The recent expansion of US shale oil production has captured the imagination of policymakers and industry analysts. It has fuelled visions of the US becoming independent of oil imports, of cheap US gasoline, of a rebirth of US manufacturing, and of net oil exports improving the US current account. This column asks how plausible these visions are, and examines the evidence to date.

By Lutz Kilian*

Only a few years ago, many observers expected a steadily growing global shortage of crude oil. This shortage did not materialise in part because of the rapidly growing production of shale oil in the US. The production of shale oil (also referred to as tight oil) exploits technological advances in drilling. It involves horizontal drilling and the hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) of underground rock formations containing deposits of crude oil that are trapped within the rock. This process is used to extract crude oil that would have been impossible to release by conventional drilling methods designed for extracting oil from permeable rock formations. Shale oil production relies on the availability of suitable drilling rigs and skilled labour, which is one of the reasons why the US shale oil boom so far has been difficult to replicate in other countries.

US shale oil production has grown from about 0.4 million barrels a day in 2007 to more than 4 million barrels a day in 2014. This expansion was stimulated by the high price of crude oil after 2003, which made the application of these new drilling technologies cost competitive. The expansion of US shale oil production soon captured the imagination of policymakers and industry analysts. By 2012, the International Energy Agency projected that the US would become the world’s leading crude oil producer, overtaking Saudi Arabia by the mid-2020s and evolving into a net oil exporter by 2030 (International Energy Agency 2012). Pundits envisioned the US becoming independent of oil imports, net oil exports financing the US non-oil trade deficit, and consumers enjoying an era of cheap gasoline with a resulting rebirth of US manufacturing. My recent research, however, suggests that these visions remain far removed from reality (Kilian 2014).

Uncertainty about the US shale oil boom

To gauge the importance of shale oil for the US economy it is useful to bear in mind that, as of March 2014, shale oil accounted for almost half of US oil production, but only about a quarter of the total quantity of oil used by the US economy. This magnitude is far from negligible, but to understand the excitement about shale oil one has to consider projections of future US shale oil production.

Publicly available projections of future shale oil production have to be interpreted with some caution.

• One concern is that increases in shale oil production are not permanent.

Sustained production requires ongoing investment. Projections by the US Energy Information Administration suggest that even under favourable conditions US shale oil production will peak by 2020 (at a level commensurate with US oil production in 1970) and then decline. Moreover, even the peak level would be far below what is needed to satisfy US oil demand.

• A second concern is that estimates of the stock of shale oil that can be recovered using current technology are subject to considerable error.

In the summer of 2014, for example, the Energy Information Administration was forced to lower its previous estimates of the stock of recoverable shale oil by 64%.

• A third concern is that it is not known how vulnerable the shale oil industry is to downside oil price risk.

This concern has become particularly relevant in recent months with the rapid decline in global oil prices. Shale oil production remains profitable as long as the price of oil exceeds marginal cost. There are indications that the initially high marginal cost of shale oil production has been declining substantially, as the shale oil industry has gained experience, but there are no reliable industry-level estimates of marginal cost.

In short, there is considerable uncertainty about the persistence and scope of the US shale oil boom, and there are many reasons to be skeptical of the notion that the US will soon (or indeed ever) become independent of oil imports.

Today, the US is the third-largest oil producer, slightly behind Saudi Arabia and Russia, with US crude oil accounting for about 10% of world production. Much has been made of the possibility of the US overtaking Saudi Arabia as the largest oil producer in the world, as the production of shale oil continues to surge. The implicit premise has been that being a large oil producer ensures a country’s energy security. It is easy to forget, however, that the US already was the world’s largest oil producer in 1973/1974 as well as in 1990. This fact did not protect the US economy from major foreign oil price shocks, suggesting that the focus on becoming the world’s largest oil producer is misplaced.

Imperfect substitutability between different types of crude oil

Even more importantly, the shale oil debate has largely ignored the fact that shale oil is not a perfect substitute for conventional crude oil, making comparisons across countries difficult. The quality of crude oil can be characterised mainly along two dimensions. One is the oil’s density (ranging from light to heavy) and is typically measured based on the American Petroleum Institute (API) gravity formula; the other is its sulphur content (with sweet referring to low-sulphur content and sour to high-sulphur content). Figure 1 provides an overview of how commonly quoted crude oil benchmarks (including West Texas Intermediate (WTI) and Brent oil in the North Sea) can be characterised along these dimensions. Shale oil consists of light sweet crude (at most 45 API), ultra-light sweet crude (about 47 API), and condensates (as high as 60API). Thus, not all shale oil is a good substitute for conventional light sweet crude oil such as the WTI or Brent benchmarks, and an aggregate analysis of the crude oil market tends to be misleading. In reality, the impact of shale has been far more complicated.

Figure 1. Classification of conventional crude oil benchmarks
Source: US Energy Information Administration.
Notes: MARS refers to an offshore drilling site in the Gulf of Mexico. WTI = West Texas Intermediate. LLS = Louisiana Light Sweet. FSU = Former Soviet Union. UAE = United Arab Emirates.

The US shale oil boom was preceded by a persistent and growing shortage of light sweet crude oil in world markets. US refiners responded to this trend by expanding their capacity to process heavy crudes that remained in abundant supply, becoming the world leader in this field. They were therefore taken by surprise when the US market was inundated with shale crude oil from the centre of the country after 2010. Not only was much of the refining structure ill-equipped to process this light sweet crude oil, but it proved difficult to ship the shale oil to those refineries on the coasts that would have been able to process it. With the development of shale oil in the interior of the country, large parts of the US oil pipeline infrastructure developed over the preceding 40 years had suddenly become obsolete, and rail and barge transport could not cope with increased demand. Moreover, exports of US shale oil that cannot be processed domestically were (and continue to be) prohibited by US law.

The resulting local excess supply of light sweet crude oil in the central US caused the WTI price of oil to fall below the Brent price. This discrepancy between domestic and global oil prices resulted from a breakdown of arbitrage between domestic and imported light sweet crude oil. There are signs that the US refining industry is gradually responding to these price differentials. Reconfiguring the US refining and transportation infrastructure, however, is a costly and slow process. For the time being, therefore, the evolution of the US price of oil is inextricably tied to improvements in the US refining, pipeline, and rail infrastructure.

In sharp contrast, US retail fuel prices have remained integrated with the world market in part because US refined products such as gasoline or diesel (unlike domestically produced crude oil) may be exported freely. As a result, the widely noted decline in US domestic oil prices relative to international benchmarks such as Brent, has not been passed on to the consumer in the interior of the country. This point is important because it removes the basis for any notion of a rebirth of US manufacturing on the basis of low-cost US gasoline and diesel fuel.

The beneficiaries of the US shale oil boom

Thus, the main beneficiary of the US shale oil revolution has been not gasoline consumers or, for that matter, domestic shale oil producers, but the US refining industry, which enjoys a competitive advantage compared to diesel and gasoline producers abroad because of its access to low-cost crude oil. In fact, refiners have every incentive to preserve the status quo and to prevent a lifting of the US ban on exports of domestically produced crude oil. An additional beneficiary of the shale oil revolution has been the transportation sector, notably the railroad industry, and the industries directly serving the oil sector. In contrast, the macroeconomic effects on real output and employment have been small, given the negligible share of the shale oil sector in the US economy. It is fair to say that there is no support for the notion that shale oil has been a game changer for the US economy. One area in which the shale oil revolution has made a difference is in reducing crude oil imports on the one hand, and increasing exports of refined products on the other, thus improving the US trade balance (and as a side-effect dampening the effect of foreign oil price shocks on the US economy). Of course, these improvements are small compared with the overall US trade deficit.

The (lack of) impact on the global price of oil

It may seem that the rapid decline in the global price of oil after mid-2014 may be attributable to sharp increases in US shale oil production, providing direct evidence of the impact of the US shale oil revolution on oil prices after all. Although shale oil is not being exported, it replaces US crude oil imports, reducing the demand for oil in global markets, as do US exports of refined products. Some observers have gone as far as suggesting that shale oil may have become a victim of its own success in that it caused a sharp drop in global oil prices. There is no credible support for this interpretation. Similar price declines also occurred in other industrial commodity markets at the same time, suggesting that the cause of the oil price decline has not been specific to the oil sector, but that it mainly reflects a weakening global economy in Asia as well as Europe, possibly amplified by the decision of many oil producers to preserve oil revenues by increasing oil production in response to falling oil prices. This view is also consistent with the comparatively small magnitude of US shale oil production on a global scale.

About the author:
* Lutz Kilian
Professor of Economics, University of Michigan; and Research Fellow at CEPR

References:
International Energy Agency (2012), World Energy Outlook 2012, Paris: OECD/IEA.

Kilian, L (2014), “The Impact of the Shale Oil Revolution on U.S. Oil and Gasoline Prices”, CEPR Discussion Paper 10304.

The post How Shale Oil Revolution Has Affected US Oil And Gasoline Prices – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Syed Badrul Ahsan*

The rise of Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party to power in Delhi in May 2014 was occasion for a flurry of activities in Dhaka.

Just how ready Bangladesh’s political classes were to welcome the change in India was initially reflected by the congratulatory message sent to India’s new leader, even before the official results of the general election came in, by the chairperson of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and former prime minister Khaleda Zia. She was soon followed by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

One does not require an extraordinary degree of wisdom to understand the cause behind this desire to extend the hand of cooperation to the new Indian leadership. For Khaleda Zia, the clear need was to convince the new leadership that for all the anti-India position her party had nurtured and practised over the years she was ready to go for a fresh beginning with Delhi. And for Sheikh Hasina, there was the unquestionable feeling that a Modi government needed to be convinced of Bangladesh’s sincerity in sustaining a cooperative framework of relations between the two countries against a background of everything that had not happened under the departing United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government.

The Bangladesh government’s grievances were quite a few, and pretty significant too. The expectation that with Manmohan Singh in charge — and with the Congress in Delhi and the Awami League in Dhaka sharing a common heritage of secular democratic politics in South Asia — such outstanding issues as the Land Boundary Agreement (LBA) and the sharing of the Teesta waters would be resolved, were in the end to be belied. With West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee scuttling the possibility of a deal on the Teesta in 2011 even as Singh prepared to fly to Dhaka, the suspicion gained ground in Bangladesh that with the feisty Banerjee in charge in Kolkata and a steadily weakening Manmohan Singh in Delhi, there was little chance of a solution to the issue being reached any time soon. Moreover, the difficulties on Delhi’s part in ratifying the LBA were another assault on hopes of better neighbourly relations between the two nations. The absence of a Teesta deal and non-action on the LBA were embarrassing for Sheikh Hasina’s government. Her detractors were beginning to castigate her foreign policy vis-à-vis India as a failure.

The arrival of the BJP government in Delhi was therefore an opportunity which policy makers in Dhaka could not afford to not take advantage of. Such a belief obviously had its roots in the sheer majority the BJP had achieved in the elections, convincing politicians across the spectrum in Bangladesh that the new Indian leadership would play hardball in the region through a reinvention of foreign policy under Modi. Dhaka was, again, convinced that with Delhi finally led by a strong government it made sense for Bangladesh to persuade India of the need for quick action on the core issues which had quite undermined ties between the two countries in the recent past.

That said, it is not hard to suppose that the emergence of Narendra Modi as India’s new leader was, in large measure, cause for worry among Bangladesh’s political circles given the BJP’s image as a Hindu nationalist organisation. The conclusion to be drawn is that politicians in Dhaka were agreed on the need to engage the new leaders in Delhi through diplomacy rather than place focus on the change in India’s internal political dynamics brought about by the defeat of the Congress. Diplomacy, so the reasoning went, was of the essence.

For his part, Modi played his cards well. His invitation to the heads of government of all South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) nations outside India to be part of the inaugural ceremonies of his government in Delhi was stunning as well as refreshing. Suddenly, in Dhaka especially, the feeling of Narendra Modi being a disturbing symbol of Hindutva politics gave way to the perception that he was beginning to look like a statesman intent on casting India in new light. And indeed Modi did not disappoint Bangladeshis.

At his meetings with the Bangladesh prime minister on the sidelines of such events as the SAARC summit in Kathmandu and the United Nations General Assembly in New York, he reassured Sheikh Hasina on the LBA and Teesta. The two issues, he informed her, would be resolved soon. Bangladeshi officials could hardly contain their glee. Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj’s visit to Dhaka was seen as adding substance to the new foreign policy perspectives of the BJP administration in Delhi.

The year 2014, considered from a diversity of perceptions, has been a time of positive note in Indo-Bangladesh diplomacy. The LBA and Teesta apart, forceful Indian action in such significant areas as the Burdwan blast involving fugitive Bangladeshi Islamist elements holed up in West Bengal has been welcomed in Dhaka. With Indian and Bangladeshi intelligence officials exchanging information on the presence of unsavoury elements in one another’s territory, relations between the two countries have taken on added substance.

And with both Modi and Hasina enjoying comfortable majorities in Delhi and Dhaka, it is only natural to expect that over the next few years, or in the forthcoming two years, the pattern of bilateral cooperation set in motion since Modi took over as India’s prime minister should logically be one of increasingly closer linkages. The Awami League government has in the past six years gone out on a limb to crack down on Indian extremist elements operating from Bangladesh territory against the Indian authorities.

Reciprocity from the Indian side, particularly in apprehending and handing over to Dhaka Bangladeshi criminal elements currently fugitive in India, will in very large measure contribute to a strengthening of links between the two countries. Regular and closer coordination between India’s Border Security Force (BSF) and Bangladesh’s Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) will surely ensure a safer frontier for people on both sides of it. Dhaka’s need for enhanced trade with India is another priority which Bangladesh expects will be considered with understanding in Delhi.

