The U.S. aircraft company Boeing announced that it has received permission to sell aircraft spare parts to Iran. Meanwhile, General Electric has also got the go-ahead to service 18 engines sold to Iran in the the late 1970s, according to Reuters.

IRNA reports that on Friday April 4, Boeing announced that the U.S. government has given it permission to begin selling spare parts for commercial aircraft to Iran. The license only allows the provision of spare parts for older Boeing planes sold to Iran before 1979 and does not allow the sale of new aircraft.

The license could be a prelude to the reestablishment of relations between Iran and Boeing, which have been severed since the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Reuters reported in November that an Iranian official has said that Iran could be looking at the purchase of 250 to 400 jets once the international sanctions were lifted.

This is the first time Boeing and GE have been given license to deal with Iran since the 1979 hostage crisis at the American Embassy in Iran.

Emblematic of the feeble condition of Western political thought these days are the indications that there is more agreement about the evil of terrorism than there is about the value of democracy.

Witness an observation made recently by Patrick Cockburn, a British journalist admired by many on the Left, who wrote in The Independent:

The “war on terror” has failed because it did not target the jihadi movement as a whole and, above all, was not aimed at Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the two countries that had fostered jihadism as a creed and a movement.

For those who want to distance themselves from the crude lexicon of Bush and Cheney, jihadism is supposedly a word with less charge, signalling that the term’s user is not on a crusade. Yet under this veneer of objectivity there is sometimes a surprising concordance with the neoconservative perspective.

Over a decade ago, I wrote:

Richard Perle, in quasi-theological terms, posits a “unity of terror.” In the same spirit, an editorial in Sunday’s Jerusalem Post, in reference to the terrorists who killed three Americans in Gaza this week, goes so far as to say:

Whether it was Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or perhaps even al-Qaida itself matters little and in fact tends to distract from what the West knows but often does not like to admit: The tentacles all belong to the same enemy.

Within this conception of terrorism, a phenomenon that is scattered across the globe has been turned into a beast of mythological proportions. The explicit connection is militant Islam, but whether the “tentacles” linking Islamic terrorists amount to concrete connections through finance and organization, or whether we are looking at bonds that have no more substance than a common cause or simply the common use of particular techniques of terrorism, these are all distinctions that the unitarians dismiss as distractions.

Cockburn now writes:

These days, there is a decreasing difference in the beliefs of jihadis, regardless of whether or not they are formally linked to al-Qa’ida central, now headed by Ayman al-Zawahiri. An observer in southern Turkey discussing 9/11 with a range of Syrian jihadi rebels earlier this year found that “without exception they all expressed enthusiasm for the 9/11 attacks and hoped the same thing would happen in Europe as well as the US”.

When a veteran reporter makes this kind of observation, even though he does not identify his source in any way at all, there will be many readers who treat Cockburn’s word (and thus that of an unidentified “observer”) as definitive. In so doing, they ignore the fact that this characterization of the Assad regime’s opponents perfectly mirrors the regime’s own propaganda.

One can treat Assad’s claim that he is fighting terrorists as a statement of fact. Or, one can treat it as a cynical and effective piece of political messaging — messaging one of whose purposes is to corral some sympathy from those in the West who, paradoxically, both vehemently reject the military adventurism that the neoconservatives initiated after 9/11 and yet also fully embrace a neoconservative view of unified terrorism.

When labels like jihadist and terrorist get used with sufficient frequency, the mere fact that the terms are used so frequently solidifies the sense that we know what they mean.

Any label applied to a person, however, calls out for a corrective: the voice of that person — a voice which may reinforce or undermine the stereotypes that repetition has created.

When it comes to the jihadists in Syria, we rarely hear what they have to say about themselves and if Cockburn is to be believed there’s little reason why we should be interested in hearing such individuals speak, since they all think alike and are all enemies of the West.

Earlier this year, a rare glimpse of foreign jihadists in Syria came in the form of an interview with a Dutch jihadist. Speaking in English, he provided a more nuanced picture of what has led young men like him to leave their families and join the fight against the Assad regime. Indeed, he spoke at length characterizing this more as a fight for Syrians than as one against their government.

His is just one voice. To what extent he can be taken as representative of others is open to question. Young men can easily be blinded by their own convictions or become servants of the agendas of others.

But while it’s perfectly reasonable to view with skepticism anyone’s claim that Islamic law would provide the panacea that can heal all of Syria’s wounds, the account that this former Dutch soldier gives of himself suggests to me that he knows his own mind.

He’s the kind of jihadist that both Patrick Cockburn and Bashar al-Assad would have you believe does not exist.

Dear Mahasweta Devi,

In Byadhkhanda (“The Book of the Hunter,” 1994), you tell the story of Chunti Kotal (1965-1992) – I first read the story in your EPW article “The Story of Chuni Kotal” (29 August 1992). Born into a poor Lodha family, Kotal suffered all the indignities of caste oppression and class exploitation. Held up by her family and community, she was able to finish high school, went to work as a government surveyor, learned the skills that earned her a degree at Vidyasagar University, and then despite her hard work found her supervisors unwilling to let her complete her course work for an advanced degree. Ruthless behavior by her professors distressed Kotal. She left Midnapur for the home of her husband, Manmatha Savar, who worked in the railway workshops in Kharagpur. There, on August 16, Chunti Kotal committed suicide. Your poignant description of the events leads to the obvious lesson: “The tribals should realise exactly where they stand here. The curse of the babu culture runs in Bengal’s veins. West Bengal forces a Chunti Kotal to commit suicide.”

Two decades later, not far from Chunti Kotal’s village in West Midnapur, another ghastly event has taken place. I do not have your literary skills, but I shall try to lay out the facts as plainly as possible. It is difficult to do this because of the grotesque violence that I am about to describe.

In Panchrol, Chandana Kotal lived with her parents. She has two children. Their father left them years ago. On March 29, 2014, a few days before the West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee was to come and address a campaign rally in West Midnapur, men from her party – the Trinamul Congress (TMC) – went to Chandana Kotal’s parent’s home. They accused Chandana Kotal of having an affair with Biltu Giri. These TMC cadres took Chandana Kotal from her home, tied her to a tree and beat her in public. The next day, these men organized a shalishi – a community meeting – where they berated her. As judge, jury, executioner, these men then had Chandana Kotal’s hair cut-off and paraded her through the village.

The shalishi is the TMC’s variant of the Khap Panchayat that one sees in North India, a gathering of oppressor caste elders whose reflexive misogyny has become legendary.

The TMC controls all of the local government seats (village panchayats) in the area. They won the panchayat elections “unopposed,” preventing with force anyone from
running against them. The TMC apparatchiks used their political authority to suborn the police. Chandana Kotal’s parents went and lodged a complaint at the local police station. The police arrested Biltu Giri, his wife and another person. Not one of the TMC cadres was arrested.

The Member of Parliament for Jhagram – the constituency that includes Panchrol – is CPI-M’s Dr. Pulin Behari Baske. He tried to go to Dantan, the main town (which also happens to be where he was born). The police prevented him from entering Dantan. He was not able to fully investigate what had transpired. This is TMC country.

Chandana’s mother, Padmavati Kotal, could not take the pressure. She ate poison on April 1 and died. Her son, Gautam Kotal, has lodged a complaint with the police against the TMC cadres for torture against his sister and harassment that led to the suicide death of his mother.

In January of this year, you shared a dais with Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, head of the TMC, the party of the men who tortured Chandana Kotal and harassed to death Padmavati Kotal. At this rally in Kolkata, you said, “Mamata has worked for the upliftment of the weaker sections of society, including minorities and tribals. She is competent enough to be the Prime Minister.”

