy of productive transformation with technological innovation and competitiveness to create decent and quality employment, as well as on a budgetary scheme that is more flexible and allows the country to increase its tax revenue, which in 2013 represented 13 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), compared with an average of 21.3 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean as a whole,” said Bárcena.

To do this, Guatemala “should boost its domestic regional development, reducing the costs of logistics, security, electricity and the Internet, while also adopting a foreign policy that integrates the areas of trade, investment, culture and politics and that reassumes leadership in regional integration processes,” she added.

ECLAC calculates that Guatemala ended 2015 with growth of 3.9 percent and estimates that this pace will hold steady in 2016, when the expansion is forecast at 4 percent.

Majority opposition in Congress

Among the challenges Morales will face is a majority opposition in Congress, chaired by Mario Taracena Díaz Sol, of the UNE. Of the 158 representatives, the Renewed Democratic Liberty party (LIDER) — whose leader Manuel Baldizón was the favorite to win the elections but ended in third place — has the largest number of legislators (45), followed by UNE (33) and the Patriotic Party (18) of Pérez Molina. The FCN has only 11 representatives, which will force the president to negotiate with the different political forces to adopt legislative initiatives.

Human rights will also be an important issue that the new government will have to address. On Jan. 6, 13 military officers were accused of forced disappearances and other crimes against humanity. Among the accused are retired General Benedicto Lucas García, former chief of staff during the regime of his brother, the former dictator Romeo Lucas García (1978-1982), and retired Lieutenant Colonel César Augusto Cabrera Mejía, whom Morales intended to appoint Minister of Interior. According to the Public Ministry, the officers are responsible for the disappearance and death of at least 558 indigenous people in the 80s.

Additionally, on Jan. 11 the trial of former dictator Efraín Rios Montt, 89, was suspended. Montt is accused of genocide during his rule between 1982 and 1983, a time considered the bloodiest in the 36 years of armed conflict. This period ended with the signing of the peace agreements in 1996 and left more than 200,000 dead and disappeared. The court decided to suspend the trial until three writs of amparo filed by Rios Montt’s defense are resolved.

While some sectors were concerned about the presence of businessmen in the new cabinet, the head of the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), Iván Velásquez, confirmed that the cabinet members Morales appointed were analyzed by the committee, finding no inconsistencies regarding their integrity.
“President Morales asked us to review whether there was any information about some people he hoped to appoint to his government,” Velásquez said. “We worked exclusively on that, and there were no active role or suggestions of the candidates for the positions. We expressed what we knew about the people that the President submitted for consideration, and we did so with the full confidence and confidentiality as appropriate in matters of this nature.”

By Matt Hadro

The youngest of James Lansberry’s nine children almost didn’t survive his birth. Born with no heartbeat, he was resuscitated and spent 11 days in the neo-natal intensive care unit. The medical bill was over $200,000.

Yet “every single dollar of those bills was paid,” Lansberry recalled, “and it was paid through gifts and notes and cards and bearing the burden from hundreds of different families across the country – people who I’ll never meet on earth, who took the time to not only bear the financial burden of my family, but I have cards and notes from 43 different states.”

Lansberry is the vice president of the Christian health-sharing group Samaritan Ministries, and has been a member since 1996. Instead of enrolling in private insurance or the public health exchanges, member families of health-sharing ministries pay a monthly premium that covers each other’s health care costs, and they can volunteer to pay even more for others’ needs.

When someone’s cost exceeds the limit of the sharable amount – $250,000 for Samaritan members – other members can volunteer to cover the additional costs.

“Health care sharing is specifically, as we practice it at Samaritan Ministries, is a lot like moving a piano,” Lansberry said at a Jan. 20 Heritage Foundation panel. “You can’t do it by yourself, and you need others to gather around you in a time of need when you can make that happen.”

Enrollment in health-sharing ministries is allowed under the Affordable Care Act, provided the ministries existed before the year 2000.

Membership in the three largest health-sharing ministries – Samaritan Ministries International, Christian Care Ministry or “Medi-Share,” and Christian Healthcare Ministries – has risen significantly since 2013, jumping from around 190,000 members nationwide to over 311,000 at the end of 2014, according to the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research arm of the Susan B. Anthony List.

The three ministries combined saw a total of $253 million in health care costs in 2015.

The author of the report on the ministries, Scott E. Daniels, credited their rising popularity in part to families’ desires to pay only for insurance coverage they need.

There’s also a demand for alternative health care providers spurred by the health care law’s individual mandate and its “values,” he added.

The “values” of the Affordable Care Act are not just abortion coverage and contraception mandates, Daniels insisted at the Heritage Foundation panel, but a much broader “secular ideal of communal solidarity” that coerces everyone into buying insurance so there are no “free riders” in society.

Health-sharing ministries are a response to these “values,” he added, because they do promote a community, but a “devoutly Christian” one of “bearing one another’s burdens” and “mutual aid,” without coverage that members would object to subsidizing like abortions and contraceptives.

In 2014, a government watchdog report found that in federally-subsidized health plans on the public exchanges, insurers were not billing abortion coverage separately, thus leaving open the possibility of federal dollars going to cover elective abortions.

“We need to go back to what we were as an early Christian community,” said Louis Brown, the director of CMF CURO, a Catholic health-sharing ministry that has partnered with Samaritan Ministries. This means “accompanying each other in all aspects of our life” and ensuring that the Lord is “Lord over everything” including health care.

