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

UN Agency Says Record-Breaking Weather Pushes World Into ‘Uncharted Territory’

0
0

Global temperatures set yet another record last year and the world witnessed exceptionally low sea ice, and unabated sea level rise and ocean heat, the United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said today, warning that the extreme weather and climate conditions have continued into 2017.

According to the agency’s Statement on the State of the Global Climate in 2016, while global temperatures hit a remarkable 1.1 degree-Celsius above the pre-industrial period, global sea-level touch record highs and the planet’s sea-ice coverage dropped more than four million square kilometres below average in November – an unprecedented anomaly for that month.

“This increase in global temperature is consistent with other changes occurring in the climate system,” explained WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.

“With levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere consistently breaking new records, the influence of human activities on the climate system has become more and more evident.”

Each of the year since 2001 has seen at least 0.4 degree-Celsius above the long-term average for the 1961-1990 base period, used by the UN agency as a reference for climate change monitoring.

The 2016 heating was further boosted by the powerful 2015/2016 El Niño weather system, during which global sea-level also rose very strongly.

Similarly, carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere reached the symbolic benchmark of 400 parts per millions in 2015 – the latest year for which WMO global figures are available – and will not fall below that level for many generations to come because of the long-lasting nature of CO2.

The extreme climate conditions also added to human suffering: 2016 saw severe droughts, affecting millions in southern and eastern African and Central America. For example, in the Caribbean, Hurricane Matthew – the first category 4 (CAT4) storm to make landfall since 1963 – tore a path of destruction in Haiti and inflicted significant economic losses in the region.

In the midst of such challenges, Mr. Taalas, underlined the importance of implementation of the Paris Agreement on climate change, which also entered into force last year.

“The entry into force of the Paris Agreement on 4 November 2016 represents a historic landmark,” he said, adding: “It is vital that its implementation becomes a reality and that the Agreement guides the global community in addressing climate change by curbing greenhouse gases, fostering climate resilience and mainstreaming climate adaptation into national development policies.”

He also called for continued investment in climate research and observations to allow scientific knowledge to keep pace with the rapid rate of climate change.


Hijab-Clad Women Claim Refused Entry To Bryan Adams Doha Concert

0
0

Women in Qatar are claiming they were refused entry to Wednesday’s Bryan Adams concert in Qatar due to their hijabs.

Canadian singer Bryan Adams performed in Doha but dozens of women have taken to social media to claim that they were barred from entering the concert, despite having valid tickets.

Speaking to Doha News, 44-year-old Tunisian expat Iram Kassis said that a security guard asked her and her sister to step out of the concert queue because her sister was wearing a headscarf.

“We have been shocked by that and asked to meet with a responsible person to clarify this issue, especially (since) it was not mentioned in the terms and conditions of the website (when we) purchased the tickets,” she said.

“This was not a club where they could ban me from entering,” she said, referring to the understanding that venues which serve alcohol do not welcome women in hijabs or individuals in local dress.

Twitter users took to the platform to express dismay.
“#women standing outside the @bryanadams concert not allowed in because of our #hijab #discrimination #disgusting,” one user tweeted alongside a photo of a woman purportedly stood outside the venue.

Twitter user Rakaposhi @dkc6004 tweeted directly at Adams.

“My wife is being prevented from entering ur concert ’cause she wears a headscarf,” he wrote.

Other concert goers claim hijab-wearing women were visible in the crowd, leading Doha News to suggest the supposed ban was not evenly enforced.

The concert organizers Alive Entertainment have yet to make a statement.

Blood Test To Detect Cancer Could Soon Be Possible

0
0

Doctors may soon be able to detect and monitor a patient’s cancer with a simple blood test, reducing or eliminating the need for more invasive procedures, according to Purdue University research.

W. Andy Tao, a professor of biochemistry and member of the Purdue University Center for Cancer Research, and colleagues identified a series of proteins in blood plasma that, when elevated, signify that the patient has cancer. Their findings were published in the early edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Tao’s work was done with samples from breast cancer patients, but it is possible the method could work for any type of cancer and other types of diseases. The work relies on analysis of microvesicles and exosomes in blood plasma.

Protein phosphorylation, the addition of a phosphate group to a protein can lead to cancer cell formation. So phosphorylated proteins, known as phosphoproteins, have been seen as prime candidates for cancer biomarkers. Until now, however, scientists weren’t sure identification of phosphoproteins in blood was possible because the liver releases phosphatase into the bloodstream, which dephosphorylates proteins.

“There are so many types of cancer, even multiple forms for different types of cancer, that finding biomarkers has been discouraging,” Tao said. “This is definitely a breakthrough, showing the feasibility of using phosphoproteins in blood for detecting and monitoring diseases.”

Tao and his colleagues found nearly 2,400 phosphoproteins in a blood sample and identified 144 that were significantly elevated in cancer patients. The study compared 1-milliliter blood samples from 30 breast cancer patients with six healthy controls.

The researchers used centrifuges to separate plasma from red blood cells, and high-speed and ultra-high-speed centrifuges to further separate microvesicles and exosomes. Those particles, which are released from cells and enter the bloodstream, may play a role in intercellular communication and are thought to be involved in metastasis, spreading cancer from one place to another in the body. They also encapsulate phosphoproteins, which Tao’s team identified using mass spectrometry.

“Extracellular vesicles, which include exosomes and microvesicles, are membrane-encapsulated. They are stable, which is important,” Tao said. “The samples we used were 5 years old, and we were still able to identify phosphoproteins, suggesting this is a viable method for identifying disease biomarkers.”

A simple blood test for cancer would be far less invasive than scopes or biopsies that remove tissue. A doctor could also regularly test a cancer patient’s blood to understand the effectiveness of treatment and monitor patients after treatment to see if the cancer is returning.

“There is currently almost no way to monitor patients after treatment,” Tao said. “Doctors have to wait until cancer comes back.”

Timothy Ratliff, director of the Purdue University Center for Cancer Research, said the findings are promising for early detection of cancer.

“The vesicles and exosomes are present and released by all cancers, so it could be that there are general patterns for cancer tissues, but it’s more likely that Andy will develop patterns associated with different cancers. It’s really exciting,” Ratliff said. “Early detection in cancer is key and has been shown to clearly reduce the death rate associated with the disease.”

Tao plans to analyze increased levels of phosphoproteins in various types of cancer to determine whether there are patterns that would signify the type of cancer a patient has. His company, Tymora Analytical, is also developing technology that would allow doctors to insert blood samples onto a cartridge and analyze phosphoproteins present, eliminating the need for ultra-high-speed centrifuges that aren’t practical in clinical settings.

The Politics Of Belonging – Analysis

0
0

Pew Research poll finds that place of birth matters little for sense of belonging or national identity.

By Bruce Stokes*

The tide of people moving across the world as immigrants or refugees has sparked concern in the developed world – from the United States to Europe to Australia. In particular, the ethnic, linguistic and cultural background of the many seeking asylum or economic opportunity has triggered debates, especially in rich countries, over the benefits and the costs of growing diversity at home.

Unease over the cultural, not only economic and security, ramifications of immigration has been a key factor in the United Kingdom’s Brexit vote, plans for a wall along the US-Mexican border and the rise of right-wing populist parties in Europe.

“Being one of us” has become highly politicized. National identity – what it means to be truly American, German, Japanese or citizen of any other nation – varies sharply among nations, political parties and generations, suggests the Pew Research Center as part of its Global Attitudes cross-national studies.  Against the backdrop of sometimes intense nationalist rhetoric, it might be assumed that many in developed countries link national identity with one’s place of birth. At a time when the number of people living outside their places of birth has reached more than 200 million – size of a populous country like Brazil – the issue of identity is sparking acute political debate.

Sense of belonging: Place of birth is not an essential feature for national identity compared with other factors, according to Pew Research surveys in selected nations

Sense of belonging: Place of birth is not an essential feature for national identity compared with other factors, according to Pew Research surveys in selected nations

A Pew Research Center survey finds that people generally place a relatively low premium on a person’s birthplace: Only 13 percent of Australians, 21 percent of Canadians, 32 percent of Americans and a median of 33 percent of Europeans suggest that it is very important for a person to be born in their country in order to be considered a true national.

There are exceptions – Hungary, 52 percent; Greece, 50 percent; and Japan, 50 percent – where about half the public considers birthplace to be very important. But in other nations – countries where there have been visible backlashes against refugees including Germany, 13 percent; Australia, 13 percent; and Sweden, 8 percent – few people make a strong connection between the locale of one’s birth and national identity.

While many in the countries surveyed are open to those born elsewhere being part of “the nation,” acceptance comes with certain requisites. Majorities in every country surveyed say it is very important to speak the dominant language to be considered a true national. This includes a median of 77 percent across Europe and strong majorities in Japan and the US, 70 percent; Australia, 69 percent; and Canada, 59 percent.

In addition, sharing national customs and traditions is very important to many people’s sense of “being one of us.” Roughly half or more link adoption of local culture to national identity in Canada, 54 percent; Australia, 50 percent; and Europe, a median of 48 percent. Somewhat fewer Americans, 45 percent, and Japanese, 43 percent, say cultural traditions are essential to being a true national.

Even within developed countries, views on national identity differ, often along partisan or ideological lines.

In the United States, 83 percent of Republicans say language proficiency is a very important requisite for being truly American. Fewer Democrats, 61 percent, agree. Among Republicans, 60 percent say that, to be considered a true American, it is very important that a person share US culture. Only 38 percent of Democrats share that opinion.

Notably, there is not much partisan difference about the link between the land of one’s birth and US national identity. Roughly a third of Republicans, 35 percent, and Democrats, 32 percent, say being born in the United States is very important.

Views of what constitutes national identity also divide publics along party lines in some European countries. In the United Kingdom, 73 percent of those who have a favorable opinion of the right-wing UK Independence Party, UKIP, say adhering to British culture is very important to being British. Just 44 percent of those who have an unfavorable view of UKIP agree. In France, sharing French customs and traditions is tied to national identity for those who have a favorable view of the right-wing, populist National Front – 65 percent say it is very important. Just 39 percent of those who hold an unfavorable opinion of the National Front strongly link culture to being truly French. There is a similar 24-percentage-point difference on the importance of Swedish customs and traditions between sympathizers with the right-wing, populist Swedish Democrats and those who see them unfavorably. And in Germany, a 22-point gap exists on the importance of culture between those who favor the Alternative for Germany party and those who don’t.

