The Palestinian political class has come to terms with the Israeli occupation. The Oslo Accords turned the Palestinian Authority (PA) into a subcontractor of the occupier, and the top brass feels comfortable with this situation in Palestine.

Right from the start, I opposed the so-called peace process because of the content of the documents Yasser Arafat had to sign. I already wrote in 1994 that the Gaza-Jericho Agreement would mean the beginning of the end of an independent Palestinian state. Palestine would be divided into Bantustans, today I would call them fenced in ghettos, which are guarded by the Israeli occupation regime. If the situation gets out of control, they are also bombarded. My worst “dreams” have come true. For the Palestinians, the Oslo Accords have become a nightmare

Nelson Mandela would have never accepted a deal with the South African Apartheid Regime for a few meaningless and hollow political symbols as Yasser Arafat did. And President Abbas has perfected this system of indirect rule and control to the detriment of his people.

The daily brutality of the Israeli occupation regime calls for an adequate answer before the Israeli colonial regime has incorporated the remains of Palestine. The Israeli Apartheid and occupation regime must go and should be replaced by a binational democratic state for all Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Globalized demands for justice elicit national apologies: Abe’s for WWII sex slavery, Blair’s for Iraq War intelligence.

By Joji Sakurai*

Apologies are never easy. Negotiating and uttering a national apology about war-time activities is especially challenging and sensitive, charged with strategic implications. And thanks to the profusion of digital media, questionable actions of the past are ever present in public view, crying out for justice and apology.

As apologies come they also invite comparison, and two recent high-profile apologies highlight differences between East and West: On the cusp of the New Year, Japan’s hawkish Prime Minister Shinzo Abe issued a surprising, yet highly specific apology for  sex slavery in Korea before and during World War II. Earlier in October, during a television interview, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair offered a less official and partial apology, not for the Iraq war, but for relying on misleading information before the 2003 invasion and misunderstanding the consequences of regime change.

Political calculation was seen as a factor in both cases – Abe sensing the benefits of closer ties with South Korea at a time of strategic peril, timely given Pyongyang’s nuclear test just days later, and the former British prime minister hoping that saying sorry might help him avoid legal difficulty ahead of publication of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq War.

But there was a key difference in how the gestures were received by their target audiences: Few in Asia bothered to ask whether Abe, the man, really “meant it” when he apologized over Japan forcing Korean women into wartime brothels, and Tokyo also pledged $8.3 million in official funds for surviving victims. Whereas in Britain, the question of how much Blair personally felt regret over Iraq was central to the apology’s reception. Blair’s perceived insincerity – many called his words mere “spin” – may have rendered the gesture meaningless. By contrast, if asked about Abe’s personal feelings in offering owabi, among Japan’s strongest words for apology, to South Korean President Park Geun-hye, many Asians might be tempted to respond that, of course, the hard-line nationalist didn’t mean it.

Yet such a response doesn’t make his gesture less significant. The formal, and not the personal, nature of the event is paramount here. Taiwan and the Philippines offered cautious welcome, and China’s reaction was “wait-and-see,” as opposed to outright rejection, which could be seen as a sign of progress. Most importantly, the apology yielded immediate impact – Abe and Park picked up the phone after the January 6 North Korean nuclear test, pledging to work together over the threat.

When a Japanese prime minister apologizes over World War II, the gesture is ritualized and choreographed. It doesn’t matter whether the leader is a good one or bad, believer or heretic, but, just that he is officially qualified to carry out the task. Abe is the symbolic lightning rod for collective contrition and also, critically, collective shame. This is why apologies are both easier in Japan, and harder. Wartime apologies, according to blood laws, cast shame upon the entire “house” – in fact, the word “owabi” contains the ideogram for “household.” And for Abe’s apology, house or family means country. The crucial point: Japanese acceptance of shame is cast not so much upon oneself or one’s generation, but upon ancestors who were active participants in the war. And for many Japanese, especially older ones, such shame is unacceptable. The Japanese traditionally revere their ancestors, and a butsudan, a family Buddhist altar where incense is lit in prayer for departed loved ones, is still a common feature for Japanese homes.

In both East and West, apologizing is a means of bringing the offender back into the social fold. But in his book Mea Culpa, sociologist Nicholas Tavuchis helps illuminate a key difference: “It is only by personally acknowledging ultimate responsibility, expressing genuine sorrow and regret, and pledging henceforth (implicitly or explicitly) to abide by the rules, that the offender simultaneously recalls and is re-called to that which binds.” This Western emphasis on the personal nature of apology has far less hold in Eastern cultures.

A January 10 interview for Abe with Japanese national broadcaster NHK was deeply revealing in this respect. When asked about the “significance” of his apology, the Japanese leader cited neither closer ties with South Korea nor the obvious matter of seeking to heal the pain of former sex slaves. The significance, he said, lay in the fact that the two sides agreed the apology to be “final and irrevocable.” That is, Tokyo would never have to apologize again. Abe’s apology was a matter of official business, a concession in a settling of scores, with no particular relevance to his personal vantage point. And oddly enough, for Korea, the success in wresting these words of apology from a conservative hawk may carry greater significance than receiving them from a liberal dove; the apology itself becomes the extraction of a price. Many Japanese could not help but wonder, as one person asked in watching the news, did Abe win or lose?

Abe’s own attitudes toward the war are intimately tied to his own family history. His grandfather, former Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi, was charged with Class A war crimes although not convicted. This paradoxically means that, while Abe may not “mean it” when he apologized over comfort women, it’s entirely possible that the words were just as costly, perhaps more so, since there was no catharsis of the sort accompanying sincere regret.

It’s not only in the political domain, but also the personal, that one can find differences between East and West in perceptions of apology. In the West, when one half of a couple feels aggrieved, an apology is obviously useful to setting affairs right. It’s usually part of the process of reconciliation, largely taken care of by time, with resentment continuing to fester until the original offense is forgotten. The apology, or lack of it, is then part of the equation of how long ill feelings last. In Japan, by contrast, and while the process may vary depending on individuals and circumstances, the apology is itself often the key objective. Ayamare! Apologize! – an aggrieved party may demand of a perceived offender. The relationship can remain frozen for an extraordinarily long time over a strikingly trivial matter, until one proffers the magic word: Gomenasai! I’m sorry!

By Rajeshwari Krishnamurthy*

The concept of using ‘counter-narratives’ to counter extremist propaganda is a strategy aimed to provide alternate narratives, to counter the narratives employed by extremist groups – the Islamic State (IS) especially – to attract, condition, and to recruit potentially vulnerable individuals, especially youth.

Given the high urgency for countering extremist propaganda, how can related efforts be made effective and sustainable in the Indian context?

Counter-narratives: Idea and Applications

Discourses promoting non-violent action do exist and in substantial measures. Problematically, however, narratives promoting violent action – and the resulting violent actions – get disproportionately high attention in various media, and narratives promoting non-violent action are side-lined, if not dismissed.

Consequently, public perception is often impacted to cause distortion and panic, resulting in a departure from rational approaches.

Equally Emphasising Message and Action

It is extremely important to formulate both long and short-term strategies in order to stem and eventually end the influence of extremist propaganda. A two-fold way to insulate individuals and society from threats of radicalism and violent action in the long run is by:

a. Systematically rendering the narratives propagated by extremists of all types, unacceptable, irrational, and unrealistic
b. Cultivating a general public sentiment that rejects violence as an option

Relevant messaging will have to be preceded by extensive consultations within the various wings of the government as well as between the government and the various civil society organisations, research institutions, subject experts, and communities from a cross-section of society. The way New Delhi finally defines and strategises to address this issue following such consultations will determine the future course of action.

Although action on the ground is vital, it takes longer to deliver results substantial enough to get noticed by the masses. In comparison, messaging in the form of speeches, statements etc. resonate more, and at a higher pace. Therefore, equal emphasis has to be laid on the content of the message New Delhi disseminates in this regard.

Key Components

Emphasis on non-violence: The messaging should echo non-leniency towards any individual or group committing or propagating violence, either in words or in action. Any discrepancy between the message and the action on the ground must be avoided, and both tasks should be carried out continually, consistently and simultaneously. Mutual respect, tolerance, non-violence, and justice as non-negotiable components of any discourse, debate or disagreement, should be promoted and ensured.

Engaging the masses: Public debates and conversations on the significance and need for mutual respect and recourse to non-violent means to address issues must be encouraged. A nation-wide cross-sectional conversation must be stimulated, so that citizens can insulate themselves from radicalisation of all types.

Delinking terror and religion: In a country like ours where a high degree of diversity and multi-culturalism exists, citizens perpetually juggle different identities – gender, class, religious, regional, caste, political, and occupational, among others. With such levels of complexity, unless terror and religion are delinked – in the messaging in particular – the aim of shielding the country from extremist propaganda will be underachieved.

It is counter-productive for a government to argue about whether or not any religion allows or disallows violence, in its messaging. It is also unnecessary for a government to seek and declare justifications for ‘counter-narratives’ in religious scriptures. Doing so digresses from the core matter, i.e. that extremism is extremism. Violence is fundamentally a wrongful action, and is punishable by law, and this should be the primary message.

