Four provinces of southern Yemen – independent until 1990 – announced that they will reject any orders that arrive from the capital Sanaa to military units and local security forces, reports MISNA.

The Committee of military affairs of the provinces of Aden, the main city, Lahj, Daleh and Abyan, loyal to President Abd Rabbo Mansour Hadi, communicated the decision after his resignation last night along with the government. The Committee also said that military units and security forces were placed on high alert, also calling on civilians to guard and protect public buildings and state symbols.

The southern provinces of Yemen reject the accord reached yesterday between the government and Shiite rebels of the Ansar Allah movement, also known as Houthis, who control the capital.

The United States said that despite the latest developments it will keep its Embassy open in Sanaa, but will withdraw more diplomatic staff: “”We continue to support a peaceful transition. We’ve urged all parties and continue to urge all parties to abide by … the peace and national partnership agreement”, said a US spokesperson.

Hadi, a key US ally, came to power in 2012 under a peace accord, mediated by the UN and Gulf monarchies, succeeding Ali Abdallah Saleh, who stepped down under western pressure, especially from Washington after a year-long popular uprising.

The post Yemen: Southern Provinces In Turmoil, US Reduces Diplomatic Staff appeared first on Eurasia Review.

There is increasing evidence on the possible involvement of the army in the disappearance of the 43 students of the Ayotzinapa Normal teaching school of Iguala, in Mexico’s southern Guerrero State, who have been missing since September 26, reports MISNA.

Based on a still partial official reconstruction, the municipal police, aided by still unidentified gunmen, attacked the protesting students, apparently detaining them and handing them over to the Guerreros Unidos drug cartel that killed them, set fire to the bodies and threw the remains in a river, for still unknown reasons.

Based on the testimony of surviving students, the soldiers who intervened on the scene of the attack against the students, ordered by the mayor of Iguala – who was arrested along with his wife – did nothing to help the injured students, actually insulting them, and even dragging some from a nearby clinic where they has been brought and placing them under arrest.

The prestigious laboratory of the Austrian Innsbruck University, where the charred remains recovered so far are being examined, has only identified one of the 43 so far.

Gripped to the hope that their kids are still alive, the families continue to protest demanding answers, also on the alleged complicity of the military in their disappearance. The families are in fact demanding military bases be inspected for traces of the missing students.

The post Mexico: Army Accused In Case Of Missing Students appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Muhammad Umar*

The Indian government was quick to realize that they couldn’t test-fire the Agni-V missile before President Obama’s visit, because that would have put Obama in an awkward position in front of the international community. He would’ve had to denounce the test, otherwise it would’ve signaled his approval for the development of the Agni-V missile technology.

As the President who represents the liberal Democratic party in the United States, and winner of the coveted Nobel Peace Prize, he would have have had to criticize the missile test, which would have been counterproductive to his recent efforts of trying to improve trade, and defense relations with India.

The test is now scheduled for the end of the month, a week after Obama’s visit.

I don’t think we truly realize that the threat of the Agni-V missile is not just limited to the South Asia region, in addition to being able to reach any target in China, the missile can also easily reach targets in parts of Europe, and as they continue to advance the Agni-V technology, could even eventually cover all of Europe, and parts of North America. This fact alone should set off alarm bells in the West.

The other point that should worry leaders in the West is the fact that the Agni-V is expected to feature Multiple Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs), which means that the missile would be able to carry up to 10 warheads, each capable of reaching different targets, separated by hundreds of kilometers.

If this doesn’t concern you, think about the recent dismissal of Avinash Chander. What does it say about India’s plans for the future?

Experts believe that Avinash Chander was fired because he wasn’t showing progress at the pace Modi expected, or that he was corrupt. I don’t think that’s the case.

I think he was fired for two reasons; first, Modi wanted to reaffirm the “make in India” policy, and second, I think Modi realized that a nuclear powered submarine, capable of carrying a nuclear MIRV missile delivery system would pose a far greater threat to the rest of the world, than any land based missile technology, including the Agni series of missiles.

Think about it, a nuclear submarine can travel anywhere in the world, and it can easily position itself to target Washington D.C., or Moscow, at anytime.

This fact alone proves why Modi insists on replacing Avinash Chander with Sekhar Basu, the nuclear scientist credited with the creation of India’s first indigenous nuclear powered submarine, the INS Arihant.

At the moment, India imports 65 percent of it’s defense technology, and that makes it dependent on other countries, which has a great deal of influence over their foreign policy.

Modi knows, to truly be independent, India must make its own weapons. India’s aggressive designs are no longer regional; they’re thinking is now bolder than ever. India is no longer concerned with just bullying Pakistan; their aim is to develop sophisticated weapons at home so they can bully anyone, at anytime, anywhere in the world.

Western powers that continue to tolerate India’s development of these new weapons should re-evaluate their position, before it’s too late. The world can no longer afford to turn a blind eye.

By using India as a puppet, in a poor effort to slow down the spread of Chinese influence in South Asia, and the South Pacific, the Americans have unwillingly facilitated India’s enhanced military capabilities, and its rapid growth. Making India a stronger adversary.

President Obama’s visit will most likely further exacerbate this issue, but it’s not too late to turn things around. It is important for the international community to keep a check on India’s growing military prowess. It should not be dismissed as a regional issue. It’s a global issue that needs to be taken seriously.

*The writer is an assistant professor at the National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST) in Islamabad. He tweets @umarwrites.

The post Agni-V Test Delay, Avinash Chander’s Dismissal – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) has dropped any pretention of standing up for universal standards for equality in sports by endorsing bans on women attending soccer matches in stadia. In doing so, the AFC has confirmed policies adopted by the Asian group as well as world soccer body FIFA that effectively supports autocratic or illiberal democratic regimes in the Middle East and North Africa.

The confirmation came in remarks by AFC general secretary Dato’ Alex Soosay to Agence France Press (AFP) that he is “happy” to respect Iranian laws that ban women from watching male soccer matches in stadia. By implication, Mr. Soosay could have also been referring to Saudi Arabia which, like Iran, bans women from stadia, and in contrast to the Islamic republic, refuses to legalize or encourage women’s soccer.

“We’re very broad-minded. In Australia there’s a big Iranian community and you can’t stop them from coming to the stadium because there’s no restrictions here. Whereas in Iran, there has been some restrictions of women entering the stadium and watching a football match,” Mr. Soosay said.

Mr. Soosay made his remarks after the Iranian football federation warned members of its national team competing in the Asian Cup in Australia not to take selfies with female Australian-Iranian soccer fans the majority of whom do not adhere to the Islamic republic’s strict dress code for women.

“National team players should be aware that they won’t be used as a political tool by those who take pictures with them,” Ali Akbar Mohamedzade, the head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Football Federation moral committee, told Iran’s Shahrvand newspaper.

Mr. Soosay’s remarks appear to be at odds with an increased focus on human and women’s rights by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and other global sports associations. IOC officials have, in recent months, privately encouraged human rights groups to take Saudi Arabia to task for its failure to allow women to freely compete in all disciplines of the Olympics.

Mr. Soosay’s remarks further contrast starkly with a warning to Iran by the International Volleyball Federation (FIVB) that it would be stripped of its right to host the 2015 Under-19 men’s world volleyball championship if it bans women from attending matches. The FIVB stance is relevant to the AFC given that Iran is widely seen as a frontrunner in the bidding for the right to host 2019 Asian Cup.

A FIVB spokesman said in November that his federation “will not give Iran the right to host any future FIVB directly controlled events such as World Championships, especially under age, until the ban on women attending volleyball matches is lifted.” The FIVB has asked Argentina to stand-by to replace Iran as the host of the tournament. In a statement, FIVB president Ary Graca said that “women throughout the world should be allowed to watch and participate in volleyball on an equal basis.”

The FIVB made its decision after talks with Human Rights Watch, which has also met with IOC president Thomas Bach. The meeting with the IOC president marked a new era in the group’s attitude towards human rights. Mr. Bach’s predecessor, Jacques Rogge, refused to meet with human rights groups during his tenure.

Mr. Soosay’s remarks further violate a resolution adopted two years ago by the West Asian Football Federation (WAFF) and endorsed by Iran that called for putting women’s sporting rights on par with those of men.

The AFC official’s remarks came against the backdrop of recent international outrage at the charging of a British-Iranian law graduate for attempting to enter a stadium to watch a men’s volleyball match. Ghoncheh Ghavami was detained in June. She twice went on hunger strike before being released on bail as she awaits trial.

Mr. Soosay defended his comments by noting that visiting female officials and media attending AFC events in Iran have been allowed into stadiums, provided they covered their hair. “You have to respect that they have to cover themselves. There is a code of attire which has to be respected. If it’s done in Iran there’s no issue at all,” Mr. Soosay said. His remarks related to foreign women who were members of visiting delegations and are subject to different rules from those that apply to women fans.

By endorsing discriminatory Iranian policies, Mr. Soosay effectively reiterated the AFC’s longstanding refusal to insist on adherence by Middle Eastern soccer associations to its principles, rules and regulations. That refusal amounts to effective support for autocratic rule in a soccer crazy region where rulers see the game as a key tool to retain power by exercising absolute control of public space and an institution that evokes deep-seated passions.

The refusal has had over the years far-reaching consequences for the AFC, no more so since 2002 when Qatari national Mohammed Bin Hammam became the group’s president until he was banned for life by FIFA from involvement in professional soccer eleven years later, and under the reign of his Bahraini nemesis and successor, Sheikh Salman Bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa.

