The ugly face of empire and disaster capitalism is visible all over the world. Detroit, Michigan, was once a thriving city but was sent into a tailspin by the deindustrialization of the United States, white flight, and institutional racism which blamed black people who were in fact the victims of catastrophe. The coup de grace was delivered by big banks like UBS, Bank of America and Barclays, which sold risky derivatives schemes to corrupt Detroit politicians. When the financial deal inevitably headed south, the banks were the creditors first in line for a payout.

Far back in that line were the workers and people of Detroit. The emergency manager, Kevyn Orr, whose very position they had voted against establishing, rules the city. The new mayor is a figurehead and the people have no representation as the Republican governor and emergency manager remake the city for capital and the gentrifying settler class.

A world away in Iraq, a nation is crumbling under the weight of eleven years of violent occupation by the United States. The once developing nation is now a ruin, with all of its infrastructure and systems from health care to education destroyed by western avarice. The prime minister who was chosen with America’s blessing, Nouri al-Maliki, has now become an inconvenience and faces a bleak fate.

The Bush administration and now the Obama team determined that promoting one side in sectarian political disputes would make for a smooth running and profitable occupation. Instead they brought war between Sunni and Shia and with goal of knocking down more dominoes, continued to fund jihadists who always upset their plans. Now Maliki is being told to get out of office if he wants help in crushing the enemies that America made for his country.

Just as Iraq’s infrastructure has been destroyed, Detroit residents now live without basic services which ought to be regarded as the right of every human being. In the United States, a country which boasts of its high level of advancement, residents of a major city must plead to the international community for the right to access water.

In a city already on the brink, the powers that be chose to pressure struggling people to pay increased fees for water. They have also used harsh and sometimes improper methods to deprive even those who have paid their bills. No one can survive at all without water to drink, and one cannot survive very well without water for cooking, cleaning and sanitation. Very powerful people in boardrooms and government offices made decisions that turned Detroit into an Iraq in America’s midst and now sneer at pleas for mercy.

Desperate Detroiters represented by the Blue Planet Project, the Michigan Welfare Rights Organization, Food & Water Watch and the Detroit People’s Water Board, have made their case to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Right to Safe Drinking Water. They issued a report which outlines the latest scheme to destroy Detroit as a city and as a home to poor and working people. The plan will ultimately privatize the water system and make Detroit another location for prime real estate and riches for the few.

President Obama and his cohorts in the Democratic and Republican parties will go to any lengths to prop up the empire, but do little to help people in need. American allies in Ukraine or Iraq and other countries receive astronomical sums of money in order to help maintain Manifest Destiny. Poor people in Detroit and the rest of the country are not so lucky. They are seen only as obstacles to putting the rule of capital firmly in place.

Iraq was invaded with soldiers, guns and bombs. Detroit was invaded by the corporate “suits” who made a fast buck for themselves. The end result is the same for Michiganders and Iraqis alike. They end up suffering in a plundered society while other people make out like the bandits that they really are.

The organizations which reached out to the U.N. took an important step in changing the Detroit narrative. Politicians and the corporate media dismiss the city’s troubles as the fault of incompetent black people. All of former mayor Kwame Kilpatrick’s incompetence could not have created the ongoing occupation of Detroit by the thieves in high places. The outreach to the United Nations is important for another reason. It points out that millions of Americans live an existence far from the myth of the great country. They are struggling to survive just like millions in the so-called third world. It is the gangsters who run the show in Baghdad and in Michigan too.

The post Detroit And Iraq – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

An estimated 10,000 Christian men, women and children from communities in northern Iraq are abandoning their homes and most of their possessions as a result of the violence and killing being perpetrated by the terrorist group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), according to Friday’s report by the United Nations.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reports that a large number of Christian refugees fled to Iraq’s region controlled by the Kurds. It’s estimated that 300,000 Iraqis from Mosul and the nearby towns and villages have sought refuge with the Kurds.

“They fled by bus, car and taxi into Iraq’s northern Kurdistan region [beginning on] Wednesday night,” UNHCR spokesperson Melissa Fleming told reporters in Geneva, Switzerland. “Many are women and children staying with families, relatives and in schools and community centres, mostly in Erbil. They tell us they fled in a big rush, and didn’t bring many belongings with them so that is a sign of how afraid they are.”

So far this year, an estimated 1.2 million Iraqis have been displaced by fighting, including Christians and Shi’ite Muslims from Anbar and Ninewa governorates, according to UNHCR.

In recent weeks Iraq has seen violent armed groups sweep through a number of provinces sending massive numbers of desperate people fleeing for safety.

“The most vulnerable and poorest families have already experienced their share of tragedy over the last few years,” said WFP Executive Director Ertharin Cousin in a press release regarding her time in Iraq

She reported that she has met families who had escaped the bloody violence perpetrated in Mosul by ISIS. She also met with members of the de facto government of Kurdistan.

“Many [Iraqi Christians] are displaced in very harsh conditions. Lack of services, support and insecurity is forcing them to move around – in too many cases making these families difficult to reach,” Cousin stated.

The post Iraq: Thousands Of Christians Flee ISIS Bloodbath – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah emphasized Saturday that Saudi Arabia is determined to root out terrorism, adding that Riyadh would adopt all measures to protect citizens and residents from the menace.

In a message to the nation on the advent of Ramadan, King Abdullah expressed hope that militants who instigate terror in different parts of the world would return to their senses after realizing that such activity goes against the teachings of Islam.

The message, which was read out on Saudi Television by Culture and Information Minister Abdul Aziz Khoja, urged Muslims all over the world to stand united.

The king and crown prince congratulated Saudis and other Muslims across the world on the advent of the blessed month. He said fasting in Ramadan fosters feelings of mercifulness and compassion in the minds of the faithful, as they compete to fulfill acts of charity to win divine reward.

“During Ramadan, we celebrate the revelation of the Holy Qur’an as a form of guidance to mankind,” the message said, urging Muslims to spread its message.

“Islam is a religion of unity and brotherhood and it calls on people to engage in righteousness,” it added.

The message said the militants are confused, as they are unable to differentiate between reform and terrorism. The king stressed that Islamic teachings urge Muslims to uphold tolerance. “Our faith rejects all forms of terrorism and we will not allow a bunch of terrorists to frighten others.”

The post Saudi Arabia King: ‘We Are Determined To Crush Terrorism’ appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By David Nakamura

Move over, Republicans. President Barack Obama has a new bogeyman: The media.

The president has let out his frustrations on the Fourth Estate for failing, in his view, to cover serious issues facing the American people and instead focusing on the frivolous. “If you watch the news, you’d think, ‘OK, Washington is a mess and the basic attitude is that everybody’s crazy,” Obama told a crowd of 3,500 Friday at the Lake Harriet Band Shell.

Recounting his meeting with a local resident to discuss her difficulties paying her bills, Obama said: “You don’t see that on TV sometimes. It’s not what the press and pundits talk about. But I’m here to tell you I’m listening.”

Obama’s disdain for the political press is well known. But he seems to be emphasizing it as part of a new push aimed at portraying him as focused on solving problems such as the economy and the environment, while his Republican rivals are focused on blocking him at every turn.

“My message to Republicans is, ‘Join us. Get on board. If you’re mad (at) me helping people on my own, why don’t you join me and we’ll do it together. I’m happy to share the credit,’” Obama said.

On Thursday night, during a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Obama also denounced the press and the GOP for driving debates over “phony scandals.”

“We talk about Benghazi, and we talk about polls, and we talk about the tea party, and we talk about the latest controversy that Washington has decided is important,” he said.

The us-against-them narrative of Obama’s latest messaging is aimed at making him more accessible at a time when his approval ratings are near all-time lows for his tenure. Even as he criticizes members of the press, however, Obama has courted them at a series of photo-friendly events, including stops at a hamburger joint, a boutique grocery and an ice cream shop.

He has played to the cameras, turning to reporters in the ice cream parlor to say: “Press, you guys want some? On me. No? Is that unethical? I’m trying to soften you up.”

At the grocery, Obama turned to the cameras to explain that he carries only two things in his wallet — cash and his driver’s license, which he noted expires in 2016. He said the photo was dated but it was a good shot of him: “I was a little younger then.”

The president’s press office knows such moments are golden for television networks and local reporters who are eager to show Obama interacting with ordinary people. Members of the traveling White House press corps, having seen such antics before, usually hope that Obama will make more serious news by remarking on Iraq or the latest Supreme Court rulings. Alas, the president made no such comments during his Minnesota trip.

At the fundraiser, Obama said: “On Monday we had what we called a White House Working Families Summit. And we just talked about bread-and-butter issues that everybody talks about around the kitchen table but, unfortunately, don’t make it on the nightly news a lot.”

The post Obama’s New Bogeyman: The Press Corps – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

This week Americans will enjoy Independence Day with family cookouts and fireworks. Flags will be displayed in abundance. Sadly, however, what should be a celebration of the courage of those who risked so much to oppose tyranny will instead be turned into a celebration of government, not liberty. The mainstream media and opportunistic politicians have turned Independence Day into the opposite of what was intended.

