Madonna may have loved living in a material world as a material girl, but a recent study shows that married couples should avoid living according to this ’80s jam at all costs.

Jason Carroll, BYU professor of marriage and family studies, and two graduate students, Ashley LeBaron and Heather Kelly, have provided more insight into what may be one of the roots of the dissatisfaction caused by materialism — a diminished view of the importance of marriage itself.

“We know that materialism can lead to poor money management and that leads to debt and strain, but financial factors may not be the only issue at play in these situations,” Carroll said. “Materialism is not an isolated life priority; as the pursuit of money and possessions are prioritized, it appears that other dimensions of life, such as relationships, are deemphasized.”

Carroll and his team surveyed 1,310 married individuals to measure materialism, perception of marriage importance and marital satisfaction. Each participant was given statements such as, “Having nice things today is more important to me than saving for the future” and “Having money is very important to me.” They were then asked to rank how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the statements.

The study found that higher levels of materialism are linked to a decreased sense of importance of marriage and less satisfaction in a marriage. One of the possible causes is that materialism crowds out other life priorities and creates a scarcity of time for other relationship priorities such as communication, conflict resolution and intimacy. Carroll and his graduate students also found that materialism may be associated with a possession-oriented rather than a relationship-oriented approach to happiness. In short, materialistic spouses may be seeking happiness in possessions, rather than people — which means they end up putting less time and energy into making their marriage a success.

For Caroll, the study is a continuation of his previous research on the topic, which received national coverage from news outlets. But while his previous study showed what kinds of problems materialism causes, this new study shows why they occur.

“Marriage dissatisfaction occurs because those who highly value money and possessions are likely to value their marriage less, and are thus likely to be less satisfied in their relationship,” said LeBaron, the study’s lead author.

Despite the findings, Carroll believes that changes can be made for couples to solve materialism issues.

“Many people are not fully aware of their materialism or the degree to which the pursuit of money is becoming an unbalanced priority in their life,” Carroll said. “It is helpful for spouses to evaluate and openly discuss the time patterns in their lives and make sure they are devoting enough time to prioritize and strengthen their marriage relationship.”

Their findings have been published in the Journal of Family and Economic Issues.

By Rashid Hassan

Christopher Henzel, the charge d’affaires of the US Embassy in Riyadh, reaffirmed on Monday that the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the US is based on fundamental shared interests including economic prosperity, security and stability.

Speaking at a function to celebrate the 242nd year of the independence of the US on Monday at Quincy House, the official residence of the US ambassador in the Diplomatic Quarter, Henzel said the US strongly supports Saudi Arabia’s ambitious goals.

“As the Saudi Arabian government implements its vision, we believe that both sides will continue to benefit from our unique bilateral relationship, and that partnership will continue to grow,” he said. “The government’s plans for the further development of the Kingdom continue at an impressive rate.”

Welcoming guests including Riyadh Gov. Prince Faisal bin Bandar, Henzel said, “2017 witnessed remarkable developments in the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the US, with Riyadh welcoming President Donald Trump on the first stop of his first overseas trip, which brought together 55 heads of state at the Arab-Islamic-American Summit.”

Henzel said security cooperation was one of the key areas of the partnership, both historically and at present.

“Countering violent extremism is a very high priority for both of our governments,” he added.

He went on to stress the strength of the two countries’ economic ties, pointing out that bilateral trade in goods between the US and the Kingdom amounted to $35 billion last year.

“Our two countries have long shared a strong economic relationship, with ties in trade and investment that have created jobs for thousands of Americans and Saudis,” he said.

Saudi citizens and companies hold major investments in the US that employ thousands of Americans. For example, Saudi Aramco now owns the largest refinery in the US states, in Port Arthur, Texas, Henzel explained, adding that US companies are working with Saudi partners on additional investment projects in energy, infrastructure, defense, health care, and many other sector.

Henzel also highlighted the increased cultural exchange over the past year, thanks in part to Vision 2030.

US performance artists including Blue Man Group, Nelly and Toby Keith, have all performed in the Kingdom recently, while events such as Monster Jam made history in the Kingdom as part of Saudi Arabia’s new initiative to offer more entertainment options to citizens and residents.

Meanwhile, the embassy has sent a number of Saudis to the US on cultural exchanges.
Another important facet of the US-Saudi relationship is cooperation in the field of education, Henzel pointed out.

“Right now, there are roughly 66,000 Saudi students in American universities,” he said.

“The Saudi government is making an incredible investment in the future of its country and I am proud that American higher education is able to play such an important role in that effort.”

Israeli police have reportedly recommended that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu be indicted over allegations of bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

Police were expected to submit their recommendations Tuesday evening following a 14-month long investigation into the “gifts affair” in which Netanyahu is alleged to have improperly accepted expensive gifts from businessmen.

The charges stem from two separate investigations, Case 1000 and Case 2000. The former involves allegations that Netanyahu accepted gifts worth thousands of dollars from wealthy businessmen. The other, focuses on an alleged deal with Yedioth newspaper for more positive coverage in exchange for a crackdown on its rival outlet.

Netanyahu, who vehemently denies the allegations, has been questioned multiple times since the start of last year, according to Reuters. If reports are correct, the police now believe they have found enough evidence for an indictment. Their recommendation will go to the country’s attorney general for a final decision.

By Michael Sainsbury and ucanews.com reporters

The Vatican appears to have cleared the ecclesiastical decks for a deal with China’s ruling Communist Party after one of two bishops at the center of a dispute over the Sino-Vatican agreement was reported to have promised to step down and make way for a bishop appointed by Beijing.

The final hurdle for the Holy See now appears to be recognizing two bishops, appointed by Beijing without Rome’s approval, who are widely understood to have familial arrangements including long-term partners and children.

After sacking Bishop Zhuang Jianjian in December, no Vatican-appointed bishops stand in the way of a deal that would see the Holy See give its imprimatur to five bishops appointed by Beijing whose dioceses do not have Vatican appointees in charge of the “underground” church.

The seven so-called illicit bishops, not named by the pope, include Liu Xinhong of Anhui and Lei Shiyin of Leshan, who are both alleged to have girlfriends, as well as Yue Fusheng of Heilongjiang, Ma Yinglin of Kunming and Guo Jincai of Chengde.

None of these “bishops” have any impediments with underground Vatican-approved prelates operating in their dioceses should the Vatican decide to recognize them as part of a deal with Beijing.

Huang Bingzhan of Shantou and Zhan Silu of Mindong are not yet approved by Rome but the removal of the underground bishops in their diocese, Zhuang Jianjian and Vincent Guo Xijin, clears the way for their approval by the Vatican.

Retired Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun told ucanews.com that five of those seven dioceses have no underground bishops, making it easier for the Holy See to legitimize those illegitimate bishops, but the other two dioceses, Shantou and Mindong, were problematic until Bishop Zhunag was pushed aside and Bishop Guo has now said he would stand aside

“How can such people be recognized by the Vatican?” Cardinal Zen said, referring to Liu and Lei.

Bishop Guo of the Catholic enclave of Mindong in Fujian province said in an interview before an evening Mass held at the “underground” cathedral in a small town that if the Vatican presented him with a verifiably authentic document to request him to step down, he would obey Rome’s decision, according to a report in The New York Times.

Multiple attempts to contact Bishop Guo by ucanews.com were unsuccessful.

The bishop was reported to have said that they should have a consistent stand to respect the deal made between the Vatican and the Chinese government, and their principle was that the Chinese Catholic Church had to have a connection with the Vatican; the connection could not be severed.

Bishop Guo, 59, is an underground bishop recognized by the Vatican but not the government. Since he was ordained as a bishop, authorities have not accepted his office and have simply treated him as a priest.

In the Holy Week last year, the bishop was detained by the government for a month and asked to write a document stating that he was “volunteering” for demotion. It was said that the document was the condition for him to be recognized by the government.

The bishop this year was asked to make way for government-sanctioned Bishop Zhan Silu, 57, of Mindong, who was ordained without permission from the pope, who approves all bishop appointments in the modern church.

Most Catholics and priests in Mindong are unable to accept this decision, but the underground priests said that “they could not agree with that decision but they would shed tears with hearts bleeding to accept,” meaning they would obey the Holy See.

An underground priest who gave his name as John told ucanews.com that he believes Bishop Guo will obey the Holy See’s request even if he is dissatisfied.

“And we will persuade believers to obey what Rome decides, but what is certain is that we cannot be cheered by the fact. The church will be scattered in the face of such a cunning agreement that makes us bow to evil,” he continued.

Ah Rong, an underground Catholic, told ucanews.com that he believes the Vatican agreement will make China more divided than it is now. “I do not understand why the China Church had to suffer so much but now such a shameless decision is taken,” he said.

Many Catholics in China and Hong Kong said the bishops were sacrificed, but Anthony Lam Sui-ki, senior researcher at the Holy Spirit Study Centre of Hong Kong, said it was not right to say that the Holy See would like to sacrifice the underground church, as Cardinal Zen has claimed, most recently when he travelled to Rome in January to press the case with Pope Francis personally to end talks with Beijing.

“It would be totally unacceptable for the Holy See to sacrifice the underground church for the sake of diplomatic relations with China,” said Lam, who has closely followed the church in China for over three decades.

“The Holy See is not going to abandon any parts of the Catholic community; the Holy See is not going to abandon any individual Catholic in China. That is what I believe. I have full confidence.

“The Holy See does not aim at diplomatic relations with China. The aim is to improve the situation of Catholics regarding religious life in China and to enlarge as far as possible evangelization to all non-believers in China. That is the main aim.”

By Michael Lelyveld

Five years after launching its ambitious Belt and Road initiative to expand trade links with Europe, China is trying to extend its horizons as far as the North Pole.

On Jan. 26, China declared its interest in the northern region with a white paper on its policies and plans for a “Polar Silk Road” to take advantage of new Arctic trade routes and resources.

Never mind that China’s northernmost territory is more than 1,400 kilometers (869 miles) south of the Arctic Circle by land and several times farther on the shortest route by sea.

The country can see major benefits from shipping northward to Europe through newly-warmer Arctic waters rather than southward through the congested Malacca Strait, past rival India and the volatile Middle East, through the Suez Canal to the Mediterranean Sea.

An Arctic route could shave 20 days off the usual 48-day voyage from China to Rotterdam in the Netherlands, the BBC said, not to mention the prospect of reduced security concerns.

“There are no Somali pirates in the Arctic,” said Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin in 2015, encouraging China’s interest in the Northern Sea Route, the TASS news agency reported at the time.

While the transit is expected to be only seasonal for the next decade or more, China has been gearing up to pursue Arctic openings for years, sending its Xuelong (Snow Dragon) icebreaker on a series of missions since 2012.

In 2015, a cargo ship operated by China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) sailed on a 55-day round trip from the port of Dalian to Rotterdam through the Northeast Passage route and back to the port of Tianjin for the first time.

Aside from shortcuts, China is eager to take advantage of potential Arctic resources including petroleum, minerals and fish stocks in international waters and in partnership with bordering countries in their exclusive economic zones.

Although it has no Arctic border of its own, China makes the case that it is an “important stakeholder in Arctic affairs” as a “Near-Arctic State” and “one of the continental States that are closest to the Arctic Circle.”

Five years after elbowing its way into the eight-member Arctic Council as an accredited observer, Beijing is boldly asserting its interests and claims.

“China enjoys the freedom or rights of scientific research, navigation, overflight, fishing, laying of submarine cables and pipelines, and resource exploration and exploitation in the high seas” and other areas, said the paper issued by the cabinet-level State Council, citing international treaties.

Full members of the Arctic Council include Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States.

“The utilization of sea routes and exploration and development of the resources in the Arctic may have a huge impact on the energy strategy and economic development of China, which is a major trading nation and energy consumer in the world,” the document said in justifying China’s role.

Good steward of the environment?

Officials hastened to give assurances that China would be a good steward of the environment as it pursues its development goals.

“It is completely unnecessary to doubt our intentions or worry about plundering of resources or destruction of the environment,” said Vice Foreign Minister Kong Xuanyou at a Beijing press conference, according to the official Xinhua news agency.

Necessary or not, some statements in the white paper may raise environmental concerns.

In making its case for greater involvement in the region, the paper argues, for example, that the Arctic has already affected China.

“The natural conditions of the Arctic and their changes have a direct impact on China’s climate system and ecological environment, and, in turn, on its economic interests,” the white paper says.

It makes no mention of the effect that China, as the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, is having on the Arctic or the role that climate change has played in opening northern routes.

According to research released in September by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 13.2 percent per decade as global temperatures warm.

The white paper treads carefully on the issue of China’s far-flung fishing interests, noting that “fish stocks have shown a tendency to move northwards due to climate change and other factors,” creating the potential for the Arctic “to become a new fishing ground.”