CMF CURO was launched in October of 2014 as an alternative to the insurance exchanges set up under the Affordable Care Act. It partnered with Samaritan Ministries to ensure compliance with the health care law, since only health-sharing ministries created before 2000 are accepted as legal substitutes for insurance.

Aside from the monthly premiums or “shares,” families pay a $300 out-of-pocket deductible for costs with a CMF CURO Visa debit card and 30 to 50 percent of costs up front, but they are reimbursed for any costs after that up to $250,000.

There is no reimbursement for morally-objectionable services like abortion, contraceptives, or in-vitro fertilization. Families cover one another’s medical needs along with personal notes and prayers.

Participants must live a healthy, Christian lifestyle: regular church attendance and no drug abuse and sexual immorality. They also must abstain from tobacco use – except for a special cigar or pipe smoke – and must submit a yearly recommendation from their pastor.

Most pre-existing conditions aren’t eligible for reimbursement unless “the condition appears to be cured” and a year has passed “without symptoms, treatment, or medication.” For more serious problems like Type 1 diabetes or a previous bout with cancer, the waiting period is longer.

Someone with these problems could conceivably enroll and rely upon the generosity of other members to cover their needs, however.

The ministry now has members in 48 states. 55,000 households have now enrolled with Samaritan Ministries.

For two families, the biggest factors in their decision to switch from the private insurance market and the exchanges to CMF CURO were the high cost and the Christian ethos – “conscience and cost,” as one member put it.

“The most immediate benefit has been cost-saving,” said Tim Mayer, a Catholic father of three from Manassas, Virginia.

The Charlotte Lozier report on health-sharing ministries found that member families paid anywhere from 45 to 60 percent less in monthly payments compared to market insurance, saving them hundreds of dollars a month and thousands per year.

The “deeper benefit,” Mayer added, was “the opportunity to take full responsibility for our own health and to take a more active role in managing it.” While normal private insurance is operated behind-the-scenes to the policyholder with insurers and providers negotiating costs, health-sharing involves considerably more personal oversight.

And it is important to have truly Christian health insurance, Mayer added, “giving the Lord more of our trust, in terms of providing for our physical needs.”

For Brooks Cross, a father of five from Hanover, Virginia, conscience played a key role in his decision to enroll his family in CMF CURO so that his premiums would not go to cover abortions, contraceptives, and sterilizations.

“Other people, if they want to live out Humanae Vitae, the Church’s teachings, they want to be fruitful and multiply and bring children into the world as a blessing, this is a way that other Christians just basically help you pay for that and make it happen,” Cross told CNA.

In the midst of a job change, Cross was searching for affordable health insurance for his family that would not subsidize abortion and contraception. However, “the rates were just so high,” he said of the private market plans.

After he and his wife prayed and searched, they found Samaritan Ministries and saw they would pay far less in monthly premiums. It was “kind of a leap [of faith],” Cross admitted, but added “it allows us to live out the Gospel.”

His family’s monthly cost for insurance dropped significantly. For instance, he ultimately paid only $300 out of pocket for his youngest child’s birth, on top of his monthly share payments.

Cross has been enrolled in CMF CURO for about a year now, Mayer for a few months. So far it was worked for both parties. Mayer said he would recommend it to any family shopping for insurance programs, provided that they don’t have a condition that might not be covered under the health-sharing plan.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif visited this week the European Center for Nuclear Research (CERN), one of the foremost international centers of scientific research.

During the visit, while addressing scientists, including Pakistani scientists and technicians, Sharif said that Pakistan considers it a matter of immense pride to have become an Associate Member of CERN last year especially, as it was the first non-European country to have achieved this milestone.

“Our Associate Membership of CERN is a recognition of the achievements of our scientists, engineers and technicians,” Sharif said.

Sharif underscored that Pakistan and CERN had been collaborating since 1994, and had carried out a number of successful projects involving sophisticated technologies and precision engineering. Pakistan was also involved in accelerator developments, making it an important partner for CERN, Sharif said.

According to Sharif, the Associate Membership of Pakistan has opened a new era of cooperation that will strengthen the long-term partnership between CERN and the Pakistani scientific community. It will allow Pakistani scientists to become members of the CERN staff, participate in CERN’s training and career-development programs and CERN Council, as well as allow Pakistani industry to bid for CERN contracts, thus opening up opportunities for industrial collaboration in areas of advanced technology, Sharif noted.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated his government’s support of illegal settlements in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem “at any time” on Sunday when discussing the case of settlers who took over two buildings in Hebron this week.

Israeli forces evicted more than 80 Israeli settlers on Friday from two buildings believed to belong to Palestinians in Hebron’s Old City, a day after the settlers forced their way into them under the protection of the Israeli army and police forces.

According to Israeli far-right news site Arutz Sheva, the settlers claimed to have purchased the buildings from Palestinians.

The settlers’ eviction caused a row among Israeli politicians, with members of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, threatening to leave Netanyahu’s coalition if the buildings remain evacuated.

“The government supports settlement at any time, especially now when it is under terrorist assault and is taking a courageous and determined stand in the face of terrorist attacks,” Netanyahu said during a Cabinet meeting on Sunday.

