During the European Middle Ages, literacy and written texts were largely the province of religious institutions. Richly illustrated manuscripts were created in monasteries for use by members of religious institutions and by the nobility. Some of these illuminated manuscripts were embellished with luxurious paints and pigments, including gold leaf and ultramarine, a rare and expensive blue pigment made from lapis lazuli stone.

In a study published in Science Advances, an international team of researchers led by the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History and the University of York shed light on the role of women in the creation of such manuscripts with a surprising discovery–the identification of lapis lazuli pigment embedded in the calcified dental plaque of a middle-aged woman buried at a small women’s monastery in Germany around 1100 AD. Their analysis suggests that the woman was likely a painter of richly illuminated religious texts.

A quiet monastery in central Germany

As part of a study analyzing dental calculus – tooth tartar or dental plaque that fossilizes on the teeth during life – researchers examined the remains of individuals who were buried in a medieval cemetery associated with a women’s monastery at the site of Dalheim in Germany. Few records remain of the monastery and its exact founding date is not known, although a women’s community may have formed there as early as the 10th century AD. The earliest known written records from the monastery date to 1244 AD. The monastery is believed to have housed approximately 14 religious women from its founding until its destruction by fire following a series of 14th century battles.

One woman in the cemetery was found to have numerous flecks of blue pigment embedded within her dental calculus. She was 45-60 years old when she died around 1000-1200 AD. She had no particular skeletal pathologies, nor evidence of trauma or infection. The only remarkable aspect to her remains was the blue particles found in her teeth. “It came as a complete surprise – as the calculus dissolved, it released hundreds of tiny blue particles,” recalls co-first author Anita Radini of the University of York. Careful analysis using a number of different spectrographic methods – including energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDS) and micro-Raman spectroscopy – revealed the blue pigment to be made from lapis lazuli.

A pigment as rare and expensive as gold

“We examined many scenarios for how this mineral could have become embedded in the calculus on this woman’s teeth,” explains Radini. “Based on the distribution of the pigment in her mouth, we concluded that the most likely scenario was that she was herself painting with the pigment and licking the end of the brush while painting,” states co-first author Monica Tromp of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.

The use of ultramarine pigment made from lapis lazuli was reserved, along with gold and silver, for the most luxurious manuscripts. “Only scribes and painters of exceptional skill would have been entrusted with its use,” says Alison Beach of Ohio State University, a historian on the project.

The unexpected discovery of such a valuable pigment so early and in the mouth of an 11th century woman in rural Germany is unprecedented. While Germany is known to have been an active center of book production during this period, identifying the contributions of women has been particularly difficult. As a sign of humility, many medieval scribes and painters did not sign their work, a practice that especially applied to women. The low visibility of women’s labor in manuscript production has led many modern scholars to assume that women played little part in it.

The findings of this study not only challenge long-held beliefs in the field, they also uncover an individual life history. The woman’s remains were originally a relatively unremarkable find from a relatively unremarkable place, or so it seemed. But by using these techniques, the researchers were able to uncover a truly remarkable life history.

“She was plugged into a vast global commercial network stretching from the mines of Afghanistan to her community in medieval Germany through the trading metropolises of Islamic Egypt and Byzantine Constantinople. The growing economy of 11th century Europe fired demand for the precious and exquisite pigment that traveled thousands of miles via merchant caravan and ships to serve this woman artist’s creative ambition,” explains historian and co-author Michael McCormick of Harvard University.

“Here we have direct evidence of a woman, not just painting, but painting with a very rare and expensive pigment, and at a very out-of-the way place,” explains Christina Warinner of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, senior author on the paper. “This woman’s story could have remained hidden forever without the use of these techniques. It makes me wonder how many other artists we might find in medieval cemeteries – if we only look.”

A novel new way of determining the value of employee stock options has yielded some surprising insights: Options granted to woman and senior managers are worth more because they hold them longer. And options that vest annually rather than monthly are worth more for the same reason.

The new valuation method, which combines standard option theory with real-world observations of what employees actually do with their grants, gets at a knotty problem: Even though stock options are one of the most common forms of compensation, companies don’t really know how much granting options costs them.

“We’ve come up with a practical method of valuing stock options that takes into account actual behavior of employees,” says Richard Stanton, a Berkeley Haas professor of finance and real estate who holds the Kingsford Capital Management Chair in Business.

The new approach is laid in “Employee Stock Option Exercise and Firm Cost,” forthcoming in the Journal of Finance and co-authored by Berkeley Haas Prof. Nancy Wallace and New York University Assoc. Prof. Jennifer N. Carpenter. Their analysis also draws on behavioral economics, which considers the effects of psychology on financial decisions.

Among their original findings: Options awarded to women cost companies 2 to 4 percent more than those granted to men, who tend to exercise their options faster. And awards to the most senior employees cost 2 to 7 percent more than grants to their lower-ranking colleagues–again, because the execs hold onto them. In addition, options cost companies significantly more when they are set up to vest less frequently–that is, reach the threshold date when they become eligible to be exercised. A shift from an annual to a monthly vesting date reduces option value by as much as 16 percent because people exercise the options earlier and more often.

According to a recent survey by Meridian Compensation Partners, 42 percent of companies responding reported they awarded stock options to senior executives. And options represent more than 20 percent of CEO pay, according to one estimate. Options allow holders to buy a specific stock at a set price until a predetermined expiration date. The basic challenge in determining the cost of employee stock options is that their value depends on how long they are kept. In general, the longer they are held, the greater the cost to the company that issued them. Consequently, the key to valuing them is to accurately predict when they will be exercised. “How much the options are worth depends on what the employee is going to do with them,” Stanton notes.

A vast literature examines how to determine the value of stock options traded on exchanges. But employee stock options are a special breed with their own special characteristics. For that reason, the valuation methods originally developed for exchange-traded options are imprecise when applied to the options companies award their employees.

Standard option theory takes into account several factors to forecast when options will be cashed in. But it was largely developed through studies of exchange-traded options, making it out of whack for employee stock options for several reasons. For one, employee stock options can’t be traded on the market–the only way employees can dispose of them is to use them to buy the underlying stock. Second, they can only be used during a multi-year window that starts when they vest and ends when they expire. Third, employees can’t easily protect themselves from the risk of having so much of their wealth tied to their employer’s stock, since the only way to reduce the risk is to exercise the option, and that impacts its value.

To arrive at a more accurate way of estimating when employees would exercise stock options, Stanton, Carpenter, and Wallace, the Lisle and Roslyn Payne Chair in Real Estate Capital Markets, analyzed a unique set of data that included complete employee stock option histories awarded to some 290,000 employees from 1981 to 2009 at 88 publicly traded corporations. The dataset gave them an unprecedented fine-grained look at option-exercise behavior. The authors then constructed a mathematical model of exercise rates that took relevant factors from standard theory and added factors related to the riskiness of the options, based on portfolio theory, along with some additional behavioral factors and information on the terms governing options grants, along with characteristics of issuing companies and option holders.

Their findings included some surprises. For example, vesting frequency had an especially powerful effect on option cost. The obvious reason is that employees are able to exercise options earlier when they vest more frequently. But something else may be at work–employees receive an email when options vest, which may prompt them to pull the trigger. “When people’s attention is drawn to their holdings, they’re more likely to make a decision,” Stanton suggests. Similarly, men may exercise options earlier and more often than women because they are more confident making financial decisions. That finding is in line with influential work by Berkeley Haas Prof. Terrance Odean, who found that male investors trade more frequently than women–behavior that reduces their net returns.

But why do high-ranking employees hold their options longer than lower-ranking colleagues? One reason may simply be that they are wealthier and don’t need a stock options windfall to pay for a home renovation or an expensive vacation.

Almost ten years in the making, the research was funded by the Society of Actuaries in response to regulatory calls for improved employee stock option evaluation methods.

A new analysis shows variation in the way state and federal regulators manage PFAS contaminants in drinking water, with some states adopting guideline levels that are more health protective than the non-enforceable levels set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

According to the study’s authors, the findings highlight the need for enforceable federal standards based on full consideration of the science to ensure consistent protection for the millions of people, including vulnerable groups like pregnant women and children, whose water supplies have been contaminated.

The study, by researchers at Silent Spring Institute, Whitman College, and Northeastern University, appears online January 8 in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology (JESEE), and is part of a special issue dedicated to PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances).

PFAS in drinking water are often traced to military fire training areas and airports, as well as industrial sites and wastewater treatment plants. More than 25 communities in the U.S. have contaminated water from manufacturing and industrial sites, and the Department of Defense has identified approximately 400 current or former military sites with contamination stemming mostly from the use of firefighting foams containing PFAS.

Despite widespread contamination and evidence linking PFAS with numerous health effects including cancers, thyroid disease, and developmental problems, there are currently no federal standards for PFAS in drinking water. “In the absence of federal standards, states are developing their own guidelines, using different approaches to determine what a safe level in drinking water should be,” says Silent Spring’s Dr. Laurel Schaider, an environmental chemist and one of the study’s authors.

To understand differences in how state and federal regulators approach the problem, Schaider and her colleagues gathered information released in June 2018 by the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council. The researchers also sourced documents from state websites and contacted state environmental and health agencies.

The researchers identified seven states that have their own guideline levels for PFOA and PFOS, the two most well-studied types of PFAS. Of these, three states (Vermont, Minnesota, and New Jersey) have adopted levels that are lower than the health advisory levels set by EPA. And since the writing of this paper, three additional states (New Hampshire, New York, and California) have also proposed guideline levels that are lower than EPA’s. “The regulatory landscape is changing quickly as communities across the U.S. discover that their water is contaminated,” says Schaider.

Some states have even taken steps to regulate other kinds of PFAS–including chemicals that companies use as substitutes for PFOA and PFOS and that also raise health concerns.

Differences in how regulators review the science is one factor underlying the variation, the team noted. States with stricter drinking water levels for PFAS considered additional health effects, such as effects on mammary gland development and the immune system, that were not used as the basis for EPA’s calculations. For instance, studies in animals have shown that exposure to PFOA in the womb alters mammary gland development, which may increase breast cancer risk. Other studies have found that exposure to PFOA and PFOS weakens the effectiveness of vaccines in children, and so could cause longer term health problems.

“This tells us that a number of states consider EPA’s health advisory levels for PFAS to be insufficiently protective,” says Schaider. “As we learn more about these chemicals, the levels at which scientists think a person can be exposed without being harmed keep getting lower, and that’s an important thing for regulators to be aware of.”

In addition, the study identified several other factors that impact how state and federal regulators set drinking water guidelines. For instance, states with more resources have the capacity to conduct their own risk assessments, while other states may be hampered by a lack of funding and expertise. Political and social factors, as well as pressure from industry, also influence the process.

Ethnic Russians were much less loyal to the Soviet regime in their encounters with the German occupiers than historians have believed up to now. This is the story told by UiO researcher Johannes Due Enstad, who has recently published a book about the German occupation of Northwest Russia during World War II.

After World War II the Soviet Union created a grandiose history of how all the inhabitants of the Soviet Union were loyal to the regime and formed a common front against the Germans in the “Great Patriotic War”.

It has been common knowledge for a long time that this is an untrue story, because many Baltic and Ukrainian people despised the Bolshevik regime. At the same time, western historians have largely agreed that the ethnic Russians were loyal to the Stalin regime when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in 1941.

According to Enstad, who is a post-doc at the Department of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages at the University of Oslo, it is time to crack this myth apart. In a book recently published by the academic publishers Cambridge University Press, he addresses which side the people of Northwest Russia chose during the German occupation.

“This area can, in both historical and geographical terms, be seen as a Russian core area and has been part of the Soviet state since the revolution. Nevertheless people – especially the peasants in the countryside, who accounted for 90% of the population – were much less loyal to the regime and the Soviet state than has been thought,” explains Enstad.

Gave Christmas gifts to the occupiers

Something that happened in December 1941, six months after the start of the German occupation, illustrates the positive reaction quite well. During that time people from some of the small villages collected several thousand woollen socks, mittens and felt boots as Christmas gifts for the German soldiers.​

Inside one of the socks there was a note signed by a Russian by the name of Mikhail Nikiforov:

“I am sending these socks as a gift to the invincible German army and pray that you defeat the Bolsheviks so that they are eradicated forever, and also for a quick victory and a safe journey home”.

“This is just one of a number of similar sources expressing a hope that the Germans would defeat the Soviet regime and contribute to a better life for the Russians,” Enstad explains and adds:

“At the same time we can note that the Germans were wished a safe journey home. No-one wanted them to stay and take over the country. This shows there was some patriotism here, but this was primarily linked to the Russian fatherland and not the Soviet regime.”

“Adolf Hitler the liberator”

But why did so many Russians show such a benevolent attitude towards the occupation force?

“Stalin had failed to generate a strong bond of faith between the Russian peasants and the regime. On the contrary, he was much hated by many peasants who had seen their lives go from bad to worse because of the collective farming the regime had implemented with great brutality,” Enstad explains.

A source from the book puts it like this: “My forefathers were prosperous farmers; the Bolsheviks made them into slaves and beggars”.

From 1929 onwards, the farmers were forced into collective farms – kolkhozes – often under slave-like conditions. Kulaks – affluent farmers – should be eliminated as a social class, according to Stalinist ideology.

This policy also hit hard in Northwest Russia. During the period 1930-1933, there were more than 125,000 farmers in the area who lost their citizenship rights, were deported to Siberia or were simply shot. The policy also led to a disaster for the harvests; there were famines in 1936-1937 and during the winter of 1940.

In 1937-1938 the “Great Terror” arrived, where Stalin, in an unbelievably brutal fashion, acted to get rid of all who might be thought of or imagined as opponents of the regime.

Given such a backdrop, it is possible to understand why so many Russians put their trust in the Germans. One good example is a letter written to “Der Führer” by the inhabitants of three small villages in the autumn of 1941:

“We give our most sincere thanks for liberating us from Stalin’s lackeys and collective farms. On the 10th of July the German Armed Forces – your Wehrmacht – freed us from the yoke of the dammed communists, the political leaders and the Stalinist government. […] We will fight against the communists together with your troops. We give thanks to the German Army for our liberty […] and ask that this message is delivered to our liberator Adolf Hitler.”