Crowd-sourcing: Furthermore, New Delhi must, concomitant to maintaining religion-neutral language in its counter-extremism messaging, engage and promote robust and constructive cross-sectional interactions, inter-community, intra-community, and between the government and the governed.

Collective responsibility: That maintaining peace, stability, and civility is the collective responsibility and duty of both the government and the governed, should be conveyed. The citizens must also deliver on their duties to themselves and their fellow citizens, and undertake efforts to guard themselves against vulnerability to radical/extremist influence of any type. To that end, greater emphasis could be laid on familiarity with the Indian constitution.

Navigating the Landscape

‘Counter-narratives’ should be named after solutions. Radicalised individuals, or individuals vulnerable to radicalisation, are unlikely to be seeking ‘counter-narratives’ or anything that markedly challenges something they believe. Simultaneous efforts should be undertaken to uproot the very reasons that cultivate vulnerability in individuals.

India will need a tailor-made strategy that takes into account civilisational and contemporary societal contexts. Confidence and the ability to trust is essential to make India’s 1.2 billion people more resilient to social regression.

Straightforward, concerted, multi-way interaction is required. Peace narratives must be treated as promoting human values, instead of only as a ‘counter’ to the extremists’ narratives. To ensure that this task is achieved not just wholly or in full measure but substantially, New Delhi must be wise in its choice of words and action, and consistently and comprehensively emphasise and promote the need and significance of non-violent action as a means to address any type of grievance – not just terror-related.

Practising and promoting non-violence is not a post-facto effort. It is and has to be a continuous process, and a duty of every individual.

* Rajeshwari Krishnamurthy
Research Officer, IReS, IPCS
E-mail: rajeshVvari@gmail.com

By Tenzin Lhadon*

The 30 November to 11 December 2015 UN Climate Change Conference in Paris (COP21) placed special interest to receive the much awaited cooperation and effort from China.

In particular, the focus was on whether China identifies itself as a global player, aligning with other developed nations, or among the developing nations, despite being the second largest economy.

China and COP21

China is recognised as the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter and therefore, its position at the international climate change negotiations – as one of the leading and most influential actors in addressing global climate change – is not just crucial but sets the tone for the success of global efforts towards combating climate change in the future.

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s speech at the opening ceremony of the COP21 and Beijing’s commitments and assurances on reducing its greenhouse gas emissions have been highly appreciated. There have been several debates and questions on whether or not China is to be regarded a developed country, because, it is the world’s largest exporter, with a GDP growth rate of 50 per cent, making its economy worth $26.98 trillion – bigger than that of the US’, which stands at $22.3 trillion.

A recent New York Times commentary illustrated how Beijing likes the Renminbi to be treated at par with other leading currencies, as well as for recognising China as one of the world’s leading economic powers. However, contradictorily, at the COP21, China shied away from identifying itself as a developed nation, apprehensive of the fact that it might have to face more regulation and responsibilities if categorised as a developed country. In fact, Beijing spoke on behalf of developing countries at the conference, calling on all the developed nations to reaffirm their promises to assist financially and otherwise, to help develop the poorer countries in their growth and sustainable development.

China and G77

In 1964 China joined the G77 group that mostly comprises of poorer countries affected by global climate change, and where developed nations were deemed responsible for providing annual financial assistance worth $100 billion. China asserted its position as a global player at the COP21 because it not only provides Beijing with a perfect platform to raise a justified voice and act as a spokesperson for the G77 nations but also helps project itself as a benign global power.

Although many observers in China felt the international climate change agreement could help with the restructuring of the economy, Chinese citizens and Beijing feel that they have a lesser say in international proposals that which are dominated by the US and EU. Many observers in China also feel the need to find a better way to communicate the country’s position and improve its international standing. Despite the recent economic slowdown, Beijing’s economic prowess and its participation and agreement on climate change issues have a bearing on China’s global stature.

China’s Special Representative on Climate Change Xie Zhenhua lauded the adoption of the historic climate change agreement at COP21, and while simultaneously reiterating China’s status as a developing country, stated that it will take actions according to its national capacity and development stage.

Climate Diplomacy

There is a general perception that countries in the northern hemisphere are developed and that those in the southern hemisphere, are not. In the global configuration of developed and developing countries, this ‘North-South divide’, and the problematic nature of this division – i.e. based on economic capabilities – always featured in international climate change negotiations.

Ideally, developed nations should shoulder more responsibility towards reducing global carbon emissions and consumption of the world’s resources, as well as contribute more towards the progress of developing countries with a particular focus on those most-affected by climate change.

The Beijing Review underscored the Chinese foreign ministry’s call for fairness in dividing responsibilities between developed and developing countries, calling the Paris climate change agreement a “a new beginning in international cooperation.”

“In broad terms, richer countries wanted to build new and less restrictive processes, while developing country blocs wanted to focus on ‘fairness’ and historical emissions, and to protect the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities,” said Yu Jie, communications strategist with China Dialogue, and former director, Climate Policy,

The Nature Conservancy.

However, China’s proclaimed status of a developing nation has becoming increasingly disputable given how it is the world’s largest CO2 emitter and an economic giant itself. In fact, the Beijing Review continues to project how China can play major role in G77/China, Brazil, South Africa, India, China (BASIC) and Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC), to bridge differences between these groups as well as between parties in a broader manner.

Reflecting on China’s significant role in the international climate debate, it is apt to conclude that Beijing’s encouraging stance at the COP21 is not only momentous but essential to the country’s task to behave like a global player. Although it is an positive effort by China, several questions still remain on its achievements towards improving the global climate situation and the amount of efforts invested towards addressing the matter.

* Tenzin Lhadon
Research Officer, CRP, IPCS

Defense Department officials today held a video conference to discuss ongoing implementation of the U.S.-Russia memorandum of understanding on flight safety over Syrian airspace, Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook said in a statement.

The call was co-chaired by Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Elissa Slotkin and Joint Staff Director for Strategic Plans and Policy Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. and their Russian Ministry of Defense counterparts

“The two sides discussed measures to enhance operational safety for counter-ISIL coalition and Russian military forces operating in Syria, including the means to avoid accidents and unintended confrontation between coalition and Russian forces whenever the two sides operate in close proximity,” Cook said.

Today’s discussions follow video conferences between the DoD and the Russian Ministry of Defense in October 2015 to discuss the safety of coalition air operations in Syria, he said.

“The conversation was constructive and the two sides agreed to continue safety discussions in this format in the future,” Cook noted.

A Danish news website has published documents backing up the allegations that in June 2013 a US plane with a connection to CIA black site programs was on call in Copenhagen ready to snatch NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden as he was stranded in Moscow.

The story of the private aircraft, a Gulfstream V with registration number N977GA, was first reported by The Register in June 2014. The plane previously used by the American intelligence to secretly transport terror subjects to clandestine detention facilities in Europe, flew from Washington, DC over Scotland to Copenhagen, the report said.

In August 2015, the Danish news website Denfri.dk filed a number of Freedom of Information requests to the government in Copenhagen, seeking the disclosure of documents concerning the alleged involvement of Denmark in a plot to arrest and extradite Snowden. On Sunday, it reported that after lengthy deliberation, it had acquired new evidence that substantiated the claim.

Among the documents published by Denfri.dk are permission for the overflight and landing of the plane, which warns that it should be operated exclusively for “state purposes of [a] non-commercial nature,” and talking points for the Transport Ministry should journalists ask about the plane.

There is also a batch of heavily redacted emails indicating communications between senior officials in Denmark’s police, Foreign Ministry and Justice Ministry, including Anders Herping Nielsen, a chief consultant of the Justice Ministry’s international office and its former deputy head, whose responsibility it is to decide on the extradition of people for trial in other countries.

The content of these emails is mostly blacked out.

“Denmark’s relationship with the USA would be damaged if the information becomes public knowledge,” the Justice Ministry wrote in its reply to Denfri.dk, commenting on reasons for the heavy redacting.

However, Denfri.dk managed to confirm that the US was granted permission to fly over as well as to land on Danish territory by “the civil registered aircraft registration N977GA or substitute.”

The investigative website also confirmed that the aircraft used Danish airspace and landed in the Copenhagen airport, basing its evidence on the obtained documents.

The Danish Justice Ministry refused to disclose any documents related to the US requesting Danish police to arrest and extradite Snowden if he set foot in the country.

However, Denfri.dk published a similar letter from the US to the Norwegian Criminal Investigation Service, which was initially reported by the Norwegian media in August. In this letter, the FBI requested the corresponding services in Norway “immediately notify the necessary and applicable agencies… in the event that Snowden should board a flight from Moscow to one of your respective countries [Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland] for either transit purposes or as a final destination.”

The letter also indicates that a similar request was filed with the Danish police.

Snowden is a former NSA employee who was responsible for the largest leak of US classified documents in recent history. In 2013, he exposed the agency’s secret electronic surveillance program to journalists.

As the US was seeking his arrest and prosecution, he was left stranded in Moscow en route from Hong Kong after his passport was revoked by US authorities. Russia eventually granted him political asylum, a move that contributed to the lengthy list of incidents that have worsened relations between Moscow and Washington. The U.S. is not used to countries not obeying its orders.

