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

Ron Paul: Two-Party US Political System In Reality A Monopoly

0
0

Former Congressman Ron Paul told RT in the midst of Tuesday’s midterm elections that the “monopoly” system run by the leaders of the two main parties is all too evident as Americans go to the polls this Election Day.

“This whole idea that a good candidate that’s rating well in the polls can’t get in the debate, that’s where the corruption really is,” Paul, the 79-year-old former House of Representatives lawmaker for Texas, told RT during Tuesday’s special midterm elections coverage. “It’s a monopoly…and they don’t even allow a second option,” he said.

“If a third party person gets anywhere along, they are going to do everything they can to stop that from happening,” the retired congressman continued.

Paul, a longtime Republican, has been critical of the two-party dichotomy that dominates American politics for decades, and once ran as the Libertarian Party’s nominee for president of the United States. While third-party candidates continue to vie against the left and right establishment, however, Paul warned RT that even the two-party system as Americans know it is in danger.

“What do they do with our young people? They send them all around the world, getting involved in wars and telling them they have to have democratic elections,” he told RT. “But here at home, we don’t have true Democracy. We have a monopoly of ideas that is controlled by the leaders of two parties. And they call it two parties, but it’s really one philosophy.”

All hope isn’t lost, however; according to Paul, American politics can still be changed if individuals intent on third-party ideas introduce their ethos to the current establishment. Americans can “fight to get rid of the monopoly of Republicans and Democrats,” Paul said, or “try to influence people with ideas and infiltrate both political parties.”

With respect to the midterm elections, though, Paul told RT that he’s uncertain what policies will prevail this year — excluding, of course, an obvious win for the status quo.

“I think the status quo is pretty strong right now, and I imagine that the status quo is going to win the election tonight,” he said Tuesday afternoon.

The post Ron Paul: Two-Party US Political System In Reality A Monopoly appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Can Pakistan Reset Its Relations With Afghanistan? – Analysis

0
0

By D Suba Chandran

The recent International Crisis Group (ICG) report on the Af-Pak region, following its excellent reports on the same subject, addresses a crucial question: Can Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan be reset?

The report focuses on three issues towards a reset: political imperatives, economic opportunities and constraints, and finally, Afghan refugees in Pakistan. This critique discusses the issues further.

What Shapes Pakistan’s Afghan Policy?

According to the report, Pakistan’s “Afghan policy is still shaped by the ‘baggage of the past’, namely the propensity to interfere in Afghanistan.” This has been the crux of Pakistan’s Kabul predicament and the related problems within Afghanistan.

Despite multiple debates in the public and within policy circles, including the Parliament, within Pakistan, there has been no credible alternate narrative on Afghanistan that is visible and convincing. To an extent, there is a widespread understanding and acceptance within civil society that there has to be a change in Islamabad’s approach towards Kabul but this change is yet to be enunciated formally as a doctrine, and implemented at the ground level.

Until there is an alternate narrative and a new Afghan doctrine, the strategic community and civil society will be lulled by its own thinking of change, instead of actual change aimed at ‘new’ relations. Else, as shall be subsequently explained, it will be back to the old actors pursuing the same policies, using the same old actors and trump cards (or the proxies, as the report refers to).

Who Shapes Pakistan’s Afghan Policy?

This is an equally important question that the report discusses under “civil-military relations.” If Islamabad has to really reset its relations with Afghanistan, then there has to be a reset within Pakistan in terms of who formulates its Afghan policy.

The Establishment – the military and the ISI – are bound to be conservative and averse to risks in taking bold new steps and completely changing the policy outlook towards Afghanistan (and India as well). The ICG report hints about the inability of the Parliament to produce a coherent document/doctrine that would be seen as a viable alternative plan. If there are serious capacity problems within the Parliament along with delicate civil-military relations further complicating foreign policy decision-making by the elected leaders, there is little reset likely to happen in terms of Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan.

The real and hard question is whether both the Sharifs (the Prime Minister and the Chief of Army Staff) are in sync in terms of Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan. Or, is the civilian Sharif under the shadow of the khakis and has only limited influence in shaping an independent policy towards Afghanistan (and also vis–à–vis India)?

In the absence of a credible alternative narrative, the media debate is likely to influence and shape the civil society’s thinking. If the media debates are well informed, without biases and not “planted’, then it is bound to create a new narrative. However, if the media debate is influenced by ‘embedded’ and partisan inputs supporting the primary arguments of select State and non-State actors, there is little that the civil society can do in terms of advancing a new narrative.

Perhaps it is because of the above two factors, the failure of Parliament and the civil society to produce a strong alternate narrative, despite an intention to change Pakistan’s policy towards Afghanistan, that it has not transformed into a tangible doctrine. Or perhaps, those institutions that actually formulate and implement Pakistan’s foreign policy are stronger in resisting the change.

Unless the ‘intention to change’ becomes ‘evident in action’, resetting Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan will stay on paper and as an idea.

…And Through What Strategies?

This should be the third related question along with ‘what shapes’ and ‘who shapes’ Pakistan’s Afghan relations. The report talks about Pakistan’s proxies and its own version of a Monroe Doctrine vis-a-vis Afghanistan; both will remain a crucial problem in resetting relations.

Of the four sets of non-State actors criss-crossing the Durand Line – the Afghan Taliban, Huqqani Network, TTP and other Pakistani groups (such as the Lashkar, Jaish, Punjabi Taliban) – any action by Pakistan supporting one and opposing another is less likely to yield positive responses. If the Pakistani Taliban provides sanctuary for their Afghan counterparts within FATA and KP, it is only natural that the latter extends the same to the former in Khost, Nuristan and other provinces across the Durand Line.

Fighting the TTP but supporting the Quetta Shura and the Haqqani Network is unlikely help Pakistan to reset its relations with Afghanistan. There seems to be an illusion within Pakistan that their security forces are fighting the Taliban and hence the problem is being addressed. However, until there is a realisation that Pakistan’s counter-terrorism approach is selective and counter-productive to its own larger national interests, the possibility of resetting Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan (and India) will remain a far cry.

As the attack on the Wagah post in Pakistan would highlight, today the militants based in Pakistan are no more the proxies of the Establishment. The non-State actors in Pakistan are clear and know what they want. Do the State actors have the same clarity?

D Suba Chandran
Director, IPCS

The post Can Pakistan Reset Its Relations With Afghanistan? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US: Tobacco Giant’s Move Could Reduce Child Labor

0
0

The tobacco giant Philip Morris International has adopted a change in policy that could protect many child workers from danger on tobacco farms in the United States.

Philip Morris International, which sells Marlboro among other leading cigarette brands, announced on November 5, 2014 that it will begin buying US-grown tobacco exclusively through third-party leaf supply companies, rather than directly from tobacco farmers. This change will require the world’s largest tobacco leaf suppliers – Alliance One International and Universal Corporation – to implement Philip Morris International’s detailed child labor policy on all US farms from which they purchase tobacco. Of the world’s 10 largest tobacco companies, Philip Morris International has the most rigorous standards, prohibiting children under 18 from many of the most hazardous tasks on tobacco farms.

“Philip Morris International’s new purchasing model means thousands of US tobacco farms will now need to meet higher child labor standards that should protect children from the most dangerous work in tobacco farming,” said Margaret Wurth, children’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Philip Morris International should carefully monitor suppliers to ensure they know the rules and follow them.”

Human Rights Watch in a May 2014 report found that children working on tobacco farms in the United States are exposed to nicotine, toxic pesticides, extreme heat, and other dangers. Most of the children interviewed reported experiencing nausea, vomiting, headaches, or dizziness while working – symptoms consistent with acute nicotine poisoning.

Weak protections under US law allow children as young as 12 to work unlimited hours outside of school on tobacco farms of any size, and there is no minimum age for children to work on small farms. Despite the known risks of nicotine poisoning, there are no special provisions in US laws or regulations to protect children from the unique hazards of tobacco work.

Universal Corporation is the world’s largest leaf merchant company, handling 25 to 35 percent of the tobacco produced in North America. Alliance One International, the other major leaf merchant company operating in the US, contracted with 1,074 tobacco growers in 2013.

Under Philip Morris International’s new purchasing model, both companies will ban children under 18 from some of the most hazardous tasks, such as harvesting tobacco, pulling the tops off tobacco plants, working at heights, handling pesticides, or working with sharp tools or in extreme temperatures. Philip Morris International should carry out regular and rigorous internal and third-party monitoring to ensure suppliers comply with the company’s child labor standards.

In addition to Philip Morris International, both companies supply US tobacco leaf to other major tobacco product manufacturers, including British American Tobacco, China National Tobacco, Imperial Tobacco Group, Japan Tobacco, and Lorillard.

Other major tobacco companies, including Altria Group and Reynolds American, buy US tobacco directly from individual growers. Reynolds American is the second-largest tobacco company in the US, but has no child labor policy.

Human Rights Watch has urged tobacco companies to prohibit children under 18 from doing hazardous work on farms in their global supply chains, including any work that involves direct contact with tobacco in any form. The Obama administration should issue regulations to prohibit children from performing hazardous work on tobacco farms, and Congress should enact laws to give child farmworkers the same protections as all other working children, Human Rights Watch said.

“All tobacco companies should do more to protect children from the hazards of tobacco farming,” Wurth said. “Each company should adopt policies to prohibit children under 18 from doing hazardous work, including all work that involves direct contact with tobacco.”

The post US: Tobacco Giant’s Move Could Reduce Child Labor appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Oregon, Alaska, DC Legalize Recreational Marijuana

0
0

Alaska and Oregon became the latest US states to legalize recreational marijuana after voters in both regions approved the appropriate laws during November 4 referenda in their respective states, The Guardian reports.

CNN also notes that a similar initiative was passed in Washington D.C., but due to the District of Columbia’s unique status, Congress has the authority to overrule local laws, and some lawmakers have already indicated their intention to do so.

According to CNN, the new Oregon law, dubbed Measure 91, provides for personal possession, manufacture and sale of cannabis for people 21 years of age and older.
Alaska’s Law, Ballot Measure 2, is similar to the one passed in Oregon; it legalizes the sale, use and production of marijuana for people over 21 years old.

The residents of Oregon and Alaska will also be allowed to keep up to four and up to six marijuana plants at home respectively, and Oregonians will be able possess up to eight ounces of cannabis, compared to one ounce in Alaska, Washington State and Colorado, The Guardian adds.

