By Ali al-Gattani

Reports of mysterious arms shipments at Libyan airports are escalating.

This new twist to trafficking was first reported last month. Salem Rafadi, commander of the Tobruk military region, talked about the seizure of weapons shipments at the eastern city’s airbase.

According to Rafadi, the first shipment was seized on February 14th. The cargo was supposedly a container of air conditioners, but when security agents proceeded to search the aircraft, they were surprised to find light and medium weapons.

Another shipment was seized on March 1st at Tobruk airbase. The cargo included medium-weapons that someone tried to smuggle to Tripoli. The commander of the base confirmed it had originated from the Gulf of Bomba, not far from the Islamist stronghold of Derna.

On March 3rd, a group stormed Tripoli International Airport and seized a shipment of weapons, but Libyan authorities hushed the news, Bawabat al-Wasat reported

In an interview after his dismissal, ousted premier Ali Zidan accused congress of smuggling arms to Syria.

Zidan did not offer proof of his allegations about government complicity in arms trafficking.

But according to political activist Mohamed Saleh, the absence of the state and the lack of control over some of the airports in Libya, particularly Mitiga Airport, has led to the appearance of these arms shipments – as well as the entry of extremists and terrorists – without the knowledge or control of the defence ministry or the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Libya became an important source of illegal weapons, Saleh said, because military storehouses fell “under control of ideology driven armed groups and militias affiliated to tribal and regional forces”, and because the country “lacks effective control over land, sea, and air borders”.

“Libya is now governed by armed militias with weapons and money,” the activist continued. “This is the reason behind our internal problems and our instability, an instability that could affect the countries surrounding Libya.”

Journalist Reda Fheel attributed the authorities’ silence to “the fear of the reactions of the armed brigades that helped topple Kadhafi, but which now stand as a stumbling block to building the new Libya”.

“UN experts said earlier that Libya has become a major source of smuggled weapons, including shoulder launched weapons,” he told Magharebia.

“These weapons are being smuggled into at least 14 countries and are inflaming conflicts on several continents,” the journalist added.

By Kevin J. Jones

U.S. President Barack Obama’s March 27 meeting with Pope Francis comes at a time of tension between his administration and the Church over religious liberty, several Catholic leaders have said.

“There has been a great deal of acrimony over issues related to religious freedom. This is something new and quite serious, since it affects the ability of the Church to carry out its mission,” V. Bradley Lewis, a philosophy professor at the Catholic University of America, told CNA March 26.

He said relations between the U.S. government and the Catholic Church are “quite vexed … I don’t believe they have been this vexed in my memory.”

Many Catholic dioceses, charities, universities, health care systems, and even the Little Sisters of the Poor, have filed legal challenges against the Obama administration’s mandate requiring most employers to cover or aid access to procedures and drugs that violate Catholic teaching: sterilization and contraception, including some abortion-causing drugs.

Lewis said that the contraception mandate has been “a source of great tension,” it is “not an isolated incident.”

The Obama administration has revised conscience protection rules in federal health care law, and argued against protecting the hiring decisions of religious groups before the U.S. Supreme Court – an argument rejected in a unanimous decision by the justices.

The administration also ended a contract with the U.S. bishops to help human trafficking victims. Its allies opposed the grant because the program would not facilitate access to abortion and contraception.

Lewis commented that Pope Francis is in a “very strong position” to make a case to the president about the importance of religious freedom, “in a way that cannot be perceived as politically motivated.”

“I hope the president will listen.”

Chad Pecknold, a religion professor at the Catholic University of America, agreed with Lewis that the Obama administration’s relationship with the Catholic Church has been “tense.”

“Some bishops have described the administration as hostile to the Catholic Church, and coercive of conscience.”

He attributed these hostilities largely to the government’s agenda, rather from “any hostility of the Church toward the duly-elected government.”

Pecknold said Pope Francis is not unaware of these tensions, and though he will have wanted to diffuse them, “he will almost certainly seek to stand with the fight for religious liberty, to defend the weak and unborn against the unjust exercise of free choice.”

He said it was unusual for U.S. presidents to visit the Pope until after the Second Vatican Council; but since John F. Kennedy’s presidency, every U.S. president has met with the Pope.

“This particular meeting between President Obama and Pope Francis is significant as their first meeting, and because of perceived symmetries between them on questions of economic justice,” Pecknold reflected.

However, he added that such meetings are “so often symbolic,” and it is uncertain whether substantive discussions take place.

Lewis said the Pope is a “unique world leader” who has “no particular political or geopolitical agenda or interest.”

“His agenda is the Gospel and his authority is moral and spiritual in nature,” he added, suggesting other world leaders value discussions with the Pope because “he has no ulterior motives” and because so many of their citizens consider him a spiritual leader.

Maryann Cusimano Love, a fellow of the Catholic University of America’s Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies, said the Church and the U.S. government have “many areas of common concern” in foreign policy and Pope Francis and Obama were likely to discuss these.

She noted their shared concern for peace and anti-poverty work, and suggested they could discuss nuclear weapons, since Obama is in Europe to host the Nuclear Security Summit.

“For the first time, a U.S. president … has agreed to the Catholic Church’s call for a world free of nuclear weapons,” Love said.

She noted the U.S. and the Holy See can find common ground in opposition to world hunger and human trafficking. Immigration issues are another point of discussion.

However, she noted that the U.S. government is arming and funding the military capacities of governments such as Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, as well as non-state combatants in Syria, while the Church has emphasized the need to reduce trade in guns and conventional weapons that can worsen conflicts.

“Bishops in Africa and Latin America will tell you that their countries are awash in guns that were ‘Made in the USA’,” Love said.

According to Love, both the Holy See and the U.S. government “work for peace in the Middle East,” though the Holy See supports stronger protections for Palestinians, including Palestinian Christians.

And Msgr. Anthony Figueiredo, director of the North American College’s Institute for Continuing Theological Education, told Vatican Radio March 26 that while “the Church … is looking for points we have in common,” the Holy See is “very concerned about questions, for example, of religious freedom.”

The Church is “concerned about ethical issues such as the destruction of the family by laws which propose gay marriage or ‘liberty’ in so many ways.”

“We believe in something else: We believe that there is a law placed in our hearts by God, and no one has the right to change that law. In fact, when one lives that law, one finds true freedom and true joy.”

“That’s what the Church wants, and certainly that is what this Pope wants.”

Following Obama’s meeting with Pope Francis, and later with officials of the Secretariat of State, the Holy See press office stated that “views were exchanged on some current international themes and it was hoped that, in areas of conflict, there would be respect for humanitarian and international law and a negotiated solution between the parties involved.”

“In the context of bilateral relations and cooperation between Church and State, there was a discussion on questions of particular relevance for the Church in (the U.S), such as the exercise of the rights to religious freedom, life and conscientious objection, as well as the issue of immigration reform. Finally, the common commitment to the eradication of trafficking of human persons in the world was stated.”

Greater economic integration may reduce the chances of conflict or tensions between countries. Among capitalist peace theorists who held this view include Immanuel Kant who maintained that “the spirit of commerce… sooner or later takes hold of every nation, and is incompatible with war.”

Historically good trade ties decrease uncertainty and establish mutual trust and confidence. To this extent, it can be said that trade is beneficial to concerned parties.

However, there is also power play at work to advance certain political agenda, possibly influencing policy decisions of smaller states.

