By Liz Fuller

(RFE/RL)  — Over the past two months, Chechnya has entered a new phase of instability that differs in several key regards from the sporadic low-level insurgency of the past 16 years.

That violence has already cost some 30 lives. It has also arguably demonstrated just how hollow Chechen Republic head Ramzan Kadyrov’s claims to total control over the region really are. Kadyrov’s classic response of systematic reprisals and large-scale detentions is likely to fuel the nascent discontent behind those attacks, however, rather than contain, let alone quash, it.

The new upsurge in violence marks the definitive end of a lull that followed the killing four years ago of Chechen insurgency commanders Khusein and Muslim Gakayev. It was those two brothers, together with strategist Aslambek Vadalov, who were said to have been behind the high-profile suicide attacks against Kadyrov’s native village of Khosi-Yurt in August 2010 and the Chechen parliament two months later.

The remaining nucleus of experienced militants — men in their 30s and 40s who had participated in the wars of 1994-96 and 1999-2000 — are believed to have left Chechnya for Syria to join the armed opposition to President Bashar al-Assad after the abortive December 2014 attack on Grozny.

Since mid-December, the Chechen authorities have reported a series of clashes between police and security personnel and mostly young assailants who in contrast to the Gakayevs’ hardened and experienced guerrilla fighters appear to be poorly armed and have little, if any, previous combat experience.

The first such attacks took place in Grozny on December 17-18; seven fighters and four police were reported killed in several separate incidents. Three wounded fighters, including a young woman, who were apprehended and hospitalized were reportedly executed days later.

Some three weeks later, Chechen police and security personnel launched a mass “sweep” operation in eight villages southeast of Grozny, taking into custody between 60 and 100 young men suspected of planning “terrorist attacks” at the behest of the extremist group Islamic State (IS). At least four, and possibly as many as 10, young men were killed in a pitched battle, the details of which remain unclear.

Then during the night of January 29-30, three young men aged between 18 and 20 were reported killed in a shoot-out with police in the southern district of Shali in which two police officers also died. Again, official accounts of what happened are contradictory. Some sources say the three attacked a police post, others that they were killed when police sought to check their identities.

In a separate incident late on January 25, a man who had been apprehended on suspicion of “extremism” and taken to a Grozny police station for interrogation succeeded in grabbing an automatic weapon and shooting four police officers before he too was shot dead.

As RFE/RL’s North Caucasus Service pointed out in the wake of the Shali shootings, the recent incidents mark a new departure. The assailants are, according to police reports, mostly young, in their late teens or early 20s, which means that they have never known a time when the Kadyrov dynasty was not in power. Some of them are reportedly the sons of fighters killed during or after the 1999-2000 war.

Unlike earlier generations of Chechen fighters who perceived Russia as their primary foe, and therefore focused their attacks on Russian military personnel, the new wave are single-minded in targeting the “kadyrovtsy” — the police and security forces recruited by Kadyrov to serve as his private army, and whose reputation for gratuitous brutality rivals his.

Yet it seems that even some “kadyrovtsy” are ready to make common cause with the disaffected: Alikhan Muzayev, one of Kadyrov’s personal bodyguards, was reportedly executed in mid-January on suspicion of having plotted with fellow villagers an armed attack on the Chechen authorities.

As noted above, the Chechen authorities routinely attribute any manifestation of armed defiance to the successful efforts of IS recruiters. This may be true of some attackers, given that video footage posted online after the December attacks in Grozny showed 11 men who appear to have been the perpetrators swearing allegiance, in some cases in broken Arabic, to IS.

The wounded attackers apprehended in Grozny in December, and one of the men apprehended in January, reportedly confessed to acting on orders from IS. But even if those confessions were genuine, rather than extracted under torture, it is still possible that at least in some other cases, the young men who resorted to violence were motivated simply by a profound hatred of Kadyrov and his regime.

The Chechen authorities’ reaction to the upsurge in violence has been twofold: first, to punish the relatives of the young attackers by taking them into custody for questioning for days on end, dismissing them from their jobs, and convening meetings at which their neighbors demand their expulsion from Chechnya.

The father of Magomed Rashidov, a young Chechen allegedly in Syria on whose orders the three men killed in Shali late last month were reportedly acting, was induced to publicly disown him. It should, however, be noted in this context that Kadyrov appears to have taken to heart Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stern injunction that it is illegal to torch the homes of slain insurgents.

Meanwhile, as noted above, dozens of young men suspected of having fallen victim to IS propaganda have been taken into custody on suspicion of planning further attacks. The most recent such detention was that on January 31 of seven young men from the northeastern Sholkolvsky district suspected of either planning an attack on local police, or preparing to leave Russia for Syria. All seven were reportedly under the age of 25.

As for Kadyrov, he has resorted yet again to the ploy of identifying ever new internal enemies and threats against which the population should be on their guard, including the emergence of a heretical purportedly Islamic sect, and the lure of Internet games such as Blue Whale, which has been blamed for driving adolescents to suicide.

Oddly, Kadyrov has not publicly identified as a threat Isa Yamadayev, whom Novaya Gazeta recently identified as the mastermind behind a plot last year to assassinate him. Reports have suggested that Kadyrov was behind the killings of Yamadayev’s brothers Ruslan and Sulim in 2008 and 2009, respectively.

At the same time, Kadyrov may be exaggerating the threat posed by IS to bring back under his control those Interior Ministry and other armed detachments that were made subordinate last year to the newly formed National Guard. It was National Guard units that conducted the “sweep” operation in mid-January.

Last week, Kadyrov appointed as first deputy commander of the National Guard units based in Chechnya his personal security adviser, Daniil Martynov.

A poll conducted by RFE/RL’s North Caucasus Service reinforces the perception that Kadyrov’s strategy of countering violent protest with new reprisals might prove counterproductive. Asked how best to respond to threats or pressure from the “kadyrovtsy,” just 2 percent of respondents advocated complying with their demands, while 8 percent advocated standing up to them. A majority — 45 percent — considered the optimum course of action leaving Chechnya, or better, emigrating, while 39 percent favored soliciting the support of trusted friends to “deal with the ‘kadyrovtsy’ on the quiet.”

By Sinem Cengiz*

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will be on a four-day Gulf tour, during which he will visit important countries of the region. Political and economic relations, as well as regional issues — particularly the conflict in Syria and chaos in Iraq — will be on his agenda.

The visit could be considered a continuation of Erdogan’s significant meetings with foreign leaders. Last month, he paid a four-day visit to three eastern and southern African countries. Following his return to Turkey, British Prime Minister Theresa May became the first Western leader to visit him since last year’s failed coup attempt. This was followed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s visit this month.

Days before Erdogan’s Gulf tour, CIA Director Mike Pompeo visited Turkey, his first trip abroad under the new administration of US President Donald Trump. Ankara, which was frustrated with the previous administration, is seeking a fresh start with Washington. The same goes for Saudi Arabia, another US regional ally. So relations with the new administration are likely to be discussed between Turkish and Gulf leaders.

Also this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin ratified the Turk Stream pipeline deal to take natural gas from Russia to Europe via Turkey. Meanwhile, Turkey’s Culture and Tourism Minister Nabi Avcı visited Israel, the first high-ranking Turkish official to do so since the rapprochement between Ankara and Tel Aviv.

In light of all these visits, meetings and agreements, Erdogan’s Gulf visit gains significance. Turkish government and Syrian rebel sources on Wednesday said Ankara-backed forces had taken the outskirts of Al-Bab, northeast of Aleppo. During his meetings, Erdogan will seek support from Turkey’s Gulf allies regarding its position on Syria. The Saudi and Qatari approaches on Syria are particularly crucial for Ankara.

Turkish interest in the Gulf has risen significantly in the past few years. It has political and economic motives behind its close relations with the region, which provides fertile ground for Turkey’s strategy of having an influential presence in the entire region.

Besides political issues, economy plays a vital role in Turkish-Gulf ties. This week, the Saudi-Turkish coordination council held its first meeting in Ankara under the chairmanship of Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu and his Saudi counterpart Adel Al-Jubeir.

While there are bilateral military and economic agreements, both countries seek to boost trade further. Saudi firms have significant investments in the Turkish defense industry, and this week the new Saudi ambassador presented his letter of credentials to Erdogan.

Also this week, senior Turkish and Emirati officials met in Ankara to discuss economic and trade relations between their two countries, which recently broke the ice after a cooling of ties due to differing positions on the military coup in Egypt in 2013.

Under King Salman, Turkish-Saudi relations have entered a new phase. He and Erdogan have frequent phone calls and are on the same page regarding regional issues.

Turkey and Qatar enjoy good relations. Almost every month, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani is in Turkey to meet with officials. Besides several bilateral agreements, these frequent visits demonstrate how the Ankara-Doha partnership has grown beyond trade and common diplomacy.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia were the first countries to stand by Turkey following the failed coup attempt. This was important for Erdogan amid weak reaction from traditional Western allies, with whom mutual distrust has increased recently. Also, the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) became the first international organization to designate the Gulen movement as terrorist. The absence of the movement’s schools in Gulf countries is a relief for Ankara.

During his visit, Erdogan is expected to once more raise the issue of a free-trade agreement between Turkey and Gulf countries that would help regional development, and reiterate his call for Arab investment in Turkey.

Investments from Gulf countries, including real-estate purchases by their nationals, has a significant impact on Turkey’s economy, which is struggling due to growing terrorist acts. Gulf money is considered an alternative to investment from the West.

So during his tour, Erdogan will seek Gulf support for Turkey’s position on Syria, explain domestic developments since the failed coup attempt, and seek Gulf support for Turkey’s struggling economy and ways to boost tourism in the country. In consideration of all these expectations, Turkey seems to be showing that its relations with the Gulf are part of a long-term strategy.

*Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes mainly in issues regarding Turkey’s relations with the Middle East. She can be reached on Twitter @SinemCngz.

Senior Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh revealed on Saturday that Qatar is set to allocate millions of dollars in financial support for different projects in the besieged Gaza Strip.

During a ceremony granting housing to Gazans whose homes were destroyed during the last Israeli military offensive on the small territory in 2014 that left tens of thousands homeless, Haniyeh announced that Qatar agreed to allocate $100 million in funds for housing reconstruction projects every year.

Saturday’s ceremony initiated the second stage of a Qatari reconstruction project known as Hamad City.

The first stage of the residential project, located in Khan Yunis, will reportedly house 860 beneficiaries in 1,060 residential units, who were selected through an electronic draw.

The residential project consists of three phases.

The Hamas official also said that Qatar agreed to build a hospital in Rafah city in the southern Gaza Strip at a cost of $21 million.

In addition, $10 million were donated to build a hospital in the Gaza Strip for people with special needs, Haniyeh said.

Haniyeh said Qatar also agreed to give a $30 million bank guarantee to start work on a new electricity line from Israel, known as project 161.

Coordination is ongoing between Qatar and Turkey to try to alleviate Gaza’s electricity crisis, added Haniyeh.

Qatar also agreed to contract Palestinian teachers from the Gaza Strip to work in Qatari schools.

By Jorge Valero

(EurActiv) — Eurozone and IMF officials met with Greek Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalotos on Friday to overcome the stalemate in the bailout programme after the lenders agreed to request an additional €3.6 billion in cuts by 2018.

The Europeans and the IMF enjoyed a bitter dispute over the last months about the fiscal situation the country will reach once the rescue programme is completed in 2018.

The bloc believes that Athens would reach the agreed 3.5% of GDP primary surplus target (before the payment of debt obligations). The Europeans also believe that the ailing country would be capable of maintaining this budgetary surplus over the next few years.

But the Fund concluded that Greece would reach only 1.5% of GDP of primary surplus by 2018. Moreover, according to its updated debt sustainability analysis, the country is on an “explosive” trajectory.

Both sides finally reached an agreement today. The lenders reached a breakthrough before the looming elections in the Netherlands (March) and France (April and May) further complicating the political landscape.

Some officials were concerned that if no deal was reached by mid-February, Athens could default on a €7.5 billion payment due in July.

But Dijsselbloem played down these risks and said “the stories of crises are greatly exaggerated”.

“Reform in Greece is going slowly, but indeed it’s going in the right direction,” he added.

The leaders agreed on requesting additional efforts from Greece worth 1% of its GDP (€1.6 billion) both in 2017 and 2018.

These adjustments would come from broadening the tax base and on pension cuts, officials told Reuters.

