Quantcast
Channel: Eurasia Review
Viewing all 73702 articles
Browse latest View live

Zarif, Kerry Meet Amid Hopes For Breakthrough In Nuclear Talks

$
0
0

Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif met with his U.S. counterpart John Kerry on Monday March 16 in Lausanne, Switzerland to continue the nuclear talks.

Abbas Araghchi, a senior diplomat on the Iranian negotiating team, expressed hope that this round of talks will resolve “important differences”.

The meeting between the foreign ministers was to take place on Sunday but an extension of talks between the two delegations which included head of Iran’s Atomic Agency Ali Akbar Salehi and Edward Moniz U.S. Secretary of Energy, pushed it to Monday.

Following this meeting, the Iranian foreign minister will travel to Brussels to meet with the European members of the 5+1.

Kerry has expressed hope about significant progress in the next few days adding that the remaining differences are political as opposed to technical.

The parties are supposed to reach a final and comprehensive agreement by the end of June.

The post Zarif, Kerry Meet Amid Hopes For Breakthrough In Nuclear Talks appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Sri Lanka: Missing Persons Commission To Hand In Interim Report On Wednesday

$
0
0

Sri Lanka’s Presidential Commission to Investigate into Complaints Regarding Missing Persons is to hand in an interim report to President Maithripala Sirisena on Wednesday, the Secretary to the Commission, Mr. H. W. Gunadasa has said.

According to the official, the report has already been finalized and it will be handed to the President on the 18th of this month.

The Commission has recorded statements from witnesses regarding 303 cases of disappearance during the first week of this month. The Commission has received 471 complaints.

The Commission earlier this month concluded the public hearing of the cases in the Trincomalee District of Eastern Province.

During the public sittings in Trincomalee District from 28th February to 3rd March, the Commission interviewed 303 complaints.

Out of the 294 complainants invited by the Commission, 128 attended the hearings. The Commission also interviewed 175 new complainants while during its 4-day hearings 474 new complaints were registered.

Since the Establishment of the Commission on 15th August 2013, the Commission up to date has received in excess of 20,106 complaints inclusive of approximately 5,000 complaints from relatives of missing security forces personnel.

The post Sri Lanka: Missing Persons Commission To Hand In Interim Report On Wednesday appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Return Of The Native: CPI-Maoist In Kerala – Analysis

$
0
0

On 7 December 2014, in the first ever incident of its type, personnel of Thunderbolt, the elite paramilitary commando unit of the Kerala Police exchanged fire with a six-member team of the Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-Maoist) at the Chappa forest area located on Kozhikode-Wayanad border. No casualties were reported as the Maoist team escaped following a 10-minute long encounter. In the subsequent days, small teams of Maoists vandalised forest offices at Wayanad and Palakkad and carried out an attack on a private quarry-cum-crusher unit in Kannur district.

On the basis of these three incidents, that occurring occurred within a span of two months (December 2014 and January 2015), it is difficult to conclude that Kerala could soon become a stronghold of left-wing extremists. However, what is undeniable is that the social conditions that allowed the rise of Naxalism in the late 1960s in Kerala continue to persist and are again being exploited by the extremists. Worse still, in spite of at least a two-year old input of the CPI-Maoist’s foray into the region, the state administration has done little to meet the exigencies.

Inspired by the Naxalbari uprisings, Kerala witnessed the first incident of left-wing extremist violence in the form of a raid on the Thalassery police station in North Malabar’s Kannur district on 21 November 1968. The attack, however, ended in a failure. Of the 1000 Naxals and their sympathisers planned to take part in the raid, only 315 turned up. A lone grenade hurled at the police station failed to explode and as the sentry at the police station set off the alarm, the group fled.

Two days later, however, a successful attack was carried out on the Pulpalli police wireless station that resulted in the killing of some police personnel. Other raids on the same day targeted estates of landlords in the Wayanad forests by armed peasants, workers and students under the leadership of Kunnikal Narayanan. Grains seized from the estates were distributed among the poor. However, most of the people who took part in the attack, including Arikkad Varghese and Philip M. Prasad, were arrested.

Following these raids, Naxal supreme leader Charu Majumdar sent a congratulatory message hailing the “heroism and courage displayed by the impoverished masses of Kerala” which he said “have raised a new wave of enthusiasm among the revolutionary people all over India.” However, apart from the fact that arrests played a role in weakening the Naxal movement in Kerala, Majumdar’s insistence on targeting the unarmed landlords and zamindars further divided the Naxals in the state. Leaders like Kunnikal Narayanan wanted to remain focused on attacking the police stations.

Few more raids took place in the subsequent years. In 1969, a police station in Kuttiyadi was attacked, in which Naxal leader Velayudhan was killed. In 1970, Naxals killed a landlord in Thirunelly and looted grains from another landlord’s house.

The spike in extremist violence led the Congress party-led state government to launch an operation that led to several Naxal leaders being arrested. Prominent leader, 32-year old Arikkad Verghese, was killed in controversial circumstances. Such measures crushed the Naxalite movement in Kerala by 1976. Charu Majumadar’s hope that the “heroic peasant revolutionaries of Kerala would lead the tens of millions of revolutionary people of India,” failed to materialise.

The December 2014 and January 2015 incidents, have been interpreted as a resurfacing of left-wing extremism in the state after nearly four decades. Districts like Palakkad, Malappuram, Kozhikode, Wayanad, Kannur, and Kasaragod have been identified as areas of Maoist presence. State police sources indicate that these districts would link up the Eastern Ghats to the Western Ghats and provide the Maoists a safe route for movement of cadres and arms.

While these assessments could be true, what is being forgotten is that the CPI-Maoist has been building up its base in the tri-junction of Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu at least since 2011. The Kerala government had been alerted by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2011 regarding the outfit’s plan to develop the tri-junction into a ‘perspective area’ for their activities. However, riding on a lethargic state response, by 2012, the CPI-Maoist had prepared well for launching the second stage of its presence in that region by declaring the formation of the Western Ghats guerrilla zone in Dakshina Kannada. The outfit made an abortive bid to attack the Thirunelly police station on 18 February 2012 to mark the martyrdom of Arikkad Varghese. And yet, till the attack on December 2014 took place, the state administration did little in terms of a futuristic plan of meeting the extremist challenge.

In terms of human development indicators, districts like Mallapuram, Wayanad and Palakkad lie at the bottom, thus, constituting perspective areas for Maoist growth and operation. The CPI-Maoist is a far more organised and capable extremist outfit compared to the Naxals who were crushed in the 1970s. Kerala would do well to develop a synchronised plan of development and security to respond to the emerging threat.

This article was published at IPCS.

The post Return Of The Native: CPI-Maoist In Kerala – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Spain Allocates 600,000 Euros To Voluntary Return Program For Immigrants

$
0
0

Spain’s Ministry of Home Affairs collaborated in both 2013 and 2014 on the Voluntary Return Programme coordinated by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which seeks to help Sub-Saharan immigrants in an unlawful situation in Morocco return to their country of origin, by providing an economic contribution of 600,000 euros.

Through this budget, the Ministry of Home Affairs has contributed to financing the travel expenses necessary to return immigrants in an unlawful situation to their country of origin.

Specifically, in November 2013 and July 2014, the ministerial department headed up by Jorge Fernández Díaz made two economic contributions for a sum total of 400,000 euros and, in January 2015 (charged to the 2014 budget), a third contribution of 200,000 euros which was not initially forecast but which was made with the aim of providing continuity to the IOM’s activities, taking into account the highly satisfactory results being obtained.

According to the Spanish government, a total of 1,775 immigrants from 20 countries have benefited under this voluntary return program between the start of 2013 and December 2014. The main countries of origin of those immigrants receiving assistance are the Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Guinea Conakry, Senegal and Nigeria.

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) is an inter-governmental organization set up in 1951 under an international treaty, which is currently made up of 127 Member States, including Spain. The IOM has been working on the Voluntary Return Programme since 2005, not only organising the return of Sub-Saharan immigrants, but also promoting the necessary conditions (training, material resources) so that on returning to their country of origin they can integrate both socially and with a job.

According to the data on the return program, between January and December 2014, more than 70% of returnees have benefited from a reintegration program in their country of origin. Of this number, 94% have initiated some form of professional activity. The IOM allocates an average of 1,500-3,000 euros for each one of these reintegration projects.

Of the 1,775 people to benefit under this program, 77% are men and 23% are women. The number of unaccompanied minors that received aid totaled six, while 37 people were identified as victims of abuse.

The post Spain Allocates 600,000 Euros To Voluntary Return Program For Immigrants appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US Shuts Diplomatic Missions In Saudi Arabia Amid Security Fears

$
0
0

By Ghazanfar Ali Khan

Operations at the US Embassy in Riyadh and its consulates in Jeddah and Dhahran in Saudi Arabia have been halted in the wake of “heightened security concerns,” it was announced on Sunday.

According to Stewart Wight, a spokesman of the embassy, “all consular services and diplomatic missions in the three Saudi cities will be cancelled for two days — Sunday and Monday.”

Wight also forewarned all US citizens to be aware of their surroundings and to take extra precautions when traveling throughout the country.

He clarified that “this warning does not apply to other Gulf countries.” Saudi officials contacted by Arab News chose not to comment on the issue.

Asked about the restoration of consular services, Wight said that they would “review” the situation and decide accordingly. The security advisory posted on the embassy website, however, warned Americans to be careful, as the embassy had received credible information that they could be targeted by militants.

They have also been advised to carry cell phones at all times, and to make sure their mobiles have emergency numbers pre-programmed.

Wight said that the “telephone lines to the consular sections at the US missions will not be open during the two days.” He called on US nationals to contact emergency numbers in case of any emergency.

