Rock soil droplets formed by heating most likely came from Stone Age house fires and not from a disastrous cosmic impact 12,900 years ago, according to new research from the University of California, Davis. The study, of soil from Syria, is the latest to discredit the controversial theory that a cosmic impact triggered the Younger Dryas cold period.

The Younger Dryas lasted a thousand years and coincided with the extinction of mammoths and other great beasts and the disappearance of the Paleo-Indian Clovis people. In the 1980s, some researchers put forward the idea that the cool period, which fell between two major glaciations, began when a comet or meteorite struck North America.

In the new study, published online in the Journal of Archaeological Science, scientists analyzed siliceous scoria droplets — porous granules associated with melting — from four sites in northern Syria dating back 10,000 to 13,000 years ago. They compared them to similar scoria droplets previously suggested to be the result of a cosmic impact at the onset of the Younger Dryas.

“For the Syria side, the impact theory is out,” said lead author Peter Thy, a project scientist in the UC Davis Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences. “There’s no way that can be done.”

The findings supporting that conclusion include:

• The composition of the scoria droplets was related to the local soil, not to soil from other continents, as one would expect from an intercontinental impact.
• The texture of the droplets, thermodynamic modeling and other analyses showed the droplets were formed by short-lived heating events of modest temperatures, and not by the intense, high temperatures expected from a large impact event.
• And in a key finding, the samples collected from archaeological sites spanned 3,000 years. “If there was one cosmic impact,” Thy said, “they should be connected by one date and not a period of 3,000 years.”

So if not resulting from a cosmic impact, where did the scoria droplets come from? House fires. The study area of Syria was associated with early agricultural settlements along the Euphrates River. Most of the locations include mud-brick structures, some of which show signs of intense fire and melting. The study concludes that the scoria formed when fires ripped through buildings made of a mix of local soil and straw.

The post Study Casts Doubt On Mammoth-Killing Cosmic Impact appeared first on Eurasia Review.

A large meta-analysis of 12 studies in sub-Saharan Africa found that women who used a type of injectable birth control had a moderately increased risk of becoming infected with HIV.

The contraceptive, depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, is sold under the brand name Depo-Provera, and it is administered as a shot every three months.

The findings, published today (Thursday, Jan. 8) in The Lancet Infectious Diseases, included data from 39,500 women. The researchers selected the studies based upon methodological rigor, such as whether they accounted for the use of condoms.

In addition to Depo-Provera, the studies also examined other commonly prescribed forms of hormonal contraception, such as the injectable norethisterone oenanthate (sold as NET-EN), combined oral contraceptives and progestin-only pills. The other birth control methods did not appear to increase HIV infection risk for women in the general population.

“We embarked on this study because of the inconsistency in the scientific literature on this topic,” said study lead author Lauren Ralph, who did this research for her UC Berkeley Ph.D. dissertation in epidemiology. “The results have potentially broad implications because hormonal contraceptives remain popular for women worldwide.”

Approximately 144 million women worldwide use hormonal contraception, and of those about 41 million women use injectable forms of birth control instead of the pill.

The study found that women who used depot medroxyprogesterone acetate had a moderate, 40 percent increased risk of acquiring HIV compared with women using non-hormonal methods and those not practicing birth control. The increased risk was slightly lower, 31 percent, among the studies done in women in the general population.

It remains unclear why the increased risk was seen among those using Depo-Provera but not the other forms of hormonal contraception, the authors said. One possibility may be that birth control with higher levels of progestin, the synthetic form of the natural hormone progesterone, changed the vaginal lining or altered local immunity, increasing the risk for HIV infection, though the researchers emphasized that this study did not examine the physiological effects of the different contraceptive methods and more research on potential underlying biologic mechanisms is needed.

The researchers cautioned that the increased HIV infection risk needs to be considered in the context of the risks associated with not using birth control.

“We do not believe that the findings merit withdrawal of this method of birth control for most women,” said Ralph. “There are significant risks associated with pregnancy and childbirth as well. It can be tricky to ensure a reliable supply of contraceptives in sub-Saharan Africa. Removing Depo-Provera doesn’t mean the women will have immediate access to other methods of birth control that are as effective. Ultimately, decisions around which birth control method to use should be made between a woman and her healthcare provider.”

The researchers noted that the results highlight the need for more studies among high-risk populations. Among the 12 studies analyzed, only two included sex workers or women with HIV-positive partners.

“The most important next steps for women all over the world are to examine ways to broaden women’s contraceptive options and increase uptake of other safe and effective contraceptive methods, and to step up research on new contraceptive methods, especially those that protect against both HIV and pregnancy,” said senior author Nancy Padian, a UC Berkeley adjunct professor of epidemiology.

The post Study Links Birth Control Shot To Moderately Increased Risk Of HIV Infection appeared first on Eurasia Review.

If you have any spare cash laying around and need of a vacation, Chevy Chase would probably recommend that you go to Europe. The euro currency has dipped to a nine-year low against the dollar. That is good for tourists going to Europe, but is not good for European economic prospects in the long term. Why?

Recently, Mario Draghi, the president of the European Central Bank and probably the most powerful man in Europe, hinted that he was about to effectively print lots of money, hoping to jolt the sclerotic European economy back to prosperity. Europe’s abysmal economic performance has led to excessive fears of deflation—that is, the falling of prices. But you say, wouldn’t falling prices benefit European consumers? Yes, but the ECB cares less about citizens and more about businesses that don’t want the prices of their products to decline.

A U.S.-or British-style “quantitative easing” by the ECB would allegedly goose the sluggish European economy back to life and increase prices, thus alleviating the fears of price deflation. After all, isn’t the United States’ economy finally experiencing recovery after years of massive money printing by the U.S. Federal Reserve? Wouldn’t that be a good thing for Europe too?

Central bankers of rich European nations, such as Germany, don’t really agree—and correctly so. They fear that their economies will suffer to compensate for the deadwood still in the economic system from financially irresponsible countries, such as Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, etc. All of these nations have been on critically needed austerity programs to get their economy-dragging huge debts down. The fear in Europe is that in Greece, a far left populist party, Syriza, may win the upcoming election and halt the austerity program that was required by international lenders when they last bailed Greece out of its financial irresponsibility.

So in compensating for these countries’ prior financial profligacy, which has dragged economic growth in Europe because of huge amounts of accumulated debt, Draghi wants to take the irresponsibility to the European-wide level by a massive printing of money. The United States has been urging Europe to undertake such a quantitative easing for a while now, but Germany has been rightly reluctant. Germany, always fearful of inflation after its experience with hyper-inflation during the interwar period, is fearful of money printing.

But didn’t money printing turn the U.S. economy around? After the financial crisis, borrowers in the United States have reduced debt, which may be helping economic growth rates. However, the growth in the U.S. economy could also be artificial. Any time money is printed on a mass scale, as it has been in the United States and Britain, it can create a sense of false prosperity.

Such artificial prosperity has occurred a couple of times recently in the United States. In the 1990s, Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman appointed by President Ronald Reagan, turned on the money spigot. The money flowed into new Internet companies, causing the dot.com bubble, which burst around the new millennium, causing a recession. To right this downturn, Greenspan and his successor, Ben Bernanke, started the money printing presses again. Much of the money flowed into the U.S. housing industry, creating a bubble that popped in 2008, leading to the worst worldwide financial and economic meltdown since the Great Depression. To “save” the U.S. and world economies, Bernanke then printed money like no one else in history.

That’s where we are today. Americans—and Europeans—should be wary of where all that money has gone. This time, where is the bubble of artificial prosperity that will come crashing down? In recent times, the U.S. economy has been on one Fed-induced sugar high after another. Europe should pay attention to the U.S. record and continue with the German-enforced austerity that will be bring about long-term European prosperity once the irresponsible countries have been forced to get their financial houses in order. Unfortunately, Europe will probably not continue on a financially more responsible course because, by all outward appearances, the U.S. economy is beginning to grow nicely.

If Greece does elect Syriza, abandon its required austerity program, and exit the Euro currency, the entire currency could come apart, with a rump group of responsible nations forming their own currency union. Such a crisis may cause central banks all over Europe to print money to “save” the system—as was done in the United States.

A better course of action is to delay gratification, continue belt-tightening austerity, and lay the groundwork for long-term legitimate economic growth. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen, because governments in Europe and America are so accustomed to intervening in economies to alleviate short-term pain. It’s too easy to just turn on the printing presses.

This article was published at The Huffington Post and is reprinted with permission.

The post Is Another Euro Crisis At Hand? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By D Suba Chandran*

Of all the coups, overt and covert since 1947, the military in Pakistan should be smiling at the invitation by the Parliament to set up military courts. As a phenomenon and institution, the military courts are not new in the democratic history of nations; numerous countries have gone through this process in establishing them for a specific purpose at a particular time in their history.

Will the military courts that are being set up in Pakistan with the passage of 21st Constitutional Amendment Bill 2015 along with Pakistan Army Act (Amendment) Bill 2015 by a two-third majority in the Parliament lead to further erosion of democratic hold over governance? Or, will it only result in addressing the militancy in Pakistan, as it is being projected by the powerless government in power? Is this a right strategy for Pakistan?

Whatever may be the reasons behind the setting up of military courts, there are few larger issues. First, it clearly shows the failure of mainstream governance: not only the democratically elected government, but also the entire judicial process. Why would Pakistan need military courts to deal with terrorism, and not trial by regular courts? The argument is – the situation is not simple and merits serious and focussed intervention.

It is unfortunate, that the judiciary in Pakistan except for a brief period under the former Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry remained under the shadows of other institutions. Even today, political leaders and TV anchors make huge accusations against the honourable judges and the Supreme Court, and get away at the end with simple apologies submitted by their lawyers. Setting up of military courts mean an indirect acceptance of the inability of legal institutions to try terrorism and terrorists. The issue is not limited to the courage of the individuals or officials in the courtroom in ensuring a proper trial, but also include the ability of concerned security officials to make a proper case and present credible evidence following a thorough investigation.

While the military courts may circumvent the above issue, it will pose a larger problem in the long run. Military courts will always result in impinging civilian rights in a given political atmosphere, whether it takes place in US or in India or in Australia. This is bound to happen and has happened in the past. In Pakistan’s case, with so much of ethnic and regional polarization with Balochis, Sindhis, Mohajirs and Pashtuns, such an occurrence is inviting more problem to the nation building process.

Second, the setting up of military courts also means abdication of authority by the democratically elected government to the military. Both the governments – PML and the previous PPP were reluctant to take decisive actions against the militants. Though Nawaz Sharif did make a statement that the civilian government would decide which cases will be pursued by the military courts, this is a foregone conclusion. If the setting up of military courts in itself is a result of pressure from the Establishment, it will be difficult to believe that the elected government will have a choice in choosing which cases need to be pursued.

In retrospect, it appears both the military and democratic governments should have sincerely followed up with two big decisions that Gen Musharraf took in 2001 and 2007 respectively vis-a-vis Afghanistan and Lal Masjid. After those two crucial decisions, successive governments should have continued with fighting the militants both across the Durand Line and within Pakistan.

Unfortunately, there were repeated political deals and selective targeting of militants with a self-imposed delusion that this was not their war and was fallout of American War against Terrorism, which in turn was a residue of American led Cold War against the Russians in Afghanistan.

Finally, the larger question relates to the very objective seeing the military courts as a solution to the problem of terrorism in Pakistan. In fact the civilian government, by passing the relevant Bills in the Parliament has democratically elevated the problem as a solution. Nothing could be more dangerous than fighting terrorism in Pakistan.

How did terrorism become such a phenomenon in Pakistan internally? While there were issues relating to Baloch and Mohajir problem in the previous years, neither of the above had become such an “existential threat” to Pakistan, as the TTP led terrorism has become today. How did TTP become such a big monster? Where did it originate and how did it grow to this mammoth level.