Therefore, it is imperative that small countries be wary of these “political strings attached” in contracting trade agreements, as well as adopt such measures as diversifying partners to avoid reliance on one or two major powers. This may give them greater room to maneuver, avoid being cornered by one camp and thus be turned into pawns in major power rivalry or competition.

Since the establishment of the ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement (ACFTA) in 2010, ASEAN-China trade had grown by 25 percent. From $7.9 billion in 1991, bilateral trade grew to $292.7 billion in 2010. While ASEAN-US trade continues to decline despite the pronouncement of the US pivot to Asia, China’s trade with ASEAN continues to rise and the country had been ASEAN’s biggest trading partner since 2009.

But while the economic dimension of China’s diplomacy towards ASEAN had been thoroughly covered, China’s drive to create security cooperation with countries in the region received less attention, partly because most of them were subsumed under the banner of “comprehensive strategic partnerships.”

China’s special relationship with Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia

Of the core ASEAN members that have the most favorable ties with China, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia stand out.

All three countries have entered into “comprehensive strategic partnerships” with China, an agreement which include provisions for security and defense cooperation. This paved the way for high level visits and exchanges between defense/military of China and the three countries, as well as joint military drills and exercises.

Chinese and Thai marines had conducted joint military exercises in 2010. Chinese and Indonesian navy in December 2013 announced a joint exercise to be held in the Indonesian part of the South China Sea (SCS). And despite the PLA naval exercises in Malaysian-claimed James Shoal in the Spratlys in March 2013, Malaysian and Chinese armed forces will conduct their first ever joint exercise with a strong maritime element in 2014.

While Thailand does not have active unresolved boundary disputes with China, Indonesia and Malaysia have maritime disputes with China over the SCS. However such disputes did not received the scale of media and public attention as it did in Vietnam and the Philippines.

Though Indonesia is not a formal party to the multilateral SCS dispute, certain parts of Indonesian SCS were included in China’s controversial nine-dash line, including waters near its gas-rich Natuna Islands, and incidents involving Chinese fishermen in these waters regularly creates rifts between the two countries.

Moreover, although Thailand has a long history of military cooperation with China dating back the 1980s, China’s success in forging security ties with Malaysia and Indonesia is fairly recent and is, in fact, a major turnaround from its largely troubled relations with these two Muslim countries, especially during the 1970s.

Whether the policy of downplaying disputes is a deliberate state policy or not, it is successful in maintaining good economic relations for now, but for how long, no one knows.

China’s economic influence 

Despite lingering unresolved territorial and maritime disputes, China continues to be a major trade partner for Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. In fact, President Xi Jinping became the first foreign leader to address the Indonesian Parliament last October 2013.

China and Brunei, both SCS disputants, also entered into a Joint Statement last April 2013 wherein the two sides pledged greater maritime and energy cooperation. But “accidents-at-sea,” such as confrontation between maritime law enforcement vessels of competing claimants, if not managed properly, can ignite nationalist stirrings which could, in turn, harden state responses towards the dispute.

As far as preventing a common ASEAN stand against increasing Chinese actions in the SCS is concerned, Beijing’s diplomacy is working. Whether it amounts to China buying off ASEAN into silence as far as SCS is concerned remains debatable. But China’s influence was felt in 2012 when an ASEAN Summit hosted by close China ally Cambodia failed to agree on a communiqué – a first in its 45 years history. The Philippine Foreign Affairs Department blamed Cambodia for the impasse saying it consistently opposed any mention of the SCS disputes.

Whether China offered more concessions to some ASEAN SCS disputants remains inconclusive but it appears that any security cooperation is preceded by good economic ties. But one must take note that improved economic performance can also finance increased external defense spending which can increase the likelihood of “accidents” if appropriate mechanisms are not put in place.

It could be that China’s diplomatic initiatives towards Indonesia and Malaysia constitute as showcases directed to win the Philippines and Vietnam over to its fold or, at least, isolate the Philippines which just legally challenged China’s sweeping SCS claims before an international tribunal and which is also perceived as the closest US ally in ASEAN. To the extent that the Philippines is not getting much vocal support from ASEAN, an organization it helped founded, this conjecture may stand.

Increasing ASEAN-China economic cooperation is risky. Recent ASEAN discord over SCS demonstrates the concealed political force that economic influence can wield. Hence, it is important to diversify economic partners, as well as political and security allies as this would spread risk and give countries greater control over their domestic and foreign policies.

This article appeared at Sharnoff’s Global Views  and is reprinted with permission.

By Dr Subhash Kapila

India-Japan-Vietnam strategic trilateral emerges in 2014 as an indigenous Asian security imperative against the contextual background of United States and Russia despite their Strategic Pivots to Asia getting distracted by global and regional events.

United States sustained focus on its Strategic Pivot to Asia Pacific is seemingly becoming diluted by domestic political constraints and revised foreign policy outlooks. US Congressional imposition of budgetary cuts is ending in reduced force deployments on the ground. With change of US Secretary of State American focus is shifting to the Middle East. US hedging strategies and risk aversion in its China policies are confusing Asian powers perspectives on US real intentions.

Russia is being distracted from its declared Strategic Pivot to Asia Pacific by the United States embarking to destabilise Russia’s Western peripheries as it recently got manifested in an American inspired regime change in Ukraine through a civilian coup. The aim of the United States is to keep Russia’s strategic focus away from the Asia Pacific.

In such a contextual strategic backdrop Asian security focus has to perforce look inwards to develop an indigenous Asian security trilateral to cater for Asian security and stability and the management of Asian conflicts flash-points.

Ideally Asian security demands an Asian Strategic Quadrilateral comprising India, Japan, Vietnam and China. But then the problem is that China in terms of Asian security and stability is a major part of the problem rather than being a part of the solution. Asian security and stability today stands endangered by China-initiated conflictual flash-points.

The imperative that therefore emerges is an Asian Strategic Trilateral comprising India, Japan and Vietnam. Common strategic concerns and strategic convergences amongst India, Japan and Vietnam have resulted in the forging of bilateral Strategic Partnerships amongst these three nations. China is the only Asian power to view the emergence of such a Strategic Triangle with misgivings and read it as a China-centric hostile move.

Notably, neither United States nor Russia as global powers are likely to view such a strategic development with any degree of concern. India, Japan and Vietnam have a record of being stable and benign powers with no record of instigating conflicts against their neighbours.

India, Japan and Vietnam are strategically pivotal nations and powerful ones at that, relatively. What requires to be done in this direction by these three nations is to synergise their respective bilateral Strategic Partnerships into a Strategic Trilateral.

As stressed by me in an earlier Paper, the aim of such a Strategic Trilateral is not to form a China-containment military bloc. The common effort required from all these three nations is to create formal mechanisms to coordinate their diplomatic efforts and initiatives to ensure a unified approach to meet any challenges to Asia Pacific security from any quarter. It would also entail intelligence sharing and assisting each other in capacity building of their respective maritime security postures. They should also work together to sensitise the global community for all countries to respect and honour international conventions especially in the maritime domains.

Such a Strategic Trilateral would not be directed against undermining of the centrality of ASEAN but complimenting it and therefore should not create any alarms in ASEAN as a regional grouping.

It does need to be pointed out that ASEAN unity in recently years is being divided by China for its narrow strategic ends and the vulnerability of smaller ASEAN country reduces the efficacy of ASEAN to deal with conflicts such as South China Sea conflict escalation by China against its ASEAN neighbours.

In terms of political acceptability of the concept of an India-Japan-Vietnam Strategic Triangle one can assess that Japan and Vietnam would be inclined to work towards implementation of such a concept.