The statement on the embassy website does not mention a specific security threat and does not call for the evacuation of facilities.

However, an intelligence source revealed that the security measures were triggered by a serious car bomb threat.

The embassy also warned on Friday that Western oil workers risked being attacked or kidnapped by “terrorist” groups.

The post US Shuts Diplomatic Missions In Saudi Arabia Amid Security Fears appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Sri Lanka: Constitutional Changes Spell Future Trouble – Analysis

$
0
0

By Dr Kumar David

The most important and admirable political development in Lanka in the recent period was the defeat of Mahinda Rajapakse and the election of Maithripala Sirisena (MS) as president in his stead on 8 Jaunary 2015.

The country was fast slipping down the road of manifest authoritarianism; the charge that siblings Mahinda, Gotabhaya and Basil were a dictatorial and corrupt triumvirate was widespread and it was the principal reason for defeat notwithstanding the regime’s popularity among many in the Sinhalese community for defeating the LTTE. The voting pattern signals the possibility of national reconciliation; just less than half the Sinhalese (45%) voted for MS (sans intimidation, flouting of election law and large scale bribery by the incumbent, it would have been larger) while Tamils and Muslims supported MS in overwhelming numbers; 85% and 95%. Lanka after a long time now has a government with a multi-ethnic, multi-faith support base. Several small but significant steps have been taken in the 50+ days since the election to lighten the subjugation that minorities have long complained of; there is reason to be hopeful.

The style of the men too is different; the contrast is as stark as black and white. Though clever at beguiling the electorate Mahinda Rajapakse was not a good person. The pages of the press are now (sic!) inundated with exposes of abuse of personal power (apart from political abuse), nepotism on a previously unheard of scale, charges of money laundering, wrongful appointments, the grotesque impeachment of the Chief Justice before a Kangaroo Court, a power grab to secure a third term by a constitutional amendment forced-marched through an obsequious parliament, and even connections to the underworld. The police wanted to arrest sibling Gotabahaya for arms laundering but instead had to do with confiscation of his passport as Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW) reckoned arrest would not be electorally popular with the Sinhalese. (A parliamentary election is due in June).

Sirisena’s dignity, humility and good behaviour has turned into something of a hit both at home and abroad; I understand Modi and the Indian public too warmed to him on his recent visit. He is low key and understated, he has put aside pomposity and trumpet blaring; his wife comes across as a simple and charming lady. The contrast with the arrogance and misbehaviour of the Rajapakse clan is a cause for much felicity; however SM, a veteran of 45 years in politics is no fool. I believe that in the constitutional and political domain he is moving with careful thought and strategy which brings me to the substantive portion of this essay.

Are promises like pie crust made to be broken?

When MS reneged on his promise to abolish the Executive Presidency (EP) he was the third after Chandrika Kumaratunga and Mahinda Rajapaksa who broke this pledge. The Memorandum of Understanding which launched his campaign reads: “The present executive presidential system will be abolished within a hundred days and replaced by a Parliamentary form accountable to the people. Under the Parliamentary system, the President will symbolize national unity and have duties and powers appropriate to the position”. There is not a shred of ambiguity. This refers to a figure-head president fulfilling ceremonial functions. Some may opine that that is not a good idea; the point here is that this is what was pledged by Candidate Sirisena and those who backed him.

The 100-Day Work programme which defines his presidency says: “Wednesday January 21: The process will begin of abolishing the authoritarian executive presidential system and replacing it with an executive of a Cabinet of Ministers responsible to Parliament”. Note carefully the use of the words “abolishing” and “replacing”. Are we now to conclude that the intention was to beguile a gullible public with a phoney pledge that he would abolish EP? I am repeating an unambiguous statement so the notion that the public was deceived after the votes were counted is hard to evade. Sirisena is a good man, many would say an excellent man, and I certainly abhor the return of Rajapaksa, but all that is another matter. This judgement that he reneged on his pledge to abolish EP is legitimate. This point has to be made before discussing the 19-th Amendment (19A) now before parliament. It is a sobering thought that power can influence even good men. As a compromise I would have accepted transitional executive powers for this directly elected president, but for this one term only; but the drafters of 19A have passed this option by.

An interesting question is what does RW, the other centre of power since it was his party, the UNP, that steered MS’a victory, want? RW was a devotee of President JR Jayewardene’s theory which launched the Executive Presidency in 1978, but he has changed. Either anti-EP pressure was too strong to withstand or he puked at former Presidents Kumaratunga’s and Rajapakse’s abuses of EP. If now guided by personal advantage he would wish to reduce presidential and enhance prime ministerial powers and aim at wining the impending parliamentary elections and remaining PM. If he covets future presidential ambitions, the converse holds. Maybe he is not motivated by a personal calculus and is cruising along with the art of the possible.

The curate’s egg

The Punch cartoon of 1895 was intended to poke fun at class in Victorian England – snobbery and grovelling. The humble Curate not daring to divulge that the egg at the overweening Bishop’s breakfast table was rotten, squeaks out “Oh, no my Lord, in parts it is excellent”. Over time the idiom lost its relish and came to denote something that is partly good and partly bad. After the Sirisena-RW double act ends, the negative side of 19A may come into play.

Although we were promised a Westminster-like parliamentary system, what 19A offers is modelled half-heartedly on the semi-presidential French Constitution. The French president is elected nationwide [so will be ours: Articles 2(b) and 4 (30) (2) of 19A]; so is the French parliament which de facto chooses the prime minister, only formally appointed by the president. The president cannot dismiss the PM unless he loses his majority or suffers parliamentary censure. When the president’s side controls parliament he is dominant in executive action, choosing whoever he wishes as PM and Ministers who implements his programme and agenda; he is the prime national figure. If this happens in Lanka the state will once again be susceptible to the worst excess of the Rajapaksa era.

However if the president’s opponents control parliament, he will be hamstrung and must choose a prime minister and cabinet which will implement a programme and agenda that he may oppose. When opposing parties control parliament and presidency in France they call it cohabitation since the French don’t care what you do so long as you pronounce it properly! If it happens in Lanka it will be more brawling than habitation. (The MS-RW duet is different for special reasons to do with MS’s election).

Unlike most parliamentary systems the French prime minister and cabinet ministers need not be members of the National Assembly (parliament). This is an attempt to mingle incompatible presidential and parliamentary systems. The former requires separation of powers, the latter a merger of the executive and legislature. Since neither structure is explicit in 19A an unstable future beckons. The root of the failure of the French system, and a lesson that Lanka will learn the hard way, is that a president elected nationwide caries the image and expectation of being the source and font of state power. If he commands a parliamentary majority he is a potential autocrat, another Rajapaksa. If parliamentary majority, and therefore PM and cabinet are opposed to him, we have deadlock. Deadlock worse than between the Obama Administration and the post November 2014 US Congress because Obama at least has a cabinet entirely of non- Congress persons of his choosing.

The powers vested in a US president are huge; not so under 19A. A president voted in under 19A without a parliamentary majority, will be a lame duck, but sporting the plumes of a peacock. The directly elected presidency must go; either way it is bad. Either it absorbs or it contradicts the supremacy of parliament. The president’s role as “Head of the Executive” [Article 4 (30) (1)] must be rescinded. But the functions and duties envisaged in Article 6 (33) (1-3) are commendable and should be retained; inter alia these expectations include, symbolise national unity, uphold the constitution, preserve religious and ethnic harmony, promote reconciliation, ensure the proper functioning of the Constitutional Council, and certain specified ceremonial duties.

Edible portions of the egg

There are several commendable or interesting provisions in the 19A draft. Independence in the appointment and functioning of key Commissions has been rescued from Mahinda Rajapaksa’s megalomaniac power grab. The old repealed 17-th Amendment has been restored via 19A and appointment criteria and procedures for eleven Commissions specified – Elections; Public Service; University Grants; Police; Audit; Human Rights; Bribery; Finance; Delimitation; Procurement; Official Languages. Appointment will be on the recommendations of a Constitutional Council, chaired by the speaker and including the prime minister, leader of the opposition and seven other parliamentarians. The function of the Constitutional Council is to recommend appointments to the aforesaid eleven commissions and to approve the appointment of judges of the higher courts, members of the Judicial Services Commission, the Attorney-General, the Auditor-General, IGP, Secretary General of Parliament and the Ombudsman.

There will be a Council of State (CoS), not to be confused with the Constitutional Council (a bad name conveying an incorrect meaning – Appointments Council would have been appropriate). A CoS is to be established since Lanka does not have a Senate or Second Chamber. Its functions will be purely advisory on matters of policy, advice on gazetted bills and matters referred by the president or the cabinet. It is a toothless entity; its method of appointment drives home this impotency.

Thirty six persons of “integrity and eminence” will be appointed to the CoS on the joint recommendation of prime minister and leader of the opposition, twenty more (again integrity and eminence is specified) will be appointed by leaders of other political parties, and a few stragglers may creep in as appointees of independent groups. All Provincial Chief Ministers are also in the CoS. It is not sated, but I trust well understood, that the CoS shall not include parliamentarians – that would be a preposterous travesty of the “two-house” concept. This needs to be explicitly specified as no scam is beyond the imagination of Lanka’s parliamentarians. Crucially, fifty-six of sixty-five CoS members are nominated by parliamentary leaders; hence it is going to be a made in parliament rubber stamp!

The powers of the president are tightly ring fenced since under Article 7(2) and (3) of 19A “The president shall always, except in the case of the appointment of the prime minister or as otherwise required by the Constitution, act on the advice of the prime minister or other minister”.

