The “Allah” issue, which had a final hearing in the highest court in Malaysia, provided further evidence that Christian-Muslim tensions globally are on the rise. The Christian and Islamic worlds can contribute to global inter-religious harmony given their common Abrahamic roots.

Mohammad Alami Musa

CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM are two major religions embraced by more than half of the world’s population. With such a significant share of the global population, relations between Christians and Muslims will therefore have a huge impact on the state of religious harmony globally. Unfortunately, the world today continues to witness the rising global trend of Christian-Muslim tensions and even conflicts that seriously affect inter-religious relations.

One that is very near home is the “Allah” issue. It became so protracted that it created tension between the two communities in Malaysia. The recent verdict of the apex Federal Court to reject the appeal of the Catholic Church to over-turn the High Court’s earlier judgement in October 2013 disallowing use of the term “Allah” in its weekly bulletin The Herald will hopefully put a closure on the “Allah issue”.

Closest yet different

Fortunately, the “Allah issue” did not escalate into violent conflict, unlike the numerous Christian-Muslim conflicts in recent times. The bloody Christian-Muslim confrontation in Maluku, Indonesia a few years ago, in which many were killed, was a grim reminder about how tragic inter-religious strife could be.

Even today, in many parts of the world especially in Africa, Christians and Muslims are killed almost daily in religious-based hostilities. Moreover, according to a report released earlier this year by Pew Research Centre, a majority of religious hostilities today involve Christians and Muslims who are in conflict with one another.

It is difficult to understand how this can happen given that Christianity and Islam are closest to each other compared with all other world religions. They share the same Abrahamic roots like belief in God, the same prophets, the Last Day and life after death. Their moral codes of behaviour are similar in many aspects. This explains why both Christian and Muslim scholars have always reiterated that the cause of these conflicts does not come from within either religion but lies in the corrupt use of religion by feuding parties on both sides to mobilise support and garner sympathy.

The closeness of the two religions was acknowledged as soon as Islam began to be preached as a new religion in Arabia by Prophet Muhammad about 1400 years ago. As a religion that came after Christianity, there was great curiosity to compare the two. Interestingly, the comparison was undertaken in 615AD by the pious Christian king of Abyssinia (now called Ethiopia) through what can be historically considered as the first Christian-Muslim dialogue.

The subject discussed was the prophethood of Jesus Christ. The king declared at the end of the dialogue that the difference in understanding of the two religions was no more than the length of a stick that he held in his hand.

Building Muslim-Christian relations

Nevertheless, there are significant differences between Islam and Christianity. The differences in doctrines, coupled with negative historical encounters between Christians and Muslims in the crusadic wars as well as during the Euro-Christian colonisation of the Islamic world, and the proselytising nature of both religions to win over converts, have paradoxically made both religions the farthest from each other despite being the closest to each other.

Scholars, intellectuals and clerics from both religions are however, not riled by the problematic nature of relations between Christians and Muslims. On the contrary, they see the critical importance of peace-building, bridging the gulf of understanding as well as re-capturing the spirit of fellowship between Christians and Muslims. They have initiated many commendable efforts at the dialogical, scholarly and practical levels to achieve these objectives over the last four decades.

The Roman Catholic Church took a historic step, through the Second Vatican Council to issue a pivotal document Nostra Aetate, in 1965, that gave a positive view of non-Christian religions. It encouraged Catholics to engage non-Christians.

The World Council of Churches, too, in 1970 organised a watershed inter-religious meeting in Lebanon which declared through the Aljatourn Memorandum that the coming together of different religions was very positive and something to be carried forward urgently.

These historical decisions provided impetus to inter religious dialogue and Christian-Muslim dialogue took off on a self-propelling trajectory. Notable global initiatives include the Building Bridges Seminar initiated by the Church of England and the Common Word between Us and You organised by 138 prominent Muslim scholars and clerics.

Singapore experience

Christian and Muslim scholars in Singapore from the National Council of Churches and MUIS Academy (of the Islamic Religious Council) respectively had also for the first time, in 2013, embarked on a path of dialogue. Adopting the approach of scriptural reasoning (which is a form of dialogue), they discovered commonalities and differences through their open discussions of Abrahamic texts.

While the dialogical and scholarly endeavours at re-building bridges of understanding are happening in a big way, the real task is to bring the two flocks together as “brothers and sisters of the same Abrahamic family”. Here dialogue of action is more effective than dialogue of words.

Adherents of both religions come together to deal with concerns and challenges that confront people regardless of their faith. The dialogue of action is more than collaborative action. It is also a platform where participants will engage each other to understand the teachings that they draw from their respective religious traditions that motivate them in their involvement.

A model is the collaboration between the Muslim-based Misr Foundation and the Anglican Diocese in Egypt to provide medical services to the poor and to get youths from both sides to be involved in music as well as the arts. These helped to minimise Christian-Muslim tension.

It is a complex and uphill but not hopeless task to counter the bigotry, extremism and militancy that affect Christian-Muslim relations. The momentum exists for the Christian and Islamic worlds to re-build the unique spiritual relationship between them through sustained dialogue and collaborative action.

Mohammad Alami Musa is Head, Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Relations (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.

The post Christian-Muslim Relations: Critical For Religious Harmony – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

India doesn’t accept Pakistan’s claims with regards to Kashmir. Pakistan’s position in Kashmir (historically known as the state of Jammu & Kashmir) is based on two narratives. The traditional and informal narrative combines a variety of claims pertaining to territory, ideology, Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination, security, sovereignty and water rights. The unconventional narrative is based on the UN Security Council resolutions, which provide that the final disposition of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people.

Pakistan doesn’t accept Indian claims. India claims that the rulers of the former Kingdom of Jammu & Kashmir signed an instrument of accession in October 1947, officially handing control of the disputed
area over to India. Pakistan doubts the very existence of the instrument of accession and insists that the then rulers of Kashmir did not have the support of most Kashmiris. Pakistan also claims that the Hindu rulers handed over control of Jammu and Kashmir under Indian pressure, thus invalidating the legitimacy of the claims.

What is United Nations Perspective?

The United Nations (UN) recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory. Historically, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has passed a number of resolutions confirming the status of Kashmir as disputed territory and asking both countries to hold a free and impartial referendum to determine the final disposition of the
region. Latterly, the UN has also favoured a final solution of the issue on the basis of bilateral arrangements. The UN has reiterated on several occasions that the only way out is through bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan.

Who else is interested in Kashmir?

Indian media repeatedly claims that the Pakistan administered part of the  disputed state has been the hotbed of Chinese and US attention. China’s active involvement in development projects in this region and increased US funding in socio-economic uplift schemes has been asserted by India to be politically motivated moves in this region. Apart from smaller projects, the US and China have also
invested in mega projects concerning earthquake rehabilitation, water management and education, etc.

Why issue has remained alive?

Significant attempts to resolve the dispute have been made at the international level, yet, has it remained live in history for obvious reasons. Collective mediation attempts by a number of UN member states, international organisations or individually sponsored by dignitaries and back channel diplomats from these states have not been fruitful so far. As an alternative recourse to official channels of diplomacy, mediation is used when conflict management efforts by disagreeing parties have reached a stand-off or both of them are prepared to cooperate with external mediation. Except passing much-quoted resolutions, The UN Security Council has, so far, failed to reengage India and Pakistan in a meaningful dialogue to permanently settle the problem. This is mainly due to the unsteady and devious nature of bilateral arrangements between the two countries. India does not accept an impasse over the Kashmir conflict under current bilateral arrangements mainly quoting the Simla Agreement as a turning point in history. Pakistan, despite being open to international mediation, seems diplomatic to address those issues that India repeatedly demands to tackle first before engaging into a mediation process.

Why UN is unable to resolve the issue?

To reengage India and Pakistan over Kashmir, the UN needs to consider the deep rooted legal framework of the conflict. India took the case to the UN in 1948 and ceased to pursue it after a bilateral agreement with Pakistan in July 1972. The Simla Agreement was negotiated between both countries along with the UN and both of
them agreed to a new line of control based on the ceasefire line of the 1971 war.

India claims that this agreement superseded all previous UN resolutions. After incorporating article 370 into Indian constitution, the administrative and constitutional matters pertaining to Indian part of the region portray a picture which gives this region a status parallel to the rest of the Indian states. However, before these tricky local and bilateral arrangements, the Kashmir case was quite clear on the UN agenda and we can see that initially the UN played a responsible role in this conflict. Both parties continue to hold differing interpretations of the Simla Agreement. Pakistan argues that it has not accepted the line of control as an international border and the UN resolutions on Kashmir are still valid. Pakistan also asserts that it reserves the right to bring the issue to the UN.

Whereas, India is not in favour of giving greater role to the UN, not even, letting the UN military observers continue to oversee the line of control in disputed territories in Kashmir. India calls the UN intervention in Kashmir a by-product of history and blames it for not being competent to resolve the matter. India dismisses Pakistan’s
attempts to rake up the Kashmir issue at the UN General Assembly and asserts that the state of Jammu and Kashmir remains an integral part of the country. Pakistan reiterates in that Kashmir is its jugular vein.

The post A Fresh Look At Kashmir – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

In this week’s address, the President continued his call for our nation to rally around an economic patriotism that says rather than protecting wasteful tax loopholes for a few at the top, we should be investing in things like education and job training that grow the economy for everybody. The President highlighted the need to close one of the most unfair tax loopholes that allows companies to avoid paying taxes here at home by shifting their residence for tax purposes out of the country. The President has put forth a budget that does just that, and he has called for business tax reform that makes investment in the United States attractive, and creates incentives for companies to invest and create jobs here at home. And while he will continue to make the case for tax reform, the President is calling on Congress to take action and close this loophole now.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
July 26, 2014

Hi, everybody. Our businesses have now added nearly 10 million new jobs over the past 52 months. The unemployment rate is at its lowest point since September 2008 – the fastest one-year drop in nearly 30 years. 401(k)s are growing, fewer homes are underwater, and for the first time in more than a decade, business leaders around the world have declared that the world’s number one place to invest isn’t China; it’s the United States of America – and our lead is growing.

None of this is an accident. It’s thanks to the resilience and resolve of the American people that our country has recovered faster and come farther than almost any other advanced nation on Earth.

But there’s another trend that threatens to undermine the progress you’ve helped make. Even as corporate profits are as high as ever, a small but growing group of big corporations are fleeing the country to get out of paying taxes. They’re keeping most of their business inside the United States, but they’re basically renouncing their citizenship and declaring that they’re based somewhere else, just to avoid paying their fair share.