While a section within Pakistan would live in a denial world and accuse the US, Israel and India for all the problems of violence within the country, the reality is far from it. The Establishment in Pakistan used J&K and Afghanistan to serve their narrow purposes during the 1980s and 1990s. The jihadi groups led by the Lashkar, Jaish, and the Harkat, and the sectarian groups led by the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Sahaba were all part of a larger problem created by the Establishment to serve its own interests both within and outside Pakistan. The Taliban in Afghanistan and the TTP in Pakistan were the fallouts; unfortunately for the Establishment, it has come back to haunt them. The stooges and trump cards today have become a threat.

Military courts will only bring the Establishment into the main environment and a lead actor. While military will have to play a leading role in any governmental strategy in fighting militancy, legal processes should be in civilian hands. Military can only be a fighting arm of a democratic government. Military courts can never be a substitute to democratic governance.

The Sharif government, perhaps under pressure has taken a decision that would haunt the democratic process further in Pakistan. Perhaps, he has found an easy way out, by outsourcing the process, and thereby abdicating the responsibility of the Parliament. Military has to be used as a strategy in fighting terrorism at the ground level, but not as a legal institution to try and convict.

To conclude, the military courts may not provide the right answers to fighting terrorism Pakistan. Problem can never be imposed as solutions! In this context, solutions lie with effective governance and credible democratic process, supported by an efficient judiciary. In fact, the court systems in Pakistan are already crowded with constitutionally established secular courts, the Shariah courts and the socially approved (and at times tolerated) local jirgas. There are enough courts already in Pakistan. What Pakistan needs is justice.

By arrangement with Rising Kashmir

The post Pakistan: The Counter-Productiveness Of Military Courts – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Gurmeet Kanwal* and Bibhu Prasad Routray*

In a spectacular strike on the security forces, cadres belonging to the CPI-Maoist ambushed a large team of police and paramilitary forces and killed 14 personnel of the CRPF in Sukma district of Chhattisgarh in December 2014. Ironically, two days before the attack, Chief Minister Raman Singh had declared that, “The day is not far when the state and Centre will together wipe out the Maoist menace and succeed in making Chhattisgarh Naxal-free.”

The Sukma attack has punctured such optimistic assessments. It was by far the gravest attack since the BJP-led NDA government assumed power in New Delhi in May 2014. The previous major attack targeting the security forces had occurred on 11 May 2014 in Maharashtra in which seven C-60 police commandos had been killed when Maoists blew up a police vehicle in Gadchiroli district. Between June and November 2014, the average monthly fatalities among the security forces was less than three – a comforting, yet complacency-inducing figure. The extremists, on the other hand, had suffered 56 fatalities during the period.

Extremism-related fatalities usually decline during the monsoon, which compels both the extremists and the security forces to scale down their operations. In addition, the CPI-Maoist was rocked by a number of high profile surrenders of some of its leaders. This led to the further extension of the lean period of Maoist violence in 2014. In the first 10 months of 2014, 472 Maoist cadres surrendered, compared with 283 in 2013. In his statement on the Sukma attack in Parliament, the Home Minister referred to the success achieved by Chhattisgarh in terms of the record surrender of the extremists, which has led to a weakening of the “morale of the Maoists”. The adverse operational impact of the recent desertions from the so-called revolutionary path has been acknowledged by the Maoists.

Maoists have overcome reverses

In the wake of the Sukma attack, it is apparent that the CPI-Maoist’s weather- and surrender-induced operational frailty is a matter of the past. While it is convenient to interpret the Chhattisgarh attack as an aberration and a desperate attempt by a dying outfit to prove a point, a range of indicators – the continuing recruitment of cadres, organisation of training camps, people’s courts, and the outfit’s foray into new states such as Kerala – underline the fact that the Sukma attack could be the beginning of the rejuvenation of left-wing extremism (LWE).

Chief Minister Raman Singh had claimed on 30 November 2014 that “Central security forces, state police jawans and officers are fighting the menace of Naxalism with better coordination on every front.” In sharp contrast, only a few days earlier, the CRPF chief had accused the Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand governments of underutilising the central forces. Be that as it may, the CRPF, designated as the primary counter-insurgency force of the country over a decade ago, needs better leadership. The force has consistently fallen short in the provision of even basic logistics support to its personnel engaged in counter-insurgency operations. The modernisation plans of the state police forces are also continuing to stagnate.

Need for a Comprehensive Strategy

Maoist attacks on the security forces and the symbols of state power are characterised by meticulous planning, systematic preparation, near-surgical execution and a high degree of coordination. On several occasions, the rebels have achieved considerable success in launching synchronised attacks on multiple targets involving large numbers of cadres. For the Maoists, besides waging a protracted people’s war with the ultimate objective of capturing or seizing political power, participating in a peace process and talks is a ‘tactic’ and considered ‘war by other means’.

The response of various state governments and the Centre is invariably reactive. While the Maoists have been expanding to newer areas and have been steadily enhancing their military capabilities, counter-Naxal operations have mostly been lackadaisical. The reasons for this apathetic approach are three-fold. Firstly, Naxal terrorism is not an emotive issue at the national level like the insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir. Secondly, there is some confusion about whether the Naxalites are terrorists or not as they have a ‘social justice’ tag attached to them. And, lastly, an impression has gained currency that the Naxal menace is not “as bad as the media makes it out to be.”

Coordination between the police and intelligence agencies of various affected states has been generally unsatisfactory. The acquisition, compilation, collation, analysis, synthesis and dissemination of intelligence are inadequate. The Naxalites are continuing to spread their tentacles and it is crucial that intelligence about their activities, arms and equipment, training, sources of funding and future operations is shared on a daily basis so that it trickles down in near real-time to the functional level. A national-level data base of all terrorist groups and individuals is an inescapable operational necessity.

State police forces and the Central armed police forces (CAPFs) need to be better equipped and trained like the army to successfully combat the serious threat posed by the Naxalites. At present they lack the army’s organisational structure and cohesiveness, the army’s institutionalised operational experience and ethos and its outstanding junior leadership – qualities that are mandatory for success in counter-insurgency operations. A great deal more needs to be done if the states are to effectively coordinate anti-Maoist operations across their borders.

The Maoist threat presents a clear and present danger. So far the national response has been inadequate, both at the policy formulation and execution levels. To cope with this serious threat, India needs a well-deliberated and finely calibrated strategy with matching operational doctrines and the allotment of necessary resources. Only a skilfully planned and coordinated strategy, with all stakeholders pooling in their resources to achieve synergy in execution, will achieve the desired results. At the same time, a comprehensive socio-economic strategy must be evolved to treat the root causes of this malaise that is gnawing away at the nation’s innards, along with a carefully drawn up plan for perception management. Good governance, development, security and perception management must go hand in hand.

*Gurmeet Kanwal is former Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi.

*Bibhu Prasad Routray served as a deputy director in the National Security Council Secretariat, New Delhi.

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

Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/MeetingtheMaoistChallenge_KanwalRoutray_080115.html

The post India: Meeting The Maoist Challenge – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Shujaat Bukhari*

Relations between India and Pakistan are again at a new low as hostilities across the International Border (IB) and the Line of Control (LOC) in Jammu and Kashmir have intensified. At least seven people including civilians have been killed in the renewed shelling and firing from either side. Amid an uneasy calm both New Delhi and Islamabad have been blaming each other for the provocation. Even unveiled threats have become part of a discourse that is shaping up now.

An “apparently empowered” Defence Minister of Pakistan Khawja Asif talked of the “language India can understand” and on January 4 he even tried to put India on defensive by saying “India wants to keep us busy in a low-intensity war or low-intensity engagement on our eastern border. They are pursuing the same tactics of keeping our forces busy on all fronts”. Earlier Pakistan’s Foreign Affairs Adviser Sartaj Aziz had protested to External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj by saying that the Border Security Force had called the Rangers for a flag meeting but they instead opened fire. But Swaraj refuted the allegations saying “Pak commanders responded to our defensive fire by using higher caliber weapons, expanding conflict zone, targeting civilian habitations”. She also warned of consequences in case the mechanisms are not followed.

This acrimonious war of words not only brings to the fore the deep mistrust both the sides have developed but also the fact that the situation could take any turn. Even an incident of fishing boat casting off into Arabian Sea near Keti Bunder, 100 kilometers from Karachi became an issue of “Pakistan exporting explosives to India”. The incident, however, was caught in the controversy within India even as the boat that blew up was marked as “Terror Boat”. Two influential dailies The Indian Express and DNA raised questions over the claims that it was meant to carry explosives to India. Leading security expert Ajai Shukla dissected the press release from Ministry of Defence as also the inputs from intelligence sources. “Questions also abound over the MoD’s contention that there was an explosion on board. In a fuel fire, any high explosive on board the vessel would simply have caught fire and burnt, not exploded” he wrote in Business Standard. Immediately dismissing the boat as a “Terror Boat” also put in the context the strand relations and the level of mistrust that exists on both sides. In this particular case the example of November 26, 2008 attack in Mumbai came handy to link it with terror.

With Prime Minister Narendra Modi not making any statement vis a vis this fresh spate of violence across the borders and no investigation launched to see what exactly happens on borders, it has shrunk the space for creating an atmosphere of reconciliation. It is not known what is happening on Pakistani side and why the Pakistan’s ISI, Army or Rangers are engaged in a renewed phase of hostility. But on Indian side it is steadily becoming clear that as of now reconciliation with Pakistan is a closed chapter.

This all started in July last year when New Delhi took a major rather surprising step to unilaterally call off the Foreign Secretary-level talks in view of Pakistan High Commissioner meeting separatists in Delhi. At that time it was seen as “fulfillment” of Modi’s electoral promise in which he had talked tough in dealing with Pakistan with regard to terror. “Terror and talks cannot go hand in hand,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi repeatedly said during the election campaign. But he had himself given a “pleasant” surprise when he invited all heads of the SAARC countries including Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to his swearing-in ceremony. Diplomatic circles were taken aback as it was something different one would expect from a tough talking Modi. If the insiders are to be believed New Delhi was keen to see Nawaz Sharif being part of the tumultuous ceremony but it could be covered up under the larger outreach to all SAARC nations.

Political grapevine is that Modi has not been able to rein in the “hawks” within the establishment who are drawing inspiration from RSS agenda to adopt a tough posture vis a vis Pakistan. Pakistan has surely not given a fair deal to India as far as the trial of Mumbai is concerned, or the latest drama about Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi is one example. But New Delhi too is not clear about its policy. It seems that the hard-liners within BJP, as also the RSS, have so far succeeded in implementing their hawkish agenda. This was the case during Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s tenure as well but he sidestepped the hawks and walked many extra miles. He crafted a mechanism of separating party interests from diplomacy. He showed how political leadership could assert itself and work independent of jingoistic agency thinking. That is how he stood alone among the Prime Ministers of India.

For Modi also, it was an opportunity to use his mandate and power to do something different. But so far he has not left any imprint of departing from the traditional mindset that runs the establishment. While being leader of the largest democracy in the world and biggest power in South Asia, he could have easily moved forward on his “intent” to carry along South Asian countries, as he had indicated by inviting SAARC heads to his investiture ceremony. Moreover, the electoral achievement he had in recent Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir, though no achievement in Valley, he could use the state’s unrest to open doors for reconciliation with Pakistan. After his stern message to his troops in November asking them to “Fire at will” in retaliation to Pakistani firing he has not made any major intervention in this phase of hostility. May be he is not happy with what is happening but he needs to come out of tutored situation and give a new hope to people using his power and mandate.

With the tension escalating on borders, the brunt of this renewed hostility will have to be borne by the people who live along the borders. What all stakeholders fail to realize is the fact that the ceasefire announced in 2003 and followed up with more Confidence Building Measures on both sides of Jammu and Kashmir had yielded dividends for the general public. This bonhomie from 2003 to 2008 might have upset the hawks and vested interests on both sides, but it had done wonders on re-engagement of people across Line of Control and giving relief to lakhs of people living on the borders. Their lives had dramatically changed and they could live in peace after more than a decade.

