By Dr. Fayaz Ahmad Bhat* and Ajaz Ahmad Bhat*

Every State of India is headed by a Governor and every Union Territory by a Lieutenant-Governor (LG). Article 157 and Article 158 of Indian Constitution defines the eligibility criteria for the post of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor. To be eligible for the post of Governor / LG, a person should be a citizen of India, be
thirty-five (35) years old, not to be a member of the parliament (Lower House or Upper House) or state legislature besides and must not hold any office of profit.

It is a general convention in India that persons having some noteworthy contribution in social, economic, political or scientific fields are preferred and favorite for the post. But these rules and conventions hardly matter and stand for when it is of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Men with strong as steel nerves have been always pet favorites. The Government of India has once again proved and established this by clearing the name of Syed Ata Hasnain (a former Army General) as a replacement to Narender Nath Vohra, a so-called civilian Governor after the infamous supposed-civilian Governor Jagmohan.

When it comes the appointment of Governors in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, ‘Fuji’s’ and ‘dictators’ have always been the anointed ones. Out of twelve persons who have served as Governors of the state, there has only been one so-called civilian candidate (the son of Maharaja of the State) — the rest were either Fuji or dictators. This may not be accidental or coincidence. For sure it is not. There is politics, there is philosophy and there is policy. The politics of occupation. The philosophy of domestication and submission of people. The policy of occupation. Here the state not only disposes what Louis Althusser calls the State Apparatus, but also an Ideological Apparatus to crush and curb the feelings, sentiments, rights and demands of the people.

While Syed Ata Hasnian, like most of his predecessors has a military background, unlike his forerunners he is the first Muslim Governor of the state. He has also served in Kashmir as a Fuji General and like most of the Generals he remained in the news, but not for his anti-militant activities, counter-insurgency movements, guerilla war tactics and anti-people activities, but for his philosophy and doctrine of “heart is weapon”, which “aims at winning the psychological battle and gaining popular support to combat the insurgency”.

Additionally, he is known for his academic stakes and is said to be a good writer and vivid reader. Amid this high expectations and anticipations are expected from the General that he will guide the state towards a new journey. The journey of peace, light, enlightenment, development and maturation.

Let us hope for the best.

*Dr. Fayaz Ahmad Bhat Heads and teaches Sociology at Government Degree College Banihal Jammu and Kashmir. Ajaz Ahmad Bhat is Delhi based Kashmiri Sociologist.

Dr.Fayaz is MPhil, PhD, NET in Sociology besides having Masters in Political Science also. He has completed his Doctorate degree from Jamia Millia Islamia a reputed Central University of India. He has also been awarded Centrally administered Doctoral Fellowship by India Council of Social Science Research. Ajaz Ahmad Bhat is Masters in Sociology and has cracked NET in Sociology.

The post Jammu and Kashmir: Legacy Of Governors, But A Light In The Darkness? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Two young women were killed in the northern Mymensingh district last week in a surge of women being killed in dowry-related incidents. One was beaten to death by her in-laws in a feud over her dowry, while the other, only 19 years-old and six months pregnant, was repeatedly beaten by her husband for the same reason and died in hospital from her injuries.

Scores of housewives in Bangladesh are killed each year, mostly by their husbands and in-laws on dowry demands, despite laws preventing such demand. The Bangladeshi government enacted laws in 1980 with the maximum punishment being five years prison time, but many poor families don’t file the cases. The law was made following the persistent demands of women’s and human rights organizations in the country.

The dowry system dates back for centuries and was introduced by the Zamindars (landlords) of the British rulers. Both the British and the landlord systems have gone, but dowry in different forms continues to mar society. The Zamindars used to buy outstanding students from poor families. The poor parents were unable to bear the burden of the educational costs of their sons. The landlords used to buy the students with the provision being that the boys, on completion of their studies, would be granted their daughter’s hand in marriage. The landlords used to think that these brilliant boys would eventually go on to hold the most powerful positions in the government, enabling the landlords themselves to exert pressure on government matters, to achieve their own purposes.

The system is still alive in the country and the government leaders, who have made the anti-dowry law, also give dowry to their son-in-laws in different forms, including land, which is very costly in the country, or making provisions for their son-in- laws to work overseas, which also benefits the sons. Even poor people are predominantly willingly to pay some kind of dowry to their son-in-laws. Before the arrival of TVs, many families had to give their son-in-laws radios, bicycles, watches etc. More recently, demands have become more excessive, with son-in- laws demanding motorcycles and even cars. In rural areas the boys, in many cases, demand hard cash. Poor families cannot pay the money, which might result in their daughters being tortured and in many cases killed. The government and rights groups are trying to improve the situation, but so far to no avail.

The post Bandgladesh: When The Dowry Culture Kills appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Top Saudi leaders joined representatives of other faiths in condemning violence by the so-called Islamic State (IS) at a conference organized in the Austrian capital by the King Abdullah International Center for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue (KAICIID) on Wednesday.

The KAICIID was founded in October 2011 by Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah to promote interfaith harmony.

“Some organizations that are affiliated with Islam are perpetrating some actions in the name of jihad. This is not Islam at all,” Secretary-General of the Muslim World League Abdullah Al-Turki was quoted by Reuters news agency as saying. “This is why we wish to deplore and strongly condemn this behavior, which we see as against Islam,” he told an audience including the grand muftis of Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan; top representatives of several churches, Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee, and diplomats.

State Minister for Foreign Affairs Nizar Madani decried the emergence of factions “that use terrorism and violence in the name of religion. They are wreaking havoc. They are killing and destroying everything.”

“Those who have embraced terrorism unfortunately attribute everything they do, every oppression they practice, to Islam. Islam has nothing to do with them,” he said.

The conference, titled “United Against Violence in the Name of Religion,” called for countering the messages of militants on social media used to lure recruits, and for leadership courses in schools and the broader community to spread the principles of diversity and tolerance.

Faisal bin Muammar, secretary-general of the KAICIID, emphasized the need to confront violence being committed in the name of religion. He said the crimes committed by IS militants in Iraq and Syria had nothing to do with any religion. He stressed that religious communities around the world must coexist peacefully, respecting one another.

The post KAICIID: ‘Islam Has Nothing To Do With IS Group’s Atrocities’ appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Neil Berry

Even before the centenary this year of the outbreak of the World War I, British people seemed to be making an ever greater emotional investment in remembering their war dead. The official days of Remembrance, Nov. 11 and the adjacent Remembrance Sunday, have become part of an extended autumn ritual during which millions of Britons wear poppies to signify their mindfulness of those who sacrificed their lives for Britain in two world wars and in recent conflicts.

This year, a spectacular ceramic installation at the Tower of London prompted by the World War I centenary and comprising 888,246 poppies — one for each fallen British soldier — has been a magnet for visitors from all over the UK, as well as for tourists.

Not everybody cared for it. In a letter to the Independent newspaper, an outraged British citizen of dual nationality protested that the equation of one fallen British serviceman with one poppy betrayed a lack of perception of the true meaning of war. Slain soldiers and innocent victims of war, declared Agustin Blanco-Bazan, should be remembered together. One might add that the installation was also compromised by its failure to pay tribute to the great numbers of British imperial subjects, Indians, Africans, Australians and others, who died fighting for the Britain.

What seldom figures in the remembrance of Britain’s wars is the issue of what they have meant for other peoples. On the weekend of Remembrance Sunday, a ground-breaking two-day international conference took place in London on the impact of the World War I on Palestine. Organized by Palestine Return Centre in conjunction with Al-Jazeera Centre for Studies, the conference was inspired by a concern to promote public understanding of the decisive part that imperial Britain played in nurturing the Palestine-Israel conflict — through the 1917 Balfour Declaration pledging British support for a national home in Palestine for Jews and through the less then even-handed British Mandate administration of Palestine from 1922 to 1948.

Speakers on the second day of the conference focused on what can be done to right the historic wrong suffered by the people of Palestine. The British human rights lawyer, Mark MacDonald, argued that the US was no longer credible as a Middle East peace broker and that the UK must join with other European countries, in bringing pressure to bear on Israel to make the concessions that it has so persistently refused to make.

MacDonald’s message was that if a Labour government were elected in the general election of May 2015 it would follow the example of Sweden and grant full British government recognition to a Palestine state.

It is, it must be said, a big “if,” for Miliband has been contending with plunging opinion poll ratings and struggling even to remain leader of his own party. Zionists have not been slow to capitalize on his difficulties, with highly publicized Jewish defections from the Labour party following the Palestine recognition vote — not to mention rumored withdrawals of financial backing.

Nearly 100 years after the Balfour declaration, the Zionist lobby that inspired it is as zealous as ever. However, there is at last an effectual pro-Palestinian lobby in British politics. And for all the selectivity of British remembrance, there is growing awareness of the special historic restitution that Britain owes to the Palestinian people.