Ability to communicate: There's wide agreement in response to Pew Research surveys that ability to speak the national language is "very important" to belonging to a nation; Canadians were asked about "either English or French"

Ability to communicate: There’s wide agreement in response to Pew Research surveys that ability to speak the national language is “very important” to belonging to a nation; Canadians were asked about “either English or French”

In Australia, supporters of the center-right Liberal Party and center-left Labor Party, 79 and 68 percent, respectively, say it is very important to speak English to be considered Australian. Only a third of the left-leaning environmentally oriented Greens agree. There is even greater partisan disparity on the importance of customs and tradition. Among Liberal Party followers, 63 percent suggest that adherence to Australian customs and traditions is very important to national identity while 44 percent of Labor Party supporters concur. Even fewer Greens agree at 15 percent.

In Canada, while majorities across all major parties say it is very important to speak either French or English, this sentiment is held most strongly by those supporting the center-right Conservative Party of Canada, 68 percent, followed by those backing the center-left Liberal Party, 59 percent, and those supporting the social-democratic New Democratic Party, 53 percent. More than six in 10 Conservatives, or 63 percent, suggest that a person must share Canadian customs and traditions to be truly Canadian. Fully 57 percent of Liberals agree, but only 46 percent of New Democrats share this view.

Sentiment regarding what defines national identity is also a generational issue, with the young placing far less emphasis than the old on culture and birthplace.

In the United States, 40 percent of people ages 50 and older percent are more likely than those ages 18 to 34, at 21 percent, to say it is very important that a person be born in the country to be considered truly American. In Japan, the generational divide is more pronounced: Older Japanese are more likely than their younger counterparts to link national identity to birthplace by a 59 percent to 29 percent margin. Generational differences, though generally more modest, are also evident in Australia and Canada, 15 percentage points each, and across most European countries surveyed.

Across the countries surveyed, the generations differ even more sharply over the importance of national customs and traditions. In the United States, 55 percent of people ages 50 and older percent are far more likely than those ages 18 to 34 – at 28 percent – to say sharing such cultural elements is very important to being truly American. There is a similar 20-percentage-point generation gap in Canada, Australia and Japan. In Europe, a median of 37 percent of 18- to 34-year-olds suggest this aspect of national identity is very important, compared with 56 percent of those ages 50 and older.

At a time when economically developed countries are challenged by increased refugee and migrant flows – and fierce debates over immigration – relatively few survey respondents subscribe to birthright definitions of national belonging. This may be a hopeful sign for those seeking asylum or economic opportunity in a new country, as it’s possible to change how one speaks and acts, but not where one was born.

*Bruce Stokes is the director of global economic attitudes at the Pew Research Center. This article is an excerpt from the Pew Research Center report “What It Takes to Truly Be ‘One of Us.’”

Taiwan’s Ex-Presidents: A Carousel Of Legal Problems – Analysis

0
0

By Thomas J. Shattuck*

(FPRI) — On March 14, the former president of Taiwan, Ma Ying-jeou, was charged with leaking classified information related to a wiretapping case. This indictment is not the first—or even second—time that a former president of the country has experienced legal troubles after leaving office.

As president, Ma released recordings of a member of the Democratic Progressive Party and Wang Jin-pyng, a member of the Kuomintang (KMT) and President of the Legislative Yuan (Taiwan’s legislative body), to the Premier.

Ma said that he ordered the leak because he felt that it was his duty as the head of state to release information related to potential influence peddling. The government’s prosecutor authorized the wiretapping due to suspicions that the two politicians were using Wang’s position to influence judicial officials.

If convicted, Ma could face up to three years in jail.

Ma has insisted on his innocence claiming that he handled everything appropriately as head of state. According to Ma, he was dealing with a crisis and what “he believed were political flaws and responsibilities involving cabinet members.”

When discussing the charge, Ma said, “Legislators can get away with peddling their influence, but the people who uncovered the scandal have been prosecuted. Where is the justice?”

Post-Presidency Blues

Ma’s post-presidency has been anything but pleasant. The wiretapping lawsuit is not the only one that Ma has faced (and is facing) since he left office in May 2016. The day that he left office, Ma faced 24 lawsuits because his presidential immunity ceased. Also, he was barred by the presidential office from travelling to Hong Kong for “national security concerns” though he has traveled several times to the United States since leaving office.

Unfortunately for Taiwan, Ma is not the first former president to be charged, convicted, or jailed after his tenure in office.

Former President Chen Shui-bian, a member of the DPP, was found guilty of corruption in 2009. He, along with his wife, was sentenced to life in prison, but the sentencing was later reduced to 20 years. He was found guilty of corruption and graft for accepting over US$20 million in bribes and misusing public funds. Chen claimed that the charges against him were politically motivated and a form of revenge by the KMT for his staunch pro-independence views.

The Chen case is an important precedent to explore because Ma may find himself in similar circumstances soon. Like Chen, Ma faces a government with the executive and legislative branches controlled by the other side. Members of the KMT have complained that Ma’s indictment is revenge for what the KMT did to former president Chen. His refusal to pardon Chen as a courtesy to his predecessor, among other things, provides little incentive for current President Tsai Ing-wen to be lenient and pardon him.

Further compounding this pattern of legal troubles, another Chen’s predecessor, Lee Teng-hui, was also indicted on corruption charges for embezzling US$7.8 million during his tenure in office. Lee was acquitted and won on the prosecutor’s appeal.

This pattern of every ex-president of Taiwan being charged is troubling for what many consider a vibrant and healthy democracy in Asia. Not only did Taiwan recently elect its first woman president in 2016, but it also handed the Legislative Yuan to the opposition DPP for the first time in the country’s history. Many across the world looked (and still do look) to Taiwan as a blueprint for a successful and open democracy in a region where there are not very many.

When it comes to ex-presidents, however, Taiwan is riding a carousel of judicial issues. What does it say for a country that the first three presidents who came to office through popular, democratic elections have faced prosecution? Can a democracy truly be characterized as vibrant and thriving when Lee, Chen, and Ma were not able to live life as a private citizen without being surrounded by a cloud of lawsuits?

Stop the Carousel

This bickering and targeting of ex-presidents is not healthy for the country. The lawsuit against Ma and related debates will soak up hours of air time on Taiwanese television, distracting people and the government from more important issues like cross-Strait relations, Chinese aggression in the East Asia, pension reform, modernizing the economy, and many other things.

If Ma is found guilty for leaking classified information in this particular case, it would be in President Tsai’s best interest to pardon him. She must break the cycle of political bickering and revenge and show herself to be a truly transcendent leader. By eschewing partisan politics and not sticking it to the opposition, Tsai can show her colleagues—rivals and allies alike—how to truly lead a nation.

An opportunistic leader would seize the moment to shore up his or her popular support, but a selfless leader should rise above—not bow to—the popular opinion of the day for the good of the country. If she does not work toward bridging gaps and reducing the hyper-partisan nature of Taiwanese politics, then in four, eight, or however many years it takes for the KMT to return to power, Tsai just might find herself taking a ride on the same carousel that Chen has ridden since 2009 and that Ma is just getting (un)comfortable on.

About the author:
*Thomas J. Shattuck
is the Assistant Editor and a Research Associate at FPRI. He received his BA in History and English from La Salle University in 2013 and his MA in International Studies from National Chengchi University in 2016. Thomas also received a Fulbright grant to teach English in Kinmen, Taiwan for the 2013-14 academic year.

Source:
This article was published by FPRI.

Sri Lanka: President Sirisena Travels To Russia, First State Visit Since 1974

0
0

Sri Lanka’s President Maithripala Sirisena is scheduled to arrive in Moscow on Wednesday, marking the first official tour of a Sri Lankan leader to Russia in four decades.

The last Sri Lankan leader to pay a state visit to Russia after Prime Minister Sirimavo Badaranaike’s memorable visit in 1974.

Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Morgulov, Chief of Protocol and other high officials, Sri Lankan ambassador Saman Weerasinghe and embassy staff and family members will receive the President on arrival at the Domodedovo International Airport in Moscow.

According to the Sri Lanka government, during the visit the two countries will enter into several new Agreements and Memorandums of Understanding (MoU) to expand bilateral cooperation in several fields such as energy, trade and commerce, agriculture, education, judiciary and defence.

The visit is expected to strengthen friendship and cooperation further and enhance bilateral trade between two countries, the Sri Lanka government said.

Sri Lanka’s main export products to Russia include tea in bulk and packed, green tea, apparel, industrial and surgical gloves of rubber, aircrafts components, desiccated coconut, activated carbon, discharge lamps, coir fiber and coir products, pneumatic and retreated rubber tyres & tubes.

The main imports from Russia to Sri Lanka are base metal products, paper and paper products, non-metallic mineral products, chemicals and plastic products, electrical and electronic products, parts and machinery woven fabrics.

Tourism is another area rapidly expanding as the number of Russian tourist arriving in Sri Lanka has marked a steady increase. There is a need for reestablishment of direct air links as the Aeroflot flight to Colombo that was commenced on 15th March 1965 was scrapped later, the Sri Lanka government said.

Spain Extends Protection For Mortgage Debtors

0
0

The Spanish government has agreed to extend until 2020 the moratorium on evictions for those groups hardest hit by the crisis, make the criteria more flexible to benefit from protection measures and offer an option to rent their primary dwelling at a reduced price.

The Spanish Minister for Economic Affairs, Industry and Competition, Luis de Guindos, stressed that the Royal Decree approved last Friday with a moratorium on evictions is part of the measures the government has been adopting since 2012 to tackle this problem deriving from the economic crisis.

Luis de Guindos pointed out that, in March 2012, the government approved the Code of Good Practices, which offered those families on the “threshold of exclusion” the possibility of negotiating to restructure their debt with financial institutions, establishing a write-off or re-possession in lieu of payment. Almost all the banks signed up to this Code. He also pointed out that, in November 2012, it was agreed to suspend evictions, an agreement that still remains in force, and that, in January 2013, 10,000 properties at very low rental prices were made available to the most vulnerable groups.

The minister underlined that almost 80,000 families have been the beneficiaries of these initiatives. Specifically, more than 24,000 evictions have been suspended and 45,600 families have benefited from the Code of Good Practices, of which 38,500 have re-structured their debt and 7,000 have passed on title to their property in lieu of payment. The Social Housing Fund has also awarded more than 9,000 homes.

Luis de Guindos highlighted that the new legislation agreed on Friday extends the suspension on evictions for a further three years until 2020. It also makes the criteria more flexible for determining which mortgage debtors are more vulnerable and can thus benefit from the protection measures.

In this regard, those family units with minors will be considered more vulnerable, instead of minors up to the age of three, which was the situation to date, as well as single-parent families with one of more minors in their care. Other recipients include family units including one or more people in a personal situation of disability, long-term care, serious illness or a victim of gender-based violence. Furthermore, as regards evictions, the requirement of having used up unemployment benefits is removed.

Protest In Iran: The Murky Geopolitics Of Soccer – Analysis

0
0

Thousands of Iranian Arabs last week attended an AFC Champions League soccer match between Esteghlal Ahvaz FC and Qatar’s Lekhwiya SC dressed in traditional Arab garb in protest what an opposition news website dubbed were government efforts to suppress their identity.