India if reluctant has to convince itself that if it has worked towards forging substantive Strategic Partnerships with both Vietnam and Japan and there should not be any misgivings in forging a Strategic Trilateral India has already set a precedent in participating in the US-Japan-India Trilateral and further in a US-Japan-Australia-India Quadrilateral.

Finally, the time has come and the moment has arrived when the idea of such a Strategic Trilateral of India-Japan-Vietnam is vigorously explored and forged in the interests of Asian security and stability.

(EurActiv) — NATO ambassadors chose former Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg as the next leader of the Western military alliance, NATO said today (28 March).

He will take over as secretary-general from 1 October, succeeding Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO said in a statement.

Rasmussen said on Twitter that Stoltenberg was “the right man to build on NATO’s record of strength and success”, and said the Ukraine crisis showed the need for NATO to have continued strong and determined leadership.

Stoltenberg, who served for nearly 10 years in total as Norway’s prime minister before losing power in elections last September, was backed by the United States, NATO’s dominant power, and Germany. British Prime Minister David Cameron said on Wednesday that he also backed Stoltenberg.

Rasmussen, a former Danish prime minister who took office in 2009, is due to step down at the end of September, after a September 4-5 NATO summit in Wales which will mark almost the end of NATO’s combat mission in Afghanistan.

Stoltenberg is the leader of the Norwegian Labour Party, of social-democratic ideology, with observer status to the Socialist International.

The Norwegian politician will take over at a time when NATO, seen by some as a Cold War relic, has gained new relevance because of Russia’s occupation and annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region [more].

NATO foreign ministers are expected to discuss at a meeting next week how they can reinforce NATO’s military presence in eastern European countries such as the Baltics and Poland which are nervous about heightened tensions with Russia.

Commission President José Manuel Barroso, Belgian defence minister Pieter de Crem, and former Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini, have previously been tipped for the NATO top job.

U.S. President Barack Obama says Russia must pull back its troops from the Ukrainian border and begin negotiating to defuse tensions.

In an interview with CBS News, Obama said Russia’s military moves may be no more than an effort to intimidate Ukraine. But he added that Russia may have “additional plans.”

On Thursday, the head of Ukraine’s national security council, Andriy Parubiy, said Russia has close to 100,000 troops along Ukraine’s borders in the north, south, and east. He said Russian forces are in full readiness to strike.

Russia says the soldiers are involved in “springtime exercises” and has assured the United States they will not cross the border.

Western experts believe the number of Russian forces near eastern and southern Ukraine is close to 30,000.

Russia: UN resolution ‘counterproductive’

Also Friday, Russia described as “counterproductive” a U.N. resolution that refuses to recognize its annexation of the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine. Russia’s Foreign Ministry said the U.N. General Assembly resolution will only complicate efforts to settle Ukraine’s internal political crisis.

The ministry accused Ukraine of seeking to distract from domestic tensions by blaming its problems on Russia.

The U.N. General Assembly passed the non-binding resolution on Thursday, with 100 countries in favor, 11 opposed and 58 abstaining.

Crimea’s majority Russian residents voted to break away from Ukraine and join Russia in a referendum earlier this month that Western powers deemed illegal.

Ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych called Friday for referendums to determine the status of all Ukrainian regions. He said only a nationwide referendum and not an early presidential election can stabilize Ukraine and preserve its sovereignty and integrity.

Meanwhile, Reuters reports that Russia’s defense minister told President Vladimir Putin on Friday that all Ukrainian servicemen loyal to Kiev had left Crimea and the Russian flag was flying over all military sites on the Black Sea peninsula.

Warships, war planes and other military hardware seized by Moscow will be returned to the Ukrainian army, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu told Putin at a a meeting with senior Russian military officers.

Also Friday, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement that restrictions imposed by Switzerland on military exports to Russia over events in Ukraine were counterproductive and not in line with the country’s policy of neutrality.

US President Barack Obama arrived in Riyadh Friday for key talks with Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah and Crown Prince Salman, deputy premier and minister of defense, on major regional and international issues.

During his fence-mending visit, the president will explain to Saudi leaders the US stand on issues such as Iran’s nuclear program and the revolution in Syria, while reassuring Washington’s support to Saudi Arabia, a longstanding ally in the region.

By Elvira M. Jukic

On visits to Bosnia, the foreign ministers of Britain, Austria and Hungary said the EU’s new approach to the troubled country – focusing now on economic issues – was the right one.

Bosnia’s Foreign Minister, Zlatko Lagumdzija, met his British counterpart, William Hague, on March 28 to discuss the European Union’s “new approach” to Bosnia and Herzegovina, which involves focusing on economic and social issues instead of on constitutional changes.

Lagumdzija’s office on Friday said the new approach would run in two directions. One will focus of Bosnia meeting the political conditions to continue on the path to EU membership. The other will focus on the real-life problems citizens face every day.

Hague visited Bosnia alongside the Hollywood star Angelina Jolie – both of whom participated in a conference on victims of sexual violence during the 1992-5 war.

Earlier, on March 27, Lagumdzija met the Austrian and Hungarian foreign ministers with whom he also discussed the new approach to Bosnia.

Austria’s Sebastian Kurz and Hungary’s Janos Martonyi said their countries supported Bosnia’s moves towards EU membership and were ready to help it overcome obstacles.

The two ministers said Bosnia needed a functional government, which was what its citizens clearly needed as well.

“We saw here that the majority of people want to join the EU,” Martonyi said, terming it, “a vision that can bring ethnic groups closer [together] in this country.”

Kurz added that Austria, Hungary and Bosnia had close cultural, economic and historic ties. [Bosnia formed part of Austria-Hungary from 1878 to the end of the First World War.] He recalled that around 150,000 people from Bosnia live in Austria today.

“The development of Bosnia and Herzegovina is very important for us, shown by the fact that Austria is the largest investor in this country,” Kurz added.

He maintained that the wave of street protests that erupted all over Bosnia in February should be seen as “a wake-up call”.

The protests forced four of the ten canontal governments in Bosnia’s Federation entity to resign.

The Turkish Government was deeply shocked after the emergence of an illegal recording of a high security meeting of state officials at the Foreign Ministry. The government vowed to impose the heaviest penalty and Ahmet Davutoğlu, the Turkish FM, said that this leak is treasonous. On YouTube, the recording was listened to hundred thousand times in a few hours.

“These gangs of treachery are the enemies of our state and people. The perpetrators of this attack targeting the security of our state and people will be found out in the shortest time and will be handed over to justice to be given the heaviest penalty. This treacherous attack targeting the Republic of Turkey will be disrupted,” the Foreign Ministry declared in a written statement late March 27th.

In addition to the foreign minister, the Turkish PM also strongly criticized the leak in an election campaign speech late Thursday in the Kurdish-dominated eastern province Diyarbakır. The PM defined this move as “immorality, dishonourableness, and vileness.”

After the leak the Telecommunications Directorate blocked all access to Youtube. After the Turkish ban on Twitter, a new ban on Youtube was expected by experts and public. In the meantime, the Supreme Council of Radio and Television (RTÜK) imposed a media ban on the broadcast of the illegal recording and its content.

The voices of the illegal recording are believed to belong to Davutoğlu, National Intelligence Organization (MİT) Head Hakan Fidan, Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioğlu, and Deputy Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar Gürel. The high-level state officials talked the most likely scenarios in a war with Syria.