The post UK Selective Memory Syndrome – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Ruhee Neog

Much has been written about Chinese President Xi Jingping’s visit to India and his camaraderie with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Irrespective of the final pronouncements on the success or failure of the meeting, the areas identified as recipients of Chinese investments were found to be particularly jarring by some analysts due to the absence of India’s Northeast in the new administration’s calculations. This exemplifes a recurring problem, and one that deserves a balanced approach – can only the Centre be ‘blamed’ for the lack of investment in the region, especially those of a Chinese nature? Or should the Centre be singularly castigated for what could be a deliberate denial regime? In such an event, what could the government’s logic be? Can the state governments also be held partially responsible?

The problem here has two sides. To begin with, this has been India’s traditional approach to its peripheries. In that sense therefore it is not a targetted campaign against one particular region. It appears that the development of the Northeast, especially investments in infrastructure, has long been side-lined due to the government’s security considerations, with an eye on China. This same logic has applied to the development of India’s other border regions. In an article for The Telegraph, Subir Bhaumik writes that the Modi-Jinping meeting fell short of the pre-visit hype because the Chinese were keen on locating a significant amount of investment in the areas corresponding to the BCIM (Bangladesh China India Myanmar) Economic Corridor.

In China’s case, this makes immense sense: it is a geographically contiguous area that would grant it land to sea access, thus serving its geo-strategic and economic purposes. Although this also holds great economic potential for India’s Northeast, the government’s reservations about China gaining a foothold in the area through an entry point into the Bay of Bengal could perhaps be understood.

However, in the same vein, some rather counter-intuitive moves have also been made that question this logic of security often offered to explain the second-tier status that seems to be accorded to the Northeast’s development. It is often alleged that Arunachal Pradesh’s infrastructural growth has been deliberately ignored to not allow ease of access to China across the border. Why then have 157 dams for hydel power generation been planned for the state? In isolation, this kind of attention is nothing if not a good thing – but how is it to be reconciled with the refrain of India’s security considerations? As Bhaumik writes, have these hazy security concerns been trumped by the rest of India’s power demands? If this the case, it can be argued that the impression is that any project deemed suitable for the Northeast would be on the basis of whether it serves the entire country’s needs – if not, then the tired threat of Chinese incursions would be resorted to.

Another instance is Indian objections to the reopening of the Stilwell Road that connects India through Ledo in Assam, Pansau Pass in Arunachal Pradesh, onto Myitkina in Myanmar and Kunming in China – security is at play here again. Only 65 km of the road is in India, the rest in Myanmar and China. Myanmar has awarded the construction of the stretch between Myitkina up to Pansau Pass on the border to China’s Yunnan Construction Engineering Group. If, in theory, China wished to arrive on India’s doorstep, and perhaps even step in, it could do so with little difficulty. Whether or not the road is developed on the Indian side would be largely irrelevant.

Another refrain, that of Chinese goods flooding the Indian market if connectivity is enhanced and a fillip given to cross-border trade, is also redundant. Informal cross-border trade, in which Chinese goods play starring roles, are already well underway. In this scenario, the overwhelming sense is that the security of India’s border areas as a reason to justify the underdevelopment of the Northeast Indian states lacks substance.

As previously stated, this is however only one side of the problem. In a federation such as India, unequal attention is paid to states. Individual states, or regions, as in the case of the Northeast, have to make sustained collaborative efforts to make their presence felt at the Centre, and do their own legwork in attracting investments, both domestic and international. Investment potential is determined after a cross-benefit assessment of a wide variety of factors: resource availability, local risks, infrastructure development, physical connectivity etc. While the Northeast has a vast pool of untapped natural resources, it is understood that either the circumstances for investments are not ripe or that the governments are not doing a good enough job in marketing their states as investment-friendly destinations, if the situation has indeed improved.

The course has to corrected from both ends – from the Centre, but also from the Northeastern states – both individually and collectively.

Ruhee Neog
Senior Research Officer, NSP, IPCS
E-mail: ruhee.neog@ipcs.org

The post Northeast India: Where Is The Chinese Investment? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Nick Cunningham

As November draws to a close, there are two major events that could profoundly change the oil markets.

With the clock ticking, the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany (P5 plus 1) are negotiating down to the wire with Iran over its nuclear program. The two sides have made substantial progress, but some difficult issues remain unresolved ahead of the November 24 deadline.

“We’re very keen to try to get to a deal, but not a deal at any price,” U.K. Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said on November 17. “There will have to be very significant further movement by the Iranians if we’re going to be able to get to a deal.”

Both sides have approached negotiations with seriousness and with the intention to actually resolve their differences, according to officials involved in the process. Iran has signaled its willingness to accept international inspections of its nuclear program and the possibility of receiving enriched uranium from abroad. In exchange the U.S. has suggested Iran could maintain some domestic ability to enrich uranium.

Outstanding issues center on the pace at which the U.S. would lift sanctions as well as the exact details of Iran’s enrichment capability. With only days left until a deadline, a deal is highly uncertain. Over at Quartz, Steve LeVine writes that the stakes are high, with either a diplomatic breakthrough or a major collapse in negotiations as the two most likely outcomes.

He says a deal is more likely than not due to the enormous financial pressure Iran is experiencing because of falling oil prices. With prices down more than 30 percent from just a few months ago, and Iran needing somewhere around $135 per barrel for its budget to breakeven, it would be the biggest beneficiary of a diplomatic accord with the west.

Not only that, but the Iranian government has also raised expectations of a deal. It has received foreign business delegations, highlighting the investment opportunities in Iran once sanctions are removed. There is potential for carmakers, mining companies, and financial institutions to expand into Iran if it opens up. BP and the French oil company Total recently said that they would be interested in going back into Iran if sanctions are lifted and the Iranian government offers favorable terms.

Earlier this year, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani promised that the sanctions regime would soon be lifted. “With your support, this government has taken the first steps towards the lifting of the brutal sanctions … We will witness the sanctions shattering in the coming months,” Rouhani told a crowd in April, according to Reuters. Talk of the pending economic benefits of a deal could make it difficult for Iran to back off.

And sanctions have taken their toll. Iran’s oil exports have more than halved from their pre-sanctions level of about 2.5 million barrels per day. As a result, Iran’s GDP fell by 5.8 percent in 2012, the year that tough western sanctions took effect.

Hardliners in both countries could work to prevent a deal. But in Iran, even among the most conservative, there may not be aggressive opposition to a deal in principle, reports The Economist.

While far from certain, a deal could see the return of several million barrels per day of Iranian oil production, although at a gradual pace.

While nuclear negotiations reach the finish line, a second event is set to take place – OPEC’s meeting in Vienna on November 27 to decide its oil production target. There has been much speculation, but little hint at what the cartel will do. There has been a flurry of diplomatic activity behind the scenes in the last few weeks as OPEC members plead their case with Saudi Arabia to cut back production. Libya’s Prime Minister visited Riyadh on November 13, arriving just as Iraq’s President departed.

Saudi Arabia has thus far showed no willingness to cut production, with officials earlier this month suggesting they would only act if oil prices dropped to around $70 per barrel. At the time, OPEC officials thought that was unlikely, but with Brent crude dropping below $80 on November 17 on news that Japan fell into recession, pressure is mounting on Riyadh to act.

There is a high degree of uncertainty over how the Iranian negotiations and the OPEC meeting will play out, but the end of November will be hugely important for energy markets.

Source: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Iran-Negotiations-OPEC-Meeting-Loom-For-Oil-Markets.html

The post Iran Negotiations, OPEC Meeting Loom For Oil Markets – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

On Nov 19, on the last leg of his three-nation trip, Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be in the the Fijian capital of Suva for a day-long bilateral visit, where he is expected to address a joint session of the Fijian parliament.

He will be the first Indian prime minister after Indira Gandhi in 1981 to visit the country. While in Fiji, Modi would address a mini-summit with 13 other countries of the region also known as the Pacific Island Countries (PICs), viz Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Republic of Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Arriving in Fiji in the wake of Modi’s visit will be the Chinese President Xi Jinping making his second state visit to Fiji.

Early this year, the military regime in Fiji had promulgated a new constitution and made preparations for elections by September 2014. Following that Rear Admiral (Retd) Josaia Voreqe (Frank) Bainimarama stepped down as military chief, formed a new political party called FijiFirst Party with the intent to contest the scheduled elections. After a watershed election on Sep 17 this year, conducted under the new constitution and a new electoral system, Fiji emerged from eight years of military rule. Election results saw a new government headed by Prime Minister Bainimarama. This article looks at the significance of Modi’s visit to Fiji.

Oceania and PICs

While trade, commerce, tourism, natural resources, including fisheries and minerals, expansive economic zones, foreign aid and the presence of island territories of Western powers have punctuated the strategic environment of the Oceania and PICs, one dominant fact that altered the political economy of the region was the post WW II drive by the island nations to seek independence from their former colonial dependencies in the Pacific.

This led to their emergence as full voting members of the United Nations (UN) which gave them political leverage on the international stage and in the process created a “market” for their sovereignty rights. According to Bernard Poirine, professor at University of French Polynesia, economic aid to PICs has been a type of trade for “geostrategic services” including use as military bases or missile launching/testing sites, for denying air and sea access to donors’ rivals or for voting in favour of donor interests at multilateral forum.