Dissolved the collective farms​

When the Red Army and the party apparatus fled from Northwest Russia, the farmers claimed their rights and dissolved the collective farms. Further south, in the fertile black earth region, the Germans maintained the collectives, so as to stay in control of the rich crops. In the North West region, where the earth was less fertile, they accepted the dissolution and introduced a “semi private” agriculture.

According to Enstad, this German agricultural policy was the main reason why the positive attitude to the occupants lasted as long as it did.

During the winter of 1941-1942, there was famine in a number of areas close to the front line and the population of Leningrad suffered greatly. However, behind the front line – and especially in the countryside – it is believed that a large part of the population had better access to food than was the case prior to the German invasion.

“This was due to the private farms being more efficient and the fact that it was difficult for the Germans to control the agricultural production in detail. It was easier for the farmers to hide part of the crops than it had been earlier”, says Enstad.

A Russian journalist, who travelled in the occupied areas, expressed it like this: “Compared to the ‘government for the workers and the farmers’, the Germans were simply dilettantes when it came to the art of plundering the countryside”.

“Many sources interviewed after the war tell us that, in a material sense too, they were better off during the German occupation than during the years after the Germans were chased into retreat,” says Enstad.

Russian orthodox renaissance

Another reason for the relative popularity of the occupiers was their policy on religion. They re-opened the churches the Soviet regime had closed, something which caused something close to a religious renaissance for the Russian orthodox church and a real revival movement in parts of the occupied areas.

“This shows that the Stalinist oppression of the church in no way managed to break the religiousness in the peasant populations. The Russian orthodox faith was still a completely central part of their identity,” Enstad explains.

He says that many priests openly supported the occupants and prayed for a German victory in their sermons.

“At the same time this acted as a double-edged sword for the Germans. Opening the churches led to increasing Russian nationalism and a growing feeling that the Russians should not live under the rule of strangers,” he says.

Rich source material

​Enstad’s sources are in the main first-hand sources collected from German and Russian state archives.

“These were reports by the German military units responsible for the occupied areas and intelligence from Russian partisans operating behind the German lines,” explains the researcher.

German and Russian reports gave a totally opposite picture of the mood of the population, however in Enstad’s opinion there are good reasons to believe that the German sources were closer to the truth.

“The Germans reported in a Prussian, matter of fact style, being open about both progress and setbacks. The partisans, however, reported using an idealised image of what was desired, exaggerated the number of Germans killed and generally expressed what they knew Moscow wanted to hear – that all Soviet citizens were loyal to the state.

Enstad also used diaries, memoirs and interviews, conducted after the war, with people who experienced the German occupation of Northwest Russia. These sources also show that the Germans were given a much warmer welcome than both Soviet propaganda and western historians have claimed.

Changing mood in autumn 1943

With what we now know about the Nazi view of the Russians as Slavic “subhumans” and about the plans to use Eastern Europe as “Lebensraum” – living space – for the German thousand-year Reich, the Russian reactions to the invasion may appear to be naive.

However, Enstad emphasises that they did not know then what we know today. And even if many got to hear about atrocities like the murder of Jews, gypsies and the mentally ill, there were also many who just brushed the stories of German brutality aside as Bolshevik propaganda. Russians were used to being fed information that they could not trust from the Soviet state.

For Russians who were living under an unspoken but constant threat of being deported to Siberia for having done something that could be interpreted as opposition to the regime, the risk of being coerced into slavery by the Germans was in reality not anything new.

But little by little, many realised that Hitler was not much better than Stalin. A particularly deep impression was provided by the inhuman treatment of Russian prisoners of war: tens of thousands starved to death in prison camps in Northwest Russia during the first months of 1942.

“Nevertheless there was no marked change in the Russians’ view of the occupiers until the autumn of 1943, when it became more and more clear that a German retreat was coming. There was then a marked increase in the passive and active opposition to the occupiers”, says Enstad.

He is of the opinion that when people live in an area where two warring fractions are fighting for mastery, it is natural to adapt to the one that is in power at any given time – and avoid confrontation as far as is humanly possible.

“Even so, this ‘calculated pragmatism’ cannot fully explain the positive reception the Germans received from large parts of the population in occupied Northwest Russia. This was first and foremost due to the great discontent with the Stalin regime and the peasants were hoping that the Germans would remove the Bolsheviks from power,” says Enstad.​

The Republic of Azerbaijan has preserved and played a fundamental role in preserving Islamic Culture, indigenous ethnic heritage and local Architecture, it is a cradle of civilization, home of Gülüstan Monument, Noah’s Mausoleum and of Momine Khatun Mausoleum in Nakhchivan.

Moreover the ‘Land of Fire and Pomegranates’ has become a special tourist destination where visitors appreciate unique urban developments, a synergy of western and eastern architecture, natural beauty and outstanding hospitality offered in Azerbaijan’s oldest cities, spiced up by carpet museums and unforgettable tasting of Kurdamir’s locally made wine and the creamy goat cheese of Jalilabad.

The writings of Sabir in Baku and of Jalil Mammadguluzadeh in Nakhchivan, embody the very essence of highly acclaimed patriotic movements and hardships of the Azerbaijani People, describe the country’s historic landmarks as well as its remarkable multiculturalism tradition that goes back many centuries.

The beautiful mountainous landscapes of the Caucasus, impressive cultural heritage sites, and unique Islamic Cultural sites are the highlight on every major city and district of Azerbaijan, some of them are, while impossible to mention all; the Cities of Gazakh and Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic are the focus of today.

The City of Gazakh is a special place where visitors will appreciate listening to traditional Azerbaijani songs. Only a few years ago Gazakh was established as the capital city of Azerbaijani Folklore; it was founded in the VIII Century by Marvan ibn Mahammad a Military Commander.

According to G. Voroshityasel, a researcher of ancient Azerbaijani language: “Gazakh is a very old town. Documents written in the IX – X Centuries make reference to Gazakh that the city had existed 1,270 years ago.” In the late XV Century, Gazakh Sultanate was established and it included Garabag beylerbeyi, under the rule of the Safavid Dinasty. The District of Gazakh is also known for its carpets; they are absolutely beautiful and certainly decorate the royal palaces of Norway and Denmark.

The designs and patters of these carpets are included in the paintings of famous Italian renaissance artists, including: Carlo Crivelli and Domenico di Bartolo, Pinturicchio and in the works of Dutch painter Jan van Eyk. The carpets of Gazakh are exhibited at the most prestigious museums in the Americas, Europe and Asia, among them is the Hermitage, the New York Metropolitan Museum, the Berlin Museum of Art, the Budapest Museum of Decorative Arts and many others.

After Gazakh, I headed to Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, via plane through Baku. Azerbaijan Airlines offers a top notch daily service to Nakhchivan city and the flight has a duration of approximately 90 minutes. At the airport I was welcomed by the Natig Travel Executives, Emil and Natig, two bright, young Nakhchivani entrepreneurs. I spent a few days in Nakhchivan, hosted by Tebriz Hotel in Nakhchivan and its impeccable amenities; during this time I was exposed to an enriching experience of the western most Azerbaijani province. Whether visiting the astonishing Alinja fortress, Noah’s final resting place and mausoleum or the iconic Haca Dag, this autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan (Azerbaijan) did not fail to surprise and astound my colleagues and myself.

Our trip to Nakhchivan would have been incomplete, scarcely equipped with historic information had we not been guided in a professional manner by Emil and Natig, two bright Nakhchivan-history guides of Natig Travel. I have travelled to many unique places and have experienced a number of tour agencies and trust me – these young professionals were seamless, from the beginning to the last moment, taking great care to ensure that our arrival/departures were without any obstacles and made sure that we felt welcomed and at home during our stay in Nakhchivan.

Due to their many years of experience in tourism and working with prestigious organizations throughout the region, Natig Travel is without doubt the best tour guide company to use in Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan. Emil will take the time to explain the unique (and largely unknown) history of Nakhchivan such as its separation from Azerbaijan by the Bolsheviks in the 1920s and the consequences of the Treaty of Turkmenchay (1828), which established the modern day borders of Nakhchivan and Iran …and much more data for history buffs.

If you are in Baku and visiting Azerbaijan don’t miss out on the opportunity to come to Nakhchivan for even a few days. I assure you that you will not regret it! Furthermore with Emil and Natig we visited Shahbuz and Kangarli Regions, both located in the Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan.

In the village of Guney Gishlag, Shahbuz Region, is located a cemetery that carries the village’s name. This ancient cemetery contains headstones, some of the graves are surrounded with little stones and others are covered with large size lime stones. This cemetery has mysteries that wait to be discovered by international historians, it has embraced a valuable heritage that speaks volumes in relation to Nakhchivan’s ancient illustrious past. On most of the head stones there are inscriptions written in Arabic language and numbers. Some of the headstones date back in the XI century, clarifying once again the ancient Turkic origins of these lands. According to the local inscriptions, and archaeological findings, this grave site dates back to the XI Century AD.

On the other hand, the Kangarli Region, in addition to its wealth of seven different types of marble (exported to Europe and Middle Eastern countries), is well known for its Gunorta Stone (Gunortaj); a natural monument located at 1,500 meters above sea level, on the western slopes of Chalkhandagh. The locals call this natural monument as Gunortaj, because it is covered with the Sun’s shadow up until gunorta (afternoon) and exactly in the afternoon its shadow disappears.

Indeed, each cultural and natural domain in these territories of Azerbaijan represents unique pictorial languages, cultural peculiarities and architectural masterpieces. In Nakhchivan – Azerbaijan, tourists will experience a reflection of a wealth of literary works including those of Nizami Ganjavi, Hafiz and Sa’di, who have provided a tremendous symbolic expression of Azerbaijani multiculturalism in their verses and harnessed a continuously refined Islamic culture that is vivid until today from the Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan (Azerbaijan) to Absheron District.

On October 26, 2017, Kazak President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, decreed that the Kazakh language was going to switch from the Cyrillic Script to the Latin Script by 2025. The new alphabet is set to contain 32 letters, nine of which will have apostrophes. The switch represents an ambitious plan by national authorities and will cost the government a considerable amount when factoring in re-education needs.

Indeed, the new initiative that the Kazakh government has opted to undertake represents one of the largest language planning initiatives in recent years. However, the notion of changing script is not unique to Kazakhstan. Instead, Kazakhstan is merely following in the footsteps of other Soviet Republics who have changed their alphabet in recent years.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, five former Soviet Republics have changed their alphabet, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, the Turkmenistan and now Kazakhstan. The recent trend of changing has been influenced by economical concerns, as many believe the Latin alphabet has a positive impact in attracting outside investment to the country. However, for many, changing the alphabet has often had political connotations, with newly independent republics wishing to get rid of the Cyrillic script, often associated with Russian imperialism, and replace it with a national script.

Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution, there were very few developed languages within the Russian Empire. Following the revolution, the Soviet authorities initiated a campaign called ‘indigenisation’. The purpose of the campaign was to encourage ethnic groups to get involved in their local state apparatus. As part of this campaign, the Soviets developed the numerous under developed languages across the Soviet Union. As a result, languages were standardised, and new writing systems were used. Initially, Soviet language planners used the Latin script, as the Cyrillic script was associated with the Tsarist Empire. However, this trend was short lived and by the end of the 1930s, the Cyrillic script was imposed on all languages.

The situation remained the same until the advent of Mikhail Gorbachev’s glasnost and perestroika.

Moldova was the first of the aforementioned Soviet Republics to change their alphabet. The Cyrillic script had been used in Moldova as evidence that the Moldovan and Romanian people spoke two different languages. On 31 August 1989, the Moldovan Supreme Soviet passed a series of language laws, one of which mandated that the Latin script was to be used for the Moldovan language.

The political undertones of the language legislation were clear, as the legitimacy of Soviet rule in the region hinged upon the claim that Moldovans and Romanians were different. The removal of the Cyrillic script proved that they were the same. Seeing what was coming, Russian speakers in the Transnistrian region claimed the laws were discriminatory and attempted to secede from Moldova. This started a struggle for independence, which caused a short but bloody civil war and resulted in Transnistria achieving de-facto independence.

Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, perhaps learning from Moldova, all waited until the Soviet Union had collapsed before making any adjustments to their language. In Azerbaijan, a Uniform Turkic Latin Alphabet was promoted during until the late 1930s. Following this period, driven by a desire to isolate Soviet Azeris from their ethnic kin in neighbouring Iran, the Cyrillic script was imposed on the people. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the new government quickly rushed to adopt the Latin script once again.

The situation was similar in both Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Turkmen was written in the Arabic script, then the Latin script, and eventually the Cyrillic script, with the switch being made around the same time as Azeri and Moldovan. Following independence, the Turkmen president, Saparmurat Niyazov, immediately instigated a return to the Latin script. The first script had some strange letters, which were rectified in 1999. Uzbekistan also adopted the Latin script following independence, however, the Cyrillic script has remained prevalent in many areas.

There are a number of lessons which Kazakhstan can draw from the failures of the other former-Soviet states. Firstly, Kazakhstan must be careful not to isolate their ethnic Russian population. Kazakhstan has the second highest population of ethnic Russians outside of Russia, after Ukraine. The changing of Kazakh from the Cyrillic to the Latin script is surely going to make learning the language more different for ethnic Russians. This is certainly the case in Moldova, were some ethnic Russian’s have still refused to learn the language.

Kazakhstan was also right to hold off on initiating any sort of language reforms in the immediate aftermath of independence. Given the chaos caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union, as the former republics attempted to transition to market economies, which alphabet was employed was likely of little relevance to the people. This would likely explain the failure to fully implement the Latin script in Uzbekistan and the need to revise the script in Turkmenistan.