Though “the president may require the prime minister or minister to reconsider, but shall act on the advice given after such reconsideration”. Therefore a president who is not from the governing party, though directly elected by a popular mandate, is a lame duck with a phoney halo. I repeat that a directly elected parliament and a directly elected president, when of opposed political hues, constitute a scheme designed for intra-state conflict. My duty is to speak truth to power though power will take no notice. There is a new air of freedom and absence of fear everywhere in Sri Lanka; surely 19A should aid these winds of change, not throw a spanner in the works.

The post Sri Lanka: Constitutional Changes Spell Future Trouble – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

India: Maoist Ebb In Telangana – Analysis

$
0
0

By Fakir Mohan Pradhan*

After a protracted political slug fest and acrimonious protests, the new State of Telangana was created on June 2, 2014, bifurcating Andhra Pradesh. According to the arrangement, Hyderabad will remain the joint capital for both the States for ten years, after which Andhra Pradesh will have its own capital and Hyderabad will be transferred entirely to Telangana. While Telangana has 10 Districts, the residuary Andhra Pradesh has 13. Interestingly, even as the undivided Andhra Pradesh successfully broke the backbone of Maoist movement in the State, the Maoists managed retain a shadow of their presence in the State. That shadow remains visible in Telangana.

At the time of the creation of Telangana, there was some apprehension that the Maoists would find conditions in the new State favourable to engineer a comeback, particularly in view of the fact that the movement for the bifurcation of Andhra was deeply penetrated by Maoist elements. Eight months after the creation of the new State, however, the profile of Maoist activities has not changed significantly.

On February 14, 2015, the Bhadrachalam Sub-divisional Police claimed to have foiled a bid by Maoists to plant explosives in the Korkatpadu forest area in Charla mandal in Khammam District to kill policemen. Four persons were arrested, including Madakam Deva (20), a special guerrilla squad (SGS) member and Madakam Jogaiah (21), a ‘militia commander’. The Police team seized one directional mine and one landmine, 100 metres of electric wire, two electrical detonators and one electric battery from them.

On December 28, 2014, the Bhadrachalam Sub-divisional Police had thwarted a bid by Maoists to blast a cell phone tower, after a half- hour exchange of fire, at Satyanarayanapuram in Charla mandal. The Police recovered three weapons, live ammunition, bows and arrows, petrol cans and revolutionary literature from the incident site. SFs reached the spot after receiving specific information about the Maoist plan.

According to partial data compiled by South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP), the new State of Telangana, since its inception, recorded two civilian fatalities and one Maoist fatality in 2014. Before the bifurcation, one civilian and one SF trooper had been killed in 2014 in the Telangana region. Thus, the area that now comprises the Telangana State recorded a total of five fatalities – three civilian, one SF trooper [an SPO from Chhattisgarh killed during a private visit] and one suspected Maoist – in 2014. The same area had recorded three fatalities – two civilians and one SF trooper – in 2013. There has, so far, been no casualty in 2015 in Telangana in Left Wing Extremism (LWE)-related incidents.

On December 29, 2014, State Director General of Police (DGP) Anurag Sharma observed that there was no current Maoist activity in Telangana, but that the ultras enter the State from neighbouring States to attempt mischief: “After bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, the Greyhounds (anti-Naxal force) was divided and whatever units have come to us, they are good enough. We are also training the District Special Parties to tackle the Maoists.” Seven incidents of exchange of fire with Maoists took place during 2014, resulting in the death of one extremist, Sharma added, and as many as 68 Maoists surrendered before Police, while 18 were arrested. 166 Maoist cadres hailing from Telangana were still underground.

On the basis of underground and over ground activities of the Maoists, Khammam District remains moderately affected while Adilabad, Karimnagar, Mahabubnagar and Nalgonda Districts are marginally affected.

The Maoist, however, are unlikely to give up their efforts to revive the movement in Telangana – the region that was, for decades, their ‘heartland’. The Karimnagar Police foiled Maoists’ attempts to revive party activities in the District with the arrest of three persons, including a militant, and the recovery of a huge quantity of ammunition and INR 1.6 million in cash from their possession, on January 13, 2015. Karimnagar DSP J. Rama Rao disclosed that, on credible information, the rural Police arrested Botla Rajendra Kumar (48) of Cheelapur village in Bejjanki mandal (revenue area), Sunil Kumar (53), an illegal arms dealer from Kanpur, and his assistant Vikas Kumar (31), from the Railway Station, and recovered the ammunition and the cash.

Maoists are also making efforts to revive their old dalams (armed squads) in Adilabad District, though the area has not recorded significant rebel activity after the death of Cherukuri Rajkumar alias Azad in an encounter on July 1, 2010. According to sources, the Maoists have revived their Mangi and Indravelli dalams and are focusing on fresh recruitments. Police claim that they were involved in two exchange of fire incidents in and around Mangi Forest in September 2014. In both instances, the Maoists escaped unhurt. Sources indicate that the Maoists are trying hard to impress upon the people that the welfare programmes of the present Telangana Government were only due to the struggle waged by the CPI-Maoist in support of the poor. Some reports suggest that the Maoists are planning to remove Adilabad from the North Telangana Zone (NTZ) and merge it into the Dandakaranya Zone, as this would provide them with a shelter zone when SF pressure is exerted on the Andhra Odisha Border (AOB) area.

Telangana has not deviated from the anti-Maoist strategy followed by the erstwhile united Andhra Pradesh, despite pockets of sympathy in the State’s political leadership. At best, the Maoists would like to use Telangana as a base for their activities in the highly affected and contiguous areas of Chhattisgarh and the Gadchiroli District of Maharashtra. There is little evidence, however, that Telangana would provide them the necessary space and licence to secure even this limited objective.

*Fakir Mohan Pradhan
Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management

The post India: Maoist Ebb In Telangana – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

UK And US Flawed Assessments On Pakistan’s Strategic Utility – Analysis

$
0
0

By Dr Subhash Kapila*

The single-most striking feature of foreign policy formulations on South Asia of Britain and the United States are their flawed assessments on Pakistan’s strategic utility to their respective national security interests, singly and jointly.

Prevailing overwhelmingly in the strategic calculations of Britain and the United States centring on Pakistan are a number of flawed assessments that Pakistan is of great strategic value for the stability of South Asia and the region and that Pakistan is a reliable Western ally of long standing and strategic value in the furtherance of British and American security interests in South Asia and that Pakistan is an essential partner in combatting global terrorism.

Further, both Britain and the United States have bought the myth sold to them by successive Pakistan Army Chiefs that it is the Pakistan Army that shields the West from global terrorist outfits like the Al Qaeda earlier and now the ISIS as articulated by the present Pakistan Army Chief.

Flawed assessments of Pakistan’s strategic utility by Britain and the United States and imparting an over-sized strategic halo on Pakistan by both of them have encouraged Pakistan to box much above its strategic weight. Basking in this unwarranted strategic halo, Pakistan has pretentions of strategic equivalence with India, and hence its disruptive strategies in South Asia.

Pakistan as a dysfunctional and failing state stands reflected in many of the assessments of British and American intelligence agencies and in business risk-forecasting estimates. These estimates chiefly arise from the explosive mix of disruptive factors that characterise the Pakistan state in 2015. This explosive mix comprises political instability; constant spells of Pakistan Army rule; a Pakistan Army induced ‘garrison state’ and ‘siege mentality’; economic backwardness arising from disproportionate defence budgets dictated by the Pakistan Army; and, more significantly where nuclear weapons are bandied as ‘Islamic Nuclear Bombs’ combined with use of Islamic Jihadi terrorism as an instrument of state-policy; all of these threaten the stability of South Asia and contiguous regions.

Britain and the United States have no cogent reasons to offer to substantiate their strategic fixation that Pakistan is of great strategic value for the stability of South Asia. On the contrary, the historical record of the last over six decades of South Asia amply illustrate that South Asia would have been stable and secure but for the region-disruptive policies of Pakistan.

Strategically ironic is the fact that in British and American Pakistan-fixated policy formulations, there is a policy blindness and irresponsible obliviousness to the prevailing strategic and military delinquencies of Pakistan, the Pakistan Army and its notorious intelligence agency, the ISI engaged in fostering proxy wars on both flanks of Pakistan through its Jihadi militias and terrorist outfits. British and American Forces fighting in Afghanistan against global terrorism were at the receiving end of Pakistan’s strategic delinquencies and double-timing.

Moving to the second point of Pakistan’s strategic utility to Britain and the United States as a staunch Western ally of long-standing and which can be relied upon to further British and American strategic interests in South Asia and the region, again, their policy establishments need to refer to their respective intelligence agencies’ assessments on Pakistan.

In this regard, one would like to first dwell on Pakistan’s record of strategic utility to the United States as its major strategic patron and then dwell on Pakistan’s strategic utility to Britain as the latter flows from the former.

Pakistan has been a rental state of the United States and the Pakistan Army a rental army available for furtherance of United States policy formulations of tactical expediency in South Asia. To this end the Pakistan Army was collusive in drone strikes on its own people, when with its own intelligence agency could have neutralised the terrorist elements nurtured by it in its frontier regions, without massive collateral damage to the rest of the population.

Pakistan moved out of the American strategic-utility orbit soon after 1962 when it exchanged the United States for China as its main strategic partner and military mainstay.

Pakistan Army’s double-timing of the United States post-US intervention in Afghanistan in 2001 is well documented and too recent to be recounted. This Pakistani double-timing of the United States occurred despite large infusions of US military and financial aid by to Pakistan in the last fifteen years, not forgetting the earlier billions of aid pumped into Pakistan.

