As host of the this year’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting China made a huge effort not only on the diplomatic and hospitality fronts, but in transferring a normally smoggy Beijing to a blue-sky Beijing. This effort to allow some sunshine onto the proceedings may have helped produce one of the main bilateral outcomes – namely the US-China agreement on reducing carbon remissions.

The biggest question on everyone’s lips before the summit was whether President Xi and Prime Minister Abe would shake hands. As is evident from the photo above, the icebreaking handshake between the two most powerful Asian leaders was ice-cold too.

Both Xi and Abe have pursued nationalist policies since they took office, repeatedly clashing over disputed islands in the East China Sea. Therefore the fact that Xi and Abe had a side meeting at all in Beijing drew enormous attention. Despite the awkwardness of the handshake it also showed that both countries are capable of dealing with the sensitive issues between them without any outsiders’ help.

The pre-summit diplomacy between China and Japan paved the way for the meeting of Xi and Abe. On 7 November, Chinese State Councillor Yang Jiechi held talks with visiting National Security Advisor of Japan Shotaro Yachi and reached a ‘Four-Point Principled Agreement on Handling and Improving Bilateral Relations’. The two statements are similar but both chose words with slightly different meanings to best describe their political positions. These differences can be seen  in the two areas where their disagreement has been the most prominent: the territorial disputes and wartime historical issue.(Click here to read the PRC official statement in English and here to read the Japanese official statement in English.)

It is clear that the real effect of the four point principle agreement will remain ambiguous until China and Japan move their relationship one more step forward.

Another highlight at APEC was the agreement for the China-backed proposal for a study on a possible Free Trade Area of Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).  This would involve countries in the US-led TPP grouping and the China-led RECEP grouping.

Countries involved in the TPP talks held talks during the APEC meeting but failed to achieve any breakthrough.

China and South Korea announced that they had completed their bilateral negotiations on an FTA.

Right after the grand APEC show, many leaders, including Obama and Abbott flew to Myanmar, where Southeast Asian leaders have opened the annual summit meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The ASEAN summit is followed by the East Asia Summit (EAS)  which is a broader gathering of the 10 ASEAN countries plus the US, China, Russia, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and India. The EU and Canada have expressed their wish to join as well.

The summitry then continues at the G20 meeting in Brisbane. which will be the last major event for Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council, and a first summit for Jean Claude Juncker, the new President of the European Commission. EU leaders have said they will strongly support the G20 proposals on tackling global imbalances. But there is likely to be less agreement on climate change as the Australian host, Prime Minister Tony Abbott, remains sceptical about the potential impact of CO2 emissions.

The post APEC And Beyond – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Barah Mikail

France has traditionally been a pragmatic geopolitical player in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). In spite of some changes in nuance, neither regional shifts brought about by the ‘Arab spring’ nor François Hollande’s presidency have changed the essentials of the so-called politique arabe de la France: retain friendly and stable relations with all MENA governments (except Syria currently) in pursuit of France’s three main interests: regional stability, energy security and arms exports.

In recent years, France has prioritised key bilateral alliances over efforts to strengthen multilateral schemes, including via the European Union (EU). While his predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy hid this reality behind a multilateral approach (the Union for the Mediterranean), Hollande displays his emphasis on a few regional allies more openly. Under Hollande, France has also further consolidated the geo-economic aspects of its MENA policy on commercial interests.

Energy And Arms Sales

France’s total trade each year with the Arab world is now worth €57 billion. In the area of energy, in spite of efforts to diversify, in general the French economy remains heavily dependent on oil which accounts for 42 per cent of its energy consumption, and gas covers one-fifth (see Figure 1).

In 2013, France imported 37.6 per cent of its crude oil from the MENA, its first oil supplier. The main oil suppliers to France within the region were Saudi Arabia (18.1 per cent), Libya (8.5 per cent), Algeria (6.1 per cent) and Iraq (2.2 per cent). Between 2012 and 2013, France’s oil supply from the Middle East witnessed a shift away from Libya, to the benefit of more stable suppliers such as Saudi Arabia and Algeria (see Figure 2).

In the area of natural gas, France’s dependency on the MENA region is less important, 14 per cent in total. In 2013, 10.8 per cent of France’s imports came from Algeria, 3.2 per cent from Qatar and 0.2 per cent from Egypt (see Figure 3).

France is aware of the need to diversify its energy mix and reduce dependency on volatile import regions such as the Middle East. However, although it has recently decreased the Middle East’s share of its energy imports, dependency on Arab and particularly Gulf providers still makes France vulnerable to the region’s highly volatile security outlook. Disruptions of energy flows due to tensions with Iran or the fragile situations in Iraq and Libya explain Hollande’s desire to strengthen relations with Saudi Arabia – the world’s biggest crude producer that currently remains more stable than most other MENA countries.

France was the third-largest external investor in the Middle East during the period 2003-2012, accounting for 6.2 per cent of total foreign direct investment (FDI) to the region. During this period, France invested a total of $58 billion: $24.6 billion in resources and oil manufacturing; $8 billion in non-oil manufacturing; $12.6 billion in commercial services; and $13 billion in non-tradables. The largest investments were made in Saudi Arabia ($16 billion), Morocco ($10 billion), Qatar ($7 billion), Algeria ($6 billion) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE – $5 billion). France also has three companies that rate amongst the top 50 multinational corporations that operate in the MENA: Total (No. 5), GDF Suez (No. 19) and Accor (No. 37). Defence companies, such as MBDA and Thales, also contribute significantly to France’s trade with the region.

Despite considerable variations on specific years, France is one of the biggest arms exporters to the Middle East. Between 2005 and 2010, for example, it came third after the United States (US) and Russia (see Figure 4).

According to French Defence Ministry figures, in 2013 some 48 per cent of France’s defence export orders went to MENA countries, with Saudi Arabia accounting for 27.5 per cent of total orders (€1.9 billion out of €6.9 billion), followed by Morocco (€584.9 million), the UAE (€335 million), Qatar (€124.9 million), Oman (€104.1 million) and Algeria (€96.6 million) (See Figure 5). During the period 2003-2012, France’s main defence clients in the MENA were Saudi Arabia (No. 1), the UAE (France’s second MENA client and fourth overall after India and Brazil), Morocco (No. 9), Oman (No. 15) and Qatar (No. 20). Nuclear agreements – with no official amounts released publicly – have also been signed with each of Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Libya, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and the UAE.

Military Footprint And The Fight Against Jihadism

In 2009, French President Nicolas Sarkozy inaugurated a military base (called ‘Peace Camp’) in the UAE. While it reflects France’s commitment to help defend Arab Gulf countries against an Iranian attack or any attempt from Tehran to disrupt commercial traffic in the Persian Gulf, the means are limited (6 Rafale aircrafts and 750 soldiers as of September 2014, costing nearly €75 million each year according to a report published by the French Senate in 2011). The base is now used for France’s participation in the US-led anti-Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) coalition in Iraq. In addition, it serves as a symbol of France’s commitment to the security of the region.

France’s military footprint in the region has grown significantly, mainly because France has put the fight against jihadism at the centre of its national security strategy, though sometimes with contradictory results for its MENA strategy. France’s decision to militarily intervene in Mali (operation Serval), to hamper rampant Islamist fighters (National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad, Ansar al-Din, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb) at Bamako’s request, is the most forceful recent example of France’s anti-jihadism focus.

At the same time, however, in Syria, France has strongly supported anti-Assad fighters of the Free Syrian Army, which has included not only ‘secular’ rebels, but also Islamists and jihadist fighters. France also succeeded in 2013 in convincing other EU member states to lift an arms embargo to supply ‘moderate’ rebel groups. Meanwhile, however, the opposition has further fragmented, creating the conditions for the rise of extremist groups (Jabhat al-Nosra, Jaysh al-Islam) and the emergence of ISIL. The growing challenge of ISIL in Iraq and Syria worries France, which has joined the international coalition bombing their positions in Iraq.

France played a key role in the operation that led to the fall of Gaddafi. However, Paris has not been able to establish itself as a privileged partner with Libya. It did not anticipate accurately the consequences of the fall of Gaddafi in terms of further instability and state failure. France’s approach to the country has since focused mainly on security issues such as participating in the Tunisia-based EU Border Assistance Mission (EUBAM) to Libya and very limited training of local forces – only 122 Libyan military officers and 75 paramilitaries had been trained as of December 2013. French companies and official representatives had to leave Libya because of the violence, and France privately worries that it may have to consider another military intervention in Libya. In a veiled reference to these concerns, French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian has said that ‘acting’ in Libya is needed with the help of the international community.

France also fears jihadist attacks on its own soil. For example, the French anti-terrorist operation Barkhane across the Sahel has been deployed partly because of growing concerns about the deteriorating situation in Libya. Furthermore, France seems intent on a rapprochement with Algeria because of their common terrorism concerns.

Closer To Saudi Arabia, Estranged From Russia And Iran

Because of shifting regional dynamics, Hollande has changed some aspects of France’s engagement with Arab partners. In the Gulf, France clearly prioritises Saudi Arabia and the UAE while de-emphasising relations with Qatar – Saudi Arabia’s regional challenger. These decisions were partly influenced by the president’s desire to distance himself from his predecessor’s policies, which favoured Qatar. Plus, France and Saudi Arabia share common points of view on two important files: their will to topple the Syrian regime and their opposition to any step that would strengthen Iran’s regional influence. This rapprochement may have helped motivate a pending Saudi-funded $2.2 billion French-Lebanese arms deal to beef up the Lebanese army’s capabilities to combat terrorism.

In the Maghreb, Hollande’s strategic choice of improving relations with Algeria, while not received with enthusiasm in Rabat which remains cold with its neighbour, has not led to a deterioration of French-Moroccan relations. France is keen on maintaining stability in Algeria, especially because of the possible impact of instability spreading from neighbouring Libya and Mali. Paris believes that Algiers is an important partner due to its contribution to the fight against terrorism in the Maghreb and the Sahel.

France sees an incompatibility between its interests and those of Russia and Iran. France maintained good relations with Russia before the 2014 events in Ukraine, but opposed Russian support to the Syrian regime. Furthermore, as the second-biggest arms supplier to the region, Moscow is one of France’s greatest arms export competitors. For example, Algeria buys 91 per cent of its arms from Russia and only 3 per cent from France. Egypt completed a $2 billion Saudi and Emirati-funded arms deal with Russia in February 2014, and Iraq a $4.3 billion deal in 2013. Moscow also sells weapons to Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Syria. In relation to Iran, France is uncomfortable with Tehran’s support to Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and with the influence it has in Iraq. Furthermore, it thinks that Tehran’s defence capacities already make it able to threaten both EU and NATO countries and the MENA region through its development of longer-range ballistic missiles. France worries that Iran’s access to military nuclear capacities would encourage regional nuclear proliferation.

France is broadly in line with the American approach to regional security challenges. But Paris has sought to push even harder than the US on some regional issues, such as support to anti-Assad fighters in Syria, and negotiations on the Iranian nuclear file. The retention of Laurent Fabius as foreign minister, who has a reputation for being an Atlanticist, following the French government reshuffle in summer 2014, is also an indication of France’s desire for more coordination with the US, including via NATO.

Uneven Support To Reform

Between 2007 and 2011, France’s bilateral Official Development Assistance (ODA) to the Middle East fell from US$1 billion (13 per cent of France’s total bilateral aid budget) to US$210 million (2.31 per cent of the total). By contrast, France’s aid to North Africa increased from US$1.066 billion (13.78 per cent of the total) to US$1.3 billion (13.25 per cent) over the same period. In September 2011, France announced it would allocate €2.7 billion over the period 2011-2013 to support Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia. In May 2011, under the French presidency, the G8 responded to the ‘Arab spring’ by launching the Deauville partnership, aimed at backing democratic transitions in the Middle East in four key priority areas: stabilisation, job creation, improving economic governance and cross-border integration. A MENA Transition Fund has been set up in this context to complement other bilateral and multilateral initiatives in support of governance and economic reforms. With a view to coming years, a significant decrease of France’s aid contributions to the MENA region can be anticipated.

According to the French law of finance for 2015, France’s public development aid will shrink by 2.5 per cent in 2015, and will be reduced by up to 10 per cent over the next three years.

Despite having provided a considerable amount of development aid to the region, France’s commitment to reform in the Middle East and North Africa is very uneven. In official rhetoric, France puts democracy and human rights at the centre of its activities in the Middle East. But in practice, France only publicly mentions human rights violations in the case of countries where this serves, or does not harm, specific French interests (Syria, Egypt). It remains
particularly uncritical in countries where strong economic interests prevail (Morocco, Algeria, Gulf countries). France’s selling of weapons to authoritarian regimes in the MENA region is indirectly impacting democratic governance and human rights-related prospects. France’s main arms import clients (Algeria, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia and the UAE) are the object of regular criticisms by human rights groups.

France’s participation in the operation that led to the fall of Gaddafi in Libya in 2011 has been followed by limited involvement in supporting democratic governance and defending human rights. Paris is focusing rather on defending its commercial interests while trying to avoid any further spill-over from the Libyan violence. As the director of Human Rights Watch in France, Jean-Marie Fardeau, put it, Paris now favours a confident ‘business first’ attitude in the name of ‘economic recovery’, though this does not mean that France is ignoring other geopolitical and strategic calculations.

Conclusion

The seizing by ISIL of several towns in western Iraq in June 2014 has raised concerns about the stability of the region. But this will not necessarily have a deep impact on France’s MENA strategy. True, in mid-August, France decided to provide ‘sophisticated’ weapons to Kurdish Peshmergas to help them fight against ISIL and it has recently joined the US-led air campaign against ISIL in Iraq. But these decisions fall under its long-held commitment to promote anti-terrorism policies and to uphold stability in the region. France’s interests in the region will most likely be persevered with, including energy supplies, investments and arms deals.

Therefore, France will prioritise its current alliances. Relations with the US and Saudi Arabia will remain strong, while engagement with Algeria is likely to grow, though cautiously considering Morocco’s sensitivities to this. The attempts to limit Iran’s influence in the MENA region will continue, especially since they are part of the price for keeping good relations with Saudi Arabia. In the coming years, France’s regional role is unlikely to contribute to significant improvements on human rights and governance in the MENA region. It would need first to put democracy and human rights at the forefront of its regional strategy, which might entail losing market opportunities. Although Paris does not anticipate the fall of more regimes, it will keep focusing on anti-terrorism strategies to prevent the risks of spill-over of terrorist violence throughout the MENA region and the Sahel.

François Hollande is sticking to a pragmatic approach towards the MENA driven by security and economic interests. But there is a distinct risk that this will (once again) come at the price of neglecting the fundamental and controversial issues at the roots of regional destabilisation, such as widespread human rights violations and flawed socio-economic governance.

About the author:
Barah Mikail is senior researcher at FRIDE.

Source:
This Policy Brief belongs to the project ‘Transitions and Geopolitics in the Arab World: links and implications for international actors’, led by FRIDE and HIVOS. We acknowledge the generous support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway. For further information on this project, please contact: Kawa Hassan, Hivos (k.hassan@ hivos.nl) or Kristina Kausch, FRIDE (kkausch@ fride.org).

This article was published by FRIDE as Policy Brief No 188 – November 2014 (PDF).

The post France’s Shifting Middle Eastern Alliances – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

When in 1974, after being deported from the USSR and finding refuge in the USA, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said that he and his books will return to a free Russia, US sovietologists met his declaration with disbelief and ridicule. How dare he challenge their wisdom that the best we could do in the foreseeable future was to contain the USSR in its sphere of influence? Communism was indeed the enemy the USA elites loved to hate.

I recalled this while reading Costs of a New Cold War: The US-Russia Confrontation over Ukraine, a collection of essays by prominent American and Russian scholars. Published by the Center for the National Interest, the book features an introduction by Paul Saunders and essays by Thomas Graham and Blake Marshall, as well as Fyodor Lukyanov and Igor Yurgens of Russia.  Alas, it falls short of its goal “to illustrate the costs that any further unraveling of the US-Russian relationship may have for both Washington and Moscow.”

The reason for this failure is the entrapment of all contributors in the conceptual framework of the Cold War. They differ only as to whether the level of current hostility approaches that of 1962 or 1984. None realizes we are deep into a New Cold War that is essentially different from the old one. The essential difference is a 180 degrees exchange of roles.[1] If during the Old Cold War the USSR was pushing the Red Flag of Communism throughout the world, now the USA is marching to convert benighted nations, such as the “authoritarian” Russia, to the blessings of “democracy, free-market and globalization.”  Now Washington preaches that America’s exceptionalism entitles it to run the “unipolar” world the way it wants.

If during the Old Cold War, the West was guided by George Kennan’s containment strategy, the booklet under review shows how “the legacy of Realpolitik has been… marginalized by the resurgent forces of Neoconservatism in Washington”. So says Gilbert Doctorow, the author of “Stepping out of Line: Collected (Nonconformist) Essays on Russian-American Relations, 2008-12”,[2] in which he praises the American dissidents now dissenting from the Washington Pravda line.

With the arrival of Mikhail Gorbachev, the age of change in the USSR was underway. The US establishment sided with Gorbachev’s reformers who wanted to retain Communism under the cosmetics of human rights. Among the few dissenting think-tanks then was the Center for Contemporary Russian Studies (CCRS) at the Monterey Institute of International Studies in California where I was professor and director of Russian studies. In 1987, jointly with Professor Nicolai Petro, we founded CCRS to educate our students, and public at large, about the forces inside Soviet society which would lead to the demise of Communism and birth of a new Russia. We published a series of books that animated a new Russia, such as Reflections on Russia by Dmitry Likhachev, a Soviet scholar and former prisoner of the GULAG, who never forsook Christian foundations of Russian civilization, or Self-Government and Freedom in Russia by Sergei Pushkarev, a prominent Russian émigré.

The series ended with my book, Russia Beyond Communism: a Chronicle of National Rebirth, published in 1991,[3] just on time before I could take it to Moscow and hand a copy to Boris Yeltsin after, emerging victorious in the August 19, 1991 coup, he hoisted the Russian national tri-color over the Kremlin. Dedicated to the 1000^th anniversary of Russia’s Baptism in Kiev in 988, the book held forth that the country needed not just economic and political reforms, but a rebirth of its Christian spirituality suppressed during 73 years of atheist Communist rule.

In May 2014 the book was published in Russian translation. Its thesis remains the same: Russia, still in the making, is essentially different from both the USSR and Tsarist Russia. I also argue now, as I argued then, that the USA should not meddle in Russia’s domestic affairs. Based on the writings of dozens Soviet authors I envisioned a gradual democratization of the country via an authoritarian transitional stage necessary for retaining the orderliness of reforms.  The most eloquent champion of such gradualism was Solzhenitsyn, the author of “Letter to Soviet Leaders”, written in 1973 before his exile. Alas, neither his providence nor conciliatory tone moved Soviet or Western elites.

Vladimir Putin receives Virgin Mary ‘fertility’ relic as Russia fights abortion, population decline|LifeSiteNews.com

US sovietologists failed to predict, and prepare for, the downfall of the USSR. But, at least, they stayed back with their Realpolitik. They did not call for a war nor tried to provoke it by stepping into Soviet sphere of influence.  This cannot be said of Victoria Nuland, Deputy Secretary of State and a Russia specialist, who made herself famous when she dismissed the EU role in Ukraine, kicked Yats (Yatsenyuk) upstairs, and put Klitch (Klitchko) is his place, all in unprintable language.[4]

Her former diplomatic colleague Thomas Graham, in his contribution to the booklet, attributes all faults to Russia, at least, “since fall 2011, when Putin announced his decision to return to the Kremlin.” He is totally oblivious of US meddling in Russia’s internal affairs. It does not occur to him that Russia can present a much longer list of grievances starting from the decision to retain and expand NATO.

As early as 1996, Richard Perle submitted his paper “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” to Benjamin Netanyahu during his first term as Israel’s PM.[5] After Netanyahu found this strategy beyond Israel’s means, it was adopted by US government. Thus the current US strategy of regime change was born. The expansion of NATO became an adjunct to the new pre-emptive military strategy in the Middle East.

In 1997 William Kristol and Robert Kagan launched a new think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).[6] After Perle joined it, PNAC has spawned a cabal of professors, public officials and journalists, known collectively as the Neo-Conservative.  The appropriate name should be pseudo-conservatives, for the Neocons have more in common with military adventurism than with social and geopolitical conservatism. The Neocon pernicious influence on US foreign policy under both the Democrat and Republican presidents made the USA hostile to any nation that is not ready to submit to its dictates. Since the February 21 coup in Kiev, Russia has been its primary target.

While the booklet seeks forewarn both Moscow and Washington about unpredictable developments and escalating costs to both, should they fail to come to terms over Ukraine, it does not put even a flicker of light at the end of the tunnel. Its American contributors fail to point out the great cost of the Neocon adventures to the health of US economy. According to Joseph E. Stiglitz, “The recent economic downturn eviscerated the wealth of many. In the US, even after the stock-market recovery, median wealth fell more than 40% from 2007 to 2013…Millions of Americans have lost their homes; millions more face the insecurity of knowing that they may lose theirs in the future.”[7]

A Nobel Prize laureate in economics, Stiglitz was the one high-ranking IMF official who resisted the meddling in Russia’s reform by a band of Neo-Liberal economists from Harvard whose misdeeds caused the renowned institution pay the highest penalty in its history.[8] We do not wish to impute ill-will to all American advisers on Russian reforms, but their zeal in planting democracy and free-market, like potato, to a country that had been 73 years under Communism was a tantamount of reckless folly. If it succeeded in making Russia capitalist, it was done at such high cost to ordinary Russians that they still shudder at the corruption, oligarchy, ordered killings, starvation and lawlessness of the Yeltsin era. Judging by what Stiglitz and other critics[9] of Neo-Liberals say about their influence on US economy, it was not much better than the bitter taste it left in the mouth of millions of Russians.

The Russian contributors to the booklet observe that if, by the meddling in Ukraine, US government aimed at dividing Russia, they badly miscalculated. President Putin now enjoys the best rating ever. Lukyanov ingeniously describes Russia’s current tactics in terms of judo: Putin, who has a black belt in judo, refrains from attacking his opponent, but rather lets the bully waste his energy by throwing his weight around. This is but a restatement of Kennan’s containment strategy which now Russia is using, consciously or not, against the United States.

The question is: Why make Russia an US enemy? After the US got bogged down in the Crusade (George W. Bush’s word), against Muslim “terrorists”, do we need to start a new Crusade against a re-born Christian Russia or an atheist China?  Some patriotic conservative Americans strongly disagree. Patrick Buchanan, a genuine conservative, Reaganite, one-time presidential candidate and publisher of The American Conservative, was brave to ask: “Is Putin One of Us?”[10] While striving to plant color revolutions in other countries, the Neocons may well have undermined the unity of the United States.

It’s is a high time that the USA and Russia put their intellectual resources together and start fighting together against the virus of Ebola and other disease, against the Islamic and all other terrorist violence, and against the indignity of inequality and poverty that plague much of the world, including the United States, Ukraine and Russia.

W George Krasnow (Vladislav Krasnov), Ph.D., is former professor at the Monterey Institute of International Studies and president of Russia & America Goodwill Association (www.RAGA.org).

[1] See the discussion of The Reversal of Fortune by Martin Sieff, including my contribution, W. George Krasnow,  Napoleon, the Neocons and New Russia: A View from Moscow http://us-russia.org/95-reversal-of-fortune-how-the-united-states-is-repeating-the-mistakes-that-destroyed-the-soviet-union-by-martin-sieff.html

[2] http://www.amazon.ca/Stepping-Out-Line-Nonconformist-Russian-American/dp/1481270060

[3] http://www.amazon.com/Russia-Beyond-Communism-Chronicle-Contemporary/dp/0813383617#

[4] http://www.thenation.com/blog/178293/not-so-secret-ukraine-phone-call

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strategy_for_Securing_the_Realm

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

[7] http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/10/13/age-vulnerability/

[8] See my two articles under the name of W. George Krasnow, published by Johnson Russia List. Would Harvard Ever Help Russia? March 10, 2006; and Did Shock Therapy Help Russia?

[9] See Henry Giroux’s book Neoliberalism’s War Against Higher Education, Haymarket Press, 2014, and his interview  http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/26885-henry-giroux-on-the-rise-of-neoliberalism

[10] http://buchanan.org/blog/putin-one-us-6071

The post The Folly Of The New Cold War – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

For the aggressive behavior and provocative policies of an emerging nuclear so-called responsible state, it is worth noting in the current milieu. The existing elected government or more precisely BJP’s aggressive military posture concerns both China and Pakistan. It has been observed at the time of formulation of Indian foreign policy that the new Prime Minister, Narendra Modi is focusing the economy and many domestic issues along with re-formulizing its international relations; especially with the US regarding Indo-US Nuclear Deal, China and Japan and its unsettled relations with its western neighbor Pakistan.

There were some changes anticipated in the manifesto of BJP, it was proposed to expand its ‘web of allies’ and that it would adopt the policy of ‘zero tolerance’ on terrorism. Another blazing agenda on the manifesto was regarding its pledge to reconsider the nuclear doctrine of ‘no first use,’ which has actually sparked the storm all around.

Gravely, the border violations are once again on the screens and discussion forums around the globe. Albeit these border skirmishes transpire more or less rather frequently in spite of 2003 cease-fire agreement. Incidentally, the 2003 cease-fire agreement among India and Pakistan has been continuously and blatantly violated from the past few years. The Line of Control (LoC) and the Working Boundary (WB) between two nuclear armed states; India Pakistan is under tense spike and is subject of disobedience of the preceding agreements in this regard. A rapid and swift escalation of violence, stronger than the usual posturing from both governments and a departure from the usual methods of resolution are what sets the current conflict apart.’

It is worth mentioning here that the nature of confrontation has been changing on either side. Even though the unfortunate cases of cross border attacks is a time in and time out practice followed by Indian army that is, of course retaliated by Pakistan but the state of affairs regarding the strategy adopted by India this time, is pretty different. The hardliner BJP’s leader should be accredited fully, who proved himself the same, as that of BJP’s (formerly) perceived course of actions toward Pakistan notwithstanding to his pre-election campaign that pretended to restore firm ties with Pakistan.

The on-going tension at the LoC and Working Boundary actually, defines the future intentions of the newly elected democratic government. More specifically, it’s been transformed in the way Modi wants to shape its foreign policy towards Pakistan and vis-a-vis the region. The contemporary scenario in this regard, is stimulating a challenge to South Asian security that is already under huge stress due to the likely post-2014 emerging strategic environment. Indubitably, the destabilizing incident, not only deteriorate bilateral relations among both nations but also exacerbate regional stability along with the stronger intentions of re-shaping their military postures.

The eastern border has been a subject of testing field of India and Pakistan’s bilateral relation. It is truly acknowledged by the Indian policy makers and political analysts, that PM Nawaz Shareef approached India with a hand of friendship, but in contrast, the now and again aggressive statements by the Indian PM, doesn’t signals optimistic across the LoC. The episode of bullets and blood stormed off all the expectations at both sides of the border. Regretfully, the efforts of formulizing a diplomatic arrangement turned out to be worthless, for which a heavy attendance was ensured on the (so-called) invitation of Indian PM’s grand reception.

Adding to what, by now mentioned; the cancellation of peace talk’s in this regard added fuel to the fire, India would go with its cynical intentions whether these talks would have been proceeded as per scheduled or not. Leaving either parts’ accusation / argumentation aside, the recent episode of border firing and other provocations in the first year of new India political establishment, at the same time, in the last quarter of 2014 (where South Asia in post-2014 is subject to several regional and global challenges) is perceived internationally, that these acts are actually molding Indian foreign policy and political approach towards the gradual (intended) escalation of Indian military posture instead of normalizing its relations with Pakistan.

Nevertheless, Pakistan’s stance is quite clear by the response of Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Asif to his Indian counterpart Arun Jaitley’s warning that Indian forces would render any “adventurism” by Pakistan “unaffordable,” said that Islamabad has the ability to respond to Indian aggression, followed by what could be perceived as a veiled threat. Moreover, he said that we do not want the situation on the borders of two nuclear neighbors to escalate into confrontation. Nevertheless, the response from Pakistani military would must deter and restrict India from taking such provocative actions next time esp. the killing of innocent civilian.

The above could be assessed as a major step-in to bring change in Indian nuclear doctrine of ‘no first use’ as well since to re-consider the doctrine is on the manifesto of BJP’s potential political scheduling. No matter to what extent these states opt for economic and trade reforms, stability at the unofficial boundaries; LoC and the working boundary is of utmost importance for a real and long term peace. Evidently, early gestures and responses from both countries raised the expectations for a fresh start of India Pakistan relations but unfortunately due to the inherent nature, India neither kept the expectations up to the mark nor able to replace the image of Narendra Modi from a hardliner with an image of a neutral and rational leader. Albeit the efforts to fathom fragility in between India and Pakistan is not that much but still if any side wants to abate this cross-border bloody fireworks, the need of hour would be to fill the communication and understanding gaps among both.

The post Blazing Barometer (LoC) In India-Pakistan Relations – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Theodoros Papadopoulos*

While it is tempting to dismiss Greece’s economic failures with a wave of the hand and a curt catchphrase blaming their supposed profligacy and laziness for leading the country down the rabbit hole, there is a far more universal thread to the country’s woes: the creeping erosion of its justice system. Whether through understaffing or through repeated attacks on its independence, the judiciary is the perfect frame to assess Greece’s muddling political evolution.

Earlier this month, reports surfaced that pointed to the gross shortage of judges and other court related personnel in the country. Just 2800 of the 5000 assigned positions for judicial employees are currently filled and a call for much needed 50 new judges has been halted. Ignoring pressing calls for reform from the European Commission, Greece still clings to its 19th-century penal code, based on the grossly outdated Bavarian Law Code. Excessive delays and red tape, significant backlogs, and suboptimal guarantees of due process, have all made the Greek judiciary one of the slowest and unreliable in the world. Contractual disputes take an average of 1580 days (more than four years) to solve in a court of law, earning Greece a dismal 155th place among the 189 countries listed in the World Bank’s Doing Business rankings. It’s no wonder international investors shy away from placing capital in the embattled Mediterranean country.

But why have these failings remained unaddressed? Knowing full well that the country’s salvation depends solely on its ability to navigate unaided the muddy waters of the global economy, why hasn’t the political elite doubled up efforts to reform its almost obsolete justice system?

In fact, the snail-like sluggishness of the Greek judicial system gives grist to the mill for high-placed individuals, one of the prime reasons for keeping the current order intact. Thanks to byzantine regulations, ministers enjoy a special statute of limitations – after two legislative sessions, they are protected from investigations into their previous actions in government. Even when these cases do manage to find their way to court, laws are not enforced equally in Greece. Officials enjoy immunity from prosecution, removable only with the backing of the majority of Parliament, a rather unlikely occurance. For example, out of 89 felony cases brought against ministers between June 2012 and May 2014, only once was immunity lifted.

In a damning speech given before Parliament, the country’s public administration watchdog, Leandros Rakintzis, bemoaned the double legal standards enabled by the country’s legislature which have made certain prominent Greeks recipients of “special treatment” by way of tailored amendments to existing laws or fraudulent judicial rulings. Refusing to name culprits, the official singled out “certain” figures accused of financial crimes, adding that the courts had been “inadequate” in imposing the law in such cases. On a related note, Vassiliki Thanou-Christofilou, the head of the Association of Judges and Public Prosecutors, echoed Rakintzis’ statements, denouncing the low or even inexistent enforcement of judicial decisions by the authorities supposed to execute them. It appears that when it comes to the upper echelons of power, judges’ decisions are left in legal limbo, published yet unenforced, thus calling into question the entire Greek judicial framework.

Unfortunately, this shabby state of affairs is no longer the exclusive refuge of politicians, but has trickled down to the business elite. Diaploki, the term given by Greeks to the system of crony capitalism, involves the intertwining interests of politicians, oligarchs and other representatives of the state, and has all too quickly become a household name.

Evangelos Marinakis, a venal football club owner that has skirted justice ever since his involvement in a massive match fixing scandal back in 2010, is now rumored to be on a shortlist to become the country’ future president. He has been making headlines recently in European media for his involvement in the Koriopolis match fixing affair. Another perfect illustration of diaploki, this scandal involved more than 70 football federation officials, referees, players, club owners, bookies, police officers, charged with putting together a criminal organization with links in seven countries.

While the charges against Marinakis were backed up by telephone conversations recorded by the Greek National Intelligence Service, he has so far successfully evaded justice, helped by the slow speed of the judiciary and endless procedural changes. Going from postponement to postponement, the case against Marinakis was supposed to come to an end in September, when he was slated to appear before the Court. Sadly, a few days before his trial date, the lead prosecutor in charge of the case was unexpectedly removed from his position, effectively putting the case once more on the back burner. In spite of the weighty criminal charges hanging above his head, this year Marinakis won a seat as local councilman in his home city of Piraeus. His club’s former spokesman was elected mayor.

This is exactly how the diaploki system plays out in Greece.

The Marinakis case is merely one of the symptoms of the hypocrisy amongst the Greek ruling elite. Unable to reform itself from within due to its inherent vulnerabilities, it has relied instead on constantly fanning the flames of anti-European feeling by blaming the country’s woes on the so-called German diktat of the bailout troika. At the same time, hidden from the eye of the Greek taxpayer, a complex system of haves and have-nots was put in place with the blessing of the government.

Beyond financial and economic reform, Athens needs most of all to revamp its entire legal framework from the ground up. Otherwise, even if Greece is one of the hardest working nations in the world, only an opaque clique of oligarchs and political elite will reap in the profits.

Theodoros Papadopoulos is a consultant and researcher based out of London, specialized in the institutional evolutions of Eastern Europe and Africa.

The post Greece’s Disappearing Justice System – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Paula Gomes Moreira

On October 26, important elections were held in four young democracies around the world, including Tunisia, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Brazil. It would also seem that Samuel Huntington’s “third wave” of democracy is still spreading and increasingly winning new fans of this type of political regime. The Chinese government, for example, has dealt with a series of demonstrations in recent weeks, led by youth Hong Kong activists demanding long-promised political reforms like the direct election of their Chief Executive and universal suffrage of the type typically seen in democratic regimes around the world.

Both of these political achievements have already been consolidated in Brazil, which just recorded one of the most hotly contested elections in its democratic history. On one side this looks like progress in terms of democratic choice, but on the other it actually represents a small step back in terms of representation; more specifically, in women’s political positions in government. While Latin American countries account for an ever-increasing share of women in leading political positions– such as Bolivia, which currently has 48% of its parliament seats occupied by women representatives – female participation remained lower in Brazil’s recent election, though female candidates did win positions in the legislative and executive branches. In the case of the federal government, the situation is even more pronounced given the fact that there was only one woman elected governor in the whole country.

Uruguay, meanwhile, is also looking back on the various progressive policies implemented during the government of José Mujica (2010-2014). The two main candidates chosen by the people to compete in the second round of elections, respectively, the government candidate, José Tabaré Vazquez, from Frente Amplio (FA) and Luis Lacalle Pou, from the Partido Nacional (National Party), have been very restrained when asked about measures adopted by the outgoing president, such as the recent decriminalization of abortion and the legalizing measures on marijuana cultivation and selling. The former president, however, will not leave the government completely, because he was elected to one of the Senate’s chairs, showing the population’s compliance with measures adopted during his five years at the executive headquarters in Montevideo, the Estévez Palace. The popularity of his government will be proven during the second round of voting if Vasquez wins.

The same cannot be said in the case of Ukraine, due to the fact that these parliamentary elections represent what seems to be a national consensus on a lasting break with Moscow and greater integration with the European Union (EU). The Ukrainian Communist Party (UCP), the largest remnant of the Soviet past of the country, did not even win one seat in parliament.

The youngest of all democracies is Tunisia. After approving a new constitution in January 2014, officials called for new elections. Parliamentary elections were polarized by the dispute between the former modernist prime minister (February-December 2011) Beji Caid el Sebsi’s Call of Tunisia Party and the Islamist Ennahda Party. One troubling aspect of these elections was the extremely low turnout from youth voters.

So, in recent days we have witnessed a series of elections in different parts of the globe. The first, in Tunisia, can be considered a legacy of past springs. Then there are Brazil and Uruguay, at their consolidation phase, if we evoke Huntington’s thought, and finally, Ukraine, at the edge of Eastern Europe, a region that inspired many of the regime transitions after the end of the Cold War.

This article was first published at Geopolitical Monitor.com.

The post A Big Week For Young Democracies – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Mohsen Pak-Aein

The trip by the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Dr. Hassan Rouhani to the Republic of Azerbaijan can be considered as an effort to open a new chapter in the two countries’ relations. Iran is one of the southern neighbors of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The two countries have 618 km of common border in addition to a host of historical, religious, cultural and even language commonalities. Moreover, membership of both countries in such regional organizations as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) is considered as a major factor that brings these two neighboring countries closer together. The Republic of Azerbaijan is the entry gate to the South Caucasus region and draws more attention from Iran than other countries in that region.

Following its independence from the former Soviet Union, Azerbaijan has based its foreign policy approach on bilateral cooperation and partnership, promotion of peace and stability, mutual understanding, and respect for other countries’ sovereign rights, and can, therefore, be a good regional partner for Iran. The Islamic Republic, on the other hand, enjoys a very sensitive and important strategic position and is a country that connects Central Asia and Caucasus to free waters of the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman. Due to its extraordinary capacity for transit of energy and in view of its chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the Islamic Republic of Iran can play an effective role in depicting future security and economic outlook of the region. Iran is also an effective element and a “regional player,” whose national security is intermingled with that of other regional countries and, therefore, cannot remain indifferent to security-based conflicts around it.

With regard to transit and transportation, Iran is a corridor connecting the Republic of Azerbaijan to free waters of the Persian Gulf. Therefore, the governments in both countries have been putting emphasis on the need to speed up construction of the Iranian railroad which will connect the cities of Qazvin, Rasht and Astara on the Iranian side before entering the Republic of Azerbaijan. The railroad will also provide an opportunity for both sides to work toward completion of the North-South Corridor, which will, in turn, connect the regional states to Europe via the Caspian Sea. Political experts believe that relations between countries take shape and are consolidated only when their high-ranking officials, especially their heads of state, have adequate political will to move in the direction of further expansion of relations. Naturally, in the absence of such a determination, no two countries would be able to boost their cooperation in other economic and cultural fields.

Existing evidence shows that at present, the presidents of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan have the political resolve to bolster bilateral relations. As a result, both Tehran and Baku are faced with a suitable opportunity as a result of this trip to further strengthen their ties. The constructive meeting between presidents of the two countries on the sidelines of the 44th Summit of the World Economic Forum in the Swiss city of Davos; a visit to Tehran by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev in April 2014; holding sessions of the two countries’ joint economic cooperation commission during the current year; and exchange of high-ranking delegations are among the positive signs, which attest to both countries’ resolve to promote bilateral relations.

At the same time, one of the main achievements of the eleventh Iranian administration has been strengthening of the country’s relations with all its neighbors. At present, the Iranian administration has adopted a principled policy to international relations and in doing so, has been able to gain a suitable standing in the world of politics. In fact, the logical foreign policy approach taken by the administration of President Hassan Rouhani has proven very beneficial to the country and its positive impact is quite evident in expansion of Iran’s relations with the neighboring states.

Of course, the efforts made by those elements that seek tension in relations between the Islamic Republic and the Republic of Azerbaijan should not be taken lightly. Outside Azerbaijan, there are certain parties, including Israel, that are not willing to see cordial relations between Tehran and Baku. Inside the Republic of Azerbaijan there are also certain groups, which sometimes out of pure ignorance, seek to disrupt close relations between Iran and Azerbaijan. Therefore, vigilance of both countries’ officials can serve to foil the plots hatched by such elements.

It seems that the road map formulated for future relations between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan is an advanced plan, which has been given priority by both countries’ officials and can create new capacities for further expansion of relations between the two neighbors.

All told, the ongoing visit by Dr. Rouhani to the Republic of Azerbaijan can be considered as a long stride toward the establishment of close ties and expansion of positive interaction between Tehran and Baku. There is no doubt about the fact that empathy and cooperation are the main factors that cement friendly ties among countries and help them have secure and peaceful relations. Friendship is a precious gem, which cannot be easily ignored and no country can be indifferent in this regard and should find ways to maintain it. It should be noted that achievement of lasting friendship is only possible through suitable planning and innovation, and new initiatives, which will make it possible for countries to meet their national interests in light of friendship.

As an expert, I believe that due to their commonalities and existing capacities, both Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan can be good allies for each other in the region. From this viewpoint, the visit to Baku by Iran’s President Rouhani in addition to long-term plans worked out by Iran for the strengthening of relations with the Republic of Azerbaijan will be harbinger of permanent cordiality between the two neighboring nations.

Mohsen Pak-Aein
Iran’s Ambassador to Republic of Azerbaijan

Source: Iran Newspaper
http://iran-newspaper.com/
Translated By: Iran Review.Org

The post Rohani’s Baku Visit, Harbinger Of Permanent Friendship – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

KAFR KANNA, a village near Nazareth, is probably the place where Jesus – according to the New Testament – turned water into wine. Now it is the Arab village where the Israeli police is turning stones into blood.

On the fateful day, the police was confronting a group of young Arabs protesting against the Israeli efforts to change the status quo on the Temple Mount (known to Muslims as “the Noble Sanctuary”). Such demonstrations were taking place that day in many Arab towns and villages all over Israel, and especially in occupied East Jerusalem.

According to the first police statement, the 22-year old Arab, Kheir a-Din Hamdan, attacked the police with a knife. In self defense, they had no choice but to shoot and kill him.

As so often with police reports, this was a pack of lies.

UNFORTUNATELY (for the police), the incident was recorded by security cameras. The pictures clearly showed Hamdan approaching a police car and beating on its windows with something, possibly a knife. When he saw that this had no effect, Hamdan turned around and started to walk away.

At that moment, the policemen got out of the car and immediately started to shoot at the back of Hamdan, who was hit and fell to the ground. The officers surrounded him and, after some hesitation, obviously a consultation between them, started to drag the wounded youngster on the ground towards the patrol car, as if he were a sack of potatoes. They dumped him on the floor of the car and drove away (to a hospital, it appears), with their feet on or near the dying man.

The pictures show clearly, for everyone to see, that the policemen violated the standing police orders for opening fire: they were in no immediate mortal danger, they did not shout a warning, they did not shoot first in the air, they did not aim at the lower part of his body. They did not call an ambulance. The youngster bled to death. It was a cold-blooded execution.

There was an outcry. Arab citizens rioted in many places. Under pressure, the Police Investigation board (which belongs to the Ministry of Justice) started an investigation. The first investigation already uncovered several facts which put an even more severe face on the incident.

It appeared that before the cameras caught the scene, the police had arrested Hamdan’s cousin and put him into the car. Obviously, Kheir a-Din wanted to release the cousin and therefore beat on the car. The cousin saw him being shot and dumped on the floor of the car in which he was sitting.

The first reaction of the police command was to justify the behavior of the policemen, whose names and faces were withheld. They were spirited away to some other police unit.

I DESCRIBE the incident at length, not because it is unique but on the contrary – because it is so typical. What was special about it was only the unnoticed presence of the camera.

Several cabinet ministers lauded the exemplary behavior of the police in this incident. This can be dismissed as the publicity-hunting of extreme right-wing demagogues, who believe that their voters approve of all and any shooting of Arabs. They should know.

However, one statement cannot be ignored: the one made by the Minister of Home Security.

A few days before the incident, Minister Yitzhak Aharonowitz, a protégé of Avigdor Lieberman and himself a former police officer, declared publicly that he did not want any terrorist to survive after an attack.

That is a manifestly illegal statement. Indeed, it is a call for crimes. Under the law, policemen are not allowed to shoot “terrorists” or anybody else after they are taken prisoner, especially when they are wounded and do not present any “mortal danger”.

Aharonowitz always seems a nice guy. He has a knack of popping up before the cameras after every newsworthy incident – whether a severe road accident, a political crime or a fire. God knows how he manages that.

In actual fact, the Minister for Home Security (formerly known as Minister of Police) has practically no function. Since the days of the British Mandate, the commander of the police force has been the Inspector General, a uniformed professional officer. The sole police function of the minister is to recommend to the government the appointment of a new commander.

But for ordinary policemen, a statement by the minister sounds like an order. Quite probably, the irresponsible utterance of the minister was a direct incitement to the crime of Kafr Kanna. Especially since neither the Inspector General nor the Prime Minister denounced it.

All this reminds one of the fateful 1984 utterance of then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, who also declared that no terrorist should stay alive after an attack. The direct result was the “Bus Line 300″ affair, in which four Arab boys, without any weapons, hijacked an Israeli bus. They were stopped, two were shot during the recapture, and two were taken alive. One of them was murdered by the chief of the Shin Bet himself, Avraham Shalom, who crushed his skull with a rock. When the pictures were published (first by me), Shalom and his colleagues were pardoned. Shamir denied any responsibility.

BACK TO today’s events. Is this the long-awaited Third Intifada? Yes? No?

Army and police officers, politicians and especially media commentators are busy trying to answer this question. (Intifada means literally “shaking off”.)

This is not just a mere semantic game. The definition carries with it operational consequences.

As a matter of fact, the entire country is now aflame. East Jerusalem is already a war zone, with daily demonstrations, riots and bloodshed. In Israel proper, since the Kafr Kanna killing Arab citizens are also mounting daily strikes and demonstrations. In the West Bank, there were some demonstrations and a fatal stabbing, after which an Arab was shot and killed.

Mahmoud Abbas is doing everything in his power to prevent a general uprising, which might quite well endanger his regime. But pressure from below is mounting. Abbas refused to meet Netanyahu in Amman.

Popular wisdom in Israel has already found a name for the situation: “Intifada of Individuals”. For the Israeli security chiefs, that is a nightmare. They are ready for an organized Intifada. They know how to quash it by force, and, if necessary, by more force. But what to do with an Intifada which is entirely made by isolated individuals, with no orders from any organization, with no grouping that can be infiltrated by the collaborators of the Shin Bet net of informers?

An individual Arab listens to the news, is incensed by the latest outrage against the Holy Shrines and drives his car into the nearest group of Israeli soldiers or civilians. Or takes a knife from the kitchen of the Israeli restaurant where he washes the dishes and stabs people in the street. No prior information. No network to be infiltrated. Quite frustrating.

The center of the storm is the Temple Mount. The al-Aqsa (“far away”) Mosque, the third holiest place of Islam, is under siege. At one point, Israeli soldiers entered the mosque (with their boots on) in pursuit of stone-throwing demonstrators.

WHERE ARE we going?

For decades now, a group of Israeli zealots has been busy planning for a new Jewish Temple to be built in place of the al-Aqsa and the magnificent Dome of the Rock. They are stitching garments for priests and making the necessary preparations for animal sacrifices.

Until recently, they were considered simply a curiosity. Not anymore.

Several cabinet ministers and Knesset members have entered the holy enclosure to pray, contrary to the status quo. Throughout the Islamic world, this has aroused alarm. Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and in Israel proper are furious.

Netanyahu promised King Abdallah II to restore quiet. But he is doing the opposite.

Jesus turned water into wine. Netanyahu is turning water into gasoline and pouring it on the flames.

The post Wine, Blood And Gasoline – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

A well known phenomenon in the animal kingdom is that when taking over a new pride, a lion will sometimes kill all the cubs. We don’t know exactly what kind of feeling drives him in this bloody act, but there’s obviously a lack of attachment. Suffice it to say the problem can be summed up thus: it’s not his family.

America’s pride is falling. And few things illustrate this better than the open-borders mentality that has allowed foreigners to bring diseases — most notably Ebola but also EV-D68 and others — into our country.

There was a time when a threat such as Ebola would have inspired travel bans reflexively. Not today. In this enlightened age, Barack Obama and underlings such as CDC director Tom Frieden tell us, with a straight face, that such measures just wouldn’t work. They also claim that banning commercial flights would frustrate efforts to aid Ebola-affected nations and thus increase the long-term chances of an epidemic in the U.S.

Space constraints preclude me from exploring every detail of their argument, but the bottom line is that it’s fallacious. A travel ban combined with a policy of issuing no visas to citizens from affected nations, a prohibition against entry by any foreign national holding a passport with a stamp from one of them, and a mandatory quarantine for Americans returning from such countries absolutely would work. No, it wouldn’t reduce the chances of more Ebola cases reaching our shores to zero, but such a requirement is unreasonable. We can’t eliminate all murder, but we still see fit to minimize it by having necessary laws, police and a criminal-justice system.

As for aid, it goes without saying that medical professionals and other emergency workers would be granted travel clearance and that charter and military planes could ferry them where they needed to go. Moreover, we’ve isolated Americans who contracted Ebola, and no one claims it prevented us from giving them sufficient treatment.

In fact, the arguments against common sense and the common good are so obviously flawed that it’s clear they are not reasons, but rationalizations. So what really explains our leaders’ common senselessness? National Review’s Mark Krikorian put it well last month:

Much of our political class is simply uncomfortable with the idea that border and immigration controls should be used vigorously and unapologetically to protect Americans. You can hear the objections now: It would be xenophobic, it might stigmatize West Africans, those countries will object to our State Department that they’re being discriminated against.

This is what it boils down to. And there’s a reason why people such as Barack Obama don’t believe in using immigration controls “vigorously and unapologetically to protect Americans.”

People such as Obama are not American.

This has nothing to do with theories about where Obama was born; as Thomas Sowell recently pointed out, native American Benedict Arnold is one of our most infamous traitors, while people born overseas have sometimes risked their necks to defend America. Nor does it even just concern Obama, as the phenomenon in question is exhibited by millions. What it has to do with is attitude.

This brings me to an October Forbes article by evolutionary biologist J.V. Chamary in which he inveighs against travel bans, calling the desire for them understandable but “selfish.” Born in France to parents from Mauritius and now living in the U.K., Chamary is the epitome of the attitude in question; he’s an internationalist, a philanderer of nations and a citizen of the world. And the thinking goes like this: we’re all just people, whether in Sacramento or Sierra Leone, Livermore or Liberia. Why should “my” country’s needs be elevated above another’s? This is the “intellectual” point of view, the conclusion someone arrives at upon thinking deeply and recognizing the truth of George Bernard Shaw’s statement, “Patriotism is the belief your country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.”

Of course, it warrants noting that the affected West African nations have behaved just as “selfishly,” sometimes quarantining large areas within their borders to contain the Ebola. And neighboring African countries have been “selfish” enough to completely isolate the affected nations. We also might wonder how selfish it actually is if our concern is for others, our fellow Americans. But, no matter, Chamary has a point.

Not a good point — but a point.

Now let’s see if he actually believes it.

An easy way to find out is to ask: would you apply the same unselfish standard to your home? Would you temporarily house a couple of the people from affected nations who’ve been allowed to enter the U.S., thus exposing your children to them on a long-term basis?

When I briefly corresponded with Chamary and asked the above, his said it was a false dilemma that he was “unwilling to waste time addressing.” But it’s sufficiently analogous. Everything said about foreigners relative to Americans applies to outsiders relative to family members. We’re all just people; “undocumented family members” are children of God just like your documented family members. And what is God’s perspective (atheists can view this as a thought exercise), which is the highest perspective? He doesn’t gaze upon our blue orb and deem the Smiths more important than the Johnsons. Why, we could even say that “family patriotism is the belief your family should be prioritized over all other families because you were born in it,” couldn’t we, Mr. Barack Bernard Chamary? So why subordinate outsiders’ needs to your family’s?

This analogy is especially apt because a nation is an extension of the tribe, which in turn is an extension of the family. Yet it’s safe to say that Chamary, Obama and their fellow travelers would not endanger their families as they have the country. Why the different standards?

I suggest that their “enlightened,” citizen-of-the-world perspective isn’t the fruits of intellectualism at all, but is merely what feels right. The difference is that they’re emotionally attached to their families.

They’re not emotionally attached to America.

This is for a simple reason.

America is not their family.

Their pride lies elsewhere

Such people are not just internationalists; they sometimes feel more of a kinship with foreign nations than the one whose passport they happen to carry. And in the case of Obama, the antipathy for his passport place is so profound that he aims to eat the cubs. Or, at least, replace them via immigration.

This is why, even though a nation without secure borders is like a house without walls, Obama will keep his walls and open our borders. For some Americans this will mean death from disease and at the hands of illegal-alien criminals, but Obama doesn’t care. Lions, even cowardly ones, do what they do. And we’re not his family.

The post Welcome To EbolaCare — Dut The Website Is Down – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Furkan Zengin

The division of the government, with Democratic control of the Presidency and Republican control of the Congress, seems likely to make Obama’s job a bit more difficult. Here, it already seems apparent that the very first clash between Obama and the new Congress will be on immigration.

Increased tensions between the two sides of the government have been seen after it was reported that Obama will unveil a comprehensive overhaul of the current immigration enforcement system, allowing certain illegal immigrants who are settled in the U.S. temporary permission to stay and the chance to acquire work permits. Despite fierce opposition in the already Republican-held House, Obama announced on June 30 that “America cannot wait forever for [Congress] to act, and that’s why today, I’m beginning a new effort to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress”.

Currently, Obama’s intention to act unilaterally on immigration raises a pertinent question: if Obama were to act without Congress would he prompt the Republicans to once again shut down the government before the conclusion of the current budget cycle?

Republicans and some Democrats have not supported the possibility that Obama would use executive action without congressional approval. Nevertheless, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who is one of the important Democratic leaders in the Senate, has expressed his support for Obama, saying, “The president should use the authority he has to try to make sure the law is enforced fairly and justly – to protect this country and be sensitive to the real-life struggles these families are facing.”

According to many high-ranking Republican leaders, the Grand Old Party (GOP) will not attempt to shut-down the government. Senator Mitch McConnell (R), who is preparing to become senate majority leader in January, explicitly stated that the shutdown in 2013 politically damaged his party, therefore it would be disadvantageous to do so again. In this regard, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R) was quoted as saying, “I do not want a shutdown. You should not take a hostage that you cannot shoot.”

The post Immigration First Cleavage Between Obama And Republicans After Midterm Elections – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Dr. S. Chandrasekharan

In reply to a question by the opposition MP Ahmed Nashid whether joining the Chinese initiative of Maritime Silk Route would adversely affect the relations with the neighbouring countries, the Foreign Minister Dunya said that Maldives, as an independent and sovereign nation, is not obliged to consult other countries before making foreign policy.

This reply was to a specific point raised by the opposition whether Indian geopolitical interests would be threatened if Chinese naval activity is conducted in a Maldivian port. Dunya also added that the interest of any foreign country should not take precedence over Maldivian national interest.

At one level one cannot take exception to the remarks of Dunya that the foreign policy of Maldives should be conducted in its best national interests, but should it not be balanced when the strategic interests of a close neighbouring country are adversely affected?

This question may be theoretical now but the increasing Chinese strategic moves close to the Indian shores raise many issues which need to be carefully thought out by the planners in Delhi.

The 1988 Invasion:

This brings me to the question of the incident that happened twenty six years ago when the very existence of Maldives was threatened by a group of fool hardy Maldivian individuals with an armed group of Tamil militants.

On November 3, 1988, a small group of Maldivian dissidents led by Abdulla Luthfy with about eighty militants of PLOTE landed in Male and attacked the presidential palace and other nearby official buildings. It is said that Luthfy had promised the leader of the PLOTE Group Uma Maheswaran that the group would be given one or two uninhabited islands on a permanent basis for training and recruitment purposes.

The attacks were badly planned and the attackers had no clear idea or plans to move to the next phase once the initial tasks were completed. Added to this was the fatal mistake made by the attackers in not securing the airport situated close to the capital of Male in another island (Hulhule) as also the Tele communication facilities that connected Male to outside world from where help could be sought. No attempt was made either to arouse the population in support of the attackers either, though there was some simmering discontent against the regime perceived to be autocratic.

The attack was therefore doomed ab. initio.

The security forces in Male that were not large enough, did manage to keep the militants at bay and did not allow them to go beyond a few buildings close to the harbour. But they could not overwhelm the rag tag group of attackers either.

Indian Help

India promptly sent an expeditionary force that reached Male the same evening. When the militants saw the Indian forces landing, they hijacked a docked ship in the harbour and tried to escape. All of them were eventually caught in the mid sea and handed over to the Maldivian authorities.

Indian help came in handy and quickly with sufficient forces. It was spontaneous there was no wait for any ‘formal Request’. Thus neighbours could be useful too.

Victory Day:

Every year, November 3 is celebrated as a “victory day” in memory of the incident and 19 people that included members of the security forces and the civilians who were killed. In a sense, this incident was perhaps the only one in the history of Maldives that threatened the very survival of the nation.

This year President Yameen in his victory day greetings called on the Maldivians to work together to foster the spirit of cooperation and defend the country’s sovereignty. He noted that Maldives, its security forces and its people emerged victorious on that day and offered his gratitude and praise to the brave soldiers and members of the public “who fought for the independence, sovereignty and security” of the country.

Not to be outdone, the former coalition and chief of Jumhoree who is now seen to be “tamed” and “muzzled” ( Recall his foolish attempt to get the Speaker’s post) declared that the people of Maldives displayed unity and harmony even when the enemies surrounded them!

There was no mention of the Indian support without which the crisis would have dragged on with adverse consequences to life, property and the very foundation and survival of the country. This is unfortunate.

Political Twist:

It is unfortunate too that the incident is now being given a political twist with one of the leading members of the then foreign policy establishment and now a senior adviser of the opposition – MDP, Ibrahim Hussein Zaki is being accused of being a conspirator.

Haveeru on line in a three page report has accused Zaki of having prior knowledge even three months before the attack. He is also being accused of having given out the schedule of President Gayoom that indicated that he will be out of the country on the day of assault.

The cases against Luthfy and his associate Sikka Ahmad Ismail Manik were thoroughly investigated as well as those against all the militants who participated in the attack. The question of Zaki of having been associated in a conspiracy never came up all these years.

In fact, if I remember correct, it was Zaki who telephoned the Indian High Commissioner who was away in Delhi on a holiday of the need for Indian help. To accuse him now of having prior knowledge is not only unfounded but spiteful. In fact he should have been rewarded for his initiative.

Lessons for India:

It is granted that there could be no permanent friendships. But India should be able to distinguish between long term friends who will never go against Indian interests than go to support others for short term gains.

The case of enthusiastic endorsement and the embrace of the new regime after the illegitimate coup in Maldives earlier is a case in point. I am reminded of the famous words of late Professor Raj Bahak of Nepal who in describing Indo Nepal relations, said that “India is harmless to enemies and useless to friends.”

The post Maldives: Its Size, Strategic Importance And Vulnerability – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Matthew Hilburn

Sweden says it can confirm a submarine violated its territorial waters near Stockholm in October.

“There is no doubt, we have excluded all other explanations. Swedish territory has been seriously and unacceptably violated by a foreign power,” said Supreme Commander Sverker Göranson in a statement.

The statement did not disclose the nationality of the submarine, but it is widely believed to have been Russian, a theory that was fueled by local news reports that Swedish military intelligence intercepted radio signals off the coast of Sweden to Kaliningrad, home to much of Russia’s Baltic fleet, and that they were transmitted on a special emergency frequency.

Russia denied one of its vessels was involved.

The hunt for the submarine, which was first spotted on Oct. 17, was the biggest mobilization of Swedish military forces since the Cold War, and included 200 men, stealth ships, minesweepers and helicopters. The search lasted a week.

Swedish military officials called the evidence they collected highly credible, and included a photo of an object taken by a “member of the public” that showed an object moving at a speed of 1 knot. The photo, they said, showed a spray of water characteristic of submarine movement.

Another civilian observed “an underwater body with distinctive features,” the statement said.

Swedish armed forces also collected data that they said generated a pattern confirming “a foreign power has violated Swedish territorial integrity.”

“The gravity of this is obvious,” said Göranson.

Sweden’s prime minister, Stefan Lofven, was quoted by The Associated Press calling the incursion “totally unacceptable.”

Richard Kauzlarich, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, said the revelation was not surprising given the pattern of “aggressive” Russian military actions, but he did say those actions could end up costing Moscow.

“The risk to Moscow however is twofold: first, the unannounced incursions could result in an accident involving civilian aircraft or shipping,” he said. “Second, rather than dividing the NATO allies and non-NATO states like Sweden, it actually brings them closer together.”

The disclosure by Sweden, which is not a NATO member, comes amid rising tensions in the Baltic region over Russian military incursions.

Earlier this week, the European Leadership Network (ELN), a London-based think tank, issued a report saying Russia’s provocative actions in the Baltic region were at Cold War levels.

NATO said they have tallied over 100 separate incidents this year in which NATO jets have been scrambled to intercept Russian planes, more than three times as many as last year.

The post Sweden Confirms Submarine Presence appeared first on Eurasia Review.

A team of scientists specializing in cave biodiversity from the South China Agricultural University (Guangzhou) unearthed a treasure trove of rare blind cave beetles. The description of seven new species of underground Trechinae beetles, published in the open access journal ZooKeys, attests for the Du’an karst as the most diverse area for these cave dwellers in China.

“China is becoming more and more fascinating for those who study cave biodiversity, because it holds some of the most morphologically adapted cavernicolous animals in the world. This is specifically true for fishes and the threchine beetles, the second of which is also the group featured in this study,” explains the senior author of the study Prof. Mingyi Tian.

Like most cavernicolous species, Trechinae cave beetles shows a number of specific adaptations, such as lack of eyes and colour, which are traits common among cave dwellers.

The new Trechinae beetles belong to the genus Dongodytes whose members are easily recognizable by their extraordinary slender and very elongated body. Members of this genus are usually very rare in caves, with only five species reported from China before now.

During the recent study of the cave systems in Du’an karst however this numbers drastically changed, Out of the 48 visited caves 12 held populations of trechine beetles. A total of 103 samples were collected, out of which the team of scientists determined ten different species, seven of which are new to science.

“This new discovery casts a new light on the importance of the Du’an Karst as a biological hotspot for cavernicolous Trechinae in China,” adds Prof. Mingyi Tian.

The post Kingdom Of Cave Beetles Found In Southern China appeared first on Eurasia Review.

After the Boston Marathon bombings, more than 100 people were treated for trauma affecting the ears and hearing–with many having persistent or worsening hearing loss or other symptoms, reports a study in the December issue of Otology & Neurotology.

Dr. Aaron Remenschneider and principal investigator Dr. Alicia Quesnel of Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary led a Boston-wide collaboration that reviewed the experience with otologic injuries caused by the 2013 attack, including follow-up evaluation of hearing and related outcomes. The researchers conclude, “Blast-related otologic injuries constitute a major source of morbidity following the Boston Marathon bombings.”

Ruptured Eardrum and Other Injuries after Marathon Bombings

The study assembles data from eight hospitals that provided care for patients with otologic (ear- and hearing-related) trauma caused by two bomb explosions near the finish line of the 2013 Boston Marathon. “Acute otologic trauma following the dual blasts was immediately apparent,” Dr Remenschneider and coauthors write. “However, the extensiveness was not appreciated until the days and weeks that followed.”

The study included 94 of the more than 100 patients evaluated at Boston area hospitals and clinics (Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston Medical Center, Tufts Medical Center, and Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates) after the blasts. Only seven percent of patients had any hearing-related symptoms before the attack.

Most of the patients sustained primary blast injury known as barotrauma. The most common type of otologic injury was tympanic membrane perforation, which is a ruptured eardrum. Forty-eight patients had tympanic membrane perforations, with 14 patients having perforations in both ears. Overall, 90 percent of patients hospitalized for other injuries had tympanic membrane perforations on examination.

Rates of perforations were nearly three times higher for patients who had other significant injuries related to the bombings, and for those who were closer to the blast. In 38 percent of cases, the perforations healed spontaneously. Patients with larger ruptures required surgical repair, which had a high rate of success (86 percent).

One Year Later, Many Have Persistent Hearing Loss

All patients expressed concern about hearing loss or tinnitus (ringing in the ears). On follow-up evaluation of 44 patients, 80 percent had reduced hearing and 68 percent had new or worsened tinnitus. Other symptoms included increased sensitivity to sound (hyperacusis) and dizziness or balance problems.

For many patients, hearing problems were still present–and sometimes still worsening–one year after the attacks. Many had difficulty hearing in noisy situations; others developed delayed problems with disequilibrium. In follow-up surveys, many patients had ongoing disability related to hearing loss, tinnitus, or dizziness.

Most of what is known about blast-related otologic injury comes from military studies; blast trauma to the ear is fortunately rare in civilian populations. The new study suggests that the impact of blast-related injury might be greater in civilians, perhaps because protective equipment normally worn by military personnel is absent in civilians.

The Boston Marathon experience suggests that otologic trauma can be a major source of immediate and lasting injury for victims of civilian bombing attacks. Dr Remenschneider and coauthors point out that many patients have “hidden hearing loss,” which may not be apparent on routine hearing tests. They emphasize the need for long-term follow-up assessments to ensure that patients receive appropriate testing and treatment for any resultant disabling symptoms.

The post High Rate Of Ear And Hearing Injuries After Boston Marathon Bombings appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Researchers at the University of Liverpool’s Institute of Infection and Global Health have found that screening for Ebola at airports could be an effective method for preventing the spread of the disease into the UK and US, but due to the long incubation period of the virus, screening won’t detect all cases.

Published in the Lancet medical journal, the study used a mathematical model to test the probability of infected travellers from West Africa entering the UK and US.

The team examined the current growth rate of the epidemic in West Africa alongside airline travel patterns to predict how many people with Ebola are likely to attempt to fly.

Approximately 29 cases

The research showed that approximately 29 Ebola infected people are expected to try and leave West Africa by the end of the year and 10 would be likely to display signs of the infection that could be picked up by airport screening.

Of the remaining 19 passengers only one or two would be expected to fly to the UK and up to three to the US. It is thought that one of these passengers would have developed virus symptoms by the time they arrive in the UK or USA.

Epidemiologist, Dr Jonathan Read, said, “We developed a mathematical model to consider how long people incubate the virus alongside how likely airline passengers are to be infected. “From this we were able to estimate that 10 of the 29 people likely to leave West Africa via airports this year would have symptoms of the disease and so could be detected at exit screening.”

Control measures

The model showed that one or two passengers may not be detected at screening, but that a single case in the UK or US would not lead to the situation in West Africa, due to better control measures in these countries.

Researchers highlighted, however, that the most effective way to restrict Ebola’s global spread is to control the disease at the source in West Africa.

Professor Tom Solomon, head of the Institute of Infection and Global Health, added: “This research shows that entry screening can reduce the overall chances of Ebola being brought into the UK, but that some infected passengers may still get through undetected.

“Even if we do see a case of Ebola that has not been detected at airport screening we have a good chance of stopping the spread of the infection.”

The post Study Predicts Likely Ebola Cases Entering UK And US Through Airport Screening appeared first on Eurasia Review.

(CORDIS) — Michelangelo’s famous Sistine Chapel ceiling paintings in the Vatican have been brought to life with innovative light emitting diode (LED) lighting. The new installation, developed by the EU-funded LED4ART project, enables visitors to better appreciate the paintings and frescos, protects the artwork from damage and uses significantly less electricity than conventional lighting rigs.

This demonstration installation shows how museums and galleries can install flexible and effective lighting solutions that are also incredibly energy efficient. By replacing the Sistine Chapel’s existing lighting system with the latest in LED technology, the project partners have been able to achieve electricity savings of up to 90 %.

LEDs based on inorganic semiconductors are incredibly efficient and offer a greener alternative to conventional lighting. They are mercury-free, have a long lifetime and could enable Europe to achieve significant energy savings if rolled out extensively.

By switching to LED lights, Europe could decrease carbon dioxide emissions from electric power use by up to 50 % in just over 20 years. Making the switch is therefore one of the most cost-effective and simple ways to tackle global warming using existing technology, resulting in a significant contribution to CO2 reduction at European level.

There was also of course an important conservation aspect to LED4ART. The project wanted to demonstrate how LED lighting can play an important role in the protection of artwork, as it is gentler than other forms of artificial light. At the same time, LED offers fantastic levels of illumination, ensuring that artwork can be fully appreciated by visitors.

This made the Vatican City’s Sistine Chapel the ideal venue for LED4ART. World-famous for its 15th century frescos by the likes of Botticelli and Perugino and Michelangelo’s ceiling masterpiece, the chapel receives millions of visitors every year. Ultraviolet light has been fading the colour of these 500-year old paintings for decades, so a practical solution was needed that would enable people to enjoy the paintings in a more protective environment.

The solution was to switch the chapel’s lighting from conventional bulbs to LED. The LED4ART project installed around 7 000 LEDs in the chapel, concealed beneath a ledge that runs the length of the room. The colour spectrum of each light was custom-made to ensure that the light emitted was as close as possible to natural light; there are no disproportionate blues or reds that might affect viewing.

The LED installation ensures that the artwork is uniformly illuminated, and that the frescos can be appreciated in their entirety. The flexibility of the installation means that each light can be adjusted to give the impression that the chapel is continuously bathed in natural light.

The success of this demonstration project should lead to further trials of LED lighting in other public venues and museums. LED4ART, which began in January 2012, is due to run until 31 December 2014. The project received EUR 867 000 in EU funding.

The post Lighting Solution That Rrotects Sistine Chapel Paintings appeared first on Eurasia Review.

EIA’s recently released November Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) projects that Brent crude prices will average $83/barrel in 2015, $18/barrel lower than last month’s outlook for 2015. STEO projects prices to remain in the $80 to $90 per barrel range next year, bottoming out under $82/barrel in the second quarter when balances are loosest and then increasing during the second half of 2015 to average $86/barrel in the fourth quarter.

Even with the downward revision to the STEO price forecast, second to fourth quarter 2015 oil price projections remain within the market-derived 95% confidence interval published in the September STEO before the recent fall in oil prices.

The lower price forecast in the November STEO reflects significant changes to the global oil balance. Compared to last month’s outlook, 2015 global liquid fuels demand in the November STEO declines by 200,000 barrels per day (bbl/d) to average 92.5 million bbl/d, reflecting a weaker global macroeconomic outlook. In the November STEO global production increases by 200,000 bbl/d to 92.9 million bbl/d in 2015, primarily due to a smaller forecast decline in Saudi production.

As previously discussed in TWIP, the combination of robust U.S. production growth, a return of disrupted Libyan production despite recent setbacks, weakening expectations for the global economy – particularly in China – and seasonally low refinery demand have weighed on oil prices. More recently, indications from Saudi Arabia that it will not operate as the unilateral global swing supplier have put further downward pressure on traders’ views of the market. Signs of willingness of other OPEC members to trim production have been scarce. Together, these conditions point to a much looser global supply/demand balance in 2015. However, actual price outcomes reflect a number of highly uncertain and inter-related factors, particularly OPEC production, global oil demand growth, and the responsiveness of marginal production – especially U.S. shale – to lower prices.

The market assessment of these factors is reflected in the wide market-derived confidence interval for crude oil prices implied by the value of futures and options contracts. Options written on West Texas Intermediate (WTI) futures contracts offer insight into market participants’s assessment of possible price movements. Note that the Brent options market is not sufficiently liquid to provide meaningful information on implied volatility beyond the prompt month. As of the five-day trading period ending November 6, implied volatility for the February 2015 WTI futures contract averaged 28%, resulting in a calculated 95-percent confidence interval of $63 to $99 per barrel.

Changes in the forecast of Saudi Arabian oil production are crucial to the revised outlook and a major source of uncertainty in the year ahead. Saudi Arabia has indicated interest in preserving market share rather than unilaterally carrying the burden of cutting production to balance the global oil market. In addition to numerous statements by high-level Saudi officials downplaying recent price declines, the Kingdom has maintained robust production past the peak summer domestic demand season, choosing to reduce the Official Selling Price (OSP) of its crude to maintain market share rather than scale back production to balance increasing supply from the United States and Libya.

Taken together, these actions send a message ahead of the November 27 OPEC meeting indicating that members cannot continue to expect Saudi Arabia to balance the market alone, providing at least the potential for shared OPEC production cuts while simultaneously shifting pressure onto marginal producers to cut production to accommodate increasing supply from elsewhere.

As a result, in the November STEO EIA has revised the forecast decline in 2015 Saudi production. Output is now expected to remain above 9 million bbl/d throughout 2015. While the STEO still expects Saudi Arabia to cut production from current levels, the outlook takes into account the Kingdom’s recent emphasis on maintaining market share. With some of the lowest-cost-per-barrel production in the world, and cash reserves approaching $1 trillion, Saudi Arabia is better positioned to withstand a lower oil price than other producers and can make up some of the lost revenue from lower prices by maintaining supply volumes.

With a looser supply/demand balance weighing on prices, STEO expects marginal producers will be unable to meet previous expectations for supply growth. The current price outlook does not support new development of the most expensive, marginal barrels such as Arctic, ultra-deep water, and some oil sands. However, given the long lead time and substantial investment required, these types of projects are unlikely to be affected within the 2015 STEO forecast period. The short timeframe between the start of drilling and first production from U.S. shale wells make them the first production likely to be impacted.

However, shale production costs have declined rapidly as techniques improve and infrastructure develops, and in a falling oil price environment drilling and completion costs will fall, making these wells cheaper to develop. Additionally, the most marginal, inefficient producers account for a disproportionally small volume of production. During the next several months, hedging, sunk cost calculations, and redeployment of rigs from more speculative plays to the most productive areas will mitigate much of the effect of lower prices. However, STEO expects that the impact from lower oil prices will increase as time passes, with the level of U.S. shale production in the fourth quarter of 2015 expected to be 100,000 bbl/d lower than forecast in last month’s STEO. Nevertheless, U.S. crude oil production is still expected to increase by 850,000 bbl/d in 2015 to average 9.4 million bbl/d.

Gasoline prices continue to decline, diesel fuel prices mostly up

The U.S. average price for regular gasoline fell five cents last week to $2.94 per gallon as of November 10, 2014, 25 cents less than a year ago, and the lowest average in nearly four years. The West Coast price led the decline, falling seven cents to $3.17 per gallon, followed by the Rocky Mountain price, which dropped six cents to $3.08 per gallon. The Gulf Coast and Midwest prices both decreased five cents, to $2.72 per gallon and $2.91 per gallon, respectively. The East Coast price dropped four cents to $2.95 per gallon.

U.S. average diesel fuel prices increased by five cents from the previous week to $3.68 per gallon, 16 cents less than the same time last year. The Midwest price increased 16 cents to $3.79 per gallon, while the Rocky Mountain price increased eight cents to $3.80 per gallon. The Gulf Coast price rose by three cents to $3.56 per gallon. The East Coast price fell by three cents to $3.57 per gallon, while the West Coast price was down one cent to $3.78 per gallon.

Residential heating oil price decreases while residential propane price is unchanged

As of November 10, 2014, residential heating oil prices averaged $3.42 per gallon, about 2 cents per gallon lower than last week, and nearly 40 cents less than last year’s price for the same week. Wholesale heating oil prices averaged almost $2.71 per gallon, nearly 1 cent per gallon more than last week and 28 cents lower when compared to the same time last year.

Residential propane prices were virtually unchanged from last week, holding at $2.40 per gallon, 8 cents less than the price at the same time last year. Wholesale propane prices averaged $1.02 per gallon, nearly 5 cents less than last week’s price and 36 cents per gallon lower than the November 11, 2013 price.

Propane inventories post gain

U.S. propane stocks increased by 0.9 million barrels last week to 81.1 million barrels as of November 7, 2014, 20.2 million barrels (33.3%) higher than a year ago. Gulf Coast inventories increased by 0.6 million barrels and Rocky Mountain/West Coast inventories increased by 0.4 million barrels. East Coast inventories increased by 0.1 million barrels while Midwest inventories decreased by 0.2 million barrels. Propylene non-fuel-use inventories represented 3.6% of total propane inventories.

The post 2015 Global Oil Balance Loosens Considerably In Latest Short-Term Energy Outlook – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Ashutosh Misra

As Prime Minister Modi arrives in Australia, one wonders as to why it took so long to break this self-imposed moratorium on prime ministerial visits since 1986. True that Modi’s historic visit to attend the G-20 Summit in Brisbane and followed by bilateral talks has been abetted by the recent upswing in relations, following the Australian nod to sell uranium and concerns of Indian student’s safety being addressed.

When the two leaders meet, outside the rubric of G-20, trade is expected to top the list. Australia’s continues to be a major exporter of coal, gold, copper ores and concentrates, vegetables, services to India and importer of passenger motor vehicles, medicaments, pearls, gems and jewellery. There is also enormous scope beyond coal and uranium in the energy sector, and Australia can tap into the India’s renewable energy efforts which suffer from various impediments. Australia has made significant advancements in wind energy, SPVs, solar hot water, waste-to-energy conversion and hydro-power systems which can be of immense utility to India’s future energy requirements and help Narendra Modi’s fulfil his promise of 24×7 electricity for all.

Australia’s Direct Aid Programme (DAP) continues to fund small-scale sustainable development projects in several states and union territories, especially in vocational training for youth; solar power and end-user training and electrification of hundreds of households; construction of diversion based irrigation to create permanent irrigation facilities; women’s economic empowerment; access to education for women and girls; and capacity development for people with disabilities. These initiatives also complement Modi’s vision for inclusive development and better governance.

Australia is equally well placed to share its successes at preserving its ecosystem by contributing to the cleaning of the Ganges, another key promise of Modi in his constituency, Varanasi. In the past, Australia has contributed to the Swatcha Ganga Chhatra Sangam at Tulsi Ghat, a joint venture mooted in 1992 between Oz Green, an Australian NGO and the Sankat Mochan Foundation.

Both sides, also stand to benefit from operationalizing MoUs in technical and vocational education and training, and encouraging cultural, students and academic exchanges, which is covered under Australia’s new Colombo Plan which funds students’ visit to Asia and the Pacific.

