Quantcast
Channel: Eurasia Review
Viewing all 73339 articles
Browse latest View live

US, Russian Media Waging Virtual Nuclear War – Analysis

0
0

By Benjamin Baird

A number of incidental moves by Russian and US authorities have sent media sources in both countries scurrying to report on doomsday scenarios. A recommendation by the Kremlin for state employees and their families living abroad to return home is being received by some as a sign of impending nuclear war.

Meanwhile, alternative news sites and bloggers across the Internet are reporting that US officials have raised the nuclear threat level as a result of perceived Russian hostility.

The Russian report, detailing the recall of public officials and students studying abroad, was published by multiple outlets across the world, including Fox News, Daily Mail, the New York Post, and many other major and fringe news organizations. However, press reporting has grossly exaggerated and sensationalized the potential for a nuclear conflict.

A Russian website based in the Urals, znak.com, originally broke the story detailing how Russians were asked to leave foreign capitals around the world. According to the report, five anonymous Russian officials recounted how they were “unofficially recommended” to ask relatives living abroad to return to Russia.

Dmitry Peskov, public affairs spokesperson for the Kremlin, denies knowledge of the claim.

This informal recommendation quickly and erroneously became a direct order from Putin for news organizations around the world.

Daily Star reported that, “Workers were reportedly told to pull their children out of school immediately.”

A Sun report, picked up by Fox News, said that, “Those that do not obey the edict will find the [sic] future employment prospects in tatters.”

Daily Mail tied the news of Russia’s recall with an earlier report that Russia was participating in massive civil defense exercises and training their civilians on how to react to a nuclear attack.

However, the exercise was a part of an annual event that has occurred since 2012, and in past years the participation and scale were larger than the October 2016 edition.

American media have responded to the Russian exodus with increasingly apocalyptic reports, and alternative news sites are reporting that the US DEFCON level has been raised as a result of increased tensions with Russia. “DEFCON” stands for defense condition, and it is a warning system used to alert armed forces in preparation for a nuclear strike.

Geller Report wrote that, “We have gone from DEFCON 5 to DEFCON 3. Bombers ready to take off in 15 minutes, missiles on launch warning.”

Other agencies were apocalyptic in their headlines before completely contradicting them. Daily Stars’ headline reads: “US nuclear attack warning ‘upgraded to level 3’ as Russian threat goes ‘beyond Cold War’.”

However, they explain their source within the body of the article: “But conspiracy theory website ‘DEFCON warning system’ claims the threat has been upgraded to level 3…it claims that while there are no imminent nuclear threats against the US the situation is considered ‘fluid and can change rapidly’.” The news site explained that the warning did not come from any government source, and that military forces are not on standby.

It appears that news outlets are attempting to draw in readers with doomsday scenarios, despite the report of impending nuclear war coming from an unofficial, civilian-based source.

Although the Cold War ended 27 years ago, various media sources in the US and Russia do not seem to be aware. The last several days have seen journalists in both countries misreport, exaggerate, or outright lie about the effects of escalating tensions between the US and Russia, and the upcoming presidential election may be the motive behind the scare tactics.

As campaign rhetoric heats up with accusations from both Republicans and Democrats involving Russia, there seems to be a proportionate rise in catchpenny reporting on doomsday scenarios in attempts to discredit opposing candidates.

Both presidential campaigns have attempted to capitalize on the state of US-Russian relations. Hillary Clinton accused Donald Trump of being too inexperienced and temperamental to deal with world leaders. She also disagrees with Trump’s admiration for Putin.

“He praises dictators like Vladimir Putin and picks fights with our friends, including the British prime minister, the mayor of London, the German chancellor, the president of Mexico and the Pope,” she said. Trump has praised the strong leadership of the Russian president.

The Trump campaign takes issue with Clinton’s policies vis-a-vis the Russians, as well. He claims that Hillary gave one-fifth of America’s supply of uranium to Russia. Two days after the first debate, Trump said, “You know what people do with uranium, don’t you? It’s called nuclear. Twenty percent. They could have never done it without her.”

Wikileaks promises to release some 40,000 emails lifted from the account of Clinton aide John Podesta before Election Day arrives. These emails show damaging details of unethical behavior from the Clinton political machine. Clinton supporters have rebuked the media for focusing on the leaks and claim the Russian government is behind the hacks of Democratic Party personnel.

Jamie Rubin, national security advisor to Clinton, said, “What’s frustrating to me as someone involved with the media over the years — each little detail gets out in the press but the whole story, all these little pieces of the puzzle, are not put together in a way that educates the American people about the significance of this act of cyber-sabotage.” He sees the Russian attempt to influence the election as a threat to national security.

President Barack Obama, a Democrat like Clinton, has recently stepped up criticism of Moscow and blamed the Kremlin for attempting to influence the election. After months of pressure from top Democratic Party lawmakers, the administration was direct in accusing Russia.

Jeh Johnson, the secretary of homeland security, and James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, released a statement condemning Moscow: “These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the U.S. election process.”

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin denies any involvement in the cyber attacks, and disagrees with US Democrats that the hacks of party servers are a threat to national security.

“Listen, does it even matter who hacked this data?” Putin said in an interview on September 1st. “The important thing is the content that was given to the public.”

Obama’s actions in recent days indicate that he is less concerned with evidence of political corruption within his party, and more focused on retaliating against Russia for their perceived involvement. In an exclusive report from NBC News, “current and former officials” of the Obama administration announced plans to retaliate against Russia with a “covert” cyber attack.

The very open and overt nature of Obama’s plans for cyber warfare with Russia may be an attempt to bolster his nominee for US president, who has come under fire for allegations of pay-for-play within the the Podesta emails. If the email leaks are seen as an attack against US interests, and not a corrupt political machine, then voters may be more trusting of Clinton. Supporters of Trump and Clinton are highlighting the narrative that best suits their candidate’s political agenda, and journalists are following suit.

This partisanship is best illustrated by Glenn Greenwald, co-founder of The Intercept, a news site dedicated to transparency in journalism. Greenwald reports that Trump once called for the execution of whistleblower Edward Snowden, but now states that he loves Wikileaks. Meanwhile, according to Greenwald, Democrats who previously celebrated Wikileaks for exposing Bush-era misdeeds now calls the group, “an evil espionage tool of the Kremlin.”

Whether Rubin is correct, and the focus of reporters should be on the national security threat posed to the US from Russian cyber espionage, or Putin is right by stating the content of the leaks is more relevant than the source, is also addressed by Greenwald.

He believes that there are five principles that should inform a journalist’s decision to report on the email hacks. He believes that, “A source’s motives are irrelevant,” journalists are always reporting information that has been “illegally obtained,” and public power means increased scrutiny from the press and an expectation for less privacy.

In the coming days, answering unconfirmed Russian cyber-attacks that expose Democrat wrongdoings with cyber warfare against Russian targets may be a dangerous move. Former CIA deputy director Michael Morrell agrees that, “Physical attacks on networks is not something the U.S. wants to do because we don’t want to set a precedent for other countries to do it as well, including against us.”

All of the overblown talk of nuclear warfare should not detract from the very real tensions between the former Cold War adversaries. Secretary of Defense John Kerry was prompted to end talks with Russia, including joint plans to combine forces against ISIS, after days of controversial bombing over the city of Aleppo from the Russian Air Force.

Russia’s ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, told interviewers that US-Russia relations were at their lowest point since 1973. He said that Russia is upset over the entrance of former Soviet Bloc states into NATO and “at the expense of Russia.” The US also withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia in 2001.

Churkin described the deterioration of relations as a matter of poor communication. “It’s kind of a fundamental lack of respect and lack of in-depth discussions.”

At the height of the US political season, it appears that the media suffers from the same lack of respect and open communication. By miscalculating Putin’s recommendation to government employees to return home, failing to discuss the implications of political misdeeds and instead pursuing cyber warfare, and attributing official status to a fringe conspiracy website with irrational fears of nuclear armageddon, the world media are already in a Cold War of information.

This article was published by Geopolitical Monitor.com


Upcoming New Jersey Casino Vote

0
0

On November 8, 2016, New Jersey voters will decide whether to allow two casinos to be built at least 72 miles from Atlantic City, in hopes to recoup both money and visitors from surrounding states. However, recent polls reflect that there is little support from NJ voters, as well as concerns from surrounding NY and NJ businesses.

In November 2013, New York approved a constitutional referendum which would allow up to six casinos in specified counties, including Orange County which borders Northern New Jersey. Had New York chosen Orange County for a casino, it might have led to a New Jersey referendum approving a casino near Manhattan.

Now, this coming November, NJ voters will now decide whether to allow two new casinos to be built at least 72 miles from Atlantic City. Each applicant would have to spend at least $2 billion. Advocates emphasize that 11 casinos have opened within 100 miles of Atlantic City since 2005 and none were in New Jersey. They hope it would recapture money leaving New Jersey and attract customers from Pennsylvania and New York.

Northern New Jersey casinos, advocates claim, would revitalize Northern New Jersey and create up to 43,000 new jobs. Meadowlands Racetrack, which expects one license, hopes to build hotels and a convention center. The referendum would also allow existing Atlantic City operators “first rights ” to a Northern New Jersey license.

One might think the referendum would be a winning proposition. Recent polls, however, show that only 27-35% of voters would approve the referendum.

The Meadowlands Racetrack owner opined, “We had a lousy campaign. The opposition, including groups such as “Trenton’s Bad Bet,” was funded by an unusual alliance. First, the New York Hotel and Motel Trades Council, representing almost 5,000 New Jersey workers, took out TV adds opposing the referendum because it did not include language that would prevent casino owners from blocking unions as did the New York referendum.”

Genting, which operates Aqueduct Race Track and casino, also financed the opposition. Other opponents, included some Atlantic City casino owners, such as Carl Icahn. Casino spokespersons said that 30,000 Atlantic City jobs would be lost and that two or three more casinos would close. Other casino owners, such as MGM, have been on the “sidelines”.

If the referendum fails, it is probable that a new referendum will be passed, which will make new casino locations more attractive.

Ghoulish Practice Of Gibbeting Corpses Haunted Public Of 18th Century

0
0

Today, a typical Halloween night might include people dressing up as ghosts, ghouls and a creepy clown or two in order to frighten passers-by.

But some of the disturbing practices from history might be more harrowing than a modern audience is used to encountering.

Professor Sarah Tarlow from the University of Leicester School of Archaeology and Ancient History has written an article for Think: Leicester, the University’s platform for independent academic opinion, highlighting the historical practice of gibbeting that evoked fear in the hearts of the public of the eighteenth century.

A post-mortem punishment, gibbeting involved enclosing the corpses of criminals in cages designed to fit closely around the body, to keep it upright and person-shaped, where they would be displayed in public locations for passers-by to witness.

“Methods of gibbeting and features of the gibbet accentuated the unsettling and disturbing aspects of the gibbeted body,” Professor Tarlow said. “Though a dead body, it remains upright and above ground. Its visibility was enhanced by locating the gibbet in a prominent place, and as close as possible to the scene of crime.

“Though a dead body, it moved. The gibbet cage was suspended from the gibbet arm using a hook and a short length of chain, so that it would move in the wind, and turn about,” Professor Tarlow said, adding, “Though a dead body, it made a noise. Contemporaries described the eerie sound of the creaking of chains and the cawing of carrion birds.”

“Though a dead body, it hung above the road and seemed to watch people coming past. Letters, diaries, petitions, and common folktales tell of people’s reluctance to pass by a gibbet, especially at night,” Professor Tarlow said.

Professor Tarlow goes on to discuss how modern Halloween paraphernalia often portrays the gibbet in an inaccurate way, using an example of a toy depicting a semi-skeletal figure gripping the bars of a cage and croaking ‘let me out’.

“For a start, in the peak period of gibbeting in Britain – the eighteenth century – nobody was gibbeted alive. Putting a body in a gibbet – or ‘hanging in chains’ – as it was known at the time – was exclusively a post-mortem punishment,” Professor Tarlow said.

“The shape of this pretend gibbet is totally wrong. Rather than being an oversized birdcage or a kind of dangling cell, actual gibbet cages were designed to fit closely around the body, to keep it upright and person-shaped, not for a living person to sit in and harangue passers-by.”

While the government at the time hoped that gibbeting would deter criminals by graphically demonstrating the consequences of crimes, Professor Tarlow suggests that creepy nastiness rather than moral reflection was the main consequence of the horrific practice.

Breakthrough In Harvesting Energy From Automotive Shock Absorbers

0
0

Boosting the fuel efficiency of motor vehicles by “harvesting” the energy generated by their shock absorbers and feeding it back into batteries or electrical systems such as air conditioning has become a major goal in automotive engineering.

Now, a University of Huddersfield researcher has made a breakthrough by designing a new system and constructing a prototype that is ready for real-world testing.

Ruichen Wang carried out the project to obtain his doctorate at the University and has published his findings. The article, in the journal Energies, is titled Modelling, Testing and Analysis of a Regenerative Hydraulic Shock System. It provides a summary of current progress in the field of vehicle energy harvesting and a detailed account of the theory and the practical development of his device, designed for installation in a heavy good vehicle.

Dr Wang, who is from Qingdao in eastern China, moved to PhD research after completing his mechanical engineering degree at the University of Huddersfield. His doctoral supervisors, Professor Andrew Ball and Dr Fengshou Gu, suggested that he should work on an energy recovery device, addressing the issue that most of the energy contained in a vehicle’s fuel is wasted.

Considerable work has already been done harvesting energy from brake systems, so Dr Wang decided to focus on the suspension.

After working on the mathematics, computational analysis and design of his device, Dr Wang personally constructed his full-size, ready-to-test prototype – a demonstration of practical engineering skills that impressed his supervisor Professor Ball.

“It has resulted in is a truly realizable application for energy recovery from a typical road vehicle. Ruichen developed a theoretical predictive model and carried out the empirical testing, and the two of them correlate beautifully,” he added.

Harvested energy can be used for any auxiliary purpose in a vehicle, said Professor Ball, and in hybrids it could recharge the electric motor.

The next stage is to work with an industrial partner to install and test Dr Wang’s system in a road-going vehicle. But the technology has a wide application and there is every possibility that it could be adapted for rail vehicles – especially as Dr Wang has taken up a full-time research post at the University of Huddersfield’s Institute of Railway Research (IRR).

Dr Paul Allen, who leads the IRR’s Centre for Innovation in Rail, explained: “We are now exploring how Dr Wang’s energy harvesting and modelling techniques can be applied to developing low-cost self-health monitoring dampers for railway vehicles, a project which already has two industrial partners.”

Concern Over Microplastics Being Found In Agricultural Soils

0
0

Microplastics are increasingly seen as an environmental problem of global proportions. While the focus to date has been on microplastics in the ocean and their effects on marine life, microplastics in soils have largely been overlooked. Researchers are concerned about the lack of knowledge regarding potential consequences of microplastics in agricultural landscapes from application of sewage sludge.

Sewage sludge is in principle waste, but it can also represent a resource in agriculture and horticulture. Fertilizer based on sludge contains valuable nutrients, but sustainable use requires that the levels of undesirable substances in the sludge is kept under control. Waste water treatment plants receive large amounts of microplastics emitted from households, industry and surface run-off in urban areas. Most of these microplastics accumulate in the sewage sludge.

Today, sludge from municipal sewage treatment plants is applied to agricultural areas as a supplement to traditional fertilizers. These applications are generally well regulated as sludge might contain hazardous substances of different sorts. Microplastics are however not currently on the regulatory agenda for the use of sludge in agriculture. The potential consequences for sustainability and food security have not been adequately analyzed.

These concerns have been expressed in an article recently published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. The researchers behind the article are Luca Nizzetto and Sindre Langaas from the Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA) and Martyn Futter from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU) in Uppsala.

“We have found figures from the Nordic countries suggesting that a large fraction of all the microplastics generated in Western societies tend to end up in the sludge in wastewater treatment plants, says Nizzetto. Via the sludge the particles are transferred to agricultural soils,” the researchers said.