In a statement, the Ministry confirmed a meeting took place in which the situation regarding the Süleyman Shah Tomb was discussed, but that the leaked content was “distorted.”

Two weeks ago, following clashes between militants of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), an al Qaeda breakaway group, and rival rebel groups in the area east of Aleppo near the Turkish border, Turkey threatened to retaliate against any attack on the tomb.

The Süleyman Shah Tomb, located 25 kilometers inside Syria, is officially Turkish land according to bilateral and international agreements from the early 1920s. With the escalation of tension inside northern Syria, there have been claims that a number of terrorist groups have threatened to attack the tomb unless its Turkish guards left.

By Cheryl Pellerin

Next week, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will convene the first U.S.-hosted meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Defense Department Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said today in a press briefing here.

Following the meeting, Hagel will travel to the Asia-Pacific region for visits with his counterparts in Japan, China and Mongolia, Kirby added.

The trip will be Hagel’s fourth official visit to the Asia-Pacific, a region of growing importance and emphasis for U.S. foreign policy and its defense strategy, the press secretary said.

“The secretary extended this invitation to ASEAN ministers in his speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue last June [and] participated in the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting-Plus last August,” Kirby told reporters.

Increased and expanded DOD engagement with ASEAN members has been a priority for Hagel, the admiral noted, and the secretary has worked with U.S. Pacific Command Commander Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III to focus on making the upcoming historic gathering a success.

Kirby said the ASEAN meeting will identify ways to strengthen multilateral security cooperation in the region and build more robust partnerships between military and civilian agencies to improve humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts.

Toward that end, Hagel has invited leaders from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Agency for International Development to join the meeting and is pleased the NOAA and USAID leaders will attend, the admiral added.

According to the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, DOD leaders expect the frequency, scale and complexity of future humanitarian assistance and disaster relief missions to increase, Kirby said.

“Secretary Hagel believes the United States and our partners must be prepared for that reality,” he noted.

From Hawaii, Hagel will travel to Japan for his second visit there as defense secretary.

“When he traveled there in October with Secretary [of State John] Kerry, he announced that the United States and Japan will begin the process of revising the defense guidelines that underpin our bilateral military-to-military relationship,” Kirby said, adding, “This upcoming trip is an opportunity to discuss those ongoing efforts and as well as other regional security matters.”

This week, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, South Korean President Park Geun-hye and President Barack Obama met in the Netherlands, the admiral added, and Hagel’s Japan visit is an opportunity to build on those discussions.

Next, Hagel will make his first visit as defense secretary to China.

“He’s very much looking forward to this visit, having hosted his Chinese counterpart [last August] here at the Pentagon,” Kirby said. “He has longstanding ties to China, beginning when he traveled there for business in the early 1980s. He also built strong relationships with senior Chinese leaders while serving as a U.S. senator.”

In China, Hagel will have a full complement of bilateral engagements focusing on the military-to-military relationship and on regional security issues, the admiral said, adding that the secretary “views this relationship as crucial to our rebalance and he will emphasize the importance of building trust, increasing openness and transparency, and upholding international norms throughout his trip.”

Hagel’s final stop will be in Mongolia, the first visit there by a U.S. defense secretary in nearly 10 years.

Mongolia is becoming a more important security partner for the United States, having deployed forces to Iraq and Afghanistan and in peacekeeping operations worldwide, Kirby said, and during the visit Hagel will thank Mongolia for its contributions and discuss ways to enhance future U.S.-Mongolian cooperation.

Kirby said that, as one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, Mongolia has a growing stake in stability across the Asia-Pacific region and he expects Hagel and the leaders there also to discuss regional security matters.

“This trip to Asia, his fourth in less than a year, is further evidence of the secretary’s personal commitment to the president’s rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region,” the admiral said, adding that the strategy is fully supported in the QDR and resourced in the president’s budget.

Most importantly, the strategy and budget shift the military from a focus on protracted counterinsurgency operations, he said, “seeking instead to regain full-spectrum capabilities that are relevant not only to Asia but to the challenges we see across the Middle East, and potentially even in Europe.”

Kirby added, “The priority this budget places on high-end capabilities and readiness is exactly what we believe is most relevant in a volatile and threatening world where America’s global commitments are and will remain sacrosanct.”

Second Deputy Premier Prince Muqrin Bin Abdulaziz was on Thursday appointed deputy crown prince. In a royal decree, Custodian of the Holy Mosques King Abdullah said Prince Muqrin will continue to hold the post of second deputy premier.

“Prince Muqrin will receive oath of allegiance as crown prince in case the position becomes vacant, and as king in case the positions of king and crown prince become vacant,” the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) cited the decree as saying.

King Abdullah said the Allegiance Commission approved Prince Muqrin’s appointment with an overwhelming majority. In future, the king can appoint a deputy crown prince after proposing his name and getting a nod from majority of members of the commission, the Royal Court statement said.

Prince Muqrin was named second deputy premier on Feb. 1, 2013. Born in 1945 in Riyadh, Prince Muqrin got his higher education in Royal Air Force College Cranwell, United Kingdom.

During 1965-80, he was appointed assistant to air operations manager and head of plans and operations division in the Royal Saudi Air Force. In 1977, he became emir of Hail region.

He was moved to Madinah as its emir in 1980, a post he held till 1999. During 1999-2005, Prince Muqrin acted as chairman of General Intelligence and then was appointed Adviser and Special Envoy of King Abdullah, the posts he continues to hold.

Original article

By Richard Giragosian

For Armenians, history has always been a central pillar of identity. Even more significant for Armenians is the denial or selective misinterpretation of history, which have always triggered intense and immediate condemnation.

Given these tenets of identity, the recent determination of many in Armenia and Nagorny Karabakh to apply their own selective interpretation of history and to resist more mainstream interpretations of the Crimean crisis is bewildering.

Yet underlying this seemingly contradictory view of Crimea and its dubious referendum, there is an even deeper level of complexity. This is evident on several levels.

First, Armenians in Nagorny Karabakh and in Armenia proper, who are normally united, now differ in their perspectives on Crimea.

For many people in Karabakh, the recent referendum in Crimea is a validation and a vindication of their own quest for self-determination. This was most evident in the celebratory, joyous public reaction to news of the Crimean vote.

For Armenia, however, the Crimean issue has more to do with the country’s strategic “partnership” with Russia.

It was this perspective that prevailed in determining the Armenian government’s response to the Ukraine conflict, which had initially been cautious. It became ever clearer this week when Armenia openly backed the Russian position by voting against a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly that reaffirmed Ukraine’s territorial integrity and labelled as illegal the referendum that led to Crimea’s annexation by Russia.

To another degree of complexity, the implications of these two positions mean that both of them present greater challenges and greater threats than any possible benefits or dividends they might bring.

For Nagorny Karabakh, the danger of embracing the Crimean referendum is that its own argument for self-determination risks being diluted. There are three main reasons for this. First, in the absence of any real threat to Crimea’s security, events there were largely driven by Russian expectations and demands. In contrast, the core issue of Karabakh’s bid for self-determination has always been security, in the wake of a pattern of violence from Azerbaijan.

Second, the Crimean referendum itself was never really a question of “national” self-determination. Rather, it was one of “regional” self-determination, with no attempt to use Ukrainian legal, political or constitutional processes for this purpose. Here too, Nagorny Karabakh’s experience of dialogue and negotiation, and its experiment in using Soviet constitutional avenues make the Karabakh referendum starkly different.