The whistleblower remains a controversial figure worldwide. Many see him as a champion of human rights and a hero, while others have labeled him a traitor and a glory hound. Since receiving asylum in Moscow, Snowden has been living in relative obscurity, only occasionally participating in privacy advocacy events via a video linkup.

By Giancarlo Elia Valori*

First and foremost, it is worth analyzing what the lifting of sanctions on Iran really means for Iran and the West.

The announcement made on January 16 last by the Iranian Shi’ite government and the P5 + 1 regarding the lifting of sanctions means that the IAEA has acknowledged that Iran has complied with all the terms and conditions of the JCPOA Treaty on the elimination of nuclear weapons and the control of the nuclear power for civilian uses by the Shi’ite regime (yet there would be much to add in this regard).

It is a decision resulting more from the Western economic crisis than the real Iranian willingness to stop its military-civilian nuclear activities. Nevertheless the Western geoeconomic collapse is now so fast that every global strategic choice must be sadly subjected to the needs of the economic and political survival of our social systems.

The EU, US and UN sanctions have now been basically lifted, especially with regard to the financial, transport, logistics and energy sectors, while the US embargo on Iran is still in place.

In this connection, data and statistics are more important than usual: so far the Iranian companies removed from the sanctions list are 278 in the transport sector; 114 in the energy sector; 16 in the fields of engineering, construction and manufacturing; 20 in the trading sector; 53 in the activities related to the nuclear cycle and finally 111 in the financial and insurance sectors.

Moreover, further 600 individuals and small to medium size companies have been removed from the list of sanctions on Iran.

About half of these 600 natural and legal persons operate in the transport sector, a fundamental sector for a nation like Iran whose economy is linked to oil.

In particular the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, the National Iranian Tanker Company and their offices and affiliated companies.

In percentage terms, the lifting of sanctions has placed back on the scene 20% of Iranian energy companies, as well as 20% of its banks and insurance companies and only 9% of its companies working in the nuclear sector.

The remaining companies operate in the trading, engineering, construction, manufacturing and the import-export sectors.

Many of these companies, however, result to be still active in Iranian missile or anyway military activities. Several banks to which now sanctions are no longer applied still have ties with the covert networks of nuclear procurement, while other companies have been used as a cover for secret nuclear activities not declared to the IAEA.

It is worth recalling that, in accordance with the JCPOA agreement, Iran can still prevent the Vienna Agency’s visits and inspections to the sites having “military relevance” and, in any case, even the AIEA experts must be subjected to the Iranian government’s acceptance.

For the EU, however, the following transactions were excluded from the previous sanctions; the transfers of funds and the financial and banking exchanges and transfers between European and Iranian entities; the banking activities, with the possibility for the Iranian credit institutions to open branches in the EU region; insurance and reinsurance activities for the Iranian companies operating in Europe; the imports of oil, gas and petrochemical products from Iran; the EU investment in the Iranian mining sector; all the shipping and shipbuilding activities; the exports of gold, gems and coins, in which Iran is rich at least since the time of the Thousand and One Nights.

The United States have lifted their sanctions on Iran and on the non-US companies working with Iran, especially in the hydrocarbon sector, although a clear US government’s ban remains for US assets and individuals to still operate with the Iranian government.

However the sanctions list by sector is largely similar to the list we have already seen for the European Union.

Nevertheless the United Nations have retained the embargo on 36 natural and legal persons, while the sanctions regime remains in place for conventional weapons (lasting five years) and for the technologies regarding ballistic missiles (lasting eight years). Obviously also the restrictions on the nuclear-related technologies are maintained.

It is worth noting that, despite the P5 + 1 agreement, there are hundreds of Iranian natural and legal persons that have not been removed from the sanctions list.

They include 86 natural or legal persons for the United Nations, including the Bank Sepah; over 150 natural and legal persons for the European Union, including banks and oil trading companies, as well as over 160 for the United States.

Obviously many of these entities can be found in all the various lists.

So far we have provided the essential data to understand the issue. But what will be the geostrategic impact of the new interaction between Iran and the Western powers of the P5 + 1 agreement? As we all know, we are now faced with a situation of plummeting oil prices.

Certainly Iran plans to flood and invade the global markets with huge amounts of oil and gas but, in this case, the clash between the country of reference of the “Party of Ali” and the country of reference of Wahhabi and Sunni purism, namely Saudi Arabia, could be turned from peripheral tensions – managed by proxies, such as the Yemeni Houthi for Iran or the “moderate” jihadists in Syria – into a direct war between the two entities of Islam.

Some experts estimate that the excess of oil production in the world amounts to 9-12 million barrels per day and, as is well-known, this has been lasting for 16 months approximately.

The United States have endeavoured to reduce prices with a view to destabilizing the economy and hence the Russian power projection between Ukraine and Syria. Saudi Arabia wants the fall of crude oil price to prevent the rise of the US shale oil which, in fact, needs a minimum price of 50 US dollars per barrel to break even the extraction costs. The European Union is floundering in an economic crisis and can afford only a smaller amount of oil.

It is a perfect geopolitical storm: the greater the fall in prices, or their irrelevance compared to costs (which is the real problem), the greater the internal competition among producers.

The oil demand has been falling since mid-2014 and Europe is cutting demand substantially, while the United States extract ever more shale oil and China reduces its oil imports.

If OPEC had read only the manuals of liberal neoclassical economics, it would have reduced extraction so as to keep prices high.

Conversely, Saudi Arabia has decided to increase extraction not to keep prices high (Saudi Arabia reaches the breakeven point with a price of 100 US dollars per barrel), but only to retain its market share.

Hence the ground for the war between Iran and Saudi Arabia will be the destruction or the driving away from the market – with terrorist and jihadist actions – of their respective allies having an oil-dependent economy.

The other variable is the rapid recovery of the Chinese economy, which could make prices increase beyond such a limit as to avoid a direct or indirect war between Shi’ites and Sunnis.

Currently China’s imports have increased by approximately 8% as against last year, but China is a major customer for Iran, for obvious technical and geopolitical reasons, while Saudi Arabia still is the second largest oil exporter to China. The first is the Russian Federation.

Moreover President Xi Jinping has further improved the Sino-Saudi relations, thanks to the visit he has paid this month to the Middle East.

Obviously China does not want the destabilization of the Greater Middle East and it is distributing its cards among all players so as to be the final broker of the new regional balance.

Indeed, this is the reason why Russia is actively mediating between Iran and Saudi Arabia so as to avoid both the confrontation and the expansion of the proxy wars which, in the Russian perspective, only benefit “NATO and the West.”

If the OPEC Islamic region set fire, what would happen to the Russian oil transport lines from Central Asia?

Furthermore, in view of the lifting of international sanctions, Iran has repeatedly stated that its oil will be managed on the market in such a way as to prevent further falls in oil prices.

Hence, as Iran has already maintained, it will produce “as much as the market can absorb”. But certainly it cannot help affecting the Saudi market area.

Nevertheless, there is a variable: the demographic and religious distribution of the Saudi population.

The Shi’ites living in Saudi Arabia are approximately eight million and are concentrated in the Eastern areas, where the headquarters of Saudi Aramco are located (in Dahran), as well as the largest oil field in the world, namely Ghawar, and the largest global terminal, namely Ras Tanura, in addition to the refinery of Abuqaiq, which is the largest one of the whole OPEC system.

The Shi’ites are the overwhelming majority of workers processing crude oil in the region and will be – or probably already are – “managed” by the Iranian brothers.

It is not hard to imagine what would happen if a Shi’ite uprising in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern province destabilized the production of the first OPEC country and added the largest oil production in the world to the Shi’ite economic and decision-making system.

However, keeping prices low allows to dispose of stocks more quickly.

Hence if Saudi Arabia keeps prices low to expand its market share, which is of primary importance compared to profitability, it is likely it wants direct confrontation with Iran.

According to the analysts of many Western merchant banks, the scenario of a real war between Iran and Saudi Arabia could lead to an immediate price peak of 300 US dollars per barrel, before stabilizing at 100 US dollars, which is the profitability limit of Saudi Arabia’s production.

It is worth recalling that Iran has a profitability level higher than Saudi Arabia’s. And this is a significant factor to assess the duration – and hence the winner – of the confrontation.

In a conference held last year with the major oil extraction companies worldwide, Iran decided to change the crude oil commercial rules, by allowing the booking of reserves though maintaining the ownership of soil.

Iran will attract at least 30 billion US dollars of investment in its oil, with 25-year contracts for the foreign companies extracting in the new oil fields and some offsetting mechanisms for price fluctuations.

Despite sanctions, Iran is the second largest economy in the Middle East and the seventh in Asia as a whole. We can imagine what might happen after the lifting of sanctions.

It is a struggle for hegemony over oil, through which the world and Western economies are controlled and governed and – subject to the careful Russian mediation and China’s balanced policy between the parties – nothing prevents the worst from happening.

About the author:
*Professor Giancarlo Elia Valori is an eminent Italian economist and businessman. He holds prestigious academic distinctions and national orders. Mr Valori has lectured on international affairs and economics at the world’s leading universities such as Peking University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Yeshiva University in New York.