Kazakhstan’s decision to change to the Latin script now is interesting. All of the aforementioned regions changed to the Latin script to assert their independence. However, Kazakhstan’s switch to the Latin script comes at a time when integration with Moscow appears high on the agenda. Indeed, the claim that it will open Kazakhstan up to outside investment is strange, given that Kazakhstan is integrating into the Eurasian Economic Union. Whatever the reasoning, Kazakhstan is making the right choice by phasing in the new alphabet. Only time will tell whether doing so was the right decision.

*Keith Harrington, NUI Travelling Scholar in Humanities and Social Sciences, PhD Candidate, History Department, Centre for European and Eurasian Studies, Maynooth University.

Energy supply security is on of Turkey’s prime concerns. Our installed capacity has reached 90 GWe, whereas peak demand was at 50 GWe in August 2018. Electricity generation has reached to 300 billion KWhours in 2018. Our local lignite production was about 50+ million metric tons in 2018. Hard coal production was 2 million metric tons. Imported hard coal was 30 million metric tons. Natural gas consumption was expected 53 billion cubic meter (bcm) in 2018.

Economies and businesses are always shaped by expectations, just as market expectations are important in economic forecasts themselves. Within our professional capacity, we have tried to outline a draft forecast for the upcoming days. While it may not necessarily foresee the future in all its detail, it is better to have one, rather than none. Here are our short term new year predictions:

Our local energy markets are in need of restructuring for about 50+b US Dollar current debt. Power plant ownership changes may occur.

The import tax as imposed on imported coal was a deterrent figure for future investments for imported coal firing thermal power plants. Anyhow the latest thermal power plants are exclusively built by Chinese companies due to their ultra low lump sum turnkey prices, covered by cheap PBoC project financing. However these plants have poor design, they have low spares, short life span. If you desperately need electricity generation, then price is not so important. The tax will be collected by our Treasury, and end price is also taxed so our Treasury will get all money from both ends, all other parties are intermediaries in the long run.

On the other hand, 5-6 $Cents per kwh electricity purchase guarantee by public enterprises for local coal firing energy generation is a good booster for newcomer investors. However it is not so pleasing to place power plant construction orders to Chinese contractors just because of their ultra cheap turnkey prices for new local coal firing thermal power plant investments.

These plants do not meet national standard, norms, rules, regulations, laws. They have poor design which are not applicable for local coal, they have limited or almost no spares and high breakdown, low availability and low life span during operation.

New tenders for local coal firing thermal power plants are in Cayirhan-2, Eskişehir Alpu, Konya Karaman, Trakya Saray. Soma Deniş, Soma- Eynez and Çan thermal power plant investment projects are ongoing. Local people are not so comfortable with new local coal investments. There will be growing public reactions expected to stop these investments.

There are still imported coal firing investment projects in Çanakkale, Aliağa, Amasra, Iskenderun bay although imported coal with current floating prices between 90-100 USD per ton of 6000 kcal/kg LHV are too expensive and hence they are not encouraged any more.

COP24 Poland 2018 meetings also advised the international investors not to invest on coal firing thermal power plants.

We also noted that recent CFB based thermal power plants are not suitable to fire high moisture content local local. High moisture content local coal can not be fired in CFB boilers since it is frozen in winter and it is in sludge (mud) form in summer time. Indirect firing pulverized coal based thermal power plant design is best for local coal with more that 30 years of proven operation.

On the other hand, two 1000 MWe each wind and solar tenders were completed. We expect to have more of these investments in future.
Solar power investments are reduced to 700-800 US$ per kw, whereas fossil fired thermal power plants are at 1500-2000 US$ per kw. Solar power needs no fuel, whereas thermal power plants needs fossil fuel which makes environment polluted. Solar power plant are available only on daytime which makes 2000 hours at least per year, whereas thermal power plants can work 6000- 7000 hours per year.

Solar power can generate electricity at 3-4 US cents per kw-hour, whereas thermal power plants sell electricity at 5-6 Us cents per kw-hour. Based on these new market figures, renewable energies are getting more competitive and feasible in the long run.

East Med offshore explorations will be more on diplomatic agenda in near future. Offshore fields around Cyprus will be the focus for fair share of natural resources.

On negotiation table behind closed doors in Moscow and Ankara (and Sochi), there were negotiations for new prices on natural gas sales, more concessions on 63 bcm capacity Turkish Stream underwater pipeline construction project and better terms for 4800 MWe nuclear contract etc.

Nuclear power is too expensive in terms of unit kw-hour compared to prevailing average electricity prices in the local market and waste disposal problem is not solved yet. There is limited activity in Akkuyu NPP, whereas Sinop NPP is on hold, and its feasibility is in evaluation. We should note that in the long term Mersin Akkuyu nuclear project may also serve as a new Russian military seaport on Mediterranean coast to reinforce Russian presence on hot seas.

Arab and especially rich Gulf countries are completely ignorant of the events which took place at our environment since they have worse incidents they face every day. We have fair deals with Iran due to our favorable gas purchase agreements. However due to their increased internal gas demand, they stopped sending gas to our system as of December. We have gas supply and energy generation drop in our energy markets. US Embargo on Iran will have its impact.

National Security is to be reinforced since SouthEast insurgency may get worse. As seen everywhere in the world, such as in Ireland, Scotland, Bask in Spain, if minorities are not fairly represented in the national parliament, then they may look for their alternative solutions.

Bankruptcy postponement epidemic in the local markets spreads to low capital- small companies. that will be a high impact on our economy despite of unrealistic pictures as pronounced by public officials. People has lost confidence to public declarations. Foreign exchange rates may dive once again low in time.

The European Union has frozen accession meetings completely for participation since all remedy requests are returned with futile responses. Luxemburg, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Denmark have already voiced necessary applicable counter measures. Death penalty, unavoidable bribery and public corruption, sexual abuse under 15 are unacceptable and non-negotiable for Europeans.

There is a wide range consensus for low profile public appearance. People deactivate their accounts in social media. They are not interested in any public expression. Newspaper columns are repetition of earlier articles. People are indifferent to every event since so many nasty things have happened in the near past with no reasoning no meaning we can name.
Immigration applications Western universities among academics and young professionals are on high rise. Similarly capital move from local to international markets are getting increased.

We believe that these are a few warning indicators, of which you will seldom read such candid forecast from a local source for our home environment anywhere else. We would be pleased to receive your comments and feedback over the course of the upcoming year.

Space is emerging out to be an important arena for future military operations. India’s pursuit of space militarization and subsequent weaponization will trigger an expensive and unnecessary arms race in South Asia, exacerbating the fragility of the strategic stability. The growing dependence of militaries on outer space assets for communication and operational tasks make them more valuable. Sooner-than-later, space will become a decisive factor and force multiplier in military operations against adversaries. The militarization of outer space occurred decades ago when military satellites began to be deployed for surveillance, communication and navigation. U.S’ operations in Kosovo in 1990s and Iraq 2003 war increased the significance of space power. But today the unsteadiness throughout the world depicts many states urging for acquiring space capabilities for strategic purposes.

There is a subtle difference between space militarization and space weaponization. The militarization of space essentially occurs by using various space assets for information gathering or helping the military to undertake land, air, and sea battles. On the other hand, the weaponization of space signifies getting into the act of destruction of space assets or ground assets of adversary states from the outer space.

Recently, the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) launched the GSAT-7A military satellite into orbit on a Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV). GSAT-7A is ISRO’s 35th communications satellite built exclusively for the Indian Air Force (IAF) and the Indian Army. The satellite will expand the communication capabilities of the IAF in different ways. Primarily, it will allow cross-connectivity between different ground radar stations, airbases and Airborne early warning and control (AWACS) aircraft. Moreover, it is assured that it will not only interlink all airbases, but also boost drone operations in the Indian maritime operations and switch to satellite-controlled Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), that offer better range and endurance.

India is developing its dedicated military satellites for Command, Control, Communications, Computer, Intelligence, Information, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4I2SR) capabilities. Currently, India has thirteen military dedicated satellites. The launch of India’s TES in 2001, CARTOSAT-1A in 2008, CARTOSAT-2B in 2010, RISAT-2 in 2009, RISAT-1 in 2012 and GSAT-7 in 2013 are significant steps toward military dedicated space system. These satellites would enhance India’s C4I2SR capabilities. After establishing these indigenous and independent system, India would pursue its Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) program and Antisatellite (ASAT) capabilities more vigorously.

This rapid technological advancement of India backed by the West is threatening for Pakistan and China. Non-proliferation measures have already been affected badly due to Indo-U.S. nuclear deals and space militarization leading to space weaponization will end up in strategic instability in South Asia. Initially, the Indian space program achieved goals in the civil space program for economic purposes, but it is drifting gradually toward militarization. Moreover, Indian became member of export cartels; Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and Wassenar Arrangement (WA). This will help India in getting an easy access to sensitive space and satellite technologies from the West. Since 2008, India is already enjoying a special status because of Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver granted by the U.S. The exceptional treatment towards Indian membership by the U.S. is challenging credibility of nuclear non-proliferation regime.

Many view India’s space program a milestone, flourishing by leaps and bounds. However, along with militarizaition of space, another significant aspect of Indian space program which is mostly overlooked is India’s assistance to Pyongyang. India has had longstanding diplomatic ties with North Korea, and even under pressure from the U.S, it refused to reduce its diplomatic engagement. There have even been reports that the Center for Space Science and Technology in Asia and the Pacific (CSSTEAP) located in India had been providing technical education to North Korean scientists.

Before the United Nations (UN) discovered, the institute provided at least thirty North Korean scientists with training courses that could greatly assist the development of Pyongyang’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

UN officials were especially alarmed by courses offering satellite communications training and instructions for launch vehicle testing to North Koreans in India. In 2016 the annual UN report to Security Council clearly indicated that New Delhi has violated UN Security Council’s unanimously adopted resolution 1718 (2006), which prohibited the provision of large-scale arms, nuclear technology and related training to the North Korea. Furthermore, in an interview to Al Jazeera, Hong Yong-il, who was trained at CSSTEAP, now Korean embassy’s new first secretary to India, praised center for informative courses.

Moreover, ISRO and Russia’s Federal Space Agency, ROSCOSMOS State Corporation for Space Activities have also agreed to work together for first Indian manned space mission, Gaganyaan. In this regard, both space agencies have signed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for joint activities in the field of Human Spaceflight Program at end of delegation level talks between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladmir Putin in New Delhi. Extension of space cooperation between the two nations is going to benefit ISRO in further consolidation and augmentation of space program in space exploration. Moreover, if indigenous space program is achieved, the technology will give India an edge in the development of missile defense and anti-satellite weapons technologies.

Over the decades, India’s officials and leaders opposed the militarization of the outer space and participated in the negotiation of the Outer Space Treaty (OST). However, India has a history of diverting provided civil nuclear technology for military purposes. Once again they are using their claimed civilian space program for military purposes which will be consequential for nuclear deterrence in South Asia. The strategic balance will be shifted to the advantage of India. It will be provided with accurate information regarding missile silos, military buildup and movement of troops. Moreover, security dilemma generated by India will trigger defensive and offensive reactions from adversary states.

Therefore, it is in favor of all states that outer space shall be for “Star Peace” rather “Star Wars”. Efforts should be made to deal with this prevailing threat by taking effective measures with regards to Prevention of Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) Treaty at Conference on Disarmament (CD). Since 1990s, the primary obstacle to the launch of discussion on the issue has been rejection by the U.S. of the need of having any new space arms control plan. However, Russia and China have been staunch advocators of PAROS Treaty and consider militarization of space as a Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA). Regionally, efforts should be made to have Transparency Confidence Building Measures (TCBMs) to ensure strategic stability and crisis stability. In view of changing scenarios at regional and international level it is advisable that Pakistan develop its indigenous capabilities and reduce its reliance on foreign entities and satellites. A well-established space program is necessity not a luxury for Pakistan.

*Misbah Arif, is a Islamabad based researcher and visiting faculty at Fatima Jinnah Women University, Rawalpindi.

Lundin Petroleum has announced that its wholly owned subsidiary Lundin Norway AS (Lundin Norway) has completed exploration well 2/6-6S, targeting the Oppdal and Driva prospects in PL860 in the North Sea. Both targets were dry.

The main objective of the well was to test the reservoir properties and hydrocarbon potential of the Paleocene sandstones in the Oppdal prospect and of the deeper Rotliegendes sandstones in the Driva prospect, located in the Mandal High area of the southern Norwegian North Sea close to the Danish maritime border. The well encountered the expected Paleocene and Rotliegendes intervals but with no hydrocarbons present. The second Mandal High area dual target well, Vinstra/Otta on the adjacent PL539 licence, will be drilled in 2019.

The well was drilled with the Rowan Viking jack-up drilling rig and was operated by MOL Norge with a 40 percent working interest. The partners are Lundin Norway with a 40 percent working interest and Petoro with a 20 percent working interest.

Anhar Rabiyah of the tribal Pannei, an indigenous group in Pangkep, South Sulawesi, Indonesia, Sikrip Piyaporn, an ethnic minority who lives in Pu Luong, Thailand and Tuyoc Ballanga of the Maeng Itneg tribe in Tubo, Abra, Philippines don’t know each other from Adam.

But their first port of call when members of their family get ill, is the medicine man or woman or local wildcrafter. Such traditional healers work with locally available medicinal plants which make their services affordable.

Unschooled, but learned, they have been around a lot longer than conventional doctors and familiar with local sensitivities and cultural beliefs and practices, making them more trustworthy in times of illnesses.

As creeping modernization gets into the hinterland villages of rural Asia, bringing in Western-trained doctors, the days of the traditional healers are numbered. And so are the important healing plants they use.

Many of the medicinal plants the traditional healers use are vanishing due to habitat destruction, over-exploitation and forgotten as the knowledge is not passed to the younger generations.

Habitat Destruction Killing Natural Drugstores

Nature is the laboratory of biodiversity and plants are its drugstore. For centuries, indigenous peoples know this as nature is their first teacher. They know what plants function to sustain life, aware that there are limited and unlimited sources of essential flora, diverse in form and habitat.