The idea of opposing — by force if necessary — a tyrannical government has been turned into a celebration of tyrannical government itself!

The evidence is all around us.

How would the signers of the Declaration of Independence have viewed, for example, the Obama Administration’s “drone memo,” finally released last week, which claims to justify the president’s killing American citizens without charge, judge, jury, or oversight? Is this not a tyranny similar to that which our Founders opposed? And was such power concentrated in one branch of government not what inspired the rebellion against the English king in the first place?

The “drone memo,” released after an ACLU freedom of information request, purports to establish the president alone as the arbiter of who is or is not a terrorist subject to execution by the US government. There is no due process involved, just the determination of the president. Thus far the only American citizens killed by the president are Anwar al-Awlaki and his teenaged son, but the precedent has been established, according to the memo, that the president has the authority to kill Americans he believes are terrorists.

Even the New York Times, which generally backs whatever US administration is in power, is troubled by the White House’s legal justification to claim the authority to kill Americans. A Times editorial last week concluded that:

…the memo turns out to be a slapdash pastiche of legal theories — some based on obscure interpretations of British and Israeli law — that was clearly tailored to the desired result.

I agree with the New York Times’ conclusion that, “[t]his memo should never have taken so long to be released, and more documents must be made public. The public is still in the dark on too many vital questions.”

Coincidentally, in addition to the “drone memo” released last week, a broader study of the US use of drones was also released by the Stimson Center. The study, co-chaired by Gen. John Abizaid, former U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) commander, concluded that contrary to claims that drones help prevent wider conflicts by targeting specific individuals, the use of drones “may create a slippery slope leading to continual or wider wars.”

In fact, the study concluded, the use of drones overseas is likely counterproductive. “Civilian casualties, even if relatively few, can anger whole communities, increase anti-US sentiment and become a potent recruiting tool for terrorist organizations,” the study found.

Seven years ago I wrote in an Independence Day column:

Only the safe-guards and limitations that are enshrined in a constitutionally-limited republic can prohibit a nation from lurching toward empire…I hope every person who reads or hears this will take the time to go back and read the Declaration of Independence. Only by recapturing the spirit of independence can we ensure our government never resembles the one from which the American States declared their separation.

On Independence Day we should remember the spirit of rebellion against tyranny that inspired our Founding Fathers to set out our experiment in liberty. We should ourselves celebrate and continue that struggle if we are to keep our republic.

The post Ron Paul: Celebrate Independence Day By Opposing Government Tyranny – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

A study published recently in The Journal of American Medical Association suggested over 50 per cent cases involving the use of stents while performing angioplasty in the United States of America may have been “unnecessary”. And, the issue as touchy in India get predictable attention.

In India, media reports have been pointing to the unnecessary use of stents during procedure for quite some time now. A section of doctors too have admitted to the fact that many doctors across cities use stents in cases when not required.

In 2009, when a Kolkata-based septuagenarian’s wife fell ill, doctors at a leading multi-speciality clinic suggested she opt for angioplasty and put five stents in his wife’s arteries.

And, when she died within a few days, the arbitrary use of stents first made headlines.

50 percent of stenting done in the US, unnecessary: JAMA

In the article titled “The whole truth about coronary stents: The Elephant in the room,” Dr. Malhotra has cited a study published by JAMA in the US involving 1,44,737 patients in a total of 1,091 hospitals which suggested almost half the stenting done was unnecessary.

He cited another study which found that 88 percent of patients undergoing a procedure for stable angina (chest pain or discomfort due to poor blood flow through blood vessels in the heart) believed that angioplasty would prevent a myocardial infarction and given various scenarios, 43 percent of cardiologists would go ahead with stenting even when they thought it would not be of any benefit.

In fact, a study by National Heart and Lung Institute in the US last year suggested one per cent to two per cent of people who have stented arteries develop a blood clot at the stent site which can cause a heart attack or stroke.

In India, last few years have witnessed an almost identical trend. Although, in most cases, stents are used when the blockage is more than 70 per cent, a few doctors have conceded using stents even when the blockage is around 30 percent.

3.50L stents used in a year in India for 2.6L patients

The use of stents has been on the rise in different states across India. In February, it was reported that an increasing number of cardiac patients in Kerala were using heart stents. Last year, reportedly 3.50 lakh stents were implanted in more than 2.6 lakh patients in the country.

Concurrently, this spurt in the use of stents could also be attributed to the fact that the government had successfully brought down the cost of stents. “We felt that there was urgent need for the government’s intervention to reduce the prices of drug-eluting stents, the cost of which vary from Rs 50,000 to Rs 1.5 lakh. We successfully came to a decision to cut down on the price,” had said the state’s minister for public health Suresh Shetty.

The fact of the matter is that patients have to be educated about their condition fully so that their decision is a sound one. The decision made by the patient or his/her kin has to be an ‘informed’ one. But, most doctors tend to scare the patient into accepting the ‘only’ option available. With the doctor getting a ‘cut’ out of the cost of the stents used, there is a direct conflict of interest in the treatment involved.

Spreading awareness, informing the patient of every possible treatment option available including briefing the patient and the kin about the risks and benefits involved are the cornerstones of medical treatment. Coaxing a patient into opting for a ‘favourable’ option or scaring one into making a hasty, misinformed decision does amount to a breach of law.

Cases of medical negligence or cheating have hit news in the past couple of years in India. Patients, assuming the role of consumers, have learned to question things and when wronged, are not afraid to take the hospital or the doctor to court.

Rs 11 crore compensation awarded in negligence case

Last year, the Supreme Court passed a landmark judgement in which the kin of patient was rewarded a compensation of Rs 11 crore in a case involving medical negligence. Just a few years before this landmark judgement, an RTI application revealed, in West Bengal, only nine per cent of the doctors, accused of ‘medical negligence or ‘ethical violations’ in the preceding 10 years, were prosecuted or dismissed. For the rest of the cases, either the cases were closed or the concerned doctor, let off the hook.

According to data revealed by the RTI application, a total of 515 cases were filed against doctors in 10 years’ period and of those, only 15 doctors had been removed from the council’s list of registered practitioners and another 30 had been let off after ‘warnings’.

In 2013, a worrying fact had come to light. In India, there is no centralised collection of data on medical negligence cases filed or details of their outcome. In 2012, the Medical Council of India had said it would make the names of doctors convicted in medical negligence or ethical violation cases, public on its website. But, there still isn’t any centralised data pool of such cases.

The USA, Canada etc., keep a database of such cases and make public the names of hospitals and doctors involved to help prevent cases of medical malpractice, negligence and ethical violation. India needs to take cue and put similar processes, tweaked to meet domestic needs, in place and swiftly.

250 patients sue US doctor for using stents arbitrarily

In 2013, in Maryland, US around 250 patients filed a lawsuit against a doctor in a hospital alleging he had performed hundreds of procedures to implant heart stents that were not medically necessary.

The patients later reached a settlement with the hospital in question but the doctor accused of malpractice lost his job and his medical license.

India too needs to monitor, track and maintain a record of cases of medical malpractice and ethical violations to better her medical facility and ensure such cases are reduced to naught.

From a time when ‘no action were taken in 91 per cent of medical negligence and ethical violation cases’ as revealed by an RTI query in 2011 to compensation of Rs. 11 crore for a medical negligence case of 15 years ago, India has come a long way.

There yet is a lot that needs to be done to enhance accountability and eliminate ethical violations and malpractice within the medical fraternity.

Prescribing ‘lowest price’ drugs and procuring a patient’s ‘informed consent’ with regard to the use of procedures such as ‘stents’ and ensuring the patient get the ‘best deal possible and the lowest cost and risk’.

The post ‘Use’ Of Stents Now Being ‘Questioned’ In India – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Terrorists from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) have publicly executed and crucified eight rival militants in Syria.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on Sunday that the incident happened in Deir Hafer in the east of Aleppo Province.

The Britain-based group said the ISIL will keep the crucified bodies in the city’s main square for three days.

The developments come as al-Qaeda-linked militant groups are committing atrocities in Syria and Iraq.

Earlier on Saturday, a video footage showed militants shooting three men execution-style outside of the Syrian city of al-Raqqa.

Al-Qaeda militants are later seen throwing the dead bodies into a cleft in the rocks a few miles south of the execution site.

Clashes between the rival militant groups still continue despite an order by senior al-Qaeda leaders to stop the infighting.

Infighting has plagued militant groups fighting the Syrian government, as the army continues to gain more ground.

The army has captured most of the militant-held towns along the mountainous border with Lebanon since its November offensive began.

Syria has been gripped by deadly violence since March 2011. Over 160,000 people have reportedly been killed and millions displaced due to the violence fueled by the Western-backed militants.

The West and its regional allies including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are giving financial and military support to the militants.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has recently said the Takfiri war in his country has strongly shifted in favor of government forces as they have made continuous gains in their fight against the terrorists.