Bangladesh, at this point in its history, is in dire need of a consolidation of democracy for its people. The government of India, through its cooperative endeavours with the government of Bangladesh, will be helping that process along. Indian democracy is constantly cited in Bangladesh as a model of modern politics. Delhi’s sustained interest in the growth of democratic pluralism in Dhaka, therefore, can only redound to the mutual benefit of the two nations.

*Syed Badrul Ahsan is Associate Editor, The Daily Observer, Dhaka. He can be contacted at contributions@spsindia.in

The post Bangladesh And India: Opportunities For Consolidation Of Ties – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney are zeroing in on inequality as America’s fundamental economic problem.

Bush’s new Political Action Committee, called “The Right to Rise,” declares “the income gap is real” but that “only conservative principles can solve it.”

Mitt Romney likewise promised last week that if he runs for president he’ll change the strategy that led to his 2012 loss to President Obama (remember the “makers” versus the “takers?”) and focus instead on income inequality, poverty, and “opportunity for all people.”

The Republican establishment’s leading presidential hopefuls know the current upbeat economy isn’t trickling down to most Americans.

But they’ve got a whopping credibility problem, starting with trickle-down economics.

Since Ronald Reagan moved into the White House, Republican policies have widened inequality.

Neither party deserves a medal for reversing the trend, but evidence shows that middle-class and poor Americans have faired better under Democratic presidents.

Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more with Democrats in the White House than Republicans.

Under Bill Clinton, in whose administration I am proud to have served, even the wages of the poorest fifth rose.

According to research by economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson, more jobs have been created under Democratic presidents as well.

These broad-based job and wage gains haven’t hampered economic growth. To the contrary, they’ve fueled it by putting more money into the pockets of people who spend it — thereby boosting business profits and hiring.

Which is why the economy has grown faster when Democrats have occupied the Oval Office.

I’m not saying Democrats have always had it right or done everything they should. The lion’s share of economic gains over the past thirty-five years has gone to the top regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans inhabit the White House.

The most recent recovery has been particularly lopsided, President Obama’s intentions notwithstanding.

Nor can presidents alone determine how the economy performs. At best they orchestrate a set of policies that nudge the economy in one direction or another.

But that’s exactly the point: Since Reagan, Republican policies have nudged it toward big gains at the top and stagnation for everyone else.

The last Republican president to deliver broad-based prosperity was Dwight D. Eisenhower, in the 1950s.

Then, the gains from growth were so widely shared that the incomes of the poorest fifth actually grew faster than the incomes of the top fifth. As a result, America became more equal than ever before or since.

Under Ike, the marginal tax rate on the richest Americans reached 91 percent.

Eisenhower also presided over the creation of the interstate highway system – the largest infrastructure project in American history — as well as the nation’s biggest expansion of public schools.

It’s no coincidence that when Eisenhower was president, over a third of all private sector workers were unionized. Ike can’t be credited for this but at least he didn’t try to stop it or legitimize firing striking workers, as did Ronald Reagan.

Under Reagan, Republican policy lurched in the opposite direction: Lower taxes on top incomes and big wealth, less public investment, and efforts to destroy labor unions.

Not surprisingly, that’s when America took its big U-turn toward inequality.

These Reaganomic principles are by now so deeply embedded in the modern Republican Party they’ve come to define it.

As a matter of fact, they’re just about all that unite the warring factions of the GOP – libertarians, tea partiers, and big corporations and Wall Street.

Yet because these very principles have contributed to the stagnation of American incomes and the widening gap between the rich and everyone else, Republican aspirants who says they want to reverse widening inequality are faced with an awkward dilemma.

How can they be credible on the issue while embracing these principles? Yet if they want to be nominated, how can they not embrace them?

When Jeb Bush admits that the income gap is real but that “only conservative principles can solve it,” one has to wonder what principles he’s talking about if not these.

And when Mitt Romney promises to run a different campaign than he did in 2012 and focus on “opportunity for all people,” the real question is whether he’ll run on different economic principles.

That the leading Republican hopefuls recognize the economy has to work for everyone and not just a few is progress.

But unless they disavow the legacy of Ronald Reagan and adopt the legacy of Dwight Eisenhower, their words are nothing more than soothing rhetoric — akin to George W. Bush’s meaningless “compassionate conservatism.”

The post The New Compassionate Conservatism And Trickle-Down Economics – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By MD Al-Sulami

Saudi Arabia’s Border Guards has been given orders to shoot anybody who tries to cross into Saudi territory illegally, said Vice Adm. Awad bin Eid Al-Balawi, acting director general of the Border Guards. “No negotiations will be held with the intruders,” he added.

Maj. Mohammed Al-Ghamdi, official spokesman of the Border Guards, said that all Border Guards received these instructions and orders.

He explained that the new instructions demand a heavier and stricter response to the border infiltration attempts and firing at them immediately without discussion.

Al-Ghamdi said that this decision is considered the Kingdom’s sovereign right, adding that the Border Guards are working to implement these instructions in order to guarantee the safety and security of the citizens and their country.

The decision comes at a time when the region is confronting terrorist groups.

On Jan. 5, three Saudi Border Guards — including the commander — were killed as four terrorists attempted to cross the Saudi-Iraqi border.

Al-Ghamdi stressed that the Border Guards are ready to deal with any emergency and will perform the tasks entrusted to them to protect the homeland and its properties.

The Saudi society welcomed the new decision as people took to social media to express their appreciation. Some used certain hashtags to convey their support for the decision, which they said would send a clear message that the Kingdom would not be lenient toward any attempts to threaten its sovereignty and security.

Others applauded the Saudi security forces for their efforts and praised their commitment to the Kingdom and its citizens saying that many of them sacrifice their lives to protect their beloved country.

The post Saudi Arabia: Border Guard To Shoot On Sight Intruders appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Shakti Sinha*

The fast-changing situation in Kabul with a new president heading a government of national unity, the end of NATO and US’ combat roles and increased insecurity poses severe challenges for India.

This comes at a time when the government of Narendra Modi has been busy consolidating its position domestically, trying to revive the economy and defining a role for India in the Indo-Pacific. Attention to Afghanistan seems to have slipped below the horizon even though the Indian mission in Herat was attacked just before Modi assumed office, and then president Hamid Karzai attended Modi’s inaugural ceremony along with other South Asian heads of government.

Independent India’s relations with Afghanistan have generally been on an even keel with the exception of two short periods of time where India faced either indifference or hostility. The first was with the Mujahideen takeover of Kabul in 1992 following the fall of Najibullah which left India friend-less and isolated; its public support for the Soviet intervention and for the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) regime meant it was on the wrong side of history. The second was, paradoxically, when the Mujahideen regime was evicted from Kabul by the Taliban (1996), who proceeded to torture and execute Najibullah.

For most of the past year, the conduct and outcome of the presidential election dominated the Afghan scene. It saw unprecedented enthusiasm and high turnout but controversies about illegalities held up the final results. Ultimately, the final outcome was a US-brokered agreement between the two main contenders, Dr Ashraf Ghani and Dr Abdullah Abdullah; the former after being sworn-in as the president appointed the latter as chief executive. If all goes well, the constitution would be amended to shift to a parliamentary system of government. For the time being, even three months after the inauguration, disagreements have held up the appointment of ministers.

The year began with president Karzai pursuing his wish-list of assistance from India including reportedly tanks, ammunitions, helicopters and transport aircraft as well as enhanced cooperation in intelligence and security matters. Karzai visited India in May and December of 2013 to push Delhi to increase its support to the Afghan government. Many in Delhi’s strategic community were critical of the then government’s diffidence, arguing that India should break free of looking at Afghanistan through American eyes, which in turn was mindful of Pakistani sensibilities. Many prominent Afghans also felt let down by Delhi’s attitude as they feared that in a post-withdrawal Afghanistan, their country would descend into mayhem unless the Afghan security forces were adequately armed and trained. That Afghanistan as a sovereign country had a right to seek support from whom they wanted regardless of what Pakistan felt; the subtext was that for a peaceful resolution of the Pakistan-backed Taliban insurgency, the Afghan government would need to negotiate from a position of strength.

Paradoxically, it was India’s overwhelming popularity among the Afghans, and substantial development support to the elected Afghan government that Pakistan cited as proof of its own fears of insecurity of being encircled. Pakistan further developed a dubious argument that Afghanistan was the site of a proxy war between Pakistan and India, both as a way to justify its support for the Taliban and to constrain India’s freedom of action in supporting the Afghan government.

US’ ambivalence in the face of relying on Pakistan to support its Afghan mission while recognising Pakistan’s role in undermining that very mission meant that the former did not want India to ‘muddy’ the waters. Not wanting to upset the Americans, the Manmohan Singh government went along and did not entertain Karzai’s request, a sign that India would only do so much to shore up a government in a neighbouring country whose stability is of vital interest to India.

The new Afghan president made China his first international destination. He followed this up with a visit to Pakistan, where in an unprecedented move he called on chief of the Pakistani army Gen Raheel Sharif at his headquarters before meeting Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Subsequently, the Americans handed over to Pakistan Latif Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban leader who had crossed over to Afghanistan and had more or less come overground to negotiate. Further, Gen Raheel Sharif flew to Kabul within hours of the horrendous attack on Peshawar’s army school and demanded of President Ghani action against Pakistani Taliban forces who he said were operating out of Afghanistan.

In this whole narrative, India seems missing in action. This is understandable since there can be no doubt that the Pakistani army is the key to peace in Afghanistan, and only the Chinese have leverage over them. Seeing the weakness of the Afghan security forces and the increased insecurity of Afghanistan, President Ghani has little option but in engaging with both these actors.

Whether the Chinese or the Pakistani army can deliver is beyond the scope of this piece, but there is no doubt that in this equation India has no role. It shares no physical borders, has desisted from supplying arms to the government security forces, is not involved with any armed groups and has no favourites among the local political groups and individuals. On the other hand, hundreds of Afghans travel to India every day for medical treatment and thousands study here. Indian films and TV serials provide mass entertainment and showcase a common heritage. India’s development role, though low key is much appreciated. And it is this mix that is India’s strength in Afghanistan.

The present policy of continuing India’s development role and forbearance in strategic matters should not be mistaken for negligence, or irrelevance. India cannot do, or seem to be doing, anything that undermines Afghanistan’s democratic regime, for both share a common goal of a stable Afghanistan, not a dysfunctional state that provides sanctuary to transnational terrorists.

*Shakti Sinha is a former civil servant who has worked in Afghanistan for the UN for three years and coordinated donor support for the Afghanistan National Development Strategy. He can be contacted at southasiamonitor1@gmail.com

The post India-Afghanistan Relations: Road To Nowhere? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The average cost of an Afghan soldier i.e. cost of arms, ammunitions, uniform and wages is estimated to be around US$1,286 per annum. This number increases with the nature of deployment, injuries and units within the army. The cadre of Afghan officers which reaches thousands has a much higher cost in terms of budget and affordability. Many question the sustainability and affordability of such a staggering cost of maintaining an expensive army at this level given the deep prevailing poverty in the country and slow economic growth. Afghanistan has an army that it cannot afford. Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) require US$4.5 billion on annual basis and it is funded fully by the NATO member countries through the Chicago conference commitments. It lacks indigenous arms industry and even some of the most basic needs of this army from its boots to ammunitions are furnished from outside the country, at times at highly unsustainable costs.

Afghan National Security Forces in its entirety is funded by NATO and the international community with negligible financial contribution by the Afghan Government through the Chicago conference commitments. Afghanistan has an army, police and intelligence combined with recently created government militias that it cannot afford. NATO commanders and Afghan military leaders are already looking at possible downsizing of the Afghan national security forces beyond 2018. Furthermore, the Afghan National Budget, which is obliged under the terms of the Chicago conference to fund US$ 500 million for the Afghan army and police, is already under tremendous constraints and the Afghan government has called on the international community to fund its recurrent budget due to domestic revenue shortfall, decline in foreign aid, flight of capital and business and growing corruption and insecurity in the country.

According to NATO – the total number of the Afghan national security forces i.e. army, police and airforce stands at around 345,000 and this number is expected either to decline or increase depending on the security and threat level in the country. The sustainment and funding of this force is primarily the job of the Afghan Treasury, but the government is already struggling to fund its civilian budget let alone the Afghan defense spendings. There are huge challenges within the Afghan security forces budget and financial management, procurement, logistics and expenditure arrangements. The Afghan military and police have a long way to go to overcome these challenges by building effective budget and financial management trained personnel and systems in place.

Afghans are famous and tough warriors, but terrible military organizers and strategists, observed a former Soviet Union Red Army General in his memoirs while he was in Afghanistan assisting the then Afghan National Army to fight off the Mujahiddin. He and his advisors had to remind Afghan officers of a task or ground battle tactic or strategy a dozen times half of which went into deaf ears. As a result – he and his own men had to take the affairs into their hands to avoid war casualties or show results that the war is making progress to their soviet politburo chiefs. Illiteracy, lack of commitment, tribal and family ties, a culture of nepotism and corruption has made the task of building an army extremely difficult at this time.

Today, more than ever Afghanistan and its security forces are in dire need of a corp of highly professional, politically impartial and highly trained military officers who could fill the shoes of US/NATO officers and fend off the Taliban and drive them out of their strongholds in the country.

But maintaining such an army and security apparatus needs to be financially viable and sustainable in the medium to long run for Afghanistan. The current army and security apparatus in Afghanistan is completely sustainable given the economic and financial constraints of the Afghan government. Based on fiscal and revenue projection – the Afghan economy is years away from being able to fund an army at current levels of expenditure.