The additional austerity dose would hardly be accepted by the government led by Alexis Tsipras. The leftwing Greek leader promised not to impose further cuts or tax raises after almost seven years of painful measures adopted in exchange for the lenders’ money.

The Greeks have also opposed further pension adjustments, as it has adopted 11 cuts since 2010.

Avoid ‘panic sessions’

The meeting on Friday was kept largely a secret, and it was not confirmed that a statement would be issued with the results, sources told Euractiv.

It was expected that Managing Director of the ESM Klaus Regling and senior representatives from the IMF and the European Commission would also attend the meeting, together with Tsakalotos and Dijsselbloem.

An official told De Volskrant, a Dutch newspaper, that the reason for the secrecy was “to avoid a repeat of the panic sessions that characterised 2010-2015″.

The disagreement on the budgetary situation and the debt trajectory for the next decades went public over the last weeks, as IMF and European officials discredited each others’ analysis about the country.

Regling wrote in the Financial Times that “a sober” look at Greece’s outstanding debt proved there was “no cause for alarm”.

But IMF chief Christine Lagarde told her European partners that the Fund’s analysis “tried in full honesty to be… ruthless truth tellers”.

Greece’s public debt peaked at 181.6% of GDP in 2016, and it is expected to decrease to 172.4% of GDP in 2018, according to the Commission.

The primary surplus target is only part of Greece’s problems.

Some estimate that Greece still needs to complete half of the reforms (prior actions) requested by its lenders to unblock €6.1 billion from the €86 billion bailout programme.

The new adjustments would come against the backdrop of a still delicate economic situation. Although the country registered a 1.8% of GDP growth in the last quarter of 2018, its unemployment level of 23% is the highest among its EU partners.

Reports from the Arctic are getting pretty grim.

The latest, from a blog called Arctic News, warns that by 2026 — that’s just nine years from now — warming above the Arctic Circle could be so extreme that a massively disrupted and weakened jet stream could lead to global temperature rises so severe that a massive extinction event, including humans, could result.

This latest blog post, written by Arctic News editor Sam Carana, draws on research by a number of scientists (linked in his article), who report on various feedback loops that will result from a dramatically warmer north polar region. But the critical concern, he says, is methane already starting to be released in huge quantities from the shallow sea floor of the continental shelves north of Siberia and North America. That methane, produced by bacteria acting on biological material that sinks to the sea floor, for the most part, is currently lying frozen in a form of ice that is naturally created over millions of years by a mixing of methane and water, called a methane hydrate. Methane hydrate is a type of molecular structure called a clathrate. Clathrates are a kind of cage, in this case made of water ice, which traps another chemical, in this case methane. At normal temperatures, above the freezing temperature of water, these clathrates can only form under high pressures, such as a 500 meters or more under the ocean, and indeed such clathrates can be found under the sea floor even in places like the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, where the temperature is 8-10 degrees above freezing. But in colder waters, they can exist and remain stable at much shallower levels, such as a in a few hundred feet of water off the coast of Alaska or Siberia.

The concern is that if the Arctic Ocean waters, particularly nearer to shore, were to warm even slightly, as they will do as the ice cap vanishes in summer and becomes much thinner in winter, at some point the clathrates there will suddenly dissolve releasing tens of thousands of gigatons of methane in huge bursts. Already, scientists are reporting that portions of the ocean, as well as shallow lakes in the far north, look as though they are boiling, as released methane bubbles to the surface, sometimes in such concentrations that they can be lit on fire with a match as they surface.

As Carana writes:

“As the temperature of the Arctic Ocean keeps rising, it seems inevitable that more and more methane will rise from its seafloor and enter the atmosphere, at first strongly warming up the atmosphere over the Arctic Ocean itself – thus causing further methane eruptions – and eventually warming up the atmosphere across the globe.”

That is scary enough, as a sufficient burst of methane, a global warming gas 86 times more powerful than CO2, could lead to a rapid rise in global temperatures by 3 degrees Celsius or more, enough to actually reverse the carbon cycle, so that plants would end up releasing more carbon into the atmosphere rather than absorbing it.

Is this scenario or a giant methane “burp” from the Arctic sea floor just a scare story?

Not according to many scientists who study the earth’s long history of global warming periods and of evolution and periodic mass extinction events.

As Harold Wanless, a Professor of Geology and a specialist in sea level rise at the University of Miami explains, prior warming periods have often proceeded in dramatic pulses, not smoothly over drawn-out periods.

“We don’t know how this period of warming is going to develop,” he said. “That’s the problem. The warming Arctic Ocean is just ice melting, but the melting permafrost in Siberia, and the methane hydrates under the shallow waters of the continental shelf can happen suddenly. Every model gets the trend, but they don’t give you the rate that it happens or when something sudden happens.”

Wanless, who has for some time been predicting ice melting rates and resulting sea level rises that are far in excess of what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been predicting — as much as 10 feet by 2050 and 15 or 20 feet by the end of this century, vs. just three feet for the IPCC — says, “Scientists tend to be pretty conservative. We don’t like to scare people, and we don’t like to step out of our little predictable boxes. But I suspect the situation is going to spin out of hand pretty quickly.” He says, “If you look at the history of warming periods, things can move pretty fast, and when that happens that’s when you get extinction events.”

He adds, “I would not discount the possibility that it could happen in the next ten years.”

Making matters worse, Wanless adds, is the fact that a large enough methane eruption in the arctic, besides contributing to accelerated global warming, could also lead to a significant reduction of the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere (currently about 21%). This is because methane in the atmosphere breaks down fairly quickly, over the course of a decade or so, into water vapor and CO2, but in doing do, it requires oxygen atoms, which it would pull out of the atmosphere. That reduction in oxygen would lead to reduced viability and growth rates of plants and animals, as well as to a significant reduction in crop productivity. This dire trend would be enhanced by a second threat to atmospheric oxygen, which is the oxygen-producing plankton in the ocean. If sea temperatures rise much, and increased acidification of the ocean continues apace as the oceans absorb more CO2, plankton, the earth’s main producers of new oxygen, could shut down that source of new free oxygen.

So there you have it my fellow humans: it’s at least possible that we could be looking at an epic extinction event, caused by ourselves, which could include exterminating our own species, or at least what we call “civilization,” in as little as nine years.

What is particularly galling, in thinking about this, is the prospect that eight of those last years might find us living in a country led by Donald Trump, a climate-change denier who seems hell-bent on promoting measures, like extracting more oil from the Canadian tar sands, the North Dakota Bakkan shale fields and the Arctic sea floor, as well as re-opening coal mines, that will just make such a dystopian future even more likely than it already is.

The only “bright side” to this picture is that it may not matter that much what Trump does, because we’ve already, during the last eight Obama years and the last eight Bush years before that, dithered away so much time that the carbon already in the atmosphere — about 405 ppm — has long since passed the 380 ppm level at which, during the last warming period of the earth, sea levels were 100 feet higher than they are today.

That is to say, we’re already past the point of no return and it’s just the lag being caused by the time it takes for ice sheets to melt and for the huge ocean heat sinks to warm in response to the higher carbon levels in the atmosphere that is saving us from facing this disaster right now.

It is at this stage of the game either too late to stop, or we should be embarking on a global crash program to reduce carbon emissions the likes of which humanity has never known or contemplated.

Hard to imagine that happening though, particularly here in a country where half the people don’t even think climate change is happening, or if they do notice things getting warmer, think that’s just a peachy thing that will reduce their heating bills.

Australia’s prime minister has been politically tone deaf for the duration of his tenure, which was won by the political assassination of his predecessor, Tony Abbott. Since being in power, he has squandered a workable majority, been held in a headlock by reactionaries in his party, and looking every bit the straw man of politics. As he withers, opponents within and without feed remorselessly.

While this slide into oblivion has taken place, the global brushfire of populism has done its bit to rattle a few of Australia’s politicians. Generally speaking, the soil for revolt in Australia has generally been infertile, much like most of the hostile continent.

There have been sharp moments of inspired anger, usually confined to the agrarian and blue-collar segments of the population. Be it the disaffected worker, or the farmer at risk of losing his or her property, such individuals provide potentially rich pickings for demagogues and party strategists.

Again, such protests have been generally contained in brief spurts of electoral indignation: Pauline Hanson’s One Nation successes in Queensland in the 1990s, for instance, and, then the party’s resurgence among other curious fruit salad choices for the Australian federal senate in the last election.

Australian voters have generally detested those “pointy-headed” intellectual types, let alone anything remotely resembling cerebral noise: there has, in fact, been very little need to engineer a broad war against the experts, since they were never liked to begin with. Pragmatism remains cult and practice down under. Revolutionary potential there remains modest.

At heart, Australia remains, essentially, a conservative society more interested in interest rates and franked dividends than broader arguments about liberties, the grand vision of its place in the world or the vanishing society. Even Prime Minister Turnbull has publicly reneged on his Republican vision, preferring to praise Australia’s titular head of state, the Queen.

Protest against the Trans Pacific Partnership has been, relative to counterparts in the US and Europe, murmurings of regret. The sovereign surrender of the country to both the unelected corporation and the United States as bully are features that are occasionally acknowledged, though never seriously.

This is the context with which Senator Cory Bernardi, one of Australia’s true reactionary conservatives, has been working within. As far back as 2014, he was already telling the National Press Club that voters were gravitating towards independents and minor parties – the big don’ts of the country’s politics – as “a popular response to a perception of cowardice and distrust of the major parties.”

Dazzled by his time in New York on secondment to the United Nations, he returned to Australia convinced that there was something coursing in the waters. He was so convinced he started giving Turnbull a splitting headache, snipingly suggesting that his leader had lost, or at the very least misplaced, the plot. Kellyanne Conway, one of the architects of Trump’s victory, loomed in his consciousness.

“The past weeks,” he said reflecting on his New York sojourn with callow optimism, “have been enlightening and filled with amazing experiences. In a sense, they have extended my understanding of what is possible and reinforced my knowledge of what needs to be done.”

His Damascus conversion meant the need to leave the Liberal Party, the bosom that had nurtured and warmed his conservative instincts for years. “My time in the USA has made me realise I have to be part of that change, perhaps even in some way a catalyst for it.”

Modest to a fault. “If you didn’t love a guy who was so in love with himself, you’d have a lot of trouble living with Cory,” observed his wife, Sinead. As far as ego is concerned, Bernardi has it in bucket loads.

His brief speech on the reasons why he was leaving the Liberal Party cherry pick the populist tree with self-serving grit. “There are few, if any, who can claim that respect for politics and politicians is stronger now than it was a decade ago.” (For those familiar with Aussie-gazing, Australians have never deemed politics a genuinely admirable pursuit now or then.)

According to Bernardi, “the body politic is failing the people of Australia and it’s clear we need to find a better way.” The major parties had been a cause of “public disenchantment,” a “direct product of the political class being out of touch with the hopes and aspirations of the Australian people.”

Political tribalism in Australia deems such acts of defection and independence as perfidious. It reeks of the rat fleeing briskly from a sinking ship; it suggests a level of intelligence and opportunism higher than the primitive collective.

“Acts of disloyalty and failing to stand by your commitments,” comments Paul Colgan, “are hallmark drivers of the type of voter cynicism which Bernardi is railing against.” Having been elected a Senator on the conservative ticket, “he will now enjoy five years of using that platform against them, while sitting in the Senate trousering $200,000 a year in taxpayers’ money as salary.”

What are, then, his chances in driving this new party? Small, if not microscopic. One Nation is far more likely to scoop a larger share, as would Family First. The church, one filled with sermons against climate change as a reality, the joys of the fossil fuel state, the evils of same-sex marriage, or the tyranny of progressivism, is already rather full and particularly noisy. Bernardi will find it hard finding a chair.

We can always say that Trump’s chances at political glory were similarly limited, with chances deemed so obscure the Huffington Post refused – initially – to cover his candidacy other than in its entertainment section.

But unlike Trump, Bernardi is a professional politician, the very figure of the establishment common room that many Australian voters would have trouble identifying with. The immediate future is more prosaic, though no less problematic for the government. It means that Turnbull will have a fully-fledged reactionary on the Right of the spectrum, a person outside the tent piddling in: a grim proposition for him indeed.

By Frank Kane*

By Mohammad Asef Ghazniwal*

Hamidullah, now 13, has changed school four times and spent two whole years out of education due to repeated sexual abuse from his teachers.

He had many traumatic memories, he told IWPR, recalling how at one school, his maths teacher would squeeze his cheeks and arms and ask, “Would you do a favour for me if I help you [in class]?”