Original article

The post Syria: ISIL Crucifies Eight Opposition Fighters appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The World Cup upheld its reputation for offering the most dramatic of entertainment on Sunday as the Netherlands advanced to the quarterfinals with a last-gasp win over Mexico.

Mexico led the match for the better part of the second half after Giovani Dos Santos had given El Tri the lead in the 48th minute, but the Dutch responded with two late strikes as Wesley Sneijder and Klaas-Jan Huntelaar netted a goal apiece in the dying stages to overturn the deficit and progress to the next round.

On the surface, it appears as though Mexico was simply the victim of a sublime strike from Sneijder and some late theatrics from Arjen Robben, who was awarded the stoppage-time penalty that Huntelaar converted for the winner.

But paying closer attention to some of the preceding events, particularly the coaching decisions of both managers, reveals precisely why the Netherlands was able to stage such a late comeback.

Mexico bossed much of the contest, a large testament to the gusto that coach Miguel Herrera had instilled in the team when he first took over in 2013.

El Tri pestered the Dutch all over the pitch, making it difficult for Louis van Gaal’s men to create much in the way of scoring opportunities.

In attack, Mexico’s feverish movement caused a few problems for the Dutch defense, which was often drawn out of position on several occasions in order to account for players moving off the ball.

Mexico got its just reward less than three minutes into the second half when Dos Santos exploited some space in front of the Dutch center-backs to unleash a shot from distance that skipped past goalkeeper Jasper Cillessen.

The goal alleviated some of the pressure on El Tri, but the Mexicans were second-best for the remainder of the match, chiefly because of Herrera’s inapt substitution strategy.

With a one-goal lead in a one-off game, the Dutch were certain to push numbers forward in search of an equalizer, putting Herrera at a crossroads.

The first option for the Mexico boss was to relieve the energetic but tired Dos Santos with a like-for-like replacement, a tactic that would have encouraged counterattacking play to help El Tri ease some of the stress on the defensive unit while forcing the Dutch outside-backs to track back.

The other option was to take a striker off and insert a central midfielder to provide reinforcements in a defensive set-up.

Herrera went with the latter, putting Javier Aquino on for Dos Santos with 30 minutes left to play. It was a decision that had an adverse effect on Mexico as it invited pressure from the Netherlands attack, a circumstance that the Dutch capitalized upon with such a healthy amount of time on their side.

With the Dutch enjoying more of the ball in the wake of Mexico’s goal, Van Gaal was left to make a few key decisions of his own.

Already short on one substitution due to an early injury to Nigel de Jong, Van Gaal managed to make the most of his two swaps, both of which appeared to be calculated gambles.

Memphis Depay was inserted into the match for Paul Verhaegh in the 56th minute, a logical substitution given that the Netherlands was in need of a goal, but it was somewhat puzzling for such an attack-minded switch to come with so much time left in the affair.

But the real eyebrow-raiser came in the 76th minute when Van Gaal showed his gall by taking off star striker Robin van Persie, who entered the match with three goals in just two World Cup games, for Huntelaar, who had yet to feature in a World Cup contest in Brazil.

It paid off, though. Huntelaar’s presence in the center of the pitch helped occupy the Mexican defenders, freeing up a bit more space on the flanks for Depay and Robben.

Also, Huntelaar’s aerial ability is superior to Van Persie’s, a nuance that was not lost on Van Gaal.

Both of those strengths manifested themselves in goals for the Dutch as Huntelaar got on the end of a corner in the 88th minute to nod the delivery back to Sneijder to slam home the equalizer.

Robben then created the winner by exploiting space on the right side of the pitch to get to the end line. The Bayern Munich man cut the ball inside onto his favorite left foot and went down under slight contact from Rafa Marquez to earn a penalty, which Huntelaar converted with great assuredness.

That’s how it ended for Mexico, which was lucky to even qualify for the tournament at all. The team was in turmoil and cycled through four coaches in the span of a month, ultimately settling on Herrera.

It proved to be the right decision as Herrera helped unite and rejuvenate a team that was as dull and uninspired as it had ever been in recent memory.

But while Herrera deserves a host of credit for getting Mexico to the knockout round of the World Cup, his tactical shortcomings were responsible for the nation’s heartbreaking exit.

The post World Cup: Netherlands Beats Mexico 2-1 appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The first ten Russian Sukhoi fighter jets arrived in Iraq on Saturday, the country’s Defense Ministry said. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is hoping the jets will make a key difference in the fight against ISIS.

“The fighter jets landed today in the morning on different military airfields,” MP Abbas al-Bayati told Iraqi media.

The official spokesperson for the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, Mohammed al-Askari, also confirmed the information, Al Iraqiya TV channel reported.

The fighter jets will be stationed at an airbase located in the southern part of the country, PressTV reported, citing military sources.

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Maliki revealed that Iraq purchased jets from Russia and Belarus in order to help its fight against Sunni militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS/ISIL).

At the same time, Maliki criticized the US for taking too long to deliver on its own contract after Iraq purchased F-16 jets from America.

On Friday, Iraqi Air Force Commander Hameed al-Maliki confirmed the shipment of MI-35 and MI-28 Russian helicopter fighters to “keep the momentum” in the attacks against ISIS, Ruptly reported.

The commander said that he signed three contracts with the Russians and stressed the importance of the choppers as “excellent anti-terrorism weapons.”

The radical Sunni Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS or ISIL) has taken large parts of the country’s north from the Shia government.

Hundreds of Iraqi soldiers have been killed by insurgents since the Sunni militants began their offensive on June 9, according to Iraqi forces.

The United Nations says more than 1,000 people – mainly civilians – have been killed during the surge thus far.

The post Russia Sends Fighter Jets To Help Iraq appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Vijay Sakhuja

Last week, Hawaii witnessed one of the largest assemblies of Navies for the biennial Rim of the Pacific Exercises (RIMPAC) hosted by the Commander, US Pacific Fleet (PACFLT). Nearly 50 warships, half a dozen submarines, over 200 aircraft from Asia, Australia, Europe, Latin America and the US were involved in the exercises. RIMPAC began in 1971 during the Cold War and was targeted against the Soviet Union. Over the years, the participation, philosophy and content of the exercises has changed giving RIMPAC a global flavour. The interest in RIMPAC has grown steadily from 14 countries participating in 2010, 22 in 2012 and 23 in 2014 which is an encouraging sign. It does not appear to be targeted against any one power and the participants now address a number of maritime security threats and challenges which range from sea lane security to humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.

RIMPAC 2014 witnessed three new entrants- Brunei Darussalam, China and Norway; but Russia, which made its debut in 2012 RIMPAC, was conspicuously absent from this year’s exercises suggesting that the shadow of Russia’s actions in Ukraine had stretched as far as the Pacific.

Among the new participants, China appears to have attracted maximum attention. Since 2010, the US had been urging China to participate in the RIMPAC. There were a number of reasons for the US to encourage China to join the RIMPAC; first, the US wants to dispel any notion of containment among the Chinese which has been lingering since the 2008 RIMPAC in which China and Russia had been excluded raising speculations that the exercises were targeted against China.

Second, the US Navy hopes to enhance engagements with the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). There have been a number of incidents at sea between the two forces despite the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) signed in 1998. Significantly, incidents involving the USS Kitty Hawk (1992), EP-3 incident (2001), USS Impeccable (2009) and USS Cowpen (2013) continue to loom large in the minds of the Chinese who feel that the US is challenging China’s rise in the region and its growing naval power.

Third, the US is encouraging the Chinese side to be more transparent about its military spending, long term naval plans, strategy and intentions in the Asia Pacific region particularly in the South China Sea and the East China Sea which witnessed a number of incidents.

Fourth, the US Navy hopes to enmesh the Chinese into multilateral naval engagements. It may be mentioned that the PLA Navy is not new to multilateral naval exercises since it has been participating in biennial ‘Aman’ series of naval exercises hosted by the Pakistan Navy. In recent times, it has sent multiple task forces to the Gulf of Aden and actively participated in anti piracy operations off the coast of Somalia. Also, China has proactively engaged other navies during the ADMM Plus exercises in Brunei late last year.

The Chinese do not appear to be quite impressed by the US overtures partly due to their belief that the US will continue to contain China. Further, they are suspicious of the US motivations and intentions on account of its ‘pivot’ or ‘rebalance’ to the Asia Pacific which involves shifting about 60 per cent of US naval forces in the region by 2020.

But the Chinese do believe that by excluding themselves from the regional maritime and naval cooperative structures, they may accentuate the ‘China threat’ perception which pervades across the region. In that context, the endorsement of the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES) agreement on procedures for ‘conduct at sea’ during un-alerted meetings/sightings between warships of the member countries is noteworthy. They see cooperative engagements as opportunities to work together with regional countries to address non-traditional security threats across the maritime commons.

However, the question still remains whether participation in the RIMPAC would add to transparency (for the US) and dispel containment (for the Chinese). It would be fair to argue that the RIMPAC is a worthwhile tool for constructive engagement between the PLA Navy and the US Navy which can offer good dividends but to expect it to transform their relationship is rather ambitious. This is also applicable to other participating navies particularly the Japanese and the Indian navies who see the modernization of the Chinese Navy as a threat.

