By Rasheed Kidwai

Muslim community activists have launched a movement against big spending on lavish marriages and excessive pilgrimage (Umrah) to Makkah and Madina.

Faizur Rahman, an Urdu-speaking native of Chennai, is an executive committee member of Harmony India, an organisation to promote secularism and communal harmony which is headed by Mr. N. Ram, the Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu. He is also the founding secretary of Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought in Islam.

Sharing his experiences with this writer, Rahman says, he has lost count of the number of public forums (and private discussions) he has used in the last two decades to speak out against baseless ritualism and extravagance (israaf) in Islam.

Dr. Aslam Parvez, author and scholar, is the Vice Chancellor of the Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderbad. Both Rahman and Parvez have been traveling all round the country, interacting with Muslim community leaders with a plea to cut down spending on lavish marriages and Umrah.

Umrah is a “minor pilgrimage” undertaken by Muslims whenever they enter the holy city of Makkah. In Islam, it is optional for Muslims to perform Umrah. Its similarity to the major and obligatory Islamic pilrimage “Haj” has made some fusion of the two natural, though pilgrims have the choice of performing the Umrah separately or in combination with the haj.

These scholars are self-confessed practising Muslims and not against Umrah per se. They say they only wish to create awareness among Muslims that Umrah not being an obligatory ritual in Islam one need not perform it every year. Instead that money  may be used for the socio-economic development of our community at a time when it desperately needs it. As per the National Commission for Enterprises in Unorganised Sector (NCEUS) report, 84% of the Muslim population of India lives on a daily income of less than Rs. 50. In other words, about 150 million of Muslims don’t even earn 50 rupees a day! Therefore, is it not the duty of wealthy Muslims to remedy this situation? they ask.

Rahman and Dr Parvez say they have received a mixed response national level organisations such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) who have maintained a stoic silence on these issues. However, some Muslim organisations and moulvis (priests) in Chennai, have expressed outrage against Rahman’s liberal and philanthropic interpretation of Islam. “In their blinkered view, asking Muslims to stop spending money on non-obligatory pilgrimages amounts to a blasphemous denial of Islamic practices,” Rahman said.

Rahman says he has received quiet support from a few madrasa-based religious scholars. One such ‘maulana’ went on to write an article in an Urdu magazine against wasting money on umrahs and multiple Haj. Maulana Hafizur Rahman Azami Omeri wrote a piece in Two Circles, a prominent web portal addressing Muslim community issues. Omeri argues that as per Hadees (sayings of Prophet) in Bukhari when Hazrat Bibi Aisha (Prophet’s wife)  asked as to which among two neighbours deserves our benefaction when resources are limited, the Prophet answered: “The one whose door is nearest to you.”

Omeri insists that in Islam Huqooqul ibaad (humanitarianism) has been given precedence over Huqooqullah (duties towards God). He argues that if any Muslim is asked for his reasons for performing Umrah and the reply will invariably be; ‘for sawaab’ (divine reward).  But more ‘sawaab’ can be gathered right here in India by helping a needy person at half the price of an Umrah, argues Omeri.

As per records, 4,48,268 Muslims applied for Haj in 2019. Rahman takes this as a sign of 450,000 Muslims having the capacity to spend around 250,000 rupees every year on a ritualistic pilgrimage. This works out to more than 10,000 crore rupees. “If we add to this amount the money Muslims annually spend of non-obligatory Umrah, we get the figure of almost 15,000 crores! Even if a small portion of this amount is to be diverted for humanitarian causes, it will come under the definition of effective altruism which, by the way, is not out of sync with the egalitarian teachings of Islam,” insists Rahman.

As per a conservative estimate, over 250,000 Muslims travel to Makkah and Madina for Umrah every year. And the average cost of the entire trip is around Rs. 140,000-2,00,000.  Therefore, the annual amount spent by Indian Muslims on Umrah alone works out to a whopping Rs. 4100 crores! In comparison, the amount allocated in the 2017-18 budget by the Government of India to the Ministry of Minority Affairs was increased from Rs 2832 crore to Rs 4535 crores.

Muslims spend a lot of money on marriages every year. In fact, a lot more than what they spend on the annual Umrah. Just look at statistics given below.

• Minimum guests from the Bride’s side — 300
• Minimum guests from the Groom’s side — 300
• Minimum cost of the Nikah feast for 600 guests @ Rs. 200 per guest  — 1.5 lakhs
• Minimum cost of the Valima feast for 600 guests at the same rate — 1.5 lakhs
• Average money spent on jewellery by bride’s side — two lakhs
• Average money spent on jewellery by groom’s side — 1 lakh
• Cost of renting the function hall for Nikah — 0ne lakh
• Cost of renting the function hall for Valima — one lakh
• Misc. expenditure on decoration etc — 0.50 lakh

Total average expenditure of one wedding comes to eight lakh rupees.

In a total Muslim population of 150 millions, assuming that at least 150,000 (0.001 percent of 150 million) middle class weddings take place in a year in India, the total money spent by the Muslim community per year on weddings is: 150,000 weddings multiplied by 6.4 lakh rupees which equals Rs. 12000 crores. Add to this the 4100 crore rupees spent on Umrahs and another 800 crores for holidaying. In other words, Muslims in India spend a minimum of Rs. 17100 crores per year on extravagant weddings, non-obligatory pilgrimages and unnecessary travel.

Let us now see how much it costs to educate a child.

At an average annual fees of Rs. 10,000, the cost of educating a child from LKG to 12th standard is 14 years x 10,000 = Rs. 140,000. For 4 years of technical education @ Rs. 100,000 per year = Rs. 400,000. Total cost is Rs. 540, 000.

Dividing 17000 crores by 540,000 we get 314814. This means, more than three lakh poor Muslim children can be educated for 18 years on the money spent in just one year by the rich Muslims on avoidable expenditure.

Dr Parvez, an accomplished scientist who has been editing and publishing a monthly journal in Urdu, Science, for the last over 25 years, has been relentlessly speaking at various forums requesting  the Muslims to concentrate on Huqooqul ibaad for the moment as the condition of Muslim community is very bad. Allah is not in need of our Umrahs or multiple Hajs. But our Ummah (community) is in desperate need of humanitarian help, Dr Parvez argues. Any contribution towards this would be worth several hundred times the sawaab of an Umrah or a second Haj.  In this context, Dr Parvez draws attention of Muslims towards a hadith in Bukhari in which the Prophet said; “One who strives for the widows and the poor is like the one who strives in the way of Allah. I shall regard him as one who stands up for prayer without rest and as one who fasts without break.”

For ages Muslims have been shielded from new ideas in the name of taqleed (sectarian conformism), and ijtihad (liberal interpretation of Islam) is discouraged,” argues Rahman adding, “In my view, Muslims will be certainly be open to religious liberalism if they are not burdened with the fear of a clerical backlash. It is not that Muslims do not realise the need for pulling their community out of poverty and illiteracy. They do, and also have the money to embark on such a mission.

Going by this school of thought, it is not because of a lack of viable models of philanthropy among Muslims that money is not reaching the genuinely deprived. Rahman states: “It is the lack of a philanthropic mind-set which is the cause. If anything can change this mind-set it is the widespread dissemination of a counter-narrative that can challenge and neutralise the anachronistic sermons emanating from most Muslim pulpits.”

On 15 March 2019, New Zealand and the world were shocked by an Australian self-declared fascist who rampaged into two mosques and opened fire on worshippers, slaughtering 49 people. Brenton Tarrant recorded and live-streamed the slaughter on Facebook. What does this latest act of terror, this time by a far-right extremist and white supremacist, portend?

By Irm Haleem*

On March 15, 2019, Brenton Tarrant, an Australian self-declared fascist, opened fire on congregants in two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, slaughtering 49 worshippers. Tarrant recorded and live-streamed the slaughter on Facebook using a helmet camera. Prior to the attack, he also left a 74-page manifesto on a Twitter account which detailed his hatred for immigrants, Muslims, and Jews, and in which he explained his actions as wanting to defend “our lands” from the “invaders”.

The tactic used by far-right violent extremists and white supremacists like Tarrant of slaughtering unsuspecting individuals in their place of worship is not new: February 1994, an American-Israeli Jewish extremist, slaughtered nine congregants in a Hebron mosque, in West Bank; June 2015, a white supremacist slaughtered nine individuals in a black church in South Carolina, United States; February 2017, another white supremacist slaughtered six people in a Quebec mosque, in Canada; October 2018, an anti-Semitic white supremacist slaughtered 11 people in the Tree of Life synagogue in Pennsylvania, United States.

Logic of Live-Streaming Images of Slaughter

What makes this most recent act of terrorism in New Zealand notable is not just the sheer number of victims, but that the shooter live-streamed the murders on a social media account. But here again, graphic recording of brutal acts is not unique; members of the radical Islamist movement, ISIS, are infamously known for recording, and later uploading, videos of brutal beheadings.

Scholars of terrorism studies explain the logic of recording and uploading images of slaughter to social media in two broad ways: First, as a tactic to get attention from a public that is already somewhat desensitised to violence and terrorism; and second, as a way to heighten the shock-and-awe and the drama of terrorism, and thereby to instill more fear amongst the persons of the targeted group.

I argue that there are two additional reasons for this gruesome tactic that can be summarised as follows: power play, and as method to dehumanise the enemy. First, as a power play, recorded images of brutality elevate the significance of terrorism from its designated smaller scale unconventional war domain, to that of grander war that can compete with the grandest visuals of brutality that we have come to expect from conventional wars.

Second, the disseminating of recorded images of brutal acts serves to belittle and dehumanise the victims. Consider, for example, ISIS’ tactic of beheading its victims and then putting their severed head on their torso. This imagery, I argue, is a kind of iconography intended not only to generate repulsion for a visual that appears shockingly grotesque, but also to depict the ultimate weakness and powerlessness of the enemy.

The Logic of Dehumanising the Other

Recorded acts of brutality dehumanise the victims by depicting them as vulnerable and thus as ‘less than’ the other humans. Demeaning language is another venue for dehumanisation of the other. For example, Adolf Hitler referred to Jews as snakes and leeches. Heinrich Himmler — a prominent leader of the German Nazi party — referred to Jews, homosexuals and gypsies as harmful vermin. Rush Limbaugh — an American right wing pundit — referred to Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib as sub-human.

Current Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte justifies his extra-judicial slaughter of ghetto inhabitants by referring to them as “drug scum”. President Donald Trump is alleged to have referred to illegal immigrants as “animals, not humans”.

The tactic of dehumanising the other — whether through graphic images that appear surreal in their brutality, or through demeaning language — is fundamentally an effort to pacify the moral conscience of one’s audience (be that the electorate of a country or potential recruits for extremist groups).

By presenting the enemy as filthy, dangerous, or sub-human, the hope is to generate sympathy for the brutality that will be levied against them. Live-streaming slaughter, as in the New Zealand massacre, offers another element of dehumanisation, as the live-streamed images become vaguely reminiscent of violent video games, thereby nullifying the gravity of the brutality.

From Right Wing Populism to Toxic Populism

The tactic of dehumanising the other (the out-groups) is a characteristic of extreme far right-wing populism. Populism is often understood as political behaviour that is premised on representing the common people. But this understanding is deficient as all politicians seek to represent the people, but not all politicians are populists.

Princeton political scientist, Jan-Werner Muller, argues that what distinguishes populists from other politicians is that populists present their agenda in ‘moral’ terms. To the extent that references to morality universally subdue, or even silent, our moral objections to violence and brutality, the populist tactic of moralising hatred and violence must be recognised as toxic for society.

It is toxic precisely because in masquerading as necessary and moral, such rhetoric often succeeds in deflecting negative attention, allowing hateful populists to go unabated at a significant human cost.

Ultra right-wing white supremacist rhetoric of violent extremism, as a defensive measure against the racial and cultural pollution of their societies by outsiders, is no different in its toxicity to Al-Qaeda’s rhetoric of fighting for the rights of the ‘ummah’, or ISIS’ rhetoric of the caliphate as the ‘rightful’ system for the ‘true’ representation of Muslims.

Populists who frame hateful narratives in terms of a morality are toxic precisely because in inciting violence and brutality, they become a threat to the very people they claim to represent.

The Desensitisation of Society

The strategy of dehumanising others through demeaning language or brutal imagery serves to desensitise the audience (the bystanders), and thereby serves to normalise violence and brutality. The larger damage in this tactic is that it invariably generates an apathy vis-à-vis the racism and inhumanity of the ultra right wing, and toxic populists amongst their audiences.

The consequences of this are that the burden of proof of both the inhumanity and immorality of right wing groups and movements comes to rest on the very victims of such policies and movements. This means that the very people who are threatened by such violence are themselves burdened with the responsibility of whistle blowing.

This only further serves to perpetuate brutality and terrorism of ring wing groups and movements, as the targeted audience often becomes intimidated into silence.

*Irm Haleem is Assistant Professor in the Strategic Studies Programme, and is also Manager of Research and Publications at the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR), a unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.

Last Friday, 50 Muslims were killed when a white supremacist, Brenton Tarrant, targeted two mosques in a shooting spree in Christchurch, New Zealand. Long overshadowed by Islamist radicalism, questions are now asked about what drives the far-right ideology and, specifically, what is the role of the Internet as a driver and enabler of violent far-right extremism and terror.

By Natasha Quek*

On March 15, 2019, simultaneous attacks were carried out at the Al Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, New Zealand, where Friday prayers were in session. The attacks resulted in 50 deaths. The perpetrator responsible for the shooting at the Al Noor Mosque recorded the shooting live on Facebook, where he revealed himself to be Brenton Tarrant, a 28-year-old Australian-born far-right extremist. Tarrant was swiftly arrested and brought to court the next day where he was charged with murder; two others have also been detained in connection with the attacks.

New Zealand has not experienced a mass shooting since the Raurimu Massacre in 1997. The latest attacks, while unprecedented in New Zealand, should not be viewed as an isolated incident, but rather an indication of a much broader trend – violent far-right extremism and terror.

What Fuels It?

Before committing the attacks, Tarrant published his 74-page manifesto, highlighting his extremist viewpoints, amplified through the online echo chamber. In his manifesto, he admits that the Internet played a big role in shaping the attacks, stating, “you will not find the truth anywhere else”. It also revealed that over the years, his extremist views manifested in multiple contesting ideologies.

Tarrant, who before the attacks posted pictures of his weapons inscribed with white supremacy symbols, claimed that he was a “communist, then an anarchist and finally a libertarian before becoming to be an eco-fascist”. Finding inspiration from online extremist narratives propagated, Tarrant has become another example of the growing and dangerous phenomenon of self-radicalisation through the Internet.