The Washington Post reports that under the ordinance introduced by ballot Initiative 71, residents of and visitors to Washington D.C. who are at least 21 years old can legally possess up to two ounces of marijuana. Residents can additionally grow up to six cannabis plants at home, and up to one ounce of the substance can be transferred from one person to another, but not sold, CNN adds.

USA Today also reports that a measure to legalize medicinal marijuana in Florida, Amendment 2, has been narrowly rejected by voters, and that the use of medical cannabis has been legalized in Guam.

“Wins in Alaska and Oregon will provide a boost to efforts in other states because they will demonstrate the benefits of regulating and taxing marijuana. Losses won’t really have much impact. After all, an initiative to make marijuana legal failed in Colorado in 2006,” Mason Tvert, a spokesman for the pro-legalization Marijuana Policy Project, said, according to USA Today.

The drive to legalize marijuana became a popular nationwide movement following the legalization proponents’ success in similar ballot initiatives in Washington and Colorado in November, 2012, CNN observes. According to a Pew Research poll cited by the agency, 54 percent of Americans are for making marijuana legal.

The post Oregon, Alaska, DC Legalize Recreational Marijuana appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Jordan Recalls Ambassador From Israel

0
0

The Jordanian government has instructed its ambassador in Tel Aviv to return home due to what Amman says is “unprecedented Israeli escalation in Jerusalem.”

The move comes just hours after a Palestinian resident of east Jerusalem rammed his vehicle into two light rail stations in the capital, killing a Border Police officer and injuring over a dozen others.

Earlier on Wednesday, police temporarily sealed off the Temple Mount to worshipers after clashes erupted with Palestinian stone-throwers who barricaded themselves with stockpiles of stones and firecrackers in Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Jordan has in recent weeks been vocal in its concern over rising tensions in Jerusalem, particularly over what Arabs perceive to be threats to the status quo.

Last week, King Abdullah promised that Jordan would safeguard holy Muslim and Christian sites in Jerusalem, as a former senior official warned that aggressive Israeli actions will lead to a third intifada.

Jordan will “continue to confront, through all available means, Israeli unilateral policies and measures in Jerusalem and preserve its Muslim and Christian holy sites, until peace is restored to the land of peace,” said King Abdullah in a speech, Jordan News Agency – Petra reported.

“The Palestinian cause remains our principal cause and is a higher national interest,” said Abdullah.

The Jordanian monarch also vowed his country would continue “to mobilize international support to rebuild Gaza, following the vile Israeli aggression, which killed thousands of our brethren.”

The king linked preventing further “aggression” to a two-state solution and the Arab Peace Initiative.

He spoke in response to a surge of violence between Jewish and Arab residents of Jerusalem, in the wake of the attempted assassination on Wednesday night of rightwing activist Yehudah Glick.

In response to the violence, Israel closed the Temple Mount to all Muslim worshipers on Thursday, something it has not done in years.

Only Muslim women and male worshipers over 50 were admitted on Friday when it reopened. By Saturday all Muslims could access the site, and on Sunday Jewish and Christian visitors, who had been banned from the area for three days, were allowed to return.

On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the site would remain open to Muslim worshipers and that there were no plans to close it.

Original article

The post Jordan Recalls Ambassador From Israel appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Taliban’s Anti-Polio Stance Endangers KP, FATA Children

0
0

By Ashfaq Yusufzai

Taliban opposition to the oral polio vaccine (OPV) continues to endanger the lives of Pakistani children in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

Pakistan has recorded the most cases it has seen in the past 14 years, reporting 231 so far this year by the end of October, Dr. Muhammad Sarwar, a doctor associated with the anti-polio campaign in FATA, said, noting that FATA tops the nation with 150 cases.

“The Taliban’s opposition to polio vaccination in Pakistan’s tribal region has put children around the world at the knife’s edge,” he said.

Militancy in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria, the only three countries where polio is endemic, is the main force preventing the crippling disease’s complete eradication, Dr. Elias Durry, the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) senior co-ordinator for polio in Pakistan, said.

“The only way to eradicate polio is mass immunisation of children,” he said.

Victims condemn TTP

The militants’ headstrong stance is provoking anger among parents.

“We curse the Taliban for depriving my child of vaccine,” said Sultan Shah, a North Waziristan man whose 18-month-old son Akram Shaw, tested positive for polio in June 2012. “The Taliban are proven enemies of children.”

Shah is not alone in condemning the TTP.

Jehandad Khan’s 1-year-old son was diagnosed with the crippling ailment in September because health workers did not visit his home for fear of Taliban violence.

“The majority of parents blame the Taliban for exposing children to polio,” the Khyber Agency resident said.

The continuing fight to eradicate polio also carries a high cost.

Pakistan September 5 approved a three-year (2014-2017) Rs. 7 billion (US $68m) vaccination programme, Dr. Altaf Bosan, head of Pakistan’s vaccination programme, said.

“We could have allocated this money to prevent other childhood diseases had we eradicated polio,” he said.

Taliban reject pro-OPV fatwas

Islamic scholars from around the world have united in the polio fight, recently issuing a joint fatwa favouring immunisation, but the Taliban aren’t heeding the edicts, FATA Health Director Dr. Pervez Kamal told Central Asia Online.

“It is the Islamic duty of parents to safeguard their children against diseases and make sure that they stay healthy,” the edict, signed in Islamabad, said. “Therefore, parents must protect their children against vaccine-preventable diseases, including polio.”

Refusals to vaccinate have wrought havoc on children’s health in FATA, KP, Sindh, Balochistan and Punjab, Maulana Sami-ul-Haq, one of the September 25 edict’s signers, said.

Signees urged the public to defy the Taliban and vaccinate their children, noting that 57 Islamic countries had eliminated polio using the same vaccine.

“The vaccine has been approved by scientists from Islamic universities and has proven efficacy,” it said.

It is shameful that the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has rejected some 800 edicts by Islamic scholars, Sami-ul-Haq said.

“However, I hope that sense will prevail,” he said.

The post Taliban’s Anti-Polio Stance Endangers KP, FATA Children appeared first on Eurasia Review.

EU Announces Kosovo Mission Graft Probe

0
0

Brussels’ foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said she will send an independent legal expert to look into corruption allegations at the EU’s rule-of-law mission in Kosovo, EULEX.

By Petrit Collaku

Mogherini told a news conference in Brussels on Tuesday that an independent expert will probe allegations that a EULEX judge took bribes to shut down cases against people accused of serious crimes.

“I took the decision today to appoint a legal expert, an independent legal expert, to look at and review the mission’s mandate implementation. Obviously with a particular focus on the handling of the allegations,” the EU foreign policy chief said.

The allegations surfaced last week when an EULEX prosecutor, Maria Bamieh, accused a former judge at the mission, Francesco Florit, of taking a 300,000 euro bribe to clear a man accused of murder and seeking another bribe in a corruption case against a Kosovo government official.

Florit strongly denied the accusations.

Bamieh, who has been suspended, has alleged that EULEX initially failed to investigate her suspicions about Florit, and instead has targeted her for being a whistleblower.

Elmar Brok, the chairman of the European Parliament’s foreign affairs committee, urged the EU on Tuesday to fully investigate the allegations to ensure that EULEX remained credible.

“The mission’s role in Kosovo is to fight against corruption and impunity, and it should set an example. We must show with no hesitation that no one is above the law and that the fight against corruption is our key priority, both in Kosovo, but within our own institutions as well,” Brok said, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Bamieh has also accused the head of the EULEX special prosecution, Jonathan Ratel, of obstructing one of her investigations involving Kosovo MP, Azem Syla, a top Democratic Party of Kosovo official.

Syla and nine other people were suspected of illegally acquiring land worth hundreds of millions of euro.

The MP said however that the allegations were false.

“The credibility of such accusations is often unfounded and tendentious,” Syla told Pristina-based daily newspaper Koha Ditore on Wednesday.

Syla added that he has made public his personal and family fortune by the competent authorities.

Ratel told BIRN last week that he did not want to respond to Bamieh’s allegations.

EULEX deals with cases of organised crime, corruption and war crimes which are considered too important or sensitive to be handled by the Kosovo judiciary.

The post EU Announces Kosovo Mission Graft Probe appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Georgia: PM Sacks Defense Minister Alasania

0
0

(Civil.Ge) — PM Irakli Garibashvili said late on Tuesday evening that he has dismissed Defense Minister Irakli Alasania.

Mindia Janelidze, who is a secretary of the state security and crisis management council at the PM’s office, will replace Alasania on the post of Defense Minister, the PM said.

Garibashvili’s announcement about firing of the Defense Minister came less than four hours after Alasania said that recent developments involving arrests of MoD and general staff officials, as well as newly filed charges against army medical officers are “obviously politically” motivated and represented an “attack on Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic choice.”

PM Garibashvili slammed Alasania’s remarks as “completely irresponsible” and said that Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic integration is “irreversible.”

“Violations revealed in the Ministry of Defense and related investigation have become a topic of active discussions in the public in recent days. Issue of procurements in the Ministry of Defense became topic of discussion of our government more than once over which ex-Defense Minister Alasania has been given censure and instructions. Despite of that investigative agencies have exposed whole set of violations and relevant legal reaction was made through launching criminal investigation. In recent days an obvious confrontation by the Defense Minister is being observed against the investigative agencies and there is an attempt to politicize the issue,” PM Garibashvili said.

“Instead of contributing to the investigation in order to help establish objective truth into the case, Irakli Alasania’s actions are causing politicization of the Defense Ministry and of the armed forces, which is categorically inadmissible for me and which affects negatively on our country’s security and government’s efficient work,” he said.

“We have stated for multiple times that fighting corruption is one of the priorities of our government and we are and will be uncompromising in case of exposing such facts no matter which agency or minister is involved – this is our principled position,” Garibashvili said.

“In order to avoid politicization of the Georgian armed forces and the politicization of the Georgian Ministry of Defense and in order to provide relevant conditions for an independent investigation, I have decided to dismiss the Defense Minister,” he said.

“Alasania’s irresponsible statement that this investigation in the ministry is an attack on country’s Euro-Atlantic choice, is completely irresponsible.”

“I want to reiterate once again what I have said for multiple times already that our country’s Euro-Atlantic integration is the choice of not only of our government by the choice of our people and this process is and will be irreversible,” the PM said.

“Georgian government’s foreign policy course, which involves the Euro-Atlantic integration does not and will never depend on any single minister’s position or opinion. So [Alasania’s] statement was completely irresponsible,” Garibashvili said.