Fiji

Fiji is the most developed of the PICs, and is home to the largest defence force (3,200 in the active forces) and the second-largest police force of the island states of the Pacific. Significant troop contributions to UN peacekeeping efforts have enabled Fiji to project itself internationally and build its profile at the UN. Fiji military and police officers have been integral to peacekeeping operations in Bougainville, the Solomon Islands, and Timor-Leste.

The country is also home to the Pacific Islands Forum (a political grouping of 16 independent, self-governing states in the Pacific Ocean) secretariat, where for years before its suspension in 2009, Fiji government officials played a constructive role in establishing the Forum Regional Security Committee and in negotiating Forum declarations on security.

Fiji has a history of armed coups followed by periods of elected governments. The armed overthrow of governments in 1987, 2000 and 2006 saw Australian and New Zealand criticism of the coups; targeted sanctions by Canberra and Wellington and pressure applied by the US and the European Union. The Fiji government as a reaction sought relationships with other international partners. It has pursued an enhanced relationship with China, expanded relations with Russia and opened new diplomatic missions in Indonesia, South Africa, and established diplomatic relations with approximately 70 countries.

Australia and New Zealand normalized relations with Fiji in July 2012 by agreeing to exchange high commissioners after a virtual admission that their hard-line policies had proved ineffective in securing Fiji’s military regime to reinstate democracy, and a softer approach to Fiji has become the best route available to influence change.

China Factor

Some of the earlier developments in the Pacific, where as a result of the rivalry between China and Taiwan, which has been intense and according to Graeme Dobell of the Lowy Institute for International Policy – “goes far beyond normal standards of diplomacy or international aid”. To secure the allegiance of the PICs, China had launched several public infrastructure projects. These include conference centres and justice ministries in Tonga and Samoa, a parliamentary complex and courthouse in Vanuatu; sports stadia in Fiji, Micronesia, and Samoa; and a courthouse and police station in the Cook Islands.

Taiwan, on the other hand provided agricultural aid as well as technical assistance in marine ecology and aquaculture. It has also offered generous scholarships as well as computer hardware and software. Currently 22 states recognise Taiwan as the Republic of China (ROC) out of which six are PICs (Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu).

While China’s aid policy in Oceania was partly aimed to contest the political position of Taiwan, the PICs benefitted not just by the virtue of their voting rights but also due to their relative proximity to the rivals and lack of development across the region. Therefore through a combination of trade, aid and diplomacy, Beijing has achieved semblance of a new regional order with itself in a leadership position, pushing out the traditional points-man, the US, and the regional powers Australia and New Zealand. In the case of Fiji, the strengthening of the relationship with China had been prodded by the sanctions imposed by Australia and New Zealand.

Japan competes with China for access to Pacific timber, minerals and UN votes including for its whaling interests. Over the past few years the US has shown much more interest in Fiji and the Pacific in general as it took a fresh look at China’s involvement in the region. The US diplomatic representation in Suva increased; in 2012 then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in the Pacific Islands Forum in Rarotonga and visited other Pacific countries.

Indian Interest

India’s ties with Fiji have fluctuated with the political instability in the island nation. The armed overthrow of governments in 1987 and 2000 were triggered by racial tensions as a radical section of indigenous Fijians objected to political power passing into the hands of the Indians. Out of the population of 849,000 in Fiji, 37% are people of Indian origin.

Fiji’s first prime minister of Indian origin, Mahendra Chaudhry, was deposed in 2000; he was finance minister in the Fiji Labour Party government that was ousted in 1987. After the 1987 coup, the high commission of India and Indian Cultural Centre were closed on May 24, 1990. The high commission was subsequently reopened in March 1999 and the Indian Cultural Centre in February 2005. Fiji established its first high commission in New Delhi in January 2004. India is now looking at hosting a meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum in New Delhi next year.

Modi’s foreign policy has been characterised by outreach to countries with substantial Indian-origin population and has resulted in extensive outreach programmes in Japan, US, Myanmar, Australia and now Fiji. India has in the past availed of the “strategic services” of the PICs when it had set up an online communications system for the islands to win their support for the Indo-US nuclear deal several years ago. It has also had a long economic relationship with Nauru, a major exporter of phosphates and the mineral-rich Papua New Guinea. The PICs, through platforms such as the “Durban coalition” and bilaterally, enable India to address and build consensus in areas such as global climate change, carbon emission targets and sea-level rise impacts, which are of great concern to these island nations.

India’s expanding naval presence is in keeping with the view that there is a need to have sea lanes of communication open. It also enables it to project maritime power, both alone and in concert with US, Australia and Japan, in a region where Chinese presence is significant. In this regard analysts see a key role for Fiji, with whom India has traditional diaspora-supported strong relations which can be leveraged for enhanced maritime presence in the South Pacific region.

(Monish Gulati is a Senior Research Fellow with the Society for Policy Studies. He can be contacted at m_gulati_2001@yahoo.com)

This article was published by South Asia Monitor.

The post Modi In Fiji: An Agenda Beyond The Diaspora – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Aijaz Zaka Syed

The Dalits or low-caste Hindus have struggled on the margins of Indian society, suffering in silence, for thousands of years. Being born at the bottom of the caste hierarchy is the ultimate sin in the ancient land. This is an issue that is as old as Mahabharata. The earliest voice of protest raised against the social and caste order of Hindu society had been that of Buddha. But even the Wise One did not have much success against the forces of status quo.

Successive Hindu reformers, from Raja Rammohan Roy to Vivekananda to Gandhi, all did their best to fight untouchability and discrimination sanctioned by caste. The Mahatma was perhaps the first leader to realize that without the involvement of all sections of Hindu society, nothing could be achieved — especially freedom.

Gandhi went out of his way to rope in Dalits, making them part of the independence movement and the national mainstream. To change the whole social perception and discourse about the Dalits, he insisted on calling them Harijan — God’s people. Gandhi did not entirely succeed in his attempts though. As some stoical Indians would explain, you cannot escape your birth however you try. The Shudras may now be called Dalits or Harijan and may have massive state support in affirmative action or reservations. But little has changed for the Dalits in terms of respect and societal acceptance, even under powerful Dalit parties like the Bahujan Samaj Party.

Untouchability and discrimination remain a fact of life. Recently, when the Dalit chief minister of Bihar, one of India’s most populous states, visited a temple, it was followed by a thorough washing and “purification” of the shrine with special rites.

Despite all the talk of national integration and pontification against discrimination and untouchability, the sharp dividing line that separates the noble, upper caste Hindus from the wretched of the earth remains as powerful and forbidding as ever.

This shows itself from time to time and at every stage, including during elections. Since the dawn of the Mandal revolution and rise of caste-inspired parties like the BSP, Samajwadi Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal, they have largely voted according to their sectarian loyalties.

This is why it is truly extraordinary what Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party have managed to accomplish in the 2014 elections and the state polls that followed. The strategic role that Dalits and other backward communities have played in the spectacular success of the BJP in the general elections and state polls is the critical footnote that most commentators have ignored.

The so-called social engineering project that the Parivar has been meticulously working on for decades delivered a windfall in 2014 when the Dalits and other backward groups en masse deserted the Congress, BSP and SP to vote for Modi. The Hindutva social engineering got a huge boost in Gujarat under Modi and was put to use with deadly efficacy in the 2002 pogrom.

Senior Hindutva leaders and BJP ministers may have choreographed the Muslim massacre that went on for months. But it was mostly the Dalits and other marginalized groups, who have historically shared good relations with Muslims and saw each other as friends and allies, who did the real work. They are the ones who were used as the cannon fodder and attack dogs of Hindutva carrying out killings, rapes and looting across Muslim neighborhoods. The Muzaffarnagar riots last year that drove thousands of Muslims from their homes after their Jat neighbors, again a community historically close to Muslims, turned on them were part of the same “social engineering” process.

Indeed, 2014 saw the peaking and most successful demonstration of the Gujarat experiment. For the first time in India’s history, lower caste communities which saw the BJP as a party of the rich, upper caste Hindus, voted for the Hindutva party in such overwhelming numbers, largely thanks to the orchestrated Modi wave and the magnetism of his machismo politics.

But give the devil his due. Instead of being brought down by his toxic past and the slur of a “chaiwala,” Modi brilliantly used the brazen, bloodletting of Muslims to burnish the image of a tough, Hindutva superhero with working class roots who could also “deal” with Muslims.

Ordinary Hindus, including the Dalits and backward classes, found it hard not to identify with him and his message of a “strong, clean, prosperous India.” In any case, with an ostrich-like Congress in total meltdown and the rest of opposition clueless, it wasn’t too difficult to connect with a disenchanted, corruption-weary voter.

So much so Mayawati’s BSP has been totally wiped out in Uttar Pradesh where it ruled until recently. The BJP has even captured Maharashtra and Haryana on its own, wrestling the former from its own ally, Shiv Sena, the more lumpen and brazen Hindutva cousin. More important, the much-trumpeted Muslim vote has been rendered totally redundant and irrelevant. BJP candidates comfortably won even from Muslim-concentrated constituencies.