Far-right extremism often creates a narrative based on a perceived threat.  One of the core characteristics of far-right movements is followers’ nostalgia for the past when they did not have to fear the supposed social, cultural and political threats posed by newcomers in their midst.

As more immigrants came in and are perceived to pose a threat to the cultural status quo, it triggers an insecurity that could serve as a radicalising mechanism.

Leveraging on Insecurities

In addition, Islamist violent extremism and the high crime rates attributed to minority groups only served to perpetuate the notion among the largely white members of far-right movements that these outsiders are a threat to their well-being. Leveraging on such insecurities, far-right movements create narratives that would further stoke fear and resentment among this group of people.

Given the current global security environment, violent far-right elements have capitalised on Islamist terrorism to justify their own acts of terror. With the incessant Internet and media reporting on various Islamist terrorist acts, which at times have Islamophobic overtones, far-right movements can easily pick an incident that will trigger a reaction.

They then use it to their advantage to boost their following, as well as the proliferation of more violent (often vengeful) narratives. Tarrant, on his part, had pointed to past terror incidents perpetrated by Islamist radicals as one of the reasons for his negative views on Muslim immigrants.

Internet as a Reinforcer of Hate

The Internet and social media have allowed paranoia and rage to proliferate far and wide very easily – providing support for hateful ideologues and racists to find like-minded communities and affirmation for their toxic beliefs.

In most cases, for an individual to radicalise into committing violent acts, there must exist a physical or virtual community who share the same grievances, to transmit ideas and reinforce beliefs, and a calling upon individuals to take action to redress the wrongs against them. Today, all these are simplified and amplified within the Internet sphere.

There are numerous websites and social media platforms that provide message boards and comment sections where individuals can share their own grievances and beliefs – allowing them to find solidarity with others whose views and experiences resonate with theirs.

A thread discussing the Christchurch shooting can already be on found on “Storm front”, a site that proclaims itself to be the “voice of the, embattled White minority”. The comments made by the site members are at best dismissive towards the victims and, at worst, vilify the very community which had just been victimised.

One of the comments in response to the shooting incident reads “Islam needs to be deported out of our land”. Another person concurs, by posting that “Invaders aren’t innocent”, reinforcing the innumerable nationalistic racist posts that cover the site.

Need to Counter Online Radicalisation

The ideological element plays a role in an individual’s progression towards extremist violence, but some have argued that it can only manifest into violence when there are pre-existing personal conditions that leaves one vulnerable to exploitation by extremist forces.

It will be the New Zealand authorities’ responsibility to investigate further into Tarrant’s turn into a far-right terrorist but one thing is clear. Online communities provide radicalised individuals such as Tarrant with the opportunity for camaraderie and communication with others who share their views but, in that process, can also set off violent triggers in individuals, with devastating consequences, as evidenced in the latest violence in Christchurch.

The Internet is a potent driver and enabler of radicalisation, regardless of religion, creed and geography. Tarrant’s online rantings and live-streaming of his shootings are additional reasons why there remain an urgent need for a sustained and comprehensive strategy by governments, community stakeholders, media and tech companies in countering all versions of online radicalisation, including the far right variety.

The strategy must address measures to counter virulent online extremist narratives as well as manage the viralisation of live images and renditions of terror attacks on social media platforms. Left unchecked, the attacks in Christchurch might trigger another cycle of violence between extremists, all of whom will cynically use atrocities committed against one another to justify their own mindless acts of violence.

*Natasha Quek is a Research Analyst with the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR), a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.

A new large-scale longitudinal study carried out by University of Sussex psychologists has found a clear link between episodes of depression and anxiety experienced by adults in their twenties, thirties and forties, with a decrease in memory function by the time they are in their fifties. The study, published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, is the first of its kind to look at the relationship between depressive symptoms experienced across three decades of early-mid adulthood and a decline in cognitive function in midlife.

The Sussex psychologists analysed data from the National Child Development Study, which was established in 1958 with a cohort of over 18,000 babies and followed participants from birth into childhood and through to adulthood. The Sussex psychologists found that an accumulation of symptoms experienced by participants over the three decades provided a strong indicator of a linear decrease in memory function by the time the adults were fifty.

They found that one episode of depression or anxiety had little effect on the memory function of adults in midlife, regardless of which decade it was experienced, but that once the episodes increased to two or three over the course of the three decades, that this predicted a steady decrease in the participant’s memory function by the time they reached fifty.

This, the psychologists from the EDGE Lab at the University of Sussex argue, highlights an opportunity to protect future memory function by promoting mental health interventions amongst young adults and they are calling on the UK government to invest in the mental health of young adults as a preventative measure to protect the future brain health of our ageing population.

Dr Darya Gaysina, Senior Lecturer in Psychology at the University of Sussex said: “We found that the more episodes of depression people experience in their adulthood, the higher risk of cognitive impairment they have later in life. This finding highlights the importance of effective management of depression to prevent the development of recurrent mental health problems with long-term negative outcomes.

“We’d therefore like to see the government investing more in the mental health provision for young adults, not only for the immediate benefit of the patients, but also to help protect their future brain health.”

As well as memory, the psychologists also assessed verbal fluency, information processing speed and accuracy scores of the participants once they turned fifty. Encouragingly, episodes of depression and anxiety had little impact on the latter four areas of cognitive function but the associated loss of memory suggests that depressive symptoms experienced in early adulthood could predict dementia in older adulthood.

Previous research carried out by the EDGE lab at the University of Sussex had found a relationship between depressive symptoms experienced in older adulthood and a faster rate of cognitive decline, but this is the first time that such a large and UK nationally representative sample has been able to make this link in the first three decade of adulthood.

University of Sussex Psychology PhD student Amber John said: “We knew from previous research that depressive symptoms experienced in mid adulthood to late adulthood can predict a decline in brain function in later life but we were surprised to see just how clearly persistent depressive symptoms across three decades of adulthood are an important predictor of poorer memory function in mid-life.

“With the publication of this research, we’re calling for the government to invest in mental health provision to help stem the risk of repeated episodes of depression and anxiety. From an individual’s perspective, this research should be a wake up call to do what you can to protect your mental health, such as maintaining strong relationships with friends and family, taking up physical exercise or practicing mindfulness meditation – all of which have been shown to boost mental health. Then of course, seeing your GP for advice if you feel you need help with depression or anxiety.”

Meadows adjacent to high-intensity agricultural areas are home to less than half the number of butterfly species than areas in nature preserves. The number of individuals is even down to one-third of that number. These are results of a research team led by Jan Christian Habel at the Technical University of Munich (TUM) and Thomas Schmitt at the Senckenberg Nature Research Society.

Germany is home to roughly 33,500 species of insects – but their numbers are decreasing dramatically. Of the 189 species of butterflies currently known from Germany, 99 species are on the Red List, 5 have already become extinct, and 12 additional species are threatened with extinction.

Now a team led by Prof. Jan-Christian Habel of the Department of Terrestrial Ecology of the Technical University of Munich and Prof. Thomas Schmitt, Director of the Senckenberg German Entomological Institute in Muencheberg in Brandenburg, has examined the specific effects of the intensity of agricultural use on the butterfly fauna.

Reduced biodiversity also on areas around intensively cultivated fields

The research team recorded the occurrence of butterfly species in 21 meadow sites east of Munich. Of these study sites, 17 are surrounded by agriculturally used areas, and four are in nature preserves with near-natural cultivation.

They recorded a total of 24 butterfly species and 864 individuals in all study sites. Specialists among the butterflies were particularly dependent on near-natural habitats, while the more adaptable “generalists” were also found in other grassland sites.

“In the meadows that are surrounded by agriculturally used areas we encountered an average of 2.7 butterfly species per visit; in the four study sites within the protected areas ‘Dietersheimer Brenne’ and ‘Garchinger Heide’ near Munich we found an average of 6.6 species,” adds Prof. Werner Ulrich of the Copernicus University in Thorn, Poland.

Negative impact of the industrialized agriculture demands rethinking

“Our results show an obvious trend: in the vicinity of intensively cultivated fields that are regularly sprayed with pesticides, the diversity and numbers of butterflies are significantly lower than in meadows near less used or unused areas,” explains the study’s lead author, Prof. Jan Christian Habel.

“Our study emphasizes the negative impact of the conventional, industrialized agriculture on the butterfly diversity and shows the urgent need for ecologically sustainable cultivation methods. Additional field studies may aid in identifying individual factors responsible for the insect die-back and in implementing appropriate countermeasures,” adds Schmitt in closing.

The center of our galaxy is a frenzy of activity. A behemoth black hole — 4 million times as massive as the sun — blasts out energy as it chows down on interstellar detritus while neighboring stars burst to life and subsequently explode.

Now, an international team of astronomers has discovered two exhaust channels — dubbed “galactic center chimneys” — that appear to funnel matter and energy away from the cosmic fireworks in the Milky Way’s center, about 28,000 light-years from Earth.

Mark Morris, a UCLA professor of astronomy and astrophysics, contributed to the research, which will be published March 21 in the journal Nature.

“We hypothesize that these chimneys are exhaust vents for all the energy released at the center of the galaxy,” Morris said.

All galaxies are giant star-forming factories, but their productivity can vary widely — from one galaxy to the next and even over the course of each galaxy’s lifetime. One mechanism for throttling the rate of star production is the fountain of matter and energy whipped up by the heavyweight black hole that lurks at a galaxy’s center.

“Star formation determines the character of a galaxy,” Morris said. “And that’s something we care about because stars produce the heavy elements out of which planets — and life — are made.”

To better understand what becomes of that outflow of energy, Morris and his colleagues pointed the European Space Agency’s XMM-Newton satellite, which detects cosmic X-rays, toward the center of the Milky Way. Because X-rays are emitted by extremely hot gas, they are especially useful for mapping energetic environments in space.

In images they collected from 2016 to 2018 and in 2012, the researchers found two plumes of X-rays — the galactic center chimneys — stretching in opposite directions from the central hub of the galaxy. Each plume originates within about 160 light-years of the supermassive black hole and spans over 500 light-years.

The chimneys hook up to two gargantuan structures known as the Fermi bubbles, cavities carved out of the gas that envelops the galaxy. The bubbles, which are filled with high-speed particles, straddle the center of the galaxy and stretch for 25,000 light-years in either direction. Some astronomers suspect that the Fermi bubbles are relics of massive eruptions from the supermassive black hole, while others think the bubbles are blown out by hordes of newly born stars. Either way, the chimneys could be the conduits through which high-speed particles get there.

Understanding how energy makes its way from a galaxy’s center to its outer limits could provide insights into why some galaxies are bursting with star formation whereas others are dormant.

“In extreme cases, that fountain of energy can either trigger or shut off star formation in the galaxy,” Morris said.

Our galaxy isn’t quite that extreme — other galaxies have fountains powered by central black holes weighing a thousand times more than ours — but the Milky Way’s center provides an up-close look at what might be happening in galaxies that are more energetic.

“We know that outflows and winds of material and energy emanating from a galaxy are crucial in sculpting and altering that galaxy’s shape over time — they’re key players in how galaxies, and other structures, form and evolve throughout the cosmos,” said lead author Gabriele Ponti of the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany. “Luckily, our galaxy gives us a nearby laboratory to explore this in detail, and probe how material flows out into the space around us.”

Morris said the centers of the nearest galaxies are hundreds to thousands of times farther away than our own. “The amount of energy coming out of the center of our galaxy is limited, but it’s a really good example of a galactic center that we can observe and try to understand,” he said.

This paper analyses the scope and quality of Tokyo’s ‘Quality Infrastructure’ development policies and initiatives in East and South-East Asia and the expansion of Japanese security and relations with the US, India and Australia. All of this, as Tokyo explains, in the context of Japan’s ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) policy in and towards the region.

By Axel Berkofsky*

Tokyo’s ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) is the core of Tokyo’s strategy and policies in and towards the Indo-Pacific. The FOIP is fairly obviously designed as a competitor to Beijing’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ (BRI), enabling Tokyo to regain some of the economic and political clout lost over the countries in East and South-East Asia since Beijing announced the BRI in 2013. The main goal of Japan’s FOIP is to promote what is referred to as ‘connectivity’ between Asia, the Middle East and Africa. ‘Connectivity’ stands for, above all, the expansion of trade and investment ties helped by improved infrastructure links. At the core of Japan’s FOIP is what Tokyo calls ‘Quality Infrastructure’, ie, infrastructure development projects funded or co-funded by Japan in Asia and Africa. Tokyo’s FOIP is complemented by the so-called ‘Quadrilateral Security Dialogue’ (Quad), an Indo-Pacific security forum facilitating dialogue and consultation between Japan, Australia, India and the US. What Japan is doing in terms of ‘Quality Infrastructure’ and expansion of bilateral (with India) and multilateral (with India, the US and Australia) security and defence ties is examined in this paper.