I want to be clear: this is only a few big corporations so far. The vast majority of American businesses pay their taxes right here in the United States. But when some companies cherrypick their taxes, it damages the country’s finances. It adds to the deficit. It makes it harder to invest in the things that will keep America strong, and it sticks you with the tab for what they stash offshore. Right now, a loophole in our tax laws makes this totally legal – and I think that’s totally wrong. You don’t get to pick which rules you play by, or which tax rate you pay, and neither should these companies.

The best way to level the playing field is through tax reform that lowers the corporate tax rate, closes wasteful loopholes, and simplifies the tax code for everybody. But stopping companies from renouncing their citizenship just to get out of paying their fair share of taxes is something that cannot wait. That’s why, in my budget earlier this year, I proposed closing this unpatriotic tax loophole for good. Democrats in Congress have advanced proposals that would do the same thing. A couple Republicans have indicated they want to address this too, and I hope more join us.

Rather than double-down on the top-down economics that let a fortunate few play by their own rules, let’s embrace an economic patriotism that says we rise or fall together, as one nation, and as one people. Let’s reward the hard work of ordinary Americans who play by the rules. Together, we can build up our middle class, hand down something better to our kids, and restore the American Dream for all who work for it and study for it and strive for it.

Thanks, and have a great weekend.

The post Obama: Closing Corporate Tax Loopholes – Transcript appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The US embassy in Libya has shut down and all diplomatic staff have been evacuated to neighboring Tunisia by military escort because of ongoing clashes and violence between rival militias sweeping the country.

Some 150 personnel including 80 Marines were moved across the border “due to the ongoing violence”, State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf tweeted.

“We had to take this step because the location of our embassy is in very close proximity to intense fighting…between armed Libyan factions,” she added.

A new Libya travel warning was issued by the US State Department on Saturday, advising against all travel and recommending that US citizens “depart immediately”.

“The security situation in Libya remains unpredictable and unstable. The Libyan government has not been able to adequately build its military and police forces and improve security following the 2011 revolution,” the travel warning explained.

The move comes as the Obama administration continues to express wariness over the safety of US staff abroad, and Libya has been of particular concern since a deadly 2012 attack in Benghazi, during which four diplomatic personnel died, including the then US ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

New clashes broke out at Tripoli airport on Friday between rival Libyan militant groups attempting to seize control of it. Loud explosions rang through its grounds following 13 continuous days of shelling which have severed air links between the city and the outside world.

“Many military-grade weapons remain in the hands of private individuals, including antiaircraft weapons that may be used against civilian aviation,” emphasized the travel warning.

The post US Shuts Embassy In Libya’s Tripoli, Evacuates Staff Amidst Clashes appeared first on Eurasia Review.

While Israel has deployed its media machine, telling the world that it has the right to defend itself against foreign aggression, arguing that no country should ever be made to tolerate systematic terror, even though under international law such narrative holds no legal ground as Israel has been de facto occupying Gaza, rendering null and void the notion of Gaza as a foreign entity, little has been said of Israel’s real motives.

To quickly settle Israel’s argument that it legally and morally can and should defend itself against any aggression coming from Gaza, it is important to understand that the Gaza strip is not under international law a sovereign state, it is an occupied land, therefore Israel cannot declare war on its people, rather it owes its people protection.

As explained by Nura Erakat in a report published in Intifada Palestine, “Military occupation is a recognized status under international law and since 1967, the international community has designated the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as militarily occupied. As long as the occupation continues, Israel has the right to protect itself and its citizens from attacks by Palestinians who reside in the occupied territories. However, Israel also has a duty to maintain law and order, also known as “normal life,” within territory it occupies. This obligation includes not only ensuring but prioritizing the security and well-being of the occupied population. That responsibility and those duties are enumerated in Occupation Law.”

As for Palestinians in Gaza they do however have an inherent right to resist foreign occupation. Such right is again, protected under international law.

But as the following arguments will attempt to demonstrate all the above, the contradicting narratives, the political manipulations and media campaigns, are but a distraction from far more pragmatic realities and maybe truth – The war on Gaza has little to do with sovereignty, terror, politics or even religion, rather it has everything to do with energy.

If Israel is so keen on levelling Hamas it is essentially because the faction has categorically refused to discuss an energy sharing agreement whereby Israel would have access to Gaza’s gas resources.

Let us all remember that Israel faces an energy crisis of biblical proportion and that Gaza’s untapped and unexploited billions of dollars represent a fortune and a lifeline which Tel Aviv will not tolerate to go to waste.

As noted by Tascha Shahriari-Parsa, “Operation Protective Edge is the war of a colonial state dedicated to expanding its theft of Palestine’s natural resources … incarcerating and bombing its people in the world’s biggest open air prison, while growing rich at their expense.”

Rather than a bunch of lunatic radicals animated by the savagery of the crusades, Zionists are actually quite a practical bunch. What they seek in Gaza is merely access to Palestine’s underground riches. Whatever happens on the surface is just there to act as a public distraction, a ploy designed for the masses so that Israel could commit grand larceny in perfect impunity under the very nose of the ever pliable world community. Who after all would dare deny the plight of martyr Israel?

To borrow the words of Tascha Shahriari-Parsa when she wrote a report for The Ecologist, “Behind the operation, behind the mass Israeli and US propaganda attempting to justify the massacre, and behind the death of every child in Gaza is a conflict rarely discussed – an imperialist conflict and a contradiction that rests on Israel’s ambitions to appropriate and profit from Gaza’s natural gas resources.”

Palestine’s vast natural resources

Let us go back to 2000 when BG (British Gas) discovered that Gaza sat on an estimated $4 billion worth of natural gas. Needless to say that this discovery came as a shock to Israel, as suddenly Gaza, this little slither of land which Palestinians have been discarded upon, this purgatory which Zionists imagined to crush Palestinians’ hopes and dreams, became a key geo-strategic priority. Israel would have to gain access to those resources.

Since BG made its first estimation, it was established that Gaza’s gas reserves are far greater than first anticipated. According to Michel Chossudovsky, a Canadian economist and prominent analyst, Gaza is basking in as much wealth as the State of Kuwait.

Rather than live in abject poverty, Gaza should be a vibrant business hub, a brilliant economic success. Instead, it has been withering away under Israel’s blockade, forced to scrap and beg for its daily bread, its people reduced to servitude.

Let us remember that Israel’s maritime blockade coincides with BG’s discovery. Let us remember that it is since 2000 that Israel has denied Palestine access to its territorial waters, thus infringing on international law and de facto putting Gaza under siege; all because Israel wants to pillage Palestine’s resources.

Not convinced yet?

Well, let us refer to an interesting and rather revealing comment made by Israeli former Defence Force (IDF) chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon back in 2007 when he laid bare Israel’s true motives. Answering comments in regards to Gaza’s gas riches, he noted, “Proceeds of a Palestinian gas sale to Israel would likely not trickle down to help an impoverished Palestinian public. Rather, based on Israel’s past experience, the proceeds will likely serve to fund further terror attacks against Israel … A gas transaction with the Palestinian Authority will, by definition, involve Hamas. Hamas will either benefit from the royalties or it will sabotage the project and launch attacks against Fatah, the gas installations, Israel – or all three … It is clear that without an overall military operation to uproot Hamas control of Gaza, no drilling work can take place without the consent of the radical Islamic movement.”

What Ya’alon is really saying is that since Hamas will unlikely agree to a deal with Israel, Israel needs therefore to eliminate Hamas, by declaring its faction a terror organization – even though many would argue that it is a resistance movement, according to international law – For argument’ sake, resisting an occupying force does not equate to terrorism.

Israel needs gas now!

So why a war now? To put it bluntly, Israel cannot wait any longer. Plagued by high unemployment and rising inflation, Israel needs to find a viable solution to both its energy crisis and mounting economic difficulties – financing an eternal war can be rather costly.

According to Israel’s own projection, the state will face an aggravated energy crisis by 2020. Earlier this July, Haaretz published a report in which it quoted the excerpt of a report written by chief scientists from the Energy and Water Ministry and the Environmental Protection Ministry, explicitly mapping out Israel’s energy crisis. It read “We believe Israel should increase its [domestic] use of natural gas by 2020 and should not export gas. The Natural Gas Authority’s estimates are lacking. There’s a gap of 100 to 150 billion cubic meters between the demand projections that were presented to the committee and the most recent projections. The gas reserves are likely to last even less than 40 years!”

Israel is quite simply running out of time. If recent mass protests in Israel in regards to depreciating living conditions and social injustice are anything to go by, officials indeed feel a great sense of urgency.
As Israel’s needs increase, so has its determination to by-pass international law, as before Israel’s will nations should only bow and recoil in awe.

Since whatever Israel cannot negotiate it will obliterate, beginning of course with Hamas, the war on Gaza came as a natural development to Israel’s geo-strategic realities.

Let us remember that the last time Israel marched on Gaza, in 2008, its military deployment also aligned with its contracting of BG to discuss critical negotiations around Gaza’s natural gas. A coincidence? Maybe not.

This new war on Gaza is a colonial war. This new war on Gaza has little to do with self-defence or terror or sovereignty… it has however everything to do with Israel’s neo-imperialistic ambitions.

This article first appeared at Middle East Monitor and is reprinted with permission.

The post The Truth About Israel’s New War On Gaza: The Energy Rush – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Millions of pilgrims offered prayers at the Grand Mosque in Makkah and the Prophet’s Mosque in Madinah on the last Friday of Ramadan.

Addressing the congregation at the Grand Mosque, Imam Sheikh Saud Al-Shuraim said: “Muslims who offered their prayers during this month are real winners. There are other Muslims who live in difficult circumstances and unable to celebrate Eid Al-Fitr.”

He reminded all Muslims to pay Zakat Al-Fitr before Eid prayers.

The Grand Mosque was fully occupied by worshippers.

Leading the night prayers, called Qiyam Al-Lail, on Thursday, Imam Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais beseeched Allah to ease the suffering of the helpless people.

The congregation of nearly 3 million faithful was reduced to tears when the imam’s voice quivered with emotions at the mention of the plight of the besieged Palestinians, Syrians and Iraqis. He prayed to God for unity among Muslims.

In a bid to avoid overcrowding, most of the pilgrims were asked to pray in the neighboring streets of the Grand Mosque.

In Madinah, worshippers filled every nook and cranny of the Prophet’s Mosque to say their Friday prayers in an atmosphere of spirituality, serenity and tranquility.