The amount of sewage sludge used as fertilizer varies greatly from country to country. In Europe and North America approximately 50 % of this sludge is reused as fertilizer on average. According to Statistics Norway, about two thirds of the sludge is reused in this manner.

Nizzetto et al estimates that between 110.000 and 730.000 tons of microplastics are transferred every year to agricultural soils in Europe and North America, comprehensively. This is more than the estimated total burden of microplastics currently present in ocean water.

These figures are of concern since the effects of microplastics accumulating in agricultural soils are unknown.

“We have very little knowledge on the effect of microplastics on soil organisms, and their impact on farm productivity and food safety is unknown,” the researchers said.

The first simulation of microplastic fate on land and rivers

In an earlier study from the same authors, and researchers of Oxford University, the first mathematical model describing the dynamics of microplastics’ fate in terrestrial environments and rivers was presented. Due to a lack of empirical data on microplastics emissions and concentrations in soils and the stream system, this study was conceived to provide a purely theoretical, nevertheless rigorous, assessment of microplastics circulation.

The model is called INCA Microplastics, and simulations have showed a strong influence of meteorological conditions and river characteristics and flows in controlling the export of microplastics from agricultural soils and their transport to the ocean. Application of sewage sludge to soils likely represent a considerable source of microplastics to the coastal and ocean environments. Similar predictions for the transport of microplastics in rivers were independently confirmed by a follow-up study by Besseling et al.

INCA Microplastics is an important tool for risk assessment and evaluating sludge management scenarios. It is the first model able to simulate microplastic applications to land, and the consequent fate of these materials in soils and surface waters.

The consequences of transfers of microplastics from urban waste water to agricultural soil barely have been considered by researchers and authorities, particularly in lieu of the extended attention directed at microplastics in the ocean.

“Clearly further research is needed to get an overview of the problem – and to find solutions – so that the growing need in the community for recycling and so-called circular economy can be safeguarded,” Luca Nizzetto said.

US Supreme Court To Hear School’s Transgender Bathroom Case

0
0

By Matt Hadro

The Supreme Court has announced that it will hear a case on whether students identifying as transgender may be required to use restrooms according to their biological birth sex.

“Schools have a duty to protect the privacy and safety of all students. That’s a compelling reason for the Supreme Court to review the 4th Circuit’s decision in this case, especially when other courts – including the 4th Circuit itself previously – have upheld that principle,” said Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Gary McCaleb, in response to the Court’s taking up the case G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board.

“In light of the right to bodily privacy, federal law should not be twisted to require that a male be given access to the girls’ facilities, or a female to the boys’ facilities,” he continued. “The Supreme Court should reverse the 4th Circuit’s ruling, which is out of step with the law and previous federal court precedent.”

Earlier, a U.S. Fourth Circuit Court judge had ruled that, in the case of student Gavin Grimm, who identified as transgender in the Gloucester County (Va.) School District, the school board must allow Grimm access to the bathroom of choice.

The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which put a temporary stay on the ruling in August. Then on Friday, Court agreed to hear the case. It may serve as a landmark case for how other similar situations around the country are resolved in the courts.

According to court documents, Grimm was born a girl but received hormone therapy and a legal name change. Grimm’s mother told school officials that Grimm was “a transgender boy.”

Grimm was initially allowed access to the boys’ bathroom at school but then “the Board began receiving complaints from parents and students who regarded G.G.’s presence in the boys’ room as an invasion of student privacy,” the petition to the Court seeking review of the case stated.

“Parents also expressed general concerns that allowing students into restrooms and locker rooms of the opposite biological sex could enable voyeurism or sexual assault,” the statement continued.

The board, “to provide a safe learning environment for all students and to protect the privacy of all students,” then restricted access to bathrooms based on a student’s sex at birth. Students identifying as a different gender would use a separate unisex bathroom.

According to lawyers, Grimm refused to use a private bathroom because doing so would “make him feel even more stigmatized….Being required to use separate restrooms sets him apart from his peers, and serves as a daily reminder that the school views him as ‘different.’”

The case went to court, and in April, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court ruled that Grimm should be allowed access to the boys’ bathroom. It cited the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights statement that “a school generally must treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity.”

The petition to the Court noted that Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination on basis of sex, allows for “separate toilet, locker rooms, and shower facilities on the basis of sex” so long as the facilities are “comparable.”

However, it added, “a Department of Education official opined in an unpublished letter that Title IX’s prohibition of ‘sex’ discrimination ‘include[s] gender identity,’ and that a funding recipient providing sex-separated facilities under the regulation ‘must generally treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity.’”

Thus, the case will hinge on whether the Court allows for this interpretation of Title IX – one that includes “gender identity” under protections against “sex discrimination” – to be correct and carry the “force of law.”

India: Bishops Extend Greetings To Hindus For Diwali Festival

0
0

India’s Catholic bishops have extended their greetings to Hindus throughout the world during their popular festival of lights, urging them to work to end corruption and violence.

“As our skies sparkle with fireworks and homes in our country will be illuminated with bright decorative lights, may our hearts be filled with the light of goodness and our country be rid of the darkness of corruption, violence and divisive forces,” the message said.

The Oct. 27 statement from the Catholic bishops conference of India, also prayed that the feast would “usher in peace, progress and prosperity in our country and in the world.”

“May the celebration of this ‘festival of lights’ re-illumine our minds and hearts that all of us, believers in the Supreme Light and people of goodwill, individually and together, strive always, even amidst difficulties and challenges, to live by and to stand for truth, light and life,” said the bishops’ statement.

Diwali celebrates mythical stories of the goodness of gods defeating dark forces of evil. The feast, which transcends faiths, is celebrated across India with people illuminating their homes and sharing gifts, fruits and sweets.

Following a Hindu calendar, the feast comes on the new moon day of October-November heralding the onset of winter. It falls on Oct. 30 this year.

Sharks Recycle Toxic Ammonia To Keep Their Skin Moist

0
0

The Pacific spiny dogfish shark is a master at recycling the ocean’s toxic ammonia and converting it into useful urea, according to new research from University of British Columbia (UBC) zoologists.

Animals typically eat protein in order to grow, but sharks also require protein to continually replenish urea in their tissues. The urea—the non-toxic nitrogen-containing substance which humans excrete in their urine—keeps the fish from drying out in salty seawater.

“It turns out dogfish can absorb ammonia at high rates through their gills,” said UBC zoologist Chris Wood, who led the study published in the Journal of Experimental Biology. “The amount the shark is able to take in through their gills and convert could amount to almost a third of the nitrogen they need from their diet.”

Wood and UBC PhD student Marina Giacomin also discovered that the ammonia isn’t absorbed into the shark’s body through simple diffusion, but by a biological process. The gas is likely carried into tissues by Rhesus proteins – channels already known to carry ammonia gas molecules across cell membranes.

The sharks may use their uncanny ability to take in ammonia to build up urea stores. As scavengers the fish often go for long periods without food—the raw protein supply required to maintain adequate urea levels in their tissues.

The Pacific spiny dogfish shark is one of the most common species of sharks in the northern Pacific Ocean. They can grow to be as large as 150 cm long and are grey in color.


Uber Says Is Will Develop Flying Taxi Service By 2026

0
0

Uber have unveiled a plan for the world’s first flying taxi service. The firm released a 98-page document detailing their plan to transport passengers via environmentally-friendly electric aircrafts, with the option expected to become available to users by 2026, The Sun reports.

Uber claim flying taxis would completely reduce commuting times, and say their aircrafts will be able to complete a two hour and 12 minute car ride in just 15 minutes.

Branded Uber Elevate, the aircraft are expected to be able to travel 100 miles on a single charge and will be able to take off and land from the top of multistory car parks.

“On-demand aviation, has the potential to radically improve urban mobility, giving people back time lost in their daily commutes,” Uber wrote in a white paper about the service.

“Uber is close to the commute pain that citizens in cities around the world feel.”

“We view helping to solve this problem as core to our mission and our commitment to our rider base.”

While Uber aren’t building the aircrafts themselves, they are planning out outsourcing the work to aviation specialists.

Climate Change And The Cost Of Inaction – Analysis

0
0

Policy proposals to offset the effects of global warming would be strengthened if we knew more about the net economic benefits of climate action relative to business-as-usual. This column argues that estimates may understate the future costs of business as usual because of heterogeneous seasonal effects, and because more business sectors than previously assumed suffer a negative impact from increased summer temperatures. The cost of inaction may be equal to one-third of the growth rate of US GDP over the next 100 years.

By Ric Colacito, Bridget Hoffmann and Toan Phan*

On Earth Day, 22 April 2016, 191 countries signed the historic Paris Climate Agreement (United Nations 2015). The primary objective is to limit global warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century, and to pursue efforts to limit this increase to 1.5°C. If implemented, this landmark agreement will have far-reaching economic effects. The success of the agreement depends on its popular support, especially in developed countries like the US, in which there is political and legal opposition. This policy debate will be strengthened if we focus on the net economic benefits of climate action relative to business as usual.

To date, much of the research on the impact of rising temperature on economic activity concerns only developed, rather than developing countries (Dell et al. 2012). Also, it has examined the small fraction of economic activities that are naturally exposed to outdoor weather conditions, such as agriculture (Nordhaus 2014). Our research provides direct evidence of a strong negative effect from rising summer temperatures on a wider range of US economic activity (Colacito et al. 2016).

We combined our estimated impact coefficient with projections of the expected temperature increases under different emissions scenarios provided by climatologists. Our analysis ignores the potential effects of new technologies to cope with rising temperatures, but it measures the cost of inaction.

We calculated that the cost of climate change could be as large as one-third of the growth rate of US GDP over the next 100 years.

Measuring the impact of rising temperatures on US economic activity

We exploited random fluctuations in seasonal temperatures across years and states, using the richness of historical data available in the US. We employed a panel regression framework with the growth rate of gross state product (GSP) and average seasonal temperatures for each US state, and found that summer and autumn temperatures have opposite effects on economic growth. An increase in the average summer temperature negatively affects the growth rate of GSP. An increase in the autumn temperature positively affects this growth rate, although to a lesser extent. This suggests that previous studies’ aggregation of temperature data into annual temperature averages may mask the heterogeneous effects of different seasons.

The summer effect is particularly pronounced in data since 1990. This leads to a negative net economic effect of rising temperatures. This implies that the US economy is still sensitive to temperature increases, despite the adoption of adaptive technologies such as air conditioning (Barreca et al. 2015). Temperature also has a stronger effect in states with relatively high summer temperatures, most of which are located in the south.

A pervasive effect

Our analysis quantified the effect of rising temperatures across sectors of the US economy. We find that an increase in average summer temperature has a pervasive effect on all industries, not just the sectors that are traditionally assumed to be vulnerable to climate change. Figure 1 shows that, in the most recent part of our sample, an increase in the average summer temperature has a negative effect on the growth rate of output of many industries, including finance, services, retail, wholesale, and construction that represent more than a third of gross domestic product (GDP). Only a few sectors such as utilities (1.8% of GDP) benefit from an increase in the average summer temperature.

Labour productivity is one of the channels through which temperature affects economic activity. In our empirical analysis, an increase in the average summer temperature decreased the annual growth rate of labour productivity. An increase in the average autumn temperature had the opposite effect. Our analysis used data at the macroeconomic level, but it is consistent with existing studies of this relationship at the microeconomic level (Zivin and Neidell 2014, Cachon et al. 2012, Zivin et al. 2015).

Figure 1 Decomposition of the summer temperature effect in the cross-section of industries

Notes: For each industry in Figure 1, the horizontal line represents the point estimate of the impact of summer temperature on the growth rate of industry GDP times the industry share of GDP. The bottom and top portions of each rectangle represent 90% confidence intervals, while the outer limits of each boxplot represent the 95% confidence interval of each estimated coefficient. Standard errors are clustered at the year level. 'All Industries' is the sum of all the industry coefficients multiplied by the corresponding industry share. The industry labelled as “Finance” refers to the BEA classification of 'Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate'.

Notes: For each industry in Figure 1, the horizontal line represents the point estimate of the impact of summer temperature on the growth rate of industry GDP times the industry share of GDP. The bottom and top portions of each rectangle represent 90% confidence intervals, while the outer limits of each boxplot represent the 95% confidence interval of each estimated coefficient. Standard errors are clustered at the year level. ‘All Industries’ is the sum of all the industry coefficients multiplied by the corresponding industry share. The industry labelled as “Finance” refers to the BEA classification of ‘Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate’.

Quantifying the short- and long-term effects of climate change

The size of this impact on growth depends on the time horizon. When comparing one year to the next, the net effect of temperature is small. According to our estimates, a 1°C increase in the average summer temperature is associated with a reduction in the annual GSP growth rate of 0.086 percentage points, and a 1°C increase in the average fall temperature is associated with an increase in the annual GSP growth rate of 0.057 percentage points. Therefore, a uniform warming of 1°C across both seasons reduces economic growth by about 0.03 percentage points. The aggregate effect in one year appears too small to influence political debate.

The cumulative effect over longer horizons, such as those of the Paris Agreement, is significantly greater. We looked at the projected monthly temperature increases for the US for the period 2070-2099 from 16 general circulation models (GCMs) under three different IPCC greenhouse gas emissions scenarios: A2 (high emission), A1B (medium emissions), and B1 (low emissions). We combined each set of temperature projections with our estimated impact coefficients. Figure 2 shows that, in the most conservative scenario (B1), the projected trend is expected to reduce the growth rate of US output by 0.2 to 0.4 percentage points by the end of the century. At the historical growth rate of US GDP of 4% per year, this would correspond to a reduction of up to 10%. The results are even more dramatic in the high emissions scenario (A2). Here, the reduction of economic growth could reach 1.2 percentage points, corresponding to roughly one-third of the historical annual growth rate of the US economy.

Figure 2 Projected reduction in the growth rate of GDP (2070-2099) under three emission scenarios

Notes: In Figure 2 the bottom and top lines denote the minimum and maximum projected impact, the bottom and top of the rectangle are the first and third quartile of the distribution of projected impacts, while the horizontal line inside the rectangle is the median projected impact.

Notes: In Figure 2 the bottom and top lines denote the minimum and maximum projected impact, the bottom and top of the rectangle are the first and third quartile of the distribution of projected impacts, while the horizontal line inside the rectangle is the median projected impact.

Our research forms part of a growing body of literature that provides strong evidence of global warming’s effects on the US economy (Deryugina and Hsiang 2014 and Bloesch and Gourio 2015). We have been able to quantify potentially significant effects of inaction and hope that our research, as well as other studies, can spur more ambitious climate initiatives.

Watch Bridget Hoffmann disuss the economic threat of climate change in the video below

*About the authors:
Ric Colacito,
Associate Professor of Finance and Economics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Bridget Hoffmann. Economist, Inter-American Development Bank

Toan Phan, Assistant Professor of Economics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hil

References:
Barreca, A, O Deschenes, and M Guldi (2015) “Maybe next month? Temperature shocks, Climate Change, and dynamic adjustments in birth rates,” NBER working paper No. 21681.

Bloesch, J and F Gourio (2015) “The effect of winter weather on US economic activity,” Economic Perspectives, 39 (1).

Cachon, G, S Gallino, and M Olivares (2012) “Severe Weather and Automobile Assembly Productivity,” working paper.

Colacito, R, B Hoffmann, and T Phan (2016) “Temperature and Growth: A Panel Analysis of the United States,” IDB Working Paper.

Dell, M, B F Jones, and B A Olken (2012) “Temperature shocks and economic growth: Evidence from the last half century,” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 4 (3), 66–95.

Deryugina, T and S Hsiang (2014) “Does the Environment Still Matter? Daily Temperature and Income in the United States,” NBER working paper No. 20750.

Nordhaus, W D (2014) A question of balance: Weighing the options on global warming policies, Yale University Press.