Asia, covering about 30 per cent of the earth’s land area, has some of the world’s most biologically wealth that are sources of medicine, especially in countries rich with traditional knowledge like China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.

But in the said countries, deforestation is widespread, causing so much destruction to habitats that cradle priceless medicinal plants. Indonesia’s annual deforestation rate 1.61%. Between 1990 and 2005, Indonesia lost 24.1% of its forest cover, or around 28,072,000 hectares.

In China, between 1990 and 2010, it lost an average of 2,486,000 ha or 1.58% per year. But it gained, between 1990 and 2010, 31.6% of its forest cover, or around 49,720,000 ha. For Malaysia, between 1990 and 2000, it lost an average of 78,500 hectares of forest per year. This amounts to an average annual deforestation rate of 0.35%.

Many medicinal plants are found in the forests of the said nations. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and Rural Advancement Fund International say majority of the 7,000 plants in the Western pharmacopeia are found in the said countries and used by about 80 per cent of the people to accommodate their primary health needs.

Over the last 50 years,, forest degradation in Asia has diminished the availability of some widely used medicinal plant species. Many of these medicinal plants have no botanical substitute, and pharmaceuticals do not yet exist for some of the diseases for which they are used.

Degradation of Asia’s forests may signify not only the loss of potential pharmaceutical drugs for the developed world but also the erosion of the sole health care option for many of rural and urban poor.

Philippine Medicinal Plants Going…Going…Gone

Not all is well with the state of medicinal plants in the Philippines. The state-owned Mariano Marcos State University (MMSU), sorry for being a harbinger, deplores in a research that some 100 plants popularly used as medicine and food are endangered with some nearing extinction.

In a study, Dr. Miriam E. Pascua, dean of the MMSU College of Agriculture, said the traditional plant species with unique characteristics, are fast disappearing, as newly developed crop varieties have spread across many places, replacing them.

Dr. Pascua warned the native plants will likely become extinct unless something is done to reverse the situation.

She fears of genetic erosion due to signs of loss of genetic biodiversity caused by intensification of modern agricultural systems, over- exploitation and excessive gathering of wild plants that are useful for food, medicine and ornamental.

The entry of pesticides has also caused biological magnification of insect pests and inadvertent introduction of diseases. The establishment of commercial plantation of industrial crops is also hastening the demise of many traditional useful plants, she said.

Also, increasing population pressure and the resulting urbanization of the environment have greatly turned biodiversity habitats into settlements.

The Ilocos Norte-based state university professor also bared key informants like elderly folks, hardly seen nowadays, asserted that some of the vanishing species have superior healing characteristics.

Considered vanishing among wild crops with medicinal properties and at the same time vegetables are : Balinsoek, red cowpea, cayenne pepper, kundol, kapas-kapas, sugod-sugod, himbabao and wild sponge gourd.

Cayenne pepper, a wild Capsicum species, is a favorite spice, especially when soaked in vinegar (inartem). A strong infusion of the fruits can be applied as a lotion for ringworm control, while a warm liquid extract of both the leaves and fruits can be applied as an ointment to relieve rheumatic pain.

Kundol, kapas-kapas, sugod-sugod, himbabao and wild sponge gourd are eaten as vegetable. But they have other uses. For instance, sugod-sugod is used as laundry soap when dried and crushed, its vine produces a lathery effect when soaked in water.

Pascua said medicinal fruit and forest trees considered vanishing are dalayap (Citrus aurantifolia), caburao (Citrus macroptera), darukis (Citrus sp.), custard apple or anonang (Anona reticulata), mansanitas (Zyzyphus mauritiana), antipolo (Artocarpus blanco), balayang (Musa errans), pomegranate (Punica granatum), bignay (antidesma bunius), carissa (Carissa carandas), zapote Negro (Diospyrus ebenaster), and pannalayapen or aping.

Dalayap and caburao are commonly used for treating cough and headache. Their leaves are crushed Or softened and then applied as poultice over the forehead to treat headache.

On the other hand, fresh leaves of anonang are applied on the stomach of children suffering from indigestion. A decoction of its green fruits, leaves and barks is used for treating kidney trouble, dysentery and diarrhea.

Granada or pomegranate fruits are used to treat diarrhea, advanced stages of dysentery, and other cases requiring the use of astringents. The juice of the fresh fruit is likewise used as a cooling, thirst-quenching beverage for one who has fever.

Vanishing Medicinal Plants Challenge Biodiversity Experts

The vital role that medicinal plants play in the the daily health care to millions of people globally cannot be taken for granted. So is their conservation.

And no other way can this be done but by protecting natural habitats where they thrive as perceived by traditional users, such as sacred forests of local, native and indigenous peoples.

Sacred forests are used for worship, and for ceremonies such as weddings and childbirth and other customary community rituals that mark cultural events like planting, harvesting, thanking dieties and celebrating seasons.

Science and conservationists often intentionally ignore or fail to recognize this. These are off limits to ordinary people and outsiders. People must obey the rules governing these.

There is also a must to promote and popularize planting of medicinal plants around homes. Domestication plays an important role in conserving medicinal plants.

The Cordillera Ecological Center in the Philippines recommends collecting deadwood for firewood as an alternative to cutting down live trees contributes to conserving medicinal plant diversity. Many trees have medicinal properties.

Burial sites are also prime conservation spots for medicinal plants. This is because, considered sacred, peopke don’t venture near them, allowing wild plants to grow robustly and profusely.

If at all, however, not too many governments have national policies funded and meant to save medicinal plants. Wild collection and biopiracy goes on, especially in poor developing nations rich with biodiversity but fast losing it.

The rape of Asia’s forests is nothing new, and the plunder and theft of its rich biodiversity is on the rise. Its forest resources, minerals, agricultural, medicinal plants and indigenous knowledge are being looted by monopoly companies that make millions of dollars patenting and selling plant germplasm, even to those who used to own it.

The fate of medicinal plant looks grim.

*About the Author: Dr. Michael A. Bengwayan wrote for the British Panos News and Features and GEMINI News Service, the Brunei Times, and US Environment News Service. In the Philippines, he wrote for DEPTHNews of the Press Foundation of Asia, Today, the Philippine Post, and Vera Files. A practicing environmentalist, he holds postgraduate degrees in environment resource management and development studies as a European Union (EU) Fellow at University College, Dublin, Ireland. He is currently a Fellow of Echoing Green Foundation of New York City. He now writes for Business Mirror and Eurasia Review.

It is said that without the invention of steam engine, there might be no industrial revolution across Europe. Since then the phenomenon of energy market advanced with a clear description of availability, sustainability and security. With this thirsty passion the imperial powers of Europe moved beyond their territorial sphere to sustain and support their industrial impulse. According to famous historian Eric Hobsbawm in his book ‘The Age of Empire’ opines that the industrial prosperity across the west occurred at the expanse of mass exploitation in the East.

When the oil was first discovered in Baku, Azerbaijan in 1848, the whole context of energy market changed and finally, it was in 1915 in the middle of WWI, the British navy converted the steam engine ship into oil engine. Perhaps, to many historians, it was the turning point in the war for British whose navy got the ascendance over the German that resulted in Allied victory in the War.

Throughout the 20th century, there had been great turbulence in the energy market because of the monopolies, beginning with Arab oil embargo on the west in the 1970s that shocked the western powers. The intensive western dependency on western oil led to oil wars beginning in the 1990s. And, today, the dynamics of international relations cannot be described without involving geopolitics that refers to the importance of strategic geography, resources and energy-economics. The west has always blamed the monopolies in the energy market by oil rich states such as Russia and Saudi Arabia that foments instability in the energy market.

On the contrary, the falling prices since 1980s, has also created major hurdles for the Petro-dollar economies acting as an instrument of foreign policy. As far as, Russia is concerned, it has always used its oil and gas resources as weapon to execute its foreign policy interest abroad. For instance, the construction of Turk-stream pipeline, that will transport the Russian oil to Turkey and then to the southern Europe. Likewise, the construction of North-stream II pipeline with Germany will also give Russia an upper hand to achieve its foreign policy interests in Central Europe.

But the global energy market is suffering for the acute aftershocks of economic meltdown of 2008, which had badly struck the energy market and within few years after the downturn the price of oil had fallen from $150 per barrel to $32. Since then the energy market doesn’t seem to recover and badly haunted the oil producing countries. Though, as per production cost, Saudi Arabia was benefiting from the falling crisis but the growing instability in the energy sector has threatened the survivability of Royal family. With the ascension of crown prince, Muhammad bin Salman, the kingdom announced Vision 2030, that aimed the diversification of the Saudi Arabia’s economy by reducing its dependency on Oil.

In the same pattern, Russia as another major oil producer signed a new deal with OPEC to cut down the production output in order to stabilize the price in the energy market. But the deal was not implemented because all oil producers were in severe oblivion and pursued their own design for the energy market. For instance, these crises had also economically destabilized the energy rich Venezuela, where the survivability of the regime is dependent on public subsidies from oil revenues. The instant slipping oil prices in the energy market has suddenly flanged Venezuela into stagflation with double-digit inflation for the first time in history. What will come then? Because the dynamics of growing turbulence in the energy market is parallel with the instability at the political landscape of oil producers.

In Russia, where the standard of living and economic growth was rising suddenly went under severe decline that has fomented political fragmentation inside the country. But the case of Russia remained less turbulent at the political landscape in comparison with France, where president Macron decision to increase taxes on fuel has enraged taxi drivers of the impoverished suburbs.

In November, while commemorating the 100 years anniversary of the treaty of Versailles, president Macron called upon the world leaders to unite to resolve the global problems. Today, he is struggling internally to unify his own people to support his reform agenda. His tax increase on diesel by €30 and gasoline by €17 per gallon, in a year, where the prices in the energy market have recovered by 16% has resented mostly the people of small towns and rural areas, where unemployment is rampant. Then came the yellow vest protests to denounce the discriminatory policies of Macron, whom they yellow vest called “the supporter of rich” because of his cut in wealth tax a year earlier.

In contrast, it seems vivid that when the downturn comes in the energy market, the economy of the world shakes with severe chaos at the political landscape engulfing broadening socio-economic divisions—the energy market oblivion is simply the political outrage for the ordinary masses.

*Shahzada Rahim is a postgraduate student with keen interest of writing on history, geopolitics, Current affairs, and International political economy.

The shoot-down of the MH17 Malaysian airliner over the conflict-zone in Ukraine’s civil war, on 17 July 2014, was finally judged, by a panel of five governments, on 24 May 2018. One of these five governments was a major suspect in the case, Ukraine itself. Ukraine had been granted, on 8 August 2014, absolute veto-power over the group’s ultimate verdict. The verdict that was announced on May 24th, was that Russia’s Government, which is hated by Ukraine’s Government, did this shoot-down and mass-murder of the 298 people on that plane. Any verdict that Ukraine had downed the plane was vetoed at the outset by Ukraine, and so Russia was declared guilty on May 24th of last year.

The 8 August 2014 agreement was that there can be no verdict in the case unless, and until, there is a verdict that has “the consent of all the parties” to the investigatory team. The official announcement said that no finding on the MH17 event would be published unless and until there has been “receipt of the consent of all parties who take part in the investigation.”

At that time, the team included four countries: Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, and Ukraine. All four signed it. A fifth member was later added, Malaysia, which likewise (though reluctantly) signed that 8 August 2014 agreement. If any one of those four (now five) Governments dissented from a proposed verdict, then that proposed verdict simply would be impossible to become publicly issued by the judging panel, as the verdict. (NOTE: I had been the only reporter in the English language to translate and report about that 8 August 2014 agreement — an agreement which still has never been made public except for two brief news-reports in Ukraine’s press.)

This panel calls itself the “Joint Investigation Team,” and it issued its verdict against Russia, in its 24 May 2018 presentation, finding that “the 53rd Anti Aircraft Missile brigade … of the Russian army from Kursk in the Russian Federation”, had shot down the airliner, and thus that Russia is guilty of having murdered the 298 people. Immediately, the Washington Post reported that, “Criminal charges against the Russian military or Russia’s government probably would exacerbate tensions between the Kremlin and the West even further, implicating Russian officials in the deaths of European tourists on their way to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.” Then, on the very next day, May 25th, Britain’s Telegraph bannered “Netherlands and Australia call for compensation for MH17 victims as they accuse Russia of downing plane”, and reported that “Australia and the Netherlands have said they hold Russia legally responsible for the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight 17 over Ukraine in 2014 and will seek reparations for relatives of the 298 people killed.”

Never before in history has a suspect in a murder-case — much less in a mass-murder case, such as this was — been granted veto-power over the verdict in the case. This situation is therefore unprecedented, historic.

On December 31st, the final day of 2018, I described in detail the actual case against Ukraine, and emailed it to all newsmedia in The West. The JIT team wasn’t allowed to consider any case against Ukraine, but there it was, for any news-medium to provide to its audience that wishes to do so. (No major news-medium accepted and published it.) Here will be only a summary presentation of that case. A significant portion of the reader-comments, to that article, said that it was too long to read; so, here is a summary:

The first part of the case is that the evidence which the JIT team had presented on May 24th included details that actually convict Ukraine, but that the JIT’s presentation simply ignored, didn’t even consider. In other words, the first part uses the very same objects of evidence that JIT said convict Russia. Therefore, Russia’s case here is built upon identically the same evidence that JIT had used in order to convict Russia.

The JIT’s May 24th presentation said that they had found parts of the missile which had destroyed the passenger plane. These parts were shown in their presentation. The JIT simply claimed that these parts came from the missile that had shot down the plane, but provided no evidence that it did, nor even that that missile had actually been found anywhere near the crash-site or had had anything to do with downing the MH17. They merely said that it did. Furthermore, they failed to present any provenance of the missile, any documentation of that missile’s ownership and control and use throughout the period since it was manufactured in 1986. No conclusion regarding either Russia or Ukraine can legally be reached about those missile-parts without knowing the missile’s provenance — whether it was owned and operated by Russia on 17 July 2014, or instead by Ukraine, or instead by the Ukrainian separatists, or by anyone else.