While Pakistan needs to change its policy and not take any step that is provocative, the government led by Modi in Delhi also has to work for bringing peace to the region.

* Shujaat Bukhari
Editor, Rising Kashmir

By arrangement with Rising Kashmir

The post India-Pakistan Relations: A New Low – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By N Sathiya Moorthy

Sri Lanka has got a new President and a new government. The nation has voted in the common Opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena, and voted out incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has promptly congratulated Sirisena, indicating the traditional Indian readiness and willingness to work with the new government.

Indian concerns in and with Sri Lanka can be broadly identified with the ‘ethnic issue’ and the ‘China factor’. As the facilitator of 13-A power-devolution deriving from the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987, India owes to itself, the Tamils of Sri Lanka and that nation as a whole, to help restore ethnic peace and balance in that country.

The Indian sympathies and assistance, if any, for the Rajapaksa government to battle out the LTTE too derived from such a perception. However, the promised peace has eluded Sri Lanka, and that has had its overtones for politics and elections in India, with particular focus on southern Tamil Nadu. More so, it has also had impacted on bilateral relations in more ways than one, particularly in the larger international context of a succession of UNHRC votes on ‘accountability issue’ deriving from US-sponsored resolution on alleged ‘war crimes’ in Sri Lanka.

The presidential poll results have shown that President-elect Sirisena’s victory was made possible by the overwhelming vote of the nation’s minorities, particularly the Sri Lankan Tamils (SLT) in the North, East and elsewhere in the country. The ruling Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in the community-centric Northern Province has proved to the world that it has ‘freed’ itself from the LTTE, and so have the Tamil voters, who mostly ignored the ‘poll boycott’ call given by a section of the ‘Tamil nationalists’.

A direct role for India in the future ethnic negotiations is ruled out, but the Indian concerns will be addressed wholly only when the new government and its limited TNA underwriter arrive at a negotiated settlement. Five years back, after the conclusion of ‘Eelam War IV’ those concerns related mainly to a political solution – 13-plus, as differently envisioned by the stake-holders concerned.

Today, ‘accountability’ and ‘de-militarisation’ issues have also been added, among others. Both sides are also variously pressured by the pending UNHRC resolution, where the international probe team is expected to present its first (interim?) report in the upcoming session in March. The new government of President Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe would require time. But the TNA cannot be seen as acquiescing to the UNHRC facilitating such time.

Potential to fall apart

India, more than the rest of the international community, could get caught in between, particularly if the US, mover of the three earlier resolutions, is constrained to move a fourth one in March. Having taken the principled and long-known stand on ‘sovereignty-related’ issue on the ‘accountability’ front, India cannot be seen as doing otherwise.

Internally, the Tamils and the TNA having given the winning edge to Sirisena along with other minority communities in the country cannot be seen as compromising on the larger issues, after yielding on non-mention of the ‘ethnic issue’ in the Opposition candidate’s poll manifesto. In real terms, they need to keep their constituency together for a long time to come.

The Sirisena-Ranil leadership, with blessings from a host of anti-Rajapaksa leaders and forces, starting with former President Chandrika Kumaratunga, cannot be seen as ‘compromising wholesale’ to the minorities, the Tamils in particular. All sides would have to face parliamentary polls in the months to come, and the ‘anti-incumbency’ Sinhala constituency may have different views on the ‘ethnic issue’ in the absence of the Rajapaksa presidency.

India will be keenly watching the proceedings out there, and so will it have to, the dynamics of the poll-time coalition, which has the potential to fall apart as much as it has the potency to stay together. The Indian concerns will also relate to the ‘Tamil Nadu factor’, where the competitive sections of the Dravidian polity, big and small, will need to readjust themselves to ‘Sri Lanka Tamil politics’ without President Rajapaksa. They will also need to retune their Sri Lanka-related politics in the country to the TNA’s successful call against ‘poll boycott’ – which most of them had subscribed to, under influence from patrons in the Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora.

China ties

The temptation in the Indian strategic community would be for the new Sri Lankan dispensation to show the door to China, which according to them has been playing spoiler to traditionally strong (?) bilateral relations between the two South Asian neighbours. It’s not easy for any government in Sri Lanka to meet their expectations, and not certainly overnight.

It’s not without reason. Independent of political affiliations of individual parties and individuals in power in Sri Lanka, the nation has had a long and tested relations with China – as against what some in the Sri Lankan strategic community would want to believe was ‘testy’ ties with India, which also came to be tested time and again over the past decades.

Be it the ‘rubber-rice’ deal of the early Fifties, or the weapons deal for Sri Lanka to take on the LTTE, the Big Two of Sri Lanka’s politics, namely, the UNP and the SLFP – three successive Presidents, namely, Chandrika Kumaratunga, Mahinda Rajapaksa and now Maithripala Sirisena come from the party – China has done for Sri Lanka that India has not done, according to these sections of the Sri Lankan strategic community. But that is not saying all of it. Not that they would want to say all that would be in praise of and acknowledgement of Indian assistance.

The question would also relate to the internal dynamics of the new ruling coalition, which is yet to take stock of their post-poll relations and draw a common agenda for the new government, which addresses the tricky ideological differences of important partners. While some like the centre-Left JVP may choose to stay away from a government, others, including the TNA and the Muslim parties, would have to rediscover themselves under the changed circumstances, and find a common ground to work with.

In the medium, if not the immediate term, India could expect the new Sri Lankan dispensation to try to move back to the balancing centrist position in relations with India and China. While this would also imply that India needs to learn fast to try and complete commitments and projects on time, the fact also remains that no nation or international financial institution is in a position to underwrite Sri Lanka’s long-standing debts to China, or replace the debtor as in personal banking transactions.

That way, the new government in Colombo would not want to be seen as dropping various developmental projects initiated by the Rajapaksa dispensation, as it has the potential to make them overnight unpopular with the masses. These developmental projects mostly involve huge Chinese investments, and Sri Lanka is yet to enjoy the fruits – in terms of employment creation and the like.

Pre-poll, the leadership of the new government had set a 100-day time-frame for changing the Constitution and abolishing the Executive Presidency. They had reiterated that the ‘ethnic issue’ fell outside the framework of the 100-day work-schedule. So would the ‘China factor’, which is going to take its time, doing the balancing act, with India on the one hand and the US on the other – both having common yet different and differentiated concerns with and about China.

*The writer is a Senior Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Chennai Chapter

The post Sri Lanka’s New Government, And India And China – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The US unemployment rate edged down to 5.6 percent in December from 5.7 percent in November (revised from an earlier reported 5.8 percent). However, the main reason was that 273,000 workers reportedly left the labor force. The employment-to-population ratio (EPOP) was unchanged at 59.2 percent, roughly 4.0 percentage points below the pre-recession level.

The establishment survey showed the economy adding 252,000 jobs in December. With upward revisions to the prior two months’ data, this brings the three month average to 289,000.

Some of the job growth in December was likely attributable to better than usual weather for the month. For example, construction reportedly added 48,000 jobs; restaurant employment rose by 43,600. But even without these strong gains, there was still healthy job growth. Manufacturing added 17,000 jobs, finance added 10,000, and health care added 52,000. Unlike prior months, the jobs in this sector were mostly (35,200) in the less well-paying administrative and waste services category. The health care sector added 34,100 jobs. Job growth in this sector has accelerated sharply, averaging 36,500 over the last three months. By comparison, it averaged just 21,200 in the year from September 2013 to September 2014. Retail added just 7,700 jobs. This reflects the earlier than usual Christmas hiring which added 88,300 jobs the prior two months.

The story on wages is less encouraging. The widely touted November jump in wages was almost completely reversed, with the December data showing a 5 cent drop from a downwardly revised November figure. The average over the last three months grew at a 1.1 percent annual rate compared with the average of the prior three months, down from a 1.7 percent growth rate over the last year. This may be due in part to a shift to lower paying jobs in restaurants, retail, and the lower-paying portions of the health care industry. However, it is also possible that we are just seeing anomalous data. Nonetheless, the claims of accelerating wage growth have no support in the data.

Interestingly, there seems to be some shrift to generally less-skilled production and non-supervisory workers. The index of weekly hours for these workers is up 3.6 percent from its year-ago level. By contrast, the index for all workers is up by just 3.3 percent. Since the former group is more than 80 percent of the payroll employees, hours for supervisory workers would have risen by just 2.5 percent. This is consistent with employment data showing much sharper employment gains for workers with high school degrees or less than for college grads. The EPOP for college grads is actually down by 0.2 percentage points over the last year.

Other data worth noting in the household survey include a rise in the EPOP for African Americans of 1.8 percentage points over the last year and for African American men of 2.2 percentage points. The EPOP for African Americans is up by 3.9 percentage points from its low in 2011, although it is still down by 4.0 percentage points from pre-recession levels. The 10.4 percent December unemployment rate for African Americans is down from a recession peak of 16.8 percent.

This report shows some evidence of the labor market impacts of the ACA. While the number of people choosing to work part-time was down slightly from its November level, it is still 1.1 million above its year-ago level. The number of people who are self-employed is also up from its year-ago level. Averaging the last three months, the number of self-employed workers is up by 480,000 (3.5 percent) from the same months of 2013. (It had been dropping in 2013.) Also, the over 55 age group comprised just 37.6 percent of employment growth in 2014, compared to an average of 65.3 percent in the prior two years. This could indicate that many pre-Medicare age workers now feel they can retire since they can get insurance through the exchanges.

On the whole, this is clearly a very positive report with the strong December jobs number (even if inflated by weather) coupled with upward revisions to the prior two months. However, quit rates are still very low and wage growth remains weak. This should remind the public of how far the labor market has to go before making up the ground lost in the recession.

The post US Unemployment Rate Edges Down To 5.6 Percent, But Wages Stagnate – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The “opportunity costs” of nuclear weapons is a thought provoking concept in Pakistan, North Korea and India; where the development of nuclear weapons take place against a backdrop of prevalent poverty and unmet basic needs. Therefore some prominent nuclear physicists in Pakistan, i.e. Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy and Dr. A.H. Nayyar, insist that development of nuclear weapons by Pakistan is a main source of its economic deprivation and Paranoia. For them, the nuclear testing of 1998 was the main reason for the economic crises in Pakistan. This is exactly a guns versus butter debate—a selection between taking care of the people who serve, or the development of equipment  needed to contest and prevail in current and future conflicts.

Nuclear weapons and the debate over the necessity for such weapons have persisted for several years. As opinions against nuclear weapons increase, so too do more and more countries yearn to possess these weapons and demonstrate their power. This means that we have to discover those benefits which are of such significance that a country prefers to divert a huge portion of its finances from public sector to become a nuclear capable state.

The rational for Pakistan to develop a nuclear weapon was so that the country could have the self-reliance to ensure its security. After the hefty losses in the wars of 1948 and 1965, and the debacle of 1971, Pakistani leadership understood that none of the great powers were going to support Pakistan in times of crisis against any Indian aggression. Therefore self-reliance was the crucial idea of Pakistan’s policy makers to make sure that only Pakistan should be responsible for defending their country against any Indian offensive. In this regard, we must understand that being a nuclear power is crucial for Pakistan’s survival and sovereignty. Preserving and improving national security is vital to the national interest, and expenses from the state budget in support of this objective are permissible.

For a country like Pakistan, having nuclear weapons means that it has the ultimate strategic defense. Wars are bad for the economy and nuclear deterrence is a best tool to avoid wars.  A short conventional war between India and Pakistan would cost Islamabad U.S. $ 350 million per day.  Now one can easily estimate the economic deprivation if Pakistan had to face another 1971 debacle without having any nuclear weapons.  In contrast, to conventional warfare, nuclear deterrence has made wars between nuclear states rationally non-viable.