Security authorities, under the direct supervision of Madinah Gov. Prince Faisal bin Salman, provided all necessary measures to facilitate the arrival of pilgrims visiting the Prophet’s Mosque.

Under the plan, and as per Prince Faisal bin Salman’s directives, a bus service has been launched to transfer visitors to and from the mosque, easing traffic congestion by preventing the entrance of thousands of cars inside the mosque precincts.

Abdul Wahid bin Ali, director of public relations and media at the General Presidency for the Prophet’s Mosque, said that 10,000 new carpets had been placed throughout the mosque during Ramadan, both in the male and female sections, as well as on the roof and in the courtyards surrounding the mosque.

The post Three Million In Makkah Pray For Besieged Muslims appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Muhammad Waqas

When Sharif’s government came into power last year, it prioritized all efforts to overcome Pakistan’s nagging energy crisis.

The worsening problem of power outages across Pakistan, lasting up to 18 hours in some regions, had crippled the economy and dampened manufacturing output, leading to industrial shutdowns and massive layoffs. Amid much fanfare, the government launched several new power initiatives that promised to pull out the country from shadows of darkness and revive economic growth. Some of these major initiatives included the Thar Coal and Dasu hydel power projects, and Bhasha dam. These projects were envisioned to increase the country’s power generation capacity in coming years and reduce its reliance on expensive, imported furnace oil for power generation.

However, recent media reports suggest that some of these projects are in a limbo. It has been reported that the commissioning of multi-purpose Diamer Bhasha dam has been delayed by about 17 years and it will now be completed in 2037. The project has been postponed as the relevant authorities failed to arrange required financing for its construction. Instead, a decision has been made to focus all efforts on early completion of Dasu hydel power project.

Given the imminent threat of acute water shortage and floods faced by Pakistan, the government’s decision may come as a big surprise.

The Diamer Bhasha dam held strategic importance as it could have alleviated the country’s energy woes, while also averting floods and a famine-like situation due to water crisis. As a result of this delay, Pakistan may struggle to feed a rapidly-growing population, projected to touch about 260 million people by 2037. The country is already facing an acute level of ‘physical water scarcity’ and its mainly agriculture-based economy could face stunted growth in the coming years. It is feared that the project delay could prove to be a strategic mistake and pose an existential threat to Pakistan.

The Nandipur Power Plant is another sorry tale of corruption and starting projects only to gain political mileage. At the time of inauguration, Sharif had launched a scathing attack on the ex-government for putting the project on backburner and termed its delay an “unforgivable sin”. Ironically, the project was shut down only after operating for five days and generating electricity at a record high cost. According to power regulatory authorities, the project did not meet technical and legal requirements for smooth operations and its premature launch was intended merely for political point scoring. Other recently launched projects such as the Guddu Thermal Power Station and a 1320MW coal-fired plant also suffer from gross mismanagement and not being fully utilized for power generation.

Before the government signs further agreements to setup new power projects, it is advisable that focus is shifted to enforcing stricter controls and improving management of existing resources. In case the government fails to properly manage these projects, the country will continue to suffer from long spells of power outages and fail to turnaround its economy. The government should realize that any aggravation of the existing power crisis may put its authority and the country itself in a precarious situation.

The post Power Scenario Still Bleak In Pakistan – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Saneya Arif

According to the Jharkhand assessment 2014 report by the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) data base, Jharkhand today stands second, after Andhra Pradesh, in countering Maoism in the country.This commentary tries to analyse the positive changes that shows a decline in Maoism in the state, changes in the central government’s policy responsible for the aforementioned achievement, and the lessons that other states of India can learn from Jharkhand to combat Maoism in their states.

What are the positive changes?

According to the SATP assessment, the figures show that the total number of Maoist related incidents in the state has come down to 4 incidents in 2014 from 383 incidents in 2013. No death has been recorded among the civilians and security force personnel in the current year. In 2013, the deaths stood at 120 and 30 respectively. There has also been a decrease in the number of Maoist deaths, which has come down to 2 deaths in 2014 from 12 in 2013.

The report also records that Maoist attacks on economic targets such as railways, telephone exchanges, mines, transmission poles, panchayat bhawans and school buildings have also reduced, which testify that Maoists have not been involved in any major incidents in Jharkhand after 2013. According to former Director General of Police (DGP) GS Rath, the police force in Jharkhand today has the greatest number of mine resistant vehicles, which has helped in bringing down the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) killings due to land mines laid by Maoist outfits. Electoral success in the state allegedly owes much to the nexus between politicians and Maoists, which has also contributed to Maoist mainstreaming. Publicly, however, politicians present an anti-Maoist agenda, as observed by Professor BK Sinha of the Political Science department of St Xavier’s College, Ranchi. During election season, Maoists release statements about not voting, which prompt the politicians to initiate bargaining with them.

What changes in central government policy could have led to this success?

In 2006, former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called Maoism the biggest challenge to India’s internal security. He stated that any development in tribal areas must also ensure that the tribal population has a stake in it, even after it has been adequately compensated for displacement. Jharkhand, after Andhra Pradesh, has been the only state to take this very seriously. Soon after, the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA) was implemented in Jharkhand. It ensured rights over minor forest produce to Gram Sabhas and removed interference by the government departments. The government of Jharkhand has also achieved remarkable success in persuading around a dozen hardcore Maoists to join mainstream society by ensuring their rehabilitation through the programme, Nayi Disha.

According to Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) Pravin Kumar, the volume of CRPF deployment in Jharkhand, which used to be three battalions six years ago, has today increased to fourteen battalions. According to him, the state government has taken the setting up of a unified command for joint action against Maoism seriously. Even the funds received under the integrated action plan (IAP) for development in the Maoism-affected areas in Jharkhand have been fully utilised.

What lesson can other states learn from the Jharkhand experience?
Other Maoists-affected states can learn valuable lessons from operation Anaconda conducted by the state in Saranda forest. Paramilitary forces established camps here for the first time. In Saranda, massive recoveries were made and at least five Maoist training camps were busted. As a result, the outfit was disbanded and all senior leaders left the area. Similar camps were also established near the Chandwa-Daltenganj route and with a similar level of success.

Furthermore, the government of Jharkhand has laid stress on police modernisation. It strengthened its intelligence, granted promotions to personnel, imparted training and strengthened police stations in affected areas, all of which also brought down the number of kangaroo courts operating in the area.

Saneya Arif
Research Intern, IPCS

The post Combating Maoism: Lessons From Jharkhand appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The world has watched with increasing dismay and horror as the remaining Iraqi Christian minorities have been forced out of their homes, most recently in Mosul and the surrounding area, in the latest wave of persecution and destruction rained down by the Islamic State formerly known as “ISIS”. Houses have been looted and robbed. Graves and shrines have been demolished. Crosses smashed and removed from churches.

Elie Essa Kas Hanna, DHI analyst on Human Dignity and Religious Freedom, said: “Iraqi Christians are the original residents of Mesopotamia – descendants of the ancient Babylonians, Chaldeans, Assyrians and a large number of Arabs tribes: Mudar, Rabia and Tay etc. Christianity has been present in Iraq since the First Century AD, when most of the population of Mesopotamia converted to Christianity, though leaving others to continue in their traditional beliefs in Judaism, Manichaeism and Parsee. Today, 2,000 years later, the descendants of these original Christians are being driven out as though guests in a home whose welcome they have overstayed – ironically by a religion that didn’t even appear on the scene for another five centuries.”

DHI Chairman Luca Volontè added: “The whole situation is clearly out of all control. There is tension between the government and the opposition forces, as well as the tension that still exists between the central government and the Kurdistan Regional Government. It is in this space of uncertainty and mistrust that the Islamic State has moved deftly to occupy a large part of Iraqi territory that is now almost two-thirds the size of the Great Britain.”

Lord Alton of Liverpool, who launched the DHI-affiliated Cross-Party Working Group on Human Dignity in the Palace of Westminster, and one of the British Parliament’s most respected authorities on religious persecution around the world, said: “In 2003, the Christian presence in Iraq was 1.5 million. After the end of the Second Gulf War, the Christian presence was reduced to 400,000 people – and most of these lived in the north. Now a staggering 90% of those Christians who remained have now fled from Mosul to surrounding areas, especially onto the plains of the Biblical city of Nineveh, on the border of the Kurdistan region.”

Lord Alton illustrated the current situation with a recent example: “The DHI notes with alarm the destruction of the Biblical Tomb of Jonah – which dates from the 8th Century BC – smashed by sledgehammer blows which have echoed around the world. We can only hope that last week’s rumour of the similar destruction of the tomb of the Prophet Daniel turns out to be false.”

Indicating the difficulty regarding the authentication of reports that are emerging from the Islamic State, Lord Alton added: “Also unverified, the UN and the BBC have reported that ISIS forces in Mosul have ordered all girls and women to undergo female genital mutilation. This is an outrage. More than 130 million girls and women have already been subjected to this barbaric practice worldwide – and it has to stop. In the Islamic State today we see a historically recurring meme sadly replaying itself: an orgy of destruction of culture and heritage sooner or later leads to attacks on human beings, their freedom and dignity.”

Volontè concluded: “The DHI believes that Iraqi Christians are a vital part of Iraqi society, and that they have an irreplaceable role to play in rebuilding together – with other citizens of goodwill – a future for their country. The DHI appeals to the international community to do everything possible to come to the aid of the few Christians left in Iraq. We add our prayers to those of His Holiness Pope Francis, who follows the suffering of Christians in Iraq with great closeness.”

The post The Islamic State Tightens Grip: Christians Flee appeared first on Eurasia Review.

In death, Staff Sergeant Nissim Sean Carmeli, a 21-year old soccer fan, embodies the deep fears, distrust and dehumanization of the other that has exploded into massive bloodshed in Gaza, threatens to spark another uprising on the West Bank and makes achievement of even a temporary Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire an almost impossible task.

One of 13 members of the Golani Brigade, an elite Israeli military unit, killed in Gaza on July 20, Mr. Carmeli is to Israelis a hero. The vast majority of thousands of supporters of Maccabi Haifa FC, at the funeral of Mr. Carmeli, a dual Israeli and US citizen, didn’t know him personally even though he attended as many of the club’s games as possible. They were responding to a call on the fans’ Facebook page that has 20,000 followers not to leave ‘a lone soldier,’ the term the Israeli military uses for personnel whose families don’t live permanently in the country, alone as he was administered his last rites.