Moving to analysis of Britain’s flawed assessments on Pakistan’s strategic utility to Britain in South Asia and the region, let it be said without further analysis that Britain has no realistic strategic interests in South Asia which Pakistan can be used for furtherance of.

In my assessment, Britain’s strategic interests in South Asia get strait-jacketed into the loyal furtherance of United States strategic formulations on South Asia.

Britain does have legitimate political and economic interests in South Asia centring on the rise of India as an emerging power and the British imperatives to invest politically and economically in India’s potential and its strategically benign rise. In terms of South Asia it is India that is better placed strategically as opposed to Pakistan for Britain to carve a niche in South Asia.

However, for the furtherance of Britain’s above spelt strategic interests, Pakistan has no role to play. On the contrary, Pakistan-fixated British strategic formulations can not only distort British formulations in South Asia but also affect Indian public perceptions of Britain.

Britain’s chief interests in Pakistan arise from the British domestic politics factor where the nearly three million strong Muslim populations in Britain, predominantly from Pakistan, have emerged as a political factor in electoral politics in certain constituencies.

Going by recent reports on rise in Islamist tendencies in Britain and some terrorism attacks in the past, Britain should legitimately hope that Pakistan could be a strategic asset in calming the restlessness that seems to be shaping in the Muslim community in Britain.

In this direction, no evidence has emerged to suggest that Pakistan has contributed in any meaningful way to inject messages of reason and advice to the Muslim community in Britain that they should get assimilated as responsible citizens of the liberal British society. In that case Britain could have then considered Pakistan as a strategic asset to Britain. .

On a wider and higher strategic plane beyond the South Asian confines is the consideration as to what extent Pakistan as the staunch Western ally provided political and military support to British and American security interests and interventions in the Middle East? During the Gulf Wars when other Muslim nations were fighting along with the US-UK coalition in Iraq, where was Pakistan as the “Major Non-NATO Ally”?

Lastly, the myth bought by Britain and USA that the Pakistan Army stands as a wall protecting the West against global terrorist outfits like the Al Qaeda and the ISIS, let the facts available speak for themselves. The horrific 9/11 attacks on USA were conceived, financed and facilitated by Pakistan as per Western published sources. Osama bin Laden was ensconced in the heart of Pakistan Army’s most prominent garrison town for years until liquidated directly by US Special Forces actions.

Concluding, strong strategic imperatives exist contextually for the United States and Britain to revise their assessments of Pakistan’s strategic utility to their respective national security interests. Pakistan’s strategic utility is exclusively reserved for China and no amount of ‘strategic halos’ endowed on Pakistan by Britain and the United States will tempt Pakistan to wriggle out of China’s tight strategic embrace.

*Dr Subhash Kapila is a graduate of the Royal British Army Staff College, Camberley and combines a rich experience of Indian Army, Cabinet Secretariat, and diplomatic assignments in Bhutan, Japan, South Korea and USA. Currently, Consultant International Relations & Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group. He can be reached at drsubhashkapila.007@gmail.com

The post UK And US Flawed Assessments On Pakistan’s Strategic Utility – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Konfrontasi: Why It Still Matters To Singapore – Analysis

$
0
0

Despite happening almost fifty years ago, Konfrontasi (Confrontation) occupies a unique place in Singapore’s national memory. Why does it still matter to Singapore today?

By Daniel Wei Boon Chua

Konfrontasi (1963-66) was a low-intensity campaign launched by Indonesia’s President Sukarno to oppose the formation of the Federation of Malaysia, which Singapore was a part of from 1963 to 1965. Although much of the conflict was fought near the Malaysian-Indonesian border in Borneo, Singapore’s security and economy suffered severely during the campaign. The most significant incident of Konfrontasi was the bombing of MacDonald House on Orchard Road by two Indonesian marines on 10 March 1965, resulting in three civilians dead and 33 others injured. The impact of that event was lingering diplomatic tensions between Singapore and Indonesia until 1973.

On 10 March 2015, a memorial to commemorate the event and Konfrontasi was inaugurated opposite MacDonald House. Yet not many Singaporeans are familiar with the details of the bombing and the larger context of Konfrontasi. How much did Konfrontasi affect Singapore and why does the conflict still resonate with Singapore today?

Understanding Konfrontasi in Singapore

In a speech in Singapore on 27 May 1961, the Prime Minister of Malaya, Tunku Abdul Rahman, announced the idea of a federation of states, which would include Malaya, Singapore and the British territories in North Borneo, Sarawak, Sabah as well as Brunei. President Sukarno, who harboured intentions of unifying the archipelagic region in a Greater Indonesia, accused the West of seeking to preserve their grip on Southeast Asia through neo-colonial states and opposed the formation of the Federation of Malaysia vigorously.

After the diplomatic route of proposing an alternative grouping, Maphilindo involving Malaya, Indonesia and the Philippines, fell through and the formation of Malaysia was realised in 1963, Indonesia’s campaign to ‘crush’ Malaysia escalated from political, economic and psychological confrontation to armed aggression against the Malaysian Federation.

When Malaysia was formally established on 16 September 1963, Jakarta expelled the Malaysian ambassador, and subsequently severed trade links with Malaysia and Singapore on 21 September. In fact, armed conflict had begun in Tebedu, Sarawak, as early as April 1963 and lasted until September 1965. Most of the clashes occurred near the Malaysian-Indonesian border in Borneo, which the Indonesians called Kalimantan, and subsequently spilled into Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore. Between 1964 and 1966, two Singapore Infantry Regiment (SIR) battalions were involved in fighting the Indonesians in Johore and Sabah.

Indonesia’s objective in Singapore was to disrupt Singapore’s financial capital and trade. During Konfrontasi, Singapore’s economy suffered because of the loss of almost 24% of Indonesian trade in 1964, as well as the bombings that turned away potential foreign investors. Indonesian soldiers in plainclothes were believed to have instigated a violent racial riot on 4 September 1964.

On 14 November 1964, an attempt by ten Indonesian marines to sabotage an oil installation was foiled. One landing on the east of Singapore on 1 December and another on 28 December were also stopped when their movements were observed and reported by civilians. Apart from targeting key installations on the island, Indonesian regulars also conducted hit-and-run bombing attacks, including the bombing of MacDonald House.

The last major operation was launched on 26 June 1965 when four boats carrying 26 regulars arrived to attack a police station and a power station. The attempt ended in failure with the sinking of all four boats by security forces. After Singapore separated from the Federation of Malaysia on 9 August 1965, Indonesian incursions and bombings in Singapore ceased. The fall of Sukarno after a coup on 30 September 1965 shifted political power to General Suharto who declared the end of Konfrontasi in 1966.

MacDonald House bombing and its aftermath

Indonesia’s only successful attack on Singapore was the bombing on 10 March 1965 at MacDonald House, in which were located a British bank and the Australian Commission. The two perpetrators from the KKO, a unit of the Indonesian Marines, were apprehended while trying to escape by boat, put on trial and given the death sentence in 1968. Although Singapore’s relations with Indonesia improved when power shifted from Sukarno to Suharto, the execution of the two marines responsible for the bombing of MacDonald House during Konfrontasi heightened tensions between the two countries.

Despite pleas for clemency by Foreign Minister Adam Malik and President Suharto, Singapore stood firm by the verdict and executed the marines on 17 October 1968. Their bodies were handed over to the Indonesian embassy and transported back to Jakarta where they were hailed as national heroes. The bodies of the two marines were received by a large crowd at the airport and buried at the Kalibata Heroes’ Cemetery. In Jakarta, a young mob sacked the Singapore embassy and tore down the Singapore flag. Members of the Singapore mission in Jakarta vacated the embassy before the violence broke out and were unharmed.

Indonesia was able to move on from the incident after Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s first official visit to Indonesia in May 1973, when he scattered flowers at the graves of the two marines. During the visit, the foreign ministers, S. Rajaratnam and Adam Malik, signed a border agreement that demarcated the maritime boundary between Singapore and Indonesia. In August 1974, Prime Minister Lee hosted President Suharto on his first official visit to Singapore, completing the rapprochement between the two countries.

Why Konfrontasi needs to be remembered

The hanging of the two Indonesian marines in 1968 was a setback to bilateral ties but was necessary to assert Singapore’s independence. In early 2014, the naming of an Indonesian Navy ship, KRI Osman Harun, after the two marines, Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said, reopened old wounds and stirred up emotions among Singaporeans and Indonesians alike. Because Singapore conducts joint military exercises with the Indonesian Navy, the naming of KRI Osman Harun was not just insensitive, but also damaging to bilateral relations. Singapore has also expressed its disappointment over the ship naming faux pas.

The memorial to Konfrontasi inaugurated on 10 March 2015 is significant because it serves as a reminder of an important event in Singapore’s history. Clearly, memories related to Konfrontasi can still affect relations between two close neighbours. It is, therefore, vital that Singaporeans develop an awareness and understanding of the political events of one of its closest neighbours and appreciate how changes in Indonesia could adversely affect Singapore’s diplomacy and economy.

*Daniel Wei Boon Chua is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.

The post Konfrontasi: Why It Still Matters To Singapore – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Ebola Has ‘Terrifying’ Impact On Nine Million Children

$
0
0

Ebola has had a devastating impact on children, who make up about 20 percent of infections in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. To protect them and their communities, it is critical to defeat this scourge, while working to restore basic services, UNICEF said in a report released Tuesday.

And, for many of the 9 million children living in affected areas, Ebola has been terrifying. These children have seen death and suffering beyond their comprehension.

“The outbreak will not be over until there are zero cases, and every single contact has been traced and monitored. We cannot afford to let our guard down,” said Barbara Bentein, UNICEF’s Global Emergency Coordinator for Ebola. “At the same time, basic services need to be re-established safely and responsibly, using the assets of the response.”