In this regard, the possession of nuclear weapons serves not only military and political purposes, but also economic functions. The acquisition of nuclear weapons appears to be associated with the long-term decline in conventional military spending. This is acutely accurate in the case of Pakistan. Pakistan’s conventional military expenditure has been constantly on decline since the nuclear tests. Military expenditure (% of GDP) in Pakistan was measured at 5.3 % in 1998, according to the World Bank. In 2012 that expenditure was 3.13 %. This is a clear instance where nuclear capability served as a major cause to diminish military expenditure in Pakistan.

Moreover, we have to not forget that the Pakistan nuclear establishment is also progressive in the peaceful use of nuclear technology. The use of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes especially in energy sector can generate some of the largest economic benefits due to the size and the number of workers needed to operate the nuclear plants. The 100 nuclear units in the U.S. are generating substantial domestic economic value in electricity sales and revenue up to $40-$50 billion each year. Canada’s nuclear energy industry has revenues of about $6.6 billion. Pakistan can also achieve the same feat by the extent of civilian benefits from nuclear weapons spending.

Pakistan has the experience of operating nuclear technology, which spans over four decades. Pakistan has the qualified manpower and professionals and it is now constructing a fourth and fifth nuclear power plants. Pakistan has reached a remarkable milestone in scientific research by becoming an associate member of the European Council for Nuclear Research (CERN). Pakistan can utilize nuclear science and technologies for its national programmes for the benefit and improvement of the society especially in energy sector. Thus, Pakistan will be able to facilitate other countries of the region in peaceful uses of nuclear energy and this cooperation will generate revenue to stabilize our economy.

The constructive uses of nuclear science are visible in applied sciences, food, agriculture, biotechnology, human health, energy and industry. Today Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission PAEC has numerous institutes to render facilities for Research & Development in these benign areas. The major institutes which are performing research in nuclear physics are Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH); Nuclear Institute of Agriculture (NIA); Nuclear Institute of Agriculture and Biology (NIAB); Nuclear Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA); National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering (NIBGE) and National Institute of Lasers and Optronics (NILOP). These all institutes are sharing their part in social inspiration.

I feel wrought up when people say, what is the use of being a Nuclear power when people are dying of poverty? This is the fact that social development should be the first and primary focus, but cutting down on our nuclear budget is not the answer. So we have to understand that Pakistan’s economic deprivation is not because of its nuclear weapons, however these weapons are source that provide channels to take economic strides and develop the nation. Hence, economic progress can also be achieved as Pakistan accomplished its nuclear feat; all we need is devotion and sincerity of purpose.

The post Pakistan’s Nuclear Capability: Cost And Benefit – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Cyber crime has transcended hacking and other online illegal activities—the black markets of the “hidden” internet are now a potent threat. This “darknet” is used by illicit traders, saboteurs and terrorist groups—with serious financial and security implications for the Indian government and business sector.

By Sameer Patil*

On November 24, a group of hackers, allegedly backed by the North Korean government, launched a cyber attack on Sony Corporation’s computers in the U.S., stealing a trove of sensitive data including confidential emails, business plans, and personal details.

In the short term, the attack reportedly cost approximately $100 million to investigate, to repair or replace computers, and to take measures to prevent future attacks.[1] But it is likely to cost Sony much more—including in potential lawsuits over stolen information—in the long run, besides denting its credibility.

The case is an important reminder for Indian businesses to re-visit their strategies to deal with cyber crimes—which have increased by 40% annually during the past three years.[2] Businesses frequently do assess the risks posed by cyber crimes, but they focus on threats from the regular World Wide Web. Now, they must also pay attention to the threats emanating from the black market on the “deep web” or the “hidden” internet.

The deep web—also described as the “darknet” or the “underworld” of the cyber world—is an anonymous internet beyond the open traffic of the regular internet. Its websites do not figure in the extensive results of conventional search engines such as Yahoo or Google. An exact estimate of data flows on the deep web is not available, but in 2001 researchers in the U.S. had speculated that it contained 7,500 terabytes of information, as compared to 19 tetrabytes on the regular internet.[3]  IT professionals in India estimate that the deep web now accounts for approximately 70% of online traffic.

The technology driving the deep web is ‘The Onion Router’ (TOR), developed initially by the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory for confidential communications. The TOR encrypts and transmits user traffic through several different computers in multiple layers. This allows individual users to hide their internet protocol (IP) addresses—a numerical identifier assigned to a computer or device logged on the internet—and gives them the freedom to remain anonymous in any online activity.

This technology has been widely used by security agencies in the West, particularly in the U.S., as well as by others, including political protestors in Egypt, Hong Kong, and other countries. Journalists have used it too—for example, in April 2014 the Reporters Without Borders non-profit group signed an agreement with TOR to ensure greater privacy and bypass surveillance by security agencies.

However, the misuse of the technology by cyber criminals to create a thriving black market on the deep web since 2011—the year the Silk Road market site emerged—is now a major challenge, since the anonymity offered by the deep web makes it even more harmful than the regular material black market.

To breach Sony’s servers, for example, the hackers used a virus which was available for distribution in the deep web’s black market. The stolen sensitive data is likely to find its way to the same market, where cyber criminals already sell such data extensively to create forged identities and commit banking frauds. Reliable figures of the value of these transactions are not available.

Payments in this market are, expectedly, made in crypto-currency such as the Bitcoin, which has no central issuing authority and permits anonymous transactions. In 2013 media reports had estimated that 12 million Bitcoins were in circulation; [4] at present, one Bitcoin is worth $300-335.

The deep web’s black market is a cornucopia of dark products, offering much more than stolen personal data and malicious software. Items traded here include sensitive trade secrets, stolen bank and credit card information, firearms, and controlled substances and narcotics which cannot be bought in an open market. Services offered include contract killing, drug peddling, and money laundering.

Like regular websites and companies, the deep web has entities too. Silk Road was one such site on the black market, with a majority of sellers offering drugs, pornography, and guns. Its activities were dominated by buyers and sellers from North America and Europe, but the site also had users from India.

Silk Road was shut down in 2013 by the U.S. government when it arrested the site’s owner, Ross Ulbricht, a U.S. citizen. Between 2011 and 2013 the site generated revenues worth $1.2 billion, while the various sellers who used the site had earned commissions worth approximately $80 million in total.[5]

This thriving black market on the deep web has, in turn, contributed to the growth in cyber crimes across the world. American internet security firms McAfee and Symantec estimate that the annual cost of cyber crimes to the global economy is between $113-575 billion.[6] [7] India incurs a fraction of this cost—around $4 billion—but it is a lot for a developing, unprepared country.[8]

Although the financial implications of the deep web’s activities, which can be quantified with some number crunching, cause enormous harm, it is the implications for national security that are far more serious.

For terrorist groups, always looking for new technologies, the deep web’s black market is an ideal platform to purchase arms and smuggle drugs, and to raise funds.[9] No hard evidence is available at present of such activity, but terrorist groups are clearly making efforts to explore this avenue.

In July 2014, a post on a WordPress blog, purportedly linked to an Islamic State sympathiser, mentioned how Silk Road and Bitcoin can be used to purchase weapons and sell narcotics.[10]

But it seems that everyone else, legitimate or illegitimate, is benefiting from the deep web too. For saboteurs and hackers, it provides easy access to malicious software. For intelligence agencies and businesses, it is a useful tool for espionage—for example, multinational corporations can hack into the servers of rival companies to mine strategic commercial information, without ever revealing their IP addresses.

In the West—especially in the U.S.—law enforcement agencies have responded to the challenge of the deep web with two strategies. They try to crack its anonymity by measures such as the National Security Agency’s Project Honey Pot,[11] which collects information about IP addresses. And they also extensively use the deep web to pursue leads on cyber crime and communicate with undercover sources.

Insulating the legitimate internet community from the ill-effects of the deep web is a challenging task. It requires sophisticated technical expertise to crack anonymous communications. Incarnations of Silk Road, for example, have survived despite the original being shut down last year by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation—in no time a new avatar, Silk Road 2.0, appeared. This too was shut down in October 2014 when the U.S. and Europol cracked down against the deep web’s black market.[12] Yet, within hours, spawns of the Silk Road went online—some of them even selling items eschewed by Silk Road, such as child pornography.[13]

The shadowy players of the deep web are clearly resilient in their illegal activities.

India is still to fully understand the financial and security implications of this deeper danger. The government and businesses are still grappling with the more pressing threats from the regular internet. But if it is not addressed, the deep web has the potential to expose another gap in India’s cyber security preparedness—the country’s critical infrastructure is already susceptible to cyber attacks because of outdated Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition systems, which manage India’s infrastructure operations.

Although India’s National Cyber Security Policy of 2013 stresses “building a secure and resilient cyber space” it does not even mention the threat posed by either the deep web or the Silk Road-type deep web black market.[14] Similarly, the Report on Cyber Crime, Cyber Security and Right to Privacy of the 15^th Lok Sabha’s Standing Committee on Information Technology does not mention these risks, though it examines in detail the threat posed by cyber crime.[15]

It is evident from the experience of western security agencies that countering the challenge of the deep web and its black market will require India to develop offensive cyber capabilities. With these, India can try to respond to the deep web’s nefarious activities and also trace and arrest saboteurs and cyber criminals, if necessary.

Formulating and implementing such a strategy—even though it will not provide complete security—is a long haul for India, but one which must be conceptualised.

The government’s recently set-up experts’ group for tackling cyber crime must include the deep web in its purview.[16] And it is imperative that the security establishment and business houses in India become aware and informed of the existence of the deep web.

*Sameer Patil is Associate Fellow, National Security, Ethnic Conflict and Terrorism, at Gateway House.

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

References

[1] Richwine, Lisa, Cyber attack could cost Sony studio as much as $100 million, Reuters, 9 December 2014 <http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/09/us-sony-cybersecurity-costs-idUSKBN0JN2L020141209>

[2] Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Setting up of Expert Study Group for tackling Cyber Crimes, 24 December 2014, <http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=114013>

[3] Bergman, Michael K., ‘White Paper: The Deep Web: Surfacing Hidden Value’,  The Journal of Electronic Publishing, Vol. 7, Issue 1, August 2001, <http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0007.104?view=text;rgn=main >

[4] Lee, Timothy B., ‘12 questions about Bitcoin you were too embarrassed to ask’, 19 November 2013, Washington Post,  <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/19/12-questions-you-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask-about-bitcoin/>

[5] Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Department of Justice, Criminal Complaint against Ross William Ulbricht, 27 September 2013, <https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb/UlbrichtCriminalComplaint.pdf>

[6] Center for Strategic and International Studies and McAfee, Net Losses: Estimating the Global Cost of Cybercrime, June 2014, <http://www.mcafee.com/in/resources/reports/rp-economic-impact-cybercrime2.pdf> p. 2

[7] Symantec, 2013 Norton Report, <http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/about/presskits/b-norton-report-2013.pptx>

[8] Ibid

[9] Weimann, Gabriel, Terror on the Internet: The New Arena, the New Challenges (Washington DC: US Institute of Peace Press, 2006), pp. 137-138.

[10] Taqi’ul­Deen al­Munthir, Bitcoin and the Charity of Violent Physical Struggle, July 2014 <https://alkhilafaharidat.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/btcedit-21.pdf>

[11] Project Honey Pot, About Project Honey Pot, <https://www.projecthoneypot.org/about_us.php>

[12] Europol, Global action against dark markets on TOR network, 7 November 2014, <https://www.europol.europa.eu/content/global-action-against-dark-markets-tor-network>

[13] Digital Citizens Alliance, Post Silk Road – Another Online Drug Den Now Dominates the DarkNet, 18 December 2014, <https://media.gractions.com/314A5A5A9ABBBBC5E3BD824CF47C46EF4B9D3A76
/2251410a-790a-459c-a48a-6a4fd7dcfb88.pdf>

[14] Department Of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India, National Cyber Security Policy-2013, 2 July 2013, <http://deity.gov.in/content/national-cyber-security-policy-2013-1>

[15] Standing Committee on Information Technology, Ministry of  Communications and Information Technology, Government of India, Report on cyber crime, cyber security and right to privacy (Report no. 52), February 2014, <http://164.100.47.134/lsscommittee/InformationTechnology/15_
Information_Technology_52.pdf>

[16] Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Setting up of Expert Study Group for tackling Cyber Crimes, 24 December 2014, <http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=114013>

The post The ‘Deep Web': New Threat To Business – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The killings in Paris have resulted in panic and public concern, but the authorities should not give the attackers what they seek. States and security forces should avoid the trap of reacting to terrorist violence with overwhelming state violence, which would serve the interests of radical militant groups to sow distrust and antagonism.