He currently chairs “La Centrale Finanziaria Generale Spa”, he is also the honorary president of Huawei Italy, economic adviser to the Chinese giant HNA Group and Khashoggi Holding’s advisor.

In 1992 he was appointed Officier de la Légion d’Honneur de la République Francaise, with this motivation: “A man who can see across borders to understand the world” and in 2002 he received the title of “Honorable” of the Académie des Sciences de l’Institut de France.

Source:
This article was published by Modern Diplomacy.

China, detaining Hong Kong booksellers, demonstrates insecurity, willingness to enforce its laws across borders.

By Frank Ching*

In an unprecedented attack on press freedom, five men – owners and employees of a publishing house in Hong Kong – disappeared. Three were arrested in mainland China and two abducted from Hong Kong and Thailand, appearing subsequently in mainland China. No charges have formally been laid, but the actions appear to be part of a crackdown on Hong Kong’s freewheeling publishing industry, which the Communist Party fears is undermining the Chinese government.

By openly flouting a commitment to respect Hong Kong’s political system and flagrantly violating Thailand’s sovereignty, attempting to shut down publication of annoying books at the expense of its international reputation, China has demonstrated its deepening own insecurity.

Since 1997, when Hong Kong sovereignty was transferred from Britain to the mainland, concerns about China respecting the “one country, two systems” generally proved misplaced until now. Complacency was rudely shaken starting in October as the men connected with the Hong Kong–based publishing company Mighty Current Media disappeared – one while holidaying in Thailand. An unconfirmed report in London’s Sunday Times claims that the detentions were related to a secret Chinese directive to “exterminate” banned books and magazines at their source, “identifying 14 publishing houses and 21 publications in Hong Kong as targets.” Beijing makes no secret of its annoyance with Hong Kong’s freewheeling press, and many publications have had a tough time: The Nineties, established in 1970, went out of business in 1998. Open Magazine, established 1987, ceased publication in 2014.

But the book publishing industry continued with a proliferation of political and gossipy books sold around Hong Kong and at its airport, attracting the interest of millions of mainland Chinese travelers.

The books, some serious, others more fiction than fact, have provided sensational fare to Chinese who want to know more about insider politics and the personal lives of top officials. Bei Ling, co-founder of the Independent Chinese PEN Center who was interviewed by the Chinese-language site of The New York Times, noted that Gui Minhai, who disappeared in October while in Thailand, has published books titled Mistresses of the Chinese Communist Party, Secrets of Wives of Chinese Communist Party Officials and Women of the Shanghai Clique.

Bei said Gui owned several publishing houses which every month put out four or five books, accounting for about a third of books on elite politics published in Hong Kong.

Other publishers have released serious books, such as the memoirs of the disgraced party leader Zhao Ziyang, who had opposed the use of force to suppress the students in 1989 and who spent the rest of his life under house arrest. His memoirs were smuggled out to Hong Kong and published in Chinese by New Century Press – run by Bao Pu, son of Bao Tong, Zhao’s former political secretary, and his wife, Renee Chiang. The book was published in English by Simon & Schuster as Prisoner of the State: the Secret Journal of Premier Zhao Ziyang.

Needless to say, China bans such books, regardless of content, thus lending them the additional cachet of forbidden fruit.

Such books would annoy politicians anywhere, but China may have gone so far as to take the drastic steps – hitherto unimaginable –of carrying out abductions in foreign territory, Thailand, and in Hong Kong. Moreover, both those victims are foreign nationals. Evidently, from Beijing’s standpoint, these books are not merely an annoyance, but rather instruments that could erode support for the Communist Party and ultimately bring about its overthrow.

The Beijing newspaper Global Times, an affiliate of  People’s Daily, justified Chinese action by suggesting that the Hong Kong bookstore had “to a large extent, targeted at the mainland” and “undercut the mainland’s rule of law system.” The Sunday Times report did not provide details about the background of the secret directive but, Ching Cheong, a veteran China watcher in Hong Kong, has asserted in an article in the Hong Kong Economic Journal that the five “disappearances” stem from a struggle within the party over efforts to deal with banned books in Hong Kong – with each side feeding information to various authors and publishers, not necessarily true, to benefit itself.

Former leader Jiang Zemin is seen as a significant player in anti-Xi maneuvers, with certain book publishers supporting him and others supporting Xi. Ching explains that publications of Causeway Bay Books, a subsidiary of Mighty Current Media, have attacked Xi with such titles as 2017: Upheaval in China, with predictions on what might happen during the 19th Party Congress.

In addition to an internal struggle, Ching said, the party as a whole feels threatened and wants to take action against banned books sold in Hong Kong.

Historically, China has opposed the use of Hong Kong as a base of subversion, and the British cooperated during colonial times. The revolutionary Sun Yat-sen was banned from the colony after 1895 because of his efforts to overthrow the Qing dynasty of the Manchus.

After the Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989, China tightened provisions in the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, to ensure that the former colony would not be a subversive base. Under the Basic Law, Hong Kong is supposed to enjoy a high degree of autonomy and the local government is responsible for running the territory. Mainland security authorities are not supposed to exercise law enforcement functions, but rather seek the cooperation of the Hong Kong police if necessary.

Now, it appears, China is so insecure that it’s willing to jeopardize Hong Kong’s status as a special administrative region under the “one country, two systems” formula, which is meant to continue at least until 2047.

Moreover, strains with other countries are emerging. The case of Gui Minhai, apparently spirited out of Thailand into China, affects Beijing’s relations with Bangkok, and, since Gui is a Swedish citizen, Stockholm is involved.

Not surprisingly, Gui addressed his nationality while appearing on Chinese television for a confession claiming that his conscience had been bothering him over involvement in a 2003 drunk-driving case resulting in the death of a young woman. He tearfully read from a text: “Even though I am a Swedish national, I truly feel that I am Chinese and my roots are still in China. So I hope that the Swedish side would respect my personal choice, rights and privacy and let me solve my own problems.”

It is perverse, to say the least, for someone in a serious legal bind to declare publicly, in effect, that he does not want diplomatic protection from the country where he is citizen.

Similarly, Lee Bo, the British citizen, reportedly wrote a letter to the Hong Kong police asking them to stop investigating his disappearance from the territory – apparently through illegal means since his travel documents remain at his Hong Kong home.

When British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond asked for information about Lee’s whereabouts during a January  visit to China, Foreign Minister Wang Yi insisted that Lee was “first and foremost a Chinese citizen.”

Quiet diplomacy may be underway. Thailand appears reluctant to complain to China and jeopardize visits from a million Chinese tourists a year. Neither Sweden nor Britain is standing up to China for now. The Communist Party seems determined to exercise power directly in Hong Kong despite solemn and voluntary promises made before the United Nations in 1984 – but China should know that the world is also watching the cross-border forays and wondering about its claim to global leadership.

*Frank Ching is a journalist and author of Ancestors: 900 Years in the Life of a Chinese Family. Follow him on Twitter.

By Mohammed Al-Sulami

The terrorist attack on a mosque in Al-Ahsa that killed four people and injured 18 was roundly condemned on Friday.

Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Mansour Al-Turki said that two suicide bombers were prevented from entering Al-Ridha Mosque in the Mahasin area of Al-Ahsa during the Friday prayer.

“When the bombers were heading toward the mosque, security personnel tracked them. When they intervened, one terrorist blew himself up at the entrance of the mosque and there was an exchange of gunfire with the other, during which he was injured and subsequently arrested. An explosives belt was recovered from him,” the official said.

He said that two security men were lightly injured and that the police were monitoring the location of the incident.

Reuters quoted a witness as saying that an explosion was followed by a gun attack.

The Senior Scholars Council strongly condemned the “heinous” attack and termed it a “failed attempt to destabilize the country and ignite sedition.”

In a statement to SPA, the council said: “These attacks are foiled due to alertness of the security officers and awareness of the Saudi people.”

It urged scholars, thinkers and writers to highlight the dangerous terrorist ideology.

Condemning the attack, Bahrain said such terror acts would never succeed in undermining the Kingdom’s security or igniting sedition among the Saudi people. It also praised “the great efforts “exerted by Saudi Arabia to enhance the security and stability of the Arab and Islamic countries. It expressed condolences to the families of the victims and wished the injured a speedy recovery.

Pictures of the scene posted on social media showed bodies on the ground.

Maj. Gen. Al-Turki told CNN: “There was a terrorism attempt. The situation has been handled.”

The identities of those killed or injured were not immediately released. No immediate claim of responsibility for the attack was made.

This would be at least the fourth deadly attack on a mosque in Saudi Arabia since May. The previous three were claimed by Daesh.

On May 22, a suicide bomber detonated himself, killing at least 21 people at the Imam Ali mosque in Al-Qadeeh village.

A week later, a man disguised as a woman blew himself up, killing at least three people, outside a mosque in Damman.

In August, a suicide bomber killed 15 people in an attack on a mosque for security personnel in southwest Saudi Arabia.

The Iranian Navy has reportedly flown an unmanned surveillance drone over an American aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf amid ongoing military drills in the waters south of the country.