A third key difference is rooted in the referendum itself. Crimeans voted to join the Russian Federation and – in contrast to nearly all other cases of self-determination – never sought or even suggested any degree of outright independence. Against that backdrop, Karabakh’s current embrace of Crimea as an inspiration is more likely to weaken and dilute the essence of its own quest. Such a development would be a deadly blow to the sacrifice and tenacity of the Karabakh Armenians. It would weaken not only their case before the international community, but also their position vis-à-vis the mediators in the conflict.

The worst-case scenario for Nagorny Karabakh, however, has more to do with Russia than with Crimea. Newly-assertive and resurgent, Russia now seems to recognise no limits or restraints. With reckless disregard and disdain for the costs and repercussions of its actions, Moscow may select new targets and other objectives, including Karabakh.

Russia may now move to expand and extend its power and influence in the South Caucasus. Karabakh could be an appealing means toward that end. This route could involved a dangerous bid for greater if riskier dividends, in which Moscow would seek to transform the frozen Karabakh conflict into a hot war, with only Russia and its peacekeepers capable of direct and immediate intervention. Such a scenario would mimic Russia’s leverage in the phase prior to the August 2008 war with Georgia. In the frozen Abkhazian and South Ossetian conflicts, it was the deployment of Russian-led peacekeepers and the issuing of Russian passports that defined and defended Moscow’s interests.

The case of Armenia, meanwhile, is in some ways even more dangerous. By adopting the Russian stance on Crimea, Yerevan seems destined to become a prisoner in its partnership with Moscow. And as the West moves to impose greater sanctions against Russia, Armenia may become even more isolated, trapped on the wrong side of history.

Perhaps even more distressingly, Armenia may also remain constrained within the new Iron Curtain that Russian president Vladimir Putin seems intent on constructing within the borders of the former Soviet Union.

Richard Giragosian is director of the Regional Studies Centre, an independent think tank in Yerevan, Armenia. This article was published at IWPR’s  CRS Issue 679.

Separatist insurgents in Thailand’s southern border provinces should immediately end attacks on teachers and other civilians, Human Rights Watch said today. Since January 2014, insurgents have killed three ethnic Thai Buddhist teachers in the conflict-ridden region.

“Separatists need to stop attacking those who are educating children,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “Separatists in southern Thailand are committing war crimes when they kill and maim teachers and other civilians.”

Under the laws of armed conflict, which are applicable in the fighting between the insurgents and Thai government forces in southern Thailand, deliberate attacks on civilians are war crimes.Thai authorities should investigate and appropriately punish security forces committing abuses during operations in the south.

On March 20, insurgents shot dead Somsri Tanyakaset, 39, a teacher at Kok Muba Friendship School in Narathiwat province’s Tak Bai district, while she was on her way home. On March 14, insurgents shot 43-year old Siriporn Srichai while she was riding a motorcycle to work at Tabing Tingi Community School in Pattani province’s Mayo district. The assailants then poured gasoline on her body and set it on fire. A leaflet saying, “This attack is in revenge for the killing of innocent people,” was found nearby. On January 14, two days ahead of the National Teacher’s Day, insurgents shot Supakrit Sae Loong of Ban Nibong School in Yala province’s Kabang district while he was riding a motorcycle from school back home.

Separatist forces have killed at least 171 teachers and torched or detonated bombs at more than 300 government-run schools in 10 years of insurgency in the southern border provinces.

The Patani Independence Fighters (Pejuang Kemerdekaan Patani) in the loose network of the separatist National Revolution Front-Coordinate (BRN-Coordinate) have ambushed teachers while traveling to and from their schools, and killed them in their classrooms and lodgings. The insurgents say that they target teachers in retaliation for violence committed by Thai security forces and pro-government militias against ethnic Malay Muslims. Insurgents also attack teachers and government-run schools as a part of their campaign to eradicate symbols of the Thai state and drive the Thai Buddhist population out of what insurgents claim is Malay Muslims land.

During the decade of armed conflict, insurgents have killed more than 5,000 people, mostly civilians. Some insurgent cells have merged with underground cartels involved in drug trafficking, arms smuggling, and human trafficking across the Thai-Malaysian border, adding to the thriving criminality in the region.

Insurgents have argued that Islamic law permits attacks on civilians in certain circumstances. However, the laws of war, which are binding on non-state armed groups as well as national armed forces, prohibit all intentional attacks on civilians, including reprisal attacks. The insurgents have also been responsible for other laws-of-war violations, including the summary execution of captured civilians and combatants, mutilation or other mistreatment of the dead, and deliberate attacks on civilian objects, such as schools.

Thai security forces have also been implicated in extrajudicial killings and other abuses against suspected insurgents or their alleged supporters in the ethnic Malay Muslim community. Instead of seriously investigating alleged abuses, the government has repeatedly extended the state of emergency in the south, which provides near-blanket immunity to military personnel and police for actions they take in the line of duty. The use of these extensive powers to shield officials who commit rights violations has generated anger and alienation in the ethnic Malay Muslim community.

The Thai government should launch credible and impartial investigations into alleged violations of the laws of war and international human rights law by security personnel from regular and voluntary units in the region. Inquiries by the police and the Southern Border Provinces Administration Center into rights abuses have proceeded very slowly and shown few concrete results. Officials often fail to keep the families of victims apprised of any progress in the investigation, compounding the families’ frustrations. While financial reparations were paid to some victims’ families, offering money to families of victims should not be considered a substitute for justice.

“The government needs to ensure that Thai security forces protect public safety with full respect for human rights,” Adams said. “Shielding abusive security personnel from prosecution will only boost insurgent extremism and intensify the atrocities.”

Journalist and non-journalist media employees engaged with newspapers and news channels in Guwahati have demonstrated their anger today in front of Guwahati Press Club against the management of Sangbad Lahari, a Bengali daily simultaneously published from Guwahati & Shillong for its sudden closure notice rendering 100 employees jobless.

The participants covered their mouths with black badges demanding the withdrawal of the closure notice issued by Shillong Times Pvt Ltd, Meghalaya. The protestors also urged Tarun Gogoi, chief minister of Assam and Dr Mukul Sangma, chief minister of Meghalaya to pursue with the management to continue its publication.

Sangbad Lahari was launched in Guwahati in 2009 and later its Meghalaya edition was started in July 2011. The then State Governor RS Mooshahary released the first copy of Sangbad Lahari from Shillong. Mentionable is that Sangbad Lahari was Meghalaya’s first Bengali newspaper. Manas Chaudhuri, the then managing director of Shillong Times group asserted that Sangbad Lahari was not a money-making venture but a social service for the esteem Bengali readers.

Mentionable is that a notice from Shillong Times Pvt Ltd, Meghalaya (Ref no ST/63/14, dated 26 March 2014) was issued by Mrs S. Chaudhuri, general manager describing the management’s decision ‘to close down the publication of Sangbad Lahari w.e.f. 1st April 2014’ due to reasons beyond its control.

The management has however offered a month’s salary to its employees as a token of support to them, which is rejected by All Assam Media Employees Federation (AAMEF). The AAMEF president Hiten Mahnata argues that the management should release at least five months’ salaries to its employees with other due legal benefits before closing down the publication.

The year 2013 witnessed the closing of three daily newspapers and a satellite news channel. While the employees of Sakaal Bela, a Bengali newspaper, Seven Sisters’ Post, an English daily and Dainik Pratibimba, an Assamese daily did not receive any compensation from the managements, the television employees of Prime News had compelled its management with a series of protests to release three months’ cumulative salary at the time of closure.