China argues that “while enjoying their lawful right to conduct fisheries research and development,” all states should fulfill their obligations to conserve resources.

The goal of developing new fisheries appears to be at odds with a draft international agreement reached two months ago that would bar commercial fishing in the central Arctic Ocean for at least 16 years.

The accord, supported by Arctic Council members, the European Union and China, was hailed as an “historic agreement” by the environmental group Greenpeace, which urged permanent steps to protect the ocean “from commercial fisheries as well as from other extractive industries.”

Environmental advocates on edge

Rising vessel traffic on Russia’s Northern Sea Route through Arctic waters already has environmental advocates on edge.

In October, The Arctic Institute, based in Washington, reported 88 violations of Russia’s rules of navigation for the region in the first 10 months of last year, representing 15 percent-20 percent of the ships using the route.

“These violations will increase the risk of incident or accident, of course,” said Dr. Simon Walmsley, marine manager of World Wildlife Fund International, according to the institute’s report.

The addition of a regular trade route for Chinese shipping through the icy waters could multiply the risks.

China’s plans for the Arctic also raise strategic issues because of concerns that the country’s commercial interests and military presence will eventually go hand in hand.

In the past five years, China has expanded its “One Belt, One Road” (OBOR) initiative to more than 60 countries while steadily upgrading its naval power and range in parallel.

Experts say that OBOR is aimed both at building the infrastructure for China’s exports and safeguarding its energy supplies as the nation becomes increasingly reliant on oil and gas imports.

“For years, Beijing has been uneasy at the thought that its energy imports transit through sea lanes of communication that are under the protection and surveillance of the U.S. Navy including in the South China Sea,” said Nadège Rolland, senior fellow at the National Bureau of Asian Research, in testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission last month.

Relations with Russia

China’s relations with Russia and its rising investment are likely to become a critical focus for the Polar Silk Road plan.

China has already made a significant opening in the Arctic region with its investment in nearly 30 percent of Russia’s U.S. $27-billion (170-billion yuan) Yamal LNG project to develop and export liquefied natural gas.

State-owned China National Petroleum Corp. (CNPC) holds 20 percent of the giant project, which launched its first exports last year, while China’s Silk Road Fund owns 9.9 percent.

The backing of the Silk Road Fund, which supports OBOR investments, may be a sign that China has been planning for years to develop a Polar Silk Road trade route.

But the stake raises the question of whether China’s strategy is to gain a toehold in the Arctic so that it can then expand its interests, or whether its goal is primarily to gain energy resources and supply routes, which it may someday be bound to protect in its national interest.

A further question is whether Sino-Russian relations have become so close that Moscow has now abandoned its misgivings about Chinese access to its northern regions after decades of keeping foreigners out.

Edward Chow, senior fellow for energy and national security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, sees the development in terms of the narrow range of choices available to Russia and the global ambitions of President Xi Jinping.

“I wonder whether it really isn’t just a demonstration of Russian weakness and Russian need,” Chow said. “They have no choice but to go to the Chinese to do Yamal LNG. Who else will lend them the money?”

Similar calculations may apply to the Polar Silk Road, the Northern Sea Route, and Russia’s plans to benefit from transit fees, icebreaker services and port development.

Whether the cooperation signals a new era of Russian trust in China may be another matter.

“I’ve got to believe it’s more the necessity than anything else,” Chow said. “If they had the money, they’d do it themselves.”

“They want Chinese money and they want to do the projects because Russians make money doing projects, but I don’t think they really want the Chinese to be controlling the ports,” he said.

“Is it really in Russia’s interest for China to be a maritime power in the Arctic? I sort of doubt it,” Chow said.

On the Chinese side, Chow said that President Xi’s tendency has been to see China’s interests at stake in many parts of the world where it was previously uninvolved.

“China under Xi Jinping, unlike previous leaders, is behaving very much like anything that happens anywhere around the world affects their interests, and therefore, they have a right to have a position on it,” he said.

“One Belt, One Road is, among other things, a manifestation of that,” Chow said.

By Ajit Kumar Singh*

A local Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) leader, Malik Tufail, was shot dead by unidentified assailants in the Mughalkhel area of Bannu District in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) on February 4, 2018.

On February 2, 2018, at least 11 Army personnel were killed and another 13 injured in a suicide bombing near an Army camp in the Sharifabad area of Kabal tehsil (revenue unit) in Swat District. The suicide bomber targeted the sports area of the military base camp where soldiers were playing volleyball. Claiming responsibility for the attack, Mohammad Khorasani, a spokesman for the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), said they had sent a young suicide bomber, Siddiqullah, to conduct the attack.

On January 23, 2018, a ‘commander’ of the Haqqani Network, Ehsan alias Khawari, and two of his associates were killed when a US drone targeted a house in the Speen Thall area of Hangu District.

According to partial data compiled by the Institute for Conflict Management (ICM), KP has accounted for at least 19 terrorism-related fatalities (two civilians, 11 Security Force, SF, personnel, and six terrorists) in the 2018, thus far (data till February 11, 2018). During the corresponding period of 2017, the Province had accounted for just two fatalities, both terrorists.

Through 2017, KP recorded a total of 123 fatalities (40 civilians, 26 SF personnel, and 57 terrorists) as against 213 such fatalities (123 civilians, 50 SF personnel, and 40 terrorists) registered in 2016. The trend of decline in overall fatalities thus continued for the fourth consecutive year since 2014.

Other parameters of violence like major incidents (each resulting in three or more fatalities), bomb blasts, and sectarian attacks also registered declines. There were 16 major attacks causing 80 deaths in 2017; as against 17 such attacks resulting in 121 fatalities in 2016. The most prominent attack in 2017 was on December 1, when at least nine persons, including six students, were killed and 37 were injured as TTP terrorists attacked the Agriculture Training Institute (ATI) in Peshawar, the provincial capital. All the four terrorists involved in the attack were also killed. KP accounted for 17 incidents of bomb blast, resulting in 23 fatalities and 110 persons injured, in 2017; as against 32 such incidents, resulting in 70 deaths and over 218 persons injured. Also, as against six incidents of sectarian attack, resulting in eight deaths and three persons injured in 2016, KP recorded only one such incident in 2017, resulting in three fatalities.

However, little has changed on the ground in terms of dealing with the reasons responsible for the growth of terrorism, including mischievous state policies, radicalization and growing fundamentalism, among others. In the most recent example of growing radicalisation, life in KP’s Mardan District came to a halt on February 9, 2018, as thousands of workers and supporters of the Aalmi Majlis Tahaffuz Khatm-e-Nubuwwat (AMTKN, the International Organisation for the Protection of the Finality of Prophethood), joined by locals, participated in protests to pressure the Government into releasing 31 men convicted in the lynching of Mashal Khan, a resident of Swabi and a student at the Abdul Wali Khan University in Mardan, on April 13, 2017. Holding banners that read “Mashalyon [Mashal supporters], stop us if you can!” the protesters chanted slogans against Mashal and the Government. Qari Ikramul Haq, leader of the AMTKN demanded that the men convicted for the murder be released. Several of the 26 men acquitted by the court in the same case, including Ajmal Mayar, attended the rally and were given a ‘Ghazi (Muslim warrior) welcome’. The people in rally offered a dua (grand prayer) for those acquitted. AMTKN is a Pakistan-based anti-Ahmadi group, closely affiliated with Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP); Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan (JI) and the Fazl faction of JI (JI-F)

Mashal Khan was lynched to death after being falsely accused of blasphemy. A group of students had shouted religious slogans during the attack and had stripped Mashal naked and about 10 of them assaulted him with planks until his skull caved in, as the others students looked on. An anti-Terrorism Court in Abbotabad awarded the death sentence to one of the accused on February 7, 2018. It also awarded 25-year prison sentences to five others and four-year sentences to another 25 accused. The decision, announced by judge Fazal-e-Subhan Khan at Haripur Central Jail, exonerated 26 of the accused. There were a total of 57 accused in the Mardan lynching case.

Significantly, according to a report published on September 29, 2014, by the Centre for Research and Security Studies, Pakistan, a total of at least 59 persons ‘accused’ of blasphemy have been victims of extra-judicial killings in the country since 1990. Of these, only one case was reported from KP: Ashiq Nabi was shot dead on April 20, 2005, in Nowshera District. Though no further definitive data is available in this regard, according to open media sources, the April 13, 2017, killing of Mashal Khan, is the second such incident reported from the Province.

The Imran Khan led Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), in alliance with JI – which formed the Government in the Province under the Chief Ministership of Parvez Khattak on May 31, 2013, replacing the Awami National Party (ANP) led Government of Chief Minister Ameer Haider Khan Hoti – came to power on a platform that is deeply sympathetic to the Islamist extremist ideology. The stated position of the present Government on TTP and other Islamist terrorist formations, according to Chief Minister Khattak’s declaration of January 26, 2014, is that military operations against these groups would be opposed. This was only a further reiteration of the position that Imran Khan and other party leaders, both of the PTI and the JI, had defined well before the elections, and that brought them to power. In October 2012, Imran Khan had claimed that the Taliban were fighting a ‘holy war’ justified by Islam in neighbouring Afghanistan: “It is very clear that whoever is fighting for their freedom is fighting a jihad… The people who are fighting in Afghanistan against the foreign occupation are fighting a jihad.”

More recently, on February 4, 2018, Imran Khan defended Afghan Taliban (to which the TTP pays allegiance) against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), claiming that they represent Western “liberals [who] are thirsty for blood.”

In the meantime, the Islamic State (IS, also Daesh) has made some inroads into KP, as in other parts of Pakistan. On June 24, 2017, at least two suspected Daesh terrorists, including its KP ‘chief’ Arif aka Khalil aka Abuzar, were killed and five SF personnel (three Policemen and two Army soldiers) injured in an exchange of fire which lasted for six hours in Shahpur village, Peshawar. A large quantity of explosives, AK 47s and material used in assembling improvised explosive devices was found at their hideout. According to reports, the terrorists had completed their ‘preparations’ for terrorist attacks in the city with the help of videos of their intended target sites.

It is not surprising therefore that terror groups continue to get more ‘dedicated cadres’ for them to work. Indeed, incidents of suicide attack, which are an important indicator of the level of existing threat in a particular region witnessing a protracted conflict, more than doubled. In 2017, KP accounted for seven such incidents resulting in 34 deaths and 80 injuries as against three such incidents recorded in 2016 which had resulted in 21 fatalities and 53 injuries. The current year, 2018, has already witnessed one such incident (February 4, mentioned above).

The surge in violence during the first 40 days of the current year, as compared to the same period last year, indicates that terrorists continue to have a significant presence in the region. Acknowledging the danger on January 10, 2018, the US Government issued a new travel advisory to it citizens cautioning them against travel to KP, Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA), and Balochistan. The US State Department statement read:

Reconsider travel to Pakistan due to terrorism. Some areas have increased risk. Do not travel to Balochistan province, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) province, the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, (FATA) and the Azad Kashmir area due to terrorism and armed conflict.

Apart from ‘domestically oriented’ terror groups, the Haqqani Network continues to operate out of the tribal regions of KP and FATA. Significantly, US drone attacks returned to KP in 2017. A US drone strike killed a ‘commander’ of the Haqqani Network and his partner in the Speen Tal area of Hangu District on June 12, 2017. The last such attack had taken place on November 21, 2013, when at least eight suspected terrorists were killed and five were injured in a US drone strike at a seminary in the Tal area of Hangu District. The Haqqani Network’s ‘spiritual leader’, Maulana Ahmad Jan, was among eight persons killed in the attack. More recently, on January 23, 2018, a ‘commander’ of the Haqqani Network, Ehsan aka Khawari and two of his associates were killed when a US drone targeted a house in the Speen Thall area of Hangu District.

Despite recording a continuous decline in terrorism-related fatalities over the past four years, KP remains a troubled region, where terrorism is just under wraps and can flare up again at any moment. All the factors responsible for the rise of terrorism, including its political sponsorship, remain intact, and no honest effort has been made to deal with these issues, as the declared state policy, both at Islamabad and Peshawar, is against taking any hard measures.

*Ajit Kumar Singh
Research Fellow; Institute for Conflict Management

By Giriraj Bhattacharjee*

On February 5, 2018, Security Forces (SFs) killed a militant of the Saoraigwra faction of the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB-S), ‘platoon commander’ Jordan Narzary, in an encounter at Belguri village in the Chirang District of Assam. A 7.62 mm pistol, along with one magazine and two rounds of live ammunition, was recovered from the possession of the slain militant.

On January 7, 2018, SFs killed a NDFB-S militant, Ricardo Hazuary aka Rekhai, in the Akshiguri area of Kokrajhar District.