The English-language website, Ahwaz Monitor, said support for Esteghlal turned into anti-government protests with fans cheering their team in Arabic rather than Farsi. Fans chanted “national slogans” such as “Arabic is my identity and honour” and “Al Ahwaz for Ahwazis and all Gulf state residents are dearest to us.” Fans reportedly recited poetry celebrating their region’s Arab heritage.

Al Ahwaz is the Arabic name for the oil-rich but impoverished, south-eastern Iranian province of Khuzestan that borders on Iraq and sits at the head of the Gulf. It is also the name of the province’s capital that hosts Iran’s foremost refinery. Part of Khuzestan’s ethnic and religious mosaic, ethnic Arabs are believed to account for at least one third of its 3.7 million inhabitants. Iranian Arabs put the figure much higher.

Ahwaz Monitor started operations last summer, providing regular reports on Iranian Arabs and government efforts to suppress their identity and deprive them of their rights. It’s not clear who funds or owns the website.

Eruptions of genuine discontent in Khuzestan, particularly on soccer pitches when Asian competition matches are played against teams from the Gulf, have become a fixture in a province that for decades has been an overt and covert battlefield in the struggle between Saudi Arabia and Iran for regional hegemony.

Protests have focussed on identity, environmental degradation, and social issues. Iranian politicians warned of a “national threat” in February when riots erupted in 11 cities in Khuzestan after they lost power during a severe dust storm. The outages led to water shortages as water and wastewater treatment plants were knocked offline. Demonstrators chanted “Death to tyranny”, “We, the people of Ahwaz, won’t accept oppression” and “Clean air is our right, Ahwaz is our city.”

International human rights groups have long accused Iran of discriminating against Iranian Arabs even though many are Shiites rather than Sunni Muslims. Dozens of protesters were reportedly killed during demonstrations in Ahwaz in 2011 that were inspired by the popular Arab revolts.

“Despite Khuzestan’s natural resource wealth, its ethnic Arab population, which is believed to constitute a majority in the province, has long complained about the lack of socio-economic development in the region. They also allege that the Iranian government has engaged in systematic discrimination against them, particularly in the areas of employment, housing, and civil and political rights,” Human Rights Watch said at the time.

Habib Jaber Al-Ahvazi, a spokesman for the Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahwaz (ASMLA), a group that demands independence for Ahvaz and is believed to be responsible for bomb attacks in the city in 2005, 2006 and 2013, told online Arab nationalist Ahvaz.tv in 2015 that soccer protests were part of an “ongoing confrontation between demonstrators and the forces of the Persian occupation.”

There is little doubt that discontent in Khuzestan is widespread and that repeated spontaneous protests in stadiums as well as on the streets of the province’s cities were genuine. Yet, determining what events and reporting is purely local and what elements may be linked to potential Saudi and Gulf attempts to destabilize Iran is difficult.

Equally, there is little doubt that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arabs have a long history of encouraging Iranian Arab opposition and troubling the minority’s relations with the government.

Iranian Arabs believe that the government fears that they are susceptible to foreign Arab influence. That suspicion, Iranian Arabs say, is rooted in Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s bloody eight-year war against Iran that ended in 1988. Saddam falsely expected that Iranian Arabs would welcome the opportunity to gain independence from Iran.

The Iranian Arab refusal to side with Saddam failed, however, to earn Arabs in Ahwaz the credit they deserved. Government suspicions have been fuelled by recent conversions to Sunni Islam of a number of Iranian Arabs.

Distrust is further fuelled by the fact that much opposition news in Khuzestan is generated by organizations associated with the exiled People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran or Mujahedin-e-Khalq, a militant left-wing group that advocates the overthrow of Iran’s Islamic regime and traces its roots to resistance against the shah who was toppled in the 1979 revolution.

The Mujahedin based themselves in Iraq during the Saudi-backed Iraqi war against Iran. More recently the group appears to enjoy increased support from the kingdom. In a clear demonstration of Saudi support, former Saudi intelligence chief and envoy to Britain and the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, told a Mujahedeen rally in Paris last year that “your legitimate struggle against the (Iranian) regime will achieve its goal, sooner or later. I, too, want the fall of the regime.”

Prince Turki’s remarks fit a pattern of Arab calls for independence of Khuzestan. Writing in 2012 in Asharq Al Awsat, a Saudi newspaper, Amal Al-Hazzani, an academic who has since been dropped from the paper’s roster after she wrote positively about Israel, asserted in an op-ed entitled “The oppressed Arab district of al-Ahwaz“ that “the al-Ahwaz district in Iran…is an Arab territory… Its Arab residents have been facing continual repression ever since the Persian state assumed control of the region in 1925… It is imperative that the Arabs take up the al-Ahwaz cause, at least from the humanitarian perspective.”

The notion that external forces may be exploiting discontent in Khuzestan has broader implications amid reports that President Donald J. Trump could revert to a policy of regime change in Iran. Iran has in the past accused the United States and Saudi Arabia as well as Israel and Britain of supporting nationalist insurgents in the Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchistan.

The province borders on the Pakistani region of Balochistan where nationalists and jihadists have targeted Chinese investment that is key to China’s One Belt, One Road initiative. Some analysts have suggested that US and Saudi support for dissidents in various Iranian provinces may be designed to force Iran to weaken, if not withdraw, support for the regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

Pakistani General Qamar Javed Bajwa, apparently concerned that potential efforts to destabilize Iran could aggravate volatility in Balochistan, noted earlier this month that “enhanced Pakistan-Iran military-to-military cooperation will have a positive impact on regional peace and stability.”


Has Iraq’s PM Resumption Of Mosul Battle Placated Trump’s Aggressive Stance? – OpEd

0
0

The highly unexpected victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential elections sent shock waves across the world, but for Iraq’s PM Haider al-Abadi, it unquestionably heralded the beginning of what promises to be a long-running painful nightmare. Even while Trump was merely president-elect, Abadi found himself in the unenviable position of having to constantly play down or cover up Trump’s highly outrageous assertions ranging from taking Iraq’s oil to scolding the ousting of Saddam, Iraq’s tyrant.

Abadi’s worst nightmare materialized with Trump ushering in his presidency by stressing, to an audience of CIA officials, on the very first day after his inauguration, not only that: the U.S. should have seized Iraqi oil – which according to him was not stealing–, but far more chillingly declaring: maybe we will have a second chance.

And while Abadi desperately attempted on Jan 24, to sweep these profoundly alarming statements under the carpet, pretending he was not clear about what Trump meant. Trump, by contrast was far from apologetic, reasserting to ABC news, the very next day, not just the same comments but brazenly refusing to elaborate what he meant by having a second chance, insisting it was a military matter.

To make matters worse Trump issued an executive order, on Jan 27, banning citizens of seven countries, including Iraq, which is supposed to be US’s principal ally in the war against ISIL, from entering the U.S., prompting furious protest across Iraq and a resounding call by Iraq’s parliament instructing Abadi to reciprocate the insulting ban.

However, as expected, Abadi bluntly refused, citing vital U.S. military support. With Abadi becoming increasingly vulnerable, his office scrambled to alleviate the mounting pressure by ensuring that his readout of the phone call, on Feb 10, with Trump, stridently trumpeted the message that, thanks to Abadi’s concerted efforts, Trump is on the verge of removing Iraq from the ban.

Abadi’s over-reliance on amateurish spin to assuage critics and galvanise support backfired when Trump – seemingly antagonized by what he calls fake news – issued his readout, reflecting glaring contradictions with Abadi’s one.

The main issues highlighted in Abadi’s readout but were not even mentioned in Trump’s one included: Trump’s assurance that he instructed the State Department to find a prompt solution to the travel ban on Iraqi citizens, Trumps ringing endorsement of Abadi’s courageous leadership – while in Trump’s version he merely thanked Abadi for his leadership – and highlighting Trump’ emphatic support to his government – whereas Trump unambiguously declared support to the Iraqi people.

More significantly, however, were the issues concealed by Abadi, which include: First, Trump’s conspicuously unqualified assertion that the U.S. is building up its military deployment in Iraq, without linking it to the inevitable defeat of ISIL.

Second, Trump’s remarks regarding Iran’s threat to the region indicating that Abadi, tacitly agreed, not just with him but to a larger extent with Saudi Arabia’s vociferous yet unsuccessful campaign – given the highly credible evidence repeatedly underscored by ex-President Obama, ex-Secretary of State Clinton and ex-Vice President Biden, along with a growing chorus of European leaders pointing the finger of blame firmly at Saudi Arabia for its highly pernicious role in funding, arming and exporting its extremist hardline Wahhabi Salafi ideology to terrorist groups, such as ISIL or ISIS, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham or Jabhet al-Nusra JN – aiming to shift the responsibility for the mounting instability and insecurity to Iran.

Indeed, such remarks could undoubtedly sabotage Abadi’s already tenuous hold on power, largely because the political blocs underpinning his premiership, Muqtada al-Sadr’s al-Ahrar bloc and especially Amar al-Hakim’s Islamic Supreme Council bloc, pretend to be pro-Iran and anti-American. Hence, Abadi moved rapidly to placate any damage, emphasizing, on Feb 11, the same day Trump’s readout appeared that Iraq will stay clear of any regional conflict, therefore inadvertently lending credibility to Trump’s readout.

Ever since Abadi became PM, in Sept 2014, the Obama administration made no secret of its relentless effort to shore up his faltering leadership, despite his spectacular failure on the crucial fronts of fighting terror, corruption and reform, and the economy.

Abadi, in return has irrefutably been working tirelessly to consolidate U.S. already growing influence by: First, in May2015, Abadi adamantly refused – at the behest of the U.S. and Saudi Arabia – allowing the Popular Mobilisation Units PMU –consisting of mainly Shia paramilitary units and volunteers, who spearheaded Iraq’s fight back against ISIL, wresting back control of many strategic cities when the U.S. stood idly by unwilling to intervene – into Ramadi to thwart ISIL’s offensive, effectively leading to ISIL’s take over of the city, which took seven months to win back. It is doubtless that Iraqi forces has paid a heavy price for Abadi’s ill-conceived determination to bend backwards to comply with the US strategy. Second, in Oct 2015Abadi defied the growing calls by his own political bloc – the National Alliance – to invite Russia to expand its highly effective and relentless campaign in Syria – against ISIL and JN – into Iraq.

Instead Abadi pledged to Joe Dunford chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, not to request Russia’s intervention despite the undeniably ineffective US campaign. It is indisputable that Russia’s robust intervention in Syria has been a game changer, compelling the U.S. to ramp up its foundering campaign in Iraq. Third, in preparing the ground for a spectacular achievement to dramatically bolster Clinton’s – the Democratic Party candidate –prospects of winning America’s elections, Abadi launched the long-awaited offensive to retake Mosul in Mar 2016.