The governance of both men reflects the autocratic traits of the societies they hail from. Both men are imperious, ambitious and have worked assiduously to concentrate power in their hands and side line their critics clamouring for reform. Both men, hailing from countries governed by absolute, hereditary leaders, have been accused of being willing to occupy their seats of power at whatever price.

As a result, Mr. Soosay’s remarks fit the mould of AFC governance. Sheikh Salman recently used a proposal to recognize Central Asia as a separate soccer region in Asia to eliminate the post of a woman AFC vice president. That post is currently held by Australian Moya Dodd, a prominent reformer whose views challenge those held by Messrs. Salman and Soosay.

The post AFC Official ‘Happy’ To Bar Women Spectators From Stadia – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Hamdi Fırat Büyük

Amid a new border dispute, Montenegrin President Filip Vujanovic has refused to appoint a new mission leader to Sarajevo. In return, it is reported that Bosnia is planning to withdraw its ambassador from Podgorica.

The dispute comes as a group of Bosnian academics, intellectuals and NGOs has published a report which claims that a short stretch of the Montenegrin coast and its surrounding areas called Sutorina legally belong to Bosnia. The group argues there is strong evidence that the territory had been a part of Bosnia until the World War II.

These claims have in turn sparked harsh debates in Montenegro between the opposition and the ruling government. The Montenegrin opposition parties have now been exerting pressure on the ruling government to provide an answer to the report, eventually calling an urgent meeting of the parliament.

“Not an inch of Montenegro should be ceded to anyone” said leader of the “Positiv” Montenegrin opposition bloc Darko Pajovic.

In what has come to follow, Montenegrin President Vujanovic has refused to sign the appointment of a new ambassador to Sarajevo because of the recent debates, pointing out that Bosnia and Hercegovina has recognized Montenegro’s independence with its current borders.

The Serbian vice-president of the House of Representatives, one of two chambers of the Bosnian Parliament, Mladen Bosic, said on Wednesday that the issue should have been resolved in other ways. “I am surprised by how Montenegro reacted,” he said, referring to the Bosnian Presidency.

“Stopping the appointment of the ambassador was too harsh. I don’t see why it should be forbidden to open a discussion about the border,” he added.

While the dispute over Sutorina has its roots in the past and should therefore not be regarded as anything new, the issue had remained frozen up until now. Moreover, the agreement which delineated the border between Bosnia and Montenegro was ratified in November of last year by both governments.

The disputed area of Sutorina and its surrounding territories include five villages as well as the region’s namesake, the river Sutorina.

Most importantly, the disputed lands lie a few kilometres from the Montenegrin coastal town of Herceg Novi. If the territory were to be granted to Bosnia, it would give the country a second access point to the Adriatic Sea, in addition to its only coastal area of Neum which spans 24 kilometres.

The post Montenegro Refuses To Send New Ambassador To Bosnia Amid Border Dispute appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Andrew E. Tchie*

Nepal is a country of nearly 30 million people occupying a strategic position between India and China. It has enormous prospects in the field of hydroelectric power generation—the Himalayan Rivers could power enough turbines to light much of northern India. If it was stable and appropriately run, Nepal, an attractive country, could become wealthier and far more interesting and appealing to investors, tourists, and the residents themselves.

Two decades after the turmoil, signs of progress are still illusive. Once one of the world’s last empires and former Hindu states, the country has failed to make significant progress since the signing of the Nepalese Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2006. Nepal has slowly progressed from a Hindu kingdom to a secular, more democratic republic, which partially employs proportionate representation and is hopeful to shift to federalism at some point in the future. Many of the agreements put into place since the conflict have taken time to bloom, like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which seeks to provide justice for the deceased and reconciliation for the average Nepali. The country now finds itself in a deadlock regarding what the future of Nepal should and could potentially look like.

Nepal’s legislative track record can be disheartening, as progress is often sluggish and lacklustre. Political leaders often seem distracted, venal, inefficient and self-absorbed, putting their own needs before those of the people, indeed, the very people whom they are called upon to serve, respect and assist. You can always tell when a minister is in town because the entire district comes to a standstill as the police and the armed forces are whipped into action to assist the one leader and his entourage of bureaucrats who are completely comfortable eating at the table on the dime of the everyday person.

According to recent figures, 80 per cent of the aid which is given to help the most needy, and the hardest hit by the government’s own inefficiency in developing the country, is embezzled by the Nepalese bureaucracy. This has caused a massive wave of young Nepalese men and women to leave Nepal and make their way towards Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Now, over half of all Nepalese households rely, to some extent, on the nearly $5 billion sent back to the country each year in remittances.

Despite calls from India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi during November’s SAARC conference for Nepal to draft its constitution in an early manner, it looks set to be deferred once again because Nepalese politicians seem to know neither how to engage in the consensus politics nor constructive dialogue that could help move the country forward. Here, what seems to be apparent is that no political party has a clear roadmap regarding the formation and implementation of the country’s future constitution. It seems to be that the only thing that the political elites can agree on is how to amass as much wealth and power as possible, despite the grey cloud that blankets Nepal’s economy and overall development. One is hopeful that new leaders who possess integrity, morals, and ethics and who are more accountable to the people rather than their parties will arrive on the stage of Nepalese politics. Nonetheless, this will not happen in the current political constellation or in the next.

Unpredictable Storms: Another Deadline, Another Rush

Over a year has passed since Nepal’s second Constituent Assembly was elected in November 2013. In March 2014 the second Constituent Assembly finally succeeded in adopting the many agreements hammered out by the first Constituent Assembly. However, the poignant issues that caused the first Constituent Assembly to dissolve without forming a new constitution after four years of deliberations and four extensions (2008-2012) are currently just as embattled and divisive as they were in the past.

Many people in Nepal are optimistic that a constitution can be formed, agreed upon and signed into law by 2015. This sign of optimism hopefully indicates that the people of the Terai, who have long been discriminated against, will be granted citizenship and the right to have more elected representatives. Nonetheless, those on the other side of the fence who are not so optimistic feel that the sluggish behaviour of the current government points to a likelihood that a new constitution will not be drafted, and that therefore any sign of federalism in the near future seems implausible at best.

There are two main problems faced by the political parties that prevent the formation of a new constitution. Firstly, the political parties have a relentless desire to be the sole controllers of the country and their members use their elite positions to benefit only those in their vicinity. This often leads to domestic failures being blamed on the Nepalese political system or the influence of India or China. Secondly, two of the four parties wish to implement a federal system of provinces that would reward their backers, i.e. the traditionally excluded native groups, remote country dwellers of the hills, and those of low-caste, such as the Dalits.

The Nepali Congress, the UML (or Communist Party) and other minor conventionalist and left-wing parties are campaigning for a territorial reshuffle that would allow for decentralisation, and reorganisation the parliamentary form of governance. The Maoists, together with Madhesi and Janajati parties, are pushing for federal restructuring along ethnic and indigenous lines, which would work to assure the political inclusion of several of Nepal’s marginalized groups, and an executive-presidential structure in which the head of state would be elected by popular vote.

The exclusion of minority interests from the new constitution has so far contributed to the gloomy nature of negotiations, and has therefore inhibited a compromise from being reached, creating an expansive morass void of effective bargaining, constructive dialogue and much-needed solutions. Much of this situation ultimately owes to the fact that the two leading parties are both short a handful of votes that would force at least some degree of compromise. This has caused questions surrounding federal restructuring to be constantly challenged and subsequently blocked.

As a result of this deadlock, no significant progress has been made so far with regard to the negations and the new Constituent Assembly is unlikely to endorse a constitution by the current deadline of January 2015. This situation has unfortunately led the peace process that began in 2006 after a decade of civil war to become all the more inadequate, and left the country’s political stability in a highly precarious state. An open wound left untreated (e.g. via medical examinations, antibiotics and careful attention) has the strong potential to become infected and spread. However, treatment can also depend on how severe the wound is, where it is located and whether other areas are also affected. It may also depend on your health and the length of time you have had the wound. Here, if Nepal’s deep-rooted issues regarding conflict reconciliation and socio-economic development, among others, are not addressed by the current government, there is a strong possibility that the country will relapse into small outbreaks of violence as tensions continue to rise.

A Partnership of Inclusivity for Women and Minorities

Seeing that the decade-long violent conflict in Nepal had far reaching impacts on conventional socio-economic paradigms of the Nepalese society, in the eyes of everyday Nepalese, and the international community, the events were a key and decisive turning point in the history of the country. The conflict not only opened the stage to voiceless men and women from lower caste communities, such as the Dalit, and indigenous marginalised minorities, it also facilitated these groups’ ability to assert their needs for justice, socio-economic opportunity and political participation.

Despite this, universal discrimination continues to be deeply engrained and invisibly sustained. Seeing that systematized domination has always been structured along class and caste-based lines in the public and economic spheres, disparities in opportunity and representation between those who have conventionally wielded power (Capitals Brahmin-Chhetris) and marginal and indigenous groups (often self-identified as Janajati) have become an increasingly prominent feature of Nepalese society.

This issue that silently and subtly persists within certain components of Nepalese society has been picked up by women activists who have gained both national and international recognition for their concerted efforts to challenge the system. This dilemma also features prominently in the relationship of the four main political parties who still continue to exert influence over large swathes of Nepalese society. Thus, the key question remains: how wide and inclusive will the coalition supporting the new constitution be? In the long run, the broader the consensus, the more resilient the new constitution; nonetheless, this also means the wider the coalition, the greater the number of compromises required.