“I never knew him, but I don’t miss a game, so Sean and I must have been together in the stadium. So we shared something,” a supporter wearing a Maccabi Haifa jersey told Ha’aretz newspaper. Maccabi fans are known for their emotional and unbending support for their team.

To Israelis the rallying around Mr. Carmeli represents Israel at its best, “a demonstration of Israeli solidarity at wartime,” as a friend said in an email. “This is the best example of what the people of Israel can be. In times of trouble, we bind together. This is our tradition, our narrative. A boy like Sean expresses values we all admire – loyalty, a willingness to give to his people, openness, warmth, caring. That’s why so many different people – religious and secular and Haredim (ultra-Orthodox Jews), young and old – are all here,” Ha’aretz quoted an official of the Israeli immigrant absorption ministry as saying during the funeral.

The official, Yaakov Danon, head of the ministry’s unit for immigrant soldiers, reflected how heart wrenching

Mr. Carmeli’s death is to both those who were close to him as well as to Israelis at large. That is to say Israeli Jews. Israeli Palestinians or Palestinians who are Israeli citizens and not residents of Israeli-occupied territories and account for 20 percent of the Israeli population did not figure in Mr. Danon’s definition of who and what Israelis are. Nor did the hundreds of innocent Palestinian civilians, including four boys aged 9 to 12 playing soccer on a Gaza beach, who have died in the almost-three-week-old Israeli assault figure in the grief of the thousands of Israelis who did not know Mr. Carmeli but came to his funeral to pay him their last respects.

That is telling in a city like Haifa that prides itself as a model of Israeli-Palestinian coexistence and home to persecuted Muslim minorities in the Middle East with its Bahai World Center on a hill overlooking the city and Ahmadiyya community. A city of 600,000 predominantly Jewish residents, Haifa’s population includes 60,000 mostly Christian Palestinians. At least seven of the 27 players of Maccabi Haifa, Israel’s most popular, club are Palestinians. A recent documentary, ‘Haifa’s Answer – Coexistence in Israel,’ projects Haifa, as “a unique example of coexistence in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, although the ideal of a shared society still seems to be far.”

To Palestinians in the Gaza Strip under continuous assault as well as to those protesting on the streets of cities on the West Bank, Mr. Carmeli was an American who migrated to Israel to squat on what was once their land. He was part of a machine that has made life hell for them since the imposition seven years ago of a blockade of the densely populated territory and is now in their view indiscriminately seeking to exterminate them. In their minds, Palestinians have already surrendered much of their land to the Israel but in return Israel refuses to recognize their right to those lands the Jewish state occupied during the 1967 Middle East war.

At the root of the divergence of perception is a belief among Israelis that Palestinians refuse to recognize their rights and seek to exterminate them. Palestinians have no doubt that Israelis at best want to continue to subjugate them and at worst wipe them off the map. This divergence of perception is what makes the Israeli-Palestinian conflict unique and engenders the kind of fear, distrust and dehumanization of the other that renders any meeting of the minds almost impossible. Unlike most other national conflicts, the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is one in which both parties envision themselves as victims.

A Palestinian sociologist, one of the few to recognize this fundamental obstacle to any agreement with Israel, summed it up as he stood at the foot of a West Bank hill crowned by an Israeli settlement and pointed his finger at residential buildings: “See how small those windows are,” he said, “those are people who are afraid.” Said a middle-aged teacher at Mr. Carmeli’s funeral: “Being here is a way to express the fear that we all feel that it could be any one of our loved ones who could die, in the army or in a missile attack.”

Fear throws out the window notions of proportionality and that what applies to one party applies to the other. Israel, one of the world’s military powerhouses, is fighting a militia with overwhelming military superiority and apparent disregard for civilian life despite protests to the contrary in a false belief that only force and demonstrations of strength will ensure its security. The notion that death breeds more death and that security cannot be built on the exercise of military superiority alone is non-existent.

Israelis, certainly those resident in the south of the country, live in daily fear of ineffectual Palestinian rockets.

Yet in each of the three wars that Israel and Hamas, the Islamist militia controlling Gaza, have fought in the last six years those missiles have become more sophisticated with the help of Syria, Iran and Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah as Ahmed Jibril, the Damascus-based leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC), admitted in a recent interview. Hamas moreover is proving its mettle in urban combat in Gazan towns.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not one that will be decided on the battlefield. If Israel’s wars in recent years have proven anything it is that Israel triumphs on the battlefield but is defeated politically. Hamas, the party Israel wants to cut down to size, is likely to emerge perhaps not liked but certainly in command of the kind of respect that Palestine Authority President Mahmoud Abbas increasingly lacks on Palestinian streets.

Protests on the West Bank deliver a message to both Palestinian and Israeli leaders. The message to the Palestinian leadership is a demand for a unified leadership that can stand up for Palestinian rights. The message to Israel is that Hamas is as much part of their leadership as is Mr. Abbas. In other words a rejection of Israel’s hope that its assault on Gaza will undermine the recently formed nationality unity government that is supported by both Mr. Abbas and Hamas.

That message is reinforced by the daily pictures of innocent Palestinians dying in Gaza that will serve only to strengthen mounting international criticism of Israel – criticism that is shared privately in the highest circles of the Obama administration even if it continues to publicly support Israel.

Israelis and Palestinians will only be able to embrace compromise when they are able to overcome their fears and recognize that what they demand for themselves is what their opponent too demands. Palestinian aspirations are no different from those of the founders of the Jewish state. Israeli prioritization of security, feeding on perceptions of a Jewish history of victimhood and the horror of Palestinian suicide bombings more than a decade ago, is no different from the security that Palestinians, terrorized by repressive Israeli policies and perceived disregard for Palestinian lives, want.

Mr. Carmeli’s death and that of some 39 other Israelis and more than 800 Palestinians in the latest Gaza war will have been in vain as long as Israelis and Palestinians refuse to recognize that they are mirror images of one another.

The post In Death, Soccer Fan-Turned Soldier Embodies Israeli-Palestinian Gap – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Selcuk Colakoglu

The 2000s have witnessed a leap forward in bilateral relations between Turkey and India. The frequency and number of reciprocal visits by senior political figures has dramatically increased. Improvements were made in economic relations, while bilateral trade volume soared from 500 million dollars in 2000 up to 7 billion dollars in 2013. As a result, India became Turkey’s 13th largest trade partner.

Despite such a significant improvement in political and economic relations, the current state of affairs is still far from reflecting the potential cooperation of the two countries. Relations between Turkey and India, both of which are members of the G-20 and qualify as emerging economies, have the capacity to reach well beyond their current level. On the other hand, a strategic roadmap aimed at improving bilateral relations that identifies areas for in-depth cooperation is yet to be set. That is, a timetable that elaborates on the stages and content of further steps that can be taken in this regard remains missing. And although improvements in commercial relations are considered to be a positive development, Turkey’s foreign trade deficit vis-à-vis India has steadily increased to 5.8 billion dollars in 2013. Therefore Turkish policy-makers are still hesitant to sign a free trade agreement (FTA) with India.

A new era in India under Modi

Turkey-India relations have entered 2014 in the shadow of such a dilemma. Indeed, 2014 was an election year for both countries. The general election in India, however, which was scheduled for May 12, was located in the foreground as its results would determine the fate of the leading Congress Party. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), rather unexpectedly, gained a majority in the parliament as a result of the elections, thus allowing it to form the new government on its own. Because the BJP is a Hindu nationalist party, in addition to the fact that 1,000 Muslims died in clashes between Hindus and Muslims under the previous provincial governorship of BJP leader Narendra Modi in Gujarat, election results caused worry among all ethnic and religious minorities. Again, concerns originating from questions of whether the “multi-cultural, secular democracy”, that has been held in high esteem up until now by India, would be interrupted by Hindu nationalism were often brought to the agenda by the international media.

BJP leader Modi took the initiative to alleviate such concerns with the statements he made both during his electoral campaign and following his election; he not only relayed warm messages to China and Pakistan, which both qualify as India’s regional rivals, but he also invited Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to his inauguration ceremony.

Experts who closely follow Indian foreign policy are of the opinion that such an attitude on Modi’s part was indeed not surprising at all, and that the foreign policy tradition carried on by New Delhi up until now will not be interrupted under Modi. Accordingly, it is underlined that the main reasons behind Modi’s ascent to power were economic in essence, stemming from high inflation, unemployment, slow growth, and rampant corruption. In this respect, the new government under Modi will prioritize economic policies according to the general view. To put it more clearly, India needs to improve its relations with all major economies in the world, and with China first and foremost. Prime Minister Modi is aware of the fact that he first needs to improve New Delhi’s relations with Islamabad, as opposed to giving rise to further tensions with this most important neighbor, in order to promote bilateral ties with the Islamic world and in particular with the G-20 member countries such as Indonesia, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia which harbor Muslim majorities. Likewise, in order to attract foreign capital and investment, he needs to preserve the harmony between coexisting ethnic and religious groups in India, including the large Muslim population in the country, within a democratic and multi-cultural framework. All these priorities are embodied in Modi’s restrained approach and moderate statements, which have been effective until now in alleviating the worries related to the BJP’s rise, both domestically and in the international arena.

Hopes for a new beginning

The first impression made by Modi presents an opportunity for Turkey as well, in terms of upgrading relations with India in the forthcoming period. In this respect, it is necessary to identify fields in which relations between the two countries can yield concrete results on a larger international scale, as well as on the bilateral level. Firstly, Ankara and New Delhi share many priorities on the multilateral level. Both countries have a broad experience in the resolution of conflicts all around the world through peaceful means and diplomacy. Both countries provide assistance to peace-keeping missions with their military and police forces in all corners of the world. They both argue that the structure of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) needs to be reformed, and its membership list rearranged. New Delhi wants to be admitted to the Security Council as a permanent member with no veto power, and Ankara has similar demands as well. Moreover, the two countries are working to develop a common political agenda and economic policies under the umbrella of the G-20.

Turkey and India are also in agreement with regard to various regional issues. They share a set of common policies aimed at the stabilization of Afghanistan. Turkey and India carried out significant projects in Afghanistan, following the NATO intervention in 2001. The two countries can follow a common cause, and cooperate more closely in the maintenance of stability and promotion of development in Afghanistan following NATO’s withdrawal from the country at the end of 2014. Likewise, India and Turkey can embark on joint economic projects and seize the initiative for conflict-resolution in various parts of Africa, a continent over which both have considerable influence. It is also known that Ankara hopes to cooperate with New Delhi in finding a solution to the ongoing civil wars in Iraq and Syria.