No civilian or SF fatalities have been registered in the State in 2018, so far (data till February 11, 2018). During the corresponding period of 2017, Assam recorded, according to partial data compiled by the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP), a total of four insurgency-related fatalities (two SF personnel and two militants).

Through 2017 Assam accounted for a total of 26 fatalities (five civilians, three SF personnel and 18 militants) as against 86 fatalities (33 civilians, four SF personnel and 49 militants) recorded in 2016, registering a steep decline of 69.77 per cent in total fatalities as compared to 2016.

More significantly, the State registered the lowest insurgency-related fatalities since 1992 [the year from which SATP data is available]. Over the years there has been a cyclical trend in total fatalities, with a peak of 783 (531 civilians, 72 SF personnel, and 180 militants) in 1998.

For the first time, since 1992, fatalities in the civilian category (five), one of the primary indices of the security situation in conflict zones, fell to a single digit in 2017. The low number of 10 in this category was recorded in 2015. At its peak, Assam recorded 531 civilian fatalities in 1998.

2017 also registered the second lowest fatalities (three) among SFs. The lowest figure (one) in this category was recorded in 2015. The State saw a maximum of 87 SF fatalities in 1996. Fatalities in this category remained in the double digits till 2011.

SFs secured a positive kill ratio against the militants in 2017, a trend established since 1997. The ratio in 2017 stood at 1: 6 in favor of SFs, as against 1:12.25 in 2016. Since 1992, the militants managed to secure a kill ratio in their favor in only three years: 1992 (1:1.78), 1995 (1:2.7), and 1996 (1:1.4)

SFs also arrested 172 militants in 2017 adding to the 490 arrested in 2016. The 2017 arrests included cadres of NDFB-S – 44; ULFA-I – 25; Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland-Khaplang (NSCN-K) – 17; National Democratic Freedom Fighter for Bodoland (NDFFB) – 8; United People’s Liberation Army (UPLA) – 8; Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak Muivah (NSCN-IM) – 6; Adivasi Tiger Force (ATF) – 6, Muslim United Liberation Tigers of Assam (MULTA) – 5;and Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC) – 5.

Nine militants surrendered in 2017, adding to 15 in 2016. One of the most prominent surrenders was that of the ‘commander-in-chief’ of the National Socialist Council of Adivasis (NSCA), Jharu Lohar aka Horen Karmakar, who surrendered before the Police in Sonitpur District on February 7, 2017. Lohar deposited one 9 mm pistol, two magazines and a large number of rounds. NSCA is one of the lesser known Adivasi outfits, largely involved in extortion and abduction.

Meanwhile, though no new Suspension of Operations (SoO) agreement or Memorandum of Settlement (MoS) was signed in 2017, 13 militant groups which were once violently active in the State remained under earlier SoO agreements with the Union and State Governments, through 2017. These included the United Liberation Front of Asom-Pro Talks Faction (ULFA-PTF), the Ranjan Daimary faction of NDFB (NDFB-RD), Pro Talks Faction of NDFB (NDFB-PTF), Adivasi People’s Army (APA), All Adivasi National Liberation Army (AANLA), Birsa Commando Force (BCF), Adivasi Cobra Military of Assam (ACMA), Santhal Tiger Force (STF), National Santhal Liberation Army (NSLA), United Kukigram Democratic Army (UKDA), Kuki Liberation Army (KLA), Hmar People’s Conference-Democratic(HPC-D), Karbi Longri North Cachar Liberation Front (KLNLF).

Another four groups – the Bodo Liberation Tigers (BLT), United People’s Democratic Solidarity (UPDS), Dilip Nunisa faction of Dima Halim Daogah (DHD-N) and Jewel Garlosa faction of DHD (DHD-J) – which were once violently active, have already disbanded over the past years. BLT was disbanded on December 7, 2003; UPDS on December 14, 2011; DHD-J on November 26, 2012; and DHD-N on March 9, 2013. There is, meanwhile, hope that talks with ULFA-PTF may come to a conclusion in 2018. Additional Director General of Police-Special Branch (ADGP-SB), Pallab Bhattacharya stated, on December 15, 2017, “The peace talk is going towards the right direction. And the process will speed up after the draft NRC [National Register for Citizen] publication.” The Final draft NRC is to be published by December 2018.

The improvement in the security situation led to the opening up of investment opportunities in the State. Advantage Assam-Global Investors Summit-2018 was successfully held at the Sarusajai Stadium in Guwahati on February 3-4, 2018. At least 200 Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) worth INR 1,000 billion were signed during the two day event.

The security consolidation in Assam was acknowledged by the Centre, with Union Minister of State (MoS) for Home Affairs Hansraj Ahir observing, on December 19, 2017, in the Lok Sabha [Lower House of the Parliament], “While the States of Sikkim, Mizoram and Tripura had no insurgency-related violence, the number of these incidents had come down in Assam, Nagaland, Manipur and Meghalaya in 2017 (till 30 November), as compared to the corresponding period of 2016.”

Even as insurgency-related violence fell to its lowest since the commencement of the troubles in the region, residual threats do remain. Incidents of abduction and extortion continued to intimidate people across the state. According to Police records, at least 5,059 abduction incidents were recorded in 2017 (upto July, no further data available). There were 6,137 such incidents through 2016. Further, there were 732 extortion-related cases registered in 2017 (till July); as against 1,295 through 2016. Though this data does not mention the people involved in these incidents, it is widely known that most of these incidents are carried out by militant groupings. The then Director General of the National Security Guard (NSG) and former Director General of Police (DGP), Assam, J.N. Choudhury observed, on November 28, 2014, “In (the) northeast, militancy has become almost a cottage industry where extortion and abduction for ransom is seen as an easy means for money.”

Continuous illegal immigration from Bangladesh (erstwhile East Pakistan) through the porous border has created demographic imbalances. According to the interim report [submitted on July 22, 2017] of The Committee for Protection of Land Rights of Indigenous People of Assam,

The principal factor causing galloping changes in the demographic composition of Assam is the unrestrained infiltration of illegal Bangladeshi migrants through the open Indo-Bangladesh international borders. These Bangladeshis like swarms of ants have spread in every nook and corner of Assam and grabbed land wherever any vacant government land – be they khas/waste land, reserved forest land, village grazing reserves (VGRs) or professional grazing reserves (PGRs), char lands or water bodies or hills, tribal belts/blocks or satra land – is available.

This emotive issue of ‘foreigners’ has sparked several protests, some violent, in the past and these continued through 2017. A public rally in Goalpara District on June 30, 2017, to protest against the alleged inclusion of several Indian citizens in the ‘D (doubtful)-voters list’ in the State by the Police and the Foreigners’ Tribunals, turned violent. In the consequent Police firing, one of the protestors, identified as Yakub Ali, (22), died. Earlier, on July 21, 2010, the All Assam Minorities Students’ Union (AAMSU) organised a rally to protest against the exercise to update NRC. The protest turned violent and the Police opened fire, killing four protestors.

The pilot project to update NRC was initially launched from Barpeta (Barpeta District) and Chaygaon (Kamrup District) revenue circle in 2010. Subsequent to the firing incident, the exercise was stopped. Later, on December 6, 2013, the Union Government issued a gazette notification to update NRC within three years. The Supreme Court later intervened on August 20, 2014, and gave the Union and the State Government three years to complete the entire process following a petition filed by a Non-Government Organisation, Assam Public Works. The updating process started in May 2015.

The first draft of National Register for Citizen (NRC) was published at midnight on December 31, 2017. The first draft of the updated NRC published the names of about 19 million persons out of a total 32.9 million applicants. The remaining names are under the verification process. Significantly, there was no incident of violence as initially feared. Nevertheless, it will be next to impossible to deport millions of migrants to Bangladesh if they are indeed found to be illegal setters, as India does not have an extradition treaty with Bangladesh.

The issue of ‘Nagalim’ (‘greater Nagaland’), which is reportedly being discussed under the Framework Agreement with the NSCN-IM has also created some trouble. Dima Hasao District witnessed violence when a mob attacked a train during the 12-hour bandh (shutdown strike) called by different organisations on January 25, 2018, following rumors that the Framework Agreement with NSCN-IM would include the Dima Hasao District. When the angry protesters, reportedly, began to attack Policemen, they opened fire, injuring seven protestors. Two of the injured persons died later.

More worryingly, five Districts of Assam (Charaideo, Dibrugarh, Sivasagar and Tinsukia) remain at risk of a potentially escalating militancy. These five Districts are contiguous to another five – three in Arunachal Pradesh [Tirap, Changlang and Longding] and two in Nagaland [Mon and Tuensang] – which fall along the Indo-Myanmar border, constituting the surviving hub of militancy in the Northeastern region. According to partial SATP data, the five Districts (Tirap, Changlang and Longding in Arunachal; and Mon and Tuensang in Nagaland) have accounted for a total of 318 fatalities (31 civilians, 28 SF personnel, 259 militants) since January 1, 2000, of which 12 (one civilian, one SF trooper and six militants) were recorded in 2017. Further, the United National Liberation Front of Western South East Asia (UNLFWESEA) and its main constituents ULFA-I and NSCN-K along with CorCom [Coordination Committee], a conglomerate of six Manipur Valley-based militant outfits, are active along the Indo-Myanmar border. Notably, most of the major recent attacks on SFs along the Indo-Myanmar border, including the June 4, 2015, Chandel attack , were carried out by NSCN-K and UNLFWESEA.

ULFA-I remains a potent threat. Director General of Police (DGP) Mukesh Sahay noted, on December 14, 2017, that ULFA-I was ‘down but not out’, adding, “I don’t have a fair idea about its current strength, but then, strength does not lie in numbers but in lethality. I can say, however, that something which was pervasive all over the State at one point of time is today confined to pockets bordering Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland.” In 2017, out of 26 fatalities in the State, eight were linked to ULFA-I. The group was responsible for two out of the five civilian killings in 2017. Similarly, out of three SF personnel killed, ULFA-I was responsible for two killings. Out of 18 militants killed in 2017, four were from ULFA-I.

While there has been a remarkable consolidation of peace in Assam, deficiencies and deficits in the security apparatus persist. According to Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D) data, as on 1.1.2017, as against a total sanctioned strength of 65,611 Policemen; only 55,403 were in position, a deficit of 15.56 per cent. Vacancies at senior levels included: Additional Director General of Police – 1; Inspector General of Police – 6; Deputy Inspector General of Police DIG – 7; Assistant Inspector General of Police – 3; Additional Superintendent of Police – 91; Assistant Superintendent of Police/Deputy Superintendent of Police (ASP/ DySP)-237. At the apex level of the India Police Service, the State had a deficit of 20.74 per cent: 149 IPS officer were in position as against the sanctioned strength of 188, considerably weakening executive direction of the Force (the figure represents the combined cadre strength of Assam and Meghalaya).

Assam’s hard earned peace needs further consolidation and greater cooperation with neighbouring State Police formations. A peaceful environment would contribute enormously to addressing the complex questions of illegal immigration, ethnicity, land alienation, as well as economic and infrastructure bottlenecks.

*Giriraj Bhattacharjee
Research Assistant, Institute for Conflict Management

By Jim Garamone

It’s a measure of the growth of cyber and America’s vulnerability to it that the cyber threat was at the top of the list of worldwide threats the director of national intelligence chose to highlight at a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on Tuesday.

Daniel Coats also covered Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and terrorism, but he led with the cyberwar that nations, organizations and sometimes individuals are fighting against the United States.

“We face a complex, volatile and challenging threat environment,” Coats told the senators. “The risk of interstate conflict is higher than any time since the end of the Cold War — all the more alarming because of the growing development and use of weapons of mass destruction by state and nonstate actors. Our adversaries, as well as the other malign actors, are using cyber and other instruments of power to shape societies and markets, international rules and institutions, and international hotspots to their advantage.”

Competition for Technological Superiority

The United States is in competition for technological superiority, Coats said, noting that adversaries “seek to sow division in the United States and weaken U.S. leadership.”

Nonstate actors, which include terrorists and criminal syndicates, exploit weak state capacity in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, to cause instability and violence within states and among states. A part of many of these malign actors is their use of cyber, the nation’s top intelligence official said. “Frankly, the United States is under attack — under attack by entities that are using cyber to penetrate virtually every major action that takes place in the United States,” Coats told the panel. “From U.S. businesses, to the federal government, to state and local governments, the United States is threatened by cyberattacks every day.” Russia, China, Iran and North Korea pose the greatest cyber threats, he said, but others use cyber operations to achieve strategic and malign objectives.

“Some of these actors, including Russia, are likely to pursue even more aggressive cyberattacks with the intent of degrading our democratic values and weakening our alliances,” the intelligence chief said. “Persistent and disruptive cyber operations will continue against the United States and our European allies, using elections as opportunities to undermine democracy, sow discord and undermine our values.”

