New York Archbishop Timothy Cardinal Dolan wrote an op-ed this week in the Daily News that was critical of Donald Trump’s remarks on immigration. He called attention to the history of anti-Catholic nativism, mentioning the role played by Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State (POAU); it is now known as Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Barry Lynn, who heads Americans United, is offended that Dolan lumped his organization in with “the violent and hateful actions of groups like the KKK.” He makes it clear he is also defending POAU.

Dolan is right about his history and Lynn is in denial. POAU was founded after World War II, and no one played a bigger role in ideologically launching it than Paul Blanshard, the most notorious anti-Catholic bigot in the nation. His screed, American Freedom and Catholic Power, is known to this day for its unrelenting bigotry. He warned that “the Menace” was about to take over America, turning it into a theocracy. “The Menace” was the Catholic Church.

POAU’s first president, Glenn Archer, drew on Blanshard’s ideology when he labeled the Catholic Church “more dangerous and clever than communism.” He wrote this after Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians in the world’s first man-made famine.

Archer also petitioned the FCC to deny TV licenses to the Jesuits, claiming they were an “alien organization.” If that isn’t nativism, the word has no meaning. Here’s another example: Archer asked the House Un-American Activities Committee to investigate “the intentions, scope and achievements of Vatican espionage here,” charging that the Catholic clergy had learned “American secrets hardly anyone except the president knows.” The paranoia of these bigots was classic nativism.

The KKK was violent and POAU was non-violent—that’s the only difference. Americans United is still blatantly anti-Catholic, making Lynn’s case against Cardinal Dolan positively ignorant.

“National security secrecy may be appropriate to protect us from our enemies; it should not be used to protect our politicians from us.”

— Margot E. Kaminski, New York Times, April 14, 2015.

It’s coming to you, roughly packaged, crudely thought out, and, we hope, incompetently executed. The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement is just about done and dusted, so claim those who have found it appropriate to keep this most “secret” of treaties under wraps. The Hawaii round of negotiations, taking place at the Westin Resort and Spa in Maui, will provide the final touches, though the delegates may be overly optimistic in assuming that their local parliaments will quite accept matters without a fight. If parliamentary sovereignty counts for anything, this will be it.

US negotiators were always in the main lane, suggesting that they would get what they wanted, breezing through the 21^st century with Washington’s vision like modern buccaneers. Much of this is based on the illusory idea the future is calculable, that economic modelling becomes truth. Sign on the dotted line, and the Mammon shall be yours.

The US Treasury Department has come up with an astrological figure of increases in American exports to Asia by $123 billion. Other figures have been drawn out of hats, most of which will hardly cut muster when the deal is actually in place. Such deals have a habit of enriching unevenly, leaving a good deal of economic, and social pillage in their wake.

Hurdles to the arrangement include sugar, milk and drugs. Canada refuses to accept more dairy imports, which has put off the delegates of the US and New Zealand. Mexico continues to stall on the issue of opening its market to exports from Asia.[1]

But the quibbling, and to-and-fro nature of such talks belies something more important. The first is the technocratic presumption that what is being negotiated is going to be beneficial for the uninvolved and effectively disenfranchised subject. Naturally, a corporate “person”, and yes, the glories of Anglo-American law were good enough to give corporations personalities, will have the sun shining upon them. (The degree this sun was anticipated can be gauged by the amount of corporate money expended in influencing the trade delegations.[2]) But the TPP, in its entire negotiating process, has become a genuine punch to citizen sovereignty, a trickle-down bonanza of delusionary advances.

There have been voices in the political spectrum lamenting the pathological secrecy behind the entire process. Such behaviour goes beyond the realms of simple diplomatic protocol, the closed-doors approach which sees the shuffling of papers and provisions beyond press scrutiny. The TPP, one part of a US-led reorientation of markets and strategies, affects citizens who have no voice, or shape, in discussions.

The colourful Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii’s 2^nd district, not essentially the picture of congressional participation, took to the floor to express her frustration at the lack of transparency in the entire process.[3] Even the locals were being left out in the cold by the business clerks. As legal scholar Margot E. Kaminski would explain in April, “Even if current negotiations over the trade agreement end with no deal, the draft chapter will remain classified for four years as national security information.”[4]

Such is the situation that even former trade officials are wondering why the process is being kept out of the critical eye of public discussion. Australia’s former Industries commission chief, Bill Carmichael, sees no problem adopting a more open approach to negotiations on such instruments. These are the industry and financial wonks who do believe that the link between parliament and the voter still prevails. Let the discussions rage.

Instead of taking the peripatetic walk of conversation in the name of national interest, the parties to the negotiations have muzzled their political representatives. Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley explained in April that the public would not be able to peruse the document till the horse had bolted. “What’s wrong with it first and foremost that we’re not allowed to read it before the representatives vote on it.”[5]

O’Malley’s feeling here is that the El Dorado being sought is the lower wage bracket, obtained an exploited overseas market. Free trade is not so much a case of improving living standards as attempting to buffer the status quo with low grade incentives.