The protest meeting today was addressed by AAMEF president Hiten Mahnata, senior journalist Amal Gupta, Nava Thakuria with others. AAMEF also decided to lodge a complaint regarding the closure of Sangbad Lahari in the office of labour commissioner in the city.

The media employees federation reiterated its demand for a social media audit of the concerned newspaper house, as its management has shown the acute financial crisis as the reason behind the closure notice for Sangbad Lahari, such that its valued readers get convinced with the present crisis.

By Parameswaran Ponnudurai

A coal-linked project in China’s dry Inner Mongolia region has caused a local water table to plunge and a local lake to shrink. In neighboring India, a thermal power plant has been forced to shut down because of severe water shortages.

In Southeast Asia, impoverished Laos risks destroying the spawning grounds of migratory fish species that feed millions of people along the key Mekong River as it pushes ahead with the controversial Xayaburi dam project aimed at selling electricity to power-hungry Thailand.

Wealthy Singapore, meanwhile, is consuming large amounts of of energy to overcome its water scarcity challenge even as the island nation’s progress toward water self-sufficiency is considered exemplary.

Decisions made in Asia for water use and management and for energy production are having major impacts on each other and serious repercussions for the region, according to studies highlighted on World Water Day last week.

The nexus between water and energy is quite evident in the region largely because of poor and uneven access, and the cross use of the two resources for exploitation, officials say.

“Some of the statistics are quite startling,” Shamshad Akhtar, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), said in a speech last week when commemorating a World Water Day event in Bangkok.

He said that while 4.3 billion people or about 60 percent the global population live in Asia, people in the region only have access to 38 percent of the world’s fresh water. As a result, Asia has the lowest regional per capita water availability in the world.

In parallel, Akhtar said, Asia’s energy consumption also remains lower than the global average, but is expected to rise sharply in the next three decades, to drive the required pace of regional economic growth.

World Water Development Report

The 2014 United Nations World Water Development Report, entitled “Water and Energy,” emphasizes how water is closely interdependent and interlinked with energy.

“Choices made in one domain have direct and indirect consequences on the other, positive or negative,” said the report, released to mark World Water Day on March 22.

“The form of energy production being pursued determines the amount of water required to produce that energy,” it said. “At the same time, the availability and allocation of freshwater resources determine how much—or how little—water can be secured for energy production.”

In Asia, coal, the most prevalent energy product within the region, is expected to remain the main source of energy, despite serious concerns about water quality degradation as an effect of coal mining and the water quantity required for cooling thermal power plants, the U.N. report says.

In the water-scarce western regions of China, new industries and coal-fired power stations secure cooling water from local lakes and rivers, drawing down groundwater aquifers and building reservoirs to capture rainwater, “all of which disrupt water supplies to other local users and lead to unsustainable water use,” the report says.

“Because of such activities, in Inner Mongolia it has been reported that the water table has dropped and grasslands such as Xilingol have become unproductive.”

Plunging water table

Environmental group Greenpeace said one coal chemical project in Inner Mongolia had extracted so much water in eight years of operation that it caused the local water table to drop by up to 100 meters (328 feet) and the local lake to shrink by 62 percent.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” the green group said in a report as China moves aggressively to ramp up coal production despite environmental and other concerns.

The U.N. report says the most recent Chinese Five Year Plan (2011−2015) calls for the creation of 14 large coal industry bases across western China, to include coal mines and coal-fired power plants.

But Greenpeace said China plans 16 mega coal power bases by 2015 that would consume 10 billion cubic meters of water annually, equivalent to one sixth of the Yellow River’s annual flow.

The water-energy nexus in Asia can also be a strategic issue, as a major cause of diplomatic anxiety among neighbors in the region is the construction of dams on international rivers to generate electricity.

For example, Laos, in a desperate need for revenue due to lack of resources, is on a dam building drive to become the “battery of Southeast Asia” by selling hydropower electricity to its neighbors.

Its decision to move full steam ahead with the Xayaburi dam, the first dam across the main stem of the Lower Mekong, has met with criticism from its neighbors Cambodia and Vietnam as well as environmental groups.

The dam, along with the proposed Don Sahong dam also on the Mekong, poses a regional security threat for the some 60 million people in Southeast Asia who rely on fish and other products from the key regional artery for their nutrition and their livelihoods, environmental and conservation groups say.

Water security

By 2030, the dams in the Mekong River tributaries will have a substantial impact on water security because the mainstream river flows and the hydrological regime of the entire Mekong river basin will be altered, ESCAP warned in a recent report.

It will also result in significant changes in the ecology of Tonle Sap Lake near Siem Reap in northwestern Cambodia, affecting ecosystem and farming productivity as well as fish migration and, by extension, compromising food security in the region, it said.

“If all the dams were built according to plan, the total loss in fish resources would be between 26 and 42 per cent, amounting to a devastating economic loss of around U.S. $476 million per year.”

In developing Asia, water used for energy production will increase from 157 billion cubic meters in 2010 to 230 billion cubic meters by 2035.

“This is a very steep increase,” ESCAP’s Akhtar said. “As a finite resource, water is a potentially binding constraint on enhancing energy security in the region.”

At the same time, energy is required for water uses, too.

While water is required to convert resources into electricity, be it through thermal, nuclear, hydro, or other sources , energy is needed at all stages of water extraction, treatment, and distribution—in agriculture, water supply and sanitation, cooling, and many other systems.

Groundwater use

In agriculture, the availability of low-cost pumps and poor irrigation services has led many farmers to increase their reliance on ground water.

While this has increased crop production and farmers’ income, “there are costs: most notably increased energy demand for pumping and unsustainable rates of groundwater use,” Asian Development Bank President Takehiko Nakao said at a recent “sustainable development” meeting in India.

To combat these trends, ADB is encouraging sustainable groundwater use through improved irrigation technologies.

As the energy used for pumping water makes up a large proportion of the cost of supplying municipal water, ADB is working with utilities to reduce water losses and also to introduce more energy efficient motors.

For example, ADB provided a grant to improve energy efficiency in Vietnam’s Ho Chi Minh City water supply system by upgrading the pumps.

It also wants to help improve the efficiency of wastewater treatment processes in the region.

Some 80 percent of Asia’s wastewater currently receives little or no treatment and causes widespread pollution.

“Treated wastewater is a valuable resource for maintaining river flows and for industrial and agricultural use—but requires energy,” Nakao said.

ADB has begun working with a private enterprise in China in wastewater management.

Nakao believes upgrading wastewater treatment plants in China will enable the reuse of 20 percent of the country’s wastewater by 2023.

World Bank initiative

The World Bank is also moving to highlight the challenges presented by water and energy.

It says it would be working with, among others, the National Energy Agency of China to look at the impact of potential water constraints in Beijing’s upcoming 2016-2020 energy plan as well as its long term plans.

The World Bank this year launched Thirsty Energy, a global initiative to support countries’ efforts to address challenges in energy and water management “proactively.”

Thirsty Energy has established a Private Sector Reference Group to share experience, to provide technical and policy advice, and to scale-up outreach efforts, the bank said.

“We hope to make more governments aware of the interdependencies and foreseeable pressure on water as a resource for energy generation,” said Diego Rodriguez, a senior economist at the World Bank’s Water Unit.

“The World Bank is ready to assist client countries which seek to find and identify appropriate integrated approaches in order to anticipate water constraints in energy investments, and prevent risks to energy projects and their long-term energy planning,” he said.