Other Threats

China also uses cyber to enable espionage and attack capabilities to support its national security and economic priorities, Coats said. “Iran will try to penetrate U.S. and allied networks for espionage and lay the groundwork for future cyberattacks,” he added. “And North Korea will continue to use cyber operations to raise funds, launch attacks and gather intelligence against the United States.”

Weapons of mass destruction is No. 2 on Coats’ list of threats. “Overall, state efforts to modernize, develop or acquire WMD, their delivery systems or the underlying technologies constitute a major threat to the United States and to our allies,” he said.

Coats called North Korea the most volatile and confrontational threat. “In addition to its ballistic missile tests and growing number of nuclear warheads for these missiles, North Korea will continue its longstanding chemical and biological warfare programs, also,” he told the senators.

Russia and China are expanding and modernizing their WMD arsenals, he said. “Iran’s implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the JCPOA, has extended the time it would take to develop a nuclear weapon from several months to about a year, provided Iran continues to adhere to the deal’s major provisions,” he added.

Pakistan is developing new types of short-range tactical nuclear weapons, Coats said, and Syria has used chemical weapons in its civil war. Nonstate actors would love to get their hands on chemical weapons and are trying to get biological weapons, he pointed out.

The Terrorism Threat

Terrorism remains a threat and runs the gamut from ISIS and al-Qaida to Lebanese Hezbollah and other affiliated terrorist organizations. Iran is a major state sponsor of terror groups.

The United States is not immune, Coats said, noting that individuals have “self-radicalized” and launched attacks against their fellow citizens.

“ISIS’ claim to having a functioning caliphate that governs populations is all but thwarted,” Coats said. “However, ISIS remains a threat and will likely focus on regrouping in Iraq and Syria, particularly in ungoverned portions of those countries, enhancing its global presence, championing its cause, planning international attacks and encouraging members and sympathizers to attack their home countries.”

Al-Qaida also will remain a threat, Coats said, telling the senators that the organization remains intent on attacking the United States and U.S. interests abroad.

The Space Domain

Space is another combat domain now, and Russia and China will continue to expand their space-based reconnaissance, communications and navigation systems in terms of numbers of satellites, breadth of capability and applications for use, the director said. “Both Russia and Chinese counter-space weapons will mature over the next few years as each country pursues antisatellite weapons as a means to reduce U.S. and allied military effectiveness and perceptions of U.S. military advantage in space,” he told the panel.

Russia is using a variety of capabilities short of war to assert its presence, Coats said. “President [Vladimir] Putin will continue to rely on assertive foreign policies to shape outcomes beyond Russia’s borders,” he added. “Putin will resort to more authoritarian tactics to maintain control amid challenges to his rule.

Russia uses these tools – including the cyber weapon – because “it’s relatively cheap, it’s low risk, it offers what they perceive as plausible deniability and it’s proven to be effective at sowing division,” he said. “We expect Russia to continue using propaganda, social media, false flag personas, sympathetic spokesmen and other means to influence, to try to build on its wide range of operations and exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States,” he added.

The director said Russia sees past actions against the United States as successful and that it views the 2018 U.S. midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations.

China also is seeking to expand its regional influence and to globally shape events and outcomes, Coats said. “It will take a firm stance on its claims to the East China Sea and South China Sea, its relations with Taiwan and its regional economic engagement,” he told the senators.

China also intends to use its “One Belt, One Road” initiative to increase its reach to geostrategic locations across Eurasia, Africa and the Pacific, he said.

In Afghanistan, the capital city of Kabul continues to bear the brunt of the Taliban-led insurgency, as demonstrated by recent attacks in the city. “Afghan national security forces face unsteady performance, but with coalition support, probably will maintain control of most major population centers,” the director said. “Complicating the Afghanistan situation, however, is our assessment that Pakistan-based militant groups continue to take advantage of their safe haven to conduct attacks in India and Afghanistan, including U.S. interests therein.”

Iran will remain the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism and an adversary in the Middle East, especially in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, Coats said. “We also assess that Iran will continue to develop military capabilities that threaten U.S. forces and U.S. allies in the region,” he added.

Sri Lanka’s Presidential Secretariat has made arrangements to implement a wide people’s program to combat bribery, corruption, fraud, malpractices and waste in the country.

The program launched under the direct intervention of the President in keeping with an election pledge made during the 2015 Presidential Election, will function under the center for combating corruption, bribery, fraud, malpractices and waste set up at the Presidential Secretariat.

Accordingly, anyone has the freedom to make a complaint at this center against any act of corruption, bribery, fraud, malpractice or waste committed anywhere in the country. The center will take action to bring anyone responsible for such acts before courts within three months of receiving the complaint.

So far 40 complaints have been received at this center and the period of entertaining complaints will end on March 1.

A press conference to create awareness about this program was held at the Government Information Department yesterday. Speaking on the occasion, Co-ordinating Secretary to the President Rajika Kodituwakku said attention would be drawn towards extending the date of entertaining complaints depending on the manner complaints were received.

Anyone can make an anonymous complaint to this center regarding any act of fraud, or corruption committed in a state institution or an individual.

Complaints will be examined through officers of the Presidential Investigations Office to establish their veracity and validity and thereafter forward them to the Attorney General’s Department for legal action. The President will make direct involvement to ensure that quick legal action is taken on such matters.

Co-ordinating Secretary to the President, A. N. R. Ameratunge said this exercise would ensure that people engaged in fraud and corruption are quickly brought to book. The program is aimed to build an extensive political and social culture, empower the administrative system, streamline the legal system and institutions involved in the administration of justice.

He said the President’s sole endeavor is to build a Sri Lanka free of fraud, corruption and waste. Although this center had no legal powers the President would intervene directly to ensure that legal action is taken against culprits involved in such misdeeds.

Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said that he would prefer for his team, Real Madrid, not to sign Neymar from Paris Saint-Germain, ESPN reports.

Madrid president Florentino Perez has made numerous attempts over the years to sign Neymar, even after his controversial transfer from Santos to La Liga rivals Barcelona in 2013.

Since Neymar joined PSG in a record €222 million deal last summer, Perez, club captain Sergio Ramos and Madrid’s Brazil internationals Casemiro and Marcelo have all spoken about the possibility of the Brazilian playing at the Bernabeu.

Rajoy, speaking to AS ahead of Madrid hosting PSG in the first leg of the Champions League round of 16 on Wednesday, said he believed in the team’s current strike force of Gareth Bale, Karim Benzema and Cristiano Ronaldo.

“I wouldn’t like to see Neymar in the white shirt,” Rajoy said. “I don’t know about [Kylian Mbappe] but Bale, Benzema and Cristiano were great, and within a few months, people are doubting them. We should have a bit more perspective. I believe in them.”

For the second time in a week, US military forces occupying northeast Syria have attacked Syrian government forces, blowing up a Russian-made T-72 battle tank on Saturday. According to a statement made today by Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, commander of US Air Forces Central Command, US forces saw a Russian tank in Syria that “took a shot at us” and the US side called in an airstrike in “self-defense.”

Harrigian said that the US troops were in a “defensive position” when they spotted the Russian tank and fired on it. He said he could not rule out the possibility that the tank was being driven by Russian soldiers when the US attacked it.

Last week’s US attack on forces loyal to the Syrian government were first reported to have killed a total of 100 fighters, with one or two Russians possibly in the mix. But just today new information suggests that the US attack had killed up to 100 Russians fighting in special “ISIS killers” squads seeking to mop up the last of the extremist group in Syria.

Losing 100 Russians to a US attack in Syria not only shifts a US/Russia proxy war to a US/Russia hot war (on one side thus far), it also carries with it a great political downside for President Vladimir Putin as the Russian presidential election season begins. Liberal challenger to Putin, Grigory Yavlinsky, is already trying to score political points by criticizing the lack of transparency over what Russians are dying for inside Syria. Putin is stuck between a rock and hard place, as he surely understands the dangers of direct retaliation but also sees the political downside of doing nothing as US forces kill Russians in Syria.

Col. Thomas Veale, a spokesman for the Inherent Resolve coalition, said of last week’s strike that it was in response to what are likely Syrian government moves to re-claim control of territory that had been vacated when ISIS was defeated in the area.

US actions in northeastern Syria make it clear that Washington intends to carve out a large chunk of Syrian territory to control, with its proxy Kurd forces acting as boots on the ground. The name of the game is increasingly clear: deny the Syrian government the ability to consolidate its control over large parts of the country now that ISIS is defeated.

The purpose? Secretary of State Rex Tillerson made it clear that the ultimate US goal in Syria was, as it has been for more than ten years, regime change.

It distorts words beyond any stretch of meaning for a foreign military that illegally occupies the territory of another sovereign state to claim “self-defense” when the military of that sovereign state seeks to expel the invaders.

How far is the United States willing to go to pursue the “regime change” policy of the past two US presidencies which remains a prime goal of Washington’s friends in the region including primarily Israel and Saudi Arabia?

Israel’s recent military escalation in Syria was halted — at least temporarily — by a warning call from Putin to Israeli prime minister Netanyahu. Will the Russian president make a similar call to Washington warning against any further US strikes on Russians operating (legally, unlike the Americans) in Syria? Will Trump’s generals heed the warning…or will they seek to call Putin’s bluff?

And what happens if Putin is not bluffing?

This article was published by RonPaul Institute.

Minamata Convention aims to reduce global mercury pollution, but may have shifted hazards toward South America’s artisanal mines.

By David J.X. Gonzalez*

Highway 120 bisects the Sierra Gorda Biosphere Reserve, snaking through the scrubby terrain of central Mexico’s highlands. Along the way it passes through Peñamiller, a sparse municipality with a few thousand residents. The local economy depends on production from agriculture and mines. A dusty offshoot from the highway leads to one such mine – a cinnabar mine, with tunnels plunging hundreds of meters into the mountainside. Miners process ore in rows of wood-fired brick ovens arranged near the mouths of the tunnels. The homebuilt ovens heat the rocky material, releasing mercury vapors that are captured, condensed, and bottled. Under a cloudless sky, with few trees for shade, the workers wear t-shirts and cover their mouths with bandanas, their only protective equipment. However, the cloth does not protect from mercury vapors, which enter the body through the lungs and cause irreparable damage to the brain and kidneys. Children live in nearby houses and sometimes play in the tailings, breathing in the mercury. This is a toxic site.

Evidence points to an emerging black market for mercury in South America, where most of Mexico’s mercury ends up. Artisanal miners in Peru, Colombia and Bolivia buy mercury and use it to extract gold under similarly hazardous conditions. Artisanal and small-scale gold mining, done by individuals or small groups with limited capital, is the largest human source of mercury pollution, accounting for over one-third of global emissions. It is also a large driver of global mercury demand. The changing landscape of mercury production and trade in Latin America, and the associated hazards, may be an unintended consequence of the global effort to regulate the toxic metal.

The Minamata Convention on Mercury, a UN a treaty that aims to reduce global mercury pollution, was adopted and opened for signatures in 2013. The convention prohibits the opening of new mercury mines, requires existing mines to close within 15 years, and encourages nations to reduce or eliminate mercury use in artisanal gold mining. However, demand persists and millions of miners in low- and middle-income countries in Latin America and elsewhere continue to use mercury.

Peru is the largest gold producer in Latin America, with a highly active artisanal gold mining sector concentrated in the Amazonian region of Madre de Dios. A recent study found that the rate of expansion of gold mines in Madre de Dios increased from 2013 to 2016, following a wave of government action that had reduced mining activity. By 2016, more than 650 square kilometers of rainforest had been cleared for gold mining, an area larger than the city of Chicago and an increase of 40 percent since 2012. There is also evidence of widespread human mercury exposure in Madre de Dios. Last year, Duke University researchers reported high mercury levels in communities throughout the region.

There is a long history of global mercury trade for mining precious metals, with a recent shift to production from high- to middle-income countries. In 2003, the world’s largest mercury mine in Almaden, Spain, shut down after two millennia of service. Over the course of its long life, Almaden produced one-third of all mercury used throughout human history, from the cinnabar that Romans applied as red pigment to liquid mercury used to make century industrial chemicals. Sometime in the 16th century, Spanish colonizers began bringing mercury from Almaden to the Americas, where it was used to enhance yields of the silver and gold that fueled the imperial economy. Eventually, mercury lost its value as safer alternatives were found for its many applications, including mining precious metals. The price of mercury dropped from a high of $80,000 per ton in the 1960s to $5,000 in 2000. By the turn of the 21st century, mercury extraction at Almaden was no longer profitable. Mercury exports from Spain continued for another 10 years. At the start of this decade, Spain and the United States were leading mercury exporters. However, the European Union banned mercury exports in 2011, followed by the United States in 2013. To meet demand, Indonesia and Mexico increased exports and became the leading exporters in 2016.