Chandana Kotal, like Chunti Kotal, comes from the Lodha tribal community. Chunti Kotal was harassed to death by what you called the “babu culture of West Bengal.” Chandana Kotal and Padmavati Kotal were, on the other hand, tortured and harassed to death by the “babu culture of the TMC,” the party whose leader you fete. In 2001, you remembered the story of Chunti Kotal for Outlook, and told Subhoranjan Dasgupta, “Lodha and Sabars and killed just because they are born into these denotified tribes while much greater criminals romp away scot free. Even the enlightened middle-class did not react.” The silence from the “enlightened middle class” around the events in Panchrol is as deafening as the silence for the enforced suicide of Ajit Bhuiyan (“The Suicide of Ajit Bhuiyan,” Counterpunch, April 2, 2014) in nearby Chandur – near the Chandrakona forest. West Bengal is being bathed in silence, drowned in the violence of your friend Mamata Banerjee’s TMC.

[Mahasweta Devi is one of India’s most well-known authors. For more on her, read the introduction by Gayatri Spivak to her translation of three stories by Devi, Imaginary Maps, 1994]

This article appeared at Counterpunch and is reprinted with permission.

Here is a link to the abstract of a peer-reviewed article in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics. (You may be able to download the full article. I could, from my university computer.)

The abstract says, “It appears that news media and some pro-environmental organizations have the tendency to accentuate or even exaggerate the damage caused by climate change. … We find that the information manipulation… induces more countries to participate in an IEA [International Environmental Agreement], which will eventually enhance global welfare.”

The article argues that by exaggerating the harmful effects of climate change, advocates can gain more support for government climate change policies.

The article says, “Linking climate change to extreme weather may be a powerful way to motivate people.” Referring to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it says, “The IPCC has tended to over-generalize its research results and accentuate the negative side of climate change. Following its lead, the mainstream media has gone even further.”

Later, “…it may be better for the countries to hold a pessimistic view of the climate problem, as it will induce more countries to participate in the IEA…” The paper then goes on to develop a mathematical model to demonstrate why this is the case.

The paper’s conclusion begins, “This article offers a rationale for the phenomenon of climate damage accentuation or exaggeration on the part of the international mainstream media or other pro-environmental organizations.” And then to show the bias of the authors, “Forming a binding IEA to curb climate change is a matter of urgency… When the media or pro-environmental organizations have private information on the damage caused by climate change, in equilibrium they may manipulate the information to increase pessimism regarding climate damage, even though the damage may not be that great. Consequently, more countries (with overpessimistic beliefs about climate damage) will be induced to participate in an IEA in this state, thereby leading to greater global welfare…”

The paper concludes, “This article further explores how the mass media may manipulate the information it privately has to influence behavior related to the environment … this article introduces a novel mechanism, ‘information manipulation.’”

This article is noteworthy because it is published in a peer-reviewed academic journal. This is not right-wing political propaganda, and it is apparent from reading the article that the authors are sympathetic to the idea that more global action needs to be taken to combat what they believe are the negative effects of climate change.

The article is written by advocates of international environmental agreements who plainly state that climate scientists and the media exaggerate the negative effects of climate change, and explain why doing so helps further their goals.

By Hamza Hamouchene

Algeria’s next presidential elections will be held on 17 April 2014 and for the last few months; this important electoral rendezvous showed all the hallmarks of a masquerade, consistent with almost all the elections in the history of the Algerian state since independence in 1962.

Elections in Algeria are not particularly known to be free, fair or transparent. They are often rigged, biased and outcomes are usually decided before the voting has begun, by the different factions of the regime and the associated interests groups.

When I think of these particular elections, the Algerian hilarious comedy Carnaval Fi Dashra (Carnival in a Village, released in 1994) comes to mind, where the main character Makhlouf Bombardier, after becoming a mayor with the help of a shady entourage and an extravagant campaign, tries to organise an international film festival that will rival with the Tunisian Carthage edition. He gets involved in corruption and embezzlement but that does not halt his ambition to run for the presidency of the republic.

This comedy is not only an entertaining show but also a satirical critique of the Algerian politics. It conveys in a very funny way what Algerians have come to think of the elections and how deeply alienated with the political system they have become.

The run up to the April-2014 presidential elections has not failed so far in delivering some episodes or scenes worthy of a Hollywood movie or a tragicomic circus farce.

Amongst the candidates running for these elections, some Franco-Algerian contenders (who had to renounce their French citizenship) stand out, not by their exemplary patriotism and integrity (which I am not questioning here) but by the fact they did not live in Algeria at all, which makes it really difficult to take them seriously. Their ambition and willingness to serve their country of origin is of course to be saluted but surely they did not embark on such plans with the illusion of winning. But who can blame them anyway for seeing these elections as an opportunity or a stepping-stone to integrate the Algerian political system?

One of them; Kamal Benkoussa, a trader and a partner in an American hedge fund in London; and who adopted Obama’s “Yes We Can” slogan for his campaign, finally decided to withdraw from the electoral race at the end of February, after realising that the game is closed and rigged in advance. He chose the famous El-Alia cemetery in Algiers to make his announcement, a well-chosen place for a deathbed of a presidential dream.

The other Franco-Algerian candidate is Rachid Nekkaz, a businessman who shot to fame after being a contender for the 2007 French presidential elections. For the last few weeks, he has been entertaining audiences with his humorous, not to say clumsy interviews on Algerian TV channels. The mystery ingredient is not absent in the mix either: what happened with the strange disappearance of the signatures he accumulated to validate his candidacy with the constitutional council seems to come straight off a spy or a conspiracy novel. He goes then and mobilise hundreds of people in a surprise protest in Algiers on 8 March that was not repressed at all, unlike all the protests organised by the anti-system Barakat (Enough!) movement who could not mobilise similar numbers and whose members were arrested several times.

What makes the unfolding tragicomedy more burlesque and sad at the same time is the candidacy of a physically unfit president for a fourth term, a 77-year old man who is still struggling to recover from a stroke that resulted in his hospitalisation in Paris for almost three months. He also spent some convalescence time to recover and regain his functional abilities in Les “Invalides” institution. Invalides in French means disabled, a status that currently suits him very well as his rare TV appearances failed to dissipate the serious concerns about his ability to run the country and only confirmed his severe state of illness. In fact these choreographed TV appearances made him a laughingstock of French TV programs.

A well-deserved treatment to say the least of a president who did not address the nation for more than 22 months, who is reduced to a picture-candidate, a megalomaniac who changed the constitution in 2008 to allow for an unlimited number of terms, probably in order to die in office and earn himself the quintessential privilege of a state funeral.

Among the six validated candidates apart from Bouteflika, Ali Benflis, a former prime-minister under Bouteflika (2000-2003) and the unlucky rival in the 2004 presidential elections, seems to be the only candidate that might represent a shade of threat to Bouteflika’s rule. After a humiliating defeat in 2004, Benflis might be thinking that this is the propitious moment to turn the tables and strike a knockout punch against his old opponent. He might be looking forward to taking his revenge and showing the nation that after ten years of absence from the political scene, he can be the next president. But the odds do not look in his favour for now. It remains to hope that he has a strong heart and he is capable of surviving another setback at the age of 70.

As we say in Algerian parlance, El-Hadj Moussa or Moussa El-Hadj, Bouteflika or Benflis, what’s the difference? Both represent some factions within the regime and are backed by certain oligarchic groups. The choice between the two will only prolong the life of the current system. What is needed is a complete rupture with the latter and with its actors who abide by its tyranny.

ELECTORAL DESPOTISM

But beyond the candidates, their qualities and flaws, democracy cannot be reduced to elections, especially when these happen in a despotic framework and when these are used to legitimise the system in place and offer a “democratic” façade for authoritarian practices and the pillaging of the oil rent. This electoral masquerade is another proof that the Algerian regime refuses to democratise despite the upheavals of the Arab uprisings and the lessons that must be learnt from the Western interventions in countries like Libya and Iraq: denying your own people freedom and the right to self-determination will only make you vulnerable to imperialist designs.