“I had no idea what he was begging for,” Hamidullah said. “My friends told he meant he wanted me to do sexual things. I was so embarrassed and felt under so much pressure that I developed mental problems.”

The teacher continued to harass Hamidullah to the extent that eventually he was forced to change school.

The boy said that he now realized his experience was not uncommon, adding, “Students are sexually exploited at schools across Ghazni province, but they are too ashamed to tell anyone.”

IWPR has discovered an alarming rate of alleged abuse by teachers in conversations with more than 50 students across the southeastern province.

Education officials and the police say that they are aware of the problem, but say that legal action cannot be taken unless the families concerned press charges.

As in other societies, sexual abuse of children is a highly sensitive issue in Afghanistan. Most cases are never reported because of concerns about shame and honour, and because people have little faith in the judicial services. Since the justice system is not set up to cope, adult assailants often go unpunished.

Aslami, the head of the Sayed Ahmad Makei high school, said that he had repeatedly encountered the phenomenon over years of teaching in different schools across Ghazni.

“I know of several teachers who made unethical requests of their students,” he continued, adding that the issue was a problem throughout the school system and even at university.

Students risked failing their classes if they refused their teacher’s demands, Aslami said.

“So far, there have been no such complaints at the school that I’m in charge of, but this may be down to the fact that people are too ashamed to come forward,” he concluded.

That was the experience of Mohammad, another Ghazni student, who said he had faced such frequent sexual harassment from his teachers that he had been forced to change schools.

He recalled one incident in the eighth grade where a teacher had asked him for sex. In shock, Mohammad Jawid said that he had left the school in tears.

“I hadn’t imagine that an educator who I saw as a spiritual father figure would have made such demands,” he said, adding that he had many peers who had simply left school altogether to avoid such abuse.

The prospect of telling the head teacher was too shameful, he continued, meaning that most pupils in this situation preferred to stay quiet. This in turn meant that the abusers felt encouraged to make whatever demands they wanted of their charges.

Mohammadullah Sarir, an activist and a member of the Paiywand Social Institute, said that the problem was widespread in Ghazni.

“I am aware of such incidents,” he said, adding that he had heard reports of adolescent boys being abused and raped by their own teachers. “Many families have been forced to change their children’s schools or even taken them out of education entirely.”

Hassan Reza Yousefi, the secretary of the provincial council who also heads the education committee, agreed that the issue was very difficult to address without legal action.

Yousefi said that “sexual harassment, in addition to security threats and economic difficulties” had significantly reduced the number of children accessing education in both the capital and the districts.

In one instance, he continued, “I recall a young man claiming that he failed his exams because he had refused his teacher’s [sexual] demands.”

Zubair, a 16 year-old schoolboy, said that this was a tactic abusers frequently employed.

“There was one teacher who put pressure on the prettier boys at exam time, and would pass these students provided that they submitted to certain acts,” he said.

Another student, Qurban, recalled the fate that befell a classmate of his.

“One school teacher made sexual demands of him in return for awarding him good marks. He was then called to the teacher’s private office and raped.”

LACK OF LEGAL ACTION

Although officials acknowledge the problem, little action has been taken.

Mohammad Abed Abed, the director of Ghazni’s education department, agreed that sexual harassment and abuse was a problem at schools in the region, fuelled by Afghanistan’s history of war, poverty, and widespread illiteracy.

Abed said that his department was committed to addressing allegations of abuse and said that they had investigated one case of sexual harassment at a school in the province in 2015. But rather than legal action, there was an agreement for the teacher concerned to be exiled to a remote part of the province.

Mohammad Aziz Azimi, the spokesman of the Ghazni governor, also said that the problem needed to be tackled, but added that the only recent incident he was aware of had been that of a mullah teaching boys at a mosque.

The case was referred to the attorney general’s office but the student had in the end refused to give evidence and asked for the case to be closed, Abed noted.

Niyaz Mohamamd Nikyad, Ghazni’s chief prosecutor, said that this sequence of events was typical.

“Unfortunately, children are victimised through such abuse but legal action is rarely taken against those responsible as people are reluctant to go public,” he concluded.

Ghazni police chief Aminullah Amirkhail confirmed that there had been instances of sexual abuse reported at boys’ schools in the province. The police were prepared to make arrests if the families or students decided to press charges, he said.

Provincial council director Khaleghdad Akbari said that the media needed to help raise awareness of the problem. In addition, resources were also spread too thin.

“On one hand, the lack of security [in Ghazni] as well as all the criminal cases have kept police busy with other issues, and on the other, a lack of action from the judiciary has made people distrust the system.”

Azimi said that a cross-institutional approach needed to be adopted.

“It is necessary to discuss this issue with the education authorities,” he said. “The residents of Ghazni shouldn’t have to suffer such problems.”

This report was produced under IWPR’s Promoting Human Rights and Good Governance in Afghanistan initiative, funded by the European Union Delegation to Afghanistan. This article was published at IWPR’s ARR 567

А Russian lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) activist and another person have been missing since January 31, 2017, in the separatist-controlled area of the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine, and are feared to be victims of enforced disappearances, Human Rights Watch said. Human Rights Watch is concerned that the de facto authorities of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) have detained them and are refusing to acknowledge their detention.

Grey Violet, a Russian transgender person (also known as Oleg Vasilyev and Maria Shtern), and Victoria Miroshnichenko arrived in the DNR on January 31. They had planned to stage a public performance in Donetsk in support of the LGBT community and record it on video.

“It is distressing that no one has been able to find out where Grey Violet and Miroshnichenko are since they arrived in the DNR 10 days ago,” said Tanya Cooper, Ukraine researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Their sudden disappearance requires prompt and effective investigation.”

One of the activists’ friends in Kyiv told Human Rights Watch that Grey Violet was last in contact with her at about 11 a.m. on January 31. Other friends confirmed that it was the last day any of them had heard from Grey Violet and that the activist had stopped answering phone and online messages.

The friends said they received information that Grey Violet and Miroshnichenko were detained shortly after their arrival in the region, presumably by DNR security officials. A Russian media reportmentioned that one of Grey Violet’s friends reached out to the DNR authorities to inquire about the activists’ whereabouts, but that an assistant to the DNR people’s council chairman said that neither the security services nor the police were holding them.

Human Rights Watch has not been able to get information about why the activists may have been detained, or whether they face any charges.

A 2016 report by Anti-Discrimination Center Memorial, a Russian rights group based in Saint Petersburg, says that the situation for the LGBT community in the separatist-held Luhansk and Donetsk regions has drastically deteriorated since the beginning of the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine in 2014. In September 2014, the de facto authorities of the separatist-held Luhansk region said they were considering a death sentence for homosexuality.

Human Rights Watch research found that local security services in both separatist-held regions operate without any adherence to the rule of law, and are not subject to checks and balances. Anyone they detain is fully at their mercy, and the victim’s relatives have no one to turn to.

If Grey Violet and Miroshnichenko are in custody, the de facto DNR authorities should immediately reveal their whereabouts, Human Rights Watch said.

“The longer Grey Violet and Miroshnichenko are held without revealing their whereabouts, the more they are vulnerable to abuse,” Cooper said. “The de facto DNR authorities should immediately find out where they are and ensure their safety. If there are lawful grounds for holding them, guarantee their due process rights, including unimpeded access to legal counsel of their choice.”

Germany responded with outrage after the United States Tennis Association made the embarrassing gaffe of playing the Nazi-era version of Germany’s national anthem during a Federation Cup tie in Hawaii, Reuters reported. The version played included the first stanza, beginning “Deutschland, Deutschland uber alles,” which was used as Nazi propaganda. Germany’s Andrea Petkovic described it as “the worst thing that has ever happened to me.”

The offensive first stanza has been banned in Germany since the end of the Second World War, but was inexplicably sung during the opening ceremony of the quarter final match on Saturday between Alison Riske of the US and Germany’s Andrea Petkovic.

“I’ve never felt more disrespected in my whole life, let alone in Fed Cup, and I’ve played Fed Cup for 13 years now and it is the worst thing that has ever happened to me,” Germany’s Andrea Petkovic said, adding “it’s 2017 – something like this simply should not happen in the United States.”

She also said that “we were left shocked and did not know how to react” saying she considered walking off court before the singles match against Alison Riske. Riske subsequently beat Petkovic.

Petkovic’s teammates and traveling fans attempted to drown out the outdated tune by singing the correct “Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit” (Unity and justice and freedom) verse over the amplified Nazi anthem.

Germany’s coach, Barbara Ritter, was distraught saying: “This is an absolute scandal, a disrespectful incident and inexcusable, I could have sobbed. Hearing the national anthem at the Fed cup is a holy moment.”

Shortly after the gaffe, the USTA tweeted its apologies, saying it extended “its sincerest apologies to the German Fed Cup team and all of its fans for the performance of an outdated national anthem.” “In no way did we mean any disrespect. This mistake will not occur again, and the correct anthem will be performed for the remainder of this first-round tie,” it said in a statement. German tennis federation chief Ulrich Klaus confirmed that his American counterpart had apologised for the mistake.

“Our American hosts at the Fed Cup opening in Hawaii made a mistake that should not happen,” Klaus said in a statement. “The fact that in the year 2017 a wrong anthem can be played that is associated with the horror of the past was for players and staff and the officials present both shocking and disturbing.”

“The USTA through its president Katrina Adams has apologised officially in writing and in person and deeply regrets the blunder.”

A doppelganger of Adolf Hitler has been seen in several locations in the Austrian town of Braunau, where the Nazi dictator was born. Police have issued an arrest warrant for the man, accusing him of “public glorification of Hitler’s personality.”

The young man dressed like Hitler, who also has the dictator’s haircut and the mustache, has been recently seen by many local residents, a regional Oberoesterreichische Nachrichten newspaper reports.

“I have seen this man in Braunau many times and wonder if it means something,” one local man said in a Facebook post, as cited by the local media. The mysterious man, who remains unidentified, but is believed to be between 25 and 30 years old, has been seen being photographed in front of Hitler’s birthplace on at least one occasion.

The lookalike was also seen in a local bookstore browsing through magazines about the World War II and has also reportedly been spotted in a local bar, where he identified himself as “Harald Hitler.”

Police have confirmed the local media reports, saying that they are “aware of this situation” and have already issued an arrest warrant for the mysterious doppelganger on suspicion of ‘revival of Nazism.’

“Public glorification of the personality of Adolf Hitler is punishable in any case,” Alois Ebner, a spokesperson of the local police department, said, as cited by the Austrian APA news agency. A local department of the Austrian home security agency has also joined the investigation, according to the local media.

The incident comes amid an ongoing legal dispute over Hitler’s birthplace. The Austrian parliament voted in December of 2016 to force the owner to sell the three-story house in Braunau am Inn to the state because she had turned down previous offers.

However, the retired women then filed a complaint with the Austrian Constitutional Court on January 31, disputing the lawfulness of the parliament’s decision.

“We received a claim by the owner. This is about the owner contesting the constitutional validity of the law,” a spokesman for the Constitutional Court said at that time, as cited by Reuters.

The Austrian government has been renting the building since 1972 to control how it is used. In October, the authorities announced their plans to demolish the house to prevent neo-Nazis from visiting the site to pay homage to the Nazi dictator.

The demolition would see the construction of a new building with no associations with Hitler, Interior Ministry spokesman Karl-Heinz Grundbock said at that time. Austria’s interior minister, Wolfgang Sobotka, said earlier that he could imagine government or social agency offices being placed at the site.

It seems that U.S. President Donald Trump has been misspeaking – to put it mildly – more often than not – since at least the presidential election times. Many political analysts assumed that once elected he would modify his positions and behave more responsibly as a president. But old habits die hard, esp. for someone like a 70-year old Trump who continues to prove all those pundits wrong.

After winning the presidential race, Trump has surrounded himself with many hateful provocateurs in the White House – for example, guys like Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, Stephen Miller and Michael Flynn – who see themselves as modern-day crusaders to settle their old scores with the world of Islam. “We must acknowledge that we are at war,” Flynn told Bannon during a discussion of terrorism in July 2016 in his Breitbart News Daily radio show. “Our enemies have declared war on us and we have to take this on with all the resources that the United States of America can bring to bear,” Flynn said. “There is no doubt.”