The Parivar has finally managed to “unite” the extended Hindu family — against the enemy. After long years of indoctrination, brazen lies and continuous hate propaganda targeting Muslims, not to mention the ongoing canard of “love jihad,” large sections of the Dalits and backward communities have turned against an already demonized and marginalized minority.

This is the most disturbing and defining outcome of the 2014 polls. Something Muslims and other minorities would ignore at their own peril. The alienation of Dalits and other marginalized communities not just means Muslims are left totally friendless and without allies in this vast and complex melting pot of a country; things could get even worse now that their votes are seen as totally worthless.
The sooner Muslims wake up to the new political realities of India the better for them. Else they wouldn’t even have time to repent. It is time for the community to urgently think of effective ways and means of ending their isolation. Instead of wallowing in self-pity and further withdrawing into its shell, they must close their ranks and reach out to make new friends and win allies.

Moreover, they must ask themselves what has gone wrong in their equation with Dalits and other communities and what they could do to mend fences. We also need to build bridges with other minorities such as Christians and Sikhs. This is not possible without sincere and bold steps. For far too long, we have remained too self-absorbed and wrapped up in our own world and its daily battles of survivals to look around and care for fellow travelers. We must speak out more and stand up for others, just as we expect others to share our pain and concerns. There was a time when Dalits and other communities looked to Muslims for guidance. How are we to provide leadership when we are totally clueless ourselves? God help us when we have worthies like Bukharis pretending to be our answer to leadership!

What in God’s name has gone wrong with us? We have had such a rich and proud past in this country. Where did we lose ourselves? It’s time to ask ourselves some hard questions. It’s about time we rediscovered ourselves and our sense of direction and purpose as a community.

Aijaz Z. Syed is a Gulf based commentator.

The post Muslims Must Reach Out To Dalits, Other Communities – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has dissolved parliament, paving the way for a snap election, BBC News reports.

Abe is seeking a new mandate for economic reforms and is delaying an unpopular increase in sales tax. But opinion polls conducted by local media indicate low support for the PM and that many people do not understand why he has called an election two years ahead of schedule.

Japan will now head to the polls in mid-December.

Speaker Bunmei Ibuki announced the dissolution of the lower house on Friday, Nov 21 morning.

Japan’s legislature, known as the National Diet, comprises the upper House of Councillors and the lower House of Representatives.

Abe is expected to hold a news conference later.

On Thursday, he said he would use the election campaign to clarify his government’s growth strategy, reported national broadcaster NHK.

Though his popularity has fallen, Abe and his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) are still expected to win the election.

Abe has said he will resign if his coalition – which holds the majority in the lower house – fails to win a simple majority.

He launched an ambitious economic plan, informally known as “Abenomics”, two years ago when he became Prime Minister.

Though Japan’s GDP growth initially saw a lift, the economy continued to slide and Japan entered a technical recession this quarter. It was exacerbated by a rise in sales tax in April, from 5% to 8%.

The increases were aimed at curbing Japan’s public debt which is the highest among developed nations, but instead scared Japanese consumers off spending.

A second increase to 10% was set for October 2015 but will now be delayed by at least 18 months.

A Kyodo News agency survey on Friday found that about 63% of respondents did not understand Abe’s decision to call an election. Only about 31% said they would support the move.

A separate survey done by the Asahi Shimbun newspaper found that only 39% support Abe. But his party performed the best in both polls, which asked respondents which party they would vote for in proportional representation districts.

The post Japan PM Dissolves Parliament, Paves Way For Snap Election appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Abdulkareem Haruna

At least 45 villagers were killed this week after suspected Boko Haram militants attacked a village in Nigeria’s northeastern Borno state.

According to local sources, Boko Haram militants riding in trucks stormed the village of Azaya Kura in the Mafa area at about noon local time Wednesday and started attacking residents and destroying houses. The militants also carted away foodstuff, wares and livestock.

An official of the Nigeria Vigilante Group, Muhammed Gava, confirmed to VOA by phone that “there was an attack and many people were killed, according to the reports we got from the Vigilante officials from that axis.”

Jabir Usman, a local from the attacked community, discussed the death toll with reporters in Maiduguri.

“From what we counted so far, 45 men have been killed and there are others that died in the bushes… due [to] excessive bleeding after sustaining bullet injuries,” Usman said.

Alhaji Shettima Lawan, the caretaker chairman of Mafa Council, said he visited Azaya Kura on Thursday to confirm the attack.

“I am still searching for motives behind mass killing and destruction by some people under the guise of entrenching certain religion,” he said. “I wish to appeal to the federal government to take urgent steps and rescue our people from imminent extinction.”

He said village residents told him that attackers burned more than 50 motorcycles and four cars and took away four other vehicles.

The chairman said corpses of people who’d been decapitated or shot were still being pulled out of bushes to be prepared for burial.

Mafa town is about 40 kilometers from Maiduguri.

Most residents in Mafa, the headquarters of the Mafa local council, fled their homes nearly two months ago after Boko Haram assailants established their authority in the area.

Attacks on surrounding villages have continued unabated, but few are reported to the public.

The post Nigeria: Boko Haram Attack Kills 45 Villagers appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Islamic State militants are reportedly acquiring gold, silver and other precious metals in a bid to further solidify their control over large swathes of Syrian and Iraqi territory by issuing their own currency, Iraqi metal dealers confirmed to McClatchy.

Earlier this month, the militants’ Beit al Mal, an ancient Islamic term which translates as “Treasury Department,” issued a statement announcing the plan. The coins, which they plan to fashion from gold, silver and copper, will be modeled on the 8th century currency of the Umayyad Caliphate.

At the time, experts expressed doubts the militant group had the technological capability and overall knowhow to produce their own modern currency for the territory under their control; roughly one third of Iraq and Syria.

A recent report in McClatchy, however, which draws on interviews with precious metal dealers in northern and western Iraq, would indicate the group is in fact moving ahead to obtain enough material necessary to carry out the plan.

One Fallujah-based gold trader, identifying himself as Hajj Samir, told McClatchy that foreign jihadists had been buying up all the gold and silver in the city’s markets. He said he alone had sold more than 15 pounds to known affiliates of the militant group.

“They said it was for gifts for their wives, but now I know why, and all the traders say the same thing,” Hajj Samir told the news portal. “We’ve been making trips to Baghdad to get more, and they buy all of it.”

Another 37-year-old trader who has worked out of Mosul told a similar story of selling off his precious metals to those connected to the group.

“We don’t ask why they’re buying so much,” said the trader, Osman Ahmed.

“But even silver in small shops outside the city is sold out.”

Ahmed said the speed with which they were buying up precious metal stocks was forcing traders such as himself to travel to cities in Kurdish-controlled territory to renew their stocks.

Zakaria Ahmed, a Mosul resident not related to Osman, said US-led airstrikes had taken their toll on IS’s currency plans, noting they had made it difficult for the militants to transport valuables.

Despite the setbacks, Zakaria, whose brother is reportedly an IS official, said the currency plan was still coming along.

“It is still in an ongoing process to be released,” he told McClatchy by phone.

The desire to create their own currency has also extended to the battlefield, with militants reportedly stripping copper wiring from electric transmission cables and other sources to gather materials for the coins.

The Islamic militant group notorious for extreme violence and war crimes has gone to great lengths to establish a caliphate with all the requisite state institutions over a piece of territory roughly the size of Belgium.

Relying on funds brought in from taxes, stolen oil and gas and organized crime, IS has, in the words of Jordanian journalist Raed Omari, “undergone the quickest transformation to statehood in modern history.”

The post Iraqi Dealers Confirm ISIS Hoarding Gold, Precious Metals To Issue Currency – Report appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Seymur Aliyev

In the issues related to security Azerbaijan mainly relies on the younger generation, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said at the First Global Forum on Youth Policies held in Baku on Oct. 29.

“It is our young Azerbaijanis who are protecting our borders. At the moment they stand face to face with Armenian aggressors to protect their motherland. And the most of our victims, during the Armenian aggression, were the representatives of younger generation,” the president said.

He said the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is the biggest threat to the regional security.

“Unfortunately, at the end of 80s – beginning of 90s of the last century, Azerbaijan became the subject of violent Armenian aggression, ethnic cleansing, and occupation of our historical lands,” President Aliyev stressed.

He said the Nagorno-Karabakh is a historic part of Azerbaijan, adding that for centuries, Azerbaijanis lived in that area, and the aggressive separatism backed by Armenia, led to the current situation.

“Twenty percent of internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan are under occupation by Armenia, for more than 20 years already. One million people became refugees and internally displaced persons as a result of that aggression,” the Azerbaijani president said.

He went on to add that the policy of ethnic cleansing was implemented against Azerbaijanis.

“Khojaly genocide was committed by Armenians. More than 600 innocent people were killed only because they were Azerbaijanis. Today, Armenian occupation, the criminal regime in Armenia is the biggest threat. The UN Security Council adopted four resolutions demanding immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Armenian troops from Azerbaijani territories,” the president said.

President Aliyev added that the resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict must be based on decisions and resolutions of international organizations, particularly the UN Security Council resolutions must be implemented.