The most important subject for the sake of advancing bilateral relations is the ordered placement of economic and commercial transactions within a certain framework. In this respect, the FTA to be signed between Ankara and New Delhi is of the utmost importance. Preparations for an FTA have been in progress since 2008, but negotiations are yet to be commenced. The two parties can formulate the agreement in a way in which both benefit. Turkish companies taking part in infrastructure and construction projects in India, and Indian companies with high-tech capabilities increasing their investments in Turkey form the solid ground upon which a balanced economic partnership can flourish. Likewise, sectors such as the defense industry and tourism have a high potential for boosting bilateral cooperation. Cooperation in the film industry and education can further serve public diplomacy by enabling the Turkish and Indian peoples to gradually come into frequent cultural contact and to familiarize themselves with one another.

In sum, it is possible to make a fresh start which will reinvigorate the immense potential between these two countries that each occupy extremely important positions in their respective regions. And the ‘Modi era’ unprecedentedly offers a fresh and great opportunity to this end.

The post Turkey-India Relations Under Modi: A New Opportunity? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Procurement managers face a critical tension at work. On the one hand, they want to find the cheapest supplier for their company. On the other hand, awarding a contract to the cheapest in a “winner-takes-all” auction might alienate the other bidders that did not win. The latter is a key point when suppliers must be screened to participate in the first place.

To ensure healthy competition in future auctions, a supplier who drops out should be replaced, which comes at a cost when testing, site visits or other screening devices are used.

Put simply, a trade-off exists between getting a low purchase price today and avoiding the costs of qualifying new suppliers for future auctions.

“Splitting the business among multiple suppliers can help resolve this trade off,” say Aadhaar Chaturvedi of the University of Namur, Damian R. Beil of the University of Michigan and Victor Martínez de Albéniz of IESE. In their article, “Split-Award Auctions for Supplier Retention,” the authors develop a model with very practical applications. They show that, unlike in “winner-takes-all” auctions where the only thing that matters is being cheapest, with split-award auctions the question of “how much cheaper” determines business-award quantities.

Crunching the relevant numbers, their model is meant to optimize auction results for the buyer, taking the long view. Two welcome side effects are that split-award auctions also benefit the suppliers and the supply chain as a whole, the authors note. They call it win-win-win.

The Importance of Auctions — With Screened Participants

Staying abreast of suppliers’ costs is tricky — especially in fast-changing industries like electronics, where rapid product-obsolescence is constantly affecting the market. To stay current on pricing in components markets, for example, large manufacturers may run quarterly auctions. This creates a lot of work for procurement managers.

Deciding who is qualified to participate in an auction is an added challenge. The stakes are high, as supply failures can be devastating. Take the case of pet food makers Menu Foods. In 2007, they had to recall over 60 million packages of dog and cat food as a result of an unauthorized, toxic chemical additive introduced by one its suppliers. To reduce the likelihood of such problems, suppliers should undergo pre-qualifying procedures, even if they are relatively time-consuming and costly, with product testing and site visits.

Maintaining a pool of pre-qualified suppliers (a “supply base”) to participate regularly in auctions saves a company from having to constantly work to qualify new suppliers. However, running sole-award auctions, where all the business goes to the cheapest supplier, risks alienating qualified participants for future auctions. After all, losers at sole-award auctions have to look elsewhere for revenues.

The Study Results and Implications

In this study of split-award auctions for supply-base maintenance, Martínez de Albéniz and co-authors find:

• For healthy competition in auctions, buyers should qualify suppliers for auctions to reach an optimally-sized supply base and then maintain that size. If the optimal supply base is four bidders, every time there’s a defector, a new Number Four should be found.
• A larger supply base allows the buyer to cast a wider net and in theory leads to more competitive bidding. However, maintaining this larger pool of suppliers and splitting awards between them effectively makes the bidding less competitive, as each supplier receives a smaller share of the business. Hence the need to find the right-sized supply base.
• The exact allocation of business to each supplier depends on their cost spread. In split-award auctions, suppliers know that they are likely to be awarded some business but not how much. This serves as incentive to stay competitive and win a larger share.
• Split-award auctions are better for everyone in fast-changing industries. The buyer avoids many of the headaches and costs of qualifying new suppliers, the system benefits from lower costs and the suppliers win business more often than they would in a winner-takes-all scenario. However, the authors note that their model would not apply to industries where there is little change in suppliers’ costs. Companies in these stable industries are better off holding sole-award auctions and locking the cheapest supplier in to a long-term contract.

  Source: Management Science 60(7): p 1723.

The post Win-Win-Win With Split-Award Auctions appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Henry Makori

For weeks now, an interesting controversy has been raging in Kenya about a popular seasoning product made by the Anglo-Dutch consumer goods giant Unilever. The government through the National Biosafety Authority announced it would stop the sale of Aromat in the country because it contains genetically modified ingredients that could harm consumers. Kenya banned production or importation of genetically modified organisms in 2012.

Unilever has gone to court, arguing that Aromat has been on shop shelves for 13 years in Kenya and that the GMOs ban, although a Cabinet decision, is not backed by any law. The multinational further argues that the government has not tabled any evidence indicating that Aromat has any adverse effect on consumers arising from its GMO ingredients.

While the hearing of the case is awaited, Aromat remains in the shops. But there is now a bizarre twist to the whole issue. It has emerged that the government of Kenya is in fact planning to lift its ban on GMOs. So, why purport to stop the sale of Aromat? Last week Deputy President William Ruto told an international agricultural conference here in Nairobi that the government was considering allowing GMOs to boost food production and alleviate poverty.

Still last week, the country’s governors (heads of the 47 counties created by the 2010 constitution) asked the government to lift the GMOs ban. They said the ban had contributed to food shortages in Kenya. Kisumu Governor Jack Ranguma, chair of the governors’ biotechnology committee, said the conventional methods of farming no longer met the country’s needs.

Pressure is piling on the government. It is not just politicians and corporates like Unilever who are pushing for GMOs. The country’s researchers and academics have in recent months used various platforms, including conferences and the media, to urge the government to embrace biotechnology.

And it is not only in Kenya. Throughout Africa, GMOs – organisms that have been biologically modified to incorporate genes with desired traits – are now being touted as a major solution to hunger and mass poverty. Supporters of biotechnology, like Kenyan-born Harvard scholar Prof Calestous Juma, believe that with GMOs Africa, which has 60 per cent of all the arable land, will be able to feed not just its people but the world.

‘Genetically-modified (GM) crops or any other breeding methods on their own cannot solve the challenges related to food quality, access to food, nutrition or stability of food systems. But their role cannot be dismissed for ideological reasons,’ Prof Juma wrote recently. ‘GM crops already benefit smallholder farmers in several major ways. For example, they help farmers control pests and disease. This leads to higher production and increased income, which in turn provides them with increased ability to consume more nutritious food.’

Tanzania’s President Jakaya Kikwete is a recent enthusiastic GMO convert. He has appealed to Tanzanians to change their negative mindset about biotechnology, arguing that as long as there were no proven negative impacts of GMOs, he saw no reason why the technologies should not be used to modernise agriculture in his country.

South Africa has been the biggest proponent of GM crops on the continent for well over a decade. Genetically modified maize, cotton, soy beans and other crops are now grown commercially. In January, the government launched a new bio-economy strategy, which it said would boost food security, improve health care, create jobs and protect the environment. The new policy promotes multi-sector partnerships and increased public awareness on the benefits of biotechnology.

Last week, Nigeria’s National Agricultural Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA) announced that the federal government had put in place necessary regulatory guidelines to fast track the adoption of GMO crops. A biosafety law will be passed to promote research and development in biotechnology, according to NABDA director-general Prof Lucy Ogbadu.

So far, only four African countries grow GM crops commercially (South Africa, Egypt, Sudan and Burkina Faso). But from the way things are moving, it will not be long before the GM gospel is embraced across the continent. GMOs supporters say biotechnology holds the key to prosperity in Africa where agriculture accounts for about two-thirds of full time employment and for more than half of the export earnings. Genetic modification will increase yields, improve nutritional quality, help crops to withstand adverse weather conditions and protect plants and animals from pests and diseases, among many other benefits.

Figures published by the European Academies Science Advisory Council indicate that in 2012, 17.3 million farmers planted genetically modified crops. Globally more than 70 percent of soy beans and more than 80 percent of cotton are of GM origin. Of the 28 countries that planted GM crops in 2012, 20 were in the developing world.

A rosy picture, no doubt. Any real examples of GM success stories? Oh, yes. Argentina was an early adopter of GM. By now its cumulative gross economic benefit is estimated to be more than $72 million, mostly from soybean production. Bt cotton, approved for use in India in 2002, is genetically altered to kill bollworm. The use of Bt cotton has brought about a 24 percent increase in yield per acre, and a 50 percent gain in profit to smallholders.

Well, but is this the entire story about GMOs? If so, why is there such relentless resistance to genetically modified food in Africa and globally? There are numerous organisations in Africa and elsewhere leading the opposition to GMOs. Nearly 50 countries around the world have either banned GM crop production outright, or have put in place extremely tight restrictions on the production and use of GM products. Could this vociferous rejection be misguided?

There are three basic concerns about GMOs. First, the science is at best inconclusive regarding the safety of genetically engineered organisms on human health and the environment. The bulk of research that supports GMOs is funded by agribusiness. Still, there is evidence that GMOs could have deleterious effects on people and the environment. The second concern is about food sovereignty. Opponents are convinced that the campaign for GMOs is part of the neo-liberal agenda to place agricultural production in the hands of a few corporate giants through seed patents and deny small farmers control of production. It is instructive that 95 percent of genetically modified crops planted worldwide come from Monsanto, the world’s leading biotechnology and genetic engineering company.

Finally, the GMOs crusade distorts the debate about food security and poverty alleviation. The problems afflicting small farmers everywhere have very little to do with technology, but almost everything to do with unequal access to land, water, affordable inputs, markets and other resources. Biotechnology helps industrial agriculture and yet it is small farmers, largely made up of women in Africa, who feed the world. Additionally, it has been shown that hunger, which afflicts a billion people today, is not a result of inadequate food production, but about issues of access. That is why people starve to death in one part of the country while food rots in another.

In this special issue of Pambazuka News, we carry articles arguing on either side of the gripping GMOs debate. It is true that African governments are under intense pressure from within but also from big agribusiness and Western governments to embrace GMOs. We believe that African governments must resist all forms of arm-twisting and food colonialism and make their biotechnology choices based on facts and the realities facing their own people. Where the science is uncertain, we urge caution.