Afghan National Budget and Security Expenditures

In a recent PBS 60 Minutes interview, Commander of the NATO forces, General Campbell, observed that Afghanistan will have to at some point in future decrease the number of their forces for financial and economic reasons. Such a decision will depend drastically on the political developments, peace process and threat level within the country. All these factors will play an important role in driving the security expenditures of Afghanistan higher or lower than its current levels.

For the Afghan government to be able to cover its own army, police and intelligence budget and financial requirements, it has to economize its national budget and work on a roadmap based on fiscal and revenue projections based on an agreed framework to cover the expenditures of the Afghan National Budget on a phase to phase basis. It should also work on building domestic indigenous capabilities and industries to drive down the cost of security expenditures. This requires an indepth analysis, a broad-based political support and agreement and finally a commitment from the international community to support this process.

Defense Budget, Financial Management, Procurement and Logistics

The Afghan national security forces lack an organized and computerized system of budgeting, financial management, procurement and logistics. The Afghan army and national police have been accused time of corruption in various contracts i.e. boots, uniforms and recently the famous case of the army hospital Sardar Mohammad Daud Khan in which millions of dollars worth of medical equipment and medicines were embezzled.

The Operation Resolute Mission (ORS) states one of its key mission objectives to assist Afghan national security forces build their financial management, procurement and logistics capabilities but many challenges remain till date.

The Civilian Phobia: Role of Civilian Managers and Leaders in the Afghan National Security Forces

Like any army and security force albeit to a lesser degree, the Afghan security forces are not welcoming to civilians joining their ranks to undertaken key administrative, policy, financial management and logistics tasks within their institutions leaving the battle field tactics and fights for them. Professional civilians are rarely welcomed and sometimes even forced out to leave the force while the military and police themselves lack the capacity to undertake some of the key administrative, financial and policy functions.

This culture has to change because the Afghan security institutions need expertise and resources in many areas where only the civilians can provide it. In the long run with the establishment of army institutes and colleges, this function might be handed over to the military personnel themselves but in the short run there is a dire need for civilian expertise in the country’s security agencies.

Transparency and Accountability in Security Expenditures

Part of any military and security agency’s job is to keep secrets and their budget on certain items are highly kept secrets. But Afghanistan as a democracy like any other has to strike a balance between transparency and national security concerns so that the millions of dollars are account for and the Afghan public are aware of the expenditures of their security agencies. The old soviet practices should not prevail. Today, little is known about the process of Afghan national security forces budgeting and financial management process. Part of it has to do with the fact that financial resources are coming through the US/NATO military channels and part of it is due to the non-transparent nature of the allocations and expenditures of the Afghan security institutions.

The Afghan army, police and intelligence agencies as institutions of a democratic state should reveal their budgets and finances both for public scrutiny and support. It is only through popular support and public trust that these institutions would succeed in meeting their basic objective of providing security to the Afghan public.

The Forgotten Afghan Indigenous Defense Industry

Afghanistan lacks basic military factories and industry to support it expanding army and police. For the first time, the British, Turks followed by the Soviets built very basic arms and ammunitions factories in Kabul. These factories were destroyed, looted or became obsolete with the factional wars for the control of Kabul in early 1990s. Today, Afghanistan lacks any sort of basic defense and military industry.

Building a defense and military industry for Afghanistan is key to economize and drive down the security expenditure of the Afghan security agencies. This will also assist the Afghan security agencies to be less dependent on outside markets for their basic equipment and ammunitions. The US/NATO forces have only been successful in building few workshops for repair and maintenance of Afghan military equipment.

There is a need for significant financial and technical investment in reviving and building new military and defense factories for the Afghan security institutions. This will be the first key step in economizing the Afghan national security forces budget.

Building a Fiscally Sustainable Force – A Framework

The current force level is not financially and economically sustainable for the Afghan government. In the medium to long run, the Afghan government based on the threat level and level of violence in the country will have to decrease the number of its forces unless there is a drastic economic miracle within the Afghan economic scene to be able to afford such an expensive force.

Like any other army and security force for building a fiscally sustainable Afghan national security apparatus – the Afghan government should focus on four pillars of a framework to build an economically and financially sustainable army and police:

1. Build Financial Management and Logistics capabilities within all the Afghan security institutions through establishing financial management, procurement and logistics systems and trained personnel.

2. Re-evaluate the entire security apparatus of the country from a financial and budget sustainability point of view. Based on the findings of this evaluation, take steps to economize the expenditures of the Afghan army and police.

3. Further political dialogue with Afghan neighbors and the armed opponents through peace process and other mechanisms to drive down the level of threats and violence in the country. This will assist in reducing the size of the Afghan army, police and intelligence. An over militarized Afghan society is not in the benefit of any of the actors in the country.

4. Launch a comprehensive program of investment in building indigenous defense and military factories and industry in the country.

The post Cost Of Violence: The Fiscally ‘Unsustainable’ Path Of Afghan National Security Forces – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Pramod Jaiswal*

India-Nepal relations are bound by history, geography, economic cooperation and socio-cultural ties. Strong people-to-people relations have continued since centuries which were further strengthened with the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship that give special privileges to people, of both the countries.

Unlike most of the borders of the world, Nepal-India share an open border and cross border marriages are common. India is Nepal’s largest trading partner and has significant contribution in development of the nation. It has played a crucial role in the political transition of Nepal by mainstreaming the Maoists. However, the presence of anti-India sentiments in Nepal portrays that India has failed to manage the public perception in Nepal.

It must be noted that Nepal figured prominently in Indian foreign policy in 2014, especially after Narendra Modi got elected as the new Indian prime minister. His invitation to the heads of governments of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) member-states to his swearing-in ceremony was the clear signal that under his tenure as the prime minister India will prioritise her relation with neighbours. After his first foreign visit to Bhutan, Prime Minister Modi paid a bilateral visit to Nepal in August 2014. He became the first Indian prime minister to visit Nepal in 17 years. The last bilateral visit to Nepal was by Inder Kumar Gujral in June 1997. Atal Bihari Vajpayee had visited Kathmandu in 2002 for a SAARC summit. There have been several visits to India by the prime ministers and the president of Nepal since.

Modi’s visit to Nepal ushered a new chapter in relations between the two neighbours. He enchanted Nepalese with a rousing address in the Constituent Assembly and Legislature-Parliament of Nepal – the first by a foreign leader. He announced a soft loan of $1 billion and promised several infrastructure development projects. The prime ministers of both the countries agreed to review, adjust and update the most talked about Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1950 and other bilateral agreements. Similarly, the Joint Commission which was formed in 1987 at the Foreign Ministers’ level with a view to strengthening understanding and promoting cooperation between the two countries for mutual benefits in the economic, trade, transit and the multiple uses of water resources was reactivated after a gap of 23 years during the Nepal visit of Sushma Swaraj, minister of external affairs of India in July 2014.

In October, the Power Trade Agreement (PTA) and the Project Development Agreement (PDA) between the Investment Board of Nepal and GMR Group of India for the development of Upper Karnali hydropower project was also signed. Both the agreements were expected to be signed during Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Nepal in August but were postponed by Nepal citing lack of enough deliberation. If the project completes on time, the 900 MW Upper Karnali Hydroelectric Project would generate dividends worth approximately $33 million from equity, royalty and free electricity throughout the concession period of 25 years. The project, constructed by an Indian company GMR, will be handed over to the state-run Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) after 25 years. Since it is being constructed on BOOT (build, own, operate and transfer) basis, the NEA will not have to share the project’s financial burdens.

Modi paid another visit to Kathmandu in November to attend the 18th SAARC Summit. During his visit, he inaugurated a 200-bed trauma centre built by India and flagged off a Kathmandu-Delhi bus service being run by the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC). He also handed over a helicopter to Nepal Army and a mobile soil-testing laboratory to Nepal.

India gave greater political recognition and priority to its Nepal policy because of its unique relationship and security implications. Only stable and peaceful Nepal can take care of India’s security interest. Hence, India wants to focus more on economic engagements with Nepal, which can provide stability. Nepal, which has a huge potential for generation of hydropower, faces a chronic power shortage which has affected the economy severely. India seeks greater connectivity and wants to harness Nepal’s huge water resources to strengthen Nepal’s economy. The PDA and PTA agreements are in that direction. India has major stakes on the peace process of Nepal. It played the role of facilitator in mainstreaming the Maoists of Nepal.

Most probably this trend would continue in 2015 too. India would continue to have deeper engagements with Nepal in 2015; more on economic issues. Indian firms are the biggest investors in Nepal, accounting for about 40 percent of total approved foreign direct investments. There are about 150 operating Indian ventures in Nepal. They are engaged in manufacturing, services (banking, insurance, dry port, education and telecom), power sector and tourism industries. The investment is expected to rise in days to come with the signing of BIPPA (Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement) between Nepal and India.

Development will get priority in Nepal after the constitution is promulgated by the second Constituent Assembly. India can be the partner to Nepal’s economic development. India might increase its aid to Nepal in 2015 to challenge the growing Chinese aid in Nepal.

India, which has major stakes in the peace process and constitution-making process of Nepal, would have to make some hard choices. It has to observe the constitution-making process as it will have lasting implications on the relationship between both the countries. India should bring all the political parties together and pressurize them to draft the constitution by consensus. Constitution drafted by consensus can only bring lasting peace and stability in Nepal.

The current government in India has also added anxiety among the Nepalese who stand for a secular and republic Nepal. They fear that Modi’s government, whose leaders had openly expressed unhappiness after Nepal was declared a secular and republic country, might encourage the hard-line Hindu party and pro-Hindu forces of Nepal to fight for a Hindu Kingdom. India should not try to fiddle with these aspirations of Nepalese as it can have adverse effect on India-Nepal relations.

*Pramod Jaiswal is a SAARC doctoral fellow at the Center for South Asian Studies, JNU. He can be contacted at contributions@spsindia.in

The post Modi Government Ushered New Chapter In Nepal-India Ties In 2014 – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Alan Holdren and Elise Harris*

Archbishop Bernardito Auza – a member of the organizing committee for Pope Francis’ upcoming visit to the US – has revealed details of the proposed schedule, which includes visits to three cities.

“He would arrive on the 22nd and he would leave the evening of the 27th. It’s really a full six days, plus the travel, so it’s really one week,” Archbishop Auza told CNA/EWTN News in Manila on Jan. 18.

A Philippines native, Archbishop Auza is the Holy See’s permanent observer to the U.N. in New York and to the Organization of American States in Washington. He is back in his homeland this week participating in the events of Pope Francis’ Jan. 15-19 apostolic journey.

The archbishop spoke of a meeting held last Monday by the U.S. trip’s organizing committee appointed by Pope Francis, during which the details of the visit were discussed.

After a projected arrival to Washington, D.C. on the evening of Sept. 22, they’re proposing that Pope Francis visit the White House the following morning, where the official welcoming ceremony would take place.

Following his stop at the White House, the pontiff would go on to celebrate Mass at Washington’s Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.

The Mass, the archbishop observed, would be primarily for bishops, consecrated and religious men and women, seminarians and representatives from humanitarian and Catholic charitable organizations.

“And we might say really the highlight of the Washington visit might be his speech to the joint-meeting of Congress, so the Senate and the House of Representatives,” Archbishop Auza said. According to the proposal, Pope Francis would leave for New York City on the afternoon of the 24th.

The U.N. general-assembly would be his destination on the morning of the 25th, which is also the opening of the 3-day Post-2015 Sustainable Development Summit.

“Practically all of the heads of states and governments will be around and they will all be there on that day, so if the Pope were to finalize this visit to the U.S. that means that he would address all the heads of states and of governments, who will be sitting with their official delegations,” the archbishop explained.

“We certainly are looking forward to that,” he said, noting how everyone involved is anticipating what the Pope might say, particularly U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, who is “extremely thrilled.”

The papal address at the U.N. would take up the entire morning of Sept. 25, Archbishop Auza said. He added that proposals for what the pontiff may do afterward include an interreligious meeting, and “of course the Pope will visit St. Patrick’s (Cathedral). That’s for sure.”

The visit to the historic church wouldn’t likely mean the celebration of Mass there, the archbishop said. Mass has been proposed instead for another area of New York. He named the Madison Square Garden as a possibility.

“Our plan is not to have a huge Mass outside of Philadelphia, because the focus will really be Philadelphia, because the Pope is going to the United States for the World Meeting of Families,” he explained.

Perhaps the most “unique ingredient” of Pope Francis’ proposed schedule for New York would be an interethnic meeting with the pontiff, which is significant given the diverse ethnic background of the city.

“Ground Zero,” the site of the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001, which brought down New York City’s twin World Trade Center towers, is another foreseeable stop on the Pope’s itinerary, Archbishop Auza noted.

Benedict XVI visited the site during his 2008 visit, but the Archbishop mentioned that since then the official memorial has been inaugurated, the museum has been finished, and the metal cross found in the wreckage of the towers is there.

“But these are just proposals. At the end of February there will be the first organizational visit (from a Vatican delegation), and then we will see what we could really fill in,” the archbishop said.

Pope Francis could spend a couple of nights in New York, but “it depends” on what else comes up.

From New York the Roman Pontiff would head to Philadelphia in the early morning of the 26th as his last stop, where he is set to participate in the World Meeting of Families from Sept. 26-27.

“Philadelphia is confirmed. That’s for sure,” the archbishop observed, explaining that the two big events set to take place with the Pope are a prayer vigil on the 26th and Mass Sunday, the 27th.

There is also an encounter planned with grandparents and children, however the archbishop said he does not know whether or not the Pope will participate.

Pope Francis himself confirmed his presence at the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia during the Nov. 17-19 Humanum Conference in Rome, saying that he will attend “if God wills it.”