United Nations/Framework Convention on Climate Change (2015) Adoption of the Paris Agreement, 21st Conference of the Parties, Paris: United Nations.

Zivin, J G and M Neidell (2014) “Temperature and the allocation of time: Implications for climate change,” Journal of Labour Economics, 32 (1), 1–26.

Zivin, J G, S Hsiang, and M Neidell (2015) “Temperature and Human Capital in the Short- and Long-Run,” NBER working paper No. 21157.

Targeted Advertising For CVE: Google Steps In – Analysis

0
0

The Redirect Method, a targeted advertising initiative by Jigsaw, a Google technology incubator, is among one of the latest ventures by the private sector in tackling security challenges such as violent extremism. Such efforts are welcomed in enhancing existing contributions in countering violent extremism.

By Dymples Leong*

Jigsaw, a Google technology incubator, announced a new initiative on 7 September 2016 that aims to use targeted advertising on Google’s search engine to confront extremist recruitment efforts online. Dubbed the Redirect Method, it seeks to engage young people who are vulnerable and sympathetic towards the messaging of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) also known as IS or Daesh.

Jigsaw aims to connect individuals interested in extremist propaganda with YouTube videos that undermines the efforts of extremists at recruiting these individuals. This initiative intensifies efforts of the world’s biggest search engine in deterring aspiring recruits from the propaganda efforts of ISIS. Could the Redirect Method be a game changer in tackling violent extremism?

The Redirect Method

At the core of the Redirect Method is a targeted advertising campaign, with similar aspects of a traditional advertising campaign such as understanding the characteristics of a target audience and the promotion of ad content. Firstly, keyword generation is conducted; identifying text entered into Google’s search field from a list of 1,700 keywords identified which an individual who is sympathetic to ISIS might use in searching for information. Some examples identified include supporter slogans. This aids in narrowing a specific sector of the audience online in order to differentiate between individuals who have positive sentiments towards ISIS versus a more general audience.

Targeted advertisements appear alongside search results in the form of text and image advertisements. Clicking on the advertisements would redirect an individual to a playlist of curated YouTube videos that were not explicitly designed for the purpose of countering the group, and are derived from pre-existing videos from sources including citizen journalism.

Why Jigsaw?

Jigsaw’s venture into using targeted advertising and technology for security purposes is but one of the increasing examples of private sector companies adopting technologies to tackle global security challenges that were commonly seen as being the purview of the government.

Google has built its business on predicting what people want based on its search advertising algorithms, with up to 3.5 billion online searches every day. Its online advertising is a US $1 trillion e-commerce sector underpinned by advertising, which helps connects a million organisations and individuals online.

Given that Google has previously trained various Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in keyword advertising, Jigsaw’s efforts in this arena is a natural progression to its previous methods of countering violent extremism.

Early pilot results look promising. According to results from the eight-week pilot project, more than 320,000 individuals were drawn to the videos for over a period of two months, while the advertisements saw a click rate that was three times more than typical ad campaigns run on Google’s AdWords. Furthermore, up to 500,000 minutes of YouTube videos were watched.

Advantages of Redirect Method

The advantages of the Redirect Method can be categorised and framed into four benefits – Easy, Attractive, Social and Timely, using the United Kingdom’s Behavioural Insights Team EAST framework to effect behavioural change:

Easy

Increasing focus has been placed on content curation over content creation in campaigns in Countering Violent Extremism (CVE). Content curation enables the streamlining of existing content into easily accessible package where all it takes is one click for individuals to be redirected to a pre-curated set of thematic videos specifically targeted to recruiting narratives of ISIS, e.g. religious legitimacy. Thus barriers to engagement with counter content are reduced.

Results from the campaign are measurable. Data from the campaign is empirical and can thus be used to evaluate the reach and effect of ads on the target audience by using Google AdWords and YouTube Analytics, similar metric tools used to evaluate a business ad campaign.

Attractive

Tapping onto the notion of confirmation bias, where individuals seek and act on information that identifies and affirms pre-existing beliefs, advertisements by the Redirect Method adopts and seemingly mimic the group’s branding philosophy. Advertisements are not judgemental or reproaching, but are phrased in questions such as “What is life like there?”

This makes it attractive and appealing to individuals who have positive sentiments towards ISIS, and enables opportunities for cognitive openings to pierce the walls of the echo chambers in order to push forward messages that answer queries that they have.

Social and Timely

Jigsaw is currently researching into the potential of developing artificial intelligence to engage with individuals directly in one-on-one conversations, building future online counsellor capabilities to chat directly, and connecting them directly with resources or agencies that can assist them. This highlights that in order to sustain the intervention process one-to-one engagement must be done. Furthermore, advertisements and videos are also timely as they intercept and capture the attention of young adults attempting to search for pro-information concerning the group.

Relooking to Overcome Limitations

While the Redirect Method can help to interrupt the cycle of radicalisation and divert young people away from extremism online, there are limitations. On one hand Redirect might drive the target audience away from mainstream search engines and into more encrypted private channels of communication, as they might fear the monitoring of online search activities. Furthermore, a large number of advertisements could potentially discourage individuals from clicking on the advertisements as advertisements might be considered as spam.

While the Redirect Method can divert the attention of these individuals at the point of intervention, it remains to be seen if the initiative can be sustainable. The development of content and engagement formats for future use is crucial.

The Redirect method offers a fresh perspective of approaching an issue where most counter efforts are seen as ‘public service announcements’ which do not fully engage the target audience. Although initial results for the pilot are small, marrying keyword detection and targeted videos are a step up from current efforts such as content blocking or removal.

While the Redirect Method is not a panacea for countering extremist information on the Internet, it provides a targeted and more organised way of getting the message to the ones who need it most. As Richard Stengel, the United States’ Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs recently commented, the messaging focus of ISIS is changing to more micro targeted messaging; thus it is now even more crucial that the focus of counter efforts be targeted towards a more visceral personalised message.

*Dymples Leong is a Research Analyst at the Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS), a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Public Vs. Media On War – OpEd

0
0

A new poll from an unlikely source suggests that the U.S. public and the U.S. media have very little in common when it comes to matters of war and peace.

This poll was commissioned by that notorious leftwing hotbed of peaceniks, the Charles Koch Institute, along with the Center for the National Interest (previously the Nixon Center, and before that the humorously named Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom). The poll was conducted by Survey Sampling International.

They polled 1,000 registered voters from across the U.S. and across the political spectrum but slanted slightly toward older age groups. They asked:

“Over the last 15 years, do you think U.S. foreign policy has made Americans more or less safe?”

What, dear reader, do you say?

If you say less safe, you not only agree with dozens of top U.S. officials the week after they retire, but you agree with 52.5% of the people polled. Those who said “more safe” add up to 14%, while 25.2% said “about the same” and 8.3% just didn’t know.

Well, at least all these humanitarian wars to spread democracy and eliminate weapons and destroy terror have benefited the rest of the world, right?

Not according to the statistics that show terrorism on the rise during the war on terrorism, and not according to 50.5% of poll respondents who said U.S. foreign policy has made the world less safe. Meanwhile 12.6% said “more safe” while 24.1% said it was about the same and 12.8% didn’t know.

Asked about four wars in particular, registered U.S. voters said each of them had made the U.S. less secure, by a margin of 49.6% to 20.9% on Iraq, 42.2% to 18.9% on Libya, 42.2% to 24.3% on Afghanistan, and 40.8% to 32.1% on bombing ISIS in Syria.

These answers should not immediately be taken to prove that the U.S. public is universally wise and well informed, and (not coincidentally) at odds with U.S. media. Not only is that margin pretty slim on ISIS, but 43.3% of those polled said ISIS was the greatest threat the United States faces. Meanwhile 14.1% named Russia, 8.5% North Korea, 8.1% the national debt, 7.9% domestic terrorists, and bringing up the rear with the correct answer of global warming as the greatest threat were a grand total of 4.6% of those polled.

A survey of U.S. news reports would certainly suggest a point of agreement here between the public and the media. But here is where it gets interesting. Although the public believes the hype about danger emanating from these foreign forces, it does not favor the solution it is endlessly offered by the media and the U.S. government. When asked if, compared to last 15 years, the next president should use the U.S. military abroad less, 51.1% agreed, while 24.2% said it should be used more. And 80.0% said that any president should be required to get congressional authorization before committing the U.S. to military action, while 10.2% rejected that radical idea that’s been in the U.S. Constitution since day 1.

The U.S. public may look quite depressingly ignorant in a quick survey of Youtube videos, but check this out: Asked if the U.S. government should deploy U.S. troops on the ground in Syria 51.1% said no, compared to 23.5% who said yes. Only 10% said yes on Yemen, while 22.8% said no — however, 40.7% said the U.S. government should keep “supporting” Saudi Arabia in that war.

Good majorities also oppose Japan acquiring nuclear weapons, Germany acquiring nuclear weapons, or the U.S. defending Taiwan against a Chinese attack. (Who invents these scenarios?)

This moderately encouraging survey of public sentiment stands in stark contrast to U.S. media coverage of wars in general and Syria in particular. The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof is ready for a bigger war as are columnists in the Washington Post and USA Today, as well as, of course Chuck Todd and other televised talking head. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton’s comment to Goldman Sachs that a “no fly zone” would require “killing a lot of Syrians” has received dramatically less press than her brave calls for creating a humanitarian no fly zone, and the steady depiction of that proposal as “doing something” — in contrast to the only other option: “doing nothing.”

The public, however, rejects the only “something” that’s on offer and just might leap at the opportunity to try something else, if anyone ever proposed anything else.

The Israeli Trumpess – OpEd

0
0

What will Donald Trump do if he loses the elections in a week and a half from now, as most polls indicate?

He has already declared that he will recognize the results – but only if he wins.

That sounds like a joke. But it is far from being a joke.

Trump has already announced that the election is rigged. The dead are voting (and all the dead vote for Hillary Clinton). The polling station committees are corrupt. The polling machines forge the results.

No, that is not a joke. Not at all.

This is not a joke, because Trump represents tens of millions of Americans, who belong to the lower strata of the white population, which the white elite used to call “white trash”. In more polite language they are called “blue collar workers”, meaning manual workers, unlike the “white collar workers” who occupy the offices.

If the tens of millions of blue-collar voters refuse to recognize the election results, American democracy will be in danger. The United States may become a banana republic, like some of its southern neighbors, which have never enjoyed a stable democracy.

This problem exists in all modern nation-states with a sizable national minority. The lowest strata of the ruling people hates the minority. Members of the minority push them out of the lower jobs. And more importantly: the lower strata of the ruling majority have nothing to be proud of except for their belonging to the ruling people.

The German unemployed voted for Adolf Hitler, who promoted them to the “Herrenvolk” (master people) and the Aryan race. They gave him power, and Germany was razed to the ground.

The one and only Winston Churchill famously said that democracy is a bad system, but that all the other systems tried were worse.

As far as democracy is concerned, the United States was a model for the world. Already in its early days it attracted freedom-lovers everywhere. Almost 200 years ago, the French thinker, Alexis de Tocqueville, wrote a glowing report about the “Democratie en Amerique”.

My generation grew up in admiration of American democracy. We saw European democracy breaking down and sinking into the morass of fascism. We admired this young America, which saved Europe in two world wars, out of sheer idealism. The democratic America vanquished German Nazism and Japanese militarism, and later Soviet Bolshevism.

Our childish attitude gave way to a more mature view. We learned about the genocide of the native Americans and about slavery. We saw how America is seized from time to time by an attack of craziness, such as the witch hunt of Salem and the era of Joe McCarthy, who discovered a Communist under every bed.

But we also saw Martin Luther King, we saw the first black President, and now we are probably about to see the first female President. All because of this miracle: American democracy.

And here come this man, Donald Trump, and tries to rip apart the delicate ties that bind American society together. He incites men against women, whites against blacks and hispanics, the rich against the destitute. He sows mutual hatred everywhere.

Perhaps the American people will get rid of this plague and send Trump back where he came from – television. Perhaps Trump will disappear like a bad dream, as did McCarthy and his spiritual forefathers.

Let’s hope. But there is also the opposite possibility: that Trump will cause a disaster never seen before: the downfall of democracy, the destruction of national cohesion, the breaking up into a thousand splinters.

Can this happen in Israel? Do we have an Israel a phenomenon that can be compared to the ascent of the American Trump? Is there an Israeli Trump?

Indeed, there is. But the Israeli Trump is a Trumpess.

She is called Miri Regev.

She resembles the original Trump in many ways. She challenges the Tel Aviv “old elites” as Trump incites against Washington. She incites Jewish citizens against Arab citizens. Orientals of eastern descent against Ashkenazis of European descent. The uncultured against the cultured. The poor against all others. She tears apart the delicate ties of Israeli society.

She is not the only one of her kind, of course. But she overshadows all the others.

After the elections for the 20th Knesset, in March 2015, and the setting-up of the new government, Israel was overrun by a band of far-right politicians, like a pack of hungry wolves. Men and women without charm, without dignity, possessed by a ravenous hunger for power, for conspicuousness at any price, people out for their own personal interest and for nothing else. They compete with each other in the hunt for headlines and provocative actions.

At the starting line they were all equal – ambitious, unlikable, uninhibited. But gradually, Miri Regev overtakes all the others. All they can do, she can do better. For every headline grabbed by another, she can grab five. For every condemnation of another in the media, she gets ten.

Benyamin Netanyahu is a dwarf, but compared to this bunch he is a giant. In order to remain so, he appointed each of them to the job he or she is most unsuited for. Miri Regev, a rude, vulgar, primitive person became Minister of Culture and Sports.

Regev, 51, is a good-looking woman, daughter of immigrants from Morocco. She was born as Miri Siboni in Kiryat-Gat, a place for which I have deep feelings, because it was there that I was wounded in 1948. Then it was still an Arab village called Irak-al-Nabshiyeh, and my life was saved by four soldiers, one of whom was called Siboni (no connection).

For many years, Regev served in the army as a public relations officer, rising to the rank of Colonel. Seems that one day she decided to do public relations for herself, rather than for others.

Since her first day as Minister of Culture, she has supplied the media with a steady stream of scandals and provocations. Thus she gradually overtakes all her competitors in the Likud leadership. They just cannot compete with her energy and inventiveness.

She declared proudly that she sees her job as the elimination of all anti-Likud people from the cultural arena – after all, “that’s what the Likud was elected for.”

All over the world, governments subsidize cultural institutions and creative people, convinced that culture is a vital national asset. When Charles de Gaulle was the President of France, he was once approached by his police chiefs with the request to issue an arrest warrant for the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, because of his support for the Algerian freedom fighters. De Gaulle refused and said: “Sartre too is France!”

Well, Regev is no de Gaulle. She threatens to withdraw government subsidies from any institution that publicly opposes the policy of the right-wing government. She demanded the cancelation of the program of an Arab rapper who read from the works of Mahmoud Darwish, the adored national poet of the Arab citizens and of the entire Arab world. She demanded that all theaters and orchestras perform in the settlements in the occupied territories, if they want to keep their subsidies.

This week she won a resounding victory when Habima, the “national theater”, agreed to perform in Kiryat-Arba, a nest of the most fanatical fascist settlers. Indeed, no day passes without news of some new exploit by Regev. Her colleagues explode with jealousy.

The basis of Israeli Trumpism and of Miri Regev’s career is the deep resentment of the Oriental – or Mizrahi – community. It is directed against the Ashkenazim, the Israelis of European descent. They are accused of treating the Orientals with disdain, calling them “the second Israel”.

Since those recruits of Moroccan descent saved my life near the birthplace of Miri Regev, I have written many words about the tragedy of Mizrahi immigration, a tragedy of which I was an eye-witness from the first moment. Many injustices were committed by the established Jewish population against the new immigrants, mostly without bad intentions. But the greatest sin of all is rarely mentioned.

Every community need a sense of pride, based on its past achievements. The pride was taken away from the Mizrahim, who arrived in the country after the 1948 war. They were treated as people devoid of culture, without a past, “cave-dwellers from the Atlas mountains”.