The PLA Navy’s participation in the RIMPAC may not serve the purpose of cooling tensions in the region, but it can potentially help mend fences between China and the US particularly after US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel’s remarks at the Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore accusing China of ‘destabilizing’ and the PLA deputy chief of staff counter-accusing Pentagon of ‘stoking fires’ in the region.

Dr Vijay Sakhuja is Director (Research) Indian Council of World Affairs, New Delhi.

The post Rim Of The Pacific Exercises (RIMPAC): Thaw In China-US Tensions? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Jim Garamone

The formation of a national unity government in Iraq will be key to defeating the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told National Public Radio Friday.

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey said it is clearly to America’s advantage to oppose ISIL. American teams now in Iraq are looking at the threat posed by ISIL and the means Iraq has to oppose that threat, he added.

ISIL is a trans-regional terror organization that originated in Syria and now controls large portions of Northern and Western Iraq. Iraqi security forces in those areas collapsed and did not confront the extremist threat.

“It’s in our national interest to begin to think through how to counter that threat,” Dempsey said.

To do so, the United States needs a credible partner in the Iraqi government, the top U.S. military officer told NPR. For more than a decade, U.S. officials have stressed to Iraqi leaders that military solutions “were only a part of the equation — that they had to take the opportunity to find a way to form a government that would work on behalf of all the people,” Dempsey said.

He said is disappointed that Iraqi leaders did not heed that advice and did not set up a government that reached out to all people of the nation. “My assessment of the situation we’re in today is not a military failure, but a failure of political leadership,” he noted.

ISIL’s advance into Iraq was accompanied by reports of massacres of Iraqi service members and citizens. But because many Iraqis are dissatisfied with their government, the group has managed to attract allies. These groups are not natural allies of ISIL, however, and if Iraq goes the route of a unity government, Dempsey said he fully expects these ISIL sympathizers to peal away from the group.

President Barack Obama has asked the U.S. military to work on options for him. “Those [options] do include high-value individuals who are the leadership of ISIL, it includes potentially the protection of … critical infrastructure,” the chairman said. “And then there is the issue of blunting attacks by massed groups of ISIL.”

The American teams in Iraq are refining the intelligence picture of the group. American aircraft are flying intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions over Iraq to color in that picture, “so that if the decision was made to support the Iraqi Security Forces as they confront ISIL, then we could do so,” Dempsey said.

Any options need to be precise, he noted.

“One thing we would absolutely have to be concerned about is that this doesn’t become an issue between Sunni and Shia, with us taking one side or the other,” the chairman said.

“There’s a great phrase that when there’s no center, there are only sides. And that’s why you’ve heard us — all those of us who’ve had experience in Iraq — state as a first principle that we really have to see what the Iraqis themselves, and in particular, the central government intends to do to try to get these groups into a better place,” he continued.

A lot depends on the assessment, Dempsey said. The American teams need to look at the Iraqi security forces and assess whether they can defend the nation.

“Once we have that assessment that will take one of two directions,” he said. “One is if they can defend Baghdad and we get indications that the central government intends to form a unity government that will begin to address the issues that have led to this uprising, if you will. Then I think that takes us on the path to provide a certain kind of support going forward.”

But if the assessment is that Iraqi forces may not hold together, or the central government is not forming a national unity government, “we still have the ISIL challenge, but we would probably look at other ways to address with other regional partners,” Dempsey said.

Iran has national interests in Iraq, and that must be taken under consideration, Dempsey said. “Iran has been active in Iraq for a very long time,” he said. “I can say with some confidence that Iran, which has a deep interest in the Shia holy sites, is undoubtedly providing assistance and support and advice on how to secure those holy sites. That wouldn’t surprise me at all. In fact, I would be surprised if we didn’t find it.”

The level of support Iran is giving Iraq will influence what the United States does. “One of the things we need to find out is whether Iran is embedded in and advising and supporting the Iraqi security forces,” he said. “That will take us in one direction. If they’re not, that’ll take us in another. And it’s really about understanding facts on the ground before we make a decision on how to address them.”

The chairman said the United States will “look at Iran with a cold eye on where and when we may need to operate in the same space and toward what is potentially the same goal of countering ISIL. But I can state with some assurance that their goals in Iraq are not going to be completely aligned with ours, and we’re very clear about that.”

The post Dempsey: Iraqi National Unity Needed To Counter ISIL appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Jamel Arfaoui

Human Rights Watch on Wednesday (June 25th) asked Tunisia to prosecute citizens implicated in war crimes in Iraq and Syria.

The call came two days after Interior Minister Lotfi Ben Jeddou confirmed that at least 2,400 Tunisian jihadists were “fighting in Syria, most of them with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and Jabhat al-Nusra, affiliated with al-Qaeda in Syria”.

According to Human Rights Watch (HRW) official Nadim Houry, video on Facebook of a “Tunisian involved in killing Iraqi border guards should serve as a wake-up call to Tunisian authorities to investigate and prosecute any war crimes by Tunisian nationals in Iraq and Syria”.

“Abu Hamza al-Mouhamadi, which appears to be his nom de guerre, is seen interrogating five detained guards, and slapping them. In a second video, he orders the detained men to pledge allegiance to ISIS and denounce Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki,” the HRW report said.

After one of the captured men refuses to repeat the words “The state of Islam forever”, Abu Hamza pushes him down, putting a gun to his throat and repeats his demand.

The execution is not shown but the guard is later seen shot in the face.

“When a Tunisian extremist so brazenly boasts of his crimes online, the authorities should send a clear and unequivocal message to all Tunisians that they won’t tolerate such conduct,” Houry said.

As the graphic videos circulate on the internet, Tunisians are voicing support for HRW’s demand for action.

Noureddine Lembarki, a specialist in Islamist groups, said that along with prosecuting jihadists, Tunisia should also investigate “the parties who facilitated their travel and provided political cover for them”. These facilitators “contributed directly to the crimes”, he told Magharebia.

“The call for an investigation into the involvement of Tunisians in acts of mass murder in Syria and Iraq confirms the need for Tunisia to speed up the issuance of an anti-terrorism law, with its chapters to criminalise taking arms abroad,” the analyst added.

As political activist Mohamed Safi Jalali argued, action on the issue by the Tunisian government would also help deter anyone tempted to fight in another country.

“From now on, they’ll think twice before any adventure,” Jalali said. Criminal prosecutions would help fortify the rest of world from these killers, “because the fire will be extended soon to all”, Jalali said.

Activist Sara Belhaj Ali agreed that Tunisians implicated in foreign jihad needed to be tried by international courts.

“This will prevent them from escaping punishment and repeating their crimes in other locations,” she said.

The post Tunisian Jihadist Video Sparks Outrage appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Nadin Bahrom

Tajik authorities are confronting the recruitment of their country’s young men into foreign insurgencies, a trend that they fear could lead to terrorism within Tajik borders.

In the past five and a half years, the country has witnessed 39 terrorist acts and 233 extremist crimes. The authorities have struck back with police work and prosecution.

“We opened 183 criminal cases against extremists [over that time period],” Prosecutor General Sherkhon Salimzoda said. “We eliminated those groups and prosecuted the extremists.”

“Recruiting of Tajik citizens into armed conflicts is happening abroad,” Interior Minister Ramazon Rakhimzoda said. “This mainly happens in dubious … schools. … We have some information on Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan and other countries. For the most part, our citizens are already abroad before they go off to fight.”

“[Recruited Tajiks] mainly were studying in Egypt and in … Waziristan,” Salimzoda said of what authorities know of some of the so-called jihadists.

Some media, though, have reported recently that terrorist recruiters are also operating inside Tajikistan, and that is a challenge. “Although Tajikistan has the legal foundation for fighting terrorism and extremism and it is a … government priority, it isn’t easy for us,” Salimzoda said.

Banned groups

The Supreme Court has banned 12 terrorist groups from operating in Tajikistan, including Jamaat Ansarullah, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and others. However, they continue striving to lure impressionable young men into their fold.

Recently, a page called Jamaat Ansarullah appeared on the Odnoklassniki social networking site. The page contains videos showing Tajik-speaking insurgents, purportedly in Syria. More than 20 masked men and one unmasked man can be seen in the videos, urging viewers to join the “jihad.”

In the clips, the militants say that more than 600 Tajik citizens are fighting in Syria, as opposed to a Syrian estimate of more than 190.

Anger among Tajik viewers

The reaction to such efforts at recruitment has been highly negative in Tajikistan.

“I am strongly against the idea of Tajiks fighting on any side in a jihad,” Hikmatullo Saifullozoda, a member of the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan’s higher policy council, said.

During the past four years, Tajik authorities fearful of brainwashing have worked to bring back more than 2,700 citizens who had been enrolled in various academies abroad.