“With the same breath, we are a nation of law and we must respect the law,” he added. “As soon as the procedures regarding the purchase are approved, we will allow the two homes in Hebron to be populated, as indeed occurred in similar instances in the past.”

Netanyahu said the procedure to determine the ownership of the buildings started on Sunday and would occur “as quickly as possible,” likely within a week.

The decision by Israeli courts regarding the status of the homes comes as Hebron’s Old City continues to stand at the heart of tensions in the occupied Palestinian territories.

The area — known as H2 and under full Israeli military control — is home to an enclave of Jewish settlers living in the center of the West Bank’s largest Palestinian city.

The flashpoint Old City was declared a closed military zone in November following the recent wave of unrest, and Palestinian residents have come under higher-than-average restrictions by the Israeli military that Israeli rights group B’Tselem has called “draconian.”

Team South Africa on Saturday concluded a successful program at the 2016 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, said the Presidency.

President Jacob Zuma led a high-powered Team South Africa delegation and delivered the message that South Africa is open for business to global investors and other stakeholders.

The delegation to Davos included Minister in the Presidency for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Jeff Radebe, Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan, Trade and Industry Minister Dr Rob Davies, Economic Development Minister Ebrahim Patel, Water and Sanitation Minister Nomvula Mokonyane, Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson and Minister of Health Aaron Motsoaledi.

Team South Africa also included the Governor of the South African Reserve Bank Lesetja Kganyago and captains of industry from various business sectors.

Team South Africa leveraged the presence of international business, analysts and politicians in Davos to assure the global community of the country’s commitment to maintaining policy certainty, fiscal discipline, macro-economic stability and the promotion of inclusive growth and development.

“South Africa reiterated that the National Development Plan, the 9-point plan for economic recovery and Operation Phakisa were being implemented with a view to ensuring economic and social growth and development.

“The current global economic challenges requires South Africa to develop a robust and responsive set of measures to ensure economic stability. The message was advocated by Team South Africa consistently to delegates in Davos,” Presidency said in a statement.

During the forum, Team South Africa had high-level interactions as well as bilateral discussions.

President Zuma hosted global investors during a session of the Business Interaction Group (BIG) on South Africa.

During this session President Zuma emphasised South Africa’s commitment to policy certainty by announcing the establishment of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Investments and a one-stop interdepartmental clearing house to facilitate support for investors.

With particular reference to the theme of Davos 2016, Mastering the 4th Industrial Revolution, Team South Africa emphasised the need to create a balance between the use of technology to mechanise and industrialise to move the economy into a knowledge state of human development and job security.

The Presidency said the overwhelming sentiment emanating from Davos was that investors continue to see South Africa as a preferred investment destination.

In addition, many countries around the world are faced with similar challenges of slowing economic growth, falling commodity and oil prices. Davos 2016 presented Team South Africa with an opportunity to discuss these challenges, global responses and best practices.

Speaking to the media, Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan said: “There was very positive sentiments expressed towards South Africa and the international community continued to see South Africa as a preferred destination.

“The fact that multinationals – amongst others, Mercedes Benz, BMW, Johnston and Johnston, Marriot Hotels – continue to invest in the country is indicative of this positive sentiment.”

In the last week, ICICI Bank of India announced it would establish an office in South Africa.

“We’re telling investors that – despite our country’s enormous challenges, many due to global shocks – we are resilient.

“It is also significant that according to the Oxford Business Group foreign investors are often less pessimistic about South Africa than many South African companies are,” Minister Pravin said.

Meanwhile, the South African delegation remains cognisant of the challenges imposed by industrialisation on development economies.

In this regard, Economic Development Minister Ebrahim Patel observed that “the 4th Industrial Revolution is challenging our world on how we do things”.

“We now have an opportunity to bring health care services to the people, [especially] rural communities using the internet. It also presents us with an opportunity for children to access education in a modernised way,” he said.

While communicating that South Africa is open for business, Team South Africa also acknowledged the challenging times in which the country finds itself.

Reserve Bank Governor Kganyago, speaking to the media in Davos, said: “As far as South Africa is concerned, our pillars remain our strong macro-economic foundations and a solid monetary policy framework.”

Vassi Naidoo, Nedbank Group Chairman, drew on the best that WEF has to offer by saying: “We are here to network and help bring the relevant thinking from the global world on areas such as business leadership, social entrepreneurs for Nedbank and for South Africa,” however, “the reality is we are in a very difficult time from [the] drop in commodity prices, oil prices.”

Chairperson of the Industrial Development Corporation, Busi Mabuza, summed up the challenges of the 4th Industrial Revolution.

“Is the convergence of technology and creativity of people. We need young population that is skilled, knowledgeable to use telecommunication and medical technology for the betterment of the people. Our networks for telecommunications should be robust enough to support the implementation of the 4th industrial revolution,” said Mabuza.

President Zuma said that as Team South Africa departs Davos, the challenges of the global economic environment coupled with domestic growth imperatives are top of mind.

“What remains undisputed is that with all sectors working together, South Africa can move forward. The brand of our country depends of all sectors playing their part for our common developmental agenda. This means business, government and labour must keep interacting and talking to ensure that we move together towards inclusive growth and prosperity for our country.

“We must build on the WEF 2016 success by cementing unity in action and stronger partnerships for the good of our country and its people,” said the President.