People that legitimately challenge this state of affairs are often dubbed agent provocateurs who are seeking to destabilise the country for the benefit of foreign powers. For instance, the former prime minister, the infamous Abdelmalek Sellal, who resigned a few days ago in order to head Bouteflika’s campaign, described the people who are opposed to the fourth term as agitators and deserve a worse treatment than the terrorists that attacked the In Amenas gas plant in January 2013. The false stability that this regime is championing is not sustainable in the long run as the social peace is bought with an oil rent that is susceptible to the cyclical changes of market prices and also because the people’s patience will run out one day.

Whoever wins Algeria’s next presidential elections: democracy surely won’t be a winner and in the absence of a viable alternative that could mobilise the masses around a liberating societal project, boycotting the elections is an honourable political choice to make.

Hamza Hamouchene is an Algerian writer, activist and co-founder of Algeria Solidarity Campaign (ASC). Follow Hamza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bentoumert This article was first published in March 2014 by The Huffington Post

THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR/S AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

As Malawi gears up to go to what many are calling the closest electoral race in its history, a new report entitled: ‘Malawi- Political Participation and Democracy,’ has pointed to the missed opportunity for electoral reforms in the country. It states that the First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system does not appear to be serving Malawi well. And ‘losers’ have ended up being crowned ‘winners’ in general elections. Currently Malawi’s electoral rules states that any person vying for political office is deemed the winner based on a simple majority. In essence, one can be a winner of an election without a mandate, as was the case in 1994 with former president Mulizi, who received only 47 percent of the vote. Ten years later this trend was repeated by late Bingu wa Mutharika, who garnered only 36 percent of the vote, yet still went on to be president, (although in 2009 Mutharika had 66 percent of the vote). In essence 64 percent of electorates rejected him, but because of the FPTP system, he ended up being at the helm of government.

‘The people of Malawi spoke up in 2006, during the constitutional conference, and decided that an overhaul of its electoral systems was needed. Almost seven years and two elections later, their wishes have not come to pass. Priority must now be placed on reforms and whoever ends up at the helm after May 20th elections, must commit to fulfilling these aspirations and focus on meaningful reform of the electoral system so that good governance and democracy can be consolidated,’ said Ozias Tungwarara, manager in the Africa Regional Office of the Open Society Foundation.

Participants at the constitutional conference had stated specifically that there has to be a 50 plus one majority for any candidate to be declared winner. This meant that if any candidate could not amass the required more 50 percent of the votes then a second round of balloting would be held. This recommendation was never been implemented, and was ignored by most politicians because it served their interests.

The report also warns of the lack of public confidence in the Malawi Electoral Commission, due to the dominance of the executive, which controls the appointments and dismissals of the Commissioners. MEC’s track record of managing elections is also highlighted, whereby irregularities and logistical problems continue to undermine its credibility. The debate for an overhaul of the voters’ roll remains unresolved, which could magnify the current perception that the MEC is unable to provide a level political playing field for opposition candidates. The report calls for all candidates to focus on calling for the creation of a new voters’ roll as a priority for future elections in Malawi. It also asks the MEC to work closely with the National Registration Bureau in its future projections on registration and confirmation of the voters’ roll, once reforms have been enacted.

The report also raises concern over the politics of ethnicity and regionalism, which it states are glaring realities in Malawi. As far back as 1994, the three dominant parties: AFORD; MCP and UDF have retained sizable and consistent margins in North, Central and Southern areas of the country, respectively. And it calls for a code of conduct established by law for political parties, which should be enforced by the MEC.

The 323-page study also praises Malawi’s democratic credentials, and urges law-makers to focus on far reaching reforms and harmonize laws that relate to local government and local government elections, the constitutional amendment act of 2012 and the national Decentralization Policy, with a view to creating a clear legal and policy framework for local governance in Malawi. The study authored by Wiseman Chirwa, focuses on nine thematic areas: Malawi’s constitutional framework; equal citizenship; policy processes; elections; political parties; the legislature; local government; traditional authorities; and development assistance. It makes recommendations for urgent reforms in all thematic areas, and states that another opportunity for demonstration of political will for political transformation in Malawi should not be lost after the general elections in May.

BACKGROUND

The studies on Political Participation and Democracy have been conducted and launched in Benin, DRC, Ghana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Senegal Sierra Leone Swaziland, South Africa and Zambia. Kenya is soon to be published. This forms part of a series of reports that also assesses governance in the Justice Sector and Public Service Delivery in Education in the respective countries.

WHO

AfriMAP, the Africa Governance Monitoring and Advocacy Project, is an initiative of the Open Society Foundations, and works with national civil society organizations to conduct systematic audits of government performance in three areas: the justice sector and the rule of law; political participation and democracy; and effective delivery of public services. The project also assesses the African Peer Review Mechanism and roles of Public broadcasters in Africa. www.afrimap.org

OSISA, the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA) is a regional Foundation that is part of a global network of the Open Society Foundations. Established in 1997, and based in Johannesburg, OSISA’s vision is the realization of a vibrant Southern African society in which people, free from material and other deprivation, understand their rights and responsibilities and participate democratically in all spheres of life. In pursuit of this vision, OSISA’s mission is to initiate and undertake advocacy work (and support initiatives by others) that seek to establish the ideals of open society in the region. www.osisa.org

MHRRC, Malawi Human Rights Resource Centre works with civil society organizations to effectively support the developing democracy in the country. MHRRC contributes towards the consolidation of channels of free expression and other rights for the citizens by working with and building the capacity of NGOs and CSOs working on human rights. http://www.humanrights.mw

Over 1,500 Palestinian children have been killed by Israeli forces since the year 2000, the Palestinian Authority minister of social affairs said Saturday.

Marking Palestinian Children’s Day, Kamal al-Sharafi said in a statement that 1,520 Palestinian children have been killed and approximately 6,000 injured by the Israeli military in the past 14 years.

More than 10,000 have been arrested, al-Sharafi added, and 200 are currently being held in Israeli prisons.

“Protecting and supporting children should be a national responsibility,” he said, calling upon the Palestinian Authority to ratify a law for the protection of minors.

Palestinians mark Children’s Day on April 5 each year.

The United Nations Children Fund said in a 2013 report that 700 Palestinian children aged 12 to 17, most of them boys, are arrested, interrogated and detained by the Israeli military, police, and security agents every year in the occupied West Bank.

In the report, UNICEF said it identified examples of practices that “amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture.”

At least 1,000 protesters have gathered in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk, the industrial capital of the region, demanding that authorities respect their right for self-determination by allowing them to stage a Crimea-style referendum.

The rally was held in the city’s central Lenin Square. Demonstrators held Russian flags and signs which read, “The Republic of Donetsk.”

The protesters called for a general all-Ukrainian strike and distributed leaflets declaring April 18 a referendum day.

“Today a referendum remains a sharp political and social issue in Donbass region. People do not leave squares and require to hold [a referendum]. The fight for a referendum is accompanied by protests against rising prices for gas, electricity and food. The socio-patriotic movement ‘Eastern Front’ offers trade unions to hold a general strike on April 18. The goal of the strike is to require that the authorities hold a referendum and introduce a moratorium on the increase of tariffs and utilities,” said the leaflet, according to local media reports.

Residents then marched from the square to the city council building. Law enforcement officers in riot gear gathered near the building.

The protesters demanded that local authorities meet them at the location. According to reports, a group of city council deputies came out of the building.

Demonstrators chanted slogans such as “Referendum” and “Berkut,” as well as “Russia” and “Taruta (the new Donbass governor recently appointed by the Kiev government) needs to go!”

Earlier, the press service of the city council reported that authorities had not received any requests or notifications from social organizations or political parties about the Saturday rally.

Deputies of the city council, Igor Ponomarenko and Igor Sviridov, promised to meet residents at Lenin Square on Sunday, according to local media.