“Religion is peace, brotherhood and unity,” the chief of the Sughd Oblast branch of the Tajik Ulema Council, Huseynchona Musozoda, said. “We’ve been hearing that people are committing murder, blowing things up and saying Allahu Akbar … as if they’ll end up in heaven. However, they will end up in hell.”

“Preachers should speak from the minbar … about the impropriety of such actions,” Dushanbe cleric Haji Akbar Turajonoda said. “A jihad is when a Muslim comes to help other Muslims incapable of defending their country from non-Muslims. This isn’t what is happening in Syria.”

Outreach urged

Tajikistan needs to find a way to stop jihadist recruiting, various observers say.

“Theologians, the Education Ministry and others should be doing outreach,” Oynikhol Bobonazarova, a human rights defender with the NGO Perspektiva+, said. “Not all individuals who go there are motivated by religion. Some are [hoping to make money.]”

“When jihadists come home, we need to work with them,” religious scholar Faridun Khodizoda said. “We mustn’t lock them up in jail, where they can ‘infect’ other prisoners. We need to have them look back on the conflict zones and fighting as a terrible dream.”

The post Tajiks Stand Against Extremist Recruiting appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Samir K Purkayastha

By making Bhutan his first port of call as prime minister, Narendra Modi tried to send across a message that his foreign policy will give maximum weight to neighbouring countries in south Asia, irrespective of their size and stature.

It is a refreshing move as there has been a growing perception among our smaller neighbours that India often take them for granted and treat them as insignificant ‘younger ’ brothers who can be arm-twisted at will.

Even deep-rooted ties with Bhutan were strained in 2012-13 following India’s so-called ‘tit-for-tat’ move to stop supplying subsidized kerosene and cooking gas to the Himalayan country.

The decision was apparently in retaliation to the then Bhutanese Prime Minister Jigme Y. Thinley’s move to chart his country’s foreign policy independently , specially woo China and without taking India into confidence.

This despite a provision in the Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty of 1949 that the land-locked kingdom would conduct its foreign policy on India’s advice.

Much to India’s chagrin, Thinley even had an informal chat with the Chinese premier at Rio de Janeiro in 2012. It was the first interaction between a Bhutanese head of the government with his Chinese counterpart.

In another clear signal of Bhutan’s growing keenness to do business with Beijing, it had procured 15 environment friendly buses from China.

India’s retaliatory move, however, did not auger well with Bhutanese
intelligentsia as has been evident from some of their strong anti-India blog posts in the wake of subsidy cut.

Apart from cutting subsidy on oil and gas to Bhutan, only immediate
neighbouring country where China has no strategic presence, India had also announced non-payment of excise duty refund and scrapping subsidy on power generated from Chukha hydel project.

Many in Bhutan see those harsh steps as New Delhi’s highhanded approach in controlling the sovereign affairs of a sovereign country just because it is highly depended on India.

All of Bhutan’s Five Years Plans till date has been supported by India. India is also its largest trading partner that accounts for 98 percent of its exports and 90 percent of its imports.

But despite such considerable assistance, Bhutan started straying towards Beijing. In 2012, the then Chinese deputy minister of foreign affairs, Fu Ying, visited Thimphu to discuss the establishment of diplomatic ties with Bhutan. Eventually, though it did not materialise, it was enough to give an indication that Thimphu can no longer be taken for granted.

In his high voltage maiden foreign visit, Modi has exactly tried to send across that message—his government will treat its neighbour with whom India shares 605-kilometer-long border as a valued friend and not a younger brother who is sustained on benevolence.

Bhutan has agreed to address India’s security concerns by heightening vigilance on its southern borders to keep out northeast Indian rebel groups who were thrown out from there in 2003 . It has also agreed to supply India 10000MW of hydel power by 2020. Modi has stressed on cultural relations — proposing a Himalayan sports festival with Nepal, Bhutan and northeast Indian states and an Institute for Himalayan studies. He told Bhutanese leaders India would open to import more from Bhutan to address its adverse
trade balance and also ensure it has enough rupees to pay for Indian
imports.

The only faux pas Modi was involved in was in the name — while addressing the Bhutanese parliament , he once said Nepal when he meant Bhutan and again said Ladakh when he meant Bhutan.

They may say what is in the name but surely Bhutan will neither like to be called Nepal nor Ladakh.

The post Message Of Modi’s Bhutan Visit – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Abanti Bhattacharya

With the Chinese foreign minister’s June visit to New Delhi and interactions with the US president in the offing coupled with Prime Minister Modi’s proposed visit to Japan have all infused a new dynamism in Indian foreign policy. Along with it has emerged a new momentum in India’s neighbourhood with the renewed focus on revitalising the SAARC process. In the new context, however, have emerged questions on the efficacy of strategic autonomy and non-alignment in Indian foreign policy. There is a thinking that Modi needs to jettison the redundant policy of non-alignment that the UPA government professed in the post-Cold War garb of strategic autonomy.

However, prior to any re-thinking on India’s foreign policy, it is necessary to shed the myopic and divisive categorization of Indian foreign policy into pro and anti-Nehruvian positions. Also, it is necessary to understand that in the present geo-political order where the US and China have distinctly emerged as rivals India has greater room for manoeuverability. Further, India does not require playing the role of a swing power akin to China in the 1970s and 80s. The reason is germane to the altered nature of global politics. India does not confront the ideologically pitted Cold War politics of the US and the USSR. Further, in the deepening trends of globalization, the economies of the US and China is deeply entwined precluding strict division of the global politics along pro or anti-US axis. Furthermore, the countries like the US, Pakistan and China have now come around advocating a common mission to end terrorism and focussing on economic integration and common prosperity.

The global thrust on economic integration has certainly accrued greater space to India that the non-alignment actually stands for. It allows India to reach out to both the US and China without fear of taking sides and draw in the benefits from both of manufacturing, investments, trade and commerce. It has also enabled India to rope in Japan in developing its backward northeast region much to the irritation of the Chinese. In fact, both Japan and China are competing to strengthen economic ties with India. This gives India leverage to bargain for the best economic deals conducive to its national interest.

In this emerging geo-political order where there is a common synergy among nations on growth and development, India under Modi does not require to jettison the non-alignment principles but to focus on fulfilling the two goals of domestic economic reform and external stability underscored in the principle. Simply put, non-alignment is essentially a route to great power status – a strategy that is independent of external forces by prioritizing national interest and ensuring strategic maneuverability. In fact, China appropriated the same strategy in 1982 under Deng Xiaoping underlined in the ‘independent foreign policy of peace’ and which resonates predominantly its foreign policy today.

Indeed, Nehru had upheld the non-alignment to project India’s great power aspirations. In fact, non-alignment was the only and best principle available to Nehru in the post-Independent India confronted with precarious domestic and external environment. Internally, India was confronted with settling the fate of some five-hundred odd princely states. Coupled with this, was the linguistic movements that shook the very fabric of the nation. With the Pakistani invasion on the northern frontiers, the question of Kashmir loomed large. Also, the establishment of a Communist regime in China followed by its invasion of Tibet created a grave situation in the north. Above all, the emergence of bipolar politics in the post-War era put India in a precarious situation. After the hard earned independence, Nehru’s primary concern was economic rejuvenation to propel India to the ranks of a great power status. And for India’s rise the preeminent necessity was peace in the external frontier. In this context, Nehru propagated non-alignment that gave freedom of action to pursue national rejuvenation. This rationale also drove him to join hands with China knowing fully well the irredentist aspirations of the newly emerged Communist government.

Clearly, non-alignment was born out of the difficult external and internal security conditions. However, this great power aspiration floundered on the 1962 debacle. This however, does not signal the failure of non-alignment. Rather, the quest for great power status failed because there was a disjuncture between theory and praxis. The weaknesses in the domestic front coupled with the external volatility of Cold War politics had derailed Nehru’s great power vision. Today India is better positioned. It is the third largest economy in Asia and fourth in the world. Also, externally, India does not require to take sides and instead engage both the US and China. More importantly, there is an alignment today that was absent in Nehru’s time between Modi’s dream of making India strong and prosperous and the external environment wedded to the principles of growth and prosperity.

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://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/NonAlignmentinModisIndia_abhattacharya_290614.html

The post Why Non-Alignment Has Greater Relevance In Modi’s India – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

North Korea says it is preparing to put two American tourists on trial for committing crimes against the state.

The official Korean Central News Agency said Monday that Jeffrey Fowle and Matthew Miller had committed “hostile acts” that were confirmed by their testimony and evidence.

North Korean media said 56-year-old Fowle entered the country on April 29 and was arrested for acts not consistent with being a tourist. The French news agency says he was detained after he left a Bible in his hotel room.

Pyongyang says 24-year-old Miller entered the North on April 10 and was arrested after he ripped up his tourist visa and demanded asylum.

No details were given on the dates of the trials.

North Korea has also been holding Korean-American missionary Kenneth Bae since November 2012. He is serving 15 years of hard labor for what Pyongyang says were hostile acts against the state.