It is no coincidence that these advisers seem to be bent upon opening new frontiers with countries like Iran, much like what the neocons tried to do with Bush Jr.’s perennial wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Like their new boss, they see immigration of Muslims to the USA as a threat to its security. So, a travel ban was imposed by Trump that singled out seven Muslim-majority countries (including Iran). We are told that his travel-ban came as a result of his consultation with Rudy Giuliani (ex-mayor of NY) – the immoral, greedy and hateful provocateur. That explains why it did not include any of the countries that produced the 9/11 radical Muslims.

Thanks to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of the Washington State, the Trump executive directive on travel ban has been found to be illegal by successive federal judges – from judge James Robart to the judges of the 9th circuit federal appeals court. A big part of the pushback over controversial travel ban is the idea that it’s a solution in search of a problem — that terrorism caused by refugees and immigrants is oversold, and especially from those seven Muslim countries.

According to a recent Cato Institute report, out of more than 3 million refugees admitted to the U.S. from 1975 to 2015, three committed terrorist acts that killed Americans. They were Cuban refugees in the 1970s and not Muslims.

Contrary to the unsubstantiated claims of the hatemongers some of the terrorist acts since 9/11 were foiled by Muslims before those attempted terrorist acts could harm anyone.

Trump and his advisors and staffs have been trying their best to propagating lies to justify his travel ban. At MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, President Trump complained on February 6 that “radical Islamic” terrorist attacks are “not even being reported” by the “very, very dishonest press.” He said, “Radical Islamic terrorists are determined to strike our homeland as they did on 9/11; as they did from Boston to Orlando, to San Bernardino. And all across Europe, you’ve seen what happened in Paris and Nice. All over Europe it’s happening. It’s gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported and, in many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it. They have their reasons and you understand that.”

As usual, it was a lie. The media had widely covered all such matters of Muslim radicals. What they often ignore, however, are the acts of white supremacists and white nationalists committing hate crimes and planning attacks on Muslims, Jews, African Americans and other marginalized communities.

When confronted, the White House provided a list of 78 attacks that were carried out by terrorists or suspected terrorists from September 2014 onward (of course, it did not include any of the White supremacist and militia attacks against Muslims). A search in Nexis, a news database, for coverage of all 78 incidents, found tens of thousands of news articles, TV news transcripts and news wire accounts of the attacks and subsequent stories related to these attacks. [It should be noted that the vast majority of the victims of terrorism have been Muslims.]

Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s campaign manager and now an adviser to the president, on Thursday did nothing to rebut that line of argument, citing a nonexistent “Bowling Green massacre” as an example of the kind of attacks Trump’s executive order would root out.

Here’s the exchange with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews:

CONWAY: It’s the seven countries that were previously identified by President Obama as being high risk as being states that either harbor, train or export — and/or export terrorism. These are nations very narrowly proscribed and also temporary.

MATTHEWS:  Sure.

CONWAY: I bet there was very little coverage — I bet — I bet it’s brand-new information to people that President Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis came here to this country were radicalized and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre.

MATTHEWS: Let’s …

CONWAY: (INAUDIBLE) don’t know that because it didn’t get covered.

Well, the so-called Bowling Green massacre didn’t get covered because it didn’t happen; there was no Bowling Green massacre.

As The Washington Post’s Samantha Schmidt wrote, there were Iraqi citizens, living in Bowling Green, Kentucky, who were attempting to send weapons to al-Qaeda in Iraq, in 2011, but it never came to fruition. They were arrested, and their arrests were covered plenty.

Later Conway recanted her story saying that she meant to say “Bowling Green terrorists” and not massacre.

What Conway and Trump advisors didn’t mention is about the real terrorist plan to massacre Americans by a white supremacist in Bowling Green, Ohio. As the New York Times reported lately, the year was 2012. A federal raid had uncovered what the authorities feared were the makings of a massacre. There were 18 firearms, among them two AR-15 assault rifles, an AR-10 assault rifle and a Remington Model 700 sniper rifle. There was body armor, too, and the authorities counted some 40,000 rounds of ammunition. An extremist had been arrested, and prosecutors suspected that he had been aiming to carry out a wide assortment of killings.

“This defendant, quite simply, was a well-funded, well-armed and focused one-man army of racial and religious hate,” prosecutors said in a court filing.

The man arrested and charged was Richard Schmidt, a middle-aged owner of a sports-memorabilia business at a mall in town. Prosecutors would later call him a white supremacist. His planned targets, federal authorities said, had been African-Americans and Jews. They had found a list with the names and addresses of those to be assassinated, including the leaders of N.A.A.C.P. chapters in Michigan and Ohio. They wrote in a sentencing memo filed in court that Schmidt planned to assassinate “members of religious and cultural groups based only on their race, religion and ethnicity.” His cache of weapons, added prosecutors, had only one purpose: to start a “race war.” Other court documents suggest that he planned to videotape his killing spree and email the video clips to his fellow white supremacists.

Beefy, thick-necked, standing 6-foot-4 and weighing about 250 pounds, Schmidt had spent years in the Army as an active-duty soldier and a reservist. His military service ended in 1989 when he got into a fight and shot three people, killing one of them, a man named Anthony Torres. As a result, Schmidt spent 13 years in prison on a manslaughter conviction and was legally barred from owning firearms. And yet, he had acquired all those firearms!

After searching Schmidt’s property, the government came to believe he was involved with the National Alliance, a virulent and long-running extremist group, which was once among the nation’s most powerful white supremacist organizations. They also suspected him of an affiliation with the Vinlanders, a neo-Nazi skinhead gang.

Founded by William Pierce, who died in 2002, the National Alliance has long been linked to terrorism. Pierce, who started the group in 1970 and ran it for many years from a compound in West Virginia, wrote “The Turner Diaries,” an apocalyptic novel that basically lays out a blueprint for unleashing a white supremacist insurgency against the government. The novel was described by Timothy J. McVeigh as the inspiration for his bombing in 1995 of a federal office building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people.

Schmidt wound up being sentenced to less than six years in prison, after a federal judge said prosecutors had failed to adequately establish that he was a political terrorist, and he is scheduled for release in February 2018. The foiling of what the government worried was a credible plan for mass murder gained little national attention.

Schmidt’s case isn’t the only one involving terror threats by a white supremacist that received little coverage by mainstream media. On Monday, February 6, the trial of Christian minister Robert Doggart began in Tennessee federal district court.

Undercover FBI agents allege that Doggart was plotting to travel to upstate New York to kill Muslims there, using explosives, an M-4 assault rifle and a machete. According to a federal investigation, Doggart saw himself as a religious “warrior” and wanted to kill Muslims to show his commitment to his Christian god.

Many political observers opine that had Schmidt been a Muslim, surely his crime would have been called an act of terrorism and he would have been sentenced for a life term imprisonment. So, sadly, justice is not color (or more properly, religion) blind here, or so it seems. People’s religion does matter in the flawed system that we have in the USA!

There is little doubt that Republicans and the Trump administration have been guilty of inflating perceived terrorism from Muslims while ignoring home-grown terrorism by non-Muslims, esp. the white supremacists.

In Ohio, around the same time that Schmidt was going to trial, there was another incident, where a gentleman was angry about something he saw on Fox News, went to a mosque in West Toledo, Ohio, set it on fire, did $1.4 million damage to the mosque. As A.C. Thompson said in the Democracy Now, “And that case, again, is another one that’s gotten very little attention.”

Nor should one ignore the crime of Glendon Scott Crawford, a man sentenced to 30 years to life in December, for building a radioactive weapon of mass destruction to kill Muslims. The guy was a U.S. Navy veteran and a member of the Ku Klux Klan, another white supremacist. In September, three men called the Crusaders, were captured plotting to kill Muslims, Somali refugees, in Kansas. Just this week, a man who was a self-professed Trump supporter had burned down a mosque in Orlando, got 30 years to life—it was a hate crime—because he had prior convictions.

At the Southern Poverty Law Center, Ryan Lenz who has been tracking racist and extreme-right terrorists said that so far he’s seen little from the Trump administration to suggest it will make a priority of combating political violence carried out by American racist groups.

“It doesn’t seem at all like they are interested in pursuing extremists inspired by radical right ideologies,” said Mr. Lenz, who edits the organization’s HateWatch publication.
Indeed, Reuters reported last week that the Department of Homeland Security is planning to retool its Countering Violent Extremism program to focus solely on Islamic radicals. Government sources told the news agency the program would be rebranded as “Countering Islamic Extremism” or “Countering Radical Islamic Extremism,” and “would no longer target groups such as white supremacists who have also carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.”

A.C. Thompson of the ProPublica, which is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest, writes, “It wouldn’t be the first time the Department of Homeland Security chose to look away. In 2009, Daryl Johnson, then an analyst with the department, drafted a study of right-wing radicals in the United States… The report predicted an uptick in extremist activity, particularly within “the white supremacist and militia movements.”

“Response to the document was swift and punishing. Conservative news outlets and Republican leaders condemned Mr. Johnson’s report as a work of “anti-military bigotry” and an attack on conservative opinion,” Thompson writes. “Janet Napolitano, the head of Homeland Security at the time, retracted the report and closed Mr. Johnson’s office, the Extremism and Radicalization Branch.”

Terrorism of any kind – whether committed by a Muslim or a non-Muslim – is pure evil and must be defeated. President Trump has every right to take prudent actions that would secure the lives of ordinary Americans. However, if his administration blames Muslims for the crimes of Daesh (or ISIS), it is like holding all Christian groups accountable for the Jonestown massacre (by Rev. Jim Jones) in Guyana or for the heinous activities of Joseph Kony’s Christian militia in Africa.

Hate crimes against the Muslim community have increased significantly since Trump has come to power. A mosque in Victoria, Texas, was burned down last month, and another in Quebec, Canada was attacked (by an anti-immigrant, white supremacist who claimed to support Trump) killing some six worshippers. None of these are good signs for western democracies.

President Trump simply cannot let the hard-core racists and bigots inside the White House to dictate government policies that would only breed hatred and intolerance. Neither can he afford to close his eyes to the crimes of the white supremacists and neo-Nazi terrorists here inside the USA. If he does, he would only encourage terrorists like Dylann Roof (a 21-year-old white supremacist who shot 9 Afro-Americans during a prayer service in the African Methodist Episcopal church in Charlestown, South Carolina), and Richard Schmidt, to start the race/ethnic/religious war – the real Bowling Green massacre that never happened. And that would be the end of America that we know about. His anti-Muslim policies are stupid and counterproductive providing oxygen to Daesh to survive and recruit.

For the USA to survive in this difficult time of dissension, it must continue to promote inclusion and multi-culture and shun exclusion, racism, intolerance and bigotry of any shade and form. The sooner Trump understands it the better it is for his administration, and the country – the land of the immigrants.

The running war of words between the White House and the mainstream media is bad news for the fight against fake new. It will lead to an even more divided America and will have consequences for the rest of the world.

By Han Fook Kwang*

President Donald Trump wasted no time declaring war on his first day in the White House. It wasn’t against Islamic State, not yet at least. Not China or Mexico. Not even the Democratic Party. The war he started immediately was with the American media.

The first salvo was fired over what he alleged as their false reporting of the size of the crowd at his inauguration. Newspapers and television networks said it was much smaller than President Obama’s and showed pictures of the two ceremonies. The new president fired back accusing them of producing fake news. Not mincing his words, he declared: “I have a running war with the media. They are among the most dishonest human beings on earth.”

Grave Implications

Since then it has been a non-stop volley of accusations and counter-accusations over issues such as his comments on the number of illegal voters in the election and the media’s reporting of his rift with the American intelligence community. The battle lines were drawn by his chief strategist in the White House, Steve Bannon, who declared: “The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the President of the United States.”

The battle between the mainstream media and the right-wing conservative elements of American society which form a large part of President Trump’s base has been going on for some time, long before he was elected. Both sides fought such a sustained hate-filled campaign to discredit the other, it became part of the political landscape in America, as commonplace as pork-barrel politics and gerrymandering.

But now, with the president himself leading the charge, the consequences of such a war are far greater. There are three important implications for the US, and the rest of the world.

First, it is going to be much more difficult to contain the spread of fake news. After President Trump’s election, social media such as Facebook were heavily criticised for their role in disseminating them. In one well-documented case, false news of Pope Francis endorsing candidate Trump was shared a million times on Facebook. In contrast, when the New York Times ran an investigative scoop on Trump’s tax returns, the groundbreaking story was shared fewer than 200,000 times.

Facebook and others promised to do more to filter out these falsehoods but their task has been made impossible because the new administration has a different spin on what is fake and what isn’t. Kellyanne Conway, a White House aide when asked why the administration had insisted the inauguration crowd size was larger than Obama’s despite photographic evidence to the contrary, said their version was based on “alternative facts”.