‘Compelling’ case

The bank says there is a “compelling” case to expeditiously improve integrated water and energy planning in order to avoid unwanted future scenarios.

At present, more than 780 million people lack access to potable water, and over 1.3 billion people lack access to electricity, the bank says.

At the same time, estimates show that by 2035, global energy consumption will increase by 35 percent, while water consumption by the energy sector will increase by 85 percent.

Climate change will further challenge water and energy management by causing more water variability and intensified weather events, such as severe floods and droughts, the bank says.

Despite the water-energy nexus concerns, the bank warns that “the absence of integrated planning between these two sectors is socio-economically unsustainable.”

By Shahriar Kia

Iran’s mullahs were caught red-handed – again – smuggling weapons to their proxies in the Middle-East region. An intercepted cargo of M-302 missiles, originating from Bandar Abbas, was bound for Gaza to stoke the fires of destruction and mayhem and further distance the region from peace and stability, the main beneficiary of which would be the Iranian regime, a dictatorship that thrives on terror and death and is the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world.

This happens while the P5 + 1 readies itself for the next round of talks with the mullahs over their much-contested nuclear program scheduled within the next week.

This gross violation of UNSC resolution 1929 once again proves that despite Rohani’s ridiculous “charm offensive”, the Iranian regime’s reliance on terrorism as the main pillar of its foreign policy has not lessened one bit. It also shows that despite Iran’s collapsing economy and the tragic state of poverty inside the country, the mullahs’ number one financial priority remains the expenditures of exporting terrorism and fundamentalism, aimed at preserving their diminishing hegemony in the region.

Neither has the Iranian regime relinquished its ballistic missile program. In a pathetic attempt at showing power, Dehghan, Rohani’s defense minister and one of the masterminds behind the 1983 terrorist attack on the US Marines’ barracks in Beirut, recently announced great progress in approving the accuracy of Iran’s ballistic missile guidance system.

In fact, the mullahs haven’t given up on their nuclear ambitions either. And if they decided to attend the nuclear talks and drink the “Chalice of Poison”, it was solely because the many crises that surrounded them at the time Rohani assumed office had left them with no other option, and they were desperately in need of a reprieve – albeit temporary.

All the facts indicate that this is the same regime, with the same ideology and the same strategy. The mullahs have only changed the pieces in their showcase in order to fool their international counterparts into easing the pressure on them. And unfortunately, they seem to have succeeded to some degree.

This regime will soon receive another $550 million in sanctions relief thanks to the interim deal forged with P5+1 last November. From the current state of affairs, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out where the money will be spent.

Yet, while Obama strives to keep the mullahs at the nuclear negotiation table at all costs, he has deliberately decided to ignore their other endeavors, including the rise of domestic suppression and the export of terrorism to the countries of the region.

Rohani is in fact trying to take advantage of the situation to elongate the life of the mullahs’ decaying regime for a bit longer by quelling the growing unrest inside the country and attempting to eliminate the Iranian opposition movement abroad, the two main elements that have the potential to bring change in Iran and put an end to the three-decade-long tyranny of the mullahs.

The recent surge in number of executions in Iran and terrorist activity against Iranian opposition members in Camps Ashraf and Liberty, Iraq, are proof of the fact. And given the concessions that the Obama-led diplomacy is willing to give to the mullahs, we can only expect the situation to exacerbate in the upcoming months.

At the end of the day, no amount of sanctions relief will save this regime – which is long overdue – from its inevitable overthrow by the Iranian people and their organized resistance. But as they near the end of their rule, the mullahs will definitely aggravate in their savagery and barbarousness, and they will take their toll on peace and stability in the region and across the world, facing the international community with the threat of an all-out conflict.

Only a firm policy in dealing with the mullahs can prevent such a disaster from happening. As Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the president elect of the Iranian resistance stressed in her speech to the gathering of 300 Iranian communities in Paris, such a policy would include not only the total dismantlement of the mullahs’ nuclear program and unprecedented inspections of their facilities, but also addressing their serious history of human rights violation and removing their instruments of warmongering and terrorism in the region.

Unfortunately, the approach taken by the international community today isn’t nearly as firm as it should be.

Shahriar Kia is a political analyst and press spokesman for Camp Liberty residents in Iraq, members of Iranian opposition PMOI, also known as MEK, which advocates for a democratic, secular and nuclear-free Iran, with separation of church and state and gender equality. He graduated from North Texas University.His Twitter handle is @shahriarkia

The Iranian president has appointed Hamid Aboutalebi as the new Iranian envoy to the United Nations. Aboutalebi is a veteran diplomat and has held several key posts in Europe.

Aboutalebi has already served as Iranian ambassador to Italy, Belgium and Australia.

Aboutalebi will replace Mohammad Khazai, who was seen as a moderate diplomat.

Western media have focused on Aboutalebi’s alleged connection with the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Iran in 1979. Aboutalebi has reportedly denied any direct connection with the incident and has said that he did, however, act as translator in some of exchanges.

Iran has applied for a visa to replace Khazai with Aboutalebi, and if the visa is approved, the new Iranian envoy is set to take over his new position.

Iranian diplomats at the UN face restrictions in traveling to New York, as do North Korean and Syrian diplomats.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called for a broad regional alliance among the countries that celebrate the Nowruz, which marks the Persian New Year.

“We can be the founders of an inclusive regional alliance that would seek the development of nations as its common goal, and we can improve the standards of living in the region, and pursue moderation,” Rouhani said in a speech at the 5th International Nowruz Festival in the Afghan capital of Kabul.

He went on to say that moderation is not simply a political slogan restricted to a certain person or country and that it rather has deep roots in the culture and literature of the countries the celebrate the Nowruz.

The Iranian president further noted that the call for moderation, which encourages peace and justice, has been welcomed by the international community.

“The firm adoption of the WAVE (World Against Violence and Extremism) resolution at the UN General Assembly, which set a collective campaign against violence and extremism on the international community’s agenda, is a clear example of this global approach,” Rouhani pointed out.

“We cannot speak of moderation in a region where even a small group beats the drums of ignorance and sows the seeds of wrath, and where extremism claims victims,” Rouhani further said in Kabul.

He stated that Afghanistan has been occupied twice by foreign forces over the past few decades – a reference to the Soviet war in Afghanistan, which lasted nine years from December 1979 to February 1989, and the US-led war in Afghanistan (2001–present), adding that foreign troops brought violence and extremism to Afghanistan and caused serious damage to the lives of the people and the country itself.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran has condemned both invasions, and has provided assistance to the great Afghan nation in both cases, and has been hosting millions of people (Afghans) as guests,” he noted.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has also called for the formation of a quadrilateral front by Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Pakistan to counter terrorism and extremism in the region.

The Iranian president said with regard to establishment of security “it is necessary to prepare a comprehensive plan for countering extremism and violence in the region and strictly prevent the flow of financial support and arms to extremist, terrorist and violence-seeking groups.”

Rouhani also warned that any negligence in countering terrorism will negatively affect the relations among the regional countries.

The Iranian president also called for the expansion of cultural and economic ties among the four countries.

Iran’s President also said his Pakistani counterpart has pledged to commit his outmost efforts to securing the release of the Iranian border guards who have been abducted and transferred to Pakistan.

Rouhani said that, during a quad-lateral meeting with the presidents of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Tajikistan, the four leaders discussed issues of interest but mainly focused on concerns over combating terrorism and extremism.