The president pointed to the fact that similar decisions were adopted by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, European Parliament, Council of Europe, Organization of Islamic Cooperation and other organizations, which fully support the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.

“We see that in some cases the resolutions are implemented within days, in our case, for more than 20 years they still remain on paper,” he added.

President Aliyev went on to say that it is necessary to be stronger, more efficient, and work harder to have resolution of the conflict based on international law norms and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.

The Azerbaijani president also expressed confidence that the day will come when the Azerbaijani citizens will return back to their native lands in Nagorno-Karabakh and other occupied territories.

“We have strong support of the international community not only on this issue, but also in general,” President Aliyev said. “The best indicator of that was the election of Azerbaijan as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council, and we were members of the council for two years from 2012 to 2013.”

“We were selected with the absolute majority from the international community — 155 countries voted for Azerbaijan,” he added.

The president said this was particularly important, because with only over 20 years of independence, Azerbaijan became a member of the international community, and managed to get such a strong support from 155 countries.

He said that unfortunately today one can observe very difficult developments in the regions surrounding Azerbaijan, in Middle East, Europe and other parts of the world, adding that sometimes they have very tragic outcomes.

“Therefore, the world must be united to fight terrorism and defend international law and justice. Azerbaijan, in the region where it is situated, plays an important role with respect to international securityand stability,” the president added.

“Azerbaijan is actually an island of stability, development and predictability in the region,” President Aliyev said. “Azerbaijan is a stabilizing force, stabilizing factor in the region. Because through regional cooperation, economic initiatives, initiatives related to energy and transportation we can achieve a lot.”

“Our policy has always been very clear, through regional cooperation and mutual support towards national interests, including economic interests, security and stability,” he added.

President Aliyev said every country is interested and tries to reach maximum level of security and stability, because it is the main prerequisite for development.

“If you don’t have stability and security, you will not have investment, and without investments even the developed countries in the world can’t go forward. At the same time, every country must be interested in security and stability beyond its borders, because you’re not living on an island. You have neighbors. Therefore, we are interested in having predictable and stable situation beyond our borders, as well as in Azerbaijan. This is how we look at issues related to regional security and regional cooperation.”

The president added that the economic, energy and transportation initiatives, which were launched, are to the benefit of all the participants.

“Only in a win-win situation we can achieve maximum results,” the Azerbaijani president said.

He added that Azerbaijan launched important, multinational, transcontinental, transportation projects, the projects related to energy security, energy diversification, and all the countries that are parts of these initiatives get the benefits.

“When we became independent, our economy was in total devastation, we had political crisis, military crisis, Armenian occupation, civil war – that was the picture in the beginning of the 90s,” the president said.

He went on to add that the efforts of political stability, political reforms, democratic development, free media as for example, free internet, and the fact that over 70 percent of Azerbaijani population are internet users, other political freedoms, and economic development are the reasons for successful development.

“And without political reforms you cannot achieve sustainable success,” President Aliyev said.

“You can achieve success for certain periods of time, but to have sustainable success you have to provide fundamental freedom for people, because everybody are born free and must live in free society with security and all fundamental rights,” he added.

The Azerbaijani president said the political reforms in Azerbaijan were backed by economic reforms.

“Without economic reforms, political reforms are very difficult to implement, and the creation of self-sufficient, strong economy was our target. That created confidence and economic independence. It is difficult to have political independence and to conduct independent policy without economic background,” President Aliyev added.

The post President Aliyev: Security, Stability Main Prerequisites For Every Country’s Development appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Shujaat Bukhari

When an Army court martial handed over life imprisonment to five of its men including a Colonel for staging a fake encounter to kill three Kashmiri youth in 2010, it evoked a mixed response. Families of the three civilians, who were picked up from a North Kashmir village, branded as “terrorists” and bumped off in Machil, close to Line of Control, did welcome the verdict but they wanted more: “Death for the killers”.

Ten days before this verdict, the Army had to face a huge embarrassment as its soldiers fired upon a moving car and killed two teenagers on the outskirts of capital Srinagar. Lt Gen Hooda, its top commander in Northern region had to accept it as a mistake and own the responsibility. Even on November 14, it came under criticism for allegedly killing a civilian after a gun battle with militants in South Kashmir. Same day a local MLA in North Kashmir’s Handwara town Abdur Rashid Sheikh made serious allegations against two Army men for killing a civilian while being in civvies. Army denied involvement but cases stand registered.

Amidst this din the “positive” verdict in Machil encounter could not make much impact. Even if the court martial awarding lifer to five guilty men is a significant development, since Army has been in denial mode for last over two decades, but the confidence that it could deliver justice is still eluding. There is a reason for that. Whatever wrongs done by Army and para-military forces such as Border Security Force and Central Reserve Police Force while fighting the militants have been brazenly covered up under the much-trumpeted “national cause”. Kashmiris have grudge against India’s national media as well which they believe have fallen in the trap of “nationalism” thus covering up the erring soldiers.

For Army, the controversial Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), that gives immunity to its men, has come in handy to protect them. Past week, the former Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram termed AFSPA as “obnoxious’ saying “it had no place in a modern, civilized country”. He as home minister is believed to have moved amendments in the law but for Defence Ministry’s opposition could not achieve his goal. On AFSPA’s continuation, noted journalist Kuldip Nayar opined in Deccan Herald that it needs re-look. “Powers to kill on suspicion is too sweeping for a democratic country,” he wrote.

Notwithstanding the fact that Lt Gen Hooda’s public acknowledgement in case of death of two teenagers and the Machil verdict are a departure from its conduct in last over 20 years, but a lot more needs to be done to restore the confidence among the people. According to an RTI reply by Jammu and Kashmir Home department on February 23, 2012, sanction is still pending in 70 cases. These are the cases of alleged custodial killings and fake encounters in which Army men have been found involved in preliminary investigations. Once the state police or the government is convinced that an Army man is found guilty it approaches Defence Ministry for formal sanction to prosecute them, but in most of the cases it has been denied. Similarly the BSF has escaped with minor punishments. BSF courts have surely proceeded against its men and according a reply under RTI it has punished more than 40 of its men in various cases of killing and rape since 1990. The punishments range from five years rigorous imprisonment to dismissal of, or reduction in service. But in a case like that of Sopore where on January 6, 1993 over 40 people were mowed down by BSF after a militant attack, it has been termed as a “mischief” and those involved were given a minor punishment.

Army’s refusal to cooperate with the civilian courts or to transparently conduct the trials in its courts have caused a major dent to people’s confidence. Pathribal is a classic case in this long list. Five civilians were picked up in March 2000, soon after militants massacred 35 Sikhs in Chattisinghpora in South Kashmir coinciding with the then US President Bill Clinton’s visit to India. They were later branded as terrorists and their charred bodies were buried in a remote area. Central Bureau of Investigation conducted a thorough probe and held five officers of Army including a Brigadier responsible for killing them in fake encounter. The case went to Supreme Court where CBI insisted on trial in a civilian court. Army put its foot down and decided to take it to its own court. The Army court absolved all of them. When a local lawyers body approached a lower court to seek the proceedings in the Army court it was denied.

Human rights defender Khurram Parvez believes that Machil verdict does not match with the commitment of justice. “The Indian army court-martial verdict is not a beginning or a water-shed moment for Jammu and Kashmir, but an illustrative case of the manner in which political considerations and interests of the Indian army overrule larger principles of justice and accountability” he said.

According to human rights organization Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society, the Army has so far held 58 court martial’s but punishment has been given in only two cases and others dismissed as minor ones.

With a baggage of not doing much to deliver justice, this verdict has come at a time when Army was found involved in two more such incidents past week. AFSPA is being seen as a major source of strength for Army to have this immunity. Machil verdict has surely opened a new window but it needs to be extended to other cases that have mauled the justice.

By arrangement with Rising Kashmir

Shujaat Bukhari
Editor, Rising Kashmir

The post Machil Verdict And Eluding Justice – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Manoj Joshi

The sentencing of five army personnel, including the commanding officer of 4 Rajput Regiment, for the murder of three young Kashmiris, is a major development for the promotion of human rights and ending the policy of impunity with which the army and police forces have operated in some parts of the country. It will also help to make the fight against Islamist militancy and radicalism more effective.

In April 2010, the three Kashmiris — Shezad Ahmed, Riyaz Ahmed and Mohammed Shafi of Nadihal village of Baramulla — were lured by two local counter-insurgency agents to the Kalaroos village in the Machil sector near the LoC. They were promised jobs as porters. Instead they were handed over to the army personnel who killed them near the Sona Pindi post and claimed that they were Pakistani infiltrators. After a hue and cry, the Army took up their court martial proceedings in December 2013 and the verdict was passed on Thursday. It will now go through the appeals process.

The sentencing of the men is only the tip of the iceberg of the issue of some 3,000 unknown men who lie buried along the Line of Control in Kashmir. While most of them are militants who tried to infiltrate or leave the Valley during the 25-year old insurgency, there is a suspicion among many that they have also fallen victim to the greed of rogue army personnel. This is an issue the country needs to confront with some urgency.