The report looks at the dramatic impact Ebola has had on children as it hit some of the most vulnerable communities in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries. Of the more than 24,000 people infected, some 5,000 are children, while more than 16,000 children have lost one or both parents or their primary caregiver.

The report also points to the central role communities are playing in the response and shows encouraging trends in safe behaviours. In Liberia, for example, a survey indicates that 72 per cent of people believe anyone with Ebola symptoms will get better care at a treatment centre, which is significant because many used to keep Ebola victims at home, spreading infection in the community.

While participating in the Ebola response, UNICEF and its partners have immunized thousands of children against other deadly diseases like measles, strengthened primary health care services, and helped minimize the risk of Ebola infections when schools reopened following months of closures that left 5 million children out of school.

In the longer-term, investing in improving health care systems in Ebola affected countries will help tackle other diseases such as measles, pneumonia and diarrhoea, which take a heavy toll on children. Planning for longer-term recovery must draw on gains made during the response, to build back better and address historical inequities, the report said.

The post Ebola Has ‘Terrifying’ Impact On Nine Million Children appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Afghanistan: Islamic State Replacing Taliban – UNSC

$
0
0

The Islamic State has infiltrated into Afghanistan and is attempting to step into the Taliban’s boots, acknowledged the UN Security Council. Russia’s representative to the UN warns Central Asian states could be the next stop for the Islamic extremists.

The presence of the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) fighters in the country has been confirmed by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA).

The UN envoy to Afghanistan acknowledged that the IS could potentially unite minor Islamist groups in the country under a new command.

“It is UNAMA’s assessment that the group’s presence is of concern, but that ISIL’s significance is not so much a function of its intrinsic capacities in the area but of its potential to offer an alternative flagpole to which otherwise isolated insurgent splinter groups can rally,” Nicholas Haysom announced at the UN Security Council, as cited by the Associated Press. Still, the IS has not established “firm roots” in the Afghanistan, he noted.

Moscow has rushed to voice concern with the IS broadening its geographical activities into Afghanistan and spreading radical Islam further to the north into other Central Asian states.

Russia’s representative in the UN expressed deep concern with “increasingly frequent reports of the worsening situation in the north of Afghanistan, in areas bordering countries which were once Soviet republics and remain ‘our friends and allies.’”

Vladimir Safronkov, Russia’s deputy UN ambassador, called on to the UN Security Council to react immediately to prevent the IS’s further expansion that could “rock the boat” and destabilize the situation in Afghanistan with its newly-elected administration.

“The states of the region have legitimate concerns about this turn of events,” he said, according to the AP. “Turning it into yet another safe haven for fighters and extremists is categorically unacceptable.”

Afghanistan’s UN Ambassador Zahir Tanin confirmed information about the IS infiltrating Afghanistan, but stressed that “the main enemy we face is the Taliban that continue to fight against us,” marking out the presence of “some splinter groups with more extreme orientations.”

In early 2015, suspicion emerged that the IS is trying to replace white flags of the Taliban with their own black ones in war-torn Afghanistan.

In January, Taliban-associated militants claimed that several minor groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan established close contacts with the self-proclaimed caliph of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Later on senior Afghan and US army officials acknowledged that ISIS is doing “some recruiting” in the country.

Kabul is already battling the IS on its own soil. On Monday the news came that an airstrike by Afghan forces on Sunday eliminated militant commander Hafiz Waheed, who allegedly had ties to the IS.

The warlord was a successor to Abdul Rauf Khadim, killed in a US drone strike last month. Khadim, Waheed’s uncle, once a Taliban commander and Guantanamo detainee, allegedly used to have allegiance to the IS.

The US administration does realize the dangers of leaving Afghanistan all alone against the growing terror threat and might slow the process of withdrawing the remaining troops, the Associated Press reported on Saturday. With 10,000 American troops currently deployed to Afghanistan, Washington intended to decrease this number to 5,500 by the end of 2015 and withdraw all the troops completely by the end of Barack Obama’s second presidential term in 2016.

Now the US and Afghanistan are likely to reassess this schedule in special consultations due to take place shortly to make the withdrawal smoother and over a longer period.

2014 was marked with Afghanistan entering a new cycle of violence, becoming the bloodiest year since 2009. Nearly 3,700 civilians were killed in Afghanistan last year, according to the UN report released in February.

The post Afghanistan: Islamic State Replacing Taliban – UNSC appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US Opens Up To Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, Syria And Iran – OpEd

$
0
0

The appointment of Robert Malley as White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf Region is not considered a sufficient indicator that there will be any radical change in U.S. strategy despite the campaign launched against the U.S. by the Zionists due to its openness to Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Syria and Iran.

On 6 March, President Barack Obama’s administration appointed Robert Malley, the former senior director of the National Security Council who dealt with the Iraqi, Iranian, and Gulf issues, and a member of the delegation negotiating the Iranian nuclear programme, as the Special White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa and Gulf region. Malley is scheduled to assume his new position on 6 April, succeeding Philip Gordon.

Edward Abington, former U.S. consul general in occupied Jerusalem, described the lawyer specialised in “conflict resolution” as being an “American Jewish” and that his appointment is a “positive development”. He was also described by U.S. national security adviser Susan Rice as “one of our country’s most respected experts on the Middle East, since February 2014 Rob has played a critical role in forming our policy on Iran, Iraq, Syria and the Gulf.”

However, the Zionist Organisation of America (ZOA) opposed the appointment of Malley for several reasons, stating that Malley is an “Israel-basher, advocate of U.S. recognition of major, unreconstructed terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah, and proponent of containment of Iran (i.e., not preventing them from attaining nuclear weapons) and proponent of negotiating with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad (i.e. not changing his regime).”

He also believes that working with the Muslim Brotherhood is “not a bad idea” and called Israel’s settlements located in the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967 “colonies”. He also called for abandoning the Road Map for Peace approved by the international Quartet in 2003 and replacing it with a comprehensive settlement plan to be imposed on the parties with the backing of the international community, including Arab and Muslim states. He did so before the Foreign Relations Committee in the U.S. Senate in 2004. He also continues to urge the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Fatah, Palestinian Authority and Hamas “to unite”.

Malley also called for “involving” Hamas in the PLO’s negotiations with the occupation, explaining his statement by saying that the PLO must include Hamas because it has become “antiquated, worn out, barely functioning, and is no longer considered the Palestinian people’s sole legitimate representative.” He also called for the resumption of negotiations between the Arabs and Israel “on all levels on the basis of the Arab peace initiative.”

The ZOA did not fail to mention his father, Simon Malley who was born and worked in Egypt as a journalist for Al-Goumhouria newspaper before moving with his family to France and founding Afrique-Asie magazine. The ZOA said that Simon Malley was “a virulently anti-Israel member of the Egyptian Communist Party, a close confidante of Yasser Arafat, and an enthusiast for violent Third World ‘liberation’ movements.” As for his mother, Barbara Malley, she worked with the United Nations delegation of the National Liberation Front (NLF), the Algerian independence group.

Robert Malley was Barack Obama’s colleague at Harvard Law School and a Middle East affairs adviser for his 2008 campaign. However, Obama was forced to cast him aside due to the Zionist campaign against both of them after Britain’s the Times revealed that Malley had been in contact with Hamas.

In his media interviews Malley explained that the contacts were part of his work with the International Crisis Group, saying: “My job with the International Crisis Group is to meet with all sorts of savoury and unsavoury people and report on what they say. I’ve never denied whom I meet with; that’s what I do.”

He added that he used to inform the State Department about his meetings beforehand and briefs them afterward. During the same year, London’s Al-Hayat newspaper quoted deputy head of the political bureau of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, and Hamas official Dr Ahmed Yousef as saying: “We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign.”

Before this, Malley, who was a member of the U.S. negotiating team in the 2000 Arafat-Barak-Clinton summit at Camp David, was the target of an Israeli-Zionist campaign because he held all three leaders responsible for the failure of the summit, and not only the late Palestinian leader, who was repeatedly accused by Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and their team of negotiators of causing the failure.

Morton A. Klein, president of the Zionist Organisation of America, said: “How exactly does someone, who is dropped as an adviser because he advocates recognition of, and meets with, the genocidally-inclined terrorist organisation Hamas, now became a senior adviser to the president, unless President Obama has all along agreed with much of what Malley thinks and advocates?”

Due to the fact that the appointment of Malley coincided with the crisis in relations between the U.S. and Israel, caused by the recent speech made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before the U.S. Congress behind Obama’s back and without his approval, analysts have begun to talk about “changes in the U.S. role in the Middle East” in the context of the Israeli media outlets and its Zionist and Jewish arms abroad.

They have also predicted that “there will be no doubt that the U.S. policy will be focused exclusively on pressuring Israel over the course of the last 22 months of Obama’s term,” as written by Jonathan S. Tobin in America’s Commentary magazine on 10 March.

During this time, Obama will be “free of electoral pressure” so the Obama administration’s treatment of the Palestinian issue is about to take on a much more aggressive attitude over the next two years. This will allow Obama to “invest the little political credit he has left in ‘bringing world peace’,” as written by Alex Fishman in the Israeli daily the Yedioth Ahronoth.

In Fishman’s view, there are now two courses of work on the White House’s agenda. First, it can follow the path of the “European Initiative” which proposes issuing a UN Security Council resolution for a “lasting solution in the Middle East”, while the second path involves waiting for the results of the Israeli elections this week, as it is a “renewal of the American peace initiative, which will have behind it a very skilled, determined person, who isn’t very fond of the current government: The president’s new man in the Middle East,” Robert Malley.

