Quantcast
Channel: Eurasia Review
Viewing all 73339 articles
Browse latest View live

Waiting For Our Team To Win World Cup – OpEd

0
0

By Saad Dossari

Within a few days, most of the people across the world will be gathering around their television sets to watch 32 nations competing for the World Cup on the playgrounds of Brazil.

Depending on one’s perspective, call it the magic of or the craziness for football that brings the whole world together. After every four years, history is updated and new records are made. This is a special event when victories are lived, defeats suffered, people shed tears of joy and pain and screams and hugs are shared. Tales of love and glory are born on these playing fields and fame and fortune follow thereafter.

It is fascinating to see that while the whole world is passionately awaiting the start of the games, Brazilians themselves are not. A research by Pew Research Center (published in the New York Times) found that 61 percent of the respondents see the World Cup as bad for the country because it is taking funds from health and education projects. Only 34 people consider this mega event as an economic opportunity. Furthermore, after about a year of huge protests denouncing the World Cup organization, 47 percent consider those demonstrations good for bringing to light important issues facing the country, while 48 percent consider it damaging to the country’s image internationally. 35 percent see the World Cup as a good chance to enhance the country’s image, 39 percent expect it to worsen the image even further, and 23 percent were of the view that it would make no difference.

For Saudis, besides paying huge amount of money to the broadcasting channel, which will stick to certain receivers just before the World Cup, we will be cheering for other nations’ teams.

We will be divided between the superpowers in football: Brazil, Germany, Argentina, Spain, England, France, and Italy. The Arab representative, Algeria, will also be remembered in our prayers.

Our own team will not be there. We have not been able to make it to the World Cup since 2006. In modern sports, where creating a team capable of competing on an international level is an industry in itself, we do not do well, for one reason or another, it is out of our league.
For a wealthy nation that loves football, our inability to make a strong international presence in the game is puzzling. Our players might have talents, we are able to build modern infrastructure, but we simply lack the vision. We might like to call our local clubs and league professional, but everything surrounding them is screaming of immaturity. The ways in which the league is managed, the way clubs are administrated are nothing but scrambled individual efforts and power struggles.

The manner in which we manage our sports, we are shortsighted, looking for a quick win, the shortest path to victory; that’s why a coach is usually averaged at one season whether we are talking about clubs or the national team, our efforts in maintaining and building youth academies are fruitless, our referees are below mediocre and our sports press is soaked with unprofessionalism.

Being to the World Cup four times (from 1994 to 2006) does not mean we were performing better; I might be going out on a limb here when I say it was nothing but a bit of luck and enthusiasm rather than systematic and planned efforts. The evidence comes in the result of those participations; we played 13 games (W: 2, D:2, L:9), we only scored 9 goals and we received 32 goals.

What I am saying here might be harsh, I might be exaggerating, but an overdose of truth is better than lubricity. In order to change, we have to look to the future, build for it, strategize, create a system, apply it equally on everybody, review and modify. We need a shuffle on how we manage our clubs, how to finance them, and how to operate them.

Paying more attention to youth is mandatory, reorganizing how we choose and compensate referees is a must and redefining sports journalism is unavoidable. We will not be the first to do such things, Japan and South Korea are amongst the latest nations who have revolutionized their sports industries, we could use their experience, and the wheel is already there. It is just a waste of time to think of reinventing.

@smaldosari

The post Waiting For Our Team To Win World Cup – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.


South Asia And GMO Crops: Another ‘Green Revolution’? – OpEd

0
0

By Graham Land

It’s around 50 years since the seeds of the Green Revolution began to grow in India. Mass starvation threatened the country and the Cold War meant that the West was fighting communism — or rather vying with the Soviet Union for global influence and access to resources — through largely non-military means. One such method of promoting Western hegemony was the United States bringing industrial agriculture to the developing world. By introducing monocrop farming, industrial fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides to what was then known as the “Third World”, the US hoped to win the Cold War through stimulating economic growth in non-industrialized economies. Revolutionizing agriculture was the way to do it.

In India, rice and wheat production skyrocketed and prices fell. Along with a significant growth in food production came a growth in population. Whether this was more a case preventing famine or causing overpopulation is a cause for some debate. It is of course not so simple a question. For example, the US government in the 1980s under President Ronald Reagan was more about fighting family planning (an issue that can never be ignored when discussing overpopulation) than ensuring food security in the Third World.

The other side of the coin was that cash crops like wheat and rice replaced the varied and biologically diverse subsistence crops that many farmers had relied on for generations. A monoculture replaced a polyculture and with it has come increased soil degradation, biodiversity loss and pollution.

This growing practice, largely controlled by multinational corporations worth billions, has both supporters and detractors. Proponents say GMO crops are the best way to feed a growing population. They claim GMOs improve crop yield and enhance the nutritional value of said crops.

(source: EcoRI.com)

In recent years, genetically modified crops (GMOs) have been making their way onto the Indian subcontinent. Yet there has also been strong opposition to GMOs in South Asia. Pakistan recently suspended the issue of new licenses for GM crops until they have established a proper legal body and scientific testing procedures. But this comes after a large penetration of Monsanto GM cotton in the country. Once a GM crop has entered the environment it can germinate and spread, legal or not.

From SciDev.net:

Neighbouring India saw the illegal sale of GM cotton seeds preceding official approval for commercial cultivation. In 2009, India imposed a moratorium on growing GM brinjal, or eggplant, but in October 2013 Bangladesh became the first South Asian country to approve commercial cultivation of a GM version of the vegetable. GM food crops such as maize, rice and vegetables are now poised to enter the South Asian market on a large scale, either through the efforts of foreign companies or of domestic agricultural research institutes, but regulation remains a thorny issue.

Again, like with the first Green Revolution, it is small farmers who are left scratching their heads. Poor farmers may not be able to buy patented seeds each year from some multinational corporation (as is required). What’s more, these GM seeds may need more water, herbicides and fertilizer than what the farmers are used to. Suddenly the poor are saddled with learning technologically based agricultural methods that differ from the ones they’ve always used. It is simply not always possible to apply these new methods successfully and so they lose out.

While the advantages of a pest-resistant cotton, corn or eggplant crop are easy to see, the disadvantages of GMOs should not be ignored or unexplored. But it seems like many of the mistakes of the first Green Revolution are doomed to be repeated.

Read about Bangladesh’s GMO debate in the Guardian.

The post South Asia And GMO Crops: Another ‘Green Revolution’? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Moon Power: China’s Lunar Helium 3 Vision – Analysis

0
0

By Fabrizio Bozzato

According to a 2013 United Nations report, the world population is projected to reach 9.6 billion by 2050. Of those future earthlings, 1.6 billion will live in India, and 1.3 billion in China. By then, Nigeria’s population is expected to surpass that of the United States. Also, the forty-nine least developed countries are going to double in size from around 900 million people in 2013 to 1.8 billion. In the light of these figures, it is not difficult to understand that humanity is going to face an increasingly acute energy trilemma – how to simultaneously achieve and balance energy security, energy equity (access and affordability) and environmental sustainability – in the coming decades.

China and energy

As the world’s second largest energy consumer, China is committed to develop clean and unconventional power in order to quench its thirst for energy. Beijing is deeply aware of the imperative of addressing the trilemma. In fact, powering an economy the size of China’s, especially the size it will be in three decades, only by burning massive quantities of finite fossil fuels and relying on conventional nuclear power is not an option. Besides making China unsustainably energy insecure and growingly politically unstable, this would eventually result into the country’s environmental, socio-economic and political collapse, and destructively impact the rest of the world. Also, the rampaging competition for fossil fuels in the international arena would generate intense geopolitical frictions, fuel regional tensions and breed armed conflicts that would make the international system savagely Hobbesian and highly flammable. For all these reasons, apart from investing in conventional energy sources, China is also focusing on renewable and unconventional energy, and has made it a strategic priority.

China’s energy policies are in a state of rapid flux, but coal and other fossil fuels are still the source of the vast majority of China’s energy consumption today. Currently, Coal accounts for 67 percent of the energy consumed in the Asian giant, oil is the second largest source (17 percent). This situation cannot be changed overnight and, as a popular Chinese saying reminds us “water from afar cannot put out a fire close at hand” [遠水救不了近火], meaning thata slow remedy cannot meet an urgency. For this reason, the Chinese are pouring substantial resources into and placing their bet also on the most futuristic and elusive of unconventional energies: nuclear fusion. Most fusion research has focused on deuterium and/or tritium (heavy isotopes of hydrogen) as fuel for generating fusion. Deuterium is found in abundance in all water on earth while tritium is not found in nature but can be produced by the neutron bombardment of lithium. However, the nuclear fusion Gordian knot could be untied by shifting to another isotope on the periodic table of elements: helium-3.

Helium-3

Helium-3 is a light, non-radioactive isotope of helium with two protons and one neutron. Even though this gas is found naturally as a trace component in reservoirs of natural gas and also as a decay product of tritium – one of the elements used in making the hydrogen bomb – there is extremely little helium-3 on our planet. In 2010, University of Wisconsin-Madison’s nuclear chemist Layton J. Wittenberg calculated that the potential helium-3 availability from natural and man-made resources on Earth for scientific experimentation was a mere 161 Kgs. The stockpile of nuclear weapons, the best current terrestrial source of the gas, provides only a supply of 15 kg circa a year.

Nuclear fusion reactors using helium-3 could provide a highly efficient form of nuclear power with virtually no waste and negligible radiation. In the words of Matthew Genge, lecturer at the Faculty of Engineering at the Imperial College in London, “nuclear fusion using Helium-3 would be cleaner, as it doesn’t produce any spare neutrons. It should produce vastly more energy than fission reactions without the problem of excessive amounts of radioactive waste.” Moreover, eliminating the use of slightly radioactive tritium in the fusion process, by using deuterium and helium-3 for fuel, also has the benefit of simplifying the engineering to meet radiation standards.

Rare under Heaven, abundant in Heaven

Indeed, Helium-3 is really rare ‘under Heaven’. How about ‘in Heaven’? Actually, the Sun – like all stars – continuously emits helium-3 within its solar wind, which consists largely of ionized hydrogen and ionized helium. The reason why Helium 3 is so rare on the Earth is that the terrestrial atmosphere and magnetic field prevent any of the solar helium-3 from arriving on our planet. However, as the Moon does not have an atmosphere, there is nothing to stop helium-3 arriving on the surface of our satellite and being absorbed by the lunar soil. Given that The Moon has been bombarded for billions of years by solar wind, helium-3 is available in the dust of the lunar surface. It has been calculated that there are about 1,100,000 metric tonnes of helium-3 on the lunar surface down to a depth of a few metres (since the regolith – i.e. the lunar soil – has been stirred up by collisions with meteorites).

Helium-3 could potentially be extracted by heating the lunar dust to around 600 degrees C, before bringing it back to the Earth to fuel a new generation of nuclear fusion power plants. Professor Gerald Kulcinski, Director of the Fusion Technology Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison, maintains that about 40 tonnes of helium-3 – which equate to two fully-loaded Space Shuttle cargo bay’s worth – could power the United States for a year at the current rate of energy consumption, without causing smog, acid rain and radioactive waste. This would require mining an areas the size of Washington, D.C. Besides, several other valuable materials – such as oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon monoxide and dioxide – will be produced in the course of recovering the helium-3. It comes as no surprise, then, that the gas has a potential economic value in the order of US$ 1bn to 3bn a tonne, making it the only thing remotely economically viable to consider mining from the Moon given current and likely-near-future space travel technologies and capabilities.

Moon Dragon

A team of University of Wisconsin scientists has calculated that if the entire lunar surface were mined, and all of the helium-3 used for fusion fuel on Earth, it could meet world energy demand for over 10,000 years. In addition, given the estimated potential energy of a ton of helium-3 (the equivalent of about 50 million barrels of crude oil), helium-3 fuelled fusion could free the world from fossil fuel dependency, and is likely to increase mankind’s productivity by orders of magnitude. But to supply the planet with fusion power for centuries, humanity has first to return to the Moon. To date only China has embarked on a long-term endeavour to achieve such an ambitious goal, having established a satellite-based lunar exploration program called the Chang’e Project (Chang’e is a fairy living on the moon in a Chinese legend) in 2004. The question is: why China?

As Professor Ouyang Ziyuan (歐陽自遠) – the chief scientist of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program – recently said, “Lunar exploration is a reflection of a country’s comprehensive national power. It is significant for raising our international prestige and increasing our people’s cohesion.” Plus, the Moon is “so rich” in helium-3, that this could “solve humanity’s energy demand for around 10,000 years at least.” In the light of the statements above, it is clear that Beijing’s lunar program represents a triple-win venture. Internationally, lunar expeditions “will increase China’s political influence in the world.” Domestically, ‘conquering the Moon’ would bolster the consensus for the political leadership and prop up Chinese national pride. Thirdly, on the energy security side, tapping into the Moon has the potential to make China not only energy self-sufficient and secure, but also turn the Chinese into the ‘helium-3 Arabs’ of the 21st century, especially in case they get to enjoy the position of monopolists. China would then become not only an energy superpower able to fix its social and environmental problems, but also the center of a global helium-3 hydraulic empire. According to British space scientist Richard Holdaway, China could have astronauts treading on the Moon by 2025.

A sense of urgency

In China, the ‘pursuit of lunar resources’ theme has then been combined with a ‘geopolitical competition’ discourse conveying a sense of urgency. “If China doesn’t explore the moon, we will have no say in international lunar exploration and can’t safeguard our proper rights and interests,” Professor Ouyang declared in 2010, hinting that progress in the lunar program would confer an edge to China if and when the extraction of the Moon’s riches turns political. The 15 December 2013 edition of the Beijing Youth Daily argued that “China can obtain a certificate to sharing lunar interests only by carrying out exploration and gaining actual results.” It also contended that “how to protect China’s interest in outer space has become an inevitable question.” Dean Cheng, an expert on China’s space program at the Heritage Foundation, got the message clear. “Once you start mining, and even before, questions arise as to ownership, as to profit-sharing (if any), as to who has the ability to establish and enforce claims in space,” he said. “A long-term presence in space will give China political capital.” Thirdly, the lunar program has been presented to policy makers and the general public as a cost effective investment.

According to experts in the US, the total estimated cost for fusion development, rocket development and starting lunar operations would be about US$15-20 billion over two decades. By comparison, another big nuclear fusion project (on Earth), the International Thermonuclear Reactor Project (ITER) has an estimated total cost of now €15 billion (US$20.5 billion), and going to the Moon to mine helium-3 would cost “about the same as was required for the 1970s Trans Alaska Pipeline.” Actually, US$ 15-20 billion does not appear to be an excessive financial commitment for a country which is to spend US$ 1.7 trillion between 2011-2015 – in the form of investment, assistance for state-owned enterprises, and bank loans – for a plan aiming at covering 11.4 percent of China’s energy needs by 2015, and 15 percent by 2020, from non-fossil energy.

Two additional charms

Finally, the seductiveness of China’s lunar vision has been enhanced with two additional charms: China’s technological advancement and solar system exploration. As for the first, Ouyang Ziyuan’s speeches often mention the achievements of the U.S. Apollo program (1963-1972) in order to illustrate the transformational characteristics of any lunar project. The Chinese scientist reminds his audiences that Washington spent US$ 25.4 billion on the Moon’s exploration at that time, which has thus far yielded an output worth fourteen times the original investment, leading to the birth of several new hi-tech industries and technologies such as the rocket, radar, radio guidance and so on, which were then put into civil use. The implication is that China’s Moon exploration and colonization are going to be the catalyst for revolutionary technological progress that can transform the country’s entire industrial landscape and bring a galaxy of economic and social benefits.

Helium-3: the big prize

However, helium-3 remains the biggest gem on the selenitic crown. If it is postulated that the commercial value of helium-3 will be US$3 billion/ton, and defensively estimated that there are 1 million tonnes of the precious gas trapped in the regolith, then the whole stock of lunar helium-3 would be worth an astonishing three quadrillion dollars. That is more than enough to cover for the costs and risks of extracting and shipping it back to Earth. Finally, it should be kept in mind that while rocket fuels and consumables now cost an average of $20,000 per pound to lift off Earth, resources could instead be carried off the Moon much more economically. Given that the lunar gravitational pull is inferior to the Earth’s, 83.3% (or 5/6) less to be exact, transporting material from the moon requires just 1/14th to 1/20th of the fuel needed to lift material up from the terrestrial surface.

Financial considerations apart, helium-3 would be crucial for what perhaps is the most ambitious goal of China’s lunar program: setting up a lunar base and using the Moon as a stepping-stone for space exploration. In order turn the Moon into an operational headquarters for scientific experimentation and further exploration of the solar system, a lunar base should be established first. Helium-3 would be crucial for achieving that. In fact, the immediately available by-products of helium-3 production include hydrogen, water, and compounds of nitrogen and carbon. Oxygen can be easily produced by electrolysis of water. Thus, by mining Helium-3 Moon settlers would be able to obtain the air and water they would need to make lunar colonization sustainable. In essence, extracting helium-3 produces the resources we need to gather more of it. Lunar helium-3 could also become the premier rocket fuel of the future, turning the Moon into the launching pad or a refueling service station for space-bound missions.

When asked if the idea of a Chinese lunar base extracting minerals was remotely plausible, Professor Holdaway replied: “It is perfectly plausible from the technical point of view, absolutely plausible from the finance point of view because they have great buying power.” Buying power will be certainly needed, given that a 2009 analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that a four-person research station on the lunar surface would cost US$35 billion to build and US$7.35 billion per year to operate.

Helium-3 monopoly

If China wins the ‘race for the Moon’ and establishes a man-tended outpost conducting helium-3 mining operations, it would create a scenario similar that of the 2009 movie Moon. In that motion picture, a private company called Lunar Industries has built a mining base on the Moon and enjoys a helium-3 extraction and shipping monopoly – the same kind of monopoly that in the past created the fortunes of ventures like the East India Companies. Unlike that fictional universe, in the case of a Chinese lunar base the monopoly would be held by a state. The ramifications and consequences of such a scenario would be ‘cosmic’. First, “China is what international relations scholars call a ‘revisionist power,’ seeking opportunities to assert its enhanced relative position in international affairs.” Thus, establishing an automated or manned helium-3 operation on the Moon would be a spectacular statement of grandeur. Secondly, due to the inevitable depletion of fossil fuels on Earth, Beijing would be in a position to gradually build a helium-3 hydraulic empire in which it would control the supply of the precious gas, and become the only energy superpower. The making of such an empire would be most likely met with resistance. Plausibly, the prospect of China’s energy supremacy, which would undoubtedly transubstantiate into pervasive geopolitical influence, would cause geopolitical tension, agglutinate anti-Chinese alliances, and prompt the other space-faring nations – in primis the US – to rush to the Moon to break the Dragon’s monopoly.