Besides the encounter with families, Archbishop Auza said that the Philadelphia visit will likely include “a visit either to a children’s hospital or a juvenile prison.”

Members of the organizational committee for the visit, he said, include himself; papal nuncio to the United States Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano; Cardinal Donald Wuerl, archbishop of Washington; Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley, archbishop of Boston; Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, also president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York; Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia; Msgr. Ronny Jenkins, secretary-general at the bishops’ conference, as well as a team of various secretaries and assistants.

On his Jan. 15 flight from Sri Lanka to the Philippines, Pope Francis also made the surprise announcement that he would canonize the founder of California’s first missions, Blessed Junipero Serra.

When asked whether or not the Pope’s itinerary for his U.S. trip would include a visit to California for the canonization, Archbishop Auza said that although it would be the ideal place, the state will most likely not be on the agenda.

“I think he may do that in Washington,” he said, noting how there is a statue of Bl. Serra in the National Statuary Hall of the Capitol building, honoring him as one of the founders of California.

The pontiff would most likely preside over “what they call a brief canonization, not the formal solemn canonization,” he said.

On a final note, Archbishop Auza spoke of the possibility that the Pope would go to Mexico as part of his trip to the U.S., saying that “they might skip Mexico this time because it becomes a very, very long (trip).”

The pontiff might make another visit to Latin America, the archbishop noted, although he did not know when that would be.

“So that’s more or less the plan. It’s a plan, we’ll see how it will pan out.”

In addition to being Catholic News Agency’s Rome bureau chief, Alan Holdren is also the Rome correspondent for EWTN News Nightly.

The post Details Of Proposal For Pope Francis’ US Visit Revealed appeared first on Eurasia Review.

As an earnest researcher and a person of avid interest in Kashmir sociology, I keep interacting with my fellow Kashmiris – both inside and outside Kashmir – to take cognizance of their views on the current situation prevailing in this sylvan vale.

While talking to youths in a few group discussions on the themes of ‘Thinking Kashmir’, ‘Is Kashmir growing’, ‘Kashmir’s Young Voices” etc, one comes across a varied set of propositions and sometimes confusing, narrow, biased and conservative thought processes. A large number of youth (though not substantial), directly brand the entire Kashmir issue as an Islamic issue and desire its redressal to live as an Islamic state, even some of them brazenly (mis)quote verses of the holy Quran to substantiate their emotional arguments and religio-political rhetoric. They also believe that Kashmiris are subjected to Zulm (oppression) by the statecraft and to them striving for Azadi (freedom), is synchronous with getting rid of the Zalim (oppressor)!

Though much is yet to be set right in the system, however these pseudo-theological connotations of the young people and their motivations aim is to paint the whole idea of the Kashmir issue as if it were a religious one, which it most definitely is not!

I also met a group of young teachers in a school in south Kashmir a few months ago; most of them abuse the concept of modernity and believe that this very modernity is their enemy and also treat the West for being responsible for all the contemporary evils on the globe. I owe this drastic (mis)understanding to our faulty education system and lack of reading habits and intense motivation of the vulnerable. On the vital Kashmir issue, they even ignore the voices of the minority like those of other communities in Jammu and Kashmir and many times feel justified with in expressing bias and exclusivist rhetoric. Even the voices of the Kashmiri Muslims living in frontier areas do not matter to most of these such self-styled analysts.

The other majority of youth, though somewhat in a similar tune, talk about the need for efforts to change the mainstream perception (of being Indian) among Kashmiri youth and give credit to the whole concept of Tehreek (Movement) that formally started in 1989. They laud the same Tehreek, however argue simultaneously that this very Tehreek was initiated very hurriedly without a proper designing and methodology and that is why it is still lacking any future direction. These young people thus ignore the civilian killings and violence perpetrated by non-state actors (NSA’s) during times of turbulence and brand all bloodshed and devastation merely as sacrifices by the people.

This makes me pause to wonder as to how we can ever brand the killing/murder/deliberate torture of people by forces or other violent elements, as sacrifices.

The same thing appears to also be happening in Pakistan where even VIP’s are brutally killed and later branded as Shaheed. The question is, were those people really willing (the ones who made such so-called sacrifices), whereas actually their victimization is being legitimized now. Some youth even hail the contribution of the last few (devastating) summer uprisings (2008-2010) and believe that the uprisings worked in the favor of Azadi and have transformed a mélange of motivated minds back to the sentiment of Azadi due to the oppression and killings by the forces.

The fact remains that Kashmiri’s were subjected to torture by all forces, whether state or non-state actors, and people who identify themselves with the Azadi loving brigade, treat the forced victimization of people as sacrifices, while the mainstream treats it a collateral damage (ye sab hota rehta hai ideology). The cruel fact remains that under the shadow of the gun, all stakeholders in the conflict and the entire valley faced the brunt of violence and suffered at the hands of all.

Another segment of the youth argues that Kashmir needs a psychological transformation among the young people so that we can transform those minds who do not identify themselves with the freedom sentiment either fully or partially. “Ab Ek Naya Rujhaan Ban Raha Hai Azadi Ka”, (a new thinking for freedom is developing now), says a student in an emotional gesture. Some more voices, while criticizing and rubbishing the arguments of other shout, “What exactly has our so-called separatist leadership done so far? The plain and simple answer is “nothing”. We are in an utter leadership crisis, had it not been so, we would have achieved freedom a long time back.”

A smiling voice in the middle of the discussion utters, “I have to be aware about things around, I need to know what is right and wrong, why should I follow some leader blindly, it is not necessary to follow leaders, I am a leader of my own self.”

What I make out from all these emphatic emotional outbursts is that a small chunk of youth is fed up with the hollow slogans and have discarded any leadership or their ideologies, while a substantial number of youth greatly identify themselves with the freedom sentiment, but are not happy with the separatist leadership.

I came across some voices who believe that ‘Our Being Muslim’ is actually our problem, otherwise America (USA) and the other big world powers would have pressurized India to liberate Kashmir.

On inquiring whether the Kashmir issue is all about Jihad and a fight for the sake of Islam, many of them seem to be sure of that, but most of the time they are contradicted their own statements when talking of Azadi for all citizens! This contradiction reflects upon the fact that there is rampant confusion in the understanding the true lexicon of the conflict itself and even the youth who volubly articulate about secession, are not clear about what they exactly want and how they envision the future of Kashmir.

That said, there is another section of the youth that does not totally subscribe to the radical Azadi sentiment and its solution through the barrel of the gun; they, instead, believe education is the real weapon to liberate oneself from the shackles of slavery and oppression. They feel the fight or chaos is all an outcome of a paucity of the “feel secure psyche” and once the “feel secure psyche” and human dignity is restored, one is automatically Azaad (free).

A gentleman in the middle of the group stands up and cries louder, “stop this emotional stuff, we need some substance to talk upon, we need some solid arguments, we need to fight the oppressors’ arguments with strong and equally valid arguments only, we need to fight their literature with authentic counter literature only, the gun has destroyed us, books will liberate us”. He goes on with his tirade and even maintains, “One feels ashamed to see our leaders, both mainstream and others, representing the Kashmir issue or problems thereof, on TV shows or news channels. What do they say? Nothing, except for some broken English and emotions and some of them even abuse the anchors and display their immature selves”.

But a young student, interrupting him yet again, starts reciting Quranic verses (perhaps knowing that none of us know the meaning), trying to justify the need for Jihad in the contemporary era of tyranny.

What I could gather from both the outbursts was that two extremes exist at the same time; a category of youth in their thirties wants to represent Kashmir and its woes via ample knowledge, sound arguments, inclusivity, and clarity of thought and emergence of genuine voices without any rhetoric. They feel education is a tool to fight the oppressor. But another category of youth in their late twenties, are highly volatile and manipulate religion, misinterpret religious commands and are full of emotions and hatred for everyone, except people of their own brigade.

A student sitting in the corner refers to the devastating Arab Spring as a big change maker and aspires for a Kashmir Spring without even admitting the mess and fallout of the self-same Arab Spring in all the post-pseudo revolution states.

During all these discussion, a small group of youth almost utters nothing, but smiles at the discussants. On asking why they don’t say anything, they argue that thinking of a peaceful Kashmir is nothing but a utopian dream because it will never be so. On further inquiry, they open up saying that we label it badly as a religious issue, which it is not, we dream of Pakistan, we dream of referendum, sometimes demand a right to self determination, but again we, the same people, participate in all elections, and even get elected as Panchs and Sarpanchs ,etc, so it is nothing but a fight for employment, Bijli, Pani and Sadak, fight for opportunities to govern and get access to resources. “We are still with the false belief that the world is looking at Kashmir and the Kashmir issue is being seriously pursued by Pakistan, UN, USA and other powers. We are living in complete ignorance and overlook Pakistan’s internal chaos and its priorities like it is so keen to grant MFN status to India, its Taliban mess and burning frontiers, etc,. We ignore healthy US and India relations; we ignore UN and its cold response on the K-Issue now.”

Listening to their talk, another group of youth, apparently of the die-hard hardliner mentality argue, “suppose all these issues like unemployment, Bijli, Pani and Sadak are addressed (though such problems will prevail for ever here), do you guys believe that Kashmir will be all peaceful and quiet for all times to come?”

This argument shocked me also though I was merely moderating the discussion. I realized that something has seriously gone wrong with the people’s hopes and aspirations and that is why such a negative collective mindset has developed.

I owe such a mess to continuous crisis mishandling and civilian killings, closure of important HR violation cases like nameless graves, Shopian case, Pathribal, Kunan, falf widows, army of Orphans, etc,. I realized that the scars of suffering and injustice meted out to the common people, have led to such a mentality. Kashmir has, though, slowly produced an alienated social collective, a hopeless society and produced a radical hope — the hope of an oppression-free Kashmir in the future.

When I was leaving the group and wishing them all goodbye, a young boy told me,” Sir Tehreek Dubti Zaroor Hai Lakin Marti Nahi, 200 Saal Baad Hi Sahi, HamKo Azadi to Milegi” (a Movement though is suppressed but it hardly dies, even after 200 years we will achieve freedom).I realized the earlier indoctrination of the younger lot that has now turned in to a spirit of radical thought process and is now reaching its peak. I also realized that for people the Kashmir issue is a long haul that will continue perhaps for many more decades to come.

Most of the Kashmiri youth want a leader like Geelani Saheb to fight for Kashmir’s freedom. One gentleman even told me, “I wish Geelani Saheb had been in his early forties at the moment”. When I inquired what he meant by that, he said, “Can you imagine if the head of the family (Father) dies when his children are too small and helpless, what happens to his family? They turn orphans and the family with all its dreams, collapses”.

A significant chunk of youth hardly consider the Jammu perspective or Ladakh opinions as valid, and for Jammu and Ladakh’s different opinions about the conflict situation in Kashmir, a chunk of Kashmiris paint the whole struggle as Islamic, giving hardly any consideration to the aspirations of other people and other regions of the state.

From talking to the youth in the Kashmir Valley and outside, I learned many things, which perhaps I couldn’t have conceptualized on my own. As a Kashmiri, who has been living outside Kashmir for many years now, I realized that dissent is still prevalent, especially among the younger generation. The dissenting voices have increased though suppressed most of the time now.

The question that struck my mind was ‘Why So’ and who is at fault? Forces, local police, crisis mishandlings by the security apparatus, the impact of last summer’s unrests and bloodshed on the psyche of the youth psyche – what? I also understood that a conflict generation has grown up who, though they do not subscribe much to the separatist camps or follow them staunchly, except for the ailing Mr Geelani, their psyche reflects that Kashmir is in a mess and it needs a solution. They are conscious of oppression and have developed a sense of alienation and simultaneously internalized hatred against the regime while living in the conflict and treating themselves the children of conflict. Most of them have even developed certain security phobias as well seeing the intolerance shown against Kashmiri students outside (attack on and expulsion of Students in Meerut, attacks on Kashmiri students in Rajasthan, etc). Some of them believe that Kashmiris are insecure everywhere outside their own territory; others argue that they feel insecure everywhere, even at home. Some believe intelligence agencies are after every Kashmiri and feel alienated both inside and outside Kashmir. The time has come when we need to think seriously about Kashmiri youth and need to restore the “ feel secure” psyche to them, think for their livelihood, education, stability and dignity.

Last Word

While we must never judge the entire Kashmir situation today by such small group discussions and generalize the total situation or collective mindset based on such a few voices, at the micro level one definitely gets a perspective, a perspective of a hijacked psyche, a new conflict socialization that has made an impact, a new motivation among youth that they feel is true, a growing conflict generation, who feel alienated by the system, who have developed a culture of hatred against the other, a culture of dissent against the system, a new political culture shaping a new but an unstable Kashmir.

I also noticed that the most of the present day Kashmir youth are well-informed on Kashmir. They have also developed an articulate critical sense. They blame separatists for not handling the previous unrests properly. They blame the state for acute extremism against the protesting youth. They also curse the absence of a dynamic separatist leadership. Reading the psyche of most of such youth clusters, I hardly found any idea of the aspiration for reconciliation in Kashmir or any peace building desire.

Learning from listening to such youth clusters I myself proved one of my earlier hypotheses wrong, i.e. ‘youth are being motivated or indoctrinated’. This was true earlier during the violent conflict, but the youth now are self-motivated, nobody is re-socializing them or trying to induct them into the culture of turmoil. Perhaps they don’t see any light at the end of the tunnel and are hopeless with their ideology of a political utopia. Perhaps nothing substantial has been done for them and their welfare. The question is what makes even educated youth join militant ranks? Certainly the system is full of flaws. Somewhere it is mishandling sensitivities, excessive regulation or torture of innocents or deviants while somewhere it is a lack of mass welfare policies and somewhere else it is increasing corruption, waywardness, discrimination, unemployment, motivation, etc,.