It is clear that these courses of action, the appointment of Malley and his record will undoubtedly breathe life into the PLO’s negotiating team, especially since President Abbas repeatedly says that going to the UN and international organisations, as well as the latest PLO’s Central Council recommendations, do not necessarily mean that negotiations will be abandoned.

These negotiations can also be considered new material used by the American camp in the Arab League to justify its on-going pressure on the PLO to continue to rely on the United States.

The appointment of Malley indicates one conclusion: that the U.S. is heading towards a new initiative to resume negotiations between the PLO and the Israeli occupying power without making any changes to its references. If the PLO interacts and deals with the “European initiative” then it is likely to deal and interact with any new U.S. initiative, according to all indications in this regard.

In this case, the PLO’s recent diplomatic actions not related to the negotiations and the United States has merely been “playing on borrowed time” while waiting for the results of the Israeli elections.

However, these actions can still be built upon in order to completely depart from the American vision for the “resolution of the conflict” in the event that Netanyahu is re-elected as prime minister.

On the other hand, Hamas should not be fooled by Robert Malley’s positions towards the movement, despite its importance, as it is an attempt to contain the movement and drag it into “negotiations” between the PLO and Israel based on the same references rejected and opposed by Hamas thus far.

As for Malley’s performance in Iran, Iraq, Syria and the Gulf, over the past year, which was praised by Susan Rice, it has had catastrophic consequences on the ground that speak for themselves. Malley’s openness to Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran and Syria is nothing more than tactical dealings in order to serve the unchanged U.S. strategy with forces that have proved their presence.

Appointing Robert Malley as White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf Region is not a sufficient indicator of any radical change in the U.S. strategy that is on the verge of tearing the Arab world apart, along with its Islamic surroundings, unless it is deterred. This is true despite the Zionist campaign opposing his openness towards Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Syria and Iran.

The post US Opens Up To Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, Syria And Iran – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

India: How To Intervene – Analysis

$
0
0

By C. Raja Mohan*

During his two-day visit to Sri Lanka, Prime Minister Narendra Modi walked the fine line between encouraging a political reconciliation between the majority Sinhalese community and the minority Tamils, and avoiding any impression of dictating a settlement. Modi presented India as an engaged but not too intrusive a neighbour. He did something similar when he went to Nepal last year and called on its parliamentarians to quickly wrap up the writing of the constitution.

India’s neighbourhood policy has learnt, over the years, to carefully navigate between the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of its neighbours and the need to manage the indivisible nature of the subcontinent’s security. India’s intervention in Pakistan to liberate Bangladesh in 1971 and the deployment of a peacekeeping force in Sri Lanka during 1987-90 are just two examples of how India gets drawn deep into the internal affairs of its neighbouring countries.

Beyond those major interventions, India is often accused of constantly trying to micromanage the internal affairs of its neighbours. China, in contrast, never forgets to mention that it follows a strict policy of non-intervention in the affairs of other countries. Beijing has found particular resonance for this approach in South Asian capitals, where India is often attacked as a neighbourhood bully.

The Great Game Folio

On the face of it, Beijing’s policy of dealing with whoever is in power seems smart and risk-free. Not really. Recent developments in Sri Lanka show that Beijing’s approach has problems of its own. In Lanka, Beijing got so closely identified with the unpopular regime of Mahinda Rajapaksa that it now faces difficulties in adapting to the regime change in Colombo.

Non-intervention, of course, is not necessarily neutral; it tends to benefit the regime in power irrespective of the merits of a situation. Given the geopolitical unity of the subcontinent, New Delhi does not have the luxury of treating the principle of non-intervention as absolute. That does not mean Delhi can claim a divine right to intervene in the internal affairs of its neighbours. India’s own experience in Lanka reminds Delhi that some interventions can turn out to be rather costly and still ineffective. The extent and nature of India’s involvement in the internal politics of its neighbours, then, must be based on a prudent judgement of the specific situation at hand.

Demand side

The question of intervention in the subcontinent is often discussed as a problem on the supply side – India’s great power ambitions and its presumed hegemonic tendencies. But there is a demand side as well. Political leaders in neighbouring countries often seek India’s support in resolving their internal disputes when it serves their interests, but are quick to accuse Delhi of meddling in their internal affairs when it does not.

Lanka’s former president, Rajapaksa, who blamed India’s intelligence agencies for rallying the opposition to oust him in the general elections last January, would have no reason to complain if RAW had “helped” him win the elections. The opposition to India’s intervention, then, is not based on principle but about who benefits and who loses from it. This says little about political hypocrisy in the subcontinent, which is endemic, but highlights the reality that Delhi’s policies have an impact on the internal power balances in neighbouring countries.

The demands for India’s intervention and the vehement political opposition to it are very much part of South Asian life and are unlikely to end soon. The former prime minister of Nepal, Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai, is facing flak in Kathmandu for saying that India has a role in helping to resolve the constitutional deadlock in his country. The Maoists used to argue that India’s regional hegemony was the greatest threat to Nepal. Some opposition leaders in Dhaka, who never missed an opportunity in the past to bash India, are now asking it to put pressure on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to hold fresh elections.

Maldives test

Before he can pat himself on the back for a fine diplomatic performance in Lanka, Modi now faces a big political test in the Maldives, where the regime of Abdul Yameen has arrested former President Mohamed Nasheed on charges of terrorism and a perverted judicial system has sentenced him to 13 years in prison.

As things boil over in the Maldives, Nasheed’s supporters want India to step in and stop the deliberate victimisation of the former president. But the ruling regime in Male will cry hoarse about India’s intervention if Delhi does anything.

Delhi, however, might find it increasingly difficult to remain mute spectator. In this particular case, it may no longer be a question of whether to intervene. For Modi, the challenge in the Maldives is about deciding when and how to act and deciding what goals Delhi must set for any prospective intervention, political or otherwise.

*The writer is a Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Delhi and a Contributing Editor for ‘The Indian Express’

Courtesy: The Indian Express, March 17, 2015

The post India: How To Intervene – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Texas: From Shale Boom To Water Revolution – Analysis

$
0
0

By James Stafford

Texas is famous the world over for two things on a massive scale: oil and droughts. Now the slick but dry state is becoming famous for water: that precious element that both resolves the drought problem and also makes it possible to pump more oil out of the ground.

Not only does Texas have the Permian Basin and the Eagle Ford shale, but it also has the Gulf of Mexico and its massive oil deposits and endless gallons of seawater that are now economically treatable thanks to next generation water processing technology.

As NASA predicts a decades-long ‘mega drought’ later this century, next generation water processing technology coming from within the oil industry promises not only to help solve Texas’ drought problem by accessing and desalinating brackish and slightly salty water sources deep under the dry Texan surface, but to go one step further by desalinating ocean water and turning dirty water into potable water.

While conventional desalination technologies only recover about 35% of fresh water from a gallon of seawater, new Dutch technology brought to Texas by a local company recovers approximately 97% of the fresh water at an economical cost. At the same time, the new technology uses no chemicals, rendering it quite possibly the ‘greenest’ water processing technology in operation today.

This ushers in the ability to add new water sources to our current ecological system by desalinating brackish and ocean water that previously was not considered in the amount of fresh water available for human consumption.

A Water Revolution Takes Root

Texas barely survived a seven-year drought in the 1950s, when 100,000 farms and ranches were lost, and a recent study by a NASA scientist says there is a good chance Texas may see something much worse than this as global warming leads to long-term drying in the west. This time it could be a mega drought—the worst in 1000 years–that could last for decades.

For the oil and gas industry, water-starved Texas is a highly competitive playing field and the competition between oil companies and other heavy users of water is intense. The shale boom and the hydraulic fracturing revolution have exponentially raised the stakes in this competition as demand for water has soared. Texas is where the fracking revolution began; and now it is where the water revolution is taking root.

Producers are surrounded in a pincher movement, both by critics of how much water they use and by internal pressure to ensure enough supplies of water to keep drilling and fracking.

The answer to Texas’ drought, concerns about future supplies of potable water, and oil industry fears of fracking drying up, is next generation technology that hits out at the water dilemma on three fronts simultaneously.

Salttech DyVaR Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) water processing technology was developed in the Netherlands by Salttech and was launched first by Texas-based STW Resources in July last year in Mentone, Texas, in the Permian Basin. The Salttech desalination system is now providing the residents of Mentone with more drinking water than they could have ever hoped for.

This is a win-win situation for all water end users, and environmentally, there are no snags: It’s a green process all the way, with absolutely no chemicals or filtration involved. And not only is the new technology providing all of Mentone’s drinking water—its entire operations are run on solar power energy.

The Salttech systems can be manufactured to process as many gallons of water per day as is needed, according to STW Resources Holding Corp, which has the exclusive license for this technology not only in the US, but also in Canada, Mexico and Central America.

For the oil industry, this is a breakthrough technology that could save it untold sums of money by reclaiming the massive volumes of precious water used in drilling and fracking and also processing produced water that accompanies oil and gas production.

For municipalities and local governments—particularly in Texas during this time of unprecedented drought–it means future water security by accessing new sources that were previously unusable just below the Earth’s surface.

For the ecosystem, it means creative conservation.

“With the shortage of fresh water worldwide, our technology can help in many areas to relieve the shortages. We can also assist in any ocean desalination reverse operations to exclude the need to dispose of the concentrated brine reject into local waterways and oceans thus preventing any possible detrimental effects to the highly sensitive balance of the ecosystem. This Salttech DyVaR is a major technological breakthrough since we can now economically process high chloride water into potable water and not have any detrimental effects on our environment,” Stanley Weiner, CEO of STW Resources, said in a January 2015 press release.