Analysis

Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe formally introduced the ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) strategy on occasion of the Fourth International Conference on African Development (TICAD VI), held in Nairobi in August 2016. Since then, the FOIP concept has taken shape and has become a strategy into which Tokyo is investing enormous resources and capital. The ‘Quadrilateral Security Dialogue’ (Quad) complements the FOIP and is aimed at further enhancing Japanese-Indian-Australian-US cooperation in the areas of maritime security, terrorism and freedom of navigation. Japan’s approach to maritime security translates, among other things, into the Japanese navy and coastguard, together with counterparts from the US, India, and Australia, contributing to US-led ‘freedom of navigation operations’ (FONOPs) and joint military exercises in the South China Sea. In August 2018, for instance, Tokyo deployed three warships to the South China Sea to hold joint military exercises with five Asian navies and the US from the end of August to October. At the time, Japanese navy vessels made calls in ports in India, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Indonesia and the Philippines and linked up during the exercise with the US Navy deployed in the region.¹ Furthermore, Tokyo announced it would strengthen Sri Lanka’s maritime security capabilities by donating two coastguard patrol craft.² In September 2018 a Japanese submarine joined for the first time a naval military exercise in the South China Sea in disputed territorial waters (claimed above all by China). At the time, a Japanese submarine was accompanied by other Japanese warships, including the Kaga helicopter carrier.³

‘Quality Infrastructure’

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) estimates that developing Asia needs around US$26 trillion in infrastructure investments from 2016 to 2030.⁴ Japan has decided to make a significant contribution. In May 2015 Prime Minister Abe announced a ‘Partnership for Quality Infrastructure’, initially providing US$110 billion for financing the construction of roads, railways and ports in Asia.⁵ Tokyo’s ‘Quality Infrastructure’ is, at least on paper, fundamentally different from how China under its BRI scheme is financing or co-financing infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa. Chinese infrastructure development policies, be it within or outside the BRI framework, are (very) often criticised for lacking transparency and being non-sustainable and exclusive; exclusive in the sense that Chinese companies build infrastructure on a sole-source basis to claim privileged access to the infrastructure they finance and build. Furthermore, many recipients of Chinese funds fear getting caught in so-called ‘debt traps’: China is giving out loans to countries aware that they will never be able to repay them, in turn creating a political dependency that enables Beijing in certain cases to ask for territorial concessions and control over the facilities Chinese SOEs are investing in. Such was the case of the investments of the China Harbor Engineering Company, one of Beijing’s largest state-owned enterprises, in the Hambantota Port Development Project. When in late 2017 the Sri Lankan government found itself unable to service the debt it owed its Chinese investors it agreed to hand over control of the port together with 15,000 acres of land around the port in a 99-year lease. While the deal with China erased roughly US$1 billion in debt for the port project, Sri Lanka today has more debt with China than before, as other loans have continued with rates significantly higher than from other international lenders. In total, Sri Lanka owes more than US$8 billion to state-controlled Chinese firms.⁶ In March 2018 the Centre for Global Development published a study naming eight countries at high risk of debt distress related to BRI-related lending, including Laos, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Montenegro, Djibouti, Tajikistan, Mongolia and Pakistan.⁷

On occasion of the G7 summit in Japan in 2016, Tokyo announced the five principles guiding its ‘Quality Infrastructure’ projects: (1) effective governance and economic efficiency in view of life-cycle costs as well as safety and resilience against natural disasters, terrorism and cyber-attack risks; (2) job creation, capacity building and the transfer of expertise and know-how for local communities; (3) addressing social and environmental impacts; (4) alignment with economic and development strategies including aspects of climate change and the environment at the national and regional levels; and (5) effective resource mobilisation including through PPP.⁸ In 2016 Tokyo expanded the ‘Partnership for Quality Infrastructure’ initiative to US$200 billion by including Africa and the South Pacific. Envisioned and ongoing Japanese investments include: (1) US$320 million for the construction of a port in Nacala, Mozambique; (2) US$300 million for port and related infrastructure in Mombasa, Kenya; (3) US$400 million for a port in Toamasina, Madagascar; (4) US$2.2 billion for a trans-harbour link in Mumbai, India; (5) US$3.7 billion for a port and power station in Matarbari, Bangladesh; (6) US$200 million for a container terminal in Yangon, Myanmar; and (7) US$800 million for a port and special economic zone in Dawei, Myanmar.

Other Japanese ‘Quality Infrastructure’ projects include:

1. The Mombasa container port development project in Kenya. In 2017 the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)⁹ signed a US$340 million loan agreement with the Kenyan government for the construction of a second container terminal.
2. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad high-speed rail corridor.¹⁰ Japan is funding 80% of the bullet-train¹¹ project through a soft loan of roughly US$8 billion at an interest rate of 0.1%, with a tenure stretching over 50 years.
3. The Thilawa Special Economic Zone (SEZ) in Myanmar/Burma. In August 2017 the JICA signed a loan agreement with the Myanmar Japan Thilawa Development Ltd.¹²
4. A US$300 million gas-fired power station in Tanzania. The project covers Japanese assistance to construct a gas-fired power station in Tanzania that will increase the country’s generating capacity by 15%. The work is conducted by a number of Japanese companies and contractors such as Sumitomo Corporation, Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems and Toshiba Plant Systems and Services.

In South-East Asia, Tokyo is funding roads and highways in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam and is assisting in the development of Cambodia’s Sihanoukville port and the construction of railway lines in Thailand. In 2016 Tokyo launched the ‘Japan-Mekong Connectivity Initiative’, which funds the trade-promoting East-West Economic Corridor from the port of Danang in Vietnam through Laos and Thailand and on to Myanmar. Japan is also financing the Southern Economic Corridor that is envisioned to run from Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam through Cambodia and southern Laos to Thailand and the south-eastern Myanmar port city of Dawei. In October 2018 Tokyo provided US$625 million for projects aimed at reducing traffic congestion and improving drainage and sewerage systems in the Burmese capital Yangon.¹³ Also in 2018, the US and Australia officially endorsed Tokyo’s ‘Quality Infrastructure’ concept. The three countries agreed in August 2018 to promote ‘Quality Infrastructure Development’ in the Indo-Pacific region. Government agencies from the US, Japan and Australia have agreed to provide joint financing for infrastructure in Asia. America’s Overseas Private Investment Corp., the Japan Bank for International Cooperation and Australia’s Export Finance and Insurance Corp. will cooperate to support energy projects such as liquefied natural gas terminals as well as infrastructure such as undersea cables.

Competing and cooperating with China

Tokyo’s policymakers obviously understand that Beijing smells containment in Tokyo’s ‘Quality Infrastructure’ policies. Security cooperation with the US, India and Australia in the ‘Quad’ framework further confirms the suspicion in Beijing that Tokyo and its like-minded partners are teaming up against China.

But there is more than just tensions and rivalry between Tokyo and Beijing. After initially refusing to consider joining the BRI, in July 2017 Japan announced that it would consider the possibility of becoming involved in BRI-related initiatives and projects if the latter met four preconditions. For Japan to contribute to Chinese-led BRI projects, they must be characterised by: (1) openness; (2) transparency; (3) economic sustainability; and (4) the ability of the developing countries involved to claim financial ownership over the projects in question. China, of course, refused to accept the Japanese preconditions, and it can be assumed that Tokyo was at the time well aware that its conditions would be unacceptable to China. In fact, the preconditions are arguably the very opposite of how many Chinese-led and Chinese-funded BRI project along the land and maritime Silk Road are being managed and operated. Nonetheless, Tokyo’s decision to consider cooperating with China on the BRI could make economic sense, since it would give Tokyo some opportunity to hold China to higher levels of transparency and accountability. In October 2018 Tokyo and Beijing agreed to set up a joint committee aimed at working on the possibility of jointly building a high-speed railway system in Thailand. That is (potentially) significant as Japan and China were recently competing for the high-speed railway system’s construction.¹⁴ Finally, during Abe’s state visit to Beijing in October 2018, Tokyo and Beijing signed a memorandum of understanding that foresees cooperation on up to 50 infrastructure investment initiatives in third countries.¹⁵ However, there are so far no details available on what kind of infrastructure projects Tokyo and Beijing are planning to cooperate on.

Teaming up with India

In December 2007 Abe declared that peace, stability and freedom of navigation in the Pacific Ocean are linked to –and depend upon– stability and freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean.¹⁶ At the time the Japanese Prime Minister also spoke about cooperation between Japan, Australia, India and the US to secure and protect freedom of navigation in both the Pacific and the Indian Ocean. When Narendra Modi came to power as India’s Prime Minister in 2014 he announced the so-called ‘Act East’ policy, ie, an increased Indian involvement in politics and security in East and South-East Asia. In 2017 India and Japan then established the ‘Act East Forum’ to further institutionalise bilateral cooperation. During the Japan-India summit of 29 October 2018 in Tokyo, India and Japan furthermore discussed seven yen-loan agreements for key infrastructure projects in India, including the renovation and modernisation of the Umiam-Umtru Stage-III hydroelectric power station in Meghalaya and sustainable forest management in Tripura.¹⁷ Current Indo-Japanese infrastructure cooperation now stretches as far as Africa. The Asian-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) initiated jointly by Tokyo and New Delhi is a project aimed at jointly promoting connectivity with Africa.¹⁸ The AAGC was announced at the Annual Meeting of the African Development Bank (AFDB) in India in May 2017. In the years ahead, the initiative will focus on four main areas: (1) development and cooperation; (2) ‘Quality Infrastructure’ and digital and institutional connectivity; (3) enhancing capabilities and skills; and (4) establishing people-to-people partnerships. Finally, it is possible that India will ask Japan to become a partner in the Trincomalee port construction in southern Sri Lanka, a project India was awarded in April 2017.¹⁹

Defence ties

The remnants of India’s non-alignment policies, it was often argued in the past, would deter New Delhi from committing itself to security and defence ties, which in Beijing could be perceived as part of Western-led containment against China. However, that has clearly changed since Beijing has begun attempting to turn the Indian Ocean into what Indian defence analysts fear could become a ‘Chinese lake’. Beijing’s massive investments in ports and other strategic industries in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, the Maldives and other countries in South Asia with access to the Indian Ocean are keeping India’s defence planners awake at night these days.

Chinese territorial expansion in the South China Sea and Chinese investments in strategic sectors in Pakistan, in particular, have become a concern in New Delhi. In September 2018 Beijing confirmed that it would be maintaining its commitment to invest US$60 billion in the so-called China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (which is part of the BRI). However, it should be borne in mind that Beijing’s public confirmation of its economic and military commitments took place against the background of the suggestion by the Pakistani Minister of Commerce, Abdul Razak Dawood, in September 2018 of temporarily suspending projects in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, the Pakistan leg of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.²⁰ In January 2018 it was reported in the (non-Chinese) media (quoting a senior Chinese military official) that Beijing was planning to build an offshore naval base near the Pakistani Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea.²¹ If and when built, such a military base²² would become China’s second offshore naval base after having opened its first in Djibouti on the Horn of Africa in 2017. China has already invested heavily in the civilian facilities at Gwadar port and the second base would be used to dock Chinese naval vessels. While India –in view of its trade and investment ties with China– will continue to remain reluctant to allow its security cooperation with Japan to be portrayed as a fully-fledged ‘containment’ of China, Indian policymakers have turned to countering growing Chinese influence in general and fostering closer economic and military ties with Japan in particular. In October 2018 Japan and India established a 2+2 dialogue mechanism, ie, regular consultations between their respective Foreign and Defence Ministers. During a meeting between Japan’s Prime Minister Abe and his counterpart Modi in October 2018, Japan and India agreed to strengthen what is referred to as ‘maritime domain awareness’ by signing an agreement between their naval forces.²³ Also in October 2018 Tokyo and New Delhi started negotiating a logistics-sharing agreement, the so-called Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA). The ACSA facilitates joint manoeuvres, including three-way exercises with the US Navy in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific. The Japanese-Indian ACSA will give their armed forces access to each other’s military bases for logistical support. Under the agreement Japanese navy vessels will also be able to secure access to Indian naval facilities in the Andaman and Nicobar islands, located close to the western entrance to the Malacca Straits through which Japanese (and Chinese) trade and fuel imports pass. India has furthermore signed military logistics pacts with the US and France, both of which have naval bases in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific.²⁴

Europe calling?

There is not too much to report on yet, but Tokyo and the EU have already expressed their joint interest in cooperating on ‘connectivity’ and ‘Quality Infrastructure’. In October 2018, on occasion of the first EU-Japan ‘High-level Industrial, Trade and Economic Dialogue’, Tokyo and Brussels discussed future cooperation and coordination aimed at jointly increasing ‘connectivity’ in the Indo-Pacific. ‘Quality infrastructure’ cooperation it was agreed, would be part of the envisioned cooperation. And Europe and Japan already put their money where their mouths were in October 2018. The European Investment Bank (EIB) signed two Memorandums of Understanding (MoU), one with the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) and another with Nippon Export and Investment Insurance (NEXI), aimed at extending loans for infrastructure projects in Asia, the Middle East and Africa.

Security cooperation with Europe and the EU in the form of what analysts also refer to as ‘Quad plus’ in the Indian Ocean region has also been thought of and talked about in Tokyo recently. However, while Tokyo undoubtedly welcomes European support for Japanese FOIP policies –including naval patrolling in the South China Sea–, European involvement will continue to be limited to France and the UK making tangible contributions. There seems to be yet little appetite in Brussels and among EU policymakers for increasing European involvement in Asian security through naval patrolling in Asian territorial waters (especially in those where China has territorial claims).²⁵ However, in view of Chinese territorial expansion in the South China Sea in complete disregard and dismissal of international law –displayed by the construction of civilian and military facilities on disputed islands–, the EU’s insistence on not wanting to take sides in Asian territorial disputes (including those in the China Sea involving China) does not exactly add to the EU’s credibility as a foreign and security policymaker with a global reach, including Asia. Tokyo will continue investing resources and political capital in seeking to gain additional like-minded partner countries²⁶ and partners to join its FOIP policy vision and strategy of a free, open and rules-based Indo-Pacific region. Next to Australia, the US and India, the UK, Canada, France, Singapore and also Vietnam²⁷ are often cited in this context.

Conclusions

Japanese funds for ‘Quality Infrastructure’ in Asian and African development projects are substantial and Japanese companies have decades-long experience with infrastructure development and investments in African and Asian countries. Japanese ‘Quality Infrastructure’ investments have made sure that Beijing’s BRI is no longer the only infrastructure development game in town. While Tokyo’s FOIP emphasises the rule of law, human rights and democracy as its guiding values and principles, Tokyo continues to make exceptions as far as the insistence on democracy and rule of law are concerned. Indeed, Tokyo’s commitment to international law and democratic values is sometimes selective as in the case of the Philippines and Burma/Myanmar.²⁸ Japan’s willingness, in principle, to cooperate with China on infrastructure development in Asia also makes political and economic sense. Recently, Abe asked Japan’s big trading houses to look into how they could participate in Chinese-led infrastructure projects.²⁹

The expansion of Japan’s defence ties with India is substantive and together with its increasingly institutionalised security cooperation with the US and Australia in the ‘Quad’ context, it is without a doubt aimed at keeping China’s military and territorial ambitions in check. Finally, Japanese-European plans to become jointly involved in infrastructure/’Quality Infrastructure’ development is laudable but still at a highly embryonic stage. Both the EU and Japan have the economic instruments and financial means to jointly work on ‘Quality Infrastructure’ development projects in Asia, Africa and elsewhere and the recently adopted EU-Japan ‘Strategic Partnership Agreement’ (SPA) has created the necessary legal and operational basis. To be sure, Tokyo and Brussels have yet to start cooperating on ‘Quality Infrastructure’ development in Asia and elsewhere and the months and years ahead will show whether or not political rhetoric and declarations will catch up with reality, leading to results-oriented EU-Japanese cooperation on the ground.

*About the author: Axel Berkofsky, University of Pavia & ISPI, Milan

Source: This article was published by Elcano Royal Institute

¹ J. Johnson (2018), ‘Japan to send helicopter destroyer for rare long-term exercise in South China Sea and Indian Ocean’, Japan Times, 22/VIII/2018.

² Ibid.