Team South Africa went to Davos against the background of investor confidence that has been demonstrated by many international companies that have increased their investments and expanded their South African operations.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), recently quoted in the New York Times, says that whistle-blower Edward Snowden, who revealed the extraordinary scope of the United States government’s mass surveillance program, is a traitor who should be tried in court for the treasonous act of “giving aid to our enemies.” Cruz even declares that the United States Constitution supports this prosecution of Snowden.

It is not out of the ordinary for a senator to want Snowden prosecuted. But, can’t Cruz have the decency to just state his opinion without hiding behind and muddying the Constitution?

Here is what Cruz said:

…’​It is now clear that Snowden is a traitor, and he should be tried for treason.’

[Cruz] pointed to his remark in 2013 that Mr. Snowden should be prosecuted if he broke any laws. ‘Today, we know that Snowden violated federal law, that his actions materially aided terrorists and enemies of the United States, and that he subsequently fled to China and Russia,” he said. “Under the Constitution, giving aid to our enemies is treason.’

Ron Paul Institute Chairman and Founder Ron Paul provided the succinct answer to this “aid to our enemies” argument in a Facebook post in June of 2013 — the month reports based on Snowden’s disclosures started to appear:

My understanding is that espionage means giving secret or classified information to the enemy. Since Snowden shared information with the American people, his indictment for espionage could reveal (or confirm) that the US Government views you and me as the enemy.

Suppose, though, that Cruz has in mind some other enemy being helped, maybe al-Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS), Russia, China, France, Brazil, or Mexico — whoever Cruz might think of as an “enemy.” Maybe Cruz is thinking of the fictional nation of Agrabah from the movie Aladdin. In December, Public Policy Polling found that 30 percent of Republican and 19 percent of Democratic voters surveyed think the US should bomb that cartoon nation.

Cruz may wake up the in middle of the night and check for Bulgarians or Vulgarians under his bed. However, constitutionally-speaking the US has no enemies. While the US has bombed, drone-striked, invaded, and funded the take-over of many countries around the world through the last few decades, the US Congress has passed not even one declaration of war since World War II.

It is absurd to say that the Constitution demands that Snowden be tried for aiding some enemy or enemies when the US House of Representatives and Senate have chosen not to employ the constitutionally-required method for declaring an enemy or enemies — passing a declaration of war under Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution.

Of course, Cruz using the Constitution in an attempt to justify prosecuting Snowden is doubly absurd given that Snowden’s revelations exposed an unconstitutional mass surveillance program.

This article was published by the RonPaul Institute.

This article examines the growing role of Asia in globalization, showing that China is not the only important player and that its impact goes far beyond the economic dimension.

By Mario Esteban*

The pre-eminence of China on the global scene and especially in the economic dimension does not mean that it is the only emerging or Asian country with a consistent participation in the globalization process, or that the internationalisation of the Asian countries is limited to only the economic sphere. Data for the overall region show an upward trend in both military and soft presence. While increasing external presence in Asia’s military domain responds mostly to the figures recorded by Japan and China, Asia’s soft presence is scattered among various countries, with South Korea, Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia all showing increasing shares of soft presence over the 1990-2014 period.

Analysis

Asia and especially China have gained considerably from economic globalization since the end of the Cold War. And economic gain is without a doubt the best known facet of the process of internationalization currently being experienced by most Asian countries.¹ In this paper we explore other dimensions, military and soft, where the specific weight of Asia has also grown significantly, demonstrating that Asia is not merely China, and that the region’s growing international presence is not limited to the economic sphere.

When analyzing the evolution since 1990 of shares of global presence by region, one notes both the decline of the traditional powers, Europe and the US, as well as the emergence of Asia (Table 1). In fact, the increase in the Asian presence is greater than the sum of the increased shares of all other regions that experienced expansion in that period. These developments point towards Asia soon overtaking America as the region with the second-largest share of global presence. In 2010, the US share of 20.5% was four points higher than Asia’s 16.5%. Four years later, the gap had narrowed to just four tenths of a percent: 18.4% versus 18.0%.

If we look at the ranking of countries that have increased their global presence since 1990 we can confirm the notion that China is mainly responsible for the dramatic increases in the share of Asian presence (Graph 1). Not surprisingly, China is the country whose share of global presence has grown most over the past quarter of a century. The Asian giant has increased its share by 3.7 points, equivalent to the sum of the current shares of global presence of Japan and Iceland.

The significant growth in China’s global presence currently accounts for 28.5% of the overall Asian share, versus only 12.6% in 1990. This increase in the specific weight of China’s share of Asia’s global presence has come largely at the expense of a declining Japanese presence (Graph 2). Nevertheless, China remains far from garnering the percentage share of Asian presence commanded by Japan in 1990, at about 42.7%.

However, this should not blind us to the meaningful advances made by other Asian countries. Indeed, China accounts for less than 50% of the positive gains in presence experienced in the region. Among the 10 countries that have raised their share of global presence, excluding China, four are Asian: South Korea, India, Singapore and Thailand. If we expand that range to the top 15, Malaysia also appears. If we combine the increased share in presence of those five Asian countries we obtain a rise of 4.0 percentage points, three tenths of a percent above China’s 3.7 points. As for the Asian countries that have lost shares of global presence since 1990, there are only two, Japan and Pakistan. The case of Japan corresponds to a traditional pattern experienced by post-industrial powers, mitigated by its rise in military presence. As for Pakistan, the main factor since the 1990s has been the decline in the country’s number of international migrants, mainly Afghan refugees.