Game of Moons

Signally, international law would be neither an impassable hurdle nor an effective deterrent. Although the 1967 Outer Space Treaty asserts common ownership over everything in the universe beyond the Earth and requires all countries to share in the benefits of space, its article 17 permits signatory states to withdraw from the treaty with only a year’s notice. Unilateral withdrawal by one of the major spacefaring powers would undermine the existing international legal regime in space, prompting the other players to secure a piece of the pie in the sky for themselves. This would start a period of colonialism reminiscent of that in 19th century. Having established a permanent manned lunar base, China would be able to substantiate its claim by satisfying an important criterion for sovereignty: the wishes of the inhabitants. Also, claims over lunar areas beyond China’s ‘red side of the Moon’ by other powers would legitimize Beijing’s acquisition of its new selenitic dominions (where Chinese sovereignty would provide regulations and protection for private investors to operate). Once in control of vast helium-3 fields, China could even astutely play ‘game of Moons’ by facilitating the settlement and encouraging the territorial claims of non-hostile or friendly powers – for example other BRICS countries – in order to contain Western expansion and access to helium-3 on the lunar surface.

The future is open

However this ‘game of Moons’ scenario is not an anticipation of an inescapable future. On the contrary, lunar exploration and resources development can be international cooperation synergizers and confidence building catalysts. Consistently, the Beijing Declaration, issued at the 2008 Global Space Development Summit in Beijing, calls for international cooperation “in all the applicative fields of space […] as the world enters a challenging period characterized by globalization, dramatic population growth, serious environmental concerns and scarcity of resources.” By 2050 there will be a dire paucity of all the economically recoverable fossil fuels (there would still be plenty of coal, but can the humankind afford to put up with the greenhouse gases?). “Also, all alternative sources of energy, like water power, solar power, tidal power, wind power, geothermal power, and wood will not be sufficient to supply more than 10 percent of the energy which will be needed by [the billions of people] that will be on earth at that time. We will be out of energy and forced to seek a new source,” predicted engineer and inventor Wilson Greatbatch at the turn of the millennium. The Moon can tend the Earth its energy salvation. The helium-3 trapped into the lunar soil offers humanity about ten times the energy that could be obtained from mining all the fossil fuels on Earth, without causing apocalyptic pollution.

Working together would make humanity’s pursuit of helium-3 power, quicker, cheaper and more efficient. Starting a cooperative effort, inclusive of China and the US, for lunar exploration would, first of all, require each participant a change of mindset as well as adopting an approach based on the four principles indicated by the Beijing Declaration: mutual benefit, transparency, reciprocity, and cost sharing. Actually, the same document identifies the development of a lunar base as the ideal next project for international collaboration on space exploration. Creative politics and diplomacy would then play a crucial role in ensuring good governance and fair dividends to all parties. New legal regimes for exploiting helium-3 and other lunar resources could be designed and approved. A new international regime, organization or enterprise for the cooperative development and terrestrial fusion of lunar helium-3 may be needed. Many diverse solutions will be possible as long as a sense of common destiny will be shared by the moon-settling nations. The race for making available a safe, clean and revolutionary source of energy to all human beings should not have any loser, only winners. Thus, civilizational or national egoisms should be left back on Earth. Helium-3 power is not meant to be the flame casting deep shadows over a new Dark Age, but the glorious light of a global renaissance.

About the author:
Fabrizio Bozzato ( 杜允士 ) is a political analyst with a keen interest in Pacific Studies. He holds an M.A. in International Relations (University of Tasmania, Australia) and a Master in Political Science (University of Milan, Italy). He also attained a Grad. Dip. in International Politics with high distinction (University of Tasmania, Australia). Fabrizio lives in Taiwan, where he is an Associate Researcher at the Taipei Ricci Institute. He has also worked at the Centre for International and Regional Affairs at the University of Fiji (Fiji Islands), where he served as Adjunct Lecturer. He is presently pursuing a Ph.D. in International Affairs and Strategic Studies at Tamkang University (Taiwan) and is an editor for the World Security Network Foundation. Fabrizio believes that the currents of the global ocean are shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific Rim, and especially Asia. He is trying his best to follow Lao Tzu’s advice about knowing honor, yet keeping humility.

The post Moon Power: China’s Lunar Helium 3 Vision – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Obama Isn’t Above The Law‏ – OpEd

0
0

It was hard enough trying to keep up with the revelations of various scandals that have been the product of the Obama administration, but now into the second year of his second term, the news of its actions—some of which are illegal, some of which ignore Congress’s authority, and some of which seemed determined to destroy our economy and attack our constitutional freedoms–all keep assaulting our comprehension.

Like many Americans I have fears of losing our freedoms as set forth in the Bill of Rights. I have doubts about an almost invisible “recovery” of the economy when 92,009,000 are still not in the labor force. I look at the Obama presidency and see one that seems increasingly lawless and witless in so many ways.

The latest assault was the exchange of five Taliban detainees, top field commanders, for an American soldier who administration spokeswoman, Susan Rice, said had served with “honor and distinction.” Like her lies about the Benghazi attack, this too was a lie. Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had, we swiftly learned, walked away from his post in Afghanistan. That makes him a deserter, something the administration must surely have known. Giving up the Taliban leaders, done without the required thirty days’ notice to Congress, looks more like Obama’s intention to empty Guantanamo then the claim of retrieving an alleged POW. Negotiations to achieve this had been ongoing for months.

This comes at a time when a report by the thi nk tank, the Rand Corporation, spells out a 58% increase from 2010 to 2013 of jihadist groups worldwide, from 31 to 49, and a doubling of the number of jihadist fighters to an estimated 100,000. In addition, the report notes the number of attacks by al Qaeda affiliates had increased to roughly 1,000 from 392. As Seth G. Jones, the author of the report, says, “The current trends suggest that the struggle against extremism is likely to be a generational one, much like the Cold War.”

Not exactly the “end of a war” that Obama keeps talking about.

At the same time Obama turned five Taliban commanders loose, his Attorney General, Eric Holder, announced the creation of a special task force within the Just ice Department to combat what he characterized as “escalating danger” from “homegrown” terrorists within the U.S. Given the fact that we have a huge Department of Homeland Security, created after 9/11, one wonders why such a task force is necessary, but we are told it will be composed of members of the FBI and the Department’s National Security Division.

The Obama administration is the same one in which the Internal Revenue Service targeted Tea Party and patriot groups seeking non-profit status. A pattern of using the government against them reflects an agenda to target any American who disagrees and speaks up against the abuse or neglect of constitutional rights.

One of those is the right to own and bear guns, but this is also an administration that has made many efforts to curb the Second Amendment and gun ownership. At the same time, we have read reports of massive purchases of ammunition and weapons by various elements of the federal government. One can understand the need to arm agents of the FBI and Homeland Security, but why did the Postal Service and Social Security agency, as well as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration need to purchase lots of ammunition?

Concurrent with this has been the deliberate reduction in the nation’s military strength to a point that rivals what existed prior to World War Two. We have a far smaller navy. Our Air Force has both older and fewer aircraft. Our Army and Marine units have far fewer men and women in active service. There are concerns about the capabilities of our National Guard as well. Meanwhile, police forces around the nation are being given military-level vehicles and weaponry.

Largely unknown to most Americans is the National Defense Authorization Act which empowers the U.S. military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial, and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States. ”

Reportedly, a study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterized Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.” Does that include members of the Tea Party movement? Members of the National Rifle Association and of veterans organizations? Opponents of abortion? All have been described as potential domestic terrorists by elements of the Obama administration

A friend-of-the-court brief in a case opposing the Act, stated: “The central question now before the court is whether the federal judiciary will stand idly by while Congress and the president establish the legal framework for the establishment of a police state and the subjugation of the American citizenry through the threat of indefinite military arrest and detention, without the right to counsel, the right to confront one’s accusers, or the right to trial.� �

Writing at World Net Daily, Bob Unrah noted that “The new law authorizes the President to use ‘all necessary and appropriate force’ to jail those ‘suspected’ of helping terrorists.’” Since the law passed,” reported Unrah, “multiple states have passed laws banning its enforcement.”

While Obama is releasing declared enemies of the nation to return to the battlefield, he and his Attorney General are expressing concerns about homegrown terrorists and the mere accusation of being sympathetic to terrorism will be enough to get a lot of people detained without any Bill of Rights protections.

Obama has unleashed the Environmental Protection Agency to assert new limits on greenhouse gas emissions by many, if not most, of the nation’s 600 coal-fired plants that generate electricity. Many plants have already closed their doors. Joseph Bast, the president of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank, responded saying, “President Obama and the Democrats are once again unleashing the Environmental Protection Agency on the American people. This is Obamacare for the environment: guaranteed to raise costs, reduce choices, and destroy an existing industry. By the time the EPA is finished, millions of Americans will be freezing in the dark.”

David Rothbard and Craig Rucker of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), another leading think tank, warned that states will be required to impose “cap-and-tax regimes like the ones Congress has wisely and repeatedly refused to enact. Others will be forced to close perfectly good, highly reliable coal-fueled power plants that currently provide affordable electricity for millions of families, factories, hospitals, schools and businesses. The adverse impacts will be enormous.”

This is a pattern of activity that will harm the U.S. economy by reducing the production of energy vital to nation’s current and future growth. In a similar fashion, the Obama administration has reduced access to explore and extract vast offshore energy resources and those that exist on federal lands.

Taken together these and other actions put at risk the future and the freedoms Americans have enjoyed since the U.S. Constitution became effective on June 21, 1788. We are watching this 226-year-old republic being put at great risk of survival.

The post Obama Isn’t Above The Law‏ – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Pope Francis Hosts Israeli, Palestinian Presidents For Prayer Meeting

0
0

sraeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas joined Pope Francis Sunday at the Vatican in an unprecedented prayer convocation for peace in the Middle East.

The three leaders, joined by the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew, heard Christian, Jewish and Islamic prayers from cardinals, rabbis and Muslim imams. The two-hour meeting in the Vatican gardens included prayers from the Old and New Testaments and the Quran that were read and chanted in Hebrew, Arabic, English and Italian.

The Argentine pontiff later told Abbas and Peres that “peacemaking calls for courage, much more so than warfare.” He defined courage as “the willingness to say ‘yes’ to encounter and ‘no’ to conflict.”

The pope issued the surprise invitation to the two leaders last month, just weeks after the collapse of the latest round of Mideast peace talks.

In the run-up to the historic gathering, the Vatican sought to dampen expectations that the convocation would lead to any immediate breakthroughs in in the stalemated peace process.

Vatican leaders also insisted the pope was not injecting himself into the peace process. They said the Church did not want to become involved in details leading to any future Israeli-Palestinian talks.

The post Pope Francis Hosts Israeli, Palestinian Presidents For Prayer Meeting appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US Dumps Hundreds Of Illegal Migrant Kids In Arizona Warehouses

0
0

Arizona is scrambling to cope with over 1,000 children caught crossing the border illegally in Texas. As outrage mounts, Homeland Security is sending mattresses and portable toilets. But even after release, the migrants’ woes are far from over.

In what appears to be a serious lack of communication on the part of the US federal government, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer expressed outrage after she learned Friday that 432 unaccompanied illegal children – caught while attempting to cross the US border into Texas – were transported to a holding facility in Nogales.

“I am disturbed and outraged that President Obama’s administration continues to implement this dangerous and inhumane policy,” Brewer said in a written statement.

“Not only does the federal government have no plan to stop this disgraceful policy, it also has no plan to deal with the endless waves of illegal aliens once they are released here.”

Another 700 children were scheduled to be transported from Texas to the Arizona facility over the weekend. Following their brief holdover, the detainees – many of them women, children and unaccompanied juveniles – are abandoned without food and water.

Homeland Security officials defended their actions, saying the families were transported to Nogales from Texas because the Border Patrol did not have the necessary resources to process the wave of illegal immigrants crossing into the US from Central America.

Last month, the Border Patrol was overwhelmed by a surge of undocumented immigrants crossing the border illegally in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, including more than 48,000 children traveling on their own, the AP reported.

Jimena Díaz, consul general of Guatemala in Phoenix, visited the center on Friday and said there were some 250 children from Guatemala, with the rest coming from El Salvador and Honduras, the Arizona Daily Star reported Saturday.

Diaz told the newspaper that the children – mostly between the ages of 15 and 17 – are being kept in separate groups, divided by age and gender. Teenage mothers with their children are also being held separately, he said.

The Obama administration plans to use the facility in Nogales as a “way station,” where, following vaccinations and medical check-ups, the children will be flown to facilities being set up in various cities, including Ventura, Calif., Fort Sill, Okla., and San Antonio, the AP reported.

A Homeland Security official told The Associated Press that about 2,000 mattresses have been ordered for the makeshift holding center – a warehouse that has not been used to shelter people in years. Meanwhile, portable toilets and showers were delivered Saturday to the facility.

Raising Arizona’s impatience

Earlier this week, Governor Brewer, who said she only found out about the program through media reports, published the text of a letter she wrote to President Obama, warning him of the humanitarian risk involved in such actions.

“I remind you that the daytime temperatures in Arizona during this time of year are regularly more than 100 degrees,” she wrote. “Consequently, this federal operation seems to place expediency over basic humanitarian concerns.”

Saying that Arizona’s law enforcement agencies, health care providers and nonprofit organizations are “stretched to the breaking point” attempting to handle the influx, Brewer blamed the failure on a “broken immigration system.”

“Our nation and the State of Arizona face significant challenges stemming from your administration’s refusal to carry out its responsibility to secure our country’s southern border,” she wrote. “This unwarranted operation is another disturbing example of a deliberate failure to enforce border security policies and repair a broken immigration system.”

Previously, illegal aliens from Central America were held in detention facilities before being returned to their native countries. Homeland Security officials say the new illegal arrivals being released will remain under supervision and are still subject to deportation.

Immigrant families were flown from Texas, released in Arizona, and told to report to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office near where they were traveling within 15 days.

However, it was never explained how the government expects to track thousands of undocumented migrants, or how much it would cost taxpayers to carry out such an ambitious task.

Meanwhile, something of a humanitarian crisis is brewing at the warehouses where the new arrivals are being held until their release.

Gov. Brewer’s spokesman, Andrew Wilder, said Friday that conditions at the facilities are so dire that federal officials have asked the state to send medical supplies to the facility in Nogales.

At the way station, private service providers are being contracted to supply meals, according to US Customs and Border Protection officials. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will provide “counseling services and recreational activities.”

The Homeland Security official told AP that the number of children at the warehouse was expected to double to around 1,400. The warehouse has a capacity of about 1,500, the official said.

ICE has said the illegal migrants were mostly families from Central America escaping extreme poverty and violence in their countries.

The post US Dumps Hundreds Of Illegal Migrant Kids In Arizona Warehouses appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Spain: Basques Form 123-Kilometre-Long Human Chain In Bid For Independence

0
0

More than 100,000 Basques formed a human chain in northern Spain Sunday in a protest for greater autonomy.

Rally organizers said the chain was 123 kilometers long, stretching from the town of Durango in Bilbao to Pamplona, the capital of the neighboring region of Navarra, DPA reports.

Several Basque politicians and union leaders joined the protest, which was organized by an initiative called Gure Esku Dago (It is in Our Hands).

Organizing group “It’s in Our Hands” estimated some 100,000 people joined the chain, which echoed a similar demonstration on Sept. 11 last year in Catalonia, another Spanish region with a large independence movement.

It was similar to a rally in Catalonia in north-eastern Spain in September when a 400-kilometre-long human chain called The Catalan Way Towards Independence was formed.

Demonstrators draped in red-white-and-green Basque flags raised their linked hands as helicopters flew over the line stretching from the city of Durango to Pamplona some 76 miles away, which is not in Basque Country but is in the neighboring Navarra region considered part of Basque cultural and linguistic territory, Reuters reports.

In October, the Basque region of 2.2 million people held its first elections since the separatist group ETA ended a campaign of bombings and shootings that has claimed about 850 lives.

From 1968 to 2010, ETA was engaged in a bloody campaign to carve out an independent Basque state from parts of northern Spain and southern France.

But police crackdowns and dwindling support finally prompted the group to renounce violence in October 2011.

The Basque Country – with its own language and culture – has traditionally sought greater self-rule from Spain.

In 2005, the Spanish parliament rejected a plan for Basque independence.

The government in April rejected a proposal on plans for Catalonia to hold a referendum on independence from Spain.

The post Spain: Basques Form 123-Kilometre-Long Human Chain In Bid For Independence appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Early Results Of Parliamentary Polls In Breakaway South Ossetia

0
0

(Civil.Ge) — Three out of nine parties, which were contesting in Sunday’s parliamentary election, are set to take seats in new parliament of breakaway South Ossetia, according to early results.

Breakaway region’s Central Election Commission (CEC) said that United Ossetia party is leading with over 44% of votes, followed by Unity of People with 16.4% and People’s Party with 7.5%.

United Ossetia, which is set to win majority of seats in the parliament, is led by Anatoly Bibilov, an acting minister of emergency situations.

Joining Russia was one of the key campaign themes of the party ahead of elections; it calls for holding a referendum on this issue.

Unity of People is led by Vladimir Kelekhsaev, who was appointed as head of Java district of the breakaway region after Tibilov became the South Ossetian leader in 2012. People’s Party is led by a member of outgoing parliament Alexander Pliev,

Other six political parties, which were participating in the election, are failing to clear 7% threshold required for endorsing members to the legislative body, according to early results.

“We are facing lots of tasks. The republic needs a professional parliament,” South Ossetian leader, Leonid Tibilov, said after casting ballot at a polling station in Tskhinvali.

“I hope that efforts of new lawmakers will be directed towards strengthening of the statehood, development of relationship with Russia and improvement of legislative base,” he said.

According to the breakaway region’s Central Election Commission, voter turnout was 50.47% two hours before the polling stations were closed.

There are no credible data about number of voters in the breakaway region. South Ossetian Central Election Commission puts the figure at about 32,600. When in 2012 presidential election breakaway region’s CEC said there were 34,000 voters, groups, which at the time were in the opposition, argued that the figure was overinflated.

It was the six parliamentary election in the breakaway region; Tbilisi denounces elections in its breakaway regions, which it formally considers as territories occupied by Russia, as illegitimate.