Henry Makori is an editor with Pambazuka News.

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

The post GMOs And Food Sovereignty: Which Way Africa? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Russian Federation’s challenge—take on the civilized world with not even half the strength of the U.S.S.R.

Moscow’s support for political assassinations in Britain and Europe, the nationalization of its industries, a complete lack of the rule of law within Russia and present abuses in Ukraine are all finally exploding to the surface. They were once held back for many years to keep a corridor of peace and kick-start further political and economic growth between Russia and the world since the 1990s. Now the truth may be the most powerful weapon against the prodigy of an “evil empire.”

Every day there seems to be some more dirty laundry and a diving Russian international image. Here are some of the present reactions to Putin’s criminal state:

Reinvestigation of Litvanenko in the UK. Scotland Yard has taken up the case of Alexander Litvinenko on request of the widow of the former KGB man who fell out of favor with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Litvinenko became a critical dissident of the regime and direction the country was headed, defected to London and was poisoned with radioactive polonium in his tea in 2006. Traces of the unique polonium act like an invisible fingerprint that can be found in the Russian embassy, apartments of suspected killers and other places of meeting or travel of the actors involved. The case for murder has not officially been proven yet in court or public hearing. The matter was regrettably kept quiet for matters of higher diplomatic ties, intelligence and agenda. UK Home Secretary Theresa May indicated that the case would reveal the “truth” of whether Russia was behind Litveninko’s death.

As a member to the Energy Charter Treaty, Russia is subject to the rulings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, Netherlands. The Court of Arbitration has just ruled in an international tribunal regarding the hostile government actions against Yukos Oil, Inc. and its shareholders. The Court ruled that Russia pay shareholders $50 billion for intentionally overtaxing and illegally expropriated their assets ten years ago. Naturally, the major shareholders received no compensation and the controversy of a decade centered around one of the most powerful men in Russia at that time, the largest Yukos shareholder, a Mr. Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Russia will be appealing the decision.

The latest EU economic sanctions target broad Russian sectors (energy, banking and defense). The previous sanctions, imposed by the 28 state union affected only specific Russian and Ukrainian players of influence who were involved in Crimea and aiding the separatists. The sanctions are to be renewed within three months and do not include previous contracts (e.g. the French Naval helicopter carrier contract).

New U.S. economic sanctions imposed jointly with the EU, in addition to the previous sanctions also targeted the same sectors of industry. “If Russia continues on this current path, the costs on Russia will continue to grow,” President Barack Obama said, laying out a clear policy of economic squeeze.

International condemnation is encircling a villainous state. New IMINT evidence released by the U.S. government shows Russia breaching Ukrainian sovereignty with heavy artillery fire from satellite images.

Actions too slow to come out before the downing of Flight MH17 had little choice after that tragedy. Russia’s response continues to be one of strange denial and support of pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine, amassing more pressure. It has decided to take on the U.S., the EU and much of the world on the air and through minor policy measures of political and economic retaliation so far. One latent fear is that this could change as they take economic measures against the EU, who have more than ten times more trade with Russia than the U.S. and an average 50 percent or more energy dependency on Russia (i.e. oil and natural gas combined). The energy supply varies greatly with some states only 10 percent and others almost 100 percent. They have shut this pipeline advantage off before.

Both sides want to secure this pipeline in spite of the conflict as it is essential to both. But is Russia even more dependent on Europe or are they far more vulnerable right now? Or is it out of the kindness of Vladimir Putin’s heart that they have not already responded with greater action against EU economic measures taken against him and his interests in Ukraine?

The likely reason for this is that they cannot afford an economic showdown with the EU, the US and other players around the world. Their country cannot afford economic warfare so they fire back with minor responses because the Russian mentality is ultimately political revenge.

Moscow, dances on a dime of public record with pledged diplomatic support in de-escalating the Ukrainian conflict. Next Russia is caught red-handed in provoking it. Indirectly, they are also responsible for supporting an unstable and clumsy ally that killed 298 innocent civilians aboard Malaysia Flight MH17.

The Kiev government has not made things any easier for any political resolution or reconciliation. Its efforts at a cease-fire and political concessions have all been promises to start a process after the other side gives-up. How could that possible work that the enemy, backed by Russia, would surrender without any sure guarantees to either player? But any guarantees would look like a total defeat for Kiev, something that they might have to accept eventually, but are at present determined to decide this on the battle-field against “terrorists” rather than a right perspective of them being ethnic-Russian separatists backed by a motherland.

It is true that a large part in the nature of the Ukrainian-Russia conflict rests on foreign intervention and international pressures aimed at Moscow. The world must continue to target bad Russia and reward good Russia.

What must also be present is EU-Kiev mentorship and staying off the big guns, so to speak. National Ukrainian humiliation of separatists and Russia downing over 16 military aircraft is a result of charging at the border of a larger army. Operational success in Ukraine are directly proportional to the political conditions, ethnicities and loyalties of the city, the proximity to the Russian border and what looks like a Moscow issuing order for conventional deterrence and denial tactics.

For now, Russia is not finished with Donetsk and Luhansk and they are ready to trade everything or endure all punishment for it.

*First published by In Homeland Security.

The post Target Bad Russia – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The United States is preparing to sell the Iraqi government 5,000 Hellfire missiles through a proposed $700 million deal intended to equip Baghdad with additional power as militants from the Islamic State continue to wage a campaign across the region.

On Tuesday, the US State Department issued a statement announcing the preliminary approval of an agreement that would give Iraq a new arsenal of AGM-114K/N/R Hellfire missiles and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support “to help improve the Iraq Security Forces’ capability to support current on-going ground operations.”

The Washington Post reported that the deal, if cleared for approval, would constitute the largest shipment yet of Hellfire missiles to Iraq. Congress will first have to authorize the arrangement, but AFP reported that lawmakers are expected to green-light the deal as planned.

Rear Admiral John Kirby, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, added that the order is only the latest instance in which Washington has reequipped the Iraqi military with weapon power as the Islamic State, a militant group previously known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, continues to mount a campaign against Baghdad that in recent months has allowed the insurgents to take hold of key towns across Iraq and contributed to the deaths of over 5,500 civilians so far this year, according to the United Nations.

The Pentagon has sent 780 Hellfire missiles to Iraq since this past January, Kirby told AFP, including 466 in the month of July alone after, according to the Post, the military went through around 300 of the warheads in June as ISIS escalated their campaign. In August, Kirby added, an additional 366 missiles are expected to be sent.

Lockheed Martin, the Maryland-based contractor that will provide the weaponry, describes Hellfire as “a combat–proven tactical missile system that can be launched from multiple air, sea and ground platforms” that offers “multi–mission, multi-target capability and precision–strike lethality.”

Earlier this month, Bloomberg News reported that the State Department planned to ask the Obama administration to approve the sale of at least 4,000 new Hellfire missiles to Iraq. At the time, a State Dept. spokesperson told Bloomberg that “as a matter of policy, we decline to comment on cases that have not been formally notified to Congress.” The legislative branch has since been made aware of the offer, though, and now has 30 days to block the sale outlined in the notice published on Tuesday by the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

“Iraq, which already has Hellfire missiles, will have no difficulty absorbing these additional missiles into its armed forces,” the Pentagon acknowledges in that notice. “The proposed sale of these additional missiles will not alter the basic military balance in the region.”

In the months since the Islamic State has ramped up its campaign to take over Iraq, US President Barack Obama has adamantly insisted that no American troops will engage in combat roles. So far, however, the commander-in-chief has sent at least 275 armed troops to Baghdad as a security precaution and ordered the deployment of hundreds of additional military advisers “to assess how we can best train, advise and support Iraqi security forces going forward.” Last week, Human Rights Watch asked the US to put any plans to send weapons to Baghdad on hold until the Iraqi government “complies with international law,” citing concerns about the illegal use of barrel bombs since a counter-campaign intensified early last month.

The post US To Sell Largest Ever Hellfire Missile Cache To Iraq appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas are committing widespread abuses with impunity in the mostly Afro-Colombian city of Tumaco and its surrounding rural areas, Human Rights Watch said today.

Human Rights Watch documented a wide range of abuses committed against scores of victims in Tumaco in 2013 and 2014 in which there is compelling evidence the FARC was responsible. These abuses included killings, disappearances, kidnapping, torture, forced displacement, attempted forced recruitment, planting landmines, extortion, and death threats against community leaders. Official data indicates the FARC has also committed sexual violence in Tumaco in 2013 and 2014.

“FARC abuses are devastating Tumaco’s Afro-Colombian communities,” said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “The FARC has a tight grip over the lives of many Tumaco residents, who are forced to keep silent as the guerrillas plant their fields with landmines, drive them from their homes, and kill their neighbors and loved ones with impunity.”

Paramilitary successor groups also engaged in rampant atrocities in Tumaco until they stopped operating in the municipality in late 2013. There is compelling evidence that members of the security forces have been responsible for some human rights violations there as well.

Human Rights Watch visited Tumaco in May and June and interviewed more than 90 abuse victims, their relatives, community leaders, and local officials, among others. Research also drew on government data, official reports, and criminal case files.

Human Rights Watch documented abuses in Tumaco against more than 70 victims since 2013 in which there is strong indication the FARC was responsible, including 12 killings, 3 disappearances, 6 cases of attempted forced recruitment, and 5 cases of torture, among other types of abuse. Human Rights Watch also documented abuses against 16 victims in recent years in which evidence points to the perpetrators being paramilitary successor groups, including the disappearance of three teenage girls and attempted forced recruitment of two teenage boys.

Official data strongly suggests that the FARC and paramilitary successor groups have committed more than 300 killings and dozens of disappearances in Tumaco over the past several years. Tumaco has among the highest officially reported levels of homicides, disappearances, conflict-related sexual violence and abuse, landmine victims, and forced displacement in Colombia. More than 10,000 Tumaco residents have fled their homes annually since 2011, according to government figures.

Over the past decade, the FARC and paramilitary successor groups – principally the Rastrojos – vied for control of Tumaco. Paramilitary successor groups emerged in Tumaco after the deeply flawed official demobilization of right-wing paramilitary organizations.

Since late 2013, the FARC has established an undisputed presence in many of the urban and rural areas of Tumaco, after numerous Rastrojos members were arrested and several neighborhoods succeeded in expelling the group. Some Rastrojos members stayed in Tumaco – and there has been concern among residents and officials over the possible arrival of another paramilitary successor group, the Urabeños – but, at this time, the FARC’s influence is uncontested by other armed groups.