In analyzing the evolution of the shares of Asian global presence (Graph 3), the first thing to stand out is that it is the region that has most increased its share in the economic as well as in the military and soft dimensions. Furthermore, it has been the military and not economic dimension that has gained most (10.9 versus 5.9 points, respectively).

Moreover, since 2011, shares of Asian military and soft presence, at 3.3 and 0.5 points, respectively, have been outpacing the region’s share of economic presence, which has remained stagnant (Graph 4). That is to say, the share of Asia’s global presence is currently growing thanks to the military and soft dimensions, which have not been restrained by the concurrent slowdown in Asia’s economic internationalisation.

The rise of Asia’s military presence is striking. Considering the rankings of the 15 countries that have increased their military presence since 1990 (Graph 5), there are three Asian nations within the top four (China, Japan, and India), seven in the top 10 (adding Korea, Indonesia, Pakistan and Singapore) and at positions 11 and 13 two more Asian countries, Bangladesh and Thailand.

Moreover, occupying the 1st and 12th positions are the US and Australia; not Asian, but very closely involved in security dynamics throughout the region.

Comparing how Asian states are positioned within different presence rankings (Table 2), there appears to be tendency by these countries to project themselves into the military sphere.

Of the 13 Asian countries under analysis, six have a military presence that is much higher than might be expected based on their levels of global presence: Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, the Philippines and India. Meanwhile, the military presence of two others, South Korea and Thailand, is moderately above their rankings of global presence, while three show a relative balance between military presence and other dimensions (China, Japan and Singapore). Only two Asian countries (Malaysia and Vietnam) show levels of military presence moderately below their global presence ranking.

The data from this latest edition of the Elcano Global Presence Index confirm the continuation of the trend in which Asian countries augment their military presence; of the three presence dimensions, this is the only area in which no Asian country has lost ground in its ranking since the previous year (Table 3).

Indeed, of the 13 Asian countries included in the index this year, seven have improved their position in the military presence ranking: Malaysia, South Korea, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan and the Philippines. Of the 15 countries that have most increased their military presence in 2013-14, four were Asian: South Korea, India, Singapore and Sri Lanka.

There are two interrelated processes that explain most of the increased military presence in Asia: the normalisation of the Japan Self-Defence Forces and the modernisation of the People’s Liberation Army in China. As a result of Japan’s defeat in World War II, the country’s armed forces have undergone major constraints in their abilities to project force and to deploy troops outside Japanese territory. These limitations have gradually become milder since the early 1990s and the current government is expected to move with greater urgency in the years to come, as indicated by the National Security Strategy adopted in December 2013. The process has led Japan to become the nation that has most increased its military presence in absolute terms between 1990 and 2014, and the trend has accelerated very noticeably in recent years, in response to the modernisation of the Chinese army. China, in turn, is the 2nd-ranked country in terms of increased military presence in absolute terms since 1990, and this has triggered reactions similar to the Japanese in China’s other neighbouring countries. Such measures are understandable since Asia is a region with numerous open international conflicts while at the same time lacking effective security solutions; still, one has to wonder at the future implications of this phenomenon.

In considering Asia’s growing international military presence, there are two competing interpretations. Some call it an arms race, a dangerous process of competition that could result in a militaristic spiral of uncertain outcome. Others posit a more benign interpretation and consider the increase in Asian military presence a sign of greater commitment (by several of the region’s countries) to the maintenance of international peace, whether in the interests of advanced economic internationalisation or out of a desire to enhance their status within the international community.

The data collected by the Elcano Global Presence Index for the period 1990-2014 suggest an ambivalent interpretation. At one extreme we find Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, which have dramatically increased their contribution of troops to UN peacekeeping missions while reducing or only slightly increasing their means of military projection. China and Indonesia, meanwhile, are countries that currently contribute many more international peacekeeping forces than in the past, but which have also significantly increased their capability for military projection (especially China). Elsewhere, South Korea and Japan have both increased their contributions to UN peacekeeping missions, but not nearly as much as they have augmented their means of force projection. Finally, Singapore contributes no peacekeeping troops at all, and Thailand very few, for UN missions, despite having strongly increased their means of military projection throughout the period. In other words, with few exceptions, the expansion and modernisation of the means of military projection in Asia have ranked above the commitment of these countries to participate in international peace missions.

As regards soft presence, the evolution of share by region (Graph 6) has been much smoother than in the cases of economic and military presence. Hence, although Asia has increased its share of soft presence overall, it accounts for only 2.8 points. The country that has most increased its share of soft presence worldwide between 1990 and 2014 is China, with 2.8 points; South Korea ranks in 7th place with 0.8 points; and three other Asian countries fall within the first 15 positions: Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam (Graph 7).

Observing the absolute variations of soft presence for the past year (Graph 8), three Asian countries are among the top 10: Japan, China and Thailand, with Japan and Thailand increasing their shares over the previous year by one tenth of a percent. China and Thailand were both ranked in this group by the previous edition of Elcano Global Presence Index. Japan, due to sharp cuts to its international cooperation budget, was the only Asian country to show an absolute decline in international soft presence between 2012 and 2013; but the trend has been reversed and it is precisely the strengthening of development cooperation that explains most of the country’s subsequent growth in soft presence between 2013 and 2014.