However, these plans were derailed largely due to the massive protest – called for by Al-Sadr to force Abadi to carry out a major overhaul of his corrupt government – that stormed the heavily fortified Green Zone, in April and May, perilously threatening the security of Baghdad’s government and parliament based there. And to make matters worse for Abadi these protests were accompanied by a dramatic surge in ISIL’s terrorist attacks, specifically targeting the Shia neighbourhoods where the overwhelming majority of Al-Sadr’s supporters live. And given that most of the suicide car bombs emanated from Fallujah, thus the PMU insisted that recapturing Fallujah should take primacy over Mosul. This, presented Abadi with a stark choice either losing face or his premiership, thus pushing Obama’s administration to swiftly dispatch, in April 2016, John Kerry ex-Secretary of State, followed by Joe Biden, both spelling out the same message that: Abadi was a red line and Mosul before Fallujah.

But ultimately Abadi had to humiliatingly back down. Four, in coordination with the Obama administration, Abadi re-launched the assault to recapture Mosul, ensuring that there is adequate time for Clinton to capitalise on it, explicitly stressing that by the time she becomes president, ISIL would have been driven out of Iraq and squeezed in Syria.

So, it is not hard to see why Trump is giving Abadi the cold shoulder treatment. In the eyes of Trump, Abadi is too close to Obama’s administration to be trusted. After all he is Obama’s Poodle in Iraq. All along Trump has made it clear that he admires strong and proud leaders like president Putin of Russia and respects decisive dictators like President Erdogan of Turkey. And indeed Trump has illustrated he is happy doing business with a weak brutal dictator provided he is rich enough to pay for his protection like Saudi Arabia’s King Salman. In Trump’s book Abadi is certainly far too weak, indecisive and lacks the charisma to be a leader.

Apart from the wholehearted support that Abadi enjoyed under Obama’s administration, which has so far been missing under Trump’s administration, it seems that Abadi has currently been facing challenges similar to those encountered before retaking Fallujah in Jun 2016. Once more, Al-Sadr’s supporters and thousands of increasingly disenfranchised citizens gathered, On February 11, demanding a complete overhaul of the electoral commission. And as before, force was used to prevent them from storming the Green Zone. Consequently, Al-Sadr vowed to escalate the protests. And simultaneously ISIL has once again ratcheted up its bombing campaign targeting Shia areas.

With Abadi cornered, he repeated what he did in Fallujah: launching, on February 19, a fresh offensive to claw back control of Western Mosul, after the Iraqi forces successfully liberating Eastern Mosul, on Jan 23. Thereby, killing two birds with one stone: halting all protests and compelling Trump to practice what he has consistently preached about combating ISIL.

As expected, Trump rapidly dispatched his Defence Chief James Mattis, the next day, to Baghdad to not only demonstrate his administration’s unflinching commitment to battling ISIL, but also to allay already deep-rooted fears regarding US long-term objectives.

And although Abadi’s re-launch of Mosul battle has successfully stemmed, but it unquestionably has not reversed Trump’s hostile stance. Surely, doing so would require much more than Mattis’s assertion that the U.S. Army is not in Iraq to steal anybody’s oil, apparently meant to dampen the tension and ease the pressure on Abadi during his visit. And while Trump’s decision, on March 6, – following relentless lobbying by the State and Defence Departments – to remove Iraq from the travel ban is a necessary first step, it is beyond doubt insufficient.

What is essentially needed is for Abadi to utilise his visit, on March 19th, to Washington to persuade Trump to declare that he has absolutely no intention to take Iraq’s oil and also to explain the motives behind the continuing U.S. military build up. Anything short of that would be a futile exercise in public relations.

*Zayd Alisa is a writer, political analyst and commentator on Middle East affairs with numerous appearances on various TV channels (including BBC, France 24, RT TV, etc.). Zayd Alisa has also published numerous articles relating to the most recent developments in the Middle East in the aftermath of the Arab spring and a number of my articles have been used as references.

EU’s Hahn Urges Speedy Formation Of Macedonia Govt

0
0

By Sinisa Jakov Marusic

Macedonia’s leaders must respect the outcome of the December 11 elections and facilitate the formation of a new government, visiting EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn said Tuesday following his mission in Skopje aimed at resolving the political crisis.

After meeting with key political leaders, Hahn urged Macedonian President Gjorge Ivanov, with whom he failed to meet during his stay, to respect the constitution and not to obstruct the mandate which would allow the formation of the opposition-led government.

“There is one suggestion and one proposal and that is to respect the democratic rules and standards which are, by the way, written down in the constitution. That means that if there is a majority in the government, by whomever, this has to be respected by everybody” Hahn said during a late night interview for Kanal 5 TV.

He also urged the quick organisation of a functional parliament as the best way to resolve ongoing tensions in the country by aiding a peaceful and institutional solution.

The leaders of the main political parties, who had separate meetings with Hahn during the day, said that the EU Commissioner had urged for the careful speeding up of the processes required for the formation of a new opposition-led government.

Only former Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski, who is the head of the right-wing VMRO DPMNE party, which strongly opposes the formation of a new opposition-led coalition government, did not give a statement after the parlays.

He did not allow media to record any footage of his meeting with Hahn.

Opposition leader optimistic:

The head of the main opposition Social Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDSM), Zoran Zaev who mustered a majority in parliament sounded optimistic that parliament would resume its session to elect a new speaker and he would manage to receive a mandate.

“All else would be a banal search for excuses from VMRO DPMNE” Zaev said. He added that after the majority elects the new speaker, President Ivanov would have no more excuses not to grant the mandate.

Macedonia’s has not managed to form a new government since the early election on December 11. It was hoped that it might result in the resolution of a political crisis that has lasted for two years.

The crisis took a turn for the worse on March 1 when Ivanov refused to award Zaev a mandate to form a government, despite the opposition leader having assembled a majority in parliament. Ivanov said that Zaev’s alleged acceptance of the so-called “Albanian Platform” might destroy the country.

Despite calls from Western representatives and diplomats for Ivanov to reconsider his decision and stick to the constitutional norms, the president has not yet changed his mind.

President fails to meet Hahn:

One of the main focuses of Hahn’s visit, was to be a meeting scheduled with Ivanov. The president cancelled it on Tuesday, saying he would not be able to return in time from Hungary, where he had been on an official visit.

The presidential cabinet said that Ivanov had nothing new to say to Hahn about his decision, suggesting that Hahn should use the time in which he planned to talk to Ivanov to instead meet with protesters who held a rally against an opposition coalition during his visit to Macedonia.

Commenting on the canceled meeting, Hahn said that it would likely be better if he [Ivanov] stayed in the country during this tense period.

“I think everybody expects him to participate in a pro active role and to contribute to a peaceful solution,” Hahn said.

Protesters express anger towards Hahn:

In Skopje, thousands of protesters rallying against the formation of a new opposition-led coalition government for a third consecutive week, used Hahn’s visit as an opportunity to vent their anger.

Protesters expressed discontent towards Hahn for not meeting them as they had previously demanded. They said that they aimed to secure the holding of yet another snap polls as well as the public rejection of the so-called “Albanian Platform”.

The protests and President Ivanov’s refusal to grant the opposition coalition a mandate appear to reflect claims made by the right-wing VMRO DPMNE party, which was in power from 2006 until the recent elections.

The party claims that if the opposition gains power, the country could crumble because of the opposition’s alleged acceptance of a so-called ‘Albanian platform’ which proposes an extention rights for the country’s Albanian population.

British Parliament On Lockdown, Assailant Shot Dead

0
0

(RFE/RL) — The British parliament has been put on lockdown after a gunman fired shots outside of the Palace of Westminster in London and tried to storm into the building that houses the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

Authorities said an assailant dressed in black made his way inside the parliamentary perimeter on March 22 and stabbed one police officer before he was shot dead by other security officials.

At the same time, in what appeared to be a coordinated attack, a car plowed into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge on March 22.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa may said she was safe after the incident. He declined to say where May was when the attack took place.

British Special Forces and heavily armed police were deployed inside the parliament building after the incidents.

EIB And People’s Bank Of China To Strengthen Green Finance

0
0

The People’s Bank of China, the central bank of the People’s Republic of China, and the European Investment Bank, the European Union’s long-term lending institution, announced Wednesday a joint initiative intended to combine policy and market best-practice and strengthen the framework for green investment.

The initiative aims to provide a clear framework for analysis and decision-making in green finance. Development of a common language will enhance the confidence of Chinese and international investors to support green finance through more consistent definitions and methodologies.

“China and the European Union jointly recognise the importance of strengthening investment in green finance to support sustainable growth, better protect the environment and tackle a changing climate change,” said Jonathan Taylor, European Investment Bank Vice President. China’s ambitious policy initiatives to establish the Green Financial System, outlined by the People’s Bank of China and government bodies last August, demonstrate the same vision as the EIB’s commitment to mobilise new investment for green finance and contributing to development of best practice in climate finance. Both the People’s Bank of China and the European Investment Bank recognise the importance of ensuring investor confidence in green finance and look forward to sharing their experience to facilitate green investment.”

According to said Hans-Dietmar Schweisgut, Ambassador of the European Union to China,“As signatories of the Paris Agreement, the European Union and China are committed to strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change and enhanced transparency of green finance.”

Schweisgut said that, “Putting theory into practice through improving accountability and aligning the financial system with climate policies is crucial to successfully tackle climate change.”

Reflecting the crucial role of capital markets in financing green investment experts from the China’s Green Finance Committee and the European Investment Bank will examine current classification of green bonds to map and compare respective approaches to green projects eligibility. This will use references including the Green Bond Endorsed Project Catalogue of the China Green Finance Committee as well as the Common Principles for climate finance tracking used by the Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) and the International Development Finance Club (IDFC).

In the coming month’s experts from the China Green Finance Committee and the European Investment Bank will work together to contribute to strengthening the capacity of Green Bonds to improve accountability in green finance and support implementation of the Paris Agreement.

The results of the collaborative study are expected to be published in a White Paper later in the year. This will compare different reporting of Green Bonds and identify ways to improve comparable reporting and include examination of definitions of sectors and projects eligible for financing through green bonds, project evaluation, management of the proceeds of green bond and use of external reviews.

Robert Reich: The Crisis Of Governance – OpEd

0
0

America is in a crisis of governance. There is no adult in charge.

Instead, we have as president an unhinged narcissistic child who tweets absurd lies and holds rallies to prop up his fragile ego, whose conflicts of financial interest are ubiquitous, and whose presidency is under a “gray cloud” of suspicion (according to the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee) for colluding with Russian agents to obtain office in the 2016 election.

He’s advised by his daughter, his son-in-law, and an oddball who once ran a white supremacist fake-news outlet.