On March 1, Donetsk City Council made a decision to support the residents in their calls for a referendum. The deputies of the city council said that the decision on whether to hold a referendum is currently being considered by the court prosecutor, and the next hearing will take place on April 22.

On Friday, a group of people gathered at the German consulate in Donetsk to protest against what they say is German interference in Ukraine’s domestic affairs. They have signed a petition asking Berlin to stop meddling.

“We ask you to convey to the leadership of your country our request of non-interference in Ukrainian internal affairs by Germany,” the petition reads.

“We ask you, based on Germany’s international authority, to warn other countries from this, not to enkindle war and not to support fascism in Ukraine,” said the people’s statement, as quoted by local media.

After President Viktor Yanukovich was ousted by an armed coup in February, the Donbass region has been gripped by protests against Kiev’s coup-imposed government. Thousands of demonstrators have been demanding to hold a referendum to decide on the future of the region – just like in Crimea, which refused to recognize the country’s new authorities.

The Republic of Crimea declared its independence from Ukraine following the March 16 referendum, in which 96.77 percent of the voters chose to rejoin Russia. Despite calls to boycott the vote and provocation attempts, 83.1 percent of Crimeans took part in the poll.

Several mothballed Mikoyan Mig-29 Fulcrum fourth-generation fighter jets were returned to combat service in western Ukraine, the country’s Defense Ministry said on Friday.

“Specialists of our team have already returned several planes to service,” the ministry quoted an unnamed commander of an Air Force unit near Ivano-Frankivsk as saying. “We are now conducting test flights. Soon, more mothballed fighter jets will take off again.”

The state of Ukraine’s armed forces came under close scrutiny when the new government took office in late February, after months of violent uprising.

Kiev launched extensive combat readiness checks of its armed forces in early March, following Crimea’s announcement that it was ready to secede from Ukraine and join Russia.

Defense Minister Ihor Tenyukh said in his report to the president that the checks revealed “unsatisfactory” condition of the armed forces.

He said that out of 507 combat planes and 121 attack helicopters, only 15 percent are serviceable. Air Force crews lack proper training and only 10 percent of them are capable of performing combat tasks.

By Catherine Maddux

With Russian troops amassed on the Ukraine border, some observers are worrying about what is being called a “post-Crimea crisis.”

And as the West awaits Russia’s next moves, analysts are examining Russian President Vladimir Putin’s public statements for clues as to whether he plans to build on his successful land grab of Crimea by going after other territories with large Russian-speaking populations.

Think Transnistria: the breakaway majority Russian enclave in neighboring Moldova that already has a minor Russian peacekeeping force on the ground.

“The readout from the Putin to [Barack] Obama call last week, from the White House, was a focus on trying to find a way to a political, diplomatic solution,” said one former NATO official, Ambassador Ivo H. Daalder, now president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

“The same phone call was read out by the Kremlin, emphasizing the dangers of quote ‘extremists in Ukraine,’ and that President Putin’s worry as expressed to Obama about events in Transdinistria,” he said.

That leads to the inevitable question: does Putin have the military might to roll into other Russian-speaking regions, such as the Baltic States, and annex more territory?

The answer is a firm yes, said Admiral James G. Stavridis, dean of the Fletcher School at Tufts University and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

“They [the Russians] certainly can do it… they will begin to incur real costs and there will be a real fight,” he said.

“From a military perspective, the more territory you try and hold onto, the more complex your challenges become,” Stavridis said. “All of a sudden, 20,000 troops, 30,000 troops don’t look like enough. Again, I think it’s an unlikely move, but not an impossible one.”

NATO meted out its punishment to Putin during a meeting of its foreign ministers in Brussels this week, declaring that its cooperation with Moscow was over. The alliance also said it was reviewing options to reassure NATO allies, particularly those who border Russia in Eastern Europe.

There were signs of hope when U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei in Paris in recent days, offering a ray of hope that Moscow was open to a political solution. But there have been little hints since of possible resolution.

But it’s hard to know if Putin is serious about pursuing diplomacy with the West, said Strobe Talbott, President of the Brookings Institution and a former deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration,

“It could turn out to be a sham on the Russian side – a distraction – but it’s also conceivable that it might produce some agreements that would calm down a situation that is extremely unpredictable and dangerous,” he said.

Meanwhile, after Russia’s formal annexation of Crimea, the situation is far from stable even though a large majority of population is pro-Russian and supports joining the Russian Federation.

Crimea is also home to a sizable Ukrainian minority, along with Muslim Crimean Tatars, who may feel threatened by Moscow and the nationalistic sentiment in the region.

The situation is so unsure that some are leaving, said Vice News Correspondent Simon Ostrovsky, who spent nearly a month filing video reports from Crimea – before and after its annexation.

“I think some people are playing this wait and see game,” he said. “I know at least one Crimean Tatar woman who has gone to western Ukraine and has remained there for the whole period of the conflict with her children. I know ordinary Russians and Ukrainians as well – I’ve just overheard conversations while I was there – them saying they are going to take their children out… and sort of anecdotally I heard [that] a lot of Ukrainians feel pressure to leave,” Ostrovsky said. “Whether that’s imagined pressure or actual pressure, I’m not sure.”

Analysts say It remains to be seen what Putin’s next move will be – and how the United States and European Union will respond.

“There is no question that the Russian strategy going forward is going to be to weaken the now rump Ukrainian state as much as possible, make as much mischief there as possible… simply to roil the situation with hopes that there will not be calm, there will not be stability… there will not be genuine democracy and constitutional government,” said Tabott.

And that plays into Moscow’s overall strategy, he said, “which is to be surrounded by states that are in one of two categories: either they are vassal states or they are basket cases.”

By Rebecca Valli

The head of the U.S. Defense Department says Washington plans to send two more missile defense warships to Japan to counter the threat posed by North Korea’s actions.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told a news conference in Tokyo Sunday after meeting with his Japanese counterpart, Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera, that two AEGIS missile defense ships will be sent to Japan by 2017, bolstering the U.S. missile defense force to seven ships.

On his second day in Japan, Hagel announced that the United States will increase military support to its Asian ally.

Hagel said, “In response to Pyongyang’s pattern of provocative and destabilizing actions, including recent missile launches and violations of recent U.N. security council resolutions, I can announce today that the United States is planning to forward deploy two additional Aegis ballistic missile defense ships to Japan by 2017.”

During the most recent flare-up of Korean tensions in late March, North Korea fired shells over South Korean waters close to the North’s western coast. South Korea responded and the two countries exchanged hundreds of live shells in just a few hours.

Pyongyang provocations

Recent provocations by North Korea also included the firing of a mid-range missile capable of hitting Japan.

Hagel said, “For the safety of Japan and of eastern Asia, we believe that Japan’s Aegis system and the United States’ Aegis system is very effective. As the secretary said, that two new ships that are able to respond to ballistic missile threats will be deployed to Japan, this is very important for the region.”

Hagel also spoke about China, a country he will visit after leaving Japan.

Relations between China and Japan have hit a low point because of a territorial dispute over islets in resource-rich waters of the East China Sea.

While the U.S. has not sided with any country on the islands’ ownership, it acknowledges Japan’s de facto management and is treaty-bound to protect Tokyo in case of aggression.

On Sunday, Hagel drew a parallel with Russia’s annexation of Crimea, saying, “You cannot go around the world and redefine boundaries and violate territorial integrity and sovereignty of nations by force, coercion and intimation whether it’s in small islands in the Pacific or large nations in Europe.”

What happened in Ukraine has some resonance in Asia, where China is embroiled in bitter disputes over its maritime boundaries to the East and South.

Concerns about China

Countries like the Philippines and Japan have raised concerns about Beijing’s increasingly assertive stance in stating its territorial claims.

Hagel called China a great power, but said the country should respect its neighbors, be more transparent about its military power and refrain from coercion and intimidation.