According to a Friday report by Fars news agency, the drone managed to capture a video during the surveillance mission over the USS Harry S. Truman.

Meanwhile, a midget Ghadir-class submarine belonging to Iran’s Navy was also deployed close to the US aircraft carrier with a mission to gather intelligence and capture footage, the report says.

The Iranian submarine was able to take “clear” photographs of the aircraft carrier without catching the attention of the staff on board, the report added.

The Bahrain-based US Navy’s 5th Fleet which commands the operations of American warships in the Persian Gulf declined to comment on the incident.

The developments come as Iran’s Navy is conducting the third day of its annual military maneuvers, code-named Velayat 94, across a large swath of territorial waters and high seas in the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and the Indian Ocean.

During the four-day exercises, Iranian marines simulate the interception of invaders, while various military vessels and submarines are being used.

On the first of the drills, a US Navy warship received a serious warning from several Iranian destroyers to keep away from the designated exercise zone near the Strait of Hormuz.

Fars news agency reported that the USS Monterey, a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, was sailing near the Strait of Hormuz where the Iranian forces were staging the main phase of Velayat 94.

The US warship, however, left the region immediately after receiving the warning from Iranian forces.

Original article

By Mirjan Schulz*

In 2008, the then President of Pakistan, Gen Pervez Musharraf, allowed relatively free general elections in the country. Islamabad’s first peaceful transfer of power from one civilian government to another took place in 2013. This commentary analyses the state-of-affairs of civilian control over the military in Pakistan, based loosely on the theory of civil-military relations by Croissant et al. (Theorizing civilian control of the military in emerging democracies; ZfVP 2011 No.5).

Military in Civilian Institutions

Contesting elections, participating in parliamentary proceedings, and/or manipulating polls, by the military, would mean the military guards itself.

In 2010, the 18th Amendment to Pakistan’s constitution was implemented, which disallowed military personnel from contesting parliamentary elections. Resultantly, active members of Pakistan’s armed forces are not entitled to assume ministerial or other high offices such as that of the President.

Nevertheless, clientelism between the military and civilian actors is still a continuing issue, and the former remains an important player behind the scenes. Until 2008, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) often manipulated the elections in favour of the military. To prevent this situation in the future, the parliament strengthened the mandate of the election commission. Consequently, manipulation did decrease during the 2013 general election; but did not cease.

Influence in Policy Areas

Although external defence is the primary duty area of any military, surveillance and control over the operations must lie with the civilian government; and likewise for internal security operations. Furthermore, the military has to be separated from other security-related actors. The military can, however, advise the civilian government in terms of agenda setting, policy formulation and adoption, in other policy areas relevant to the former. However, the civilian government should have the final say on decisions, including those on military budgets.

In Pakistan, cleavages between the military and the civilian leadership in matters of external defence are fewer, because they often share the same opinion. For instance, since incumbent Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif took office, the Pakistan Army has relatively practised restraint vis-à-vis impeding efforts towards Indo-Pak rapprochement.

Regardless, many experts assess a continuing strong influence of the armed forces in these matters. Pakistan’s National Security Council (NSC) is responsible for issues of national security, and is currently led by the prime minister as well as cabinet ministers. Formed in 1969, the NSC has fluctuated between being active and inactive. The Council was abandoned after Musharraf’s tenure too, in 2009, but was revived by Sharif, in 2013. Between 2013-2016, the Council seldom met – and many decisions on external defence were taken between the prime minister and military officers itself.

As regards internal security, although the responsibility of planning operations officially lies with the civilian leadership, the military’s influence remains high because civilian authorities are heavily dependent on the latter to execute those plans. This is an outcome of the poor capabilities of the police forces, and the numerous domestic conflicts.

Furthermore, structures of the military and those of other security-related actors, overlap. For instance, military officers comprise half the members of the ISI.

In other policy areas, that the armed forces did not intervene when the parliament amended the constitution in 2010, was a positive signal. However, due to corruption and inefficiency in the civilian institutions, military institutions often deliver better than the former.

According to Christine Fair, previously, “the military had submitted a number, stating the overall funds request which would be approved without scrutiny.” However, since 2008, the military budget has been discussed in the parliament. Nevertheless, the military is not entirely dependent on annual domestic budget allocations alone. The Pakistan Army reportedly owns shareholdings and land ownerships estimated at approximately $21 billion, enabling it to establish an initial framework of a parallel state.

Functional Aspects of Military Structures

Although a military can independently decide on matters of recruitment, training, and operational doctrines, it still must follow guidelines set by the civilian leadership.

Yet, military courts have been set up in Pakistan, the provision for which the military has often abused in order to protect its members from civilian courts.

Furthermore, in the past, members of the Pakistan Army have often been awarded unprecedented extensions to their tenures – highlighting the powerlessness of the civilian government. Since 2008, Pakistan’s Nuclear Command Authority (NCA) has been chaired by the prime minister. There exists a 50-50 representation of military personnel and civilian authorities in the NCA membership. During peace time, the prime minister’s decision is final in an event of a stalemate on use and movement of nuclear weapons. However, during war time, the military can override him/her.

Overall, the 2008-2016 period witnessed some progress towards limiting the military’s formal involvement in civilian institutions, and towards a comparatively empowered election commission. Yet, Pakistan continues to be beleaguered by a severe lack of civilian control; and the civil-military power imbalance, especially in the ISI and the NCA, remains one of the most problematic issues.

These, coupled with the military’s unwillingness to relinquish the control and influence it wields on matters of national importance, indicate that chances of a change in status quo are low in the near future.

* Mirjan Schulz
Research Intern, IPCS
E-mail: mirjan.schulz@gmail.com

Iranian media report that foreign airlines will soon be re-establishing flights to Tehran following the lifting of international sanctions against Iran.

Mohammad Khodakarami, the deputy head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization, was quoted by Iranian media on Thursday January 28 saying the agency is engaged in talks with British Airways officials who are in Tehran to discuss the resumption of flights to Tehran.

He added that French and Dutch airlines have also expressed interest in doing so.

Air France has announced that after seven years, it will resume flying to Tehran in April 2016.

KLM has not announced any concrete plans about resuming flights to Iran.

AFP reports that European airlines cut off their flights to Tehran following the imposition of Western sanctions on Iran. Currently, Iran Air has three flights per week to Tehran and two weekly flights to Paris and Amsterdam.

Last week Iran announced that it is also reviewing the possibility of establishing a direct flight to the United States. If established, it would be the first such flight in more than 30 years.

Iran has also announced that it is interested in purchasing several passenger planes from the U.S. company Boeing. Reports indicate, however, that an agreement for the purchase of 114 Airbus passengers planes was signed on Thursday in Paris.

Sri Lanka’s minority religious groups are concerned after Buddhist hard-liners reacted angrily to the president’s proposed new constitution.

President Maithripala Sirisena’s new constitution, proposed on Jan. 9, would decentralize power in a bid to prevent ethnic tensions in the country, but Buddhist hard-liners say it contains provisions that regulate the power of the Buddhist clergy, the Christian Post reported.

Justice and Buddha Sasana Minister Wijeyasayadasa Rajapashe denied this claim, saying they are intended only to enable the government to discipline monks who break the law.

Others who oppose the change say that it is an attempt by the government to be more “likeable” to Western nations.

Buddhism currently enjoys “the foremost place” in the Sri Lankan constitution. Article 9 decrees that “Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the state to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana [message].”

By Sheel Kant Sharma*

But for the Iran nuclear accord, the year 2015 would have been a wasted year for arms control and non-proliferation. All high praise and superlatives marking Iran’s implementation of the nuclear deal with P5+1, are fully apt. Iran’s entry into the global nuclear community was sealed on 19 January 2016 in the statement by the Director General of the IAEA that ‘Iran is a normal state’. The IAEA’s professional contribution in this context has been outstanding. The tireless diplomatic marathon that brought this about and the leadership provided by US and its partners in P5+1 have been unprecedented. They would not have made headway without the sagacity, wisdom and forward looking disposition of the leadership in Tehran, particularly after the 2013 elections. In terms of dispelling war clouds and letting diplomacy win in the Middle East, one can find in it shades of Anwar Sadat’s fateful diplomatic offensive resulting in the peace treaty with Israel in 1979, which too, in a sense, had foreclosed repetition of a full scale war. However, the peaceful resolution of the Iranian nuclear imbroglio is truly in a class of its own, without a parallel.

Its larger political impact will take time to show. However, to fully grasp the importance of the nuclear accord, a brief historical prelude may be pertinent. The nuclear file on Iran which the IAEA scrambled to construct in 2002 has grown over the past decade plus, and has entirely new features different from past experience with proliferation. The 1990 disclosures about Saddam Hussain’s clandestine nuclear weapons program had already led to substantial strengthening of IAEA safeguards through the 1990s under the Non-proliferation Treaty, including the Additional Protocol to the mandatory comprehensive safeguards.