“I had a meeting yesterday with [lawmakers from Alasania’s] Free Democrats faction, which is a member of the [GD ruling] coalition. I had a very open conversation with them and in their presence I asked Alasania questions, which were coming from the prosecutor’s office, and which I, as the Prime Minister, also have, but I have not yet received any reasoned answer, except of his abstract opinions and groundless responses,” Garibashvili said.

“I also want to state that our country’s Euro-Atlantic integration does not mean that alleged misspending of GEL 4 million should be taking place in the Ministry of Defense,” he said, referring to charges which have been filed against one former and four serving MoD and general staff officials, who were arrested on October 28.

Then referring to newly filed charges against other general staff officials from the medical service, who are accused of alleged negligence in cases of servicemen’s foodborne illnesses last year, Garibashvili said: “The minister who fails to solve the issue of food for soldiers for two years [since Alasania was the defense minister] of course cannot be considered as an efficient minister and he would have definitely been dismissed anyway even for that reason only.”

“And the minister, who purportedly was awarding his friends with tender and procurement [contracts] of course could not have stayed on this very responsible post,” Garibashvili said.

The PM said that the Georgian Dream ruling coalition will hold a meeting of its main decision-making body, political council, on Wednesday, and also invited at the meeting Alasania and his Free Democrats party, which formally still remains part of the GD coalition.

“Alasania and his party, as a member of the coalition, have all the rights to attend the meeting of political council and I want to say that I want to also convene an expanded meeting of the political council and I want Free Democrats parliamentary faction members to also attend this meeting,” Garibashvili said.

Alasania said late on November 4 that he would be attending GD’s political council meeting on Wednesday.

Mindia Janelidze, 36, whom the PM said would replace Alasania on the post of the Defense Minister, is not a political figure and is relatively little known to wider public.

Janelidze, who is currently secretary of the state security and crisis management council, was director of the counter-intelligence department at the Ministry of Interior since late 2012 when now PM Garibashvili held the post of the Interior Minister.

The post Georgia: PM Sacks Defense Minister Alasania appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Is Barack Obama Worst President In American History? – OpEd

0
0

After my recent appearance on the Fox News Channel’s morning show, Fox and Friends, Donald Trump, appearing after me on the same show, asserted that my ranking of Barack Obama 34th out of 41 presidents rated—in the new, revised edition of Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty—had “zero credibility” because Obama was the worst president in American history.

Donald Trump has a right to his opinion and may be an expert on real estate and “shock marketing,” but he is an apprentice at American history. With America’s ahistorical orientation and restrictive two-party political system, people on the right of the American political spectrum reflexively and viscerally believe that the current left-of-center president is the worst in history; left-leaning people had the same opinion of George W. Bush.

Yet in the American two-party system, the parties behave like two giant corporations that are alone in one market—that is a duopoly. They pretend to fiercely compete on the surface but really collude under the table. This fact is hard for the American public to grasp, given the harsh public rhetoric and posturing by both parties and a 24/7/365 cable news environment that feeds on such rhetorical controversy. But the evidence that this sub rosa collusion among the parties exists is that the policy records of “liberal Obama” and “conservative” Bush are very similar. They both started and escalated needless wars, restricted civil liberties in the fight against terrorism, and increased the federal government’s role domestically. As an example of their parallel actions at home, they both expanded health care coverage, increased federal intrusion into education, bailed out or socialized industries, doled out goodies on a grand scale to special interest groups, and spent like drunken sailors on domestic programs.

Yet, historians do not share the view that Obama and Bush are the worst presidents in American history. They usually pick on people like James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce, Herbert Hoover, and (very unfairly) Warren Harding as being the bottom dwellers. I might disagree with many of such choices by historians, but I don’t disagree that Obama and Bush aren’t the worst.

Naturally, people—especially in America—live in the moment and, given the “crisis” orientation of cable news, think that this is the worst period the country has ever gone through. Not really. In U.S. history, there have been much greater economic calamities and grander needless wars—and thus worse presidents.

In Recarving Rushmore, the four worst presidents—falling below both Obama and George W. Bush—were in rank order: James Polk, William McKinley, Harry Truman, and Woodrow Wilson. James Madison was correct that war is the primary cause of big government in American and world history. War creates a national security state, greater government intervention in domestic society and the economy, and promotes the state’s erosion of cherished civil liberties. What these four presidents have in common is that they led the country into needless wars that changed America for the worst. James Polk purposefully started a war with a weak state, Mexico, to steal a third of its land and, in doing so, aggravated regional tensions that eventually led to America’s most searing and cataclysmic war—the Civil War. William McKinley undertook the Spanish-American War to launch the United States, which had revolted against the British Empire, into its own imperial role by acquiring colonies and beginning the long, interrupted trajectory toward America as an interventionist superpower. Harry Truman converted a local war in Greece into an expensive worldwide Cold War against the Soviet Union, which began with a stalemated hot war in non-strategic Korea that led to the creation of the national security state, the imperial presidency, and the shelving of the traditional requirement that the American people, rather than its leader, would decide if war was needed. Finally, Woodrow Wilson, ignoring America’s tradition of staying out of Europe’s wars, took the nation into World War I, which laid the seeds for the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s rise, World War II, and the Cold War.

So Barack Obama is a bad president whose stock is dropping, as I said on the show, because his war against ISIS is likely to make Islamic radicalism and terrorism worse; but Woodrow Wilson is the worst president in American history, because he ruined the 20th century and is now working on the 21st.

This article appeared at and is reprinted with permission.

The post Is Barack Obama Worst President In American History? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Bulgaria: Borisov To Receive Government Mandate After Political Turmoil

0
0

By Hamdi Fırat Büyük

It is expected that Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev will give the leader of the political party Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB) the mandate to form a new government on Wednesday.

The president’s decision came just after a week of consultations with political parties at the presidency. The Bulgarian President held his last meeting with the second largest party of Bulgaria, the Bulgarian Socialist Party.

Leader of GERB Boyko Borisov will have a week to form the new government. He has already spent the month after snap elections positioning for this endeavour. However, if he fails in forming a government, the mandate will pass to the Socialist Party that attained the second largest amount of votes in the snap elections. If the Socialists also fail, the president will give the mandate to another party.

Boyko Borisov, Prime Minister from 2009 to 2013, was expected to become Prime Minister once again, having overcome objections from GERB’s new coalition partner, the centre-right Reformist Block.

Nonetheless, despite its alliance with the Reformist Block, which is the parliament’s fourth largest party, GERB still needs to secure the support of 14 more seats to reach the minimum number of 121 that is required to form the government. Therefore, it seems that Borisov will try to make informal arrangements with other parties.

The Movement for Rights and Freedoms (HÖH), being the third largest party in the parliament and the party of ethnic Turks, and the nationalist parties, such as ATAKA and the Patriotic Front, will most likely avoid such arrangements.

After the previous elections, GERB had failed to form a government with its first mandate and the current distribution of seats in the parliament is not extremely different from what it was then. At that time, after the failure of GERB, the Bulgarian Socialist Party and the ethnic Turkish Party, HÖH, succeeded in forming a government.

The post Bulgaria: Borisov To Receive Government Mandate After Political Turmoil appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Why China Should Facilitate Af-Pak Reconciliation – Analysis

0
0

By Emre Tunç Sakaoğlu

Afghanistan’s newly elected president Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai arrived in Beijing on Tuesday, October 28, for his first overseas state visit, where he met with Chinese President Xi Jinping and other high-level Chinese authorities, as well as Chinese businessmen over the span of four days. The visit has come at a time when the Taliban insurgency and civil strife still ravages Afghanistan, not only in terms of security but also in terms of economy, as the latter is directly associated with domestic stability and peaceful regional integration. In this sense, securing financial aid and investment from China topped Ashraf Ghani’s agenda. But what was rather implicit concerning his visit is the fact that Ashraf Ghani radically turned to China also for security cooperation, an act that may have region-wide ramifications in the future, immediately after he signed a security pact with the U.S. that foresees a limited number of American troops remaining in Afghanistan after the NATO withdrawal in December 2014.

Security: a pre-condition for business

The stock value of Chinese investments in Afghanistan, concentrated mainly in the copper-mining and oil-drilling sectors, has already exceeded $7.5 billion, leaving a remarkable economic footprint by any standards. And the headlines put on the table in the first two days of Ashraf Ghani’s visit demonstrate that China hasn’t yet lost its appetite for making further inroads into Afghanistan’s economy. Indeed, according to estimates, Afghanistan possesses over $3 trillion worth of subterranean resources, including copper, iron ore, gold, silver, coal, gemstones, and minor metals.* Moreover, the overall vision of China that aims to create a sphere of cross-border economic interdependence and prosperity in its close neighborhood offers Afghanistan a central role as a transit and trade hub. But Afghanistan’s resources, alongside its logistic potential, still remain largely untapped as tendered projects are known to stall because of prolonged warfare and insufficient infrastructure.

Realizing that NATO alone couldn’t maintain the level of stability required for China to proceed with its medium-term business operations in Afghanistan, and at a crucial time when ISAF’s mission is drawing to a close, Beijing has begun to pursue a distinct diplomatic agenda over the last two years concerning Afghanistan’s security and its incorporation into regional political networks. This represents a stark change for China after having spent years of avoiding any political meddling in the country’s domestic affairs. As its first priority, China is seeking national reconciliation in Afghanistan as the latter is still grappling with the deep-rooted Taliban insurgency. In this vein, Beijing even appointed a special envoy to Kabul last July as a sign that it is redefining its overall policy concerning Afghan politics and the state of domestic security there.

The Afghan side is also aware that economic benefits go hand-in-hand with stability and security. By opening the floodgates to Chinese investment in his country’s infrastructure and primary industries, in the medium-term, Ashraf Ghani hopes to reverse the Afghan economy’s dire downtrend and cut its dependence on Western donors that administer foreign aid for its budget expenditures. Thereby, he hopes that stability in his country will be reinforced with a strong economic basis that makes public goods, security, services, and other governmental benefits available for the Afghan people even in the most remote corners of the country. But Kabul may have ulterior motives that foresee the coupling of China’s economic cooperation with domestic stability in Afghanistan in a way that will ultimately require China’s involvement in talks and disputes with the Taliban. The new administration led by Ashraf Ghani, knowing perfectly well that Beijing will not be able to resist the allure of Afghanistan’s riches, may be trying to oblige China to play the role of an informal security guarantor for the Afghan government in the future by offering lucrative contracts to Chinese companies. While investments in Afghanistan’s mining sector and the installment of transport routes through the country for channeling energy resources and other goods can serve as the bedrock of regional economic prosperity, they can also make security cooperation between Kabul and Beijing inevitable as China’s stakes in Afghanistan increase.