Recent trends in international mercury trade point to changes on the ground. Peru tightly regulates domestically-produced mercury, prohibiting its use in mining, but imported mercury can be used for mining. Peru imported at least 100 tons of mercury each year from 2010 to 2014. About half of Peru’s mercury imports ended up in Madre de Dios, where artisanal gold miners use an estimated 44 to 50 tons of mercury each year. Peru stopped importing mercury in 2015. However, despite the suspension of mercury imports, there are no indications that artisanal miners have stopped using mercury.

Mercury may be passing from Mexico to Peru by way of Bolivia through an emerging black market. Mexico became the leading mercury supplier to Peru in 2012 as imports from Europe and North America decreased. Mexico remained the leading supplier until Peru stopped importing mercury in 2015. However, as exports from Mexico to Peru decreased, exports from Mexico to Bolivia rose. Between 2014 and 2015, exports from Mexico to Peru dropped from 94 to 9 tons. In the same period, exports from Mexico to Bolivia jumped from 24 to 138 tons. Artisanal gold mining activity in Bolivia has increased during the past decade, but a six-fold increase in one year is unlikely. There is also evidence of transnational mercury smuggling. In August 2015, for example, Peruvian authorities seized an illegal shipment of more than 1 ton of mercury near the Bolivian border.

Continuing demand for mercury and the suspension of exports from high-income countries is driving unsafe mining in Mexico with consequences for human health.  Mexican mercury exports increased from 25 to 266 tons between 2010 and 2016. There is little data on the health effects of mercury mining in Mexico, but the studies that exist raise concerns. Researchers found heavy mercury exposure among residents of Plazuela, another mining community in the Sierra Gorda Biosphere Reserve. Children as young as 6 years old had mercury exposure above the national limit. Unfortunately, the results from Plazuela are likely not isolated, and Mexico has numerous artisanal mercury mines.

The apparent rise of a black market for mercury in Peru reveals a challenge for enforcing the Minamata Convention. The Minamata Convention provides a blueprint to reduce mercury pollution in the coming years. In the meantime, the mercury supply chain in Latin America remains toxic, from end to end.

*David Gonzalez is pursuing a PhD in the Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources at Stanford University.

The World Health Organization describes the hazards of mercury pollution and poisoning.

Days after CDC Director Brenda Fitzgerald resigned following revelations that she had purchased stock in major tobacco companies, it came out that U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch owned at least $15,000 worth of tobacco giant Philip Morris International (PMI)’s shares, while Senator Patty Murray’s husband previously owned shares in Reynolds American, another tobacco titan. These disclosures contrasted sharply with both senators’ positions on the Senate committee overseeing public health policy, and elicited justifiable outrage over the idea that officials in charge of anti-tobacco initiatives had financial interests in Big Tobacco.

Unfortunately, Fitzgerald, Hatch and Murray’s links to tobacco are not so unusual after all, but merely the latest visible examples of policymakers accepting money from tobacco industry interests. The full breadth and depth of such ties raises serious concerns about the extent to which these connections have affected tobacco control policies, both in the U.S. and Europe.

Observers astonished by Fitzgerald’s tobacco shares forget U.S. policymakers’ long history of being intimately tied with Big Tobacco. By the late 1990s, the industry spent more than $10 million every national election cycle. This wasn’t even kept very hush-hush: nearly 60% of members of Congress accepted tobacco money, and former Speaker of the House John Boehner actually handed out checks from tobacco lobbyists on the House floor.

Connections to Big Tobacco have reached a fever pitch in the Trump administration. Trump himself declared investments in Philip Morris, which along with Reynolds American donated $1.5 million to Trump’s inauguration. Vice President Mike Pence claimed in 2001 that “despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn’t kill.” Two months later, tobacco lobbyists debated when to cut Pence his next check. Over Pence’s Congressional career, these payments added up to an estimated $39,000.

Health Secretary Tom Price, forced to resign over his extensive charter travel on the taxpayers’ dime, pocketed campaign donations from Big Tobacco for decades and held $37,000 worth of Philip Morris shares in 2012. Attorney General Jeff Sessions received so much money from Reynolds’ PAC during one of his Senate campaigns that he had to send some back.

The problem is by no means limited to the United States: Big Tobacco has thoroughly penetrated British politics as well. At the seemingly harmless end of the scale, the House of Commons was caught buying small tins of snuff at taxpayers’ expense. On a more sinister note, British American Tobacco is the top beneficiary of the Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund.

This investment choice accompanies a long saga of MPs and peers accepting gifts from the tobacco industry, such as opera and tennis tickets. One in four MPs who voted against plain packaging had accepted hospitality from the tobacco industry, many of whom spoke out vehemently against the tobacco control measure. Conservative MP Mark Field, who had accepted Wimbledon tickets from Imperial Tobacco, warned against a “huge rebellion” in Parliament.

But while accepting such gifts is not illegal under British law, it does violate the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), to which the UK is a party. The FCTC calls on signatories to kick the tobacco industry from the decision making process, reserving contact for when absolutely necessary to efficiently regulate the sector – which clearly does not apply to MP David Morris’ all- expenses-paid visit to one of Japan Tobacco International’s factories in Northern Ireland.

Big Tobacco has been hard at work across the Channel, as well—most infamously in the so-called Dalligate scandal. EU Health Commissioner John Dalli was forced to resign after it was suspected that he knew about Maltese entrepreneur Silvio Zammit’s attempts to solicit massive bribes from the tobacco industry in exchange for influence over the EU’s Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). Ironically, the commissioner who replaced Dalli had an investment, albeit small, in Imperial Tobacco.

Despite the European Union’s adherence to the FCTC, there has been intense contact between MEPs and tobacco lobbyists, particularly leading up to the vote on the TPD. Philip Morris spent a staggering €5.25 million in 2013 to lobby MEPs, keeping 161 lobbyists on its payroll to meet with nearly a third of the European Parliament.

Many MEPs acknowledge the extraordinary pressure the tobacco industry places on them, but insist that their votes aren’t influenced by their contacts with Big Tobacco, just as British politicians who accepted industry gifts claim that they are able to keep such hospitality separate from their political work.

These assertions are disingenuous – it’s clear that Big Tobacco is getting more for their money than that. They successfully shaped the EU’s Treaty of Amsterdam to their will. They repeatedly delayed key votes on the TPD, and made certain that when finally passed, the directive was significantly watered down from initial drafts. They are employing the same tactics on their latest battleground, the track and trace system provided for by the TPD to combat the illicit cigarette trade.

The tobacco industry is now hoping that the implementing measures published by the Commission are adopted. While the FCTC and its Protocol on the elimination of the illicit trade in tobacco products (both of which have been ratified by the EU) prohibit the industry from taking part in the track and trace system due to the companies’ role in advancing the parallel trade, the EU’s own system would provide them with key roles. The so-called delegated acts spelling out the conditions for the track and trace system are now up for review with the European Parliament. One MEP, Younous Omarjee, has already called on his colleagues to veto the text.

We can be sure, based on this long history, that Big Tobacco will be doing its utmost to buy this vote as well. It’s time for Europe to recognize the lengths to which the tobacco industry will go to promote its agenda, and to accept that conflicts of interest like Fitzgerald’s dabbling in tobacco stocks are more pervasive than we might like to admit. Until the EU ferrets out all of these connections and establishes a zero-tolerance principle for policymakers having financial links to Big Tobacco, European tobacco control legislation will have smoky fingerprints all over it.

*Alicia Conway is currently undertaking a Master’s in Economics and Management in London.

Some recent reports show that North Korea has continued to evade international sanctions against its illicit nuclear and missile programs. Citing U.S. intelligence reports, Lamb (2017) said North Korea transferred “three nuclear warheads” to Iran last spring together with “a suspected ‘dirty bomb’ freebee for Hezbollah.”i A recent UN report also documented North Korea’s egregious violation of UN Security Council sanctions in 2017 (see http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42928348). No doubt North Korea will continue to violate international sanctions.

International sanctions on North Korea have not been effective for two main reasons. Internally, the Kim regime can hold up with minimum revenue since it has long abandoned a large portion of its population from economic support and governmental welfare.ii The regime need not feed 25 million people, but has sustained itself with an economy good only for its loyal elite that forms a fraction of its population. The regime is often jokingly called “the Republic of Pyongyang,” and even in its capital Pyongyang, most residents rely on jangmadang through individual trades (akin to local fairs or farmers’ markets) since state-supplied daily rations no longer exist. In other parts of North Korea, deprivation is kept as a necessity for its people, and oppression and human rights abuse are the daily norm. Externally, the regime has relied on several long-term allies that can help create loopholes in international sanctions, such as China, Russia, Lebanon, Zimbabwe, and Iran. The earnings the regime makes from willing trade partners for slave labor, counterfeit, banned commodities and arms may enable its small economy to keep rolling.

While illicit international trades with North Korea were sanctioned, inter-Korean collusion was not sanctioned in a similar manner. The criminal nature of inter-Korean collaboration was only recently recognized, after much damage had been done to UN and U.S. sanctions. Examples include (a) the South’s direct cash transfers to the North for slave labor at the Kaesong Industrial Complex, (b) the South’s massive giveaways of foods and commodities to the North which were disguised as humanitarian aids, and (c) undisclosed direct transactions at the government level. I will briefly recap the first two cases, then give some recent cases of the third type.

Examples of Inter-Korean Collusion

The first two cases are well-documented inter-Korean collusion under the South’s “engagement policy” (a.k.a. sunshine policy). The two Koreas exploited lack of public understanding of how distribution channels work in North Korea. When cash payments and aids supplies are handed over to North Korea, how they are used and distributed internally is beyond reach for the outside world and is dictated solely and strictly by North Korean authorities. Thus, absence of external watchdog function entitles the regime to an exclusive right of possession and use of the materials provided from the outside. Cash payments went straight to the Kim family’s bank accounts, and food supplies went to the North’s military bases; little was given to the hungry population that the outside aids aimed for in the first place. South Korea’s governments knew all that but did nothing to correct or address this issue, and many economists and outside analysts sympathetic with the regime penned their voices in support of the sunshine policy.iii The result was concerted human rights abuse, as angry defectors from North Korea contested, since inter-Korean collusion helped prop up the North’s dictators when the regime’s economy was on the verge of collapse.

Take Kaesong workers’ wages, for instance. The North asked the South’s governments to pay each month’s total wages in a lump sum and make payments in cash directly to the Kim regime’s budget office, not to individual workers. The South agreed and never raised issues or concerns. The North gave 2% of the wages back to the workers and took the other 98% as state revenue. If that is not slave labor, what is? The same occurred with North Korean construction workers and timber workers sent overseas to other countries.

Besides the human rights abuse issue, many suspected that the inter-Korean business partnership at the Kaesong Complex served to generate important revenue for the North to use for its illicit nuclear and missile programs, too. A recent discovery reinforces the old concerns. According to a July 2007 South Korean Ministry of Unification file, the South’s Roh administration supplied 50,000 tons of heavy oil to North Korea, which was later used as fuel for North Korean missiles. The report showed that Mr. Moon Jae-in, then presidential chief of staff pushed for the deal (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cdUBFIo06I).

Mr. Moon, after elected President of South Korea last May, made at least two undisclosed direct transactions with the North, but the South’s presidential Blue House refused to give out details. The first concealed transaction occurred in October, and the second one allegedly involved his delegation to Lebanon and UAE in December.

On Oct. 21, 2017 a South Korean fishing ship named Hungjin entered east waters of North Korea with its navigation system and satellite equipment intentionally shut off. The ship kept sailing to the north, then got detained for a few days by North Korean authorities in Rajin, a port city only 90 miles down from Vladivostok, Russia. In an unprecedented show of hospitality, North Korea not only swiftly released the ship and crew unharmed, but returned the ship loaded with “3.5 tons of frozen puffer fish that the North Korean authorities kindly packed for them” (as reported and discussed in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn3Goxm40Po).

Despite timely sea-police reports, the presidential Blue House deliberately withheld information until North Korea announced the ship’s release “on humanitarian grounds” and South Korean media picked up the news subsequently. Even the South’s Defense Secretary said he first learned about the ship’s detainment when the news broke out in the media. That implicates that Moon stood behind a secretive transaction with the North’s Kim, in violation of international sanctions. The official report of investigation from the South’s government was full of incomprehensible anomalies and contradictions, which strongly indicates a coverup at the government level.