His cabinet is an assortment of billionaires, CEOs, veterans of Wall Street, and ideologues, none of whom has any idea about how to govern and most of whom don’t believe in the laws their departments are in charge of implementing anyway.

He has downgraded or eviscerated groups responsible for giving presidents professional advice on foreign policy, foreign intelligence, economics, science, and domestic policy. He gets most of what he learns from television.

Meanwhile, Congress is in the hands of Republicans who for years have only said “no,” who have become expert at stopping whatever a president wants to do but don’t have a clue how to initiate policy, most of whom have never passed a budget into law, and, more generally, don’t much like government and have not shared responsibility for governing the nation.

As a result of all this, the most powerful nation in the world with the largest economy in the world is rudderless and leaderless.

Where we need thoughtful resolve we have thoughtless name-calling. Where we need democratic deliberation we have authoritarian rants and rallies. Where we need vision we have myopia.

The only way out of this crisis of governance is for us – the vast majority of Americans who deserve and know better – to take charge. Your country needs you desperately.

Neutrino Observatory Project Facing Issues In India – OpEd

0
0

The neutrino project involving investment of more than Rs. 15,000 million was sanctioned by the Government of India under the XIth plan and the scientists originally hoped to start construction of the facility by 2011. Around 25 research institutions are associated with the project, with Tata Institute of Fundamental Research acting as the nodal institution.

The proposed massive neutrino detector will be built in a cavern set in massive charnockite rock (group of igneous rocks found in South India with those in Tamil Nadu known to be the hardest).

The cavern will be excavated by drilling a tunnel of 1.9 to 2 km in length, so that there is a vertical overburden of about 1,300 meters.

For a good neutrino detection facility, a vertical cover of at least 1,000 meters is required, so that the observed neutrino events are not contaminated by unwanted particles that will be absorbed by the overburden.

The India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) will be a major underground experimental facility to study the elusive and nearly mass-less fundamental particles of nature called neutrinos.

Environmental issues

After initially denying permission to the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) to locate the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) at Singara in Nilgris district in Tamil Nadu, the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF), Government of India both accorded environmental and forest clearance for locating the project in the Bodi West Hills (BWH) in the Theni district in Tamil Nadu.

However, the Southern Bench of the National Green Tribunal has recently suspended the environmental clearance granted to the neutrino observatory by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF), due to some objections such as the proposed location being just about 4.9 kilometres from the Madhikettan Shola National Park in Idukki district of Kerala. The Southern Bench of National Green Tribunal has asked the project promoters to submit fresh application with more details.

The project has also been objected to by local people on safety considerations.

The project is suffering prolonged delay.

Apprehension of the protestors

There have been several doubts raised by protestors, such as possible radiation from the project and the apprehension that the mountain where the tunnel would be drilled would become unstable.

There are also fears that hazardous chemicals and gases could be used at the facility.

What do scientists say on environmental concerns?

Of course, the scientists promoting the project have said that such apprehensions of the protestors are unjustified.

Scientists say that there will be no radiation emitting from the lab, as the lab is deep in the earth to keep out radiation.

It is further said that the lab will not affect the structural stability of the mountain. While making the tunnel, technological advancements will ensure that the environment is left untouched; at the most, the rock blasting will cause flutters, but that won’t last long and normal conditions “will be restored in quick time.”

To ensure safety of the experiment and the people, the gases will be recycled many times and only then released in controlled amounts. The equipment and the gases used for the experiment will be hermetically sealed, so that there would be no chance of any pollution and or contamination.

What do scientists say on the need for the project?

According to the scientists, this India-based neutrino observatory is a particle physics research project, proposed to be implemented to primarily study atmospheric neutrinos. The project is anticipated to provide a precise measurement of neutrino mixing parameters.

The field of neutrino physics has attracted worldwide attention and there is a need to understand many questions put forth by the phenomena of neutrino oscillations.

The Super Kamiokande neutrino observatory in Japan, Sudbury Neutrino Observatory in Canada, Gran Sasso Lab in Italy, IceCube Neutrino Observatory in the South Pole are some of the existing neutrino laboratories in the world.

As far as India is concerned, this is a Mega Science Project, that would enable India to join the group of elite countries that are conducting research on such advanced field, so that India will not be left behind in the global scientific pursuits.

Obviously, the scientists are thrilled about this project, since it would place India in the league of advanced nations that carry out such research projects, with China particularly considering such research project as thrust areas for long term scientific pursuits.

What the scientists have failed to say?

Critics seem to be of view that such an advanced science and technology oriented Rs.1500 crore project is only of academic research at this stage, with the end results of the investment and efforts not being clearly known or defined or explained.

Critics wonder whether India should initiate a research activity for the sake of research, while there is lack of clarity on the outcome.

Common men in the country and the taxpayers expect to be told in precise and quantitative terms about the long term targets, objectives and envisaged benefits of this program. They seem to think that they have received vague explanations, which only adds to confusion about the need for such project, even among those who are favorably inclined towards research pursuits.

Scientists simply say that the project will benefit the country by enhancing India’s scientific manpower. They claim that the use of state of the art technologies in the design and development of the project would build a technologically stronger nation. Beyond that, any tangible explanation involving facts to explain the commercial worthiness of the investments have not been advanced to satisfy the anxious queries from the common men of India.

While the activists and local people seem to be concerned more about the safety issues at this stage, the fact is that the commercial and technical justification for the project in simple style that can be communicated to the common man has been conspicuous by its absence. This makes it difficult to difficult to study the cost-benefit analysis of the project.

It is true that, sometimes, the objective of scientific pursuits in a particular direction are more based on expectations and hopes and the discovery of unknown factors that may be of great significance. Even in such case, this should be explained to the people in a straight forward manner. If this investment in the neutrino project is a calculated risk from the point of view of commercial terms, let it be told to people.

Many concerned people may support the project even if there is a calculated risk considering the overall possible benefits.

Lack of communication is the problem

This appears to be a repeated problem in India that the government and the scientific community do not adequately communicate with citizens in a transparent style with regard to the objectives of their activities and the risk factors, if any, that are involved.

The lack of transparency and communication is the real cause for delay and the controversies in the case of several projects.

The neutrino project is one more example of such an approach of the scientific community and the government with regard to the conceived projects for implementation.

Where Does Your Health Insurance Premium Go? – OpEd

0
0

AHIP, the trade association for health insurers, has a nifty infographic answering the question: “Where does your premium dollar go?”

Obviously designed to defray accusations that health insurers earn too much profit, the infographic shows “net margin: of only three percent. A full 80 percent of our premium dollar goes to paying medical, hospital, and prescription claims.”

Fair enough. However, the elephant in the infographic is the 18 percent of premium that goes to “operating costs.” Lest you think that’s a synonym for “overhead” or “bureaucracy,” AHIP helpfully explains: “Operating costs include consumer-centric activities such as communicating with members, running customer service operations, quality reviews, and data analysis, among other activities.”

Well, readers have to judge how “consumer-centric” those operations are.

In 2015, average premium for a single worker in an employer-based plan was $6,251. So, $1,125 of that contributed to the insurer’s “operating costs.” How much health spending did the average insured person in an employer-based plan incur? $5,141, of which $813 was out of pocket. In other words, insurers’ “operating costs” added 22 percent to actual spending on health care.

Let’s compare this to auto insurance. For a sedan, annual cost of ownership amounts to $8,558 for a sedan, including $1,222 insurance. So, operating costs (excluding insurance premium) are $7,336 – 43 percent more than average annual health spending for someone in an employer-based plan. Yet, the entire premium of auto insurance is less than the operating cost buried in the premium of health insurance!

Another way to look at it: About 25 percent of the premium of auto insurance covers operating costs (see here and here). That would be $305 for a sedan – a mere four percent of the operating costs.

The reason? We do not expect auto insurance to cover almost every penny of spending we incur every year to run our cars. If only that were true of health insurance.

The real question is not where our health insurance premium dollars go, but how much of our health dollars go to premiums.

This article was published by The Beacon


Moderate Drinking Linked To Lower Risk Of Some Heart Conditions

0
0

Moderate drinking is associated with a lower risk of several, but not all, cardiovascular diseases, finds a large study of UK adults published by The BMJ today.

The finding that moderate drinking is not universally associated with a lower risk of all cardiovascular conditions suggests a more nuanced approach to the role of alcohol in prevention of cardiovascular disease is necessary, say the researchers.

Moderate drinking is thought to be associated with a lower risk of developing cardiovascular disease compared with abstinence or heavy drinking.

In the UK, moderate drinking is defined as no more than 14 units (112 grams) of alcohol a week.

To put this into context, one unit of alcohol is about equal to half a pint of ordinary strength beer, lager or cider (3.6% alcohol by volume) or a small pub measure (25 ml) of spirits. There are one and a half units of alcohol in small glass (125 ml) of ordinary strength wine (12% alcohol by volume). [Source: NHS Choices]

There is, however, a growing skepticism around this observation, with some experts pointing out several shortcomings in the evidence. For example, grouping non-drinkers with former drinkers, who may have stopped drinking due to poor health.

So researchers at the University of Cambridge and University College London set out to investigate the association between alcohol consumption and 12 cardiovascular diseases by analyzing electronic health records for 1.93 million healthy UK adults as part of the CALIBER (ClinicAl research using LInked Bespoke studies and Electronic health Records) data resource.

All participants were free from cardiovascular disease at the start of the study, and non-drinkers were separated from former and occasional drinkers to provide additional clarity in this debate.

After several influential factors were accounted for, moderate drinking was associated with a lower risk of first presenting to a doctor with several, but not all, cardiovascular conditions, including angina, heart failure and ischaemic stroke, compared with abstaining from alcohol.

However, the authors argue that it would be unwise to encourage individuals to take up drinking as a means of lowering their cardiovascular risk over safer and more effective ways, such as increasing physical activity and stopping smoking.

Heavy drinking (exceeding recommended limits) conferred an increased risk of first presenting with a range of such diseases, including heart failure, cardiac arrest and ischaemic stroke compared with moderate drinking, but carried a lower risk of heart attack and angina.

Again, the authors explain that this does not mean that heavy drinkers will not go on to experience a heart attack in the future, just that they were less likely to present with this as their first diagnosis compared with moderate drinkers.

This is an observational study, so no firm conclusions can be drawn about cause and effect. Added to which, the authors point to some study limitations that could have introduced bias.

Nevertheless, they say it is the first time this association has been investigated on such a large scale and their findings have implications for patient counselling, public health communication, and disease prediction tools.

In a linked editorial, researchers at Harvard Medical School and Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in the US say this study “does not offer a materially new view of the associations between alcohol consumed within recommended limits and risk of cardiovascular disease.

“This work, however, sets the stage for ever larger and more sophisticated studies that will attempt to harness the flood of big data into a stream of useful, reliable, and unbiased findings that can inform public health, clinical care, and the direction of future research,” they conclude.