The Xinjiang dilemma

As mentioned, maintaining stability in Afghanistan will become all the more difficult after NATO combat troops depart from the country at the end of this year. According to the security pact with the U.S. which was signed by Ashraf Ghani on the eve of his visit to China, after NATO pulls out its remaining troops, a residual force, which will include 9,800 American and 500 British troops, will be left in the country in order to safeguard the American embassy, train the Afghan forces, and assist them in counter-terrorism. Against this backdrop, China is poised to play a greater role in maintaining stability and driving reconstruction in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of NATO troops, not only because of its economic interests there, but also because of a deeper domestic problem with direct links to Afghanistan that Beijing needs to deal with.

While the U.S. is a distant actor distracted by many domestic and international challenges and with no particular stake in Afghanistan anymore; China permanently shares the same region with Afghanistan and its power and focus is not globally dispersed but regionally concentrated. But what is more important is the reality that rising Islamist militancy in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region poses a more direct threat to China than radical terrorist groups originating in the same region pose to the distant U.S. That is partly due to the fact that Xinjiang, home to over 10 million Muslim Uyghurs, and Afghanistan’s remote northeast share a slender 76 km-long border at the so-called Wakhan Corridor.

Beijing believes that a collapse of the central government in Kabul would transform Afghanistan into a hotbed of terrorism from which terrorist activity would easily be able to spill over into China’s restless northwest Uyghur region. Islamist militants from Afghanistan and Pakistan are already suspected of having infiltrated religiously-motivated groups in the region which are behind a recent spate of deadly attacks against Chinese civilians throughout the country. According to this reasoning, it is clear that if a power vacuum emerges in Afghanistan, Central Asia, including parts of Xinjiang, will face dire consequences. But the reality is that if China essentially attaches Xinjiang’s future to that of Afghanistan, even if only through commercial and political means in a bid to maintain stability in the region while incorporating the country’s vast resources into its own economic sphere, it will ultimately risk finding itself dragged into the intractable security quagmire as a whole in the case that a long-lasting peace cannot be built in Afghanistan. The blurrier the boundaries separating China’s Xinjiang Region and Afghanistan become, the greater the risk posed by a potential failed state or a lack of durable reconciliation in Afghanistan. There is no doubt that Afghanistan can be seen as a double-edged sword; after all it did cause the USSR in the past, and the U.S. today, to retreat in order to avoid further attrition, with neither able to discover a permanent solution.

China-Pakistan ties

Besides Chinese assistance regarding reconciliation with the Taliban, Kabul wants to use Beijing’s political clout as leverage in talks with Pakistan as well. Pakistan is a strategic ally of China, but has been accused of providing safe havens for hardliner Islamist militants in its tribal, mountainous border regions with Afghanistan. According to Chinese sources, these regions also host training camps where ethnic Uyghurs are indoctrinated and radicalized. Afghan authorities underline that although Pakistan denies facilitating the operations of the Taliban or any other radical groups, it admits that a peaceful environment in the region would be conducive to joint business ventures and many other benefits. In this respect, the Afghan side wants China to push Pakistan to initiate a peace process between the Taliban and Kabul.

Indeed, China’s previous contacts with the Taliban, when the latter was governing Afghanistan in the 1990s, and its strategic partnership with Pakistan can help to lay the foundations for an overall compromise in the Af-Pak region. In this respect, China can play a mediatory role in such a tripartite reconciliation process. This would also enhance bilateral cooperation between Pakistan and China and help to root out radical organizations operating in Xinjiang, such as the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), which are said to be based along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. Actually, it is not only Afghanistan, but the U.S. and many other countries that see Pakistan as the source of radical ideas and organizations that spread to both Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia, whether this is intentional or not. But without Pakistan’s cooperation in counter-terrorism efforts that cover the Af-Pak region and Xinjiang, the process of incorporating Afghanistan into China’s greater economic sphere may end up further aggravating China’s northwestern Uyghur region.

In sum, it is possible to say that Ashraf Ghani’s apparent strategy to link the economic fate and national security of China, especially as it relates to China’s northwestern Xinjiang region inhabited by over 10 million native Muslims, with that of Afghanistan will either lead to no concrete result or further complicate China’s Uyghur issue, that is, unless Pakistan is factored in as the key to resolving the greater region’s (Af-Pak and Central Asia) problem of epidemic radicalism and militancy. Considering that China is utterly resistant to the idea of establishing military bases abroad, and to sending soldiers beyond its borderlands other than with UN peace-keeping missions, we cannot assume it would provide any concrete support or physical reinforcement in Afghanistan as it relates to the maintenance of stability there for fear of escalating conflict between Kabul and the Taliban. And even if it did, the odds of success for any conventional force are historically-proven to be quite low.

On the other hand, by not sending soldiers to fight in Afghanistan or Pakistan in the future, China can secure the sympathies of the peoples and ruling elites in both countries, and therewith attain the capability to play that role of a mediator on which all parties may agree. That means the future of security in Xinjiang, as well as the future of Chinese investments in Afghanistan, will depend on Beijing’s capability and willingness to facilitate a long-standing, multilateral status-quo covering the Af-Pak region. The maintenance of such a stance by Beijing can be seen as the alternative to unilaterally rushing down the slippery slope that is Afghanistan and gradually dragging itself into an endless and all-encompassing military adventure in the long-run.

* Eltaf Najafizada, “U.S. Afghan study finds mineral deposits worth $3 trillion”, Bloomberg, 2011, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-29/u-s-afghan-study-finds-mineral-deposits-worth-3-trillion.html. Accessed on 30 October 2014.

The post Why China Should Facilitate Af-Pak Reconciliation – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Is China Really A Threat To The Interests Of The West In Africa? – Analysis

0
0

By Yağmur Erşan

China’s relations with African countries have been swiftly developing in recent years. This is true not only for economic relations, which can be seen in trade, investment, technology transfer, training and development assistance, but also for political and social relations.

Economically, China not only encourages its companies to invest in Africa but also supports them with loans that increase their competitiveness in the region. The number of Chinese companies active on the African continent now exceeds 2,500. They invest in various sectors such as energy, construction, agriculture, telecommunications and transportation. Hence, China’s direct investment in Africa reached 25 billion dollars in the end of 2013 and trade volume between the two rose to 210.3 billion dollars.[1] Politically, both sides have increased the frequency of high level visits in order to develop bilateral relations. Excluding those which recognize Taiwan, China currently has cooperation agreements with more than 50 out of the 55 countries in Africa, and these countries are supporting China’s policies in the international arena. Moreover, China establishes the institutions to facilitate communication, and in this sense, the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) is one of the most noteworthy. Established in 2000, FOCAC has brought the leaders of 44 African countries together in Beijing to discuss the possibilities of cooperation in 2003, 2006, 2010 and 2012. During these summits many critical agreements were signed between China and various countries in Africa. By way of Confucius Institutes and exchange programs, China also aims to develop social relations with African countries. In 2012, China’s Department of Foreign Assistance at the Ministry of Commerce said that China was hosting more than 27,000 students from Africa. By the end of 2013 this number reached 35,000. [2] However, while these kinds of programs may further communication between the two sides, the very high number of Chinese workers on the African continent who do not know the local language and live in separation from the native society poses some social problems.

In this sense, China’s penetration of the continent has raised the concerns of the West, who, until now, had not seen such a powerful rival to its interests. Although many Western sources claim that China now pursues the same policies that the West had centuries ago, namely to exploit the natural resources of the continent, China insists it is not an imperialist power and that it pursues different strategies which are more attractive for the African countries.

A comparative analysis of China-Africa relations

In 1963, Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai visited ten African countries and announced eight principles to define the terms of China’s bilateral relations on the continent. Still in effect, these principles are as follows:

  • The relations will be based on the principle of equality
  • The Chinese government will respect the sovereignty of the countries with which it interacts
  • China will provide economic aid in the form of interest-free or low-interest loans
  • The aim of China in providing aid is to promote economic development, not the escalation of dependency of recipient countries on China
  • The projects will be finished before the agreed deadlines
  • High-quality equipment and materials will be used in the projects
  • Technical assistance will be delivered to the recipient countries
  • Chinese workers operating in these countries will work under the same conditions as local workers [3]

When these principles are compared with those of the West, the first listed above emphasizes equality in China’s bilateral relations on the continent by noting that it and the African countries are both ‘developing’, while the West – the ‘developed’ world – came to the region as an imperialist power. Although the West currently advertises China as a colonizer, China itself emphasizes that it and the African countries are equal partners by underlining its lack of a colonial history on the continent.

The second principal, China’s declaration of respect for sovereignty, may be the most attractive for the African governments. In this regard, it does not matter for China who has come to power, who has stepped down, or what kind of regime these countries may have. It emphasizes that it can cooperate with all governments. Such a stance is pleasing for the African governments because they are generally authoritarian. Corruption, bribery and a lack of transparency are very common features of these countries and are frequently pointed out and criticized by the Western powers. China, on the other hand, does not intervene in any of these issues when granting aid or loans, a decision that has pushed forward its cooperation with these countries.

Thirdly, China provides interest-free or low-interest loans to these countries without stipulating any preconditions. Here, while the West does in fact impose conditions on these loans based on human rights, transparency, good governance or political reform, China does not. Hence, China’s low-interest loans that are void of such preconditions have become an alternative to the forms of credit offered by Western organizations such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

Fourthly, China aims for ‘development’ in Africa, and this means that it usually funds projects instead of simply transferring money to the local governments. Here, China strives to reduce poverty and increase the local peoples’ standard of living. Although Western powers have been providing aid to Africa for centuries, therefore constituting an overall higher cumulative sum of assistance than that afforded by China in a general sense, they usually transfer money via institutions and are unable to trace where the money is used.

The fifth principle, related to the fourth, indicates that China is very sensitive about finishing assigned projects before their deadlines. When China funds a project, they are usually looking for a local firm that is engaged in a joint venture with a Chinese firm, as such an arrangement eases cooperation on certain issues. In addition, China is known to send directors and high-level managers and to provide materials or technical assistance and technology so that the projects can be finished on time. Western powers also provide this support to a certain extent, but when compared to China these actors face certain limitations and are hence unable to fund as many projects at such a fast rate.