Then in December, the South’s government sent a delegation to Lebanon and UAE. The special envoy was led by the president’s chief of staff, Im Jong-seok aboard the South’s Air Force One. Many viewed that Im travelled for confidential transactions in Beirut and Abu Dhabi, that both visits had to do with North Korea, and that the presidential plane, not searchable by foreign or domestic authorities, was necessary to carry out the undisclosed transactions.

Before his appointment as Moon’s chief of staff, Mr. Im headed an organization that specialized in monetary transfers to North Korea. Suspicions abound that Im transferred illicit profit from Bitcoin manipulations to the North. The U.S. Treasury Department apparently secured evidence for South Korea’s money laundering through Bitcoins and recent transfers to North Korea, which now supports the suspicions. Given that Beirut, Tehran, and Pyongyang have been close allies, and that Tehran has immense influence over the Shi’a-led Hezbollah government in Beirut, many believe that Im’s meeting with the Lebanese president was for a business involving North Korea and that the business was likely a “dangerous” one.

Aftermath of the South’s “candlelight revolution”

Why have the two Koreas colluded, despite the North’s steady development of nuclear warheads and open threats to the U.S. and the South? Is the “inter-Korean engagement” a Trojan horse? It clearly is, and that’s where the U.S. geopolitical interests face another challenge.

Numerous events indicate that the two Koreas have quietly and steadily moved towards forming a united Communist state under the North’s political system. The “candlelight revolution” that supported Moon’s presidency in last May has reference to the dominant anti-American and pro-Chinese political groups in South Korea that hatched through the Gwangju riot in May 1980 and gained power in the 1990s, especially during the presidency of Kim Dae-jung. The two Koreas have a shared interest in elimination of the U.S. influence and military presence from the Korean Peninsula. Moon’s reference to “a peaceful means to ease tensions between the U.S. and North Korea” implicates a unified Communist Korea that accommodates China’s geopolitical interests.

The South’s Moon administration has craftily sabotaged the UN Security Council resolutions and used the Winter Olympics in Pyongchang to help “promote” the North’s propaganda https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR6SxBzt85Q). During his 10-hour talk with the North’s delegation, Mr. Moon never raised an issue with denuclearization of North Korea or with their ballistic missile threats to the U.S. and its allies. How could Moon accept the North’s invitation for a summit meeting in Pyongyang with a big, happy smile, without ever questioning their nuclear threats to the South Koreans? That clearly shows that Moon acts as North Korea’s ally and a friend of the Kim family, not as a responsible member of the Indo-Pacific allies of the U.S.

This year has political significance both for the U.S. and North Korea. For the U.S., the North Korean provocations and threats with ballistic missiles have left them with no other road to go. President Trump has repeatedly addressed this point. For North Korea, this year marks the 70th anniversary of its Party’s foundation, and completion of its nuclear programs need be recognized in its Constitution. Besides, the Kim regime feels a sense of urgency that a unified Communist Korea would have little chance if not established during Moon’s presidency. The U.S.-North Korea standoff is thus deadlocked and unlikely to avoid military conflict this time.

But the inter-Korean collaboration only adds fuel to the flames and does not ease the tensions. If the two form a united Communist Korea, most South Koreans would face what Cambodia and Vietnam saw in the 1970s. The authoritarian rigidity of the Kim regime cannot accommodate a large South Korean population that challenges oppression and protests. If a united Communist Korea fails, which I think is quite likely, South Korea’s economy and political future would face a very serious setback. The Moon administration has alienated the U.S. and Japan and almost severed its alliance with them. It remains to be seen how South Korea gets out of the swamp and disconnects itself from the Chinese money and influence that has manipulated its many sectors.

The small, quiet Olympic town of Pyongchang sits right in the eye of a storm. Strangely enough, the North Korean pleasure squads did a cheer under a stateless “unification flag,” and the South Korean national flag was carried by German athletes.

*Max S. Kim is a Seoul-based freelance journalist

By Filip Rudic and Bahrie Sadiku

A court document obtained by BIRN reveals that two policemen in north Kosovo admitted in court to tampering with evidence at the crime scene where Serb politician Oliver Ivanovic was shot dead.

Two policemen admitted to tampering with evidence at the scene of Kosovo Serb politician Oliver Ivanovic’s murder, according to a written record of a decision by the Basic Court in the town of Mitrovica to release them from detention.

One of the policemen, identified by the initials Z.J., told the court that he did what the prosecution alleged “out of ignorance and lack of training, and not deliberately”, and that he sincerely regretted his actions.

The lawyer for the other policeman, identified as D.M., told the court that her client called an ambulance on his mobile phone, thinking that Ivanovic was sick but not realising what had happened to him, according to the court document.

During the hearing in Mitrovica on Monday, the prosecution said that the surveillance videos examined by the investigators showed Z.J. picking up a bullet casing from the crime scene and putting it in his pocket.

According to the prosecution, the second policemen, D.M., saw Z.J. doing this but did not react.

The prosecution also claimed the two officers allowed a passer-by to walk into the crime scene where Ivanovic was shot dead on January 16 in front of his party’s offices in northern Mitrovica.

The court ruled that the prosecution already has all the evidence from the crime scene, so there are no concerns that the suspects, who were released from custody on Monday, could destroy any evidence.

The two policemen from the mainly Serb northern part of Mitrovica were arrested on Saturday.

Ivanovic was the head of the Freedom, Democracy, Justice initiative, which was opposed to the main Belgrade-backed Kosovo Serb party, Srpska Lista, which is part of the Kosovo government.

The well-known politician had said several times that he and his family had received threats, and had asked Kosovo, Serbia and others for help, but without any response.

Serbia declared his murder an act of terrorism and demanded to be allowed to participate in bringing the culprits to justice.

Ivanovic was seen as a political moderate who advocated coexistence between Kosovo’s Serb minority and Albanian majority.

Before his death however he was being retried for allegedly ordering the murder of Kosovo Albanians in 1999 during the war in 1999. He pleaded not guilty.

The third millennium saw the advent of the digital revolution in a very spectacular way: computers invaded every home and place of work, the Internet became as important as a morsel of bread, if not more. Satellite television revolutionized our taste, hype and culture and smart phones affected greatly our social habits. Thus, information and communications technology — ITC — became part and parcel of our daily life. Today, we all wonder, earnestly, how did we cope with life before this revolution?

Digital Future For Humanity

Back in the 1960s of the last century, the visionary Canadian scientist Marshall McLuhani prophesied the future omnipotence of ITCii by arguing that the world will become a “planetary village” and so it became. The distances have shrunk dramatically allowing constant exchange between people and giving international trade an incredible boost, very beneficial to humanity at large.

This technology affected positively almost every area of our civilization: telemedicine has developed tremendously, electronic education spread all over the campuses and artificial intelligence has known quite a positive metamorphosis: driverless cars have made their apparition, drones are becoming normal accessories of life and sophisticated robots are rolling off assembly lines and apparently some of them can display humor and basic feelings.

For Henning Meyer, editor-in-Chief of Social Europe and a Research Associate of the Public Policy Group at the London School of Economics and Political Science, presents the digital revolution in the following words:iii

“The digital revolution, used here as shorthand for broader technological change, is one of today’s most hotly debated topics in politics, economics and business. It makes politicians wary about which preparatory policies to pursue, economists ponder productivity increases and trade unions think about the future of work. We are undoubtedly faced with large-scale disruptions in many areas that require adjustments.

Most people, however, are struggling to get a firm grip on the subject. They ask: what does this all mean for me and the organisations I am part of? What does technological change mean for my job? What kind of policies could be pursued in order to address these new challenges?

To analyse exposure to the digital revolution and potential policy solutions you need to start breaking it down into manageable dimensions. Three areas in particular warrant special attention: What are the forces shaping the application of new technologies? What does the digital revolution mean for the future of work? And what kind of policies could help to address these issues?”

Positive effects

ITC is definitely making our lives easy; we can communicate at will and on end, work from our homes and pay our standing bills online. We can consult our bank accounts day and night and make whatever transactions iv are necessary, including stock market operations. We can order food or a call a cab, buy an airline ticket and purchase any desired goods, any time we want and we can, also, choose our life partner as we want him or her to be.

The digital revolution is, of course, also, affecting greatly the economy: stock markets are all digitized to ease operations and to avoid potential crushes ahead of time. Of course, we all remember the horrific crush of the Wall Street on October 29, 1929 known as the Black Tuesday that ultimately led to the Great Depression that lasted until 1941 worldwide.

Social media has become an important aspect of our lives. We can talk to family and friends anytime, exchange photos and documents, play online, etc. Facebook has a membership of 3,5 billion around the globe; it is a social media for work, education, gossip and the pursuit for narcissistic inclinations. But, it is, also, a real forum of debate and discussion along with other social media and the home of cyber democracy in which people can express freely their ideas and criticism in total anonymity.

Thanks to the social media, the Arab Spring materialized and brought hope of change to this world suffocated for ages by harsh dictatorships and stifling tribal and patriarchal systems of governance. Prior to the advent the social media, demonstrators were easily detected by mukhabarat (political police) and arrested before they opened their mouth. With social media they were able to plan their protest, specify the venue and inform the world before the police knew and arrested them. They had, also, the possibility to stream their activities to the world to see and react to. In many ways one can say that social media was the powerhouse of the Arab uprisings.

In this regard, Heather Brown (journalist specialized in Arab media), Emily Guskin (journalist specialized in Hispanic media market) and Amy Mitchell (Director of Journalism Research) argue quite rightly:v

“Almost immediately after the Arab uprisings began, there was debate over the role and influence of social media in the ouster of Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and the imminent overthrow of Mubarak. In covering what some deemed the Facebook or Twitter revolutions, the media focused heavily on young protesters mobilizing in the streets in political opposition, smartphones in hand. And since then, the violent and sectarian unrest in Syria has brought increased attention to the role of citizen journalism.

Social media indeed played a part in the Arab uprisings. Networks formed online were crucial in organizing a core group of activists, specifically in Egypt. Civil society leaders in Arab countries emphasized the role of “the internet, mobile phones, and social media” in the protests. Additionally, digital media has been used by Arabs to exercise freedom of speech and as a space for civic engagement.”

Knowledge society

So, the applications of ITC are very beneficial because in many ways they are making life easy to everyone and what’s more computers are taking over many tasks and jobs done by humans and this however could have a negative effect on the long run if humans lose their bread winner occupations that could, ultimately, antagonize them and make them detest the use of machines.

The explosion of ITC all over the world is creating knowledge societies in which knowledge can be used by people equally to improve their lives and further their legitimate desire of better living conditions. Hence, UNESCO calls, with much strength, for building knowledge societies worldwide to create opportunities of wellbeing, wealth and happiness to all humans equally:vi

“Knowledge and information have significant impact on people’s lives. The sharing of knowledge and information, particularly through Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) has the power to transform economies and societies. UNESCO works to create inclusive knowledge societies and empower local communities by increasing access to and preservation and sharing of information and knowledge in all of UNESCO’s domains. Knowledge societies must build on four pillars: freedom of expression; universal access to information and knowledge; respect for cultural and linguistic diversity; and quality education for all.”

Negative Effects

The use of computers would push for general artificial intelligence, more sophisticated and more risky, a move that could rekindle machine phobia among humans as a result of the legitimate fear of seeing intelligent machines dominate humanity like in science fiction films. In this particular case, alas, the digital revolution could herald the end of humanity.

Another negative side effect of the digital revolution is that social media is somehow destroying the social fabric. Children spend most of their time on social media and neglect socializing with their parents and discussing their problems with them. Maybe in the future the concept of family will change dramatically to become anonymous of belonging and identity no more.

You can follow Professor Mohamed Chtatou on Twitter: @Ayurinu

Endnotes:
i. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/0/marshall-mcluhan-did-predict-internet/
ii. http://robynbacken.com/text/nw_research.pdf
iii. https://www.socialeurope.eu/understanding-digital-revolution-means
iv. https://www.thebalance.com/the-great-depression-of-1929-3306033
v. https://www.thebalance.com/the-great-depression-of-1929-3306033

References:
Boas, T., Dunning, T. & Bussell, J. (2005). “Will the Digital Revolution Revolutionize Development? Drawing Together the Debate”. In Studies in Comparative International Development, Summer 2005, 40 (2), 95-110. New York: Springer.

This concluding article returns to the broad question that motivates this special issue of Studies in Comparative International Development: Will the Digital Revolution constitute a revolution in development? In addressing this issue, we explore a number of common themes emphasized by the different contributions: the future of the North-South divide, the role of the state in promoting digital development, the transferability and adaptability of specific information and communication technologies, the challenges and potential benefits of controlling digital information, and the developmental effects of digitally enabled communities. We argue that the Digital Revolution’s ultimate impact on development will depend on several key variables, including the extent to which these technologies foster within-country linkages among different sectors and socioeconomic classes; the degree to which new technological applications may be customized or transformed to advance local development; and the outcome of political contests between organized interests that are promoting different ways of organizing and governing the global digital economy. While it is difficult to fully assess a transformation while living in the midst of it, research on the social, political, and economic implications of the Digital Revolution will constitute an important agenda for development scholars in the years to come.