A spokesperson of EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said that the EU “does not recognise the constitutional and legal framework within which these elections have taken place.”

The post Early Results Of Parliamentary Polls In Breakaway South Ossetia appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Cindy Sheehan: Top Two And Democracy Destroyed – OpEd

0
0

The primaries are over in California and there’s good news and bad news.

The good news is that, as of this writing, almost 90k Californians voted for left-wing candidates (Luis Rodriguez, GP: 48,000; Me: 39, 000), but the VERY BAD news is that California had less than 20% voter turnout and the Top Two vote getters are both corporatist members of the establishment in every way.

The tragic news is that MANY Californians, who voted in the Top Two law in 2010 do not understand it. Top Two is what’s called an “Open Primary” where party affiliation doesn’t matter and each voter can cast a vote for any candidate, but only the Top Two vote getters in the primary move on to the general election in November. Already, voters are contacting me to tell me that they will be voting for me in November, even though I came in 7th and my campaign is over.

In 2010, Top Two was originally sold to the voters here in California as a way to weed out people who are at the extreme right or extreme left and we know what that means: it means anyone who has a vision for something different from the Corporate establishment and its theft of wealth and resources.

So, again in November EVERY office has either a Democrat or Republican to choose from and not one 3rd party or independent candidate will be on anyone’s ballot and this is contributing to the descent into a one-party state where even though the “centrists” are in charge, social services and education have been decimated while Brown’s friends in Big Oil, Banks, and Private Prisons are being rewarded.

Neel Kashkari, the Republican who will be facing Brown in November, is an ex-Goldman Sachs executive who managed Obama’s TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) program and is just another member of the parasitic 1% class.

Of course, Democracy USA style is a only a myth but at the beginning of the last century, California led the nation in progressive reforms. The Top Two scam is the nail in the coffin unless we stand up to overturn it and support bills in the state legislature that will at least ameliorate the horrible effects. However, how can we change something that few really understand?

I am excited that I finished 7th in a slate of 15 candidates and the votes are still coming in. So far, I know that 39,085 Californians voted for an unashamed, unapologetic, radical Socialist, peacenik, and, to me, that’s a good base to build upon to organize for the future.

Also, with the co-operation between my campaign and the campaigns of other Peace and Freedom and Green Candidates, I believe an infrastructure has been put into place for a relevant Red-Green Alliance of disaffected people to wrest this state and world from the hands of the Corporate Oligarchy.

We the people must demand it because of the urgency of now.

Cindy Sheehan for Cal Gov, 2014 is deeply grateful to everyone who donated to the campaign, voted for me, or volunteered.

Venceremos! Hasta la victoria, siempre!

The post Cindy Sheehan: Top Two And Democracy Destroyed – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Review Board Approves ‘Forever Prisoner’ Ghaleb Al-Bihani For Release From Guantánamo, But Also Approves Ongoing Detention Of Salem Bin Kanad – OpEd

0
0

Six weeks ago, I reported on the Periodic Review Boards for two “forever prisoners” at Guantánamo — Ghaleb al-Bihani and Salem bin Kanad — who are both Yemenis, and were regarded by the Guantánamo Review Task Force, appointed by President Obama to review all the remaining prisoners’ cases in 2009, as too dangerous to release, even though it was acknowledged that insufficient evidence existed to put them on trial.

The PRBs — involving representatives of the Departments of State, Defense, Justice and Homeland Security, as well as the office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who meet at an office in Virginia and hear testimony by, or on behalf of the prisoners by video link from Guantánamo — took place to establish whether these two men should still be regarded as a threat, or whether they should be recommended for release.

This category of prisoner — as opposed to those approved for release, or those recommended for prosecution — is particularly problematical, as it relies on a presumption that the so-called evidence against the Guantánamo prisoners is somehow reliable, when that is patently not the case. The files on the prisoners are for the most part a dispiriting collection of unreliable statements made by the prisoners themselves or by their fellow prisoners in circumstances that were not conducive to telling the truth — immediately after capture, in America’s notorious prisons in Afghanistan, or in Guantánamo, all places and circumstances where torture and abuse were rife; or, in some cases, where bribery (the promise of better living conditions, for example) was used to try to secure information that could be used as evidence.

In March 2011, when President Obama shamefully approved the ongoing imprisonment without charge or trial of 48 men designated as being too dangerous to release, he tried to sweeten the pill by promising periodic reviews of the men cases. However, these only finally materialized last year, at which point the credibility of the trial system at Guantánamo — the military commissions — was also in tatters, with the result that 25 prisoners out of the 36 originally recommended for trials were also added to the list of those eligible for Periodic Review Boards, making 71 men in total (as two of the original 48 had died in the meantime).

As I have explained in a series of articles about the Periodic Review Boards, which have had only patchy coverage in the mainstream media, the entire review process is flawed, because it seeks to validate Guantánamo’s ongoing and unjustifiable system of holding men neither as criminal suspects nor as prisoners of war, when there is no third way, but at least two of the first three review boards decided that the men whose cases were being examined — all Yemenis — should be released (see here and here for my reports).

In the bleakly surreal reality of Guantánamo, however, all this meant was that they were added to the list of 55 other Yemenis who were cleared for release by the task force (in its final report in January 2010), but who are still held because everyone in a position of power and responsibility in the US government is worried about the security situation in Yemen; in other words, men cleared for release because they are not regarded as posing a threat to the US will, the US fears, not be monitored closely on their return home, as though they were men who had not been cleared for release in the first place because they are not regarded as posing a threat to the US.

Ghaleb al-Bihani approved for release

On May 28, the fourth Periodic Review Board — for Ghaleb al-Bihani, who had worked as a cook for forces supporting the Taliban prior to the 9/11 attacks and the US invasion of Afghanistan, and who, in Guantánamo, has developed serious health problems — recommended his release. In his PRB, al-Bihani had distanced himself from a claim (unsubstantiated, it should be noted) that a least one of his family members had ties with Al-Qaeda, and had addressed his desire to be resettled in another country, as well as providing evidence of his diligent efforts at self-improvement during his long imprisonment. In their final determination, the board stated that, unanimously, they had “determined continued law of war detention of the detainee is no longer necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States.”

The final determination continued:

In making this determination, the Board considered the detainee’s plans for the future, as well as his desire and efforts to separate himself from family members with known ties to extremism. The Board found the detainee credible on his commitment to living a peaceful life. The Board also considered the detainee’s low level of training and lack of leadership position in al-Qa’ida or the Taliban. The detainee’s shift in behavior from being disruptive in detention to playing a positive and constructive role in the administration of the camp, his efforts to improve his health situation, and his efforts to improve himself through exploring non-extremist matters were also noted by the Board.

The board recommended that al-Bihani “be transferred with the standard security assurances, as negotiated by the Guantánamo Detainee Transfer Working Group,” also The Board recommending, as requested by al-Bihani, “resettlement in a third country with appropriate support, including adequate medical care.”

The decision to approve al-Bihani’s release was apparently taken on May 15, but it was not announced until May 28. Pentagon spokesperson Army Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale said that the board had determined that al-Bihani “can be transferred from the US base in Cuba ‘as soon as practicable,’” as the Associated Press described it, “without specifying when [he] might be moved from the prison.”

Responding to the decision, Pardiss Kebriaei, Senior Attorney at the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, who represents Mr. al-Bihani, stated:

The Periodic Review Board’s decision approving Mr. Al-Bihani for transfer from Guantánamo is encouraging. The security and other agencies on the board rightly determined that his continued detention of more than 12 years is unnecessary. Indeed, Mr. Al-Bihani was an assistant cook 12 years ago for a Taliban-affiliated group that no longer exists, and he is now seriously ill.

Kebriaei added, crucially:

The Obama administration must now give effect to the board’s decision and release Mr. Al-Bihani. Simply adding him to the group of dozens of men cleared to leave Guantánamo, but still indefinitely detained, does nothing to end his wrongful detention or close the prison. As Mr. Al-Bihani stated at his hearing, his hope is for resettlement in a third country, where he may begin a new life. He would also accept repatriation to Yemen.

Kebriaei also noted, in another important assessment of the absurd situation that prevails at Guantánamo:

Since President Obama lifted his self-imposed moratorium on transfers to Yemen a year ago and promised a “case-by-case” review of individual men, not one Yemeni has been released. In fact, no Yemeni has left Guantánamo alive in nearly four years, despite the fact that one-third of the remaining men at Guantánamo are Yemenis approved for transfer. The administration’s stated commitment to close Guantánamo will continue to ring hollow until it starts treating detained men from Yemen as individuals and stops seeing them solely through the prism of their national origin and country conditions. It can start with the release of a sick former cook.

Salem bin Kanad not approved for release

The second Periodic Review Board decision — to continue holding another prisoner, Salem bin Kanad (who seems to have both Saudi and Yemeni origins, even though the US lists him as a Yemeni) — took place on May 21, but was only made available on the PRB website a few days ago. Coinciding with the engineered uproar about the release of five Taliban prisoners in exchange for US PoW Bowe Begdahl, it failed to get a mention anywhere in the media, which was disappointing, as the PRB decisions deserve to have proper coverage.

I had fears that, although there was no evidence that bin Kanad, a Taliban foot soldier, posed a threat to the US, it would not help his case that he refused to take part in his PRB, so that the board members had no way of interacting with him, and in their final determination, as I feared, the board “determined continued law of war detention of the detainee remains necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States.” No one was on hand to point out the irony of recommending a minor Taliban foot soldier for ongoing imprisonment at the same time that five Afghan prisoners who held leadership roles in the Taliban were being freed in Qatar in a prisoner swap.

The board explained that they had “considered the detainee’s history of fighting on the frontlines in a Taliban unit, including possibly serving in a low-level leadership role and possibly receiving extremist training,” and also “noted inconsistencies regarding the detainee’s behavior while in detention and a lack of clarity regarding threatening anti-US statements made by the detainee in the past” — that later assessment providing an insight into what is regarded a supposing a threat; namely, having made “threatening anti-US statements … in the past.”

The board also recognized that bin Kanad had initially taken part in the process of meeting his the representatives appointed by the military, but then ceased his involvement, with the result that they felt they “had insufficient information on the detainee’s family and the support they are prepared to provide him upon his return as well as the detainee’s skills and employment prospects.” Pointedly, they added that they “had difficulty assessing the detainee’s credibility due to his decision not to participate in the hearing,” and, as a result, looked forward to reviewing his file in six months’ time. They also encouraged him “to fully participate in any future review.”

I hope that we will have some positive new soon about the release of prisoners clear for release through the PRBs — as well as those cleared by the task force over four years ago — because, every day that cleared prisoners are not freed is a day that ought to bring shame and disgrace on the United States.

To conclude this round-up, I’m also posting below the statement that Ghaleb al-Bihani presented to his PRB, which was not available until recently, and which provides further insight into his state of mind and his hopes for the future. It also makes clear that, although he has consistently been listed by the US as a Yemeni, he was born in Saudi Arabia, where he lived until his ill-fated decision to travel to Afghanistan, and his subsequent imprisonment at Guantánamo.

Periodic Review Board
Ghaleb Nasser Al-Bihani, ISN 128, April 8, 2014
Statement of Ghaleb Nasser Al-Bihani

I am still learning English, so I would like to present my statement in Arabic.

My name is Ghaleb Nasser Al-Bihani and my ISN is 128. I was born in Tibuk, Saudi Arabia, where I lived continuously until I was about 21, but I am a Yemeni citizen. I was born in 1979. I was brought to Guantánamo when I was 22 and I am now 34 years old.

I want a chance to build a normal life the same way other people build their lives. I don’t need an easy life, and I don’t want a hard life. I just want an ordinary life.

I want my own family. I want to become a father, and I look forward to the day when I can hold my baby in my hands. I want to provide for my family and my child.

It may be hard, but I want to pursue my education. The first thing I want to do is take classes that will help me find a good job — like English, computer and carpentry classes. Since my days would be spent working or looking for a job, I would plan to take classes in the evening.

I also want to take care of my health. I have diabetes and related problems, including severe back pain and migraines.

I have these hopes because I want a stable life. I want a happy life for my children. I want to take good care of them and provide them with an education, because I know their future will depend on it. I want to give them a better life than I had. I lost both my parents when I was a young boy, and it was hard growing up without a mother or father. I want to be in a position where I can give my children the guidance that I did not have.

I have done my best to prepare for the life that I want. I have struggled on a daily basis here because of my health, and I have felt desperate and frustrated. You can imagine that when you feel like this, you do not always act in ways you want.

Sometimes my health condition has gotten worse and made me even more tense, anxious and depressed, and given me insomnia. It got so bad last year that I asked my attorney to write a letter to the camp administration and discuss with them my health and psychological condition. I wanted to be transferred to Camp Echo just so that I could keep to myself and be in a calm environment.

But I am trying. My lawyer and relative can tell you that I have requested many books because I want to educate and improve myself, and I spend most of my time reading. In my cell now, I have many books, including English and Spanish language books, a book about diabetes and high blood pressure, a book about the Dalai Lama, and the biography of Martin Luther King. I like to read biographies because I want to learn about other peoples’ lives and the circumstances they faced, and how they were able to overcome their difficulties and move on with their lives. I want to learn how they were able to learn positive lessons from their difficulties, and how they were able to reach their goals in life without looking at the past. I hope to have the same strength and patience to overcome my difficulties.

Given a choice, I will build the life that I imagine in a new country — maybe Qatar, or countries in Europe, Latin America, or Asia that may be willing to take me. When I think of freedom, I think of a new country — a place where I can have my own independent life, where there are opportunities, where the security situation is better, and where education is important. I thought of Qatar because it is an Arab country, so it would be familiar, but also because its economy is strong, its security situation is stable, it has job opportunities, and it can provide good medical treatment for my conditions. It is a modern country with freedoms, where I would be able to live my life as an equal person.

I want to settle in a third country. If I am transferred to such a place, I can promise you that I would not try to go back to Saudi Arabia or go to Yemen, where I have never even been or lived.

But I am willing to go to any country that the government decides is an appropriate option for me. For the chance to build this new life, I will accept security measures that other transferred detainees have been subject to. I will also participate in a rehabilitation program.

For years, I have said these things about my hopes for my life to everyone who has asked. I have said it before and I will say it again — I want to build a new future for myself.

I can’t change the past, and I can’t control what other people do or what goes on in a given country. But I can control my own actions. For years I have talked about what my hopes are for the future and what my decisions would be. I have struggled through the effects of my diabetes to try to improve myself, to show that these are not simply words. I have a bright vision of my future. It is all I think about. I am asking for the chance to make my vision a reality.

The post Review Board Approves ‘Forever Prisoner’ Ghaleb Al-Bihani For Release From Guantánamo, But Also Approves Ongoing Detention Of Salem Bin Kanad – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Paracels: Does China Have ‘Undisputed Sovereignty’? – Analysis

0
0

By Nguyen Hung Son

The month’long “oil rig” crisis in the South China Sea has had the world seized by daily footage of clashes and confrontation between Chinese and Vietnamese vessels. The crisis began when China sent its biggest oil rig into water near the Paracels where Vietnam has claimed as its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf.

Many countries have expressed concern over what they see as China’s unilateral attempt to change the status quo in the South China Sea. US President Barrack Obama, in his speech to the West Point’s Graduation Ceremony, even referred to the incident as an act of aggression in the South China Sea. The ASEAN Foreign Ministers, in their meeting prior to the ASEAN Summit in Nay Pi Daw last month saw the new development as a cause of serious concern to regional peace and stability. China, however, dismisses these criticisms and insists it is conducting regular operations in China’s sovereign water.

One of the key problems is the sovereignty dispute over the Paracels. China argues that it has indisputable sovereignty over the Paracels, a claim which Vietnam sternly dismisses. Vietnam insists it has established title to the Paracels since the 16-17th century when no country owned the islands. Since then Vietnam has continually and effectively exercised its sovereignty over the islands until China illegally took them by force in 1974. Vietnam dismisses China’s claim of sovereignty over the Paracels because it considers the activities of private Chinese individuals, who China claims to have discovered the islands or who might have been aware of the islands for a long time, were insufficient to establish China’s ownership over the islands under international law. Unlike the Vietnamese State which has shown interests and continuous efforts in establishing jurisdiction over the islands since the 16th century, the Chinese State showed no evidence of wanting to take the islands into possession throughout its long history. No official Chinese historical book or map recorded the Paracels or the Spratlys as Chinese territory up until the mid 20th century. In all Chinese official documents and maps, the southern most point of China’s territory never exceeded Hainan Island.

The reason for China’s lack of interests in acquiring territories at sea might have been deeply embedded in China’s history and culture. China had long been a massive land power that did not look at the sea favorably and did not see any need for tiny territories at sea. For thousands of years, China always viewed the sea as a source of piracy and insecurity. Hence, many dynasties in China, as late and the Ming and the Qing, continued to ban maritime activities. The well known Haijin policy prohibited maritime shipping and encouraged people to be inward looking. A radical Haijin law during the Minh dynasty even required every coastal citizens to move 40 miles inland, emptying the coast line. Those who ventured out to the sea were charged with treason against the state and the Emperor.

China often points to a statement made by the late Prime Minister of Vietnam, Pham Van Dong, in 1958 as proof of Vietnam’s acquiescence to China’s sovereignty over the Paracels. However, Vietnam has rejected the allegation pointing to the fact that the statement made no reference to the Paracels and Spratlys. It was merely an executive branch document ensuring the Chinese government that the Democratic Republic of Vietnam’s (DRV) government agencies would respect the 12 nautical miles breath of China’s territorial sea, and that the statement did not deal with sovereignty issue.

It should be noted that China, as an active contributor to the 1954 Geneva Accord, was well aware at that time that the Paracels were under the administration of the Republic of Vietnam according to the signed Accord, not the Democratic Republic of Vietnam represented by Pham Van Dong. In its historical context, the statement made by Pham Van Dong was an act of support of the DRV to the attempt of its ally to extend its security parameters from 3 miles to 12 miles in face of eminent threats from the 7th Pacific fleet of the United States encroaching upon China’s coastline in defense of Taiwan.

Neither did Vietnam agree with the claim that China’s sovereignty over the Paracels received international recognition. At the San Francisco Conference of 1951, in response to the Soviet Union delegation’s request to revise the text of the Treaty to recognise the islands group of Paracels and Spratlys as the People’s Republic of China’s territories, 48 out of 51 delegations voted decisively against the idea. Until today, there has been no official record of public recognition of China’s sovereignty over the Paracels by any country.