By Farish A Noor*

By now  the world has been made aware of the tragic killings that took place at the office of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris, France. The fact that we know about this event, and are reporting and writing about it, already means the attackers have won the first round in their terror campaign: this is to publicise their deeds and to strike fear in the hearts of many. Having made this concession, we cannot afford to allow them to gain any further ground.

Charlie Hebdo, like its counterpart publication Le Canard enchaîné, happens to be a satirical publication that has lashed out on a range of issues, from racism to political corruption, shady business dealings to abuse of political power. In the course of its work, it has also targeted politicians, celebrities, populist demagogues and religious figures.

Playing into the hands of the attackers

Ironically, its readership – which has never been as large as the more popular and populist tabloids – is made up of left-leaning better-educated professionals who have traditionally been associated with the more democratic, open-minded, more tolerant sectors of French society. The fact that the paper has been consistently raising questions about the treatment of minorities and immigrants, and has been a thorn in the side of right-wing nationalists in France tells us something about where its political leanings lie.

But by attacking Charlie Hebdo’s office, and killing some of its editorial staff and cartoonists, those responsible seem to be driven by a more nihilistic intention of deliberately sowing even more racism, discord and distrust among the French public. There has been condemnation of the attack by European Muslim intellectuals like Tariq Ramadan, and the French media have highlighted the fact that among those killed was a French-Muslim policeman.

Still, this latest incident is bound to fall right into the hands of right-wing nationalists who will use it as an excuse for an even more vocal campaign against minorities and immigrants in the country. What happens in France in the coming days and weeks will be a test of the country’s national resilience, and whether French society can come together at a time of national crisis.

Shift to the right?

Should the political centre of French society move to the right as a result of this event – as we are seeing now in Germany, with demonstrations held against Muslim minorities there – then that would signal a singular victory for the terrorists themselves, who remain a minority within a minority in their own community.

Rising anti-minority sentiment would only divide French society further, and weaken the voices of the moderate democrats who wish to uphold the principles of French republicanism, which happens to include the defence of free speech and the protection of the press. It would also add fuel to the anxiety of the minorities themselves, some of whom may feel that they are not loved or welcomed in the adopted country of their birth, and who feel that there is no hope for them to integrate and succeed in France.

This can only lead to a deeper societal division between the minority and majority communities, and create an oppositional relationship that will lead to more antagonism and racism. The net result would be a situation where the moderate middle ground shrinks even further, and the extremists on both sides grow bolder – which is precisely what some radical militant groups would like to see happen.

The other thing to watch is how the state security services in France deal with this genuine security problem, and whether the effort to stem the problem of extremism can and will include the active and meaningful participation of all communities. This is particularly poignant in this case, for the magazine Charlie Hebdo was known for its staunch and consistent defence of civil liberties for all.

When dealing with the very serious problem of violent extremism, states and security forces need to avoid the trap of reacting to violence with an even greater threat of overwhelming state violence, which merely heralds the way for repression. That would be a fatal error.

Should they respond in that manner, it would lead to a situation where the terrorists have won an even greater victory, for the whole country would then be in a state of constant fear. When dealing with terrorism of any kind, states and societies need to be firm, but above all we must never let the terrorists get what they want, which is a widespread moral panic for all.

*Farish A Noor is Associate Professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.

The post Responding To The Paris Attack: Beware The Fatal Error – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Öznur Keleş

Two days ago, in what has been deemed France’s worst terrorist attack, gunmen stormed the offices of French magazine Charlie Hebdo murdering 12 and wounding 11. The attack is believed to be the deadliest in France since 1961. Stephane Charbonnier, editor of the magazine, and the famous cartoonist Jean Cabut were among those killed during the incident.

The Kouachi brothers are the main suspects in the shooting at the Paris offices of the satirical magazine. It is known that Cherif Kouachi, 32, and Said Kouachi, 34, are French citizens. They still remain at large. According to the authorities, hundreds of French security forces have converged on an industrial park about 30 miles northeast of Paris, as the two suspects now appear to be surrounded at a printing business with at least one hostage.

This terror attack has also revived debates on Islamophobia, with some experts expressing their concerns that the attack will lead to the spread of anti-Muslim sentiment.

USAK expert on the EU Fatma Yılmaz-Elmas was a guest on Channel 24, a Turkish news channel, on October 8th, 2015, where she condemned the attacks in France. Elmas also assessed the threat of a rise in Islamophobia subsequent to the Charlie Hebdo attack, concluding that the event might induce the spread of anti-Muslim sentiments.

Remarking that Europe’s socioeconomic and political fragility is reflected in recent social events, Elmas stated that this attack might lead to a deepening of cultural fault lines in Europe. In this respect, appropriate policies should be implemented.

Elmas stated that Turkey stands as one of the most exemplary countries in terms of showing that Islam can coexist with the values of democracy, rule of law, etc. Here, Elmas underlined that Turkey should continue to cooperate with the EU and that the two parties would greatly benefit from identifying and acting upon the lowest common denominator between them when it comes to the issue.

The post Charlie Hebdo Attack Could Induce Spread Of Anti-Muslim Sentiments In Europe appeared first on Eurasia Review.

There must be a limit to the number of immigrants, whatever their status, that any sovereign state can accommodate before its social cohesion and infrastructure begin to collapse under the strain. Acknowledgement of this political reality has been slow to develop within Western governments, largely because it runs counter to the generally liberal approach that most adopt towards legal immigration. There has also been some reluctance to take action because of the grey area that exists between immigrants and genuine refugees, to whom governments have humanitarian obligations under international law.

There is another reason why most governments have been reluctant to recognize the political hazards of unrestricted immigration – the fact that it is an issue taken up with enthusiasm by parties of the right, often of the extreme right. Such parties have enjoyed an upsurge in popularity in the past decade. Many frame their appeal by emphasizing illegal immigration, which has soared to unprecedented levels. Sometimes they use other arguments. Just before Christmas a German group calling itself Pegida (Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the West) drew a crowd of 17,500 people to a demonstration in Dresden. Claiming to be neither racist nor xenophobic, Pegida says it is simply calling for the preservation of the country’s Judeo-Christian culture. It advocates a tightening of the immigration laws, not only within Germany but in the EU generally.

In the US, the Tea Party regards illegal immigrants, vast numbers of whom continue infiltrate into the country from Mexico, as “a direct to threat to … the rule of law, free markets, private property, individual freedom, and fiscal responsibility.” Estimates vary, but some 15 to 20 million illegal immigrants are thought to be living in the States, while the annual influx is about a million. In Britain, the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) has sprung to prominence in recent years. Its leader, Nigel Farage, has said that the party is likely to go into the upcoming general election promising a five-year ban on people coming to settle in Britain while immigration policy is sorted out.

In France the National Front’s policy is to reduce annual immigration from 200,000 to 10,000, to ban all illegal immigration and to end the current right of illegal immigrants to remain in France if they have been in the country for a certain time. No doubt the National Front will ensure that the Islamist attack in Paris on the magazine Charlie Hebdo on January 7, 2015 feeds into the forthcoming elections. In Norway there is the Progress Party; in Switzerland, the Swiss People’s Party. In Austria the Austrian Freedom Party has had representatives in parliament since 1999. Similar examples can be found in Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Holland, Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria and Greece, all of which have extreme right parties that hold parliamentary representation.

In Australia it was the right-wing government that took the initiative early in December to deal with a backlog of 30,000 illegal “boat people”. For them it tightened the immigration laws, while for genuine refugees it introduced temporary visas which grant protection for up to three years but do not give them the right to settle in Australia for good. New Zealand follows Australia’s tough approach to illegal immigration. But none of the countries combatting uncontrolled or illegal immigration had so far declared that saturation point had been reached – until the announcement early in January from Lebanon’s Interior Minister, Nohad Machnouk: “There’s no capacity any more.”

Lebanon is hosting what is now the highest per capita number of refugees anywhere in the world. Since the beginning of the Syrian conflict more than 1.5 million refugees have taken shelter in a country with a population of 4.5 million. On January 5 Lebanon imposed new restrictions to stem the flood of refugees pouring in from war-torn Syria. Travellers from Damascus will now need to make a formal application to enter the country, and will have to apply for one of six types of entry permit — tourist, business, student, transit, medical or short stay. Each permit requires specific documentation, such as hotel bookings, and for tourists possession of $1,000, or for business people an invitation from a Lebanese company. There is no provision for those seeking asylum, but according to Ron Redmond, a spokesman for the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) in Lebanon: “The government says that it will allow those extreme humanitarian cases access.”

The unprecedented influx of homeless, desperate people has overwhelmed Lebanon’s water and electricity supplies, pushed up rents and depressed the economy. Host communities across the country have been stretched to breaking point. Villagers say they have been forced out of their jobs by Syrians willing to work for lower wages. An increasing number of attacks on the informal refugee settlements have been recorded. More than 45 Lebanese towns and villages have imposed curfews, enforced by local, often violent vigilantes, banning Syrian refugees from moving after dark.

In addition to the disruption of ordinary life caused by accommodating hundreds of thousands of incomers, Lebanon faces a social problem all its own. The Lebanese social order has traditionally been a careful balance between the Sunni Muslim, Shia Muslim and Christian elements in its society. Seats in the parliament are allocated 50-50 as between Muslims and Christians, while the President is always a Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, and the Speaker a Shia Muslim. The Syrians fleeing into Lebanon are almost all Sunni Muslims, and there are fears – not least among Hezbollah and its supporters, who are of the Shi’te tradition – that if they were settled permanently, they would destabilise the country’s delicate sectarian balance.

Lebanon has been pushed to the very limit of viability in absorbing incomers. It will no doubt be used as an object lesson by governments, political parties and organizations across the world with their own agendas for limiting immigration – and indeed there are lessons to be learned from Lebanon’s experience. Although it has been the victim of events largely beyond its control, its ordeal does demonstrate just how disruptive to a society an uncontrolled and unplanned influx of newcomers can be. The answer surely lies in government policies that encourage controlled and planned immigration likely to benefit a society, offer humanitarian shelter to refugees fleeing from their home countries in fear of their lives, and have zero tolerance for those seeking to enter a state illegally, and for those profiting from this form of human trafficking.

The post Lebanon Reaches The Limit – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Islamic State’s violence dominated 2014’s news headlines, masking important non-violent initiatives around the world. But endeavors for peaceful solutions are thriving, and India, with its legacy of a non-violent freedom struggle, must contribute to this process as a counter-force against the advocates of violence.

By Rajni Bakshi and Sameer Patil*

Images of brutal violence were at the forefront in the media and in public memory in 2014—which ironically marked a century since World War I was fought ostensibly to end global conflicts.

The proliferation of violence also raises questions about the ability of the United Nations—70 years old in 2015—to meet its mandate of mitigating disputes across the world; the UN has not yet been reformed to address current global challenges.

Even as inter-state wars continue, the last century has also taught the world a lot about peace—primarily through successful non-violent transitions from totalitarian regimes to democracy in Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Asia.

However, in recent years, the same methods seem to have become less effective—in West Asia, for example, violent civil wars have replaced the ‘Arab Spring’. The turmoil has been further complicated by the rise of the militant Islamic State as a direct consequence of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and constant meddling in the region by other big powers such as UK, France, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. Meanwhile, as the Charlie Hebdo tragedy in Paris shows this week, al-Qaeda has made a comeback driven partly by its competition with the Islamic State.