The issue is directly linked to that of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act which gives military personnel indemnity against killing people in an insurgency-hit area. The indemnity is meant to protect the personnel from prosecution and legal action. However, it is only for actions done in the exercise of their duty, but the forces have often used it to cover up actions that were clearly illegal and some of them ought to be classified as murder. But, while the intention of the act is to protect soldiers who have acted in good faith, often it is used to protect people who have clearly violated its intention and carried out acts that are clearly illegal.

There is little doubt that if the armed forces and police personnel are to operate in insurgency-hit areas, they need legal protection against suits and prosecution for acts they may carry out in the exercise of their duties. However, equally, there is need to protect the ordinary citizens from palpably illegal actions carried out by security forces’ personnel using the act as a shield. The best way out of this conundrum is to ensure that the draconian provisions of the law are balanced with equally draconian penalties against those who willfully misuse the act.

The government needs to consider, too, that the situation in most insurgency-hit parts of the country is very different from the time the law was passed. Whether it is the North-east or J&K, militancy is at an all time low and this is not because of the AFSPA, but the changed political dynamics of the region. It would be fitting for the government to consider the abrogation of the Act in line with the improved situation there.

The role of the army and police is to fight against those who violate the laws of the land and try to overthrow its legal government. But by equal measure, it is the duty of these forces to uphold the law and any violation of the rights of non-combatants and innocents deserves punishment. In our country, as is well known, even the President cannot order the death of a person. It can only be done by the courts of law and through due process.

Most people in India are not quite aware of the extent of human rights violations and illegal acts that have taken place in Kashmir and other places like Nagaland and Manipur. Torture was fairly common. There were a lot of extra-judicial killings and cover-ups of the incidents were also common.

The interesting thing is that the Indian Army usually took a tough approach towards such actions and many of its soldiers were court-martialled and jailed for excessive use of force, custodial killings and rapes. However, the army, in its wisdom, did not publicise this. However, other forces like the BSF and CRPF more often than not failed to act against their personnel in many of the very obvious atrocities that took place and which only added fuel to the fire of militancy.

Ironically, the government was much tougher on violations in the pre nine-eleven era. After the “Global War on Terror”, the government has taken the excuse of terrorism to deny justice to the innocent who have been victimised in the name of fighting terror. In the past, the government used to provide details on the personnel punished and even publish them in the Home Ministry annual report. Now that tradition is forgotten and the lobby in support of maintaining the AFSPA, regardless of the dramatic improvement in the ground situation, has become impossible to counter.

The problem is that many of the atrocities took place in the very small area of the Kashmir Valley. It has understandably left behind a residue of bitterness which will not be easy to eliminate.

Actions like the Army’s decision to acknowledge a mistake in the killing of two young men in Budgam earlier this month, and the sentence to the Rajput regiment personnel, are an important first step. The people know that we cannot turn back time or get back their loved ones, but an acknowledgement of the truth of what happened in the past helps in the healing process.

(The writer is a Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Delhi)

The post Right Decisions Towards Healing Processes In Kashmir – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The police used tear gas and hydrants to disperse thousands of demonstrators protesting yesterday afternoon outside the government building on Zócalo Square, in the heart of Mexico City. The demonstrators are demanding justice for the 43 students missing since September in the southern Guerrero State.

The families of the students also participated in the protest, with demonstrators chanting slogans against President Enrique Peña Nieto.

The students disappeared after a police intervention to prevent them from demonstrating for their rights. According to investigators, after attacking them police handed them over to members of a criminal gang who killed them.

The post Mexico: Missing Students Protest Repressed By Police appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Prime Minister Modi’s Fiji visit is a chance to broaden and deepen the relationship between India and the South Pacific. Promoting an inclusive policy that engages civil society and the private sectors of both countries, will be a step in the right direction in order to regain lost ground due to years of neglect.

By Tevita Motulalo

If India’s rivals have succeeded in anything, it’s in convincing the great power of the sub-continent that it should be content and consumed with its own regional problems.

But contentment is confinement.

India is poised to be a global power, and not just a great power. That requires a comprehensive approach to regions of concern, and beyond that, requires comprehensive policies towards all regions, not just traditional areas of influence.

It is hard to define India’s South Pacific policy, apart from a pretension of pre-occupation with the Fijians of Indian origin. This narrow focus has limited India’s ability to broadly inspire all the peoples of the region. Not only does it appear almost ‘race-based’, it also limits non Indo-Fijian people-to-people interactions. This has resulted in a narrow and inadequate knowledge between the people of India and those of the South Pacific.

The Indian government has traditionally relied on its missions in Fiji, Australia, and New Zealand, and the Indian diaspora in Fiji, for visibility and knowledge in the region. This ‘Track One-and-a-Half’ diplomacy may have worked for india in other parts of the world, but not in the South Pacific where cultures, economies and priorities are complex and vastly different from one another and where direct people-to-people connectivity would have been beneficial.

For example, when the Indian government attempted to reach out to Fiji after the first anti-Indian coup in Fiji in the early 1970s to assist Indo-Fijians in that country, it was barred by Australia which then was the influential power in the region. Additionally, relations between Indo-Fijians and indigenous Fijians have famously been a source of intense friction in the domestic politics of that country. Assuming then, that Indo-Fijians, or even Fiji, will be a neutral vanguard of Indian interests in the region is not only limited, but seriously flawed.

Any continuation of this policy or using proxies, is exactly what is expected to change under new prime minister Narendra Modi’s watch.

For the past two decades, most of the discussion and allegiances of the small island countries in the South Pacific focused on the ‘One China Policy’ and tensions between Taiwan and China. What is now starting to emerge is a Chinese ‘One-Asian-giant’ policy, thanks to the intense push from China. India’s benign neglect of the region had a role to play in that outcome – though there is no animosity towards India.

Is it too late to resuscitate India-South Pacific relations?

Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Australia, and side-trip to Fiji, can prove helpful, and should be optimized to gain maximum effect. While in Fiji on November 19, Modi will meet with leaders from over a dozen Pacific Island Countries. They will be coming to Fiji at short notice – displaying their interest in India.

There are two issues that Modi will face. First, these are leaders of independent countries, some of which have larger populations and economies than Fiji. They may not next time, be willing to be summoned to Fiji at the convenience of India, and because they still see India engaging with the region through a proxy (Fiji ) seemingly chosen based on ethnic links.

Second, two days after Prime Minister Modi leaves, China will be hosting its own summit in Fiji for those same South Pacific leaders. The agreements that China signs can then be followed up in-country via its vast network of embassies throughout the region.

In particular, China’s commitment to source and modernize the Fijian military, especially its naval capabilities, will not only change the security architecture in the region, it will affect the political dimensions in that country. Depending on the traditional levers of the diaspora may not be the wisest strategy for India.

It will certainly benefit India to establish at least a few more points of entry into the South Pacific, for instance in the other larger economies of Melanesia outside of Fiji. A major ‘dealmaker’ for India can be the Kingdom of Tonga, which is in Polynesia. As the only country in the region never colonised, India and Tonga have a long, if informal, history of direct relations, including a 1981 visit by former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, making Indira a popular girls’ name in Tonga.

India facilitated Tonga-Moscow relations in the 1970s, which resulted in the first Soviet mission in a South Pacific island nation. The importance of this was reflected in Canberra’s fateful, reactive push for the first Chinese missions to be set up in the South Pacific, in Fiji and Samoa, to ‘balance’ the region in 1976.

Prime Minister Modi’s Fiji visit, and follow up, is a chance to broaden and deepen the relationship between India and the South Pacific. Expanding the number of entry points, and a comprehensive, inclusive policy that engages civil society and the private sectors of both countries directly, will be a step in the right direction.

The learnings from India’s organic and innovative service industries is exactly what the countries of the South Pacific need, to supplement and revive their heavily-exploited islands that are currently dependent on Beijing and the Developed World. Cooperation in energy, agriculture and maritime activities, which are at the heart of the Indo-Pacific arc, can be initiated.

The South Pacific is the transit point for $5 trillion worth of trade between the Indian Ocean and the Pacific. It’s location is geostrategic, and has the greatest concentration of the world’s micro-nations: 14, all of which have a vote in the United Nations and can lean in India’s favour, if only relations were much more active.

If India can make it to Mars, it can certainly make it to the South Pacific.

Tevita Motulalo is Senior Researcher for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

This article was written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

The post A Comprehensive Pacific Policy For India – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The 18th SAARC Summit will cover a wide range of issues, including connectivity, climate change, and SAFTA. A number of similar issues were discussed at the last summit—what’s been the progress since then? Given its constraints, does the association have a future? Gateway House asks and answers five questions on SAARC.

By Sharmadha Srinivasan

What is the agenda of the upcoming SAARC meeting?

The theme of the 18th SAARC Summit to be held in Kathmandu, Nepal, on November 26-27 is ‘Deeper Integration for Peace and Prosperity’. South Asian nations are set to sign three framework agreements related to connectivity—the Agreement for the Regulation of Passenger and Cargo Vehicular Traffic amongst SAARC Member States, the SAARC Regional Agreement on Railways, and the SAARC Framework Agreement for Energy Cooperation (Electricity). In addition to these three agreements, a 31-point Kathmandu Declaration will be issued on the concluding day of the summit.