Unwin, Tim. “Towards a Framework for the Use of ICT in Teacher Training in Africa.” Open Learning 20 (2005): 113-129. Unwin stresses the need for teacher training to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) Africa has set for 2015.

The author also argues ICTs should not be limited to just computers and Internet, but offer a variety of learning solutions. The paper covers current initiatives designed to bring ICTs into African schools, including their successes and failures. Unwin advocates focusing on using ICT for education instead of just educating people on how to use ICTs. The author also advocates locally produced content so the curriculum is relevant. The paper discusses other principles of good practice as well. Unwin concludes by proposing a framework to put his principles into use.

Wasserman, Herman. “Mobile Phones, Popular Media, and Everyday African Democracy: Transmissions and Transgressions.” Popular Communication 9 (2011):146-158. Wasserman examines the effect mobile phones and other ICTs have in creating social change and enabling users to engage politically in Africa.

The paper includes criticisms from Malcolm Gladwell and others claiming social networking is low-risk participation. The author also discusses how readily Africa has adapted to mobile phone technology. Wasserman argues these phones have begun to bridge the digital divide. While the paper still points out limitations, it argues the technology has still changed Africa’s social practices. The article then discusses areas where mobile phones have made an impact in participation in government on both a national and local level. Wasserman also describes the business impact of mobile phones. Finally, the author examines the continent’s preference to use the technology to connect with local friends and family instead of the global network.

In June last year, the Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that according to information, the leader of the Islamic State Abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi had reportedly been killed as a result of airstrikes conducted by the Russian aircrafts on a southern suburb of Raqqa on May 28.

Similarly, Rami Abdul Rahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) told Reuters [1] in July last year the Observatory had “confirmed information” from activists working in the eastern countryside of Deir al-Zor that Al-Baghdadi had been killed.

The so-called Observatory’s reports are generally taken at face value by the mainstream media, but in this particular case, the report was somehow overlooked, despite its “wide network of on-the-ground reporters in Syria and a high degree of credibility” (no pun intended).

According to Russian claims, the airstrikes targeted a meeting of high-ranking Islamic State leaders where al- Baghdadi was reportedly present. The meeting was gathered to plan exit routes for militants from Raqqa through the so-called “southern corridor.” Apart from Al-Baghdadi, 30 field commanders and up to 300 militants were also killed in the airstrike.

On Monday, Nick Paton Walsh reported for the CNN [2] “The Islamic State’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was wounded in an airstrike in May last year and had to relinquish control of the terror group for up to five months because of his injuries, according to several US officials who spoke exclusively to CNN.”

Now, even the mainstream media is admitting the possibility the Russian airstrike might have incapacitated Al-Baghdadi. As the CNN report further states: “It’s believed the airstrike occurred close to the date offered by the Russian military in June when they claimed to have killed or injured the Islamic State leader.”

According to another report [3] on Monday by Al-Jazeera, “Islamic State’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is alive and being treated at a medical facility in northeastern Syria after being severely wounded in an air raid, a senior Iraqi official said.”

“The head of Islamic State sustained serious wounds to his legs during air raids,” Abu Ali al-Basri, Iraq’s intelligence and counterterrorism department chief, was quoted on Monday by the Iraqi government-run al-Sabah daily as saying. “Al-Baghdadi suffers from injuries, diabetes and fractures to the body and legs that prevent him from walking without assistance,” said al-Basri.

Although al-Baghdadi has not publicly appointed a successor, two of the closest aides who have emerged as his likely successors over the years are Iyad al-Obeidi, his defense minister, and Ayad al-Jumaili, the in charge of security. The latter had already reportedly been killed in an airstrike in April last year in al-Qaim region on Iraq’s border with Syria.

Therefore, the most likely successor to al-Baghdadi would be al-Obaidi. Both al-Jumaili and al-Obeidi had previously served as security officers in Iraq’s Baathist army under Saddam Hussein, and al-Obeidi is known to be the de facto deputy of al-Baghdadi.

Excluding al-Baghdadi and some of his hardline Islamist aides, the rest of Islamic State’s top leadership is comprised of Saddam era military and intelligence officials. Hundreds of ex-Baathists reportedly constitute the top and mid-tier command structure of the Islamic State who plan all the operations and direct its military strategy.

Thus, apart from training and arms that have been provided to militants in the training camps located in the Turkish and Jordanian border regions adjacent to Syria by the CIA in collaboration with Turkish, Jordanian and Saudi intelligence agencies, the only other factor which has contributed to the astounding success of the Islamic State from early 2013 to August 2014 is that its top cadres are comprised of professional military and intelligence officers from the Saddam era.

Moreover, according to a recent AFP report [4] by Maya Gebeily, hundreds of Islamic State’s jihadists have joined the so-called ‘moderate rebels’ in Idlib in their battle against the advancing Syrian government troops backed by Russian airstrikes. The Islamic State already had a foothold in neighbouring Hama province and its infiltration in Idlib seems to be an extension of its outreach. On January 12, the Islamic State officially declared Idlib one of its ‘Islamic emirates.’ It has reportedly captured several villages and claims to have killed two dozen Syrian soldiers and taken 20 hostages.

In all likelihood, some of the Islamic State’s jihadists who have joined the battle in Idlib were part of the same contingent of militants that fled Raqqa in October last year under a deal brokered [5] by the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). In fact, one of the main objectives of the deal was to let the jihadists fight the Syrian government troops and to free up the Kurdish-led SDF in a scramble to capture oil and gas fields in Deir al-Zor and the border posts along Syria’s border with Iraq.

Islamic State’s foray into Idlib, which has firmly been under the control of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) led by al-Nusra Front since 2015, isn’t the only instance of its kind. Remember when the Syrian government was on the verge of winning a resounding victory against the militants holed up in east Aleppo, Islamic State came to the rescue of so-called ‘moderate rebels’ by opening up a new front in Palmyra in December 2016.

Consequently, the Syrian government had to send reinforcements from Aleppo to Palmyra in order to defend the city. Although the Syrian government troops still managed to evict the militants holed up in the eastern enclave of Aleppo and they also retook Palmyra from Islamic State in March last year, the basic purpose of this tactical move by the Islamic State was to divert the attention and resources of the Syrian government away from Aleppo to Palmyra.

Fact of the matter is that the distinction between Islamic jihadists and purported ‘moderate rebels’ in Syria is more illusory than real. Before it turned rogue and overran Mosul in Iraq in June 2014, Islamic State used to be an integral part of the Syrian opposition and it still enjoys close ideological and operational ties with other militant groups in Syria.

It’s worth noting that although turf wars are common not just between the Islamic State and other militant groups operating in Syria but also among rebel groups themselves, the ultimate objective of the Islamic State and the rest of Sunni militant outfits operating in Syria is the same: to overthrow the Shi’a-led and Baathist-dominated government of Bashar al-Assad.

Regarding the Syrian opposition, a small fraction of it is comprised of defected Syrian soldiers who go by the name of Free Syria Army, but the vast majority has been comprised of Sunni Arab jihadists and armed tribesmen who have been generously funded, trained, armed and internationally legitimized by their regional and global patrons.

Islamic State is nothing more than one of numerous Syrian militant outfits, others being: al-Nusra Front, Ahrar al-Sham, al-Tawhid Brigade, Jaysh al Islam etc. All the Sunni Arab militant groups that are operating in Syria are just as fanatical and brutal as the Islamic State. The only feature that differentiates the Islamic State from the rest is that it is more ideological and independent-minded.

The reason why the US has turned against the Islamic State is that all other Syrian militant outfits only have local ambitions that are limited to fighting the Syrian government, while the Islamic State has established a global network of transnational terrorists that includes hundreds of Western citizens who have become a national security risk to the Western countries.

Sources and links:

[1] Syrian Observatory says it has ‘confirmed information’ that Islamic State chief is dead: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-baghdadi-idUSKBN19W1AW

[2] ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi injured in airstrike last May: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/12/middleeast/isis-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-wounded-intl/index.html

[3] Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi: ‘Alive but wounded’ in Syria: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/02/abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-alive-wounded-north-syria-180212150123915.html

[4] Four years and one caliphate later, Islamic State claims Idlib comeback: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/four-years-one-caliphate-later-claims-idlib-comeback-143938964.html

[5] Raqqa’s dirty secret: the deal that let Islamic State jihadists escape Raqqa: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/raqqas_dirty_secret

Saudi Arabia, in an indication that it is serious about shaving off the sharp edges of its Sunni Muslim ultra-conservatism, has agreed to surrender control of the Great Mosque in Brussels.

The decision follows mounting Belgian criticism of alleged intolerance and supremacism that was being propagated by the mosque’s Saudi administrators as well as social reforms in the kingdom introduced by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, including a lifting of the ban on women’s driving, the granting of women’s access to male sporting events and introduction of modern forms of entertainment.

Relinquishing control of the mosque reportedly strokes with a Saudi plan to curtail support for foreign mosques and religious and cultural institutions that have been blamed for sprouting radicalism. With few details of the plan known, it remains unclear what the curtailing entails.

It also remains unclear what effect it would have. A report published last month by the Royal Danish Defence College and three Pakistani think tanks concluded that madrassas or religious seminaries in Pakistan, a hotbed of militant religious education, were no longer dependent on foreign funding. It said that foreign funding accounted for a mere seven percent of the income of madrassas in the country.

Like with Prince Mohammed’s vow last November to return Saudi Arabia to an undefined “moderate” form of Islam, its too early to tell what the Brussels decision and the social reforms mean beyond trying to improve the kingdom’s tarnished image and preparing it for a beyond-oil, 21^st century economic and social existence.

The decision would at first glance seem to be primarily a public relations move and an effort to avoid rattling relations with Belgium and the European Union given that the Brussels mosque is the exception that confirms the rule. It is one of a relatively small number of Saudi-funded religious, educational and cultural institutions that was managed by the kingdom.

The bulk of institutions as well as political groupings and individuals worldwide who benefitted from Saudi Arabia’s four decades-long, $100 billion public diplomacy campaign, the single largest in history, aimed at countering post-1979 Iranian revolutionary zeal, operated independently.

By doing so, Saudi Arabia has let a genie out of the bottle that it not only cannot control, but that also leads an independent life of its own. The Saudi-inspired ultra-conservative environment has also produced groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State that have turned on the kingdom.

Relinquishing control of the Brussels mosque allows Saudi Arabia to project itself as distancing itself from its roots in ultra-conservatism that date back to an 18^th century power sharing arrangement between the Al Saud family and Mohammed ibn Abdul Wahhab, a preacher whose descendants are at the core of the kingdom’s religious establishment.

The decision, Prince Mohammed’s initial social reforms, and plans to cut funding notwithstanding, Saudi Arabia appears to be making less of clean break on the frontlines of its confrontation with Iran where support for ultra-conservative and/or militant groups is still the name of the game.

Saudi Arabia said last month that it would open a Salafi missionary centre in the Yemeni province of Al Mahrah on the border with Oman and the kingdom. Saudi Arabia’s ill-fated military intervention in Yemen was sparked by its conflict with Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, a Zaydi Shiite Muslim sect with roots in a region bordering the kingdom, that dates to Saudi employment of Salafism to counter the group in the 1980s and early this century.

Saudi militants reported in the last year that Saudi nationals of Baloch origin were funnelling large amounts of money into militant madrassas in the Pakistani province of Balochistan on the border with Iran. Saudi-funded ultraconservative Sunni Muslim madrassas operated by anti-Shiite militants dominate the region’s educational landscape.

The money flowed, although it was not clear whether the Saudi donors had tacit government approval, at a time that Saudi Arabia is toying with the idea of seeking to destabilize Iran by stirring unrest among its multiple minorities, including the Baloch.

A militant Islamic scholar, who operates militant madrassas in the triangle where the borders of Balochistan, Iran and Afghanistan meet, was last year named a globally designated terrorist by the US Treasury while he was fundraising in the kingdom.

Algerian media reports last month detailed Saudi propagation of a quietist, apolitical yet supremacist and anti-pluralistic form of Sunni Muslim ultra-conservatism in the North African country. The media published a letter by a prominent Saudi scholar that appointed three ultra-conservative Algerian clerics as the representatives of Salafism.

“While Saudi Arabia tries to promote the image of a country that is ridding itself of its fanatics, it sends to other countries the most radical of its doctrines,” asserted independent Algerian newspaper El Watan.