Many African countries—including South Sudan, Nigeria, and the Democratic Republic of Congo—are grappling with bloody civil wars and uncertain political transitions.

In Europe, diplomacy has been upstaged by the militarisation of U.S. foreign policy, as is evident in the proxy war between the West and Russia in Ukraine.

China has been expanding its influence through infrastructure and aid programmes among smaller African and Asian countries. But the country has also stirred up old—and some imaginary—disputes, and in response to disputed claims over islands with its Asian neighbours, is increasingly exerting its growing military might.

In Pakistan, terrorists and religious extremists continue to wage asymmetric warfare against India. These forces are now a part of Pakistan’s social fabric and endangering its survival as a functional modern state. Afghanistan’s fragile political and security transition is threatened by the violent resurgence of the Taliban.

As we step into 2015, it is important to highlight that violence is not inevitable. Many non-violent movements across the world are growing in success; they are vastly influential and social media has enabled people of diverse views to come together

In the Philippines, Poland, Chile, South Africa and Bolivia, over the past three decades, non-violent movements have led to transitions from dictatorship to democracy. Between 1900 and 2006, of the 25 major resistance movements against repressive regimes, 20 were non-violent—and 70 % of these were successful.

For example, 2014 began with a historic peace agreement between the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Philippines government—ending almost 40 years of conflict. An Islamic insurgency has been accommodated rather than obliterated by a Christian majority state through a negotiated settlement.

Similarly, Colombia is negotiating with the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) rebels to end 50 years of conflict. This initiative is invigorated by grassroots groups promoting Gandhian concepts of non-violence there and in other Latin American countries.

Closer home, Nepal has peacefully transitioned from a Maoist insurgency against the monarchy to an electoral democracy. While the drafting of the country’s Constitution has been fraught with disagreements, the political reconciliation process involving the Maoists has not collapsed.

Diplomacy and dialogue have so far also averted a larger regional conflagration over the issue of Iran’s nuclear programme. Although a full agreement has not been reached in the stipulated time-frame, the P5+1 and Iran have not abandoned negotiations.

The U.S.-Russia agreement of September 2013 to eliminate chemical weapons in Syria is no small achievement. The stipulated deadlines have largely been met, but the internal strife continues, with terrible consequences for half the population that has been displaced.

Clearly, the global impulse for peace remains strong. With its legacy of a non-violent freedom struggle, how can India contribute to this process in 2015?

In his speech at the UN in September 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of the concept of vasudhaiv kutumbakam—a world-family. This ideal was central to Mahatma Gandhi’s vision of not just a free India, but also a world free of any form of domination and exploitation—this was the basis of true non-violence.

The challenge for Modi is to actualise this ideal—within and outside India.

It can be achieved if India celebrates and reaffirms its inherent cultural and ethnic diversity, and works to strengthen a nation that is free of discrimination. By doing this, India can become a stronger counter-force against the advocates of violence and of a clash of civilizations.

While diplomacy and negotiations must continue to address the flash-points of cross-border warfare, the dramatic rise of the Islamic State has demonstrated that the real contest is not between religions but within, as moderates grapple with fundamentalists in the process of confronting the challenges posed by modernity and globalisation. The fault line is between democracy based on a genuine respect for freedom and diversity versus authoritarian fundamentalism.

We enter 2015 with the hope that the enduring success of non-violent methods in overcoming political disagreements and resolving disputes will expand and pervade the global stage.

About the authors:
* Rajni Bakshi is the Gandhi Peace Fellow at Gateway House.

* Sameer Patil is Associate Fellow, National Security, Ethnic Conflict and Terrorism, at Gateway House.

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

The post War And Peace – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The ideology of Hindutva is once again in a position to dictate the political and cultural life of the Indian nation since Narendra Modi, who once worked for the main Hindu nationalist organization, took the prime ministerial responsibilities. Unfortunately, there is no any other political or social power in India that could challenge this ideology which is so destructive for India’s secular fabric and cultural diversity. The ideology of Hindutva has deeply penetrated in every sector of current Indian life through its various organizations and groups such as Bharatiya Janata Party (Political wing); Vishwa Hindu Parishad (cultural mobilization wing); Bajrang Dal (para-military group); and Shiv Sena (violent fascist group).  The irony lies in the fact that a major portion of western media still ignores the growing issue of Hindutva that leads South Asian region towards perpetual instability.

Recently, The Daily Mail’s investigations revealed that the US embassy in New Delhi has sent a very “strong-worded diplomatic cable to Washington”, urging Obama administration to take a very serious view and initiate a strong action against Hindu fanatic groups and Hindutva laboratories that is emerging as a new and a very deadly source of global terrorism.

The Daily Mail’s revelation further adds that the US Embassy in New Delhi has now very strongly started believing that Hindutva Brotherhood and other Hindu fanatic groups, particularly those, attached to Sangh Parivar are getting organized on the pattern of Taliban and Hindutva network has got all the potential to become even more lethal than Al-Qaeda and other Muslim extremists’ militant groups.

In addition to that it was also mentioned in the diplomatic cable that Hindu extremists can become a permanent threat to the world peace and the ongoing global anti-terror war will have to open another front and this time in a nuclear State with every possibility of nuke weapons. The situation is more alarming because these Hindu religious extremists, having deep roots in Indian Armed Forces and Delhi nuclear command infrastructure have potential to trigger a nuclear war in South Asian region.

This is an open fact that major portion of current Indian decision making center consists of Hindu extremist leaders but more importantly, under the umbrella of BJP, Hindutva movement appears to be gaining momentum around the globe. Nearly 1.5 to 2 million Hindus currently live in US and an estimated 2, 40,000 Indian immigrants are living illegally in the United States without proper immigration documents. This huge number of population is vulnerable to various wings of extremist parties who are running joint terror camps in India where large number of Hindu trainees  some as young as 8 to 13 years old and they even came from USA, Europe, and Australia.

On the other hand,  BJP-RSS-VHP supporters in the U.S are actively lobbying to get access to U.S. policymakers in order to ensure that US wouldn’t undermine Hindu chauvinists to come to power in New Delhi. It has been even made quite easier by the Indo-Israeli nexus which has strong presence in US decision making center.

The emergence of violent Hindu extremist organization in such a situation, when US led NATO forces formally ended the 13 years bloody war in Afghanistan, have put further question regarding the credibility of global war against terror. The uprising of Hindu violent organization can export terror camps to the chaotic Afghan soil that would ultimately lead Afghanistan to another war-zone but more importantly the adjacent Pakistani tribal areas can be seriously affected with the new wave of Indian sponsored terror organizations.

It is pertinent for Pakistan to redefine the terrorism that cultivates in Afghan soil with Indian support. Internal stability in Pakistan is directly linked with peace in Afghanistan. That’s why Pakistan should raise this serious issue with Afghan authorities in order to bring long-lasting peace and stability in both hard-hit victim areas of terrorism which is reshaping by India with its invisible Hindu violent organizations.

The post Modi’s Hindutva And South Asian Security – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Ethiopia is being hailed as a shining example of African economic growth. Principle donors and devotees of the International Monetary Fund/World Bank development model (an imposed ideological vision which measures all things in terms of a nations GDP) see the country as an island of potential prosperity and stability within a region of failed states and violent conflict. “Economic performance in recent years has been strong, with economic growth averaging in double-digits since 2004,”states the IMF country report. The economic model (a hybrid of western capitalism and Chinese control) adopted by the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) government is a centralised system that denies democracy – consultation and participation in “development plans” is unheard of – ignores and violates human rights.

A willing ally in the “war on terror,” Ethiopia is a strategically convenient base from which the US launches it’s deadly Reaper Drones over Yemen and Somalia, carrying out “targeted assassinations” against perceived threats to “national security” and the ‘American way of life’. In exchange perhaps, irresponsible benefactors – Britain, America and the European Union – turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the human rights abuses being perpetrated throughout the country by the highly repressive dictatorship enthroned in Addis Ababa.

Widespread repression

Whilst there are state-fuelled fires burning in various parts of the country: Oromo, Amhara, Gambella, and the Lower Omo Valley for example. Regions where Genocide Watch (GW) consider “Ethiopia to have already reached Stage 7 (of 8), genocide massacres,” arguably the worst atrocities are taking place within the Ogaden, where GW say the Ethiopian government has “initiated a genocidal campaign against the Ogaden Somali population.”

A harsh region subject to drought and famine where, according to human rights groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as well as first hand accounts, innocent men, women and children are being murdered, raped, imprisoned and brutally tortured by government forces.

The region borders Somalia and is populated largely by ethnic Somalis, many of whom do not regard themselves as Ethiopian at all and see the Ethiopian military operating within the region as an occupying force. The Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) has been engaged in a struggle for independence for the last 22 years. They were elected to power in the 1992 regional elections; however, after they had the democratic gall to propose a referendum on self-determination, the central government under the leadership of the previous Prime-Minister – Meles Zenawi, sent in the military: leading members of the newly elected regional authority and their supporters were executed and arrested and the army installed to control the region. The ONLF, branded terrorists by a government that labels all dissenting individuals and groups with the “T” word, were driven into the bush from where they have been waging armed and diplomatic resistance ever since.

Since 2007, all international media and prying meddlesome humanitarian aid groups have been banned from the area, making it extremely difficult to collect up-to-date information on the situation. The main source of data comes from courageous refugees and defected military men who have found their way to Kenya or Yemen. Most fleeing the region end up in one of the five sites that comprise the sprawling UNHCR-run Dadaab refugee camp in North Eastern Kenya. Established in 1992 to accommodate 100,000 people for 10 years, it is often described as the largest refugee camp in the world and is now home to round 500,000, although manipulated Kenyan government figures are much lower.

Maryama’s story

Maryama arrived in Dadaab with her son and daughter in May 2014 after fleeing her homeland in Ethiopia. She had been the victim of terrible physical and sexual abuse at the hands of the Ethiopian military. Her shocking story echoes the experience of thousands of innocent women – many of whom are no more than children – throughout the affected parts of the Ogaden. I met Maryama in the UNHCR field office of the Dagahaley site in October 2014. She spoke to me of her life in the Ogaden and the violence she had suffered. We sat on the ground in the shade of a UN office building. She spoke with clarity and passion for over an hour, her two-year old son on her lap.

Like many people in the Ogaden, Maryama lived a simple life as a pastoralist. Tending her goats and camels, she moved from place to place with her family. She had never attended school, cannot read or write and knows little or nothing of her country’s politics. Some time in 2012, she was arrested when a large group of armed soldiers from the Ethiopian military descended on her family’s settlement in Dagahmadow in the district of Dagahbuur. “They came to us one day while we were tending to our affairs in our village and they accused us of being supporters of the ONLF as well as having relatives in the ONLF.” The soldiers “called all the village people together and started carrying out acts of persecution. They took anything of value, including property and livestock, by force and burnt down homes in the process. I had just given birth seven days earlier when they came into my home and they asked me why I am inside the house [a small semi-circular wooden structure made from branches and mud] by myself [she was bathing her son at the time]. They saw footsteps near my home, which they followed and concluded that it must have been left by the ONLF” [the prints were in fact made by the military]. “All of us were taken out of our homes and questioned about the ONLF, we all denied any involvement. Our homes were then burnt.”

The solders moved from house-to-house questioning people about the footprints. A young mother, who had given birth the day before and was holding her child, was interrogated, she knew nothing and said so. An elderly woman went to her aid; she was caught by the throat and questioned about the footprints – she knew nothing. They shot her dead. Two men from the village arrived and were immediately questioned. One of the men answered, denying any connection with the ONLF; two soldiers tied his hands together, threw a rope around his neck and pulled on each end until he choked to death. Maryama was ordered to hold the strangled man upright and not allow him to fall to the side. When, exhausted after two hours, she let go of the body she was “arrested with six other girls (including my sister), one of the girls had given birth that day.” On the first night in captivity [in an abandoned village] “she was forced to her feet by two soldiers, one of them kicked her in the stomach – she fell on the floor, keeled over and died on the spot. They also shot my sister in front of us. I watched as she bled to death next to the other girl who had died from the beating.”