“With this power, comes new and wider responsibilities is that how you use that power, how do you employ that military power,” said Hagel. “And I want to talk with Chinese about all of that particularity transparency. This is a key dimension of relationships. ”

The defense secretary will depart for Beijing on Monday.

Analysts in China say the territorial disputes are likely to come up during Hagel’s visit, as are military cooperation and measures to deal with North Korea.

Hacktivist group Anonymous plans to execute an anti-Israel operation dubbed #OpIsrael by launching massive cyber-attacks against Israeli ministries and organizations on April 7, the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day.

“On April 7, 2014, we call upon our brothers and sisters to hack, deface, hijack, database leak, admin takeover, and DNS terminate the Israeli Cyberspace by any means necessary” the group said in a statement.

The move is an act of protest against Israel’s policies, including those against Palestine.

“The further assault on the people of Gaza, who have been flooded by your sewage, terrorized by your military apparatus, and left to die at the border while waiting for medical attention will NOT be tolerated anymore,” the statement read.

“We will not stop until the police state becomes a free state and Palestine is free.”

On a website dedicated to the event, another hacker group – AnonGhost – posted a video saying that the attack will target every possible Israeli website in order to show solidarity with Palestine.

In March, hackers united under the AnonGhost banner claimed to have crashed the website of Israel’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. The group posted the logins and passwords of the website’s users online.

The first cyber-attacks under the name OpIsrael were launched by Anonymous during and Israeli assault on Gaza in November 2012. Around 700 Israeli websites, including high-profile government setups such as the Foreign Ministry and the Israeli President’s official website, were taken down. Following the attack, Anonymous posted the personal data of 5,000 Israeli officials online.

The websites of the Israeli parliament, ministries and other government organizations stopped operating for some time after last year’s attack, which also took place on April 7.

A Middle East hacker who participated in the operation told RT that the “aim of the attack was to show the world the true face of Israel and its armed forces.” He said that last year’s attack was a warning for Israel to be ready for new, larger “surprises.”

In retaliation against the massive assault, Israeli hackers allegedly broke into the website OpIsrael.com and posted pro-Israeli content. The site was allegedly being used to coordinate cyber-attacks on Israeli sites.

North Korea has slammed the South’s recent ballistic missile test, calling it a “farce” aimed at showing off Seoul’s military strength in the face of threats from Pyongyang. Seoul said Friday it had successfully test-fired a new ballistic missile capable of carrying a one-ton payload up to 500 kilometers, suggesting it could hit any part of the North. The launch was carried out on March 23, just three days before the North test-fired two medium-range ballistic missiles capable of striking Japan.

A spokesman for the North’s military heaped derision on Seoul’s rocket test late Saturday, pointing to its range of “just 500 (310 miles) kilometers.”

“Great irony is that (the South is) claiming that they did a great job by conducting a test-fire of a ballistic missile with a range of just 500 kilometers,” state-run KCNA quoted the official as saying.

Tensions between the two Koreas were heightened further by rare exchanges of fire across the tense Yellow Sea border on March 31, AFP reports.

The North dropped more than 100 shells across the sea border during a live-fire drill, prompting Seoul to fire back about 300 volleys.

The North’s spokesman claimed the South’s “poor military reaction” to the drill drew criticism at home, leading it to carry out the missile test to “calm the mounting accusation and derision”.

“This farce only brought disgrace to them,” said the spokesman.

The isolated and nuclear-armed North is known to have mid-range Rodong-class missiles capable of hitting targets 620-930 miles away.

Pyongyang’s test-firing of two Rodong missiles on March 26, its first launch of a mid-range missile since 2009, followed a series of rocket and short-range missile tests by the North in recent weeks.

The launches were seen as an angry protest at Seoul-Washington joint army drills ongoing in the South, which the North habitually slams as a rehearsal for invasion.

South Korea’s new missile was developed under an agreement reached with the US in 2012 to near-treble the range of the South’s ballistic missile systems.

In return, Seoul accepts limits on its missile capabilities.

The 2012 agreement denounced as a provocation by Pyongyang. It allows Seoul to deploy missiles with a maximum range of 500 miles.

The US also stations 28,500 troops in the South and guarantees a nuclear “umbrella” in case of atomic attack.

The United States said Sunday it plans to send two more missile defense warships to Japan to counter the threat posed by North Korea’s “provocative” actions.

By Joergen Oerstroem Moeller

(YaleGlobal) — Shale oil and gas has been labeled a game changer. Statistics would suggest that, yes, the new technologies and discoveries associated with hydraulic fracking change the energy picture and economic outlook, in particular for the United States, but less so than predictions would have it a year or two go.

The greater impact won’t be on the US economy, but rather US-Saudi relations and stability for the Middle East. President Barack Obama met King Abdullah March 28, and both leaders recognize that the geopolitical ground shaped by their common interest in stable oil prices has shifted, creating a new imbalance that could spill over into Mideast security policy.

Estimates for the impact on US economic growth vary from 0.2 percentage points per year to a marginal hike of the growth rate. Petrochemical exports have risen threefold from 2006 to 2012, but account for not more than 1.2 percent of US gross domestic product. The trade balance has improved by a modest 0.1 to 0.2 percentage per year, yet still is in deficit to the tune of around 3.5 percent of GDP.

The expectations were and still are that shale oil and gas would help bring manufacturing back to the US – re-manufacturing. The figures do not bear such hopes out though. From 2007 to 2009 more than 2 million manufacturing jobs were lost; 600,000 have returned.

Changing course

Most analyses set the profitability of the technology to extract shale oil and gas at an oil price of US$60 to 80 per barrel. That should put future extraction on the safe side, but so far low hanging fruits have been plucked, postponing the prospect of higher costs. Hydraulic fracking is exempt, totally or partly, from major federal environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. These exemptions are not likely to vanish overnight, but environmental concerns are lurking in the background; any alterations will inevitably result in higher costs.

Since the Shah of Iran’s fall in 1979, the world of oil has been governed by a tacit American-Saudi Arabian understanding that keeps a firm grip on Middle East politics. There have been ups and downs, but the partners have never questioned the understanding – until now.

One of the consequences was implicit US support for Saudi Arabia, keeping the Middle East under Sunni Muslim control despite religious trends and demographics in favor of the Shiites in several countries governed by the Sunnis. Obviously, the resentment has grown and over the last decade surfaced, raising the prospect of nothing less than a civil war between these two religious orientations. The Saudis probably, almost certainly, expected the US to intervene in Syria to prevent the Shiites from getting the upper hand. Preparatory talks in February/March for the President Obama/King Abdullah meeting signaled that the two sides were inching closer to reconcile their views, but it is not clear what came out of the summit. The recent US decision to suspend operations of the Syrian embassy indicates a policy shift although its direction may not be obvious. The Russian intervention in Ukraine/Crimea may have made the United States more aware of the need to accommodate Saudi Arabia instead of linking up with Russia.

In the short run

Observing US dithering and faced with the turmoil in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia gradually has come to realize that the United States is changing course in the Middle East albeit without a clear new course or objective – except that Saudi Arabia does not count in the same way as it used to. And in Iran, while it’s unclear what lies behind the negotiations on Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons, the plain fact that the US is shifting track is one more straw on the camel’s back.

The global price of oil was once manipulated – more or less – by the United States and Saudi Arabia. The US was interested in a price not too high, the Saudis in a price not too low.

The rising production of fossil fuel including oil is a portent of US self- sufficiency in energy; the forecasts differ substantially as the timing is concerned with a consensus saying 2025 to 2030, but some expect the self-sufficiency happening even earlier. In 2020 the US will have displaced Saudi Arabia as the world’s biggest oil producer. US dependency on petroleum imports from the Gulf has fallen dramatically, close to 20 percent in 2012; Saudi Arabia accounted for 13 percent of total imports in 2012.