The transcript of the JIT’s May 24th presentation asserted that the key serial number on the two missile fragments is 1318869032, because “the number 9032 [in that number] is the unique identification number of this specific missile engine.” However, they failed to provide any evidence of the missile’s provenance.

On 17 September 2018, Russia’s Government documented the provenance of that missile, not only by means of the 9032, but by other serial numbers that were shown on the fragments in the JIT team’s May 24th presentation. Russia’s presentation discussed, in detail, 1318869032, 8868720, 886847379 and 9M38. All of those numbers that were visible on the fragments were shown to have been from one-and-the-same Buk missile. It had been manufactured in Russia in December 1986, and promptly sent to Ukraine in 1986, and was never thereafter inside Russia, nor in the possession of the Russian Government. It stayed in Ukraine. For example, the record on 886847379 shows that on 29 December 1986, this missile, which had been assembled only five days earlier, was sent to what today is the 223rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade in Ternopol Ukraine, where it became part of the Ukrainian Armed Forces upon Ukraine’s independence in 1991.

The September 17th video by Russia, in English, describes the missile’s exact provenance, and shows all of the documents on its provenance; and here is a summary of that video, in which the cited timings are marked in parentheses, for ease of the reader’s verification:

The video says (6:00) that the key number on the parts that were shown is actually 8868720, because “the last four digits, 8720, are a unique factory serial number, of this specific missile.” The missile was given (9:49) “military stock number 886847379” and (10:20) “was sent via the railway to military unit 20152 on December 29, 1986.” That military unit’s (10:50) “current name is the 223rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade” in the Ternopol region of Ukraine. (11:35) “Currently, this brigade is equipped with Buk missile systems and is now stationed in the town of Stryi in the Lvov region of Ukraine. What is of particular interest is that since 2014, this unit of the 223rd … has been engaged on an ongoing basis in the so-called anti-terrorist operation in [Ukraine’s war against] the territory of the Donetsk and Lugansk Republics [the breakaway formerly Ukrainian region].”

Consequently, if this Buk did shoot down the MH17, as the JIT claims it did, then Ukraine shot down the MH17.

The U.S.-allied team never yet has responded to Russia’s documentation of the provenance of that Buk missile. Perhaps the JIT already recognized, at the time of their May 24th presentation, that Russia might possess documentation on that missile’s provenance, and they just didn’t want it. At that time, on May 24th, they said in their detailed news-conference, that they wouldn’t want to “turn to the Russian authorities to obtain information about this subject”. That refusal, in advance, to accept such information from Russia, about this missile’s provenance, provided them an excuse to ignore any documentation that Russia might possess, and could present in response to the JIT’s verdict. Perhaps publication of the present article (this summary of my lengthier presentation) will help to generate a response from the JIT. That is why this article, like its lengthier predecessor, is being submitted to all newsmedia in The West.

On 20 September 2018, just three days after Russia had made its presentation, the Dutch Government headlined that “JIT countries confirm their support for Dutch prosecution of MH17 suspects”, and opened: “On Wednesday in New York the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Malaysia and Ukraine confirmed their political support and cooperation with regard to the prosecution of MH17 suspects in the Netherlands.” The Dutch Government now will prosecute Russia for the MH17 downing.

Exactly a year before that, on 20 September 2017, the now 5 countries in the JIT had signed a joint “Memorandum of Understanding”, saying “Arrangements for signatories and other grieving nations to make financial contributions to the national proceedings in the Netherlands will be laid down in a financial memorandum of understanding” and that “This Memorandum will remain in effect for five years and will be automatically extended for successive five-year periods.” So, they intend to continue forever their ‘investigation’ into MH17, until they can present to the world evidence that Russia did it, and they are seeking from the global public, donations to help pay for this ‘investigation’. Apparently, they know that their present ‘case’ stinks. They don’t have any evidence (other than the doctored ‘evidence’ they had already stopped even citing) that Russia had been involved, at all, in this mass-murder.

When that U.S.-allied team had made its May 24th presentation, the serial numbers on the missile-fragments which were shown in the photos they presented, were not documented, at all, as to the missile’s provenance records — its ownership and location throughout its existence. Those numbers were visible on the missile-parts, but were simply ignored as tools by which to identify the missile’s provenance.

The JIT team isn’t asking Russia for the team to examine those logbooks that Russia had shown in its presentation on September 17th, but instead ignores the Russian presentation, perhaps hoping that the public won’t ever get to see this documentation, or even to know about it. But here it is, for anyone who wants to see it.

And here, again, is the lengthier presentation I provided on December 31st, that Ukraine perpetrated the MH17 shoot-down, for anyone who wants to see that.

This is the verdict that Ukraine’s Government vetoes, at the JIT. It certainly is not the JIT’s verdict. It can’t be.

As regards the 8 August 2014 agreement that all members of the JIT signed, the details of it remain secret to the present day. On 20 November 2014, Russian Television bannered “Dutch government refuses to reveal ‘secret deal’ into MH17 crash probe” and reported: “The Dutch government has refused to reveal details of a secret pact between members of the Joint Investigation Team examining the downed Flight MH17. If the participants, including Ukraine, don’t want information to be released, it will be kept secret. The respected Dutch publication [actually leading science publisher] Elsevier made a request to the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice under the Freedom of Information Act to disclose the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) agreement,” but that request was refused.

The MH17 case was fixed at its start, and the details of how it was, are to remain hidden forever. But the Dutch Government is seeking donations to help it to continue forever its prosecution against Russia, as the perpetrator of the MH17 shoot-down.

—————

*Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010.

The United States-China trade war is creating a new dimension for power rivalry in Southeast Asia. China’s Belt and Road Initiative and America’s Indo-Pacific strategy may receive fresh impetus as companies in both countries seek out new frontiers. Although an uneasy truce between President Trump and Xi was reached in Buenos Aires, it will soon be tested. As such, U.S. and Chinese firms will continue to relocate to Southeast Asia or expand their existing footprint in the region. The region is well poised to absorb re-directed trade and investment flows from the world’s two largest economies. For Southeast Asia, the trade war can also kick-start much needed reforms or accelerate the pace of present efforts to boost competitiveness. However, due to uneven levels of development and diversity, some countries are better positioned to benefit from the trade war than others. 

Southeast Asia is dynamic and robust. It has a youthful population with a large labor-age force, large consumer demand, increasing infrastructure investments, and relative political stability. Based on World Bank 2017 figures, 68% of the region’s population is between 15 and 64. AC Nielsen estimates the region’s middle class will reach 400 million by 2020, doubling 2012 figures. Regional economies are increasingly more competitive. The World Economic Forum 2017-18 Global Competitiveness Index showed modest gains (one-two notches in the rankings) made by Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand compared to their previous year’s performance, while Brunei, Indonesia and Vietnam made impressive strides (five and above places’ ascent in the rankings). The region is also among the most active in global value chains (GVCs). The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s 2017 World Investment Report listed Singapore’s GVC participation rate at 76%, Malaysia’s at 64%, Philippines’ at 58%, Thailand’s at 52%, and Vietnam’s at 51%. Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines are also among the top exporting countries from the developing world. 

All these contribute in making the region attractive to foreign capital, not least from trade war protagonists, such as the U.S. and China. China and the U.S. are ASEAN’s largest and fourth largest trade partners respectively. However, while China dominates the trade scene, the U.S. remains the region’s top investor. More than 3,000 US companies do business in the region and the 2017 ASEAN Business Outlook Survey showed that 87% of these American firms anticipate greater trade and investment in ASEAN in the next five years. In addition, ASEAN is actually investing more in the U.S. than in China. This said, China has been making tremendous inroads in the investment space as well, becoming the top investor for Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, and Malaysia, and the second largest investor for Singapore and Vietnam.

Southeast Asia is fast becoming a magnet for China’s overseas direct investment (ODI). In a survey of 59 economies done by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2017, Singapore had eclipsed the U.S. to become the top destination for Chinese outbound capital. Other regional countries have also climbed up several notches in terms of Chinese investment. This includes fourth ranked Malaysia (up from 20th in 2015), Thailand (ranked 18th in 2017 from 38th in 2015), Indonesia (ranked 26th from 44th in 2015), Philippines (ranked 28th from 39th in 2015) and Vietnam (ranked 30th from 40th in 2015). Breaking down China’s global sectoral investments by country will further reveal the region’s significance for its big northern neighbor. Vietnam was the fifth largest target market for Chinese investments in the automobile sector, while Singapore is the third largest market for financial services. In terms of consumer goods, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Philippines, and Indonesia were ranked second, fourth, fifth, sixth, and ninth top markets respectively. In the energy field, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand were ranked fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth largest markets respectively. In addition, Philippines and Malaysia accounted for the ninth and tenth largest telecoms markets for Chinese enterprises.

China’s proximity, financial largesse, surplus capacity, formal mechanisms such as the ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement, and initiatives like the Belt and Road support its economic diplomacy in the region. Choosing Jakarta as the venue to announce the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank back in 2013 also demonstrate the importance China attaches to the region. The completion of the Singapore-Kunming railway project, which jives with the ASEAN Master Plan for Connectivity, will further integrate mainland Southeast Asia with China. Likewise, investments into industrial park and port infrastructure (e.g. Kuantan and Melaka in Malaysia, Kyaukpyu in Myanmar, Sihanoukville in Cambodia, interest in Indonesian port projects like New Priok and Kendal and in Thailand’s Kra Canal project) will position China as a facilitator of regional connectivity.

In contrast, less institutional arrangements (e.g. the ASEAN-US Trade and Investment Framework Agreement and Expanded Economic Engagement), perceptions of retrenchment, and the less-pronounced economic dimension of the Indo-Pacific strategy present challenges for continued U.S. engagement with the region. While efforts to leverage private finance and collaboration with partners like Japan and Australia to meet the region’s burgeoning demand for infrastructure funding are welcomed, delays in mobilizing private capital and its higher risk aversion heighten the advantage of state capital. That said, commitment to established standards and greater opportunities for local content apparently constitute the pros of private financing. Although relatively small, the U.S. announcement of a $113 million down payment for infrastructure, technology, and energy investments in the region was welcomed, as it has the potential to catalyze private capital flows.

The structure of its external trade provides some cushion and opportunities for Southeast Asia. Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof constitute the top class of goods traded by the region with both the U.S. and China, accounting for close to 30% of its trade with China and a quarter of its trade with the U.S. Deep integration in the value chain and increasingly higher value added ensure greater resilience amidst the raging trade war compared to churning out easily substitutable low-end goods, such as agricultural exports. The presence of downstream ecosystem in the region may also entice more manufacturers to head south.

Furthermore, despite America’s increasing preference for bilateralism under the Trump administration, Southeast Asia’s active interest in multilateral free trade agreements will still offer benefits for the region. Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam are signatories (March 2018) to the rebranded Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), with Singapore ratifying last July. Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand also expressed their interest to join the trade pact. The ten-country bloc are also actively taking part in negotiations for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). The first summit was held in Manila last year and the agreement is expected to be signed this November in Singapore. The U.S. is curiously absent in both the CPTPP and RCEP, although President Trump did raise the possibility of the U.S. rejoining the CPTPP if terms can be renegotiated to benefit American interests.

As the trade war intensifies, Southeast Asia is finding ways to adjust and adapt accordingly. Countries which already have a higher trade and investment portfolio with both the U.S. and China are expected to get even more investment. Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand are China’s top trading partners in the region and not surprisingly, these countries are also among America’s biggest trade partners in the region. While these countries have their own unique developmental milieus, they share several elements in development strategies, such as continued institutional capacity building and infrastructure investments. As such, countries that were early to address basic developmental requirements now enjoy some competitive headway compared to their peers. This said, other regional countries are not sitting idly by and are instead taking their own measures to ensure that they can turn the US-China trade war into an opportunity. 

This article appeared at China-US Focus

Quoting Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton, who was recently on a visit to Israel and told reporters in Jerusalem that American forces would remain in Syria until the last remnants of the Islamic State were defeated and Turkey provided guarantees that it would not strike Kurdish forces allied with the United States, fake news have been circulating on the mainstream media that Trump has made a turnaround by delaying his planned Syria withdrawal.

Quoting the corporate media’s preferred, though highly partisan and dubious source of information on Syria, The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), Al-Jazeera’s sister news outlet The New Arab in particular is reporting [1] the Syrian Observatory’s purportedly “extensive network of on-ground activists and reporters” has seen American military convoys of hundreds of trucks and vehicles headed to the US military bases in Raqqa in eastern Syria, and Manbij and Tal Abyad in northern Syria from the Iraq border.

The policy decision to withdraw American forces from Syria, however, has already been taken in principle by the Trump administration, and whether the complete exit of the US troops from Syria would take a few weeks or several months is simply a matter of modalities to be worked out by operational commanders of the American forces.

Taking notice of the fake news, even Donald Trump was compelled to clarify his intentions on the Syria exit strategy in a tweet on Monday, January 7, saying: “The Failing New York Times has knowingly written a very inaccurate story on my intentions on Syria. No different from my original statements, we will be leaving at a proper pace while at the same time continuing to fight ISIS and doing all else that is prudent and necessary.”

Regarding the American military convoys headed to Raqqa, Manbij and Tal Abyad, the US commanders planning for the withdrawal of the American troops from Syria have recommended that the Kurdish fighters battling the Islamic State be allowed to keep the US-supplied weapons, a move that would likely anger NATO-ally Turkey, according to an exclusive report [1] by Reuters.

The report further adds: “The proposal to leave the US-supplied weapons with the Kurdish YPG militia, which could include anti-tank missiles, armored vehicles and mortars, would reassure Kurdish allies that they were not being abandoned.”

Thus, the convoys carrying surplus weapons of the American forces in Iraq to the US military bases in Syria were actually meant to distribute the weapons among Washington’s Kurdish allies in order to compensate the Kurds for their loyalty, despite objections from Washington’s NATO-ally Ankara.