The post North Korea To Indict Two American Tourists appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Once upon a time, thousands of years ago, a proud and independent nation lived and thrived in its own land in the heart of the Middle East. Throughout the ages, although subject to many foreign invasions, this people refused to be integrated with their various conquerors and retained their distinctive culture. At the start of the First World War, their country was a small part of the Ottoman empire. Afterwards, in shaping the future Middle East, the Western powers, in particular the United Kingdom, promised to act as guarantors of this people’s freedom. It was a promise subsequently broken.

The broad outlines of this story may sound familiar, but no, it is not the Jewish people or Israel being described. It is the long, convoluted and unresolved history of the Kurds. Yet events have conspired to bring the Kurdish and the Jewish people into an embryonic relationship that might yet develop into a new political force in the Middle East.

The Kurds are an ethnic group who have historically inhabited a distinct geographical area flanked by mountain ranges, once referred to as Kurdistan. No such location is depicted on current maps, and the old Kurdistan now falls within the sovereign space of four separate states. Even so, the area is still recognizable, and the people who inhabit it still consider themselves Kurds.

It is certainly an odd, indeed unique, situation. What was once Kurdistan, together with all its 30-plus million inhabitants, is currently divided between Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria. Most Kurds live within Turkey’s borders, but Kurds form the largest minority in Syria, while within Iraq they have developed a near autonomous state.

As for Turkey, more than 40,000 people have been killed in the three-decade conflict between Turkey and the Kurdish independence movement, the PKK. Comprising about 20% of Turkey’s 77 million population, fractious Kurds have long been a pressing political problem for Turkey. But on June 25, 2014 Turkey’s government took its first concrete step in an effort to secure peace with its Kurdish population, seeking to advance talks ahead of elections in August, when Erdogan will doubtless become the country’s first directly elected president. Even though Erdogan is seeking the Kurdish vote, there is no possibility of Turkish Kurds being granted any form of autonomy. It may seem paradoxical, but Erdogan strongly supports Kurdish independence in Iraq – mainly, one suspects, because he would prefer a weakened and divided Iraq on his doorstep to a strong unified state.

As for the rest of historic Kurdistan, the current turmoil within the Middle East has provided the Kurds an unexpected opportunity to reassert their long-suppressed yearning to rule themselves. There is a surprising sub-text to this upsurge in Kurdish self-confidence – growing indications that the Kurdish leadership is anxious for a close and friendly working relationship with Israel.

Kurdish nationalism emerged with the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, largely as a reaction to the secular nationalism that revolutionized Turkey under Mustafa Kemal in the 1920s. The first of many violent uprisings occurred in 1923 and, after 20 more years of struggle, Mullah Mustafa Barzani emerged as the figurehead for Kurdish separatism. He helped set up a Kurdish Republic (KDP) in Iran in 1946, but this was crushed by the Iranian army and he was forced into exile.

When the monarchy in Iraq was overthrown in 1958, Barzani returned but, just two years later, after another uprising, his KDP was broken up by the Iraqi government. A peace deal between the government of Iraq and the Kurdish rebels was eventually signed in 1970, granting recognition of their language and self-rule, though clashes over control of the oil-rich area around Kirkuk continued.

When Barzani died in 1979, the leadership of the KDP passed to his son, Masoud. But a new – and, as it turned out, rival – force had emerged in Kurdish politics with the founding by Jalal Talabani of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK). During the Iran-Iraq War, which began in 1980, the KDP sided with the Iranians against Saddam Hussein and helped launch an offensive from the north. In retribution Saddam ordered the notorious poison gas attack on the Kurdish town of Halabja, during which some 5,000 civilians were massacred.

Later, during the 1990s, the KDP and the PUK fought a bitter civil war for control of the Kurdish-dominated parts of northern Iraq. Finally, in 1998, Barzani of the KDP and Talabani of the PUK agreed a peace treaty and signed a joint leadership deal. Eventually the two organizations established a unified regional government. Masoud Barzani became a member of the Iraqi Governing Council and later served as its president. He was elected President of Iraqi Kurdistan in June 2005.

Meanwhile in Syria the civil war brought the Kurds to the forefront of the region’s politics. Syrian government forces abandoned many Kurdish occupied areas in the north and north-east of the country, leaving the Kurds to administer them themselves. In October 2011, sponsored by Iraqi Kurdish President Barzani, the Syrian Kurds established a Kurdish National Council (KNC) composed of no less than 15 separate parties all pressing for Kurdish autonomy.

In June 2014, the leader of the Kurdish Left, one of the 15, penned a letter to Israel’s President-elect Reuven Rivlin. Israel “isn’t our enemy,” wrote Mahsum Simo; Syrian President Bashar Assad and his aides were. “We in the Kurdish Left Party ask the government and people of Israel to stand by the Syrian people [more than before],” he said.

On June 25, the Jerusalem Post reported that Amir Abdi, the head of foreign relations for the Kurdish Party, when asked what kind of relationship his party envisages with Israel, responded: “We share a strong relationship with the friendly State of Israel and do not forget” the aid they have given to wounded Syrians inside their country.

His sentiment was reiterated by Mohammed Adnan, chairman of the Revolutionary Congregation for Syria’s Future which, he explained, was made up of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.

“It is our job to build a peaceful future,” he said, and “cooperate with Israel…We are ready to make peace.”

Mendi Safadi, an Israeli Druse who served as former Likud deputy minister Ayoub Kara’s chief of staff, has independently met with members of the liberal and democratic Syrian opposition who want friendly relations with Israel. Safadi asserts that these moderate opposition groups want to make the unprecedented offer of inviting an Israeli representative to take part in future working meetings with foreign government representatives.

These are straws in the wind, indeed. It seems clear that if Iraqi Kurdistan eventually emerges as a sovereign state, Israel will be among the first to recognize it. And if any sort of united or autonomous Kurdistan straddling Syria, Iraq and Iran emanates from the current turmoil, Israel might find itself with a valuable friend and ally within the very heartland of the Middle East.

The post The Kurds And Israel: Straws In The Wind – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Stuart Littlewood

I’ve been reprimanded for being too critical of the Presbyterian Church (USA) which has taken 10 years and 5 general assemblies to deal with its objectionable investments, and then only by the narrowest of voting margins.

An email arrived this morning urging me to “show some love to Presbyterians coming under attack for divesting”. Of course I warmly congratulate the 310 delegates who voted for divestment, but the 303 who apparently still think it’s OK for the Church to invest its money in companies that profit from Israel’s illegal occupation of the Holy Land get no hugs and kisses from me. I expect better from a major Christian church with nearly 2 million members. I expect it to be able to tell right from wrong and not drag their feet while defenseless Christian communities suffer horribly in the land where Christianity was born.

Winning the vote relied too much on the efforts of outside groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace, who provided strong moral support against massive Zionist pressure to reject divestment. The vote simply wasn’t convincing enough to put the matter beyond doubt and could be reversed next time.

The divestment decision coincided with the election of a new Moderator, Dr Heath Rada, who was immediately berated by Jewish propagandists and ambushed by CNN. He seemed ill-prepared to take on the important role of front-man.

How could Rada have been surprised by the line CNN took? His performance against the ‘professionals’ will have undone a lot of hard work by the foot-soldiers. And he seems to know diddly-squat about the true situation in the Holy Land.

A post-conference letter from the Presbyterian leadership summarized the business done at the General Assembly, including this key decision:

“The Assembly approved a measure to divest from three corporations – Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions – it believes are not in compliance with the church’s policy on socially responsible investing. The decision is a significant step in the denomination’s policy that says it should not profit from ‘non-peaceful pursuits’. This does not constitute divestment from Israel – the church maintains significant investments in companies that do business in Israel.”

So what’s the problem? That’s right, there isn’t one.

‘Choose your friends wisely, they will make or break you.’ – J. Willard Marriott

A much sillier issue for Dr Rada and US Presbyterians is the mishandling of the study booklet ‘Zionism Unsettled’, which came out earlier this year. One Jewish leader complained that it was “worthy of a hate group, not a prominent American church”. Others said it attacked the very legitimacy of the Zionist enterprise. According to Dr Rada, in the CNN interview, the Presbyterian General Assembly doesn’t support what ‘Zionism Unsettled’ says. He thought the publication had “become so inflammatory that it is a problem” and would be removed from sale.

If a Congregational Study Guide is published under the Presbyterian Church’s banner, one supposes that it has been checked and double-checked to make sure it is “legal, decent, honest and truthful” – the universal standard by which advertisements and other promotional material are judged. So what can possibly be so objectionable that senior churchmen are dropping it like a hot potato?

It was produced by the Israel/Palestine Mission Network (IPMN), an organization of the Presbyterian Church (USA) set up to encourage wider and deeper Presbyterian involvement with Palestinian Christians and advocate for the human rights of Palestinians under military occupation.

On the question of Zionism the Church previously voted to “challenge and encourage discussion of theological interpretations that confuse biblical prophesies and affirmations of covenant, promise, and land, which are predicated on justice, righteousness, and mercy, with political statehood that asserts itself through military might, repressive discrimination, abuse of human rights, and other actions that do not reveal a will to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with God”. This comes from the Church’s 2003 paper ‘End the Occupation now’.