Also both internal and outer factors of political instability (like police/military atrocities in the valley and Syria, Iraq, Gaza happenings) are casting a deep imprint on Kashmiri youth.

The need of the hour is to have extensive field work on the conflict situation and workout some effective paradigms of reconciliation in Kashmir. Furthermore, interaction must be enhanced at the grassroots level by significant stakeholders to know the field in Kashmir and the other perspectives and aspirations of masses, especially of the vulnerable youth. A public dialogue policy must be initiated and unheard voices given genuine space. The youth of Kashmir need sympathetic listeners where they can express themselves freely and without any fear. The genuine woes of people need to be sincerely addressed and we should seriously ponder over the already hardened and growing conflict generations of Kashmir. Peace building efforts need to be enhanced; mishandlings checked to zero, zero tolerance towards HR violations and more infrastructures for education, employment and development is the need of the hour. Under the Modi regime, the entire Kashmir region is pinning high hopes of the return of the peace and previous glory. The new establishment at the centre has to deliver to compensate for the horrible wrongs done against the masses for decades.

Views expressed are personal and based on his field visits in Kashmir and informal discussions with Kashmiri youth both inside and outside Kashmir. Mail at adfer.syed@gmail.com].

The post Kashmir: A Radical Hope – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The World Economic Forum launched Sunday the Global Strategic Foresight Community, a new multi-stakeholder peer network aimed at positively shaping future industry, regional and global agendas by identifying emerging or underappreciated global shifts and bringing them to the attention of decision-makers.

The community will consist initially of 32 established thought leaders drawn from leading organizations in the private, public and civil society sectors. The focus of the community’s work over the coming two years will be to identify and examine global shifts in today’s rapidly changing world. “The shifts that our members are focusing on were identified for the potential impact they could have on the future, and because of a sense that, by raising them today, we can maximize our prospects for leveraging their potential benefits,” said Trudi Lang, Director, Strategic Foresight, World Economic Forum.

The task of the community in its first two years will be to assess the shifts in terms of how and where they challenge current mental models, how they interact to enforce, balance, or counter each other, and how they might provoke systemic change across social, economic, environmental, technological and political systems. All insights generated will be shared with stakeholders of the World Economic Forum, including governments, businesses and civil society organizations, with the aim of improving leaders’ ability to take informed decisions.

“Broadening our understanding of what could occur, thinking the unthinkable, imagining options offers the opportunity to shape the future in ways we deem desired and meaningful. By taking a long-term, proactive approach we can adapt to our future, rather than simply be reactive,” said Kristel Van der Elst, Senior Director, Strategic Foresight, World Economic Forum.

The post World Economic Forum Launches Global Strategic Foresight Community appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Sri Lanka President Maithreepala Sirisena says he is dedicated to build a prosperous and peaceful country while fulfilling pledges given to the general public at the presidential election.

The government elected by the public will always seek the advice and the blessings from the Maha Sangha to fulfill the obligations and responsibilities it has to the people, the President said.

Addressing a religious ceremony held at the Kelaniya Raja Maha Vihara Temple Saturday to bless the new government and the new leaders as well as the members, the President said the government’s hope is to build a prosperous country with a strong economy.

Sirisena said the country will be developed with the national and religious reconciliation.

“The people have understood the need of a national government established with all parties. Now it has become a reality,” the President said.

Sirisena noted that the people have entrusted the responsibilities of the country to him and assured those responsibilities will be fulfilled correctly under the guidance and advice of the Maha Sanga.

President Sirisena said he will take every action for the betterment for the people and the Buddha Sasana.

The President of the Dayaka Sabha of the Temple, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe said measures will be taken to govern the country in a righteous manner.

The Anunayake of the Malwathu chapter Venerable Divul Kumbure Vimala Damma Anunayake Thero making an Anusasana speaking at the occasion said no room will be left for anyone to sabotage the government’s efforts taken with unity and brotherhood to eradicate the poverty in the country. The Thero has blessed the new government for the efforts to develop the country.

The post Sirisena Pledges To Develop Sri Lanka With National And Religious Reconciliation appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Alok Bansal*

2014 ended with India-Pakistan relations hitting a new low, there have been allegations of cross border firings and even worse, Indian security forces have alleged that there have been attempts by Pakistan to push in terrorists through the sea routes, a replication of Mumbai.

As the year was coming to a close, a boat carrying suspicious cargo was intercepted off Gujarat coast and destroyed itself when challenged to stop. Sources have claimed that the crew on board had been in touch with Pakistan’s security forces. It appears as though the ties have hit rock bottom with the year coming to an end.

India-Pakistan relations have gone through a rollercoaster during 2014, which began with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif firmly in saddle, with a new Army Chief and Chief Justice. Like all other political leaders in Pakistan, Nawaz knew that Pakistan’s salvation lies in good relations with India. It would also help him to reduce the salience of the Pakistan Army, in the body politic of the state. He accordingly tried hard to improve trade relations with India.

The first two months witnessed lot of discussions on trade, including importing electricity through Amritsar. To bypass the terminology “Most Favoured Nation”- offensive to hardliners, a new term Non-discriminatory Market Access (NDMA) was coined and it appeared as if NDMA would be granted to India by Feb 15. However, the army ensured that this step, which had the potential to permanently change the dimension of India-Pakistan relations, never came about.

It instigated farmers and certain sections of the industry like pharmaceuticals, engineering and automobiles, to protest against granting market access to India. Army sponsored columnists started projecting that trade could be catastrophic for Pakistan. Even a benign offer of exporting electricity through Amritsar was seen as devious machination of India and was projected as though it would enable India to tinker with the water flow of the Western rivers. In the agrarian heartland of Punjab, it became an extremely emotional issue.

A huge movement was created by the army through proxies, who talked of not only non-tariff barriers (NTB) in India, but also about hidden subsidies to Indian farmers. Although Indian authorities gave an assurance that all NTBs that were specific to Pakistan would be removed, it did not cut any ice. Finally as the elections in India were announced, the whole exercise went into a limbo as it was felt that negotiations during elections were meaningless. Moreover, granting concessions to Pakistan, while contesting elections did not make political sense.

The elections in India gave an unprecedented mandate in favour of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and a government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power. The new government invited the heads of states/government of all South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) states to the prime minister’s swearing-in ceremony. Accordingly, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was invited and he rightfully responded by attending the ceremony and gave a positive stimulus to the emerging bonhomie by rejecting a call by the Kashmiri separatists to meet him. In keeping with this prevailing atmosphere of trust, it was decided that the foreign secretaries of India and Pakistan should meet in Islamabad to lay a platform for reviving the composite dialogue process, which had been stalled for two years.

However, this cordiality created problems in Pakistan, as the army realised it could lead to the army’s political marginalisation. Consequently, it worked on a two-pronged strategy to unravel this emerging bonhomie. Firstly, it started firing across the Line of Control (LoC), which elicited a stronger retaliation. Secondly, it campaigned to weaken Nawaz and managed to get Tahir-ul-Qadri, a Pakistani politician and Islamic scholar, and Imran Khan, chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, to lay siege to Islamabad with their followers. Nawaz, who was cornered, had to seek support from the army to survive. The army did provide him crutches, but forced him to sing its tune. It asked the envoy in New Delhi to meet the separatist leaders of ‘Hurriyat Conference’ just before the Foreign Secretary level talks, despite instructions from the Indian government not to do so; thereby forcing India to call off the talks.

In the UN General Assembly, a beleaguered Nawaz read the army’s script, wherein he tried to raise the Kashmir question. The relationship consequently went into a deep freeze. Meanwhile, the firings continued unabated not only on the LoC, but also across the International Border in Jammu and Kashmir. The NDA government in India, which had come to power riding on a strong nationalist sentiment, had to give the security forces the autonomy to retaliate strongly.

The ice was eventually broken when the two prime ministers shook hands during the SAARC summit in Kathmandu in November last year, but there has been no further progress in bilateral ties. The terrorist attack on a school in Peshawar led to widespread sympathy for the victims across the border and there was genuine outpouring of grief. All educational institutions prayed for the departed souls and maintained two minutes silence. Even the Indian parliament expressed sympathy for the bereaved families.

There was a general perception that this could lead to better India-Pakistan relations, as Pakistan would realise the dangers of harbouring terrorists. For a change the rift between the Islamist extremists and the army appeared permanent and strikes were launched on the terrorist hideouts. The government also terminated its moratorium on death penalty and hanged many terrorists, who had been awarded the sentence long ago.

For the first time, the Nawaz government overtly expressed its desire to eliminate all terrorists and the army conceded that there were no good or bad Taliban. It appeared that Pakistan would eliminate or at least incarcerate those who were responsible for the Mumbai and other incidents of terror in India. However, Indians were stunned when courts in Pakistan granted bail to Zakiur Rahman Lakhvi, the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attack. Although the authorities arrested him again in another case and an appeal was filed in the Supreme Court against the bail, the incident created serious apprehensions in India. To compound the matter, firing across the border and LoC in Jammu and Kashmir intensified.

At a time when Pakistan is in no position to fight a war with India and Army General Raheel Sharif has made elimination of all Taliban his avowed objective, the firing on the LoC shows fissures within the Pakistan army. It appears there are sections within the army who are unwilling to go along with the army chief. Consequently, firings across the LoC have resumed, as these elements realise that the Indian security forces will respond in strength and this could aggravate the situation along Pakistan’s eastern front, forcing it to halt operations in Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and shift troops to the east. To create further fissures within the armed forces, Adnan Rashid, a former Air Force personnel who is part of the Pakistani Taliban, recently released a video wherein he has exhorted the Pakistani soldiers not to obey their officers. As an added incentive, he has promised them complete amnesty if they joined Taliban.

The future of India-Pakistan relations will continue to be decided by GHQ in Rawalpindi, but the recent incidents have shown that until and unless the troops deployed along the border are reined in, the relations cannot improve. The detection of a boat off Gujarat, which destroyed itself, leads to suspicion that it was either carrying terrorists or arms for them. This shows that there are elements within Pakistan who want to attack India, with or without the approval of their superiors.

The Pakistan Army, despite its outer façade is no longer a monolith and in days to come could show further fissures. Consequently, there could be increase in firings across the LoC and International Border. The two ‘Sharifs’ in charge of Pakistan’s destiny need to improve relations with India by allowing trade and unilateral reduction of forces across LoC and International Border, if they really want to have any chance of success against the Taliban.

*Alok Bansal is executive director, South Asian Institute for Strategic Affairs (SAISA). He can be reached at contributions@spsindia.in

The post India-Pakistan Relations: Hostage Of Rawalpindi GHQ – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Boaventura de Sousa Santos*

The heinous nature of the crime against the journalists and cartoonists from Charlie Hebdo makes it extremely difficult to offer a cool-headed analysis of what is entailed in this barbaric act, its context and precedents, as well as its impact and future repercussions. Still an analysis is urgently needed, lest we fan the flames of a fire that one of these days may well hit our children’s schools, our homes, our institutions and our consciences. Here are some thoughts towards that analysis.

THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM: TORTURE AND DEMOCRACY

One cannot draw a direct connection between the Charlie Hebdo tragedy and the fight against terrorism waged by the US and its allies since September 11, 2001. It is a known fact, however, that the West’s extreme aggressiveness has caused the death of many thousands of innocent civilians (mostly Muslims) and inflicted astounding levels of violence and torture on young Muslims against whom all suspicions of wrongdoing are speculative at best, as attested to by the report recently submitted to the US Congress. It is also well known that many young Islamic radicals claim that their radicalisation stems from their anger at all that unredressed violence.

In view of this, we must stop and consider whether the best way to bring the spiral of violence to a halt is to pursue the same policies that have driven it so far, as has now become all too evident. The French response to the attack shows that democratic, constitutional normalcy is now suspended and an undeclared state of siege is in place; that this type of criminal should be shot dead rather than incarcerated and brought to justice, and that such behaviour in no way seems to contradict Western values. We have entered a phase of low-intensity civil war. Who in Europe stands to gain from it? Certainly not the Podemos party in Spain, nor Greece’s Syriza.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

The freedom to express oneself is a precious commodity, but it, too, has its limits, and the truth is that the overwhelming majority of those limits are imposed by those who advocate limitless freedom whenever their own freedom is curtailed. The examples of such limits are legion: in England a demonstrator can get herself arrested for saying that David Cameron has blood on his hands; in France Islamic women are not allowed to wear the hijab; in 2008, cartoonist Siné (Maurice Sinet) was fired from Charlie Hebdo for writing an allegedly anti-Semitic article. What this all means is that limits do exist; it’s just that they vary for different interest groups. Take Latin America, for example, where the major media, which are controlled by oligarchic families and by big capital, are the first to cry out for unrestrained freedom of expression so that they can throw abuse at the progressive governments and silence all the good that these governments have done to promote the well-being of the poor.

It seems that Charlie Hebdo knew no limits when it came to insulting Muslims, although many of its cartoons were racist propaganda and contributed to feed the Islamophobic, anti-immigrant wave now sweeping over France and Europe in general. Besides many cartoons in which the Prophet is shown in pornographic poses, one in particular was very much explored by the far right. It depicted a group of pregnant Muslim women presented as Boko Haram sex slaves, their hands resting on their belly bump, screaming “Hands off our welfare benefits”. At one stroke, the cartoon stigmatised Islam, women and the welfare state. As was to be expected, over the years the largest Muslim community in Europe saw this editorial line as offensive. On the other hand, however, its condemnation of this barbaric crime was immediate. We must therefore reflect on the contradictions and asymmetries of the lived values some of us believe to be universal.