This key transitional phase in which Nepal currently finds itself marks the opportune time to seize the moment and stimulate and encourage the formation of an inclusive and truly representative political regime that will assist and aid the development of the rights of women, indigenous groups and other minorities. Nonetheless, the formation of the constitution seems as though it will be pushed back to 2015. During this time, the government needs to refine the frame of public debate and scrutiny to view human capital from a renewed and critical perspective. If the government wants to intensify and increase growth and to consistency encourage the populace, it needs to begin negotiations on increasing and incorporating the presence of marginalized groups in the political leadership. Women, and all minority groups, must be able to enthusiastically and equally partake in the drafting of the new constitution in a constructive and industrious manner. While there is no doubt that this will effectively delay the formation and ratification of the constitution, it will inevitably reduce the potential for a resurgence of violent conflict.

This will allow many of these groups to feel included in the process, introducing their own perspectives of all areas of political life. In the long run, the establishment of such a decision-making constellation will prioritize the significance of closing the gender and ethnic divides that currently plague the political and economic development of Nepalese society.

*Andrew Edward Tchie is a PhD student in Government and Associate Fellow at the University of Essex, and a former Consultant and Research Fellow at the United Nations Development Programme’s Conflict Prevention Programme in Nepal.

The post A Nation In Bewilderment: Struggle For Nepal’s Future – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

THERE USED to be a joke about a sadist and a masochist.

“Hit me! Beat me! Kick me!” the masochist pleads with the sadist.

The sadist smiles a cruel smile and slowly answers: “No!”

THAT, MORE or less, reflects the situation on our northern border at this moment.

Two Israeli drones have bombed (or missiled) a small Hezbollah convoy, a few miles beyond the border with Syria on the Golan heights. 12 people were killed. One was an Iranian general. One was a very young Hezbollah officer, the son of Imad Mughniyeh, a very high-ranking Hezbollah officer who was also killed by Israel, some seven years ago, in a Damascus car explosion.

The killing of the Iranian general was perhaps unintended. Seems that Israeli intelligence did not know that he, and five other Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers, were in the convoy. An Israeli army officer admitted this in a roundabout way. A second officer denied the statement of the first.

He did not apologize, of course. One cannot apologize when one does not officially admit to being the perpetrator. And, of course, Israelis do not apologize. Never ever. Indeed, one far-right party in the present election has turned this into an election slogan: “No apologies!”

The intended victim of the attack was the 25-year old Jihad Mughniyeh, a junior Hezbollah officer whose only claim to fame was his family name.

IMMEDIATELY AFTER the killing, the question arose: Why? Why now? Why at all?

The Israeli-Syrian border (or, rather, cease-fire line) has been for decades the quietest border of Israel. No shooting. No incidents. Nothing.

Assad the father and Assad the son both saw to this. They were not interested in provoking Israel. After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, which started with a huge Syrian surprise success and ended with a complete Syrian defeat, the Assads wanted no new adventure.

Even when Ariel Sharon attacked Lebanon in 1982, the Syrian troops stationed in Lebanon did not intervene. But since one of Sharon’s war aims was to drive the Syrians out of Lebanon, he had to open fire himself to get them involved. That adventure ended with a Syrian success.

Any intention Bashar al-Assad might ever have had to provoke Israel (and it seems that he never had any) vanished when the Syrian civil war started, more than four years ago. Both Bashar al-Assad and the various rebel factions were fully occupied with their bloody business. Israel could not interest them less.

SO WHY did Israeli drones hit a small convoy of Assad’s allies – Hezbollah and Iran? It is very unlikely that they had any aggressive intentions against Israel. Probably they were scouting the terrain in search of Syrian rebels.

The Israeli government and the army did not explain. How could they, when they did not officially admit to the action? Even unofficially, there was no hint.

But there is an elephant in the room: the Israeli elections.

We are now in the middle of the election campaign. Was there, could there be, any connection between the election campaign and the attack?

You bet!

TO SUGGEST that our leaders could order a military action to increase their chances in an election borders on treason.

Yet It has happened before. Indeed, it happened in many of our 19 election campaigns till now.

The first election took place when we were still at war. David Ben-Gurion, the war leader, won a great election victory, of course.

The second election took place during the fight against the Arab “infiltrators”, with almost daily incidents along the new borders. Who won? Ben-Gurion.

And so on. In 1981, when Menachem Begin ordered the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor, somebody dared to suggest that the action was connected with the upcoming Knesset election. This gave Begin the opportunity for one of his greatest speeches. Begin was an outstanding orator in the European (and very un-Israeli) tradition.

“Jews!” he addressed his audience, “You have known me for many years. Do you believe that I would send our gallant boys on a dangerous mission, where they could be killed or, worse – fall into the captivity of these human animals – in order to gain votes?” The crowd roared back “No!”

Even the other side played their part. The Egyptians and Syrians launched their surprise attack on Yom Kippur 1973 in the middle of the Israeli election campaign.

After the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, his heir, Shimon Peres, also faced an election campaign. During his short regency, he managed to start and lose a war. He invaded Lebanon and during the fighting a UN refugee camp was bombed by mistake. That was the end of the war and of Peres’ reign. Binyamin Netanyahu won.

WHEN LAST week’s killing was announced, the country and the army were requested to prepare for war.

Along the border, tension spread. Massive troop deployments took place. Armored brigades moved north. “Iron Dome” anti-missile batteries were positioned near the border. All the media prepared the public for instant revenge actions by Hezbollah and Iran.

That’s where the joke comes in. Netanyahu fully expected Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah chief, to bomb Galilee in retaliation. Nasrallah just smiled one of his enigmatic smiles.

Revenge? Sure. But not just now. Some other time, perhaps. Some other place, too. Maybe in Bulgaria, where Israeli tourists were killed to avenge Imad Mughniyeh’s assassination. Or even in Argentina, where the prosecutor investigating the destruction of two Israel-Jewish centers was found shot this week (by himself or by others.) The bloody attacks in Buenos Aires, 20 years ago, were attributed to Hezbollah and Iran after another Israeli action in Lebanon.

So why doesn’t Nasrallah avenge the drone action now? When you count on an enemy’s revenge action, it is very frustrating when it doesn’t come on time.

TO UNDERSTAND this, one must review the election campaign.

It is being waged by two large blocks – the right-wing led by the Likud and the center-left led by the Labor party. The left has gathered unexpected momentum by uniting Labor with Tzipi Livni’s little faction, and now, incredibly, has overtaken Likud in the polls. Aside from the two blocks there are the Orthodox and the Arab citizens, who have their own agendas.

The two main blocks sail under different flags. Likud and Co. sail under the flag of Security. The public believes that Netanyahu and his allies are more trustworthy when it comes to war and keeping our army big and powerful. The public also believes that Labor and its allies are more effective when it comes to the economy, the price of housing and such.

This means that the outcome will be decided by which side succeeds in imposing its agenda on the campaign. If the campaign comes to be dominated by the issues of war and fear, the Right will probably win. If, alternatively, the main issue is housing and the exorbitant price of cottage cheese, the Left has a chance.

This is not a matter of particularly acute perception, but of general public knowledge. Every missile launched by Hezbollah or Hamas will be a missile for Likud. Every day of quiet on the borders will be a day for Labor.

IT WAS therefore quite obvious to many Israelis that the sudden flair up on the northern border, caused by an unprovoked Israeli attack that makes no sense, was an election ploy by Netanyahu and his companions.

Many knew. But nobody dared to say so. The political parties were afraid of being seen as stabbing the army in the back. Accusing Netanyahu of risking a major war in order to win an election is a very grave matter.

The Labor party published a lame statement supporting the army. Meretz kept quiet. The Arab parties were busy with creating a united Arab list. The Orthodox couldn’t care less.

Gush Shalom, of which I am a member, prepared to publish an unequivocal accusation.

And then the silence was broken from a totally unexpected quarter.

General Galant gave an interview in which he squarely accused the government of warming up the northern border for election purposes.

Galant? Incredible!

Yoav Galant was the chief of the Southern Command during the cruel Molten Lead campaign. After that he was appointed by Netanyahu as the new army Chief of Staff. But before the appointment could be consummated Galant was accused of expropriating public village land for his palatial home and had to back out. I always considered him an out-and-out militarist.

Two weeks ago, Galant suddenly reappeared on the stage as candidate No. 2 on the list of Moshe Kahlon’s new center party with no ideology except bringing down prices.

Galant’s statement caused an outcry, and he quietly retracted it. But the deed was done. Galant had opened the gate. A horde of commentators stormed through it to spread the accusation.

The campaign may never be the same again after Galant’s gallant deed.

The post Galant’s Gallant Act – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Political and business leaders from ASEAN member states told participants at the 45th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting that the ASEAN Economic Community, uniting 10 countries with over 600 million people in a common market, will be a reality by the end of 2015.

“Some in the audience may not believe it, but believe me, we will have a single market by the end of the year,” Pridiyathorn Devakula, Deputy Prime Minister of Thailand, promised. Devakula said that tariff reductions within the community have already been largely accomplished, but work remains on cutting non-tariff barriers.

“The free flows of goods, capital and labour will provide the opportunity for ASEAN to become the factory for the world,” Samdech Samdech Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of Cambodia, said. He added that the next step would be for ASEAN to seek free-trade agreements, and that he expected the community to benefit from continued growth in China, from the opening of India’s economy and from renewed dynamism in Japan.

Pham Binh Minh, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Vietnam, said: “Greater integration will provide many benefits to the entire ASEAN community.” Integration should spur governments to implement structural reforms, and more developed ASEAN countries should assist their less developed states in catching up.