The IPMN “speaks to the church not for the Church”. Nevertheless, the Church cannot pretend the ‘Zionism Unsettled’ booklet isn’t theirs. No-one is going to believe that the Church chiefs didn’t approve it before making it available to the public, especially as it claims to provide “helpful guidance on how you and your congregation can contribute to the cause of just peace for the people who share the Holy Land and promote more truthful relationships among followers of the three Abrahamic religions”.

Exactly what is needed, one might have thought since Zionism is to many minds the central problem in the Holy Land and beyond. If the 76-page work is as honest as it should be, the following announcement is all the more astonishing: “The 221st General Assembly (2014) declares that ‘Zionism Unsettled’ does not represent the views of the Presbyterian Church (USA) and directs all Presbyterian Church (USA) entities to express this statement in all future catalogs, print or online resources.”

At best it looks like a betrayal of the truth (assuming the publication is accurate) and a stab in the back for one of the Church’s most important missions.

The publication was still for sale on the PC(USA) website for $10 when I looked yesterday. Trying to bury it while openly selling it is madness in the present highly charged atmosphere. Either say what’s wrong and bin it or get four-square behind it.

Frequently Asked Questions on the Church’s website makes its position on various issues clear. Here are just a few examples..

• The General Assembly has called for a study to determine whether a two-state solution continues to be viable. [Makes sense, as fewer and fewer informed people think so. The language describing this measure is reassuringly robust.]

• Regarding ‘Zionism Unsettled’, the Assembly declared that the publication does not represent the views of the Presbyterian Church (USA)… [But they ought to explain WHY.]

• The following companies were found to be out of compliance with the Church’s investment criteria, as well as resistant to change and further dialogue:

Caterpillar provides bulldozers used in the destruction of Palestinian homes and for clearing land of structures and fruit and olive tree groves in preparation for construction of the barrier wall. [According to Haaretz, Caterpillar say they don't sell equipment to Israel, only to the US Government. This needs checking.]

Hewlett-Packard has extensive involvement with the Israeli army and provides electronic systems at checkpoints, logistics and communications systems to support the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip, as well as business relationships with illegal settlements in the West Bank.

Motorola Solutions provides military communications and surveillance systems in illegal Israeli settlements.

• In 2012, the General Assembly approved an additional layer of corporate engagement: the boycott of all Israeli products produced in the occupied Palestinian Territories. This is not a cultural or academic boycott, or a boycott against any product made in Israel. Instead, it is a call to recognize that factories in illegal settlements extend the occupation and prevent a just peace between Israel and Palestine.

There’s no need to explain further to the media or inquisitive Jewish groups.

The Playground Bully

The reaction of Jewish ‘friends’ to the Presbyterians’ perfectly reasonable divestment decision has been anything but friendly. An important challenge for the Church, therefore, must be how to keep its strange friendship with interfering Jewish groups from getting in the way of its Christian duty. It fears offending the Jewish community but must be aware of the vicious crimes Israelis commit daily against its Christian brothers and sisters in the Holy Land. Given the endless suffering inflicted on Palestinians – Christian and Muslim alike — in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Jews living comfortably in America are hardly in a position to whine about being offended. The offence is theirs if they defend Israel’s conduct. The offence is also theirs if they fail to condemn it.

On the PC(USA)’s decision to divest, the President of the Union for Reform Judaism said: “PC(USA) has by a very narrow margin chosen its preference for a policy of isolation rather than one of engagement…. I said to the Assembly: ‘You can chose partnership and engagement or you can choose separation and divestment.’ Were they to have chosen to continue working cooperatively with us on peace efforts to make real a two-state solution, I offered to facilitate a meeting of the Presbyterian leadership with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. At this meeting we would have discussed with the Prime Minister any areas of concern about Israel’s policies regarding the Palestinians. With their vote today, they have, sadly, chosen the latter course of divestment and separation. So be it.”

A false dichotomy of course, followed by a ludicrous bribe. Meeting Netanyahu would change nothing (except that you’d come home processed, brainwashed and re-programmed) just as “working co-operatively” with most Jewish groups has achieved nothing and never will.

The Israeli Embassy in Washington said: “The resolution of the Presbyterian Church this evening in Detroit is shameful. It removes its ability to be a constructive partner to promote peace in the Middle East….” Note that anyone who goes against Israel’s wishes is no longer a partner for peace, as if peace was ever on Israel’s agenda. Right now 250 Palestinian children abducted from their homes or the streets and 23 Palestinian MPs are reported to be banged up in Israeli jails, representing Israel’s peaceful intent.

Rabbi Noam Marans, the American Jewish Committee’s director of Interreligious and Intergroup Relations stated: “The PCUSA leadership is facilitating the delegitimization of Israel in the guise of helping Palestinians. It is a very sad day for Presbyterian-Jewish relations when church leaders from across the US align with the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. This is an affront to all who are committed to a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The PCUSA decision is celebrated by those who believe they are one step closer to a Jew-free Middle East.” He added that the PCUSA leadership should have told church members: ‘We will not support misinformation, we will not condone propagandist indoctrination. Instead, they have empowered those within the denomination who are driven by hatred of Israel to undermine support for the peaceful resolution of the conflict via a directly negotiated two-state solution.” The irony of his words is completely lost on Marans, it seems.

Is this the language of Jewish-Christian friendship? No. It’s the voice of playground bullies in a concerted attempt to stifle legitimate debate and obstruct responsible action. Those of us who don’t hang around religious playgrounds have no time for it. In the real world outside of religion and corrupt politics anyone who speaks in such a disrespectful manner is sent packing.

Say Goodbye

Naturally, the Church must continue to engage across the faiths with genuine peace-seekers, but why get embroiled with those who are indifferent to the crimes of the Zionist regime and respond to the slightest criticism with hateful smears and accusations?

Hopefully the divestment rumpus has injected a dose of realism. The time has surely come for Presbyterians (and other denominations) to take J Willard Marriott’s advice and review their friendships and say goodbye to those whose purpose, through intimidation, is to blunt Christian decency and undermine freedom of action.

Unfortunately an Open Letter reaching out from the PC(USA) leadership to “our American Jewish Interfaith Partners” makes no distinction, so it looks like business as usual with the playground bullies.

Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Visit: www.radiofreepalestine.org.uk.

The post US Presbyterians Under Pressure For Doing Their Christian Duty – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

This interview with Sarah Harrison of the Courage Foundation is based on a radio interview conducted by Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese on Clearing The FOG, originally heard on We Act Radio, 1480 AM in Washington, DC also available by podcast.

Sarah Harrison is a British journalist, legal researcher, and WikiLeaks Investigation Editor. She works with WikiLeaks and is a close adviser to Julian Assange. Harrison accompanied National Security Agency whistleblower, Edward Snowden, on a high-profile flight from Hong Kong to Moscow while he was sought by the United States government. She is Director of the new Courage Foundation which seeks to defend whistleblowers as well as our right to know.

Kevin Zeese: Sarah, tell us what the Courage Foundation is and what the goals of the organization are.

Sarah Harrison: The Courage Foundation was born from the idea that whistleblowers need protection from prosecution. When we first started to help Edward Snowden, there were many other NGOs and organizations around the world that should have been able to help him; but, when it comes to high risk people with huge persecution from places like the United States, the reality is that to move quickly and robustly to provide the support they need is actually very difficult. So after we helped Snowden, we realized that there was a need for an organization that was able to do this for future Snowdens as well. So we set up Courage on that basis. In addition, Courage will be fighting for policy and legal changes to give whistleblowers the protections they deserve. I’m very pleased that you accepted to be on our advisory board Kevin.

Kevin Zeese: Thank you for inviting me to be on the board. I also like the way you frame the issue of the public’s right to know as part of the agenda because I think that is essential to having any kind of Freedom of Speech in the 21st century. It is important to frame it as not just our right to speak but our right to have information.

Sarah Harrison: In the United States they are aggressively going after whistleblowers and truth tellers. When you look at the Jeremy Hammond case, he exposed abuses by the private intelligence organization, Stratfor, that was spying on Bhopal activists. He was aggressively prosecuted by U.S. courts and sentenced to ten years in prison. You see persecution against individual journalists and publishers as well. Anyone that is speaking truth to power in any real manner is being come down upon by the U.S. government to try and set examples and to stop the truth from being exposed in the future.

Kevin Zeese: That is exactly right. You are a good person to be directing Courage because you have showed a lot of courage, I don’t know if you knew what you were getting into when you escorted Snowden to Russia but I’m sure that it has had a big impact on your security and liberty. Now that you are based in Germany, are you able to go back to the UK? Do you fear prosecution? What are your thoughts on the risks that you took?