TOLERANCE AND ‘WESTERN VALUES’

The context of the crime is dominated by two currents of opinion, none of which is conducive to building an inclusive, intercultural Europe. The more radical of the two is openly Islamophobic and anti-immigrant. These are the hardliners of the far right all across Europe and of the right wherever it feels threatened in upcoming elections (as is the case of Greece’s Antonis Samara). For this current of thought, the enemies of European civilization are among ‘us’. They hate us, they wield our passports, and the situation cannot be solved unless we get rid of them. The anti-immigrant overtones are unmistakable. The other current is that of tolerance. These people are very different from us, they are a burden, but we have to “put up with them”, for, if nothing else, they are useful; we should do it, however, only if they behave moderately and assimilate our values.

But what are “Western values”? After many centuries of atrocities committed in the name of such values both within and outside Europe – from colonial violence to the two world wars – a degree of caution and much reflection are in order about what those values are and also about why, depending on the context, now some of them, now others, tend to take precedence. For example, no one questions the value of freedom, but the same cannot be said for equality and fraternity, the two values underlying the welfare state that prevailed in democratic Europe after World War II. In recent years, however, social protection – which used to ensure high levels of social integration – began to be questioned by conservative politicians and is now seen as an unaffordable luxury by the parties of the so-called “arc of governance”. Isn’t it true that the social crisis caused by the erosion of social protection and by growing unemployment, especially among youth, is like fuel to the flames of radicalism found among the younger generations, who, in addition to unemployment, are the victims of ethnic and religious discrimination?

A CLASH OF FANATICISMS, NOT OF CIVILIZATIONS

What we are facing now is not a clash of civilizations, because Christian and Islamic civilization share the same roots to begin with. What we have before us is a clash of fanaticisms, even if some of them are just too close to us to be recognized as such. History shows that many fanaticisms and the way in which they clashed were related to economic and political interests, which in any event were never beneficial to those who suffered most at the hands of fanatics. This is the case, in Europe and its areas of influence, of the Crusades and the Inquisition, the evangelisation of colonial populations, the religious wars and the conflict in Northern Ireland. Outside Europe, a religion as peaceable as Buddhism has legitimised the slaughter of many thousands of members of Sri Lanka’s Tamil minority; in 2003, Hindu fundamentalists also slaughtered the Muslim populations of Gujarat, and the likelihood of their rise to power as a result of President Modi’s recent victory makes one fear the worst. It is also in the name of religion that Israel is carrying on with its unpunished, ethnic cleansing of Palestine and that the so-called Islamic Emirate is slaughtering Muslim populations in Syria and in Iraq.

Could it be that the defense of unrestrained secularism in an intercultural Europe, where many people do not identify with this particular value, is itself a form of extremism? Do extremisms oppose one another? Do they interconnect? What relationships are there between the jihadists and the Western secret services? How come the jihadists of the Islamic Emirate, who are now seen as terrorists, used to be freedom fighters when they were fighting against Gaddafi and Assad? How is it that the Islamic Emirate is funded by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey, all of them allies of the West? This being said, the fact remains that, over the last decade at least, the overwhelming majority of victims of all fanaticisms (including Islamic fanaticism) belonged to non-fanatical Muslim populations.

THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE

The absolute, unconditional revulsion experienced by Europeans in the face of these deaths should make us wonder why they do not feel the same kind of revulsion in the face of a similar, if not much higher, number of innocent deaths caused by conflicts that, at bottom, may have something to do with the Charlie Hebdo tragedy. On that very same day, 37 young people were killed in a bomb attack in Yemen. Last summer, the Israeli invasion caused the death of 2,000 Palestinians, including about 1,500 civilians and 500 children. In Mexico, 102 journalists have been murdered since 2000 for speaking up for freedom of the press, and in November 2014, 43 young people were killed in Ayotzinapa, also in Mexico. Surely the difference in those reactions cannot be based on the notion that the life of white Europeans, coming from a Christian culture, is worth more than the lives of non-Europeans or of Europeans of another colour, whose culture originates in different religions or in other regions. Is it because the latter live at a remove from the Europeans and are less familiar to them?

On the other hand, does the Christian injunction to love one’s neighbour provide for such distinctions? Is it because the big media and the political leaders in the West tend to trivialise the suffering inflicted on those others, or even to demonise them to the point of making us think that they had it coming?

* Boaventura de Sousa Santos is a Professor of Sociology at the School of Economics, University of Coimbra, Protugal. Sousa Santos has taught in various universities including Yale, Wisconsin-Madison Law School and University of Warwick.

The post Charlie Hebdo: Some Tough Quandaries – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Preet Malik*

There is little doubt that the government and public opinion take India as an important player in Myanmar’s designs for its future. However, there are unfortunately gaps between expectation and what so far has been promised or delivered by India.

It is also fairly clear that the foreign policy establishment in India has come to recognise the importance to India of Myanmar as a strategic and security partner. However, before making an assessment of the present state of play on the India-Myanmar relationship it is worth pointing out that the Indian leadership has yet to understand the nature and direction that the relationship deserves.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has undoubtedly provided a new dynamism and sense of purpose to Indian diplomacy and has displayed a deft personal touch in establishing a high level of personal relationship with many of the world leaders. However, he failed to recognise the strategic and security importance to India of Myanmar as a neighbour that also serves as the land bridge to Southeast Asia and the Pacific region. Modi failed to recognise these aspects when he failed to invite President Thein Sein along with other neighbouring countries to his swearing-in ceremony. He again failed to attach priority to the relations with Myanmar that warranted his making a specific bilateral visit to that country on par with what he has shown in the case of Nepal and Bhutan.

During the November 2014 visit that Modi made to capital Nay Pyi Taw he had a 45-minute meeting with Thein Sein on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summit. The meeting was routine in nature, restating the areas of cultural, connectivity and commercial ties. On the cultural front the reference was to enabling Myanmar scholars’ entrance to the Nalanda University, thus reiterating the importance of the Buddhist connection.

On connectivity there was a review of the progress of the Trilateral Highway and a reference to the establishment of industrial SEZs and the desire to establish a bus service between Manipur and Mandalay.

As far as India’s commercial involvement is concerned it has been perfunctory in nature despite the clear areas of advantage to Indian business entities where investment would pay off. A case in point is the paper and pulp industry, an area where Myanmar has a rich raw material resource base that would enable India to cover the deficit in meeting domestic demand. The private sector is holding back on investing in Myanmar as it is uncertain over the outcome unless it is carried out on the back of concessional financing commitments from the government of India as well as a risk related assurance policy. It feels that this is essential for it to take the investment plunge into Myanmar.

The progress on the Kaladan Multi-modal project was reviewed. This project has been inordinately delayed and still awaits a decision on establishing a longer connecting road with Mizoram. This project is of significance as it would provide connectivity to the north eastern states to both India and the outside world and would help in granting substance to the economy of the region.

The main stumbling block to the timely and cost competitive completion of Indian projects in Myanmar lies at the doors of bureaucratic red tape and the hitherto dependence on the public sector to carry out both the definition and the construction of these projects. The main culprit is the finance ministry that interferes at every stage delaying the release of funds despite the approval and budgetary clearance for the projects. These delays have resulted in India earning the reputation of one that holds promise but fails on delivery. The solution lies in the setting up of a monitoring system involving the Ministry of External Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Office that would help cut out administrative and financial delays.

Another aspect that is of immense importance for bilateral relations is for swift progression of the implementation of the Border Area Development Agreement. This requires involvement by India, on a cross border basis, in the establishment of institutions and programmes in the areas of education, healthcare, and communications while simultaneously developing the requisite industrial base covering areas like agriculture, food processing, irrigation, and a timber-based industry. The political commitment has to be translated to development on the ground.

The security issue that confronts both countries and where progress would be of mutual benefit requires that much greater attention be provided to the socio-economic projects in the border areas with financial, technological and institutional support being extended on a large scale by India. The aim has to be to ensure that development and the requisite institutional support works towards providing a secure future to the people on both sides of the border areas where they recognise that the state machinery is working to guarantee the future of the people and their welfare.

This is the only way in which the state machinery would be strengthened to bring a sense of purpose to the people and remove the need for them to indulge in insurgency. It has to be recognised that if the material needs of the people and sense of a secure future prevails then the need for the people to seek their rights outside the present associations fades away.

To conclude, the security aspect and cooperation on the issue has to lie at the forefront of relations between the two countries. The fact that the mastermind of the Assam massacre is operating out of Myanmar’s Kachin State only places stress on this issue. What needs to be kept in mind is that China utilises the Wa and the Kokang tribals to provide military equipment and training to Indian insurgents.

The strategic value of Myanmar is of great importance and significance to India and a close relationship with that country is an imperative. Hopefully Modi shall soon recognise the centrality of Myanmar to India and attach the importance that the relationship requires.

*Amb. Preet Malik was a former Ambassador of India to Myanmar. He can be reached at preet.malik@preetmalik.in

The post India And Myanmar: A Relationship That Needs Nurturing – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Noorrahman Rahmani*

One hundred days after Mohammad Ashraf Ghani came to power, Afghans feel betrayed and dissatisfied with his performance so far. They say the compromises their new president has made could be devastating for Afghanistan and the future of its fledgling democracy.

Most of the several dozen Kabul residents interviewed across the capital say that in his first 100 days in office, the new president has done the opposite of what he promised before he was elected.

As part of his election bid, Ghani set out an ambitious programme of actions he would take during his first 100 days. But as that expired, a web-based initiative called Sad Roz, which means “100 Days”, set up to monitor the Ghani administration’s performance, said that of the 110 election promises, only four had been fulfilled, 23 were in progress, and work on the remaining 83 had not even started.

“During campaigning, he said he would not create a ‘corporation’ where ministerial jobs and other senior posts were distributed to various political factions as was the case during his predecessor’s time; instead, ministers would be chosen based on merit and qualifications,” said Shapur Ahmad, 27, a Kabul university student. “But the recent announcement of the cabinet members, which took him more than 100 days, showed that he’s worse than his predecessor in terms of bringing unqualified people and those associated with war criminals to power.

“He’s basically proved he is a liar, and no one is going to believe him in future.”

Another resident of the capital, Samandar Khan, 40, said that “[Hamed] Karzai, too, made compromises, but at least he was the only person leading the country. Unfortunately, our current government is led by two leaders – himself [Ashraf Ghani] and the chief executive officer. The first thing he did during his swearing-in ceremony was to breach the constitution by signing a decree appointing his rival Abdullah Abdullah as chief executive officer, hence halving his own duties and responsibilities, counter to current Afghan laws.”

In Khan’s view, Ghani is a good economist but not a politician, and in a country like Afghanistan, the job of being president requires someone with a knowledge of politics.

“He hasn’t been able to do anything during these 100 days,” he said. “Corruption within the government has significantly increased, as all the ministries have been led by acting ministers during this period, the security situation has further deteriorated, he was unable to announce a cabinet during this time, and he dismissed a lot of experienced and qualified civil servants.”

Another interviewee Safia, 30, a mother of two, agreed that there had been no positive changes to people’s lives.

“I am truly disappointed at the choice I have made. I voted for Ghani thinking he would change Afghanistan, since before his candidacy, he was once declared the world’s second best thinker by an international organisation,” she said. “It took him and his rival Abdullah… months to agree on the results of the June 2014 vote. They ultimately agreed after intervention by the international community, particularly the United States and its Secretary of State, which led to the creation of the current unity government with two heads. It will take them months to agree a single strategy or decision. The government’s inability to announce the cabinet during the 100 days is a good example of the problem of government leadership.”

According to Safia, “The delayed announcement of the poll results badly affected people’s economic circumstances. A lot of people lost their jobs, and more continue to do so.”

In the presidential election held on April 5 last year, none of the candidates gained the required 50 per cent of the vote, so it went to a second round in June between Ghani, who polled 32 per cent, and Abdullah with 45 per cent. Ghani emerged from the run-off as winner with 56 per cent of the vote, with Abdullah behind at 44 per cent. Claims of fraud were made on both sides, necessitating a total nationwide recount that delayed the declaration of a new president. Ghani was finally inaugurated on September 29.

Not all those interviewed agreed that Ghani’s deal awarding Abdullah the new post of chief executive officer was a fatal error. Some say he was forced to be flexible because he was not in a position to dispense overnight with powerful parties that have grown stronger over the past 13 years.

Abdul Qahar Jawad, a journalism lecturer at the Kabul University, believes the president was under pressure on all sides, from the international community as well as Afghan political parties.

“It is very difficult for a technocrat like Mr Ghani, who has been educated in the West and has recently returned to the country, to get rid of the political parties who still have their own small armies controlling large swathes of the country,” Jawad said. “But during his five-year term, he will need to work towards ending the culture of monopolising power among these groups. If he doesn’t, no one will trust him with a second term.”

Ghani’s spokesman Nazifullah Salarzai dismissed suggestions that his first three months had not been a success.

“Three months isn’t enough time. However, the president took some fundamental steps during his 100 days in office,” the spokesman said. “He signed two security pacts – the Bilateral Security Agreement with the United States and the Status of Forces Agreement with NATO, and he resolved the Kabul Bank case – the single biggest corruption scandal since 2001 when the Taleban regime was toppled. He represented Afghanistan at the London Conference as well as making trips to various countries including several NATO member states, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – states that can play a pivotal role in bringing peace to Afghanistan.”

The official said the reason why Ghani had been unable to form a cabinet during his first 100 days was that he needed to ensure he selected qualified individuals. “The government has been able to present a young cabinet whose performance will be evaluated by the president and parliament every six months. If they don’t perform well, decisions will be made.”