A high oil price benefits the United States, at least in the short run, with access to lower energy prices enhancing competitiveness vis-à-vis China, Japan and Europe. How much is open to dispute. Hydraulic fracking is reaching a stage where production costs goes up, requiring a high oil price to be profitable. Considering the high investments in this technology and subsequently in infrastructure, the last thing the United States wants is a fall in oil price pulling the carpet out from under the feet of this technology.

On top of that is the lure of future US exports of petroleum products restricted since 1973. Keeping the oil within the US depresses energy prices, benefitting the economy, but in the longer run, it is difficult to see growing production of fossil fuel including oil while still maintaining restrictions on exports. The temptation will become too big to resist. As one of few large buyers and sellers at the same time, the United States will likely want to pursue its own interests and not link up with other producers including other Western producers.

All this is precisely the opposite of what Saudi Arabia wants.

If the oil price stays high, not only will hydraulic fracking continue to be profitable in the United States, but a number of other countries around the world may start using the technology. The European Union is considering whether to allow fracking and, if so, under which conditions to prevent negative effects on the environment.

With a higher the oil price, marginal producers are more likely to enter the arena, undermining Saudi Arabia’s position. If the US starts to export crude oil for the global market, it will be a major new player politically and economically, and could make the existing institutional structures like OPEC obsolete, edging the Saudis away from the center of oil diplomacy.

Common interest in the oil price underpinning a US- Saudi understanding is no longer in place; on the contrary, a conflict of interest is apparent.

Seen from the outside, the Saudis have tried to communicate their displeasure to the US, maybe trying to wring another kind of understanding out of the wreckage. This was done explicitly and publicly in October 2013 by Saudi Arabia’s former spy chief and ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, at the annual Arab-US Policymakers Conference.

The signals ran into a US stone wall. Unless gaps in policies and perceptions are bridged, prospects for future stability of the Middle East do not look good.

Joergen Oerstroem Moeller is a visiting senior research fellow, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, and adjunct professor, Singapore Management University and Copenhagen Business School. This article originally appeared in YaleGlobal Online on April 1, 2014 with the headline Shale Gas Helps Fracture US-Saudi Ties.

While the world’s attention remains focused on Ukraine, Crimea is portrayed as its hotbed. No wonder as this peninsula is an absolutely pivotal portion of the Black Sea theatre for the very survival of the Black Sea fleet to both Russia and Ukraine. In the larger context, it revels the old chapters of history books full of overt and covert struggles between Atlantic–Central Europe and Russophone Europe for influence and strategic depth extension over the playground called Eastern Europe.

However, there are two other vital theatres for these same protagonists, both remaining underreported and less elaborated. The author brings an interesting account on Caspian and Artic, by contrasting and comparing them. He claims that both water plateaus are of utmost geopolitical as well as of geo-economic (biota, energy, transport) importance, and that Caspian and Arctic will considerably influence passions and imperatives of any future mega geopolitical strategies – far more than Black Sea could have ever had.

Between Inner Lake and Open Sea

As the rapid melting of the Polar caps has unexpectedly turned distanced and dim economic possibilities into viable geo-economic and geopolitical probabilities, so it was with the unexpected and fast meltdown of Russia’s historic empire – the Soviet Union. Once considered as the Russian inner lake, the Caspian has presented itself as an open/high sea of opportunities literally overnight – not only for the (new, increased number of) riparian states, but also for the belt of (new and old) neighbouring, and other interested (overseas) states.

Interest of external players ranges from the symbolic or rather rhetorical, to the global geopolitical; from an antagonizing political conditionality and constrain to the pragmatic trade-off between (inflicting pain of) political influence and energy supply gain. Big consumers such as China, India or the European Union (EU) are additionally driven by its own energy imperative: to improve the energy security (including the reduction of external dependencies) as well as to diversify its supplies, modes and forms on a long run.

On a promise of allegedly vast oil and natural gas resources (most of which untapped), the Caspian is witnessing the “New Grand Game” – struggle for the domination and influence over the region and its resources as well as transportation routes. Notably, the Caspian is a large landlocked water plateau without any connection with the outer water systems. Moreover, 3 out of 5 riparian states are land-locking Caspian, but are themselves landlocked too. (Former Soviet republics of) Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan have no direct access to any international waters. That means that pipelines remain the only mode of transportation and delivery of carbonic fuels, thus creating yet another segment for competition, and source of regional tension as the 3 raparian states do depend on their neighbours for export routes.

Finally, due to both the unsolved legal status of the Basin as well as the number of political and territorial disputes in Caucasus and on the Caspian, numerous new pipeline constructions and expansion projects have been proposed, but so far not operationalized. For the EU, the most important being the Nabucco pipeline, which, although not fully guaranteed, serves as the hope for reduced dependence on Russia.

The following lines will therefore consider the geopolitical, legal and economic (including the energy security for the final end–user, supplier and transiting countries) features of the Caspian theatre, complex interplays and possible future outlook.

To explain the long lasting Russian presence at Caspian and still prone interested in the region, two factors are at interplay: geopolitical and geo–economic.

Ever since Peter the Great, Russian geopolitical imperative is to extend the strategic depth. It naturally necessitated ensuring the security for its southwest and southern flanks of the Empire. Such a security imperative brought about bitter struggles for Russia over the domination of huge theatre: Eastern and Central Balkans, Black Sea, Caucasus and Caspian basin. Russia was there contested by the Habsburg empire, by the Ottomans, Iran (and after collapse of the Ottomans by the Britons) all throughout the pre-modern and modern times.

Just a quick glance on the map of western and southwest Russia will be self-explanatory showing the geostrategic imperative; low laying areas of Russia were unprotectable without dominating the mountain chains at Caucasus, Carpathian – Black Sea – Caucasus – Caspian – Kopet Dag. Historically, the main fight of Russia was with the Ottomans over this line. When the Ottomans were eliminated from the historic scene, it was Britain on the Indian subcontinent and in Iran as a main contester – the fact that eventually led to effective splitting the basin into two spheres of influence – British and Russian.

The Caspian water plateau – a unique basin

The Caspian (Azerbaijani: Xəzər dənizi, Persian: دریای خزر or دریای مازندران, Russian: Каспийское море, Kazakh: Каспий теңізі, Turkmen: Hazar deňzi) is the world’s largest enclosed or landlocked body of (salty) water – approximately of the size of Germany and the Netherlands combined. Geographical literature refers to this water plateau as the sea, or world’s largest lake that covers an area of 386,400 km² (a total length of 1,200 km from north to south, and a width ranging from a minimum of 196 km to a maximum of 435 km), with the mean depth of about 170 meters (maximum southern depth is at 1025 m). At present, the Caspian water line is some 28 meters below sea level (median measure of the first decade of 21st century)1. The total Caspian coastline measures to nearly 7,000 km, being shared by five riparian (or littoral) states.

Figure 1: The Caspian Sea and its hydrogeology. Sources: WorldAtlas (n.d.a.), n.p.a.; EVS (2011), n.p.a

The very legal status of this unique body of water is still unsolved: Sea or lake? As international law defers lakes from seas, the Caspian should be referred as the water plateau or the Caspian basin. Interestingly enough, the Caspian is indeed both sea and lake: northern portions of the Caspian display characteristics of a freshwater lake (e.g. due to influx of the largest European river – Volga, river Ural and other relatively smaller river systems from Russia’s north), and in the southern portions where waters are considerably deeper but without major river inflows, salinity of waters is evident and the Caspian appears as a sea. (Median salinity of the Caspian is approximately 1/3 relative to the oceanic waters average). The geomorphology of the Caspian is unique and many authors have referred to the formation similarities of the Black Sea–Caspian–Aral and their interconnectivity back to Pleistocene. Most probably, some 5,5 million years ago two factors landlocked the Caspian: the tectonic uplift of the basin and the dramatic fall of the earth’s oceanic levels which literally trapped the Caspian to the present shores. Due to its unique formation and present water composition variations, the Caspian hosts rare biodiversity and many endemic species of flora and fauna (presently, threatened by rising exploration and exploitation of vast oil and gas reserves).