The sixth principle shows the importance that China places on using good quality materials and equipment in its projects. In this sense, while China has faced a great amount of criticism for not actually using high-quality supplies, they are often preferred by the local people and firms because Chinese materials and equipment are cheaper than the same products originating from the West.

Seventhly, China delivers technical assistance to the relevant countries. To reach this aim China sends experts to different parts of Africa to train the locals and thus integrate them into the projects.

The eighth and final principle specifies that Chinese workers will work under the same conditions as the local laborers. China finds itself in an advantageous position in this sense when compared with the West because Chinese workers are used to working under difficult conditions and can therefore live according to the same circumstances as many African peoples. However, Western companies usually work with the Africans that offer more flexibility when it comes to working hours and capabilities.

To sum up, although China is becoming more integrated into Africa as laid out above, it is still too early for it to truly compete with a West that began to establish close ties with the continent as early as the 16th century. Thus, China and Africa still find themselves in the process of building trust. If China continues to undertake more efficient projects at faster rates and stays out of the recipients’ internal affairs, this picture could change, however. Keeping this in mind, I would argue that the West is not worried about today, but about the future, because nobody can truly foresee the limits of China’s intentions.

[1] http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2014-05/05/c_133311619.htm.

[2] http://www.voanews.com/content/african-students-face-challenges-in-china/1963445.html.

[3] Brautigam,D. (2008). China’s African Aid: Transatlantic Challenges. Washington D.C: The German Marshall Fund. p. 9.

The post Is China Really A Threat To The Interests Of The West In Africa? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Cape Verde And Drug Trafficking: A Major Challenge To Rule Of Law – Analysis

0
0

By Gustavo Placido Dos Santos

West Africa has been affected by a range of illicit maritime activities, such as human trafficking, the smuggling of small arms and narcotics, illegal fishing and piracy. In an increasingly interconnected world the rise in these activities in the region does not solely represent a challenge to security and stability. In fact, it has profound implications for the international community, namely the EU and the US. Those activities, drug trafficking in particular, are a major source of income not only for drug cartels in Latin America, but also for jihadi groups in West Africa, the Sahel and the Maghreb, thus threatening international security and stability.

Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde are two drug trafficking hubs in West Africa.1 While this is hardly a surprise in the case of Guinea-Bissau—some regard it as world’s first narco-state—, Cape Verde has been away from the spotlight. The difference can partly be explained by the fact that Guinea-Bissau has become a main transit point of drug shipments to land-routes towards the Maghreb and Europe, therefore representing an apparent more immediate threat to the international community, while Cape Verde is a transit point between Latin America and the African continent.2 Cape Verde, despite being considered a case of success in the continent in terms of socioeconomic development and democratic resilience,3 has faced recurrent difficulties regarding financing and capacity-building of its security forces, which, added to the fact that the archipelago is located in the route between Latin America and West Africa, makes the country extremely appealing for drug traffickers.

Cape Verde’s increasing relevance in the expansion of drug trafficking led to the inauguration in 2010 of the Maritime Security Operations Center (COSMAR) in the country’s capital, Praia. Financed by the US, COSMAR enables a more efficient collaboration between national agencies responsible for monitoring and controlling illicit activities along the territory. It facilitates the planning of joint operations with other nations. Among other benefits, COSMAR provides access to radar and satellite images.

This is the second such center in Africa, the other being based in Morocco and focused on the Mediterranean region.4 Cape Verde’s choice to be the host for COSMAR indicates the country’s increasing centrality in international drug trafficking routes.

Drug trafficking clearly undermines the rule of law. In a recent interview, Cape Verde’s ambassador to the UN, Fernando Wahnon, alluded to the threat represented by the spread of drug consumption in the country, and also the greater risk of corruption among the authorities. In his words: “These [criminal] organizations’ power of corruption is immense. In a vulnerable state such as Cape Verde [criminal organizations] threaten the rule of law and the institutions themselves”.5

Therefore, it is clear that Cape Verde’s democratic institutions must be robustly supported. Under this line of thought, in 2005 Cape Verde became the third country to join the Millenium Challenge Corporation (MCC), a US-backed programme aimed at promoting economic growth in countries that abide by certain criteria of good governance. Cape Verde also managed to become the first African country to complete the programme, and in 2012 signed a second governance pact.6

Often regarded as a democratic example in the continent, Cape Verde has been a relevant vector in Washington’s strategy for the region’s security and stability. Of equal importance, it is considered an important piece in the US campaign against international terrorism. The small African archipelago is not only a center of stability in a volatile region, but also enjoys a strategic location in the South Atlantic. To lose Cape Verde to drug trafficking would be a strategic nightmare for the US and Europe. Coincidence or not, the new US ambassador to Cape Verde, Donald L. Heflin, previously served as the first official and general-consul at the Mexican city of Nuevo Laredo.7 Located in the border with the US, Nuevo Laredo is known for the drug trafficking and bloody clashes between rival drug cartels.8 Heflin also worked in African Affairs at the State Department for five years, finishing as Acting Director of West African Affairs. However, it is his experience in Nuevo Laredo that makes his nomination to Cape Verde an interesting development. In his testimony to the Senate, Heflin could not have been clearer: “The United States and Cabo Verde are partners on a number of important matters. Among them, maritime security and transnational crime are key. The Government of Cabo Verde strongly supports counter-narcotics maneuvers and is a gracious host to US ship visits. Cabo Verde is a model in the region for strategic partnership”.9 As Fernando Wahnon affirmed, “Cape Verde’s inability to monitor its economic zone lures organized crime”. Without means and resources “it would be impossible to do it alone.” He concluded that in order to “try to overcome the difficulties [it is necessary] to initiate joint operations with other countries”.10 In the absence of support programmes for maritime monitoring (COSMAR) and socioeconomic development (MCC), Cape Verde would possibly place its democratic regime and rule of law at risk. That does not necessarily mean that the island nation will follow in the footsteps of neighboring Guinea-Bissau. Nonetheless, it is important not to let everything that was achieved in recent years go to waste due to drug trafficking.

Like the US, Portugal should strengthen cooperation with Cape-Verdean authorities in the fight against drug trafficking. The new Indicative Cooperation Programme (ICP) 2015/2017, which will soon be signed by both countries, will surely reflect this.

Published also in Portuguese: Gustavo Plácido dos Santos, “Cabo Verde e o narcotráfico: um desafio muito sério ao estado de direito” (IPRIS Comentário, No. 6, Outubro de 2014).

About the author:
Gustavo Placido Dos Santos

Portuguese Institute of International Relations and Security (IPRIS)

Source:
This article was published by IPRIS as IPRIS Viewpoints 158, November 2014 (PDF)

Notes:
1. A report by the West Africa Commission on Drugs (WACD) reveals that in 2010 the bulk of the cocaine flux from Latin America to West Africa passed through Cape Verde, and from there on to the Atlantic coast of West Africa (where Guinea-Bissau is located). The report also analysis Guinea-Bissau’s transformation into a major transit point for drugs in West Africa. See “NOT JUST IN TRANSIT: Drugs, the State and Society in West Africa” (WACD, June 2014).
2. Ibid.
3. Cape Verde is one of the few African countries that managed to maintain a democratic regime since independence. The country is also on the right track to fulfil the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and has attained the second place in the 2004 Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance.
4. “PM inaugura Centro de Operações de Segurança Marítima” (Página Oficial do Governo de Cabo Verde, 21 May 2010).
5. “Cabo Verde admite dificuldades na gestão das águas territoriais” (Lusa, 27 September 2014).
6. “Cabo Verde” (Millennium Challenge Corporation).
7. “US Ambassador to Cabo Verde: Who Is Donald Heflin?” (ALLGov, 27 September 2014).
8. “At least 23 people killed in Mexican border city as victims hanged, decapitated” (Fox News, 5 May 2012).
9. “Statement of Donald L. Heflin Ambassador-Designate to the Republic of Cabo Verde Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee” (United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 29 July 2014).
10. “Cabo Verde admite dificuldades na gestão das águas territoriais” (Lusa, 27 September 2014).

The post Cape Verde And Drug Trafficking: A Major Challenge To Rule Of Law – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Should India Give Up On The UNSC? – Analysis

0
0

Despite staking a claim to permanent UN Security Council membership 60 years ago, India is no closer to that goal. While conflict zones remain in Africa and Asia, economic might has shifted eastwards. The West-dominated UNSC is becoming irrelevant. If India becomes a permanent member, can it influence the council’s ethos?

By Neelam Deo and Karan Pradhan

In his address to the 69th United Nations General Assembly on September 27, Prime Minister Narendra Modi called for a reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to “make it more democratic and participative.” It was a thinly-veiled call for India to be made a permanent member.

Modi reiterated that India was one of the founding members of the UN in 1945, and urged that the reforms be carried out in time for the international organisation’s 70th anniversary next year. He highlighted the fact that institutions must reflect 21st century realities or risk irrelevance—a challenge the UN is already failing to meet.

The UNSC is the most important organ of the United Nations. It decides issues of war and peace, and has a total of 15 members. Of these, the five permanent members wield veto powers: U.S., Russia, UK, and France—the victors of World War II—and late entrant China.

Since 1945, the UNSC has been reformed only once, in 1963, to expand the number of non-permanent non-veto empowered members from six to 10. This does not reflect even the most basic realities of a world in which the population has grown from 2.3 billion, when the UN was established, to over 7 billion now, and the number of UN member countries has almost quadrupled from 51 to 193.

Since 1955, India has claimed permanent representation in the UNSC. In later years, two of the defeated former powers, Japan and Germany, have also staked a similar claim, as has emerging power Brazil. Numerous other countries also remain claimants to UNSC seats—including two (unnamed so far) from the African Union and an Arab/Islamic country

It is unacceptable that India, with a population of 1.2 billion, a $2 trillion economy, the third largest country in terms of purchasing power parity, a nuclear weapons power with the third largest standing army in the world, and a major contributor to the UN’s peacekeeping missions, is not a member of the UNSC—that too when economically and morally exhausted nations like France and UK remain on the council.

Many spoilers without credible claims of their own are committed to derailing the chances of neighbours and rivals. But it is the opposition from the Uniting for Consensus (that includes Italy, Mexico and Pakistan—called the “Coffee Club” by UN diplomats) as well as the reluctance of existing members that has confounded the reform.