These arguments did not, however, convince critics of the president interviewed for this report.

“The Kabul Bank case was symbolic because he needed to go to the London Conference with some achievements, win more support and demonstrate that he is serious about the fight against corruption,” said Shogofa Shafiq, 24, a university student. “It is true that I voted for him and also encouraged others to vote for him. But I feel guilt for any bad things he does since I am partly responsible for him being elected president of Afghanistan.”

*Noorrahman Rahman is IWPR Country Director in Afghanistan. This article was published by IWPR at ARR Issue 508.

The post Afghans Unconvinced By Ghani, 100 Days On appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Recent scientific advances have meant that eyesight can be partially restored to those who previously would have been blind for life. However, scientists at the University of Montreal and the University of Trento have discovered that the rewiring of the senses that occurs in the brains of the long-term blind means that visual restoration may never be complete.

“We had the opportunity to study the rare case of a woman with very low vision since birth and whose vision was suddenly restored in adulthood following the implantation of a Boston Keratoprosthesis in her right eye,” explained Giulia Dormal, who led the study. “On one hand, our findings reveal that the visual cortex maintains a certain degree of plasticity – that is the capacity to change as a function of experience – in an adult person with low vision since early life. On the other, we discovered that several months after the surgery, the visual cortex had not regained full normal functioning.”

The visual cortex is the part of the brain that processes information from our eyes.

Scientists know that in cases of untreatable blindness, the occipital cortex – that is the posterior part of the brain that is normally devoted to vision – becomes responsive to sound and touch in order to compensate for the loss of vision.

“This important brain reorganization represents a challenge for people encountering eye surgery to recover vision, because the deprived and reorganized occipital cortex may not be capable of seeing anymore after having spent years in the dark,” Dormal said.

To ascertain how much of a challenge this may be, the researchers worked with the patient, a 50 year old Quebec woman. They conducted behavioral and neurophysiological measurements before and after surgery to track changes in her sight and brain anatomy, and in the way her brain responded to sights and sounds. This involved taking MRI images as she completed various visual and auditory tasks and comparing her scans with scans that had been taken from people with normal eyesight and people with untreatable blindness who had performed the same tasks.

“We show that structural and functional reorganization of occipital regions were present in this patient before surgery as a result of longstanding visual impairment, and that some reorganizations can be partially reversed by visual restoration in adulthood,” said Oliver Collignon, who supervised the research. “Because of important advances in visual restoration techniques, such findings have important clinical implications for the predictive outcome of blind individuals who are candidate to such interventions.”

The study suggests that eye surgery can lead to a positive outcome even when performed in adulthood after a life-time of profound blindness. There is however an important caveat.

“The recovery observed in the visual cortex, that is highlighted by a decrease in auditory-driven responses and by an increase in both visually-driven responses and grey matter density with time, is not total,” Dormal explained. “Indeed, auditory-driven responses were still evidenced in certain regions of the visual cortex even 7 months after surgery, and these responses overlapped with visually-driven responses. This overlap may be the reason some aspects of vision, despite having improved with time, still remained below normal range 7 months after surgery.”

The clinical implications of the research are two-fold.

“Our findings open the door to the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging before surgery as a prognostic tool for visual outcome and pave the way for the development of adapted rehabilitation programs following visual restoration,” Collignon said.

The post How Does Brain Adapt To Restoration Of Eyesight? appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The year 2014 ranks as Earth’s warmest since 1880, according to two separate analyses by NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists.

The 10 warmest years in the instrumental record, with the exception of 1998, have now occurred since 2000. This trend continues a long-term warming of the planet, according to an analysis of surface temperature measurements by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) in New York.

In an independent analysis of the raw data, also released Friday, NOAA scientists also found 2014 to be the warmest on record.

“NASA is at the forefront of the scientific investigation of the dynamics of the Earth’s climate on a global scale,” said John Grunsfeld, associate administrator for the Science Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington. “The observed long-term warming trend and the ranking of 2014 as the warmest year on record reinforces the importance for NASA to study Earth as a complete system, and particularly to understand the role and impacts of human activity.”

Since 1880, Earth’s average surface temperature has warmed by about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degrees Celsius), a trend that is largely driven by the increase in carbon dioxide and other human emissions into the planet’s atmosphere. The majority of that warming has occurred in the past three decades.

“This is the latest in a series of warm years, in a series of warm decades. While the ranking of individual years can be affected by chaotic weather patterns, the long-term trends are attributable to drivers of climate change that right now are dominated by human emissions of greenhouse gases,” said GISS Director Gavin Schmidt.

While 2014 temperatures continue the planet’s long-term warming trend, scientists still expect to see year-to-year fluctuations in average global temperature caused by phenomena such as El Niño or La Niña. These phenomena warm or cool the tropical Pacific and are thought to have played a role in the flattening of the long-term warming trend over the past 15 years. However, 2014’s record warmth occurred during an El Niño-neutral year.

“NOAA provides decision makers with timely and trusted science-based information about our changing world,” said Richard Spinrad, NOAA chief scientist. “As we monitor changes in our climate, demand for the environmental intelligence NOAA provides is only growing. It’s critical that we continue to work with our partners, like NASA, to observe these changes and to provide the information communities need to build resiliency.”

Regional differences in temperature are more strongly affected by weather dynamics than the global mean. For example, in the U.S. in 2014, parts of the Midwest and East Coast were unusually cool, while Alaska and three western states – California, Arizona and Nevada – experienced their warmest year on record, according to NOAA.

The GISS analysis incorporates surface temperature measurements from 6,300 weather stations, ship- and buoy-based observations of sea surface temperatures, and temperature measurements from Antarctic research stations. This raw data is analyzed using an algorithm that takes into account the varied spacing of temperature stations around the globe and urban heating effects that could skew the calculation. The result is an estimate of the global average temperature difference from a baseline period of 1951 to 1980.

NOAA scientists used much of the same raw temperature data, but a different baseline period. They also employ their own methods to estimate global temperatures.

The post 2014 Warmest Year In Modern Record appeared first on Eurasia Review.

(EurActiv) — EU member states have reacted in different ways to the security threat highlighted by the Paris terrorist attacks, pointing to how difficult it would be to put in place a common European response to the challenge. The EurActiv network reports.

EU ministers are devising ways to respond to the Paris killings, which range from the confiscation of travel documents of people considered dangerous, to speeding up agreements for the exchange of traffic data of passengers, and strengthening, or reforming the borderless Schengen Area.

The European Commission is reluctant to take a leading role, saying that only member countries are equipped with intelligence services and can assess the security threat. What follows is an overview of measures taken in across the bloc.

France

In France, military forces and police are “everywhere” since 7 January, when the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo took place. French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said that 122,000 law enforcement personnel were tasked with the protection of the French population.

The Ministry of Defense decided to deploy 10,500 soldiers to sensitive areas, with nearly half of them assigned to the protection of the country’s 717 Jewish schools. In front of each of these schools, military vehicles are stationed, along with several armed soldiers.

Other places at risk include religious areas like synagogues and mosques. A special prefect in charge of the protection of religious places has been appointed.

Newspaper buildings are also on the list of Interior Ministry, and all of them are looked after by at least one police officer. The Canard Enchainé, another satirical newspaper, is under even stronger protection after receiving serious threats on 8 January.

“It’s your turn,” warned a message sent to the Canard Enchaîné, threatening to kill the journalist “with an ax”. A formal investigation has been opened by a Paris prosecutor on this threat.

On 14 January, the Council of Ministers adopted a decree forbidding certain people to leave French territory, and prohibiting foreign fighters from entering France.

Rightists have tried to advocate for some sort of French “Patriot Act”, but the government does not agree, and says it would not rush to adopt a new law. The French authorities remain opposed to any emergency or exceptional measures that would damage civil rights.

However, Valls called on the European Parliament to vote in favor of an agreement on Passenger Name Records, or PNR, a single registry of air traffic data.

The proposal, initially tabled in 2011, is currently blocked in the European Parliament, where MEPs are concerned about the protection of individual freedoms and privacy.

Belgium

The country hosting the EU institutions discovered that it was also the target of terrorist attacks, not necessarily related to the Paris attacks.

Belgian police killed two men who opened fire on them during one of about a dozen raids on 15 January, against an Islamist group that federal prosecutors said was about to launch “terrorist attacks on a grand scale”.

The killings took place after the police conducted raids on the homes of “foreign fighters”, that is, Belgian nationals who have returned from the Syrian conflict, where they had been fighting a holy war, or jihad.

Earlier in the day, in an apparently unrelated development, police detained a man in southern Belgium whom they suspected of supplying weaponry to Amedy Coulibaly, killer of four people at a Paris Jewish grocery, after the Charlie Hebdo attack.

With half a million Muslims, mostly of French-speaking North African descent, among its 11 million citizens, Belgium has seen similar discontent to that in France among young, unemployed children of immigrants in blighted, post-industrial towns like Verviers, once a major centre for wool, and other textile mills.

One of the measures adopted in Belgium concerns wiretapping. The legal framework in which the judiciary can authorise wiretapping is being made more flexible, so that wiretaps can be performed more quickly.

Another planned package of measures reportedly includes the freezing of assets of foreign fighters and stripping terrorist fighters of their Belgian nationality.

For a country of its size, more Belgians have taken part in the fighting in Syria than any other European state. The Belgian government believes about 100 of its nationals have come back with combat experience. A further 40 may have been killed, and about 170 are still in Syria and Iraq.

Germany

As a reaction to the threat of radical Islamists, the German government intends to withdraw the personal identification cards of potentially violent extremists for a much longer period than was initially planned.

According to Internal Affairs Minister Thomas de Maizière’s draft law, these ID cards could soon be confiscated for up to three years. Previously, the government had indicated that confiscation periods would not exceed 18 months.

In this way, authorities hope to prevent jihadists from leaving the country to go to conflict regions in Syria and Iraq. Those affected by the measure would receive a replacement ID which does not permit the holder to leave Germany.

In addition to personal ID confiscation, Germany’s Justice Minister Heiko Maas is planning to make it a punishable offence to prepare for travel to a terrorist camp. Here, the German government is relying on a UN Resolution from September of last year on foreign fighters. Firstly, persons who seek to leave Germany to participate in “acts of violent subversion” abroad or to train for participation in such acts would be liable to prosecution in the future. Second, a new criminal offence for terrorism financing is also underway in Germany.

But Maas continues to reject the prospect of reintroducing data retention. “Data retention exists in France and they could not prevent the attacks in Paris either,” the Justice Minister said. “And such storage infringes upon fundamental rights. The European Court of Justice clearly determined that.”

Police forces are also calling for additional mobile communication frequencies for German security authorities and the Bundeswehr, Germany’s military.

UK

Hours after meeting with security chiefs on 12 January to discuss Britain’s response to the atrocities in France, Prime Minister David Cameron said that if his Conservative Party is victorious in the general election in May, he will push to introduce “comprehensive” legislation to give intelligence agencies more powers to track Internet and cellphone data.

He indicated that any new legislation proposed by his party would oppose platforms that permit encrypted communication that couldn’t be accessed even with a warrant. Such measures could possibly include Apple’s iMessage and WhatsApp.

Italy

Immediately after the Paris terrorist attack at the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo, Minister of Internal Affairs Angelino Alfano met the Committee for Strategic Anti-Terrorism Analysis to study and develop possible actions to prevent future terrorist attacks in Italy.

After the meeting, Alfano announced that the monitoring activities and the security measures of vulnerable targets (such as institutional buildings and places of worship, but also newspapers headquarters and TV stations) would be reinforced, and that specific attention will be paid to Vatican City, and the Pope.

With respect to “foreign fighters”, the Italian government has prepared a regulation for the application of “measures of personal prevention” that the police will use against people under suspicion of organised crime. The regulation will also help the Italian police reinforce controls on the web (often used as a vehicle to recruit and train terrorists) through specific actions, such as the creation of a blacklist of suspected pro-jihad websites.

Spain

Spanish Secretary of State for Security Francisco Martinez met on 13 January in Strasbourg with Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship Dimitris Avramopoulos, and proposed that European institutions jointly respond to jihadist terrorism.

Martinez informed Avramopoulos about amending the draft Law on Protection of Public Safety, which aims to incorporate into the Aliens Act a provision adapted to the geographical, border security and uniqueness of the Spanish enlaves of Ceuta and Melilla, because of the assaults on their fences. The goal is to “win legal certainty”.

Spanish Interior Minister Jorge Fernández Díaz raised the possibility of changing Schengen’s rules to allow some border checks “aimed at those people about whom there is a clear risk or a real suspicion that they could be terrorists”.

Denmark

Following the attacks in France last week, Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt is looking into how the Danish secret service can get extra resources to fight terrorism, and also to push forward a referendum on its opt-out from EU justice and home affairs cooperation.

In order to strengthen EU-wide police cooperation and to collect passenger data, Denmark needs to get rid of its opt-out on EU Justice, one out of four opt-outs which the country currently holds. The other opt-outs include the Monetary Union (EMU), Defence and ‘Citizenship of the European Union’.

In October, Thorning-Schmidt first announced that a referendum on the Justice opt-out imminent was imminent. In December, a majority of the parties in the parliament made an agreement which stated that irrespective of the results of the general elections, which have to take place before 15 September this year, a referendum will be held before the second quarter of 2016.

Slovakia

In the wake of the Paris attacks, both Prime Minister Robert Fico and Interior Minister Robert Kaliňák expressed their satisfaction with the work of Slovak information service (SIS). Slovakia is against restoring controls at the internal Schengen borders.

“Our secret services are high profile. I don´t think there would be a failure,” Fico said, suggesting that his country didn’t feel threatened.