³ See, eg, ‘Japanese submarine conducts first drills in South China Sea, Reuters, 17/IX/2018.

⁴ J. Sugihara (2018), ‘US, Japan and Australia Team on Financing Indo-Pacific Infrastructure’, Nikkei Asian Review, 11/XI/2018.

⁵ M.P. Goodman (2018), ‘An uneasy Japan steps up’, Global Economics Monthly, vol. VII, nr 4, Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), Washington DC, Apri.

⁶ Maria Abi-Habib (2018), ‘How China got Sri Lanka to cough up a port’, The New York Times, 25/VI/2018. Also see Kai Schultz (2017), ‘Sri Lanka, struggling with debt hands a major port to China’, The New York Times, 12/XII/2017. For further details on China’s investments in Sri Lanka in the framework on Beijing’s BRI see also Mario Esteban (2018), ‘Sri Lanka and great-power competition in the Indo-Pacific: a Belt and Road failure?’, ARI nr 129/2018, Real Instituto Elcano, 28/XI/2018.

⁷ ‘See China has a vastly ambitious plan to connect the world, The Economist, 26/VII/2018.

⁸ ‘G7 Ise-Shima principles for promoting quality infrastructure investment’, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan (MOFA).

⁹ Japan’s development agency responding to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

¹⁰ ‘Japan dedicated to making Indian Shinkansen a reality’, The Economic Times, 9/XI/2018.

¹¹ The Japanese Shinkansen bullet train.

¹² Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) press release, 17/VIII/2017.

¹³ B. Lintner (2018), ‘Japan offers ‘quality’ alternative to China’s’, The Asia Times, 18/VIII/2018.

¹⁴ M. Duchatel (2018), ‘Japan-China relations: confrontation with a smile’, European Council on Foreign Relations, 1/X/2018.

¹⁵ S. Armstrong (2018), ‘Japan joins to shape China’s Belt and Road’, East Asia Forum, 28/X/2018.

¹⁶ Abe, Shinzo (2012), ‘Asia’s democratic security diamond’, Project Syndicate, 27/XII/2012.

¹⁷ ‘Why Northeast Asia matters for India-Japan collaboration in the Indo-Pacific’, The Economic Times, 31/X/2018.

¹⁸ Jagannath P. Panda (2017), ‘Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC): an India- Japan arch in the making’, Focus Asia – Perspective and Analysis, nr 21, August, Institute for Security and Development Policy Stockholm,.

¹⁹ ‘Sri Lanka to offer India port development to balance out China’, The Economic Times, 19/IV/2017; see also David Brewster (2018), ‘Japan’s plan to build a “Free and Open Ocean’, The Interpreter, Lowy Institute, 29/V/2018.

²⁰ ‘China says military backbone to relations with Pakistan’, Reuters, 19/IX/2018.

²¹ Cristina Maza (2019), ‘Why is China building a military base in Pakistan, America’s newest enemy?’, Newsweek, 5/I/2019. See also Minnie Chan (2018), ‘First Djibouti… now Pakistan port earmarked for a Chinese overseas naval base, sources say’, South China Morning Post, 5/I/2018.

²² Individuals in the Chinese military and government spoken to by the author continue to remain very reluctant to admit that what China is building will be a ‘real’ and/or ‘fully-fledged’ military base.

²³ ‘India, Japan agree to hold 2+2 dialogue to enhance security in the Indo-Pacific region’, Economic Times, 29/X/2018; see also Roy Shubhajit (2018), ‘India, Japan decide to have 2+2 talks between Defence, Foreign Ministers’, The Indian Express, 30/X/2018.

²⁴ Brahma Chellaney (2018), ‘The linchpins for a rules-based Indo Pacific’, The Japan Times, 28/X/2018.

²⁵ European politicians and EU officials essentially fear Chinese economic and political repercussions should Europe ‘dare’ to increase its current involvement in Asian territorial disputes involving China.

²⁶ ‘Like-minded’ in the sense of supporting and subscribing to Tokyo’s FOIP goals and vision.

²⁷ Mentioning Vietnam and ‘like-minded’ in the same sentence is appropriate when the latter refers to Vietnam and Japan sharing the objective of freedom of navigation and a rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific as part of Tokyo’s FOIP. When comparing political systems, form of governance and the respect for freedom of speech and expression, Japan and Vietnam can hardly be referred to as ‘like-minded’.

²⁸ James D.J. Brown (2018), ‘Japan’s values-free and token Indo-Pacific strategy’, The Diplomat, 30/III/2018.

²⁹ ‘How to read Japan’s rapprochement with China’, The Economist, 25/X/2018.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has usually been analysed for its economic and geopolitical importance. There is a third crucial function of BRI − the prevention of military as well as soft balancing coalitions against Beijing by smaller Asian states along with countries such as the US and India. BRI thus is a major instrument in the hands of China in its wedge strategy in the Indo-Pacific.

By T.V. Paul*

The rise of China and the expansion of its naval presence in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea have not produced an intense balance of power coalition directed against Beijing. Even the military buildup by the United States in the Pacific before and after the Pivot to Asia strategy of 2012 has not been as strong as one would expect if balancing was the intent.

It is a puzzle that if balancing against power was automatic why we see only limited activism in the military arena as well as coalition building in the face of Chinese transgressions. Instead of active military balancing many states are resorting to soft balancing based on institutional mechanisms, limited coalitions and partial arms buildup. They are arming tepidly and not to the extent of creating a proper balance of power equation in the military sense. Even the institutional soft balancing efforts are hampered by China’s counter soft balancing as well wedge policies which are encouraging some states to bandwagon with it or remain neutral.

Puzzle of Non-Balancing

The puzzle of non-balancing cannot be explained without reference to China’s grand strategy of expansion. It appears that China has indeed developed asymmetric strategies under the cover of economic globalisation and by providing collective and individual economic goods to smaller states in Asia-Pacific, managed to prevent a hard-balancing coalition emerging in the current order.

China’s active effort to frustrate a coalition, even a soft balancing variety, is evident in its interactions with potential candidates. In my recent book: Restraining Great Powers: Soft Balancing from Empires to the Global Era (Yale University Press, 2018) I outline the various efforts by states and players such as Japan, India, and ASEAN to use institutions and limited coalitions to balance China’s threatening policies.

However, these have received Chinese attention and Beijing has made intense diplomatic efforts to frustrate such soft balancing coalitions from emerging.

China is strongly opposed to India’s joining of the quadrilateral soft balancing coalition (or Quad) involving the US, Japan and Australia. At their Wuhan summit in May 2018, Chinese leader Xi Jinping seemed to have successfully convinced India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi not to include Australia in the now annual trilateral Malabar naval exercises between India, Japan and the US.

Beijing is concerned that the Quad may be for soft balancing now, but it has the potential to becoming a hard-balancing coalition. India’s subsequent decision not to actively participate in the US-led infrastructure investment projects involving the three countries suggests that the Chinese wedge strategy has at least worked in the short run.

China’s Wedge in ASEAN?

Similarly, China has managed to create a wedge among ASEAN states when it comes to the South China Sea. ASEAN’s efforts at soft balancing via the code of conduct negotiations, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), ASEAN Plus 3 all are premised on the expectation of restraining China’s aggressive foray into the South China Sea through soft balancing institutional mechanisms.

However, since 2010, ASEAN has been able only to come up with whittled down resolutions at its annual meetings and during some years even failed to do so due to lack of consensus among members. The Chinese economic strategy helps Beijing in this regard. In recent months, even Japan, reeling under the Trump tariff threats has mellowed down its rhetoric and soft balancing efforts against China.

BRI: China’s Mechanism to Prevent Balancing Coalitions

Analysts have discussed the economic and political pros and cons of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). But they neglect a key function it serves in the strategic arena. Beijing uses economic instruments to prevent a balancing coalition, both soft and hard, from emerging in the Indo-Pacific region. The BRI has come as a major source of investment and infrastructure development for many states in the region.

These states are unlikely to join in a military balancing coalition against Beijing. Stronger regional powers such as India and Japan are hampered by their lack of resources available or committed to regional states nowhere near what China has offered. This places them in the estimation and strategic calculations of these states in a lower position when it comes to coalition building.

The smaller states of South Asia − Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Maldives (until recently) − have been effectively wedged from India through BRI and other economic and infrastructure aid that China offers. India is thus forced to offer them economic support, albeit unequal in quantity, in order to prevent them from falling completely into Beijing’s orbit.

BRI has helped China to solidify its hard balancing coalition with countries like Pakistan. But not too many others have fallen for a military alignment with China which shows that money can buy some loyalty, but forming a bandwagoning coalition in the 21st century is going to be cumbersome.

Making smaller states disinterested and thereby preventing them from forming balancing coalitions with the US, India or Japan against its expansionist pursuit may be the most China can achieve for now.

*T.V. Paul is James McGill Professor of International Relations at McGill University, Canada and a Visiting Professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He is also a former president of the International Studies Association (ISA). In his new book, Restraining Great Powers: Soft Balancing from Empires to the Global Era (New Haven: Yale university Press, 2018), Paul discusses the different soft balancing and hard balancing strategies states have used from Post-Napoleonic era to today’s globalised world.

Never let a bloody and opportune crisis pass. In New Zealand, there is talk about gun reform after attacks on two Christchurch mosques left fifty dead. There have been remarks made in parliament about unchecked white supremacy growing with enthusiastic violent urge in Australasia. In Turkey, the approach has shifted into another gear: the canny, even menacing exploitation by Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The election campaign is in full swing.

Spending his time, as he often does, whipping up audiences at rallies into feverish states, the sometimes shrill leader hits form when he dons the gear of the fully fledged demagogue. With the massacre still fresh, and the unavoidable insinuations from the Christchurch shooter about the mortal dangers posed by Islam, both current and historical, the platform was set.

Using footage from the Christchurch attack as part of his campaign show, Erdoğan promised that he was on guard against anti-Islamic forces and keen to hold the shooter to account. He also found reference to Gallipoli – site of much slaughter between the Australian New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) and Turkish forces in 1915 – irresistible. “What business did you have here? We had no issues with you, why did you come all the way here?” He already had the reason: “we’re Muslim and they’re Christian.” As for those who came to Turkey with anti-Islamic sentiments, the promise was stern: they would be sent back in coffins “like their grandfathers were” during the Gallipoli campaign.

Senior aide Fahrettin Altun was left with the task of adding ill-concealing camouflage: the President’s “words were unfortunately taken out of context”, reassuring those coming to ancient Anatolia that “Turks have always been the most welcoming & gracious hosts to their #Anzac visitors.” A translation of what Erdoğan is meant to have said was quickly issued, though the thrust was similar. The difference here was the speech’s stress against the shooter and those of his ilk, with an unmistakable promise for retribution against any malcontents. “Your ancestors came and saw us here. Then some left on their feet, some in coffins. If you come here with the same intentions (to invade our land) we will be waiting and have no doubt we will see you off like your ancestors.” Softening the waspish blow slightly, Erdoğan also spoke of Gallipoli (Çanakkale) as both “the symbol of the dream of peace we all share, and the brotherhood that grows from common sorrows.”

As a gathering of the press on March 20, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison considered the remarks by Erdoğan to be “highly offensive to Australians, and highly reckless in this very sensitive environment.” The reason was rather elementary for the prime minister: the Turkish leader had attacked the sacred nature of the ANZAC tradition, insulting their “memory” and violating “the pledge that is etched in the stone at Gallipoli, of the promise of Ataturk to the mothers of our ANZACs.” Travel advisories to Turkey might have to be updated; the Turkish ambassador would be rebuked.

Morrison’s understanding, and, for that matter, that of many Australians, shows the latent contradiction inherent in the ANZAC tradition. Having invaded the Ottoman Empire in a daring, foolish and ultimately catastrophic enterprise in 1915, the Allied forces of the First World War, which did have a significant contingent of fresh faced Australian and New Zealand soldiers, were treated in death far better than most.

The slain ANZACs, in particular, were given soothing balm and reassurances by the victorious Turks. In 1934, a tribute was made by Atatürk, one that inscribes the Kemal Atatürk Memorial on Anzac Parade in Canberra: “Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives… You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side here in this country of ours.”

Having removed the boundaries of difference between the men, the Turkish statesman posits a maternal image, one intended to reassure mothers that their lost sons had become the offspring of another land, to be cherished and remembered in their death. Images of soil and earth abound. “You, the mothers who sent their sons from faraway countries, wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well.”

These sons had a mission; they had attacked a sovereign entity as part of a great power play. Winston Churchill, then Britain’s First Lord of the Admiralty, felt that knocking the Ottoman Empire out of the First World War was just the ticket to break the murderous stalemate on the Western front. To that end, the ANZACs had merely been another set of invaders in the service of empire. Instead of gloating, Atatürk showed a measure of modesty and humility.

Erdoğan should never be accused of such restraint and composure, just as the cult of ANZAC cannot be accused of being wholeheartedly receptive to the Turkish perspective of the Gallipoli campaign. For the Australian and New Zealand dead, their sacrifice is given the ghastly cellophane of freedom; they did so to protect liberties held sacred. It would be far more appropriate to see the Turkish effort as one for freedom. As Erdem Koç ruefully penned in 2015, “Had the hundreds of thousands of young men not joined the army and headed to Gallipoli, and the bravery displayed on the frontlines not happened, it’s without doubt modern Turkey would not have been formed.”

Did the Turkish leader have a point on Australian laxity in dealing with the shooting? For Morrison, misrepresentations had been taking place on “the very strong position taken by the Australian and New Zealand Governments in our response to the extremist attack in New Zealand that was committed by an Australian, but in no way, shape or form, could possibly be taken to represent the actions, or any policy or view of the Australian people.”

Morrison fumed that his response had been appropriate and swift, those of an “open, tolerant society, accepting all faiths and peoples”, embracing “our Muslim brothers and sisters in New Zealand and in Australia, quite to the contrary of the vile assertion that has been made about our response.”

Morrison’s programmed retort – Australia as tolerant, open, embracing – jars with the reaction within Australia in various, irritable circles. Waleed Aly, who wears academic, journalistic and broadcasting hats depending on the occasion, explained with regret on his program, The Project, that there was “nothing about Christchurch that shocks me.” Its ordinariness proved the most threatening of all.

Remarks from the tetchy, reactionary Senator Fraser Anning were then cited, ones insisting that the Christchurch killings were a product, not of white nationalist mania but permissiveness towards Islamic fascism and the tendencies of those who follow Allah. The comments were not part of the shooter’s manifesto, Aly noted, but placed upon “an Australian parliament letterhead”. As he continued to urge: “Don’t change our tune now because the terrorism seems to be coming from a white supremacist. If you’ve been talking about being tough on terrorism for years, and (on) the communities who allegedly support it, show us how tough you are now.”