Abdul Wahid Omar, Minister, Economic Planning Unit, Malaysia, noted that the region has grown at an average of over 6% a year for decades. “We now want to make sure that the economic prosperity we achieve is translated into higher personal income for the people,” he said. Integrations of rules and regulations and the creation of an ASEAN identity – perhaps in part through a common time zone – are logical next steps.

“ASEAN is growing faster than China or India, but it must be seen by outside investors as a single market,” Anthony F. Fernandes, Group Chief Executive Officer, AirAsia, Malaysia, said. Fernandes said the 10 countries still have different regulatory systems and bureaucracies. Government leaders must make it easier for companies and investors to operate in all 10 countries simultaneously. “Not everything will get done by December, but a lot will be fixed and it will be a fantastic platform,” he predicted.

James T. Riady, Chief Executive Officer, Lippo Group, Indonesia, said that unlike northern Asia, with its emphasis on heavy industry that works closely with government, most of ASEAN’s economies depend on entrepreneurship, light industry and services. The ASEAN common market will particularly benefit the services sector, which gains competitiveness with scale. “If the ASEAN Economic Community can become a reality this year, we are at the beginning of something quite fantastic,” he said.

Serge Pun, Chairman, Serge Pun & Associates (Myanmar), Myanmar, said that for years he had been a sceptic about ASEAN, but he is becoming a believer. Protectionist impulses are strong in both government and business, but governments now appear determined to make the ASEAN Economic Community a reality. “I have drawn a lot of optimism from looking at how governments view integration.” He added that the community’s diverse economies are an advantage, as less-developed countries such as Myanmar would welcome the unskilled jobs that more developed ASEAN members are shedding.

The post Confidence Grows ASEAN Economic Community To Be Launched By End Of Year appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Manoj Joshi*

There has been a certain element of surprise in India’s invitation to US President Barack Obama to be the first American to be a chief guest at the Republic Day parade next week. After all, he is now a lame-duck president of a country where both houses of Congress are in the control of the Opposition.

But, in democracies, foreign policies don’t change with a change in government. Perhaps there are changes in emphases. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has emphatically indicated that good and close relations with the United States will form the core of his global policy. In the short time he has been in power, Modi has met Obama thrice — during his visit to the US in September, at the East Asia and G-20 summits in Myanmar and Australia respectively. An indication of his thrust are the close ties that the Modi government is building with two key Asia-Pacific allies of the US — Japan and Australia. China may be awash with investible cash, but so are Japanese and American private companies, and the Prime Minister hopes that his ambitious economic programme will find favour with them.

Ties between India and the US are often expressed in overarching terms as relations between the two great democracies and so on. But the reality is that there is a transactional element to them as well. Both sides seek to maximise their national interests, whether it is in trade, investment, or strategic links.

India’s problem has been that it has neither a product like oil which is considered strategically vital, nor does it have an ideology like Communism or Islamism which can scare the world. Son in the past, the relationship has mainly figured the US helping India, whether it was in helping us reform our education system in the 1950s and 1960s, providing food aid and later technology assistance to trigger the Green Revolution, or to hold our hands when we were defeated by China in the 1962 war. India was also the victim of US policy in this period, mainly in relation to Pakistan which used the American connection to offset India’s natural geopolitical authority in South Asia.

India’s advantage is that unlike China, which is number one in the list of nations that want to replace the US as a world power, India is a number two, and a distant one at that. Unlike China which has begun to benchmark itself against the United States as a world power, India is finding it difficult to barely maintain its hold on South Asia.

When the US looks at the Indian economy and its potential, it sees a country with whom it would like closer economic ties, a place where their investment can get good returns, and their products find a market. As a global power, coping with a rising China, India comes to American minds as well when they think of their Asian pivot. While allies like Japan and Australia are important, neither of them are big enough to offset China’s enormous geopolitical pull. Only India with its billion plus population, geographic spread and economic trajectory can do that. An Asian pivot minus India simply lacks any credibility.

In return, the US has made it very clear that they would do everything in their power to make India into the kind of world power it wants to be. This could be through greater technology transfer and economic partnerships that could bring prosperity in India. It could also be assisted through the transfer of strategic US military products which are some of the best in the world.

Friendship with the world’s sole superpower is not something to be sneezed at. It is not just the direct benefits that matter, but also the indirect ones. In the 2000s, good ties between India and the US played a great role in smoothening New Delhi’s relationship with the ASEAN, Japan and Australia. Even now, you can be sure that unless India works out a satisfactory problem to the nuclear liability issue, there will be little or no movement in New Delhi’s negotiations for a civil nuclear deal with Japan.

But we need to do a lot of homework before we can exploit the full potential of the relationship with the US. First and foremost are the structural changes needed to promote the ease of doing business in India. This is something that is not US specific, indeed, some of its biggest beneficiaries will be Indian corporates as well. Second, we need to provide the Americans satisfaction on the nuclear liability issue. Because riding on that are other benefits such as the American assistance in becoming part of a number of global technology cartels — the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Australia group on chemical weapons and the Wassenaar arrangement that restricts export of conventional weapons. Without these agreements, technology ties with the US will remain constrained because virtually everything today has dual applications — military and civil.

There is an asymmetry between India and the US — one the world’s greatest power, a rich country, and the other a weak and poor South Asian nation. India is not in much of a position to demand anything of the US. But New Delhi can drive a hard bargain and ensure that the US does not tilt the playing field entirely in its own favour. So whether it is the climate change issue, the contentions relating to intellectual property rights, or ties with China, India can play hardball to further its own interests because the US needs close ties with India to ensure a favourable balance of power for its friends and allies. For us, this is a great opportunity to use the US connection, just as the Chinese did in the 1980s to ride to world power status.

*The writer is a Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, Delhi

Courtesy: www.mid-day.com

The post India And US: Friends With Benefits – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Sri Lanka President Maithripala Sirisena has given instructions to relevant officials not to let any foreign national or a foreign company to mine gems in the country.

The President said the government is not ready to endow the local gem industry to foreign companies and instructed the officials to refuse requests for gem mining.

Assuming duties as the Mahaweli Development and Environment Minister at the ministry yesterday, the President stressed that laws on environmental conservation should be further solidified.

President Sirisena emphasized that no one should be permitted to exploit environmental resources regardless of their status. Rules of conserving environment should be strongly implemented without allowing room for damaging it, he said.

He instructed the relevant officials to stop mining of sand and transporting in the Polonnaruwa district from the 1st of February.

The President asked the relevant institutions to submit a report after an intensive study on the possibility of using the sand resources in this area in the future. He also asked the officials to conduct a study and submit a report on the suitability of the areas for sand mining and the possibility of using sea sands as an alternative.

President Sirisena requested the National Gem and Jewellery Authority to provide a report on current projects implemented and also asked about the tender process and the mechanism of issuing licenses for gem mining.

Ordering the National Gem and Jewellery Authority to halt all illegal gem mining, the President asked the officials to immediately halt the gem mining in Moragahakanda reservoir and its premises.

The President instructed the relevant sectors to inform him if someone including politicians or businessmen attempt to damage the environment.

He also told the officials to procure office items produced by the State Timber Corporation for the Ministry and affiliated institutes as a pilot project to increase the income of the Timber Corporation.

President Sirisena also instructed the officials of ministries to formulate a strategic plan and submit it by reviewing the activities of the Ministry and affiliated institutions under the 100 day programme.

The President also appointed new officials to the institutions under the Mahaweli Development and Environment Ministry today. New officials were appointed to the Mahaweli Authority and affiliated institutes, Marine Environment Protection Authority, State Timber Corporation, Gem and Jewellery Research Institute.

The post Sri Lanka To Not Allow Foreign Companies To Mine Gems appeared first on Eurasia Review.

A video has reportedly appeared on the internet showing one of the Japanese hostages held by jihadists. He claimed his companion was executed and said the Islamic State want him swapped for a female suicide bomber.

Kenji Goto shows a picture of the beheaded body of his fellow captive, Haruna Yukawa, reported the SITE Intel Group, an organization that tracks the online activity of terrorists.

In his message, Goto reportedly blames Japan’s prime minister for Yukawa’s death and says that the Islamic State now wants the release of Sajida al-Rishawi, an alleged attempted suicide bomber, who is believed to be connected to the attack on a hotel in Jordan in 2005.

Sajida al-Rishawi is currently in prison in Jordan. During the 2005 attack in Amman her suicide belt didn’t detonate and she survived. Later she was captured and confessed, but later retracted her confession. She was sentenced to death in 2006, but appealed to the court and the case is still in process of appeal.

Japanese government spokesman Yoshihide Suga has said his country is outraged by the atrocity.

“This is an outrageous and unacceptable act,” Suga said. “We strongly demand the prompt release of the remaining Mr. Kenji Goto, without harm.”

Suga also said the government is holding an emergency meeting over the situation. The authorities have started an investigation and verification of the contents of the video.

After the meeting, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that Japan “will not give in to terrorism.”

On Tuesday, the Islamic State (formerly ISIS) terrorist group published a video on several extremist websites showing two Asian men wearing orange fatigues standing on their knees alongside a masked man in black holding a knife. The man said the militant group demanded a $200 million ransom for the hostage’s lives to be paid within 72 hours. This is the same amount of money that Japan had pledged to pay as a contribution to the US-led campaign against IS.

The Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe reiterated that he will stand by his country’s commitment not to pay ransoms while speaking on the phone with UK Prime Minister David Cameron on Thursday, Kyodo news agency reported.