On the contrary, Vietnam sees that many countries have directly or indirectly reminded China that the Paracels do not belong to China.

Most recently, on 16 May 2014 the US State Department said that sovereignty over the Paracels is disputed. The statement by the ASEAN Foreign Ministers expressing serious concerns over the on-going China’s oil rig incident issued on 10 May 2014 showed that ASEAN did not view this incident as a regular activity within China’s indisputed sovereign waters as China would like to think.

China, therefore, should admit that sovereignty over the Paracels is disputed and withdraw its oil rig from its current location because any drilling that causes permanent change to the seabed in the disputed water is not allowed under international law.

Dr. Nguyen Hung Son is a researcher at the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam. The views expressed are the author’s own.

The post The Paracels: Does China Have ‘Undisputed Sovereignty’? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Indian Mujahideen Arrests: Lessons Learnt And Future Directions – Analysis

0
0

By Husanjot Chahal and Pushpita Das

Just a few days before the swearing-in ceremony of India’s newly elected Prime Minister, four Indian Mujahideen (IM) operatives were arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in Jharkhand. These arrests claim to have unraveled the entire conspiracy behind the Bodh Gaya (July 7, 2013) and Patna (October 27, 2013) blasts. The four arrested include Numan and Taufiq Ansari, Mojibullah and importantly the key IM operative Haider Ali, alias ‘Black Beauty’. Ali – the main accuse in the two blasts – was reportedly recruiting youth in Jharkhand, Bihar and UP before he was arrested. He is, allegedly, the principal link between the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and the IM, and is therefore considered an important catch after arrests of prominent IM operatives like Tehseen Akhtar alias Monu and Waqas in March 2014, and Yasin Bhatkal along with aide Asadullah Akhtar in August 2013.

These arrests have been a great success for the Indian Intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Their sustained efforts in analyzing the modus operandi and establishing links to secure intelligence breakthroughs played an important role in initiating these successes. Consecutive arrests of key IM operatives helped in attaining information and locations of the rest and the security agencies bear credence for acting quickly to nab the others. Significant cooperation from the international community in the form of deportations of important catches, willingness to share information and other counterterror initiatives, also played an important part in aiding these successes.

While the success of these arrests has come as a major breakthrough in the fight against terrorism, there are a few causes of concern that needs to be addressed. To begin with, despite repeated emphasis on ensuring synergy between the central agencies and state police forces to fight terrorism, on ground coordination between these agencies remains quite dismal. This lack of coordination is manifested by inter-agency competition, confusions over operational jurisdictions and disputes over investigations and custodies of the operatives. For example, the NIA and Delhi Police have been engaged in a series of turf wars over the investigation of terror cases and custodies of operatives – be it a brawl inside the Delhi High Court for the custody of IM operatives Tehseen Akhtar and Waqas, or a two year court case over confusions in probing the Syed Maqbool and Imran Khan case. Along with this, the fight against terrorism has been hindered by the tenuous relationship between the Centre and the States, highlighted by instances where the State has shown reluctance to handover terror cases to the Central agencies. The denial of Central government’s offer to order a NIA probe into the train blasts at the Chennai Central railway station by the Tamil Nadu government, being one recent example.

It is largely believed that intelligence is vital for any fight against terrorism. Likewise, the role of the Indian Intelligence agencies has been significant in the continuous successes against IM; however it is not without its shortcomings. It has been generally observed that intelligence sharing among the agencies at the ground level has not been optimum/effective. Allegedly, sharing of intelligence, particularly in organizations such as the Subsidiary Multi Agency Centres (SMAC), has become a paper contribution exercise instead of a platform where agencies share daily information. There is also a lack of a mechanism to filter any poor or inaccurate information that gets integrated in these Centres and subsequently passed on to all agencies. This aspect is problematic since it leads to the creation of a faulty information base.

Therefore, a serious effort to improve inter-agency coordination and cooperation along with a removal of Centre State differences is the primary need. Perhaps, establishment of a federal anti-terror agency, akin to the National Counterterrorism Centre (NCTC), and fully operationalizing the National Intelligence Grid (NatGrid) could be a good start.

Where organizational reforms might prove to be of great importance in ensuring synergy to counter IM’s existing terror structures, reforms in the social sphere would be useful in curtailing the revival of these terror structures in India. The recent arrests of key operatives have created a crucial void in the operational leadership of Indian Mujahideen. It is believed that whenever an organization is in crisis, significant efforts have made by its leaders to revive it. Likewise, it is feared that efforts will be made to revive IM, broadly through a combination of internal and external factors.

Internally, this could be done through a focus on radicalization aiming to renew the indigenous cadres and boost group resilience. This process of radicalization would, most likely, involve – (a) tapping potential individuals or groups dissatisfied with the socio-political context in which they live, (b) translating their real or perceived grievances into extreme ideas, (c) consolidating their views via indoctrination, propaganda, brainwashing, etc., (d) presenting the enterprise as representing an honourable and prestigious response, (e) motivating them to commit acts of terror, and (e) using ideology to reduce moral inhibitors and justify course of action, etc.

To counter such efforts, the government should focus on a novel de-radicalization programme to ensure that the numbers of IM’s homegrown operatives do not rise. An important point to bear in mind is that contrary to the existing narrative of radicalization that charges the poor and economically backward classes as the major constituents of terror organizations, most arrested IM operatives are young, educated, middle-class individuals with a technical know-how. Thus, it would be important to investigate as to why these educated youth are increasingly getting drawn towards terrorism. Maybe the answer to this is the effectiveness of propaganda by the terror ideologues, frustration pushing identity assertion among the Muslim youth, etc. The government should take steps to examine such factors and also conduct careful analysis of increasing activities/alignments of IM operatives with existing terror structures and crime syndicates. For that matter, analyzing the network of front organizations linked to the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) could be an effective counter-measure.

Further it would be right to say that although for the time being, IM’s operational capacities in India have suffered a setback, however, the real masterminds still thrive. Most of them are said to be operating from Pakistan. As noted above, the efforts to keep the terror architecture indigenous in character would focus attention on recruitments within India; however, these indigenous troops are usually complemented by a set of trained cadres from Pakistan, which has been the case so far. The government should significantly focus on intelligence to keep track of these trainers and also build greater cooperation with regional countries. In addition to strengthening synergism among the internal and external Intelligence agencies, creating inter-agency task forces with specific objectives will help in bringing out a clearer picture.

In conclusion, these recent arrests have led to a belief in some quarters that it is the end of IM in India. Such beliefs are at best naïve given that the top leaders are still safe in Pakistan. The government should focus on greater inter-agency cooperation and strengthen defenses to a threat that is aiming to rebuild using resources both within and abroad. This could be achieved by: (a) building structures, such as NCTC, to improve coordination among central and state law enforcement organizations as well as internal and external intelligence agencies, and (b) initiating a new de-radicalisation programme along with a careful monitoring of IM’s linkages. Unless the necessary reforms – both in the administrative and the social sphere – are made, the vicious circle of terrorism will perpetuate in the country.

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India.

Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://idsa.in/idsacomments/IndianMujahideenArrests_pdas_060614

The post Indian Mujahideen Arrests: Lessons Learnt And Future Directions – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Sri Lanka’s National Security – Analysis

0
0

By Gotobhaya Rajapaksa

Sri Lanka is one of the most peaceful and stable countries in the world today. Its citizens enjoy the benefits of peace and have complete freedom and countless opportunities to build better futures for themselves. At the same time, Sri Lanka faces potential threats from various sources. Guarding against these threats and ensuring the safety of the nation is the first duty of the government, because national security is the foundation of freedom and prosperity. As such, the government needs to be fully aware of all the issues that impact the country in areas such as defense, foreign policy, economic affairs and internal law and order. It must formulate a comprehensive national security strategy to deal with them.

A viable national security strategy must constantly align ends with means, goals with resources, and objectives with the tools required to accomplish them. The strategy needs to be aligned with the aspirations of the people, and it must have public support. Ideally, if comprehensive security is to be ensured, it requires the achievement of national cohesion, political and economic stability, the elimination of terrorism, the countering of extremism, and the formulation of effective responses to external challenges. The government must make every effort to keep aware of a continually changing situation and take appropriate action in response to new developments and challenges. It is only then that the safety of the nation can be assured.

This article on Sri Lanka’s national security concerns examines the following areas:

  • Sri Lanka’s overall national security context;
  • The primary threats to Sri Lanka’s national security at present; and,
  • The strategies being formulated in response to these threats.

The Context of National Security in Sri Lanka

In the early years of independence, national security did not need to be a primary concern of the government of Ceylon. As an independent dominion of Great Britain, and as a non-aligned nation with excellent relationships within and outside the region, Ceylon faced few pressing threats. As a result, the attention given to national security was minimal, as was the emphasis placed on the country’s defense apparatus. The military was largely ceremonial. It only had to assist the government on occasions when there were issues such as public sector work stoppages or riots. The need to strengthen law enforcement and the armed forces to protect the nation against internal or external threats was not seen as a pressing concern. The attempted coup d’état in 1962 further reduced the attention given to the defense apparatus by the government.

Fearing that a strong military would be a threat to democracy, as had been the case in some neighboring countries during this period, funding for the armed forces was drastically reduced and recruitments curtailed.

Ceylon’s weak military was not in a good position to deal with the first major threat to its national security, which came as the 1971 Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) Insurrection (also known as the 1971 Revolt). Although investigations into JVP activities had been going on for some time, cutbacks to intelligence services, including the closure of the special branch of the police in 1970, had left the government largely unaware of the scale of the insurrection it was facing. The nation’s military was not up to the task. In response to the government’s appeals for help, India and Pakistan sent in troops to secure critical installations while essential equipment and ammunition was provided by Britain and the Soviet Union. Although the insurrection was successfully suppressed within a short time, it had many consequences. Perhaps the most crucial from a historical perspective was that national security became a much greater concern both for the government and for the general public. As Ceylon became Sri Lanka in 1972, upholding national security was one of its foremost priorities.

In the late 1970s, Sri Lanka saw the emergence of the greatest threat to its sovereignty in the form of the terrorism of the Tamil separatist groups in the North and East. As the conflict worsened in the early 1980s, particularly after the riots of 1983, the threat of terrorism loomed large not only in the North and East but throughout the country. The rise of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), and the likelihood of its attacks in public places fostered a deep insecurity amongst the people. There was significant loss of life and of property, and economic development foundered. Instability grew as arms and ammunition started to flow to criminal elements in the underworld. By the late 1980s, the second JVP insurrection caused the further deterioration of the security situation throughout Sri Lanka. The increasing instability and violence prompted more intrusive security measures.

As the terrorism situation worsened, there was also an increasing involvement of foreign powers and the international community in Sri Lanka’s internal affairs. During the early stages of the terrorist conflict, India trained LTTE cadre in training bases established in Tamil Nadu. Many of the leaders of other separatist groups also frequented that state. It is also important to note that several international non-governmental organizations that were based in the North and East first started to cooperate with the terrorist groups active in those areas during this period. In 1985, India facilitated talks between the government of Sri Lanka and the separatist groups; these talks were held in Thimpu, Bhutan. The talks collapsed due to the unrealistic demands made by the separatists. These demands would have gravely affected Sri Lanka’s sovereignty if granted, and the government had no choice but to refuse them. Fighting soon resumed. By this time, the conflict transformed into one between the state and the LTTE, which had used the ceasefire granted for the Thimpu talks to destroy rival separatist groups.

As the fighting gained momentum, the emphasis given to national security by the government also increased. A new ministerial position was created for national security. The military was also significantly strengthened, with larger recruitment drives, the acquisition of better assets, and improved training to counter the growing threats. With its improved capabilities, the military was able to make progress in fighting the terrorism of the LTTE. Changes were also made within the structure of the military. The need for a coordinated effort to combat terrorism led to the establishment of a joint operation command to coordinate the three armed services, police and intelligence services in counter-terrorism operations. The military used battle formations for the first time, and the national intelligence bureau to coordinate the intelligence services was established at a national level.

In 1987, the very successful Vadamarachchi Operation enabled the government to regain control of much of the North, leaving the LTTE on the brink of defeat. At this point, India intervened directly in the conflict by air dropping humanitarian relief supplies over Jaffna. This led to the abandonment of the Vadamarachchi Operation, and the signing of the Indo-Lanka Accord. An Indian Peacekeeping Force (IPKF) was introduced to the North of Sri Lanka, where it soon got embroiled in conflict with the LTTE. After more than two years of fighting, the IPKF withdrew in October 1990, and fighting resumed between the LTTE and government forces.

Although there were periodic attempts at peace talks, the intensity of the war grew during the 1990s and in the early 2000s, with several major battles being fought and much hardship suffered throughout the country. The military was strengthened significantly to deal with this threat. Specialized units such as the Commando Regiment and the Special Forces Regiment of the Army, as well as the Special Boat Squadron of the Navy were developed to deal with the increasing military challenge posed by the LTTE in the North and East.

In addition to its battles with the military, the LTTE also frequently carried out attacks against civilians throughout the country. Numerous bombings took place in public locations in Colombo, killing thousands. Hundreds more were massacred in vulnerable villages near LTTE dominated territory. Critical installations and economic targets such as the International Airport, Central Bank, and the Kolonnawa Oil Refinery were also ruthlessly attacked. In order to contain this very serious threat to national security, precautionary measures had to be greatly increased throughout the country. This led to the visible presence of soldiers on the streets, the widespread use of checkpoints, frequent cordon and search operations, and the constant upholding of the Emergency Regulations, which gave wide-ranging powers to the military and law enforcement agencies. The entire country was effectively on a war footing.

In 2002 the government signed a Ceasefire Agreement with the LTTE under Norwegian mediation. This launched the next major phase in the internationalization of Sri Lankan conflict. Norway was joined by the European Union, the United States, and Japan, which together comprised the four co-chairs of the Sri Lankan peace process. A Sri Lanka monitoring mission was also established, comprising members from Nordic countries, to supervise the implementation of the ceasefire agreement. Despite their presence, the LTTE continued to create instability in the country assassinating its key opponents including Hon. Lakshman Kadirgamar, the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, and carrying out periodic attacks against civilians.

In 2006 the LTTE provoked a humanitarian crisis by closing the vital Maavilaru Sluice Gate. This affected the right to water of thousands of households, and even affected national food security by preventing the flow of water to many thousands of acres of agricultural land. The government intervened with a limited operation to reopen the sluice gate, but was met with large-scale attacks by the LTTE on several fronts. This led to the widening of the military campaign into the humanitarian operation that ultimately freed Sri Lanka from terrorism.

During the ceasefire period, the LTTE had managed to strengthen its offensive capabilities significantly. It had approximately 30,000 cadres in its ranks and a vast arsenal of weapons and equipment that included heavy artillery, mortar, missiles, rocket propelled grenades, and light aircraft. Combating such an enemy that employed guerrilla tactics required the Sri Lankan Armed Forces to grow significantly.

Between the end of 2005 and the end of 2009, the number of army personnel grew from 120,000 to over 200,000; its nine divisions were increased to 20; its 44 brigades expanded to 71; and its 149 battalions increased to 284. The navy and the air force were also expanded significantly, and given tasks beyond their classic role. The upholding of security throughout the country also required the Police and Special Task Force to be strengthened, and the Civil Defense Force was revamped and significantly expanded.

Because of the internationalization of the Sri Lankan situation during previous decades, there was a great deal of foreign scrutiny on the progress of the humanitarian operation. By keeping Indian leaders constantly informed about what was happening on the ground, and by skillfully managing relationships with other nations, it was possible for Sri Lanka’s war effort to continue unimpeded.

Nevertheless, towards the end of the war in 2009, the foreign ministers of France and the United Kingdom arrived in Sri Lanka and attempted, without success, to intervene in the military campaign.

Efforts by external parties to end the humanitarian operation reflect the tremendous influence that the LTTE’s international network had on foreign capitals. Many in the international community willfully ignored the fact that the government of Sri Lanka is duty-bound to protect its citizens from the aggression of the LTTE terrorists. Even after the war ended and peace dawned in 2009, this bias against the government led to Sri Lanka being taken up at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Although the initial resolution against Sri Lanka was defeated that year, two more were sponsored by the United States in 2012 and 2013, and successfully passed.

Today Sri Lanka is a country enjoying the full benefits of peace, and it is engaged in a concerted push to accelerate its economic development and bring prosperity to its citizens. The country has much to catch up on. Three decades of conflict cost Sri Lanka countless opportunities for growth: foreign and local investment suffered due to fears about the war; tourists did not visit the country, and many of its best and brightest went overseas to build better futures for themselves. Countries such as Singapore, which was in a similar economic position to Sri Lanka when it reached independence in 1948, developed at a tremendous rate during this period. At least partially, this is because they did not have a major conflict with which to contend. Sri Lanka’s prospects, on the other hand, were greatly curtailed as a result of the war. This is why the biggest responsibility of the government of Sri Lanka, even in today’s post war situation, is to ensure the continued security of the country. Without security and stability, there will be no economic development.

Sri Lanka’s national security should be addressed in the context of its history, the realities of its present situation, and most critically from the perspective of the several responsibilities of the state. The state must ensure that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the nation is maintained, and that there are no threats to the safety of its population. Ensuring economic growth so that the people of the country can raise their living standard is also critical in order to prevent internal problems from recurring in the future. Creating a favorable international environment for Sri Lanka is similarly of the utmost importance in keeping adverse external influence at bay.

Securing the safety of Sri Lanka’s physical assets and safeguarding its democracy are also critical. Sri Lanka’s national security must be understood within a unified, single framework that integrates the nation’s defense, law and order, foreign policy and economic policy.

These four areas need to come together, creating a comprehensive national security strategy. This is essential if Sri Lanka is to consolidate its present peace and stability and fulfill its potential.

Present National Security Concerns

Sri Lanka today faces a range of security threats worthy of concern, including;

  • The possible re-emergence of terrorism
  • The emergence of other extremist groups
  • The worsening of ethnic divisions and communal violence
  • The challenges of maritime security and border control
  • The growth of organized crime
  • Foreign interference in domestic affairs
  • Non-traditional technology-driven threats, including social media.