India’s new government has taken up the issue not only in the General Assembly, but also at summit-level interactions with the U.S. and China. After Modi’s White House meetings in September, President Barack Obama expressed his appreciation for India’s role in peacekeeping operations for the last 60 years and reiterated his backing for a reformed UNSC with India as a permanent member. In the past, France, UK, and Russia have also supported India’s claims to permanent membership. But the verbal support has so far not translated into any action.

Meanwhile, even as the reform remains in abeyance, global geopolitics have changed.

Today, there are three major conglomerations of problems: the turmoil in West Asia, encapsulated by the brutal Islamic State, which is quickly redrawing the map of the region; the rise of an increasingly expansionist and assertive China; and the renewed standoff between the West and Russia.

It is worth noting that although matters of war and peace are the core function of the UNSC, it has not been consulted on any of these issues. The most blatant instance was Obama’s address to the UN General Assembly on September 24, where he defended airstrikes on Syria and Iraq. The U.S did not deem it necessary, once again, to seek the approval of the UNSC. Sadly, UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon was pressured to support the U.S.’s unilateral actions, though he expressed the vain hope that the UNSC will lead the effort against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

In the east, China has completely rejected international arbitration on territorial disputes with its maritime neighbours, despite the Philippines taking the issue to the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.

And amid steadily deteriorating Russia-West ties, U.S.-led NATO has not taken the issue to the UNSC, though it has accused Moscow of breaching international law and compromising Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by annexing Crimea. With these disagreements—as well as the opposing perspectives on Syria—the equation between the West and Russia has deteriorated to a point reminiscent of the hostilities between the two during the Cold War.

The new standoff over Ukraine has completely paralysed the UNSC. However, such disregard was already evident when the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 without the Security Council’s authorisation, distorted the sense of UNSC Resolution 1973 on Libya in 2011 by justifying the invasion of that country, and recently ordered airstrikes on Syria.

These repeated unilateral actions raise questions about the UNSC’s relevance. It then becomes necessary to ask if India should persist in its efforts to be part of an organisation that lacks weight and sway.

In fact, whether India should seek membership is a matter of debate within the country. Former colonial powers are not going to allow a change, nor will China allow other Asian countries, particularly Japan, to enter. But there is also the view that though India may not gain much from becoming a part of an archaic organisation, the world needs an expanded UNSC that includes countries like India to influence the very ethos of the council.

At a time when faster growing economies, more youthful populations, and the concentration of natural resources are mainly in the developing world, as are problems like the dispersion of capacity to build weapons of mass destruction, a reform of global political management systems to respond to crises and violence—such as the chaos in West Asia—is even more imperative.

If the UNSC includes India and Brazil, and also represents Africa and West Asia, it will infuse the council with a deeper understanding and enable a wiser response to the world’s cascading political crises, unlike the hasty and excessive militarism of the West.

Ambassador Neelam Deo is Co-founder and Director of Gateway House. She has been the Indian Ambassador to Denmark and Ivory Coast with concurrent accreditation to several West African countries.

Karan Pradhan is a Senior Researcher at Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

This feature was written for Gateway House.

The post Should India Give Up On The UNSC? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

South Korea’s Foreign Policy: More Rhetoric, Less Content? – Analysis

0
0

By Sandip Kumar Mishra

South Korea’s foreign relations especially in East Asia are in a state of impasse under the current President Park Geun-hye. During the last President Lee Myung-bak, it was clear that South Korea gave priority to its alliance with the US and resultantly drifted away from its closest economic partner, China. The current President Park Geun-hye from the very beginning wanted to balance this over tilt. She tried to implement a two-leg policy, and made her first ‘official visit’ to the US and first ‘state visit’ to China, emphasising the importance of both in the foreign policy calculus of the country. It was indeed a very perceptive move. Similarly, South Korea under the current administration declared the initiation of ‘trust politik’ towards North Korea, which was a correction to the unconstructive hard-line policy of the previous South Korea administration. It was considered to be the right choice to pacify North Korea and engage it in meaningful dialogue towards denuclearisation, economic reform, and ultimately, bringing about a peace regime on the Korean peninsula.

However, it seems that in both of these foreign policy objectives, South Korea has not been able to move forward as expected. South Korea appears to put more emphasis on rhetoric and showmanship and less on content. South Korea sought Chinese support in its dealings with North Korea, and as a quid-pro-quo, showed its agreement with Chinese objections to Japan’s assertive behaviour. However, this was not considered sufficient by China. China expects more from South Korea based especially on Shinzo Abe’s approach towards Japan’s historical and territorial disputes with the former.

China was expecting South Korea to show restraint in the process of partnering with the US’ strategic games in the region. South Korea has recently announced its part in the US THAAD missile defence system in East Asia and also declared that it would not take over the operational command (OPCON) of the joint forces during the war-time until 2020s, which was supposed to be taken over in 2015. There are reports that this has led China to re-contemplate its relations with North Korea. Reports also say that the Chinese Ambassador to North Korea has become more active in his engagement with North Korea.

The foreign policy objective of the current South Korean government might be different than the previous one, but it appears to be gradually but surely moving on the same path and towards the same destination. For the first time there have been confirmed reports that China was decisively unhappy with North Korea and was ready to work with South Korea to resolve the North Korean issue. If China drifts away from South Korea, it would be a huge loss for Seoul.

South Korea’s North Korean policy has also been more rhetorical and less pragmatic. The ‘trust politik’ seems to have got the sequencing wrong as North Korea is expected to make a gesture first. There are lots of activities to begin inter-Korea talks, and South Korea has recently constituted the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation. However, one of the two Vice-Presidents of the Committee states that South Korea should ‘wait out’ North Korea. Basically, the current South Korean government’s emphasis on a ‘principled engagement’ with North Korea is not very different from the previous government’s hard-line policy. So, the result of this ‘trust politik’ has also been a deadlock. Basically, it seems that South Korea, rather than reaching out to North Korea and Japan, is making proclamations meant for its domestic audiences.

Regarding South Korea’s estranged bilateral relations with Japan, the blame could largely be attributed to the ‘indiscriminate’ assertiveness Japan under Shinzo Abe. Japanese assertiveness vis-à-vis China does have some reasonable explanations but it does not make any sense to distance South Korea and push it towards China. However, South Korea has also been inflexible and the Park Geun-hye has deliberately avoided any meeting with Shinzo Abe. This gesture might be useful for evoking popular sentiment in South Korea but it cannot be called strategic in terms of foreign policy. It would definitely be more productive to talk and with Japan and try to persuade it to moderate its stand.

From the Indian perspective, it seems that South Korea’s foreign policy is equally dissatisfactory. The previous South Korean administration under Lee Myung-bak had the ‘New Asia Initiative’ policy to reach out to the Asian neighbourhood including India in a more proactive manner. It was an important departure from the past when South Korea was more involved with big regional players such as China, Japan, the US and Russia. President Park Geun-hye tried to carry forward this policy and visited India in the very first year of her office. However, her attempts to reach out to Southeast Asia have been weak or at least inconsistent. For example, she decided to visit India at the wrong time: when the UPA government was about to end its term. More than anything else, Park Geun-hye has been too complacent in reaching out to the new Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. India and Japan have forged several new ties and strengthened old ones in the past few months but there have not been enough proactive South Korean attempts to reach out to the new Indian government.

The Park Geun-hye administration still has more than three years of office. During this time, South Korea can learn from its non-achievements and become more comprehensive and strategic in its foreign policy making, and also detach itself from domestic political demonstrations.

Sandip Kumar Mishra
Assistant Professor, Department of East Asian Studies, Delhi University

The post South Korea’s Foreign Policy: More Rhetoric, Less Content? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.


India Needs An Anti-Tapering Strategy – Analysis

0
0

India faces heightened geoeconomic risks as the U.S. exits its unconventional monetary policy and the value of the dollar appreciates against major currencies. We can mitigate the risks with a multilateral safety net to provide liquidity, and by attracting FDI through the ‘Make in India’ programme.

By Rajrishi Singhal

New geoeconomic risks are threatening global economic stability and India will have to craft a crisis response plan as these risks—arising in the developed world—start unfolding.

The first risk to the global economy is the tightening grip of deflation in various rich countries—the U.S., UK, members of the European Union, and Japan—while inflation persists in the emerging economies. The developed world is trying hard to nudge prices up, while emerging economies such as India, South Africa, Turkey or Brazil are struggling to tamp down rising prices.

These diametrically opposing economic conditions have yielded contrary monetary policies. Central banks trying to pull up the inflation curve have kept interest rates extremely low, virtually near zero percent. In contrast, emerging economies have kept interest rates high to discourage prices from climbing further.

This gap in interest rates makes money behave like a liquid: it flows to assets offering higher returns. As a result, capital flows from developed economies have sought better returns through growing investments in Indian equities, bonds, and foreign currency loans to private sector companies.

Both forms of inflows—portfolio investments and external commercial borrowings— represent potential sources of risk. And in fact the risks have started materialising. The Federal Reserve bank announced on October 29 that it is exiting its quantitative easing programme (or QE, under which it bought a fixed amount of bonds from the market every month) because it can sense green shoots of growth in the U.S. economy.[1] In addition, the Fed has also hinted that it plans to increase interest rates in 2015.

As the Fed stops buying bonds, it will invariably affect the state of liquidity in global markets. When liquidity dries up demand also evaporates, forcing asset prices to head southwards. Investors and lenders then rush to liquidate assets to avoid booking a loss. When that happens, expect some outflows from India, which will have an impact on current account deficit and subsequently, through the exchange rate, on inflation.

On foreign currency borrowings, the risk is home-grown: most corporate borrowers have not hedged their foreign currency exposure in the hope that the rupee-dollar value will move in a narrow band, or in the misguided expectation that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) will intervene to protect the exchange rate. In fact, the RBI’s repeated exhortations to corporates to hedge their foreign borrowings have been largely ignored. The extent of hedged exposures was revealed by RBI deputy governor H. R. Khan recently: only 15% in July-August 2014 against 35% during 2013-14.[2]

If tapering—and a subsequent increase in U.S. Fed rates—do lead to the rupee depreciating (as it did during May-August 2013 when news of tapering first broke), the unhedged exposures will translate into a higher debt burden. At the macro-level, this represents a financial stability risk for the country.

The RBI attempted to introduce an indirect penal provision by forcing banks to make higher provisions against unhedged foreign currency exposures of their corporate clients. But that did not help. Banks claimed they do not have access to data; also, banks cannot force a company to hedge their foreign currency exposures.