After a series of undeclared and suspicion-causing nuclear activities in Iran came to light in 2002-03, the IAEA prepared a questionnaire and sought closer engagement under its Statute to come to grips with the implications of Iran’s actions. Iran responded by fielding a team of negotiators with IAEA as well as the EU-3, namely, France, Germany and UK. This team was then led by present President Rouhani in his earlier avatar as Chief Negotiator. With efforts on EU’s part, there seemed a chance and a fledgling hope in late 2003 of Iran resolving the issues and coming clean. However, the opening up and readiness of Iran to accept obligations under the Additional Protocol, pending ratification – which Rouhani was able to do – was not enough for its interlocutors. They conveyed the strict US demand for a complete cessation of suspicious activities, total transparency about what was underway and unhindered access to sites in Iran to IAEA inspectors for monitoring and verification of Iran’s compliance with enhanced safeguards obligations under a provisional Additional Protocol.

This was a tall order for Iran and failed to get any traction whereas new evidence surfaced from Libya about Iran’s forays into nuclear weapon design and related work. By the end of 2004, a downward spiral set in on Iran’s engagement with the EU interlocutors and the IAEA. What followed 2005 onwards was massive and defiant escalation of all nuclear activities in Iran even as it carried on with implementing the IAEA’s NPT safeguards minus the Additional Protocol. Thus the Iran file gathered mass through monitoring, inspections, and analyses as well as open source and intelligence inputs by several states – all of which figured in the regular reports to the Board of Governors under a special agenda item on Iran every quarter. In addition, Iran’s alleged breach of safeguards obligations was referred to the UN Security Council, much to Iran’s annoyance.

While negotiations, in spite of the shadow of Security Council sanctions, still continued from 2005 till 2012, they were marred by upsets. The upsets were caused by revelations of undeclared nuclear activities such as a huge new underground centrifuge plant for uranium enrichment, a plutonium reactor project, heavy water production and trappings of a range of processes dealing with uranium metal in chemical forms suitable for possible weapons purpose. On the other hand, as Iran’s credibility dipped, the UN Security Council kept up with more censure and tighter sanctions; also covering Iran’s ballistic missiles program. Iran chose defiance and set on course to build, operate and refine thousands of centrifuges and amass tons of low enriched uranium by 2011, as its right under the NPT, even while complying with the IAEA’s inspections and verification. There was increasing clamour during 2011-12 about military solution and resort to force alongside sabotage of Iran’s nuclear program. The vice grip of tighter sanctions by the US, UN and EU became nastier on Iranian society.

The challenge for diplomacy to find a modus vivendi in this difficult situation was twofold. First, Iran’s interlocutors sought to compel it into full compliance with obligations under the NPT, to roll back its huge enrichment venture at every place, and to abandon the plutonium reactor project and all suspected activities with possible military use. Second, to reduce all capacity and capability of Iran to a level which would rule out a ‘break out’ scenario under which, like North Korea, Iran too could at some point in time scrap engagement with the IAEA, expel inspectors, terminate safeguards and give up on the NPT to proceed to weaponisation. Since Iran, however, held that its nuclear program was permissible under the NPT, that it remained in compliance with the NPT and that it had no weapons program, the interlocutors’ demands were dismissed as being without any justification based on facts.

The stalemate hardened and led to mounting threats of the exercise of a military option both by Israel and the US. It is in this scary backdrop that a change of guard took place after general elections in Iran in 2013 and President Rouhani assumed office, with blessings of Supreme leader Khamenei.

As it turned out, informally and through back channels with the US, President Rouhani’s team was already exploring options to turn the page on the impasse and to explore negotiating options for lifting of sanctions. A very consistent and serious endeavour, therefore, was made on the part of all sides to seek a breakthrough by talks not just under the P5+1 format but also bilaterally between the US and Iran.

This endeavour bore early results by November 2013: Iran accepted a specified scaling down and verifiable freeze of all its alleged nuclear activities in return for limited sanctions’ relief; pending time-bound pursuit of a comprehensive solution through intensive negotiations under agreed terms of reference.

First taste of success was in the outlines of a comprehensive deal which emerged by April 2015 even though it faced sustained opposition from hardliners in the US, Israel and in the Gulf states as also by the religious orthodoxy in Iran. The outlines indicated that both sides had bridged the gaps substantially on multiple aspects to block all pathways for Iran to acquire a bomb in return for lifting of all nuclear related sanctions. The mainstay of the vehement campaign against an accord was the breakout scenario – i.e. regardless of the nature of Iran’s expanded commitments, what if Iran were to rescind them all at the time of its choosing and rush for the weapon?

The accord at hand today has effectively addressed this breakout dimension and it is here that the Joint Comprehensive Program of Action (JCPOA) marks another leap on the non-proliferation front. This leap goes further than the mandate of the Additional Protocol and comprises closer, continuous monitoring of the permissible running of about 6000 centrifuges for 3.6 per cent enrichment at Natanz by, among other things, latest equipment capable of real time data transmission; the IAEA’s control on dismantled parts of more than 12000 centrifuges and the plugging of all gaps in the IAEA’s information base about military dimension of Iran’s activities – none of this was hitherto imagined within the NPT’s legal remit. Iran has demonstrated its resolve and openness by accepting this vastly expanded IAEA role, albeit only within a specified and limited timeframe. The IAEA’s 15 December 2015 report is a landmark on non-proliferation annals in that it brings out in the open Iran’s past undeclared dabbling into military use of nuclear technology and details how that has ceased.

There were instances after the Cold War, of South Africa, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Belarus returning to the NPT as non-nuclear weapon states but the IAEA’s verification of that transformation was nowhere as intrusive and extensive as it is in Iran’s case. It is here that the disclaimer in the JCPOA as well as the related Security Council resolution that the agreement with Iran does not set a precedent is pertinent. This protects Iran’s emergence, by and by, as a ‘normal’ member of international community, as the timelines set by the JCPOA kick in and sanctions are lifted. It possibly also sets at rest apprehensions about the IAEA’s expanded non-proliferation mandate being applied elsewhere.

Nonetheless, in terms of new and advanced verification and compliance activities by the IAEA – and that too with a cooperative negotiated process bearing the UNSC’s stamp – the Iran agreement has scaled new frontiers and established new benchmarks.

No wonder that the successful implementation of the deal has engendered an all-round trust that underpins the mainstreaming of Iran not only within the nuclear community but also the global economy and trade. Iran is confident that it richly deserves the end of its isolation even as it voices its undiminished scepticism about the West and eschews broader cooperation. The US too remains careful and delicately balances claims about success of diplomacy with good deal of caution; particularly not to let die hard domestic critics of the JCPOA impede implementation of the deal in this election year. Hence the broader political ramifications would need to be harnessed with a calibrated pace.

Ruffled sensitivities are in full display among Iran’s neighbours who in these past several decades became confident of a new regional dispensation against Iran whereby even the Persian Gulf of all history was being rechristened as mere ‘Gulf’, if not Arab Gulf. Iran’s emerging from isolation in the new avatar seems set to shatter that confidence. With the nuclear shadow out of way Iran’s allegations against its detractors may not be so easy to dismiss, especially in regard to grappling with the Daesh menace and resolution of crisis in Syria. Hence, there is severe unease among the US allies and partners in the region. At the same time, Chinese President Xi Jing Ping’s much heralded visit to Tehran shows how others are rushing in to capitalise on the opportunity. Pakistan too, by visits of its prime minister and the army chief to Iran and Saudi Arabia, is exploring ways to derive what advantage it can in the situation. The question naturally for a New Delhi observer is what initiatives India should have been contemplating at this juncture.

* Sheel Kant Sharma
Former Permanent Representative to UN Office in Vienna & IAEA

The moon was formed by a violent, head-on collision between the early Earth and a “planetary embryo” called Theia approximately 100 million years after the Earth formed, UCLA geochemists and colleagues report.

Scientists had already known about this high-speed crash, which occurred almost 4.5 billion years ago, but many thought the Earth collided with Theia (pronounced THAY-eh) at an angle of 45 degrees or more — a powerful side-swipe (simulated in this 2012 YouTube video). New evidence reported Jan. 29 in the journal Science substantially strengthens the case for a head-on assault.

The researchers analyzed seven rocks brought to the Earth from the moon by the Apollo 12, 15 and 17 missions, as well as six volcanic rocks from the Earth’s mantle — five from Hawaii and one from Arizona.

The key to reconstructing the giant impact was a chemical signature revealed in the rocks’ oxygen atoms. (Oxygen makes up 90 percent of rocks’ volume and 50 percent of their weight.) More than 99.9 percent of Earth’s oxygen is O-16, so called because each atom contains eight protons and eight neutrons. But there also are small quantities of heavier oxygen isotopes: O-17, which have one extra neutron, and O-18, which have two extra neutrons. Earth, Mars and other planetary bodies in our solar system each has a unique ratio of O-17 to O-16 — each one a distinctive “fingerprint.”

In 2014, a team of German scientists reported in Science that the moon also has its own unique ratio of oxygen isotopes, different from Earth’s. The new research finds that is not the case.

“We don’t see any difference between the Earth’s and the moon’s oxygen isotopes; they’re indistinguishable,” said Edward Young, lead author of the new study and a UCLA professor of geochemistry and cosmochemistry.

Young’s research team used state-of-the-art technology and techniques to make extraordinarily precise and careful measurements, and verified them with UCLA’s new mass spectrometer.