Gorsuch Makes Important Distinction When Asked About Assisted Suicide

0
0

By Matt Hadro

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch made a crucial ethical distinction in his response to questions about doctor-prescribed suicide during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday, said one ethicist.

When asked what his views were on end-of-life care in the case of a terminal patient enduring unbearable pain, Gorsuch replied that “anything necessary to alleviate pain would be appropriate and acceptable, even if it caused death. Not intentionally, but knowingly. I drew the line between intent and knowingly.”

This is an important distinction, said Edward Furton Ph.D., director of publications and an ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center. He told CNA that the situation presents the case of “double-effect,” where proper steps taken to alleviate a patient’s pain may have the side effect of causing their death, but are permissible when certain conditions are met.

“You’ve got a good intention, the action you’re doing is good – in this case, it’s alleviating the pain with appropriate amounts of medication,” he explained, emphasizing that the dosage of pain medication may never be lethal and should not render the patient unconscious except when “absolutely necessary.”

“You’ve got a side effect, which is not intended, but is foreseen. It is going to happen, but you don’t want it to happen, you’re doing your action for another reason. And there is really no other route to alleviate the pain. So this is perfectly appropriate, it makes good sense,” Furton said.

Gorsuch, a judge on the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, faced his third day of questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday as he is considered for confirmation to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court.

He wrote a book in 2006 on “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia.” Gorsuch explored various arguments made in favor of doctor-prescribed suicide and euthanasia before offering his own observations and opinions.

The book “was my doctoral dissertation, essentially,” he told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. It was written “in my capacity as a commentator” and not as a judge, he clarified. The book was published the same year he was nominated and confirmed to the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

He argued in the book that “human life is fundamentally and inherently valuable, and that the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong.” Regarding doctor-prescribed suicide, he upheld laws prohibiting it, basing his argument upon “secular moral theory.”

Asked by Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) to briefly discuss his book, Gorsuch suggested that doctor-prescribed suicide could pose a significant threat “to the least amongst us – the vulnerable, the elderly, the disabled.”

It does this by becoming a cheap end-of-life option offered to vulnerable people, he said. “I do know that when you have a more expensive option and a cheaper option, those who can’t afford the more expensive option tend to get thrust into the cheaper option.”

“It’s a long book. It’s complicated. And I do not profess to have the right, final, or complete answer,” he admitted. “I hoped, at most, to contribute to a discussion on an unanswered social question where all people – and I do think all people – have a good faith interest in trying to reach some consensus socially on it.”

Currently, doctor-prescribed suicide is legal in six states and in the District of Columbia, with some 25 states to consider legalizing it this year.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) pressed Gorsuch on the matter on Wednesday, citing California’s End of Life Option Act that legalized the procedure in the state.

“I, in my life, have seen people die horrible deaths – family, of cancer – when there was no hope. And my father, begging me, ‘stop this Diane, I’m dying’,” she explained. “And my father was a professor of surgery.”

“And the suffering becomes so pronounced – I just went through this with a close friend – that this is real. And it’s very hard,” she continued, asking him what he thought of California’s law.

Gorsuch, speaking in his personal capacity, said that for some terminal patients, “at some point, you want to be left alone. Enough with the poking and the prodding. ‘I want to go home and die in my own bed in the arms of my family’.”

“And the Supreme Court recognized in Cruzan” – a 1990 decision on an end-of-life case – “that that’s a right in common law, to be free from assault and battery, effectively. And assumed that there was a Constitutional dimension to that. I agree.”

Gorsuch added that the matter of a terminal, suffering patient foregoing treatment was a personal one for him.

“Your father, we’ve all been through it with family. My heart goes out to you. It does. And I’ve been there with my dad. And others,” he told Feinstein.

Speaking as an ethicist, Furton clarified that in end-of-life cases, pain management may certainly be used but should never be an overdose and should not render the patient unconscious except in extraordinary circumstances.

Pain medication should be “measured, so that it matches the pain that the patient is experiencing,” he said.

“You can’t just give them a massive dose, or something like that,” he said, as “it would bring about their death in a way that was not measured and not connected to a proper intention which is to alleviate the pain.”

And medication should not induce unconsciousness, except in extraordinary cases, he insisted.

“Another important element is that the loss of consciousness in a person who is dying is very significant, and shouldn’t happen unless it’s absolutely necessary, because we should meet our Maker alert and in a prayerful way,” he added.

Furton praised Gorsuch’s knowledge and treatment of the matter as someone who “has obviously thought about these issues very carefully.”

“So I think we should be happy that he has such a strong sense of where to draw the line in a case such as this, where you’ve got a person with intractable pain and needs to have it remedied,” Furton said.

“He understands that that is not intentionally killing somebody. It’s not euthanasia, it’s not physician-assisted suicide. A lot of people don’t understand the difference between those two, so it’s good that he does because he’s obviously going to be a man of considerable power and importance in the area of law.”

Competition From China Reduced Innovation In US – Analysis

0
0

The discussion of the decline in US manufacturing during the 2016 presidential election campaign largely focused on job losses. This column examines the effects of Chinese import competition on another metric for the health of the US manufacturing sector – innovation. Firms whose industries were exposed to a greater surge of Chinese import competition from 1991 to 2007 experienced a significant decline in their patent output as well as their R&D expenditures. While politicians’ ‘obsession’ with manufacturing is primarily due to job losses, an accompanying reduction in innovation may well affect economic growth in the longer term.

By David Autor, David Dorn, Gordon Hanson, Gary P. Pisano and Pian Shu*

The decline of the US manufacturing sector played such a prominent topic in the 2016 presidential election campaign that New York Times journalist Binyamin Appelbaum wondered in a headline “Why Are Politicians So Obsessed With Manufacturing?” (Appelbaum 2016). Much of the concern about the health of the manufacturing sector derives from the observation that its employment level is near historic lows. Ever since the end of the Great Recession, the sector has employed fewer than 12.5 million workers – the lowest job count in manufacturing since the US entered WWII in 1941. Manufacturing lost almost 6 million jobs during the 2000s alone, and strikingly, most of this decline came before the onset of the Great Recession.

Despite the poor employment performance in the 2000s, however, value added in manufacturing has been growing as fast as the overall US economy. Its share of US GDP remained stable, an achievement matched by few other high-income economies over the same period (Moran and Oldenski 2014). While the extraordinary growth of value added in the computer and semiconductor industries masks a more sluggish performance in other manufacturing industries (Houseman et al. 2014), the sector’s output growth clearly exceeds its employment growth.

Another metric for the health of the US manufacturing sector, which has been less present in the recent debate, is its production of innovation as measured by patents. Manufacturing is the locus of US innovation and accounts for more than two thirds of US R&D spending (Helper et al. 2012) and for a similarly large share of US patents. Figure 1 shows that the annual number of patents awarded to US-based firms (dated by the year of patent application) doubled from less than 40,000 in 1991 to more than 80,000 in 2001, but subsequently declined through 2007.

Figure 1 US innovation and imports from China

Source: Maas (2017) based on authors’ calculations using the U.S. Patent and Inventor Database and the UN Comtrade Database.

Source: Maas (2017) based on authors’ calculations using the U.S. Patent and Inventor Database and the UN Comtrade Database.

During the 1990s, and especially the 2000s, the US manufacturing sector was exposed to a rapid surge in import competition from China. Figure 1 shows that imports from China increased more than tenfold between 1991 and 2007. Most of that growth occurred after China’s accession to the WTO in 2001, which coincides with the trend reversal in US patent production. The Chinese export boom was triggered by a series of economic reforms that included the establishment of Special Economic Zones for the production of export goods, and an easing of restrictions that had hindered firms’ access to labour, capital, and technology. The emergence of China as the world’s leading exporter of manufactured goods has been a major competitive shock for manufacturing firms in the US and elsewhere (Autor et al. 2016).

Although a now substantial literature evaluates the impact of China’s rise on labour market outcomes such as industry employment (Pierce and Schott 2015, Acemoglu et al. 2016) and workers’ earnings (Autor et al. 2014), far less is known about the impact of trade on innovative activities in US firms and industries. The effect of more intensive product-market competition on innovation is theoretically ambiguous. In standard oligopoly models, greater product market competition lowers profits and reduces incentives to invest in innovation. However, greater competition may also induce more innovation, either if pre-innovation rents fall relative to expected post-innovation rents (Agion et al. 2005), or if firms redeploy slack factors from goods production to innovation activities as competition depresses the demand for the firms’ products (Bloom et al. 2014). Indeed, a European study finds that firms in several European countries innovate more when Chinese imports increase in their industries, even as their employment level falls (Bloom et al. 2016).

In a recent paper, we analyse the impact of Chinese import competition on innovation in the US (Autor et al. 2016). Our analysis draws on all US corporate patents with application dates from 1975 to 2007 that are granted by March 2013. To obtain more information about the firms that applied for these patents, we use the firm names indicated on the patents to match them to firm data from Standard & Poor’s Compustat database. One challenge in this matching process is that patent records often contain different versions, abbreviations, and (mis-)spellings of a firm’s name, so that the names on patents do not correspond exactly to those in the firm database. We overcome this problem by constructing a novel matching algorithm that leverages the capabilities of an internet search engine. In a first step, we enter every firm name string that appears in the patent or Compustat data into the bing.com search engine, and we collect the URLs of the top five search results. We assign a patent to a Compustat firm if the corresponding firm name strings lead to at least two common URLs. This fully automated procedure builds on the web search engines’ capability to detect a company homepage or other webpages relating it even if the firm name’s is abbreviated or misspelled. Overall, we match almost three quarters of all corporate patents to Compustat, which covers companies listed on US stock markets.

The overall growth in corporate patents shown in Figure 1 masks important heterogeneity in patenting trends for the two sectors that contribute the most to overall US patent output. The computer and electronics sector increased its share in overall US patents from 10% in 1975 to 35% in 2007, and accounted for almost all the growth during the 1990s seen in Figure 1. By contrast, the chemical and petroleum sector’s contribution to US patent output fell from 27% in 1975 to 10% in 2007, as the number of annual patents from this sector declined over time. Both the growth in computer patents and the decline in chemicals patents began well prior to the surge of Chinese exports in the 1990s. This observation is important because import competition from China hit the computer sector much more than the chemical industry, yet it would be erroneous to attribute the superior innovation performance of the computer sector to its greater import exposure, given that the acceleration in patenting in that sector predates the exposure to China trade.

The central finding of our regression analysis is that firms whose industries were exposed to a greater surge of Chinese import competition from 1991 to 2007 experienced a significant decline in their patent output. A one standard deviation larger increase in import penetration decreased a firm’s patent output by 15 percentage points. Using data from the 1975 to 1991 period and a regression setup that accounts for the diverging secular innovation trends in computers and chemical, we confirm that firms in China-exposed industries did not already have a weaker patent growth prior to the arrival of the competing imports.