Regarding inveterate neoconservative hawk John Bolton’s reassurance to the Israelis on Washington’s Syria withdrawal in Jerusalem, it should be looked in the backdrop that over the years, Israel not only provided medical aid and material support to militant groups battling Damascus – particularly to various factions of the Free Syria Army (FSA) and al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate al-Nusra Front in Daraa and Quneitra bordering the Israel-occupied Golan Heights – but Israel’s air force virtually played the role of the air force of the Syrian jihadists and conducted hundreds of airstrikes in Syria during the eight-year conflict.

Though after Russia provided S-300 missile system to the Syrian military after a Russian surveillance plane was shot down in Syria on September 18, killing 15 Russians onboard, Israel has conducted only a couple of airstrikes in Syria, one on the Christmas Day in which Israeli F-16s took cover [2] of civilian airliners flying to Damascus and Beirut airports. The purpose of the airstrike was to locate the precise location of the S-300 air defense system installed in Syria by the Russians in order to target it on a later date, or to keep the Israeli air force out of its reach.

Notwithstanding, on December 28, the Syrian army said it entered Manbij for the first time in years, after the Syrian Kurds urged Damascus to protect the town from the threat of impending Turkish military offensive, though Turkish President Erdogan has termed the handover a “psyops” by the Kurds.

According to a report by RT: [3] “A high-ranking Turkish delegation arrived in Moscow on Saturday, December 29, only a day after international media broke news on Kurdish militias inviting Syrian forces to enter Manbij before the Turks do. Syria’s military proclaimed they ‘raised the flag’ over Manbij, but there have been no independent reports confirming the moving of troops into the city.”

The report notes: “The Saturday Moscow meeting was key to preventing all actors of the Syrian war from locking horns over the Kurdish enclave. Obviously, Turkey will insist that it is their forces that should enter Manbij, Russia will of course insist the city should be handed over to Assad’s forces, Kirill Semenov, an Islamic studies expert with Russia’s Institute for Innovative Development, told RT.”

The report further adds: “Realpolitik, of course, plays a role here as various locations across Syria might be used as a bargaining chip by all parties to the conflict. Semenov suggested the Turks may agree on Syrian forces taking some parts of Idlib province in exchange for Damascus’ consent for a Turkish offensive toward Manbij or Kobani.”

It becomes abundantly clear after reading the RT report that a land swap agreement between Ankara and Damascus under the auspices of Moscow is in the offing to avoid standoff over Manbij.

The agreement would likely stipulate that Damascus would give Ankara free hand to mount offensives in the Kurdish-occupied Arab-majority towns Manbij and Kobani in northern Syria in return for Ankara withdrawing its militant proxies from Maarat al-Numan, Khan Sheikhoun and Jisr al-Shughour, all of which are strategically located in the south of Idlib governorate.

Just as Ankara cannot tolerate the presence of the Kurds in northern Syria along Turkey’s southern border in line with its “east of Euphrates” military doctrine, similarly even Ankara would acknowledge the fact that Damascus cannot possibly conceive the long-term presence of Ankara’s jihadist proxies in the aforementioned strategic locations in the south of Idlib governorate threatening the Alawite heartland of coastal Latakia.

If such a land swap agreement is concluded between Ankara and Damascus, it would be a win-win for all parties to the Syrian conflict, excluding the Kurds, of course. But the response of Damascus and Moscow to the concerns of the Kurds has been tepid of late.

Not only have the Kurds committed the perfidy of playing the proxies of Washington during the Syrian conflict which abandoned them after Trump’s announcement of withdrawal of American troops from Syria, but we must also recall another momentous event that took place in Deir al-Zor governorate in February 2018.

On February 7, the US B-52 bombers and Apache helicopters struck a contingent of Syrian government troops and allied forces in Deir al-Zor that reportedly [4] killed and wounded scores of Russian military contractors working for the Russian private security firm, the Wagner group.

The survivors described the bombing as an absolute massacre, and Kremlin lost more Russian citizens in one day than it had lost throughout its more than three-year-long military campaign in support of the Syrian government since September 2015.

The reason why Washington struck Russian contractors working in Syria was that the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – which is mainly comprised of Kurdish YPG militias – had reportedly handed over the control of some areas east of Euphrates River to Deir al-Zor Military Council (DMC), which is the Arab-led component of SDF, and had relocated several battalions of Kurdish YPG militias to Afrin and along Syria’s northern border with Turkey in order to defend the Kurdish-held areas against the onslaught of the Turkish armed forces and allied Syrian militant proxies during Ankara’s “Operation Olive Branch” in Syria’s northwest that lasted from January to March 2018.

Syrian forces with the backing of Russian contractors took advantage of the opportunity and crossed the Euphrates River to capture an oil refinery located to the east of Euphrates River in the Kurdish-held area of Deir al-Zor.

The US Air Force responded with full force, knowing well the ragtag Arab component of SDF – mainly comprised of local Arab tribesmen and mercenaries to make the Kurdish-led SDF appear more representative and inclusive – was simply not a match for the superior training and arms of Syrian troops and Russian military contractors, consequently causing a carnage in which scores of Russian citizens lost their lives.

Clearly, Moscow and Damascus hold the Kurds responsible for the atrocity along with Washington, and hence it is unlikely that the Syrian military would come to the rescue of the Kurds in the event of a Turkish military offensive east of Euphrates.

Evidence that has emerged during investigations into organ harvesting in China has compelled an adjudicating panel to make an interim judgment overwhelmingly against China. Taking the unusual step of releasing its provisional findings early, the London tribunal into forced organ harvesting in the People’s Republic has found “unanimously, and sure beyond reasonable doubt – that in China forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience has been practiced for a substantial period of time involving a very substantial number of victims.”

So persuasive were the testimonies, that presiding judge, Sir Geoffrey Nice, QC, took the unusual step of releasing interim findings before the final ruling, expressing his hope that in doing so, “the oxygen of publicity given to the allegations made and supported to the extent they are by our interim judgment, may allow the real oxygen of life to continue life itself in some who might otherwise be killed.” He expressed his public duty to “possibly save innocents from harm” by doing so, adding: “Reflecting on our several duties to fellow citizens of the world we can properly remind ourselves of past atrocities where states sought destruction of some part of their communities and recall the parts played in horrifying events that unfolded by others who remained silent.”

Sir Geoffrey, who was the deputy prosecutor in the trial of Slobodan Milosevic (1941-2006), former President of Serbia, in The Hague, was commissioned by the International Coalition to End Transplant Abuse in China (ETAC) to head up the Independent Tribunal Into Forced Organ Harvesting from Prisoners of Conscience in China, held between December 8-10. He said that he hoped the Tribunal would give its final judgment in the Spring, but until then it was urging the People’s Republic of China (PROC) to come forward and put its side of the story.

In his concluding statement, he continued to appeal to those who might want to refute the findings and pressed them to come forward to defend the practice. He called for more evidence to either back up or refute the “compelling” witness statements before the final verdict was released. Despite damning testimonies from around the world, Beijing’s silence on the matter has been deafening.

Invitations delivered to representatives of the PROC to attend the hearings have so far fallen on deaf ears, but in his concluding statement, Sir Geoffrey pleaded for information which might contradict the interim judgment or suggest that nothing criminal has, in fact, been involved in China’s organ transplant practices. Before his final judgment was given, he said that he also wanted to hear from named doctors who have expressed favorable views about China’s transplant practices and who have so far declined invitations to assist the Tribunal. He urged them to reconsider their position to withhold evidence and to speak up for their own stance on the matter.

Three days of personal evidence to the tribunal came primarily from Falun Gong exiled practitioners (of whom it is estimated that tens of thousands have been harvested for their organs since Jiang Zemin, former President of China made it his stated purpose to rid China of their influence. Researchers such as Canadian human rights lawyer David Matas, former Canadian parliamentarian David Kilgour and US investigative journalist Ethan Gutmann – estimate that as many as 65,000 Falun Gong prisoners of conscience have been killed:  Ethan Gutmann, The Slaughter: Mass Killings, Organ Harvesting and China’s Secret Solution to Its Dissident Problem, New York: Prometheus Books, 2014.)

Uyghurs, whose precarious position has been highlighted in recent news have also come forward with their concerns. Together with irrefutable proof that between 1-3 million Uyghurs are now serving extrajudicial sentences in so-called transformation through education camps, or worse, the fact that the biometric data of the entire Uyghur population of Xinjiang has been gathered is worrying. (Reuters report of August 10, 2018: Gay McDougall, a member of the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, cited estimates that 2 million Uyghurs and Muslim minorities were forced into “political camps for indoctrination” in the western Xinjiang autonomous region.)

Giving evidence, Uyghur doctor and former Xinjiang surgeon, Enver Tohti, who was once required to remove the organs of a live prisoner at the execution ground in the capital city of Urumqi talked about his concerns. These were compounded following the CCP offer of free health checks for all in the region which was announced in June 2016. The checks involved collecting biometric data from all Uyghurs in Xinjiang which has fueled his suspicion that this was in order to build a national database for the organ trade. “According to the Chinese media, the number of samples have been collected has exceeded 17 million,” he reported. (Human Rights Watch report of December 13, 2017. This report cites the Xinjiang Daily Newspaper report of 2017-11-02 which published the conclusions of the State ‘Physicals for all’ push to harvest biometric data from Xinjiang citizens between 12-65 from September 2016.)

His fear was that the camps were a cover for the organ harvesting trade. He said that to date many people have simply disappeared and only those who have proved too much a liability through sickness have been released. He described how in October 2017 on a visit to Taipei, he was approached by a Taiwanese man whose brother had traveled to Tianjin, on the north-eastern coast of China, for a kidney transplant. “Since he was aware of Falun Gong situation, he asked his surgeon not to have an organ from a Falun Gong practitioner. His surgeon assured him that: now, all organs are coming from Xinjiang!”

All bar one of the witnesses who gave evidence at the Tribunal, reported severe mental and physical torture on arrest, including in some cases sexual abuse and rape by other prisoners ordered to attack them. Each one reported undergoing full medical examinations, including blood tests and ultrasounds of their internal organs carried out on them. They all confirmed that other Han Chinese prisoners had not been subject to these tests.

An Israeli surgeon giving evidence at the Tribunal gave weight to the suspicions of harvesting by reporting that organs for transplant in China could be ordered a fortnight in advance. A patient of his who had urgently needed a heart transplant had been approached by his own insurance company undertaking to act as a middleman. A heart could be found, all costs would be paid by them, and the transplant would be booked for two-weeks-time.

Following 30 witness statements, Sir Geoffrey concluded by saying that together with issuing a final judgment as to whether forced organ harvesting has been and was still going on in China, the Tribunal had also been charged to determine whether international criminal offenses have been committed by state or state-supported bodies or organizations or individuals in China. “To date,” he said, “none of the reports into China’s transplant practices despite hinting at the possibility of international offenses having been committed, have ever explored this allegation specifically.”

Whilst recognizing that a tribunal such as this was not responsible for the use to be made of its judgment, Sir Geoffrey regretted that allegations against the PROC over the years concerning forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience had born little fruit. He noted that under normal circumstances, a tribunal like theirs, “would not issue a partial or interim judgment but would wait until it had made all relevant factual and legal decisions and then issue its single final judgment.” But in this case, he said that “different considerations may apply where issuing a partial or interim judgment may serve the immediate public good.”

In closing he regretted that: “Without reference to criminality, it can be confidently asserted – not insignificant perhaps on ‘Human Rights Day’ that this year celebrates precisely 70 years to today since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted – that China’s practice of forced organ harvesting as evidenced before us is in breach of, as a minimum, the Declaration’s:

Article 3 (right to life); Article 6 (recognition as a person before the law); Article 7 (equality before the law); Article 9 (not to be subject to arbitrary arrest); Article 10 (full equality to a fair and public hearing in determination of rights); Article 11 (presumption of innocence).”

He added that Article 5 (torture) was also shown to have been breached by witnesses called to give evidence. All but one spoke of torture on arrest and detailed the subsequent medical testing they had undergone which was consistent with preparation for organ harvesting.

Concluding by reminding the Tribunal that, “Dangerous concepts of sovereignty that might now allow ‘other’ countries to do within their borders to their own citizens what they like to pay no regard to humanity being a single family protected by essential and codified rights. These concepts have to be confronted, and by confronting them with clear and certain decisions, such as ours concerning forced organ harvesting, real benefits may follow.”

He restated his hope that members of the public, doctors, academics, or government officials, would come forward and give their evidence which, he said would be considered “just as it would have been heard in the last three days.” “The ‘call for evidence’ on the China Tribunal website remains open so that members of the public may continue to contribute statements, or to identify further witnesses or documentary evidence, that the Tribunal may wish to consider.”

*Ruth Ingram is a researcher who has written extensively for the Central Asia-Caucasus publication, Institute of War and Peace Reporting, the Guardian Weekly newspaper, The Diplomat, and other publications.

This article appeared at Bitter Winter

New year occasions, given the pleasant fiction it entails, are times to change. Resolutions are made by that delightful species Homo sapiens, hope packaged for quick delivery to those who promise change. The weak will become stronger; the strong will show humility. The venal, well, they just might change.

Human nature suggests the opposite, and 2019 has begun with an unsurprisingly consistent thud from the White House. The House Democrats have barricaded themselves on one side; President Donald Trump mans the opposing positions. A partial government shutdown has been in effect for almost three weeks. But the new year tidings have merely made the president more insistent. He demands $5.7 billion to construct a steel barrier as part of the border fortifications along the US-Mexico border, and reminds Democrats that they did, in 2006, vote for a physical barrier of 1,120 km. Overall, he insists this is small beer, as Mexico will fund the wall through a rejigged North American Free Trade Agreement. Mexican officials and politicians beg to differ, as they always have.

In his January 8 address, the president insisted on a “growing humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border” (growth of a crisis is a common Trump theme). That particular “southern border is a pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs, including meth, heroin, cocaine and fentanyl. Every week 300 of our citizens are killed by heroin alone, 90 percent of which floods across from our southern border.”