Polemical and polarising comments will continue; there may even be retaliatory attacks to add to the bloodletting. It is not just jealousy that doth mock the meat it feeds on; hatreds will do just as nicely, ensuring that the Johnnies and the Mehmets shall part ways, man barricades and fill the coffins.

By Per Bylund*

The movie V for Vendetta has provoked public discussion of the meaning of anarchism. Murray Rothbard was an advocate of the stateless society, but he was never accepted by the anarchist movement and is still considered more a “capitalist lackey” than anarchist thinker. Indeed, anarcho-capitalism has always been considered an oxymoron by the self-proclaimed “true” anarchists.

Part of the reason is a general inability to understand different uses and definitions of words in the classical socialist and liberal traditions. Socialists refer to “capitalism” as the system in which the state hands out and protects capitalists’ privileges — and therefore oppression of labor workers. They don’t see that capitalism, in the classical liberal tradition, means rather a free market based on free people, i.e., voluntary exchanges of value between free individuals.

A deeper and more interesting reason is anarchism’s socialist roots. As shown in, e.g., the Anarchist FAQ, most — if not all — historical anarchist thinkers were proud to announce their ideas belonged to the progressive socialist tradition. The “founding father” of anarchism, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, was socialist; American 19th century individualist anarchists often claimed to be socialists; and the Russian communist anarchists Mikhail Bakunin and Peter Kropotkin were obviously socialists.

There were however a few anarchists who were not explicit socialists, but they were few and relatively unknown if at all accepted as anarchists. The German egoist Max Stirner somehow managed to become generally accepted as an anarchist even though he never claimed to be a socialist. (He never claimed to be an anarchist, either).

It would be futile to claim the anarchist tradition is not originally and mostly socialist and that is not the point of this essay. I do not refute socialism’s importance to anarchism in theory nor in practice, but I will show how the definition of “socialism” is too rigid and statist, as opposed to what anarchists generally claim, and it seems to be based on an unfortunate misunderstanding of man and the market. The main problem is the socialist anarchists’ refusal to think anew when new facts have been revealed.

Peter Kropotkin, the famous late 19th- and early 20th-century Russian communist anarchist, stated that there are essentially two kinds of socialism: statist socialism and anarchism. The difference between the two is that statist socialism wishes to take control of the state and use it to enforce socialism, whereas [socialist] anarchism wishes to abolish the state and thereby the oppressive capitalist economic system. Kropotkin’s distinction solves quite a few inherent contradictions and problems in statist socialism, such as enforcing equality through letting a few rule the many via the state.

But some of the problems persist in the anarchist version of socialism. The problems arise due to the fact that socialists generally tend to have a static view of society, which makes them totally ignorant of how things change over time. Socialists would probably not admit this is the case, since they do know that things have been changing through the course of history (Karl Marx said so) and that things never seem to stay the same. But still they argue as if “ceteris paribus” is the divine principle of reality, and it is not.

Socialism does not allow for a time component (or, it is deemed unimportant and therefore omitted) in the analysis of the world or the economy. Things are generally thought to be as they are even though they were not the same in history and that they need to be changed in the future. In a socialist world people are equal and should stay equal; the individual choices of actors in the free marketplace (yes, socialist anarchists do talk about the market) do not change this fact. In this socialist view of the world there is simply no understanding whatsoever for that characteristic of the market that Ludwig von Mises called time preference.

This important piece of information about how the market works (that is, how people function) means a person usually prefers having a value now to having the same value some time in the future. This has nothing to do with earning interest on investments, but is rather a natural part of what it means to be a rational being (one would do better with a certain amount of food now than with that same amount food a week from now). Without knowledge about this (or even without time preference per se), calculating what “will be” on the market would be a whole lot easier (but totally wrong).

But time preference is not a part of the socialist perception of the world or economics. Understanding this fact makes it a lot easier to understand the socialist demand for teleological equality, i.e., equality as a measure of justice applicable both before and [especially] after interactions and exchanges have taken place in the market place. If the world and economy would be perpetually static and thus no values are ever created, then economic equality is theoretically possible. (It is perhaps even fair.)

But this is not the case, and thus the socialist analysis is wrong. This weakness, which we can call time ignorance, persists in the anarchist version of socialism.

Socialist Time Ignorance

Kropotkin defines this kind of socialism as “an effort to abolish the exploitation of Labour by Capital,”1 and Benjamin Tucker says “the bottom claim of Socialism [is] that labour should be put in possession of its own.”2 Well, that doesn’t sound that bad. Another way of saying the same thing would be that every individual has a natural right to that which he produces, and that it is a violation of his natural rights to forcefully remove this product of his labor from his hands.

Whether you call it natural rights or not, this is the essence and common theoretical basis for how value is generated in both classical liberalism and Marxism. Whenever an individual invests his time, skill, and effort into trying to achieve a value, he creates value and is as its creator the rightful owner of that value. It is hard to argue the individual is not the rightful owner of his labor; John Locke even went so far as to call labor the “unquestionable property of the labourer.” If the individual doing the work does not own his labor, then who does?

The difference between classical socialism and liberalism is not in the definition of ownership or how it arises, but in its meaning. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, even though he is famous for stating “property is theft” (meaning property privileges causing exploitative conditions), also stated that “property is freedom” in the sense that man is only free when he is the sole owner of that which is in his possession and that which he creates. What he was referring to is wage labor being exploitation of the labor worker by the privileged capitalist.

To understand this view, we need to remember time preference is not applicable (or not allowed). From the socialist perspective, any difference in value between input and output is either fraud or theft (to use libertarian terminology). If you invest labor (input) to achieve a value of $100 and receive pay (output) of $95 dollars you are being oppressed.

This is part of why capitalism, using the socialist definition, is oppressive. Whoever “offers” a job (i.e., the capitalist) makes a profit simply because the value of the workers’ invested labor is greater than what they receive in pay. (The reason they can do this, socialists claim, is because of state-enforced property privileges indirectly forcing labor workers into wage slavery.)

Another way of saying this is that surplus value is released for the managers and owners of industry through paying labor workers only part of their labor input. In this static view of how the world works under the capitalist economic system, employment sure is usury and “wage slavery.” I can’t argue with that, and I will not argue with the identification of many historical and contemporary employment schemes being de facto usury due to privileges handed out to capitalists by the political class.

The analysis, however, is fundamentally wrong, and it is so simply because socialists don’t understand time preference. It is of value (but not necessarily monetary value) to many a worker frequently to receive a fixed amount of pay for invested labor instead of taking the risks of producing, marketing, and selling a product in the market place (even if the enterprise is not carried out individually but in cooperation with other workers).

It is also true in reverse: the “capitalist” values money now more than money later; thus, profits at a later time need to be greater than labor costs now to “break even.” The point here is that if a worker would voluntarily choose between multiple different alternatives there is reason to believe employment is sometimes (or, in perhaps often) an attractive choice.

The reason this is so, is because of division of labor, risks in the market place, and so on. But it is primarily because of time preference, meaning a worker might value a fixed wage now and at predetermined intervals more than investing his labor now and gain the full value later. The laborer could therefore be in equilibrium when investing labor generating $100 worth of products a month from now even if he is paid only $95 now.

To some people less money now than more money later is indeed usury, but that is only a fact that strengthens the theory of time preference as put forth by Austrian economists. People have different perceptions of value and do value different things at different times, and therefore one individual may very well find employment is to his benefit while other individuals cannot for the world accept such terms. And the same individuals might think very differently at a different point in time.

Values are Subjective

This necessarily brings us to another important point that is closely related to the nature of time preference, and that is the identification of values as subjective. Monetary values are objective in the sense that $1 is always $1 (or, in other words, 1=1 or “A is A”), but receiving the amount of $1 could mean a lot to one individual and at the same time mean close to nothing to another. Of course, socialist anarchists and even statist socialists understand the relativity of values, e.g., that $1 to a poor person means a lot more than it ever would to a wealthy person (even though it is still only $1). That’s why socialists often claim rich people have nothing to fear from taxes (even large sums don’t mean much to them) whereas poor people can gain “a lot.”

But relative value in this sense means only that the individual assessment of the value of $1 is relative to how many dollars he or she already has (or can easily get). This is different from the identification of values as subjective.

A subjective value does not necessarily mean a certain amount of money is compared to another amount. Values are subjective in the sense that something of value means you consider yourself being better off with it than without it. This has nothing to do with amounts of monetary units or comparing apples with apples; subjective value is the individual assessment of something as compared with the same individual’s assessment of the alternatives. Values are subjective in the sense that the individual alone makes the assessment and makes it according to his or her individual preferential hierarchy. Thus, subjective value does not depend on what is being valued, but rather on how it is perceived!

Therefore, a laborer’s analysis of whether employment is beneficial does not only involve the monetary value of invested labor and received payment, but also everything else he values. Employment could be of great value to a risk aversive individual, since the risk of losing money is very low, whereas the same deal for someone else, who perhaps gets a kick out of taking risk, is nothing but outright slavery. People are different.

This brings us to a third and last important point that follows directly from the fact that values are subjective: there are only individuals. Even though cultural and social identities tend to make people think in the same direction, they are still not the same and they do think differently. Socialists in general obviously fail to realize this.

As has been shown in the example of employment versus no employment, individuals value things differently. Some individuals would accept wage labor and be fully satisfied with it (and even find it the best available alternative), while others cannot find employment to their benefit at all. Individuals are uniquely different, and that means they do have different preferences.

This is one of the main reasons state policies are always oppressive and never can work satisfactorily: they provide one system or solution for one kind of people, and that has to cause problems when applied on a population such as the 300 million unique individuals living in the United States.

Anarchism: A World of Sovereigns

The fact that “there are only individuals” is also a great argument for anarchism. There cannot be a single system forced on any two individuals without it fitting one individual better than the other, and thus such a system would create legal inequalities (and therefore be oppressive). Also, since there are only individuals there is no reason to believe some individuals should have the power to rule other individuals. If there are only individuals, all of them should be sovereign self-owners and enjoy an equal full right to their selves.

But this fact means also that people are different and that some people will value certain things while other people value completely different things. Some people will have high time preference for certain values, while others will have low time preference. Some people will be able to use their time and skill to create a lot of value to others (assessed subjectively), while others create value only recognized by a few. And individual choices will always be individual choices, the decisions made depending on the individual’s subjective assessment of values he chooses to identify.

Socialism, as commonly defined by the socialists (of both anarchist and statist varieties), fails to realize this fact and therefore categorically dismisses market solutions, functions, and institutions that arise voluntarily and spontaneously. It might be true that socialists themselves would never accept wage labor, but many others would perhaps happily accept employment as being beneficial to them individually or collectively.

The same is true with the famous Marxian credo, usually advocated also by socialist anarchists, that the laborer is free only when he has taken ownership of the means of production. But how can we say a certain kind of profession or “class” shares the exact same values? That necessarily presupposes an extreme class consciousness, where individuals no longer exist. If “class consciousness” is instead interpreted rather as a sense of class belonging and unity in certain values, time preference and subjectivity of values would still apply!

A free-market anarchist can embrace many of the socialist-anarchist goals, such as equality in the right to self, one’s labor, and any fruits thereof. We can support the socialist anarchist goal to abolish the state as an inherently evil institution forcing individuals to relinquish that which is theirs by natural right. But we also see the shortcomings of socialism as currently defined; time preference is a fundamental piece of information on how people, and therefore the market and society, function.

Because of time preference it is not possible to dismiss totally the notion that inequalities might arise in the free marketplace.3 Individuals will act in accordance with their perception of what is most beneficial to them and the people, gods, or artifacts important to them. Some value monetary wealth while others value health, leisure, family, a nice house, or fast cars. People will choose differently depending on their situation and their preferences, and even if they start off in a state of egalitarianism some choices will be better (with respect to something, e.g., amount of monetary assets) and some poorer.

It is not unlikely some people will choose to accumulate wealth (to whatever degree possible without the existence of state privileges) while others will eagerly spend what they earn on entertainment or engage in conspicuous consumption. The choice should be the individual’s and there is no way we can say it is “right” or “wrong” — it is for the individual to decide.

Thus, if we truly believe in the individual as a self-owner and sovereign we shouldn’t claim to know what he or she will (or should) choose, and we cannot say what he or she will not choose. In a society of only free individuals, all of them will be equal in their right to self and thus we cannot tell people they cannot trade their labor in the future for value now. They will do what they perceive to be in their interest, and I will do what I perceive to be in mine, and what is in our interests personally or mutually is for us to decide individually.

This is the reason one cannot say employment and capital accumulation vanishes when the state is abolished. Indeed, the opposite is true. This is also the reason Murray Rothbard truly was an anarchist, even though he did not accept the illusion of a world without time preference.

*About the author: Per Bylund, PhD, is a Fellow of the Mises Institute and Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship & Records-Johnston Professor of Free Enterprise in the School of Entrepreneurship in the Spears School of Business at Oklahoma State University, and an Associate Fellow of the Ratio Institute in Stockholm.

Source: This article was published by the MISES Institute

• 1. Evolution and Environment, p. 81
• 2. The Anarchist Reader, p. 144
• 3. In a free market, it is however less likely than in a state system, since no one can gain coercively enforced privileges at the expense of others.

By Paolo Zucconi

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) could be one of the richest countries in the world, but its recent history only consists of internal conflict and poverty. Governed by the Kabila dynasty from 1997-2018 and affected by decades of civil wars and humanitarian crisis, the country is a huge source of rare minerals and raw materials. Coltan, for example, is a key material used in various high-tech industries, including aerospace. Extracted by thousands of slaves, the mineral has been illegally extracted and sold via Burundi since 1995. Over the years, many armed groups emerged to seize control of the mines, employing large-scale violence to make profits from the illicit trade.

About 13 million people today depend on foreign aid in Congo. About 4.1 million are refugees – more than in Syria. The new president, Felix Tshisekedi, won in disputed elections last year and has called for national reconciliation.

Whereas eastern Congo is no longer affected by heavy military clashes with its neighbors, in the last two years, smaller scale cross-border dynamics have intensified and armed resistance increased. There are about 100 militias fighting government forces. However, civil wars and internal conflict is not the only problem. The latest Ebola crisis is also spreading, and the worst-hit areas are already heavily affected by violence and poverty.