We’ve all heard of desalination technology before, but the sticking point—as it always is with new technology—is cost. Desalination has never been economical on a commercial scale before. Until now, the price of desalinated water projects has hovered around $8 a barrel, but the Dutch version comes in at around $1.50-$2.00 per barrel, or approximately $1,100-$1,350 per acre-foot of water.

Additionally, whereas your typical desalination plant returns only about 35% of the water, Saltech technology can return 97%–and this is a key factor in the economics and environmentally positive attributes of the technology.

Mentone was just the small beginning. Another Permian Basin project is planning much bigger things.

In the Capitan Reef Aquifer, in the city of Fort Stockton, Texas, STW is now drilling its first production well and planning to drill several additional wells into this and other brackish aquifers about 2,000-4,500 feet under the surface. The goal is to start selling water in the second quarter of this year.

This is nothing like the fracking revolution and the shale boom. This is a revolution of much greater proportions—and again, it’s playing out in Texas.

Source: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Texas-From-Shale-Boom-to-Water-Revolution.html

The post Texas: From Shale Boom To Water Revolution – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Could A BLACK-BAT Have Secured Ukraine? – Analysis

$
0
0

Paul Poast and Johannes Urpelainen believe the answer is yes. In fact, they’re convinced this military option, which could pattern itself after the three-nation Baltic Battalion, remains the most reliable one to secure Kiev’s long-term future.

By Paul Poast and Johannes Urpelainen*

This site and the news are understandably dominated by Ukraine. World leaders have described the situation as potentially “apocalyptic” and Russia’s forceful acquisition of Crimea harkens back to a time of territorial power politics, increasing fears of a renewed Cold War.

Many commentators have offered their insights into the ongoing crisis and how it could play out over the coming months and years. We are not seeking to add to this commentary. Instead, we ask a different question, “if Ukraine survives the present crisis, then what?” Moreover, what could have gone differently over the past two decades to prevent the crisis from occurring? Was a showdown over Ukraine inevitable?

We argue that it was not inevitable. This contention is based on the relationship between states in democratic transition and international organizations (see here and here). States in the midst of consolidating their democratic institutions can and have made use of international organizations to facilitate their transitions. The experience for some of these states, especially those in Eastern Europe, suggests that the situation in Ukraine did not need to reach the point of crisis. In fact, it seems that Ukraine’s inability to join certain regional international organizations (IOs) has played a major role in bringing the crisis about. This suggests that Ukraine’s future can be secured by creating its own IO modeled on the Baltic Battalion (BALTBAT).

Ukraine and regional international organizations

Ukraine has membership in a number of IOs, such as the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. But Ukraine lacks full membership in the most lucrative regional IOs, namely NATO and the EU. Ukraine has remained outside these organizations during a time where other post-Soviet states throughout Central and Eastern Europe have secured membership. While some of these other states were the relatively stable and large countries of Central Europe (e.g. Poland), others were immersed in the devastating wars following the collapse of Yugoslavia (e.g. Croatia), and still others, like Ukraine, directly border Russia (e.g. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania).

Ukraine’s accession failure was not due to a lack of effort on the part of its post-Soviet government. Following the end of Communist rule, the Central European countries of Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia created the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) to signal to their Western neighbors a competence and willingness to engage in regional economic cooperation and, eventually, to pursue Western integration. However, the ‘Visegrad three’ decided to prevent Ukraine from joining CEFTA. The leaders in Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia were aware of Ukraine’s desire to be a CEFTA member, but as Hungarian Prime Minister Jozsef Antall remarked, “Ukraine should be able to join the world and the European countries through various channels. However, I do not think it would be expedient to include Ukraine [in an association with the Visegrad countries]”[1] Ostensibly, the reasons pertained to Ukraine being in a different stage of development than the Visegrad three countries. Instead, CEFTA expanded into Slovenia, leaving Ukraine out.

We cannot prove that Ukraine’s membership in CEFTA or other regional organizations would have changed the country’s future, but there are reasons to believe so. For the Visegrad group, CEFTA was a critical early step toward a decidedly Western foreign policy – one that eventually led to EU and NATO membership. Had Ukraine followed a similar course, it could have achieved a more secure position vis-à- vis its mighty Eastern neighbor.

What, then, could Ukraine have done differently? The Baltic experience offers some lessons.

The Baltic model

During the Second World War, Hitler was desperate for Ukraine’s land and natural resources, and this desire motivated his ignominious Russian campaign. Hitler, however, never pined for Lithuania, Latvia, or Estonia as he did for Ukraine (though he did publicly acknowledge that the fate of Lithuania was in Germany’s interests). Nevertheless, the Baltic experience offers lessons for Ukraine in the realm of geopolitics.

Upon independence, the Baltic states feared a renewal of Russian aggression. NATO members, particularly the United States, shared this concern, but Russia was adamantly opposed to Baltic membership in NATO. Wary of provoking Russia, NATO withheld membership from the Baltic states.

Rather than accept their fate, the Baltic states took the initiative in proposing the Baltic Battalion (BALTBAT) to help pool together military resources. In a Memorandum of Understanding, the Nordic states (some of whom, like Denmark, were also NATO members) offered material and technical assistance to BALTBAT.

This was a smart move by the Baltic states. States with fledgling democratic institutions (such as the Baltic states at the time and Ukraine at present) tend to benefit from forming their own organizations, as the road to membership in more lucrative established organizations, such as NATO, is often unavailable. Forming their own organizations enables these states to tailor institutions to suit their needs, pool limited resources, provide a low cost means for established states to filter assistance through the organization, and, perhaps most importantly, signal a desire to participate in the increasing international ‘legalization’ favored by the established Western democracies.

Following the Baltic model?

Were similar options available to Ukraine? Given its inability to join CEFTA (and, ultimately, EFTA and then the EU) could Ukraine have followed a similar path by creating its own IO? And would such a strategy be effective today?

A regional integration scenario might prove viable for non-NATO members in the Black Sea region, such as Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova. In a Black Sea equivalent of BALTBAT – call it BLACK-BAT – both regional NATO (particularly Turkey) and non-NATO states could provide technical and material assistance to these Black Sea states. While BALTBAT was oriented towards peacekeeping operations, a BLACK-BAT organization might take on a different focus, such as naval cooperation in the Black Sea and beyond. Indeed, Ukraine actually took steps in this direction. Just as the Baltic states offered to participate in NATO peacekeeping operations without a guarantee of NATO membership, Ukraine participated in NATO’s ”Ocean Shield” naval operations to prevent piracy off the eastern coast of Africa.

Besides regional integration, Ukraine’s other alternatives appear unattractive. First, Ukraine could follow the example of Austria during the Cold War, by existing as a neutral buffer state between NATO and Russia. However, research shows that the fate of buffer states is precarious, as the major powers on either side have an incentive to invade and occupy the buffer.

Second, Ukraine could suffer the fate of Germany after World War II: being divided into two countries, a ”West” Ukraine and an ”East” Ukraine (producing the irony that the decision to split Germany in 1945 was reached at the Yalta conference). Splitting the country recognizes the sharp divisions between the Eastern and Western halves of the country. Ukraine, as Lincoln Mitchell writes, is a country “where the western half was Poland, the eastern half was Russia, and Kiev was pulled in both directions”. A West Ukraine would be free to join NATO, while East Ukraine could either be annexed by Russia or remain in its sphere of influence as an independent state. However, particularly if Russia annexed East Ukraine and took steps to stop NATO accession of West Ukraine, NATO and Russia might again be drawn into conflict.

Third, NATO could call Russia’s bluff. Russia eventually relented to Baltic membership. The United States and its allies could move forward with accession talks. Of course, this risks provoking even more aggressive measures by Russia.

In the short to medium term, none of these are attractive alternatives. Each risks either unnecessarily escalating the crisis or permanently relegating Ukraine to secondary status in the European system. The Baltic experience points to a more constructive approach, one in which Ukraine can take charge of its own security without concerns of Russian reprisal or Western rejection. To paraphrase Theodore Roosevelt, this middle course suggests that Ukraine’s leadership avoid inflammatory rhetoric towards Russia, but grab hold of a BLACK-BAT.

*About the authors:
Dr. Paul Poast is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University, New Brunswick. He received his B.A. from Miami University (Oxford, OH), his M.Sc. from the London School of Economics and Political Science, and his Ph.D. from the University of Michigan.

Dr. Johannes Urpelainen is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. His research focuses on international cooperation and institutions, environmental policy, and energy poverty.

[1] “Three Visegrad Leaders Discuss Ties,” 14 March 1992, in Foreign Broadcast Information Service, Daily Report: East Europe (hereafter, FBIS-EEU) 25. March 1992: 2-3.

The post Could A BLACK-BAT Have Secured Ukraine? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Jordan: Islamic State Cell Discovered

$
0
0

Jordanian authorities have discovered a Daesh cell in Mafraq, Jordan, according to Roya News.

The investigation is ongoing. As of now six Syrians stand accused of working directly with Daesh.

The city of Mafraq, which is located in the northern part of Jordan, is also home to Zaatari refugee camp, which hosts more than 83,000 Syrian refugees.

In fact, a recent surveyed showed that Syrians make up 88 percent of Mafraq’s total population.

Since the onset of the Syrian crisis four years ago, approximately 806,993 Syrians have fled to Jordan.

Original article

The post Jordan: Islamic State Cell Discovered appeared first on Eurasia Review.

How’s European Gas Race Going? – OpEd

$
0
0

Looking at developments the European Union has given the impression that it is working to solve both the Ukrainian crisis and find a solution to its energy problem. Coming next winter, the EU would need to have all its ducks in a row if it is to extract itself from under Russia’s control.