Abe said multiple times that that he will not give in to terrorism. However, his government vowed to rescue the Japanese nationals, with the Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga stating that the government “is doing everything it can, and saving lives is the top priority.”

Meanwhile, Tokyo had failed to contact the militants to negotiate the release in the given time.

The Japanese hostage is the last victim on the list of foreign hostages executed by IS militants in Syria and Iraq, for whom their governments refused to pay ransom. Among them are US aid worker Peter Kassig executed in November 2014, UK aid worker Alan Henning murdered in October 2014, UK aid worker David Haines killed in September 2014 and American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, slain in August 2014.

The post Islamic State Claims Kills One Japanese Hostage, Offers Swap For Other Hostage appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The government of the Democratic Republic of Congo has used unlawful and excessive force to crack down on protests since January 19, 2015, Human Rights Watch said today. The demonstrators were protesting proposed changes to the electoral law that many Congolese believed would permit President Joseph Kabila to stay in office beyond his mandated two-term limit.

Human Rights Watch confirmed that 36 people, including one police officer, were killed during the demonstrations in Kinshasa, Congo’s capital. Of these, Congo’s security forces fatally shot at least 21 people. Additionally, on January 22, at least four people were killed during demonstrations in the eastern city of Goma.

“Congolese security forces have fired into crowds of demonstrators with deadly results,” said Ida Sawyer, senior Congo researcher at Human Rights Watch. “People should be allowed to express their views and peacefully protest without the fear of being killed or arrested.”

On January 17, the National Assembly adopted modifications to the electoral law that would require a national census ahead of the next election, a step that could significantly delay presidential and parliamentary elections scheduled for 2016. On January 23, following a week of protests, the Senate adopted an amended version of the law, clarifying that the holding of elections would not be conditional on a census being completed and that the constitution’s electoral timeframe would be respected. If signed into law, the amended law would address a main concern of the protesters.

Demonstrations were held in cities across the country, including Kinshasa, Bukavu, Bunia, Goma, Lubumbashi, Mbandaka, and Uvira. In Kinshasa, protesters demonstrated on January 19, 20, and 21 near the Palais du Peuple parliament building, around the University of Kinshasa, and in Bandal, Kalamu, Kasa-vubu, Kimbanseke, Lemba, Limete, Makala, Masina, Matete, Ndjili, and Ngaba communes.

Many of the demonstrations turned violent after members of the Congolese National Police and the Republican Guard presidential security detail fired teargas and live ammunition into the crowds. The demonstrators in some cases hurled rocks at the security forces and looted and burned shops and offices of perceived government supporters.

Human Rights Watch documented a number of instances in which police or Republican Guard soldiers took away the bodies of those shot in an apparent attempt to remove evidence of the killings. Republican Guard forces also fired indiscriminately in a hospital, seriously wounding three people.

Opposition leaders had called on supporters to mobilize against the proposed revisions beginning on January 19. They urged people to stay home from work and school and instead to take to the streets to “save our nation in danger” and urge Kabila to step down at the end of his term, in 2016.

On the evening before protests began, government authorities blocked opposition leaders at their party headquarters in Kinshasa. Several were arrested in Goma and Kinshasa in the following days. Early in the morning on January 20, authorities shut down all Internet and text message communication in Kinshasa and other parts of Congo. It was partially restored on January 22. Several opposition leaders said their phone numbers have been blocked.

Congo’s national police commissioner, Gen. Charles Bisengimana, told Human Rights Watch on January 23 that 12 people, including at least one policeman, had been killed during the demonstrations in Kinshasa earlier in the week. He said the police force is investigating the exact circumstances of the deaths.

The United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which set out international law on the use of force in law enforcement situations, provide that security forces shall as far as possible apply nonviolent means before resorting to the use of force. Whenever the lawful use of force is unavoidable the authorities should use restraint and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offense. Lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable to protect life. Under the Basic Principles, in cases of death or serious injury, appropriate agencies are to conduct a review and a detailed report is to be sent promptly to the competent administrative or prosecutorial authorities.

The Congolese authorities should immediately stop the unlawful and excessive use of force by the security forces and prosecute those responsible for killings and other abuses, Human Rights Watch said. They should also investigate the January 21 shooting at Kinshasa’s General Hospital. Political party leaders should not incite supporters to violence or hostility, and should urge them not to use violence.

“The Congolese government has fired upon peaceful protesters and detained opposition leaders in a blatant attempt to silence dissent,” Sawyer said. “The authorities should urgently ensure that everyone is allowed to protest peacefully and voice their concerns without government interference.”

The post DR Congo: Deadly Crackdown On Protests, Says HRW appeared first on Eurasia Review.

King Abdullah’s reign brought about marginal advances for women but failed to secure the fundamental rights of Saudi citizens to free expression, association, and assembly. Abdullah’s successor, King Salman, should halt persecution of peaceful dissidents and religious minorities, end pervasive discrimination against women, and ensure greater protections for migrant workers.

Over King Abdullah’s nine-and-a-half year rule, reform manifested itself chiefly in greater tolerance for a marginally expanded public role for women, but royal initiatives were largely symbolic and produced extremely modest concrete gains. The spread of internet and social media empowered Saudi citizens to speak openly about controversial social and political issues, creating a broader social awareness of Saudi Arabia’s human rights shortcomings, but after 2011, Saudi authorities sought to halt online criticism through intimidation, arrests, prosecutions, and lengthy prison sentences.

“King Abdullah came to power promising reforms, but his agenda fell far short of achieving lasting institutional gains on basic rights for Saudi citizens,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director. “King Salman, the new ruler, should move the country forward by ending intolerance for free expression, rooting out gender and sectarian discrimination, and fostering a fair and impartial judicial system.”

Early in his reign, King Abdullah promoted modernization of Saudi Arabia’s state apparatus, making it more efficient and transparent; encouraged a modest public re-evaluation of the enforced subservient status of women and religious minorities; allowed greater debate in the media; and promoted some degree of judicial fairness. After 2011, the authorities subordinated the king’s reform agenda to a campaign to silence peaceful dissidents and activists who called for religious tolerance and greater respect for human rights.

Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. Photo by Mazen AlDarrab, Wikipedia Commons.

King Salman should take steps to prohibit discrimination against women and religious minorities and institute protections for free speech. A significant first step would be to repeal vague legislation used to prosecute Saudis for peaceful speech and create a written penal code that includes comprehensive human rights protections. He should also order the immediate release of Saudi citizens jailed solely for calling for political reform.

The most concrete gains for women under King Abdullah included opening up new employment sectors for women. In February 2013, King Abdullah appointed 30 women to the Shura Council, a consultative body that produces recommendations for the cabinet.

Systematic discrimination against women persists, however. Authorities have not ended the discriminatory male guardianship system. Under this system, ministerial policies and practices forbid women from obtaining a passport, marrying, travelling, or accessing higher education without the approval of a male guardian, usually a husband, father, brother, or son. Employers can still require male guardians to approve the hiring of adult female relatives and some hospitals to require male guardian approval for certain medical procedures for women. Women remain forbidden from driving in Saudi Arabia, and authorities have arrested women who dared challenge the driving ban.

“It is not enough for women to sit on the Shura Council if they can’t even drive themselves to work,” Stork said.

The government continues to control the appointment of newspaper editors and punish Saudis who criticize members of the royal family, government policies, or senior clerics. Under King Abdullah, Saudi authorities prosecuted human rights, civil society, and pro-reform activists for nothing more than exercising their right to freedom of expression. After 2011, Saudi courts began imposing prison sentences of over 10 years for speech-related crimes.

The government began to overhaul the justice system in 2007, but the country still lacks a written penal code, allowing judges wide discretion in certain cases to decide what behavior constitutes criminal offenses. Judges continue to jail and sentence people for “sorcery” and “sowing discord.”

Some written laws promulgated during King Abdullah’s reign curtailed basic rights, including vague provisions of the 2007 anti-cybercrime law, which prosecutors and judges used to charge and try Saudi citizens for peaceful tweets and social media comments. In 2014, Saudi authorities issued new counterterrorism regulations containing broad provisions that allow authorities to criminalize free expression and grant excessive police powers that are not subject to judicial oversight.

Saudi officials failed to pass an associations law under King Abdullah, leaving Saudi citizens with no legal avenue to set up non-charity nongovernmental organizations, and authorities prosecuted independent activists who set up unlicensed human rights organizations.

There have been no institutional gains in religious tolerance. In 2003, King Abdullah began a national dialogue series to bring Saudis together to discuss sensitive issues, including religious extremism and tolerance. In 2008, the Muslim World League, with the king’s encouragement, began an interfaith dialogue initiative in Mecca and took it to Spain, the UN, and Switzerland. Neither of these efforts led to any improvement in the rights of religious minorities inside the kingdom, which does not allow public practice of any religion other than Islam.

Saudi Shia citizens continue to face systematic discrimination in public education, government employment, and in being allowed to build houses of worship. Shia citizens protested for an end to systematic discrimination in 2011 and 2012, but authorities used force to halt these demonstrations and arrested and tried many of those who participated.

“King Abdullah was a great champion of religious dialogue outside the kingdom, but these initiatives produced few benefits for Saudi Arabia’s Shia minority, who continue to face systematic discrimination and are treated as second-class citizens,” Stork said.

The post HRW Says Saudi Arabia King Abdullah’s Reform Agenda Unfulfilled appeared first on Eurasia Review.