The decision to relinquish control of the Brussels mosque that in 1969 had been leased rent-free to the kingdom for a period of 99 years by Belgian King Baudouin followed a Belgian parliamentary inquiry into last year’s attack on Brussels’ international Zaventem airport and a metro station in the city in which 32 people were killed. The inquiry advised the government to cancel the mosque contract on the grounds that Saudi-inspired ultra-conservatism could contribute to extremism.

Michel Privot of the European Network Against Racism, estimated that 95 percent of Muslim education in Belgium was provided by Saudi-trained imams.

“There is a huge demand within Muslim communities to know about their religion, but most of the offer is filled by a very conservative Salafi type of Islam sponsored by Saudi Arabia. Other Muslim countries have been unable to offer grants to students on such a scale,” Mr. Privot said.

The US embassy in Brussels, in a 2007 cable leaked by Wikileaks, reported that “there is a noted absence in the life of Islam in Belgium of broader cultural traditions such as literature, humanism and science which defaults to an ambient practice of Islam pervaded by a more conservative Salafi interpretation of the faith.”

Saudi Arabia has worked hard in the last year to alter perceptions of its Islamic-inspired beliefs.

Mohammed bin Abdul Karim Al-Issa, a former Saudi justice minister and secretary general of the World Muslim League, the group that operates the Brussels mosque and has served for half a century as a key funding vehicle for ultra-conservatism insisted on a visited last year to the Belgian capital that Islam “cannot be equated and judged by the few events and attacks, carried out because of political or geo-strategic interests. As a religion, Islam teaches humanity, tolerance, and mutual respect.

Mr. Al-Issa, in a first in a country that long distributed copies of the Protocols of Zion, an early 20^th century anti-Semitic tract, last month, expressed last month on International Holocaust Remembrance Day that commemorates Nazi persecution of the Jews “great sympathy with the victims of the Holocaust, an incident that shook humanity to the core, and created an event whose horrors could not be denied or underrated by any fair-minded or peace-loving person.”

Mr. Al-Issa’s comments no doubt also signalled ever closer ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel, who both bitterly oppose Iran’s regional influence. Nonetheless, they constituted a radical rupture in Saudi Arabia, where Islamic scholars, often described Jews  as “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs.”

Many libertarians have embraced the slogan “taxation is theft.” I myself think it is more precise to say that taxation is extortion. But even saying that fails to capture how egregious taxation really is, especially income taxation.

When a mugger or a home invader accosts you, he points a gun at you or waves a knife in your face and demands your wallet or some other property. In most cases, if you surrender your property to him as he demands, he takes it and flees, and you will most likely never see him again. He is, in the classic phrase, the roving bandit.

In contrast, the state is, in Mancur Olson’s classic term, the stationary bandit. It extorts your money constantly, ceaselessly, and no amount of plunder sates its appetite for what rightfully belongs to you. You are milked endlessly by people who have no rightful claim to loot you, but do have the power to take even more of your wealth in the form of interest or penalties or to place you in a steel cage if you make too much of a fuss about being looted.

With income taxation, however, the matter is even more exasperating and outrageous. In this case, the state’s legal henchmen construct an immense body of rules for determining how much tax is “owed” by persons in a nearly infinite variety of circumstances, depending on the form and source of the income, the amount, the timing of its receipt, the permissible deductions from the taxable amount, and so on. The rules run to thousands of pages, and tax experts themselves, including those employed by the tax collection agencies, cannot agree on the amount of tax liability associated with even a moderately complicated tax return.

Yet, despite the virtual impossibility of correctly calculating a person’s tax liability, each person is held strictly to account, subject to criminal penalties, if he should miscalculate as determined by one of the tax collector’s auditors. In short, people are charged with accomplishing the nearly impossible, then punished when they fail. Not surprisingly, countless people live in fear of the state’s tax collectors, who are notorious not only for their stupidity, but for their aggressiveness, unreasonableness, and mercilessness.

So, people spend many hours of valuable time each year sweating over the accumulation of prescribed documents, filling out complex forms, and paying accountants and lawyers to help them steer clear of the horrors that lie in wait for those who make a misstep and get caught. And, to repeat, it never ends. Where is the mere roving bandit when we really need him?

This article was published at The Beacon.

By Dan Southerland*

China has expanded its presence in the Indian Ocean, causing India to respond with a military build-up and far-reaching diplomatic contacts with potential allies.

During and after the time that Indian troops ended a more than two-month-long Himalayan standoff with Chinese soldiers in the remote kingdom of Bhutan’s Doklam Plateau last August, nationalistic feelings have been running high in India.

In what some Indians refer to as “Post-Doklam Development,” India has been ramping up infrastructure projects along its long and poorly demarcated border with China.

New Delhi has also speeded up the acquisition of new weapons and their deployment, according to Debasis Dash, a researcher specializing in strategic affairs who is currently studying at the University of Malaya.

According to the Times of India, the Indian government plans to recruit 15 new battalions of troops to bolster border defenses along its borders with China and Pakistan. This would come to about 15,000 men.

Three nuclear powers—China, India, and India’s long-time nemesis, Pakistan—are engaged in this strategic power game.

On the diplomatic front, India has been deepening ties with Southeast Asian nations, many of which have been looking to India to counterbalance China’s growing power and influence.

In order to protect sea lanes, India has bolstered its ties with Australia and Japan while looking to them for assistance. As the Financial Times noted recently, the idea of an “Indo-Pacific” region with India playing a more active strategic role has been endorsed by Australia, Japan, and U.S. President Donald Trump.

But India now faces a crisis in the Maldives islands, located near the southwestern tip of the Indian subcontinent, that should test how forcefully India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, is prepared to respond to growing Chinese influence.

The former president of the Maldives, Mohamed Nasheed, has appealed to India to intervene in the Maldives to deal with the ongoing political crisis there.

It’s no secret that Prime Minister Modi was distressed at the ouster of Nasheed in a coup in 2012. After being jailed, Nasheed was allowed to go into exile for medical treatment and now lives in Sri Lanka.

Modi and the Maldives

India’s sensitivity to Chinese moves in its backyard became apparent early last month when the parliament of the Maldives, the smallest and least populous nation in South Asia, endorsed a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with China.

The New Delhi-based Indian Express said that the Maldives’ parliament “rushed through” the FTA despite much internal criticism of it.

It was the Maldives’ first such agreement with any country.

On Feb. 5, facing popular unrest, Maldives President Abdulla Yameen declared a state of emergency. Yameen then sent troops into the streets of Male, the nation’s capital, to maintain control.

Yameen had directed the arrest of two Supreme Court justices shortly after the high court issued a ruling calling for the release of jailed opposition politicians in the Maldives.

The Maldives, an island chain with a population of roughly 400,000 people, is best known for its luxury resorts and coral reefs. But because of its location just southwest of the southern tip of India near vital international shipping lanes, India considers it strategically important.

International pressure

According to The New York Times, Nasheed had become an international celebrity because of his work to combat climate change. He also happened to be the country’s first and only democratically elected leader. So his words carry weight both in the region and beyond.

On Feb. 2, Nasheed had said that he planned to run again for office. But President Yameen, now ruling under what amounts to martial law, was already making plans to run for reelection later this year. With all of his opponents jailed or in exile, he would be running unopposed.

Nasheed urged India to send an envoy to the Maldives backed by the military,” according to a report from New Delhi by Amy Kazin of The Financial Times over the past weekend (Feb. 10-11).

But it’s not at all clear at this point whether Prime Minister Modi would consider intervening in the Maldives.

U.S. President Donald Trump spoke by phone with Modi on Feb. 8 to discuss various topics, including the situation in the Maldives. The two “expressed concern about the political crisis in the Maldives and the importance of respect for democratic institutions and the rule of law,” according to a statement issued by the White House.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, meanwhile, described the moves made by Maldives President Yameen as an “all-out assault on democracy.”

China, on the other hand, has come out strongly in defense of the Maldives leader.

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi told an envoy from the Maldives on Feb. 8 that China believes the Maldives government and people have “the wisdom and ability to appropriately handle the issue facing them and return the country to normal order in accordance with the law.”

China has invested heavily in the Maldives. As The Economist magazine explains in its current issue (Feb. 10-16), China has backed several Chinese projects in the Maldives with loans.

The projects include a hospital, a U.S. $800 million expansion of the airport, and a China Maldives Friendship Bridge between the capital and the airport.

According to The Economist, “There is no public tendering, and no budgets have been published.”

“Diplomats and NGOs suspect costs have been wildly inflated,” the magazine’s “Banyan” columnist says. “Any default, and China can extract concessions, such as a base on the Indian Ocean.”

Meanwhile, everyone assumes that Chinese cash is “lining politicians’ pockets” in the Maldives.

Former President Nasheed has alleged that nearly a quarter of the Maldives’ budget goes to interest payments. Others on the island itself estimate that three-fifths of the debts that the country is amassing are owed to China. Nasheed calls it a “debt trap” that gives China huge leverage over the Maldives.

Worsened relations

Indian relations with the Maldives have deteriorated since 2012, when the Maldives expropriated its international airport from an Indian company which had a contract to upgrade and operate the airport.

China in recent years has forged closer ties with India’s neighbors, including Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. The Financial Times reported that in 2015, the Maldives amended its constitution, allowing foreigners to buy land, thus paving the way for Chinese companies to buy islands, which India says have potential military use.

The newspaper also said that two Chinese military ships docked at a Maldivian port last August. Other reports say that it was three ships.

India has long considered the Maldives to be part of its sphere of influence, given its proximity to India as well as the historical ties between the two countries.

In 1988, India intervened in the Maldives with a military force to prevent an attempted coup backed by an armed Sri Lankan separatist group known as the Tamil Tigers.

Now Indian foreign policy hawks and some foreign policy analysts see China’s growing presence in the Maldives as a test of India’s claim to be a rising power capable of maintaining regional security.

In one much-quoted comment, a Rumel Dahiya, a retired Indian Army brigadier general, said that “if India cannot even safeguard its primary interests so close to its mainland, then it can hardly be trusted to become a net security provider for the wider region.”

Dahiya’s comment was published by the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses in New Delhi.

According to Stratfor, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank and consultancy, if India intervenes in the Maldives, it could “tilt the regional political scales in favor of China,” which has already benefited from anti-Indian sentiment in Nepal.

Sending Indian troops into the Maldives, Stratfor says, “would undoubtedly reinforce New Delhi’s image as a domineering hegemon unafraid to use force against its smaller neighbors.”

For decades, the Maldives was considered a model Islamic nation, says Stratfor. Its Muslim majority practiced a tolerant form of Islam. But in recent years its Muslims have leaned toward Salafist and Wahabi forms of Islam. Some of this has come from students who studied these ultra-conservative ideologies in Pakistan and in Saudi Arabia, a supporter of the current government in the Maldives.

The Pakistani factor

Even as it copes with China, India continues to consider neighboring Pakistan to be a major security threat. India has fought five wars with Pakistan since 1947. Skirmishes between the two sides in divided Kashmir have become routine over the decades.

So it’s obvious that India would be concerned about reports that China is planning to build a naval base close to the Pakistani port of Gwadar.

Gwadar is located on the Arabian Sea only 690 nautical miles west of Mumbai.

Both China and Pakistan deny reports of a plan to build a Chinese naval base at Gwadar. But The Economist notes that construction at the port is planned as part of a $57 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is intended to connect landlocked western China to the Arabian Sea.

The United States, meanwhile, announced on Jan. 4 that it would suspend most U.S. security assistance to Pakistan, pending a stronger effort by Pakistan to expel the Taliban and enemies of Afghanistan’s government from the Pakistani side of the two countries’ border.

Such a development would have been unthinkable during the Cold War years when Pakistan was considered a staunch military ally of the United States.

The suspension of security aid would cost Pakistan an estimated U.S. $2 billion in aid already budgeted.

But China, describing Pakistan as its “irreplaceable all-weather friend,” seems more than ready to make up for any shortfall in security funding for the South Asian country.

Analysts explain that for Pakistan, Gwadar has the potential to act as a counter to any Indian attempt to blockade the port of Karachi, the most populous city in Pakistan. Karachi’s port handles more than 60 percent of the country’s cargo.

Joel Wuthnow, a research fellow at the U.S. National Defense University, says that “Indian strategists worry that Chinese investments in the Indian Ocean region, such as port development projects in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, will precipitate a greater Chinese naval presence in India’s backyard.”

Dr. Wuthnow spoke at a hearing on China’s Belt and Road Initiative held by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission on Jan. 25.

The bottom line: Deep mutual mistrust appears to be the only constant factor in Indian-Pakistani relations. But mutual nuclear deterrence seems to be working.

*Dan Southerland is RFA’s founding executive editor.