What are the issues that will dominate the discussions at the summit?

The summit next week is expected to make a commitment to eradicate illiteracy by 2030 from the region and to address violence against women; it will also stress on providing high-quality education that will help build skills and knowledge, ensuring employment opportunities for youth, and according respect to senior citizens; and it will call for ending all forms of terrorism.

Other important issues which are expected to be addressed are climate change, poverty alleviation, and the promotion of tourism, trade, and investment.

The proposal for a SAARC Development Bank, put forth by India in July this year and well received by member countries, is also likely to feature prominently at the meeting in Nepal

What is the progress on past accords and agreements within SAARC?

At the last summit in the Maldives, four agreements were signed—the SAARC Agreement on Rapid Response to Natural Disasters, the SAARC Seed Bank Agreement, the SAARC Agreement on Multilateral Arrangement on Recognition of Conformity Assessment, and the SAARC Agreement on Implementation of Regional Standards.

However, tangible progress on major agreements such as SAFTA seems to have stalled; the roadman drawn for the implementation of a South Asian Customs Union and a South Asian Economic Union during the 14th SAARC Summit in New Delhi in 2007 has not yet materialised; and the 2010 SAARC Agreement on Trade in Services has not progressed much.

What are the issues that are not being adequately addressed?

India’s proposal for a SAARC power grid and the proposal made by Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa for a SAARC currency are issues that must be duly considered. A power grid will be an important milestone in achieving energy cooperation in the region. A clear roadmap must be drawn for the timely and effective implementation of these proposals at the upcoming meet.

What is the future of SAARC?

If SAARC is to remain relevant, it is necessary to evaluate the progress made on SAFTA after it was signed at the 12th SAARC Summit in Islamabad, Pakistan, in 2004. Eight years after SAFTA came into force in 2006, intra-regional trade today accounts for only around 5% (according to data of the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India) of the aggregate global trade of its member countries. This compares poorly to intra-regional trade within the European Union, as well as within ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations).

The declaration at the 17th Summit in the Maldives stressed that SAARC countries will intensify efforts to fully implement SAFTA. It said that member countries would work to reduce the Sensitive Lists in trade as well as speedily resolve non-tariff barriers, and expedite the process of harmonising standards in goods traded and customs procedures.

However, the single biggest impediment to the future of SAARC is the relationship between India and Pakistan, which must be addressed if the association is to move forward.

Sharmadha Srinivasan is a Junior researcher at Gateway House. She has earlier interned at Espirito Santo Securities in the capacity of an economist, and at the Institute of Economic Affairs in London as a researcher.

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

The post A primer On SAARC appeared first on Eurasia Review.

How has Russia’s grand strategy evolved during Vladimir Putin’s second term as President? Samir Tata thinks the evolution is a partial one. Moscow now accepts the realities of an increasingly multipolar world, but it’s also hell bent on preserving what it sees as its vital spheres of influence.

By Samir Tata

Since the end of September, and just six months after the re-annexation of Crimea, Moscow has started to signal that it thinks the time is right for a reset in NATO-Russia relations. But are such overtures merely a rhetorical smokescreen to hide Russian revanchism or a serious call for a return to realism and pragmatism? It’s an important question, bearing in mind that NATO will need to decipher Russia’s grand strategy before crafting its response. What also hangs in the balance is whether Russia and the West become embroiled in Cold War 2.0 or embark upon a new era of détente.

Neither Tsarist nor Soviet

So what key points should NATO and the West revisit when trying to understand Russia’s contemporary grand strategy? The first point to make is that Vladimir Putin now accepts the realities of the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries: Russia lost the Cold War and, as a result, lost virtually all of the gains it made in the aftermath of World War II. Moscow also recognizes that it has no chance of resurrecting the Tsarist Russian Empire. In a remarkably candid speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2007, Putin signaled that Russia would craft a new grand strategy that reflects the new circumstances of the emerging multipolar world. However, this new grand strategy would continue to reflect the ‘constant’ of Russian nationalism.

Under Putin, Russia continues to carve out a strategically coherent sphere of influence to safeguard its vital national security and energy interests. This sphere of influence takes in at least part of the former Soviet space and, in a carefully calibrated manner, extends beyond Russia’s national boundaries. In its near east, for example, Moscow considers the security of the three energy-rich Caspian Sea littoral states – Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan – to be a vital national interest. According to the US Energy Information Administration, these three Caspian states have combined oil reserves of approximately 37.6 billion barrels of oil and almost 385 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas. By comparison, Russia has approximately 80 billion barrels of oil and1,688 Tcf of natural gas reserves.

Accordingly, ultimate control over access to the energy resources of these three Caspian littoral states is a critical component of Russia’s power (just as control over access to Persian Gulf energy resources is a key element of US power). Moscow is unlikely to tolerate any government in Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan or Kazakhstan that is considered hostile to its interests (or any foreign intervention, either overt or covert, in support of such a hostile government). Simply put, NATO member countries as well as China can access the energy resources of these three Caspian littoral states (including energy resources transiting through them), but only with Russia’s implicit agreement.

In this respect, the adjacent Central Asian states of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are also geo-strategically important because they help Moscow to consolidate its control over access to Caspian energy resources. As China seeks to reduce its dependence on maritime trade routes – which are controlled by the US Navy – it will have to increasingly rely on Russian cooperation as part of its bid to establish alternative land routes through Central Asia. For example, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline network (CAGP), which transports gas from Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to China, is currently being expanded to include a fourth line from Turkmenistan traversing through Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan before reaching its final destination in western China. Ultimately, these three Central Asian states serve as buffers against Chinese encroachment. It is not surprising that currently Moscow’s only foreign military bases are in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

Moscow’s bid to keep China’s regional influence in check also extends to Russia’s far-east. Russia’s main priority in this region is to develop its Eastern Siberian oil and gas fields in order to significantly increase its energy exports to China, Japan and South Korea. To support this, Putin has reaffirmed Russia’s long standing offer to settle its dispute with Japan over the disputed Kuril Islands and its willingness to sign a peace agreement that formally ends World War II. In return, Moscow would expect Japan to become a major purchaser of Russian energy and make significant investments in its oil and gas fields.

Keeping NATO in Check

The major challenges to Moscow’s grand strategy are to be found on Russia’s western, northern and southern borders. In the west, Russia’s national boundary abuts several NATO member-states that were either former Warsaw Pact allies or part of the Soviet Union. These include Poland and Lithuania, whose northern and southern borders surround the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, thereby depriving it of direct land and air access to the rest of the country. Russia also finds itself confronting several NATO members in the Arctic Ocean region, most notably the United States. In response, Moscow recently announced an expansion of its military presence in the high north. This includes the establishment of a new Arctic Military Command that is responsible for securing a border that stretches from the Barents Sea to the Bering Strait.

Russia clearly sees the safeguarding of its highly vulnerable southern flank against NATO encroachment as the central feature of its grand strategy. Accordingly, Moscow has attempted to carve a sphere of influence that includes Belarus to the southwest, Ukraine to the south, and Georgia and Armenia to the southeast. In this respect, Russia’s recent re-annexation of Crimea and support for rebels in Eastern Ukraine can also be viewed as part of Moscow’s bid to preserve strategic depth where it is arguably needed most. By reincorporating Crimea into the Russian Federation, Moscow has ensured that its naval base at Sevastopol, home of the Russian Black Sea fleet, remains beyond the reach of NATO. Russia’s thinly disguised military assistance for ethnic Russian insurgents in Eastern Ukraine is clearly aimed at securing sufficient political autonomy for the region to preempt any possibility of a united Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. Devolution short of independence along the lines of Scotland (or Catalonia) seems to be Russia’s endgame for Eastern Ukraine. Russia’s brief war against Georgia in 2008 has, as a practical matter, removed Georgia from NATO’s orbit.

Cold War 2.0 or Détente 2.0?

Over the course of a week in early April 2008, President Putin drew a bright red line against further NATO expansion specifically into Ukraine and Georgia, and implicitly into Belarus and Armenia. Speaking at a press conference following the NATO Bucharest summit, Putin declared that Russia viewed the appearance of a powerful military bloc on its borders as a direct threat to the security of the country. Since then, Moscow’s actions in Georgia, Crimea and Eastern Ukraine demonstrate that it is determined to enforce its red line.

NATO’s response has been more bark than bite, reflecting the Alliance’s desire to extend social democratic norms to as many of Russia’s neighbors as possible while avoiding any action of a military nature. Economic sanctions imposed by NATO members have been largely symbolic so far (with the coincidental fall in oil and gas prices having a far greater impact). At the recent NATO Wales Summit, the Alliance reconfirmed its intention to eventually add Ukraine and Georgia to its membership. As well as demanding Russia’s withdrawal from Crimea, NATO also used the summit to signal that it regards Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova as within its sphere of influence. However, NATO has failed to articulate any strategic rationale for ignoring Russia’s red line.