Maryama told how after witnessing these atrocities, soldiers put a plastic bag over her head and tied a rope around her throat until she lost consciousness. When she came to, she found herself outside in a deep pit; she was naked and in great pain; she found it difficult to move. Her son was nowhere to be seen. Eight other people were with her, five were dead – one was a cousin, two were neighbours. These people had gone missing 10 days previously; it was assumed they were in prison. She cried hysterically.

After 28 days in the pit, her son was brought to her and they were both taken to prison. She was held captive in Jail Ogaden, in the regional capital Jigjiga, for approximately two and a half years, during which time she was subjected to torture and extreme sexual abuse. There were, she told me, over 1,000 women in the prison. At this point it is perhaps worth stating the obvious: this woman had broken no law, had not been charged with any offence or been granted any of her constitutional or human rights.

Maryama, along with other female prisoners, was routinely tortured by military personnel; stripped naked, they were forced to crawl on their hands and knees across a ground of sharp stones. Their knees would collapse and bleed; if they stopped, they were verbally insulted and beaten with wooden sticks or the butt of a rifle. Another favoured method of torture was to strip the women and take them to the latrines where toilet waste was thrown over them. At the same time they were beaten with sticks, belts and hit with the butt of a rifle. They were not allowed to wash and were forced to sleep covered in this waste.

Maryama, who was around 18 years of age when she was first arrested, was repeatedly raped by groups of soldiers while in prison. They like the women to be young – 15 to 20 – and semi-conscious when raped so the girls cannot resist and the perpetrator cannot be identified; part strangulation with a rope or a blow to the head using the butt of a rifle renders the innocent victim unconscious. Soldiers are told to use the penis as a weapon and are “trained,” defected military men told me, to rape women and how to “break a virgin”; violent demonstrations on teenage girls are given by training officers. They are told to eat hot chillies before going out on patrol, so their semen will burn the women rape victims. A defected divisional commander in the Liyu Police, Dahir, related how during his five years in the force he had witnessed between 1200 and 1500 rapes in the Ogaden.

The creation of a climate of fear amongst the population is the aim of the government and the military; they employ a carefully planned, if crude, methodology to achieve their vile objective. False arrest and detention of men and women, arbitrary assassinations and torture, rape and the destruction of property and livestock make up the arsenal of control and intimidation employed by the EPRDF government.

Unbelievable

The Ethiopian regime maintains that nothing untoward is taking place within the Ogaden region. The military and Liyu police (a renegade paramilitary group), they tell us, are safeguarding civilians against the terrorist organization operating there, namely the ONLF. Soldiers in training are brainwashed to see the population of the region, men, women and children, as enemies of the State. Accounts like Maryama’s are pure fiction, government spokesmen say, and, sorry chaps, the region is unsafe for members of the international media or human rights groups and you cannot enter. And if you do, you will be arrested.

There is indeed terrorism raging throughout large parts of the Ogaden and elsewhere in the country; it is State Terrorism perpetrated by a brutal regime that is guilty of widespread criminality, much of which constitutes crimes against humanity.

The post State Terrorism In Ogaden, Ethiopia – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Cold War has not two protagonists but three or more. The contemporary struggle over the future of Ukraine betrays a similar pattern. The familiar exhortations against Russia refer to the sanctity of international law and the unforgivable violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Yet behind these principles lies a more prosaic reality. Ukraine has become the new buffer nation between Russia and the EU.

By Matthew Parish

Cold War has not two protagonists but three or more. This truism is often missed. The Cold War between 1947 and 1989 was notionally a period of hostility between the United States and the Soviet Union, in which the two superpowers did not confront each directly but instead fought proxy wars through third states. Yet those third states shaped the conflict. Although the European colonial powers were in decline in the second half of the twentieth century, they did not suffer their fates in a vacuum. America’s struggle with the Soviets was a component in the narrative, for the United States saw Europe not so much as an ally but as a buffer territory for the storage of military hardware. The Soviets also embraced a buffer state mentality. Russia has always expected invasions to come from the west. To understand the contemporary conflict involving Russia and Ukraine, it is necessary to understand the tripartite nature of relations between Russia, the United States and the European Union.

The American desire during the Cold War was the same as it has always been throughout its history: not to be a global policeman but rather to be left alone. Its wish to be the unchallenged superpower is driven by the conviction that this is the best way of compelling foreign states to leave it in peace. The United States is a quixotic imperialist: in its desire to avoid foreign entanglements it becomes immersed in them. It is reluctantly drawn into international relations, a realm the nation has barely if ever understood, only when it perceives a threat to the quiet life the United States wants to live apart from other states. This philosophy pulls the United States into conflicts far more often than it would wish.

America’s vision for the world after the Second World War was a short-sighted one: place the Soviet Union at a distance, in an autarchy that would not bother her; weaken Great Britain, so that her empire could never again interfere with America’s trade and prosperity; and redevelop Germany, to act as a buffer state so that the Soviet Union could not expand westwards and threaten European stability as had Nazi Germany. If the Soviet Union could be isolated using strategies of this nature, so that the Europeans were left to deal with her without reference to the Americans, then US foreign policy could be declared a success.

The Americans cared little about what happened within the borders of the Soviet Union, as long as the Europeans served as a buffer for any collateral effects events might have. The Cold War began when the Soviets indicated they were not prepared to respect the post-war division of territory into Soviet and western spheres of influence agreed at the Yalta Conference in December 1943. If the Soviets advanced into Europe then American security would be compromised. The Cold War came to an end only when the constant game of escalation and de-escalation of tensions and military build-up led to the Soviet Union’s demise in the late 1980s following a sustained drop in the price of oil, the country’s main export.

The contemporary struggle over the future of Ukraine betrays a similar pattern, in which there is not one but three interested parties in the new Cold War now emerging. The familiar exhortations against Russia refer to the sanctity of international law and the unforgivable violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity in annexing Crimea and encouraging rebel operations in Donbas,. Yet behind these principles lies a more prosaic reality. Ukraine has become the new buffer nation between Russia and the EU. Russia still perceives such a territory as essential between it and Europe. During the first Cold War, the buffer was further west along the borders of nations such as West Germany and the Soviet satellite states in central Europe which had communist ideology imposed upon them. With the emancipation of those states at the end of the Cold War the buffer zone shifted eastwards towards countries such as Belarus and Ukraine that were formerly part of the Soviet Union, now notionally independent but still with the greater weight of their economic and political ties connecting them to Moscow.

In the Russian mind, Europe would like to press the buffer zone ever further eastwards and acquire domination over Moscow and Russia that the Kaiser, the Nazis and Napoleon previously attempted. For the Europeans, and in particular the Germans, the goal is to undermine this buffer zone mentality on the part of the Russians by connecting the Russian economy and sphere of influence to that of the European Union. The Americans have very little interest in Ukraine and Russia’s buffer zone at all, save to the extent that it undermines European stability and therefore draws the United States back into European politics. All these incentives are remarkably close to those that prevailed during the Cold War. The principal misconception in the popular mind is that the Americans have any geopolitical interest in Ukraine other than through their subscription to NATO. If the Ukraine crisis degenerates into a wave of military unrest affecting neighbouring NATO member countries, then the United States might become embroiled in a an armed confrontation with Russia that it does not want. The real driver of crisis in Russia is Europe.

The February 2014 revolution in Maidan Square in Kiev was a curious affair. President Viktor Yanukovich was removed from power even though the next Presidential election was due in January 2015, less than a year away and which Yanukovich was certain to lose. From the domestic point of view, it hardly seemed worth orchestrating a revolution to achieve so moderate an acceleration of an inevitable result. Yet the revolution was driven by EU discontent, because Europe had sought to negotiate a stabilisation agreement with Kiev – a predecessor to EU accession negotiations. Yankovich, under twin threats and promises from Moscow, had repudiated the draft agreement with the Europeans in December 2013. Europe overreacted, encouraging revolution because it was incensed that its project to spread the Union eastwards was being thwarted. In the rush, Russian strategic sensibilities were overlooked. From the Russian perspective Ukraine’s ambiguous polity, between west-leaning nationalists and an ambivalent Russian-speaking plurality in the east and south, rendered the country the final buffer territory against eastward European expansionism. This quality would be lost if Ukraine progressed towards Euro-Atlantic integration. By intervening directly in Ukraine’s politics, Europe encouraged Russia to do the same and destabilised the status quo. The methods of intervention were dramatically different, but that has always been so and the west should not have been surprised by Russia’s martial reaction.

The rest is history. After the EU escalated by fomenting revolution, Russia did the same by annexing Crimea. She then promoted rebellion in Donbas. Europe imposed ever increasing sanctions upon Russia, and Russia sent ever greater military forces into Ukraine. Rhetoric became increasingly bellicose. Russia miscalculated. She thought the United States was leading the complaint against her, while Europe would not react in so hostile a way, valuing her commercial connections with Russia whereas the United States has far fewer such connections to lose. Yet European sanctions ended up being more severe than those imposed by the United States. That is precisely because Ukraine lacks geopolitical significance for the United States, which wants to stay away from problems European. By contrast the Europeans have a distinctive agenda for Russian assimilation to the European model: stepwise absorption of Russia’s near-abroad, commercial and diplomatic engagement with Russia, and use of soft power to develop a Eurasian region under its influence, as an extension of the European Union.

In her battles over Ukraine, Russia thought that the United States was her principal enemy and Europe could be divided. But that assessment misjudged American perceptions of the region’s strategic significance. American actions over the Ukraine crisis are driven primarily by the desire that the buffer zone between Russia and Europe does not again blow up as it has in the past, necessitating US intervention in Europe at a time when it would prefer to focus its attentions upon Asia. Russia does not present a threat to contemporary US interests, but it is an obstacle to the European project of developing liberal social democracy across nations upon its periphery. Hence the European reaction to Russian interference in Ukraine has been more recalcitrant than that of the United States, because Europe is also familiar with the propensity of Russia to opportunistic expansionism to push its buffer zone further westwards. The Baltic States, Finland and Poland have all been placed upon higher military alert in past months lest Russia give any indication of military aggression in the direction of these states using Ukraine as a catalyst.

Russian policy on Ukraine has been broadly successful, notwithstanding the human cost. Ukrainian integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions such as the EU and NATO has been brought to a halt. The Ukrainian economy has been demonstrated as dependent upon the Russian. Europe has been forced to subsidise the Ukrainian state through IMF loans and miscellaneous grants. Russia can turn war in Ukraine on and off as she wishes. However Russia has also learned that she must pay a price for her intervention. Sanctions have caused some damage to the Russian economy, principally by constricting credit from European banks into domestic Russian businesses. The collapse of oil prices has led to the collapse of the Rouble, whose value is inevitably tied to oil in an economy in which hydrocarbon exports are by a long way the principal source of foreign currency.

The cause of falling oil prices is a glut in supply (for which US shale oil extraction is principally responsible) and also in expectations of future supply, as ever more oil fields are discovered worldwide. This is compounded by cooling Chinese and European demand for petroleum products during a period of modest global economic growth. The decision by Saudi Arabia in the 27 November 2014 meeting of OPEC not to cut capacity was presumably driven by a lack of interest in reducing its own market share. The principal beneficiaries of an OPEC production cut would have been the Russian and Iranian economies, non-OPEC members and two of Saudi Arabia’s regional political rivals in the Middle East.