By identifying the variables underlying the rise of the soft presence of Asian countries, it can be seen that tourism is as a near-constant in the countries that have increased their share. Moreover, the South-East Asian countries (excepting Singapore and Malaysia) can be said to be almost exclusively responsible for the increase in the continent’s overall soft presence. In countries such as China, South Korea and India, plus Singapore and Malaysia, tourism does not have an especially strong impact or its soft presence is complemented by other variables including science, culture and education. Also striking is that, with the exception of India, South Asia generally shows a stagnant or declining share of soft presence, because these countries have not boosted tourism like their South-East Asian neighbors and because they have considerably lower levels of socioeconomic development, which hampers the positive development of other variables.

Conclusions

It is clear that the growing internationalization of Asia goes beyond China and the economic sphere, the manifestations of the booming Asian presence with which we are most familiar. However, while China does account for an increasing percentage of Asia’s global presence, the share of Asia’s economic presence has stalled since 2011, helping the military and soft dimensions to become the two main sources of its growing share in global presence.

About the author:
*Mario Esteban, Senior Analyst, Elcano Royal Institute | @wizma9

Source:
This article was published by Elcano Royal Institute

Original version in Spanish: Los nuevos motores de la presencia global asiática

Notes:
¹ This phenomenon has been recently addressed using data from previous editions of the Elcano Global Presence Index. See Mario Esteban (2014), ‘The Rise of China and Asia: What the Elcano Global Presence Index Tells Us’, ARI, nr 21/2014, Elcano Royal Institute; and Mario Esteban (2014), ‘La globalización de Asia según el Índice Elcano de Presencia Global’, Comentario Elcano, nr 34/2014, Elcano Royal Institute.

Russia bashing partly relates to the provisional suspension accorded to Russia’s athletics (track and field) team by the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF), for anti-doping oversight, inclusive of several athletes being accused of using illicit performance enhancing substances. Simultaneously, there’s Russian acknowledgement of a doping problem, which should face an increased scrutiny

A couple of Russian whistleblowers openly favor a complete international ban on Russian athletics – never mind the innocents facing penalty, as wrongdoers in other countries essentially have a longer leash. These whistleblowers are described as “hiding” outside Russia. Such a characterization conjures up a certain image among many in the West, who see that nation as a place where going against officialdom is very much subject to punishment.

(In the US, it’s commonplace to perceive bravery when attacking official Russia from inside that country, despite numerous examples to the contrary. As one example, on the John Batchelor Show of this past January 5, Stephen Cohen countered this American establishment thought by saying that Russian print media has more dovish criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stance towards the West, when compared to US mass media giving space to mainstream Russian views.

The nay-saying comeback will bring up the lessor diversity at the leading Russian TV networks on some key issues. This point has a degree of comparative relevance to the print versus national TV news situation in the US. When the subject of Russia comes up, it’s rare to see mainstream Russian views on American mass media TV. Such limited instances include sound bites, followed by a last word mop-up rebuttal, lacking a thorough give and take.

These observations aren’t intended to belittle the murders of Anna Politkovskaya, Boris Nemtsov and some others. Rather, it’s to note the many individuals of like minded politics who’ve carried on in Russia, without being beaten and/or killed – adding that the Politkovskaya and Nemtsov examples don’t appear to have been Kremlin involved actions. Circa the 1960s, there were numerous politically motivated killings in the US, which haven’t been conclusively tied to government involvement. The US and Russia each have citizens who independently commit violent actions.)

The Russian whistleblowers in question have made a serious charge, claiming an extremely high level of Russian athletics team doping, that’s quite likely subject to a defamation related lawsuit. Over the years, numerous Americans have fled the US to avoid prosecution in that country. For fairness sake, why hold Russia to higher standards, if it’s comparatively lacking in civil liberties? The advocacy for greater freedom in Russia is doomed to failure when collapsible biases are present.

(I’m of the belief that in overall comparative terms with the West, Russia lacks in the area of freedom. At the same time, I believe that it’s nowhere near as un-free as some claim, in addition to noting some not so politically diverse occurrences in the West. I’m encouraged by knowing a number of mainstream Russians, who seek greater openness in Russia and abroad. These particular individuals are a patriotically proud people, seeking a better world.)

World Anti-Doping Agency head Dick Pound and Hajo Seppelt, the producer of the German documentary, which ignited the IAAF provisional ban on Russian athletics, acknowledge that the scope of their investigation is limited to Russia, while also acknowledging that doping/doping cover-up isn’t exclusive to Russia. This selective form of overview creates an unfair advantage, seeing a greatly scrutinized Russia unlike others.

US hurdling great Edwin Moses, is among those supporting a ban on Russia’s track and field athletes at the 2016 Summer Olympics. Moses’ association for social change in sports as a director with the Laureus World Sports Academy, is contradicted by his discriminatory advocacy towards Russian athletics.

With IAAF oversight, the Russian sports authorities involved with revamping the anti-doping regimen for the athletics team have made significant changes, with some understandable bitterness at the provisional suspension and threat of a Summer Olympics ban. In addition to key personnel changes in the management and administration of Russian athletics (including drug testing), none of the athletes under suspicion are on the current roster. One senses that the Russian athletics team will get the nod to compete in the upcoming Olympiad. Its newly elected president puts the odds at 50%.