Energy officials from Brussels to Sofia are pushing forward to secure more Caspian volumes against Russian gas leverage — in an effort to secure gas for both their nationals and their businesses.

As it happens, the EU officials could just have found the solution they were looking for as they turned east to the Caspian region to solve their energy conundrum. Europe first considered Azerbaijan, the initiator of the only Caspian gas supply route in Western direction, and energy-rich Turkmenistan, but later turned to Moscow with a new proposal to join the TAP.

“Russia can use the Trans Adriatic Pipeline from a regulatory and political perspective, for shipping its gas to the EU countries, if the country builds the “Turkish Stream” pipeline,” Brendan Devlin, advisor in the European Commission’s DG energy told EurActiv.

“It doesn’t matter who the shipper is, and we don’t care if it is Russian gas, Libyan gas and Azerbaijani gas. The internal market works like that. It’s the rules that we have set up for Russia, or for Gazprom,” Devlin said. “And as we require them to implement those rules, they are free and welcome to use pipelines in the European Union on the same basis.

TAP, one of the core links of the Southern Gas Corridor designed to Supply Shah-Deniz gas to Europe, has been granted an exemption from Third Party Access. But, beyond this exemption, TAP is subject to TPA as any other pipeline in the EU under the EU legislation. However, this does not nullify pipeline’s commitment to transport Azerbaijani Shah Deniz-2 gas to the European market.

It seems now that not only Russia has changed its tactics—using third parties as Turkey to bring gas to the EU borders, it looks Europe has tried to win more discounts.

Chi Kong Chyong, the research associate at the Judge Business School and director of the Energy Policy Forum at the University of Cambridge, believes it was a rather intelligent decision by regulators to exempt only the first phase of the TAP from TPA, since a fair competition should be applied to all suppliers who would like to use extra capacity, including shippers with Russian gas.

“This is exactly what the Russians are pointing to if you analyze their proposal for inland pipeline connecting the Turkish Stream offshore with Greece-Turkey border – the end point of this onshore pipeline is just 10km away from the entry point of TAP,” he wrote in an e-mail to AzerNews.

The expert notes that if Russia wants a ‘free ride’ and use the capacity of TAP they can do this by just lowering the price. “Hence, price competition might emerge between Russia and say Azerbaijan. This is exactly what Europe needs, as a consumer,” the expert notes.

The EU officials earlier insisted that the South Stream could not bring gas into Europe unless it confirmed to European energy competition rules, which would include allowing other suppliers to put gas into the pipeline. While some analysts doubt the feasibility of the Turkish Stream, which replaced the South Stream, others say a route to Turkey makes strategic sense.

Chi Kong Chyong said the European Commission has officially stated in its recent European Energy Union Strategy that it welcomes both supply and route diversification.

“Russia is only mentioned once in the context of revising Europe-Russia energy relations when the ‘time is right’. What one can tell from this is that there is a political will from the European Commission to diversify away from Russia. This, of course makes the Turkish Stream politically unpalatable for Europe, at least for the time being and this of course is a function of Russian-Ukrainian conflict,” he wrote.

The expert notes that should Europe welcome the Turkish Stream, the latest version of Russia’s pipeline politics, it could potentially drive down Europe’s gas import bill.

“The Turkish Stream is as about bypassing Ukraine as it is about foreclosing competition from Caspian gas, particular coming from Azerbaijan and potentially from Turkmenistan, Iran, Iraq and Eastern Mediterranean Sea – Turkish Stream is Russia’s policy insurance against supply disruption on the Ukrainian route but more importantly against a potential loss of market share to other supplies in that region.”

Studies have predicted the use of natural gas in Europe to increase 1.5% annually, and the consumption to hit 550 billion cubic meters in Europe in 2020. At present, 160 billion cubic meters of the gas consumed in Europe comes from Europe, but this will fall to 140 billion cubic meters by 2020. As domestic production falls, EU states are increasingly dependent on imports from other regions in the world to meet their growing natural gas requirements.

Speaking about what could be Europe’s choice for supply routes, Chi Kong Chyong notes that Europe, as a net importer of energy, should have a strong interest in having well-functioning internal market so that to minimize market power and distortions – “a rational policy would be of course to welcome supply and route diversification, as it is officially stated in Europe’s policy documents”.

However, the expert does not exclude LNG both in terms of quantity and cost as other supply option in the long-term, saying “unless magic happens and shale gas potential can be unlocked in Europe, which I am skeptical about, especially observing the direction of the European energy policy – a strong call for further efficiency and more renewable.”

“There is indeed a more serious concern which goes much deeper than the question about energy security and supply diversification – a more problematic question, which affects all gas supply options to Europe is the wider future of natural gas in Europe over the 2025–2030 time horizon,” the expert concluded.

Gas should represent about 31% of the world energy demand growth between 2005 and 2020 (coal 25% and oil 22%), according to Enerdata. The European gas consumption should increase by 40% until 2020. The power sector is the main driver of this growth, capturing 53% of this increase.

The post How’s European Gas Race Going? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Egypt: Court Seeks Death Penalty For Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohamed Badie

$
0
0

The Giza criminal court is seeking the death penalty for Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohamed Badie and 13 others, and has referred the case to the Grand Mufti of Egypt, the country’s highest Islamic legal official, which is the first step towards imposing a death sentence, reports MISNA.

The Muslim Brotherhood was banned and declared a terrorist organization by Cairo authorities. According to the local media, the defendants were found guilty by the court of organizing a terrorist “operations room” to plan attacks on security forces and resist the state.

Badie was given the death penalty on other convictions last year, but the ruling was then overturned, while another death sentence was commuted to a life term.

Although the Mufti’s ruling is not binding, the ordinary court usually indulges the decision. The court’s final verdict is set for April 11. Many other Muslim Brotherhood top leaders are awaiting a final verdict with Badie, including his deputy Khairat el-Shater and former parliament speaker Saad al-Katatni.

Since the former army chief and current President Abdel Fattah al-Sissi ousted his predecessor, the Islamist Mohamed Morsi, on 3 July 2013, Cairo authorities carried out a violent crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood supporters, leaving at least 1,400 dead. The government is accused of manipulating the judicial system, leading to death sentenced in mass trials against hundreds of Brotherhood members and the arrest of some 15,000. On March 7, Egypt for the first tie executed by hanging a supporter of the ousted Islamist president, convicted for the violence in Alexandria.

Also Morsi, detained and on trial, risks the death penalty in at least four cases. The Mulsim Brotherhood, which won elections between 2011 and 2013, denies resorting to violence.

The post Egypt: Court Seeks Death Penalty For Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohamed Badie appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Brazil: Ruling Party Treasurer Formally Charged In Petrobras Scandal

$
0
0

Prosecutors said they have “ample proof” to formally charge João Vaccari, the treasurer of the ruling Workers’ Party (PT) of President Dilma Rousseff, in the widening corruption scandal engulfing Brazil’s state-run Pereobras.

Prosecutors accused Vaccari of soliciting donations from former Petrobras services chief Renato Duque and executives at engineering firms accused of funneling money from the oil company.

According to the prosecutor Deltan Dallagnol, Vaccari was “well aware” the donations he was seeking comprised funds stemming from bribes, as confirmed by plea bargain deals with executives who were indicted and jailed late last year. Dallangol added that these plea bargain deals have restored 500 million reais ($154 million) of stolen money to public coffers to date.

The PT claims that all the donations it received were legal and Rousseff has firmly denied knowing about corruption at Petrobras though she was chairwoman of its board from 2003 to 2010 when much of the alleged graft occurred.

The scandal has heaped political pressure on Brazil’s government, with outrage among Brazilians bringing tens of thousands to the streets.

The post Brazil: Ruling Party Treasurer Formally Charged In Petrobras Scandal appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Private Sector Hardest Hit By Losses After Disasters

$
0
0

During the 2011 Thailand floods the private sector suffered 94 percent of the colossal US$44 billion of economic losses. New research from the United Nations in Asia-Pacific shows that this situation is not unusual, with Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), which make up 90 percent of the private sector in Asia-Pacific, being particularly vulnerable to natural disasters. As a result, business resilience is essential to societal resilience.

The heavy losses mean that businesses and governments must build stronger partnerships and deeper engagement in managing disaster risks and impacts, Dr. Shamshad Akhtar, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), told a session of the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan.

“The public and private sectors should assume joint responsibility to properly assess and share risks, while mainstreaming and integrating disaster resilience into their DNA in such a way that they reinforce each other in design and structuring of risk mitigation,” said Dr. Akhtar. “For the post-2015 Disaster Risk Reduction Framework to work, it needs to be supported by adequate and innovative risk financing mechanisms. Public-private partnerships will be essential,” she added.

Advancing these arguments, ESCAP has released a new publication, Resilient Businessfor Resilient Nations and Communities, in partnership with the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC), and R3ADY Asia-Pacific. The report details options for governments and businesses to work in partnerships towards common resilience through supporting business continuity for value chains, undertaking more risk-sensitive investment and providing incentives for resilience projects.

The report also stresses that although SMEs often employ over half the workforce and generate between 20 and 50 percent of GDP, they are the least prepared to bounce back from disasters. As such, this sector should be offered special support to address disaster risks more effectively.

Further detailed is the need to recognize that businesses should be held accountable for their own share of risk creation, both by governments through adequately enforced legal and regulatory systems, and by society at large. On the other hand governments are responsible for creating an enabling environment for businesses to
invest in disaster risk management

The post Private Sector Hardest Hit By Losses After Disasters appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Viewing all 73702 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images