Some solutions have been suggested—for example, the Mint newspaper recommended that the RBI should convince the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India to discipline unhedged corporates.[3] But it might be too late by the time it is implemented.

The risk to India gets aggravated because of a schism building within the developed bloc: while the Fed exits its accommodative policy, the European Central Bank (ECB) is planning to launch a stimulus programme to stir up growth in somnolent Eurozone.[4] On interest rates too, the ECB has differed from the Fed by remaining noncommittal. In both these economic zones, interest rates are virtually close to zero percent.

The deviation in strategies, and the first signs of economic growth in the U.S., have resulted in the dollar value appreciating. This adds to the risk profile of emerging markets, including India: a stronger dollar will induce many investors to dump emerging market assets in favour of less riskier U.S. treasury bonds.

Two risk mitigation strategies exist. One has been suggested by Reserve Bank of India governor Raghruam Rajan in an April 2014 speech.[5] Rajan has recommended a multilateral safety net to provide liquidity to emerging markets when developed country central banks unwind their unconventional monetary policies.

The second is the “Make in India” programme launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which seeks to increase the share of manufacturing in the economy’s GDP. If properly implemented, the scheme can act as a magnet for foreign direct investment, which is an acknowledged source of stable foreign investment, compared to the relatively fickle portfolio inflows.

Rajrishi Singhal is Senior Geoeconomics Fellow, Gateway House. He has been a senior business journalist, and Executive Editor, The Economic Times, and served as Head, Policy and Research, at a private sector bank, before shifting to consultancy and policy analysis.

This article was published by Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

References

[1] Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Press Release, 29 October 2014, <http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20141029a.htm>

[2] Khan, Harun R, Indian Foreign Exchange Market: Recent Developments and the Road Ahead, 6 October 2014, Reserve Bank of India, < http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/BS_SpeechesView.aspx?Id=919>

[3] Dugal, Ira, ‘Unhedged forex exposures continue to haunt RBI’, Mint, 9 October, 2014, <http://www.livemint.com/Money/76txu2oLY1h1dLHuxLNRoL/Unhedged-forex-exposures-continue-to-haunt-RBI.html>

[4] Draghi, Mario, Introductory Statement to the Press Conference (with Q&A), European Central Bank, 2 October 2014, <https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pressconf/2014/html/is141002.en.html>

[5] Rajan, Raghuram, Competitive Monetary Easing: Is It Yesterday Once More?, Reserve Bank of India, 10 April 2014, <http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/BS_SpeechesView.aspx?Id=886>

The post India Needs An Anti-Tapering Strategy – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Leaked ASEAN Document Pushes Talks On South China Sea

0
0

By Sok Khemara

A leaked ASEAN document, a draft of the chairman’s statement for next week’s summit, notes progress on a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea and urges the group’s members to peacefully resolve their maritime disputes with China.

A senior government source from an Association of Southeast Asian Nations member, who did not want to be named, gave the document to VOA this week. The statement is a draft of the communique that would typically be released at the end of an ASEAN summit, such as the one being held in next week in Myanmar, also known as Burma.

The summit, set for November 9-13 in Naypyitaw, will host regional and international leaders for talks on a broad range of issues.

But the leaked statement is written in the past tense, as if the summit had already happened.

It says, “We expressed our concerns over recent developments in the South China Sea, which have increased tensions in the area. We reaffirmed the importance of regional cooperation in maintaining peace and stability, promoting maritime security and safety, and the freedom of navigation, including in and overflight above the South China Sea.”

It goes on to say, “We reaffirmed the collective commitments of ASEAN member states and China to peace, stability and maritime security and for the full and effective implementation of the Declaration of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) in its entirety. We noted progress on negotiations on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC) and underscored the importance of maintaining the momentum of negotiations and working expeditiously towards the early conclusion of the COC.”

China and ASEAN have been working on a conduct code for more than a decade but have made little progress. They reached a non-binding declaration of conduct more than a decade ago.

China has said it will negotiate territorial disputes only in one-on-one talks and has rejected any multilateral venue for dealing with the issues.

Chheang Vannarith, lecturer at the University of Leeds in Britain, told VOA Khmer that ASEAN was unlikely to conclude the COC in the next few years.

The South China Sea issue “remains sensitive and complicated for some countries in the region because they don’t want to fracture their relationships with China, a country that is the key business partner,” he said.

Achmad Rizal Purnama, first secretary of the Indonesian Embassy in Washington, told VOA that the most important thing for ASEAN and China was to create an atmosphere conducive for COC talks.

“When we are talking about the diplomatic part, we are aiming to conclude the Code of Conduct sooner rather than later because the conclusion of the so-called COC will pave the way for the issue itself to be addressed in an appropriate manner,” he said.

He also said the ASEAN summit and other summits with world leaders would present a good opportunity to address pressing issues facing the region and globe.

The South China Sea dispute has become quieter in recent weeks, after China removed an oil rig from waters also claimed by Vietnam.

Political analyst Sok Touch, Dean of Khemarak University in Cambodia, said ASEAN would not be able to solve the problem of the South China Sea because ASEAN members have different systems and foreign policy priorities.

“First, ASEAN has the different forms of governing its own nations — some are communists, dictatorships, democratic. … All these are the barriers of finding common goal to solve the South China Sea,” he said.

The draft also stresses that ASEAN is jointly condemning Islamic State militants and criticizing North Korea for missile tests in violation of U.N. resolutions.

Myanmar, which is chair of ASEAN this year, has not commented on the leaked document.

The post Leaked ASEAN Document Pushes Talks On South China Sea appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Hawaii To Relocate Homeless With One-Way Plane Tickets

0
0

One of the biggest shelters in Hawaii has secured the funding to start an initiative that will vet the homeless population of Waikiki and ultimately select 120 individuals to be flown elsewhere with one-way plane tickets.

Hawaii’s Institute for Human Services (IHS) officially launched its $1.3 million initiative to fight homelessness this week, and among the facets involved in the effort is a program that will put dozens of people on airplanes in order to relocate them away from the tropical island town.

“We found out that many (Waikiki homeless) are transient who made a choice to become homeless, as well as people who became homeless shortly after arriving in Hawaii,” Kimo Carvalho, development and community relations manager for IHS, told Civil Beat. “We are trying to do an aggressive public relations effort, trying to water down misinformation, basically not making Hawaii be an attractive destination to come and be homeless.”

To accomplish as much, officials behind the multi-pronged program plan on putting around 140 individuals into area shelters during the effort’s first year, while flying another 120 “transient individuals” back to wherever they came from.

Last year, the State Legislature approved $100,000 to be used towards a three-year “Return to Home” program that would have similarly involved purchasing one-way plane tickets for a substantial chunk of the Waikiki homeless population, but Governor Neil Abercrombie, a Democrat, refused to release the funds to Department of Human Services reportedly because he feared it would encourage individuals to come to Hawaii with the intent of receiving a free trip home.

IHS Executive Director Connie Mitchell told Hawaii News Now last month that around 500 homeless people presently reside on the streets of Waikiki, a beachfront neighborhood in Honolulu that boasts a total population of around 18,000, according to census statistics from 2013. If the IHS succeeds, then ideally more than half of that figure will be admitted to a shelter or relocated off the island within the next year.

“I think a lot of people may not even know about IHS who are in Waikiki. So it’s really an opportunity for us to just let people know that there is help if they’re looking for help,” Mitchell said.

But in addition to IHS, the relocation program has also found support in another group: Hawaii’s tourism industry. In September the Honolulu City Council approved measures that prohibit sitting and lying down on sidewalks in Waikiki, and proponents of those bills cited concerns from the hospitality community when making their case.

“We are pushing to make it illegal to sleep on the sidewalks of Waikiki, because we’ve heard from our hotel industry that it’s very concerned about keeping Waikiki as an attractive visitor destination,” Jesse Broder Van Dyke, a spokesman for Honolulu Mayor Kirk Caldwell, a Democrat, told the Associated Press ahead of last month’s vote.

“It’s time to declare a war on homelessness, which is evolving into a crisis in Honolulu,” Mayor Caldwell, himself wrote in an essay that appeared in The Honolulu Star-Advertiser this past June. “We cannot let homelessness ruin our economy and take over our city.” Ultimately, the measure that would have banned people from resting on city sidewalks was rejected by local lawmakers.

Regardless, the mayor’s wish may now soon come true, but at a cost nevertheless. IHS is contributing $824,000 to the cause, and the Hawaii Lodging and Tourism Association last week pledged $100,000 of their own.

“When the number one complaint from our visitors is why they will not be coming back to Hawaii is homeless, you have an issue,” George Szigeti, president and CEO of HLTA, said to Hawaii News Now.

“So when IHS came to us with a plan of action tailored to address the homeless situation in our Waikiki community, we were pleased and we immediately pledged our support,” Szigeti said.

Next, according to Civil Beat, HIS hopes to raise another $400,000 to fund the full program, which will also be used to boost the resources at area shelters, including employment and medical services.

“I do think that conversation will have to touch on a couple very sensitive rails and I think a central rail is going to be this idea of what is aloha and how we, those who live here, view what is aloha and what is our message going to be nationally,” Colin Kippen, the state’s homeless czar, told Civil Beat. “How will that message be delivered in a way which preserves the essence of what aloha is?”

But Szigeti of the Tourism Association told KHON News last week that the program, which officially started this Monday, may take a while to make a difference. “I think this is a program that’s going to need some sustainability,” he told the network. “It’s not going to be one year to fix the problem. We need to be here next year and the year after and address the needy.

“When IHS came to us with a proposed plan of action for Waikiki’s homeless situation, we were thrilled,” he added. “Homeless will get the help they need and those who live, work and visit our Waikiki community will appreciate how this problem can be effectively addressed.”

Others, like Interfaith Alliance Hawaii’s Bishop Stephen Randolph Sykes, aren’t certain the city should be spearheading a campaign, however, that is so heavily focused on dispersing the homeless population by any means necessary. “We recognize Waikiki is our economic engine, and having our homeless there is not something that is necessarily beneficial,” he previously told AP, “but creating an island-wide type of situation where we’re criminalizing homelessness is just not ‘pono,’ it’s not ethical, because these people don’t have any place to go, and we’re just pushing them around.”