Russia has an interest to not get banned by having a more transparent process on the issue at hand. The greater onus will arguably be on the likes of Moses to well substantiate the collective punishment route. As presented in the German documentary, the allegations of vast Russian athletics doping is premised on a considerable degree of unsubstantiated hearsay. Thus, a reasoned compromise could see Russian athletics with the embarrassing provisional suspension and international review on record, followed by the penalty getting lifted before the next Summer Olympics.

In the event of a standing 2016 Summer Olympic ban on Russia’s athletics team, there’s a precedent for the athletes on that squad (not found guilty of doping) to still participate, in a way that serves to disrespect their nation.

At the 1992 Summer Olympics, Yugoslavia (then consisting of Serbia and Montenegro) was hypocritically banned from participation because of the war in Bosnia. Croatia wasn’t banned despite that country’s armed involvement in Bosnia. Ditto the armed nationalist transgressions of the Bosnian Muslim nationalist dominated government, which was represented as the internationally recognized Bosnia.

Individual Yugoslav athletes competed at the 1992 Summer Olympics under a designation that didn’t specify their national origin. Inconsistent with that route was the banning of Yugoslavia’s world class teams, in men’s team handball, volleyball, basketball and water polo. Why couldn’t they have competed under a non-national designation like the “Unified Team” (comprised mostly of Russians from the former USSR), that won the men’s ice hockey gold medal at the 1992 Winter Olympics? (Due to the sudden dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia and some other former Soviet republics agreed to compete as the “Unified Team” at the 1992 Winter and Summer Olympics.)

All of the aforementioned Yugoslav teams were medal contenders. What not a better way to punish that nation by keeping them out of the Olympics altogether? A matter relating to the biases against Russia and Serbia.

This article initially appeared at the Strategic Culture Foundation’s website on January 24.

By Wasbir Hussain*

2016 brings both hope as well as challenges for the government in dealing with insurgency in Northeast India. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government in New Delhi is continuing with the traditional carrot-and-stick policy in dealing with insurgency in the region but a definite strategy or policy to deal with the insurgent groups does not seem to be in place as yet.

Among others, the major positives for the government in 2015 with regard to insurgency in Northeast India include: the significant signing of the ‘Framework Agreement’ with the Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) for an eventual resolution of the problem; and getting the jailed General Secretary of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), Anup Chetia, back to India from Bangladesh. Strong military action against the trigger-happy National Democratic Front of Bodoland-Songbijit faction (NDFB-S) has rendered the outfit weak and incapable of any major attacks. Efforts for peace with insurgent groups of the region have also been started by spiritual guru and the founder of the Art of Living, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, apparently at the behest of the highest levels in the Union Government.

Setbacks have, of course, kept the challenges alive. The NSCN- Khaplang (NSCN-K) abrogated its 14 year-long truce with New Delhi. In fact, in April 2015, the NSCN-K formed the United National Liberation Front of Western South East Asia (UNLFW). The UNLFW has already carried out several attacks on the security forces. The Maoists too have been trying to consolidate their position in the Northeast, but arrests of some of their leaders and members have hurt their plans. The foothold of Islamist fundamentalist groups seems to be increasing in the region, and if not curtailed, may cause a serious headache for the security forces in the future.

2016 may actually be quite unpredictable, and the following scenarios may emerge:

A. Signing of Peace Accords with Major Insurgent Groups

On 03 August 2015, the 18-year long negotiation with the NSCN-IM led to the signing of a ‘framework agreement’ between the government and the former. Details of the agreement were not disclosed during its signing. Finally, on 25 December 2015, the NSCN-IM issued a statement in which it said the agreement looks at a final solution in which Nagas will have the right to exercise their ‘sovereign powers’ over their ‘territories.’ However, with a view to solving the Naga-related political problem, the statement said both parties agreed to share sovereign power for an enduring and peaceful co-existence of the two entities. Thus, in 2016, we may witness a Peace Accord signed between the government and NSCN-IM.

A similar accord may be signed with the ULFA too. The ULFA had signed a tripartite agreement for Suspension of Operations (SoO) with the government on 03 September 2011. Since then there has been a series of talks between them. Now that their General Secretary Anup Chetia, who was in prison in Bangladesh, has been brought back and has since obtained bail, he will participate and lead the talks with New Delhi. Chetia’s joining in peace talks is a positive sign and an accord with the ULFA may soon turn into a reality.

With Chetia siding in favour of the pro-talk faction of the ULFA, Paresh Barua remains the only top ULFA leader against talks. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar is now informally talking to Barua and trying to persuade him to come for talks. But with Barua still refusing to talk without the issue of ‘sovereignty’ being discussed, it is difficult to foresee him being engaged in a dialogue. Some glimmer of hope in improving the insurgency scenario in Manipur has been witnessed after Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met Rajkumar Meghen alias Sanayaima, the detained leader of Manipur’s oldest insurgent group, the United National Liberation Front (UNLF), at the Guwahati Central Jail, on 17 December 2015.

The response of the jailed leader has been good. This is the first major mediatory effort by anyone with the Meitei insurgent groups in Manipur, and, therefore, can be termed as a significant move towards achieving peace in the state.