Who Is The Gatekeeper?

When even the most documented facts are being disputed, who can play gatekeeper? Even more troubling, anti-Trump websites speaking on behalf of the progressive left in the US have upped their fake news output in response. Speaking to the Atlantic magazine, Brooke Binowski, managing editor of the fact-checking Snopes, said she had seen more fakes news emerging now directed at liberal audiences.

So, both sides are now adding to the mountain of falsehoods. The result of all this will be an even more divided America – that’s the second consequence of this damaging war. There is now almost no hope the political divisions will heal after one of the most divisive presidential elections.

The media can be a powerful medium for unity even in a diverse country like the US. It did so after the September 2001 terrorist attack. But the US media is now a participant in the war and has itself become a divisive force. For the rest of the world, a divided America is bad news because it will result in more uncertainty in American foreign policy.

Third, how the American mainstream media respond will determine whether they emerge from this war with credibility enhanced or damaged even more. Newspapers like the New York Times and TV networks like CNN had to eat humble pie when they called the election wrongly.

It wasn’t just that their polls were off (many got theirs wrong as well) but they shaped their news coverage and commentaries accordingly, reflecting their disinclination for Trump. Even after his victory, they continue to be active participants in the war, in their selection of stories and their slant. Of course, no one can accuse them of producing fake news and their professionalism isn’t in doubt. But they are clearly partisan and contributing to the division in the country.

Perhaps they have no choice because the White House attacks against them go to the very heart of their existence. When someone attacks your brand and the very thing you stand for, the natural instinct is to counter-attack and discredit the attacker or you could be destroyed.

No-Win Situation

But what if the attacker is none other than the president? And what if in mounting your counter-attack you risk betraying the values of impartiality and fairness that underpin your reputation?

Mainstream media in the US is now in this no-win situation. It is a sorry state and will make the battle against fake news even harder to win. When there is so much falsehood, mainstream newspapers and television should capitalise and benefit from it by being the paragon of accuracy and fairness that they have always claimed to be.

They can and should become the most trusted source of information counting on their established reputation and brand developed over the years. But how can they play this role if their integrity is constantly being undermined by the White House and they are actively engaged in the war of words against the president?

An America at war with itself cannot be great again, not for President Trump, or the media, or the rest of the world.

*Han Fook Kwang is Senior Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Although Trump has already succeeded in creating a degree of havoc all around the globe, what we need to begin to prepare for is the moment this president is truly tested.  We cannot afford to let his administration play fast and loose with objective facts, to dismiss serious findings because they do not suit the president’s outsized ego.

By Dr. Sam Ben-Meir*

During President Trump’s first full week in office he has begun to dismantle America’s moral standing on the international stage. From his reconsideration of CIA ‘black sites’ to his insistence on vast voter fraud, to his inhumane ban on immigration from Muslim countries, Trump seems to be intent on normalizing discredited policies, adhering to blatant falsehoods, and waging an assault on human dignity.

To those who say ‘it can’t happen here’ – generally the same ones who said Trump can never become president – to them I say: it is happening here. We must guard against attempts to undermine the rule of law and our commitment to welcoming immigrants; we must not allow facts to be rewritten to support the administration’s chosen narrative. The only way to avoid compromising our fundamental principles is not to say it cannot happen here, but rather to actively and zealously defend them.

Trump is an authoritarian who has already begun to ride roughshod over the freedom of the press – as we saw with the arrest of journalists who were covering the protests. Trump is successfully stoking the flames of a false populism based on discrimination, anti-immigration and a flamboyant disregard for truth and decency. The denial of anthropogenic climate change, for example, is part of Trump’s overall contempt for opinions or conclusions that, however well substantiated, do not agree with his nostalgic and dangerous agenda for this country.

Trump’s epistemology, if we may call it that, reduces knowledge to perspective, a condition where everything is open to creative redescription. If we can propose alternative facts to the inauguration turnout, why need we stop there? Can we propose alternative facts to any objective description of reality? Perhaps a white supremacist would like to pose alternative facts to the history of American slavery. Are there alternative facts to the Holocaust waiting to be discovered? To truly defeat Trumpism, it will require among other things, reinvigorating our commitment to things like truth, justification, objective evidence, and warrant.

The banning of refugees is a cruel and inhumane policy: it is an attack on human dignity. It is un-American, it is also un-Christian and un-Jewish. The most basic moral tenet of both Christianity and Judaism is the injunction to love thy neighbor. Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan is especially timely now because when we understand the story in context we see that to love thy neighbor really means to love your enemy (the Samaritans and Jews hated each other). I am not suggesting that we should open our borders to professed enemies – I’m saying that we must either be a nation that protects and nourishes dignity, righteousness, and justice, or we must steadily sink into a new era of brutal policies – and on the other side of that lies a dark and perilous unknown.

Not only is the ban illegal, heavy handed, and grossly immoral, it is also self defeating and lacks any logic whatsoever: forbidding entry from countries that have not harmed an American here in forty years – including Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria – while exempting countries, such as Saudi Arabia, which was the country of origin of most of the 9/11 terrorists. Nor should we overlook the fact that Trump has exempted countries where he happens to do business.

This ban is positively harmful to America, while at the same time revealing a depressing lack of psychological insight. It is characteristic of a narrow-minded and authoritarian personality. In the end, Trump’s ban will likely make us more enemies than it succeeds in protecting us from. It is as if he is going out of his way to generate Muslim outrage at American bigotry and cowardice.

For the ban is, indeed, a profound act of cowardice. It is certainly possible that a refugee may commit some violent crime in the US – we shouldn’t suppose they’re angels – but the question is do we want to allow that fear to override our basic commitment to do what is right not only ethically, but also in terms of our long-term interests as a nation.

Our long-term interests do not prescribe discrimination against people based on faith; our long-term interest does not prescribe turning our backs on those who have worked alongside American soldiers every step of the way; it does not prescribe turning away the best minds and promising talents because we’ve adopted inane views about their religion.

Our institutions are still stable and they will continue to be so through the next four years – but that requires vigilance, resistance, and sometimes defiance. Fortunately, the majority of Americans are opposed to Trump’s morally corrupt and craven immigration policy. Fortunately, mayors across the country are reaffirming their cities as sanctuaries, where all of its people will be protected from deportation.

Although Trump has already succeeded in creating a degree of havoc all around the globe, what we need to begin to prepare for is the moment this president is truly tested. We cannot afford to let his administration play fast and loose with objective facts, to dismiss serious findings because they do not suit the president’s outsized ego. When Trump doubles down on a patent falsehood, he is actually debasing the most valuable currency we possess, namely truth. The president has already inflicted significant moral harm through his rejection of basic manners and decency, his devaluation of objective inquiry, his readiness to fan the flames of resentment, and his disregard of the plight of millions of refugees, for whose dire condition America is at least partially responsible.

We need to continue to resist by every means at our disposal, lest he drag this country into the moral gutter.

*Dr. Sam Ben-Meir teaches philosophy at Eastern International College. His current research focuses on environmental and business ethics.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of TransConflict.

By J Nastranis

“Africa is by no means destined to lag behind the rest of the world economy. On the contrary, it could easily become a global economic powerhouse – and within the next decade. But, to fulfil its economic potential, Africa must industrialize,” says Director General LI Yong of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).

This has been stressed repeatedly at recent international forums, including the Sixth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD VI) in August 2016, and the G20 summit in Hangzhou, China, the following month, he adds. For the first time, the G20 placed industrialization in Africa – and all of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) – on its agenda. The African Union’s Agenda 2063 also supports this drive.

It is not surprising therefore that UNIDO will intensify efforts to foster industrialization in Africa and LDCs as part of its plans for 2017 to focus on very concrete actions to implement its strategic priorities. According to LI, “Last year re-confirmed the very close connection between UNIDO’s mandate and the global agenda; this will be the foundation of our work in 2017”.

The 2030 Development Agenda encompassing 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted in 2015 fully recognized the central importance of Inclusive and Sustainable Industrial Development (ISID), which, Li says, is at the core of UNIDO’s mandate.

In 2016, the need for the Organization’s continued contributions was further highlighted when the UN General Assembly (GA) entrusted UNIDO with the lead role to implement the Third Industrial Development Decade for Africa (IDDA III) ending 2025. The first IDDA’s covered the 1980s and 1990s.

Calling for enhanced international cooperation, including North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation, in support of Africa’s industrialization, including through the implementation of the Third Industrial Development Decade for Africa, the GA reaffirmed in June 2016 that South-South cooperation was not a substitute for, but rather a complement to, North-South cooperation.

The Organization also contributed to the G20 work related to the industrialization of Africa and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) that include 34 in Africa, 13 in Asia and the Pacific, and one in Latin America and the Caribbean. UNIDO’s report to the G20 Development Working Group highlighted the benefits of inclusive and sustainable structural transformation and industrialization for diversifying the economy, creating jobs and building equitable societies.

It also underlined the benefits to Africa and LDCs of leveraging trade in intermediate goods, investment, and regional and global value chains. Such chains, the report said, can be served by micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, using their relative advantages in flexibility, innovativeness, personalized contacts, quality of products and creating new opportunities for the international sourcing of scarce specialized skills. Besides, enterprises from Africa and LDCs may be able to learn from the experience of other developing countries, especially in Asia.

The report further said: “Africa and LDCs should move away from the ‘generalized’ industrial policies that have proved ineffective over the last three decades. They also need to build strong institutions and viable investment climates. And they need to realize the full potential of public-private partnerships (PPPs) and the opportunities for collaboration among industry, governments and other stakeholders.”

The report also offers recommendations for national policy as well as regional and global collective actions to advance industrialization and end poverty and hunger.

The Organization’s Director General says: To implement its ISID mandate, which helps UNIDO Member States harness the full potential of industry to lasting prosperity for all, the Organization will further mainstream its Programme for Country Partnership (PCP) approach. From an initial three pilot countries (Ethiopia. Peru and Senegal), the strategic PCP approach will be enlarged to include many more countries.

Considering that the PCP helps leverage more technical and financial support from development partners to achieve inclusive and sustainable industrial development in targeted countries, UNIDO expects an expansion of the PCP to contribute to a successful implementation of IDDA III.

At the same time, UNIDO will strengthen its partnerships with international financial institutions (IFIs), in line with the new cooperation framework put in place last year with the World Bank. This would enable UNIDO to further explore programmatic synergies with regional and international financial institutions to develop joint operations for a larger number of activities.

The overarching first priority action in 2017 relates to the implementation of the Global Goals, for which UNIDO will work even more closely with the international community to achieve all SDGs, with a special emphasis on SDG 9 on industry, innovation and infrastructure.

By R. Upadhyay

The objection by a section of Indian intelligentsia against the November 30, 2016 Supreme Court Order on national anthem that all cinema halls in the country shall play it before the start of the film suggests that even after seven decades of country’s independence they continue to be under the siege of colonial and enslaved mindset. They seem to have no emotional attachment to the glorious nationhood of Bharatvarsh which has been holding it together for millenia.

Although, a cross section of political leaders welcomed the order of the supreme judiciary, some wise people like the former Attorney General and eminent jurist Soli Sorabjee “questioned the order terming it as an example of judicial over reach”.(Indian Express dated December 2, 2016).

Similarly, the members of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a Christian sect in India believe the singing of national anthem an act of unfaithfulness towards God. They are even planning to approach the Supreme Court to reconsider the order. (http://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/28718-jehovah%E2%80%99s-witnesses…)

These and similar statements from a section of the intelligentsia have encouraged a section of people to disbelieve that Bharat has been a nation since Vedic days. Hence this paper to disabuse such people that India has been a united cultural entity from times immemorial.

In fact eulogising this nation our scripture Vishnu Puran says:

“Gayanti devah kil Geetkaani, Dhanyaastu te Bharat bhumi bhaage,

Swargapavarga aspad margabhutei Bhavanti bhooyah purushah suratvaat”

(Bharat is the way of all of the heavenly pleasures and even salvation. It’s a very welcome piece of fortune to be born as a human being on this soil of Bharat in spite of being a deity).

While referring to the geographical boundary of Bharatvarsh Vishnu Puran says: “उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् । वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ”

(The country that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; where dwell the descendants of Bharata known as Bharati.)