In this week’s address, President Barack Obama shared his plan, outlined in his State of the Union address earlier this week, to give hardworking families the support they need to make ends meet by focusing on policies that benefit the middle class and those working to reach the middle class. Through common sense proposals like closing loopholes that benefit the wealthy and providing tax relief to the middle class, making two years of community college free for responsible students, strengthening paid leave policies and access to quality child care for working families, and raising the minimum wage, we can ensure that everyone benefits from, and contributes to, America’s success. Middle-class economics is working, and we have laid a new foundation, but there is still progress to be made, and the President said he is eager to get to work.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House

Hi, everybody. This week, in my State of the Union Address, I talked about what we can do to make sure middle-class economics helps more Americans get ahead in the new economy.

See, after some tough years, and thanks to some tough decisions we made, our economy is creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999. Our deficits are shrinking. Our energy production is booming. Our troops are coming home. Thanks to the hard work and resilience of Americans like you, we’ve risen from recession freer to write our own future than any other nation on Earth.

Now we have to choose what we want that future to look like. Will we accept an economy where only a few of us do spectacularly well? Or will we commit ourselves to an economy that generates rising incomes and rising chances for everyone who makes the effort?

I believe the choice is clear. Today, thanks to a growing economy, the recovery is touching more and more lives. Wages are finally starting to rise again. Let’s keep that going – let’s do more to restore the link between hard work and growing opportunity for every American.

That’s what middle-class economics is – the idea that this country does best when everyone gets their fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.

Middle-class economics means helping workers feel more secure in a world of constant change – making it easier to afford childcare, college, paid leave, health care, a home, and retirement.

Middle-class economics means doing more to help Americans upgrade their skills through opportunities like apprenticeships and two years of free community college, so we can keep earning higher wages down the road.

Middle-class economics means building the most competitive economy in the world, by building the best infrastructure, opening new markets so we can sell our products around the world, and investing in research – so that businesses keep creating good jobs right here.

And we can afford to do these things by closing loopholes in our tax code that stack the decks for special interests and the superrich, and against responsible companies and the middle class.

This is where we have to go if we’re going to succeed in the new economy. I know that there are Republicans in Congress who disagree with my approach, and I look forward to hearing their ideas for how we can pay for what the middle class needs to grow. But what we can’t do is simply pretend that things like child care or college aren’t important, or pretend there’s nothing we can do to help middle class families get ahead.

Because we’ve got work to do. As a country, we have made it through some hard times. But we’ve laid a new foundation. We’ve got a new future to write. And I’m eager to get to work.

Thanks, and have a great weekend.

The post Obama: Middle-Class Economics – Transcript appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Andrea Gagliarducci

Pope Francis completed the membership of the new Vatican body with responsibility for dealing with clerical sex abuse on Wednesday, marking a further step in providing adequate procedures to insure justice for all the victims.

The body is a specific office within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that will deal with ‘delicta graviora’, or ‘more grave crimes’. These are the most serious crimes in the Church, and most notably include offenses against morality: the sexual abuse of a minor by a cleric; or the acquisition, possession, or distribution of child pornography by a cleric.

The new office is established as a college of seven people, whose names were announced Jan. 21.

Bishop Charles Scicluna has been appointed president of the college. Now the Auxiliary Bishop of Malta, Bishop Scicluna served from 2002 to 2012 as Promoter of Justice in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – that is, as the Vatican’s public prosecutor – personally handling the sex abuses crises of 2002 and 2010 and carrying forward the ‘zero tolerance’ line wanted by St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI to tackle the issue.

The other members of the college are: Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, prefect of the Congregation for Catholic Education; Cardinal Attilio Nicora, president emeritus of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See; Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts; Bishop Juan Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru, secretary of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts; Cardinal Giuseppe Versaldi, president of the Prefecture for the Economic Affairs of the Holy See; and Archbishop José Mollaghan, Emeritus of Rosario.

The college has also two supplementary members: Cardinal Julian Herranz Casado, president emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts; and Bishop Giorgio Corbellini, president of the Labour Office of the Apostolic See and of the Disciplinary Commission of the Roman Curia.

The new office is charged with lightening the work of the ordinary session of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, handling the appeals on ‘delicta graviora’.

Aside from sexual abuse of minors, the ‘delicta graviora’ which the college will examine include those against the sacraments — including those against Eucharist, such as profaning a consecrated Host; against Confession, such as violating the seal; and against Holy Orders, such as the attempted ordination of a woman.

According to the 2001 motu proprio Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela, which transferred authority for investigating abuse cases from the Congregation for Clergy to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith so that they could be dealt with more speedily, a person aggrieved by an administrative decision of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith could ask for a review of the decision by the ordinary session of the congregation.

This session is called ‘feria quarta’, and takes place once a month on a Wednesday, and includes all 25 cardinal and bishop members of the congregation.

The new office will assist the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in this work.

According to Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See press office, the congregation “had to examine 4-5 appeals a month, of priests who were deemed to have been wrongly accused.”

It is yet to be decided how the new college will organize the work, nor if the college’s judgement on each case will be always accepted by the feria quarta, or if the feria quarta will be able to overturn the college’s judgements.

The work will obviously depend on the number of cases waiting for review, and monthly meetings will be likely scheduled.

The rescript simply reads that the work of the commission will juxtapose the work of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which will maintain its competences.

It will be likely the congregation itself entrusts the new office with a certain numbers of appeals which are usually examined during the ordinary session.

All of these details will be discussed in the further months, probably with the issuance of specific regulations that will establish the functions and modus operandi of this new body.

The post Pope Francis Completes New Vatican Office To Tackle Clergy Abuse appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Sylvia Mishra

President Barack Obama’s visit to India to attend the Republic Day celebrations is rich in symbolism and has political and diplomatic significance. This is the first time that the President of the United States is the chief guest in India’s Republic Day parade. Obama is also the first American President to visit India twice during his tenure. After a period of drift and unpleasantness, the expectations for the bilateral relationship have rapidly risen since the election of a new government in India last May. Both Obama and Prime Minister Narendra Modi have seized the moment to reinvigourate the bilateral ties. If Modi has put America at the very centre of his dynamic foreign policy strategy, Obama appears eager to work with what is undoubtedly a more vigorous and action-oriented government in Delhi. As Obama told an Indian magazine before his arrival in Delhi the “stars are aligned to finally realise” the long shared vision for a deeper partnership.

The visit is expected to galvanise the bilateral relations, embarking on ‘fast paced engagement’ to elevate Indo-US strategic partnership to the next level. Both the countries have signaled the political will to produce some tangible outcomes from the second summit meeting between the two leaders in less than four months. Four areas – economic, defence, nuclear and climate change are – are likely to see concrete steps forward during Obama’s three-day sojourn in Delhi.

Enhanced economic cooperation

The renewed growth in the US and the launch of long overdue economic reforms in India have set the stage for some significant steps forward in areas relating to economc cooperation, trade and investment. The growing frustration in America about dealing with Indian economic policy making in the second term of the UPA government has given place to hopes about Modi’s promise to significantly improve the ease of doing business in India and create conditions for economic growth and foreign direct investment. Recently, the two countries were successful in negotiating an arrangement to address India’s concerns about food security in the context of multilateral trade negotiations, reviving the stalled World Trade Organisation (WTO) trade facilitation. It is likely that both the countries would also discuss issues surrounding property rights regime thereby, developing a common framework for addressing their long-standing differences on patent protection. As India and US near $100 billion in bilateral trade, there has been sustained discussions on both sides to develop a bilateral investment treaty to simultaneously help provide a framework for American investors. The two countries may also explore the prospects for the negotiation of a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). There are also ongoing talks of finalising a framework to resolve the cases of transfer pricing due to differences between tax authorities of both countries. President Obama is also expected to be meeting and discussing with India-US CEOs during his visit.

Extending scope of defence cooperation

It is expected that both the countries would renew the Framework of Defence Cooperation that was signed in 2005 and is due to expire this year. Media reports have suggested that the new agreement will be bolder than the previous one and bring greater purposefulness to joint military exercises, intelligence sharing, cooperation with third parties, and policy consultations between the civilian leaderships of the two defence establishments. There will be particular emphasis on operationalising the Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI) by announcing the co production of a number of weapons systems. The DTTI launched under the previous government now dovetails nicely with Modi’s emphasis on “make in India” and the new government’s determination to strengthen India’s domestic defence industrial base by encouraging the participation of domestic private sector and foreign arms companies.

Climate change and clean energy

Both the countries would be exploring opportunities to enhance bilateral partnership on climate change by creating policy frameworks of introducing clean energy, promoting platforms such as CLEAN (Clean Energy Access Network) and phasing downhydroflurocarbons(HFCs). Obama’s India visit is expected to operationalise US-India Partnership for Climate Resilience announced during PM Modi’s visit to the US last September. It is unlikely that India would accede to any US-initiated climate deal similar to US-China bilateral agreement. While China’s industrialisation might have peaked, India’s future depends on further expansion of its power generation. The focus, instead, is likely to be on finding a way to rapidly expand renewable energy production in India and reduce the weight of coal in India’s future energy mix with American assistance and technology transfer.

Making headway to resolve the nuclear logjam

India and the US are expected to engage in discussions that would break the gridlock over India’s nuclear liability law that now prevents American participation in India’s atomic energy programme. Intensive negotiations in the last few weeks have explored ways to work around the stringent provisions of the Indian law that expanded the burdens on suppliers of equipment to India’s nuclear programme. If Washington is focused on liability issues, India wants America to demonstrate greater flexibility on the arrangements for external safeguards on the nuclear programe and strongly support India’s membership of the various non-proliferation regimes including the Nuclear Supplies Group (NSG) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Progress on the three fronts would help realise the full promise of the historic civil nuclear initiative that the two governments had unveiled in 2005.