The firm data allow us to embed the patent analysis in a wider context of other indicators for the activities of firms. Importantly, we find that import competition not only reduced patenting but also firms’ R&D expenditures. Import-competing firms further experienced declines in global sales, employment, capital stock, and stock market value. They were more likely to suffer a decline in operating profits.

The innovation activity of US firms did not merely shift from the US to other countries. We estimate similar negative effects of import competition on patents by US firms’ domestic employees and by their foreign employees. Instead, our results are most consistent with the notion that the rapid and large increase in competition squeezed firms’ profitability and forced them to downsize along many margins, including innovation. Consistent with that interpretation, we find that the adverse impact of import competition on patent output was concentrated in firms that were already initially more indebted and less profitable.

The decline of innovation in the face of Chinese import competition suggest that R&D and manufacturing tend to be complements rather than substitutes. That is, when faced with rapidly intensifying rivalry in the manufacturing stage of industry production, firms tend not to substitute effort from production to R&D. While politicians’ ‘obsession’ with manufacturing is primarily due to the sizable employment losses in the sector during recent decades, an accompanying reduction in innovation may well affect economic growth in the longer term.

*About the authors:
David Autor,
Ford Professor and Associate Head, MIT Department of Economics

David Dorn, Chair of International Trade and Labor Markets, University of Zurich

Gordon Hanson, Pacific Economic Cooperation Chair in International Economic Relations and Director of the Center on Emerging and Pacific Economies, UC San Diego

Gary P. Pisano, Harry E. Figgie Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School

Pian Shu, Visiting scholar, MIT Sloan School of Management; Assistant Professor, Harvard Business School

References:
Acemoglu, D, D Autor, D Dorn, G H Hanson and B Price (2014), “Import Competition and the Great US Employment Sag of the 2000s.” Journal of Labor Economics, 34: S141-S198.

Appelbaum, B (2016), “Why Are Politicians So Obsessed With Manufacturing?” New York Times Magazine, October 4.

Aghion, P, N Bloom, R Blundell, R Griffith and P Howitt (2005), “Competition and Innovation: An Inverted-U Relationship.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120: 701-728.

Autor, D, D Dorn and G H Hanson (2016), “The China Shock: Learning from Labor Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade.” Annual Reviews of Economics, 8: 2015-240.

Autor, D, D Dorn, G H Hanson, G Pisano and P Shu (2016), “Foreign Competition and Domestic Innovation: Evidence from U.S. Patents.” CEPR Discussion Paper No. 11664.

Autor, D, D Dorn, G H Hanson and J Song (2014), “Trade Adjustment: Worker-Level Evidence.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129: 1799-1860.

Bloom, N, M Draca and J Van Reenen (2016), “Trade Induced Technical Change? The Impact of Chinese Imports on Innovation, IT and Productivity.” Review of Economic Studies, 83: 87-117.

Bloom, N, P M Romer, S J Terry and J Van Reenen (2014), “Trapped Factors and China’s Impact on Global Growth.” NBER Working Paper no. 19951.

Helper, S, T Krueger and H Wial (2012), “Why Does Manufacturing Matter? Which Manufacturing Matters? A Policy Framework.” Brookings Institution Policy Report.

Houseman, S, T J Bartik and T J Sturgeon (2014), “Measuring Manufacturing: How the Computer and Semiconductor Industries Affect the Numbers and Perceptions.” Upjohn Institute Working Paper no. 14-209.

Maas, S (2017), “Competition from China Reduced Domestic Innovation.” NBER Digest, February.

Moran, T H and L Oldenski (2014), “The US Manufacturing Base: Four Signs of Strength.” Petersen Institute for International Economics Policy Brief PB14-18.

Pierce, J R and P K Schott (2016), “The Surprisingly Swift Decline of U.S. Manufacturing Employment.” American Economic Review, 106: 1632-1662.

Trump’s Asia Policy, Two Months On – Analysis

0
0

How President Trump conceives of and intends to pursue US interests in Asia is of concern to Asians. However, there is some scope for relief after the initial bluster. Trade however is another matter.

By Joseph CY Liow

Two months into the Donald Trump presidency, it is clear that – whatever our personal misgivings about the personality and mannerisms of America’s 45th president – we in Asia will have to live and work with President Trump. What matters most for our region though, is not the polarising debates over his immigration ban, his Mexico border wall, or even his tweets about Obamacare. Rather, what concerns us most in Asia is how President Trump conceives of and intends to pursue American interests in Asia.

After two months in office, it remains a challenge to divine elements of an Asia policy in this new administration. While key foreign policy positions in the cabinet have been filled, there are hundreds if not thousands of positions across government departments that remain vacant. Indeed, until these officials are in place, it is impossible to obtain a clear sense of what American foreign policy is under Donald Trump. There are however some early signs, and several observations can be made in that regard.

Security and Foreign Policy

First, we should distinguish between words and deeds. To be sure, the world is seized with every word, or tweet, from Donald Trump. In keeping with this fascination, every offhanded or ill-informed remark has been well-documented and parsed. On the basis of words alone, the picture looked grim.

During the campaign trail, Trump took a cantankerous line on China, although this is hardly unusual for US presidential campaigns in more recent times (with the possible exception of Barack Obama’s). More alarming however, were his comments suggesting reconsideration of America’s security commitments to regional allies South Korea and Japan.

These were met with consternation not only in Seoul and Tokyo, but also elsewhere in the region where the U.S. had hitherto invested security equities and deepened defence relationships. And if these were not enough, receiving the phone call from the independence-leaning Taiwanese president, Tsai Ing-wen, followed by capricious comments about possibly reviewing Washington’s longstanding One China policy, the foundation for Sino-US relations for more than four decades, was positively distressing. The appointment of China hawks to key positions on trade and commerce added further to the adversarial climate.

Yet, after two months of the Trump presidency, the administration’s approach to regional security is actually looking fairly conventional. Relations with Japan were quickly placed back on an even keel, thanks in no small part to Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe, who was quickest off the blocks to engage Trump in order to head off any chance of the United States gravitating away from its traditional commitment to Japan.

Meanwhile, Secretary of Defence James Mattis made a successful visit to Tokyo, where he reinforced American commitment to Japan and to regional security, and to Seoul, where he reassured his hosts that the US would stand by them in the event of North Korean agression. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson just completed his first Asia tour to Tokyo, Seoul, and China and Vice-President Mike Pence is expected to head to Asia in April.

Trump’s Policy towards China and Japan

On relations with China, Trump has pulled back from the brink and declared that his administration would abide by Washington’s One China policy. All this indicates people need not make too great a play of President Trump’s tweets. This may be common sense – Trump is, after all, now a politician – but it is worth repeating.

Second, set aside his antipathetic tone and we realise that Trump’s call for America’s allies to assume a greater share of their security is hardly new. In their own ways, presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama had also pushed for greater burden-sharing.

The simple reality is that the US can no longer afford to underwrite on their own the security of all their friends and allies. But even on that score, it is notable that, as senior Japanese diplomats involved in the meetings confided, Secretary Mattis did not raise the subject of burden-sharing at all during his visit to Tokyo. Equally significant, there was no attempt by Trump to question or undermine the messages Mattis sent on his trip to South Korea and Japan after the fact. If anything, President Trump reinforced Matthis’ message during his own meeting with Prime Minister Abe.

Third, we need to recognise that insofar as national security and foreign policy are concerned, President Trump has surrounded himself with very strong and competent personnel, most of whom are in the mould of traditional national security and foreign policy senior officials.

James Mattis, H.R. McMaster and John Kelly are anything but “yes men”. And while some are frustrated at Rex Tillerson’s performance thus far, few doubt his professional qualities as a corporate leader. Simply put, if Trump intended to have his way or bulldoze foreign policy through, he would have appointed a very different cast of characters.

Of consequence too, amidst speculation swirling around Trump’s approach to Moscow, is the fact that this key national security leadership all possess a sobering view on Putin and Russia. This suggests they are not likely to tolerate any capitulation of American interests to Moscow. This is not to say that the waters ahead will not be rough. There are three caveats.

Caveats: More Confrontational on China

First, the State Department, presumably architects of foreign policy, has apparently been kept out of the loop on foreign policy discussions thus far in this administration. Part of the problem lies in the fact that while Rex Tillerson may be a veteran CEO, he is inexperienced as a government policymaker and is still finding his feet. Add to this the fact that many senior appointments have yet to be made, and you have a department in drift.

Second, there is concern that Steve Bannon, Trump’s enfant terrible chief strategist and advisor, has been given a place on the National Security Council. There is good reason for this apprehension, for Bannon’s appointment was an unprecedented move with disturbing portents, especially if he becomes a competing centre of power in national security pollicy-making.

Third, on China, this administration has signalled intent to be more competitive, and confrontational if necessary. Underlying this is the present administration’s view that while it shares with its predecessor the objective of stable Sino-US relations, they differ on how best to achieve this.

In the minds of many a Trump official, the Obama administration was too soft on China. The objective now is to achieve stability by digging in rather than ceding American interests and influence in the hope that China could be persuaded to change course on any given issue, which is their view on their predecessors’ China policy. This will likely be the new normal in Sino-US relations that Beijing and the rest of the region must prepare for and adjust to.

Rough Road Ahead: Trade and Economics

While the story on the security front seems to offer up a refreshing degree of continuity thus far, the same cannot be said for trade and economics. While President Trump is not an isolationist, he is an unapologetic protectionist and mercantilist. As if to drive home that very point, he made the withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) the first of his wave of executive orders.

In so doing, he sent a clear signal that he is not interested in multilateral trade agreements, which he feels disadvantage the US, and will only pursue bilateral agreements where, presumably, he will have more negotiation leverage.

Much has been made about the death knell that Trump sounded for the TPP. Two points should nevertheless be made in this regard. First, the TPP is not quite dead: not yet, anyway. Technically, the remaining 11 signatories can still salvage the TPP by amending the enactment rules so that US participation is no longer required for the implementation of the deal. Of course, while this may keep the TPP alive, the absence of the US will render it a less compelling trade agreement.

Second, the fate of American commitment to the TPP was already hanging in the balance anyway. Lest we forget, just about every presidential candidate opposed the TPP. This included Hillary Clinton, an architect of the agreement.

Serious Concern for Asia

There remains legitimate concern that the US might indeed still be headed towards a trade war with China. While Trump’s national security team can still be defined by continuity, his trade team appears intent on disruption on the back of rather bizarre macroeconomic logic that will see debt balloon even further because of increased spending, increased borrowing, and reduced taxes.