Kaliňák too stressed that there was no immediate security threat and no sign of increased risk of a terrorist attacks. To prevent them, the Anti-Terrorist Branch, the Department of the fight against terrorism and the National Security Analysis Centre are deployed and fully operational, he added.

The Interior Minister commended French security forces for having done their best.

“As I have heard, they managed to avoid a number of attacks. But, unfortunately, prevention in this area cannot be one hundred percent.”

The Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Miroslav Lajčák said Slovakia was not perceived as a Western symbol.

“Therefore, we should emphasize the prevention and the monitoring. Placing any restrictions beforehand, not knowing where they lead, would be counterproductive,” Lajčák said.

Poland

Warsaw hasn’t been active, except for taking part in the interior ministers’ summit in Paris on Sunday. Interior Affairs Minister Teresa Piotrowska said some vague words about “being vigilant”. There is no sense in Poland that something needs to be changed.

Romania

The Paris attacks revived talks on the issue of the so called “big brother” law, designed to regulate prepaid SIM cards. The law is intended to introduce retention of client data by telephone and internet providers, and will also require citizens to provide their personal identification number when purchasing a prepaid SIM card.

These two legislations have been put down by the Romanian Constitutional Court last year, but the recent terrorist attacks inspired officials to resume discussions leading to the adoption of such legislative acts.

Another measure that follows a larger geopolitical context concerns the adoption of a cross-party agreement on increasing the country`s defence budget. The proposal came in the first days of 2015 from President, Klaus Iohannis, who invited all political parties to assume a 2% GDP allocation for the defence budget for the following 10 years. After separate consultations with all major political parties, an agreement was signed to uphold this objective.

In the meantime, Socialist MEP Ion Mircea Pașcu expressed concerns that Romania’s bid to join Schengen, the EU’s borderless space, could be delayed because of the terrorist attacks, or even worse, that Schengen could be suspended.

“From this point of view, we cannot give up the freedom of movement in exchange of the right of opinion. Democracy comprises both,” he told EurActiv Romania.

Bulgaria

In Bulgaria, Minister of Defense Nikolai Nenchev was quoted as saying that the country’s anti-terrorism legislation would be reviewed.

But more importantly, Bulgaria, already overwhelmed by asylum seekers who enter the country through Turkey, is adding an additional 130 kilometers of fence to their border. On several occasions, the Bulgarian government expressed concern that terrorists could penetrate the country under the cover of asylum-seekers.

On 13 January, the Bulgarian authorities said they had arrested a French citizen suspected of having links to one of the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks on Charlie Hebdo. Fritz-Joly Joachin, 29, was first detained under an international arrest warrant while trying to enter Turkey on 1 January, a week before the Paris attacks.

The warrant, issued by the French authorities, said Joachin had abducted his 3-year-old son. On Monday, Bulgaria received another warrant from Paris alleging that Joachin was a member of a criminal group preparing terrorist acts. Reportedly Joachin had been in contact with Cherif Kouachi, one of the brothers who carried out the Hebdo attack. He is now awaiting extradition to France.

Greece

Greece is in election mood, as early general elections to be held on 25 January will determine the future of the country and its relations with EU partners and creditors. Security concerns are therefore not a major issue.

Vasilis Kikilias, minister for Public Order and Citizen Protection, told EurActiv Greec that Athens closely follows the developments in France.

“We have contributed and we will help if needed, but I think that for now there is not any terrorism issue in our country,” Kikilias said.

He also emphasised that Greece is a safe country and proved it with its success in combating internal terrorism.

“There is cooperation with all the allies within the EU and NATO because nowadays, crime is not local but cross-border, sometimes cyber, and we must be vigilant,” he concluded.

Cyprus

“Cyprus will take all the necessary measures to prevent such a terrorist attack,” the country’s President Nicos Anastasiades said on 14 January, without elaborating more.

He also declined to comment on the statement of the head of Cypriot intelligence services, Andreas Pentaras, who said that jihadists use the territory occupied by Turkey as a gateway to Europe.

Turkey

EU candidate Turkey, which shares a 900 kilometer land border with Syria, is believed to be a major transit country for European foreign fighters.

On 12 January, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said that Hayat Boumedienne, known as France’s ‘most wanted person’, was recently spotted in Turkey. Boumedienne is reported to be the partner of Amedy Coulibaly, the perpetrator of the attack on the Jewis supermarket in Paris, who was killed by the police.

Çavuşoğlu said that Boumedienne entered Turkey on 2 January from Madrid, and that mobile phone records make it clear that she crossed into Syria on 8 January.

“Even before France asked us, we shared this intelligence [with France] as soon as we had it. We told them, “Look, the person you are looking for came here, stayed here and illegally crossed into Syria,” said Çavuşoğlu.

Turkey says that it doesn’t tolerate the transit of foreign fighters via its soil, and often complains that European countries are reluctant to share intelligence with Turkish authorities, despite the threats. Struggling to cope with the irregular flow of people at its southern border, Turkey says that it is not possible for them to screen each and every person entering from Europe for threats, and that only if European authorities share intelligence in a timely way, it could hand “dangerous” people over.

Serbia

On 9 January, the government of Serbia, an EU candidate country, established a permanent group for the fight against terrorism. Media reported that the security services strengthened the monitoring of extremists.

The biggest threats are from football fan groups and of jihadists that return from Syria. Fighting wars in other countries is a crime, according to Serbian legislation.

The post EU Anti-Terrorist Measures Go In All Directions – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the dollar has lost over 97 percent of its purchasing power, the US economy has been subjected to a series of painful Federal Reserve-created recessions and depressions, and government has grown to dangerous levels thanks to the Fed’s policy of monetizing the debt. Yet the Federal Reserve still operates under a congressionally-created shroud of secrecy.

No wonder almost 75 percent of the American public supports legislation to audit the Federal Reserve.

The new Senate leadership has pledged to finally hold a vote on the audit bill this year, but, despite overwhelming public support, passage of this legislation is by no means assured.

The reason it may be difficult to pass this bill is that the 25 percent of Americans who oppose it represent some of the most powerful interests in American politics. These interests are working behind the scenes to kill the bill or replace it with a meaningless “compromise.” This “compromise” may provide limited transparency, but it would still keep the American people from learning the full truth about the Fed’s conduct of monetary policy.

Some opponents of the bill say an audit would somehow compromise the Fed’s independence. Those who make this claim cannot point to anything in the text of the bill giving Congress any new authority over the Fed’s conduct of monetary policy. More importantly, the idea that the Federal Reserve is somehow independent of political considerations is laughable. Economists often refer to the political business cycle, where the Fed adjusts its policies to help or hurt incumbent politicians. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Arthur Burns exposed the truth behind the propaganda regarding Federal Reserve independence when he said, if the chairman didn’t do what the president wanted, the Federal Reserve “would lose its independence.”

Perhaps the real reason the Fed opposes an audit can be found by looking at what has been revealed about the Fed’s operations in recent years. In 2010, as part of the Dodd-Frank bill, Congress authorized a one-time audit of the Federal Reserve’s activities during the financial crisis of 2008. The audit revealed that between 2007 and 2008 the Federal Reserve loaned over $16 trillion — more than four times the annual budget of the United States — to foreign central banks and politically-influential private companies.

In 2013 former Federal Reserve official Andrew Huszar publicly apologized to the American people for his role in “the greatest backdoor Wall Street bailout of all time” — the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing program. Can anyone doubt an audit would further confirm how the Fed acts to benefit economic elites?

Despite the improvements shown in the (government-manipulated) economic statistics, the average American has not benefited from the Fed’s quantitative easing program. The abysmal failure of quantitative easing in the US may be one reason Switzerland stopped pegging the value of the Swiss Franc to the Euro following reports that the European Central Bank is about to launch its own quantitative easing program.

Quantitative easing is just the latest chapter in the Federal Reserve’s hundred-year history of failure. Despite this poor track record, Fed apologists still claim the American people benefit from the Federal Reserve System. But, if that were the case, why wouldn’t they welcome the opportunity to let the American people know more about monetary policy? Why is the Fed acting like it has something to hide if it has nothing to fear from an audit?

The American people have suffered long enough under a monetary policy controlled by an unaccountable, secretive central bank. It is time to finally audit — and then end — the Fed.

This article was published by the RonPaul Institute.

The post Ron Paul: If The Fed Has Nothing To Hide, It Has Nothing To Fear – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Sino-India ‘water wars’ narrative has been overblown and there is a need for a better understanding of China’s intent.

By Zhang Hongzhou

For years, Indian security analysts, most notably Dr. Brahma Chellaney, have been warning of the coming water wars between India and China. While water issues could emerge as a major threat to Sino-India relations given rapidly rising demand, competing water usages and threats from climate change, the ‘water wars’ narrative has been overblown.

Furthermore, to address growing water challenges and manage the potential water disputes between two countries, there is an urgent need for a better understanding of China’s intent and Sino-Indian disputes need to be re-examined in terms of two misperceptions: the Grand Western Water Diversion Plan and China as an uncooperative water hegemon.

The Grand Western Water Diversion Plan

The Grand Western Water Diversion plan is a radical water diversion project proposed by the Chinese water expert-Guo Kai. It intends to divert water from the upstream sections of six rivers in southwestern China, including the Brahmaputra River – which flows into India – to the dry areas of northern China. It is believed that if the water is diverted, the water levels of the Brahmaputra will drop significantly, affecting millions in India’s Northeastern region.

At first glance, it seems that India’s fear is reasonable. Given China’s acute water shortage problem, China could be motivated to divert waters from transboundary waters. Next, based on China’s track record, mega water projects such as the Three Gorges Dam and the South-North Water Diversion project seem to be the Chinese approach to address its domestic water problems. However, it is a serious mistake to believe that the Chinese government would implement the plan given the following reasons:

Firstly, despite the fact that China is a one-party state, competing interests prevail among different social groups and even between different government entities; hence the opinion of a few scholars and even retired officials cannot represent the policy preference of the government. Apart from strong criticism from the mainstream scholarly community, on several occasions, the Chinese government has clearly stated that China has no plans to divert water from the Brahmaputra River to the Yellow River. In addition, China claimed that it would not do anything that would harm the interests of the lower riparian states including India.

Secondly, many outsiders wrongly perceive the Grand Western Water Diversion Plan as the western line of China’s South-North water diversion Project which intends to link the headwaters of the Yangtze and Yellow rivers across the high-altitude Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. While both the eastern line and central line of the South-North Diversion project were completed, the western line remains largely conceptual. Considering its grand scale and potential ecological, social and environmental impacts many experts feel that the western line may ultimately prove impossible to build.

Thirdly, Chinese scholars and even government officials have become more aware of the futility of water diversion projects to meet China’s water shortages. As stated by China’s former minister of water resource, Wang Shucheng, solutions lie in the development of a water-sustaining society; water diversion projects are not only costly but also aggravate current ecological and relocation problems. Furthermore, with declining costs of water recycling and desalination technologies, the western route could turn out to be economically unattractive, not to mention the massive Grand Western Water Diversion Plan.

Lastly, given the potential negative impact of the Grand Western Water Diversion Plan on China’s relations with its lower riparian neighbours, particularly India, it is even more unlikely that the Chinese government will seriously consider the Grand Western Water Diversion Plan. This is especially the case under Chinese President Xi Jinping’s New Foreign Policy Doctrine of bringing amity, security and common prosperity to its neighbourhood.

China as an uncooperative water hegemon

The other misperception of the Sino-India water dispute is China’s uncooperative attitude towards transboundary rivers issues, arguably reflected in China’s passive role in international water governance and its reluctance to cooperate with downstream countries. Indeed, China’s engagement with the global water governance regime is very limited. China voted against the adoption of the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention (UNWC) and it is unlikely that China will sign up for the convention in the near future.

Besides, at the regional level, China also appears to be quite uncooperative in terms of transboundary river management. For years, China has been criticised for being absent from the Mekong River Commission and turning down binding water agreements with India.

Although it is true that China needs to cooperate more with neighbouring countries on the transboundary river issues, it is unfair to label China as the uncooperative water hegemon. Firstly, for many years, data and information related to water, land and other critical resources which have been considered state secrets, have not been made open even to the domestic audience, not to mention foreign countries.

Nonetheless, what should be noted is that these areas are gradually opening up. China has become more willing and open to share hydrological data with neighbouring countries including India.

Precondition for closer relations

Secondly, China’s vote against UNWC is not without its reasons: (a) 1997 UNWC’s emphasis on responsibility at the expense of the interests of upper riparian states; (b) conflict between mandatory involvement of third party in dispute settlement and China’s long tradition on bilateral approach to dispute settlement; (c) national sovereignty and national security concerns.

Thirdly, contrary to common belief, China is party to some 50 treaties governing or related to its shared water resources, though most of the treaties are not water sharing agreements. Fourthly, according to Professor Patricia Wouters, a study which compares China’s transboundary water treaty practices with approaches adopted under the UNWC shows that China in fact embraces the fundamental cornerstone principles of UNWC ―the overarching duty to cooperate, the norms of equal and reasonable use and due diligence obligation not to cause significant transboundary harms―despite the treaties’ vague content.

Besides, China’s aversion to a UNWC’s third party compulsory dispute settlement is linked to culture and tradition. However, what is clear is that both UNWC and fundamental principles of Chinese foreign policy―Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence― stress peaceful resolution of international disputes.

If history can serve as a guide, based on China approaches to transboundary water disputes management with Russia and Kazakhstan, a warming bilateral relationship is the precondition to closer cooperation on the water issues between China and India.

Zhang Hongzhou is an Associate Research Fellow with China Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

The post China-India Water Disputes: Two Major Misperceptions Revisited – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.