Sarah Harrison: I was aware that there were obviously potent risks. I think it was dependent on how far we managed to get in the process. But, I think it was a risk worth taking. I wanted to show that there was another example, other than Chelsea Manning who was put in a cage. Chelsea was the last example of a high profile whistleblower that the world had seen. I wanted to show that there was another possibility that you could be in another country with asylum. In addition I think it was important to show future whistleblowers that if you come forward and expose wrong doing that there are people who will stand with you and help you no matter what the cost.

Previous whistleblowers, Thomas Drake, William Binney, and Daniel Ellsberg talk about it and often say it is a process where they feel very alone after they’ve blown the whistle because they miss their job, their families and their whole world. And I think it is very important to show a sense of solidarity around whistleblowers.

The reason that you spoke about me not being able to go home: I’m from the United Kingdom which has a very strange law that is part of the Terrorism Act called Schedule 7. It is what they stopped David Miranda, Glenn Greenwald’s partner, under and it happens in sea ports and airports, essentially, where you are not fully in UK jurisdiction but you are subject to the will of their officials. If you’re stopped for questioning under Schedule 7, you are compelled to answer their questions. You have no right to silence. And if you do not answer some of their questions, which someone in my position would be unable to do for source protection reasons, you commit a crime upon entry. It’s a very unique situation in the U.K. that makes it actually quite dangerous for anyone that really has to uphold source protection for their job.

Margaret Flowers: What are some of the legal changes that you see are necessary to protect people who are trying to expose the truth?

Sarah Harrison: There are a couple of things: first, we really need to understand that precedents are trying to be set around the world that allow prosecution of publishers, editors, journalists and whistleblowers. For example, if you look at the grand jury examining Wikileaks in the United States, this is a secret court proceeding that is trying in any way possible to convict a publisher. People need to see that these are dangerous precedents that are being set and fight against these secret processes.

When it comes to whistle blower protections, one of the things to fight for going forward is to understand the realities of the situation. It is unrealistic to expect that a country is suddenly going to put in place laws that are really going to protect someone like Snowden who comes forward with such high value classified information. It is better to focus on agreements and conventions between countries that prevent extradition so there is the ability to support a whistle blower from another country somewhere else.

Kevin Zeese: Those are great points. You know in the United States there are a couple of things I would add to answer your question, Margaret. One would be the Espionage act. It was a World War I law that was rarely used and President Obama has used it more than any other president, in fact he has used it more than all the presidents combined and doubled. It was the most serious charge of which Chelsea Manning was convicted. The constitutionality of the Espionage Act is an issue that every media outlet, every publisher in the country should side with Chelsea Manning on because if what happened to Chelsea is allowed, it destroys Freedom of the Press. Chelsea, who was not a spy, was convicted of espionage and the judge said there was no need to prove that she intended to commit espionage. The fact that no intent to commit espionage needs to be proved means that if a media outlet publishes any document related to national security, it can result in an espionage conviction. It makes it almost impossible to report on national security issues.

The other thing in the United States is most of the whistle blower protections do not apply to national security cases. So that is a gigantic shortcoming. Those are two areas in the United States where we need to take some actions.

Sarah Harrison: When Edward Snowden blew the whistle he was actually a contractor at that time so even the supposed protections that are meant to be in place do not apply to contractors.

It is also important for the media to question the rhetoric that the government uses. For example when the government comes out and says “Oh well there were other avenues he could have taken,” this should not be taken as truthful because in fact there were not other avenues. Rather than blindly reprinting the quote, the media should be questioning it. When the government throws out concepts like ‘national security’, which they are really just using as fear mongering words, it needs to be questioned by the media. In fact, what national security risks were created by Snowden’s disclosures or Manning’s disclosures? The media really has to look at what national security really means. It means protecting the security within a nation. It is not an excuse to go invade another country halfway around the world. The media should really be examining the rhetoric the government throws out and looking at what it really means rather than allowing the government to falsely describe the impact of these leaks and allowing Chelsea Manning to be forgotten in jail.

Kevin Zeese: That’s exactly right, and I think a lot of that has to do with the lack of independent media. We have a very corporate-dominated, mass media, and that media works closely with the government. In addition, the media is kept in fear by the government and if the Espionage Act is found to be constitutional without any proof of criminal intent, without the government having to prove any intent to commit espionage, it is just going to make it harder for the media to tell the truth because they will be in even more fear. So it is a gigantic problem. Let me just close with a final question for you Sarah, what’s the first campaign of Courage.

Sarah Harrison: So we are starting with a campaign for our first beneficiary who is Edward Snowden. It is called Stand With Snowden and the point of this campaign is to show solidarity around the world for Snowden. There are a few reasons for this, first it is important for the whistleblowers themselves to know they will have support. Secondly, we want people to really show their government they support Snowden at this a critical time for him as his temporary asylum period in Russia ends. So we are asking people to upload photos to the Courage Foundation site, CourageFound.org, and you will see the tab there for campaigns and you can upload your own photo saying “I stand with Snowden” and include your city and country. Trustees of the Courage Foundation will in a few weeks be writing to those governments formally and asking them to act as their public wishes them to and grant Edward Snowden political asylum. There is a High School that did a group photo… there are some very nice ones. People should have a browse around.

Kevin Zeese: There are a lot of photos up there from all over the world. It is great to see the movement in support of Snowden growing and we hope to help build that support even more. Sarah, I really appreciate the courage that you have shown and the work that you’ve done for the last few years. It is really good you are heading this new effort and we want to do what we can to help.

Margaret Flowers: You also worked closely with Julian Assange in recent years. He has just finished two years of being held in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where he has political asylum. Reportedly there continues to be an investigation of Assange in the United States and people have been calling for an end to that investigation and protesting outside the embassy. What are your thoughts on the threat to the publisher and editor-in-chief of Wikileaks?

Sarah Harrison: I think Julian Assange’s situation is yet another precedent being set that we should fight against – his right to take up his asylum is being blocked. His asylum is not related to the Swedish case, but the US threat. Not only that, but there is a lack of due process in the Swedish case. Both Mr Assange and the Ecuadorian government have asked the Swedes to question him in the embassy (and before that Mr. Assange asked that they question him when he was under house arrest), and yet the Swedes refuse, although this is a normal legal procedure. These are just some of the abuses in the Swedish case – there are many which you can read about at Free Assange Now and Justice For Assange.

To me it is very worrying that even in such a high profile case there can be these obvious abuses of international law and so few step in to act. With regards to his situation in the embassy – he continues to work hard, but it cannot be easy being in such a small place, with no sun, horizon or much movement for two years. I hope that soon either Sweden or the UK will stop abusing his case, in the mean time he will continue to work, as can be seen by the WikiLeaks publication that we made on TISA on his 2 year anniversary in the embassy.

Kevin Zeese: We encourage people to donate to the Courage Foundation and its campaign to defend Edward Snowden. You can donate to Courage here.

Sarah Harrison: Thank you very much for having me.

Margaret Flowers: Thank you for taking the time.

Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers are organizers of Popular Resistance and they co-host Clearing The FOG. Kevin is on the advisory board of the Courage Foundation and he also serves on the steering committee of the Chelsea Manning Support Network.

The post Courage: Showing Solidarity With Whistleblowers And Defending Our Right To Know – Interview appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Hindus are upset at the artwork depicting TV star Kim Kardashian, 33, as a Hindu deity, which they say hurt the feelings of devotees and is irreverence and trivialization of the sacred.

Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, in a statement in Nevada (USA)
today, said that it was highly inappropriate that Kardashian was shown as Hindu deity in an exhibition in New York recently. Hindu deities were highly revered in Hinduism and were meant to be worshipped in temples or home shrines and not to be substituted with faces of Hollywood stars for dramatic effects.

Zed, who is President of Universal Society of Hinduism, urged Kardashian to strongly condemn this denigrating depiction of herself as Hindu deity and approach the New York graphic designer and artist Hannah Kunkle (who created it) to immediately withdraw it from public view.

Rajan Zed also urged Kunkle to publicly apologize to disturbed Hindus and to remove it from her website and not put it for public displays in the future. Equating Kardashian with god and showing her as divine was simply not acceptable.

No faith, larger or smaller, should be ridiculed,  Zed said, and added that inappropriate use of Hinduism concepts and symbols was not okay.

Rajan Zed stated that Hindus welcomed artists to immerse in Hinduism but taking it seriously and respectfully and not just for improper showing of Hindu symbols and concepts to advance their selfish agenda. Casual flirting sometimes resulted in pillaging serious spiritual doctrines and revered symbols. Hindus were for free speech as much as anybody else if not more. But faith was something sacred and attempts at belittling it hurt the devotees. Artists should be more sensitive while handling faith related subjects, Zed pointed out.

Kunkle recently held a public art exhibition of graphic Photoshop collages titled “The Passion of Kim Kardashian” at Palisades in Brooklyn, New York, created under her Kim Kardashian project.

Kim Kardashian (Keeping Up with the Kardashians) is an American television and social media personality, fashion designer, actress, businesswoman, socialite and model.

The post Hindus Upset At Depiction Of Kim Kardashian As Hindu Deity appeared first on Eurasia Review.