In discussing terrorism, it is vitally important to appreciate the sheer scale of the problem that the government of Sri Lanka faced over the past three decades. Since the 1970s, the LTTE grew from a small organization of armed individuals to a large, sophisticated terrorist outfit with very advanced combat capabilities. At its height, the LTTE had more than 30,000 battle-hardened cadres; access to large stockpiles of modern armaments, ammunition and equipment; a sophisticated naval wing and a fledgling air wing. For a considerable period of the conflict, the LTTE was able to maintain the illusion of a functional state apparatus in the territories it dominated. It also had significant influence in foreign capitals as a result of its extensive international network. Defeating the LTTE required a concerted effort on the part of the Sri Lankan government. As a result of the unwavering leadership of His Excellency President Mahinda Rajapaksa, this task was achieved in May of 2009.

In the immediate aftermath of the war, there were a number of issues that needed immediate attention. First was the problem of nearly 300,000 internally displaced people who had been used as the LTTE’s human shield during the last phases of the war. Then there was the need to de-mine the North and East so that those areas would be safe for human habitation. This resulted in the recovery of hundreds of thousands of mines and improvised explosive devices laid by the LTTE during its retreat. Infrastructure development and reconstruction of those areas after years of neglect under the LTTE’s dominance was another significant challenge to be dealt with, after which it was possible to resettle the Internally displaced persons (IDPs) in their places of origin. One of the most important issues concerned the nearly twelve thousand surrendered LTTE cadres and four thousand detained cadres. The government took the bold step of trying to rehabilitate nearly all of them so that they could become productive citizens in the future. The vast majority of them have already been reintegrated with society.

Amongst other post war achievements has been the disarming of other armed groups that used to operate in the North and East, and the encouragement these groups have been given to contribute to society through democratic processes. The restrictions that used to be in force on movement, fishing, high-security zones, etc., have all been removed. Democracy has been completely restored, with free and fair elections taking place. Economic growth in the North and East has been truly remarkable in the recent past, and it is clear that normalcy has been restored to the people.

Despite all of these very positive developments, however, the threat of terrorism re-emerging persists. One of the main reasons for the LTTE’s success during its heyday was its extensive international network, which has been in operation for many decades. Following the ambush and massacre of 13 soldiers in the North by the LTTE in 1983, there was a major communal backlash against the Tamils in the rest of the country. As a result of the July 1983 riots, a large number of Tamil people left Sri Lanka and travelled to countries such as Canada, the United Kingdom, Malaysia and parts of Europe.

These countries granted asylum to the immigrants, and later granted many of them citizenship. As such, there is a large population of immigrant Sri Lankan Tamils dispersed throughout the world. A small minority of this population supports the LTTE even to this day.

Extremist elements within this community, together with LTTE agents and operatives, including trained terrorists who fled Sri Lanka at various times during the war, comprise the LTTE’s international network.

After the demise of Prabhakaran, the LTTE’s former procurement chief Kumaran Pathmanadan, better known as KP, took control over this network and indicated that it would continue to work for the separatist cause through peaceful means. However, a breakaway faction emerged almost immediately, led by Nediyawan, who wanted to continue Prabhakaran’s ideology of violence.

Nediyawan’s group was previously known as The Tamil Eelam People’s Assembly or The Tamil National Council and is now known as the Tamil Coordinating Committee. Based in Norway, this group has been working with other international groups to promote the LTTE’s separatist cause in many parts of the world. The Tamil Coordinating Committee has control over most of the assets of the LTTE’s international organization, including its media networks such as Tamil Net.

Following the arrest of KP in August 2009, Rudrakumaran took over the leadership of the main network and began working towards establishing a “government in exile.” This group now fashions itself as The Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE). In the guise of fighting for Tamil rights, its primary objective is to lobby foreign governments for the establishment of a separate state in the North and East of Sri Lanka. The so-called “Transnational Government” has some twenty “Ministers” and “Deputy Ministers,” and was formed with assistance of an advisory committee comprising prominent pro LTTE activists, including foreigners who have been helping the LTTE for many years. There has recently been a revolt within the TGTE where one third of its members loyal to Nediyawan went against the leadership of Rudrakumaran because they wished to engage in more radical action.

Another prominent LTTE-linked group emerged out of the British Tamils Association (BTA), which was active since 2001 in supporting the terrorism of the LTTE in Sri Lanka. In 2006, the leader of the BTA, Arunachalam Krishanthakumar, alias Shanthan, was investigated on suspicion of supporting terrorist activities. As a result of these suspicions about the BTA, the British Tamils Forum (BTF) was formed in 2006 to carry on the same activities in a new guise. The BTF acted as an umbrella organization that mustered support from the immigrant Tamil community and local British politicians for dividing Sri Lanka. With Shanthan’s arrest by British authorities in June 2007 for providing material support to terrorism and his conviction in April 2009, as well as the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009, the role played by the BTF needed to be changed to suit the post-war environment.

As a result of this, the Global Tamils Forum (GTF) emerged in February 2010, with many of the same members as the BTF. The head of the GTF is the so-called Father Emmanuel, a Priest who was once hailed by Prabhakaran as “a freedom fighter who has given leadership to a movement committed to setting up the homeland to Tamil Eelam.” Father Emmanuel has been engaged in a propaganda campaign against Sri Lanka for many years, targeting Tamil expatriates, foreign governments and international organizations. He is known to have visited LTTE strongholds in Sri Lanka in mid-2000 to conduct training for selected youth who were earmarked to take up overseas appointments for fundraising and propaganda for the LTTE.

Under Father Emmanuel’s guidance, the GTF has successfully influenced a number of politicians from various political parties in European countries as well as the United States, Australia, Canada, and India to support the separatist cause. In addition, the GTF has courted officials within international organizations such as the United Nations, the European Union and various international non-governmental organizations. Part of the success of the GTF in these activities can be attributed to the influential pro-LTTE foreigners’ involvement in it.

Yet another group that is active internationally in supporting the separatist cause is the LTTE Headquarter Group, which is based in France and headed by Vinayagam, a senior intelligence cadre who managed to escape during the final stages of the war in Sri Lanka. This group is known to engage in human smuggling, with some of its past operations including the sending of the “Sun Sea” and “Ocean Lady” vessels from South East Asia to Canada in 2009 and 2010. The members of this group generally maintain a low profile and their movements are kept to a minimum as most of them have been issued Red Notices by Interpol for their involvement in criminal activities. They also keep their distance from both Nediyawan’s and Rudrakumaran’s groups, but still maintain links with the GTF.

All of the LTTE-linked groups are coordinated by the GTF and united by one overarching objective. Their unwavering intent is the division of Sri Lanka and the establishment of a separate state for Tamil Eelam. There are several strategies through which they will try to achieve their objective. These include: the winning of international opinion for the separatist cause; increasing international pressure on Sri Lanka in various areas including pushing for international investigations into war crimes and claims of genocide, and by encouraging international monitoring of the national
reconciliation process; undermining all efforts of the democratically elected government of Sri Lanka to create a better future for its citizens through reconciliation and economic development; and continuing to push for the resumption of conflict through reorganizing local pro-LTTE elements within Sri Lanka.

The efforts of these LTTE-linked groups have been successful to a limited extent in that despite the war having ended four years ago, the internal affairs of Sri Lanka remain at the forefront of the UNHRC’s sessions as well as at the top of the agenda of several prominent international NGOs. It has to be noted that many of those who create this pressure by claiming to be human rights activists and victims of state repression are actually trained LTTE cadres and operatives now fully engaged in propaganda activities. It is very important to understand that their attempts to pressure the government through international bodies such as the UNHRC and non-state actors, such as international NGOs, strengthen those who work against Sri Lanka’s interests.

In this context it must be further realized that there are groups even within the democratic mainstream in Sri Lanka that obtain funding from the LTTE’s international network and pro-LTTE elements overseas, which more or less openly talk about achieving the very same objectives that the LTTE had. Though they appear to have a democratic face, their actions and remarks clearly show that the extremist separatist ideology has not yet disappeared. Their ultimate objective is achieving the division of Sri Lanka. As a result of their actions and statements, it is very much a possibility that certain radical elements will feel empowered to once again attempt to take up arms in the name of separation. This is a major national security threat that needs to be taken with the utmost seriousness.
In addition to the threat of terrorism, Sri Lanka also faces a potential threat from other extremist groups. These are the remnants of the radical groups that were involved in previous insurgencies. Some of these groups are trying to reorganize within Sri Lanka and mobilize people to once again take up their extreme left wing causes. There is information that some of these groups have started to establish ties to LTTE-linked agents to create further problems in Sri Lanka. Some of their activities include radicalizing students and encouraging them to take to the streets in various protests. Though such activities are still in their early stages, they pose another serious national security concern that must remain a consideration.

Another growing concern in the post-war environment is the increasing communalism amongst ethnic groups, which, if left unaddressed, could result in the rise of ethnic tensions in the future.

During the period of the war, it was not only the Sinhalese and Tamil communities that were affected by the terrorist separatism of the LTTE, but also the Muslims. After the LTTE started engaging in ethnic cleansing in the North in the early 1980s, it expelled the Sinhalese community from Jaffna and soon after turned its attention to the Muslims. Several massacres were carried out at Mosques in the East, and in October 1990, the LTTE expelled more than 75,000 Muslim residents from the North. This was followed by further brutal attacks on Muslims in vulnerable villages near LTTE dominated territory. In this environment, the Muslims also started to organize for their own protection against the LTTE. Since the LTTE’s defeat, some of these groups have begun to engage in activities that stem far beyond self-protection. There is information that some of these groups have even tried to link up with global Islamic terrorist organizations. This is a situation that requires careful monitoring.

On a broader scale, it also must be acknowledged that one of the consequences of the terrorist conflict Sri Lanka endured for thirty years has been the increased insularity of ethnic groups. Rather than identifying themselves on the basis of nationality, the communities of Sri Lanka have begun to identify themselves on the basis of their ethnicity or their religion. Instead of calling themselves Sri Lankan, they identify themselves as Sinhalese or Tamils or Muslims or Buddhists or Christians. This fragmentation of Sri Lankan identity is most unfortunate, because activists within these communal groups seek minority rights or ethnic rights rather than working within the framework of a common national identity.

The cross-border links that can arise as a result of such insular ethnic or religious identification are also very troublesome. It is clear that there are some in the Tamil community who identify themselves more with the Tamil community of Tamil Nadu than with their fellow Sri Lankans. This has been encouraged by some parties overseas who wish to promote the idea of a greater Tamil Nation. Similarly, it has been observed that there are some foreign groups that wish to encourage Sri Lankan Muslims to identify themselves more with the global Muslim community, thereby reducing their integration within Sri Lanka. This trend has been particularly prevalent in the post-September 11 world in which a tendency among certain groups to try and influence the global Muslim community toward, religious extremism has become visible.

The increasing insularity and cohesion amongst minority ethnic groups has also led to the emergence of hard line groups from the majority community: the popularity of certain political groups and movements can be viewed as being largely a response to this trend.

In turn, the emergence of hard line groups in the majority community causes further tensions amongst other communities, which leads to a vicious cycle of greater fragmentation of the Sri Lankan identity. Sri Lanka has had numerous divisions in the past that ultimately led to conflict, making this a very serious national security concern at the present moment. Sri Lanka must learn the lessons of its past, and ensure that history is not repeated.

The maintenance of maritime security is another serious national security concern for Sri Lanka. In the past, the only maritime security issues that had to be dealt with were the illegal movement of Indians into Sri Lanka and the smuggling that took place between Sri Lanka and South India. Preventing these threats was one of the foremost duties of the military in the 1950s and the 1960s.

However, with the evolution of the LTTE and other terrorist groups in the 1970s and beyond, maritime security imposed greater challenges.

For example, it is a well-known fact that the LTTE acquired a vast arsenal of weapons and equipment including artillery, missiles, mortars, armored vehicles and even light aircraft. None of these items was produced in Sri Lanka, but were brought into Sri Lanka by sea. In addition to military supplies, the LTTE’s cadres were initially trained at bases in Tamil Nadu. Given the recent activities of LTTE-linked organizations outside Sri Lanka and particularly in Tamil Nadu, this is very much a current threat.

The organized trafficking of persons or human smuggling is another significant maritime security issue. Organized groups, some of which are connected to LTTE-linked organizations, have lured many people seeking better economic prospects into this lucrative, illegal operation. In 2013 alone, more than 440 people have attempted to leave Sri Lanka illegally. Having sold their properties and handed over all their wealth to the operators of these schemes, the victims of human trafficking find themselves trapped on board unsafe vessels along with hundreds of others, travelling to countries that will most often refuse them entry. In order to make a compelling case for their acceptance by border control authorities abroad, such economic refugees often concoct stories about being persecuted in Sri Lanka, thereby damaging the country’s reputation. Furthermore, the mechanisms of human trafficking have enabled trained terrorists to escape justice in Sri Lanka and flee abroad to safe havens, from which they may once again attempt to cause problems to the country through other means.

A further consideration with regard to maritime security is the protection of our maritime assets. One of the problems Sri Lanka has faced in the maritime domain after the defeat of the LTTE has been the increasing incidence of pirate fishing in Sri Lankan waters by South Indian fishermen. These fishermen use illegal practices such as bottom trawling to maximize their catch. This causes serious damage to the healthy fish stocks in Sri Lankan waters, and also adversely affects the livelihoods of native fishermen. These fishing boats that illegally enter Sri Lankan waters have also been known to engage in other criminal activities including drug smuggling.

Protecting Sri Lanka’s waters, both from these fishermen and others who might seek to exploit its other oceanic resources, including oil and gas, will be one of the key maritime security challenges for Sri Lanka in the future.

Somewhat further afield, the threat of international piracy is also a maritime threat to Sri Lanka. Many of the world’s most important sea-lanes of are located in close proximity to Sri Lanka, and both the newly built Hambantota Port and the Colombo Port are ideally situated to service the hundreds of vessels that cross these lanes on a daily basis. The reach and sophistication of the pirates originating mostly from East Africa has been increasing in recent years. This factor undermines the security of these sea-lanes and could pose a serious problem to shipping in the region in the future. This will have an impact on the country’s economic security as well, and is therefore another challenge that needs to be monitored.

With regard to border security, one of the concerns Sri Lanka has is the possibility of the country being used as a transit point for transnational crime. The arrest of certain elements connected with extremist regional terrorist groups in India and Pakistan has shown that they have used Sri Lanka as a transit point from which to coordinate their activities. Some, who are known to have been temporarily sheltered in Sri Lanka after claiming refugee status in the west, are known criminals who engaged in illegal activities such as credit card fraud, drug smuggling and counterfeit currency printing abroad.

Organized crime in Sri Lanka is another issue that needs to be addressed. As a result of the rise of terrorism and the insurrections Sri Lanka experienced over the last forty years, and the response required from the state, a considerable amount of arms and ammunition inadvertently fell into the hands of criminals. Organized criminal activities include drug-trafficking, armed robberies, kidnappings for ransom and financial frauds. There are also groups that engage in illegal land seizures.

In today’s environment, the possibility of foreign interference in Sri Lanka’s internal affairs remains a significant national security concern. With the involvement of countries like India, Norway, and the United States in Sri Lanka as a result of the recently ended conflict, matters relating to this country’s internal affairs have gained increased visibility within the international community. India, in particular, is very sensitive to what is going on in Sri Lanka because of the large Tamil population in its influential southern state of Tamil Nadu. Especially during the elections cycle, Sri Lanka figures large in Indian politics. In the recent past, the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu even attempted to pressure the Indian government into opposing Sri Lanka internationally. This is a serious threat to Sri Lanka’s security, and perhaps even its sovereignty.

Furthermore, as a result of the rapid economic and military development of countries like India and China in recent decades, the entire Asian region has become increasingly important in global affairs. Sri Lanka’s important geostrategic position within the Indian Ocean region has brought it increasing attention. It is conceivable some western powers might wish to have a Sri Lankan government that is closely aligned with their interests, and will seek to influence Sri Lanka’s destiny so that it cannot pursue the independent course it is presently following.

A third factor that has led to Sri Lanka’s increasing importance in the international arena involves regional power politics. Tensions between India and Pakistan and between India and China are particularly sensitive in this regard. With China emerging as a world economic leader, there is a widespread belief that India will seek to align itself with the others similarly concerned at China’s ascendancy. The likelihood of the United States showing more interest in the region and aligning more with India is a factor that may affect Sri Lanka. Further, its establishment of a base in the Maldives is also changing the complexion of the region. These are developments that need to be monitored from the point of view of Sri Lanka’s national security.

The final threat to Sri Lanka’s national security is the emergence of new technology-driven media, including social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and other websites. We have seen the potential for these new media to destabilize nations and affect serious change in the case of countries like Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, etc. Although the likelihood of events such as the Arab spring transpiring in Sri Lanka is minimal, because it is a democratic nation with an extremely popular political leadership that enjoys a very large electoral majority, this is still another threat that needs to be monitored.

Particularly due to increasing internet penetration and computer literacy in Sri Lanka, many youth are familiar with social media; they use them to gather information as well as to propagate ideas. Those with vested interests can exploit social media, causing problems in Sri Lanka or any other country, by circulating certain ideologies online and mobilizing and organizing people. This can be done with a minimal physical presence, and therefore constitutes a threat that is difficult to contain through the traditional tools of national defense.

National Security Response

The foregoing threat assessment makes clear that even in the present post-war situation, national security remains very much a justified concern for the government of Sri Lanka. In addressing the challenges discussed above and developing a comprehensive national security strategy, it is important for the government to take a holistic view and incorporate many of its elements into a single policy framework.

In terms of internal security, the best response to most of the threats that we face is the development of the intelligence services. Sri Lanka has two primary intelligence arms; the State Intelligence Service and the Defense Intelligence, which comprises the Directorate of Military Intelligence, Directorate of Naval Intelligence, and Air Intelligence. In addition, the police maintain the Special Branch, while the Special Task Force also has its own intelligence division. Furthermore, the Terrorist Investigation Department and Criminal Investigation Department of the police also work closely with the other intelligence agencies on matters relating to national security.

In the past, the lack of strength and coordination amongst these various intelligence services was a serious handicap. It is essential that they work together under a unified command structure in order to improve coordination and enhance capabilities. Towards this end, the present government has brought these intelligence services under the Chief of National Intelligence, who reports directly to the Secretary to the Ministry of Defense. This has streamlined coordination and improved cooperation amongst the intelligence agencies.

Another important development in this regard has been the augmenting of resources allocated for the intelligence function.

After the war, the number of military intelligence units has been increased and each security force headquarters now has its own intelligence unit. The intelligence personnel are being provided increased training in order to enhance their capabilities and capacities, and as Sri Lanka moves forward, it is hoped that the intelligence agencies will be able to keep track of and contain domestic national security concerns.