This attitude was a part of the contempt for Arab culture, a contempt deeply embedded in the Zionist movement. Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, the right-wing Zionist leader and forefather of the Likud party, wrote in his time an article entitled “The East”, in which he expressed his disdain for Oriental culture, Jewish and Arab alike, because of its religiosity and inability to separate between state and religion – a barrier to any human progress, according to him. This article is rarely mentioned nowadays.

The Oriental immigrants came to a country that was predominantly “secular”, non-religious and Western. It was also very anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. The new immigrants understood quickly that, in order to be accepted in Israeli society, they must get rid of their traditional-religious culture. They learned to distance themselves from everything Arab, such as their accent and their songs. Otherwise it would be difficult to become part of the country’s new society.

Before the birth of Zionism – a very European movement – there was no enmity between Jews and Muslims. Quite the contrary. When the Jews were expeled from Catholic Spain, many centuries ago, only a minority immigrated to anti-Semitic, Christian Europe. The vast majority went to Muslim lands and was received with open arms all over the Ottoman Empire.

Before that, in Muslim Spain, the Jews achieved their crowning glory, the “Golden Age”. They were integrated in all spheres of society and government and spoke Arabic. Many of their men of letters wrote Arabic and were admired by Muslims as well as Jews. Maimonides, perhaps the greatest of Sephardic Jews, wrote Arabic and was the personal physician of Saladin, the Muslim warrior who vanquished the Crusaders. The ancestors of these Crusaders had slaughtered Jew and Muslim alike when they conquered Jerusalem. Another great Mizrahi Jew, Saadia Gaon, translated the Torah into Arabic. And so on.

It would have been natural for Oriental Jews to take pride in this glorious past, as German Jews take pride in Heinrich Heine and French Jews in Marcel Proust. But the cultural climate in Israel compelled them to give up their heritage and pretend to admire solely the culture of the West. (Eastern singers were an exception – first as wedding performers and now as media stars. They became popular as “Mediterranean singers”.)

If Miri Regev were a cultured person, and not merely a Minister of Culture, she would have devoted her considerable energy to the revitalization of this culture and giving back pride to her community. But this does not really interest her. And there is another reason.

This Mizrahi culture is totally bound up with the Arab-Muslim culture. It cannot be mentioned without noticing the close relationship between the two for many centuries, during which Muslims and Jews worked together for the advancement of mankind, long before the world heard of Shakespeare or Goethe.

I have always believed that restoring pride was the duty of a new generation of peace-lovers that will arise from among the Mizrahi society. Lately, men and women from this community have reached key positions in the peace camp. I have high hopes.

They will have to fight the present culture minister – a minister who has nothing in common with culture, and a Mizrahi woman who has no Mizrahi roots.

I hope for a Jewish-Mizrahi revival in this country because it can advance Israeli-Arab peace and because it can strengthen again the loosened ties between the different communities in our state.

As a non-religious person I prefer the Mizrahi religiosity, which has always been moderate and tolerant, to the fanatical Zionist-religious camp that is predominantly Ashkenazi. I have always preferred Rabbi Ovadia Josef to the Rabbis Kook, father and son. I prefer Arie Der’I to Naftali Bennett.

I detest Donald Trump and Trumpism. I dislike Miri Regev and her culture.

Nakhchivan, Azerbaijan: A Journey In The Land Of Shah Ismayil – OpEd

0
0

The Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan exemplifies a series of important aspects in the cultural assets, archeological monuments and historical peculiarities of the Republic of Azerbaijan, during the XI-XVIII centuries.

The wealth of Nakhchivan’s cultural monuments established during the XI – XVII Centuries is a testimony of the great political, commercial and cultural influence that this Caucasian territory, as a whole, has garnered and exerted during the medieval history of Azerbaijan. Some of these landmark monuments are: Kharabashahar; Khinjab Cemetery; Astabad Necropolis; Aza Bridge; Ganza Cemetery; Kharaba Caravansary.

The medieval settlement of Kharabashahar was established in the XII Century and continued to be a prominent commercial center through the XVII Century. It is located nearby Garachug Village, in the Region of Babek and it covers a territory of approximately 40 acres.

In the early 1960s, Azerbaijani and international archeologists have discovered in this historical settlement a series of unique remnants of brick walls, metal agricultural items (horseshoes, knifes and other agricultural tools). Moreover they have found remnants of craftsmen, smith house, home residues and economic items, coins of Elkhani, decorative instruments, glazed and unglazed clay pots, colored glass, and remnants of animal skin, tree logs, bones and fabric residues. The unearthed clay pieces are very similar to medieval ceramics and artifacts that were found in Iran and in the Near East, and belong to the same period.

Another emblematic late medieval cultural site is the Khinjab Cemetery, an archeological monument atop the hill and behind Khinjab Village, located in the Region of Kangarli. Although the archeological features above ground and graves have been partially lost the head stones of most graves are present until today. On the centuries old head stones tourists will find inscriptions in Arabic. On some graves there are square shaped stone masses and a significant number of grave stone pieces. In 2006, during a number of investigations and research, there was discovered a very rare grave tomb, named by the local people as the “attack stone.” On this landmark there are observed some inscriptions written in Arabic and a few other unique descriptions. Today at the cemetery, visitors will appreciate various pieces of glazed and unglazed pottery and plates. Based on the archeological and cultural artifacts and chest stones located on most of the graves; the Khinjab Cemetery dates back in the XVI Century. Sections of this cemetery have also been used during the XX Century.

Another cemetery that dates back to the Middle Ages (12-17 centuries) is the Astabad Necropolis, located near Astabad, Nakhchivan City. The human skeletons, buried on a meticulous Muslim tradition, have been discovered on this necropolis. On some graves there were observed stone carvings, monuments and ram carvings on some of the stone plates. The majority of the grave stones have fallen down and destroyed, however on some of them inscriptions in Arabic graphics are observed. Immediately after the construction of the Araz water reservoir, this historic site has been covered by water.

The architectural monument of Aza Bridge is located over the Gilanchay River in Aza Village, in the Region of Ordubad. The bridge connects the villages of Aza and Darkandi. It has a width of 3.5 meters and 46 pagan meters in length and has five arches. It is constructed with reddish color local mountainous stones.

Wave Cutters are implanted on four of the bridge spans, in order to smooth the activity of the many trade caravans that were moving from east to west through the Silk Road. The Aza Bridge was constructed over the period of Shah Ismayil (1587-1629), the Safavid leader in a territory that was crucial to the trade caravans that connected the distant markets of India and China with the Black Sea countries and throughout European territories. It is necessary to emphasize that all of the trade caravans promoted the local products of Nakhchivan in the popular markets of Europe, local products including: dry fruits, handicraft products, silk garments; all of these were exported towards Western Europe. The Region of Ordubad is among the world’s top region in the production of silk costumes and clothing.

History has been merciless with this part of Azerbaijan, as a result of destructive historic events and several natural disasters; the bridge has been destroyed and restored a few times. In 1977 the flood waters destroyed parts of this bridge and the cultural monument was entirely reconstructed.

It is impressive to see that today’s Nakhchivani people use this bridge to transport goods and commodities from Nakhchivan City and from Ordubad Region travel to the Aza village. This bridge was originally built during the XVII Century.

The Region of Ordubad is home of the Ganza Cemetery, this archeological monument in the center of Ganza, features most of the graves with head stones that have remain above soil since medieval times.

The cemetery consists of Muslim graves that are directed from East to West. Around a few graves there are square shaped stones that are lying and on some others there are small oval shapes. Head stones of some graves were hewed and prepared from green color stones that are a characteristic from the Ordubad region.

Tourists will appreciate the stone plaques that are square shaped and have been completed with an arch shaped ending. On these head stones there are inscriptions written in Arabic. The inscriptions are from the 16th-17th centuries. According to the local people this area of the cemetery belonged to Haji Huseyngulu and he had donated this land parcel for the village cemetery. During the repeated investigations there were found glazed and unglazed ceramic products from the Middle Ages. As a result scholars have found traces that confirm the organization of XV Century funeral ceremonies to be conducted in this cemetery.

The Region of Kangarly is well known for its Kharaba Caravansary, an archeological monument located nearby the Village of Khok, its territory extends up to two acres. There have been found a large number of burned bricks which shows that once upon a time these materials were used for construction works. At the present visitors will find construction places with square shaped holes and little hills of bricks. According to the construction residues and remnants it is evident that these caravansary buildings have consisted of square shaped constructions built close to one another. Moreover, the over ground materials consist of mainly glazed and unglazed pink color ceramic pieces; which are a prominent feature of the Late Middle Ages. It is well determined that, based on the archeological materials found, these remnants of the Kharaba Caravansary are related and have inherited an extensive commercial movement during the XIV – XVIII Centuries.

All of these cultural and archeological monuments of Nakhchivan, Azerbaijan, have played an important role to strengthen and preserve the past cultural characteristics that continue to be evident and exert influence in the present environment of the Azerbaijani society.

Betting Markets Favoring Trump To Win White House – OpEd

0
0

While the world listened to Hillary Clinton address the Iowa public in her first public appearance since news of the FBI probe reopening broke, the betting markets are actively moving already and according to at least one online betteing platform.

Donald Trump’s odds, after plunging to contract lows in recent weeks, have jumped substantially and moments ago rose as high as 32 before paring gains modestly shortly after.

webAt the same time, while note exactly a flash crash, Hillary’s own odds have slid from the recent range of around 80% to the low 70s.

To be sure the gap remains substantial, with Hillary enjoying a comfortable lead, although should the current shake up persist, it won’t take much for Trump to catch up.

Finally, recall that online odds for Brexit were showing the Remain camps as a virtual certainty as recently as hours prior to the vote, so perhaps this will be a repeat of the British anti-establishment vote…


Pinpricks: Russia Pursues Hegemony In The Balkans – Analysis

0
0

By John R. Haines*

(FPRI) — In the early 1950s, the British government adopted a new approach to conducting covert operations behind the Iron Curtain. Dubbed “pinpricks” by the head of MI6, Stewart Menzies,[1] it employed overt propaganda and limited covert action to chip away Soviet control. Pinpricks was well suited to exploit political weakness, target economic vulnerability, promote dissension, and spread distrust.[2] An intentionally cautious and incrementalist approach, pinpricks avoided actions that might provoke Soviet escalation and retaliation, opting instead to make Soviet satellite states more of a liability than an asset.

Russian President Vladimir Putin opts for something similar. His method is to promote instability in select geostrategic regions in which Russia seeks to avert further NATO accessions. Mr. Putin’s objective is to maintain traditional Russian buffer zones, and where practicable, to expand those zones opportunistically. He sees the Balkans as a Russia-predominant sphere of influence, in which Russia historically has competed for hegemony with European and Turkish interests. He also seeks to insulate Russian economic interests in the region along with geopolitical ones. The Balkans region represents an increasingly important geopolitical bridge for Russian energy pipelines to Western Europe, especially as Russia looks to rebalance its energy transit corridor away from Ukraine.[3] Thus, the Balkans can be said to represent, at the same time, a Russian geopolitical buffer zone and an economic staging ground.[4] It is classic Mackinder: Russia, as a great power, endeavors to erect barriers to adversaries and buffer zones for itself.[5]

The region traditionally has served as congenial ground for the exercise of Russian soft power, especially among Serbs for whom cultural, historic, and religious ties to Russia are strong. Headlines last year in Blick[6] and Handelsblatt[7] phrased it this way:

Hated in the West, a hero in the Balkans: “Putin is our God.”

Mr. Putin “has turned Kosovo into a key part of the narrative concerning the West’s humiliation of Russia.”[8]

The Balkans is central to the Kremlin’s narrative about the post-Cold War normative order being broken, which is deployed both externally and inside Russia . . . Muscular foreign policy resonates with a deep-seated view that “might is right,” only that this time around the West is on the receiving end.[9]

Understanding the Balkans sometimes requires one to reconcile seemingly conflicting perspectives. For example, Leon Aron wrote that Mr. Putin has continuously pursued “an overarching goal: the recovery of economic, political, and geostrategic assets lost by the Soviet state in 1991.”[10] James Ker-Lindsay rejects this, arguing instead that Russian policy is opportunistically agile and expedient.[11] In fact, both statements are true at the same time. Mr. Putin is dogged in pursuit of long-term objectives but flexible in adopting the most expedient means available to him at any given point in time. There is a common historical thread from Mr. Putin’s Balkan strategy back to Imperial Russia’s:

It is true that our political interests are, as they have always been and as they will never cease to be, tightly linked to those of Orthodoxy [ . . . ] It is an interest of the first order for us to have in our immediate neighborhood populations that are attached to us by ties of faith.[12]

That passage is from a July 1856 instruction written by Foreign Minister Alexander Gorchakov to the Imperial Russian ambassador in Constantinople. Today, Mr. Putin substitutes his envisioned “Russia World” (Russkiy Mir) for earlier notions of Mother Russia (Matushka Rossiya) and the Orthodox East (Pravoslavnyi Vostok). Contemporary expressions of Slavic sodality take forms like the Balkan Cossack Army (Balkanskoye kazach’ye voysko “BKV”), a paramilitary group subordinate to the Moscow-based Central Cossack Army[13] (Tsentral’noye kazach’ye voysko), which Mr. Putin established by presidential decree in April 2014. The BKV’s Gennady Yakovlevich Temnikov said this in September 2016:

The Orthodox people are as one. Here, we see Russians and Montenegrins and Serbs. We have defended our interests for centuries so we know the story. We’ve known it since the Battle of Kulikov. We know its heroes.[14]

“Pray to God to preserve Russia,” said the BKV’s chief of Montenegrin affairs, Colonel Slobodan Pejović, who dismissed Montenegro’s accession discussions with NATO as “unacceptable”.[15]

A Recent BKV Formation in Kotor, Montenegro (Source: Srpska.ru[16])

A Recent BKV Formation in Kotor, Montenegro (Source: Srpska.ru[16])

Confined pockets of prolonged instability give rise to conditions favorable to the piecemeal annexation of territory.[17] Russian actions in the Balkans do not always entail annexation in a strict de jure sense, but instead, something akin to de facto annexation in the manner of a vassalage or protectorate.[18] An 1895 account of “Russian armies in their piecemeal annexation” described it as “slow pressure, like the percolation of water through the sand on the banks of a river.”[19] Foreign Minister Gorchakov warned in 1864 of being drawn “from annexation to annexation with unforeseen complications.”[20] Russian statecraft has long recognized the risks associated with promoting instability.