The fact that oxygen in rocks on the Earth and our moon share chemical signatures was very telling, Young said. Had Earth and Theia collided in a glancing side blow, the vast majority of the moon would have been made mainly of Theia, and the Earth and moon should have different oxygen isotopes. A head-on collision, however, likely would have resulted in similar chemical composition of both Earth and the moon.

“Theia was thoroughly mixed into both the Earth and the moon, and evenly dispersed between them,” Young said. “This explains why we don’t see a different signature of Theia in the moon versus the Earth.”

Theia, which did not survive the collision (except that it now makes up large parts of Earth and the moon) was growing and probably would have become a planet if the crash had not occurred, Young said. Young and some other scientists believe the planet was approximately the same size as the Earth; others believe it was smaller, perhaps more similar in size to Mars.

Another interesting question is whether the collision with Theia removed any water that the early Earth may have contained. After the collision — perhaps tens of millions of year later — small asteroids likely hit the Earth, including ones that may have been rich in water, Young said. Collisions of growing bodies occurred very frequently back then, he said, although Mars avoided large collisions.

A head-on collision was initially proposed in 2012 by Matijauk, now a research scientist with the SETI Institute, and Sarah Stewart, now a professor at UC Davis; and, separately during the same year by Robin Canup of the Southwest Research Institute.

When the moon is high in the sky, it creates bulges in the planet’s atmosphere that creates imperceptible changes in the amount of rain that falls below.

New University of Washington research to be published in Geophysical Research Letters shows that the lunar forces affect the amount of rain – though very slightly.

“As far as I know, this is the first study to convincingly connect the tidal force of the moon with rainfall,” said corresponding author Tsubasa Kohyama, a UW doctoral student in atmospheric sciences.

Kohyama was studying atmospheric waves when he noticed a slight oscillation in the air pressure. He and co-author John (Michael) Wallace, a UW professor of atmospheric sciences, spent two years tracking down the phenomenon.

Air pressure changes linked to the phases of the moon were first detected in 1847,and temperature in 1932, in ground-based observations. An earlier paper by the UW researchers used a global grid of data to confirm that air pressure on the surface definitely varies with the phases of the moon.

“When the moon is overhead or underfoot, the air pressure is higher,” Kohyama said.

Their new paper is the first to show that the moon’s gravitational tug also puts a slight damper on the rain.

When the moon is overhead, its gravity causes Earth’s atmosphere to bulge toward it, so the pressure or weight of the atmosphere on that side of the planet goes up. Higher pressure increases the temperature of air parcels below. Since warmer air can hold more moisture, the same air parcels are now farther from their moisture capacity.

“It’s like the container becomes larger at higher pressure,” Kohyama said. The relative humidity affects rain, he said, because “lower humidity is less favorable for precipitation.”

Kohyama and Wallace used 15 years of data collected by NASA and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission satellite from 1998 to 2012 to show that the rain is indeed slightly lighter when the moon is high. The change is only about 1 percent of the total rainfall variation, though, so not enough to affect other aspects of the weather or for people to notice the difference.

“No one should carry an umbrella just because the moon is rising,” Kohyama said. Instead, this effect could be used to test climate models, he said, to check if their physics is good enough to reproduce how the pull of the moon eventually leads to less rain.

Wallace plans to continue exploring the topic to see whether certain categories of rain, like heavy downpours, are more susceptible to the phases of the moon, and whether the frequency of rainstorms shows any lunar connection.

By Rajendran Nair Karakulam*

The unprecedented success of the Hardik Patel-led agitation in galvanising the powerful Patidar community on the issue of OBC (other backward classes) quota has once again brought back the spotlight on one of the most controversial policies in India. Taking note of various implications of the stir that generated considerably public attention, ORF organised a panel discussion India’s Reservation Policy’ held at ORF on January 21, 2016 to brainstorm key principles underpinning India’s reservation policy.

Moderating the panel, Dr. Niranjan Sahoo, Senior Fellow, ORF put forth some hard questions. He asked the panel to deliberate on the method of implementation of the policy over the last 60 years, suggest the way forward and also consider an ‘exit policy’ for people who have benefitted from quota policy. He exhorted the panelists to look at more evidence based studies to relook at some of the key dimensions of reservation policy particularly the aspects of ‘eligibility’, creamy layer and soft affirmative policies.

Debating India’s reservation policy

Professor Ashwini Deshpande of the Delhi School of Economics defended the relevance of reservation policy as it ‘desegregates the elites’ which if not done, she argued, would have been a recipe for social disharmony. She then went on to counter certain universal arguments against affirmative action like it reinforces casteism, it should be based on income levels and that the beneficiaries are the creamy layer. To these she stated that casteism exists without affirmative action by giving the example of the private sector. She explained that the response to EWS quota imposed in Delhi schools was even more vicious and that clustering of community and thereby only the creamy layer being a beneficiary is the problem with all governmental policies in India and therefore the idea must not be to remove it completely. She concluded by arguing that affirmative action is necessary and an evidence based approach should be taken to which community should it be extended to. She also highlighted the importance of other affirmative action methods along with quotas.

Dr. Surjit Bhalla (Chairman, Oxus Research and Investment) countered the arguments raised by Professor Deshpande by highlighting that in this context it is essential to distinguish affirmative action from quotas and stated that, while affirmative action is absolutely necessary, quotas are not the correct system. Pointing out many statistics, he argued that OBCs should absolutely not get quotas and that Muslims are the community that have been hurt the most by this policy. He argued for economic based, rather than caste based, reservation. He also argued that quotas are an anti-merit system. In the end he stated that presently the whole policy has become a political tool.

Dr. D. Shyam Babu from the Centre for Policy Research opened his argument by highlighting the three key aspects of Reservation namely- Representation, Human Rights and Social & Economic upliftment. He focused on the present state of quotas and stated that the whole policy has become ungovernable in practice. He then went on to talk about the minimum standards of education that need to be implemented to make the policy workable. He also highlighted that caste discrimination is indeed a reality, especially in universities. Dr. Sahoo pointed out that an important question before the nation is how to depoliticize the issue of reservation and have a dispassionate approach towards it.

Ms. Britta Petersen, Senior Fellow, ORF explained the success of quota system by citing the reservation policy for women in the Green Party which has eventually led to the German Parliament having 36.5% women today. Talking about reservation policy in Europe, she highlighted that the European Union allows positive action but does not make it a duty on the state. She pointed out that the legitimacy of the policy in Europe is derived from its temporary nature. She pointed out that in Europe what works is a method of quotas long with other measures of affirmative action.

Dr. Cristina Dragomir, a political scientist from SUNY Oswego, began by pointing out that the tensions, problems and arguments that related to the reservation policy in India is the same as that in the US. Through a series of case laws, she pointed out the jurisprudence relating to constitutionality of affirmative action in the US. She also highlighted the importance of the Fisher v University of Texas case in determining the future of affirmative action policy in the US. She also pointed out various arguments against quotas that have been presented in the US such as the fact that students are more likely to do better at lesser schools than at big universities. The United States approach towards bringing diversity may undergo a complete overhaul if the decision in the aforementioned case were to state the need for moving towards an economic basis of affirmative action.

The Q & A session that followed raised many points about the effectiveness and need of reservation policy and the issue of merit and economic basis of reservation. The following discussion highlighted the fact that economic prosperity of lower castes does not solve the problem of discrimination and that the opposition that existed in India was to ‘quotas’ itself and not the basis of it. The need to explore alternatives to the quota policy was also expressed vehemently. It was urged by some that the need of the hour is to make the present system work through implementing minimum standards of education.

While concluding, Dr. Sahoo stated that the key points that have emerged from the discussion are that there is a need to move beyond quotas and other options of affirmative action including improving the educational and training opportunities must be taken into consideration. Adequate support must be provided to the lower castes whether or not quotas are to be continued. And he highlighted that, as with many other governmental policies and schemes, which he called “soft-affirmative” policies, the key is proper implementation. Had there been better implementation of the existing policies for the last 60 years, he argued, the country might have seen a completely different society today.

*This report is prepared by Rajendran Nair Karakulam, Research Intern, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi

The figures released by Spain’s Labor Force Survey (Spanish acronym: EPA) for the fourth quarter of 2015 show that the economic recovery is having a strong effect on the labor market, the Spanish government said. According to data released by the Spanish National Statistics Institute (Spanish acronym: INE), unemployment fell by 678,200 last year – the largest annual drop since EPA records began.

The unemployment rate now stands at 20.9%, representing a decrease of 2.81 points in 12 months and the lowest rate since the second quarter of 2011. In turn, employment rose by 525,100 at a year-on-year rate of 2.99% to an average of 18,094,200 people in work in the fourth quarter of 2015. Jobs were created in all sectors of the economy in the last year.

According to the Spanish government, the strength of the economic recovery in Spain, with a year-on-year GDP growth rate of over 3%, is enabling the labor market to show its dynamic nature once again. The reduction in unemployment of 678,200 exceeds the end-of-year forecasts made by the government and shows that the recovery is helping to ease the still high level of unemployment. The unemployment rate has fallen almost three points in the last 12 months to 20.9%. The number of unemployed who lost their job over a year ago has fallen by 425,400 and the number of first-time job-seekers has fallen by 91,700. When compared with the third quarter, unemployment has fallen by 71,300 to stand at 4,779,500.