According to Doctors Without Borders, the Ebola epidemic in Congo is out of control. About 570 people have died so far and another 907 are infected. The current crisis is considered the second worst in the history of Congo and it is spreading fast for several reasons:

First of all, widespread instability and armed conflict is impacting the epidemic response, with health workers recently being attacked at two Ebola treatment centers in Katwa and Butembo. There are high risks for personnel working in the hot zone, who risk being kidnapped or killed. Doctors Without Borders had to suspend its activity in those areas because of a critical situation. New medicines and experimental vaccines continue to arrive, but distribution is extremely difficult. Katwa, near the Uganda-border, is the most critical area. Several cases are also in Butembo and the outbreak could spread into other villages and cities, where there are not any properly equipped medical facilities nor trained personnel for containment, and where there are more migration flows to Rwanda, South Sudan, Uganda.

Long-term tensions and clashes between the government and rebel groups aren’t helping in the fight to contain the Ebola outbreak. The Kivu conflict is one example. Between 2004 and 2008, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) and the Hutu group Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) fought over control of rare minerals and natural resources in the region. There are still clashes ongoing, which impedes effective anti-Ebola strategies from being implemented.

However, this is not the only problem. According to Joanne Liu, President of Doctors Without Borders, local police coerce people to go to Ebola treatment centers to comply with health measures against Ebola. But this is leading to further alienation among the community, and is counterproductive to controlling the epidemic. Not all the people who are being forced to move are infected. There is a communication issue. Due to coercive measures, locals do not perceive these centers as a solution, choosing instead to hide in their own communities. As a result, over 40% of fatal cases pass away in the community and not at a health clinic.

The increasing militarization of this crisis risks negative effects, especially with regards to trust – an important commodity given the DRC’s sectarian conflicts. The key challenge concerns community mistrust, especially in Katwa. Community members are not proactive in reporting suspected cases and refuse to cooperate with operators in the treatment centers. A major role should be played by the government in strengthening community-based prevention policies. Local police is necessary to endorse cooperation between foreign operators and the local population, as well as to provide a local security presence to reassure locals. However, local police should not exercise discretionary power on reporting suspected cases and/or act as coercive authority. Otherwise, there’s a risk of alienating the people whose cooperation is crucial in containing the outbreak.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect those of Geopoliticalmonitor.com or any institutions with which the authors are associated.

By Giancarlo Elia Valori

The issue of Sinai and its jihad is increasingly important, also considering Hezbollah’s new strategy in Southern Lebanon, as well as the current deployment of Iranian, Syrian, Russian and various Sunni and jihadist forces between the Golan Heights and the Bekaa Valley, on the border between Syria and Israel.

 The “sword jihad” in the Sinai peninsula, however, dates back to many years ago.

 In 2011, precisely at the peak of tension both in the West and within some of the so-called “moderate” Islamic forces operating in the Maghreb region, during the various national “Arab springs”, the Ansar Bayt Al-Maqdis group (ABM) was created in the Sinai peninsula.

 As was easy to foresee, unlike what CIA believed at the time, the destabilization of the old regimes had strengthened and not weakened the jihadist organizations.

 ABM was the new network of exchange, training, intelligence and fundraising of the local jihad that, for the first time, played its own autonomous role.

 For all the organizations of the Egyptian-Palestinian “holy war”, the opportunity of Mubarak’s fall was too fortunate to be missed.

 In the void of power (and of welfare for the Sinai populations), the newly-established ABM easily succeeded in winning the local populations’ support.

 It should also be noted that, albeit always careful in its approach – except in the strategic void occurred with Morsi’s government linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, which lasted from June 30, 2012 to July 3, 2013, when the coup of the Head of the military intelligence services, Al Sisi, ousted him from power – Egypt was interested only in the security of Sinai’s oil networks, not in the support of local populations.

 Even currently, with the emergence of Sinai’s jihad, Egypt bears the brunt of its strategic oversight and the poor social and political analysis of the peninsular system around its canals.

 Nevertheless Al Sisi-led Egypt has very little money- hence some simplicity in its analyses is quite understandable.

  The activity to make the Sinai networks safe had already started as early as Mubarak’s time and has continued until the current government of Al Sisi, who knows all too well that – after the “cure” of the Muslim Brotherhood -he cannot completely trust his own police forces or his intelligence services, and hence is thinking of somehow “delegating security” for the Sinai peninsula also to third parties.

 At that juncture, however, the news was spread that the Israeli forces were using precisely Palestinian elements to collect primary intelligence on the Sinai’s Isis, one of ABM current developments.

 ABM was one of the first groups outside the Syrian-Iraqi system to swear allegiance to the “Caliph” Al Baghdadi.

 Israel used those intelligence networks only to support Egypt  in its specific local war on terror, considering that Daesh-Isis still had at least 2,000 active elements in the peninsula that, for the time being, were not specifically targeted to the Jewish State.

 On January 11, 2019, for example, the Egyptian Armed Forces successfully hit and hence killed 11 terrorists, who were already making operations against the city of Bir-el-Abad in Northern Sinai.

 It was even said that the Israeli intelligence had infiltrated the local Daesh-Isis. This was also confirmed by Egyptian President Al-Sisi himself who, in an interview with the American TV channel CBS on January 3, 2019, reaffirmed the existence of close cooperation between the Israeli intelligence services and the Egyptian forces in all the anti-jihadist operations in Sinai.

 Clearly, the goal of ABM – which had meanwhile quickly converged into Al Baghdadi’s “Caliphate” –was the stable deterioration of relations between Egypt and Israel.

 It should also be noted that the continued terrorist action against the oil and gas networks in Sinai forced Jordan to look for and buy oil and gas elsewhere.

 Obviously the permanent insecurity of networks in Sinai slowed down and often blocked the prospects for expansion of the Israeli gas and oil in their connection both with Egypt and with the long Arab Pipeline network reaching Damascus and, through Turkey, the European market.

 Hence, since 2013, with the successful coup staged by Al Sisi, the ABM – which was already part of the pseudo-Caliphate system – has been focusing on one goal: the fight against the Egyptian armed forces and power.

 Hence Sinai’s new jihadist network is composed of Wilayat al Sinai, i.e. the pseudo-Caliphate network; some groups linked to Al Qaeda, such as Jund al Islam, a structure  operating above all in Sinai’s Western desert, as well as Ansar al Islam and other groups, always active in Sinai’s Northern  peninsula.

There are also militant groups that are explicitly linked to the Islamic Brotherhood, such as Hassm (the acronym of the “Army of Egypt’s Forearms”) and Liwa al Thawra, also known as “the Banner of the Revolution” which, however, operates above all in Egypt, between Alexandria, Cairo and Suez.

 It should also be noted that last February both the Islamic “State” of Daesh-Isis and Al Qaeda itself uploaded a video in which Ayman Al Zawahiri harshly criticized the behaviour of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and above all in Sinai.

 Hence in 2014 Al Sisi militarized Sinai.

 Although not much is known about it, it is a low-intensity war that has already exacted a toll of several thousand victims.

 The ABM, renamed Wilayat al Sinai after its affiliation with Daesh-Isis, was still supported by much of Sinai’s population, while the economic crisis of the region worsened with the embargo imposed by Egypt, with a view to stopping oil smuggling and the widespread arms trafficking.

 At that juncture, Al Sisi launched its great Comprehensive Operation Sinai 2018, a military action which began on February 9, 2018, and was organized between the Nile Delta and Northern and Central Sinai.

 In fact, everything began after the attack on the Al-Rawda mosque of November 24, 2017. It should be noted that Al-Rawda is a mosque linked to the Jayiria Sufi sect, a mystic “order” widespread particularly in Sinai, especially in the Bir el-Abed area.

 Thanks to the effective results of that great operation, Egypt also closed the Gaza border and the Rafah border that, however, has been recently reopened.

 It is worth noting that the “great operation” had been  launched shortly before the Egyptian political and presidential elections of March 2018.

 Hence these are the terms of the equation: strong anti-Egyptian jihadist threat in Sinai; limited forces available to the Egyptian army and intelligence services and above all the issue of the International Monetary Fund’s loan to Egypt, which has strategic and military importance also in Sinai.

 Therefore Al Sisi’s military credibility is one of the essential factors of his financial salvation.

 In fact, in November 2016, the IMF granted to Egypt an Extended Fund Facility worth 12 billion US dollars.

 All the applicative reviews, including the last one of February 4, 2019, have already been approved by the Fund’s board.

 So far, however, the reforms implemented by Al Sisi’s regime have always been evaluated positively by the  aforementioned board.

 And also by many private investment banks, which could also take over from the IMF at the end of the Extended Fund Facility.

 Hence macroeconomic stabilization but, first and foremost,  resumption of the GDP growth.

 Tourism, the primary sector of the Egyptian economy, has again started to perform very well. The same holds true for migrants’ remittances and for the product of the non-oil and manufacturing sector, which the IMF has identified as the key to Egypt’s future – a sector which is recovering and, anyway,  is also growing steadily.

 The social protection put in place by the Egyptian government, essential for “keeping the crowds under control” (and, often, also local jihadist terrorism) provides food for children, basic commodities and medicines, with a recent and significant increase of the liquidity available in the many smart cards already distributed to the poor people.

 The takafol and karama programs, designed to support the poor families’ standard of living, already apply to over 2.2 million households, i.e. 9 million Egyptians.

 Too many poor people and hence many candidates to swell the jihad ranks, with a very effective network now available, including para-Caliphates, Al Qaeda and all the rest, but especially the network of Muslim Brotherhood’s “young people”, who are refocusing on a “slow-paced”, but equally  cruel, brutal and effective jihad.

 Hence, without making it explicitly known to Israel, Egypt has already placed Hamas in the frontline of its low-intensity war in Sinai.

 In late November 2018, the former ABM group in Sinai had also already seized a shipment of Iranian weapons, especially kornet missiles, that went from Iran to Hamas through the Gaza Strip.

  For some years, however, the relations between the Palestinian Islamic jihad and Egypt have weakened, thanks to the well-known support that the Palestinian group of Gaza, also linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, has provided to the Sinai jihad. Hence currently the real strategic link lies in the structural clash between Daesh-Isis and Hamas in the Sinai peninsula.

Obviously, the primary goal of the Israeli secret services is always to get good intelligence on the Al-Baghdadi system in the peninsula, but Hamas does not certainly remain silent.

 In fact, in early January 2019, the Interior Minister of the Gaza Strip – obviously a Hamas leader – arrested as many as 54 aides of the Israeli forces who, according to Hamas, were operative of Shabak, the Israel Security Agency.

 In Sinai, however, Isis still has a very close relationship with Hamas and is still the main carrier of arms smuggling in the Gaza Strip.

 Currently, however, the real news is that the “Caliphate” has harshly broken with the Muslim Brotherhood’s group  that rules in the Gaza Strip.

 As a result, as previously said, Egypt has enlisted precisely Hamas in its fight against the so-called  “Caliphate”.

  Therefore also Qatar’s portentous funding granted only to  Al Sisi’s regime is not useless here. This is an essential factor to understand the new strategic equation of both Qatar and  present-day Egypt.

 It was exactly in early January 2018, however, that the “Caliphate” openly declared war on Hamas.

   Later, in March 2019, there have also been severe attacks on Israeli civilian positions, starting from the Gaza Strip.

 The Israeli intelligence services have also ascertained that the specifically military wing of Hamas, namely the “Izz-ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades”, have already agreed with the Egyptian Armed Forces to fight the “Caliphate”, especially in the areas on the border with the Gaza Strip.

 The Egyptian intelligence services have also notified Israel, the United States and Saudi Arabia of the fact that they know the military-financial transactions of the Egyptian regime with Qatar very well. They have also informed Russia that the agreement between Hamas and the Egyptian forces is designed to permanently “recovering” Gaza’s Palestinian group, while in October 2018 Egypt had also arranged a short agreement between Hamas and Israel to reduce  tension between the two areas.

 In essence, pending the forthcoming end of military activities in Syria, a new tripartite order is being created, in the Middle East, between Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Emirates. All these three actors really want Israel to participate in the whole stabilization of the region.

 This obviously implies the stable solution of the Palestinian issue, possibly with a new joint leadership –also different from the current one – and hence a new division of the areas of influence also within the Palestinian world.

 Egypt wants to directly control the Gaza Strip, i.e. Hamas and the smaller local networks of Fatah and the Palestinian Jihad again in the Gaza Strip, but without forgetting the military and financial ties of these three organizations with Iran.

 In the design of the new Arab tripartite agreement, Iran shall leave quickly.

 Egypt is here imagining a sort of unification between the various groups of the old Palestinian resistance movement, with new organizations of political representation within the Gaza Strip and possibly also in the PNA’s Territories.

  Nevertheless many problems will obviously emerge: the Palestinian National Authority, de facto expelled from the Gaza Strip, has had no news or ideas about the state of security in the Gaza Strip for at least ten years.

 Egypt, however, does not want to put only in Hamas’ hands the whole issue of Sinai stability, as well as its sensitive, but fundamental relations with Israel.

 Al Sisi is mainly observing – with extreme care –  the role played by the number 2 leader of the PNA, Mohammed Dahlan, who has good relations with Hamas, but is still accused by Fatah of being “the one who lost the Gaza Strip in 2007”.

 In any case, currently Egypt and Israel have excellent relations (Al Sisi and Netanyahu have regular phone conversations every week), while it should be recalled that it was exactly the emergence of the Sinai jihad that enabled Egypt to militarize the areas in which that had been  forbidden exactly by the Peace Treaty with the Jewish State.

 Another central issue is the cooperation between Israel and Egypt on energy issues.

Recently an agreement has been signed to enable Egypt to import Israeli natural gas to liquefy it.

 Egypt absolutely needs the Israeli support, considering that – in this context – the struggle against Turkey was and still is an all-out struggle.

 Nevertheless this new collocation of the military agreement between Egypt and Hamas has also put Israel in difficulty, which was not consulted, before this alliance, about the Gaza Strip.

 The pact between the group of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Gaza Strip and Egypt became known to Israel only when Hamas pointed out to Egypt that there had been breaks in the “truce”, which the Israeli army still did not know in all its strategic value and relevance.

 In any case, Israel has tripled the sale of electricity to the Gaza Strip, while as many as 11,000 trucks were sent from the Jewish State to support the population of the Gaza Strip.

 Qatar alone provided over 15 million US dollars of aid to the political and humanitarian organizations of the Gaza Strip.

 Indeed, Hamas wanted above all a refund or monetary support from Israel, but much greater than expected, at least for the funds that the PNA’s leader, Mahmoud Abbas, had decided autonomously to remove from the autonomous administration of the Gaza Strip.