Although Sri Lanka today has no immediate requirement for offensive military operations, it is of the utmost importance that security measures not be relaxed. The military is not engaged in law enforcement activities, and their visible presence has been greatly reduced. Still it is essential that the military remain in strategic locations throughout Sri Lanka. Particularly in the North and East, where we know that there are still potential threats to national security, it is essential to have a significant, though unobtrusive, military presence. Some recent efforts of international actors to reorganize pro-LTTE elements in the North underscore the need for this. For example, the recent arrest of some youth in Jaffna and Chennai, who had been recruited by a Chennai based LTTE-linked group funded by the LTTE’s Europe-based network, shows the utmost need to remain vigilant in this regard.

It must also be underscored that as a sovereign nation, Sri Lanka has every right to place its security elements in any part of the country it so chooses. While some in the international community talk about the so- called militarization of the North and East, and some political parties in Sri Lanka decry the presence of the military in these areas, it must also be understood that the people of the North and East mostly have a very cordial relationship with the military. Since the end of the war, the military has been involved in a great deal of reconstruction work, and has also supported the local people in resuming their livelihoods. They have provided equipment and material for agriculture, fishing and various types of assistance for small business development. The increased attention given to civil-military affairs also helps national security because it helps the armed forces win the hearts and minds of the people in the former conflict areas.

With regard to the work of the defense services in the post-war environment, it is also essential to expand the responsibilities of the navy and the coast guard. The protection of Sri Lanka’s maritime borders is of the utmost importance, and there is a great deal of responsibility on these two institutions to safeguard our seas. Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) must be protected. The navy needs more assets in order to patrol effectively. It also requires greater surveillance capabilities through augmenting its radars and adding a new air surveillance capability. The air force, too, needs to improve its capabilities with regard to surveillance operations.

Regarding internal security the national identity system has been significantly improved. Because it was previously a manual, paper-based system, criminal and terrorist elements could very easily obtain forged identity cards. This enabled terrorists to operate throughout Sri Lanka under various names and aliases; this is why the threat of suicide bombings and other attacks in the rest of Sri Lanka was such a pressing problem during the war period. To address this critical weakness, the Registrar of Persons Department was brought under the Ministry of Defense and Urban Development, and a new identity card system that uses biometric information will soon be introduced. Similarly, the problem of people coming into Sri Lanka and staying illegally under false pretenses will be addressed through the introduction of a proper border control system in which biometric information will be incorporated into the passport and international standards used for identity verification.

Above all enhancing domestic security will require national reconciliation and the forging of a common Sri Lankan identity.

Economic development is an absolute necessity in this regard. The fact remains that unless people enjoy a reasonable standard of living, peace and reconciliation are very difficult to achieve. This is why the government has spared no expense or effort to develop infrastructure and build up the North and East. This will enable the benefits of peace to flow down to the people of those areas. When people know that they have the opportunity to achieve a better future for themselves, it is highly unlikely that they will waste their time on violent ideologies. The achievement of economic development and national reconciliation are therefore two of the key areas of focus for the government in the present national context.

Finally, it is of the utmost importance that Sri Lanka maintain cordial relationships with its allies. Despite the present pressure from Tamil Nadu, it is essential to maintain a strong and healthy relationship with India. Relations with the many countries that helped Sri Lanka in the past, both in economic terms and political terms, should be strengthened further through skillful diplomacy and further development of mutual ties. It is essential to continue to strengthen the existing cordial relationships with powerful nations such as China and Russia, which have permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council. In this overall context, it is very important that the foreign policy of Sri Lanka is realistic.

Ultimately, the best way to ensure that Sri Lanka remains safe and strong in the future is for its citizens to put aside the differences of the past, unite as Sri Lankans, and work toward a better future for themselves and their fellow people.

About the author:
The Hon. Gotabhaya Rajapaksa assumed duties as Sri Lanka’s Secretary to the Ministry of Defense in November 2005 and continues in that role through the present.

Source:
This article was originally published in the PRISM Volume 4, Issue 4, pages 139-155 (PDF), which is published by the National Defense University.

The post Sri Lanka’s National Security – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Sri Lanka: Balance In Motion? – OpEd

0
0

With the historic election of the world’s biggest democracy ushering a new era of leadership and a break in the Nehru – Gandhi dynasty, incumbent Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi invited the President Mahinda Rajapaksa to his the swearing-in ceremony on 26 May to which the latter graciously accepted the invitation. This gesture was preceded a few days before by the prompt courtesy extended by President Rajapaksa hot on the heels of Modi’s resounding election victory for good wishes and a reassurance of strengthened bilateral relations between India and Sri Lanka. “I take this opportunity to congratulate the Indian people on the conclusion of a successful and peaceful general election,” President Rajapaksa said, in an exclusive statement released to The Hindu by his office on Friday. “India and Sri Lanka have always shared good relations, and I look forward to working closely with the new administration,” he said in the statement. He also invited Mr. Modi on a state visit, according to a tweet from President Rajapaksa’s official twitter account.

In the same week, President Rajapaksa concluded bilateral talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping on 22 May while in Shanghai for the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia today. The official communique from the President’s office noted that the discussions between President Rajapaksa and President Xi touched on ‘new areas of cooperation including maritime cooperation’ while discussing progress of ongoing collaborative projects. Notably, President Xi noted that Sri Lanka is an important partner and that he was happy that the China-Sri Lanka relationship had been elevated to one of “strategic cooperation” during the President’s last visit to China in May 2013.

Meanwhile, President Mahinda Rajapaksa had expressed his gratitude towards the assistance granted by China for development activities and extended an invitation to President Xi to visit Sri Lanka, noting that the last visit by a Chinese Head of State to Sri Lanka was in 1986. The response was positive with President Xi intimating that he will accord priority towards a visit to Sri Lanka as soon as possible.

The timing of the two invitations may be coincidental but the overtures and restatements of strengthened bilateral ties with the two countries cannot be. Therein becomes apparent what should be: The importance to Sri Lanka of both emerging giants in Asia, which became evident within the space of one week.

The Asian Century

Against the larger global context, established is the fact that two key players in a potential Asian Century are India and China, both of which are gaining increasing relevance to Sri Lanka‘s positioning both nationally and internationally. Sri Lanka too is keenly aware of the importance of both countries in the region and seems to want to maintain a careful balance of the respective interests.

India

The economic footprint of two emerging Asian giants in post-war Sri Lanka has been established.

India‘s assistance package in post-war Sri Lanka began with an assistance package of approximately US$ 110 million for immediate relief and resettlement; and thereafter an initiative in the form of construction of 50,000 houses for Internally Displaced Persons under a grant; a US $800 million credit line for reconstruction of Northern Railway lines; a Southern Railway Project under another concessional credit line of US$ 167.4 million; and among others, assistance to fishing communities; setting up of vocational training centres; assistance to war affected women through training and employment generation projects; and revival of agriculture through provision of tractors, seeds and agricultural implements.

The Indian position on Sri Lanka too is clear. The 2012 Independence Day Message of the Indian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, Ashok K. Kantha was telling of the value his country accords to the bi-lateral relationship with Sri Lanka: Mahatma Gandhi called Sri Lanka the ―nearest neighbour‖ to India. It is through that prism that we see our ties. For Sri Lanka, the end of three decades of internal conflict has brought historic opportunities. India, as its closest neighbour, is prepared to be Sri Lanka‘s partner in this journey.’

The High Commissioner went further to explain the importance of the relationship in the region: India and Sri Lanka, knit together by the ties of history, geography and culture, are destined to play key roles in the coming rise of Asia. Our partnership must therefore progress in the spirit of being the closest of neighbours and friends whose destinies are interlinked.‘ The importance and value of this relationship is also reflected in the magnitude of the India-funded housing project in Sri Lanka which the High Commissioner described as one of the largest grant assistance projects undertaken by the Government of India in any part of the world.‘

However, despite such significant investment in rebuilding Sri Lanka, the central government in India is faced with political pressures from its ruling coalition in the south of the country which has had its own implications for the India-Sri Lanka relationship. This has been reflected in intimations from Indian leaders in different contexts including responses to Modi’s invitation to heads of government for his swearing-in ceremony.

The former Indian Cabinet Minister and Member of National Democratic Alliance (NDA) Subramanian Swamy summed up the Indian perspective in August 2013 when speaking at the National Defence Seminar in Sri Lanka, I can tell you with full conviction today that the Indian people wish Sri Lanka well. We, in India in fact feel kinship with you Sri Lankans, emotionally, historically, religiously, linguistically and also for the benefit of our mutual national security. As recent genetic research reveals, Indians and Sri Lankans have the same DNA.

But I make it clear at the same time, even the most ardent well-wisher of Sri Lanka in India wants to see that the present feeling of marginalization that seems to have gripped the Tamil community for real or imagined reasons, including sections which were never with the LTTE such as the Plantation Tamils, is ended by a reconciliation process wherein the Tamils feel empowered to participate in nation building as if the LTTE era had never existed.
The devolution must, we in India recognize, be within the comfort zone of Sinhala majority feelings and at the same time be considered adequate by the Tamil minority.’

China

China‘s position on Sri Lanka is less complex. In a speech titled ―China‘s Peaceful Development and its National Defence Policy‖delivered by China‘s State Councillor and Minister of National Defence General Liang Guanglie, at Sri Lanka‘s Defence Services Command and Staff College of Sri Lanka on August 30, 2012 during an official visit to Sri Lanka, was resonant with gratitude and reassurance. ‘Sri Lanka is one of the first countries to recognize the People‘s Republic of China. Since the establishment of bilateral diplomatic relations, China-Sri Lanka friendship has withstood the test of international vicissitude and we have always maintained good cooperation.’

The Minister of National Defence went further to extend China‘s unequivocal support and commitment to Sri Lanka‘s progress, ―We are ready to take this opportunity to further advance the All-round Co-operation Partnership of Sincere Mutual Support and Ever-lasting Friendship between us.‘

The long-standing amity and co-operation in defense, economic and other areas can be traced back to the China-Ceylon Rubber-Rice Pact of April 1952, which entered history books as one of the earliest, if not the earliest of agreements signed by Communist China with a non – Communist country. The Pact is one now held out by China as an early example of a continuing pragmatic principle in international relations.’

In post-war Sri Lanka, China has invested as much as US$ 6.5 billion, primarily in infrastructure projects. Its commitments for the past five years other than infrastructural investments have included, among others, US$ 2.12 billion of which 2.1 billion was repayable. US$ 24 million has been in the form of outright aid. It has been reported that China provided as much as a quarter of Sri Lanka‘s foreign borrowings in 2011. Chinese companies have bagged, so far, at least 14 major infrastructure projects in the country.

The global backdrop

Asia‘s robust economic performance over the three decades preceding 2010, compared to that in the rest of the world, made perhaps the strongest case yet for the possibility of an Asian Century. By the early 21st century, however, a strong case could be made that this Asian performance was not just sustainable but held a force that could significantly alter the distribution of global political power.

A report titled Asia 2050: Realizing the Asian Century, released last year in August by the Asian Development Bank highlights multiple risks and challenges those Asian leaders need to manage if political power in the region is to be sustained: Growing inequality within countries, in which wealth and opportunities are confined to the upper echelons are undermining social cohesion and stability; Many Asian countries will not be able to make the necessary investments in infrastructure, education and government policies that would help them avoid a Middle Income Trap; Intense competition for finite natural resources, such as land, water, fuel or food, as newly affluent Asians aspire to higher standards of living; Global warming and climate change, which could threaten agricultural production, coastal populations, and numerous major urban areas; and the rampant corruption, which plague many Asian governments.

Despite forecasts that predict the rising political strength of Asia, the idea of an Asian Century has faced criticism. This has included the possibility that the continuing high rate of growth could lead to revolution, economic slumps, and environmental problems, especially in mainland China. Some believe that the 21st century will be multi-polar, and no one country or continent will have such a concentration of influence.

Proponents of the Asian Century respond that since the two most populous countries, China and India are in Asia then it‘s only natural that they will play a bigger role in world affairs than smaller countries and thus it won‘t be a multipolar century. However, this is why advocates of the Asian Century don‘t think one country will dominate world affairs, just that Asia will, primarily China and India. But even today Japan and South Korea are also rather important partly because both are world leaders in information technology.

Skeptics argue that it is premature to proclaim an Asian Century. They argue that Asia has no decision centre, nor coordinating institutions comparable to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or the European Union. This is important, because, whereas the West is relatively at peace with itself, Asia is riddled with actual conflicts, and also looming ones. This school of thought contends that in many ways, Asia‘s undeniable progress reflects its conversion to Western values: Capitalism, democracy, individualism, gender equality, and secularism are Western notions that have been adopted in Asia. Hence, they argue that we have not entered the Asian Century but have rather entered the first Global Century.

The regional backdrop

The Indo-Chinese rivalry in relation to regional domination is oft characterized in modern times by what is called the ―String of Pearls‖ phenomenon, described as China‘s naval expansion in the Indian Ocean region which links several ports in the region, namely, Sittwe in Myanmar, Chittagong in Bangladesh, Hambantota in Sri Lanka, Gwader in Pakistan and Marao in Maldives. The phenomenon has been described by others as a ―Necklace of Thorns intended to strangle India.

The entrance into Sri Lanka‘s economy in a big way by both emerging Asian giants, China and India, has become a cause for concern among some quarters in Sri Lanka‘s political circles which believe that Sri Lanka is now the ground on which India and China will openly clash.

That said, both India and China, together with the rest of the world, are only too aware of the need to maintain peace in the Asia Pacific region, not only in its own interest but also in those striving to achieve global security.

Accordingly, there have been attempts on both sides, namely, Indian and Chinese, to find common space that is non-confrontational and accommodative of the interests of what is said to have become the most important bilateral relationship of the century. Shyam Saran, a former Secretary of the Ministry of External Affairs was very clear when he indicated some years ago that there is enough space in the region for both China and India to be on the ascendant as we were once in history for an extended period of time.

Further, India and China willingly became signatory to a document called the ―Shared Vision for 21st Century “in 2008 which means that both countries accept ―significant historical responsibility to ensure a comprehensive, balanced, sustainable social development of the two countries and to promote peace and development in Asia and the world as a whole … they respect the right of each country to choose its own path of social, economic and political development and drawing lines on the grounds of ideologies and values or on geographical criteria is not conducive to peace and harmonious coexistence.”

The local calculus

What becomes imperative for Sri Lanka then is to play a critical role, given its increased interest and engagement with India and China, to ensure that contention is not peddled between the two countries. Rather, it should seek to diffuse existing tensions and provide fresh impetus towards emphasizing that there exists sufficient strategic space for both countries to co-operate and develop within the Asian region, and globally, with no encroachment on the national sovereignty of either. The role that Sri Lanka played in the Sino-Indian War of 1962 is worthy of recollection at this juncture. A disputed Himalayan border was the main pretext for war, but other issues played a role. The war failed to resolve disputes between the world‘s two most populous countries and its legacy continues to weigh down on an otherwise robust bilateral relationship built mainly on economic terms.

From a Sri Lankan perspective, the war must be remembered for another reason. Given the leverage of Sri Lankan leaders during the time, then Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, Sirimavo Bandaranaike was able to take the initiative for a conference of the non-aligned countries in December 1962 in Colombo, to mediate between India and China.

As Sri Lanka was regarded a close and trusted ally, Prime Minister Bandaranaike was subsequently invited to visit both countries where she explained what has henceforth been called the ―Colombo Proposals.‖ While India accepted the Colombo Proposals absolutely, China accepted the Proposals in principle. The Proposals became the basis on which mediation between the two countries took place. Prime Minister Bandaranaike regarded the mediation effort as the highest of Ceylon‘s efforts in seeking to achieve its foreign policy aims.

Sri Lanka must in no way become a battle ground or bargaining tool in what is fast becoming the most important bilateral relationship of the twenty-first century. Rather, it must strive to be a constructive force that shapes the destinies of the two emerging Asian giants individually, thereby contributing to peace and stability in the region, and in turn acquiring its own unique international positioning.

Sri Lanka must win the confidence of India and China, be a trusted friend of both emerging superpowers so that it can be called on to mediate and be the reliable peace broker in the unfortunate event of a potential dispute similar to that which erupted in 1962. Sri Lanka must in no way become a base for a clash between two emerging superpowers in the Asian continent. Sri Lanka must continue to pave the way for a strategic presence in Asia. As the events of the past week demonstrated, the bilateral relationship with both emerging giants will become critical towards achieving these aims. Getting the balance right will be equally important.

The post Sri Lanka: Balance In Motion? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Saudis Strongly Favor Female Cabinet Ministers

0
0

By P.K. Abdul Ghafour

Calls are mounting for the appointment of women to the Cabinet to further strengthen government’s efforts led by Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah for women empowerment.

Fifty-four percent of people who participated in a survey conducted by Khadija bint Khuwailed Center at the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce & Industry backed appointment of women as ministers to expand their role in nation-building endeavors.

Speaking with Arab News over the issue, Maha Akeel, director of information department at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, expressed optimism.

“We have seen so many initiatives by King Abdullah in recent years for empowerment of women, including their appointment to the Shoura Council and creating more job opportunities for women in different sectors,” she said.

“The survey result is a positive indication as more than half of the participants support appointment of women as ministers and I am sure it will happen eventually and will not take very long,” Akeel said.

Asked whether women ministers would make life of Saudi women better, she said: “Women ministers will serve the whole society as the appointment will be made on the basis of merit and not gender.”

She emphasized the need for providing equal opportunities for both men and women.

Basma Omair, executive director of Khadija center, said the survey result reflected a major change in the attitude of people toward women.

As many as 3,000 men and women took part in the survey and 51 percent of them backed appointment of women as mutawifat to organize Haj affairs while 81 percent supported women working from home.

The post Saudis Strongly Favor Female Cabinet Ministers appeared first on Eurasia Review.


After Syria, ISIL Plans Iraq Dismemberment – OpEd

0
0

By Abdulrahman Rashed

In early 2012, the then developments in Syria were the talk of the town. All the analyzes revolved around the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front.

Some even denied their very existence and most analysts believed the two organizations shared same values and goals and had no links with Al-Qaeda. Some suspected them of being the organs of the regime that funded similar groups in Iraq and Lebanon.

This debate went like this for 6 months, only to become clear later that it was Al-Qaeda after all. They served the Syrian regime politically by instilling fear in the ethnic minorities and they alienated international forces. They also fought the Syrian Free Army. Al-Qaeda had used the same strategy in Iraq.