In turn, employment rose in the fourth quarter of 2015 at a year-on-year rate of 2.99%, with over 525,000 net jobs created. The employment increase is balanced, with positive results from all sectors of the economy and an increase in permanent employment contracts. The number of people in work rose by 45,500 in the fourth quarter, an increase of 0.25% on the previous quarter. All the paid jobs created in the last quarter of the year were subject to indefinite employment contracts (up 103,400), while the number of temporary contracts fell by 63,600. The temporary employment rate is down almost one half of one point to 25.66%.

The greatest job creation in year-on-year terms took place in the private sector, with an increase of 452,000 jobs. A total of 73,100 jobs were created in the public sector. Jobs are being created in all sectors of the economy. There are 421,500 more workers in the services sector; 50,800 more in the agriculture sector; 28,100 more in the construction sector; and 24,600 more in the industrial sector. Over 95% of the jobs created in the Spanish economy in 2015 are full-time (501,700). Furthermore, of all the paid jobs created in the last year (505,700), two-thirds are subject to temporary employment contracts and one-third to permanent employment contracts.

The number of households where all active members are unemployed fell in the fourth quarter by 16,300 to a total of 1.56 million. In turn, the number of households where all active members are in employment rose by 64,400 to 9.5 million.

By Davoud Feirahi*

Iran’s President Hassan Rohani met with Pope Francis, the leader of millions of world Catholics, in the second leg of his European tour, which took him to Italy and France. The meeting between head of Iran’s executive power and the Pope is of high political and international importance under the current conditions that govern the international system. The Pope is considered as important representative of the Christian civilization and, from this viewpoint, enjoys special position and respect among European countries and the world.

On the other hand, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran is also one of the important representatives of the Islamic world, especially that this government is headed by the clerics and Muslim ulema. As a result, the meeting between Iran’s president, as a cleric, and the Pope can be considered as an opportunity in which representatives of two major world religions, namely, Islam and Christianity, have sit down for talks in an interactive atmosphere, which is a big event in its own right.

This meeting took place at a time that special conditions have overshadowed relations between the Islamic world and Christianity, on the one hand, and relations between Iran and the Western world, on the other. At the same time, the merciful image of Islam is being tarnished by many international media. Meanwhile, violent measures taken by extremist and terrorist groups that embark on violence and massacre of people with a claim to be following Islam have also greatly helped prop up this media line. Another point is that the meeting between Rohani and the Pope took place at a time that the manufactured nuclear crisis, which had created a wide gap between Iran and the Western countries, has reached a final solution, as a result of which a unique opportunity has been created for both sides to reduce their differences and listen to each other’s voice.

By taking advantage of these conditions, Rohani managed to provide two possibilities. Firstly, he brought up and pursued the issue of coexistence, which he has made the main motto of his administration inside the country, in the form of the coexistence of civilizations and the merciful Islam. By doing so, he proved that despite their loud voice, terrorists are a minority, because the majority of people in the Islamic world do not cherish their ideas and it happens that the majority of Muslims are peace-loving people. Historical records also show that apart from some exceptions, Muslims have always lived in peaceful coexistence with other religions. The important point is to establish the fact that Muslims and Christians can stick to their special convictions while engaging in two-way interaction on equal standing.

Secondly, the one-on-one meeting between Rohani and the leader of the world Catholics was a good opportunity for great leaders of the world to engage in direct talks instead of hearing the voice of Islam through media, so that it would be possible to introduce a pacifist voice as the dominant voice of Islam to representatives of other religions. In this way, instead of the two sides talking about each other, they talked about dialogue. This issue is important in that indirect and mediated talks are usually prone to distortion, especially that the dominance of the world’s media empire can introduce the violence of a small group as that of a majority. Taking these conditions into account, it will seem evident that direct talks between Iran and the West are of high value. Also, the mere presence of Iran’s president in Vatican, as a religious scholar and a member of the elite, who enjoys good ranking in the country and from the viewpoint of his scientific and social standing and command of the ideology of Islam enjoys a good position, will certainly be followed by useful outcomes.

*Davoud Feirahi
University of Tehran Professor and Islam Scholar

Source: Iran Newspaper
http://iran-newspaper.com/
Translated By: Iran Review.Org

By Jai Kumar Verma*

The Pakistani military-controlled Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) is pumping illegal drugs of more than Rs.7500 crores (USD1100 million) every year into the state of Punjab in India. In doing so, the nefarious ISI is killing many words with a single stone. Firstly, the illegal money generated through drug trafficking is utilized in funding numerous terrorist outfits which carry out terrorist activities in India. Secondly, large numbers of rural youths, farmers and labourers have become drug addicts and which has adversely affected the strength, moral and capability of the younger generations in this otherwise prosperous state. ISI is also using smuggling of drugs for supporting the Khalistan secessionist movement.

The terrorists are suspected to have used routes and contacts of drug smugglers during the Pathankot airbase attack on January 2, 2016. In fact, drug addicts are used as couriers, support agents for ISI operations in India. ISI also uses drug addicts for transportation and concealing of arms and ammunition.

ISI sponsored terrorist attack on Pathankot airbase should compel Indian security agencies to tighten measures against narcotics smuggling as it is abundantly clear that the ISI had used the smuggling network for the terrorist attack.

It is unfortunate that Indian security agencies have ignored smuggling of drugs for several years and now the problem has become so acute that even security and law enforcement personnel are suspected of assisting the drug traffickers.
ISI has successfully created a powerful network which included drug traffickers, Indian Fake Currency Notes (IFCN) smugglers, organized criminal gangs, terrorists and greedy politicians and security personnel who assist ISI operations advertently or inadvertently.

According to analysts drug trafficking is a multi billion rupees racket and several powerful and influential persons are also involved in this illegal trade. The related problem of drug addiction is impacting the security personnel also.

At present the cost of one gram of drug is approximately INR 3000. Drug traffickers use Pakistani SIM cards, which are operative up to 50 KMs inside Indian Territory to mislead the Indian security agencies.

The analysts claim that about 20 percent of the money generated through drug trafficking is used in financing various terrorist outfits in the states of Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab and in the North-East.

It is interesting to note that when vigilance becomes stringent in the Punjab area, ISI uses Nepal and Bangladesh for smuggling of drugs. But nevertheless, Punjab remains a transit point for sending drugs, arms and ammunition to Jammu and Kashmir. In fact, India has become a transit point for the drugs produced in Golden Triangle and Golden Crescent, including various categories of chemicals used in purifying of the drugs are either procured or transited from India. India’s proximity with Afghanistan, which produces more than 70 percent of world heroin, is an important factor for using India as a transit point for drug trafficking.

Central and state governments should chalk out a strategy to eradicate the drug menace. Indian law makers must enact stringent laws which provide severe punishments to the offenders and judiciary should be galvanized in such a way that the cases are decided expeditiously.

The construction of fences at borders has reduced the flow of drugs into India, but there still remain points where borders could not be fenced due to dense forest, and riverine terrain. All these vintage points should be guarded by honest security personnel as recently few security personnel were caught as ISI agents. Electronic as well as aerial surveillance should be enhanced.

Drug smuggling is an international problem and to counter which India has signed bilateral as well as multilateral agreements with quite a few countries like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar and also with Pakistan in 2011. According to these agreements signatories should exchange the information, should launch joint investigation to curb the drug smuggling but as all powerful ISI itself is involved in drug trafficking, India could not get any useful information from Pakistan.

The locals as well as Government should accept that drug addiction is a major problem and a vigorous de-addiction programme must be launched in the state. More de-addiction camps should be established and family members should not hesitate to send the drug addicts in the de-addiction centers. The drug addicts should be rehabilitated after the treatment.

Unemployment has considerably increased in rural Punjab and hence, a large number of youths are getting involved in narcotic smuggling which has become a big danger to the security of the country. There is a requirement to create more job opportunities in the state.

Smuggling of drugs is more dangerous than terrorism because terrorism is financed by drug money and number of times terrorists use routes and contacts of drug traffickers. Hence, terrorism can only be curbed if drug trafficking can be controlled.

Dawood Ibrahim and his notorious ‘D’ company are closely working with ISI in drug trafficking, financing terror outfits and carrying out terrorist activities in India. Now the emergence of Islamic State and formation of al-Qaeda in Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) are unfortunate events and ISI will take the advantage of these developments hence Indian security agencies should be more vigilant.

There are also reports that Boko Haram, a ruthless terrorist outfit active in Nigeria, and Dawood Ibrahim have decided to cooperate in drug trafficking in this African nation and even beyond. It will raise problems for the security agencies of the region especially for India which might become a bigger transit point in the underground market of drugs.

Drug trafficking is an international problem and thus, cannot be eliminated only by the security agencies. Active participation of the local masses is essential to eradicate the menace of drug trafficking both in India and abroad.

*Jai Kumar Verma is a Delhi-based strategic analyst. He can be contacted at editor@spsindia.in