 As usual, the response was obviously a terrorist one, with bombs thrown at the IDF troops and the Jewish population outside the border.

 Despite of the above mentioned stabilization projects, Hamas wants to make the most of the climate prevailing for the Israeli upcoming elections scheduled for next April.

 Certainly the next target of the Palestinian groups will be the joint Israeli-US exercise scheduled for March 4 next.

 It will be a very important military exercise: a United States European Command (USEUCOM) battery composed of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missiles will be made operational, right on the border between the Gaza Strip and the Jewish State.

 The THAAD system will soon be added to the Israeli defense systems, along with the Iron Dome, mainly operating against short-range missiles; the Arrow system, intercepting long-range missiles in their exo-atmospheric phase and David’s Sling to hit tactical ballistic missiles.

 Both the THAAD and the Arrow systems are already included in the USEUCOM’s early warning network, using a series of radars located on a US base in the Negev desert.

 A base that, however, already monitors any missile launch  from Iran.

 Obviously the THAAD network is a US implicit suggestion not to give in to the flatteries and blandishments of the  Sunni treaty on the new areas of influence between Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar – a treaty which is still written in the Sinai sand.

*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

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Honoris Causa, Sabahudin Hadžialić, as among the most distinguished professors from the war-torn (even in peace his country is not better) South-East Europe (former Yugoslavia – currently living in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovna) who works in the European Union as a guest professor to Lithuania, Italy, Poland.

Hadžialić, in March 10-31, is conducting lectures (half of it is live and half of it within this semester will be conducted online) on the module Social Media, for which he wrote the syllabus that was accepted by the Faculty of Educational Sciences and approved by the University Nicolaus Copernicus in Torun, Poland.

The Social Media Module describes what constitutes social media, and enables students to describe how various social media forms can be analyzed on the basis of critical theory; and provide a venue towards the impact of social media on identity formation; and be able to describe the methodological challenges when studying social media.

1. A page about the module of SOCIAL MEDIA
   
2. Facebook group created for the module SOCIAL MEDIA
   
3. YouTube advert for this module at UMK:
   

Professional cooperation between Prof. Sabahudin Hadžialić and colleague Dr. Hab, Dorota Siemieniecka, started back in 2016, when Hadžialić, as an Editor in Chief of DIOGEN pro-culture magazine (and as prof. from BiH and Italy) visited University Nicolaus Copernicus and conducted a well-visited lecture on “Freedom and misuse of freedom of media“.

The Faculty of Educational Sciences informed the public about the professor’s arrival to Torun and prepared an interview with Prof. Hadzialić about interesting scientific topics from his area of interest, which will be published in the main Journal of University Nicolaus Copernicus in June 2019.

Sabahudin Hadžialić was born in 1960, in Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Today he lives in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. He is a professor, scientist, writer, poet, philosopher, journalist, and editor. He has written 24 books (poetry, prose, essays as well as textbooks for the Universities in BiH and abroad) and his art and scientific work is translated in 25 world languages. He has published books in BiH, Serbia, France, Switzerland, USA and Italy and numerous scientific papers in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Poland, Lithuania, India. He participates within EU project funds and he is a member of Scientific boards of Journals in Poland, India and USA. Also, he is a regular columnists and essayist since 2014, of Eurasia Review. Since 2009 he is co-owner and Editor in chief of DIOGEN pro culture – magazine for, culture, art, education and science from USA. He is a member of major association of writers in BiH, Serbia and Montenegro as well as Foundations and Associations worldwide. As professor he was teaching and still does at the Universities in BiH, Italy, Lithuania and Poland.

Detailed info: http://sabihadzi.weebly.com.

Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez is proposing a road map that includes a social, feminist and ecological Europe including a Spanish ‘Green New Deal’, with a more ambitious European Budget, Monetary Union and its own defence framework, among other goals, and commits to pro-European forces in elections in which, “Europe’s role – driving forward or lagging behind – is at stake”.

Sánchez took part in an event organized by the Spanish Federal Council of the European Movement to debate the future of Europe at the Athenaeum in Madrid. In his speech, he called for a “more social” Europe that no citizen feels excluded from; only in this way will “the EU be felt by Europeans to be at the heart of their own project, and not as the heritage of an enlightened, cosmopolitan class”.

Sánchez reiterated, as he had done previously in the European Parliament, that “we must protect Europe so that Europe can protect its citizens”. In this regard, he called for a commitment to be made on May 26 to the pro-European forces, to protect the EU, in elections in which, “Europe’s role – driving forward or lagging behind – is at stake,” he said.

Sánchez advocated the social democratic pact that gave rise to the European project as the basis to make Europe a genuine community of values, a Europe that “only makes sense as a project if it defends cohesion”; on the one hand, social and territorial cohesion, preventing insurmountable breaches from opening up and, on the other hand, political and economic cohesion so progress can be made in a world in which independence does not mean sovereignty.

But Europe, stated Sánchez, is also a community of interests that must be protected through unity. Europe must look at China and the United States and take its place next to them. Against this backdrop, the Prime Minister highlighted Europe’s fundamental role as an important player in the Mediterranean, as a physical border with Africa and also as a gateway to such a strategic area as Latin America. Spain “wants to be, and in fact already is, at the very heart of the new drive that the European Union needs to take,” Sánchez stressed.

Eight political action goals to boost the European movement

In order to protect Europe and so that Europe can protect us, “we must regain momentum and face up to new challenges”, to which end the Sánchez proposed eight goals for political action. The first of these is to consolidate the modernization and digital and ecological transition of our economy from a leadership position, catering for new sectors whilst not forgetting traditional sectors. Secondly, he proposes undertaking the new reforms that are pending, including underpinning the single currency, completing the Monetary Union, culminating the Banking Union, consolidating the Fiscal Pillar of the Euro and getting the European Deposit Insurance Scheme under way.

Thirdly, Sánchez claimed that it is necessary to maintain our social contract and protect the most needy through such decisive actions as the European Unemployment Benefit Scheme, which would complement current national schemes. Fourthly, he proposed culminating a feminist Europe through the adoption of a binding European Union Gender Equality Strategy to combat the gender gap, the higher unemployment rate and insecurities predominantly suffered by women.

Staying at the forefront in the fight against climate change is the fifth point to which end Sánchez proposed pushing through a ‘Green New Deal’, capable of shaking up the economy with sustainable industries and jobs, and a high added value thanks to innovation and knowledge. A new deal that allows us to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda quicker and better.

The sixth goal raised by Sánchez is to tackle the migratory challenge from a dual perspective; from an internal perspective by providing orderly and supportive protection to those immigrants that need Europe and “not allowing this issue to be weighed down by a perverse focus that only looks at illegal migration”, and also tackling the problem from an external perspective, placing cooperation and development aid with Africa on the front line of action.

In this road map, the seventh goal would be to achieve a firm and effective foreign policy, ensuring its own defence framework, providing for multilateral collaboration, but not dependence, and making decision-making on foreign policy, which at present requires unanimity, more flexible, and hence faster.

Lastly, Sánchez recalled that all these policies to make Europe more useful and effective in protecting its citizens require an ambitious European Budget, in both size and content, which rises to the times and reflects the new priorities, without abandoning traditional policies.

Spain is ready for Brexit

With a view to the upcoming Extraordinary European Council to study the different possible Brexit outcomes, Sánchez stressed that Spain will adopt a constructive position to ensure the orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom, recalling that the withdrawal agreement in place is the “best possible deal” and that if the United Kingdom proposes an extension to the deadline, then it must indicate to what end and for how long. “Going round in circles is not a solution”, claimed Pedro Sánchez.

Sánchez also recalled that Spain is ready for a disorderly withdrawal, that we are working to ensure the best possible relations with the British people and that we have a contingency plan in place that we “hope will be ratified by a parliamentary majority”.

By Ken Bredemeier

President Donald Trump said Thursday the United States is recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, the Syrian territory it captured in 1967’s Six-Day War and has controlled since then.

Trump, in a Twitter comment, said the Golan Heights “is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!”

Trump’s statement came while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was in Jerusalem, becoming the highest-ranking U.S. official ever to visit the contested Western Wall in the holy city of Jerusalem accompanied by an Israeli leader, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The visit possibly signaled tacit U.S. recognition of Israeli control of the Jewish holy site, but it was quickly followed by Trump’s specific announcement on the Golan Heights.

Netanyahu has accused Iran of attempting to launch attacks on Israel from the Golan Heights, saying, “I think for this reason and many more, it is time that the international community recognizes Israel’s stay on the Golan, and the fact that the Golan will always remain part of the State of Israel.”

The Israeli leader praised Trump’s decision shortly after the president’s announcement.

“President Trump has just made history,” Netanyahu said after calling the U.S. leader. “The message President Trump has given the world is that the United States stands by Israel. We are deeply grateful for the U.S. support.”

Last week, the U.S. State Department, in its annual human rights report, dropped the phrase “Israeli-occupied” from the Golan Heights section, instead calling it “Israeli-controlled.” Pompeo told reporters the change in terminology was not accidental but rather a reflection of the reality on the ground that the Jewish state controlled the territory.

In his visit to Jerusalem, Pompeo reaffirmed the long-standing U.S. friendship and support for Israel.

Pompeo accused Tehran of seeking the “annihilation and destruction” of Israel. “With such threats a daily reality of Israeli life, we maintain our unparalleled commitment to Israel’s security and firmly support your right to defend yourself,” he told Netanyahu.

The Golan Heights is about 1,800 square kilometers on the northeastern edge of Israel along its border with Syria, with about two-thirds of it controlled by Israel and the remainder under contested Syrian control. There have been numerous battles over the land during the eight-year Syrian Civil War.

After the 1967 war, Israel formally annexed the territory in 1981. But the international community has not recognized that annexation and considers the Golan Heights as occupied territory.

Trump and other former U.S. leaders and top U.S. officials have visited the Western Wall privately in the past but not with an Israeli leader.

The Western Wall is located underneath the Old City’s Muslim Quarter in eastern Jerusalem that was captured by the Israelis in the Six-Day War.

But for decades, top U.S. officials have refrained from visiting the site with Israeli leaders to present a sense of impartiality in deciding eventual control of Jerusalem in the years of unresolved discussions over the creation of a Palestinian state.

The Palestinians have sought to claim east Jerusalem as its capital of an eventual independent state, but Israel also considers Jerusalem as its eternal and indivisible capital.

“I think it’s symbolic that a senior American official go there with a prime minister of Israel,” Pompeo said. “It’s a place that’s important to many faiths, and I’m looking forward to it. I think it will be very special.”

Pompeo and Netanyahu viewed the wall and adjacent tunnels. The two officials stopped by a visitor’s center to watch a virtual reality recreation of the Jewish temple that once stood on the Temple Mount.

The Temple Mount is revered by Jews as the holiest site in Judaism, which once housed the biblical temples. It is also home to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, considered the third holiest site in Islam.

The Western Wall website says that the tour of the tunnels “allows visitors to reach the segments of the Wall hidden from view, and to touch the original and special stones that tell the story of the Jewish nation.”

Pompeo’s visit to the site and the recognition of the Israeli ownership of the Golan Heights could further inflame tensions between Palestinians and Israelis. The Palestinians have already severed ties with the U.S. over Washington’s Jerusalem policies.

Trump, early in his administration, abandoned long-standing U.S. policy by moving its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem after recognizing Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.

When Trump did so, he said it did not determine the city’s eventual borders, but Palestinians viewed the U.S. action as tipping the scales toward Israeli support and cut ties with the U.S.

Nabil Abu Rudeineh, spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, criticized Pompeo’s visit to Israel absent any corresponding plans to meet with Palestinian officials. “While they are claiming to be trying to solve the conflict, such acts only make it more difficult to resolve,” he said.

Pompeo said, “The Israelis and Palestinians live side by side. We need to help them figure out how to do that. It’s a fact, and this administration wishes well for the Palestinian people.”

While in the Old City, Pompeo, a devout Christian, also stopped at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, where tradition says Jesus was crucified and resurrected.

Pompeo visited Kuwait on the first leg of his five-day Middle East trip before heading to Israel and Lebanon, the last stop.

Pompeo met formally with both Netanyahu and Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, reaffirming U.S. support for Israel and its right to defend itself against attacks. They also discussed how best to combat what the U.S. considers Iranian aggression in the Middle East.

Trump is meeting with Netanyahu in Washington next week. Netanyahu’s government is headed to a tough April 9 re-election contest as the prime minister is embroiled in a corruption investigation and faces allegations of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. Netanyahu has called the case against him a political “witch hunt.”

In comments to reporters en route to the Middle East, Pompeo dismissed the suggestion that his meeting with Netanyahu could be seen as the United States intruding in the Israeli election in support of the prime minister.

A senior State Department official said last week that Pompeo would not be meeting with Netanyahu’s opponents but with Netanyahu alone as the current head of the Israeli government.

Researchers have discovered what gives human sperm the strength to succeed in the race to fertilise the egg.

The researchers, from the universities of York and Oxford, discovered that a reinforcing outer-layer which coats the tails of human sperm is what gives them the strength to make the powerful rhythmic strokes needed to break through the cervical mucus barrier.

Only around 15 out of the 55 million sperm that embark on the treacherous journey to fertilise the egg are able to make it through the reproductive tract where cervical mucus, which is one hundred times thicker than water, forms part of one of nature’s toughest selective challenges.

The findings could lead to better sperm-selection methods in IVF clinics, with the fittest sperm being identified under conditions that mimic nature more closely.

3.5 million people in the UK are affected by fertility issues and couples who opt for IVF spend an average of £20,000.

Dr Hermes Gadêlha, from the Department of Mathematics at the University of York, said: “We still don’t fully understand how, but a sperm’s ability to swim could be associated with genetic integrity. Cervical mucus forms part of the process in the female body of ensuring only the best swimmers make it to the egg.

“During the sperm selection process, IVF clinics don’t currently use a highly viscous liquid to test for the best sperm as until now it was not entirely clear whether this is important. Our study suggests that more clinical tests and research are needed to explore the impact of this element of the natural environment when selecting sperm for IVF treatments.”

Sperm tails – or flagella – are incredibly complex and measure just the breadth of a hair in length.

The researchers used virtual sperm model to compare the tails of sperm from humans and other mammals, which fertilise inside the body; with sperm from sea urchins, which fertilize outside the body by releasing their sperm into sea water.

While the tails of sea urchin and human sperm share the same bendy inner core, the study suggests that the tails of sperm in mammals may have evolved a reinforcing outer layer to give them the exact amount of extra strength and stability required to overcome the thick fluid barrier they come up against in internal fertilisation.