Apart from economic, defence, nuclear and energy issues, both the leaders are also expected to engage in discussions over a gamut of issues ranging from maritime cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, investments in smart cities and industrial hubs, collaboration and partnership in health, higher education and research, solutions to urban issues and cyber security challenges among others.

The post Importance Of Obama’s India Visit – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

In the words of A C N Nambiar, Subhas Chandra Bose – a rare leading light of the freedom movement who cannot be implicated in India’s Partition – was a ‘one-idea’ man. His sole objective was the liberation of his motherland from the yoke of British imperialism. His politics was a curious blend of contrasting ideologies. In the supreme interest of the motherland, he was willing to reach out to people irrespective of their ideological persuasions, which is clearly illustrated by the disparate backgrounds of some of his aides who were pivotal in enacting his ‘great escape’ from Calcutta in January 1941 to Peshawar and onward to Kabul. On reaching Kabul, it was the German Foreign Office and the Abwehr that was largely instrumental in getting him out of Afghanistan under the guise of an Italian into war torn Europe via Moscow.

His admiration of socialist ideals endeared him to the Congress Socialists who won him the party’s presidency at the Tripuri session in 1939 despite Bapu’s disapproval. He laid the ground work of a Planning Commission predicated on a Soviet-like model of centralized planning for the post-independent Indian economy. But when he sought out allies to force the British out of India, he became attracted to those who were diametrically opposite to his known socialist moorings and this left many of his erstwhile Congress supporters bewildered.

However, there is another school of thought on his proximity with the Hindu Right drawing on the Hegdewar-Bose contacts in Calcutta. Right wing sources claim that the very idea of waging a war for India’s independence from foreign soil was conceived in a meeting between Bose and Savarkar at the latter’s residence at Dadar, Bombay in 1940 and both remained in touch with each other through Rash Behari Bose who exchanged messages with Buddhist monks visiting India on pilgrimage. For Bose, the ‘end’ – of liberating India – was more important than the ‘means’ of achieving it. Bose was convinced that only a free nation could offer its citizenry the rights and opportunities for political, economic and social empowerment.

World War I ended with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the crippling of the German military juggernaut. With the fall of the Ottomans, Britain could carve up Arab lands to secure its energy interests, which were vital to the British economy while Indian sepoys formed the bulk of the British Imperial Army. Bose realized that economy and military formed the two main pillars of Pax Britannica. However in the aftermath of WWI, there were sweeping changes in international equations. Russia, Germany and the US were all rapidly industrializing. Germany began to compete with Britain for economic and military supremacy and Japan, an ascendant Asian military power, began challenging British colonialism and naval prowess. Though both Russia and the US added economic and military heft, their alliance with Britain against the Axis powers was taking shape.

Knowing that India was the biggest supplier of raw materials for British manufacturing and the largest market for consumer goods, Gandhiji waged war on Britain on the economic front through well-conceived strategies like ‘boycott’ and ‘swadeshi’. But Bose was convinced of the need to add military might in India’s struggle for independence to bring down the two pillars of British Imperialism. Economically and militarily humbled, the costs of governing a restive colony like India for Britain would be prohibitive. Bose was clued in to the British policy of confining the sepoys to cantonments to insulate them from social unrest. To strike at the roots of the British Raj, Bose was left with no option but to lean on the Axis powers that had begun pummeling Britain.

When PV Chakravarty, a former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, was acting as Governor of Bengal in 1956, Lord Clement Atlee who was British PM in post-war years and who was responsible for granting India freedom stayed in the Raj Bhavan during his visit to Calcutta. The Governor put it straight to him like this: ‘The Quit India Movement of Gandhi died out long before 1947 and there was nothing in the Indian situation which made it necessary for the British to leave India in a hurry. Why then did they do so?’ In reply, Atlee cited several reasons, the most important of which were the INA activities which weakened the very foundation of the British Empire in India…..that the Indian military men could no longer be trusted to prop up the Empire.

This tell-tale account shows that Bose was not off the mark in relying on Kautilya’s ‘mandala’ strategy of my-enemy’s-enemy-is-my-friend while aligning with the Axis powers to uproot colonialism from the sub-continent. But his revulsion against racial discrimination in Nazi Germany can be gauged from his counsel to Kitty Kurti, a German-Jewish lady, to flee the Third Reich and his refusal to accept a Nazi Party reception at Munich during his exile in Europe in the 1930s. He had even dared to admonish the Fuhrer for lauding the British administration in India. Without a Gandhian movement, Sri Lanka and Myanmar gained independence in 1948. It was a post-war shift in the balance of power, due to the end of British hegemony, which paved the way for independence.

When Bose assumed the presidency of the Congress in1938, the party ruled seven of the eleven provinces of British India. Punjab and Sind in the north-west, and Bengal and Assam to the east were out of the party’s kitty. After the fall of the Sadullah led Muslim League ministry in Assam, Bose rushed to the state to cobble up a Congress led coalition government, in contravention of Abul Kalam Azad’s – the Central leader overseeing Assam affairs – decision to oppose the formation of a Gopinath Bordoloi led coalition as he was short of votes. Bose reasoned that a Congress-led rule would improve Hindu-Muslim relations and strengthen nationalist solidarity against British rule. With the assistance of Mohammed Tayebullah and Debeshwar Sarmah, Bose mustered the electoral support in favour of Bordoloi and also helped him in sinking differences with the Barak Valley Congress stalwarts over the composition of ministry. When it was decided that all provincial governments run by Congress must resign to oppose Britain’s unilateral move to involve India in the war effort, Bose strongly pitched for the Bordoloi government to continue out of concern for Assam’s geo-strategic interests. Bapu later acknowledged Bose’s acumen.

During his 1939 visit to Guwahati, while presiding over the meeting of the All Assam Progressive Youth Association, Bose narrated an incident of the Assam Oil Company workers who ended a six month long strike upon the ‘defence of India’ proclamation. He also recalled the hardships faced by the tea workers and deliberated on the international scenario which was ripe for India to demand ‘Swaraj’. In an earlier political mission to Shillong via Guwahati, Bose visited Cotton College on 31st of October 1938. In an animated speech, after a rousing welcome, he drew attention of the students towards trade and commerce of the country, issues of poverty and unemployment and the nation’s political developments. He urged them to work tirelessly for the country’s progress. His admiration of a strong and developed state was ecumenical.

The post Glimpses Into The Life Of Legendary Bose – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Myanmar’s terrorist – Buddhist monk Wirathu is untouchable inside the country. In 2003 he was sentenced to 25 years in prison but was released in 2010 along with other political prisoners. Most keen observers knew the reason as to why this anti-Muslim zealot was freed by the regime. He was to serve as its pit bull and inciter for committing hate crimes and ethnic cleansing drives against the minority Muslims, esp. the Rohingya people that live in the Arakan (Rakhine) state of Myanmar, bordering Bangladesh.

And Wirathu continues to deliver for the regime. He has effectively become the face of Burmese Buddhism. His ‘969’ fascist movement has led to widespread hate crimes and genocidal campaigns against the minority Muslims all across the Buddhist-dominated country, and has brutally rendered more than a million Muslims homeless. Many Burmese Muslims are risking their lives to get out of this den of hatred and intolerance, once called Burma. So frightening is the situation inside Myanmar, esp. the Rakhine state, even the Rohingya refugees that live under horrible conditions in makeshift camps inside Cox’s Bazar district of Bangladesh don’t want to return to their ancestral land inside the Buddhist country.

That is what Buddhist terrorism has done for its victims! And Wirathu’s signature is everywhere in all such genocidal activities against the minority Muslims since his release from the prison.
In recent days, Wirathu has again shown what a monster and ugly devil he is. He had the audacity of calling the UN special envoy – Yanghee Lee – a ‘whore’ and a ‘bitch.’

So what was Ms. Lee’s crime? Well, Ms Lee, who was on a 10-day trip to the South East Asian country, said the Rohingya faced systematic discrimination. She criticized draft legislation, proposed by a coalition of nationalist Buddhist monks, which includes curbs on interfaith marriage and religious conversions.

All these proposals and calling a spade a spade were too much for the Buddhist monk Wirathu to swallow. Last Friday, he spoke at a public rally where he criticized the UN interference and personally attacked Ms Lee, according to local media.

“We have explained about the race protection law, but the bitch criticized the laws without studying them properly,” he said from the stage to the crowd.

“Don’t assume that you are a respectable person because of your position. For us, you are a whore.” He added, “You can offer your arse (ass) to the kalars if you so wish but you are not selling off our Rakhine State.”

And yet, despite world-wide condemnations for his sexist and insulting remarks, the Myanmar government has not silenced its pit bull – the foul-mouthed monk – Wirathu.

I am not surprised. As already hinted, he is their guy, doing their evil, playing their games and ethnically cleansing Muslims from the face of Myanmar – which were/are all sanctioned by the Myanmar government for decades.

The Fortify Rights, a human rights group, last year provided evidences showing that discrimination of the Rohingya Muslims was the state policy. It was premeditated and willful. It said that the government’s orders, shown in leaked documents, amounted to “state policies of persecution” in Rakhine state. In a report, Fortify Rights said it had analyzed 12 government documents from 1993 to 2013, and found that government policies imposed “extensive restrictions on the basic freedoms of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar’s Rakhine state”. The policies restricted Rohingya’s “movement, marriage, childbirth, home repairs and construction of houses of worship”, it said. Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine state were also prohibited from travelling between townships, or out of Rakhine, without permission, the report said.