By encouraging the aspirations of nationality with a view to . . . autonomy, we can provoke fatal complications for the future peace . . . [21]

Russia sometimes becomes a party to conflict-resolution negotiations as a means to influence confined conflicts.[22] This practice allows it to exploit ceasefire and similar agreements as a maskirovka, behind which it can engage in piecemeal annexations and subversion.[23] Confined conflicts are sometimes mischaracterized as proxy wars.[24] They are instead manifestations of exploiting divisions and playing one nation off against another, both longstanding Russian practices. Konstantin Mikhailovich Basiliy, who served as Imperial Russian ambassador in Constantinople in the mid-19th century, described these practices as “the awakening of nationalities, by all sorts of secret and open means, in order to sow discord between them and to detach them from the common center . . . [25]

Mr. Putin’s pursuit of regional hegemony through instruments like confined conflicts and instability pockets is much in the style of 19th century Imperial Germany:

[I]t is fair to say that this instability was confined to his means; the end he tried to compass underwent no change. [The Kaiser’s] watchword was Deutschland über alles, Germany above all things. The hegemony of the German nation in Europe, and of possible in the planet, was, and is, the ultimate goal of his policy.[26]

He seems to believe the West operates in a likewise manner in places like Ukraine. Consider this passage from an internal Kremlin document summarizing discussions about Ukraine at the 2014 Munich Security Conference:

[T]he European Union and the United States are willing to tolerate the country’s disintegration, and do not consider such an evolvement to be extraordinary. The notion of the EU absorbing a large Eastern European country “piecemeal” not only is discussed openly by a number of EU officials, but finds support among the ranks of Ukraine’s elite as well.[27]

For a given situation to escalate on its own momentum from an isolated instability pocket to region-wide conflict is inimical to Russian interests. Secretary of State John Kerry erred when he characterized the Balkans as a “conflict zone” in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in February 2015 (which was extensively quoted in Russian and Balkan media outlets):

If we talk about Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, and others—Georgia, Moldova, Transdniestria—they’re all in the line of fire.[28]

That Russia applies different tactics in the eastern and the western Balkans exemplifies Mr. Putin’s tactical agility in the pursuit of long-term objectives. His approach in the eastern Balkans expresses a diplomatic synecdoche of a sort. “Russia’s basic strategy in Transdniestria is the control of the part over the whole,”[29] as one scholar put it. By contrast, in the western Balkans, Mr. Putin “needs merely to generate instability. He realized long ago the world cares about peace only when blood spills.”[30]

After all, Putin needed another conflict in which he could play the role of mediator. But Bosnia is superior even to Syria—the “Orthodox king,” protecting his smaller brothers from Western and Islamic foes at the same time—it’s just beautiful! Russians choke with excitement![31]

This essay considers two Russian “pinpricks” at latitudinal opposite sides of the Balkan Peninsula. In the western Balkans, there is the nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s increasingly restive constituent, the Serb Republic, better known as Republika Srpska. And in the western Balkans, there is the separatist Transdniestria region (Pridnestrovskaya Moldavskaya Respublika) of the Republic of Moldova, where a national presidential election is scheduled for late October 2016.

Transdniestria, the Disagreeable Suitor

“She is displeased at not finding a suitor more agreeable
to her. But while despising the suitor, she accepts his
hand, because there is no other way for her to go where
she wants to go.”
[32]

(Source: UNIAN)

(Source: UNIAN)

And so it is with Mr. Putin. He, too, on occasion must accept uncongenial suitors who get him where he wants to go. In early September 2016, Yevgeny Shevchuk,[33] the leader of Moldova’s separatist Transdniestria region—the self-declared Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (Pridnestrovskaya Moldavskaya Respublika)—issued a surprise presidential decree to implement a decade-old national referendum. Mr. Shevchuk said his intent is to carry out “the will of the Pridnestrovie people on their free accession to the Russian Federation.”

Renewed discussion of accession has at least as much to do with the territory’s internal politics than with any hoped for reunification with Matushka Rossiya because Mr. Shevchuk’s popularity has plunged in advance of this December’s presidential election in Transdniestria. While he received nearly a 74 percent majority in the 2011 runoff election, Mr. Shevchuk garnered support from only 14 percent of likely voters according to a recent opinion survey.

Russian spokesperson Dmitry Peskov had a tellingly ambiguous response to Mr. Shevchuk’s decree:

I’m not aware of any Kremlin reaction. It’s necessary to understand the basis of these actions, but lacking details, I can’t comment one way or another.[34]

That tepid reaction may reflect the Russian government’s anticipation of a pro-Russian national government after Moldova’s 30 October presidential election. The likely winner is Igor Dodon, who leads the Moldovan Socialist Party (Partija socialistov Respubliki Moldova). Mr. Dodon registered a 38.3 percent plurality in a recent opinion poll[35] and benefits from the inability of Moldova’s four pro-European Union parties to agree on a single candidate.

(Source: Novosti Pridnestrov’ya [39])

(Source: Novosti Pridnestrov’ya [39])

Mr. Dodon rejected as inadequate a promise by the national government in Chișinău to establish 100 polling stations for expatriate Moldovans.[36] According to him, the proper standard is “one voting center for every 3000 voters.” He demanded (in a 6 September statement posted on his Facebook page) that Chișinău establish 159 voting centers in Russia alone.[37] Allegations of voting fraud will undoubtedly challenge the legitimacy of the October election’s outcome. Over the past two decades, the number of Moldovans registered to vote increased by some 500,000, this in a country with a domestic population of about 3.6 million (down from slightly less than 3.7 million in 1996). As of August 2016, Moldova’s Central Elections Commission reported 3,237,032 people were eligible to vote, which is based on holding a Moldovan residence permit whether or not one lives in the country.[38]

The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) is attempting after a six-year interruption to revive the so-called “5+2” format talks between Moldova and Transdniestria.[40] The format provides for direct negotiations between Chișinău and the separatist Transdniestrian government in Tiraspol  (i.e., the “2”) with the OSCE, Russia, Ukraine, the European Union, and the United States (i.e., the “5”) acting as mediators and observers. The revived 5+2 talks got off to an inauspicious start at a two-day mid-July conference on “confidence-building measures”[41] held in Bad Reichenhall, Germany. Moldova’s Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Sergei Golovach (who chairs Chișinău’s delegation) referred to members of the Transdniestrian delegation as “separatists.”[42] At an early October 5+2 meeting, Transdniestrian delegates accused Mr. Golovach of repeatedly referring to them as “the Taliban,” an epithet they called “unbalanced and odious.”[43]

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitri Rogozin made clear in a July 2016 Kommersant interview that his country wants to see a federal Moldova, one in which Transdniestria “gradually recovers its status as part of a single Moldovan state.”[44]

[I]f Moldovan politicians . . . want to unify with Romania, then it is better to let Transdniestria go in an amicable way. If they don’t want to unify with Romania but instead remain a sovereign state, one that will protect all its citizens, then it will take years but those years will not be in vain. They will go toward the restoration of [Moldova’s] territorial integrity . . . [A]ny politician can say anything, but it is an undeniable fact, even for the fiercest supporters of unification with Romania, [that] if Moldova were to take a step toward Romania, this sharp turn would cause Transdniestria to fall off.[45]

His real meaning, wrote Georgiy Kukhaleyshvili in the Ukrainian online newspaper Fraza, is this: “Putin wants to turn Transdniestria into a scarecrow for NATO” (Putin khochet prevratit’ Pridnestrov’ye v pugalo dlya NATO).[46] Calling Transdniestria “a firing range for Russian missiles” (poligon dlya rossiyskikh raket), Georgiy Kukhaleyshvili argues that the territory could play a defensive role similar to Crimea. Transdniestria’s geographic location is ideal to counter NATO’s forward-deployed ballistic missile defense system on the footprint of the Soviet-era Devaselu airbase in southern Romania.[47]

Russia wants to create a precedent for the incremental taking of stand-alone regions in neighboring post-Soviet states where there are separatist tendencies . . . [I]t is implicit blackmail against Ukraine. The example of Transdniestria preparing to join the Russian Federation demonstrates the possibility of repeating this scenario in the Donbas.[48]

The Ukrainian newspaper Ukraí̈ns’ka pravda called Transdniestria “a trump card—it can be used to destabilize both Moldova and Ukraine’s Odessa region.” The Russian government’s preferred outcome, Ukraí̈ns’ka pravda speculated, is a pro-Russian government in Chișinău. “Shevchuk fears Russia will return the enclave to Moldova, and his circle and other criminal elements will be excluded from the financial flow.[49]

That being said, Transdniestria is “not as sacred as Crimea,” wrote Vadim Dovar, who added, “An anecdote, repeated twice, isn’t so funny.”[50] A commentary in the Russian online newspaper Vzglyad reached a similar conclusion. “The Transdniestrian referendum on joining Russia is not what it seems,” wrote Eugene Krutikov, who continued that its “desire to become part of the Russian Federation only irritates Moscow” (stremleniye Pridnestrov’ya voyti v sostav RF tol’ko razdrazhayet Moskvu).[51] He correctly pointed out that the 2006 referendum—which then-Transdniestrian head Igor Smirnov, who was running for reelection, purposely held the same day as the territory’s presidential election—asked voters whether they supported Transdniestrian independence, which would leave it free to join the Russian Federation.[52]  The sine qua non to triggering such a move was “a change in Moldova’s status, for example, its unification with Romania” according to the Vzglyad commentary.

There’s a fashionable conspiracy theory now, according to which the Kremlin manipulates everything that happens on the planet, including the behavior of hackers in the US election and the ocean tides, to say nothing of the decrees of the President of Transdniestria [ . . . ] But there’s a geographical reality that Transdniestria has no common border with Russia and will become part of Russia only after the first nuclear explosion of World War III, or some other unexpected turn of events, among which the most promising is an alien invasion (and evil one; the invasion of friendly aliens guarantees nothing) [ . . . ]

Things like Shevchuk’s decrees cannot blow up the situation in the region. Even Ukraine cannot do it. The only real reason for hostilities to resume or to launch a real process of integration with Russia would be a change in Moldova’s status, for example, its unification with Romania. But this scenario is no more likely than the arrival of aliens. It’s time for Tiraspol to learn something important: Moscow is very sensitive to unexpected attempted ‘initiatives’ that destroy its carefully constructed system of foreign policy vectors [ . . . ]

Much in Transdniestria relies on domestic intrigues, nepotism and complex investment schemes, and nothing positive can develop in such circumstances. And there’s always a reason to believe it could get even worse.[53]

“Worse” might describe the prospect of Transdniestria morphing into a Balkan Kaliningrad.[54]  The reference is to Russia’s Baltic enclave, one that the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies’ Igor Nikolaychuk calls “the single most important object in the Russian Federation’s overall military infrastructure.”[55] An especially disruptive scenario would involve the deployment of Russian short-range ballistic missiles in Transdniestria. Systems like Russia’s Iskander [56] are used for battlefield support against nearby targets.[57] In confined geographic theatres like Moldova-Romania, a hypothesized Iskander deployment would directly challenge NATO’s missile defense system based in southern Romania, which requires defensive depth of at least 500 kilometers (the range of the Iskander-M). The Transdniestrian government announced in February 2010 that it was prepared to host Russian missiles on its territory. After Moldova’s pro-Russia political party Equality (Ravnopraviye)[58] asked Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to “take measures to protect Transdniestria against new threats”[59] from NATO’s planned anti-missile defenses in Romania, President Igor Smirnov stated that he was “prepared to accommodate” any Russian countermeasures.[60] In late November 2011, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev identified a set of asymmetric countermeasures in response to NATO’s European missile defense architecture. He cautioned that if those countermeasures proved insufficient

[T]he Russian Federation will deploy modern offensive weapon systems in the west and south of the country, ensuring our ability to take out any part of the US missile defense system in Europe. One step in this process will be to deploy Iskander missiles . . .”[61]

Transdniestria’s eastern border with Ukraine (Source: Wikipedia [62])

Transdniestria’s eastern border with Ukraine (Source: Wikipedia [62])

Another “worse” scenario might involve (despite what Vzglyad writes) the outbreak of a large-scale conflict along Transdniestria’s eastern border with Ukraine.

This would likely involve the escalation of some localized conflict. On 19 October, for example, Transdniestria’s State Security Committee (Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti PMR “KGB-PMR”) announced that it apprehended six Ukrainian nationals whom it accused of “engaging in covert surveillance in the vicinity of KGB-PMR exercises” near Kamenka (Camenca in Romanian) on the territory’s western border with Moldova.[63]

Republika Srpska: Welcome, Orthodoxy’s Son

Putin, our friend from St. Petersburg.
The entire Serbian Guard awaits you
Putin, Orthodoxy’s son.
Russia rises up.

We look to the sixteenth of October
All of blessed Serbia awaits you.
With you, comes so much that is good.
Our hope, the strength of our Orthodox faith.
                                     – Stanko Lacman-Barič[64]

(Source: Total Croatia News [65])

(Source: Total Croatia News [65])

The western Balkan nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosna i Hercegovina or “BiH”) is surrounded on all sides by Croatia, Serbia, and Montenegro (all former Yugoslav federal republics). BiH’s constituent parts are, respectively, the Serb Republic (Republika Srpska) and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“BiH Federation”).

Republika Srpska’s brief and troubled history began with its formation in the early 1990s by the Bosnian Serb Assembly (Skupština bosanskih Srba).

That self-declared representative body of Bosnian Serbs established the “Republic of the Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina” (Republika srpskog naroda Bosne i Hercegovine) in January 1992. It claimed territorial control of Serb autonomous areas and other Serb ethnic strongholds within BiH. After the BiH national government in Sarajevo refused to recognize the Republic, it held a national independence referendum in March 1992 that was boycotted by most Bosnian Serbs. The referendum passed, and an independent BiH (which included the territory claimed by the Republic) was formally recognized by the European Union the following month.

Republika Srpska (yellow) and BiH Federation (blue) (Source: globalsecurity.org)

Republika Srpska (yellow) and BiH Federation (blue) (Source: globalsecurity.org)

The Bosnian Serb Assembly promptly declared the Republic’s independence from BiH and adopted the name “Serb Republic” (Republika Srpska), a truncated version of its earlier one. Its early leaders (including its first president, Radovan Karadžić, later convicted of genocide and war crimes against Bosnian Muslims and Croats) intended to seek the eventual incorporation of Republika Srpska into a Greater Serbia. In November 1992, however, the United Nations Security Council called on member-states to recognize BiH’s territorial integrity and affirmed that “any entities unilaterally declared . . . will not be accepted.”[66]

A recent commentary published by the Serbian veterans’ organization Patriotic Front (Patriotski Front) answered the rhetorical question “What does Republika Srpska mean to Serbs?”

Serbia must not abandon Republika Srpska just as it never abandoned Bosnia. Republika Srpska is an independent Serbian state beyond the borders of the Republic of Serbia, not part of some “invented nation” . . . We are grateful to Milorad Dodik [the president of Republika Srpska], who despite difficulties managed to preserve the unity of the Republika Srpska and the Serb people. We are grateful to Russian President Vladimir Putin for his support and assistance to the Serbian people, and for ensuring our national security and territory. Together we win![67]

“Putin’s man in the Balkans”[68] is how the Austrian newspaper Der Standard characterized Mr. Dodik:

But one must not think that the populist wants to destroy only Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was no accident that Dodik traveled to Moscow three days before the referendum to meet the Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is about larger geopolitical plans of the Russian regime. Dodik is not alone as a vassal of Putin’s interests. Similar political figures are also found in Macedonia and Serbia. Their aim is to weaken the West’s position in the Balkans . . . The fact that the referendum could take place at all shows the bankruptcy of Western policy in the Balkans.[69]

Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik (Source: Novorossia Today [72])

Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik (Source: Novorossia Today [72])

In late September, Mr. Dodik went ahead with his promised referendum[70] to establish 9 January—the date on which the Bosnian Serb Assembly in 1992 declared independence—as “Republika Srpska Day” (Dan Republike Srpske). Voters approved the measure almost unanimously (99.8 percent in favor). The referendum “shows the new geo-political balance in the Balkans,” wrote Der Standard’s Adelheid Wölfl.[71]

The referendum was a reaction to a 2015 decision by the BiH constitutional court, which ruled that the holiday discriminated against non-Serbs because it falls on a Serbian Orthodox religious holiday. The court was responding to a November 2015 challenge by Bakir Izetbegović, a member of the BiH tripartite presidency and leader of the predominantly Bosniak (i.e., Bosnian Muslim) political party, the Party of Democratic Action (Stranka demokratske akcije). The referendum was “a feast for Serbian separatists”[73] in the word of one commentary. If so, it is an opportunity for Mr. Putin as well.

Supporting Serbian separatism is part of a [Russian] strategy of creating pressure within the European Union, or at least causing chaos on its periphery. Ideally for the Kremlin, Bosnian Serbs face a choice not only about independence, but also about the military means to achieve it. This gives rise to another stress point, one to distract the European Union from the Ukraine conflict, sanctions, and so on. Russia, claiming to act as a humanitarian force defending the Serbian people, would gladly introduce peacekeepers into the region, and by so doing create yet another platform to bargain with the West, along with Syria.[74]

Russia’s Pravda concluded, “It is apparent now that the American policy of agglomerating countries out of unagglomerative parts has failed.”[75] Izvestia and Lenta repeated Mr. Dodik’s admonition that “Republika Srpska could secede from Bosnia and Herzegovina . . . in the event of any military operations on the part of Bosnian authorities.”[76] The reference is to BiH’s hoped-for NATO accession (it joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace program in 2006). Republika Srpska looms large in BiH’s relationship with the security alliance. On the one hand, its threat to declare independence complicates Western political calculations about the advisability and timing of BiH’s accession. On the other hand, Russia by no means discourages speculation about the effect of Republika Srpska inside NATO.