The researchers used virtual models to add and remove the features of flagella in the different species so that they could identify their function.

They tested the ability of virtual sea urchin-like sperm to swim through liquid as viscous as cervical mucus and found that their tails quickly buckled under the pressure, rendering them unable to propel themselves forward.

Human sperm on the other hand, thrashed around wildly in a low-viscosity liquid like water, but in thicker liquids they began to swim in a powerful rhythmic wave.

Dr Gadêlha added: “Using virtual sperm we were able to see how mammalian sperm is specially adapted to swim through thicker fluids. We don’t know which adaptation came first – the stronger sperm or the cervical mucus, or whether they co-evolved – but nothing in nature is by chance and precisely what is required for species to reproduce has been added due to evolutionary pressure over millions of years.”

With no central nervous system to make decisions about how to move and when – what controls sperms movement remains a scientific mystery.

“We know that, just like in our arms and legs, sperm have tiny muscles which allow their tails to bend– but nobody knows how this is orchestrated inside the tail, at the nanometric scale,” said Dr Gadêlha.

“Sperm are an architype of self-organisation – movement seems to be happening automatically, perhaps because of a complex combination of many mechanisms at play.”

Social media has given those espousing anti-vaccination sentiments an effective medium to spread their message. However, an analysis of a viral Facebook campaign against a Pittsburgh pediatric practice reveals that the movement isn’t “all about autism.” Instead, the research from the University of Pittsburgh Center for Research on Media, Technology, and Health finds that anti-vaccination arguments center on four distinct themes that can appeal to diverse audiences.

The research, published in the journal Vaccine, suggests a framework that pediatricians can use to open a conversation with parents who are hesitant to immunize their children, while also “inoculating” those parents with skills to resist anti-vaccination messages on social media.

“If we dismiss anybody who has an opposing view, we’re giving up an opportunity to understand them and come to a common ground,” said senior author Brian Primack, M.D., Ph.D., director of Pitt’s Center for Research on Media, Technology, and Health, and dean of the Pitt Honors College. “That’s what our research is about. We want to understand vaccine-hesitant parents in order to give clinicians the opportunity to optimally and respectfully communicate with them about the importance of immunization.”

Vaccines are hailed as one of the greatest public health achievements of modern medicine and have prevented more than 100 million cases of serious childhood contagious diseases. However, in the U.S., only 70 percent of children ages 19 to 35 months receive all recommended immunizations, and, so far this year, hundreds of children in a dozen states have contracted measles, a disease that was declared eliminated in the U.S. nearly two decades ago due to high vaccination rates. In Europe, tens of thousands of children have been diagnosed with the vaccine-preventable disease, and dozens have died in the past year.

In 2017, Kids Plus Pediatrics, a Pittsburgh-based pediatric practice, posted a video on its Facebook page featuring its practitioners encouraging HPV vaccination to prevent cancer. Nearly a month after the video posted, it caught the attention of multiple anti-vaccination groups and, in an eight-day period, garnered thousands of anti-vaccination comments.

Elizabeth Felter, Dr.P.H., assistant professor of community and behavioral health sciences at Pitt’s Graduate School of Public Health, connected Kids Plus Pediatrics with graduate student Beth Hoffman, B.Sc., and scientists at the Center for Research on Media, Technology, and Health. Hoffman led the team in partnering with the pediatrics practice to perform a systematic analysis to better understand the people behind the comments and how they cluster in the digitally-connected world of social media.

Hoffman’s team analyzed the profiles of a randomly selected sample of 197 commenters and determined that, although Kids Plus Pediatrics is an independent practice caring for patients in the Pittsburgh region, the commenters in the sample were spread across 36 states and eight countries.

The team also found that the majority of commenters were mothers. In those for which it could be determined, the top two political affiliations of the commenters were divergent, with 56 percent expressing support for Donald Trump, and 11 percent expressing support for Bernie Sanders.

By delving into the messages that each commenter had publicly posted in the previous two years, the team found that they clustered into four distinct subgroups:

• “trust,” which emphasized suspicion of the scientific community and concerns about personal liberty;
• “alternatives,” which focused on chemicals in vaccines and the use of homeopathic remedies instead of vaccination;
• “safety,” which focused on perceived risks and concerns about vaccination being immoral; and
• “conspiracy,” which suggested that the government and other entities hide information that this subgroup believes to be facts, including that the polio virus does not exist.

“The presence of these distinct subgroups cautions against a blanket approach to public health messages that encourage vaccination,” Hoffman said. “For example, telling someone in the ‘trust’ subgroup that vaccines don’t cause autism may alienate them because that isn’t their concern to begin with. Instead, it may be more effective to find common ground and deliver tailored messages related to trust and the perception mandatory vaccination threatens their ability to make decisions for their child.”

Todd Wolynn, M.D., chief executive officer of Kids Plus Pediatrics and a co-author of the research paper, said that although the negative comments in reaction to the practice’s video were disheartening, he’s glad it turned into a learning experience that may benefit other clinicians.

“We’re focused on keeping kids healthy and preventing disease whenever possible. In this age of social media disinformation, evidence-based recommendations from a trusted health care provider are more important than ever,” he said. “We’re thrilled to play such a key role in research that empowers pediatricians worldwide to meet parents where they are, appreciate their concerns, and communicate the incredible power and value of vaccination.”

The ~125 million-year-old Early Cretaceous fossil beds of Los Hoyas, Spain have long been known for producing thousands of petrified fish and reptiles (Fig. 1). However, one special fossil stands unique and is one of the rarest of fossils — a nearly complete skeleton of a hatchling bird.

Using their own laser imaging technology, Dr Michael Pittman from the Department of Earth Sciences at The University of Hong Kong and Thomas G Kaye from the Foundation for Scientific Advancement in the USA determined the lifestyle of this ~3cm long hatchling bird by revealing the previously unknown feathering preserved in the fossil specimen.

Chickens and ducks are up and about within hours of hatching, they are “precocial” (Fig. 3). Pigeons and eagles are “altricial”, they stay in the nest and are looked after by their parents. How do you tell if a hatchling came “out of the egg running” or was “naked and helpless in the nest”? Feathers. When precocial birds hatch they have developed down feathers and partly developed large feathers and can keep warm and get around without mum’s help. “Previous studies searched for but failed to find any hints of feathers on the Los Hoyas hatchling. This meant that its original lifestyle was a mystery,” says Dr Pittman.

Michael Pittman and Thomas Kaye brought new technology to the study of Los Hoyas fossils in the form of a high power laser. This made very small chemical differences in the fossils become visible by fluorescing them different colours, revealing previously unseen anatomical details. They recently had tremendous success with the first discovered fossil feather which they disassociated from the famous early bird Archaeopteryx by recovering the chemical signature of its fossil quill, a key part of the feather’s identification that had been previously unverified for ~150 years. The new results on the hatchling bird finally answered the question about its lifestyle as it did indeed have feathers at birth (Figs. 2, 4) and was thus precocial and out of the egg running. The feathers were made of carbon which has low fluorescence using Laser-Stimulated Fluorescence (LSF), but the background matrix did glow making the feathers stand out in dramatic dark silhouette (Fig. 2). “Previous attempts using UV lights and synchrotron beams failed to detect the feathers, underscoring that the laser technology stands alone as a new tool in palaeontology” added Tom Kaye, the study’s lead author.

This discovery via new technology demonstrates that some early birds adopted a precocial breeding strategy just like modern birds. Thus, in the time of the dinosaurs, some enantiornithine bird babies had the means to avoid the dangers of Mesozoic life perhaps by following their parents or moving around themselves. “One of the feathers discovered was of a substantial size and preserves features seen in other hatchlings. It indicates that our hatchling had reasonably well-developed flight feathers at the time of birth”, says Jesús Marugán-Lobón, a co-author from the Universidad Autónoma of Madrid, Spain (Figs. 2B, 4). This and other “illuminating” discoveries are adding to our knowledge of ancient life with details surviving in the fossil record that were never thought possible even a couple decades ago.

Luke Frishkoff, University of Texas at Arlington assistant professor of biology, explores how human land use expedites biodiversity loss in a paper recently published in Nature Ecology & Evolution.

For a study conducted at the University of Toronto, Frishkoff, as a postdoctoral fellow, and his collaborators traveled to the Dominican Republic to take a census of the region’s Anolis lizard species along an elevation gradient affected by deforestation. The species is a common group of tropical lizards that are a model system in ecology and evolutionary biology.

“This work uses elevation as a lens to understand the potential implications of climate change,” Frishkoff said. “Temperature changes along an elevation gradient, and general climate temperatures are expected to continue warming. By comparing the highlands to the lowlands, we can, in some sense, get a picture of how these biological communities might look in the future.”

The lowlands along the gradient are warmer than the highlands due to altitude, and a forest canopy blocks direct sunlight making the vegetation-dense areas cooler than their agricultural surroundings at any elevation. The study determined elevation plays a major role in which species survive as humans modify the habitat.

“The takeaway message is that the lizard communities in the lowlands are pretty good at coping with habitat conversion–they lose abundance, but don’t go extinct,” Frishkoff said. “When the forest is cut down in the highlands and the habitat warms, the pastures become filled with species from the warmer lowlands. Unlike the lowland species, the locally adapted forest lizards unique to the region’s mountaintops cannot survive when the forest is cut down.”

Frishkoff points out that biodiverse animals in any habitat act as “ecological players” to balance the ecosystem and often provide services that benefit humans in a variety of different ways. In order to get the most benefit from these ecological players, humans need to understand and have mechanisms to predict which species will survive as the climate warms and human land use changes, and Frishkoff’s research indicates the effects of habitat conversion can change radically with elevation.

The Dominican Republic study is part of a larger project, Frishkoff said. Since coming to UTA in September 2018, he has begun looking at lizard populations throughout Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Central America and Texas to understand the rules that govern species survival in a variety of different climates and conditions.

“We need to be able to predict what species are going to do well in what environmental contexts,” Frishkoff said. “The broader goal is to lay that foundation to predict biological communities across climates, across land uses. So that eventually policymakers can use that information eventually to make decisions that integrate human wellbeing and biological wellbeing.”

In his research, Frishkoff focuses mainly on reptiles and amphibians. He said the placement of UTA offers a great wealth of biological diversity to support his research, which is enriched by the university’s Amphibian and Reptile Diversity Research Center. The ARDRC is home to the largest herpetology collection in Texas with more than 200,000 specimens.

Using the collection, Frishkoff’s lab is beginning to study morphological differences between species to understand whether certain body shapes allow various species to do better in urban environments like the one UTA lies at the center of.

“Luke’s ongoing and developing research endeavors to address critical issues facing our global environment and support a sustainable urban community – two driving themes of our university’s strategic plan,” said Clay Clark, professor and chair of the Department of Biology. “He will make contributions to our growing footprint as a research enterprise.”

Off the coast of Washington, columns of bubbles rise from the seafloor, as if evidence of a sleeping dragon lying below. But these bubbles are methane that is squeezed out of sediment and rises up through the water. The locations where they emerge provide important clues to what will happen during a major offshore earthquake.

The study, from the University of Washington and Oregon State University, was recently published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth.

The first large-scale analysis of these gas emissions along Washington’s coast finds more than 1,700 bubble plumes, primarily clustered in a north-south band about 30 miles (50 kilometers) from the coast. Analysis of the underlying geology suggests why the bubbles emerge here: The gas and fluid rise through faults generated by the motion of geologic plates that produce major offshore earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest.

“We found the first methane vents on the Washington margin in 2009, and we thought we were lucky to find them, but since then, the number has just grown exponentially,” said lead author Paul Johnson, a UW professor of oceanography.

“These vents are a little ephemeral,” Johnson added. “Sometimes they turn off-and-on with the tides, and they can move around a little bit on the seafloor. But they tend to occur in clusters within a radius of about three football fields. Sometimes you’ll go out there and you’ll see one active vent and you’ll go back to the same location and it’s gone. They’re not reliable, like the geysers at Yellowstone.”

The authors analyzed data from multiple research cruises over the past decade that use modern sonar technology to map the seafloor and also create sonar images of gas bubbles within the overlying water. Their new results show more than 1,778 methane bubble plumes issuing from the waters off Washington state, grouped into 491 clusters.

“If you were able to walk on the seafloor from Vancouver Island to the Columbia River, you would never be out of sight of a bubble plume,” Johnson said.

The sediments off the Washington coast are formed as the Juan de Fuca oceanic plate plunges under the North American continental plate, scraping material off the ocean crust. These sediments are then heated, deformed and compressed against the rigid North American plate. The compression forces out both fluid and methane gas, which emerges as bubble streams from the seafloor.

The bubble columns are located most frequently at the boundary between the flat continental shelf and the steeply sloped section where the seafloor drops to the abyssal depths of the open ocean. This abrupt change in slope is also a tectonic boundary between the oceanic and continental plates.

“Although there are some methane plumes from all depths on the margin, the vast majority of the newly observed methane plume sites are located at the seaward side of the continental shelf, at about 160 meters water depth,” Johnson said.

A previous study from the UW had suggested that warming seawater might be releasing frozen methane in this region, but further analysis showed the methane bubbles off the Pacific Northwest coast arise from sites that have been present for hundreds of years, and are not related to global warming, Johnson said.

Instead, these gas emissions are a long-lived natural feature, and their prevalence contributes to the continental shelf area being such productive fishing grounds. Methane from beneath the seafloor provides food for bacteria, which then produce large quantities of bacterial film. This biological material then feeds an entire ecological chain of life that enhances fish populations in those waters.

“If you look online at where the satellite transponders show where the fishing fleet is, you can see clusters of fishing boats around these methane plume hotspots,” Johnson said.

To understand why the methane bubbles occur here, the authors used archive geologic surveys conducted by the oil and gas companies in the 1970s and 1980s. The surveys, now publicly accessible, show fault zones in the sediment where the gas and fluid migrate upward until emerging from the seafloor.

“Seismic surveys over the areas with methane emission indicate that the continental shelf edge gets thrust westward during a large megathrust, or magnitude-9, earthquake,” Johnson said. “Faults at this tectonic boundary provide the permeable pathways for methane gas and warm fluid to escape from deep within the sediments.”

The location of these faults could potentially provide new understanding of the earthquake hazard from the Cascadia Subduction Zone, which last ruptured more than 300 years ago. If the seafloor movement during a subduction-zone earthquake occurs closer to shore, and a major component of this motion occurs within the shallower water, this would generate a smaller tsunami than if the seafloor motion were entirely in deep water.

“If our hypothesis turns out to be true, then that has major implications for how this subduction zone works,” Johnson said.