Limiting global warming to 1.5°C could avoid around 3.3 million cases of dengue fever per year in Latin America and the Caribbean alone – according to new research from the University of East Anglia (UEA).

A new report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) reveals that limiting warming to the goal of the UN Paris Agreement would also stop dengue spreading to areas where incidence is currently low.

A global warming trajectory of 3.7°C could lead to an increase of up to 7.5 million additional cases per year by the middle of this century.

Dengue fever is a tropical disease caused by a virus that is spread by mosquitoes, with symptoms including fever, headache, muscle and joint pain. It is endemic to over 100 countries, and infects around 390 million people worldwide each year, with an estimated 54 million cases in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Because the mosquitoes that carry and transmit the virus thrive in warm and humid conditions, it is more commonly found in areas with these weather conditions. There is no specific treatment or vaccine for dengue and in rare cases it can be lethal.

Lead researcher Dr Felipe Colón-González, from UEA’s School of Environmental Sciences and the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, said: “There is growing concern about the potential impacts of climate change on human health. While it is recognised that limiting warming to 1.5°C would have benefits for human health, the magnitude of these benefits remains mostly unquantified.

“This is the first study to show that reductions in warming from 2°C to 1.5°C could have important health benefits.”

The Paris Climate Agreement aims to hold global-mean temperature well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.

The team studied clinical and laboratory confirmed dengue reports in Latin America and used computer models to predict the impacts of warming under different climate scenarios.

They found that limiting global warming to 2°C could reduce dengue cases by up to 2.8 million cases per year by the end of the century compared to a scenario in which the global temperature rises by 3.7°C.

Limiting warming further to 1.5°C produces an additional drop in cases of up to half a million per year.

Southern Mexico, the Caribbean, northern Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela and coastal Brazil will be most affected by increases in dengue cases.

Brazil would benefit the most from limiting warming to 1.5°C with up to half a million cases avoided per year by the 2050s and 1.4 million avoided cases per year by 2100.

The team also found that limiting global warming would also limit the expansion of the disease towards areas where incidence is currently low such as Paraguay and northern Argentina.

Co-author Dr Iain Lake, also from UEA, added: “Understanding and quantifying the impacts of warming on human health is crucial for public health preparedness and response.

“Warming has already reached 1°C above pre-industrial levels, and the current trajectory, if countries meet their international pledges to reduce CO2, is around 3°C – so clearly a lot more needs to be done to reduce CO2 and quickly if we are to avoid these impacts.”

The research was led by the University of East Anglia, UK, in collaboration with colleagues at Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Brazil.

Tropical rainforests play a critical role in regulating the global climate system–they represent the Earth’s largest terrestrial CO2 sink. Because of its broad geographical expanse and year-long productivity, the Amazon is key to the global carbon and hydrological cycles. Climate change could threaten the fate of rainforests, but there is great uncertainty about the future ability of rainforests to store carbon. While severe droughts have occurred in recent years in the Amazon watershed, causing widespread tree mortality and affecting the forests’ ability to store carbon, the drivers of tropical rainforests’ sensitivity to drought are poorly understood.

A new study led by Pierre Gentine, associate professor of earth and environmental engineering at Columbia Engineering, shows that photosynthesis in tall Amazonian forests–forests above 30m–is three times less sensitive to precipitation variability than in shorter forests of less than 20m. Taller Amazonian forests were also found to be older, have more biomass and deeper rooting systems that enable them to access deeper soil moisture, which makes them more resilient to drought. The paper was published online on Nature Geoscience.

“Our findings suggest that forest height and age are an important regulator of photosynthesis in response to droughts,” sayid Gentine, who is also a member of the Earth Institute and the Data Science Institute. “Although older and taller trees show less sensitivity to precipitation variations (droughts), they are more susceptible to fluctuations in atmospheric heat and aridity, which is going to rise substantially with climate change. Our study shows that the Amazon forest is not uniform in response to climate variability and drought, and illuminates the gradient of responses observable across Amazonian forests to water stress, droughts, land use/land cover changes, and climate change.”

Climate change is altering the dynamics, structure, and function of the Amazon. While climate factors that control the spatial and temporal variations in forests’ photosynthesis have been well studied, the influence of forest height and age (affected by deforestation for instance) on this controlling effect has rarely been considered. Gentine used remote sensing observations of solar-induced fluorescence (a proxy for photosynthesis), precipitation, vapor-pressure deficit, and canopy height, together with estimates of forest age and aboveground biomass. His group applied statistical techniques to estimate how age and height could modify forest sensitivity to droughts.

Gentine’s remote sensing observations showed that tall and older forests were less sensitive to droughts but more sensitive to heat and atmospheric dryness. This finding has implications for the capacity of younger vs. older forests to withstand–or not–future droughts. For instance, deforestation could increase the fragility of the forests to droughts, as the forest becomes younger and thus more sensitive to droughts.

“Our study makes it clear that forest height and age directly impact the carbon cycle in the Amazon,” Gentine said. “This is especially significant given the importance of the Amazon rainforest for the global carbon cycle and climate.”

Intensifying river floods could lead to regional production losses worldwide caused by global warming. This might not only hamper local economies around the globe – the effects might also propagate through the global network of trade and supply chains, a study now published in Nature Climate Change shows.

It is the first to assess this effect for flooding on a global scale, using a newly developed dynamic economic model. It finds that economic flood damages in China, which could, without further adaption, increase by 80 percent within the next 20 years, might also affect EU and US industries. The US economy might be specifically vulnerable due to its unbalanced trade relation with China. Contrary to US president Trump’s current tariff sanctions, the study suggests that building stronger and thus more balanced trade relations might be a useful strategy to mitigate economic losses caused by intensifying weather extremes.

“Climate change will increase flood risks already in the next two decades – and this is not only a problem for millions of people but also for economies worldwide,” said Anders Levermann, project leader from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany and the Columbia University in New York.

Without further adaption measures, climate change will likely increase economic losses worldwide due to fluvial floods by more than 15 percent accumulating to a total of about 600 billion US dollar within the next 20 years. While the bulk of this is independent of climate change, the rise is not.

“Not only local industries will be affected by these climate impacts,” said Sven Willner, lead author of the study from PIK. “Through supply shortages, changes in demand and associated price signals, economic losses might be down-streamed along the global trade and supply network affecting other economies on a global scale – we were surprised about the size of this rather worrying effect.”

World Bank Economist: “Natural disasters are not local events anymore”

The World Bank’s lead economist with the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, Stéphane Hallegatte, who pioneered research in the area of indirect disaster effects but was not involved in the present study, commented: “This work combines two very innovative lines of work: global risk assessment for natural hazards and network theory to understand how localized shocks propagate in time and space. It contributes to scientific progress in multiple ways, but one of the most important policy messages for me is that the world is so interconnected that natural disasters are not local events anymore: everybody can be affected by a disaster occurring far away. It means that risk management is more than each country’s responsibility: it has become a global public good.”

The study is based on projections of near-future river floods on a regional scale already determined by the greenhouse gas emissions that humans have so far emitted into our atmosphere – impacts after 2035 depend on future additional emissions. The authors investigate the overall economic network response to river flood-related shocks, taking into account the inner dynamics of international trade. They do so with the specifically designed, new Acclimate-model, a dynamic economic computer simulation.

Without major adaptation, China could suffer biggest direct losses

Without major adaptation measures, China could suffer the biggest direct economic losses from river floods – adding up to a total of more than 380 billion US dollar in economic losses over the next 20 years, including natural flood events not related to global warming. This corresponds to about 5 percent of China’s annual economic output. 175 billion of the total losses in China will likely occur due to climate change.

“This is a lot,” said Willner, “and it is only the effect by river floods, not even taking into account other climate change impacts such as storms and heat waves.”

The European Union and the United States on the contrary might be affected predominantly by indirect losses passed down along the global trade and supply network. In the US, direct losses might be around 30 billion US Dollar, whereas indirect losses might be 170 billion US dollar in the next 20 years.

“The EU will suffer less from indirect losses caused by climate-related flooding in China due to its even trade balance. They will suffer when flooded regions in China temporarily fail to deliver for instance parts that European companies need for their production, but on the other hand Europe will profit from filling climate-induced production gaps in China by exporting goods to Asia. This yields the European economy currently more climate-prepared for the future,” said Willner. “In contrast, the US imports much more from China than it exports to this country. This leaves the US more susceptible to climate-related risks of economic losses passed down along the global supply and trade chain.”

Global trade allows global buffering – India could be a winner

“More intense global trade can help to mitigate losses from local extreme events by facilitating market adjustments,” explained co-author Christian Otto from the Potsdam Institute and Columbia University. “When a supplier is impacted by a disaster hampering its production, international trade increases the chance that other suppliers can jump in and temporarily replace it. Interestingly, the global increase of climate-induced river floods could even cause net gains for some economies such as India, South East Asia, or Australia.”

The study’s focus is not on damages to production facilities of businesses, but to what extent a regional economy stagnates due to flooding.

“We adopted a rather optimistic view when it comes to the flexibility and promptness of shifting production towards non-affected suppliers after an extreme weather event,” said Christian Otto. “Hence our study rather underestimates than overestimates the production losses – things could eventually turn out to be worse.”

Trump’s tariffs might impede climate-proofing the US economy

“We find that the intensification of the mutual trade relation with China leaves the EU better prepared against production losses in Asia than the US. The prospect that the US will be worse off can be traced back to the fact that it is importing more products from China than it is exporting,” said PIK’s Anders Levermann. “Interestingly, such an unbalanced trade relation might be an economic risk for the US when it comes to climate-related economic losses. In the end, Trump’s tariffs might impede climate-proofing the US economy.”

For resolving this risk and balancing out the negative trade relation, there are generally two options: either isolation or more trade.

“By introducing a tariff plan against China, Trump currently goes for isolation,” said Levermann. “But Trump’s tariff sanctions are likely to leave US economy even more vulnerable to climate change. As our study suggests, under climate change, the more reasonable strategy is a well-balanced economic connectivity, because it allows to compensate economic damages from unexpected weather events – of which we expect more in the future.”

Executive Summary

The question of non-traditional risks and challenges posing to Central Asia have not been widely debated. However, this paper focuses on non-traditional risks and challenges with special attention to the energy security of Afghanistan’s phase of TAPI gas pipeline and Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan (TAP500 KV) electricity transmission line projects. After Turkmenistan’s segment, TAPI and TAP500 KV is now entering into the second implementation phase. The transmission lines are crossing through relatively most insecure and unstable Farah, Nimroz, Helmand, and Kandahar provinces of Afghanistan. However, existing and prospective risks and challenges have not been well addressed.

According to the reports, recently Farah’s province key districts collapsed into Taliban hands. How the government of Afghanistan will be able to implement its segment of power projects crossing via the mentioned provinces? What measures does the Government need to take to achieve completing the power projects and makes its sustenance? These and similar questions are addressed.

After Turkmenistan, TAPI and TAP associated with risks and challenges entering into the second implementation phase in Afghanistan.

I argue that under President Ghani, the “North Look policy” is in a strong and enthusiastic trend. President Ghani’s recent 23 agreements with Uzbekistan and quick inauguration of the TAPI and TAP projects indicates his willingness to increase economic and energy-oriented relations with Central Asia to relinquish the country from Pakistan’s economic trap and decrease economic dependency on the unreliable neighbor.

In conclusion, this proposal by closely examining the non-traditional risks and challenges to the Central Asian Security sheds new lights on neglected and less illustrated prospective and existing risks and challenges posing to the energy sector.

Introduction

The Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline and Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) electricity transmission line are the region’s significant big energy projects. These are not only projects but means that connect two regions of Central Asian and South Asia. The planned TAPI pipeline has a length of 1814 km, which 214 km in Turkmenistan, 774 km in Afghanistan, 826 km in Pakistan and reach to the Fazilka region of India. Given the capacity, TAPI can supply 33 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas annually. The project is for 30 years and the total cost is estimated $ 9.9 billion (Shoib, 2018). Following by the TAP electricity transmission line. The planned TAP can supply 500 kV of electricity from Turkmenistan, crossing through Afghanistan to Pakistan.

According to Afghanistan state-owned electricity agency, DABS, Afghanistan’s part of expenditure is estimated $ 70 million, which will receive $ 50 million as transit duties from the project. The twin energy projects were inaugurated in December 2015. Asian Development Bank (ADB) country director for Afghanistan Samuel Tumiwa states “The Asian Development Bank is committed to financing TAP. We have put aside some money to finance it. Asides from the benefits from greater electrification, it is also good economic cooperation between the countries. So when we have good economic cooperation between the countries, the case is so strong that everything else, security issues and political issues get sidelined and you get good cooperation between these countries which will bring stability in the region,” reported Afghan-based TOLO news agency.

Afghanistan’s segment of TAPI and TAP kV500 progress

As mentioned above that two different projects with the same line inaugurated in December 2015. The first phase, the Turkmenistan’s segment of the TAPI construction completed. The second construction phase kicked off in the presence of the partner countries’ leaders on 23 February 2018, in western Herat city of Afghanistan. The pipeline will cross through volatile Nimroz, Farah, Helmand, and Kandahar provinces of Afghanistan to Pakistan, and India. However, Afghanistan’s segment of TAPI and TAP kV500 progress seems questionable. It is so far ambiguous what measure will the government take to ensure the projects’ implementation phase within its territory. As the projects cross through southern Afghanistan where Taliban and other insurgent elements are operating. Following the TAPI and TAP kV500 projects inauguration ceremony Taliban announced their support. Instead they continue blaming the government for delaying the construction, Reuters reports.

Given the TAP’s transmission line progress the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed in the presence of the three partner countries; Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan in 2015. The project practical commencement was decided by the RECCA-VII conference in Ashgabat, which ADB expressed willingness to provide logistical support. To date, the international donors’ promise has remained on the page, no practical action has been made so far (MFA http://recca.af/?page_id=2147).

President Ghani’s North Look Policy

President Ghani visited Uzbekistan on 4th December 2017. The visit was considered a “land mark visit” by the local media. Many aspects related to economic development were discussed with his Uzbek counter-part, Shavkat Mirzayov. The visit was amid Afghanistan’s efforts to reduce economic dependency on Pakistan. Both sides discussed “fighting terrorism, extremism, and drug trafficking, as well as upgrading security in Central Asia. The talks resulted in a general joint statement” Eurasia daily reports.

In addition, to ensure and address the security concerns faced by the Hairatan Bridge, connecting Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, a join security commission was agreed upon to ensure the security. President Ghani’s gravitation towards Central Asia was welcomed with few consecutive visits which demonstrates a new chapter in bilateral relations. Notably, Kazakhstan as first Central Asian states that got non-permanent UNSC seat the delegation led by Kairat Umarov, Kazakhstan’s ambassador to the UN first prioritized Afghanistan in the agenda. The delegation accompanied by Nikki Hally, U.S. ambassador to the UN, visited Kabul for participation at the Kabul Peace Process conference in February 2018.

Following by the Tashkent meeting that held under the theme of Tashkent Conference on Afghanistan on 26-27 March 2018. The conference that was attended by regional and international partners. The declaration was adopted by “Republic of Uzbekistan, by Afghanistan, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, EU and UN” (UzNNA 2018). These visits demonstrate Ghani’s foreign policy gravitation placing the Central Asia at the core of the priority areas. His North Look Policy resulted with a win-win strategy for Afghanistan and as well for the Central Asia. This means in short term Afghanistan’s dependency on the immediate but unreliable neighbor, Pakistan would reduce that would relinquish the country from economic trap.

Existing and Prospective challenges

As long speculated that local militant group disrupts the TAPI project construction activities. However, the purported Taliban’s spokesperson Qari Yousuf Ahmadi declared they will make ensuring security for those parts of the project that comes under their control. Yosuf sends the message to a local media outlets and states that “The Islamic Emirate views this project as an important element of the country’s economic infrastructure and believes its proper implementation will benefit the Afghan people. We announce our cooperation in providing security for the project in areas under our control,” (Alikozai 2018).

However, Taliban’s conditional support ensuring the security of the power projects seems with suspicion. Because recently the power line that transmits 300 MW electricity from Uzbekistan to capital, Kabul was cut off in the Baghlan province, northern Afghanistan. They claimed that “until our legitimate demands are met, the Islamic Emirate (as the Taliban call themselves) will keep the power cut to Kabul, which houses all large bases and centers of the foreign invaders and domestic enemies, its responsibility falls upon the officials of the Kabul regime” (EFE 2018). Iran is also a potential rival to the TAPI project implementation. its planned gas pipeline called Iran-Pakistan-India (IPA) or “Peace Pipeline” is considered a rival to the TAPI. The country’s regional hegemonic role could pose security challenges to the Afghan portion of construction. Before the inauguration session held in Herat province of Afghanistan, Iran has taken any possible way to derail the ceremony by their hand-picked trained militants. fortunately, they diverted the way and preferred to support the government position (Bruce 2018) Radio Free Europe reports.

TAPI passes through the Zaranj-Delaram highway in Nimruz province of Afghanistan. Taliban are influentially active in the area. Last week, 21st May Monday, an unknown militant group opened fire on the AMBC workers, a demining NGO that killed five workers on the spot and abducted one. A Few days later the corpse of the abducted was found in the vicinity of the city Pajhwok reports. So far no group including the Taliban has taken the responsibility, Reuters reports. Such ambiguous situation will derail the projects’ construction progress. Ahead of the inauguration of the project in 2015, the then defense minister of Pakistan Khwaja Asif stated that Pakistan will use their influence on Taliban to ensure the project’s security (Shoaib 2018). The question arises that to what extent does Pakistan stand on their position or will Taliban accept Pakistan’s influence. Or will Pakistan pursue a win-lose or win-win strategy against India in this project? Similar questions will be answered while the actual project functional time arrives.

Way forward for Afghanistan

The partner countries along with the international donors are willing to assure the projects’ implementation. However, this is not only the budget allocation that can ensure the projects’ implementation successful but also other necessary measures to be taken.

It needs to be mentioned that if the government of Afghanistan, partner countries, and the international donors would like to efficiently ensure a successful implementation the following measures including but not limited need to be taken:

For Afghanistan to makes the projects successful the following steps needs to be taken, which includes but not limited to:

1. Active Action Task Force that can preserve the security of the projects crossing through volatile provinces of Afghanistan.

2. Creating a common ground with the local power brokers over the given projects implementation phase. In the past they had proven a challenge for foreign investors in different part of the country.

3. As Taliban have mentioned that they will ensure the security of such civil projects. But their statement must not be trusted. The recent electricity line suspension by the Taliban in Baghlan province could be an example.

4. Based on conventional wisdom, Pakistan had often used many other pressure buttons to pressurize Afghanistan and India. TAPI and TAP kV500 should not turn as a pressure button to make Afghanistan and India to compromise with Pakistan on the matters that country seeks. The speed up the projects’ implementation, a prior common ground must be reached by the partner countries. This would be a win-win strategy for Afghanistan.

5. The regional forums and conferences as RECCA, Heart of Asia-Istanbul process, Kabul Peace process conferences, SCO, and similar forums must put these projects as the core of their agenda.

Conclusion

TAPI gas pipeline and TAP electricity transmission line are undoubtedly the region’s two significant projects. Despite the gas and electricity supply, the economic corridor will turn Afghanistan into a regional economic hub. The project ensures the regional connectivity between energy-scarce and energy surplus regions. Projects crossing through Afghanistan will be a test for the country to demonstrate the capacity of having the ability to ensure the security of such projects. In future, similar prospective projects, such as Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) will cross via Afghanistan. Afghanistan must utilize every aspect of its potential to ensure the security of such projects. This can pave the way for Afghanistan to attract mini and mega projects, which will boost the country’s legitimate status on the regional and international level.

However, the existing challenges face to the construction should not be taken easily. Perhaps this would be the first and last test for Afghanistan to utilize every possible way. Regional countries excluding Iran at this stage are on the common ground while it comes to the existing projects. To bring the region and international community on the same page convening regional and international forums would prove effective to ensure the importance of the projects. For instance, the regional organizations, Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), RECCA, and other peace process forums are of vital importance to play a constructive role in ensuring regional connectivity and making the energy projects implementation successful.

*Rahimullah Kakar, OSCE Academy 2016 Alumnus, and holds an MA in Politics and Security from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Academy based in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic.

Bibliography
Afghanistan Times. 2018. “Kabuli infuriated over Power cut off,” 16 April 2018. Accessed 15 April.

Alikozai, H. 2018. “Taliban vows to Protect TAPI Gas Project Pipeline.” VOA, 24 February. Accesses 10 April 2018.

EFE, 2018. “Taliban attack on the electricity pylon causes outage in most of Kabul,” 26 March. Accessed 15 April. https://www.efe.com/efe/english/world/taliban-attack-on-electricity-pylon-causes-outage-in-most-of-kabul/50000262-3564989

Jehanmal, Z. 2018. “TAPI to be implemented alongside TAP.” Afghanistan Times, 27 February. Accessed 16 April 2018.

MFA. “TAP 500.” RECCA. http://recca.af/?page_id=2147.

Omaid, H. 2018. “ADB Pledges to Finance the TAP Project,” Tolo News, 03 March 2018. Accesses 16 April 2018.

Pajhwok, 2018. “Taliban Threaten to Cut off Power Supply to Kabul,” 24 March. Accessed 17 April 2018.
Nadeem, B. 2018. “5 demining TAPI Project route in Kandahar killed,” Pajhwok News, 21 May 2018. Accessed 26 May 2018.
Pannier, B. 2018. “Afghan TAPI construction Kicks off, But Pipeline questions still unresolved,” RFE/RL, 23 February. Accessed 18 April 2018.

Putz, C. 2018. “Central Asian States Step Up Afghan Diplomacy.” The Diplomat, 23 January. Accessed 14 April 2018.

Putz, C. 2018. “TAPI Moves into Afghanistan, Taliban Promise to Protect the Project.” The Diplomat, 27 February 2018. Accessed 19 April 2018.
Rahim, S. 2018. “Why Pakistan is TAPI’s biggest Hurdle?” The Diplomat, 07 April. Accessed 18 April 2018.
UzNNA, 2018. “Declaration of the Tashkent Conference in Afghanistan: Peace Process, Security Cooperation, and Regional Connectivity.” 28 March.

Nothing in a swath of land stretching from the Atlantic coast of Africa to China is undisputed.

Food is often emblematic of disputes over identity, history and political claims that underlie an arc of crisis wracked by ethnic and religious conflict; clamour for political, economic, social, national and minority rights; efforts by states and ethnic groups to garner soft power or assert hegemony, international branding; diplomatic leverage; and great power rivalry.

Israel and Lebanon fight humus wars and join Palestine in battles over the origins of multiple dishes.

Turks, Arabs, Jews, Greeks, Armenians, and Iranians claim as their national dish baklava, a sweet whose variations over time reflect the region’s history. They fight over the sweet’s origins and even that of the word baklava.

The battles over the origin of foods have forced countries to rewrite aspects of their histories and major companies to review the way they market products. Food also serves as a barometer of the influence of regional powers.

Iranian dates flooding Iraqi markets suggest that Iran is winning its proxy war with Saudi Arabia, another major grower, in Iraq, the world’s biggest producer of the fruit prior to the country’s multiple wars dating back to the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.

Iranian domination of the market symbolizes the Islamic republic’s massive inroads into Iraq ranging from the fact that it is the country’s foremost trading partner to its political influence in Baghdad and military sway exemplified by Iraq’s powerful Shiite militias.

Saudi Arabia, which only recently switched from effectively boycotting Iraq to forging political, economic, and cultural links is playing catch-up. The kingdom garnered a degree of soft power on the soccer pitch and has plans to invest in Iraqi sectors like petrochemicals, energy and agriculture.

The more than a decade-long Israel-Lebanon hummus wars are both a struggle to claim whose food it is, counter perceived Israeli attempts to colonize Palestinian and Levantine culture, and an effort to make an international mark though securing a place in the Guinness Book of Records by competing for the title of having made the largest pile of the chickpea dip. Hummus symbolizes “all the tension in the Middle East,” says Israeli food journalist Ronit Vered.

The war kicked into high gear with Lebanon, home to Middle Eastern haute cuisine, producing a 4,532-pound plate in 2009 prepared by 250 Lebanese sous-chefs and their 50 instructors that was intended to deprive Israel of its earlier record engineered by Sabra, an Israeli hummus producer.

That same year, Lebanon also made its mark with a 223-kilogram kibbeh, a cylindrical cone-shaped dish made of cracked wheat, minced onions, finely ground lean beef, lamb, goat, or camel and spiced with cinnamon, nutmeg, clove, and allspice.

“We were not trying to prove something, but to remind people that we should take the international market more seriously. (In the U.S.), if you question that hummus is Israeli, you’re an outcast, but hummus existed long before Israel,” said then Lebanese tourism minister Fadi Aboud.

In a reflection of the complexity of Middle Eastern disputes and a hint towards hummus’ Arab origins, it was an Israeli Palestinian, Jawdat Ibrahim, rather than an Israeli Jew who took up the Lebanese challenge.

The owner of a popular restaurant in Abu Ghosh, Mr. Ibrahim months later cooked up a 4,090- kilogram hummus that was served in a satellite dish. “It was (a) big issue ­­that hummus was Lebanese. I said, ‘No, hummus is for everybody.’ I hold a meeting in the village and I say, ‘We are going to break Guinness Book of World Record.’ Not the Israeli government, the people of Abu Gosh,” Mr. Ibrahim said.

More recently, Mr. Ibrahim has come under fire for charging a Chinese party of eight $4,400 for a meal that included hummus.

Food battles do not stop at the borders of Africa and Asia. They extend into Europe and impact projections of national heritage and commerce.

In March, Virgin Atlantic felt obliged to drop classification of a salad on its in-flight menu as Palestinian even though it was based on a Palestinian recipe after pro-Israel passengers protested and threatened to boycott the airline. The airline opted for the more generic name, Couscous Salad.

“Our salad is made using a mix of maftoul (traditional Palestinian couscous) and couscous, which is complemented by tomatoes and cucumber which really helps lift the salad from a visual perspective and is seasoned with a parsley, mint and lemon vinaigrette. However, we always want to do the right thing for our customers and as a result of feedback, we have renamed this menu item from our food offering at the end of last year and we’re extremely sorry for any offense caused,” said a spokesperson for Virgin Atlantic.

Quipped Palestinian cookbook writer Christiane Dabdoub Nasser: “Maftoul is Palestinian, just like pasties are Cornish and pâté de foie gras is French. No one can deny that and yet the airline, to add insult to injury, apologizes for the offense that the mention of Palestinian maftoul might have caused.”

American cookbook writer and television personality Rachel Ray two months earlier sparked an uproar on social media when she showcased hummus alongside stuffed grape leaves, and various dips made from beet, eggplant, sun dried tomatoes, walnut and red pepper as well as tabbouleh, a salad, as Israeli dishes, disregarding their Levantine origins.

“This is cultural genocide. It’s not Israeli food. It’s Arab (Lebanese, Palestinian, Syrian, Jordanian). First the Israelis take the land and ethnically cleanse it of Arabs. Now they take their food and culture and claim it’s theirs too! Shame,” tweeted prominent Arab American James Zogby.

British supermarket chain Waitrose took a hit in 2015 when it distributed a magazine entitled Taste of Israel that featured tahini, zaatar and other dishes that like Ms. Ray’s foods originate in pre-Israel Arab lands across the Levant.

Similarly, Sweden recently conceded that meatballs, long celebrated as one the internationally best known icons of traditional Swedish cuisine, were in fact an Ottoman import.

Sweden’s official Twitter account, featuring Swedish multi-national Ikea’s rendering of the dish, admitted that Swedish King Charles XII had brought the recipe from Turkey in the early 18th century when returned from five years in exile. “Let’s stick to the facts!” Sweden said.

Swedish food historians and gourmets had already accepted that Kaldolmens Day or Cabbage Roll Day that commemorates the death of King Charles celebrates another dish that he discovered while dwelling among the Ottomans.

Refuting Sweden’s claim was easy compared to battles over baklava whose history dating to the 8^th century BC Assyria tells the story of shifting regional power, changing tastes and the communality of food that can prove to be equally divisive.

Turks, Arabs, Jews, Greeks, Armenians, and Iranians all contributed to baklava as we know it, yet they are reticent to acknowledge the sweet as a regional rather than a national dish.

Greek seamen and merchants brought it to Athens where cooks introduced a malleable, thin leaf dough to replace the Assyrian rough, bread-like mixture of mixture of flour and liquid. Armenians added cinnamon and cloves while Arabs introduced rose and orange blossom water. Iranians invented baklava’s diamond-shape and perfected it with a nut stuffing perfumed with jasmine.

Ebtisam Masto is a refugee who fled war-torn Syria with her six children to Beirut where she joined a cooking programme in an effort to rebuild her life. Summing up the region’s battle of the palates, she says”

“Food is a way to preserve history and culture, to pass traditions on to the next generation so that they can understand their origins and identity. If we don’t preserve (food) and teach it to them, it will disappear. It is our duty to keep it going.”

The UN Security Council neither represents the power realities of the contemporary era nor does it factor the security considerations of developing countries into its structure. While Europe is overrepresented by the presence of Britain, France and Russia, other geographical regions comprising mostly developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America are underrepresented. So far as the existing structure of the Security Council is concerned, it is China, as a permanent member, is supposed to have represented and continue to represent the interests and security concerns of all developing countries.

However, history speaks somewhat a different story. China has never been inclined to formally identify itself with the largest multilateral bodies of the developing world such as the Non-Aligned Movement and G-77. China’s contentment with observer status within NAM and major statements of G-77 being issued as position papers on behalf of ‘G-77 and China’ point to this fact.

Furthermore, China makes far less troop contribution to the UN peacekeeping operations which are mostly undertaken in developing countries, in contrast to lesser developing countries such as India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

It is quite palpable that what Deng Xiaoping said to his party cadres way back in the year 1990 still resonates in the Chinese foreign policy circles and points to China’s individualistic aspirations. He said: “Some developing countries would like China to become the leader of the Third World. But we absolutely cannot do that – this is one of our basic state policies. We cannot afford to do it and besides we are not strong enough. There is nothing to be gained by playing that role. We would only lose most of our initiatives”. These remarks sit quite uncomfortably with the most populous country of the world representing the largest landmass of the developing world as a permanent member.

The UN Security Council still reflects the post-Second World War power realities. In fact, the idea germinated among the Allied powers to manage and regulate international politics when the Second World War was on. It is pertinent to note that the then US President F. Roosevelt unfolded such plan in an after dinner conversation at White House in May 1942 to the then Foreign Minister of the USSR, Moltov. The US President believed that the US, the USSR, Britain and China could possibly police the world in the aftermath of the Second World War. His thinking underlying such belief was their power position and population over a billion could go a long way in defending small and incapable nations.

However, more than their intentions of protecting incapable countries from aggression, crude realities guided the formation of the UN Security Council. Following the Second World War, the US wanted China to be a permanent member to contain Japanese power ambitions in Asia. Britain wanted another colonial power France in the UN Security Council to meet challenges stemming from anti-colonial forces demanding independence.

The fact that needs to be underlined is that the geographical representation of third world countries assumes significance not merely for the sake of accommodating aspirations of different regions rather it is vital in view of changing power realities and notions of security. The Permanent Member of the UN Security Council and the developing world should have shared security perspective. The UN, in the current century, has to deal primarily with the security problems of the third world as intra-state conflicts and civil wars have grown manifold compared to inter-state wars which were part and parcel of recurring imperial struggle between western powers. With the passage of time while Europe has integrated under the banner of European Union, the Cold War between the US and the erstwhile Soviet Union has subsided. But the countries of Asia and Africa which once served as colonies of imperial western powers still suffer from numerous socio-economic malaise and political instability.

The UN operation in Somalia pointed to the western troops’ incapability and impatience in understanding socio-economic and political problems confronting the people there which eventually led to the withdrawal of the American and western troops and turned the operation into largely a third world-led effort. Similarly, while there was hardly any effort to contain genocide in Rwanda, Afghanistan was allowed to continue to boil until the American interests were threatened directly. In Bosnia, differences in perspectives on the use of military power between the UN and NATO became clear with NATO stressing the effective use of military power and UN emphasizing observation of restraint. Reforms at the UN Security Council will go a long way in addressing differences in security perspectives which are primarily allied to the issue of representation of the developing world.

By Jeoffrey Maitem

Philippine government forces killed nine members of a Muslim rebel group during a raid carried out as part of President Rodrigo Duterte’s anti-drugs war, putting at risk the passage of a long-delayed law for expanded autonomy in the south, officials said Monday.

The raid, which took place late Friday in the town of Matalam on southern Mindanao island, was meant to arrest two notorious drug pushers, according to local police spokesman Superintendent Bernard Tayog.

But a huge firefight erupted after those inside the home resisted, instantly killing seven, Tayog said. Two others died hours later, according to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), which claimed the rebel fighters thought they were being attacked by another armed group.

Several high-powered firearms, including sniper rifles and a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, were found at the site, police said, adding that no drugs were found.

Senior leaders of the MILF disputed the police version of events, saying those slain belonged to its elite jungle fighting force, the Bangsamoro Islamic Armed Forces (BIAF), which has been helping the army go against pro-Islamic State (IS) groups in the south.

“They were disarmed before they were shot at close range by policemen and soldiers,” said Butch Malang, head of the MILF Coordinating Committee on the Cessation of Hostilities, which had filed a complaint with the government peace panel.

The fatalities were part of the MILF’s 105th Base Command, which has been helping the government against other militant groups in the area, Malang said.

Jerome Succor Aba, a member of the rights group Suara Bangsamoro, condemned the killings as he urged the MILF and other Muslims to demand justice to their fallen comrades.

“The Duterte administration is jeopardizing the hard-earned gains of the Moro people towards just and lasting peace,” he said. “While Congress is discussing the passage of the Bangsamoro Basic Law, the military and the police are also busy killing the primary stakeholders of its approval.”

He was referring to the law that is supposed to give the MILF expanded autonomy in the country’s south. It was a key component of a peace agreement that rebels had signed with the government in 2014, but has been repeatedly bypassed by a Congress fearful of granting the MILF vast powers in the south.

The BBL, now up for deliberation by the Senate and House of Representatives, outlines the basic structure of the proposed autonomy in Mindanao, the country’s mineral-rich southern third where many areas remain mired in poverty because of the insurgency.

The 12,000-member MILF dropped its bid for self-rule to settle for an expanded autonomy when it signed a peace deal with Manila in 2014.

In February, Congress voted to extend martial law in Mindanao until the end of this year, saying that military rule was needed as the government was still rounding up stragglers from IS-linked groups who fought in the city of Marawi.

More than 1,200 people, most of them militants, died in the five-month Marawi siege that ended in October.

Mark Navales also in Cotabato City contributed to this report.

By Michael Lelyveld

Those seeking a clear understanding of China’s financial policies may have to turn to the country’s courts, where stiff sentences are being handed down for deals made years ago.

A recent New York Times report suggested that a belated government crackdown on financing and investment practices was the driving force behind an 18-year prison term given to Anbang Insurance Group founder Wu Xiaohui on May 10.

Wu was found guilty of “fundraising fraud and embezzlement of corporate funds,” said the Shanghai Municipal No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court, according to state news agency Xinhua.

The court found that Wu “concealed his shareholder status,” masking his control over Anbang, which figured prominently in China’s overseas investment boom over the past five years.

Among other things, Wu allegedly “absorbed a huge amount of funds” by selling “investment-purpose insurance products that exceeded approved amounts,” shifting funds to pay for personal debts as well as Anbang investment deals.

The fraud amounted to 65.2 billion yuan (U.S. $10.2 billion) in addition to 10 billion yuan (U.S. $1.5 billion) of embezzlement, the court said.

At his trial, Wu expressed remorse after initially voicing doubt that he had broken any laws, The Wall Street Journal reported.

The Times portrayed the punishment as a message to other free-wheeling investment groups that China’s wild ride of foreign buyouts with risky financing has come to a halt.

“Mr. Wu’s sentence caps a months’ long effort by Beijing to make Anbang an example for other big Chinese conglomerates that borrowed heavily to buy up high-profile trophy assets like hotels and Hollywood studios,” the paper said.

Anbang was known most widely for its deal to buy New York’s Waldorf Astoria hotel for U.S. $1.95 billion (12.4 billion yuan) in 2014. That was before regulators began to take the risk of runaway investment expansion seriously.

‘Dangerous’ debt growth

For well over a year, China dismissed repeated warnings from the International Monetary Fund about “dangerous” debt growth and risky financial practices.

“International experience suggests that China’s credit growth is on a dangerous trajectory, with increasing risks of a disruptive adjustment and/or a marked slowdown,” the IMF said in an August 2017 staff paper, sounding the third such warning in a little over a year.

China routinely responded by downplaying the threat with selected data on sovereign debt levels. That attitude has changed with President Xi Jinping’s focus on financial risks as one of the “three big battles” to be fought by 2020, along with poverty and pollution.

“Currently, financial risks are volatile and frequent,” Xi wrote in a recently released book on national security, cited separately by The Times.

“Although systemic financial risks are generally under control, risks are accumulating from nonperforming assets, liquidity, bond defaults, shadow banks, external shocks, a property bubble, government debt, and internet financing, and the financial markets are also in a mess,” Xi said.

The major worry over the foreign investment spree by groups including Anbang, HNA Group Company Ltd. and Dalian Wanda Group Company Ltd. is that it was financed with high-yielding wealth management products (WMPs) and other pledges that could not be paid.

The groups have come under regulatory pressure to sell their real estate and other overseas assets that they amassed during the buying binge. China’s regulators apparently viewed Anbang as the worst case for risk.

On Feb. 23, the China Insurance Regulatory Commission (CIRC) announced an immediate takeover of Anbang by government agencies for one year, citing solvency threats.

The move came nine days after regulators warned all insurers against using debt-backed domestic assets as collateral for borrowing overseas.

With the tough penalties on Anbang, China may now be using the courts to compensate for lapses of regulatory policies in the past.

Anbang crossed a line

Derek Scissors, an Asia economist and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, said that Anbang crossed a line that was not previously well-drawn.

“Anbang is legitimately connected to risky lending, since the acquisition roll they went on was enabled by getting credit despite moving outside their core business,” said Scissors by email.

“And in the Chinese system, sending someone to prison after the fact is a standard signal that they are serious about better loan review now,” he said.

The government’s response to risk now appears to be a hodgepodge of ad hoc decisions on withholding or extending credit, dispensing fines for vague infractions to signal tighter supervision, and allowing some bond defaults.

Last month, the newly-organized China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) said it handed out 646 penalties against financial institutions and 798 more on individuals in the first quarter. Fines totaled more than 1.1 billion yuan (U.S. $184 million) for “defective corporate governance and breaches of macro-regulation policies.”

“All forms of violations have been seriously inhibited to forestall systemic financial risks,” the agency said.

In mid-March, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) also said it had penalized 339 listed companies for violations including insider trading and market manipulation since last year as part of efforts to control financial risks.

China’s police have also taken credit for reducing financial risk with claims of catching more than 90,000 economic crimes since 2017, including illegal fundraising, pyramid schemes and underground banking, the Ministry of Public Security said.

But the risk reduction campaign has hardly been a model of consistency, or for that matter, coordination, despite Xi’s evident push from the top.

Regulators have sprinkled interventions in cases like that of Anbang with instances of tough love, allowing some risks to take their course.

Such was the case of Beijing-based developer Zhonghong Holding Co., which slid into default in late April with overdue debts of 2.3 billion yuan (U.S. $364 million) after buying a 21-percent stake in California’s SeaWorld Entertainment last year, according to Reuters reports.

At least 20 corporate bond defaults have taken place in China so far this year, the South China Morning Post said.

Last week, a unit of troubled CEFC China Energy Company Ltd. added to the list after the collapse of a deal to acquire shares in the Russian oil company Rosneft. On May 21, CEFC Shanghai International Group Ltd. missed bond payments totaling more than 2 billion yuan (U.S. $327.3 million), Reuters reported.

Has tough love gone too far?

The risk-control mission has already sparked fears that tough love has gone too far, leading to the loosening of bank purse strings with a surprise lowering of the reserve requirement ratio on April 25.

In April, new yuan-denominated loans of 1.18 trillion yuan (U.S. $186.4 billion) topped forecasts as outstanding loans rose 12.7 percent from a year earlier, Reuters said.

The credit support for the economy signaled that the government could continue to take steps in seemingly opposite policy directions in the name of controlling financial risks.

“For investors watching the Chinese economy and rates, the message is clear: China hasn’t somehow magically cracked the code of debt-free growth,” The Wall Street Journal said in its Heard on the Street column.

Rather than worrying about bank lending and debt, regulators are concerned mainly with where the money comes from, the column suggested.

WMPs may be out, but other older forms of shadow financing still appeared to be in, the paper said.

Reports from a special meeting of China’s top political advisory body painted a mixed picture of the government’s progress in controlling financial risk.

Speaking to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) meeting on May 15, Vice Premier Liu He said the country is “entirely confident in, and capable of, winning the battle to prevent and resolve financial risks,” the official English-language China Daily reported.

Other comments appeared less sanguine.

Shang Fulin, deputy director of the CPPCC’s economic committee and a former top banking regulator, said that risks are “largely under control.”

But he added that “pressure of systemic financial risk remains quite heavy,” citing “macro leverage levels, the real estate market, local government debt, irregular financial activities and the lack of a mature social credit system.”

A Xinhua report from the meeting also carried a comment from Liu suggesting that efforts to deal with the risks of past credit policies are still at an early stage.

“People should understand that capital is needed to start a business, money borrowed must be paid back, and there are risks in investment and prices to pay for wrongdoing,” Liu said.

The policy mishmash may leave it up to regulators and courts to decide when financial risk has gone too far, leaving investment groups to watch out for the barn door and whether it is swinging open or closed.

“The Chinese assume this is an implementation problem rather than a structural problem,” said Scissors.

“In particular, they think they’ve cracked down enough that loose money will bring happy economic and political benefits but carry much less financial risk than before. Won’t work,” he said.

By Leman Zeynalova

Much of the work has been done for the detailed feasibility study in all countries of the Eastring gas pipeline, Public Relations and Communication specialist at Slovakia’s Eustream company Pavol Kubik told Trend.

Eastring will transport natural gas from different areas and alternative sources. At the first stage, it will provide the Balkans and/or even Turkey with gas from the European gas market. At the final stage, when its bi-directional mode should be in place, Eastring will transit prospective Romanian Black Sea natural gas, Caspian and Middle East natural gas to Europe.

“The Eastring project continues according to the schedule. Lot of work has been done for the detailed feasibility study in all countries of the future pipeline,” said Kubik.

“We closely cooperate with our partners’ transmission system operators and I believe we will be able to provide more information once the study is finalized (later this summer).”

He reiterated that the pipeline capacity will be available for all shippers/sources (including natural gas transported via the Southern Gas Corridor) on the transparent and non-discriminatory basis.

The Southern Gas Corridor is one of the priority energy projects for the EU. It envisages the transportation of gas from the Caspian region to the European countries through Georgia and Turkey.

At the initial stage, the gas to be produced as part of the Stage 2 of development of Azerbaijan’s Shah Deniz field is considered as the main source for the Southern Gas Corridor projects. Other sources can also connect to this project at a later stage.

As part of the Stage 2 of the Shah Deniz development, the gas will be exported to Turkey and European markets by expanding the South Caucasus Pipeline and the construction of Trans Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline and Trans Adriatic Pipeline.

Kim Yong-chol, the vice-leader of North Korea and the former head of the country’s intelligence agency, is on his way to the US for talks to arrange the upcoming meeting between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un.

Trump has confirmed earlier reports of Kim Yong-chol’s arrival in a tweet. “We have put a great team together for our talks with North Korea. Meetings are currently taking place concerning Summit, and more,” Trump tweeted.

Yonhap earlier reported the North Korean official was due to arrive in the US on Wednesday.The summit is currently scheduled for June 12 in Singapore.

Kim Yong-chol, aged 72 or 73, is under personal sanctions by the US for his alleged role in attacks on South Korea and the 2014 hacking attack against Sony Pictures. During his time as head of the North Korean intelligence service, the Reconnaissance General Bureau (2009-2016), he was targeted for sanctions twice.

He currently heads the United Front Department, the North Korean office responsible for relations with the South. He was also picked to lead the North’s delegation at the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, where he watched the closing ceremony next to Trump’s daughter Ivanka. There was no interaction reported between the two at the time, though.

The upcoming summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un, the first meeting of a sitting US president and a North Korean leader, has been the subject of a fierce back-and-forth for weeks now. Initially scheduled to take place on June 12 in Singapore, Trump briefly called it off last Thursday over the North’s “tremendous anger and open hostility.”

Less than 24 hours later he said the meeting was back on the cards, seemingly having relented after Pyongyang stated commitment to sitting down with Washington “at any time, in any way” to achieve peace in the Korean Peninsula.

By Kalinga Seneviratne

The frenzied moves over the weekend of May 26-27 by leaders of South Korea and North Korea to revive the on-again, off-again North Korea-US summit, and pictures flashed across the region of the two Korean leaders warmly hugging each other for the second time within a month, are rapidly turning public opinion across the region in North Korea’s favour with the United States and President Donald Trump seen as the “evil”.

The pictures accompanying reports in Asian news media on Trump’s cancellation of the much anticipated summit always carry side-by-side a smiling affable North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and a stern-looking Trump.

The tone of the reports – though it is not explicitly said so – tends to lay blame on U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton and Vice-President Mike Pence for their belligerent rhetoric referring to the “Libyan solution”.

This perhaps hit a chord across Asia because the last thing it wants is a Western-instigated “Arab Spring” chaos in the region. Asia knows very well that such a scenario will only benefit the West, especially the American arms industry, and will put Asia’s economic progress back by generations.

On Sunday May 27, following his secret meeting with Kim Jong Un, South Korean President Moon Jae-in said that his North Korean counterpart has expressed his intention “to put an end to the history of war and confrontation” through a successful summit with the United States.

But Moon also reiterated that Kim has expressed concerns not about his ability to denuclearise but “on whether he could trust the United States to end its hostile policy and guarantee the security of his regime when the North denuclearises itself”.

Many Asian media commentaries tend to reflect this concern, even in staunchly pro-U.S. countries such as Japan and Singapore.

“It was fully predictable that there would be many twists and turns in the bilateral negotiations to bring an end to decades of hostile confrontation between the two countries,” noted Japan’s Asahi Shimbun in an editorial.

“Any major development concerning the relationship between Washington and Pyongyang would have huge implications for the future of the security landscape in Northeast Asia,” it went on to say. “The crux of the matter is for the two countries to reach an agreement that guarantees long term benefits.”

It added that the priority at the moment should be to avoid a situation like last year, which brought the Korean peninsula to the brink of war.

Ravi Velloor, Associate Editor of Singapore’s The Straits Times, noted that coming hours after the world media noted Kim’s desire to denuclearise by blowing up its test site, Trump’s withdrawal from the summit makes the United States lose more in the eyes of the world than North Korea.

“The US decision to cancel the summit will also reinforce the Chinese narrative that the U.S. was never serious about a solution for the Korean peninsula because continued tension gives Washington an excuse to place nuclear weapons in China’s periphery,” argued Velloor.

The Straits Times’ commentary was also critical of Bolton and Pence’s reference to Libya. “For his part, Mr Kim, who has no doubt taken note of Mr Trump’s decision to walk away from the nuclear deal signed with Iran by his predecessor, is acutely aware that the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was murdered in public two years after he surrendered his nuclear weapons programme,” noted Velloor.

“Any comparison of North Korean denuclearisation to the Libyan model was bound to have been received poorly by Mr Kim.”

China has also called on Kim and Trump to talk and settle their differences. “An end to hostilities and denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula are the goals that many countries have been working for in the past decades,” said the China Daily in an editorial, adding, “which is true of China, whatever Trump might suggest to the contrary.”

North Korea wants to hold talks with the United States on an equal basis, and its nuclear strategy is based on that concept, argued Dr Zhu Feng, Head of the School of International Studies at Nanjing University, in a commentary published by China Daily.

“DPRK (North Korea) is sincere about restoring peace on the Korean Peninsula and improving Pyongyang-Washington ties,” said Dr Feng. “In fact, equal treatment has been a consistent factor in the demands of the DPRK to hold peace talks. And perhaps that’s why Pyongyang has never agreed to abandon its nuclear programme.”

In a commentary, the Philippines’ Manila Times noted that “unbearable pressure” has been placed on the South Korean government by Trump’s unilateral actions in cancelling the summit.

“The regression virtually humiliated Moon’s administration,” noted the newspaper . “As Moon and his staff spared no efforts in mediating between Kim and Trump, it has been proved that at least on the matter of denuclearisation, the divergence between Pyongyang and Washington is much more significant than that between the two Koreas,” which would put pressure on the military alliance between South Korea and the United States.

In a lengthy article in the same newspaper on how North Korea has “cheated” on peace and denuclearisation deals in the past five decades, Kim Myong-sik, a former editorial writer for The Korea Herald, admits that current leader Kim Jong Un has caught the imagination of the South Korean people, which he attributes to good “acting skills” by the young leader.

“Kim, 35, or 36, carried an air of sincerity in his meetings with Moon, 65, and (Chinese leader) Xi, who turns 65 next month, but he was more relaxed in his tete-a-tete with South Korea’s leader at Panmunjeom, especially when their get-together progressed into an exclusive promenade and a dinner party,” noted Myong-sik.

He also pointed out that “our extremely competitive TV channels” have given the North Korean leader almost as much exposure as the president of the Republic of Korea and Koreans have come to see “Kim’s rather affable gestures”.

Myong-sik argued that through the decades of North Korean “deceptions” China has risen to G-2 status when North Korea advanced to virtual nuclear power status. “The new superpower should henceforth be far more responsible about ensuring global nuclear security than in the past, when it simply played host to a multilateral conference,” he said.

Rahul Pathak of The Straits Times noted that with doors suddenly being opened for the first ever summit of US and North Korean leaders, new terminology may emerge.

“Instead of complete, verifiable, and irreversible Denuclearization (CVID), one could settle for ‘sufficient’ denuclearisation (SVID),” he argued. “Mr Moon, a man with a vision, Mr Trump, a man with his eyes on the prize, and Mr Kim, with his cold calculations and a country to feed, may yet conjure something remarkable down the road. Their interests are aligned (and) it remains for the stars to follow suit.”

By Kalinga Seneviratne*

Buddhists across Asia are going to temples, bathing the baby Buddha, giving food to monks, lighting lamps and offering incense sticks accompanied by chanting paying homage to the Buddha on Vesak day, May 29 this year. While keeping with these traditions is important, Asia’s Buddhists are letting go a great opportunity to shape the global development path in an ecologically friendly, compassionate and a sustainable manner.

As the centre of gravity of the world’s economy shifts to Asia, Buddhism – which has shaped Asian civilizations for over 2000 years – has much to offer in guiding Asia’s development path. Buddhist philosophy has a rich reservoir of ideas on living sufficiently and comfortably without exploiting nature and people, ideas that anyone can adopt irrespective of your religious affiliations, as the mindfulness fad in the West shows. Mindfulness itself is rooted in the age-old Buddhist meditation practice of ‘Vipassana Bhavana’.

Often, I find it sad, when I hear young Asians – whose ancestors for generations have been Buddhist – saying proudly “we are free thinkers”, and refuse to identify as Buddhists. I have often explained to them that Buddhists indeed are “free thinkers” – as reflected in Buddha’s sermon to Kalama on free inquiry – and they are essentially atheists – as Buddhists don’t accept a dependency on a creator God. This makes it possible to adopt Buddhist ideas without converting to a religion.

However, this liberalism has also created problems, such as in the Mindfulness craze in the West, where in order to “secularize” mindfulness, westerners have taken out the spiritual aspects of the teaching such as the development of compassion and loving kindness.

Thai Buddhist social critic Sulak Sivaraksa is critical of the way the West has appropriated a Buddhist practice. “It will be a wonderful thing to practice; for some, it will bring wonderful benefits (but) to seek mindfulness exclusively has the potential to evolve into something unwholesome, something negative,” argues Sivaraksa in a recently published book on mindful communication for sustainable development.

Pointing out that CEOs of many big global corporations have been sent for mindfulness training, he warns: “When building up empires, taking up this meditation practice without the ethics (wisdom) will not see his mind changing for the better (of humankind) or becoming benevolent, more compassionate, more wise.”

The foundation of Buddhist ethics is in what is called the three poisons – greed, hatred and delusion. To eliminate suffering in the world, Sivaraksa says we need to understand these poisons and mindfulness training needs to guide you to this – to eliminate what he calls the “structural violence” of our economic systems. These include the exploitation of the poor and the environment; issues of climatic change and environmental sustainability.

If we look at the results of the ‘Arab Spring’, it is a good example of how the three poisons have taken the better of humanity. A greed for resources (oil and gas) has led to a widespread manifestation of hatred from all sides, who were initially fed a delusion of freedom and democracy, by parties, that were merely interested in grabbing the resources of the region for themselves. This also reflects the structural violence of the global economic system that is creating conflict rather than cooperation.

In the past two years, I was involved with a project at Chulalongkorn University in Thailand, which was originally funded by UNESCO, to development of curriculum to introduce mindful communication methodology into journalism training programs in Asia. We have developed curriculum where we promote a concept called “human-centric journalism” and in the economic and development reporting we introduce ‘sufficiency economics’ principles.

In economic reporting curriculum, we have used the concepts enshrined in the Buddhist ‘Four Noble Truths’, on understanding suffering (dissatisfaction), its causes and manifestations, cessation or extinction of suffering, and the path leading to the cessation of suffering.

This is a path of investigative journalism we promote, where the journalist is not just a watchdog, but an advocate or facilitator for finding solutions – to map a sustainable development path sans the structural violence of the current economic system. This also leads us to ‘sufficiency economics’, a concept the late Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej promoted at the height of the Thai economic meltdown in 1997 and has been recently revived by the military led government. The concept emphasizes community development that strengthens the community to the self-supporting level.

This concept has been adopted by Bhutan, where they have rejected the GDP-based method of measuring progress, and they have adopted the ‘Gross National Happiness’ (GNH) concept based on the ‘sufficiency economics’ principles. In 2015, at the Climate Change Conference, the UN adopted Bhutan’s call for a holistic approach to development, a move endorsed by 68 countries. Now, a UN panel is looking at ways how this model can be replicated across the globe.

The current methods of journalism we teach – borrowed from the West – are too adversarial and promote conflict rather than cooperation and wellbeing of humanity. We may need to call the new mindful journalist a communicator – rather than a journalist – one, who could use a variety of digital communication tools to analyse, report and advocate for sustainable development.

If Asia is to give leadership to such a sustainable development movement and shape the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, funds need to be mobilized, especially from within the Buddhist communities. This is where rich Buddhist temples, individuals and foundations could help. Rather than spend millions on building huge Buddha statues and grand temples – there are enough of them across Asia – Buddhists need to fund media networks and training programs that promote these Buddhist concepts.

* Kalinga Seneviratne is a Sri Lankan born Buddhist journalist and communication scholar currently based in Singapore.

I spent last week at a conference in South Korea, during which time Trump went from seeking a meeting with Kim Jong Un to cancelling it, then suggesting it might be back on.

“What does Trump want?” South Korean officials at the conference kept asking me. Notably, no one asked what the United States wants. They knew it was all about Trump.

Trump’s goal has nothing to do with peace on the Korean peninsula, or even with making America great again. It’s all about making Trump feel great.

“They are respecting us again,” Trump exulted to graduating cadets at the Naval Academy last Friday. “Winning is such a great feeling, isn’t it? Nothing like winning. You got to win.”

In truth, the United States hasn’t won anything, in Korea or anywhere else. After fifteen months of Trump at the helm, America is far less respected around the world than it was before.

The only thing that’s happened is Trump is now making foreign policy on his own – without America’s allies, without Congress, even without the State Department. Trump may consider this a personal win but it hardly makes America safer.

Some earnest foreign policy experts are seeking to discover some bargaining strategy behind Trump’s moves on North Korea. Hint: There’s no strategy. Only a thin-skinned narcissist needing flattery and fearing ridicule.

Trump got excited about a summit with Kim when he thought it might win him praise, even possibly a Nobel Peace Prize. He got cold feet when he feared Kim might be setting Trump up for humiliating failure. Now he’s back to dreaming about the Prize.

The delicate balance in Trump’s brain between glorification and mortification can tip either way at any moment, depending on his hunches. All international relations become contests of personal dominance.

He rejected the 2015 Iran treaty for no apparent reason other than Obama had entered into it. Trump couldn’t care less that by doing so he has harmed relations with our traditional allies, who pleaded with him to stay in. And he’s undermined America’s future credibility. Why would any nation (including North Korea) enter into a treaty with the United States if it can break it on the whim of a president who wants to one-up his predecessor?

Ditto with the Paris climate accord. Obama got credit for it, so Trump wants credit for unilaterally sinking it.

Trump has demanded that America’s nuclear arsenal be upgraded. Why? Since 1970, the United States has been committed to nuclear nonproliferation. What changed? Trump. A more powerful arsenal makes him feel more powerful – “respected again.”

It’s not about American interests in the world. It’s about Trump’s interests.

Wonder why Trump promised to lift trade sanctions on ZTE, China’s giant telecom company? ZTE has been trading with North Korea and Iran, in violation of American policy. Everyone around Trump advised against lifting the sanctions.

Look no further than Trump’s personal needs. ZTE is important to China, and China recently pledged a half-billion-dollar loan to a project connected with Trump’s family business.

While we’re on the subject of high tech, why has Trump pushed the Postal Service to double the shipping rate it charges Amazon? I mean, isn’t Amazon important to America’s high-tech race with the rest of the world?

The most likely explanation is that the CEO of Amazon is Jeff Bezos, who’s also far richer than Trump. Bezos also owns The Washington Post, and the Post has been critical of Trump.

As you may have noticed, the man doesn’t like to be criticized. As Trump explained to Leslie Stahl of “60 Minutes” during his campaign, his aim is “to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you.”

Any halfway responsible president of the United States would be worried about Russian meddling in U.S. elections. Protecting American democracy is just about the most important thing a president does.

But Trump has turned the inquiry about the Russians into a “dark state” conspiracy against him. And he’s demanded that the Justice Department investigate the people who are investigating him.

With Trump, there’s no longer American foreign policy. There’s only Trump’s ego.

If peace is truly advanced on the Korean peninsula, the Prize shouldn’t go to Trump. It should go to South Korean president Moon Jae-in, who has tirelessly courted the world’s two most dangerous megalomaniacs.

Most of Israel’s largest banks are providing services that help support, maintain, and expand unlawful settlements by financing their construction in the occupied West Bank, according to Human Rights Watch.

The 41-page report, “Bankrolling Abuse: Israeli Banks in West Bank Settlements,” details new research on the scope of banking activities in settlements and the violations to which these activities contribute. Israel’s seven largest banks provide services to settlements. The report also documents the involvement of most of them in building housing units that expand settlements by acquiring property rights in new construction projects and shepherding the projects through to completion. The transfer by the occupier of members of its civilian population into the occupied territory, and the deportation or transfer of members of the population of the territory, are war crimes. By facilitating expansion of settlements, these banking activities facilitate unlawful population transfers.

“Israeli banks are partnering with developers to build homes reserved exclusively for Israelis on Palestinian land,” said Sari Bashi, Israel and Palestine advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “The projects these banks underwrite contribute to displacing Palestinians unlawfully.”

Human Rights Watch searched online listings for settlement construction projects, Palestinian and Israeli land and municipal records and construction company reports, interviewed landowners, visited settlement construction sites, and reviewed research on banking activities and land status by the Israeli nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) Who Profits and Kerem Navot.

A map created by Human Rights Watch provides a partial picture of the financial services the banks provide throughout West Bank settlements. In addition to construction projects, banks provide loans to settlement regional and local authorities and mortgage loans to homebuyers in settlements and operate bank branches there. Palestinian West Bank residents, forbidden by military order to enter settlements except as laborers bearing special permits, cannot use these services. Palestinian and foreign banks provide services to Palestinian customers outside the settlements.

Settlements are unlawful under international humanitarian law. They contribute to a discriminatory regime in which Israeli authorities restrict and stunt Palestinian economic development, while subsidizing and supporting Israeli settlements built on land unlawfully seized from Palestinians. International humanitarian law forbids an occupying power from using land except for military purposes or to benefit the local population living under occupation.

Banks that finance or “accompany” construction projects in the settlements become partners in settlement expansion, supervising each stage of construction, holding the buyers’ money in escrow, and taking ownership of the project in case of default by the construction company. Most of that construction is on what the Israeli authorities declared to be “state land,” which can include land unlawfully seized from private Palestinian landowners. Israel uses this land in a discriminatory fashion, allocating one third of state or public land in the West Bank, not including East Jerusalem, to the World Zionist Organization and just 1 percent for use by Palestinians.

In the Palestinian village of Azzun, for example, Murshed Suleiman’s family lost regular access to their land when Israel erected its separation barrier between Azzun and the nearby settlement of Alfei Menashe, on the Israeli side. Bank Leumi, Israel’s second largest bank, is partnering with an Israeli construction company to build five new buildings in this settlement, on land that belongs to Azzun.

Just outside the Palestinian village of Mas-ha, Mizrahi Tefahot, Israel’s fourth largest bank, is accompanying two new housing projects, with a total of 251 housing units. The project essentially expands the settlement of Elkana toward Mas-ha, exacerbating restrictions on land access. The Aamer family has largely lost access to what had been about 500 dunams (50 hectares) of their land. Family members say that part of the new construction is on land that their father bought but has been seized without their permission and is now off-limits to them.

In Mas-ha, too, the Israeli authorities built the separation barrier to veer deep into the West Bank, to situate Elkana and other settlements on the “Israeli” side.

Human Rights Watch contacted both banks for their response but received no substantive replies.

Settlements inherently contribute to serious human rights abuses. Companies that conduct business in or with settlements cannot mitigate or avoid contributing to these abuses, because the activities they conduct take place on unlawfully seized land, under conditions of discrimination, and through a serious violation of Israel’s obligations as an occupying power. These activities raise concerns about pillage, due to land seizure policies by the Israeli military that make it difficult to ascertain whether the landowners have freely given their consent.

Human Rights Watch believes that to comply with their human rights responsibilities, banks, like other businesses, should cease doing businesses in or with Israeli settlements. They should stop locating or carrying out activities inside settlements, financing, administering or otherwise supporting settlements or settlement-related activities and infrastructure, and contracting to purchase settlement-produced goods.

“Banks cannot do business in settlements without contributing to discrimination, displacement, and land theft,” Bashi said. “To avoid this outcome, they should end their settlement activities.”

The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s 12 conditions on Iran nuclear deal – that were outlined in a speech at the Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington, D.C. on May 21, 2018 – have merits; particularly his condition of “Iran must respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi Government and permit the disarming, demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias”.

If Iranian influence on the Iraqi militias is allowed to continue, these militias would be again encouraged to marginalize and torture the Sunni Arab population, whose sufferings would then become the rallying point for the revival of ISIS or the emergence of ISIS-like new group/s.

What’s more, if Iranian influence continues to prevail on the Iraqi Shia militia groups, the Shias – who are the followers of those schools of thoughts that are different from what these militia groups follow – will also come under attack from the Iran-backed Shia militias.

ISIS rose on capitalizing the marginalization of Sunni Arabs

When the US was largely withdrawing its forces in Iraq, they left an Iraq that was sectarian and chaotic. The Sunni population – specifically of Arab ethnicity – had to face widespread tortures from the hardliner sectarian elements across Iraq.

Before the emergence of ISIS, the continuous protests by the Sunni Arabs in Iraq’s Anbar province (including in Fallujah) and the breakout of armed clashes every now and then between Sunni Arab protesters and security forces — increasingly showed frustration of the Sunni Arab population, as they were being neglected by the sectarian regime in Bagdad and were being tortured by some sectarian elements in the Iraqi army and the Iran-backed Shia militias.

After the rise of ISIS, a substantial portion of the Iraq’s Sunni Arab population – who were extremely frustrated from the tortures by the Shia militias and the sectarian Iraqi army personnel – had either directly jointed ISIS after embracing its ideology or atleast cooperated with ISIS in many issues.

Hence, the sufferings of the Sunni Arab tribes in the hands of the sectarian Iraqi regime (under the premiership of Nouri al-Maliki), the sectarian elements in army and the Iran-backed Shia militias had pushed a substantial number of the Iraqi Sunnis (of Arab ethnicity) to align themselves with ISIS.

But once the administration of Haider al-Abadi (who succeeded Nouri al-Maliki) managed to bring the Sunni Arabs on board by marginally wining their trust, the situation took an about-turn. The Sunni Arabs joined the US, the Iraqi army, the Kurds (the other Sunni ethnic population in Iraq), the Iran-backed Shia militia groups and the militias of Muqtada al-Sadr in order to fight the ISIS.

The result was obvious. The presence of ISIS in Iraq was substantially diminished.

Revival of ISIS if Iranian interference in Iraq continues

Now that ISIS’s presence has largely reduced in Iraq, the Iran-backed Shia militias might again turn their guns back on the Sunni Arab population — a scenario that will pave the way for either the revival of ISIS or the emergence of ISIS-like new group/s, who will try to capitalize on the renewed sufferings of the Sunni.

Hence, it is important to curtail Iranian interference in Iraqi politics. It is important to reduce Iranian influence on the Shia militias and to disarm them, so that they can cause no harm to not only the Sunni Arabs, but also the Shias from those schools of thoughts that are different from what these militias follow.

It, thus, appears that the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s aforesaid condition of “Iran must respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi Government and permit the disarming, demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias” is something that should be taken seriously by the governments of stakeholding countries (including Iraq), who then should put pressure on Iran to do exactly what Pompeo has asked to do in this regard.

With the approaching of the twenty-eighth Plenary Meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), an elite nuclear cartel to control nuclear commerce, the fingers are crossed once again with regards to the non-NPT state’s membership issue. With this in the contemporary international security environment, the NSG membership debate has emerged as an urgent issue for the states in Asia, explicitly.

It is known to all that the US is lobbying and pressuring the rest of the states in order to accommodate India into the NSG club, and this all began post-Indo US nuclear deal.For this purpose the international community is continually portraying India’s nuclear track record as A grade. This could be to achieve their (big powers) self-centered goals. After the US, many other countries have followed suit by engaging India into similar kind of Uranium deals (Indo-US Nuclear Deal) for a dual purpose. Undoubtedly, India is one of the worst proliferators; it once had scornful disdain for non-proliferation regimes, which has now been conveniently forgotten by the world. Consequently, it has negative implications for the South Asian nuclear region.

Previously, several countries, apart from China, were defying the US pressure and insisting on a two-step approach for admission of non-NPT states into the NSG and for the need to develop an objective and equitable criteria, which would be applicable to all the applicants in future. On the other hand, India has ruled out the possibility of joining the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as a non-nuclear weapon state. Amandeep Singh Gill, permanent representative of India to the Conference on Disarmament, told the UN General Assembly recently that the question of India joining 6th NPT as NNWS (non-nuclear weapon states) can not arise in the near future.

In the backdrop of China’s continued efforts to block India’s entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), Indian official said that it has taken up with Beijing all the concerning issues concerning during the recent Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Dialogue between the two sides. The Indian delegation at the talks was led by Pankaj Sharma, Joint Secretary (Disarmament and International Security Affairs) in the MEA, while the Chinese side was led by Wang Qun, Director General of Department of Arms Control at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China. This is a step that India considers as much needed one, especially after its entry into three of the four multilateral export control regimes over the last two years.

If India wants recognition as a nuclear weapons state, it should be required to meet the nuclear group’s standards, including opening negotiations with Pakistan and China on curbing nuclear weapons and halting the production of nuclear fuel for bombs. In this regard, President SVI Dr Zafar Iqbal Cheema said that India’s alone entry into NSG would put back Pakistani efforts for developing its infrastructure and industry by decades. Therefore, such an eventuality would have serious consequences for national security and economic and industrial development of Pakistan.

Nevertheless, the outcome of this forthcoming plenary meeting on the enlargement of cartel’s memberships would not come as a surprise because no major breakthrough for non-NPT states accession to NSG is expected for foreseeable future, viewing no change in China’s position for accepting new or non-NPT countries into its fold.

However, it is yet to be seen what consensus participating Governments will reach on the admission of new states into its folds. However Pakistan feels encouraged by the increasing number of states supporting neutral formula and realizing Pakistan’s concerns about preferential treatment extended to India. It is hoped that NSG members would adopt an impartial criteria for all non-NPT countries in the forthcoming plenary meeting. Otherwise another exemption for India would accelerate arms race in South Asian region by infuriating Pakistan to expand its nuclear capabilities and will also question international efforts to curb proliferation. To sum-up, criteria-based NSG membership is a mutually beneficial proposition because it will benefit the strategic restraint, the stability in South Asia, the Non-proliferation regime, NPT and NSG.

China intends to extend the CPEC into Afghanistan which is a positive move towards regional economic integration. So, it has played a vital role in bringing the two countries on table.

Pakistan recently had its fourth meeting of Afghanistan-Pakistan Action Plan for Peace and Solidarity (APAPPS) on May 14, 2018, which can further pave the bilateral relations among the two neighbors – Pakistan and Afghanistan, thus eventually materializing the CPEC to extend towards Afghanistan. The two sides showed their interest to promote pace and solidarity among six different areas mutually beneficial for them.

These areas include commitments including: Pakistan’s support for Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace and reconciliation; to undertake effective actions against fugitives and the irreconcilable elements posing security threats to either of the two countries; deny use of their respective territory by any country, network, group or individuals for anti-state activities against either country, to put in place a joint supervision, coordination and confirmation mechanism; avoid territorial and aerial violations of each other’s territory; no public blame game, instead APAPPS cooperation mechanisms would be utilized to respond to mutual issues of contention and concerns and working groups and necessary cooperation mechanism would be set up as per APAPPS. Upon successful implementation of this joint action plan the two countries will meet the common objectives of eliminating terrorism and achieving peace, stability, prosperity and development of the people of the two countries.

Continuing to achieve the peace and solidarity will help improve the economic relation between Afghanistan and Pakistan. As the political constraints and terrorism, extremism, and separatism are the major contributing factors behind the poor economic and trade relation between Afghanistan and Pakistan. At present, for Pakistan, CPEC is the window for economic development. However this window of opportunity faces severe security challenges. In this regard, the APAPPS will be instrumental in improving the security situation in Pakistan specifically in terms of curbing terrorism. Once these security challenges will be addressed the possibility of extending CPEC to Afghanistan will be even more likely.

Moreover, China has been quite helpful in promoting these peace talks between Pakistan- and Afghanistan. This will provide not only a smooth regional connectivity to CPEC but a broader perspective for OBOR initiative. With the extension of CPEC into Afghanistan, the country can become a major beneficiary of this project because in near future the corridor will add to the economic development of this fragile country-Afghanistan, by enhancing economic activities in the area which can put the flimsy economy of Afghanistan on a sound footing, eventually securing and bringing peace to the westward borders of Pakistan.

There are several connectivity projects that Pakistan, China and Afghanistan can undertake if become partners under the CPEC. The significant road projects that may be incorporated in the economic connectivity to Afghanistan envisages 265 km Peshawar to Kabul motorway and the road link connecting western alignment of CPEC to Afghanistan by linking Chaman to Kandahar, Mazar-i-Sharif to Termez near the border of Central Asian countries. This passage will offer an effortless and short access to Afghanistan in order to connect to the sea port of Gwadar (which is almost 600 kilometres shorter than the presently existing transit route being used by the traders and people of Afghanistan). This connection will integrate Afghanistan with other regions and also allow it to start commercial activities through the Indian Ocean.

Consequently the Chinese efforts for APAPPS will bring Kabul and Islamabad much closer, which is the need of the hour. This will also address Chinese fears about the spread of Islamist militancy from Pakistan and Afghanistan to the unrest-prone far western Chinese region of Xinjiang. This is not the first time that China is paying a role of mediator in solving the conflict of interest and grievances between the parties involved in CPEC. Previously China has played a vital role in bringing the Baloch tribes on the table to discuss the matters related to CPEC. So, the APAPPS will provide a forum to enhance connectivity and cooperation through CPEC projects with neighboring countries, including Afghanistan, Iran and with Central and West Asian states.

*Qura tul ain Hafeez has done M Phil in international relations from Quaid-I Azam University Islamabad. She is currently working as a Research Associate at Strategic Vision Institute Islamabad. She can be reached at Quraathashmi@gmail.com

May 28 this year marked the 20th anniversary of historical moment when Pakistan successfully detonated nuclear devices in the Chagai district, Balochistan; and joined the prestigious club of nuclear weapon states.  Pakistan was compelled to test the nuclear weapon in response to a series of nuclear tests by India on May 11th and 13th of same year, 1998. It is important to note that it was the second series of nuclear tests by India in 1998, the first being the so-called Smiling Buddha in May 1974.

After conducting a series of five nuclear tests in May 1998, the Indian politicians and public were of the view that now they had a monopoly over the nuclear technology and capability in the region, however test of six nuclear explosions by Pakistan was a befitting response to India’s sheer misperception.

India’s nuclear tests of 1974 and 1998 left Pakistan with no option to ensure its defence but to restore to the balance of power in the region by maintaining deterrence equilibrium. It is the fact that development of Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities is the expression of its security concerns to counter India’s conventional superiority over Pakistan. Due to various security challenges, security dilemma is operational between both states. India’s nuclear test in 1974 was significant factors due to which Pakistan felt threatened and believed that it was only with the help of developing the nuclear capability can it ensure its security and survival.

Subsequently, Pakistan followed the policy of nuclear ambiguity which is widely considered justified by security analysts on the grounds of an Indian threat. Same applies to the Pakistan’s retaliatory response of conducting nuclear tests in May 1998. After India’s nuclear test, Pakistan’s government emphasized that “Pakistan’s failure to respond in kind would have made it vulnerable to its aggressive neighbor”. Speech of President Nawaz Sharif in May 1998 has proven that acquisition of nuclear capability was inevitable for the security and survival of Pakistan.

As a result of successful nuclear tests, Pakistan appeared as 7th nuclear weapon state of the world and 1st country of the Muslim world having the nuclear weapon capability. Since then Pakistan remembers this day as Youm-e-Takbeer; ‘The day of Greatness” as a reminder of the tough choice Pakistan made to ensure its defence despite the immense international pressure from the US and other Western countries. Soon after nuclear tests, sanctions were imposed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on both India and Pakistan. However, the explosion of nuclear weapons marks the “Overt Nuclearization” of South Asia and both countries were acknowledged as de facto nuclear weapon states.

Though the roots of nuclear deterrence and strategic stability can be traced back to the pre-nuclearization period when the debates erupted regarding ambiguous nuclear capabilities of India and Pakistan. Now due to the existence of deterrence equilibrium and strategic stability, no matter how fragile, both Pakistan and India have been able to maintain crisis stability over the past 20 years: wherein no conflict has actually escalated into a full blown war.

According to SIPRI 2018 report, India is the largest arms importer of the world. It is developing a sophisticated inventory of nuclear arms comprised of tactical weapons, inter-continental ballistic missiles, and anti-ballistic missile system to fulfill its aspirations of acquiring the status of “regional power”. On the other hand, Pakistan’s leadership, both political and military, understand the possibility to promote security and peace in region through arms control rather than arms race. Therefore to prevent South Asia from a nuclear arm race, Pakistan put forward various proposals: First, in 1974 to declare South Asia as “nuclear weapon-free zone”; Second, the post-1998 proposal to establish “Pakistan-India strategic restraint regime”. Unfortunately, India has consistently rejected all these proposals. India’s unwelcoming attitude has left Pakistan with no option but to restore to the balance of power in the region by developing sophisticated nuclear capabilities.

Moreover, nuclear weapon and nuclear related technology is seen as contributing to Pakistan’s economic and defence base that could ultimately ensure national security objectives of the country. First, talking about economy or energy security: Pakistan has a modest nuclear power programme. It is using peaceful nuclear power and technology to ensure long-term energy security. Pakistan is also one of the ‘energy deficient’ states that focuses on energy security to fulfill its socio-economic demands. Second, due to nuclear weapon capability Pakistan’s defence has become impregnable.

On the other hand, when it comes to the significance of nuclear weapon capability in political arena to fulfill foreign policy objectives, it is unfortunate that even after acquiring the nuclear weapon capability, the overall political standing of Pakistan in global arena has not favorably changed. Though Pakistan has the option to use nuclear weapon as negotiating tool to fulfill its political objectives but nuclear weapon capability is considered as a tool to ensure state’s defence against aggression, be it conventional or nuclear. Therefore, the rationale behind Pakistan’s military nuclear programme remains the same over the years i.e. to counter the conventional military superiority of India.

To conclude, after 20 years of nuclearization, May 28 marked the “historic milestone” of Pakistan’s successful and calculated response to counter India’s aggression through operational preparedness of the Strategic Forces to maintain peace and stability. Every year, Youm-e-Takbeer is observed across the country in commemoration of Pakistan’s decision to ensure it security, to maintain strategic stability and to deter external aggression despite the immense international pressure and threat of crippling sanctions. Consequently, the utility of nuclear weapons can be checked from the fact that despite multiple escalations after overt nuclearization of South Asia, India has not dared to attack Pakistan thus nuclear weapon capability of Pakistan has ensured safety, security and durable peace and protection from any external aggression.

*The writer is currently working as Research Associate at Strategic Vision Institute and can be reached at asmaakhalid_90@hotmail.com

The European Court of Justice confirmed Tuesday that ritual slaughter without stunning may take place only in an approved slaughterhouse.

According to the EU’s top court, that obligation does not infringe freedom of religion as it is only intended to organize and manage the freedom to practice ritual slaughter, taking into account the fundamental rules on the protection of animal welfare and the health of consumers of meat.

The Muslim Feast of Sacrifice is celebrated each year for three days. A large number of practicing Muslims consider that it is their religious duty to slaughter an animal or have an animal slaughtered, preferably on the first day of that feast, whose meat is then eaten by the family, with the remainder being given to the poor and needy and to neighbors and more distant family relatives. There is a consensus among the majority of Muslims in Belgium, voiced by the Council of Theologians within the Muslim Executive of Belgium, that that slaughter must be carried out without first stunning the animals and in observance of other ritual requirements attached to that slaughter.

From 1998, Belgian legislation provided that slaughter prescribed by a religious rite could be carried out only in approved or temporary slaughterhouses. Therefore, each year the minister responsible approved temporary slaughter houses which, together with approved slaughter houses, were permitted to carry out ritual slaughter during the Muslim Feast of Sacrifice, thereby making up for the lack of capacity of approved slaughterhouses related to the increase in demand during that period.

In 2014, the Minister for the Flemish Region responsible for animal welfare announced that he would no longer give approval for temporary slaughter houses on the ground that such approval is contrary to EU law, specifically the provisions of a 2009 regulation on the protection of animals at the time of killing. From 2015 all slaughter of animals without stunning, even slaughter during the Muslim Feast of Sacrifice, had to be carried out exclusively in approved slaughter houses.

It is in that context that, in 2016, various Muslim associations and an umbrella organization of mosques brought an action against the Flemish Region. In particular, they challenged the validity of certain provisions of the regulation with regard, in particular, to the freedom of religion. The Nederlandstalige rechtbank van eerste aanleg Brussel (Dutch -speaking Court of First Instance, Brussels, Belgium), hearing the case, decided to refer the matter to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.

In Tuesday’s judgment, the Court of Justice states, first of all, that ritual slaughter comes within the definition of ‘religious rite’ within the meaning of that regulation. Therefore, it falls within the scope of the freedom of religion guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Possible theological differences on that subject cannot in themselves invalidate that classification as a ‘religious rite’.

The Court also examined whether the regulation constitutes a restriction on the freedom of religion. The Court points out that in the EU, as a general rule, animals are killed only after stunning. By way of derogation, the practice of ritual slaughter without prior stunning is authorized, so long as it is carried out in slaughterhouses approved by the competent national authorities which comply with the technical requirements relating to construction, layout and equipment (those requirements being set out in another EU regulation).

The Court stressed that that derogation does not in any way prohibit the practice of ritual slaughter in the EU, but, to the contrary, it gives expression to the positive commitment of the EU legislature to allow the slaughter of animals without prior stunning in order to ensure effective observance of the freedom of religion, in particular with regard to practicing Muslims during the Feast of Sacrifice.

Therefore, the obligation to carry out ritual slaughter in an approved slaughterhouse simply aims, from a technical point of view, to organize and manage the freedom to carry out slaughter without prior stunning for religious purposes. Such a technical framework is not in itself of such a nature as to restrict the right to freedom of religion of practicing Muslims.

Ritual slaughter is subject to the same technical conditions as those which apply, in principle, to any slaughter of animals within the EU, regardless of the method used, the Court ruled.

Furthermore, the EU legislature has reconciled the observance of the specific methods of slaughter prescribed by religious rites with those of the fundamental rules laid down by the regulations of the EU regarding the protection of the welfare of animals at the time of killing and that of the health of consumers of meat.

Lastly, the Court examined the considerations related to the fact that the approved slaughterhouses situated in the Flemish Region which comply with the requirements of the regulation do not provide sufficient capacity to meet the increase in demand for halal meat recorded during the Feast of Sacrifice.
In that connection, the Court recalls that the validity of an EU measure must be assessed on the basis of the facts and the law as they stood at the time when the measure was adopted and cannot depend on the specific circumstances of a particular case. The issue highlighted by the Belgian court simply concerns a limited number of municipalities in the Flemish Region. Therefore, that issue cannot be regarded as inherently linked to application on an established rule throughout the EU. An occasional problem of lack of slaughter capacity in one region of a Member State, related to the increase in demand for ritual slaughter in the space of several days on the occasion of the Feast of Sacrifice, is the result of a combination of domestic circumstances which cannot affect the validity of the regulation.

Two police officers were killed on Tuesday when an assailant opened fire at them in the center of the Belgian city of Liege.

The perpetrator also shot a passer-by before being shot and killed by police.

The shooting happened near a cafe on the Boulevard d’Avroy, public broadcaster RTBF said on its website.

The gunman fled the scene, taking a cleaning woman hostage at a nearby school, but he was later “neutralized,” RTBF reported, quoting police and fire services.

Two other police officers had been injured, Belga news agency said.

The national anti-terrorist crisis center, which Interior Minister Jan Jambon said on Twitter was monitoring the situation, said terrorism could not be excluded as a motive though it was also looking into other possible reasons.

“It (terrorism) is one of the questions on the table, but for the moment all scenarios are open,” a spokesman for the crisis center said.

Speaking on Belgian television, Prime Minister Charles Michel said: “There was a serious incident. The information so far is not clear yet.”

He was rushing to the crisis center to get more information.

“We don’t know anything yet,” Catherine Collignon, spokeswoman for the Liege prosecutors office, told AFP when asked about the shooter’s motives.

Belgium terror prosecutors later took over the case.

Liege, an industrial city close to the German border in a French-speaking region, was the scene of a shooting in 2011, when a gunman killed four people and wounded more than 100 others before turning the gun on himself.

Belgium has been on high alert since a Brussels-based ISIS cell was involved in attacks on Paris in 2015 that killed 130 people and Brussels in 2016 in which 32 died.

Original source