He added that Pakistani President Mamnoon Hussain emphasized during the meeting that he will put all his efforts into bringing about the release of the Iranian guards, adding that Islamabad will also try hard to keep its joint border with Iran safe from now on.

By Waleed Abu al-Khair

In the past year, a plethora of press reports and video clips have surfaced on Chechens, among other Caucasus fighters, now fighting alongside Islamist groups in Syria.

These Chechens have fought alongside the al-Qaeda-linked “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) and Jabhat al-Nusra (JAN), al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria, while experiencing fractures and tensions with these groups, as each seeks to establish its own caliphate in the region, analysts told Al-Shorfa.

“The presence of Chechen fighters in Syria is linked to al-Qaeda and its branches in Syria,” said strategy analyst Maj. Gen. Yahya Mohammed Ali, who is retired from the Egyptian army. “Since they began arriving, they joined ISIL, JAN and other battalions and factions” that subscribe to the ideology of al-Qaeda.

However, the on-going dispute between ISIL and JAN and other concerns drove a number of Chechen mujahideen to break away and form independent fighting factions and battalions of their own while retaining full co-ordination with al-Qaeda groups in military engagements against the Syrian regime, he added.

Czech magazine Tyden reported that many of the Chechen fighters in Syria belong to the Caucasus Emirate, an umbrella group that seeks to establish an Islamic caliphate in the Caucasus.

Maj. Gen. Wael Abdul Muttalib, researcher at the Cairo-based Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, said the leaders of Chechen militias in the Caucasus “view fighting in Syria as a great opportunity to train their fighters and use the combat experience”.

“The Chechen presence in Syria has gone beyond participation in the fighting and turned it into an opportunity to train young [Chechens] for a limited period of time, after which they return to the Caucasus area,” he said.

In March 2013, a foreign fighter going by the name Abu Omar al-Chechen announced the creation of “Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar” under his command, according to the Chechen news agency Kavkaz Centre.

Late in the year, al-Chechen swore allegiance to ISIL, and was replaced by another Chechen commander, Salaheddine, “as most Chechens in Syria refuse to pay allegiance” to ISIL, the BBC reported.

Around the same time, the second in command to Abu Omar al-Chechen, Saifullah, and a group of his fighters pledged allegiance to JAN, Kavkaz Centre said.

Salaheddine al-Chechen and his deputy Abdul Karim Krymsky have spoken out against the fighting between ISIL and other opposition factions, and Krymsky also has been vocal in his condemnation of ISIL’s tactics and attitude towards the local population, saying that the group has brutalised and murdered civilians, according to EA WorldView, a news and analysis source based at the University of Birmingham in the UK.

“Tens and hundreds of corpses, mass graves, became a kind of calling card for ISIL wherever it went,” Krymsky told Kavkaz Centre in early March.

“Most worryingly, these events came to be part of everyday life, whereby ISIL was not ashamed of its crimes,” he added.

Chechens have also committed atrocities amounting to ‘war crimes’

Strategy analyst Ali said that Chechen fighters have also committed atrocities, most linked to the actions of al-Qaeda as a whole.

Several videos recorded by Chechen fighters after battles show bodies of people who have been executed, he said.

“Chechen fighters are known for their fierceness in battle, which has reached a level of criminality and commitment of what could be classified as war crimes,” he added. “Among their most notable military engagements was their role in the Aleppo airport battle and their subsequent elimination of surrendered fighters by beheading.”

Czech magazine Tyden reported on its website in August that after the takeover of Aleppo airport, Chechens slit the throats of and beheaded captured members of the military.

“This is the first time Chechens have been confirmed to be fighting outside their territory after doubts about their involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq,” Ali said.

Chechen and Caucasus fighters in Syria fall under four main groups, each headed by its own commander, namely: Jund al-Sham, led by Muslim Abu al-Waleed al-Chechen, Omar al-Chechen group, Saifullah al-Chechen group and Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar formerly led by Salaheddine al-Chechen, who was recently reported to have died, media and relief activist Faisal al-Ahmed, who is from Aleppo, told Al-Shorfa.

Chechens in Syria have fought in battles including the fight for Kafr al-Hamra village, the storming of the French hospital, the attack on Handarat air defence battalion and the battle of Aleppo Central Prison, in addition to battles in Deraa and rural Latakia, he said.

In Latakia, Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar was linked to the August massacre of 190 Syrian civilians.

It was among five armed opposition groups “responsible for specific incidents that amount to war crimes” including shootings, stabbings and in some cases executions of entire families, Human Rights Watch said.

In Kafr al-Hamra, Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar was responsible for an August car bomb blast that killed more than 50 people, according to Echo Kavkaz Media Centre.

‘Biggest loser is the Syrian people’

“Although the Chechen groups are independent, or claim to be independent, from other al-Qaeda-affiliated groups, they take part in military operations with both ISIL and JAN according to the geographical area they are in,” relief activist al-Ahmed said.

In the recent battles on the coast, these groups took part in military operations in co-ordination with JAN, and are now in full co-operation with ISIL in Aleppo, he said.

These fighters, therefore, are involved in the same war crimes attributed to ISIL and JAN, and have imposed the same pressures on civilians in terms of sharia law and punishment, he said.

“The Syrian people were thrust into the internal wars between these armed groups, and were forced to live in an atmosphere alien to their own lifestyle which is known for its religious and moral tolerance,” he added.

“All armed Islamist groups in Syria, especially those affiliated to al-Qaeda, such as ISIL and JAN, and Chechen groups, have their own goals represented in establishing their own Islamic emirate,” he added.

“The biggest loser is the Syrian people whose material and psychological capabilities have been exhausted in their three-year revolution,” al-Ahmed said.

Meanwhile in al-Raqa, where ISIL and JAN have committed grave atrocities, Chechens who sometimes belong to these groups have been seen living expensively and ostentatiously, Al-Hayat reported in March.

Main Syrian opposition forces have rejected calls for foreign jihadists to join the fight in Syria.

“Our official position as the Supreme Military Command of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) […] is that we thank them but reject any calls for jihad in Syria,” Luay al-Meqdad, media and political co-ordinator for the FSA, told AFP last April.

“We reject any presence of foreign fighters, regardless of where they are from,” he said.

Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is leading in the municipal elections with 46.69 percent of the votes, according to the Anadolu Agency.

Republican People’s Party (CHP) holds the second place in the elections with 28.38 percent of the votes. Representatives of the National Action Party have 14.41 percent of the votes.

At this moment 70.1 percent of the votes counted.

The municipal elections began in Turkey on March 30. The voting began at 07:00 and continued until 16:00 local time in the following districts: Adiyaman, Agri, Artvin, Bingol, Bitlis, Diyarbakir, Elazig, Erzincan, Erzurum, Gaziantep, Giresun, Gumushane, Hakkari, Kars, Malatya, Kahramanmaras, Mardin, Mus, Ordu, Rize, Siirt, Sivas, Trabzon, Tunceli, Sanlıurfa, Van, Bayburt, Batman, Sırnak, Ardahan, Igdır and Kilis.

In all other districts the elections were held between 08:00 and 17:00 local time.

The number of registered voters in Turkey is 52,695,831 people. Out of them, some 26,704,757 people are women and 25,991,750 people are men. Some 194,310 ballot boxes were installed throughout the country.

Some 26 political parties participate in the municipal elections.

Despite the fact that 26 political parties participate in the municipal elections, it is expected that the main struggle will be between the representatives of the Turkish Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP).