Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif says it is possible to reach a final nuclear deal before the November 24 deadline should six world powers show political will.

Zarif said that the Islamic Republic has put forward various proposals during its nuclear talks with six world powers to assure them of the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear work.

“We have entered the final phase of the negotiations,” said the top Iranian diplomat, adding that Tehran and the world powers could reach a final nuclear agreement “if the opposite side has the political will to reach a solution” to Iran’s nuclear issue.

Zarif expressed hoped that the ongoing nuclear negotiations between Tehran and the six powers would lead to a result that guarantees the country’s peaceful nuclear rights.

“Whatever the outcome, either an agreement or resistance against excessive demands, we hope that November 24 will become a national victory in achieving the objectives we were pursuing in theses negotiation,” he added.

The top Iranian diplomat voiced optimism that any permanent nuclear agreement between Iran and the world powers would both respect the Iranian nation’s rights and allay “legitimate” concerns of the international community.

Iran’s foreign minister has also described as “useful” his latest nuclear talks with Catherine Ashton, the chief negotiator of the P5+1 group, stressing the importance of the group’s “political will” to reach a final agreement.

“We had useful talks and decided how to advance the talks within the next days,” Mohammad Javad Zarif said after a working lunch with Ashton in the Austrian capital, Vienna, on Tuesday.

“Everything else depends on the opposite side’s political will,” the top Iranian nuclear negotiator added.

Zarif called on the P5+1 to stop drawing “meaningless redlines” which are only appealing to certain pressure groups and will do nothing to solve the nuclear issue.

The post Iran Says Final Nuclear Deal Possible Before November 24 Deadline appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Abdolreza Ghofrani

There is less than one week till the new round of nuclear talks resume between Iran and P5+1 in which a comprehensive and mutually agreed upon agreement probably will be reached. Different predictions, sometimes being contradicted, have so far been made and still are going on. Through the last round of negotiations in Muscat in previous week the comments, analyses and reports on this issue had reached its peak, because there was the probability that Muscat talks would lay fair and proper grounds for the comprehensive agreement on 24 November. Though no details of the Iran- US talks were leaked, US Secretary of State John Kerry’s shuttle to Oman capital did make it anybody’s guess that the negotiations should have reached a critical and sensitive stage encouraging Mr. Kerry to visit Oman twice within 48 hours. Thereafter, the unofficial and unexpected visit of Oman Foreign Minister Yusuf Bin Alavi caused strong rumors and murmuring that there must have been important issues pushing Oman top diplomat to this surprised trip to Tehran. Anyhow, either an agreement has been reached or not, and if the differences between the two sides narrowed, are all the issues which will be known next week.

However, an issue discussed time and again over the past couple of days was the rigorous negotiations focusing on sanctions and the time and mechanisms of lifting those sanctions. From the outset, Iran’s status has been the lifting of all sanctions on this country once and for all and this be done in the shortest span. Over the past year Iran has shown pretty much flexibility even going beyond the context of the Joint Action Plan signed between the two parties last year. Now the ball is in US court and it is for this country to be as much flexible as the other party has been. But the developments over the last week and the viewpoints voiced by US officials and the American mass media have indicated that the Administration has not apparently made its final decision. It is not quite clear if the US government will do so up to the 24 November. The reason for being indecisiveness can be:

1- A confusing foreign policy prevailing US administrations for decades. The strong pressure groups, particularly Israelis robust lobbies have had deep influence on this situation.

2- Pursuing the decades old way by which US administrations have sought to achieve their goals without paying the fair price in return.

There have been several cases to prove this. In that case, it will not serve the goals of this negotiations which is reaching a mutually agreed upon agreement but further deepens the lack of confidence that still does exist.

Americans need to appreciate that so far Iran has taken positive strides, a fact that is undeniable. So if this time around the talks, by any reason, do not come to a desired conclusion and even the negotiations be extended, it is US that have to be held responsible. The consequences of this new development certainly will not be limited merely to either Iran or the 5+1, but will adversely affect thoroughly the entire region and further destabilize this sensitive part of the world. It was just yesterday that the savage terrorist group ISIS beheaded an American young man and US government just witnessing could do nothing. This savage terrorist band is pretty aware that despite US air attacks on their positions and also sending a limited number of its boots to the region could not and still is not able to do anything and that is a salient weak point for Washington. So any nuclear agreement with Iran, provided that serving the fair and legitimate rights of the latter, will mostly benefit US. Moreover, with its active presence and having full acquaintance of the region, Iran is pretty capable and powerful to take care of this illegitimate group and control it once and for all. On the other side it is a great misperception that by prolonging the nuclear talks, US can wear out Iran to gain concessions from Tehran.US is quite aware that now the national interests of Iran is at stake. Notwithstanding with the problems of continuing sanctions, Iran will never spare any action to safeguard those interests. It was also a big blunder on the part of US to extend the state of emergency against Iran for another year alleging that as a routine action. Washington justification for this untimely action particularly in this sensitive juncture is quite ridiculous.

If Iran, given its domestic problems and observation, has so far been able to bring the nuclear talks to this stage should be considered a valuable opportunity for Washington. Certainly if US do not seize this opportunity, there is no guarantee that another one will come by. Then the public opinion in Iran and eventually in international arena will judge and the outcome certainly will not be in favor of US. At the end of the day US has to face further insecurity in this sensitive region as well as more beheading of its citizens by savage terrorist group of ISIS. Certainly this time around American public opinion responses to the policies of their government will be pretty harsh.

Abdolreza Ghofrani
Former Senior Diplomat and International Analyst

The post Iran Viewpoint: Opportunities That May Not Come Again – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Nick Simeone

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel today called Russia’s actions in Ukraine “dangerous and irresponsible” and said the tensions provoked by Moscow have probably done more to unify NATO than anything else in years.

“It has brought the world together in a way where they are isolating themselves by their actions,” Hagel said of Russia, as he took questions from Marines during a visit to North Carolina’s Camp Lejeune.

‘Very Dangerous’ Actions

One service member asked the defense secretary if he envisioned the United States becoming more involved in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Russia’s actions toward Ukraine, as well as stepped-up Russian military air flights over European airspace and plans for similar flights over the Gulf of Mexico are “very dangerous,” Hagel said.

“The violations of sovereignty and international law that the Russians have perpetuated continue to require responses,” the defense secretary said. The United States is working with NATO “in shifting our entire rotational rapid deployment focus,” he added.

U.S. European Command chief Air Force Gen. Philip M. Breedlove , who is also NATO’s supreme allied commander for Europe, has said Russian military equipment continues to flow across the border into Ukraine, something Russia denies.

The post Hagel: Russia’s Actions ‘Dangerous And Irresponsible’ appeared first on Eurasia Review.

(EurActiv) — The continued depreciation of the single currency should help the eurozone economies grow in 2015. Spain would be the biggest winner, according to the French Economic Observatory. EurActiv France reports.

The eurozone is drawing away from the risk of deflation. This is the conclusion of a study by the French Economic Observatory (OFCE), whose authors believe that the falling value of the euro since May 2014 should limit the risk of deflation.

Between mid-2012 and mid-2014, the euro increased in value by 10% compared to other currencies, but this trend has reversed over the last six months, and the effective exchange rate has fallen by 5.2%.

According to OFCE, this depreciation is set to continue into 2015. They predict that the euro exchange rate will reach 1.2 US dollars by the second trimester of 2015, a situation that could help the eurozone avoid falling into a period of deflation.

Businesses are critical of a strong euro, because it hampers the competitiveness of their exports.

The study’s authors state that “the depreciation of the euro is needed to support structural reform in Europe and support demand even as fiscal austerity policies are further undermining it”.

Single currency depreciation aids eurozone growth

The decline of the euro should encourage exports to countries outside the eurozone, who currently benefit from lower prices elsewhere. The competitiveness of national producers would also be increased, leading to reduced imports and benefiting domestic production.

This would boost eurozone economies and help to further distance the EU from the risk of economic deflation, which would cause the value of national debts to rise.

Of the six countries studied (France, Germany, Spain, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States,) Spain would have the most to gain from a drop in the euro exchange rate, and a policy of competitive disinflation.

Short term benefits for France

The Observatory estimates that a 10% depreciation of the euro against other currencies would make French exports more competitive. The French government has long been campaigning for a depreciation of the single currency for this reason.

The study says “the [French] Treasury Department believes that a 10% decrease in the effective exchange rate of the euro (against all currencies) would increase [French] GDP in the first year by 0.6 percentage points, creating 30,000 jobs, reducing the public deficit by 0.2 GDP points and pushing up consumer prices by 0.5%”.

The other side of the coin is that a weak euro would increase the price of importing goods, leading to a host of different problems. The results would include rising energy bills, increased production costs for businesses and a decrease in households’ purchasing power.

The OFCE also warns that France would only feel the benefits of a devalued currency over the short term. After seven years, the additional growth it would bring to the French economy would drop to 0.1%, and job creation would stagnate at around 43,000 jobs.

The post Euro Depreciation Bolsters EU Economies Against Deflation appeared first on Eurasia Review.

(EurActiv) — Drilling for shale gas remains under an unlimited ban, said German Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks, dismissing media reports of government intentions to soften the fracking ban. But she did not rule out certain “rare” exceptions. EurActiv Germany reports.

“In general, fracking with environmentally toxic substances is prohibited,” explained German Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks on Monday (17 November) speaking with Deutschlandfunk radio.

“That is also what we determined in the coalition agreement and this ban absolutely does not expire,” the social democrat said.

Over the weekend, Der Spiegel reported that the German government was planning to soften its ban on commercial fracking.

The news magazine wrote that trial drilling was possible if expert committees made up of at least six scientists showed no concerns.

In addition, the report indicated intentions to omit a paragraph stating that only fracking deeper than 3,000 metres would be permitted. A corresponding measure was expected to be passed through the Bundestag this year, Der Spiegel’s article read.

The compromise was supposedly mediated by Chancellery Minister Peter Altmaier, at the initiation of the economic wing of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the Mining, Chemicals and Energy Trade Union and the Federation of German Industries.

The Bundestag’s factions are currently in deliberations over a measure on fracking. “Once these agreements are concluded, the draft law will go into consultations among the departments and then it will soon be ripe for the cabinet and be approved,” explained deputy government spokesperson Christiane Wirtz on Monday.

But Hendricks dismissed Der Spiegel’s report. Commercial fracking above 3,000 metres will not be permitted, she told Deutschlandfunk.

The German government’s expert commission has the possibility to express its opinion, she indicated, “but the ban is still valid: fracking is prohibited for a depth less than 3,000 metres,” Hendricks emphasised. Trial drilling can be conducted for scientific reasons, but only without the use of water polluting fracking substances, the Environment Minister said.

A spokesman of the Environment Ministry explained on Monday that the commission is charged with the task of advising decision-makers: “A recommendation is made on the basis of science and technology but it is not binding in any way. It can declare a recommendation for fracking or it can do the opposite. But water law authorities in the regions are the ones who decide whether or not to permit fracking. The commission does not change anything in this regard.”

Within the coalition, Hendricks said she pushed for an unlimited ban on fracking at the time, attempting “to only permit it under very rare exceptions.”

At the same time, she did not rule out the prospect that gas fracking could be allowed in Germany at some point in time. “If, at an unforeseeable time, it can be scientifically proven that [fracking] is completely harmless, then it may no longer be permanently forbidden.”

The Environment Ministry’s spokesman also did not consider it impossible for fracking to be permitted at a later date. “The state of science and research is not static; it is constantly evolving. That is why it would be completely wrong to set in stone such a ban on commercial fracking. That is neither how the state of science nor technology work in a democracy,” the spokesman explained.

The fracking process uses chemicals to release gas from shale deposits underground. But environmental protectionists are concerned over possible pollution in the groundwater.

In the United States, the fracking boom created a drop in energy prices, boosting the economy. In the meantime the branch has been put under considerable pressure amid quickly falling oil prices.

Daniel Tost

The post Germany: Government Upholds Fracking Ban appeared first on Eurasia Review.

An extraordinary bright orange flash has lit up the sky in Russia’s Sverdlovsk region in the Urals. While locals captured the massive ‘blast’ on numerous cameras, both scientists and emergency services still struggle to explain the unusual event.

Dark evening skies in the town of Rezh in Sverdlovsk region near Russia’s Ekaterinburg turned bright orange for some ten seconds on November 14, with the event being caught on several cameras by the locals.

A driver filmed the massive flash with his dashcam, later posting the video on YouTube, with more people commenting they’ve seen it too. Teenagers in the town of Rezh also filmed the phenomenon with a mobile phone.

Theories of what might have caused the “blast” appeared both on social and traditional media, with a new meteorite or military exercise in the region being among the top guesses. Regional emergency services said no accidents in connection with the event had been recorded. No sound of explosion has been reported either.

According to E1.ru, the emergency officials suggested the military were behind the flash, as they might have had a scheduled explosive ordnance disposal procedure. The city administration has also said such ammunition disposal might have taken place, while the military themselves denied they were behind the mystery.

“No exercise and training were underway on that day, and no military units are based in the region, so we have nothing to do with it,” a military press service told E1.ru.

A fireball caused by an asteroid’s collision with the Earth’s atmosphere is among other presumed reasons for the burning sky.

“Looks like a falling bolide. Because of the low cloud cover it ceased to exist above the clouds and lit up the whole sky,” a member of the meteorites committee of the Russian Academy of Sciences Viktor Grokhovsky told 66.ru.

Another astronomer, Vadim Krushinsky, doubted his colleague’s theory, saying the color of the flash does not support the asteroid speculation. The shade of light depends on the body’s temperature, and flashes caused by bolides are usually whiter, he explained to Ekburg.tv. The observatory engineer suggested his own theory, saying a space rocket launch might have been the cause.

A path of launches from the Plesetsk cosmodrome lies above the area, Krushinsky said. But, according to Russian Federal Space Agency’s website, the latest launch from the Plesetsk cosmodrome happened on October 29, with the next one planned for November 24.

People in the Urals witnessed a space ‘invasion’ event a year and a half ago, when the famous Chelyabinsk meteorite hit the region. A massive fireball explosion in February 2013 injured over a thousand people with shattered glass mostly, and damaged many residential and industrial buildings.
– See more at: http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/26452/53/#sthash.4i2P7H2h.dpuf

The post Meteor #2? Massive Flash Stuns Russian Residents – (Video) appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By David Trilling

The slowdown of Russia’s economy is inflicting pain across Central Asia. But impoverished Kyrgyzstan has no choice but to stay close to Moscow, Prime Minister Djoomart Otorbaev tells EurasiaNet.org.

In an exclusive interview in Bishkek, Otorbaev addressed criticism of Kyrgyzstan’s decision to join the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union, his country’s energy crisis, and the inevitability of slower growth due to the downturn in sanctions-afflicted Russia, Kyrgyzstan’s largest export market.

“If I said we are independent of the problems in our biggest market, I would be wrong. Russia is our biggest market, the biggest regional economy. Of course we are dependent on it, but we must prepare for the worst,” Otorbaev said in the November 15 interview.

On November 12, the International Monetary Fund projected Kyrgyzstan’s growth would fall from 10.5 percent in 2013 to 3 percent this year, and the inflation rate would jump to around 10 percent. The plummeting value of remittances from Russia sent by labor migrants and traders is adding to trade deficits across the region, the IMF said, and a weaker ruble contributes to inflation. A day before the IMF assessment, Kyrgyzstan’s Finance Minister Olga Lavrova told parliament that the country’s foreign debt accounted for 53 percent of GDP at the end of October and was entering dangerous territory.

The ruble’s 30 percent slide against the dollar this year is the major factor in the sharp decrease in transfers from Kyrgyz citizens working in Russia, both migrant laborers and traders who depend on Russian markets. That is putting pressure on the som.

The National Bank has spent over $300 million so far this year to try to ease the som’s slide. But, like Russia, Kyrgyzstan is moving toward a free-floating exchange rate. Pointing out that a weaker som helps exporters, Otorbaev, a mathematician with experience in Europe’s private sector and in banking, said, “We are not prepared to keep the som strong. The intervention is just to ease the spikes.”

Compounding the pressure on the Kyrgyz economy, Russia’s low oil-refining capacity has pushed up the price of gasoline across the region, “an unpleasant surprise” that has also stoked inflation. Meanwhile, a drought this year hurt agricultural production. A bread seller at Bishkek’s Ak-Emir market complains that a 50-kilo sack of flour has jumped 60 percent in price since last year.

Some have criticized Kyrgyzstan’s move to join the Eurasian Economic Union – which promises the “free movement of capital, goods, services, and labor” among members. Bishkek plans to sign on to the Russia-led organization by the end of next month, after several years of apparent foot-dragging. Opponents, inside Kyrgyzstan and abroad, say the project is Vladimir Putin’s attempt to reassert Russian power throughout the former Soviet Union. Since Russian-fueled unrest began in eastern Ukraine this spring, Moscow has seemed to increase pressure on its neighbors to join.

In recent weeks, Kyrgyzstan’s parliament has passed reams of legislation on membership in both the customs union and the EEU, which will come into being on January 1.

Otorbaev insists Kyrgyzstan will formally join both in late December and that border controls with Kazakhstan will be lifted by the middle of next year.

“We’ve gotten some criticism from the United States,” Otorbaev says of EEU membership talks. “I would like to hear the arguments of those who would like us to close the border. [...] With whom are we going to trade? I don’t know. The United States is not here. Europe neither. China is very aggressively importing things. If someone would advise us, I would be more than happy to hear them.”

Citing inflation as the government’s biggest fear, Otorbaev likens Kyrgyzstan’s EEU accession to the Baltic States entering the European Union in the early 2000s. “We are a small economy joining a big union and will have similar benefits,” he said. “We expect more positives than negatives. […] There is no alternative.”

Aside from issues of economic integration, one of Otorbaev’s toughest tasks is to raise artificially low energy tariffs – a legacy that Kyrgyzstan inherited from the Soviet Union. Previous governments postponed the painful measure, which he says is now critical.

The Kyrgyz population has for too long expected to pay below-market rates for electricity, Otorbaev said. And now, reform can no longer wait. This year’s drought, increased demand and aging infrastructure left the country with a deficit of 2.4 billion kilowatt-hours this coming winter.

“We have crossed the Rubicon. All of a sudden we went from being an export-oriented country to import-oriented,” he said. Kyrgyzstan plans to import 1.4 billion kWh from neighboring Kazakhstan, for which it will pay eight-times more per kWh. In the immediate future, Otorbaev’s government will subsidize much of the purchase, but the expensive outlay will force him to implement “major reforms.”

“No government before us did this. We have to do it. This is a gamble my government must take,” he said.

An obstacle that Kyrgyzstan will have to contend with for years is its poor relations with foreign investors. While protracted spats have frightened away would-be investors, Otorbaev tried to accentuate the positive. “Kyrgyzstan is considered by the outside world to be a country where we always have revolutions. But things are cooling down dramatically,” Otorbaev, who in previous governments held a number of senior economic posts, said. He pointed to a successful tourist season at Lake Issyk-Kul as an indicator that Kyrgyzstan is entering a more stable era.

Politicians seeking to score points still interfere in the crucial mining sector, he conceded. Such meddling can be expected to continue as next fall’s parliamentary elections approach.

The choice to enter the EEU could have profound ramifications for Kyrgyzstan’s relations with its largest investor, China, by hiking tariffs on Chinese imports. Otorbaev pointed out, though, that his country’s cheap labor, electricity and real estate will continue to be a boon for Chinese investors seeking to build factories within the Moscow-led trade bloc.

“I think they will come more. They want to sell things to the Russian market,” Otorbaev said. “This is a fantastic opportunity for producers.”

David Trilling is EurasiaNet’s Central Asia editor.

The post Kyrgyzstan Has ‘No Alternative’ To Closer Russia Ties – Prime Minister appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Mina Habib

After six hangings, public opinion appears solidly behind capital punishment.

The recent execution of a group of men found guilty of gang rape has been welcomed by human rights groups as well as officials in Afghanistan, despite strong international criticism.

On August 28, armed men wearing police uniforms stopped a group of cars returning to Kabul from a wedding ceremony in Paghman district. They tied up the men and raped at least four of the women, and stole jewellery and other valuables.

Seven suspects were arrested and were quickly brought to trial and sentenced to death. Two of them later had their sentences commuted to life imprisonment.

The outgoing president, Hamed Karzai, signed the death warrants shortly before he left office. His successor, President Ashraf Ghani, chose not to block them.

The five men were hanged in Kabul on October 8, along with a sixth man, Habib Istalif, convicted of leading a kidnapping gang in a separate case.

International organisations including the United Nations, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch condemned the decision to carry out the executions, and said the judicial process had been flawed.

Not only was the trial rushed – the televised proceedings took just two hours – but one of the defendants said he had made his confession under torture. Karzai had called publicly for the death penalty even before the trial started.

Noting that capital punishment was applicable to very few crimes under Afghan law, Human Rights Watch said, “International human rights treaties to which Afghanistan is a party only allow the death penalty for the most serious crimes when there is scrupulous adherence to fair trial standards. This case fell far short of those international standards.”

However, in Afghanistan, where violence against women is common and often goes unpunished, the case sparked huge interest. Public opinion was largely supportive of the sentences.

Even domestic human rights groups welcomed the executions. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission said they sent an important message about the rule of law.

“The law has not been applied properly for the last 13 years,” commission spokesman Abdul Maruf Bedar said. “Law enforcement has been biased. As a result, impunity – people escaping justice – has caused crime levels to increase.”

Bedar said that under the new Ghani administration, “many hope that this problem will be addressed”.

Officials claimed that the executions had an immediate deterrent effect on gender violence.

“We haven’t had any reports of rape [since then], although we had high figures for violent crime against women in the first six months of the year, prior to the executions,” said Aziza Adalatkhwa, head of the justice department at the women’s affairs ministry.

Adalatkhwa said the threat of the death penalty could do a lot to reduce crime levels, providing trials were fair.

Senior police officers, too, said that crime had fallen since the highly-publicised executions.

“After these six individuals were executed, the crime level dropped significantly,” Kabul police spokesman Hashmatullah Stanekzai said. “The offenses recorded at police stations were mostly minor family matters, not major crimes.”

Many feel that a society in which armed men have gone unpunished for so long cannot afford to have too many scruples in pursuit of law and order.

“The execution of these six individuals has had a positive impact on the situation,” said Munawar Shah Bahaduri. “It was a serious warning to professional criminals.”

His colleague from Faryab province, Mohammad Hashem, agreed, saying “current circumstances require it”.

“If capital punishment is abolished here some day, I will be amongst those who oppose the decision,” he added.

According to Fawzia Naseryar, a parliamentarian from Kabul, “some people have been brought up to be uncontrolled and ungovernable during years of war. They don’t obey the law, so the law must be imposed rigorously. I support the death penalty… firstly because it is mandated by Islam, and also because it serves to punish criminals and reform society.”

Fatana Gailani, head of the Afghanistan Women Council, pointed out that high crime rates were a consequence of broader factors like continuing conflict, unemployment, poverty, lack of education.

However, she too stopped short of condemning the recent executions.

“Although the execution of these six individuals was appropriate and had a positive impact on the crime level, the death penalty is not the ultimate solution,” she told IWPR.

Capital punishment has been applied sparingly since the Taleban government was ousted in 2001. While as many as 400 people have received death sentences in the last 13 years, fewer than 40 executions have been carried out. In the past, Karzai has been criticised for his apparent reluctance to sign death warrants.

Kabul resident Sanabar, 60, who has four daughters, said the hangings had boosted her faith in the government.

“I used to guard my daughters all day long, because I was sure that no one would defend us if something happened,” she said. “I prevented my daughters from travelling to college. However, since the criminals were executed, they are now going to the city and continuing their studies. This has created hope for us.”

Kabir, 57, who sells second-hand clothes in Kabul’s Kart-e Char neighbourhood, said that he had never sent his two young daughters to school for fear they would be assaulted.

“Since I have no sons [to accompany them] and there was no security, I didn’t allow my daughters to go to school after grade six,” he said. “I used to worry every day. I used to leave work and go home to check on my girls…. Now I can work in peace. Executing these six men has really weakened the morale of criminals.”

Mina Habib is an IWPR reporter in Kabul. This article was published by IWPR’s ARR Issue 503

The post Death Penalty Works, Afghans Say appeared first on Eurasia Review.

French officials have identified a second Frenchman among the militants in a video showing the severed head of an American aid worker and the beheadings of at least 18 Syrian soldiers.

President Francois Hollande said Wednesday during a visit to Australia that two French nationals are in the video released by the Islamic State group but did not give additional details.

Investigators said they believe the second man was a 22-year-old from a Paris suburb who traveled to Syria about a year ago.

On Monday, officials identified the first man in the video as Maxime Hauchard, also 22, a convert to Islam who went to Syria last year.

The Paris prosecutor’s office said the second French suspect was also a Muslim convert who traveled to Syria in August 2013. The second suspect was known to intelligence services, it said.

Hollande highlighted the danger of what he called young people being brainwashed by militants abroad. Earlier this year, France toughened its anti-terrorism laws to stop citizens from going to Syria and prevent young Muslims from becoming radicalized.

Foreign fighters

Thousands of Western volunteers have joined the Islamic State group, which has taken control of large swathes of both Syria and Iraq. More than 1,130 French citizens are involved in jihadi cells linked to the two countries, with 376 nationals in the region.

A report published by the CPDSI, an institute created specifically to study radicalization linked to Islam in French society, showed on Tuesday that the majority of those that had turned to radical Islam were from middle class families, originally atheist and under 21.

The Islamic State group has released multiple videos showing the executions of American and British hostages. Abdul-Rahman (Peter) Kassig was the American aid worker seen in the latest video.

Kassig was taken captive 13 months ago while doing humanitarian work in war-torn Syria. U.S. President Barack Obama on Sunday condemned his killing, calling it “an act of pure evil.”

The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the Islamic State group has now executed more than 1,400 people in Syria since the end of June, when it declared a caliphate over vast territories it controls in Iraq and Syria..

The United States, Britain and France are all taking part in airstrikes against the militant group in Iraq, with U.S. planes also bombing Islamic State targets in neighboring Syria.

The post France Identifies 2nd French Citizen In IS Video appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US President Barack Obama will announce an executive order on immigration reform Thursday, according to the White House.

In a statement on Wednesday, the White House said Obama will give a prime-time address at 8 p.m. on Thursday to discuss his plan for immigration reform, likely to include temporary reprieve from deportation for as much as 5 million undocumented immigrants.

A senior congressional aide told The Washington Post that Obama’s chief of staff, Denis McDonough, will meet with Democratic senators on Thursday, further proof that an executive action looms. Democrats have worked in recent days, writing op-eds and appearing on television, to defend such an announcement from Republican criticism.

Pres. Obama was first reported on Wednesday to be giving an immigration announcement on Friday, but later the White House said the address would be given on Thursday evening.

“This is a step forward in the President’s plan to work with Congress on passing common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said.

Last Wednesday, following the Republican Party’s takeover of the US Senate, Obama warned that he would take whatever lawful actions he feels are necessary to “improve the function of our immigration system,” following years of unsuccessful efforts from Congress to accomplish as much on its own. The White House says that the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has previously pushed back on efforts from Democratic lawmakers to introduce immigration reform, and the results of last Tuesday’s mid-term elections will soon see to it that the GOP has a majority in the Senate as well next session.

“So if in fact there is a great eagerness on the part of Republicans to tackle a broken immigration system, then they have every opportunity to do it,” the president said. “My executive actions don’t prevent them…but should be a spur for them to try and get something done,” said Obama.

On the heels of Obama’s post-Election Day remarks, Republican Party representatives said the GOP should consider countering any attempt from the White House to unilaterally weigh in on immigration reform with an order of impeachment. GOP leaders added that any executive action would “poison the well” for the rest of Obama’s two-plus years in office.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), the soon-to-be Senate majority leader, said the use of executive authority in this instance “would be like waving a red flag in front of a bull.”

By taking executive action, it is likely that Obama will derail any opportunities to cooperate with the GOP majority in Congress during the rest of his term, including on bipartisan initiatives like tax reform, among other issues.

The post Obama To Announce Immigration Action On Thursday appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Two French jets, backed by US-led coalition planes, have targeted ISIL trenches near Iraq’s northern city of Kirkuk as operations continue against the terrorist group’s frontlines.

Two Dassault-built (AVMD.PA) Rafale fighters hit trenches, used by ISIL militants to capture the northern Iraqi oil city, at around 0330 GMT, French Defense Ministry said in a statement on Wednesday.

“This action was carried out simultaneously with our allies to create a breach in the defensive positions held by the terrorists on the frontline between Iraqi forces and” ISIL militants, the ministry added.

Earlier in the day, French government spokesman, Stephane Le Foll, told BFM TV that the country would soon boost its deployment in the region to fight the ISIL militants.

Paris also reportedly plans to send Mirage fighter jets to Jordan to increase its operations against the ISIL cult.

French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve recently said the number of French nationals leaving the country to join the ISIL militant group in Syria and Iraq shows an 82-percent rise in 2014.

“There is a considerable increase in the number of departures” from France to the Middle East in recent months, Cazeneuve said in a radio interview, adding that the increase has put about 375 French citizens “in the theater of operations in Syria and Iraq.”

The ISIL terrorists currently control parts of eastern Syria and Iraq’s northern and western regions. They have committed heinous crimes and threatened all communities, including Shias, Sunnis, Kurds, Christians and Izadi Kurds, during their advances in Iraq.

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

Original article

The post France To Send 6 Fighter Jets To Jordan To Target ISIL In Iraq appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Aparupa Bhattacherjee

The Islamic State (IS) unilaterally declared an ‘Islamic Caliphate’ in Iraq and Syria in June 2014. This has resulted in the increase in the numbers of radicalised Muslims from all over the world travelling to the region to support the IS, and Southeast Asia is no exception.

According to reports, there are roughly 30 Malaysians, 60 Indonesians, 50 Filipinos, one Cambodian and a few Singaporeans have already joined the IS. However, there are barely any reports that cite Muslims from Myanmar having joined terrorist group. Why is that the case? Why are there low or negligible numbers of radical Islamist jihadists joining the IS from Myanmar? What are the general sentiments the Myanmarese Muslims foster towards the IS?

The Anti-Muslim Sentiment Factor

The growth of anti-Muslim sentiment in Myanmar to some extent thrives on the misinformed notion that most Muslims encourage terrorism. The presence of militant and secessionist groups such as Rohingya Solidarity Organisation (RSO), the Arakan Rohingya National Organisation (ARNO) and a newly formed fundamental group called the Arakan Mujahedeen (AM) have resulted in the development of such a perception. Muslims in Myanmar are aware of this notion and that radical Buddhists misuse the sentiment.

Thus, Myanmarese Muslims know and feel that any news of anyone from their community’s involvement in any kind of terrorist activity would worsen the already bad situation for them; especially given their small number (approximately four per cent) in comparison to the majority Buddhists (approximately 89 per cent).

Although there are grievances among Muslims over the use of violence against their community in various riots that have taken place since 2012, most of them feel that violence is not a good medium of response.

This became clear when the London based Myanmarese Muslim association became the first to announce their denial to support any al Qaeda dream to “raise the flag of Jihad” across South Asia, and stated that Myanmarese Muslims will never accept any assistance from a terrorist organisation.

Lack of Vanguards?

In Southeast Asian countries, most jihadist recruiters are home-grown terrorist organisations. In Myanmar, both the RSO and the ARNO are too weak to play this role. The AM, although armed, so far claims to want to achieve political emancipation of the Rohingya Muslims via political means as opposed to resorting to violence. The RSO, which shifted its base to Bangladesh after the 1977 Nagamin operation in Myanmar, has thrived due to support from the Islami Chhatra Shibir, a wing of Bangladesh’s Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) and also from Jemaah Islamiya (JI). Heavy crackdowns by the incumbent Awami League government in Dhaka, both on the JeI and the RSO, and the disintegration of the JI into several smaller and weaker groups are among the reasons for present state of the RSO.

Significant numbers of Myanmarese Muslims are naturalised citizens of the country; and even for those who are full citizens, restrictions are placed on travel simply because they belong to a minority religion. Thus, travelling to Iraq and Syria is only possible via Bangladesh, and that too, only illegally. This is no other viable option given Dhaka’s strict vigilance measures. Furthermore, the lack of support from recruiters too deters most radicalised Myanmarese Muslims from traveling to unknown lands to wage jihad.

Lower Levels of Ideological Indoctrination?

Both the RSO and the ARNO were formed with an aim to create a separate state for Rohingya Muslims as opposed to waging jihad. Economic and political segregation were the bases of the formation of these groups. They were introduced to the concept of ‘global jihad’ only after their link up with al Qaeda and the JI.

However, both organisations were not influential enough, and not based in Myanmar, resulted in their failure to instil their extremist ideology among the locals. Thus, unlike other terrorist organisations in Southeast Asia, the RSO and the ARNO could not to anchor the extremist ideology in their home ground.

The large numbers of Southeast Asian Muslims who travelled to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for Islamic education in 1990s were the ones who brought the seeds of radical Islam to the region. Myanmar was an exception in this case. Factors such as globalisation, urbanisation, and westernisation that, in the 1990s, led other Southeast Asian Muslims to travel abroad to study religion, did not influence the Myanmarese. This was because Myanmar, during that period, was under the military Junta rule, and as a result, was cut off from the rest of the world.

Many madrassas in Indonesia, Malaysia and southern Thailand also function as media for the dissemination of jihadist ideology. In Myanmar, the presence of such madrassas preaching radicalised interpretations of Islam are only restricted to the northern areas of the Arakan province; and here too, the numbers are trivial. Thus, it appears that Myanmar so far lacks the necessary apparatus key to create a conducive environment for the growth and grip of radical Islam – which also explains the limited influence, the IS’s propaganda for ‘global jihad’ has had on Myanmarese Muslims.

Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Research Officer, SEARP, IPCS
E-mail: aparupa@ipcs.org

The post Myanmar: Why The Islamic State Failed Here – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Roomana Hukil

On 4 November 2014, a young Christian couple was publically set on fire in Punjab, Pakistan. It was alleged by a mob of 1200 persons that the couple had desecrated verses from the Quran. According to source, the mob had apparently offered a waiving of severe retribution if the couple converted to Islam, but when the couple refused, locked them in a brick kiln, and set on fire.

Harassment and instances of violence against Pakistan’s minority Christian community has increased suddenly in the past few years. Last year, anti-Christian riots erupted in Gojra and Lahore, causing 170 families to flee their homes.

According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, in 2013, 501 people were victimised on blasphemy charges that entailed incidents categorised under “attacks on places of worship, stating derogatory remarks, disgracing in any form, unclear happenings and other cases.” While most outbreaks are instigated out of socio-economic reasons, they are constantly also backed by religious dogmas and false accusations of blasphemy. In the recent years, this trend has become increasingly pronounced. Assassinations of high-profile political leaders, attacks on the impoverished populations, and expulsions of minority students for misspelling/ misquoting the Quran point towards the intensification of radicalism and resultant attitudes among hard-line Islamists in Pakistan.

Why are Christians being targeted in Pakistan? Why is the Pakistani State reluctant to re-evaluate or repeal the biased blasphemy laws?

Vulnerability

Christians are the second-largest religious minority in Pakistan after the Hindus, representing 1.8 per cent of the country’s total population. A large number of Christians reside in south Karachi, Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. While a section resides in the poorest sectors of Pakistan involved menial jobs, there is a significant section that is flourishing in the corporate sector, in Karachi. In Pakistan, any sense of economic progression or identity-assertion by a minority group results in a sense of paranoia among the radicals in the majority groups. Consequently, both sides, irrespective of their economic contribution to the country are vulnerable to the wrath of Islamist extremism in Pakistan.

Additionally, there has been a gradual change shift in the Christian community vis-à-vis their socio-economic and political demands. Since 1992, the Pakistan Christian Congress (PCC) has been demanding a separate Christian province in Punjab. Furthermore, Christians have been extremely vocal in expressing equal rights, demanding state benefits, exhibiting intolerance towards the blasphemy laws and refuting the majoritarian attitude towards the minority groups. Asserting for greater autonomy and representation in society is largely dismissed in Pakistan. Minority communities that remain submissive and camouflage within the rest of the society are accepted by the radicals. Those who resist are assaulted.

For instance, the Pakistani Federal Minister for Minority Affairs, Shahbaz Bhatti, was assassinated on the grounds of supporting the cause of Pakistani Christians, condemning the 2009 Gojra riots and demanding for justice.

Role of Blasphemy Laws

Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code was introduced during the 1980s. It reinstated the position of religious zealots to act according to their whims and fancies. Pakistan has some of the strictest anti-blasphemy laws in the world, and they prescribe punitive punishment to those who ‘deliberately intend to wound the religious sentiments of others in their sight, hearing, and presence through imprisonment, fine or both’.

The law has been been heavily criticised for extending protection towards the embodiments of the Islamic faith alone while excluding that of other religious faiths. While the law is applicable to all, in a multi-faith society such as Pakistan, it is seen as highly discriminatory, as even the slightest rumours about instances of defaming the Prophet and/or the Quran continues to spark hysteria amongst the radicalised Muslims.

Stagnant Status Quo

The state has condemned violent attacks against the Christian community, but its tight-lipped stance on the issue of amendment or repealing of the biased laws questions the government’s credibility and intents on the issue. Given the identity of the country as an Islamic Republic, the government feels that any move towards altering the blasphemy laws will infuriate religious extremists who might reciprocate in unfavourable ways. In 2011, the former Governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, was assassinated for criticising the blasphemy law while advocating for justice for Asia Bibi – a Christian woman who was sentenced to death over allegations of defaming the Prophet. The then government that had initially announced its intention to amend the law fell silent on the subject after Taseer’s assassination.

Repealing the law doesn’t alone or automatically mean the end of the woes of the Christian community. While it may bring about a change in the relationship politics between the majority and minority groups, this will be short-lived. Instead of promising to alter or remove the blasphemy law, one solution would be to create a national consensus on the need to reform the law by highlighting the death tolls and cases of abuse this law has invoked on minority groups.

However, the current trajectory of affairs indicates that the government will remain cautious on the issue as radical elements continue to grow in Pakistan. In the process, it will continue to disregard international humanitarian laws and continue to commit human rights violations by backing the interests of one section of the society whilst excluding the aspirations of the other.

Roomana Hukil
Research Officer, (IReS), ACSA, IPCS
Roomana@ipcs.org

The post Pakistan: Why Are Christians Being Persecuted? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By K. P. Fabian

The US midterm poll results have considerably reduced President Obama’s control over US foreign policy. With the Republicans’ seizing majority in the Senate as well as enhancing their strength in the House of Representatives where they already had majority combined with the falling approval rating of his six years of presidency, Obama will have to seek the concurrence of the Republicans on any foreign policy initiative that requires Congressional approval. For example, he cannot lift sanctions on Iran as part of a deal on the nuclear issue without the support of the Republicans. Has Obama become a lame-duck president?

This is the right time to raise a fundamental question about Obama’s policy towards Syria: Is there a coherent , consistent policy, based on a reasonably accurate assessment of the ground realities in Syria? The answer is a definite no.

Any policy has to be based on good assessment. On August 11,2011, Obama publicly asked President Basher al-Assad to step down as he had lost his legitimacy. Soon, Germany, France, and UK came out with similar calls for Assad to step down. In retrospect, it is evident that the assessment that Assad was fast losing ground and about to fall was flawed. We do not know how such an assessment was arrived at. But, it is known that Saudi Arabia and Qatar had conveyed to Washington that their intelligence agencies had done the necessary investigations and come to the conclusion that Assad was about to fall. It would appear that US accepted that assessment uncritically. However, President Obama did not find it necessary to give increased military aid to the ‘secular and moderate’ group(SM for short) that he chose to support, partly owing to fear that weapons might be captured by the ‘extremists’ opposed to US. While one can understand the logic of caution, it is difficult to ignore the inconsistency and inconsequentiality of policy. Was there also a wish-fulfilling assessment that if Assad falls MS will inevitably take over?

Having decided to give only limited and patently insufficient military aid to SM, US decided that there was scope for a political, negotiated resolution to the crisis. Kofi Annan was appointed as the Representative of both UN and Arab League. A conference was convened in Geneva in June 2012. The selection of participants was deeply flawed. Iran, a major player but for whose support Assad might have fallen, was not invited. Saudi Arabia was strongly opposed to Iran’s participation and Obama would have come under criticism from the powerful pro-Israeli lobby within US if Iran was invited. The representation from Syria was only the SM, rather a marginal player within Syria. Even SM was deeply divided about the wisdom of attending. A negotiated solution is possible only when both sides are prepared to compromise. In the present case, Assad was not prepared to step down and SM was not prepared to backtrack from its demand for him to step down. The final product was a document that called for an end to violence, a call that did not make any sense as Assad was not prepared to stop using violence against his opponents he called ‘terrorists’ and the major armed groups fighting the regime were not represented at Geneva. Predictably, Kofi Annan came to the conclusion that the whole process was sterile and he walked out.

In August 2012, President Obama came out with ‘red lines’ and threatened President Assad with ‘enormous consequences’ should he cross them. Basically, it was about the moving around or use of chemical weapons. The first chemical attack occurred in March 2013 in Khan Al Asal . The UN Mission to investigate into the attack reached Damascus on August 21, 2014 and that day there was a large scale attack in Ghouta, a suburb of Damascus, killing about 1400 human beings. US charged Assad with responsibility for the attack on Ghouta though it was unable to present any conclusive evidence. Reports came out of US plans to strike at Syria.Russia and China stated that there was no evidence against Assad. The Pentagon moved war ships with Tomahawk missiles and B- 52 bombers close to Syria. The attack was to commence between August 30 and September 1. On August 31, when Obama was expected to announce the commencement of airstrikes, he changed course and said that he was going to ask for Congressional approval. The Senate was going to approve airstrikes, but it was not certain that the House of Representatives would go along. The House wanted hearings first. Polls showed that majority of people did not support airstrikes.

The White House put out the story that the President changed his mind as a result of a walking conversation with his Chief of Staff Denis McDonough. But few people believe that. The general impression is that finding that his Plan A was not working, Obama decided on Plan B. John Kerry in a press conference hinted that should Assad surrender his chemical weapons, there would be need for airstrikes. Russia seized on that statement and arranged for Syria to join the Chemical Weapons Convention and to agree to the destruction of its stock.

There is another story, not to be dismissed, about the change of track by Obama. The US intelligence told him that there was no hard evidence against Assad and that US action would be considered as aggression and that the Middle East might ‘go up in smoke’. President Putin had spoken of ‘catastrophic consequences’ of US military action without Security Council approval. Obama was compelled to change course.The net result was that the weapons with the Syrian Government were located and destroyed; there might be weapons with the rebels as chemical weapons are easy to make; Assad’s position got strengthened; Obama’s credibility as Commander-in-Chief declined; and Saudi Arabia and others expecting airstrikes were disappointed. It is obvious that Obama did not show good judgment expected of a President when he announced plans to strike and then hesitated. In fact, the error goes back to his ‘red lines’ speech of August 2012 that upset his own military and diplomats as it was a rather hasty response to a question.

We might mention en passant the second Geneva Conference held in January/February 2014 for which Kofi Annan’s successor Lakhdar Brahimi worked hard. Iran was invited and then dis-invited.As the Conference was a resounding failure, Brahimi resigned in May 2014. There is no attempt at a political resolution of the crisis now.

The airstrikes against IS(Islamic State) in Syria going on for more than a month meant to ‘degrade and ultimately destroy IS’ have prevented them from taking over Kobane at the border with Turkey. Does the US have any policy towards Assad? Defence Secretary Hagel has asked his President in writing what US policy towards Syria as a whole is. That Hagel had to ask for in writing shows that Obama has not so far formulated any policy. Obama’s announced plan to train 5000 Syrians chosen by MS to be trained outside Syria before they are sent to Syria does not make sense as they will have to fight the other armed rebel groups , the Syrian government forces, and the Kurds.

It should be pointed out that it is not always possible to have a clear cut policy in a fluid situation like that in Syria and that the belief of some Obama’s critics that US can intervene in foreign conflicts and decisively influence the outcome is rather naïve. But that said President Obama could have been less inconsistent , inconsequential and incoherent. As of now Syria is divided into many with Assad controlling a third of territory. There is no sign of any end to the meaningless massacre that has been going on for more than forty months.

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/PresidentObamasPolicyonSyria_kpfabian_181114.html

The post President Obama’s Policy On Syria – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The assembly elections in the state of Jammu and Kashmir are approaching and a high rural turnout in the state, especially in the Valley, is now the trend.

The elections in Kashmir Valley will be held in four phases from November 25 to December 20, in which several parties are trying their luck and are eager to form the government.

Nevertheless, observation and interactions reveal that election fever significantly differs from Jammu to Kashmir to Ladakh, with divisions based on regional ideologies and politics, as well as people’s like or dislike for particular parties. The trend suggests that just two waves seem common, the BJP wave in Jammu and Ladakh and the PDP wave in the Valley. The Valley actually divides Kashmir Psephology into two main collective perceptions; i.e., a boycott loving brigade and keen voters.

However, amid the election fever, the violence factor does remain intact, despite a sufficient security apparatus in place.

Every time Kashmir goes to elections, violent activities tend to rise reminding us of the continuing dissent of a significant chunk of the population against the electoral process that has so far not been seriously dealt with. However, amid this uncertainty and aspirations for change, varied perceptions come to fore.

Inevitably, the youth end up questioning the very utility of voting in Kashmir.

A research scholar on asking whether he will vote in the upcoming elections says, “How many MLA’s visit their constituencies and keep meeting masses once they get elected. so far and how many issues have actually been tackled? They (leaders) are hardly concerned about Kashmir and Kashmir issue once they get elected; therefore voting for us is a futile exercise. Who to vote is a huge dilemma”.
Another young man is of the opinion that even if we chose some MLA’s, they and their queries are hardly taken to the assembly and actually solved”.

In the 2014 elections, the fact remains that Kashmiris fail to show much of an interest in the Lok Sabha polls, as compared to assembly polls because most of the populations believes that Kashmir does not really matter in such elections as compared to other massive states.

Amid these thoughts, there are however obvious trends, people’s interests, guesses and comments.

A teacher from central Kashmir believes that not parliamentary elections, but assembly elections influence Kashmir politics. He says,
“To most of the masses here, these are the real difference making elections and have a lot to do with peoples’ progress, so they consider them significant.”

People also argue that these elections have a direct link to their issues, as MLA’s can make a significant difference in their areas, but unfortunately nothing much has happened in aftermath.

As expected, speculations and people’s self-conceptualized opinion polls, to be read as wild guesses, are all over the place.

A friend from Jammu guesses, “In Jammu division again it will be BJP vs PDP because of both Modi Wave and PDP wave but BJP’s denying tickets to its sitting MLA’s may cost them dear.”

Meanwhile, the mainstream politicians, especially the heavyweights, are being garlanded and welcomed by the masses in their respective support areas and the institution of blame game is in place. Right now political giants like Gh. Nabi Azad, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, Prof. Bhim Singh, Gh. Hassan Mir, Omar Abdullah, Sajad Lone are trying their best to reach the masses with their ideas besides BJP trying their best to make their visibility strong in the valley. Also PM Modi’s personal visits planned to the valley will matter a lot.

Manifestos are not new either, except some developmental slogans. Same old stories, same old dreams continue to haunt the Valley.

The National Conference (NC) this time surprisingly is not relying on its age old autonomy card,  but development is its big slogan which the critics ridicule it for due to its perpetual failure to achieve the same. They criticise the ruling party for not realising the revocation of controversial AFSPA despite improvement in people’s security and the invisibility of the government during recent floods is proving the last nail in the coffin.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) — the main opposition party —  talks of K-issue resolution, development, healing touch and safety and dignity of Kashmiris. PDP possesses a sound backing especially in South Kashmir and that is why Mehbooba Mufti of PDP defeated Dr Mehboob Beg of NC in the parliamentary elections this year. Indeed,  Congress vs PDP is going to be an interesting fight in the south Kashmir.

There are other candidates as well who talk of Kashmir issue “solutions”, some talk of development, while some others just criticize others, etc, however join the hue and cry over the flood response and unemployment of youth, which is very high.

On the other hand, the much loved separatist and revered octogenarian separatist leader SAS Geelani is back with his routine boycott formula and in tune are with him all the separatists who have either been arrested or put under house arrest to avoid any mess during elections.

Amid all this new drama and old boycott gimmick, there are not much takers of Geelani’s agenda especially in the rural landscape of Kashmir where politics of personal affiliation and an idea of a leader ‘being the neighbour’ or a friend or a hero is considered above the K-issue and the boycott agenda itself.

Most of the rural politics in Kashmir is for the first time not based more on the old sentiment in NC support because of the charismatic Sheikh Abdullah factor. Now people understand, more than emotions. Older lot however still favours Sheikh Abdullaha who passed away in 1982 but love to cast their vote on his plough.

I still remember how in the previous assembly elections in Kashmir an old man was taken by a PDP worker to a polling station with all the motivation, support, comfort and clearly instructed about whom to vote but the ailing old man after casting his vote clearly said that he knows just one sign to vote for and that is Sheikh Sahab’s plough (NC sign). The fuming PDP worker left the old man without dropping him home back.

Congress, NC or PDP; support is mostly on the sense of neighbourhood, outreach of local politicians to people in their own areas, regional alliances, etc.

The congress factor is also significant now because of the new era of youth with smart phones who now are much more informed and know the national politics well. Gulam Nabi Azad (mostly named as Azad sahib) is treated as a credible politician throughout the valley for his efficient chief Ministership (November 2, 2008 -July 11, 2008) and developmental vision. Azad is making his all out efforts to ensure congress victory in the state.

Yet, amid this all high drama a sense of disappointment and pessimism continues to haunt the youth psyche.

“There were some subtle expectations from the outgoing government but they failed drastically to solve the Kashmir’s problems and security issues here. Kashmir really had not been benefited by the dynasty politics and moreover if this time people do vote that will not be for resolving K-dispute but for development of Kashmir in terms of economy which no one has so far fulfilled” says a student at Kashmir University.

On the same question, a Kashmiri Sociologist while asking about rural urban voting trends argues, “Rural Kashmir except a few most sensitive regions (like Sopore and some areas of Pulwama) votes more because of expecting more facilities to be provided to them by selecting a particular candidate (not necessarily of a particular party). Since rural people lack the basic amenities of life like sufficient electricity, drinking water, roads, health care access, education, employment, reach to the corridors of power, etc, they whole heartedly participate to select their known candidates. Also at a time when rural people in Kashmir are shifting to other non-agricultural activities to earn their living, voting behaviour though has changed its choices but has not ceased at all. Comparatively in the urban areas people do enjoy almost all basic requirements of life and have options of cash earning activities and many other recreational facilities and that is a nice option to them not to go for voting.”

Studying the elections sociologically in Jammu and Kashmir, one observes the tradition of continuity and change. The politics of vested interests and ideologies, projected leaders and the dynasty rule still prevails and keeps enjoying the support of the masses.
While lamenting at the faded glory of Kashmir, an elderly man feebly narrates about the relation between the elections and onset of violence in Kashmir. He believes that the rigged elections of 1987 actually led to the armed struggle in Kashmir that started in 1989.

He adds, “If we pay a glimpse on the whole history of election pattern and contesting fashion in Kashmir, various painful aspects and agonising viewpoints come to surface. Kashmir Psephology reveals nothing but a prolonged scene of betrayal, a pathetic story of exploitation, marginalization of the particular sections and identities. It aims at exploitation and use of the poor. It means disguised enslavement, family monopoly, predetermined appointments & disappointments, hollow public luring for personal power, vote bank politics, violence for power, plots, corruption, mass embarrassment, general injustice & atrocities on the common man. Who cares”.

A political scientist argues that, “The most interesting facet of Kashmir psephology on one hand is the peoples’ claim for “Azadi” and simultaneously contesting/participating in elections under the same constitution on the other. Sometimes one wonders how this all goes hand in hand and how do the same masses identify with such conflicting ideologies and horrible dichotomies”.

Though they call it change of way and not ideology, however talking of Kashmir elections no doubt is an integral part of the whole political process.

“While politicians also maintain that elections here are for local governance and for Bijli, Paniand Sadak to befool the masses. Actually by participating in this whole process we prove that we are an integral part of India,”says a student of Urdu from Kulgam area.
To most of the youth change at the centre really does not matter but it matters at the state level. They feel whosoever comes, Kashmiri’s alienation and sufferings continue.

A youth from north Kashmir on defining elections says, “To a common Kashmiri, what is an election here now? Another face of corrupt and Delhi sponsored brigade, new power opportunity, yet another visionless governance and youth exploitation. Further another term of moral, social, economic and administrative disorder and rottenness will come into being”.

A university colleague argues, “Elections here to me simply mean rallies and rushes, inconveniencing the public, impressive speeches, a saga of blames and accusations on each other, show of might and rhetoric, inter-party fights and hostilities, conspiracies against each other, political advantage of each other’s lapses, family and traditional authority politics, appointment of some new faces and disappointment of some prior ones, youth enslavement, artificial dreams, hollow promises, use of youth for sloganeering, public gatherings, public luring, fights, vote loot, use of youths for facilitating ‘Jalsaas’ (political gatherings), and blame game on floods, etc.”

People also feel that everything is done for the vote bank in this part of the world.

“Elections no doubt are essential for the maintenance of political structure of the state but the Kashmir political and election studies reveal that it is a imposed thing and not the institutional need. Moreover, we witness the party monopoly both at the centre and state level who mobilize their agents to run the campaigning and voting  process and public hardly gets to decide anything which defeats the actual goal of true elections,”comments  a research scholar from Kashmir University.

Iram Saba, a tutor from Srinagar says, “I will not vote because I have never voted and my family has also not voted. It is almost a taboo here now. Actually no voting has become a culture here that also benefits the politicians. We follow the election boycott. The question also is to vote for whom?”

Last Word

The so called political giants, heavyweights and self made intellectuals and Parties contesting elections in Kashmir lack the very vision on Kashmir. However it remains to be seen whether it will be the success of BJP’s Mission 44+ or the next government will be of PDP and congress coalition or some other combo.

While it is true that there is no Modi wave as BJP has hardly been a significant stakeholder in the valley, the fact remains BJP is displaying its hard work at the ground level and appointing a young brigade of politicians to win Kashmir. The other Parties are not highly liked too for their manifestos, leadership style, governance, etc, by the masses but the heavy voting is expected.

Yes, the people especially rural section of the population show a high participation but only because of their affiliations to politicians based on either knowing the leader personally, neighbourhood issues, concept of Biradari, or to take avenge of the last supported party or candidate or being a worker or simply to get a casual labour job after the leader in the neighbourhood gets elected or become a minister.

Kashmir’s theatre of elections currently plays the drums of autonomy, dual currency, healing touch, AFSPA revocation,Budgam killings row, Pathribal case closure, poll boycott, article 370 support and abrogation slogans, ‘Kashmir will be our priority slogan by BJP’, BJP anchoring roots in Kashmir, Omar’s autonomy and Geelani’s boycott, etc.

The law of situation has changed the sphere of influence and the sphere of obligation and paved the way for a different psephology this time.

Though it is an established fact that Kashmir Psephology is not entirely different from that of the rest of India as electoral process still remains topsy-turvy/sensitive in most parts of the country but at the end of the day one comes to conclude that a lack of developments on the K-issue, lack of peace building, leadership crisis, lack of credible politicians, dearth of young and able politicians, lack of mass friendly ideologies, lack of development and progressive vision, lack of conflict termination, continued violence, HR violation, unaccounted killings, increasing dissent and undying secessionist tendencies, etc, haunt the Kashmir Psephology.

Amid the high drama of elections in the troubled valley, the common man has been left confused, mentally tortured and ideologically starved. With the powerful elite enjoying every bit of it, it is the suffering masses who continue to live under the shadow of hopelessness.

Ahmad Faraz aptly puts it, “Har koi Apni Hawa Main Mast Firta Hai Faraz Sheher-e-NaPursaan Main Teri Chashm-i-Tarr Dekhega Kon”

(Adfar Shah is a Delhi Based (Kashmiri) Sociologist and Columnist at Pointblank7,SAISA,Foreign policy.org, Analyst World and Kashmir Times. This write up first appeared in Pointblank7.Mail at adfer.syed@gmail.com)

The post Kashmir: On People And Voting Trends – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

New Delhi‘s immense investment in conventional arms, and the upgrading of its anti-missile program (Ballistic Missile Defense) and its latest doctrinal transformation have indulged Pakistan to respond in the form of TNWs in one or the other way, which is necessary for the restoration and maintaining of the credibility of its nuclear deterrence.

The recent successful launches of November 13 and 17 of Intermediate and Medium Range Ballistic Missiles is a timely and needy response to the recent launch of Delhi’s Medium Range Ballistic Missiles Agni II and its long range, subsonic cruise missile Nirbhay on November 9 and 17, respectively. The nuclear-capable cruise missile, Nirbhay has a range of over 700 kilometers that was announced to be test-fired from Balasore in Odisha state. And the test-launch of long-range nuclear-capable strategic ballistic missile, Agni-II has a strike range of 2,000 km that was fired from the Wheeler Island off the Odisha Coast.

Evidently, the main purpose of Islamabad is to ensure that Pakistan has counter strike capability that limits the threat of India’s conventional limited war. For that reason Pakistan successfully tested the Shaheen-II (Hatf-VI) Ballistic Missile on November 13 that is capable of carrying nuclear and conventional warheads to a range of 1500 kilometers. The other recent successful test launch was of the Intermediate Range Shaheen 1A (Hatf IV) Ballistic Missile. It was aimed at re-validating various design and technical parameters of the weapon system. Shaheen1A Missile is capable of carrying nuclear and conventional warheads to a range of 900 Kms whose impact point as declared, was in Arabian Sea.

Both were observed and valued by the prominent officers of the strategic organizations including Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Muhammad Zakaullah, Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Zubair Mahmood Hayat, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command, Lieutenant General Obaid Ullah Khan,Vice Admiral Zafar Mehmood Abbasi, Commander Pakistan Fleet, Chairman NESCOM, Mr Muhammad Irfan Burney and other senior officers from the strategic forces, scientists and engineers of strategic organizations.

Shaheen I-A with its highly accurate and indigenously developed guidance system is amongst the most accurate missile systems. The Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Muhammad Zakaullah naval therefore, reiterated Pakistan’s desire for peaceful co-existence in the region. Similarly he expressed his confidence with the armed forces’ capability to safeguard the country against any aggression and congratulated the scientists and engineers for their dedication, professionalism and commitment towards achieving Pakistan’s full spectrum credible minimum deterrence capability. He also appreciated the operational preparedness and readiness of Army Strategic Forces Command, which made the successful launch of Shaheen-II Weapon System possible. He showed his full confidence in the existing robust Strategic Command and Control System. The successful test launch has also been warmly appreciated by the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan who congratulated the participating troops, the scientists and engineers on their outstanding achievement.

Pakistan has tested a wide range of missiles, including nuclear-capable, ranging from the Hatf-IX tactical missile with a range of 60 kilometres to Hatf-IV, in recent months as part of efforts to strengthen its nuclear arsenal to counter India’s conventional superiority. The latest Pakistani test was the 5th in 2014 and was part of Pakistan’s efforts to maintain a ‘minimum credible deterrence.’ On November 17, intermediate range Shaheen 1A (Hatf IV) ballistic missile (900km) was test-fired; on November 13, intermediate range Shaheen-II (Hatf-VI) (1500km) was tested; On September 26, short range surface-to-surface missile Hatf IX (NASR) (60km) was test-launched; On May 8, the short range surface-to-surface ballistic missile Hatf III (Ghaznavi) (290km) was test-fired, while on April 22, a short range surface-to-surface ballistic missile Hatf III (Ghaznavi) (290km) was tested.

Primarily, the ongoing race between India and Pakistan at a tactical level is to show each other capabilities as well as abilities but in this particular tactical level race Pakistan is not acting actually it is reacting. But, this ongoing race is becoming the burning point of concern not only for the whole region but also for the whole globe. Pakistan doesn’t want to involve itself in dire and unending race but behavior of Indian strategists, government and decision makers is compelling Pakistan with full force to react accordingly.

However, these successful tests clearly show the capabilities as well as abilities of Pakistan. At each and every level whether it is technological, tactical or strategic the readiness and robustness of Pakistan cannot be challenged. All efforts, which are being done by India to gain conventional military superiority, are in vain. Therefore, it is not easy task to counter Pakistan’s military abilities especially nuclear capabilities. These all aggressive moves which are being made by India have big potential to bring South Asia at the verge of instability that would result in destruction.

Both writers work for Strategic Vision Institute (SVI), Islamabad as Research Associates and can be reached at raza.svi@gmail.com & beenishaltaf7@gmail.com

The post Maintaining Deterrence Equation – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Gustavo Placido Dos Santos

Recent events in Ukraine and the threat posed by the European Union’s dependency on Russian energy — Moscow supplies a quarter of Europe’s needs for natural gas, 80% of which runs through Ukrainian territory — has led Brussels, and EU’s city-capitals, to consider alternative sources towards alleviating the dependency and thus increasing Europe’s energy security. Beyond Russia and European indigenous production — which accounts for 33% of the EU’s usage of natural gas—Europe’s five largest partners are Norway (22%), Algeria (9%), Qatar (6%) and Nigeria (2%).1 One can notice that the small share of Nigerian natural gas out of the total European imports does not correspond to Abuja’s real capacity and potential in becoming a strategic energy partner.2

In fact, the Nigerian government aspires to do just that. On the sidelines of the ministerial meeting of the EU-OPEC energy dialogue, which took place in Brussels in June 2014, Nigeria’s Petroleum Minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, said “[t]he Federal Government restated its resolve to support the long term gas supply security for the European Union countries as part of measures to expand the nation’s gas market”.3

This strategic approach towards the European market is, on the one hand, a sign that the government in Abuja recognizes Europe’s energy market potential — the EU’s aspiration to diversify energy sources has motivated such an approach — and, on the other hand, is a product of recent developments in the global natural gas market. Among these developments the United States’ shift to the domestic exploration of shale gas, and Mozambique’s affirmation as a major player in the natural gas market4 are key. Being one of the most promising African countries, in terms of energy, the fact that Mozambique is located on the Indian Ocean’s shoreline has driven Asian powers to increasingly focus their attentions towards Maputo.5 Also worth noting is that Asia currently represents Nigeria’s main natural gas export market.6

For Nigeria, satisfying European natural gas needs implies an increase in the production of the resource. With that purpose in mind, Abuja has in motion plans to build additional LNG production infrastructures—apart from Bonny LNG, the only one currently in operation—such as the Olokola LNG, the Brass LNG and the Train 7 at Bonny LNG. To make these projects operational, the government must put an end to the constant delays and settle the years-long stalemate over the Petroleum Industry Bill.7 Failing to overcome these obstacles may result in Nigeria losing ground to international competition.

Among the potential major beneficiaries of Nigeria’s strategic shift are Portugal and Spain. While Lisbon and Madrid are already the two largest European importers of natural gas sourced in Nigeria,8 they also belong to the small group of EU countries that do not import Russian gas. Since they don’t depend on energy from Russia, Lisbon and Madrid will have, at least in principle, a greater margin of manoeuvre in fomenting deeper ties between the EU and Nigeria. That will require, however, grand investments in terms of infrastructure construction and development — something which poses a considerable obstacle.9 Equally relevant is the fact that the Nigerian alternative is not risk-free regarding Europe’s goal of attaining energy security, in particular when considering piracy in the Gulf of Guinea and the fragile stability and security in the Niger Delta.10

Gas pipelines across Mediterranean and Sahara. Graphic by Sémhur, Wikipedia Commons.

Despite the focus on LNG, Nigeria also intends to bolster gas exports to Europe by building the Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline (TSGP) that will connect the Niger Delta — home to the bulk of Nigeria’s gas reserves — to Algeria,11 and on to Europe via already existent gas pipelines. It is estimated that the TSGP will cost US$20 billion. According to the feasibility report, the TSGP will be more competitive than the GNL option, since operational costs will be inferior and waste less natural gas. The report adds that the pipeline’s “critical advantage” is the ability to supply gas to African regions that are often affected by high energy prices and desertification.12

Nevertheless, despite the alleged advantage in terms of costs, the project’s development faces several obstacles. To start with, finding the US$20 billion dollars to finance the TSGP will be a difficult task. Secondly, some militant groups in the Niger Delta oppose the allocation of funds for the project before the economic and social problems in the region are properly dealt with.13 Thirdly, some analysts believe that the quantities carried by the gas pipeline will exceed European demand.14 Lastly, the region through which the pipeline crosses includes extremely volatile centres of instability.15

Adding to these factors, the Russian energy company Gazprom has a stake in the pipeline project. Hence, importing gas via a company in which Gazprom has interests goes against the EU’s goal of reducing dependency on Russian energy.

In short, to diversify energy sources implies widening the number of energy suppliers. As such, Nigeria appears to be a viable option and a potential strategic partner that would contribute to European energy security. In fact, when weighing the variables at stake it becomes clear that the GNL option is more advantageous to Europe than the TSGP. Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to completely exclude from the equation the risk posed by instability in Nigeria. The social and political tensions are far from becoming things from the past. Having said this, the risk factors and the opportunities will not fail to be taken into account by the EU in its interaction with Abuja.

* Published also in Portuguese: Gustavo Plácido dos Santos, “Nigéria: uma fonte alternativa de energia para a União Europeia?” (IPRIS Comentário, No. 13, Novembro de 2014).

About the author:
Gustavo Placido Dos Santos
Portuguese Institute of International Relations and Security (IPRIS)

Source:
This article was published by IPRIS as IPRIS Viewpoints 165, NOVEMBER 2014 (PDF)

Notes:
1. Data from 2012. See “Statistical Report 2013” (Eurogas, December 2013), p. 6.
2. Nigeria has one of the world’s largest proved natural gas reserves and is the world’s fourth largest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG).
3. “Nigeria promises to meet EU’s long term gas supply needs” (Platts, 25 June 2014).
4. Recent natural gas discoveries place the country as Africa’s third largest holder of proved gas reserves. See “Mozambique” (EIA, July 2014).
5. In late October 2014 Maputo’s government signed deals with China, Japan, United Arab Emirates and Indian companies. These deals are likely to result in a substantial decrease in Asian demand for Nigerian natural gas. “Nigeria’s LNG export threatened as Asian buyers turn to Mozambique” (Daily Trust, 4 November 2014).
6. The main LNG importers of Nigerian natural gas are Japan (24%), Spain (19%), France (12%), South Korea (9%), and India (7%). Also worth noting, some of the natural gas is also exported via the West African Gas Pipeline (WAGP).
7. A legislative initiative aimed at solving structural, operational, regulatory and investment challenges faced by the petroleum and gas industry. An overview of the bill is available at “Bill Aims to Improve the Health of Nigeria’s Oil and Gas Industry” (Open Society Foundations, 30 May 2014).
8. Spain imports 3.27 billion cubic meters annually and Portugal 1.75. See “World Oil and Gas Review 2014” (ENI, October 2014).
9. Also worth considering is the fact that an increase in the volume of natural gas within the Iberian market allows for a reduction of oil-dependency.
10. The Niger Delta has for the past decades been a source of instability and insecurity.
11. Algeria is the second largest African producer of natural gas and also the second largest gas supplier to Europe. In global terms, Algeria is the seventh largest exporter of LNG. “LNG First-Mover Algeria Seeking to Grow Exports” (Natural Gas Intelligence, 17 October 2014).
12. Such as northern Nigeria, Niger, southern Algeria, Burkina Faso and southern Mali. See “Nigeria – Algeria Pipeline” (Ministry of Foreign Affairs [Iran]).
13. The Niger Delta population has not experienced substantial benefits out of the vast profits derived from the exploration of energy resources. In addition, bad management practices by multinationals operating in the region have regularly resulted in oil-spills that have gravely affected the population and traditional livelihoods, such as agriculture and fisheries.
14. “Trans-Saharan gas pipeline operational by 2015 if obstacles overcome” (North Africa Post, 26 November 2012).
15. The gas pipeline crosses northern Nigeria, Mali, and southern Algeria. Separatist and jihadi groups, such as the Touareg, Boko Haram, Ansar Dine, and Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM), pose constant threats to energy infrastructures and foreign interests in the regions in which they are present.

The post Nigeria: An Alternative Energy Source For The European Union? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Maria Alicia Nuñez

In the Americas, three nations prevail as leading consumers and producers of beef: the United States, Brazil, and Argentina. From burgers to filet mignon, beef is often considered a staple food, even a delicacy. Its consumption is deeply ingrained in some cultures, but only a few understand the impact of industrial demand of cattle products. Most people are not aware that beef production is directly responsible for producing vast levels of greenhouse gases and expanding deforestation, especially in the Amazon forest region. In fact, in the past 25 years forests with an area the size of India have been cleared in Central and South America.[1] Although demand for beef has stagnated in the U.S. and certain Latin American countries, worldwide consumption continues to expand, and producers in the Western hemisphere are eager to supply. In fact, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) predicts that beef production and consumption will double by 2050, a situation that can ultimately be costly to the environment.[2] The article does not attempt to promote the eradication of beef from the personal diet, but to present an argument for the preservation of the environment, which includes a decrease in current levels of consumption, as well as innovative farming practices.

In terms of production, the U.S. takes the lead with an average of 11 million tons produced per year, followed by Brazil with 9.7 million tons and Argentina with 2.6 million tons.[3] In the U.S., people consume an average of three hamburgers a week, resulting in 156 burgers a year per person.[4] Argentina has historically been a prime consumer, and in the 1960s citizens consumed about 222 pounds per person every year. Beef plays a central role in the culture and identity of Argentina, so much so that in the 1990s former President Carlos Menem once joked, “Don’t come to my country if [you’re] vegetarian.”[5] Today, their consumption is slightly lower at about 129 pounds per person, but it is still well above the global average of 58.4 pounds per person a year.[6] Even though certain countries have reduced their consumption, overall worldwide trends indicate that beef-lovers are on the rise, especially in developing countries.

Meat Atlas. FoEE

Patterns of beef consumption in developed countries are adapting to new trends, medical discoveries, and high prices. Inflation has caused an increase in beef prices, driving consumers to seek other sources of food. In addition, many farmers have decided to opt out of the business of cow grazing to enter the high-demand market of soy and corn production because these crops are inexpensive to grow and sell at high prices. The decrease in consumption can also be attributed to medical studies, which reveal that beef elevates levels of cholesterol and must be consumed in moderation. Lastly, compared to other types of meat, beef production has the most costly effect to the environment.

According to the Worldwatch Institute, “Over the last 30 years, the number of farm animals – and that includes both four-footed livestock like cattle and pigs and goats and sheep, as well as poultry – has increased about 23 percent since 1980.”[7] The increase of meat demand cannot be attributed to developed countries, but to developing ones. Economic growth in developing countries has spurred a broader middle class. People tend to spend their additional earnings on more expensive items, such as meat products. However, if demand keeps rising, suppliers will opt for cattle-raising methods that are more resource-efficient but worse off for people’s health and environmental welfare.

The cattle-raising quandary

Average shoppers purchase food at supermarkets without taking a look at labels. Consumers tend to buy beef products based on price and type of cut. Rarely do people inquire as to what occurred before the product arrived at the store. In order to be more conscious omnivores, consumers must be aware of what they eat because the process of food production inevitably has a nefarious effect on personal health and the environment.

There are two predominant techniques employed to raise cows. One method, called grazing, allows cattle to wander throughout enclosed grasslands. Grazing is considered more humane; cows are free to roam the land before heading to the slaughterhouse. Grazing methods imply that cows eat mostly grass and are not given antibiotics, hormones, or supplements. Of course, there are variations to these methods, such as feeding cows with grains and vitamins during the final stages of their lives to accelerate growth. Raising livestock naturally is an extremely slow process and utilizes large amounts of water and land in order to achieve an optimal beef weight. It takes much longer to raise a cow naturally, and consequently more resources are used for its growth. In the past 40 years, vast areas of forests have been destroyed to give way to agriculture and cattle ranching.[8] In addition, cows produce large amounts of natural waste that contains methane, a greenhouse gas that is harmful to the environment. Methane accounts to 18 percent of all greenhouse gases, and livestock waste is three times more potent than human waste.[9] At least through grazing, cows sequester carbon emissions on the pasture and this results in better air and water quality than feedlots.[10]

Grazing techniques are most regularly used in Brazil and Argentina, although different demands are pushing for new developments.[11] Often seen in the United States, feedlot mechanisms are gaining traction all over the world. Grazing requires vast tracts of land that are utilized solely for the cows’ livelihood, but yield little production as they take years to mature. As a result, farmers are encouraged to use the land to plant corn or soy, products that have a higher demand. Instead of grazing, they turn to feedlots, which confine the cows in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Cows in feedlots are fed on a corn and soy diet, amongst other grains, even though these are not part of a natural diet for cattle. In many feedlots, cows are administered hormones and antibiotics to speed growth. The total lifespan of the cow is shorter, which means less use of water, food, and land. However, cows produce methane and large concentrations of these gases harm the environment. In addition, a shorter lifespan means more beef is produced, since this allows more cows to move through the feedlots.[12]

Studies show that red meat is linked to heart disease and cancer. In a study, heavy consumers of red meat were associated with low physical activity, smoking, and higher body mass.[13] Corn is not the natural food of cows, and therefore grain-fed beef contains about 22-39 percent more cholesterol. Grass-fed beef is healthier because it has higher levels of linoleic acid and omega-3. [14] There is no perfect way to raise cattle, but given the choice, grass-fed is healthier and friendlier to the environment.

Albeit not the greenest activity, eating beef is deeply embedded in the culture of countries in the Americas, especially in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and the United States. As a result, it is foolish to assume that everyone can completely cut off his or her beef consumption. In addition, its production plays a significant role in the economy. However, more sustainable practices should be encouraged. Individuals can reduce their carbon footprint by lowering their consumption or choosing either organic or 100% grass-fed beef. In addition, innovative practices from the farmers’ side can increase the fertility of the land and reduce gas emissions. One noteworthy example is Estancia Grass-fed Beef that works with the traditional Argentine model of cattle grazing. It involves a rotating system of 5-7 years of cattle ranching followed by 1-2 year crop cycle.[15] Their model maintains the fertility of the soil and avoids monoculture, a dangerous method that deprives the soil of its nutrients. Those willing to supply their products, while still being mindful of the environment, should follow sustainable practices, such as Estancia’s. In addition, it is everyone’s job as conscious consumers to be aware of the products they eat. By simply cutting a few portions of meat a week, each individual can play a significant role in the preservation of the environment.

Maria Alicia Nuñez, Research Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

References

[1] ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0262e/a0262e00.pdf

[2] http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/35571/icode/

[3] http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/publications/foee_hbf_meatatlas_jan2014.pdf

[4] http://www.opb.org/news/blog/ecotrope/shrinking-the-environmental-footprint-of-beef/

[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/world/americas/argentina-falls-from-its-throne-as-king-of-beef.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[6] http://www.beefusa.org/udocs/annualpercapitaconsumption-meat-boneless491.pdf

[7] http://www.voanews.com/content/decapua-farm-animals-29mar12-144898655/179917.html

[8] ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0262e/a0262e00.pdf

[9] http://www.opb.org/news/blog/ecotrope/shrinking-the-environmental-footprint-of-beef/

[10] http://www.opb.org/news/blog/ecotrope/which-is-greener-grass-fed-or-grain-fed-beef/

[11] http://animalfrontiers.org/content/1/2/46.full

[12] http://www.opb.org/news/blog/ecotrope/which-is-greener-grass-fed-or-grain-fed-beef/

[13] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/health/research/red-meat-linked-to-cancer-and-heart-disease.html?_r=0

[14] http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=141

[15] http://grist.org/sustainable-food/in-argentina-factory-farms-replacing-grass-fed-beef/

The post Is Grass-Fed Really Greener? Beef Production In The Americas – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Law enforcement agencies in Ferguson, Missouri should respect the public’s right to peaceful protest following the grand jury decision in the Michael Brown case, Human Rights Watch said today. In the event of renewed protests, police should permit peaceful assembly and expression, refrain from using excessive force, and conduct operations with transparency and accountability.

A state grand jury will soon decide whether to indict a Ferguson police officer, Darren Wilson, for the fatal shooting of Brown, an African-American teenager, on August 9, 2014. Citing the “possibility of expanded unrest” should the grand jury decide not to indict, Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri on November 17 declared a 30-day state of emergency.

“Respect for protesters’ rights should be at the heart of an effective law enforcement response to any demonstrations in Ferguson,” said Alba Morales, criminal justice researcher with the US program at Human Rights Watch. “While Missouri understandably wants to be prepared for the risk of unrest, state and local officials need to make clear that abuses like those in August are unacceptable.”

Brown’s killing touched off large public demonstrations, beginning the evening of August 10 and continuing mostly unabated for two weeks. Human Rights Watch found serious problems in the police response to the protests. The problems included the intimidation of protesters that infringed upon their rights to assembly and freedom of expression, which are protected under both the US Constitution and international law. At times, the police used unnecessary and disproportionate force. The authorities also hindered media organizations from gathering news on the protests.

The protests laid bare bitter and longstanding tensions between residents of Ferguson, an overwhelmingly black township, and its majority-white police force, owing to what residents said was racially discriminatory policing. Many residents described to Human Rights Watch years of police harassment and intimidation.

Human Rights Watch has twice written to Governor Nixon since early September to request that Missouri undertake a comprehensive and transparent review both of the reasons underlying the protests and of the law enforcement response, and to improve policies and practices for policing future protests. The governor’s office has not responded to the letters.

“If new protests break out in Ferguson, law enforcement will have an opportunity to show that they have learned from past experience,” Morales said. “Far from improving public security, disproportionate responses to protests only fuel anger and resentment, while endangering protesters and bystanders.”

The post US: Respect Rights Of Ferguson Protesters, Says HRW appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Gauri Khandekar

Within just six months in power, Narendra Modi has managed to induce a dramatic overhaul of India’s hitherto muffled and ill-defined foreign policy, and has dramatically increased his country’s global profile. Successful summits with the BRICS grouping (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), Japan, China, Nepal and Bhutan were topped off with a high-profile visit to the United States (US) from 27-30 September. Modi’s US visit was his most interesting foreign trip: barred from entry to the US for nine years because of accusations over his role in the Gujarat massacre of 2002, the red carpet to the White House was rolled out. Modi received a ‘rockstar’ reception in the US, especially from Americans of Indian origin, for example addressing 18,000 people at Madison Square Gardens in New York.

Unlike his predecessors, Modi has underscored foreign policy as a priority from the beginning alongside a strong mandate to put India’s economy in order. Modi aspires to re-invigorate India’s emerging power status, which suffered in recent years due to poor economic growth. He has not only injected focus and ambition into India’s foreign policy, but also linked it directly to his plan to transform India’s economy. Launched in September 2014, ‘Make in India’ has become Narendra Modi’s signature programme as he aspires to convert India into a global manufacturing hub. His foreign policy mantra therefore is strongly driven by geo- economics – especially attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) – and at the same time seeks to consolidate India’s leadership role in South Asia.

While the previous Congress party- led governments prioritised relations with the US and the European Union (EU) (the Singh government negotiated the historic US-India nuclear energy agreement from 2005-2008 and launched free trade talks with the EU in 2007), Modi is shifting the focus to India’s immediate neighbourhood and other major Asian countries like Japan, China and Australia, as well as the BRICS grouping.

Modi has a personal penchant for foreign policy and, unusually, had undertaken numerous foreign visits (especially to China and Japan) while Chief Minister of Gujarat, an Indian state. Modi’s foreign policy mixes uber-pragmatism with business acumen. He has managed to convince both China and Japan to invest heavily in India while re-establishing India’s foothold in its precarious immediate neighbourhood. Reaffirming India’s traditional non-aligned policy, Modi has employed a more muscular approach to asserting his country’s independence while taking a very selective approach to multilateral cooperation. For example, India singularly vetoed the World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) in July (a draft already agreed by the WTO’s 160 members including the previous Congress-led Indian government at the Bali Ministerial Conference in 2013) over food security concerns. A breakthrough was reached in the fringes of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in November, when the US agreed not to challenge India’s food security policies at the WTO, removing the main impasse to the agreement. With the US, Modi has steered clear of joining any US grand strategy on Asia or the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq and Syria, but spoke during his visit there about trade, investment and bilateral security cooperation.

IndIa’s ImmedIate NeIghbourhood

As an emerging power with global aspirations, India must first befit a regional power. Modi’s first major decision after securing power was to extend an unprecedented invitation to South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) leaders for his swearing-in ceremony, despite opposition in India from certain state leaders and political party allies. Modi wishes to emphasise New Delhi’s role in India’s immediate neighbourhood and to revive SAARC, a role long neglected by New Delhi. This move not only confirmed India’s acceptance of its responsibility as a regional leader, but was also the first sign of a shift in Indian foreign policy.

On his first day in office, Narendra Modi held successful bilateral talks with Pakistani Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif. The last major breakthrough in Indo-Pak relations transpired under the previous Vajpayee-led BJP coalition (1998-2004) with the Sharif government, a development which Modi seeks to emulate. By initially holding out the olive branch to Sharif, Modi not only coaxed the latter to reciprocate, but also set Pakistan’s democratic apparatus against its anti-Indian military establishment and intelligence agency who opposed Sharif’s trip to India. However, prior to his election, Modi had promised to take a tough stand on Pakistan.

When Pakistani High Commissioner to India, Abdul Basit, met Kashmiri separatists in August (a policy tolerated by previous Congress-party governments in India), India called off scheduled foreign secretary talks a week before they were to take place. Modi drew his first red line on Pakistan. Bilateral talks were also held with all other SAARC leaders. Symbolically, Modi’s first foreign visit was to neighbouring Bhutan in June, and in August he became the first Indian PM to visit Nepal in 17 years, where he offered a $1 billion line of credit for infra- structure development and energy projects. In June, Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj travelled to Dhaka. Bangladesh is a key neighbour that can help India to better connect with its geographically isolated north-eastern territories, curb India-focused Islamic terrorism, and counter China’s growing influence in the Bay of Bengal.

The drawdown of US and NATO troops from Afghanistan will leave behind a major regional power vacuum which Modi seeks to fill. By taking a lead as the largest country in SAARC, India is looking to set the rules for the region, which is home to nuclear-armed arch rival Pakistan, and is increasingly susceptible to Chinese influence. In recent years, the Chinese strategic footprint in India’s neighbourhood has deepened, in particular via investments in commercial ports in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Burma/Myanmar. These are, however, perceived suspiciously by Indian hawks as a ‘string of pearls’ aimed at encircling India and containing its expansion, whilst also monitoring India’s naval activities. While these ports remain commercial for the moment, China’s deepening of relations with India’s neighbours through military and economic assistance and high-profile infrastructure projects is the real concern. For example, some three-quarters of China’s arms exports are sold to three of India’s South Asian neighbours: Bangladesh, Burma/Myanmar and Pakistan.

EngagIng East AsIa

The centrepiece of Modi’s East Asia manoeuvrings is his China-Japan waltz. Modi shares a personal bond with both Japan and Japanese PM Shinzo Abe. Modi travelled twice to Japan as Chief Minister of Gujarat – Japan did not follow the US and Europe with travel bans on Modi following accusations over his role in the 2002 Gujarat massacre. Modi is one of only four people that Abe follows on twitter (in addition to Indian Home Minister Rajnath Singh), and during Modi’s five-day visit to Japan in August-September, he was received in Kyoto with a bear hug from the usually stiff Japanese PM. During that visit, Japan elevated its relationship with India to a ‘special global strategic partnership’ and pledged $35 billion in investments in Indian infrastructure and energy development, be- sides doubling its FDI over the next five years.

A bullet train or Shinkansen project worth $10 billion and an agreement on joint production of rare earths were also announced (India holds around 2.2 per cent of the world’s rare earth reserves). Although a much-anticipated nuclear energy agreement was not signed, energy cooperation and military ties were significantly strengthened. Both countries also agreed to establish a ‘two-plus-two’ security arrangement bringing together foreign and defence ministers, hold regular maritime exercises, and that Japan would continue to participate in Indo-US military drills. In Tokyo, Modi also condemned the ‘vistar vaad’ or expansionist tendencies of ‘some countries’ who ‘engage in encroachments and enter seas of others’ – a veiled reference to Chinese territorial expansionism.

Although India has its own border dispute with China, Modi is not anti-Chinese. He travelled to China four times before becoming PM to woo investments into Gujarat. There too, like Japan, he was received with the honours proffered to a head of state. Modi is an admirer of Chinese development and feels at ease amongst Beijing technocrats. On one of his visits, he not only carried red business cards printed in Mandarin but declared that ‘China and its people have a special place in my heart’. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi travelled to India soon after Modi’s election while Modi met Chinese President Xi Jinping at the BRICS Summit held in Brazil from 14- 16 June 2014.

Xi Jinping concluded a three-day visit to India landing in Ahmedabad (Modi’s hometown) on 17 September, Modi’s 64th birthday. The visit was highly symbolic and marks the beginning of greater Chinese investments in India – China has invested only $400 million in India in the last decade, compared to the €26.8 billion FDI stock
Beijing held in the EU by the end of 2012 according to the European Commission. Xi is the first Chinese president to visit India in eight years and brought along a delegation that included around 135 Chinese business leaders. Twelve agreements were signed in all.

China pledged to invest $20 billion in Indian infrastructure and manufacturing sectors, agreed to build high-speed rail links and construct two industrial parks in the Indian states of Gujarat and Maharashtra. The visit also saw the twinning of commercial capitals Mumbai and Shanghai as well as Ahmedabad with Guangzhou. In addition, a five-year economic and trade development plan was agreed, and greatly welcomed in New Delhi given India’s large trade deficit with China (some $36.2 billion of a total trade of $66 billion in 2013).

One hallmark of Modi’s nascent foreign policy has been his ability to attract both China and Japan to invest in India without agitating either. However, Modi is also wary of China in some respects. To counter China’s new ‘Maritime Silk Route’ which would link Europe to China via the Indian Ocean, Modi will soon launch a new foreign policy initiative, ‘Project Mausam’. Following the pattern of seasonal monsoons used by ancient Indian sailors, Mausam will stretch from East Africa to Indonesia, proffering India robust control over the Indian Ocean by deepening links with littoral states. For example, India has recently stepped up defence cooperation with the Maldives and Sri Lanka (following Xi’s visit to these countries before travelling to India), while four Indian warships are currently stationed on a two-month term off the coast of East Africa and the Southern Indian Ocean.

ince 2008, India hosts an Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONs) every two years, with the aim of enhancing naval cooperation among 35 Indian Ocean littoral states, and this Symposium can be expected to be further developed under Modi.

Furthermore, Modi will not shy from potential disputes with China. During Xi’s India visit, Indian President Pranab Mukherjee purchased seven new oil and gas blocks from Vietnam in an area of the South China Sea disputed by both China and Vietnam. India has also offered Vietnam a $100 million line of credit to buy patrol boats. Foreign Minister Swaraj has stated that if India should recognise the One-China policy, China should also recognise the One-India policy, referring to the territories of Aksai Chin, Arunachal Pradesh and Trans-Karakoram Tract disputed by India and China.

Modi’s India has pursued a renewed engagement in the rest of Asia too. Swaraj has travelled to ASEAN (Association of South- east Asian Nations) countries to boost India’s profile there, while in the Middle East (where roughly 7 million Indians live) she oversaw the return of 46 Indian expats kidnapped by the Islamic State in Iraq. In September, Modi and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot signed a landmark civil nuclear energy deal to enable Australian uranium sales to India in a major boost to strategic bilateral ties. In November, Modi visited Australia – the first visit from an Indian Prime Minister in 28 years. Australia and India will also hold their first joint naval exercise in 2015.

Furthermore, an India-Russia annual summit scheduled for December 2014 in India presumes a renewal of Indo-Russian ties. Russia, which is India’s second-largest arms supplier and a major nuclear fuel supplier, is also looking to build a $40 billion gas pipe- line to India. Russia is also eager to divert some of its funds from Europe to infrastructure in India. In March, India abstained along with rest of the BRICS countries from voting on a UN Resolution on the territo- rial integrity of Ukraine, and objected to the suggestion of Australia, Chair of the G20, to disinvite Russia from the G20 November 2014 Summit.

WhIther the West?

Modi has had a relatively colder relationship with the West, soured mainly because of his ostracism by the US and European governments following the Gujarat massacre in 2002. His recent visit to the US therefore was more a personal victory lap for him than a revolutionary moment for the Indo-US relationship. At the White House, Modi and Obama discussed ways the US and India could repair their rocky relations. The landmark Indo-US nuclear agreement inked during the Bush administration in 2005 has been held back by Obama. Furthermore, Obama also pushed India to speak with Pakistan to resolve the Kashmir issue during his trip to India in 2010, a suggestion not appreciated by many Indians – especially at a time when India was waiting for Pakistan to persecute perpetrators of the Mumbai 2008 attacks. The ‘defining relationship of the 21st century’ that President Obama spoke of during the same visit has not yet happened.

The US has also been critical of India’s stalling of the WTO’s TFA in July. The TFA would drop trade barriers and import duties across its membership, adding an estimated $1 trillion to global Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Modi is certainly keen on economic growth, but was concerned about India’s ability to provide subsidized staple food for its poor (this US-India impasse was overcome at the APEC Summit in November). Discussing a host of prickly issues, both leaders agreed to renew their defence cooperation for 10 years and spoke of trade and investment especially in India’s defence sector. The US has recently become the top arms exporter to India.

Europe has so far been ignored in Modi’s foreign travel itinerary. Many European leaders including the UK deputy prime minister and the French and German foreign ministers have visited Modi in India this year with billions of dollars’ worth of deals in tow. Already France is India’s third-largest arms supplier, Germany is India’s top trading partner in the EU and the UK and India are negotiating a civil nuclear cooperation agreement. But Modi’s reciprocity has been lukewarm. No visit was scheduled in 2014 to Europe although a trip to Germany is now on the agenda for early 2015. Visits to the UK, France or the Nordic countries, may also be likely during 2015 (Sweden and Denmark were the first countries to reach out to Modi in 2008 when their Ambassadors met him in Gujarat, while the UK hosts a huge Indian diaspora). If anything, Modi can be expected to strike interest-based partnerships with European countries rather than pursue high-profile ties like the previous government. In October, for instance, Indian President Pranab Mukherjee travelled to Finland to sign a key nuclear cooperation pact.

Relations with the EU, however, are likely to further deteriorate as Modi may prefer to engage individual EU member states than the EU institutions. EU-India relations have remained dormant for some time now due to low levels of engagement. Bilateral visits from the EU remain limited and the annual EU-India Summit has not been held in 2014 (or 2013) despite ten years of the EU-India strategic partnership (signed in 2004) and the golden jubilee of relations (established in 1964). Modi also did not attend the biennial Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Summit held in October in Milan. The EU-India FTA under negotiation since 2007 is nowhere in sight, and the Modi government is likely to renegotiate parts of the FTA or lower its overall ambition. In September, Commerce and Industry Minister Nirmala Sitharam stated that ‘the government wants to enter into such deals on its terms and if necessary, start all over again’.

EU-India engagement on foreign policy remains a blind alley. Cooperation on civil nuclear energy at EU level has been limited due to a lack of consensus among EU governments. On the research side, however, India and EURATOM have entered an agreement on fusion energy research in 2009 and an agreement on civilian nuclear energy research is under negotiation and may be signed next year. In all of this, cooperation on urbanisation seems a particularly promising avenue for engagement. The EU remains relatively absent from India’s infrastructure sector, a top priority for Modi, but could become the entry platform for its 28 member countries to the vast Indian infrastructure market. The EU already has a pre-existing model for co- operation on sustainable urbanisation with China that promotes exchanges and cooperation between a large number of European and Chinese stakeholders. Launched in September, Modi’s signature project ‘Make in India’ aims to transform India into a manufacturing hub and could well accommodate European high-speed railways, world-class infrastructure and technology which all have a large potential market in India. By tapping into Modi’s ‘Make in India’ project, an EU- India urbanisation partnership could help re-launch a wilting strategic partnership.

ConclusIon

India is recalculating its geostrategic approach. Relations with Japan, China, Russia and Australia are gaining importance in relation to those with the US and the EU, traditionally considered priority strategic partners. Asia, beginning from the immediate neighbourhood out, is likely to be the main geographic focus of Modi’s foreign policy. Without a restructuring of the international economic architecture to reflect contemporary realities,
India will aggressively pursue multilateralism through alternative platforms like the BRICS.

The EU needs to factor Modi’s priorities into reshaping its engagement to India, such as foreign direct investment and infrastructure, or else it is likely to be overlooked in New Delhi. As for the US, India will reject any ‘American-led alliances’, be it in the Middle East against Islamic terrorism or in Asia against China. Modi may push at the boundaries of India’s long-held non-aligned policy, but the defining framework of his foreign policy will be corporate-style geo-economics. Modi believes that India is an emerging global power, and therefore first needs a solid economic base. Economic remodelling at home will govern India’s foreign policy leaning, and those with dispensable cash will be prioritised.

About the author:
Gauri Khandekar is head of the Agora Asia-Europe Programme at FRIDE.

Source:
This article was published by FRIDE as Agora Asia-Europe Number 17, November 2014 (PDF)

The post Modi’s Foreign Policy Mantra: Geoeconomics, Regional Hegemony, Global Aspirations – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.