Indeed, the “America First” agenda is staring a massive current account deficit in the face. Yet, the Trump team comprises individuals who have made a career of anti-China protectionism, and they are intent on taking the US down this road. Because of this, relations with China will have to be managed carefully and strategically in terms of how the trade and security agendas can be reconciled in hopefully reassuring ways.

There is no doubt that the personality of the president and his unfamiliarity with the mores that govern the corridors of power in Washington has struck a discordant chord even within his own party. Indeed, the polarised atmosphere in American politics means that some people are cognitively predisposed to seeing and thinking the worst of him.

Yet for us in Asia, such frustrations that bedevil the American electorate should not be allowed to dominate discussion on the possible shape of the Trump administration’s foreign policy in our region. On that score, Trump’s bluster aside, the early signs do lend to some degree of relief especially on the security issues; but there is serious cause for concern when it comes to the trade and economics side of the ledger.

*Joseph CY Liow is Dean and Professor of Comparative and International Politics at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. This appeared earlier in The Straits Times.

Syrian Crisis Settlement Requires Genuine Willingness To Compromise – OpEd

0
0

Another round of Syrian talks was held in Astana on February 15–16. During the two-day meeting various talks have been held between Russia, Iran and Turkey with the participation of the government delegations of the Syrian Arab Republic and Syrian armed opposition, as well as representatives of Jordan and the United Nations.

The main outcome of the talks in Kazakh capital was a final agreement on the establishment of a joint group as part of Syria ceasefire monitoring mechanism with the participation of Iran, Russia and Turkey.

“The Astana platform is unique, and has, of course, proven its viability. It is the Astana platform where the most important issues are resolved, including issues of maintaining the ceasefire. I think that this is one of the priorities which will help in setting up a truly constructive political engagement,” said Russia’s chief negotiator at Astana talks on Syria Alexander Lavrentiev.

However, according to him, it is too early to consider the possibility of direct intra-Syrian dialogue.

“The reality of talks on Syria peace process shows that direct intra-Syrian dialogue is still far from being possible. As I said before, the level of mutual distrust is rather high and many mutual accusations still remain. But I believe that we must move ahead every time, step-by-step, without leaving any space for confrontation,” Alexander Lavrentiev said.

According to many observers, the agreement reached in Astana became possible largely due to the successful operation of Russian Air Forces and cooperation with Turkey and Iran.

In particular, victory in Aleppo has forced the countries, which have influence on the fighters, to move to negotiations and forced moderate opposition to start a real fight against Al-Nusra terrorists. According to several experts, this may become the beginning of the long war end.

Analyzing the situation in Syria, Itamar Rabinovich, Israel’s former ambassador to the United States, former chief negotiator with Syria between 1993 and 1996, professor emeritus of Middle Eastern History at Tel Aviv University, distinguished global professor at New York University, foreign member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, pointed to the strengthening of Bashar Asad’s position.

“The situation in Syria can be described as a consolidation of Bashar al Asad’s position that does not necessarily lead to a resolution of the Syrian crisis through the reestablishment of a unified Syrian state controlling the national territory through one central government,” he told PenzaNews.

In his opinion, this state of affairs is primarily the result of Russia’s military intervention on the Fall of 2015 and US policy of avoiding “boots on the ground” in Syria.

“The Astana Process reflects Russia’s diplomatic primacy in Syria but also its limitations. The process helps limit the violence to a level that the world can tolerate but cannot lead to a diplomatic solution. The Jihadist and the more moderate rebel groups are still entrenched in large part of the countries and neighbouring countries like Turkey, Jordan and Israel are looking after their particular interests. The Sunni Arab states headed by Saudi Arabia are still investing resources in order to prevent an Iranian Shiite victory and hegemony in Syria,” the analyst said.

He also stressed that the US policy under Donald Trump remains unclear.

“As in several other areas of foreign policy the Trump Administration is sending mixed and contradictory signals: talk of a ‘grand bargain’ with Russia and Pentagon sources speaking of a change in policy and sending US soldiers into combat in Syria,” Itamar Rabinovich reminded.

Thus a political diplomatic solution that would restore normalcy in Syria is not in sight, he believes.

“More likely is further consolidation of Asad’s control over part of the country and continued de facto partition of the rest of the country,” he said.

In turn, Kamal Sido, Head of Middle East Department of the Society for Threatened Peoples (STP), drew attention to the difficult humanitarian situation in the country.

“Today the situation in Syria is very complicated: civilian population suffers a lot. In particular, they do not have enough electricity, medicines and food in northern Syria, where my parents live. The Turkish authorities closed the border there. They continue to help Islamic extremists and militants and blocked the roads for humanitarian aid to the Kurdish population living there. There are reports that Turkey is trying to attack villages near Kobani,” the expert said.

He stressed that the Kurds condemn such movements by Turkey and expect particular actions from Russia to change the situation.

Moscow and Ankara are cooperating in Syria, and we would like to see Russia having an impact on Turkey, so that it would not attack the settlements of Kurds, Christians and Assyrians in the north of Syria,” said Head of Middle East Department, STP.

Besides, in his opinion, Astana Process would be more effective with the Kurds participation.

“Of course, every peace negotiation on Syria is good, because the civilian population is tired of war, but we would like the representatives of all groups of the Syrian conflict to take part in these meetings. However, Turkey is opposed to the Kurds representatives in Astana. So, we also expect Russia to take certain steps in this respect,” Kamal Sido said, adding that the main goal is the end of hostilities and ceasefire respected by all parties of the conflict.

Meanwhile, Tor Bukkvoll from Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI) expressed the opinion that Russian Air Forces operation provided necessary conditions for peace talks on Syria.

“In terms of assessing Russia’s contribution to the settlement of the conflict, it seems to me that there are many ways to a ceasefire. Russia chose a relatively brutal one, but it did lead to peace negotiations,” the expert said.

However, it is too early to speak about long-term truce and final completion of the acute phase of the conflict, he believes.

“Whether this will lead to a lasting peace, and by that justifying some of the carnage that has taken place, remains to be seen,” Tor Bukkvoll added.

In turn, Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow at Brookings University and author of several publications for The National Interest magazine expressed the view that Astana meeting cannot give an additional impetus to the Geneva process.

“I think the Geneva process is dead. We need a fresh start based on the goal of some kind of confederation, or autonomous zones for the Sunnis and Kurds,” the American analyst said.

According to him, these changes should be documented at legislative level.

“These zones should be codified in a peace deal and backed up by peacekeepers including Russians, Turks, Americans, and Arabs. Then we can all collaborate to keep going after ISIS and al Nusra (Front for Conquest),” Michael O’Hanlon said.

In turn, Dr. Vassilis Kappis, Lecturer in Security and Intelligence Studies, Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies (BUCSIS), The University of Buckingham, United Kingdom, said that Bashar Assad’s army has sufficient resources for further progress.

“The situation can be characterised as volatile but rather clear in terms of who holds the upper hand in tactical terms. Both the rebels and the Islamic State are on the defensive while Assad forces make slow but steady gains across multiple fronts. This indicates that the Syrian army remains a cohesive and capable fighting force, possessing the requisite logistical and warfighting capacity to carry on with a long – if necessary – war,” the British analyst said.

However, according to him, ISIS also shows certain resistance.

“The ongoing battle for the city of Al-Bab demonstrates that the Islamic State does not –at this point at least – face an imminent collapse. Its battlefield resilience is an ominous sign about the prospects of swiftly capturing Raqqa, even though recently SDF/YPG forces have achieved considerable territorial gains in the vicinity,” Vassilis Kappis said.

“The situation in the country’s north, finally, is complicated, as Euphrates Shield forces, consisting of Turkish and Syrian rebel militias, appear to have established a zone of control, thereby attaining Ankara’s goal to prevent YPG forces from uniting the Kurdish cantons in Syria’s north and thus consolidate Rojava as a de facto Kurdish entity along Turkish borders. The ability of Euphrates Shield forces to retain a long-term presence in the area is doubtful, however, with Syrian government forces just a few kilometres away from Al-Bab after recapturing various cities and villages in the Aleppo province,” the expert added.

In his opinion, Astana meeting was an important step towards long-term truce, which, however, does not guarantee a complete cease-fire.

“During the Astana talks, Russia, Turkey, and Iran agreed to jointly oversee the truce, a condition that can be considered necessary but not sufficient for the long-term viability of a cease-fire agreement. The two main points of contention, however, remain unresolved: the nature of the political transition in Syria, and more particularly the future role of Assad and his regime, as well as the political status of the Kurdish-held areas, a subject of utmost significance to Turkey. It is no coincidence, in this regard, that both the rebels and Turkey dispatched low-level delegations in Astana,” BUCSIS expert said.

He also stressed that a number of influential rebel groups refuse to engage with the Syrian government while Turkey would like to avoid a compromise with regards to its ongoing operation in the country’s north.

“While Washington’s approach to the Syrian conflict has yet to be fully determined by President Trump, both Russia and the United States regard the Kurds as a reliable ally and an effective fighting force against the Islamic State. At the same time, both powers have been equally sensitive to Turkish security and geopolitical concerns. Overall, there is little doubt that in the coming months, all cards will have to be placed on the table, as players prepare for the endgame in the Syrian conflict,” Vassilis Kappis said.

In turn, Ilgar Velizade, Head of the Baku-based South Caucasus Club of Political Scientists, said that Syrian conflict is quite internationalized, and its resolution is only possible with the participation of all stakeholders.

“Despite the obvious successes in Aleppo and some other areas, fierce fighting is still under way near Al-Bab, in the very vicinity of Damascus, in the territories controlled by the ISIS in the north. In addition, the conflict directly involves foreign players: Russia, Iran, Turkey, the United States, and indirectly some other countries. Of course, Russian operation in Syria and its significance can hardly be overestimated. Today Moscow is one of the major players and resolution of Syrian crisis is impossible without its weighty contribution” the expert said.

According to him, the Astana Process indicates the desire of key parties of the conflict to contribute to its early resolution.

“However, the meeting had a working character, and we could not expect more than the parties’ consent to continue negotiations – with the discussion of specific subjects and some details. Besides, there will be no comprehensive outcome without active participation of the United States, the UN Special Envoy for Syria, main forces of the Syrian opposition and the supporters of the current president of the country,” Ilgar Velizade said.

He also praised the role of Kazakhstan as a facilitator of the negotiation process.

“It requires a lot of courage to carry out this mission in such a difficult period of time,” the analyst said.

According to him, now it is necessary to think over the agenda of a major international conference on Syria under the UN auspices.

“Perhaps this conference with a clear agenda and specific agreements may give rise to a large peace process on Syria. And most importantly – there should be a strong political will of all the parties of Syrian crisis, their willingness to compromise in order to achieve the main task for today – suspension of active hostilities. The success they will achieve coping with this task will determine Syrian future,” the expert resumed.

Source: https://penzanews.ru/en/analysis/63633-2017

Viewing all 73339 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images