The Inner Circle – Similarities

The so-called “Inner Circle” of the Caspian Basin consists of the five littoral (riparian) states, namely Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan, sharing the common coastline.

As much as the geographically distant as well as different by their distinctive geomorphology and hydrology, the Arctic and Caspian – when contrasted and compared – however resemble several critical similarities.

Both theaters are grand bodies of water surrounded by 5 riparian/littoral states. (Meaning both are water surrounded by landmass, while Antarctica represents landmass surrounded by water.) Both of them are of huge and largely unexplored natural resources and marine biota. Both the Artic and Caspian have numerous territorial disputes and are of absolute geopolitical importance for their respective littoral states, and well beyond. Finally, both theaters are also of unsolved legal status – drifting between an external quest for creation of special international regime and the existing Law of Sea Convention system (UNCLOS).

Ergo, in both theaters, the dynamic of the littoral states displays the following:

1. Dismissive: Erode the efforts of international community/external interested parties for creation of the Antarctica-like treaty (by keeping the UNCLOS referential);

2. Assertive: Maximize the shares of the spoils of partition – extend the EEZ and continental shelf as to divide most if not the entire body of water only among the Five;

3. Reconciliatory: Prevent any direct confrontation among the riparian states over the spoils – resolve the claims without arbitration of the III parties. (preferably CLCS).

One of the most important differentiating elements of the two theatres is the composition of littoral states. The constellation of the Arctic Five, we can consider as being symmetric – each of the Five has an open sea access (as the Arctic itself has wide connection with the oceanic systems of Atlantic and Pacific). On contrary, the Caspian Five are of asymmetric constellation. The Caspian Five could be roughly divided on the old/traditional two (Russia and Iran), and the three newcomers (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan). This division corresponds also with the following characteristic: only Iran and Russia have an open sea access, other three countries are landlocked – as the Caspian itself is a landlocked body of water.

Like no other country, the Persian proper is uniquely situated by connecting the Euro-Med/MENA with Central and South, well to the East Asia landmass. Additionally, it solely bridges the two key Euro-Asian energy plateaus: the Gulf and Caspian. This gives Iran an absolutely pivotal geopolitical and geo-economic posture over the larger region – an opportunity but also an exposure! No wonder that Teheran needs Moscow for its own regime survival, as the impressive US physical presence in the Gulf represents a double threat to Iran – geopolitically and geo-economically.

1. The Caspian basin records gradual and cyclical water level variations that are basically synchronized with the volume discharge of the Volga river system and co-related to the complex North Atlantic oscillations (amount of North Atlantic depressions that reaches the Eurasian land mass interior).

The Holy Land’s bishops have said that Christians and Muslims need to unite against extremism, stressing that people of all beliefs are at risk.

“Christians and Muslims need to stand together against the new forces of extremism and destruction,” the Assembly of Catholic Ordinaries of the Holy Land said in an April 2 statement posted on the website of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem.

“All Christians and many Muslims are threatened by these forces that seek to create a society devoid of Christians and where only very few Muslims will be at home,” the assembly continued. “All those who seek dignity, democracy, freedom and prosperity are under attack. We must stand together and speak out in truth and freedom.”

The assembly’s bishops urged the pursuit of “a society in which Muslims and Christians and Jews are equal citizens, living side by side,” in which “new generations can live and prosper.”

They downplayed notions that Islamic extremism threatens only Christians.

“There is no doubt that the recent upheavals in the Middle East, initially called the Arab Spring, have opened the way for extremist groups and forces that, in the name of a political interpretation of Islam, are wreaking havoc in many countries, particularly in Iraq, Egypt and Syria.”

“There is no doubt that many of these extremists consider Christians as infidels, as enemies, as agents of hostile foreign powers or simply as an easy target for extortion,” the assembly continued. “However, in the name of truth, we must point out that Christians are not the only victims of this violence and savagery.”

The statement noted that moderate Muslims and those labeled heretical, schismatic, or non-conformist are also being attacked and murdered.

While Christians are sometimes targeted “precisely because they are Christians,” they are victims “alongside many others who are suffering and dying in these times of death and destruction.”

“They are driven from their homes alongside many others and together they become refugees, in total destitution.”

However, the assembly warned against selective use of the charge of persecution. They criticized using the word “persecution” only to refer to Christians suffering “at the hands of criminals claiming to be Muslim.”

This habit “plays into the hands of extremists, at home and abroad, whose aim is to sow prejudice and hatred, setting peoples and religions against one another.”

The assembly attributed the uprisings to desires for “a new age of dignity, democracy, freedom and social justice.” Christians had lived under “dictatorial regimes” that provided “law and order” at the “terrible price of military and police repression.” Christian fear of extremism and chaos led them to defend these regimes.

“Instead, loyalty to their faith and concern for the good of their country, should perhaps have led them to speak out much earlier, telling the truth and calling for necessary reforms, in view of more justice and respect of human rights, standing alongside both many courageous Christians and Muslims who did speak out,” the bishops said.

The bishops noted that Christians and Muslims should be aware that the outside world will not protect them, as local and international powers “seek their own interests.”

“We, alone, can build a common future together. We have to adapt ourselves to realities, even realities of death, and must learn together how to emerge from persecution and destruction into a new dignified life in our own countries.”

The bishops voiced their prayers both for their allies and for those “who are harming us now or even killing us.”

“We pray that God may allow them to see the goodness he has put in the heart of each one,” they said. “May God transform every human being from the depth of his or her heart, enabling them to love every human being as God does, He who is the Creator and Lover of all.”

Moody’s Investors Service has downgraded Ukraine’s government bond rating one notch from Caa2 to Caa3, citing the current political crisis and deepening economic instability as reasons for its negative outlook, RT reports.

The Caa rating is a credit risk grading pertaining to investments that are both very poor quality and entail a high credit risk. The current downgrade drops Ukraine from Moody’s “extremely speculative” rating to “default imminent with little prospect for recovery.”

Moody’s said the downgrade was driven by three factors, which “exacerbate Ukraine’s more longstanding economic and fiscal fragility.”

The first factor is Ukraine’s political crisis, citing the recent regime change in Kiev and subsequent events in Crimea. The agency went on to cite Ukraine’s stressed external liquidity position, which faces continued decline in foreign currency reserves, the withdrawal of Russian financial support and a spike in gas import prices.

Moody’s further noted that this assessment accounts for the near-term liquidity relief recently hammered out with the IMF.

Finally, due to a “sizable fiscal deficit,” the agency expects a significant contraction of GDP and a sharp currency depreciation as the debt to GDP ratio hits between 55-60 percent by year’s end.

Based on these factors, Moody’s said the country was unlikely to see Ukraine’s sovereign debt rating improve in the near future, stating its outlook for the country was negative. Any improvement would only come if long-term political and economic improvements were forthcoming.

By Antonio Canale-Mayet

The World Trade Organization (WTO) was mostly trifling in its way for the organization of the Bali 9th ministerial conference in Indonesia, December 3-6, 2013. After twelve years without any progress being made — or many advancements — of the Doha rounds agenda that have been paralyzed since 2008, leaving again the negotiation table without any agreement would have been another fiasco in the history of this multilateral process that has earned such little confidence from international observers.

It is for this reason that the Ministerial Declaration of Bali is an important achievement in that 159 member countries approved this multilateral document; it is the first global agreement since the creation of WTO, in 1995. Nonetheless the previous meetings, and given the background of the organization, we should welcome the progress of December 6th with the caution that it is only one signal of life, rather than being a sign of full image recovery as some advocates of multilateralism are timidly trying to trumpet and publicly argue for the Bali outcome.

One of the aspects of the ministerial agreement that is worth underlining is without any doubt the agreement of commerce assistance. These measures aim at simplifying customs bureaucracy, which will facilitate the interchange of commodities that are in transit, thanks to the elimination of customs tariffs for these types of products.