For Trump, selective culling and trimming is essential to any message that winds its way to the public sphere that can be dared called a forum. He edits texts, perceptions and accounts to oblivion, putting in place his distinct variation. Where there is something minor, there is bound to be a catastrophe. Where there is a calamity, it is bound to be distinctly minor.

This was his view on the use of emergency powers as described by Adam Smith, the sort he hopes to use in dealing with getting funds to resolve his Mexican problem, thereby ending the “humanitarian” and “security” crisis. Doing so would enable him to access sources otherwise frozen by the current shut down. “Congressman Adam Smith, the new Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, just stated, ‘Yes, there is a provision in law that says a president can declare an emergency. It’s been done a number of times.’”

That tweet is, as is the Trump method, right and wrong, and even he hopes to make sure that the work is best done through Congress. Smith did tell ABC News’s This Week that emergency powers were available to be invoked. But, as ever, the qualifying statement follows. “In this case, I think the president would be wide open to a court challenge saying, ‘Where is the emergency?’ You have to establish that in order to do this.’” Those words to George Stephanopoulos have managed to make their way into the ether of forgetting, as is the Trump way.

Political emergencies tend to be confections and propagations, puffed realities advanced by demagogues and figures of desperation. The issue of a Mexican emergency on the border has always been far-fetched, but last Friday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was insisting that there were 4,000 suspected or known terrorists who had been caught attempting to enter freedom’s land, with Mexico being the “most vulnerable point of entry”. Such a statement implied that Mexico was playing its own irresponsible part in ensuing this vulnerability to prosper. A qualifier was subsequently made by White House advisor Kellyanne Conway: the figures used in rather cavalier fashion by Sanders had been from 2017 for the whole set of attempted entrants.

Trump has some latitude in redirecting military funds by a declaration of a formal emergency under the National Emergencies Act of 1976. The threshold is surprisingly low, a more than generous nod towards executive flexibility in determining what might constitute a state of sufficient disturbance. What matters from Trump’s perspective is showing how the border wall would fit into the category of a military fortification. While his judgment might well be challenged in court, the issue of standing for any opponents will be problematic.

Trump has been attempting to make his own crusted resolutions, which seem very much like those made in 2018. For man quick to disturb and disrupt, he remains painfully, and sometime ineffectively, consistent. Even he found the issue of giving his January 8 address a bit of a bore, and did his boring best to remind us why he feels the Democrats should throw their lot in to assist the wall project.

Opponents should now know that the way through the man’s heart is to anticipate the proffering of a promise that can only be made by giving the impression that his wishes will be satisfied, only to then adjust the outcome. Pretend, and let the rest go. But politics in the Trump era remains, for the moment, ruled by a classic misapprehension: that the tweet is not only the message, but the whole message, to be attacked for its facts, presumed or otherwise. Treat it seriously at your own peril. As things stand after the January 8 speech, the words of Congressman Justin Amash of Michigan are as accurate as any: “Nobody convinced anybody.”

By Giancarlo Elia Valori*

Disinformation – i.e. what the Soviet intelligence services called Dezinformatsjia – is at the origin of the phenomenon that we currently define – with oversimplification -fake news, spread to support or not voters’ or consumers’ specific choices, obviously both nationally and internationally. Nowadays the “political market” is globalized exactly like the market of goods and services and hence all the tools available to a country and to its political elite need to be used.

Certainly the intelligence agencies’ room for manoeuvre is currently much wider than it was at the time of the Cold War. Hence many mass manipulation techniques, which in the past were specifically political, are now also commercial, behavioral, cultural, scientific or pseudo-scientific. They are closely interwoven and currently the electoral or political manipulation operations often stem from commercial marketing techniques.

Dezinformatsjia, however, is always a “weak to strong” operation, i.e. a series of strategic and information actions that try to prevent the use of force by those who are tactically superior.

Those who have not enough missiles targeted against the enemy,  or have not the maximum military efficiency, faces the opponent with psychological and propaganda techniques, which cost less and – by their very nature -do not trigger a conventional military countermove by the enemy against whom they are targeted. However they can trigger an equal and opposite disinformation by the target country.

These are all “ironic” operations, in the etymological sense of the word. Irony comes from the Greek word eironèia, i.e. “fiction, dissimulation, or to say the opposite of what you think”.

Just think of the great demonstrations against “Euromissiles” in the early 1980s -not foreseen by the Soviets, which put a strain on the huge intelligence network of the Warsaw Pact in Europe – or of the myth of the opening to dissent in the era of Khrushchev’s “thaw”. Or just think – as maintained by Anatoly Golytsin, the former KGB officer who defected to the USA – of the schisms between the USSR and Mao’s China, or of the transformation of the Komintern into Kominform, in which also Yugoslavia secretly participated, even after the famous schism between Tito and Stalin.

According to Golytsin, a senior KGB officer, all the divisions within the Communist world were a huge and very long sequence of fake news. Westerners never believed him, but the predictive power of his book, New Lies for Old, published in the USA in 1984, is still extraordinary.

He foresaw the “liberalization” of the Soviet system and even its collapse, so as to be later reborn in a new guise. All true, until today.

But what is really Dezinformatsjia, i.e. the technique that is at the origin of fake news and of all current psychopolitical operations?

For the KGB experts, disinformation is linked to the criterion of “active operations” (aktivinyyemeropriatia), i.e. the manipulation and control of mass media; the actual disinformation, both at written and oral levels; the use of Communist parties or covert organizations. In this case, just think of all the organizations “for peace” or for friendship “among peoples”, as well as of radio and TV broadcasts.

“Active measures” even include kompromat, i.e. the “compromising material”, as well as damaging and disparaging information about Western agents or politicians’ involvement in sex, illegal and drugs affairs. This information is collected and used strategically across all domains, with a view to creating negative publicity.

An active kind of measure that we have recently seen at work against President Trump. Nevertheless it has been implemented by his fellow countrymen, who, however, do not seem to be very skillful in the art of desinformatsjia.

It should be recalled, however, that currently a fundamental technique is to manipulate the opponents’ economies or to support guerrilla groups or terrorist organizations.

Manipulation of economies through statistical data or governments’ “covert” operations on stock markets, while support for terrorist groups, even those far from the State ideology, is provided through an intermediary that may be another State or a large company, or through bilateral financial transactions outside markets.

The Red Brigades, for example, initially trained in Czechoslovakia by passing through the Austrian woods at the border, owned by the Feltrinelli family.

When the publisher Giangiacomo Feltrinelli was found dead near an Enel trellis in Segrate, but long before the Italian police knew who had died on that trellis, the Head of the KGB center in Milan hastily went to report to the Soviet embassy in Rome.

Many friendly and enemy States, however, used right-wing and left-wing terrorism against the Italian Republic.

The goal was clear: to destroy or annihilate a dangerous economic competitor, especially in Africa and in the East.

Dezinformatsjia, however, was institutionally targeted against what the Soviets called “the primary enemy”, namely the United States.

Under Stalin’s power – who was dialectically “superseded” by Khrushchev, always in contrast with true innovators – “active measures” also included assassination.

I do not rule out at all that, in particular cases, this tradition has been recovered even after the death of the so-called “little father”.

As we can see, “active measures” -namely Dezinformatsjia – still has much to do with contemporary world.

If we only talk about fake news, we cannot understand why it is spread, while if it is interpreted in the framework of the old – but still topical – disinformation strategy, everything gets clearer.

In the Soviet regulations of the 1960s, every KGB foreign branch had to devote at least 25% of its forces to “active measures”, while each residence had an officer specifically trained at Dezinformatsjia.

It should be noted that, in 1980, CIA estimated the total cost of “active measures” at 3 billion US dollars, at least.

It was the real struggle for hegemony that the USSR was fighting, considering that the missile, nuclear and conventional balance of the two forces on the field did not permit a real military clash.

However, the result of the final clash would have been very uncertain.

Nowadays every State produces fake news, as well as ad hoc opinion movements, and spreads agents of influence in the media, in universities, businesses and governments.

Hence the globalization of disinformation, not simply fake news, is the phenomenon with which we really have to deal.

During the Cold War, the Soviet apparata spread the fake news of the CIA and FBI involvement in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, while the East German apparata often spread news about Western politicians being members of Nazi hierarchies or about the pro-Nazi sympathies of Pope Pius XI.

It should also be noted that Andropov, who was elected General Secretary of the CPSU in 1982, had been the Head of the KGB First Chief Directorate, precisely the one that coordinated and invented all “active measures”.

At the time, Western newspapers were filled with news about Andropov as a “modernizer”, a reader of the American literature classics and a jazz lover.

Was it Dezinformatsjia? Obviously so, but no one answered that question, thus raising expectations – among the NATO European Member States’ peoples – about a sure “democratization” of the Soviet Union in the future.

Andropov, however, secretly believed that the United States would unleash a nuclear war in the short term against the USSR. Hence this was the beginning of a long series of Dezinformatsjia hard operations right inside the United States.

Nevertheless, following the rules of “active measures”, they were not specifically targeted against the US military and political system, but against other targets apparently unrelated to the primary aim: the US responsibility for the (impossible) creation of the AIDS virus or – as the Soviet Dezinformatsjia always claimed – the “unclear” role played by CIA and FBI in the assassinations of J.F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King or even the death of Elvis Presley.

A specific product for each public.

Hence a fake storytelling is created – not a series of objective data – around a theme that is instead real, so as to reach the goal of a generic defamation of the primary enemy, where there is always a “bad guy” (obviously the US government and its Agencies) and a “good guy”, that is the American people that must be freed from the bad guy holding them prisoner.

According to the theories of the great Russian scholar of myths, tribal rituals, folktales and fairy storytelling, V.I. Propp, whose text “Morphology of the Folktale” was published in Leningrad in 1928, this is exactly one of the primary narrative elements of the folktale.

As in the case of  KGB “active operations”, Propp’s scheme envisages some phases of construction of the myth or of the folktale: 1) the initial balance, i.e. the phase in which everything is devoid of dangers; 2) the breaking of the initial balance and hence the creation of the motive for the subsequent action; 3) the vicissitudes of the hero, who is the one who “restores order” after the natural twists and turns; 4) the restoration of balance, namely the conclusion.

Hence the mythical and fairy mechanism concerns the archetypes of the human psyche, as described by Carl Gustav Jung.

This is the reason why, despite their evident counter factuality, propaganda constructions work well and last well beyond the time for which they were thought and designed.

Active operations are modeled on the natural parameters with which the human mind works. When well done, said operations do not use abstract theories, cultural or sectoral models. They speak to everyone, because they act on the unconscious.

It is no coincidence that currently the archetypal branding – i.e. the marketing system based on the 12 Jungian archetypes – is increasingly widespread.

It was created in 2001, several years after the fall of the USSR and in the phase in which the New World Order was strengthening.

Propp’s four elements work just as an “active measure”, based on four categories: 1) mastery and stability; 2) belonging; 3) change; 4) independence.

It is easy to verify how these four categories of modern marketing (and of the archetypal tale) fully apply  both to disinformation operations, which can often favor one of the four elements compared to the others, and to the actual political marketing.

Hence politics, intelligence services’ propaganda and marketing currently work on the basis of the same deep psychic mechanisms.

In the Soviet tradition, there is also a certain tendency to use Ivan Pavlov’s psychology in the field of intelligence.

Pavlov developed the theory of “conditioned reflexes”, i.e. the psychic mechanism that is produced by a conditioning stimulus.

The experiment of the dog and the bell is, in fact, well-known and needs no elaboration.

It should be noted, however, that the conditioned reflex is triggered precisely when the food announced by the sound of the bell is no longer there, while the dog shows all the typical reactions of the animal in the presence of food.

Here, the “active measures” of disinformation create a conditioned reflex by connecting a country, a leader or a political choice to something universally negative which, however, has nothing to do with the primary object.

This connection becomes instinctive, automatic, obvious and almost unconscious.

Just think of the automatism – once again artfully created – between the Italian intelligence services and the so-called “strategy of tension”.

The goal of perfect Dezinformatsjiais to create a Pavlovian conditioned reflex that works immediately and naturally as a Freudian “complex”.

Nevertheless, with a view to being successful, every fake news or message that is part of an “active measure” must have at least a grain of truth – otherwise it immediately appears as an opinion or ideology, which is soon rejected by the subject.

This means they can be discussed and maybe accepted rationally, but the “active measure” must mimic an immediate, natural and pre-rational reaction. Otherwise it becomes traditional propaganda or part of an open debate, exactly the opposite of what it has to do.

Hence the message must be processed with extreme care to reach the goal of any disinformation operation: to convey in the public “enemy” and / or in its ruling classes a message that – when well done – fits perfectly and unknowingly into the communication mechanisms of the “enemy”.

Western experts call this procedure “weaponization of information” or “fabrication of information”.

Nowadays, however, all information is distorted by the manipulation about the aims it must achieve – just think of the Italian and European debate on immigration from Africa.

Hence also the West uses the weaponization of information- but, probably, it still uses it badly.

Hence we will never witness the end of fake news – which  have always existed – but simply its refinement as real natural “states of mind” or, more often, as immediate reactions, such as those connected to a conditioned reflex artfully created.

In this case, there is no longer difference between reality and imagination.

Fake news as fiction – we could say.

If this is the new battlefield of psywar, it will be good for Italy – even autonomously from the NATO center that deals with “strategic information” – to equip itself with a structure, within the intelligence agencies, developing and carrying out specific disinformation operations.

For example, with reference to the Italian companies operating abroad, to Italy’s general image in the rest of Europe and to its action in Africa or in the rest of the world.

*About the author: Advisory Board Co-chair Honoris Causa Professor Giancarlo Elia Valori is an eminent Italian economist and businessman. He holds prestigious academic distinctions and national orders. Mr. Valori has lectured on international affairs and economics at the world’s leading universities such as Peking University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Yeshiva University in New York. He currently chairs “International World Group”, he is also the honorary president of Huawei Italy, economic adviser to the Chinese giant HNA Group. In 1992 he was appointed Officier de la Légion d’Honneur de la République Francaise, with this motivation: “A man who can see across borders to understand the world” and in 2002 he received the title “Honorable” of the Académie des Sciences de l’Institut de France.”