The name Bharat is a result of joining of two words- ‘Bha’ and ‘rat’. The term Bha is etymologically derived from the Sanskrit verb ‘Bha’ that means light and the term ‘Rat’ means immersing or devoted. The term ‘varsh’ which means country was added with Bharat and therefore the complete meaning of Bharatvarsh is a country where people are deeply immersed to (Divine) Light. Since the natives of this region were noble beings, anyone addressing elders used to call them Aarya and this land of nobles was also known as Aaryavart.

Thus, the name Bharatvarsh became the spiritual-cultural heritage of this land which forms the basis of a nation and its people are found proud of it from generation to generation. Unfortunately, the conquest of this land by outsiders who were unaware of the country’s glorious past tried to destroy its nationhood by changing its name from Bharatvarsh to Hindustan by Muslim invaders and later India by the British. Both the alien rulers played the politics of re-naming it with a view to re-shape its socio-cultural and political conditions according to their respective native traditions.

According to Wikipedia “A national anthem (also state anthem, national hymn, national song etc.) is generally a patriotic musical composition that evokes and eulogizes the history, traditions and struggles of its people, recognized either by a nation’s government as the official national song, or by convention through use by the people”.

Although there is a reference of the word ‘rashtra’ (nation) in our Veda, the people of anglicised and ‘secularised’ mind set call it a myth. They believe that prior to the advent of British rule there was no concept of nationhood for Bharatvarsh. They were perhaps not aware that Bharatvarsh was a ‘Rashtra’ from times immemorial. In Yajurveda there is a hymn praying the Supreme Power for the spiritual, economic, defence, education and agricultural growth of the nation. The hymn is as under:

आ ब्रह्मन् ब्राह्मणो ब्रह्मवर्चसी जायतामा राष्ट्रे राजन्यः
शूर इषवयोऽअतिव्याधी महारथो जायतां दोग्ध्री धेनुर्वाढानड्वानाशुः
सप्तिः पुरन्धिर्योषा जिष्णू रथेष्ठाः सभेयो युवास्य यजमानस्य वीरो जायतां निकामे निकामे नः
पर्जन्यो वर्षतु फलवत्यो न आषधयः पच्यन्तां योगक्षेमो नः कल्पताम् O Supreme Lord! May there

–Yajur Veda, 22.22

“O Brahman! Let there be born in the kingdom ‘brahmanas’ with ‘brahmatejas’ (divine lustre) who are well versed in the Vedas; let there be born the ‘rajanyah'(kings), heroic, skilled kings, archers and mighty warriors; cows giving abundant milk; load carrying oxen; the swift coursers; industrious, cultural women. Let the person who holds the yajna have brave and triumphant charioteer youth capable for addressing meeting. May ‘Parjanya’ (clouds) send seasonal rains; may our fruit-bearing plants and trees ripen; may the ‘yogakshemam’ (spiritual and prosperous well-being) of our people increase steadily.”

In fact this hymn was the national anthem of ancient Bharatvarsh. Even today this hymn is chanted by the people at the end of any religious function in many parts of the country.

After Independence, our Constituent Assembly instead of reviving the name of ancient Bharatvash registered it under a dual and bilingual identity – ‘India,that is Bharat’. In fact Bharatvarsh was a geo-cultural boundary bound by common history and heritage as well as also a juridico-political conception. There were many kings who ruled in different territories of this boundary but the entire region was under one spiritual-cultural umbrella of a nation called Bharatvarsh and those kings who conquered the whole Bharatvarsh were known as ‘Samrat’ like Ashoka and Chandragupta.( http://newglobalindian.com/tag/bharatvarsha:).

Irrespective of their varied caste, sect, region, local customs, food habits, costumes, professions and languages, the people of Bharatvarsh believed in polytheistic Sanatana Dharma that originated from the liberal Vedic texts – EKAM SADVIPRAH BAHUDHA VADANTI (He is one, wise men call Him differently) and the spiritual voices of their ascetic ancestors that permitted complete freedom to worship the deities of one’s choice without any ill-will against any other faith. With such spiritual strength and freedom they maintained the cultural unity of their motherland and gradually contributed to the internationally acclaimed civilisation, as its people were deeply immersed to the root of the name Bharatvarsh.

Despite this historical fact it is surprising that during freedom movement Jawaharlal Nehru preferred the term ‘Jai Hind’ (Victory of Hind) as the battle-cry in preference to ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ (Victory to Mother Bharat). Unfortunately, no Indian leader has so far raised the issue to replace the prevailing salutary term Jai Hind in our army and police with the term Jai Bharat.

After Independence, our constitution makers incorporated ‘JANA GANA MANA …… ’ a poem composed by Rabindranath Tagore as national anthem in the constitution to revive our cultural and spiritual legacy for instilling a sense of patriotism and nationalism for which people should be proud of.

The key words of the SC directive were to instil “committed patriotism and nationalism”. This is apparently a message that the people should revive the sense of their glorious national pride which was enslaved and colonised by the alien rulers. To pay respect to the national anthem is paying respect to the nationhood of the motherland. The highest judiciary has perhaps sensed the indifference of Indian people over national pride which has pushed them towards the ideology imposed on them by the West sowing the seed of destruction and disunity and therefore SC directive is only to empower the people with national self and pride.

Even our former president APJ Kalam had written a beautiful poem to express his patriotism and nationalism. In the last stanza of the poem he expressed:

“Oh Almighty, bless all my people to work and transform
Our country from a developing into a developed nation.
Let this second vision be born out of sweat of my people,
And bless our youth to live in Developed India. APJ”.

(KALAMhttp://www.abdulkalam.nic.in/my_national_prayer.html)

Any effort however small it may be to remind ourselves of our glorious past and to sustain the unity of the country should be welcomed and not objected to for narrow sectarian reasons.

By Madhukar SJB Rana

Historically, Nepal has prospered, until the advent of the East India Company into the subcontinent, as an economic corridor and a civilizational bridge between adjoining northern India and Tibet. Following the calamitous loss by Nepal in the Anglo Gurkha War of 1814-16, it was territorially reduced in size by around 33 percent and its prevalent national ‘geo-psychology’ was transformed from an emerging Himalayan empire aspiring to be an economic and cultural bridgehead between India and China to simply of a “yam between two boulders.” Subsequently, it sought to look inward and close its doors to the outside world. This paper attempts to examine the idea of a Trans-Himalayan Economic Corridor (THEC) centred on Nepal. It is based on the firm belief that a THEC can profoundly transform the entire southeastern Himalayan subregion and the Ganges Basin – where most of the world’s absolute poor and deprived peoples now live – with benefits for all.

The south-eastern Himalayan subregion and the Ganges Basin need a big push in infrastructure investments coupled with far more robust annual economic growth rates to meet the challenges posed by its poverty, mass unemployment and massive underemployment of its human capital. As also, risks arising from natural disasters, climate change, global warming, and not least, water, food, health and energy security threats. Amidst the development and security challenges faced by the Himalayan subregion, the emergence of Asia as a world economic fulcrum, led by China—and a China that is in the throes of its “look west” national strategy offers grand opportunities to deal with these challenges.

The Southern Silk Road (SSR)

The SSR existed historically.^[1] It commenced in Yunnan connecting it to Myanmar, India, Nepal and Tibet with a loop back to Yunnan. It is believed that this Silk Road was at its peak in the 13^th century with the Mongol Dynasty flourishing; but declined in the 14^th century on account of the isolationist policies followed by the Ming Dynasty. It was also called the Tea and Horse Road. However, this has received scant attention. It was, if you like, the predecessor to the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor (BCIM-EC).^[2] Yunnan is planned as bridgehead for inter-regional and subregional integration with Myanmar, Bangladesh, eastern India just as China’s Xingjiang is to Central Asia, Afghanistan and Pakistan in reviving the more popular northern Silk Road.

Imagine the prospects, the “One Belt, One Road”^[3] or OBOR extended to South Asia by executing the BCIM Corridor and, furthermore, reviving the SSR to connect the Tibetan Plateau to Nepal and extended it into Bihar in northern India and beyond by both road and rail and, even later on by energy grids. It is, indeed a vision of grandeur where all of Asia— North, Central, South, East and West— will be connected by China to Europe and Russia by road and rail. Even so, integration possibilities with Tibet and the Sichuan Province need to be studied and explored for Bhutan, Nepal, North India with and without the extension of the BCIM Economic Corridor with these new destinations.

The BCIM corridor could be extended to Nepal to realize the BBIN vision^[4] of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It will also permit India’s Northeast to be connected to another Himalayan corridor through Nepal by land and the potential to have the BCIM countries connected in the near future to the railway network of China with the Lhasa-Kathmandu-Lumbini railway. Such a rail link would make it possible for Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal to trade by land with Pakistan and Afghanistan too.

Trans-Himalayan Economic Corridor

Nepal has made it clear that it wishes to act as a Himalayan land-bridge between Central and South and Southeast Asia. Thus it would welcome the ‘southern OBOR’ to be connected with Europe and also welcome the extension of the Chinese Railway into Kathmandu and Lumbini, the birth place of Lord Buddha. Nepal’s King Gyanendra raised the idea of Nepal as a ‘transit economy’ when he proposed this at the Second South-South Summit in Doha in 2005.^[5] This strategic policy was well incorporated in the country’s Annual Budget of 2005 with this author, in his capacity as Finance Minister then. Further, the king asked this author to lead a delegation to Lhasa and Beijing to discuss matters about opening more routes on the China-Nepal border for bilateral trade as well as express Nepal’s interest that it would like to see the extension of the Beijing-Lhasa train to the Nepalese border and on to Kathmandu.

Five years later since the idea was first announced, Nepal’s Maoist Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) coined the concept “trilateral strategic relations” involving India, China and Nepal in 2010. He believed that this concept would “address concerns of all three at once”. In 2012, Prachanda, in his capacity as Chairman of Nepal’s Maoist Party, was reported to have signed a $3 billion deal with China-sponsored Asia Pacific Exchange Cooperation (APEC) to develop Lumbini as a world class religious tourism and cultural city.^[6] The envisaged project would enormously benefit China, India and Nepal, especially Bodh Gaya, Sarnath and Kushinagar in Bihar. Maoist leader, Babu Ram Bhattarai, while addressing the Parliament on becoming Prime Minister in 2011 stated that, henceforth, Nepal should act as a “friendship bridge”^[7] and dispense with the notion that it is a “yam between two stones”.

Arguably, India will prefer Nepal as the Himalayan bridge economy for national security reasons, pending non-settlement of China-India border disputes. Hence, it is of utmost importance for Nepal to take advantage of the Mid-Hill-East-West Highway and link it with Uttarakhand and Sikkim to create a Greater Himalayan Economic Corridor by extending the BCIM Economic Corridor to Bhutan and Nepal. Nepal needs to call for the revival of the SSR as a major new diplomatic thrust with China to establish a Trans Himalayan Economic Belt. It should be underscored here that China has already urged India to join this belt.^[8] China foresees the Himalayas as the next frontier for global resource management and conservation particularly in (a) the wake of climate change and global warming and the fact that it serves as the Asian water tower for 4-5 billion peoples and (b) the yet unknown mineral deposits in the Himalayan subregion. Already it is reported that Afghanistan is endowed with $1 trillion of newly found mineral deposits.^[9]

It was projected that trade through Sikkim’s Nathula Pass would be $ 48 million by 2007 and will rise to $ 527 million by 2010.^[10] As it turns out, not more than $ 5-6 million of border trade actually occurs. This suggests that security and defense politics takes precedence over geo-economics. With such vast potentials, Nepal was quick to declare, in 2005, its interest to serve as a ‘transit economy’, which was eminently possible as per the Treaty of Transit with India. Nepal’s exports to Tibet rose from $ 5.8 million in 1991 to $ 33 million in 2005. A 10 percent of the projected traffic through the Nathula Pass, diverted to Nepal, would be highly significant for Nepal’s balance of trade with both China and India accruing from the transit fees.

It would also provide huge scope for the transit corridor from Birgunj, on the Indian border, to Tatopani on the Chinese border as an opportunity to invest in modern warehouses; container depots; material handling equipment; weighing bridges; inspection and testing laboratories; weighing bridges; repacking logistics centres as well as provide modern living and eating amenities for truckers, agents and freight forwarders. It was planned to also open many more North South Riverine transport corridors to make it possible for traffic in transit directly from West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh in northern India.