The report said a government order stipulated that married Rohingya couples in parts of Rakhine state could not have more than two children, while another document said Rohingya had to apply for permission to marry, in what the report described as a “humiliating and financially prohibitive” process.

One document published in the report said officials should force a woman to breastfeed her child if there were doubts over whether she was the birth mother.

The restrictions against the Rohingyas have been known about for some time, but what’s new for the world community back in February of 2014 was that campaigners said they had the official orders issued by the Buddhist-dominated local government in Rakhine state.

A year is approaching soon since the publication of the report from the Fortify Rights. And nothing has happened to motivate the criminal Myanmar regime and its murderous rank and file within the larger Buddhist community to change its genocidal policies against the Rohingya people, who remain the most persecuted people in our time.

Last week, the UN passed a resolution calling on Myanmar to give the Rohingya people citizenship.

It is highly unlikely that the Myanmar regime will oblige. Its pit bull – the face of Burmese Buddhism – has already opened its ugly mouth, insulting the UN, of which Myanmar remains a member state. The UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein has called on religious and political leaders in Myanmar to unequivocally condemn all forms of incitement to hatred including abhorrent public personal attack against Ms. Lee. Instead of apologizing, Wirathu has defended his personal attack on United Nations special rapporteur Yanghee Lee, saying senior monks had used similar language in the past – even at the sacred Shwedagon Pagoda.

Buddhist monks are a powerful political lobby inside Myanmar. With a general election scheduled this year I doubt any political leader would speak up and risk Wirathu and the fascist monks turning on them. It should also be noted that Buddhist monastic code, called Patimokkha, allows for use of such abusive words that were used by Wirathu.

It would be thus foolish of the world community to expect the unexpected from inside Myanmar. It has to take actions that are meaningful and that stop the extinction of the Rohingya people.
As I have said a number of times, feeding only carrots to an unruly donkey won’t do the tricks. Only biting sanctions can sober the Myanmar’s pariah regime and its pit bull Wirathu. When they feel the pain they will know what have contributed to their pains and hopefully, change their demonic course for the better.

The post Wirathu: The Pit Bull Of Myanmar Regime – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Despite more pessimism at the World Economic Forum this year than last, central bankers and economic leaders were more upbeat about economic prospects for the year ahead. With the International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasting 3.5% growth this year, panellists at a session on the global economic outlook pointed to the upside potential of the European Central Bank stimulus package, falling oil prices, structural change in Brazil, China and Japan, and robust growth in the United States.

The ECB decision on quantitative easing (QE) lays the ground for stimulus in the Eurozone but the challenge now is for governments to move ahead with structural reforms. “We have done our part, but the ECB cannot raise productivity, increase employment or encourage investment. That requires a more comprehensive set of reforms,” said Benoît Coeuré, Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank, Frankfurt. Explaining the ECB’s intervention, he said: “We could not sit by and watch the political foundations of the European project being undermined.”

Other panellists welcomed the ECB package while underlining the need to back up this monetary manoeuvre with structural reforms, including labour market reform and fiscal stimulus to increase aggregate demand. “QE creates the space for the structural reforms and investment,” said Min Zhu, Deputy Managing Director, International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington DC.

The decline in the oil price is a boost to growth in most economies and will ease the transition to structural reform. This is the case in Brazil despite its growing oil production. Joaquim Levy, Minister of Finance of Brazil, said the country is shifting from increasing incomes of its poorest citizens, which was the focus of its economic policies for the past decade, to building investment, both by companies and the government. “Our goal is to make Brazil a nimbler, more agile market, where it is easier to do business,” he said.

Japan is also well into implementation of a programme that includes aggressive monetary easing, gradual fiscal consolidation, and structural reform that are intended to lay the foundations for 2% growth this year. Haruhiko Kuroda, Governor of the Bank of Japan, is upbeat not only about Japan’s growth prospects but also about China. “China is making huge structural reforms while continuing to grow at 7.5%,” he said.

US economic performance is strong and provides a significant boost to global demand. But Zhu warned that much of the growth is coming from consumers and government spending, with private investment still relatively low. Meanwhile, he called on policy-makers to put the poorest countries, which have been battered by economic headwinds, at the top of the policy agenda.

Technology will play a huge and unpredictable role not only in the real economy but also in the financial sector through payments and trading systems. The potential is huge, said Mark J. Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, but prudence is necessary. “We don’t want to find ourselves in an Uber situation in the financial markets,” he added.

The post Economic Prospects Brightened By ECB Package, Falling Oil Prices, Structural Reforms appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Divya Kumar Soti*

As details of the troubled dark past of the Paris attackers are emerging, the failure of intelligence agencies in preventing the attacks is well evident.

The two brothers, Cherif and Said Kouachi, who carried out the shooting at the Charlie Hebdo office had known linkages with a notorious jihadist ring which had been operating since 2003 from 19th Arrondissement of Paris. The 19th Arrondissement network began to operate after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. It drew inspiration from Arabian jihadist figures like Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi and Anwar Awlaki. The jihadists linked with the network have been found to be associated with terrorist conspiracies in Iraq, Tunisia, Algeria and France.

Cherif Kouachi was arrested by French police in 2005 while he was leaving for Iraq to take part in jihadist activities there. He spent three years in prison pending trial, and was ultimately convicted, but was released in lieu of custodial period already served while under trial. While in jail he came in close contact with Al Qaeda’s recruiter of Algerian origin, named Djamel Beghal, as well as Amedy Coulibaly who killed four hostages at the Kosher Grocery Store. Cherif Kouachi was again arrested along with Coulibaly in connection with a plot to secure the escape of a leading Algerian jihadist from French prison but was later released as investigators were not able to find adequate evidence.

Still in 2011 the Kouachi brothers were able to travel to Yemen via Oman where they attended short duration arms training camp and met Al Qaeda preacher and then leader of Al Qaeda in Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) Anwar Awlaki. While the Kouachi brothers proclaimed at Charlie Hebdo office that they are acting on the behest of AQAP, the latest video released on the internet features Coulibaly swearing allegiance to Islamic State’s self-proclaimed Caliph al Baghdadi. In the video, Coulibaly claims to have worked in coordination with Kouachi brothers as they carried out strikes against Charlie Hebdo office. Coulibaly may be heard in the video as saying: “We did some things together, some things separate – that way we would have more of an impact… We arranged it to synchronize so we would go out at the same time, which was not a problem.”

The fact of coordination between them is also evident from the reports in European media to the effect that Coulibaly’s wife Hayat Boumeddiene (also wanted in connection with Paris attacks) slipped into Islamic State-controlled area of Syria as early as Jan 2. Investigations have revealed that Hayat was maintaining constant contact with Cherif Kouachi’s wife before she left for Syria.

New tactical cooperation

This is the first case where jihadists from Al Qaeda and Islamic State may have closely coordinated their actions without any sanction from their respective high commands. Clearly, the nuanced ideological differences and hegemony struggle between the Al Qaeda and Islamic State leadership has not affected the close relationship between the committed grassroots jihadists who once worked as part of the same network. While the Islamic State twitter handles hailed the Paris attackers, a clearer statement is still to emerge from Al Qaeda’s central leadership based in Pakistan. But the Al Qaeda leadership will find it extremely difficult not to welcome this voluntary coordination.

Hit and run, hit again

The Paris attackers may have unknowingly or knowingly laid down a new tactical model which other terror modules may try to emulate in future. While the Kouachi brothers hit a soft target i.e. Charlie Hebdo office, they took no hostages nor did they exchange fire with the police. They simply vanished from the scene drawing thousands of French policemen in a massive manhunt.

While this was going on Coulibaly sprang into action shooting down a policewoman the next day. Again Coulibaly did not pick up any skirmish with security personnel and ran away using the metro. The following day when police was able to zero in on the Kouachi brothers, Coulibaly emerged again and attacked the kosher grocery store and staged a simultaneous hostage crisis. All this manoeuvering which involved mysterious street shootings in different parts of the city amplified the paranoia among the masses. This is what Coulibaly means when he says “……….that way we would have more of an impact”.

Case similarities with Sydney cafe attacker

The perpetrators of the Paris attacks had a well-known criminal record and radical leanings like Man Haron Monis, who took 18 people hostage in Sydney’s Lindt Cafe on Dec 15, 2014. Both Kouachi brothers and Monis had been on the watch list of French and Australian security services respectively but were dropped later as their activities did not look all that notorious. Monis, a born Shia, had recently converted to Sunni faith and had sworn allegiance to Baghdadi on his website, just a day before he attacked the Lindt Cafe.

Time to revisit penology

Cherif Kouachi during the period he spent in the French prison became even more committed to the global jihadist cause as he came in touch with key Al Qaeda operatives lodged in the same jail. Coulibaly, who was in jail on robbery charges, also got radicalized through the same influences. Clearly, the classification of prisoners in French jail was faulty and helped in the hardening of terrorists. Every prison system has lessons to learn from the entire episode which underlines the need to keep under trials and ordinary felons segregated from terrorist ideologues and recruiters.

These happenings also underline the need for constantly monitoring the terror under trials out on bail as well as terror convicts after they are released while serving their sentences.

*Divya Kumar Soti is an independent national security and strategic affairs analyst based in India. He can be contacted at contributions@spsindia.in

The post Counter Terrorism Lessons From Paris Attacks – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.