Source: This article was published by Modern Diplomacy

Joko Widodo is likely to lose the 2019 presidential election in West Sumatra. Jokowi’s poor electoral prospects in the province are based primarily on his association with the PDI-P which has links to founding President Sukarno and his role in ending a rebellion in the province in the 1950s and 60s.

By Adri Wanto*

West Sumatra is the only province in Indonesia where more than 50% of its population are consistently dissatisfied with the performance of the Joko Widodo (“Jokowi”) government. This is based on data from various surveys since 2014. The data also predicted Jokowi to experience poor electoral prospects in the 2019 presidential election in the province.

According to a survey by Indikator Politik Indonesia and Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC), more than 60% of West Sumatran people, better-known as the Minangkabau ethnic community, are dissatisfied with Jokowi’s performance. Both survey results were in line with the 2014 presidential election results, where the Jokowi-Kalla ticket only received 23.1% of the votes while their rival Prabowo-Hatta camp gained 76.9%.

Trend Not Favouring Jokowi

Since the fall of the Suharto regime in 1998, the Indonesia Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) has belaboured to gain political ground in the province of West Sumatra. In the 1999 national legislative elections, although the PDI-P gained a national majority of seats in parliament, they only won two seats (out of 14) in West Sumatra province. In the 2004 and 2009 elections, the PDI-P failed to gain even a single seat in the province, only finally gaining back two seats in 2014.

Presidential candidates supported by the PDI-P have also fared poorly in the province. In the 2004 presidential election, Megawati Sukarnoputri only received 16% of the votes in West Sumatra, while her rival Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (running as a candidate from the Democrat Party) received 84% of the votes. This trend was repeated in the 2009 presidential election, when Megawati, backed again by the PDI-P, pulled in only 5.9% of the votes compared to SBY’s 79.9% in the province.

The 2014 presidential election showed this trend was not just about individual candidates, but more broadly linked to party affiliation, when the PDI-P backed the Joko Widodo-Jusuf Kalla ticket. Even though Jusuf Kalla’s wife was an indigenous member of the Minangkabau ethnic community, the ticket only garnered 23% of the votes compared to their rival Prabowo Subianto’s 76.9%.

Sukarno’s Painful Legacy in West Sumatra

Jokowi, nevertheless, has been more successful than Megawati in consolidating some support from Minangkabau elites. On 17 March 2018, a number of prominent Minangkabau leaders residing in Bandung expressed their support for the president. On 17 September, ten local government heads (two Mayors and eight Regents) in West Sumatra also declared their support for Jokowi in the 2019 presidential elections.

These supporters consider the development of infrastructure in Indonesia under the Jokowi administration to have improved significantly. They have also generally approved of his increased visibility in the region, having visited West Sumatra five times in the first four years of his term to foster development projects. This resulted in the creation of the hashtag #MinangPemilihJokowi (“Minang Vote Jokowi”) in support of his candidacy.

However, while some local political leaders and Minang elites based in Java Island support the president, Jokowi must still contend with the controversial historical legacy of his political allies. The prevailing opinion of Jokowi among many Minangkabau people is that he is an ‘employee’ of the PDI-P and thus a tool of the party’s leader Megawati.

The crackdown by the Sukarno government on the PRRI movement in Sumatra in the 1950s caused a deep and longstanding wound among the Minangkabaus’ older generation. Therefore, any individual candidates and political parties associated with President Sukarno will not win major support from Minangkabau people.

Psychological Scars of PRRI Remain

After Indonesia declared independence in 1945, it went through a period of instability as it struggled with economic development, foreign debt and governance failures. This challenge was exacerbated by the fact that the newly-formed nation was composed of many diverse and fractious provinces and not all of them were satisfied with the Java-centric direction the country was taking under Sukarno.

As a result, from 1958-1961 several provinces in Sumatra declared their independence and attempted to separate from the new nation-state of Indonesia. Known as the Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia (PRRI), the movement was considered a rebellion against the central government and military forces were dispatched to Sumatra to suppress it.

The crackdown on the PRRI movement caused a deep and longstanding wound among the Minangkabaus’ older generation. PRRI leaders were persuaded by the Sukarno government to negotiate but all of them were arrested and sent to prison. During the conflict, thousands of Minangkabau people were victims of the ferocity of the government army and many were displaced from Sumatra.

Jokowi’s Current Policies on Islamist Groups Not Helping

Based on the Indonesia Programme’s research in the province of West Sumatra at the end of November and the beginning of December 2018, this historically painful narrative still occupies a prominent place in the memories of some public figures and continues to generate resentment and distrust of anything associated with the ideology and legacy of Sukarno.

Furthermore, in general Minangkabau culture is quite conservative, adhering to a traditional philosophy of adat bersandi syarak, syarak bersandi Kitabullah (“traditions are built on religion and religion is built on Al-Quran”).

Jokowi is generally viewed skeptically by hardline Islamic organisations and his dissolution of conservative groups like Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) and purported ‘discrimination’ toward militant clerics like Habbib Rizieq are considered harmful to Islam by some conservative Minangkabau people. This, coupled with his association with the PDI-P, Megawati and the toxic legacy of her father hurts Jokowi’s electability in West Sumatra even as his developmental agenda gains popularity.

*Adri Wanto is an Associate Research Fellow with the Indonesia Programme at S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.

By S. Chandrasekharan

As expected, in the highly charged political atmosphere, the overwhelming victory of the Awami League in the National Elections held on 30^th December, has raised allegations that the election had been marred by violence and that it had not been fair.  In fact, one of the editorials in the Daily Star described the victory of the Awami League as an “overkill”. 

The logic goes this way.  It is generally believed that both the Awami League and the BNP have one third of the committed voters and it is only the third one third group that decides the fate/chances of one of the groups coming to power. 

But this time it has not worked this way.  The BNP had explicitly associated itself with the JEI who had contested in twenty-five seats.  The JEI being a religious fundamentalist organization had been banned by the Court from participating in the elections.  Yet they did openly and when they saw the trend of their losing badly, they withdrew their candidacies. Another 22 of the BNP also withdrew from contesting when they found that it was going to be tough.

True, there has been violence with eighteen deaths.  So it was in 2014 elections and it was equally bad in 2010 when the death toll was less.

The BNP has to blame itself for the poor showing.  The leadership took its own time to decide whether they should go for confrontation or participation in the elections.  With Khaleda in jail, all decisions appear to have been taken in London by Khaledha’s son, Tareque Rahman.  The ever faithful and loyal Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir did his best in patching up an alliance -the Jatiya Oikya Front and getting the eminent lawyer and the Constitutional expert Dr. Kama Hossain into the alliance with his Gono Forum.

The international reaction was on predictable lines.  While the Western Powers, the UN and associated establishments focused on the violence that marred the elections which in turn affected the credibility of the elections, others generally sent in their congratulations to Sheikh Hasina on her victory.

Those who sent congratulatory messages will include India, Iran, China, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Russia and UAE.

The Western Powers mentioned about “credible reports that polls irregularities marred the voting.”  Strongly worded statements emanated from USA, UK and the European Union.  It is likely that these powers would, in the near future mount pressure on Bangladesh for a ‘transparent’ examination  of alleged irregularities, violent incidents, intimidation and harassment.  Canada joined the chorus and said that it was disappointed by “credible” claims of irregularities and called on the Government  to work transparently with all parties to address the claims.

Given the alleged violence, had the BNP won I am not sure whether these Powers would have reacted similarly.  What has been noticed is that the Western Powers generally for reasons not known have a general dislike for Hasina. 

While the Human Rights Watch in making the allegations had asked for an independent impartial commission to determine the extent of violations, the Transparency International has gone further in demanding a judicial probe.

On 3^rd January, the opposition front submitted a joint memorandum detailing all the irregularities to the Chief of Election Commission of Bangladesh.  Three leaders of the BNP.-Their Secretary General Alamgir, a Standing Committee member and another Executive member met the American Ambassador at the embassy on 4^th Jan. and discussed various issues relating to the General Elections.

There are enough built in legal remedies to sort out the complaints on the irregularities in the elections.  The BNP has eminent lawyers to conduct the cases and instead of going to court, the leadership has chosen once again to boycott the parliament and none of the members of the BNP were present for the oath taking ceremony.  The Gono Forum led by Dr. Komal Hossain and a part of the Jatin Oikya Front broke ranks from the alliance and decided to let its two members to take the oath in the next meeting.

The Jatiya Party led by Ershad and known for its somersaults now decided to be the main opposition.  A day earlier, the Parliamentary group of the Party that met had decided to join the Awami led Government.  The next day when Ershad returned to Dhaka he declared that the Jatiya Party will be the main opposition and that he will act as the ‘Leader of the Opposition’.  He was not present for the earlier meeting, but it looks that he has been advised to take the role of opposition!

An unprecedented mandate has given Sheikh Hasina many challenges.  An overwhelming majority by itself does not give good governance as we saw in the Delhi State.  People’s expectations will be high.  Sheik Hasina is quite conscious of the problem.  She cautioned the Parliamentary members who had assembled for their first meeting that “People who remain in power for long become monsters.”  But we should not, she added.

It is expected that Hasina will choose her cabinet carefully to be announced anytime now. Those who had proved to be a failure and unpopular in the last cabinet may be eliminated.  Some technocrats may be included.  She should not forget those freedom fighters who had remained faithful to her  and had not asked for any returns are  rewarded at least now and tried.

For the BNP too, the challenges are many.  They made the big mistake in boycotting the last general elections of 2014 but worse still, unleashed a level of violence the reverberations of which are still being felt. Having lost the elections decisively, it is hoped that they do make the same mistake  in opposing the Government.  Their main challenge in my view will be to keep its flock together after the huge disappointment in the current elections.  I have said earlier- Hasina could go out of the way and end once and for all the ever-permanent enmity between the two top leaders.

By S. Chandrasekharan

On December 21, in a surprise move ,the Army Chief Gen. Hliang announced a four-month ceasefire of operations in the northern and eastern regions bordering China and to end by April 30,  2019.

The idea, it is said, is  to let the Government have some free space  to negotiate with the ethnic Insurgent Groups that have not so far signed the ceasefire agreement.  The Army announced that they are forming special teams of Army Officers to help the Government in the negotiations.  It is also sad that this period will be utilized in settling the differences among the signatories themselves like the one between the KNU and the RCSS , though no mention was made of the conflicts between the Army and some of the ethnic groups that have signed the national cease-fire agreement.

The Northern Alliance consisting of KIO, TNLA, MNDAA and AA met on 27^th and responded to the Ceasefire declaration.  They said that they would halt all military activities but offered to hold talks in China and not within Myanmar. It was also mentioned that the talks should involve the Government, the Military and the ethnic groups belonging to the FPNCC.

Significantly the offer of ceasefire did not include the operations that are going on in Northern Rakhine State because of the continuing threat from the ARSA as declared by the Army. The reason could be that the operations against the Arakan Army and the ARSA do not affect the Chinese border as the present cease fire order appears to be China driven.  China also suspects that ARSA is in league with Uighur terrorists of Xinjiang.

The Arakan Army has also not been quiet.  On 4^th January, over 300 Arakan Army Insurgents attacked four border posts in Rakhine State’s Buthidaung Township.  14 Policemen were killed and 7 injured and another 14 taken prisoners. The prisoners that  had 14 Border Police Officers and 9 civilian women were returned the next day.

Earlier, there was another incident suspected to be by the ARSA when two Buddhists were killed, and their throats slit. Counter operations have been going on since then.

It is therefore no surprise that the operational areas in the northern Rakhine State have been excluded from the Army’s ceasefire declaration.  But it will be an embarrassment both to the Northern Alliance and the bigger group- the Federal Political Negotiation and Consultative Committee (FPNCC) led by United Wa State Army, backed by China, as the AA is part of the Northern Alliance and the FPNCC.  Yet the northern alliance had agreed for the negotiations apparently on the advice of the Chinese as the present initiative of the Army appears to be China driven and China backed move.

The Army also insisted on four of the six points it had demanded earlier from the ethnic groups in accepting the cease-fire and these were-

1.   Avoid capitalizing on the cease-fire Agreement.
2. Avoid placing a heavy burden on the local people
3. Abide by the existing laws.
4. Adhere to the promises agreed to in the peace declaration.

Reasonable enough, though no monitoring system to supervise the cease fire and an institutionalized system to resolve allegations of ceasefire violations which normally arise in case of conflicts have been made.

More significantly, the Myanmar Army chief claimed on the same day he announced the unilateral cessation of operation that the peace process will be completed by 2020.  Why 2020?  Was he referring to the next General elections when the NLD of Suu Kyi  is not likely to get the same majority and the Army backed USDP (Union Solidarity & Development Party) is expected to have a better showing!

The Army’s position on the cease fire needs a fundamental paradigm change as the 2008 Constitution is not federal in character and needs to be amended.  Only then can meaningful talks take place to look for a permanent solution to the ethnic problem that has battered the country since its independence.  The Army Chief has not helped the situation, when he declared following the cease-fire declaration that the ethnic armed groups need to participate in the peace process if they accept democracy and national development through national unity and solidarity!

The cease-fire has to be a long and sustaining one and nothing can be achieved within the four months stipulated by the Army.

Why then did the Army declare a temporary cease fire now when it can continue the operations against the Northern Alliance for any length of time?  The Myanmar media suggests that that the idea is to divert international attention where they are under pressure both individually and collectively for their operations and alleged atrocities against the Rohingyas.  This does not appear to be the position as they will be facing flak anyway in the coming months from the International Criminal Court and the UN backed Human Rights Groups. 

What is more likely is that it is at the initiative of China who seem to be in need for peace and stability in their border region with Myanmar for successful completion and operation of projects under the BRI.