We must not forget that Yugoslavia for years pursued a policy of “sitting on two chairs,” acting as a “Trojan horse” in the socialist camp in order to get help from the United States and NATO.[77]

So judged an August 2012 assessment by the Ljubljana-based International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES), which continued:

Current political events clearly point to the existence of a BiH transversal forming a Moscow–Belgrade–Banja Luka [Republika Srpska’s capital] triangle . . . which at some point could prevent BiH joining [NATO] . . . That transversal would infiltrate into the security architecture of NATO, the European Union, and other international institutions and agencies that guarantee the security of Western countries.[78]

The Serbian media portal b92 reported earlier this year that Kosovo—which declared independence from Serbia in February 2008—was preparing to request formally to join NATO’s Partnership for Peace program.[79] This may further complicate Western calculations about additional regional security partnerships in the western Balkans, notes a Lenta commentary.

The 22 February 2008 resolution adopted by the Republika Srpska parliament provides that Bosnian Serbs may secede from Bosnia and Herzegovina if a majority of UN member states and EU states recognize Kosovo’s independence.[80]

When the February 2008 resolution was adopted, Branislav Dukić—who chaired the Serb Movement of Independent Associations (Srpski pokret nezavisnih udruženja “SPONA”)—declared at a rally in Banja Luka:

[If] Kosovo proclaims independence, SPONA will demand the parliament do likewise and extract Republika Srpska from BiH. We have a right, which is the right of all people to self-determination, one that includes the right to secede.[81]

That trigger—Kosovo declaring independence—had occurred five days earlier. Mr. Dukić reiterated the linkage between Kosovo and Republika Srpska:

“If Kosovo’s illegal parliament may declare independence, there’s no reason Republika Srpska’s legal parliament wouldn’t have the same right . . . In the event Kosovo unilaterally declares independence, others can do the same.”[82]

Mr. Putin used a similar argument earlier this year about Kosovo to justify Crimea’s 11 March 2014 “declaration of independence.”[83] Dismissing “Putin’s pseudo-analogy,” Wulf Lapins argued that it cuts two ways:

For the premise that “what Kosovo is allowed cannot be denied Crimea” means in reverse that “what Crimea is allowed must also apply to Kosovo” . . . [Mr. Putin’s] government’s implicit message, therefore, reads like a Bible verse: Knock and the door shall be opened. Not a word about how Russia herself so far has strictly denied Kosovo Albanians the right to self-determination, one she now expressly demands for the people of Crimea.[84]

That is unlikely to sway Mr. Putin, for whom Republika Srpska is a useful instrument to influence political events in the Balkans, not as an end in itself.

[A] pro-Russian state within the EU would not, of course, be an unattractive scenario for the Kremlin either . . . Russia can use Serbia as an effective instrument with which to administer pinpricks to the EU, and thus Moscow remains willing to invest in the Russian-Serbian friendship.[85]

All this led the Balkan newsmagazine Nedeljink to warn ominously that “War is inevitable in the Balkans.”

Russia is not trying openly to alter the environment in the region. Instead, it aims to strengthen its alliances, to stop the expansion of NATO, and to defend its economic interests in the Balkans. But in the end, the result may be the collapse of the existing order in the Balkans. If the West backs Russia into a corner because of Ukraine, Moscow could precipitate a serious crisis in the region that would include both the EU and NATO simply by giving the Bosnian Serbs the “green light.”[86]

(An Imagined) History Returns to the Balkans

And what have the centuries brought you?
Madness and experience.
To be or not to be—that is the question.
It’s always yours, Europe.
                                                     – Yuri Kuznetsov The House (1973) [87]

Mr. Putin is adept at formulating narratives to incite existential questions about European geopolitics that many Western leaders—including prominently, Mr. Obama—sanguinely maintain are relics of a bygone era. Mr. Obama has argued that Mr. Putin need merely disengage himself from Russia’s historic alignments, something that fundamentally misunderstands the temperament of Russian leaders. Pyotr Chaadaev wrote in his c.1820s Philosophical Letters of what he called Russia’s “differentness” (novizny):

It is one of the most lamentable traits of our peculiar civilization that we have yet to discover truths that are commonplace elsewhere, even among peoples that are in many respects less advanced than us. This is because we have never moved in concert with the other peoples. We do not belong to any of the great families of the human race. We are neither of the West nor of the East, and we do not have the traditions of either. We stand, as it were, outside of time . . . [88]

Russian novizny is a fundament of Mr. Putin’s Balkan narrative. He makes common cause with Orthodox Serbs and other disgruntled peoples who are “geographically inextricable from Europe, yet culturally constructed as ‘the other’.”[89] Mr. Putin’s narrative competes with what Maria Todorov calls the “persistent hegemonic discourse from the West, continuously disparaging about the Balkans,”[90] as well as the hackneyed view that Balkan peoples “were then, and are still, unlike Europe.”[91]

For Balkan territories like Transdniestria and Republika Srpska, “independence meant the ‘return to history.’”[92]

Consequently, the illusion was that a lost line could be embraced, and lost identity could be restored, if carefully sought from a lost past.[93]

The argued “lost past” is a composite of real and imagined histories that reveals, as George Kennan wrote in the early 1990’s, “how much of today’s problem has deep roots and how much does not.”[94] It is Mr. Putin’s peculiar genius to craft disruptive narratives around imagined histories that associate Russia with a common lost past and a shared differentness.

President Obama’s hubristic declaration that the United States “doesn’t do pinpricks”[95] rings hollow, according to Lionel Beehner.

“The comment was obviously meant to reassure our allies that we have their backs and will enforce our red lines with overwhelming force if necessary . . . But ever since the winding down of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and with the possible exception of Libya, it would seem the United States only does pinpricks.”[96]

Ambassador James F. Jeffrey writes, “To move the needle from a pinprick to something of lasting strategic value, the President must overcome his aversion to using force.”[97] Mr. Obama has not, alas, done so.

[T]he result is that such strategies provoke increased deception and aggression as extremists cynically exploit the democracies’ moral confusion, defense cuts, withdrawals, half-hearted ideological combat, “pin prick” military approaches, and diplomatic trust.[98]

Mr. Putin’s pinprick strategy is qualitatively different from the one Mr. Obama dismisses. While Mr. Obama “continues his policy of disengagement . . . [and has] no intention of backing his words with action,”[99] writes Gary Kasparov, Mr. Putin deals effectively in provocations and demonstrations:

[Mr. Putin’s] pinpricks in the side of NATO . . . serve the important domestic purpose of showing Russia’s population that the government stands up to the West and forges its own path internationally.[100]

And when a confined conflict goes hot as in eastern Ukraine, observes Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Mr. Putin deftly exploits pinpricks to avoid “hav[ing] to consider real concessions”[101]

The challenge faced by the United States in Transdniestria and Republika Srpska is the product of serial misjudgments about Russian intentions and inurement to Western sanctions more than anything peculiarly Balkan. The regional security environment could deteriorate quickly if today’s (somewhat) contained situation in Transdniestria becomes a larger Moldovan crisis upon the election of an abjectly pro-Russia national government, given the country’s position as a veritable geographic wedge between Romania and Ukraine.

Ballistic missile and missile defensive systems are a persistent and growing threat to regional security. Russia’s Iskander short-range ballistic missile system, a recent CIA research report noted, “is a weapon that can affect the military-political situation in the regions of the world when it is positioned in in states that do not have a large territory.” Were Russia to deploy Iskander in Transdniestria (or worse, in western Moldova), NATO would be challenged to reestablish depth for its “Aegis Ashore” missile defense system based in southern Romania.

The author contends mismanagement of the United States’ relationship with Russia over the past several years has been punctuated by rhetorical slights and bellicoseness. So it is perhaps worth ending with an extended quote from George Kennan’s famous 1947 essay, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct.”

In these circumstances it is clear that the main element of any United States policy toward the Soviet Union must be that of long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies. It is important to note, however, that such a policy has nothing to do with outward histrionics: with threats or blustering or superfluous gestures of outward “toughness.” While the Kremlin is basically flexible in its reaction to political realities, it is by no means unamenable to considerations of prestige. Like almost any other government, it can be placed by tactless and threatening gestures in a position where it cannot afford to yield even though this might be dictated by its sense of realism. The Russian leaders are keen judges of human psychology, and as such they are highly conscious that loss of temper and of self-control is never a source of strength in political affairs. They are quick to exploit such evidences of weakness. For these reasons it is a sine qua non of successful dealing with Russia that the foreign government in question should remain at all times cool and collected and that its demands on Russian policy should be put forward in such a manner as to leave the way open for a compliance not too detrimental to Russian prestige.[102]

Mr. Putin’s pinpricks approach has had the inherent advantage of not requiring that Russia take and hold large territorial expanses, while at the same time (and at a lesser cost) complicating the defenders’ map. It is perhaps Russia’s best hope of checking NATO expansion—either by means of a blocking strategy that exploits the geographic position of separatist enclaves, or in the event a friendly government takes office in Moldova by removing it from the accession queue entirely. Western leaders must rediscover a seriousness of approach to match their purpose in the Balkans. This will require them to find ways to reengage Russia, lest pinpricks populated with missile systems mutate into something of an order of magnitude more dangerous than today’s already volatile security environment.

The translation of all source material is by the author. The opening quote by Defense Secretary Weinberg is from the transcript of the 22 December 1981 meeting of the United States National Security Council. See: http://www.thereaganfiles.com/19811222-nsc-34.pdf, 5. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

About the author:
*John R. Haines
is a Senior Fellow of the Foreign Policy Research Institute and Executive Director of FPRI’s Princeton Committee. Much of his current research is focused on Russia and its near abroad, with a special interest in nationalist and separatist movements. As a private investor and entrepreneur, he is currently focused on the question of nuclear smuggling and terrorism, and the development of technologies to discover, detect, and characterize concealed fissile material. He is also a Trustee of FPRI.

Source:
This article was published by FPRI.

Notes:
[1] Rory Cormac (2014). ” The Pinprick Approach: Whitehall’s Top-Secret Anti-Communist Committee and the Evolution of British Covert Action Strategy.” Journal of Cold War Studies. 16:3, 13.

[2] Official Committee on Communism (Overseas) Minutes, 15 February 1950, in The National Archives (TNA) of the United Kingdom, CAB 134/4, AC(O)(50)4th Meeting. Cited in Cormac (2014), 13.

[3] Muhidin Mulalić  & Mirsad Karić (2014). “The Western Balkans Geopolitics and Russian Energy Politics.” Epiphany. 7:1, 87 & 103.

[4] This dual purpose is suggested by Ioannis Michaletos. See: Michaletos (2015). “Balkans lose geopolitical importance.” Serbianna [published online 17 October 2015]. http://serbianna.com/analysis/archives/3119. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[5] Harold J. Mackinder (1904; 2004). “The geographical pivot of history”. The Geographical Journal. 170:4, 4298-321.

[6] “Im Westen gehasst, im Balkan ein Held: «Putin ist unser Gott».” Blick [published online in German 13 August 2015]. http://www.blick.ch/news/ausland/im-westen-gehasst-im-balkan-ein-held-putin-ist-unser-gott-id4067549.html. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[7] “Putin ist unser Gott.” Handelsblatt [published online in German 11 August 2015]. http://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/international/russland-auf-dem-balkan-putin-ist-unser-gott/12143392.html. Last accessed 20 October 2016. The headline read in the original German text, “Im Westen gehasst, im Balkan ein Held: «Putin ist unser Gott.”

[8] “Russia in the Balkans.” Conference report published by the LSEE-Research on South East Europe at the London School of Economics and the South East European Studies at Oxford (13 March 2015), 2, 3.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Leon Aron (2013). “The Putin Doctrine.” Foreign Affairs [published online 8 March 2013]. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2013-03-08/putin-doctrine. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[11] Christopher T. Barber (2015). “Russian Foreign Policy in the Balkans,” 1-2. https://www.academia.edu/12126562/Russian_Soft_Power_in_the_Balkan_Peninsula. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[12] Barbara Jelavich (1991). Russia’s Balkan entanglements 1806-1914. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 147.

[13] Its website can be accessed here: http://vko-ckv.ru

[14] “V Kotore sozdano Balkanskoye kazach’ye voysko.” Srpska.ru [published online in Russian 12 September 2016]. http://www.srpska.ru/article.php?nid=30064. Last accessed 21 October 2016. One of its recruiting videos can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BVKoUrWLN8. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[15] “V Chernogorii sozdali “kazatskoye voysko”, kotoroye vozglavil rossiyskiy general.” iPress [published online in Russian 15 February 2016]. http://ipress.ua/ru/news/v_chernogoryy_sozdaly_kazatskoe_voysko_kotoroe_vozglavyl_rossyyskyy_general_180448.html. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[16] http://www.srpska.ru/article.php?nid=30064. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[17] Johan Norberg & Fredrik Westerlund of the Swedish Defense Research Agency (Totalförsvarets forskningsinstitut) have a similar thesis vis-à-vis Russian actions in Ukraine. See: Norberg & Westerlund (2014). “Russia and Ukraine: Military-strategic options, and possible risks, to Moscow.” RUSF Briefing No. 22 (April 2014). Another scholar writes that for Imperial Russia, “‘annexation’ was often an evolutionary, informal, and piecemeal process.” See: Allen Chew (1970). An Atlas of Russian History. Eleven Centuries of Changing Borders. (New Haven: Yale University Press).

[18] Chew (1970), op cit., vii.

[19] “Russia, Mongolia, and China.” Littell’s Living Age. CCV:2656 (1 June 1895) 556.

[20] The Annual Register (1873). “Circular Dispatch Addressed by Prince Gortchakow to Russian Representatives Abroad” [sic] dated 21 November 1864. Appendix. Public Documents and State Papers. (London: Riverton’s) 230.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Kresnar Shala (2015). Western Balkans Region and the Geopolitical Context: Russian Influence. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung report (22 September 2015) 5. http://www.fes-prishtina.org/wb/media/2015/Rajoni%20i%20Ballkanit%20Perendimor%20dhe%20konteksti%20gjeopolitik%20Anglisht_Krenar%20Shala.pdf. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[23] For example, Edward Lucas (who is a senior editor of The Economist) argued that the 17 April 2014 Geneva Statement on Ukraine [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/joint-geneva-statement-on-ukraine-from-april-17-the-full-text/2014/04/17/89bd0ac2-c654-11e3-9f37-7ce307c56815_story.html] “was a maskirovka, allowing Russia to continue its piecemeal annexation and subversion of Ukraine, while tying the West up in knots over diplomatic process and procedure.” See: Andras Radnoti (2014). “Edward Lucas: Greater Europe was always a non-starter.” Russian International Affairs Council blog [published online 30 April 2014]. http://russiancouncil.ru/en/blogs/westerlies/?id_4=1138. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[24] See for example: Adam Balcer (2015). “Matushka Rossiya and the Balkans.” Aspen Review. 2 (February 2015) 66. http://www.aspeninstitute.cz/en/article/2-2015-matushka-rossiya-and-the-balkans/. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[25] Jelavich (1991), op cit., 150.

[26] “Floreat Germania, Pereat Europa.” Contemporary Review 516 (December 1908) 752.