“Almost no one has been held accountable for the atrocities in Tumaco,” Vivanco said. “As long as Colombia fails to deliver justice in Tumaco, residents will remain vulnerable to abuses, whether from guerrillas, paramilitaries, gangs, or security force members.”

The Attorney General’s Office reported that only seven of its investigations into the more than 1,300 homicides committed in Tumaco since 2009 have led to convictions. Prosecutors have not obtained a single conviction in any of their more than 680 investigations into disappearances and forced displacement committed since 2009 in Tumaco and several nearby municipalities. Only four of the 314 investigations into sexual violence and abuse in Tumaco since 2009 have led to a conviction. Eight local prosecutors interviewed by Human Rights Watch were handling more than 1,100 investigations each. In some of the cases documented, justice authorities delayed – or completely failed – to take basic steps to investigate abuses.

The municipality of Tumaco, in southwestern Colombia, has roughly 200,000 residents, 89 percent Afro-Colombian. Slightly over half of the municipality’s population lives in the city of Tumaco, Colombia’s second-largest Pacific port. Much of Tumaco’s rural population lives on land that is collectively owned and governed by what are termed Afro-Colombian “community councils” and on indigenous reserves. Tumaco’s poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality rates are all more than twice the national average.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and the UN independent expert on minority issues have found that Afro-Colombians nationwide face discrimination, socio-economic exclusion, and pervasive violence.

The FARC should immediately end its abuses against civilians in Tumaco and the rest of Colombia, Human Rights Watch said. It should stop using antipersonnel landmines, and disclose information on where landmines are laid so they can be cleared; stop interfering with school safety and children’s education; and reveal the whereabouts and/or return the remains of disappearance victims.

The Colombia government should promptly and effectively investigate, prosecute, and punish atrocities in Tumaco, Human Rights Watch said. It should significantly increase the personnel and resources assigned to the Tumaco prosecutor’s office, and establish a robust witness protection program for Tumaco cases. It should also address the issue of racial discrimination when carrying out policies to improve socio-economic conditions and curb abuses in Tumaco.

“As the FARC discusses peace in Havana with the Colombian government, in Tumaco its members have been brutalizing some of the most vulnerable communities in Colombia,” Vivanco said. “A peace agreement could eventually improve conditions in Tumaco but, in the meantime, the FARC needs to end its abuses against the civilian population, and the government should ensure justice for atrocities by all sides.”

The post Colombia: FARC Battering Afro-Colombian Areas appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The bodies of 20 Palestinians were recovered from the rubble of destroyed buildings in the northern Gaza Strip on Wednesday evening, as Gazans took stock of a 23-day Israeli assault that has killed 1,359 people so far with no end in sight.

The announcement by Gaza medical teams of the recovery of the bodies in Jabaliya came only hours after Israeli shelling killed 17 in a crowded market in Shujaiyya, as thousands took advantage of a temporary Israeli ceasefire to shop on the third of the Muslim Eid holiday.

Ambulances raced racing towards the site of the blast as medics and residents frantically tried to gather up the dead bodies.

An AFP correspondent saw at least five bodies being shoved onto stretchers and driven off to hospitals or mortuaries as quickly as the ambulances could take them. Even civilian cars were used to evacuate the dead and the wounded.

“The first shell hit, and people immediately started evacuating the wounded,” said a man called Abu Maysarah. “They (the Israelis) saw them evacuating the wounded, and they struck them again,” he said as a nearby building burned, belting out smoke as debris littered the street.

A bloodied, limp lifeless body lay in a pool of petrol and mud, his head crushed.

“There were journalists over here, and they hit them as well as they stood next to the ambulances,” he shouted.

TV images showed at least one journalist lying motionless in the street, his flak jacket with “Press” on the front soaked in blood.

“We want a battle,” Abu Maysarah cried, furious.

“We want Qassam to strike back, in the heart of Tel Aviv!” he said of the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas.

It was not the first time this battered district between Gaza City and the border had taken the brunt of Israel’s 23-day assault.

On July 20, more than 100 people were killed in the district on the single bloodiest day in Gaza in more than five years, as Israel staged a blistering offensive, pounding the district to dust and leaving bodies scattered in the streets.

Ministry of Health Spokesman Ashraf al-Qidra said Wednesday evening that the total death toll had surpassed 1,359 and 7,677 injured. Of those, 129 were killed and 400 injured on Wednesday alone, as even the temporary Israeli ceasefire failed to slow the carnage.

Israel earlier announced a four-hour temporary humanitarian ceasefire from 3-7 p.m. However, it exempted all areas in which its forces were actively operating, leading Hamas to denounce the move as “worthless.”

Despite the ceasefire announcement, around 34 Palestinians were killed by Israeli shelling during the period.

Israeli shelling from land and sea, as well as airstrikes, continued into the night.

Mayar Jamal Abu Musbeh, 9, and Mohammad Taysir Abu Haza, 25, were killed in shelling on houses in Deir al-Balah, while Alaa Abd al-Karim al-Qarra, 23, died of injuries sustained earlier in Gaza City.

The post 20 Bodies Found In Gaza Rubble, Wednesday Death Toll Hits 129 appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Evan A. Feigenbaum

John Kerry visits India Wednesday as a raft of crises consume American diplomacy. By contrast, US-India relations are at a moment of opportunity, but the US Secretary of State faces challenges in New Delhi that are significant in their own way.

For one thing, after a decade of disengagement with Narendra Modi, Washington is eager to make a fresh start. The US is sending three cabinet secretaries to India in quick succession – Kerry (State), Penny Pritzker (Commerce), and Chuck Hagel (Defence) – and Washington is preparing to host Modi himself in September. From the US perspective, Modi’s government offers a welcome respite from years of perceived strategic and economic drift under UPA-2.

But Kerry’s visit is also very well timed:

First, the NDA government has been in office for nearly two months. Modi has met Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, among others, so it is high time for cabinet-level US engagement.

Second, as Kerry himself argued in a speech this week, relations with strategically important countries cannot be shunted to the sidelines by crises. For over a decade, India has been among the small group of countries vital to American strategy. And the US has a strong stake in continued Indian reform and success-especially as they contribute to global growth, promote market-based economic policies, help secure the global commons, and maintain a mutually favourable balance of power in Asia.

Third, Kerry and others, including Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, just attended the US-China strategic and economic dialogue in Beijing. Continued absence from New Delhi at the cabinet level would invite unflattering comparisons between US approaches to China and India.

The two sides’ first challenge is to find new ways of working effectively. Modi, unlike UPA-2, has designed an administration with a strengthened executive and an activist Office of the Prime Minister. In such a set-up, there are inherent limits to reliance on ritualized Strategic Dialogue between foreign ministries.

The two sides should relook existing structures, reinvigorating trade, defence, and CEO forums. But they also need new lines of coordination that reflect the emerging institutional and political set-up in New Delhi.

Kerry is attending a Strategic Dialogue (capitalized “S” and “D”) that has been a calendar-driven exercise. What the two countries need is a “real” strategic dialogue (lower case “s” and “d”), built upon a less ritualized but more powerful set of first principles: strengthened coordination, no surprises on core security equities, sensitivity to each other’s domestic constraints, and frequent not ritualized contact at the highest levels.

The most immediate need is to strengthen trust after a rough patch.

From India’s perspective, the causes of these frictions include US trade cases, the Khobragade debacle, and inadequate US attention to India’s security concerns, especially in India’s neighborhood.

From the US perspective such concerns have centered on the scope and pace of Indian economic reforms. These have badly tainted market sentiment and soured US firms on India. Retroactive taxes and the nuclear liability bill have compounded these negative sentiments.

Viewed through this prism, the current US-India standoff at the WTO is badly timed.

The US side will listen closely to India’s economic priorities. Hopefully, it will bring a few ideas-for example, technology releases, defence licenses, and co-production. Washington needs to avoid hectoring about India’s investment climate. Instead, it should inject something tangible into the mix, especially since Beijing and Tokyo, among others, offer India project finance vehicles the US lacks.

But the biggest challenges are structural, and long-term in nature.

First, economic constraints have hindered strategic coordination, especially in East Asia.

The US and India share a powerful interest in assuring a favourable balance of power. Much binds them, not least shared regional maritime and energy interests. But lofty strategic ambitions require strengthened economic, not just security, content in relations with regional states, and with one another in the East Asian context.

So it is hardly ideal that Washington and New Delhi are pursuing separate, and competitive, regional trade agreements: Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

Meanwhile, US economic weight in Asia is increasing absolutely but declining in relative terms. From 2000 to 2009, China’s share of ASEAN trade increased threefold, surpassing the US share, which declined by a third in the same period. The US wants to leverage TPP to restore its leadership but there is zero prospect of a TPP this year and the Administration has no stomach to pursue needed Trade Promotion Authority with Congress.

India’s challenge is greater. Trade plays a growing role in its economy but scale remains a handicap. In 2012, 11.7 percent of ASEAN trade was with China, just 2.9 percent with India. And that is no coincidence: the backbone of East Asian economies remains integrated supply and production chains from which India is largely absent. With rising labour costs in China, the geography of Asian manufacturing will shift, so India has an opportunity to align its national manufacturing policies with strategic imperatives to the east.

At the same time, the US and India need new bilateral economic vehicles. Vice President Biden has called for an increase in trade from $100 to $500 billion-a number analogous to US-China trade. But that is hard to fathom: India lacks China’s manufacturing base, its integration into regional and global supply chains, its comparative openness to foreign investment at a comparable stage of development, and its hard infrastructure.

Instead of pithy slogans, the two sides need better aligned agendas, especially on opportunities for cross-border investment, manufacturing, infrastructure, and gasification and energy opportunities.

For Americans, the most pressing need is for growth-conducive reforms and investor friendly tax and sectoral policies in India. The Arun Jaitley budget offered hope but less than many in the US had wished for.

One step would be a bilateral investment treaty. Indian firms would benefit from investor protections in the US. US firms would welcome relevant legal changes and safeguards in India. Both countries would benefit from the treaty’s independent arbitration process.

In fact, investment is, at this point, more important than trade. It is a vote of confidence in the other country’s economy, and meshes well with current needs on each side.

Above all, the two sides need to continue their difficult quest for strategic consensus. Enhanced intelligence and counterterrorism cooperation offer one opportunity. So do defence co-production and weapons sales because they increase the potential for interoperability.

But a positive security agenda is needed, especially in Asia, through new initiatives across a series of baskets: energy, seaborne trade, finance, the global commons, and regional architecture.

The two sides will need to manage differences of tone and substance on strategic issues of concern, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, and China.

Take China: The fact is, India views Beijing’s role in South Asia with far greater alarm than does Washington, and this is unlikely to change soon. The US will lean toward India, but seek to avoid becoming caught between New Delhi and Beijing.

Many in India continue to fear a US-China condominium on issues of importance to New Delhi. This fear has receded as US-China relations have deteriorated since 2010, yet India remains sensitive about perceived inattention to its equities. And this concern is even more pronounced in Afghanistan and Pakistan, amid US withdrawal and policy turbulence.

The US and India can do (much) better. Kerry’s visit is a start. Modi’s September visit will be pivotal.

(Evan A. Feigenbaum is vice chairman of the Paulson Institute at the University of Chicago and Nonresident Senior Associate for Asia at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He served twice as deputy assistant secretary of state in the George W. Bush Administration, including for South Asia, where he was responsible for US-India relations.)

This article appeared at South Asia Monitor.

The post Kerry Visit To India: Preparing For Modi’s Pivotal Visit – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s popularity among Sinhala and Muslim people in Sri Lanka shot up following the military victory over the LTTE in 2009. He won the presidential election in 2010 with 57.88 percent of the votes cast, about a  seven percent increase from what he obtained in 2005. The President’s confidence was such that he modified the Constitution to remove the two-term limit through the 18th Amendment. The underlying assumption was that  he was popular enough to win more elections and could continue in power for a long time. In fact, Rajapaksa looked certain to win the third term and was making behind the door arrangements to go for the next presidential election early next year as the Amendment allows the President to conduct the election “at any time after the expiration of four years from the commencement of his current term of office.”

One of the factors which boosted the President’s confidence, and which could encourage an early election, is the feeble opposition. The United National Party (UNP), the main opposition party, is divided and unable to capitalize on any of the flaws of the government. Many people, not without reason, believe that opposition leader Ranil Wickremasinghe cannot win national level elections, especially against the powerful Mahinda Rajapaksa. Moreover, an absence of a clear alternative candidate to President Rajapaksa helps keep the morale of the detractors of the government low.

It is against this backdrop, that some of the leading political and civil society leaders convened in Colombo last week to adopt what is called the “road-map” to abolish the executive presidential system, which was introduced in 1978. The meeting called for a grand opposition political alliance against the government. The significance of the meeting was that it managed to bring some of the key opposition political figures to support a political agenda, i.e abolishing the present system of governance. For example, leader of the opposition Ranil Wickremasinghe, former army commander and presidential candidate Sarath Fonseka, former president Chandrika Kumaratunga, the impeached former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, and leader of the Tamil National Alliance, Rajavarothayam Sambandan attended the meeting. Some political commentators believe that this meeting could be a turning point and could lead to a regime change.

Although the meeting could very well be a defining moment, at this point in time, it seems to face two major challenges: (1) the agenda, and (2) a common candidate.

The meeting aims to mobilize the opposition political and social entities in Sri Lanka and form a broad alliance under the general slogan of abolishing the presidential system. Ever since the present system was introduced, the Sri Lankan society has been gradually but steadily sliding into authoritarianism, which could eventually culminate in a dictatorial state. Therefore, the validity of the slogan cannot be easily contested, despite the fact that Sri Lanka has experienced authoritarian phases even under the parliamentary system of governance. Ending the presidential system may slow down the erosion of democracy.

The question however is how many votes the slogan could fetch against the government. In a way one could argue that abolishing the system is an elitist mantra as the authoritarian tendencies and the need for change are felt strongly among the urban elite and civil society circles. The common people and especially the rural masses do not feel strongly about the need for change of the system. In fact, some people do not believe that there is an authoritarian slide in the country. Looking at the Sri Lankan society today one could easily argue that such issues as cost of living, corruption and increasing national debt could be more attractive and fetch more votes than the abolition of the present system. Going to a national election with a single issue, which could bring the votes of the urban elite, could be a costly mistake.

Obviously, one of the main aims of the meeting was to form a broad national alliance with what is popularly called a “common candidate” to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa in the next presidential election. The problem is that there are too many ambitious people within the opposition ranks, which could undermine an agreement on a possible common candidate despite the agreement on the need to abolish the present system. Ranil Wickremasinghe has asserted that he should be the common candidate and there is no indication that the UNP would settle on a common candidate from outside. One cannot expect too many opposition parties to endorse Wickremasinghe as the common candidate. It is possible that different opposition parties could field their own candidates eventually in the next presidential election.

The road map meeting was organized by the National Movement for Social Justice headed by Maduluwawe Sobhitha Thero. Sobhitha Thero was also proposed as the common candidate by a section of the opposition parties. Sri Lankan society, however, has not indicated so far that a person from outside of the political establishment would be accepted as a national leader. Therefore, despite the agreement on the need to change the system, the road ahead for the national alliance seems challenging.

However, if an alliance could be formed based on last week’s meeting and if the alliance broadens its agenda to include the common man’s problems, it could very well be a spoiler for the President’s plans for the third term. There are two reasons for this.

First, the recent ethnic tensions, especially between the Sinhala and Muslim communities, indicate that President Rajapaksa can hardly rely on Muslim votes. Tamil votes will mostly go to the candidate supported by the TNA, and TNA cannot and will not endorse Rajapaksa. This reality would force Rajapaksa to rely mostly on Sinhala votes. A common candidate with Sinhala Buddhist outlook could seriously damage this vote bank.

Second, the recent election to the Southern and Western Provincial Councils demonstrated that the ruling party’s vote bank has begun to slowly shrink. This could be a national trend. If this is the case, the President’s quest for a third term in office will not be a cake walk. Therefore, one can be assured that the government and its agencies will be watching the road map process with concern.

The post Sri Lanka’s Grand Opposition Alliance? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Arjun Hardas

The ongoing war between Israel and Hamas is currently in its third week and so far, at the time of this writing, shows no signs of coming to an end anytime soon. This current round, the third full -fledged operation in just over 7 years since the Hamas’ forcible takeover of the Gaza Strip, began with the abduction and subsequent murder of three Israeli teenagers by suspected Hamas terrorists, in June this year.

Israel retaliated by arresting over 500 Palestinians, including almost the entire Hamas leadership in the West Bank. Hamas, in turn, restarted firing rockets and missiles into southern Israel, sending almost 3.5 million Israelis (almost 45% of its total population) into shelters.

While so far this operation looks like a repeat of the previous two operations, there are sound reasons why it will be different this time due to the various strategic errors Hamas seems to have made.

Its biggest problem this time is an almost complete lack of support from its usual allies. Its most powerful supporters, Iran and Egypt, are totally out of the picture this time. The former is busy trying to defend its interests in Iraq and Syria, and even its proxy, the Hezbollah, has not got involved beyond lobbying a couple of token shots across the Israel-Lebanon border. In Egypt, the pro-Hamas Muslim Brotherhood is in total disarray after its ouster in a military coup and is in no condition to go to anyone else’s help.

The second biggest error made is the missile attacks on Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. By launching its long-range Iran-made missiles against these two major cities, the Hamas has crossed a red line. There is no way Israel will allow a situation where its capital city and its commercial capital will remain permanently under the threat of a future missile barrage by the Hamas. Its third big mistake was prematurely unveiling these long-range missiles and completely underestimating the capability of the Iron Dome system.

A large number of civilian casualties and major damage to Israeli towns and cities could have had a devastating effect on Israeli morale, but the performance of the Iron Dome system has almost completely prevented that situation. And most importantly, the Hamas has never really understood the resolve of the civilian population this time to fully support the Israeli government to prosecute the war against the Hamas to its logical end.

The civilian population, especially in the south, has endured years of rocket firing from Gaza, and so are now willing to pay the price in terms of military casualties so long as the terror infrastructure in Gaza is permanently destroyed. This war has brought Israel together like no other. In all its conventional wars, in 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, the ordinary Israeli citizen, while contributing via conscript soldiers and commandeered civilian vehicles, has never been directly on the front line. This time, as in the 2006 war against the Hezbollah, war has reached their drawing rooms and bedrooms. This time everybody is on the frontline with no distinction.

Closer to home, a miniscule minority of 5,000 Jews in India has also been following the Gaza war closely. This war impacts them directly with many of their relatives and friends under daily rocket fire. There are currently about 80,000 Jews of Indian origin living in Israel, with a large number of them living in southern Israel, putting them very much in range of the rockets and missiles being fired daily from Gaza.

While mainly concentrated in Dimona and Ashdod, they have a sizeable number in Beersheva, the capital of the Negev, in the coastal town of Ashkelon, in the formerly Arab towns of Ramle and Lod in-between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and even in a settlement in the West Bank. Some have decided to brave the daily missile barrage further and have settled in Sderot, a small town barely half a kilometre from the Gaza border and the main target of rocket attacks by the Hamas right from 2001 itself.

This writer, while visiting Sderot in 2010, met a Mr Erez Kolet, who turned out to be the grandson of the late Ezra Kolet, a one-time President of the Jewish Welfare Association in New Delhi. The Indian Jewish community also has many of its members currently serving in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), in both combat and support services with some having been deployed in Gaza as well. While perfectly aware they could face death or serious injury by these rockets and missiles, the community is stoic in their outlook. They have decided not to let everyday life come to a standstill and instead take each day as it comes, an attitude that seems more Indian than Israeli!

The Indian Jews represent a unique community in Israel, being one that immigrated to Israel for economic and religious reasons rather than due to religious persecution. This is seen in their recounting happy memories from their lives in India and the first generation’s preference to speak in Marathi and Hindi more than in Hebrew. Many return to India for holidays and to visit relatives and co-religionists who have decided not to move to Israel.

Initially pushed to peripheral towns in the Negev desert or to border towns, to the first line of physical defence in case of a land invasion by the Arabs, Indian Jews built a life for themselves and are now represented in almost every profession.

Over the years direct threats to their homes were slowly eliminated with peace treaties being signed with their former enemies such as Egypt and Jordan, but today their towns and cities are again in the frontline of a determined enemy. For the community it is very simple. In a national emergency, they are all Israelis and that is where the buck stops finally.

(Arjun Hardas is an independent journalist who has frequented Israel and the Palestinian territories. He can be contacted at southasiamonitor1@gmail.com)

This article appeared at South Asia Monitor.

The post The Indian Jew: An Indian At Heart But Also A Loyal Israeli – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.