Nevertheless these trends appear exogenous to Russian policy in Ukraine. Oil price-driven economic pressure upon Russia makes the Ukrainian crisis less soluble, not more so. The greater the internal political pressures in Russia, the more the Kremlin may feel motivated to engage in revanchist escapades to divert public attention from domestic economic hardship. There is no obvious solution for Russia in which she gives Europe some of what it wants on Ukraine in exchange for economic relief. This is particularly so given the typically intractable nature of sanctions: once in place they tend to persist for a long time, because if the international community sees that they work it tends to keep them in force as a means of continuing an effective form of pressure.

Regional commentators are expecting a springtime reconflagration of the conflict in eastern Ukraine, after a winter hiatus in which combat is unattractive to either side due to the forbidding weather. Before that happens, the United States should encourage mutual de-escalation. The first tranche of a staged settlement is military détente in exchange for commitments from the EU that Ukraine will not proceed with legal and political measures integrating Ukraine into Europe. Russia currently demands devolution of the Donbas region, but this is not an end in itself. Russia does not want two new provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk incorporated into its federation. The rationale for Russian’s demands for regional devolution, and indeed for the sectarian regional warfare Russia is promoting, is not to dismember the country decisively but rather to prevent Ukraine from integrating westwards. This is maintained by preserving political chaos. If credible commitments against integration can be fashioned, the devolution agenda may be tacitly abandoned. America would welcome any such compromise, as it renders the prospect of military escalation requiring its response less likely and hence advances its strategic agenda of staying out of Europe to the extent possible.

Russia will require wholesale internal political reorganisation before she warms to the idea of gradual Euro-Atlantic integration as a long-term plan for the Eurasian region. That will not take place under the Kremlin’s current occupancy, which appears unlikely to change for the indefinite future. In the interim, a confident buffer zone of neutrality must be maintained to secure peace between Europe and Russia. Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and Georgia must form the bedrock of this buffer zone. These countries must be handled with care. No level of economic damage to Russia will blunt her military belligerency in the face of a perceived western geopolitical threat. This does not mean Ukraine need be abandoned. But the country’s economic and political progress must be pursued cautiously. The European powers intervening in Kiev’s precarious politics must always be aware and deferential towards Russian strategic interest in the country, or Ukraine cannot be stable.

There is a vast amount that can be done to support Ukrainian economic, legal and democratic development without supporting revolutionary activities or encouraging the country to sign western-leaning treaties. NATO, the EU and the other tools of eastward development for Ukraine are off the table for the next ten years. Nevertheless similar objectives can be pursued using less coarse tools.

Matthew Parish is an international lawyer based in Geneva, Switzerland and the Managing Partner of the Gentium Law Group. He is the author of three books and over a hundred articles about international law and international relations, and was formerly an official in the international administration of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 2013 he was named as a Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum and one of the three hundred most influential people in Switzerland. www.matthewparish.com 

The post Fighting Cold War In Russia And Ukraine – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The United States, Uganda, and the Central African Republic should ensure the prompt transfer of a rebel Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) commander to the International Criminal Court (ICC). In 2005, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Dominic Ongwen for crimes against humanity and war crimes.

On January 6, 2015, US military advisers working with the African Union (AU) Regional Task Force in the Central African Republic received Ongwen into custody. The AU task force consists nearly entirely of Ugandan military personnel. US, Ugandan, and Central African authorities are negotiating Ongwen’s future, media reports say. He should have immediate access to a lawyer and the ability to communicate in a language he understands.

“With Ongwen in custody, the door is open for victims of LRA crimes to see some long-awaited justice,” said Daniel Bekele, Africa director. “He should promptly be transferred to the ICC, which has a warrant for his arrest.”

Ongwen, originally from Gulu, northern Uganda, was a commander of the LRA, an armed group led by the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony that has killed, maimed, and abducted thousands of civilians, many of them children, in remote regions of northern Uganda, northeastern Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic for over two decades. In December 2003, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda referred the LRA situation to the ICC, which opened an investigation into the situation in northern Uganda and issued warrants for Ongwen and four other LRA leaders, including Kony, in 2005. Since that time, three suspects are believed to have been killed. Kony remains at large.

Ongwen was himself abducted into LRA ranks at age 10 when he was on his way to school. Senior LRA leaders gave him military training, and he grew to be known as one of the more ruthless commanders. After Ugandan forces pushed the LRA out of northern Uganda in 2005 and 2006, fighters reportedly under Ongwen’s command and other LRA forces committed vicious attacks and terrorized communities in Congo’s Bas Uele and Haut Uele districts over several years.

The US had offered a US$5 million reward for information leading to Ongwen’s arrest. While the United States is not a party to the ICC, it can assist with the transfer of Ongwen and other ICC suspects to the court. Such action was taken in 2013 when another ICC fugitive, Bosco Ntaganda, a former Congolese army general and warlord, entered the US embassy in Kigali, Rwanda. The Central African Republic and Uganda are both ICC members, obligated to cooperate with the ICC under the ICC’s treaty, the Rome Statute.

Under the Rome Statute, the ICC only prosecutes cases when national courts are unable or unwilling to prosecute. Once a case has been taken up by the court, as in the Ongwen case, it would only revert to national courts on the basis of what is known as an admissibility challenge, in which a state can show that it is investigating and prosecuting him for the same crimes.

In 2011, Uganda established a judicial unit with authority to try serious crimes committed in violation of international law, known as the International Crimes Division. At the same time, a blanket amnesty for any individual who “renounces and abandons … rebellion” remains in effect in the country. This has raised questions about the government’s commitment to prosecuting serious crimes committed in northern Uganda.

“Justice for LRA victims and fair proceedings for Ongwen should be the priority at this time,” Bekele said. “Authorities negotiating Ongwen’s future should respect the ICC warrant. Ongwen belongs in The Hague and any country seeking to prosecute him should then raise the issue with the ICC.”

Ongwen is believed to be the only former child abductee to face charges before the ICC. Judicial proceedings against Ongwen would raise important issues regarding a defendant who was himself a former child soldier, even though the crimes Ongwen is charged with were committed as an adult. Ongwen’s abduction was a war crime, and he was denied parental care and spent formative years under the control of a group notorious for extreme brutality. These are mitigating factors that should be considered during possible sentencing in the event of trial and conviction, and may also be relevant to his legal defense.

“Ongwen is both a victim and alleged perpetrator of LRA atrocities,” Bekele said. “Judicial proceedings need to take into account not only Ongwen’s alleged crimes, but also the LRA’s brutal indoctrination of children and its possible impact on Ongwen.”

The post HRW Calls For Transfer LRA Commander To International Court appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The radical Muslim preacher Abu Hamza has been sentenced to life in prison by a New York court after being found guilty of supporting terrorist organizations.

He was jailed for offences including efforts to launch an Al-Qaeda training camp in the US and aiding hostage takers in Yemen.

Hamza, 56, appear at the US District Court in Manhattan at 1500 GMT on Friday.

Hamza, whose real name is Mustafa Kamel Mustafa, was convicted of 11 charges in May last year. During his trial, jurors heard a tape in which Hamza said: “Everybody was happy when the planes hit the World Trade Center.”

He was found guilty of facilitating the 1998 abduction of 16 Western tourists by providing Yemeni kidnappers with advice and a satellite phone. Four hostages – three Britons and an Australian – were killed in the operation.

He was also convicted of conspiring to set up a terror training camp by sending two followers to the US state of Oregon to establish a militant training camp in 1999.

Furthermore, he was found guilty of providing material support to Al-Qaeda, assisting the Taliban and sending terror recruits to Afghanistan.

Prosecutors urged a life sentence for a man they called a “global terrorist leader who orchestrated plots around the world.”

His lawyers said the court should take Hamza’s disabilities into account – including being blind in one eye, having had both forearms amputated, diabetes and high blood pressure – when handing down sentence.

They argued he should not receive a life sentence and that Hamza should be sent to a prison medical facility instead of a maximum security prison.

Hamza revealed he lost his hands in an accidental explosion two decades ago in Pakistan, where he claimed he was working as an engineer.

The Egyptian-born father of nine gained notoriety for encouraging violence, as he spread inflammatory messages at the London Finsbury Park Mosque, which he led, following the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center.

The 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui and the British would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid reportedly attended Finsbury Park Mosque, but Hamza denies ever having met them.

In 2006, Hamza was jailed for seven years in Britain for soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred before his extradition in 2012 to the United States to face terror charges.

The post US Court Sentences Abu Hamza Sentenced To Life In Prison appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Kaveh L. Afrasiabi*

The gruesome murder of several journalists in Paris and the ensuing manhunt has already triggered a tsunami of questions about the connection of this blatant act of terror and the broader fight against terrorism. Even before the dust settles, the French right has called for death penalty laws and some French law enforcement officials have hinted that they will soon confront the government on its policies that limit their surveillance of the French Muslim communities. The French Foreign Ministry officials have already linked the attack to France’s role against the ‘Islamic State’ and Al-Qaeda, vowing to continue the policy, which now is bound to have even a higher level of public acceptability in the aftermath of the Paris attack.

At the same time, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has called for cooperation with Russia in the fight against terrorism, a new development that can play a positive role in lessening the current tensions between Russia and the West over Ukraine.

With respect to Saudi Arabia and some other member states of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), suspected of funneling arms and money to the radical jihadists in Iraq and Syria, the Paris terror will without doubt serve as yet another reminder of their atrocious policies that have had the net effect of strengthening the cancer of terrorism throughout the Middle East. That cancer has now spread to Europe, hardly any surprise given the large number of jihadi recruits from the Muslim population of Europe, who will definitely feel the brunt of acts of terror perpetrated by some fringe elements with loyalty to ISIS or other similar extremist groups in Iraq and Syria. A rude awakening, the Paris terror lays bare with extreme clarity the fundamental error of some Western governments in providing direct support to the extremist groups in Syria who are fighting the government in Damascus, not to mention the similar atrocious, and short-sighted, policies on Libya, nowadays scene to the post-Qadafi civil war led by the extremist jihadi groups. In other words, the Paris terror attack calls for a wholesale rethinking of the hitherto tolerant policies of the West with respect to the extremist groups in Syria, who have made the inroad into Iraq since last June and pose an imminent threat to their own Persian Gulf sponsors.

In terms of Iran’s initiative of a “world without extremism,” showcased both at the UN and at a recent international conference, the Paris terror is yet another sad reminder of how big a danger this threat is, the inadequate preparations by the international community to deal with it, and the requirements of policy change by various governments, both in the West and the region, in order to compensate for the current shortcomings of a viable international coalition against the scourge of terrorism. For the simple, yet disturbing, fact is that the Paris terror attack should be viewed as a ‘blow back’ for misguided policies above-mentioned, one of which is the failure of Western governments to declare all those extremist groups as outright terrorist and to institute severe punishments for those aiding and abetting them. In France, only recently a feeble move in this direction was initiated by the French Parliament, in other words, the government of Francois Hollande is responsible for the tardiness on this matter, a function of the misguided French policy on Syria.

To conclude, as President Dr. Rouhani rightly stated recently, these terrorists represent a threat to humanity, they represent a trans-national threat with their dangerous absolutist worldview that legitimizes the physical eradication of whole sects and minority groups, tantamount to quasi-religious fascism. As in the WWII struggle against fascism, this phenomenon also calls for a unified global strategy, crystallized in Rouhani-led UN General Assembly resolution on a “world without extremism and violence.” In a word, the sad and brutal reality of the Paris terror attack is a confirmation of the fundamental soundness of Iran’s approach to this problem.

*Kaveh Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of several books on Iran’s foreign policy. His writings have appeared on several online and print publications, including UN Chronicle, New York Times, Der Tagesspiegel, Middle East Journal, Harvard International Review, and Brown’s Journal of World Affairs, Guardian, Russia Today, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Boston Globe, Mediterranean Affairs, Nation, Telos, Der Tageszeit, Hamdard Islamicus, Iranian Journal of International Affairs, Global Dialogue.

The post Iran Viewpoint: Paris Terror, The Policy Ramifications – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.