[27] “Predstavlyayetsya pravil’nym initsiirovat’ prisoyedineniye vostochnykh oblastey Ukrainy k Rossii.” Novaya Gazeta [published online in Russian 24 February 2015]. https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2015/02/24/63168-171-predstavlyaetsya-pravilnym-initsiirovat-prisoedinenie-vostochnyh-oblastey-ukrainy-k-rossii-187. Last accessed 21 October 2016. In late February 2015, the Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta published a purported Kremlin policy paper that it said was written and circulated inside the Kremlin a few weeks prior to the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Novaya Gazeta has a strong reputation for investigative reporting, and six of its journalists have been murdered since 2001 (including Anna Politkovskaya, who was shot in the elevator of her Moscow apartment building in October 2006). The newspaper is owned by Evgeny Alexandrovich Lebedev (known in the West as Alexander Lebedev), a Russian businessman with extensive media holdings in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.

[28] “Rossiya i Serbiya gotovyatsya provesti novyye voyennyye ucheniya.” Regnum [published online in Russian 1 March 2015]. https://regnum.ru/news/polit/1900401.html. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[29]  http://www.balkandefense.com/russias-basic-strategy-in-transnistria-is-the-control-of-the-part-over-the-whole/. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[30] “Posle Sirii. Pochemu Putin reshil rasshatat’ Balkany.” Espreso [published online in Russian 24 September 2016]. http://ru.espreso.tv/article/2016/09/26/posle_syryy_pochemu_putyn_reshyl_rasshatat_balkany. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[31] Ibid.

[32] From Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevskii (1863; 1886). What’s to be done? (Boston: Benjamin B. Tucker) 55] According to the Russian intellectual Nikolai Valentinov, Lenin once told him Chernyshevskii “was the greatest and most talented representative of socialism before Marx.” See: Valentinov (1951). “Chernyshevskii i Lenin.” Novyi zhurnal. 26-27 (1951) 193-194.

[33] Asked by the Russian government’s RT television channel who he preferred to win the United States presidential election, Mr. Shevchuk answered, “Between Trump and Clinton, I choose Vladimir Putin.””Yevgeniy Shevchuk: Mezhdu Trampom i Klinton ya Vybirayu Putina.” Novosti Pridnestrov’ya [published online in Russian 20 September 2016]. http://novostipmr.com/ru/news/16-09-22/evgeniy-shevchuk-v-moskve-provyol-vstrechu-s-dmitriem-rogozinym. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[34] “U Putina poka ne kommentiruyut “prisoyedineniye” Pridnestrov’ye.” Ukraí̈ns’ka pravda [published online in Russian 9 September 2016]. http://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2016/09/9/7120128/. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[35] The survey found 27.5% of respondents were undecided and 11.6% indicated they would not vote. “Sondaj CBS-Axa, IDIS Viitorul: PD-salt în sondaje și suflă în ceafa PSRM.” Deschide [published online in Romanian 28 September 2016]. http://www.deschide.md/ro/stiri/politic/1257/Sondaj-CBS-Axa-IDIS-Viitorul-PD—salt-în-sondaje-și-suflă-în-ciafa-PSRM.htm. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[36] The Moldovan government established polling stations in Italy (25), Romania (11), Russia (8), the United States (7), France (6), Portugal & Spain (4 each), and Canada & Turkey (3 each). There are two polling stations per country in Britain, Israel, Greece, Ukraine and Germany, respectively. There is a single polling station in Ireland, Belarus, China, Czech Republic, Latvia, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Poland, Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Qatar, Monaco, and Japan, respectively.

[37] https://www.facebook.com/dodon.igor1/photos/pcb.1737874189786801/1737874066453480/?type=3&theater. Last accessed 3 October 2016. Mr. Dodon demanded the following numbers of polling stations: Russia (159); Italy (47); United States (16); Canada (6); Germany, Spain and Ukraine (5 each); Israel (4); Romania and Greece (3 each); and Portugal (2). He would allot the remaining countries on the Chișinău’s roster one center each.

[38] Ion Preasca & Inna Civirjic (2016). “Din cimitir în secțiile de votare.” RISE Moldova [published online in Romanian 9 September 2016]. https://www.rise.md/articol/cimitirul-din-listele-electorale/. Last accessed 13 October 2016. An updated version of the 9 September article was published under the headline “Moldovában a halottakat is megilleti a szavazati jog.” See: https://occrp.atlatszo.hu/2016/09/28/moldovaban-a-halottakat-is-megilleti-a-szavazati-jog/. Last accessed 13 October 2016.

[39] “Yevgeniy Shevchuk: prisoyedineniye Pridnestrov’ya k RF zavisit ot vozmozhnostey samoy Rossii.” Novosti Pridnestrov’ya [published online in Russian 23 September 2016]. http://novostipmr.com/ru/news/16-09-23/evgeniy-shevchuk-prisoedinenie-pridnestrovya-k-rf-zavisit-ot. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[40] “OSCE Special Representative for Transnistria settlement urges the parties to re-engage in dialogue.” Moldova.org [published online 12 October 2016]. http://www.moldova.org/en/osce-special-representative-transnistria-settlement-urges-parties-re-engage-dialogue/. Last accessed 14 October 2016. http://www.osce.org/cio/253901. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[41] “Bavaria conference reinforces German OSCE Chairmanship’s emphasis on an outcomes-based Transdniestrian settlement process.” OSCE press release published14 July 2016.

[42] http://radiopmr.org/golos/464/. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[43] “Predstaviteli Tiraspolya vyrazhayut nedoumeniye v svyazi s vyskazyvaniyami chlena delegatsii ot RM.” Novosti Pridnestrov’ya [published online in Russian 13 October 2016]. http://novostipmr.com/ru/news/16-10-13/pridnestrovskaya-delegaciya-v-okk-zhdyot-razyasneniy-i-oficialnyh. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[44] “Yesli Moldaviya sdelayet shag v storonu Rumynii, Pridnestrov’ye otvalitsya.” Kommersant [published online in Russian 7 July 2016]. http://kommersant.ru/doc/3032367. Last accessed 13 October 2016.

[45] Ibid.

[46] Georgiy Kukhaleyshvili (2016). ” GEOPOLITIKUM Putin khochet prevratit’ Pridnestrov’ye v pugalo dlya NATO.” Fraza [published online in Russian 13 July 2016]. http://fraza.ua/analitics/13.07.16/248506/putin-hochet-prevratit-pridnestrove-v-pugalo-dlja-nato-.html. Last accessed 13 October 2016.

[47] For an extended discussion of the Aegis Ashore deployment in Romania, see the author’s July 2016 essay “If the Atlantic Ocean is the New Black Sea, What’s the Black Sea? Aegis Ashore and the Black Sea Region’s Changing Security Dynamic.” http://www.fpri.org/article/2016/07/atlantic-ocean-new-black-sea-whats-black-sea-aegis-ashore-black-sea-regions-changing-security-dynamic/

[48] “Rossiya gotovit krymskiy stsenariy v Pridnestrov’ye.” Hubs [published online in Russian 12 September 2016]. http://hubs.ua/authority/rossiya-gotovit-kry-mskij-stsenarij-v-pridnestrov-e-87735.html. Last accessed 15 October 2016.

[49] “Manevry Putina v Moldove: pochemu Rossiya reshila anneksirovat’ Pridnestrov’ye?”Dialog [10 September 2016). http://www.dialog.ua/news/96821_1473527163. Last accessed 3 October 2016. The reference is The latter is to the country’s endemic corruption.

[50] “Vadim Dovnar: Pridnestrov’ye. Yesli by ya byl Putinym.” nr2 [published online in Russian 11 September 2016]. http://nr2.lt/blogs/VADIM_DOVNAR/Vadim-Dovnar-Pridnestrove-Esli-by-ya-byl-Putinym-123567.html. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[51] “Stremleniye Pridnestrov’ya voyti v sostav RF tol’ko razdrazhayet Moskvu. Referendum PMR o vkhozhdenii v Rossiyu–sovsem ne to, chem on kazhetsya.” Vzglyad [published online in Russian 17 September 2016]. http://www.vz.ru/politics/2016/9/17/832723.html. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[52] The referendum offered voters two statements. The first statement, which was approved by 97.2 percent of voters, was “Do you support a policy of independence for Transdniestria and its subsequent free association with the Russian Federation?” The second question, which was rejected by 94.9 percent of voters, was “Do you consider it possible to renounce Transdniestria’s independent status and followed by its entry into the Republic of Moldova?

[53] Vzglyad (17 September 20160, op cit.

[54] Grigory N. Perepelitsa (who directs a think tank associated with Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry) expresses the opposite view, arguing “Russia does not want a second Kaliningrad.” See: “Ekspert ob”yasnil, pochemu Pridnestrov’ye predstavlyayet ugrozu dlya Ukrainy.” Glavred [published online in Russian 14 September 2016]. http://glavred.info/politika/ekspert-obyasnil-pochemu-pridnestrove-predstavlyaet-ugrozu-dlya-ukrainy-388320.html. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[55] “Nikogda ne udastsya prevratit’ Kaliningradskuyu oblast’ v region mira.” NewsBalt [published online in Russian 4 April 2016]. http://newsbalt.ru/analytics/2016/04/kaliningrad-russia-usa/. Last accessed 3 October 2016.

[56] The reference is to Russia’s 9K720 Iskander-M [NATO Reporting Name: SS-26 Stone], a theater (280km range) mobile ballistic missile designed for tactical strikes on small, high value mobile and stationary land targets. It replaced the SS-23 Spider (500km range) system that was destroyed under the INF treaty. The name Iskander is from the Persian language name of alexander the Great.

[57] http://www.army-technology.com/projects/iksander-system/. Last accessed 25 October 2016.

[58] Formally, the Republican Social-Political Movement “Equality” (Russian transl.: Respublikanskaya obshchestvenno-politicheskoye dvizheniye Ravnopraviye. Romanian: Mişcare Social-Politică Republicană Ravnopravie.)

[59] “Rossiyu prosyat razmestit’ otvet na amerikanskuyu PRO v Pridnestrov’ye.” NBM.md [published online in Russian 15 February 2010]. http://www.nbm.md/news/main/rzmesenie_pro_pridnestrovie/default.aspx. Last acessed 25 October 2016.

[60] “PRO v Pridnestrov’ye: Tiraspol’ sdelal Rossii predlozheniye.” RIA-Novosti [published online in Russian 15 February 2010]. https://ria.ru/defense_safety/20100215/209336885.html. Last accessed 25 October 2016.

[61] President of Russia (2011). “Statement in connection with the situation concerning the NATO countries’ missile defence system in Europe.” Published online in English 23 November 2011. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/13637. Last accessed 25 October 2016.

[62] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camenca_District#/media/File:Raionul_Camenca,_Transnistria.jpg. Last accessed 25 October 2016.

[63] “SOTRUDNIK GPSU ZADERZHAN PRIDNESTROVSKIMI POGRANICHNIKAMI.” Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti PMR website [published online in Russian 19 October 2016]. http://kgb-pmr.com/news/458. Last accessed 25 October 2016.

[64] These are the first two stanzas of a poem written by Stanko Lacman-Barič to celebrate Vladimir Putin’s October 2014 visit to Serbia. It was published online by the Serbian media portal Blic on 14 October 2014 [http://www.blic.rs/vesti/politika/pesma-vladimiru-nas-putine-s-peterburga-grada/cr2xz39]. The stanzas read as follows in the original text:

Naš Putine s’ Petersburga grada,
Čeka tebe sve Srbije garda,
Naš Putine pravoslavni sine,
Što Rusiju diže u visine.

Čekamo te šesnaestog oktobra,
Čeka tebe sva Srbija draga,
Donosiš nam mnogo, mnogo dobra,
Naša nada, pravoslavna snaga.

[65] http://www.total-croatia-news.com/item/13867-croatia-referendum-in-the-republika-srpska-in-unacceptable. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[66] United Nations Security Council (1992). Resolution 787 (1992) adopted by the Security Council at its 3137th meeting on 16 November 1992.  https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N92/723/03/IMG/N9272303.pdf?OpenElement. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[67] “Chto oznachayet Respublika Serbskaya dlya Serbov?” Srpska.ru [published online in Russian 1 August 2016]. http://www.srpska.ru/article.php?nid=28325. Last accessed 19 October 2016.

[68] Adelheid Wölfl (2016). “Republika Srpska: Putins Mann auf dem Balkan.” Der Standard [published online in German 26 September 2016]. http://derstandard.at/2000044974636/Putins-Mann-auf-dem-Balkan. Last accessed 17 October 2016.

[69] Ibid.

[70]“Mijović: Izborni proces najveći kriminal u BiH.” n1 [published online in Croatian 22 September 2016]. http://ba.n1info.com/a113976/Video/Info/Mijovic-Izborni-proces-najveci-kriminal-u-BiH.html. Last accessed 18 October 2016. Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic and Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic earlier declined to support the referendum or to intervene to prevent it. The referendum yielded its first results in BIH nationwide municipal elections, which were held several days later: Mr. Dodik’s political party, the Alliance of Independent Social Democrats  (Savez nezavisnih socijaldemokrata/Savez nezavisnih socijaldemokrata), saw the number of municipalities under its control rise 30 percent from the previous election. The referendum and the municipal elections occurred under the cloud of some 500 thousands questionable or non-existent registered voters on the Republika Srpska rolls.

[71] Adelheid Wölfl (2016). “Referendum in der Republika Srpska: Auch Nichtstun ist ein Signal.” Der Standard [published online in German 21 September 2016]. http://derstandard.at/2000044740553/Referendum-in-der-Republika-Srpska-Auch-Nichtstun-ist-ein-Signal. Last accessed 17 October 2016.

[72] http://novorossia.today/141457-2/. Last accessed 21 October 2016.

[73] “Referendum razdora. Zhdet li Yevropu novyy bosniyskiy krizis?” Yevropeyskaya pravda [published online in Russian 3 October 2016]. http://www.eurointegration.com.ua/rus/articles/2016/10/3/7055302/. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[74] Ibid.

[75] “Banya-Luka brosila vyzov Vashingtonu.” Pravda [published online in Russian 26 September 2016]. http://www.pravda.ru/world/europe/balkans/26-09-2016/1314238-resp_serbska-0/. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[76] “Respublika Serbskaya mozhet vyyti iz sostava Bosnii i Gertsegoviny.” Izvestia [published online in Russian 22 September 2016]. http://izvestia.ru/news/633934. Last accessed 18 October 2016. “Respublika Serbskaya prigrozila vykhodom iz sostava Bosnii i Gertsegoviny.” Lenta [published online in Russian 22 September 2016]. https://lenta.ru/news/2016/09/22/respserbskajabigexit/. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[77] “Operatsiya «Burya». Unichtozheniye Respubliki Serbskaya Kraina.” Voyennoye obozreniye [published online in Russian 17 August 2013]. https://topwar.ru/32043-operaciya-burya.html. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[78] “BiH: Transverzala Moskva–Beograd–Banja Luka–Sarajevo.” IFIMES [published online in Croatian 28 August 2012]. http://www.ifimes.org/ba/8494-bih-transverzala-moskva-beograd-banja-luka-sarajevo. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[79] “Washington ‘readies plan for Kosovo’s NATO membership’.” b92 [published online 19 May 2016]. http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2016&mm=05&dd=19&nav_id=98050. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[80] Lenta (22 September 2016), op cit.

[81] “Studenti iz RS najavili proteste.” Univerzitet u Banjoj Luci [published online in Serbian 14 February 2008]. http://unibl.rs/sr/vesti/2008/02/studenti-iz-rs-najavili-proteste. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[82] “Dodik: Nezavisnost može razviti razne ideje i kod drugih.” Radio-televizija Vojvodine [published online in Serbian 14 February 2008]. http://rtv.rs/sr_ci/region/dodik-nezavisnost-moze-razviti-razne-ideje-i-kod-drugih_49386.html. Last accessed 20 October 2016. “SPONA traži otcepljenje RS.” Dosije Novosti [published online in Serbian 19 February 2008]. http://www.novosti.rs/вести/планета.480.html:210721-Касни-став-о-Косову. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[83] Formally, the “Declaration of Independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol” (Deklaratsiya o nezavisimosti Avtonomnoy Respubliki Krym i goroda Sevastopolya). See: http://www.crimea.gov.ru/news/11_03_2014_1. Last accessed 20 October 2016.