In addition to this, NATO continues to face a number of problems that will test the resolve of the Alliance for the foreseeable future. These include defeating the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, and declining defense expenditure within most member-states. Which begs the question: does NATO really need to add confrontation with Russia to its already extensive list of challenges?

From the perspective of some of the key architects of détente – at least in the context of Russian-German détente – the answer would seem to be ‘no’. Mikhail Gorbachev, who agreed to German reunification within NATO and presided over the dissolution of the Soviet Union, recently warned against moves by the West to isolate Russia. Three former German chancellors – Helmut Kohl, Helmut Schmidt and Gerhard Schroeder – have also publicly criticized the imposition of sanctions against Russia and further NATO expansion into Ukraine and Georgia. In addition, Angela Merkel, the current German chancellor, recently signaled that she is unwilling to consider additional sanctions against Russia and would instead prefer to focus on engaging Moscow and stabilizing the situation in Ukraine. So, without German support for further NATO expansion, the United States and others may find themselves out on limb when it comes to confronting Russia over its actions in Ukraine.

Consequently, Washington and its NATO allies should seriously consider cooperation over confrontation and accept Moscow’s invitation to reset relations. There’s no guarantee that this reset will succeed: but if Moscow is bluffing why not call its bluff? After all, there is no downside to pursuing this option given that the current trajectory of East-West relations points to a new Cold War. Engagement might eventually lead to a neutral Ukraine (minus Crimea) that’s free to do business with the West. If this scenario ever comes to pass, then the upside of a reset with Moscow would ultimately be the renewal of a Cold War-style détente.

Samir Tata is a foreign policy analyst. He previously served as an intelligence analyst with the National-Geospatial Intelligence Agency, a staff assistant to Senator Dianne Feinstein, and a researcher with Middle East Institute, Atlantic Council and National Defense University.

The post Kremlinology 2.0: Deconstructing Russian Grand Strategy – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Five million people are expected to flood Goa, India in order to venerate the remains of 16th century Spanish missionary Francis Xavier. The remains will be on display for 40 days beginning this weekend ans it is a decade event. Officially called the “Exposition of the Sacred Relics of St Francis Xavier”, it has become a state-Church collaborative event, promoted by the state’s Tourism Department. The government of Goa has allotted some US$1.6 million to renovate and build infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and accommodation facilities.

“The exposition has been increasing in popularity with each event recording a roughly twentyfold increase in the last 30 years”, said Father Alfred Vaz, chief of the organizing committee of the Goa archdiocese. “This year we expect some five million people, at least half a million foreigners, to visit and venerate the relics”, added the priest.

Critics like Jose Mario, a Catholic who lives close to the cathedral compound, said the Church is “running a business” with the exposition of the remains of the saint. “It is no more faith. It is a business of donations and no one tells how much they collect”.

This year organizers are trying to attract more young people to the event by organizing an international FIFA approved soccer match involving teams from Egypt, Brazil, Portugal, Ghana, Nepal, India and Colombia. The teams are scheduled to play in at least four Indian cities, Fr Vaz said. Goa is well known for soccer in India, “we would like to spread the spirit of Goan football across India with a Christian spirit” as a special exposition program, he said.

The post India: Millions Arriving In Goa For Francis Xavier appeared first on Eurasia Review.

It is ironic that the annual commemoration of the death of Yasser Arafat should turn into an occasion for rekindling the flames of internal strife. This was clearly the aim of last week’s bombings that targeted the homes of Fatah leaders in Gaza, as well as the podium for the commemorative ceremonies of Arafat, who strove to make Palestinian national unity one of the pillars of his political legacy.

How desperately those concerned need to be inspired by the political legacy of that great president.

During a visit to demonstrate solidarity with the West Bank village of Al-Mughayyar, where settlers, under the protective eye of occupation soldiers, set fire to a mosque, Director of the Ministry of Awqaf (Religious Endowments) Kamel Abu Aliya remarked that his ministry have documented 20 similar attacks on mosques in the West Bank since 2011.

In targeting mosques, the occupation is clearly targeting major symbols of national and popular unity. Mosques, by definition, gather people together rather than drive them apart. Inside the mosque all the factions of the national struggle that are at odds with each other assemble as one with their fellow men, in solid ranks with a single heart.

The occupation has never foregone any means at its disposal to drive a wedge into the Palestinian national ranks. This has not changed. So it is ironic that the bombings would become an occasion to present the occupation with the gift of factional polarisation and a war of words, at a time when the factions most need to be united, and that they would serve to turn the national compass away from Jerusalem, on which Arafat had set his national compass until his dying breath.

But here is another important point. Both sides of the dispute — Fatah and Hamas — have condemned the attacks, denied all charges of responsibility and insist on the need to conduct an investigation into bombings as quickly as possible.

If these two factions can agree on these points, what would keep them from agreeing to form a joint fact-finding committee that would include representatives from all other factions (most notably the Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front) and independent figures from civil society that would be committed to publishing its findings in fulfilment of the right of the Palestinian people to know the truth?

Moreover, why couldn’t the creation of a joint committee such as this become a new mechanism for enhancing national reconciliation and ending acrimonious exchanges before they spiral out of control?

In this regard, when Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas says that he is not interested in “an investigation by them” — referring to Hamas, of course — but does not propose an alternative investigatory mechanism, he is not helping efforts to unearth the truth, which his people are more eager to learn than the two factions whose protracted dispute has exhausted their people.

But the most appalling irony resides in their aversion to turning the finger of accusation in the direction of the ultimate beneficiary from all this — namely, the Israeli occupation authority and its state. A focus on that beneficiary would suffice, in and of itself, to contain the dangerous repercussions of the bombings on national unity and, simultaneously, to expose the truth about the existence of parties who fear their interests would be jeopardised by the end of the rift in both the occupied West Bank and blockaded Gaza Strip.

These parties are exploited, knowingly or not, by the occupation, and collectively they form a “fifth column” that works to obstruct the process of national reconciliation in order to safeguard their interests.

But even if those who carried out the bomb attacks were Palestinian this does not obscure the identity of the first and foremost beneficiary. This, moreover, comes at a time when the occupation is escalating its aggression against the Palestinian people under occupation.

It is increasing its forces in the West Bank, intensifying its repressive measures and moving to augment its budget for settlement expansion. More significantly, the Israeli government recently approved a bill of law to extend the laws of the Israeli state to the Jewish colonies in the West Bank, as is the case in East Jerusalem and the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. In other words, we are effectively speaking of another Israeli annexation bid.

The history of dissension and strife is repeating itself. A statement by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) urges Fatah and Hamas to exercise restraint and to remain alert to the conspiracies that are being woven against the Palestinian people.

It cautions the two factions against falling into the Israeli trap of igniting Palestinian discord and urges them to give competent agencies and relevant political authorities sufficient time to unearth the threads of the crime.

Yet this statement, which applies perfectly to the current situation, was issued by the PFLP in July 2008 after four Ezz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigade members were killed in a bombing on Gaza beach. At the time, Hamas accused Fatah and the Fatah charged Hamas with carrying out an “internal purge.”

Nothing appears to have changed, apart from the fact that today Fatah accuses Hamas of planting the bombs and the latter responds that the attack was related to an internal conflict inside Fatah. In both cases, the occupation power and its government come out innocent!

That rush to judgment and finger pointing before the smoke has cleared is suspicious and raises questions regarding the political motives behind such reactions. One is reminded of a similar case of accusations that were hurled after the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri in 2005.

Before his blood had dried some fingers in Lebanon pointed to Syria, even though it was palpably evident that Damascus could not have been behind the crime as it was fully aware that it could only be harmed by the consequences.

The same applies to Hamas today. After its long political experience it would realise that it could only stand to lose from the Gaza bombings.

The hands that carried out the bombings in Gaza might be Palestinian and even Fatah or Hamas hands, but those who issued the orders could not have been Palestinian decision-makers. Anyone familiar with the history of Palestinian assassinations knows this.

The perpetrators may have been motivated by personal interests but the consequences cannot possibly serve Palestinian interests, factional or otherwise. They can only serve the occupation authority and its state, especially as the victim is certainly the Palestinian people and their national unity.

The fifth column that benefits from Palestinian division and that feels threatened by its end is still searching for opportunities to sabotage Palestinian national reconciliation. It must have seen the Gaza bombings as a perfect opportunity to fan the flames of discord, offering a service free of charge to the occupation (presuming the best possible intentions under that situation), or not free of charge (presuming the worst).

It does not take much effort to reach the above conclusion. However, building on it by containing the unpatriotic repercussions of the attacks requires great thought and effort in order to prevent outbursts of factional acrimony or to keep them contained in order to safeguard national reconciliation from collapse.

This is essential to ensure that the reconstruction of Gaza moves forward, to sustain the national unity government and to return the focus to solidifying national ranks in the face of the occupation’s ongoing aggression against the Palestinian people, their security and wellbeing and their sanctities, and behind the political battle that the Palestinian presidency is waging in the international arena.

The post Gaza Bombings Rock Palestinian Reconciliation – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.