B. Sporadic Incidents of Insurgent Violence

The formation of the UNLFW to jointly fight the Indian state has led to a spurt in insurgent violence in the region. The decision to float this new front was taken during a meeting on 17 April 2015, held, perhaps, at the headquarters of the NSCN-K in Myanmar.

The NSCN-K, a constituent of the UNLFW, began hitting at security forces in quick succession. The first attack was carried out on 26 March 2015 (a day before the NSCN-K called off its truce) on the outskirts of Kohima, where four Assam Rifles troopers were injured. On 04 June 2015, after few more attacks in between, the rebels launched a massive raid on the Indian Army, killing 18 soldiers and injuring at least 11 others.

On 07 August 2015, the NSCN-K announced that the ‘framework agreement’ signed with NSCN-IM is intended exclusively for that group alone, and asserted that it is under no obligation to either agree or disagree with the accord. In September 2015, government declared NSCN-K a terrorist organisation under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

Apart from increased violence by the NSCN-K, other outfits too are active, especially in Meghalaya and Manipur, the Garo National Liberation Army (GNLA) in particular.

C. Tough Posture of the Government against Insurgency

In 2016, the government would surely continue with its tough stance against the region’s insurgent groups like the ULFA-I, the GNLA and the NDFB-S. Successful counter-insurgency measures have since weakened the NDFB-S significantly. Another tough stance of the government was noticed after the 04 June 2015 ambush of the security forces in Manipur. Immediately after this incident, the Indian government followed it up with a surgical strike on insurgent camps inside Myanmar’s territory on 09 June 2015, in which approximately 50 rebels were reportedly killed.

D. Efforts of Civil Society Groups to Gain Momentum

Efforts from the civil society groups to broker peace with the region’s insurgent groups may gather momentum in 2016. In Nagaland, the civil society is trying to bring the NSCN-K back to the negotiating table. In August 2015, a four-member delegation of the Naga Mothers’ Association (NMA), a frontline Naga women’s group, walked across to Myanmar and held talks with the NSCN-K leaders. After the meeting, the delegation informed that the NSCN-K was not averse to reconsidering its decision. However, soon after the NMA team returned, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) announced a reward on Khaplang’s head, hurting the efforts of the Naga civil society.

E. Maoist Consolidation in Northeast India

With most major insurgent groups in the region signing ceasefire agreements or peace accords with the government, the space left vacant is slowly being filled up by the Maoists. The Maoists are now planning to make fresh recruitments in Assam. In the rural areas of eastern Assam, short documentary films are being shown to young boys aged between 12 to 13 years, to brainwash them to join the Maoist movement. Details of such youths are being shared through WhatsApp. These include details about the youth’s education, family background and location.

Therefore, if their activities are not curtailed soon, Northeast India is in danger of a full blown Maoist insurgency.

F. Rise of Islamic Militancy

In 2016, there may be increased penetration of Islamic fundamentalist elements in the region, especially in Assam. Though radical Islam is not practiced by the region’s Muslim population, chances of radicalisation of a section of the youth in the near future, cannot be denied. The November-December 2014 arrests in Assam, of twelve persons with links with the Islamist terror outfit Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) shows that there is an attempt at radicalising a section of Muslim population in the state, a development that cannot be brushed aside as a minor security matter.

Overview and Projections

2016 can well witness the signing of two major peace accords with two of the front-line insurgent groups of the region – a Naga peace accord with NSCN-IM and an accord with the pro-talk faction of the ULFA, headed by Arabinda Rajkhowa and Anup Chetia. Civil society initiatives to broker peace with some of the recalcitrant northeastern rebel groups and factions like the NSCN-K; ULFA-Independent (led by Paresh Barua); and moves to try and convince some of the leading Meitei insurgent groups in Manipur to agree to a dialogue with the government, is likely to gather momentum.

Simultaneously, as part of New Delhi’s current stance of not going for talks with those outfits who believe in nothing but violence, tough counter-measures will continue during the year against groups like the GNLA and NDFB-S. On the whole, it will be a mixed bag insofar as the government’s achievement in tackling insurgency in the Northeast is concerned.

However, the security establishment cannot afford to be complacent, because groups like the NSCN-K, the ULFA-I, the NDFB-S and the GNLA, in addition to the assortment of the Meitei outfits in Manipur, can continue to keep the region on the boil.

* Wasbir Hussain
Executive Director, Centre for Development & Peace Studies, Guwahati, and Visiting Fellow, IPCS

Libya’s internationally recognized parliament has rejected a unity government named last week under a UN-brokered deal aimed at uniting the country’s warring factions, BBC News reports.

The vote is seen as a major blow to UN efforts to unify the country’s two rival parliaments.

Islamic State militants have stepped up attacks in recent weeks, targeting the country’s oil infrastructure.

Libya has been in chaos since the 2011 overthrow of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

Of 104 members attending the session in the eastern city of Tobruk, 89 voted against backing the government. The Tunis-based Presidential Council now has 10 days to put forward a new, shorter list of ministers.

Libya’s state oil company said earlier that the country had lost $68bn in potential oil revenues since 2013.

Western nations hope the formation of the new government will help bring stability and tackle the growing threat of the so-called Islamic State group (IS).

IS militants have taken advantage of the political vacuum to expand their presence in the country.