The Mufti of Sunnah in Iraq took an important step by declaring the ISIL a terrorist outfit having no links with Baathist fighters, veteran military or the tribal forces. Since the Kuwait war, as a matter of fact, there was no Baath or Baathists. These are now old names that describe groups of the angry Sunnis of Iraq.

Gen. Petraeus also realized this fact and thereby changed his policy toward tribes in Al-Anbar. They became his allies against Al-Qaeda. He also persuaded some Sunni opposition figures to return to Baghdad. The current crisis began in the form of peaceful sit-ins in Al-Anbar last December, in anticipation of the parliamentary elections. They had 17 demands, most of which were about legal system, demanding the release of detained people and to stop execution of people. These demands found many ears, including some Shiite leaders, like Muqtada Al-Sadr and Amman Al-Hakim.

Instead of negotiating with them, or leave them alone in their tents, Al-Maliki, the habitual fool he is, opened the gates of hell. He sent a large force that arrested Ahmad Al-Alwani, an elected MP from a famous tribe and killed his brother, which was a clear violation of the constitution and the laws. His brother is still detained. And subsequently all hell broke loose in Al-Anbar. What about the ISIL and Al-Qaeda? They are found in the area. They lie hidden since the Sunnah Sahwah tribes drove them out.

Their story makes an important chapter in the history of the last war. Sattar Abu Raishah formed a tribal coalition of Sunnah Arabs. He also formed Al- Anbar Rescue Council. Within one year, he took out Al-Qaeda and did what the US forces failed to do. Al-Qaeda assassinated him in 2007. The tribal coalition remained until the US handed over the power to Al-Maliki, who, for sectarian reasons, stopped the government subsidies to the thousands who were part of the coalition and became part of the Iraqi army.

Within this vacuum, ISIL was reborn. It became allied with the rebels, and got engaged in fighting Al-Maliki forces. Instead of negotiating with the tribes, he destroyed Fallujah and caused thousands of people to flee the area. Al-Maliki’s forces failed to quell ISIL and the tribes, and they all began to hunt down government forces.

Last Wednesday Iraqis woke up to the news of the fall of Mosul and the remaining cities in Nineveh governorate. The following day Tikrit followed suit, and most of Salahaldin governorate. Now there are groups on the outskirts of Baghdad.

The rebels are the majority. ISIL is also there. It will later become a burden on the rebels, and a sure ally of Al-Maliki. This reminds us of what’s going on in Syria, where there are now 3 major players: The Assads and their Iranian allies, the Free Syrian Army and its allies, and the terrorists of ISIL. Iraq will be like this. The presence of ISIL will not change the major factors of the conflict in Iraq. One third of the population are being punished by the regime for sectarian and well as politically expedient reasons. It is only natural that they will revolt against it.

They will continue to resist him, either as tribes or as other armed factions. Here is the place where Al-Qaeda creeps in. Where there are angry people and huge political vacuum, they show up. Just like they did in Afghanistan and Syria. Like ISIL and Al-Qaeda, there is Nuri Al-Maliki, a bad man who is willing to massacre his people just to remain in power, much like Bashar Assad. In order for Iraq to remain stable, Al-Maliki must go, together with Al-Qaeda.

Email: Alrashed.arabnews@gmail.com

The post After Syria, ISIL Plans Iraq Dismemberment – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Unusual Suspects: Women And Gangs In South Africa – Analysis

0
0

By Dariusz Dziewanski

Gangsterism has a long tradition in South Africa’s Cape Flats. But the popular image of swaggering, macho young men is incomplete: women have always had a role, albeit overlooked, in that history.

At the age of 15, Charmaine Debruine became one of three female members of the Backstreet Kids, a Hanover Park gang. Like most adolescent girls involved in gang life, she joined through her boyfriend. But the gang crucially also provided a sense of identity and security in the face of domestic problems. “I had a tough life at home. There was no mother. There was no father… I wanted that sense of belonging.”

The Backstreet Kids no longer exist, most of its members lost to violence or long-term jail sentences. Charmaine also went to prison, serving four-and-a-half years for involvement in a robbery and murder. Now aged 35, she is the lone female within a team of 10 former gang members in Hanover Park’s Ceasefire programme who use their experiences to mediate gang disputes and help young men and women quit gang life.

It is the kind of support she never had when she was young, a period in her life when she could have used somebody looking out for her. “In my time I didn’t have proper guidance,” she says. “Now people from Ceasefire are here to guide you.”

Ceasefire’s target

Ceasefire is based on a violence-prevention model developed in the United States by the NGO Cure Violence. According to the organization’s website, the programme works to “reverse the spread of violence by using the methods and strategies associated with disease control – detection and interruption, identifying individuals involved in transmission, and changing social norms of the communities where it occurs”.

The Hanover Park programme operates out of the First Community Resource Centre, a non-profit organisation founded by Pastor Craven Engel. He describes how, at the programme’s outset, “nobody could identify and get a working plan for female gangsters, because gangsters were seen as men.”

Recruiting Charmaine into Ceasefire provided an opening to reach out to other women that had joined gangs. “Charmaine was our catalyst in telling the females, ‘you can change your behaviour, you can enter into a job, you can cut out this living [with] the gang’.”

A study in 2012 by Mexican research group Seguridad, Justicia y Paz, rated Cape Town as the 34th most lethal city in the world, with a murder rate of 46.15 per 100,000 people. Much of that violence is concentrated in the Cape Flats, 30-minutes from the city’s wealthy, cosmopolitan centre.

Often referred to as ‘apartheid’s dumping ground’, much of the Cape Flats were populated from the 1950s through the forcible relocation of non-white communities from central Cape Town to its low-lying periphery. Hanover Park is one in a patchwork of still neglected and poor ‘Flats’ communities where gangsterism – and with it violence and drug dealing – is part of everyday life.

City authorities estimate there are between 100 to 120 gangs in Western Cape Province, with membership ranging from 80,000 to 100,000. How many are women is unknown. Women rarely shoot on the “frontlines like the guys”, says Charmaine. Generally their roles are to conceal guns or drugs: or they may be used as spies or informants, or lure opposing gang members – with the promise of sex – to be ambushed and killed in the regular turf wars.

Naboewieyah Kelly joined Western Cape’s biggest gang, the Americans, aged 14. “I would help them smuggle, sell the drugs, and keep the stuff by my house,” she says. Her face still lights up as she describes how she would be given a firearm to shoot in the air as a feint to distract the police and the rival gang to be targeted. “They showed me how to use any kind of a nine [millimeter], a 38 [caliber], a Glock… Then I just go, and I shoot in the air … If it’s not me, then there is a guy with me and he will do the shooting, and I walk away with the [gun].”

Due to a shortage of women police officers, chances are low that a female gang member will be searched, unless directly implicated in a crime.

Dangers

But female gang members face other risks. Even if not deliberately targeted, they can get caught up in gang shootings. And the penalty for being suspected of spying can be severe, including gang rape or death.

When it comes to gender, the gangs are deeply conservative – mirroring the most patriarchal aspects of South Africa’s gender relations – where women can be subject to extreme levels of sexual violence. According to police crime figures, the equivalent of more than 26 rapes were reported every day in the Western Cape in 2012. Far more go unreported.

Commonly referred to as a ‘brotherhood’, Western Cape’s gang culture is a notoriously masculine space. ‘Troubles,’ one of the founders of the Spoiled Brats, is clear: “Women, they don’t actually get seen. It’s almost like they’re down there. Because the only time [male gangsters] need a woman is when they want to satisfy [themselves] … Then they will fetch a girl.”

According to Troubles, leadership roles for women are extremely rare: “Where it’s maybe gangsterism stuff getting started, getting talked [about], then [females] must go.”

And women must constantly negotiate their roles in the gangs. “For some girls, if they don’t have a boyfriend in the gang, they maybe sleep with everyone every time. Or they sleep with the leader of the gang,” said Nabo.

Winning respect is key: Nabo’s method was to carry a knife – and use it when necessary. “I did stab a lot of guys. For sometimes they must talk right to me. If they don’t know me, and they just want to talk to me like they want to … Then I just show you how you must talk to a lady.”

For Charmaine, “it all depends on how you carry yourself. You need to know when to act like a woman and when to adopt a man’s behavior. But it’s not for mommy’s girls … Otherwise they’re not going to respect you. And it’s very easily – for them to disrespect you and use you.”

At times she felt compelled to play what she calls a ‘feminine role’. “[The gang is] going to buy something to eat, and say, ‘OK, you’re the only woman, make that something to eat’. Just like the same way they are treating me here at Ceasefire,” she says with a laugh. “But otherwise, at night, when I’m on corners with them, seriously I hated it when they treated me like a woman. [Men would tell me] ‘hey, you’re the woman, you must do that’. No, it doesn’t work like that. You’ve got the same tattoo as I do, so no way.”

Getting out

Women gang members seeking to leave the gangs must confront a raft of lasting challenges not faced by their male comrades. They may be left to care for children fathered from relationships with gangsters, and it is not uncommon for one woman to have children from multiple partners within the same gang, explains Ceasefire’s Engel. Sexually transmitted infections are another key issue disproportionally affecting women.

For Engel, “the challenges [affecting women] are different, and … there’s not so much opportunity for girls. For guys, you’ve got different programmes and exits [from gang life] for the men, and projects – working projects. Come to the girls, there’s not a lot of projects that [are targeted at] them … they don’t get noticed.”

Charmaine’s journey out of gang life was through sheer determination. The turning point was going to prison, where she put herself through high school. But when Charmaine was released, she did not have a support system to help her transition into a new life.

“I had nobody. I had to work [odd jobs] just to give me 10 Rand for roll-on [deodorant]… I wanted to give up hope. But I just kept telling myself that tomorrow is going to be better, tomorrow is going to be better. And that’s how I survived, up until now.”

Drug addiction made the process even more difficult. “I didn’t go to rehab. These ones, these participants [in Ceasefire] are very lucky.” Charmaine has now been out of prison and gangs for 12-years and devotes her life to giving young women like Nabo the assistance she never had.

Charmaine got Nabo into the Ceasefire programme at age 26. They met through Nabo’s mother, who insisted she got some help. “It was a Friday, Charmaine told me to come on the Monday – just to hear about my story. So she did get me in there at [the rehabilitation centre] Camp Joy. Because I told her that there were some guys there that were looking for me because I’m a witness in a case. They were going to kill me.”

Rehabilitation programmes aimed specifically at women are vital to helping them quit gangs and overcome the drug addiction that often comes with gang life. “Camp Joy helped me a lot… They know I come out of a hard life. I was going to explode because of the things I kept in.”

Nabo is eager to help other girls caught in similar struggles. “If I get an opportunity to get across another female like that – in such a situation –then I will do my best to see that that female won’t get involved.”

The post Unusual Suspects: Women And Gangs In South Africa – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Salvadoran President Rejects Gang Truce, Security Policy Remains Unclear – Analysis

0
0

By Michael Lohmuller

The June 1 inauguration of Salvador Sánchez Cerén, a former guerrilla combatant, as president of El Salvador was undoubtedly a historic moment for the Central American nation. Yet persistent insecurity and institutional corruption, as well as a languishing truce between the nation’s two major gangs, risks seeing the country descend into a pernicious new era of crime—characterized by increasingly sophisticated organized criminal activity.

During his inauguration speech in San Salvador, Cerén promised the nation that “security, employment, and education” would be top priorities of his administration, calling for an initial guarantee of citizens’ security to ensure such development.[1] Yet in regards to one of the largest security issues looming for his government—the truce between the MS-13 and Barrio-18 street gangs, or maras— Cerén remained largely ambiguous. On June 10, however, Benito Lara—Cerén’s Minister of Justice and Security—announced that the truce would not form part of the administration’s security policy, and reaffirmed previous commitments to use “all legal instruments of the state” in order to combat crime and violence.[2]

Yet, despite comments from administration officials rejecting the truce, few details have been given regarding the administration’s short- and long-term security objectives. Murders and extortions in El Salvador have been on the rise, reversing earlier gains made towards violence reduction that was seen during the truce. This worrisome trend demands immediate action while a sustainable, long-term solution is formed. Despite its deterioration, the truce—which has routinely been criticized for its opacity and exclusiveness—still presents an opportunity for El Salvador to make significant gains towards improving citizen security. Instead of flat-out rejecting the truce, the Cerén administration should take advantage of the space the truce has created. To do this, the government should warily enable the process in the short-term, with the aim of keeping levels of violence under control, while simultaneously instituting reforms and programs aimed at dismantling criminal organizations and ensuring citizen security over the long-term.

Worsening Violence & Insecurity

The United Nations reports that El Salvador currently has a homicide rate of 41 per 100,000 people, down from 71 per 100,000 in 2009, which still makes it the fourth most violent country in the world.[3] The decline in murders was due in large part to the commencement of a gangland truce between the rival MS-13 and Barrio-18 maras enacted in March 2012. Following the truce’s implementation, homicides in the country dropped dramatically from around 14 to six per day for almost a year. Unfortunately, the downward trend began to reverse itself after Ricardo Perdomo became the Minister of Security in May 2013. Since then, almost 3,000 homicides have occurred, which equates to an average of more than eight murders per day.

Violence has been especially bloody during the first half of 2014, with El Salvador experiencing nearly 400 more homicides from January to April this year when compared to the same period in 2013.[4] So far, in 2014, the homicide rate has averaged over nine per day. May was particularly violent, seeing an increase to 12 murders per day; Friday May 23 alone registered 30 homicides, starting a weekend in which more than 80 people violently lost their lives.[5] These figures are nearing pre-truce levels. 2011 registered an average of 12 homicides daily, and January and February of 2012—the months immediately preceding the truce—averaged 13.8.[6]

In light of this recent escalation in violence, the gang truce is now generally considered to be disintegrating, or already undone, with critics and proponents of the truce launching accusations back and forth. Raúl Mijango and Fabio Colindres, the truce’s mediators, and Paolo Luers, a spokesman for the truce’s negotiators, blame the surge in brutality on the Mauricio Funes administration (2009-2014). Mijango, Colindres, and Luers accuse Funes of withdrawing support when it became politically untenable for his political party, the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN), leading up to the presidential election.[7] They have also criticized Security Minister Perdomo for impeding the truce’s mediation process, including the arrest of several of the gangs’ spokesmen. Conversely, Perdomo has said a rise in homicides is a method for pressuring the Cerén government into supporting the truce. Before leaving office, Funes proclaimed that the truce had failed, and blamed much of the unrestrained violence on a turf war between two competing factions of the Barrio-18 gang, Los Revolucionarios and Los Sureños, claiming the latter group are responsible for attacks on the police.[8]

Perceptions of La Tregua

These differing opinions represent two general schools of thought regarding the truce. The first sees it as a means for the gangs to strengthen their political and operational positions as a sophisticated narco-criminal-political movement. The second explanation portrays the truce as a way to reintegrate gang members into society via social and economic programs, while also seeking to lower overall levels of violence.[9]

The first camp includes the likes of Perdomo, who has said the gangs are using the truce to form ties with transnational drug traffickers, particularly the Mexican cartel Los Zetas. Perdomo claims the truce has resulted in “a mutation of the gangs toward a drug-trafficking structure.”[10] Carlos Ponce, a Salvadoran criminologist and former advisor to the National Civil Police (PNC) and Attorney General’s Office (FGR), said the gang leadership has been using the truce to modify and develop their operations, becoming “more sophisticated, stronger and more dangerous criminal organizations.”[11] Ponce says the gangs are also now attempting to disrupt investigations by infiltrating El Salvador’s security forces, and are trying to exert greater territorial control.[12] He added that the porous borders of Central America’s Northern Triangle—which includes El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala – enable the gangs to move freely.

Opinions or beliefs of the gangs’ motives aside, there is enough evidence to suggest they are indeed consolidating their power structures and taking on an increasingly sophisticated range of criminal activities. Some mara members are working with transnational drug traffickers by protecting drug shipments, conducting low-level assassinations, and receiving military-style training.[13] Héctor Mendoza Cordero—the PNC Deputy Director of Investigations—observed that from January to March of this year, 334 gang members have been arrested on drug-related charges. In 2013, the PNC’s Anti-Drug Division arrested 1,036 gang members on drug-related charges, compared to just 590 in 2012.[14] The maras have also increased their weapons trafficking, and are able to obtain military-grade weapons from neighboring countries or from corrupt or coerced elements of El Salvador’s security forces.[15] Extortion of local residents and businesses was also never included in the truce’s terms and has continued largely unabated, undermining political and popular support for the truce.

The second opposing perspective of the truce portrays it as offering a chance to institute social and economic programs intended to help reintegrate gang members into society, while also reducing levels of violence.[16] Paolo Luers feels this is still possible, saying the gangs remain committed to the truce and that it has not yet come undone. Instead, Luers says, “what’s in crisis is the government’s relationship with the truce,” warning that “if the next government comes in with the same attitude they could lose everything at any moment. And that doesn’t mean that the gangs are going to return to killing each other. That means they are going to confront the state.”[17] Raúl Mijango, one of the truce’s mediators, also recently said the truce is still alive. He stressed the truce was between the rival gangs, and that the government did not have (nor needed to have) an agreement with either side. Regardless, he hopes the new government will facilitate the work of the mediators and create an environment conducive for reducing violence.[18]

Additionally, it is important not to overestimate the coherence of the maras’ organizational structures or ability to coordinate activities. The maras are hierarchical organizations, which has allowed gang leadership to command lower-ranking members to comply with the truce. Yet the gangs also maintain complex horizontal relationships among various cliqas, or cliques, whose local operations are largely independent of any centralized authority. Howard Cotto, head of El Salvador’s National Anti-Drug Commission, notes that each clique has significant autonomy in how it generates income and manages its resources.[19]

It is also important to keep in mind the size of the gang problem in El Salvador and neighboring countries. A report from December 2011 by the PNC estimated that in El Salvador alone 9,000 gang members were in prison, with another 27,000 on the streets. Given similar levels of gang activity in Honduras and Guatemala, total gang membership in Central America’s northern triangle has been estimated at over 100,000.[20] Some estimates have even placed gang affiliation in El Salvador—which has a population of around 6.5 million—at over 450,000.[21] In any event, while such numbers can be considered unrealistic, gang membership in El Salvador likely numbers in the tens of thousands. The main takeaway here is that the gangs’ structural attributes may actually serve as an impediment to their wholesale conversion into powerful narco-gangs. Instead, various sub-groups are more likely to establish alliances with foreign cartels and engage in transnational drug trafficking.