The post Hawaii To Relocate Homeless With One-Way Plane Tickets appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Political Prophecies: Sealing The Fate Of Al-Aqsa – OpEd

0
0

Israel’s decision to shut down al-Aqsa Mosque on Thursday, 30 October, is not just a gross violation of the religious rights of Palestinian Muslims.

In fact, the rights of Palestinian Muslims and Christians have been routinely violated under the Israeli occupation for decades, especially in Jerusalem, and more recently in Gaza. During the 51-day war on the Gaza Strip, a reported 73 mosques were destroyed, while 205 were partially destroyed, according to a Palestinian government report.

The Noble Sanctuary located in Jerusalem’s Old City, is known as Haram al-Sharif in Arabic and is home to the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. It serves as much more than a religious role in Palestinian society because it is a unifying national force and symbol as well. Thus, unsurprisingly, it has been a target of numerous Israeli raids, including attempts to burn it down, or conduct excavations under it to seek the fulfilment of biblical prophecy.

In response, “Defending al-Aqsa” has been an unswerving rallying cry for Palestinians throughout the years. Several Palestinian uprisings were unleashed as a reaction to Israeli political or military plans to alter the status quo over the mosque. The Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000 was one such uprising. It lasted for nearly five years, during which thousands of Palestinians and hundreds of Israelis were killed in clashes that were provoked by late Israeli leader, Ariel Sharon.

That context should be remembered if the current coverage of the very worrying situation in and around Jerusalem is to be meaningful in any way.  The war on the mosque, which is central to the spirituality of hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, is not simply the work of a few Jewish extremists. It is part and parcel of an Israeli government agenda which has been crystalizing in recent years and months. Next month, for example, the Israeli Knesset will vote on a motion calling for the partitioning of al-Aqsa.

One of the leading advocates of that partition, at least in terms of a first step towards a complete takeover, is the Temple Mount Faithful organisation, headed by Yehuda Glick.

Founded by Gershon Salomon, Temple Mount Faithful Movement, according to its website, is dedicated to the “the vision of consecrating the Temple Mount to the Name of G‑d, to removing the Muslim shrines placed there as a symbol of Muslim conquest, to the rebuilding of the Third Temple on the Temple Mount, and the godly redemption of the People and the Land of Israel.”

This messianic vision is not entirely alien to the discourse of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. His logic in defence of illegal settlements in occupied Jerusalem is such: “The French build in Paris, the English build in London and the Israelis build in Jerusalem. To come and tell Jews not to live in Jerusalem – why?”

Indeed, there seems to be little conflict between the vision of the Temple Mount Faithful Movement-like organisations, the political attitude of Tel Aviv or the many steps underway to terminate Palestinian properties, demolish homes, and expand Jewish settlements.

Yehuda Glick, the well-funded US-Israeli “activist”, whose obsession with destroying al-Aqsa knows no bounds, and who has been frequenting the mosque in provocative visits under Israeli police cover for years, has been the face of the Israeli designs against al Aqsa.

On Wednesday, 29 October, a suspected Palestinian assailant shot and wounded him as he stepped out of a Jerusalem conference focused on building the Temple Mount on the ruins of al-Aqsa. His alleged attacker, Moataz Hejazi was killed by Israeli police. His sister told Al-Jazeera on 30 October that her brother was badly beaten, then taken to the roof of a nearby building and shot.

The decision to shut down al-Aqsa took place after the incident. Some in the media and in Israel see Glick – who has been a notorious figure for many Palestinian Jerusalemites throughout the years – as a victim of wanton Palestinian violence. He was “part of a growing movement among religiously militant Jews demanding more prayer rights at the al-Aqsa compound,” ABC News casualty reported.

But Glick demanded more. His group’s mission was to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian inhabitants of East Jerusalem. His actions testify to this.

The shooting of Glick is reminiscent of a similar episode in the blood stained history of the region, one that had dreadful consequences.  On  25 February, 1994, the US-born Jewish extremist Baruch Goldstein stormed into the Ibrahimi Mosque in the Palestinian city of al-Khalil (Hebron) and opened fire.

The aim was to kill as many people as he could, and that he did, by killing up to 30 people and wounding over 120.

It was not enough that Israeli soldiers within the vicinity of the Ibrahimi Mosque allowed Goldstein – armed with a Galil rifle and other weapons – access to the mosque, but they opened fire on worshippers as they tried to flee the scene. Israeli soldiers killed 24 more and injured others.

Goldstein was a member of the Jewish Defence League (JDL), a racist party of Jewish extremists founded by Meir Kahane. The Temple Mount Faithful, like other such extremists groups, consider Goldstein, a hero. Like Glick, Goldstein was also American and lived in an illegal al-Khalil settlement.

While Goldstein’s mass murder was condemned by many, including many Israelis, there is no denial that Jewish extremists, who are mostly populating the illegal settlements of the West Bank and Jerusalem, are part of a larger Israeli government plan aimed at ethnically cleansing Palestinians.

While Israeli bulldozers dig into Palestinian land during the day, levelling mounds of ground and destroying olive groves for settlement expansion, heavy machinery burrows beneath the Old City of al-Quds – Jerusalem – at night. The Israelis are looking for evidence of what they believe to be ancient Jewish temples, presumably destroyed in 586BC and 70AD.

To fulfil the “prophecy,” Jewish extremists believe that a third temple must be built. But of course, there is the inconvenient fact that on that particular spot exists one of Islam’s holiest sites: The Noble Sanctuary. It has been an exclusively Muslim prayer site for the last 1,300 years.

The combination of right-wing politicians allied with religious zealots is now defining the Israeli attitude towards Palestinians, particularly in Jerusalem. They are eyeing al-Aqsa for annexation, the same way the Israeli government is labouring to permanently annex large swathes of the occupied West Bank.

In fact, last February, the Israeli Knesset chose the 20th anniversary of the Goldstein massacre of Palestinians in al-Khalil, to begin a debate concerning the status of the al-Aqsa compound. Powerful right-wingers want the government to enforce its “sovereignty” over the Muslim site, which is administered by Jordan per the Jordanian-Israeli peace treaty of 1994. Israeli MP, Moshe Feiglin, is the man behind the move, but he is not alone.

Feiglin is a member of Netanyahu’s Likud party, and has strong backing within the party, the government and the Knesset. His supporters include Yehuda Glick, the American-born fanatic.

It remains unclear what fate awaits al-Aqsa Mosque. Caught between Israeli annexation plans, raids of Jewish extremists, international silence and a history of bloodshed, al-Aqsa is facing difficult days ahead, as indeed are the people of Jerusalem, whose suffering, like their city, seems eternal.

The post Political Prophecies: Sealing The Fate Of Al-Aqsa – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

European Satellite Could Discover Thousands Of Planets In Earth’s Galaxy

0
0

A recently launched European satellite could reveal tens of thousands of new planets within the next few years, and provide scientists with a far better understanding of the number, variety and distribution of planets in our galaxy, according to research published today.

Researchers from Princeton University and Lund University in Sweden calculated that the observational satellite Gaia could detect as many as 21,000 exoplanets, or planets outside of Earth’s solar system, during its five-year mission. If extended to 10 years, Gaia could detect as many as 70,000 exoplanets, the researchers report. The researchers’ assessment is accepted in the Astrophysical Journal and was published Nov. 6 in advance-of-print on arXiv, a preprint database run by Cornell University.

Exoplanets will be an important “by-product” of Gaia’s mission, Perryman said. Built and operated by the European Space Agency (ESA) and launched in December 2013, Gaia will capture the motion, physical characteristics and distance from Earth — and one another — of roughly 1 billion objects, mostly stars, in the Milky Way galaxy with unprecedented precision. The presence of an exoplanet will be determined by how its star “wobbles” as a result of the planet’s orbit around it.

More important than the numbers of predicted discoveries are the kinds of planets that the researchers expect Gaia to detect, many of which — such as planets with multi-year orbits that pass directly, or transit, in front of their star as seen from Earth — are currently difficult to find, explained first author Michael Perryman, an adviser on large scientific programs who made the assessment while serving as Princeton’s Bohdan Paczyński Visiting Fellow in the Department of Astrophysical Sciences. The satellite’s instruments could reveal objects that are considered rare in the Milky Way, such as an estimated 25 to 50 Jupiter-sized planets that orbit faint, low-mass stars known as red dwarfs. Unique planets and systems — such as planets that orbit in the opposite direction of their companions — can inspire years of research, Perryman said.

“It’s not just about the numbers. Each of these planets will be conveying some very specific details, and many will be highly interesting in their own way,” Perryman said. “If you look at the planets that have been discovered until now, they occupy very specific regions of discovery space. Gaia will not only discover a whole list of planets, but in an area that has not been thoroughly explored so far.”

Ultimately, a comprehensive census allows scientists to more accurately determine how many planets and planetary systems exist, the detailed properties of those planets, and how they are positioned throughout the galaxy, Perryman said.

Perryman worked with Joel Hartman, an associate research scholar in Princeton’s astrophysical sciences department, Gáspár Bakos, an associate professor of astrophysical sciences, and Lennart Lindegren, a professor of astronomy at Lund University. Gaia is based on a satellite proposal led by Lindegren and Perryman that was submitted to the ESA in 1993.

Research on exoplanets has increased dramatically in the 15 years since Gaia was accepted by the ESA in 2000. The new estimate is based on a highly detailed model of how stars and planets are positioned in the Milky Way; more accurate details of Gaia’s measurement and data-analysis capabilities; and current estimates of exoplanet distributions, particularly those derived from NASA’s Kepler satellite, which has identified nearly 1,000 confirmed planets and more than 3,000 candidates. Crucial to conducting the assessment is the much-improved knowledge that now exists about distant planets, Perryman said, such as the types of stars that exoplanets orbit.

The first exoplanet was detected in 1995. Nearly 1,900 have since been discovered. Bakos, who focuses much of his research on exoplanets, launched and oversees HATNet (Hungarian-made Automated Telescope Network) and HATSouth, planet-hunting networks of fully automated, small-scale telescopes installed on four continents that scan the sky every night for planets as they transit in front of their parent star. The projects have discovered more than 50 planets since 1999.

“Our assessment will help prepare exoplanet researchers for what to expect from Gaia,” Perryman said. “We’re going to be adding potentially 20,000 new planets in a completely new area of discovery space. It’s anyone’s guess how the field will develop as a result.”

The post European Satellite Could Discover Thousands Of Planets In Earth’s Galaxy appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Viewing all 73339 articles
Browse latest View live


Latest Images