[84] “Krim = Kosovo? Putins Pseudo-Analogie.” Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft [published online in German 17 April 2014]. http://www.ipg-journal.de/kommentar/artikel/krim-kosovo-putins-pseudo-analogie-357/. Last accessed 20 October 2016. Mr. Lapins is head of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung), a think tank affiliated with German Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands).

[85] Sarah Wohlfeld (2015). “Ohne Kompass Richtung Brüssel? Serbien zwischen EU-Annäherung und russischer Vereinnahmung.” DGAP kompakt, Nr. 14 September 2015  [published online in German 24 September 2015], 4. DGAP kompakt is published by the German think tank, Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik e.V.

[86] “Zašto je neizbežan novi rat na Balkanu.” Nedeljink [published online in Bosnian 13 June 2016]. http://www.nedeljnik.rs/nedeljnik/portalnews/zasto-je-neizbezan-novi-rat-na-balkanu/. Last accessed 17 October 2016.

[87] http://www.situation.ru/app/rs/lib/kozhinov2/kozhinov22.htm. The original Russian transliteration reads as follows:

I chto zhe vek tebe prines?
Bezumiye i opyt.
Byt’ il’ ne byt’ — takov vopros,
On tvoy vsegda, Yevropa.

[88] Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev (1991). Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i izbrannye pis’ma, t. 1. (Moscow: Nauka) 90, 92-93.

[89] Maria Todorova (1997). Imagining the Balkans. (London: Oxford University Press) 455, 17.

[90] Ibid., 59.

[91] From an introduction written by the president of the 1913 Balkan Commission, Baron d’Estournelles. See: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (1914). Report of the International Commission to Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars. (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace) 3. http://www.pollitecon.com/html/ebooks/Carnegie-Report-on-the-Balkan-Wars.pdf. Last accessed 24 October 2016.

[92] Ketevan Kakitelashvili (2012). “Reconstruction of History and Nation Building in the Post-Cold War Era: South Caucasus and the Balkans.” In The Balkans and Caucasus: Parallel Processes on the Opposite Sides of the Black Sea, Ivan Biliarsky, Ovidiu Cristea & Anca Oroveanu, Eds. (Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing) 218.

[93] Ibid.

[94] George F. Kennan (1993). “The Balkan Crisis: 1913 and 1993.” The New York Review of Books (15 July 1993). http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1993/07/15/the-balkan-crisis-1913-and-1993/. Last accessed 24 October 2016.

[95] “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on Syria.” The White House Office of the Press Secretary, 10 September 2013. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/10/remarks-president-address-nation-syria. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[96] Lionel Beehner (2013). “No Pinpricks? We Only Do Pinpricks.” The Atlantic [published online 15 October 2013]. http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/no-pinpricks-we-em-only-em-do-pinpricks/280566/. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[97] James F. Jeffrey (2014). “The Pinprick President.” Foreign Policy [published online 15 August 2014]. http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/08/15/the-pinprick-president/. Last accessed 15 October 2016.

[98] Sven F. Kraemer (2015). Inside the Cold War From Marx to Reagan: An Unprecedented Guide to the Roots, History, Strategies, and Key Documents of the Cold War. (Lanham, MD: University Press of America) 515.

[99] Gary Kasparov (2015). “Putin Takes a Victory Lap While Obama Watches.” The Wall Street Journal [published online 29 September 2015]. http://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-takes-a-victory-lap-while-obama-watches-1443568463. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[100] “Is Russia waging a lukewarm war on the West?” http://www.gezatatrallyay.com/single-post/2015/10/12/Russia’s-International-Strategy. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[101] “Waffenhilfe ist überfällig.” Neue Zürcher Zeitung [published online in German 21 September 2011]. http://www.nzz.ch/meinung/kommentare/waffenhilfe-ist-ueberfaellig-1.18478621. Last accessed 14 October 2016.

[102] “X” [George F. Kennan pseud.] (1947). “The Sources of Soviet Conduct.” Foreign Affairs. 25:4 (July 1947). https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/1947-07-01/sources-soviet-conduct. Last accessed 24 October 2016.

Georgia: Coalition Of 22 NGOs Calls For Clarity In Russia Policy

0
0

(Civil.Ge) — Twenty-two Georgian NGOs, mostly think-tanks and watchdogs, which came together as the Coalition for Euro-Atlantic Georgia this September, said in a statement that the government should persist in pushing back against Russian occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. They have warned against any initiatives that might blur such approach and create an “illusion of yielding to occupation”. They also said that civil society groups should be involved closer in devising the government’s approach.

The statement comes at the heels of the widely publicized interview with MP candidate Salome Zourabichvili, who said defining Russia as the occupying power in Georgia’s legislation is counterproductive to diplomatic efforts. Zourabichvili, who served as Georgia’s Foreign Minister in 2004-2005, is running for the parliament as an independent candidate, but has support from the ruling Georgian Dream – Democratic Georgia (GDDG) party.

In the statement, the Coalition called for maintaining the reversal of Russia’s occupation as Georgia’s key foreign policy priority in dialogue with its international partners. They also spoke for maintaining the Geneva International Discussions – a multilateral format presided over by the EU Special Representative – as the key venue for discussions with Russia.

The Coalition spoke against “any attempts or calls” for the creation of the new venues for bilateral dialogue with Russia. They have suggested to refine the current bilateral talks on humanitarian matters that are led by the Special Representative of the Georgian Prime Minister Zurab Abashidze and Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Gregory Karasin. The Coalition says Georgian representative should have the status similar to his Russian counterpart, while his mandate should be more clearly defined.

Foreign Minister Mikheil Janelidze told reporters on October 28 that the Georgian government’s policy towards Russian occupation “is absolutely clear and result-oriented”. He added that Georgian diplomats are “working actively” in all international venues where Georgian-Russian conflict and occupation are discussed.

Saudi Arabia: Global Outrage Over Houthi Missile Attack Targeting Mecca

0
0

The ballistic missile launched by the Houthi militias targeting the holy city of Makkah late on Thursday evoked worldwide condemnation on Friday with foreign ambassadors in Riyadh, key world leaders and prominent organizations joining Saudi society in unequivocally denouncing the “heinous act.”

In a uniform voice, ambassadors in the capital slammed the attack. The missile was intercepted by Saudi ground forces and downed 65 km from the holy city of Makkah.

German Ambassador Dieter W. Haller said: “We condemn this kind of attacks in strongest possible terms.” He said it is important for all stakeholders on Yemen to resume peace talks to find a solution according to the
UN resolutions as proposed by its envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed.

Speaking to Arab News on telephone from the US, Norwegian Ambassador Rolf Willy Hansen said the attack would be condemned by all peace-loving people. “I sincerely feel that these matters could be settled at a negotiating table peacefully.”

Finland’s Ambassador Pekka Voutilainen said: “That kind of missile attack on Saudi soil has to be condemned in the strongest possible words. It is not acceptable.” He said the UN has come with a road map to restore peace in Yemen. Houthi militias doing this will disturb the peace process, which is important to restore the political stability.

Indian Ambassador Ahmad Javed said: “Targeting a holy place must be strongly denounced.”

Belgian Ambassador Geert Criel said: “We are shocked by the attack on Saudi territory by the Houthi militias. This is absolutely unacceptable.” He said he hoped the cease-fire would continue in order to achieve the goal of the UN peace talks to restore political stability in Yemen.

Pakistan Ambassador Manzoor Ul Haq said: “The news of a missile attack targeting the holy city is shocking for every Muslim. We strongly condemn any attack against Makkah or any other part of the Kingdom.”

Turkish Ambassador Yunis Demirer said: “We strongly condemn the missile launch by Houthi militias toward Makkah, the most sacred place for Muslims … We are relieved by the fact that the Saudi defense forces were able to intercept and destroy the missile.” He added: “Our Foreign Ministry also issued a separate statement condemning this attack.”

Bangladesh Ambassador Golam Moshi told Arab News that his country strongly condemns the heinous act of the Houthis. “This is not an attack on Saudi Arabia, it is willful aggression on Islam,” he said.
“Under the able leadership of Premier Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh is prepared to send its troops to protect the holy cities of Makkah and Madinah,” the envoy said.

Meanwhile, Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir said the attack has not only violated the peace agreement but also targeted Makkah, where Muslims from all parts of the world come for pilgrimage.

Arab coalition spokesman Brig. Gen. Ahmed Al-Assiri said: “Targeting the holiest place on the earth with a ballistic missile last night reveals the fake slogans of Houthi militias.”

Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Secretary-General Abdullatif Al-Zayani expressed the bloc’s strong condemnation of the attack.

“The GCC considers the brutal assault, which violates the sanctity of this country, a provocation for Muslims. It shows the Houthi disregard for Islamic holy sites. It is evident of the Houthi refusal to follow the will of the international community and their decisions to reach a political solution to the crisis,” Al-Zayani said in a statement.

Ahmed Aboul Gheit, secretary-general of the Arab League, pointed out that the attack was an unacceptable violation of the sanctity of the holy land. In a statement, Aboul Gheit said this is a serious escalation by the Houthi militias.

Describing the attack as a gross violation of the sanctity of the House of Allah, Shoura Council Speaker Abdullah Al-Asheikh said it is a blatant attack supported by the Iranian regime’s agents in Yemen. Al-Asheikh pledged the council’s support to all measures taken by the Saudi government to protect the sovereignty, security and stability of the country.

The Muslim World League said the attack has violated the sanctity of the holy place and also hurt the sentiments of the world Muslims.

UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed tweeted: “The Iranian regime supports a terrorist group which targets the holy city of Makkah. Is this an Islamic regime as it claims?”

Jordanian government spokesman Mohammed Al-Momani said that “such heinous acts serve neither the Yemeni cause, nor the Arab and Muslim causes.”

“Any attack against holy places would expand the cycle of violence,” Al-Momani said, while reiterating calls to adhere to legitimacy and restore security of Yemen.

Bahrain Foreign Minister Khaled bin Ahmad Al-Khalifah said: “Targeting Makkah is not only a violation of all international covenants, but it’s the biggest crime ever.”

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry said: “This is an outrageous aggression against the sanctity of the holiest Islamic shrine and a provocation for the religious sentiments of millions of Muslims around the world.”
Doha reiterated support to relentless Saudi efforts to ensure regional security and stability and its efforts to achieve peace in Yemen.

Egypt described the attack as “a dangerous development which targeted the innocent people who came for the pilgrimage.”

Bulgaria’s Georgieva Resigns EU Commission To Join World Bank

0
0

By Aline Robert

(EurActiv) — European Union Commission Vice-President Kristalina Georgieva resigned on Friday (28 October) to take a job at the World Bank.

Bulgaria’s European Commissioner for the Budget and Human Resources will leave Brussels by the end of the year to become director-general of the World Bank in Washington. This is a major defeat for the Juncker Commission, which was already weakened by Brexit and the refugee crisis.

Georgieva is widely liked by her staff and has a reputation as a “hard worker”, according to one civil servant.

Embattled Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said he regretted Georgieva’s decision, but that “the work of the European Commission must go on”.

Juncker has once again given the Budget and Human resources portfolio to German Commissioner Günther Oettinger, who briefly stood in for Georgieva in September, while she was standing for the position of UN Secretary-General.

On that occasion, a lack of support from the main members of the Security Council cost her the job, despite the feeling that it was time for a woman to lead the UN. The job at the World Bank could be seen as a consolation prize for a political fighter who is noticeably more active in Brussels than some of her fellow Commissioners.

Georgieva’s regular disagreements with Martin Selmayr, Juncker’s head of cabinet, are surely one of the reasons behind her decision to leave the executive. After Jonathan Hill, she is the second Commissioner to have resigned in the space of just four months.

Social Sciences And Humanities In Afghanistan: What Really Is At Stake? – OpEd

0
0

The problem of social sciences and humanities in Afghanistan is complicated by one simple fact: in the age of the so-called “war on terror,” Afghanistan is not only a topic for social scientists, but also a concern for government officials.

As a result, Afghanistan Studies are not merely scientific, but political and strategic, since they secure and serve the national security of (Western) countries. Therefore, the initial task of think tanks, consultants, and researchers is to, first and foremost, approach Afghanistan in terms of Policy, Plan and Program (PPP).

As the security and strategic objectives in Afghanistan increase, the mentioned model of PPP also becomes increasingly popular by providing practical advice in areas as diverse as financial forecasting, social surveying, and counterinsurgency analysis.

In a sense, the PPP model seeks a notion of social sciences in Afghanistan that has the potential to become an organization of counseling services and thus could be involved in an advisory role with authorities. A number of examples of such a function can be found in the vast archive of the research-based organizations: their assessment reports, survey forms, datasets, statistical tables, frequency graphs, policy evaluations, opinion polls and so forth. To a large extent, the PPP model, from the inception of war on terror until the present day, has been oriented towards practical social sciences and humanities in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, for reasons that will be discussed, the PPP model is one of the major obstacles in the way of a successful formation of social sciences as an independent, localized and mature discipline.

Understanding Afghanistan as Policy, Plan and Program reveals a tendency for collaboration between academia and the private sector. The private sector and its demand for policy-relevant knowledge gained a fresh momentum in the post 9/11 era. As a result, dozens of organizations emerged trying to provide policy-relevant information on state building, peace building, and development. Accordingly, the dense growth of such organizations strengthened the private sector in the field of knowledge and contributed to influence the research priorities, research funding, and researcher’s motivation. Under such circumstances, academia and private sector were bound together as an organic whole, which is a condition that has prevented social sciences from being independently motivated, well organized, and well disciplined.

With shifts in social sciences to counseling services and ultimately to more dependency on funding agencies, Afghan scholars are no longer involved with the permanent institution of science, (such as the university) but rather with (private) organizations of science. These organizations, which are often dedicated to strategic studies, evaluation/monitoring, conflict resolutions, and human rights development, set competitive market in which social scientists must compete for more funding and better opportunities. Private organizations in Afghanistan are, thereby, accorded to the leading role in producing knowledge; however, as they rely on the short-term policy goals, their production turns out to be short-sighted, fragmented, and less comprehensive than it should be.

This unsustainable knowledge system forces social scientists to confront a series of dilemmas and pitfalls, most of which relate to the fragile intra-university coherence. Here, the university is a unity in which social scientists share their standards, accords, ideals, moral conventions, protocols, meanings and scientific jargon. These characteristics stand to the progression of the school of thoughts, academic journals, and production of knowledge and theory. From this perspective, the lack of epistemic consensus among Afghan social scientists, their poor contribution to theoretical literature, and the low number of university journals must be considered signs of an unsustainable university system. In this system, social scientists would be more occupied with doing commissioned research, rather than with academic life, with individual vocation rather than with the scientific participation, with organizations rather than the university.

The massive shift of social sciences we are witnessing in Afghanistan from academic-self-governance to corporate enterprise gives a perspective as to how social sciences and humanities are directed according to the PPP model. Taking the above arguments into consideration, the dominant model of Afghanistan as Policy, Plan, and Program is detrimental on three accounts. First, it strengthens the private sector at the cost of university autonomy. Second, it disturbs the independent research community. Finally, as part of our conclusion, it inhibits the social science from being rich, productive, and a comprehensive discipline.

The social sciences and humanities in Afghanistan need to be confronted with an alternative model, but the question is how. This is a point at which the PPP model ceases to be of any particular significance to us. Rather, we should go beyond the bounds of such a model to support the Personalized, Participatory, and Pioneer inquiry.

*Nima Zahedi Nameghi, ​Researcher for Centre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche sur l’Afrique et le Moyen – Orient (Interdisciplinary Center for Research on Africa and the Middle East.

Viewing all 73339 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images