Internal security is another area of potential cooperation, particularly, in dealing with home-grown terrorism (HGT). The Joint Working Group in Counter-Terrorism provides the necessary framework for security cooperation. India has long been affected by HGT and in the face of growing reports of Australians joining the ISIS and possible attacks on the home soil, Australian legislative and law enforcement bodies are scampering to put together an effective counter-terrorism policy. This necessitates both sides sharing information, intelligence and mutual experiences to devise better strategies. In July, the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security (CEPS) signed a MoU with the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy to strengthen policing and security cooperation and promote research collaboration, academic-practitioner interaction and capacity building programmes. Similar MoUs are expected between CEPS and National Investigation Agency and Central Bureau of Investigation.

But opportunities are also accompanied by differences and challenges which need attention. Last week, ignoring the opinion of his treasurer Joe Hockey, strategic experts and the Australian Labour Party, Tony Abbott and the National Security Committee declined China’s invitation to join the $50 billion Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, of which India is the inaugural President. While India and China seek to create alternatives to the western dominated global financial institutions, Abbott, in spite of his desire for deeper ties with India and China, remains aligned with the US-led international affairs. These ideological and strategic differences will have to be accommodated into future bilateral engagements.

Domestically, at the Commonwealth level Australia needs to do more to deliver on what Julia Gillard once announced, “Australia government is committed to building a greater understanding between our two peoples and Australians’ understanding of India, its culture, its history and place in the world”. Rhetoric needs to be backed by meaningful and substantial commitment. As opposed to $53 million allocated to set up a China Research Centre at the Australian National University, just $9 million were allocated to create the Australia India Institute, which has recently been oxygenated by a paltry funding of $ 3 million. India studies and study of Hindi remain in a sorry state and have long been overlooked and underfunded areas in Australian universities.

To be fair to Australia, India too needs to commit greater resources for incorporating the study of Australia and student exchanges in curriculums in Indian universities. At the policy level, in the MEA, Australia remains clubbed with 14 other countries of SE Asia and the Pacific. It needs to be reorganised into a new Australasia division. New Delhi should look into funding more India Chairs in Australian universities through ICCR and also advise the MEA to constitute more bilateral dialogues with institutions across Australia.

These are some of the deliverables that can add greater ballast and substance to bilateral ties.

Ashutosh Misra is Research Fellow, Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security, Griffith University, Australia

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

Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/ModisMissionDownunder_amisra_141114.html

The post Modi’s Mission In Australia – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Elise Harris

Today the Vatican published the official itinerary for Pope Francis’ upcoming visit to Sri Lanka and the Philippines, during which he is slated to spend roughly two days each in Colombo, Manila and Tacloban.

Officially announced by the Vatican in July, the trip had been unofficially revealed by the Pope during an in-flight press conference on his way back from the Holy Land.

Pope Francis’ decision to visit Sri Lanka and the Philippines marks his second trip to Asia in six months – the first being to South Korea in August. The papal voyage will follow the theme of “Mercy and Compassion,” and will last from January 12-19.

After departing Rome the evening of Jan. 12, 2015, the Roman Pontiff will arrive to Colombo, Sri Lanka the following morning, where he will be received with an official welcoming ceremony and afterwards meet the bishops of the island.

While in Sri Lanka the Pope will also pay a courtesy visit to the country’s president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, hold a meeting with leaders of different religions, and will canonize Sri Lankan Blessed Giuseppe Vaz.

Before leaving Sri Lanka on Wed., Jan. 15, the Bishop of Rome will pay a visit to the city of Bolawalana’s “Our Lady of Lanka” chapel, after which he will travel to Manila. Upon his arrival to the Philippines, Pope Francis will have an official welcome at the Air Base where he lands.

The official welcoming ceremony will take place the following morning, after which the Pope is slated to visit with the country’s president, Benigno Aquino III, as well as local authorities and the diplomatic corp.

Later that day he will celebrate mass with bishops, priests and religious in Manila’s cathedral, and afterward will hold an encounter with families. He will depart the next morning, Jan. 17, for Tacloban.

In Tacloban the pontiff will celebrate mass after his arrival, and will then have lunch with survivors of the typhoon Yolanda that devastated the country last year, causing the death of around 6,000 people.

After the lunch, the Pope will go on to bless the city’s “Pope Francis Center for the Poor” and will hold mass for priests, religious, seminarians and families of the typhoon survivors. He will return to Manila by plane that evening.

On his last full day in the Philippines, the Roman Pontiff will hold a brief encounter with interreligious leaders, followed by a meeting with the youth in the afternoon, and will conclude the day by celebrating mass in Manila’s Rizal Park.

He will have a farewell ceremony the morning of Mon., Jan. 19 at Manila’s Air Base before returning to Rome, where he will arrive at roughly 6p.m.

Pope Francis’ visit will also mark the 20th anniversary of the 1995 Manila World Youth Day, the largest ever papal event, which gathered around 5 million young people to pray with St. John Paul II.

Please find the full schedule for the Pope’s trip below:

January 12, 2015

7:00p.m. Depart for Colombo by plane from Rome’s Fiumicino airport

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

9:00a.m. Arrive to the international airport of Colombo
Welcoming ceremony
1:15p.m. Encounter with the bishops of Sri Lanka in the Archdiocese of Colombo
5:00p.m. Courtesy visit to the President of the Republic in the presidential residence
6:15p.m. Interreligious encounter in the Bandaranaike Memorial International Conference Hall

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

8:30a.m. Holy Mass and canonization of Blessed Giuseppe Vaz in the Galle Face Green in Colombo
2:00p.m. Transfer by helicopter to Madhu
3:30 Marian prayer at the shrine of Our Lady of the Rosary in Madhu
4:45p.m. Transfer by helicopter to Colombo

Thursday, January 15, 2015

8:15a.m. Visit to the “Our Lady of Lanka” chapel in Bolawalana
8:45a.m. Farewell ceremony at the international airport of Colombo
9:00a.m. Depart from Colombo by plane for Manila
5:45p.m. Arrive to the Villamor Air Base of Manila
Official Welcome

Friday, January 16, 2015

9:15a.m. Welcoming ceremony at the presidential palace
Courtesy visit to the president
10:15a.m. Encounter with authorities and with the Diplomatic Corp in the Rizal Ceremonial Hall of the presidential palace
11:15 Holy Mass with bishops, priests and religious in the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception of Manila
5:30p.m. Encounter with families in the Mall of Asia Arena in Manila

Saturday, January 17, 2015

8:15a.m. Depart from Manila by plane for Tacloban
9:30a.m. Arrive at the airport of Tacloban
10:00a.m. Holy Mass next to the Tacloban International Airport
12:45p.m. Lunch with some survivors of typhoon Yolanda at the Archbishop of Palo’s residence
3:00p.m. Blessing of the Pope Francis Center for the Poor
3:30p.m. Encounter with priests, religious, seminarians and families of the survivors in the Cathedral of Palo
5:00p.m. Departure by plane for Manila
6:15p.m. Arrive to the Villamor Air Base of Manila

Sunday, January 18, 2015

9:45a.m. Brief encounter with religious leaders of the Philippines in the University of St. Thomas in Manila
10:30a.m. Encounter with youth in the sports field of the university
3:30p.m. Holy Mass at Rizal Park in Manila

Monday, January 19, 2015

9:45a.m. Farewell ceremony in the Presidential Pavilion of the Villamor Air Base in Manila
10:00a.m. Departure from Manila by plane for Rome
5:40p.m. Arrive to Rome’s Ciampino airport

The post What Will Pope Francis Be Up To In Sri Lanka, Philippines? appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Mohammed al-Jayousi

Several states and international bodies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund met Sunday (November 9th) in Bahrain to attend a conference titled “Combating the Financing of Terrorism”.

In a declaration issued at the close of the daylong conference, participants called for full and effective implementation of the recommendations of the intergovernmental group Financial Action Task Force and the UN Security Council on terrorism financing, the official Bahrain News Agency reported.

Seven international organisations and 29 countries agreed on the need to investigate and prosecute terrorist financing on the level of groups and individuals, and to publicly identify terrorism funders and supporters, as well as to ensure that any transfer of funds or assets is monitored and liable to punishment in the case of violation.

Participants called for protecting non-profit organisations and those who collect charitable donations from being exploited by terrorist groups during the collection, transfer or use of the funds, while not impeding legitimate charitable activities.

They also urged the application of systems of disclosure of liquidity and maintenance of authority to confiscate funds linked to terrorist financing.

Other recommendations included continuing efforts to assess and determine the sources and mechanisms of terrorism financing; combating online fundraising for terrorist groups; and preventing places of worship and educational institutions from being used to collect funds for terrorist activities.

“Cutting off the financial supply to terrorist groups is half the war against these groups and organisations, which means there is a need to reach effective and deterrent mechanisms to combat and halt all forms of financing for all these organisations and groups,” Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa said during the conference.

Muwaffaq Taha Ezzedine, director general of the public debt department at the Iraqi Ministry of Finance and head of the Iraqi delegation to the Manama meeting, said Iraq at the present time is the country suffering most from terrorism worldwide.

Groups such as the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) and al-Qaeda seized Iraqi lands, and Iraqis face gruesome crimes carried out in the name of Islam, he said.

“Islam is innocent of these groups,” he told Al-Shorfa.

Ezzedine welcomed the support of the international community for Iraq, the efforts of the international coalition against ISIL and the fight against terrorism in all its forms, in particular its financing.

“The Manama meeting is of great importance at the present time in the face of violence and terrorist threats the region is witnessing at the hands of terrorist groups, particularly ISIL and its financing channels,” he said.

The conference recommendations are a broad outline of ways to combat terrorism financing in the region and protect its countries from all threats, he said.

Strengthening transparency, monitoring

Assistant Egyptian Foreign Minister Hussein Mubarak said he believes that the most dangerous kind of terrorism financing is linked to the funds of non-governmental or non-profit organisations that go to terrorist groups and support their criminal activities, while giving them legal legitimacy.

He commended efforts to put an end to such financing by strengthening transparency, disclosure and financial monitoring of the accounts of these non-profit associations or organisations.

“The Manama meeting is very important, especially its recommendations which should drain the headwaters of the financial sponsor of terrorism, ensure that funds do not reach terrorist groups, and reduce their criminal activities in the region and the world,” he told Al-Shorfa.

The Arab League, he said, has special legal mechanisms and legislation to combat the financing of terrorism, thus guaranteeing that Arab countries can strengthen joint efforts to dry up terrorism funding channels.

Egypt is ready to do all it can to facilitate the work of the international coalition against “terror organisations”, particularly ISIL, Mubarak said.

Bahrain Central Bank Governor Rasheed al-Maraj said the participation of 29 countries and seven international organisations in the Manama meeting is evidence many are determined ” to take advantage of leading international experiences in combating terrorism financing”.

He urged promoting the exchange of information among countries to reduce funding channels, both traditional and online.

“Bahrain, as represented by its central bank is committed to the international principles of combating terrorism financing,” he told Al-Shorfa.

This commitment shows through the bank’s daily work in helping apply legislation to ensure precise monitoring of anything related to combating terrorism financing or economic crimes such as money laundering.

The fight against terrorism financing must be accompanied by co-operation with regional and international anti-money laundering and terrorism financing organisations such as the Egmont Group, the Financial Action Task Force, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

These groups can provide active technical support and enable countries to strengthen institutions that combat terrorism financing, he said.

The post Bahrain Conference Tackles Terrorism Financing appeared first on Eurasia Review.