Those who will benefit the most from these decisions are without any doubt the less developed countries and within this group are the landlocked nations. At the local level, the major effects for Chile will be a greater simplification and a highly convenient environment for regional trade and commerce, reflected in the One Window Shop government service for businesses, binding rules and an efficient system that resolves controversies. According to Chilean Foreign Minister, Hon. Alfredo Moreno, “It is clear that our country has many commercial agreements, this establishes a general policy that is very positive and is valid in countries that currently have no trade agreement with Chile.”

In regards to agriculture policy and food products, negotiations were not as fruitful as the other items in the agenda. There are two positions revealed in Bali, that establish a framework on fixing the commodity prices for food reserves that countries can keep legally. It is these types of problems that make us view with skepticism these multilateral negotiations. The inability of multilateral forums to achieve ambitious results and reforms is seen extremely limited by the interests of those determined to work with less rules in the development of international commerce. In this occasion it was India who attempted to threaten by not signing the agreement in Indonesia if the ministerial meetings were not complying with their demands, and this was not in reference only to agriculture.

Therefore the alternative of achieving agreements that make a real impact is to lean towards regional or plurilateral agreements that of course are recognized under the legal framework of WTO. However, given the current situation of unilateral liberalization and the regionalization process of international commerce, as well as the existence of multiple entities focused in commercial negotiations that are endorsed by the rules of WTO and are not inside its structure, it seems easier to achieve these agreements by using different institutional means.

Parallel forums seem to be not only a viable alternative but also the major source of many agreements signed before WTO formation. We may recall that the creation of APEC at the end of 1980s as a great measure responsible to loosen the Uruguay round of GATT, and the pressure that is exerted today by the Transpacific Accords (TPP) or the ASEAN could be the source of agreement from Bali and subsequent meetings of the future.

For the same reason, Chile, and its new government – should be conscientious of the contributions that Chile has as one of the most open economies of the world and as a point of reference in the consolidation of commercial treaties. In this context, consolidation is presented as an alternative that could regulate regional relations, placing a string that is needed to guide the relations of these countries and hold the commercial structures that are already established.

Chile is definitely more advanced than the rest of the world according to its efforts that the nation has undertaken unilaterally and regionally in order to liberalize its commercial relations with the rest of the commercial partner countries in the world. While taking into consideration the small advancements in Doha negotiations, which Bali has attempted to correct; the Republic of Chile, many years ago, has decided to carry out a significant campaign in the regionalization of commerce, and today it can see first-hand the positive results and real contributions being made through regional alliances instead of multilateral gatherings.The future governments of Chile should not neglect the aspect of regional cooperation and should find ways to maintain a balance between the national and global benefits in order to maintain their goodwill to open up with the rest of the world.

Translated from Spanish by Eurasia Review Contributor: Peter Tase

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott should make the protection and promotion of human rights in China a central purpose of his trip there, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to the prime minister. Abbott will make his first trip to China as prime minister from April 7 to 12, 2014, primarily focused on trade and investment.

“Australia has been way down the ladder in pressing for human rights improvements in China, opting instead for ‘quiet diplomacy,’” said Elaine Pearson, Australia director at Human Rights Watch. “Prime Minister Abbott should forcefully defend basic human rights – for reasons of principle but equally in pursuit of stronger diplomatic and economic ties.”

The letter notes Australia’s occasional tough public statements in defense of human rights, such as its interventions around China’s 2013 review at the Human Rights Council, and Abbott’s own 2012 statement that, “As prime minister I would hope for political reform to match China’s economic liberalization.” The letter urges him to publicly express concern about the Chinese government’s use of arbitrary detention, its crackdown on reform advocates and independent groups and particularly on anti-corruption activists, and its latest efforts to limit online speech.

“China needs Australia as much as Australia needs China, and this leverage should be used to support the kind of change inside China that will benefit both countries,” Pearson said. “If Abbott gives China a free pass on human rights during this visit, Beijing will perceive him – and Australia – as weak.”

By Dr. Bhaskar Balakrishnan

For the sixteenth time, India will hold the biggest elections in human history, with some 815 million eligible voters electing 543 members to a new lower house of Parliament, the Lok Sabha. This is truly an inspiring example of democracy for the international community, given the fact that India is a developing country, with a 26% of its highly diverse population of 1236 million still illiterate. In South Asia, India stands out as a country that has stood firmly and unwaveringly on the side of democracy.

The independent Election Commission has geared up for this mammoth operation. The election will be conducted over nine days during 7 April to 12 May. Over 930,000 polling stations will be operated, with video recording of crucial events. Electronic voting machines will be used as in previous elections. This will enable the counting to proceed quickly, and the results would be available on 16 May. The sixteenth Lok Sabha will be convened by 1 June. The total expenditure including that by political parties is estimated at $ 5 billion, making it the second most expensive in the world. The voter turnout is likely to be more than the 60 % seen in 2009.

India’s diversity is reflected in its political landscape and the composition of its Parliament. There are today 6 national parties, 47 regional parties and over 1500 unrecognized parties. This rich spectrum is necessary to represent the interests of India’s 29 States and 7 Union Territories; 9 major religious faiths, and 22 scheduled languages listed in its Constitution. The States range from giants such as UP with a population of 200 million, to Sikkim with a population of 614,000. Even the EU consisting of 29 countries, has not achieved the degree of integration and synthesis that India has achieved in its 66 years of independence.

It is the resilience of India’s democracy and the flexibility of its Constitution that has kept it together despite numerous challenges. The long drawn out birth of its 29 th State, Telengana to accommodate local aspirations is an example. Another was the rejection of the ill advised attempt to impose a state of emergency in 1975-77. India has so far been able to absorb and accommodate diversity and differing opinions into its system. The growth in strength of regional parties has been a logical response to centralized governance by the national parties and their inability to accommodate strong regional leaders into their structure.

The forthcoming elections pose a challenge to India’s voters they choose their representatives to the Lok Sabha, from which will spring forth the next government. The voters have displayed remarkable sagacity in the past and will no doubt do so again. In the past elections they have judged no single party worthy of ruling this country and have opted for coalition governments. This time also, no single party is likely to get a majority and the leading party will face the challenge of putting together a coalition government. Such coalitions have governed India since 1998, but decision making and adopting legislation has proved increasingly difficult. The functioning of India’s Parliament has also been disrupted due to confrontation among political parties. In a highly demanding, turbulent, and competitive global environment, cooperation, not confrontation is what India needs within its political system.

A distinct feature of the present election is the large component of young voters and those who will vote for the first time. Their concerns over corruption, quality of governance and unemployment are making an impact. The political scene has also been enriched and enlivened by the appearance of unconventional political movements and parties, with strong grass roots and decentralized structures.

The impact of electronic and social media is also strong due to the high penetration of television, internet, and mobile phones within the population. Elections are not an end in itself, but are means to achieve good governance. In India’s first past the post system, a candidate can win an election with much less that 50% of the votes in a multi-cornered contest and if the voter turnout is low. This time the voter can choose to reject all the candidates using the “None of the above” option.

The Election Commission deserves high praise for its efforts to ensure clean, fair elections, and high voter turnout. The disclosure requirements for candidates have enabled voters to assess candidates more effectively. Its long experience of holding elections in India has attracted world-wide attention and many countries have sought India’s help with elections. Parties and candidates across the board are held to account if they violate the EC’s strict code of conduct that becomes operational once election is declared.

But elections are necessary but not sufficient for a successful democracy. Between elections, the conduct and governance of political parties requires an independent, impartial, and effective regulatory system and framework. Issues such as financing of political parties and elections, role of media, internal governance, freedom of information, etc need to be taken up. This will improve the quality of democracy and credibility among India’s citizens.

Dr. Bhaskar Balakrishnan
The author is a former Ambassador of India