Map 1

China was most keen to develop outlying town of Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). Beijing-Lhasa railway was extended to Shigatse in 2014,^[11] TAR’s second largest city. Further, it was felt desirable that the TAR develop Zhangmu, connected to the Arniko Highway, as its premier port of entry into South Asia. The Nepal government has decided to ask China to expand the Arniko Highway as a 4 lane highway connecting Tatopani to Kathmandu.^[12] It is the closest and fastest route to Shigatse. Additionally, seven trading points will now be opened up with Tibet – Yari, Mugu, Choser; Larke, Lamabagar, Kimathanka and Olangchula. In all, there will be a minimum of nine Trans-Himalayan trading points with China.

Map II

Map III

The TAR authorities were also giving priority to develop its second largest border entry port at Gyirong for both trade and tourism. As of 2012, it is completed, with an investment of $ 190 million, establishing a 44.5 sq km infrastructure facility with a logistic park; storage processing centre; joint customs post and a tourist centre. Transport corridors are not just confined to highways but also embrace airways, waterways, electricity grids, pipelines and gas lines; optic fibre lines and railways. Unlike Transport or Transshipment or Transit Corridors, Economic Corridors are more preferable as more value addition takes place in the economies through production as a result of the transportation and distribution infrastructure. This happens from the backward and forward linkages created and the subsequent multiplier impacts.

Economic Corridors must seek integration of subregions through value-additions and supply chain innovations. For this to happen infrastructure in the form of highly capital intensive SEZs, EPZs, FTZs, EPVs, Industrial Parks must be created. To have maximum benefits it would be ideal to revive the subregional SAGQ Framework and link it with the BCIM to integrate the eastern seaboard of the subcontinent with Mekong region in the framework of BIMSTEC.

Five possible economic corridors are possible in Nepal. They are:

1. Karnali Economic Corridor: Can integrate Far West Region of Nepal with Tibet, Kumaon, North UP (Lucknow Growth Axis)

2. Gandhak Economic Corridor : Can integrate West Region of Nepal with Tibet, North UP (Gorakhpur Axis)

3. Bagmati Economic Corridors: Can integrate Central Region of Nepal with Tibet and Bihar (Patna Growth Axis)

4. Kosi Economic Corridor: Can integrate Eastern Region of Nepal with Tibet, Sikkim, Darjeeling, Doars (Siliguri Growth Axis).

Another development of strategic significance for the Greater Himalayan Region is the construction of the Mid-Hill-East-West-Highway of Nepal with due emphasis to ten model town developments along the way to serve as growth centres. The new strategic highway will be 1176 km long. It may be shortened to economize on costs, which is estimated at Rs 43 billion (Rs 10 million per km and Rs 20 million per km black topped). It serves 24 districts in 215 VDCs and 7 million people or 25 percent of the total current population. The Eastern section will traverse Chisobhanjyan-Ganeshchowk-Myaglung-Basantpur-Hile-Bhojpur-Diktel-Ghurmi-Dulikhel-Kathmandu-Pokhara; and the Western Section Pokhara-Baglung-Musikot Border-Rukumkot-Musikot-Chaujahari-Dailekh-Lainchaur-Saijula-Silgadi-DSatbanjh-Jhulaghat.

The Nepali government’s plan to establish ten model cities along the mid-hill highway is observed as a special attraction. Proposed cities are Phidim (in Panchthar district), Basantapur (Terhathum), Khurkot (Sindhuli), Baireni Galchhi (Dhading), Dumre (Tanahun), Burtibang (Baglung), Chaurjahari (Rukum), Rakam (Dailekh), Sanfebagar (Achham) and Patan (Baitadi). The significance of this highway is, other than halting migration to the plains, it will make possible ‘off season’ export of crops to India and China from its ecological diversity. Phidim and Baitaidi are entry points to Sikkim and Uttarakhand respectively which, if connected, will open a ‘new horizon’ for Himalayan subregional cooperation extending to Himachal Pradesh for the creation of a Green Himalayan Economy.

Map IV

It is hoped that these three Himalayan entities will join hands to plan various Green Missions keeping sight of the broader Asian and world markets. Such Green Missions could concentrate on specializations in different horticulture, floriculture, medicinal herbs products and services through intensive cultivation of selected crops and their processing and global marketing and branding. Joint efforts in development, promotion and marketing in the field of religious and adventure tourism is another potential especially in setting of a World Spiritual City in the Kailash Mansarovar region of Tibet. Huge scope for joint venturing and creation of Himalayan MNCs exist to take full advantages of the markets in China and Northern India in the areas of cement, pulp and paper manufacturing , medicinal herbs and pharmaceutical, iron and steel, fertilizer, and tourism resorts. It is staggering what the potential for development and growth that is possible from this Trans Himalayan Economic Corridor when one considers that the total population of the area could be more than 200 million without UP and nearly 400 million with UP if we can form this trilateral Trans Himalayan Economic Corridor involving China India and Nepal. The Economic Corridor can also be envisaged by networks such as air ways, water ways, ferry services, energy and gas grids.

Should the BCIM Economic Corridor be extended to Bhutan and Nepal one can expect two dynamic developments, namely (a) the Kosi River Basin Economic Corridor in the near future. There is the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) SASEC subregional programme and (b) a Kathmandu Haldia Transport Corridor which if it materializes will restore the pride of Kolkata as the grand Asian metropolis: that it was during the British Raj—but this time connected by sea as well as land to the rest of the world.

When Nepal seeks to be a transit economy or a bridgehead economy, it should be clear that to serve as a change agent for the realization of the once dreamt Asian Community of the late 1940s and now being revived as the ‘Chinese  Dream’ with the emergent Renaissance of Asia. Asian Community needs air, land, inland water and sea connectivity – including cyber connectivity. While such connectivity is necessary they are not sufficient. Both conditions need to be met for what could be called ‘Total Connectivity’. This means markets must be connected through bilateral FTAs. As we know FTAs will need to be supported by BOT oriented investments to create ‘production complementarities’ along with the ‘trade complementarities’ rendered by FTAs. Production complementarities may be created through creation of supply chains in select products or sub sectors and also through relocation of the highly labour intensive industries into Nepal by China (e.g. leather and leather products, textiles and garments, locks, etc.)

Market connectivity must be supported by institutional connectivity to realign macro and mega policies which requires connectivity between public and private sectors and not least municipal governments. Financial and legal connectivity is another area where we have to connect the money and exchange regimes that may have to innovate with new instrumentalities like stocks, bonds as well as barter like trade over infrastructure in each territory. This way we have a trade and exchange regime that uses national currencies while developing capital and bond markets too. Connectivity between municipalities is also important to understand local development plans to help municipalities integrate themselves with the OBOR/BCIM or THEC. Human capital connectivity is fundamental if we are to have all this connectivity not just for growth but also jobs. For jobs we need our human capital to be of the highest quality and in tune with the labour market demands. This calls for connectivity in the areas of science, technology education and R&D where we seek common standards and technical qualifications.

Conclusion

Political scientists look upon trilateralism as an impossibility, when trilateralism involves a triangular relations where powers are not equal. Economists look upon it as straight line or corridor spanning geographic borders to gain from the opportunities arising from their differential resource endowments and fiscal differentials because of comparative advantage or competitive advantage or manufacturing supply chains. How does one explain the movement of once imperialist Japan’s labour intensive manufactures – called flying geese – to Korea and Taiwan and, later, China and Southeast Asia. Also, it is misguided to think that small powers wish equal status in political terms so long as the economic benefits are mutual and, ideally, equitable.

Technology can change the face of the earth. It was so with the steamship in the medieval age. In the 21st century, it looks likely that technological determinism will be pronounced with the massive spread of high speed railways, at least in the Himalayan region. And thus usher in a new paradigm in international relations. The advent of the railway into Tibet and its borders in South Asia is a new factor; with all the force for change emanating through the so called ‘economic pull factor’ from the Tibetan plateau on its South Asian neighbourhood that could spread into the Ganges Basin. What explains better the interest of India to now opt for the BCIM Economic Corridor despite the traditional security risks of opening up its Northeast region to the outside world? Going further, it may be hypothesized that trilateral economic cooperation is more beneficial from a security perspective for big powers for the simple reason that security risks are curtailed in trilateralism when it engages strong buffer states (such as Nepal and Myanmar). This is why trilateralism is preferred to bilateralism by big powers.

The above arguments also lead us to conclude that precisely owing to economic and technological determinism, it is not necessary to have a common security agreement or understanding before trilateral cooperation can ensue. Non-traditional security threats are solid causes for trilateralism. Further, security agreements or understanding curtail the manouverability of the smaller powers from reaching out to extra-regional big powers which are strategic for their survival. Economic corridors are excellent confidence-building investments to deal with the emergent mega risks from the impending water security caused by climate change and global waning and the inevitability of complex disputes over riparian rights— upper, middle and lower.

Chinese scholars admit that for Xi’s ‘China Dream’, anchored on Silk Road and Route strategies, to succeed, innovations in international relations are eminently needed. So far, these ‘innovations’ are limited to creation of transport corridors and massive investments in the infrastructure necessary for the deserted corridors. This includes energy grids as well as communication networks to supplement the transport and logistics networks. Beyond this, Chinese scholars speak of cooperation in new frontiers such as, for example, human capital development. It recognizes how devolved planning and management of corridors can and should be by calling for institutional innovations such as formation of transporters, industrialists, traders forming alliances and creating ‘alliances between cities’ along the corridor and discovering networking mechanisms between these institutional platforms.^[13]

Chinese scholars and planners must begin to visualize, at least, in its immediate neighbourhood, that what is important is not transport corridors but economic corridors leading to subregional integration of contiguous territories. Having said this, for the Himalayan subregion it must envision the rivers as the bedrock of subregional cooperation for harmonious development with peace and security uppermost in mind. It is, therefore, suggested that harnessing the Indus, Ganges and Brahmaputra Rivers in the context of a broader, macro level River Basin Development would be ideal for all partners for shared prosperity and sustainability. This would require that economic corridors focus on agriculture and agro-processing; forestry and forestry products; mining and mineral products; water resource engineering; construction engineering; S&T and R&D for creation of world class intellectual capital among others as priority areas.

To underscore, economic corridors are perfect tools for subregional co-operation through devolution of responsibility and authority to local bodies and communities. They need seamless connectivity by road, rail, waterway, rope way, grids etc. But, importantly, the markets must be integrated and supported by financial cooperation by local governments and banks with risks judicially shared by all the central governments.

Japan Rising 1950’s vision of an Asian Highway Network is being revived as it too wishes to promote its technology, knowhow and surplus dollars and invest in Asian infrastructure —perhaps in competition to China. This will be a welcome development for us in South Asia as we have greater choice over sources and projects. It also promises to benefit South Asia in another direction; namely, the possible development of Asian MNC that combine East Asian finance, technology and knowhow with South Asian labour for the construction of the mega infrastructure trans Himalayan projects to build connectivity and harness its vast water resources for water security, energy security, food security and riverine transportation.  It must be said here that the momentum with which Trans Himalayan Economic Corridors assume shape and form will depend, critically, on the settlement of all bilateral boundary issues between neighbours.

This article was originally published in GP-ORF’s Emerging Trans-Regional corridors: South and Southeast Asia

^[1] See “The Ancient Tea and Horse Caravan Road: The ‘Silk Road’ of Southwest China”, The Silk Road Foundation Newsletter at silkroadfoundation.org/newsletter/2004vol2num1/tea.htm

^[2] The BCIM-EC is a four-nation connectivity initiative involving Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar. See for instance Patricia Uberoi, “The BCIM Economic Corridor: A Leap into the Unknown?”, ICS Working Paper, November 2014 at http://www.icsin.org/uploads/2015/05/15/89cb0691df2fa541b6972080968fd6ce.pdf

^[3] In 2013 Xi Jinping announced the “One Belt, One Road” initiative to revive the ancient silk roads. See chronology of the OBOR at http://english.gov.cn/news/top_news/2015/04/20/content_281475092566326.htm

^[4] The Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal or BBIN is a sub-regional vision for economic integration. The first this towards this objective was achieve when the four nations signed a motor vehicle agreement for free movement in June 201.  See “Forget SAARC, if Pakistan does not cooperate, India will come up with ‘BBIN’”, First Post,  February 26, 2015 at http://www.firstpost.com/world/forget-saarc-if-pakistan-does-not-cooperate-india-will-come-up-with-bbin-2121773.html

^[5]See full text of the address of at the Second South-South Summit, Doha, State of Qatar on 15 June 2005 available at http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/nepal/document/papers/king_June05.htm

^[6] “Nepal’s Prachanda inks Lumbini deal with Chinese NGO: Report”, November 8, 2012, Global Post at http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/india/nepal-prachanda-lumbini-china

^[7] “Nepal to Act As Friendship Bridge Between India, China”,16 September, 2011, Outlook at http://www.outlookindia.com/newswire/story/nepal-to-act-as-friendship-bridge-between-india-china/735004

^[8] Pradumna B Rana and Binod Karmacharya, “A Connectivity Driven Development Strategy for Nepal: From a Landlocked to a Land-Linked State”, ADBI Working Paper Series, Tokyo, No. 498, September 2014 at   http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/156353/adbi-wp498.pdf

^[9] “$1 Trillion Trove of Rare Minerals Revealed Under Afghanistan”, September 4, 2014, Live Science at http://www.livescience.com/47682-rare-earth-minerals-found-under-afghanistan.html#sthash.LFSq94lU.dpuf

^[10] “Nathu La beckons”, Frontline, Volume 23 – Issue 14,  July 15-28, 2006 at http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2314/stories/20060728002603600.htm

^[11]“Himalayan rail route endorsed”, China Daily, 5 August 2016 at http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2016-08/05/content_26361358.htm

^[12] “Nepal to request China to expand Araniko Highway”, The Kathmandu Post, 9 November, 2015 at

http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2015-11-29/nepal-to-request-china-to-expand-araniko-highway.html

^[13] Shi Ze, “‘One Belt and One Road’& New Thinking with regard to Concept and Practice”, New Paradigm, Schuller Institute (no date and place) at http://newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com/media/one-road-and-one-belt-and-new-thinking-with-regard-to-concepts-and-practice/

Former US President Obama lauded Enlightenment values – democracy, enterprise, human rights – now under assault in the US and around the world.

By Marc Grossman*

Many US Presidents since John F. Kennedy have cited the Enlightenment as the foundation for America’s constitutional system and the values which the United States and the larger West have promoted and defended since the late 18th century. But no American president until Barack Obama has had to report that the Enlightenment’s fundamental values – described in his farewell speech on January 10, as “a faith in reason, and enterprise, the primacy of right over might …the rule of law, human rights, freedoms of religion, speech, assembly and an independent press” – are under assault in the United States and around the world.  Just weeks into the Trump administration such concerns have acquired an added urgency.

Until recently, it seemed Enlightenment values were ascendant. In the 1990s, the Soviet Union collapsed and Western ideals of economic, political, religious freedom spread across the world. Between 1990 and 2015, global GDP increased by $51 trillion and incomes across the world rose by 136 percent. Millions of people were lifted out of poverty. And according to Freedom House, the world today still has more democracies in the world today than dictatorships.

But democracy and values of the Enlightenment are under siege. Islamic and other fanatics perpetrate merciless violence. Authoritarian governments and movements are on the rise. Racism, sexism, intolerance and anti-Semitism are “new normal” components of discourse. “Alternative facts,” touted by Washington officials, replace logic and science-based evidence. Political gridlock weakens many of the world’s democracies. Too many Europeans have abandoned their belief in the ideal of integration as an antidote to centuries of bloodshed.

President Donald Trump’s inaugural address, 10 days after Obama’s farewell, was infused with pessimism, nationalism and nostalgia for what historian Mark Lilla calls a “happy, well ordered state where people know their place, live in harmony and submit to tradition and their God,”  a society which supposedly existed before “the elites challenged this harmony.

The political promise so many saw in the rubble of the Berlin Wall and the potential of ever increasing global economic integration have faded.

First, too many of citizens were excluded or left behind. The American families described in David Smick’s book The Great Equalizer believe the system is “rigged” in favor of the large over the small. They see jobs lost to countries who do not play by the rules, crumbling infrastructure, out-of-touch political leaders, and family budgets one unanticipated expense away from disaster. They worry their children will be worse off.

Second, and surely related, there is an increasing reaction to and rejection of Enlightenment values and ways of thinking. Lilla writes in his book The Shipwrecked Mind, that “Millennial expectations of a redemptive new social order and rejuvenated human beings inspire the revolutionary; apocalyptic fears of entering a new dark age haunt the reactionary.” Believers in this narrative recall a traditional world which “ran continuously from antiquity to the Catholic Middle Ages” and provided a “coherent narrative for understanding and practicing virtue in their individual and collective lives.” They suggest that world was destroyed by the “Enlightenment Project.”  Lilla describes those “who have preserved the memories of the old ways” as people who maintain that only they can “see what is happening.  Whether society reverses direction or rushes to its doom depends entirely on their resistance.”  This is the common theme of Islamists, European nationalists who met in Koblenz on January 21 and many who aspire to “make America great again.”

Third, as Zaki Laïdi argues in his prescient book A World Without Meaning, first published in French in 1998, at the end of the Cold War, “We thought we saw the great work of the Enlightenment coming to fruition, whereas in fact everything seems to indicate it was brought ruthlessly to an end.” Laïdi describes the Cold War as a unique, long-term battle between democracy and communism for “the appropriation of meaning.”  Both sides saw themselves as promoters of “progress, an identifiable course toward a better world.”  When the Berlin Wall fell, this “meaning” was lost as a lodestar both for individual identity and as an organizing principle for nation states; “power became divorced from meaning.”

Globalization, in Laïdi’s view, delivered the final blow because “globalization is a state and not a meaning.”

To build a future more acceptable than the present requires a commitment to creating a reenergized Enlightenment, in today’s vernacular, Enlightenment 2.0.  Based on its still relevant philosophical foundations, an updated Enlightenment would have as explicit objectives the promoting of rapid, sustainable, economic growth; producing a world order capable of meeting multiplying global challenges; and restoring meaning into the lives of the globe’s citizens.

The “how” is an urgent matter for public debate. Three connected foundational thoughts may be relevant to start that conversation.

First, without falling into the trap of exclusion, there is a need for the recognition and promotion of spirituality – renewed focus on the human spirit – as part of a full life. Pope Francis is right to remind that materialism is not an answer to all questions, and to paraphrase Laïdi, globalization is policy, not faith.

Second, without looking for enemies to recreate the Cold War in Europe or Asia or  elsewhere, but always ready to defend interests, governments and citizens can use  a reenergized Enlightenment as a foundation for nation states to begin the search for an international system which returns meaning to relations between and among states through their foreign policies. A return to meaning might begin with a broad coalition that destroys ISIS, ends bloodshed in Syria, and then focuses on the political and economic development of the Middle East.  New meaning may also come through elevating not just the mechanisms but the collective effort to fight disease or protect the environment.

Finally, and most important, there is a requirement for global and national policies that open new possibilities for productive, meaningful work for as many citizens as possible as rapidly as possible.  The just announced 2016 US economic growth rate of 1.6 percent is too low to achieve this objective. Unlike the ambiguities inherent in meeting the needs of human spirituality or the challenges of the global system, the United States and other governments can implement identifiable policies to increase the pace of growth and liberate what economic strategist David Smick sees as America’s natural entrepreneurial spirits: Real tax and regulatory reform that fosters growth and equality. Focus on producing safe conventional and alternative energies. A fair global system that promotes and does not choke off economic integration. Infrastructure investments funded by a return of US corporate cash parked abroad.

Because Enlightenment values are under attack does not make them wrong or irrelevant. They matter and need defending.  Of course, those who seek an Enlightenment for the 21st century must avoid becoming “Enlightenment reactionaries” themselves, convinced that only those who preserve these “old ways” can understand what is really happening. The goal of free people should be to debate and then create a relevant, morally sound and modern set of guiding principles that can reconnect our work and our domestic and international systems to the great human aspiration to live lives of significance and meaning.

*Ambassador Marc Grossman is a Vice Chairman of The Cohen Group. A US Foreign Service Officer for 29 years, he retired in 2005 as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. The ambassador was the US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, 2011-2012, and a Kissinger Senior Fellow at Yale in 2013.  The author thanks Hannah Hudson for her support on this essay.   

By Maja Zivanovic

Speculation that Aleksandar Vucic will stand for the Serbian presidency mounted on Friday when the vice-president of his ruling Serbian Progressive Party, Milos Vucevic, announced that would propose Vucic as the party’s candidate for the elections, expected in March or April.

“If Vucic doesn’t propose a different name, I will recommend him as the presidential candidate, because this campaign boils down to him,” Vucevic said.

If the ruling party does indeed propose Vucic, one person who will be left disappointed is Serbia’s current President, Tomislav Nikolic, who is also a member of the same party.

Nikolic last week said he hoped to get the support of the Progressives for another mandate as head of state.

Nikolic won the election in 2012 as the candidate of the Progressives in a tight race with Boris Tadic. On several occasions he has said he expects the support of the Progressives once again, and is convinced he has the support of a majority in the party.

“I founded it [the Serbian Progressive Party] and I believe it is the strongest party,” he told the Belgrade based Kurir.

Some media reports have suggested that Nikolic could run for president even without the support of the Progressives.

But Socialist leader Ivica Dacic, head of the most important coalition partner of the Progressives, on Friday called the idea “nonsense”.

“I will personally with all my energy support Vucic and he will win in the first round,” Dacic predicted to Serbia’s public broadcaster RTS.

Vucic has not commented on his potential candidacy recently, but did warn that he would quit as Prime Minister if the candidate of the Progressives did not win, rejecting the possibility of political cohabitation.

“In such circumstances, good results are not possible. Then it would be better to leave myself,” he said in November.

So far, the list of announced candidates comprises ultra-nationalist Serbian Radical Party leader Vojislav Seselj, former Ombudsman Sasa Jankovic, former Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic, right-wing Dveri party chief Bosko Obradovic, Democratic Party of Serbia leader Aleksandar Popovic, and former Progressive Party member Sasa Mirkovic – who is running as an independent.

The others are Serbian People’s Party leader Nenad Popovic, Miroslav Parovic, from the right-wing Treca Srbija party, Cajetina municipality chief Milan Stamatovic, Bratislav Jugovic, who are both running as independents, the president of the Serbian Institute in Washington, Danijela Sremac ,and an American from Serbia, Vladimir Rajcic.

The latest poll conducted by Gallup and published on Wednesday showed that Nikolic would win the election if Vucic did not compete.

As an independent, it said, Nikolic would win 37.2 per cent of votes – and if he was supported by the Progressive Party, the Socialists and other members of the ruling coalition, he could count on 50.2 per cent of the votes in the first round.

According to the poll, in both cases the second-best rated figure is former foreign minister Vuk Jeremic.

Poll have shown that if Nikolic and Jeremic enter the second round, Nikolic would win 58 per cent of the vote and the former foreign minister, 42 per cent.
– See more at: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/presidential-elections-in-serbia-all-eyes-on-vucic-02-10-2017#sthash.xQNCTBKo.dpuf

Nicotine exposure, before and after birth, can cause a child to have hearing problems due to abnormal development in the auditory brainstem. This is according to a mouse model study published in The Journal of Physiology.

Nicotine exposure during pregnancy has previously been shown to harm the brain development of a fetus. Mothers who smoke, use e-cigarettes or nicotine replacement therapy have an increased risk of premature delivery, decreased child birth weight, and an increased rate of sudden infant death.

This research reports, for the first time, that the auditory brainstem, an area of the brain which plays a role in analysing sound patterns, may develop abnormally in offspring when pregnant mothers are exposed to nicotine before and after giving birth. Children with impaired auditory brainstem function are likely to have learning difficulties and problems with language development.

The researchers added nicotine to the drinking water of pregnant mice to reach blood nicotine levels similar to heavy human smokers. The offspring of the mice were exposed to nicotine before birth and via the mother’s milk until they were three weeks old — an age that is approximately equivalent to primary school children. The scientists then analysed the brains of the offspring mice by measuring the firing properties and signalling abilities of their neurons. These results were compared to a control group of offspring from pregnant mice with no nicotine exposure.

Neurons that get input from the cochlea (sensory organ in the ear) were less effective at transmitting signals to other auditory brainstem neurons in mice exposed to nicotine. Moreover, these signals were transmitted with less precision, which deteriorates the coding of sound patterns. These could be part of the underlying causes for auditory processing difficulties in children of heavy smoking mothers.

Ursula Koch, Professor at the Freie Universität Berlin and lead investigator of the study said, “We do not know how many other parts of the auditory system are affected by nicotine exposure. More research is needed about the cumulative effect of nicotine exposure and the molecular mechanisms of how nicotine influences the development of neurons in the auditory brainstem.”

She added, “If mothers smoke during pregnancy and their children show learning difficulties at school, they should be tested for auditory processing deficits.”