Policy Moving Forward

In his June 10 remarks, Cerén called for the creation of a “National System of Citizen Security,” which he indicated would be under his control. The Minister of Justice and Security, Benito Lara, also said one of the administration’s first actions will be to deploy more police to areas with a heavy gang presence.[22] Officials have said the security policy is simple, in that they “are going to develop all that is within our power to combat extortions, homicides, and other types of crimes.”[23] Yet, while few details regarding the specifics of such actions have been given, Lara said they will be based on a policy he called “Justice, Security, and Coexistence.” This, he said, will include elements of prevention, repression, attention to victims, and the strengthening of the nation’s basic institutions. The use of force will also be “the last resort and not an immediate solution to social conflicts.”[24]

There are numerous factors contributing to the violence that El Salvador is today experiencing. Cerén said his administration would implement an integrated focus, adopting a multidimensional and inter-institutional approach to implementing policy aimed at confronting the problem of violence and delinquency.[25] The truce, however, will not form part of the administration’s security policy. Nonetheless, Lara said that if the gangs “came to an agreement between themselves … we will not interfere.” Lara added that this is not to be taken as meaning the government will integrate the truce as part as its policy.[26]

By itself, the truce must been seen as an inadequate response to public insecurity. In effect, it largely acted as a means for the Funes administration to give the impression it was doing something to curb widespread insecurity, acting as a stopgap measure following the failure of harsh mano dura (iron-fist) anti-crime policies enacted under President Francisco Flores Pérez (1999-2004).[27] While the truce has not solved the nation’s problem of insecurity, it has opened a window of opportunity for the government to begin putting in place programs and structures that could augment the presence of institutions in high-risk areas and improve the lives of citizens.[28] Yet the Salvadoran government must not lose sight of containing and dismantling criminal structures in the country, especially given rising violence and disconcerting evidence of the maras evolution and links to Mexican and Colombian drug trafficking networks.

This calls for a dual-approach by the Cerén administration, with an overall goal of violence reduction and restoration of citizen security. In the short-term, this may entail further negotiating with the gangs for a new truce, with the aim of halting and reversing increasing levels of violence. Accompanying this should indeed be an increased presence of law enforcement agencies in neighborhoods that remain under control of the maras, but this should not entail a reversion to failed mano dura policies. The best-case scenario in the short-term would be to create an atmosphere of tranquility so that Cerén’s administration can focus on issues such as institutional reforms and combating corruption, which exacerbate and compound the problems of gang violence and impunity. While engaging with gang leaders in the short-term is not an ideal solution, it may help put the necessary conditions in place to work towards long-term peace and security, something that the Salvadoran people deserve but have not enjoyed for several decades.

Michael Lohmuller, Research Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Sources:

[1] BBC. “Ex-rebel becomes El Salvador leader.” BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-27568032 (accessed June 4, 2014).

[2] Cota, Isabella. “Sanchez Ceren Sworn in as El Salvador President.” Bloomberg.com. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-01/sanchez-ceren-sworn-in-as-el-salvador-president.html (accessed June 4, 2014); EFE. “Sánchez Cerén reafirma que no dará tregua al crimen organizado y la violencia.” http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/internacionales/sanchez-ceren-reafirma-que-no-dara-tregua-al-crimen-organizado-y-la-violencia/20140610/nota/2267441.aspx (accessed June 12, 2014); EFE. “Tregua entre pandillas no forma parte de política de seguridad en El Salvador.” http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/internacionales/tregua-entre-pandillas-no-forma-parte-de-politica-de-seguridad-en-el-salvador/20140610/nota/2267672.aspx (accessed June 12, 2014).

[3] Dalton, Juan José . “El Gobierno salvadoreño investiga la penetración de las maras en el ejército.” EL PAÍS. http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2014/05/06/actualidad/1399339408_436415.html (accessed June 4, 2014).

[4] Robbins, Seth. “Will El Salvador’s new president try to salvage a crumbling gang truce?.” The Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2014/0601/Will-El-Salvador-s-new-president-try-to-salvage-a-crumbling-gang-truce (accessed June 4, 2014); Baires, Lorena. “El Salvador: Gang violence increases.” Infosurhoy. http://infosurhoy.com/en_GB/articles/saii/features/main/2014/05/01/feature-01?source=most_viewed (accessed June 4, 2014).

[5] Melara, Gabriela. “Naciones Unidas condena ola de violencia en ESA.” La Prensa Grafica -. http://www.laprensagrafica.com/2014/05/28/naciones-unidas-condena-ola-de-violencia-en-esa (accessed June 4, 2014).

[6] Arauz, Sergio. “Sánchez Cerén mantendrá en su gabinete al ministro de la tregua.” elfaro.net. http://www.elfaro.net/es/201405/noticias/15418/ (accessed June 4, 2014).

[7] Martínez, Carlos , and Luis Sanz. “Goberino desmantla la tregua y los homicidios alcanzan 30 en un día.” elfaro.net. http://www.salanegra.elfaro.net/es/201405/cronicas/15432/ (accessed June 4, 2014).; Robbins, “Will El Salvador’s new president.”

[8] Maruicio Ramírez Landaverde, subdirector of the PNC, said from the beginning of January to April 15 there were 60 attacks by gangsters against public security agents. Dalton, Juan José. “El Gobierno salvadoreño llama a reeditar el.” EL PAÍS. http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2014/04/18/actualidad/1397784962_152058.html (accessed June 4, 2014). ; Baires, “El Salvador: Gang violence increases.”

[9] Dudley, Steven . “2 Divergent Views on El Salvador Gang Truce, 1 Sad Conclusion.” 2 Divergent Views on El Salvador Gang Truce, 1 Sad Conclusion. InSight Crime. http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/2-divergent-views-on-el-salvador-gang-truce-1-sad-conclusion (accessed June 4, 2014).

[10] Baires, “El Salvador: Gang violence increases.”

[11] Ibid.

[12] Security Minister Perdomo has said 26 gang members have been caught attempting to infiltrate the armed forces so far this year, with local media reporting that around 120 gang members have infiltrated El Salvador’s Military Academy and the Academy of Public Security. Dalton, “El Gobierno salvadoreño investiga.”

[13] Dudley,”2 Divergent Views on El Salvador Gang Truce.”

[14] Baires, “El Salvador: Gang violence increases.”

[15] Lopez, Jaime, Mauricio Caceres, Luis Alberto Lopez, Mario Beltran, and Ross Mary Zepeda. “Have the Maras Planted a ‘Trojan Horse’ Among El Salvador’s Security Forces?.” InSight Crime. http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/have-the-maras-planted-a-trojan-horse-amid-el-salvadors-security-forces (accessed June 4, 2014).

[16] Dudley, “2 Divergent Views on El Salvador Gang Truce.”

[17] Robbins, “Will El Salvador’s new president.”

[18] Velásquez, Warner. “Mijango: La tregua fue entre las pandillas, el Gobierno no tiene que pactar con nadie.” La Pagina. http://www.lapagina.com.sv/nacionales/96293/2014/06/10/Mijango-La-tregua-fue-entre-las-pandillas-el-Gobierno-no-tiene-que-pactar-con-nadie (accessed June 11, 2014).

[19] Garzon, Juan Carlos. “Rethinking the El Salvador Mara – Drug Trafficking Relationship. InSight Crime. http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/rethinking-the-el-salvador-mara-drug-trafficking-relationship (accessed June 4, 2014).

[20] Farah, Douglas, and Pamela Phillip. Central American Gangs and transnational criminal organizations the changing relationships in a time of turmoil. Alexandria, VA: International Strategy and Assessment Center, 2013.

[21] Tager, Ana Glenda, and Isabel Aguilar Umaña . La tregua entre pandillas salvadoreñas: hacia un proceso de construcción de paz social. Guatemala: Interpeace, 2013, p. 32.

[22] Marroquín, Rafael. “Desplegarán más policías a los municipios con mayor presencia de maras .” . http://www.elsalvador.com/mwedh/nota/nota_completa.asp?idCat=47655&idArt=8844490 (accessed June 12, 2014).

[23] EFE. “Nuevo Gobierno de El Salvador excluye tregua entre pandillas.” Nuevo Gobierno de El Salvador excluye tregua…. La Prensa. http://www.laprensa.com.ni/2014/06/10/planeta/197957-nuevo-gobierno-salvador-excluye (accessed June 12, 2014).

[24] Marroquín, “Desplegarán más policías.”

[25]http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/internacionales/sanchez-ceren-reafirma-que-no-dara-tregua-al-crimen-organizado-y-la-violencia/20140610/nota/2267441.aspx

[26] EFE. “Tregua entre pandillas no forma.”

[27] Cruz, José Miguel. “¿La alternativa a la tregua?.” elfaro.net. http://www.elfaro.net/es/201405/opinion/15444/ (accessed June 3, 2014).

[28] El Faro. “Sánchez Cerén y la tregua.”

The post Salvadoran President Rejects Gang Truce, Security Policy Remains Unclear – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

This Palestinian Façade – OpEd

0
0

Full marks to Egypt’s newly elected president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Alone among the world’s statesmen, he has refused to recognize the cobbled-together Fatah-Hamas “unity” government. Hamas is formally designated a “terrorist organization” by the United States and the European Union, just as it is by Egypt. All the same, based upon Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas’s assurances that his new administration is composed solely of non-political technocrats, that it will honor all agreements entered into by the PA, recognize Israel and reject terror, the US and the EU, together with the United Nations and China, have declared that they accept and will work with the new administration.

Once again, led by the US, the world as a whole prefers to turn a blind eye to stark reality in favor of insubstantial hopes and unachievable promises.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the Fatah-Hamas unity government, said the UN was prepared to support it and its efforts to reunite the West Bank and Gaza, and hoped that the move would provide new opportunities to progress the peace process with Israel.

The EU was equally forthcoming. “We welcome the declaration by President Abbas that this new government is committed to the principle of the two state solution based on the 1967 borders, and to the recognition of Israel’s legitimate right to exist. The EU’s engagement with the new Palestinian government will be based on its adherence to these policies and commitments.”

Yet when on June 11 a rocket was fired from Gaza into southern Israel, narrowly missing a major traffic highway, the US said it did not hold the PA responsible. “We acknowledge the reality that Hamas currently controls Gaza,” said US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki to reporters in Washington.

So, although Abbas heads a Fatah-Hamas unity government, it is not to be held to account for the continued terrorist activities of one of the partners. If Israel decided to bring these crimes against humanity to the International Court of Justice, that body might not take the same view.

Egypt’s el-Sisi sees the situation more pragmatically. He knows Hamas for what it is – an extremist Islamist organisation, closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, intent on overthrowing the new Egyptian administration by supporting terrorist activity both in the Sinai and within Egypt itself. So when the PA and Hamas claimed that Sisi, as a gesture of support for the new Palestinian government, would open the Rafah crossing from Gaza to Egyptian Sinai, they were wide of the mark.

Cairo’s response was that the border terminals would remain open only if PA security forces from Ramallah assumed control of the borders and officiated at the crossings. But Hamas has no intention of handing this strategic resource over to Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah. Any PA bid to take over control of the Gaza crossings would be forcibly resisted. A standoff has therefore already developed between the two partners.

In the event, not only has Cairo kept the Rafah crossing shut, but it has strengthened military oversight on its borders with Gaza to prevent incursions at any point. In addition, a law has been drafted by the Egyptian authorities proposing long prison sentences for anyone attempting to “prepare, dig or use” a tunnel connecting Egypt to a foreign “entity” or nation (in other words Hamas or the Palestinian government) for the passage of goods or persons.

Under the unity deal, the PA is obligated to urge Egypt to end its blockade of Gaza. Success in that particular venture is, to say the least, dubious.

This Fatah-Hamas “reconciliation” papers over wide discrepancies of policy, bitter enmity and divergent aspirations between the two partners. For example, the unity deal stipulates that Hamas will incorporate Fatah-led PA forces in Gaza, and that this will be reciprocated in the West Bank. This is an aspiration likely, in the words of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, to be “more honored in the breach than the observance.” For how will Hamas and the PA coordinate on security when they have continued to target each other’s members since the signing of the reconciliation deal? The Freedoms Committee, which was set up to help implement the agreement, says the ongoing arrests of Hamas members in the West Bank has “strained the reconciliation atmosphere”, and that the charging of Fatah members in Gaza is also continuing.

How will Hamas and Fatah forces coordinate vis-à-vis Israel, particularly given the PA’s cooperation with Israel on security issues, including the arrest of Hamas members – a hugely unpopular policy among Palestinians. Just last week, Abbas described the “security relationship” with Israel as “sacred”, adding that it would continue regardless of a Palestinian unity government or any disagreements with Israel.

This, and his insistence that the new government will adhere to non-violence, contrasts with statements by Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh who has said that the reconciliation deal “aims to unite the Palestinian people against the prime enemy, the Zionist enemy”, and that “it aims to pursue the choice of resistance in all forms”.

The UN, the EU, and the US choose to ignore or discount the glaringly obvious fact that Hamas defiantly remains what it has always been – an Islamist, terrorist organization intent on supporting the Muslim Brotherhood’s subversion of the new Egyptian administration, and of pursuing the so-called armed struggle against Israel. It has chosen to associate itself with its prime internal enemy, the Fatah-led PA, for its own reasons – doubtless hoping to participate, and to triumph, in the forthcoming parliamentary and presidential elections, as a vital step towards replacing the PA in the West Bank, just as it did in Gaza.

The New York Times, in an editorial on June 7, puts in a nutshell the dilemma that the Obama administration has maneuvered itself into.
“The United States and other countries that consider Hamas a terrorist group may find it impossible to continue aiding the Palestinians if Hamas plays a more pronounced role,” it wrote, adding that the US “has to be careful to somehow distinguish between its support for the new government and an endorsement of Hamas and its violent, hateful behavior. To have some hope of doing that, the United States and Europe must continue to insist that Mr. Abbas stick to his promises and not allow Hamas to get the upper hand.”

It seems pretty obvious that this Fatah-Hamas unity deal, far from representing reconciliation, is a façade that conceals as violent a fraternal struggle for power and supremacy as ever.

The post This Palestinian Façade – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Rise Of Far-right Parties In The European Parliament – Analysis

0
0

By Naser Khader

The European Parliament’s recent election was highly significant for the far-right movements all across Europe. Many European countries experienced a strong surge of electoral support for what can only be described as far-right parties – and as the recent campaign platforms can attest, a number of these parties are very far to the right. France, Greece, Germany, Denmark, Holland, UK and Finland were obvious examples of this.

Across Europe, two sentiments have driven growing voter support for the far-right platform: dissatisfaction with the European Union (based on the ongoing enlargement of The European Union, while national loss of sovereignty) and a fear that immigration is threatening economic growth. Even the names of the parties reflect an appeal to sovereignty: UK Independence Party (UKIP); the Freedom Party of Austria; and France’s National Front. Compared to the mainstream parties that have dominated the European Parliament, these groups (with newfound success) have embraced nationalism as a major theme that distinguishes them from their brethren on the left and right. And given that the Parliament’s 2014 elections have shown a growing popularity of far-right parties, many voters across Europe feel that their country’s partnership with the European Union has come at the expense of their nation’s individual power.

Critics of the European Union within the far-right have also united on their concerns over open borders between EU members and uncontrolled immigration. Amidst an already bleak economic landscape, high unemployment has compounded fears over the role of foreign workers. Eastern European immigrants have sought employment in western European countries for decades. But the current economic environment has compounded the tension felt by western Europeans as eastern Europeans are securing jobs—whether coveted or not—in their countries.

These concerns have been reflected in the platforms of numerous far-right parties, fueling viewpoints that range from moderate to extreme. Within the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD), leading party candidates have directly expressed neo-Nazi views. As frightening as it is, NPD has now earned a seat in the European Parliament. Greece’s Golden Dawn is another example of an ultra-nationalist party that has gained support through the European Parliament elections, and is now the third largest party in country with 9% of the votes.

In addition to the above, support of the far-right was also bolstered by a low turnout among those who would traditionally vote mainstream during the European Parliament. With less electoral support, the mainstream parties are easier to challenge, which many far-right parties have proven in this election.

Actual influence or empty threats?

Post-election, we must contend with the question of how this surge of support for the far-right will impact the EU and its citizens. The far-right parties have gained a considerable amount of votes in their respective countries. In both France and the UK, the far-right parties claimed electoral victory and took seats in the European Parliament. Even extremist parties with strong anti-Semitic leanings, such as Hungary’s Jobbik party (who have publically expressed that the country’s Jewish inhabitants should be registered on lists of citizens who pose a threat to national security) received 14.7% of the Hungarian vote.

The frightening prospect of openly neo-Nazi members residing in the European Parliament is now a reality. However, their ability to impact policy across the EU will be limited by their unwillingness to form partnerships with other far-right parties. To achieve any kind of influence, the far-right parties will need to form a “block” of 25 Parliament members from at least 7 different countries. That means parties like Front National and UKIP will need to work together and establish similar priorities—a scenario that seems highly unlikely (since the leader of UKIP Nigel Farage more than once has expressed that there ideology isn’t comparable with Front National). It is also unrealistic that Front National or UKIP would form this block with the far-right parties from Greece and Germany that are openly neo-Nazi, regardless of similar views on immigration and the EU.

What certainly will change is the political rhetoric used in the European Parliament. Many mainstream voters are concerned that the new surge of far-right politicians may bring along extremist views, exposing a new challenge for the European Parliament.

The increase in EU-skeptical votes has also been driven by the financial disparities between the northern and southern European countries, a reality at odds with the EU’s founding ideals of unity and economic security. Countries like Italy and Spain have received enormous financial aid from wealthier EU countries, which has made national sovereignty even more palatable for EU citizens who feel that their country’s wealth is being unwisely dispersed.

While the European Parliament elections have brought attention to fringe political parties across the EU, this trend may not extend to each country’s presidential elections. It can be argued that the increased votes for far-right parties demonstrate that some voters do not believe their concerns are being heard through the European Parliament’s mainstream parties. It is highly unrealistic that these parties will receive as much electoral support on the national level, since a considerable amount of their bond with voters is fueled by concerns with the European Union. To put it simply: this election is a reflection of skepticism towards the governance of the EU, more so than a reflection of new national political movements.

About the author:
Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Naser Khader served as a member of the Danish Parliament, Folketinget, from 2001 until 2011, as a member of the Conservative Party. Khader’s main research areas include freedom of speech and the fight for democracy and democratic values in multicultural societies.

Source:
This article was published by the Hudson Institute and reprinted with permission.

The post The Rise Of Far-right Parties In The European Parliament – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Viewing all 73339 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images