The same goes for other states involved in the negotiations. Members of parliament in Australia, for example, may see the document with their uncomprehending eyes, but must sign a four-year confidentiality provision. One of the requirements counters, if not repudiates the parliamentary spirit altogether: “I will not divulge any of the text or information obtained in the briefing to any party, I will not copy, transcribe or remove the negotiating text”.[6] This absurd state of affairs can only trigger suspicion.

Then come the dangers, in terms of use and price, to medicine and copyright. Weasel words are circulated – “digital governance” is a hot one, code for control, restriction and regulation. Embedded in the agreement is a form of copyright policing that seems both draconian and unrealistic. The US delegation still insists on copyright terms of 70 or more years with the necessary compensation for infringements.

Few on the medical side of things are convinced by this. Doctors without Borders has insisted that the TPP brings the kibosh to bear on cheaper pharmaceuticals, proving it to be “a bad deal for medicine.”[7] This is less a case of bring on the medicine than bringing on the money. “Unless damaging provisions are removed before negotiations are finalised, the TPP agreement is on track to become the most harmful trade pact ever for access to medicines in developing countries.”[8]

The horse trading has also reached degrees of cynicism that would make any Machiavellian hack proud. Deals have been done to paper over wretched human rights records – take the case of Malaysia, which was upgraded by the US State Department in the human trafficking stakes ahead of fresh talks in Hawaii. It had previously received the worst rating in terms of trafficking, something which bars the US from making trade deals.

Under Secretary of State Sarah Sewall would unconvincingly parry suggestions that the TPP had shadowed the moves. “No, no. no. The annual TIP Report reflects the State Department’s assessment of foreign government efforts during the reporting period to comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking persons, established under US law, under the TVPA.”[9]

Sheer coincidence, of course. Until you realise that these alignments tend to mount. The leaked environment chapter of the TPP shows how environmental degradation will be tolerated in favour of the profit principle. And if there is one thing that this agreement will enshrine, is the profit principle over that of representative democracy.

Notes:
[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/28/here-are-the-remaining-hurdles-to-obamas-massive-asia-trade-deal/?utm_content=buffer1032b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/23/us-trade-tpp-lobbying-idUSKCN0PX2JO20150723

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fC0qppnK_U

[4] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/opinion/dont-keep-trade-talks-secret.html?ref=opinion&_r=1

[5] http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/apr/23/martin-omalley/martin-omalley-says-congress-wont-see-pacific-trad/

[6] http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/02/australian-mps-allowed-to-see-top-secret-trade-deal-text-on-condition-of-confidentiality

[7] http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/article/tpp-negotiators-must-fix-most-damaging-trade-agreement-ever-global-health?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=social

[8] http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news-stories/briefing-document/trading-away-health-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement-tpp

[9] http://www.democracynow.org/2015/7/28/headlines#7289

By Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi for Sryia Comment

The involvement of Hezbollah in the Syrian civil war and its deployments of fighters from Lebanon are basic facts of the conflict. Less explored is the development of Hezbollah as a native Syrian force and brand. At this site, we previously profiled one such group- the National Ideological Resistance– and interviewed its commander. Founded in Tartous governorate and primarily operating there as well as Hama and Aleppo provinces, the National Ideological Resistance cooperates with Hezbollah. However, it is not the only Syrian Hezbollah group around. This piece looks at Quwat al-Ridha, another such force.

Quwat al-Ridha’s name translates as “Al-Ridha Forces”- al-Ridha being a reference to the eighth Shi’a Imam. Indeed, Quwat al-Ridha sources sometimes refer to their group more fully as “Imam Ali al-Ridha Forces.” The pro-regime site al-Hadath News offers an overview of this group in an article from May 2014:

“Quwat al-Ridha is considered the core nucleus for ‘Hezbollah in Syria’- the organization that has appeared recently operating military in clear form, under the leadership and supervision of Hezbollah in Lebanon: this wing has placed before its eyes fighting ‘Israel’ in the Golan, and similarly the takfiris within.

Quwat al-Ridha is composed, as we have said before, mostly of native Syrian young fighters, Shi’a and Sunni, the majority of them from countryside areas (Homs, Aleppo, Deraa and Damascus countryside). There is no official survey for the number of these forces, but they have come to be considered essential, for they have participated in a number of the greatest battles, decisive on the Syrian battlefield.

Qalamoun

According to available information from al-Hadath News, units of these forces have participated in the Qalamoun battles, especially the battles on the principle fronts (Yabroud, Rankous), and it was among the number of forces that were at the head of the advance and assault operations. A fighter from Hezbollah who participated in the fight describes the performance of Quwat al-Ridha as “distinguished and learned from the fighting methods of Hezbollah,” adding that they “enjoy important military strength as well as solid ideology and organized operation, making them among those distinguished on the battleground in which they operate.”

During the Rankous assault, Quwat al-Ridha units participated with effectiveness, according to al-Hadath News information derived from field sources, for the al-Ridha fighters advanced towards Qalamoun from the side of West Ghouta in vehicles and centred to the east from Rankous, and at the arrival of zero hour- the hour of the decisive assault upon it- they advanced in parallel with the advance of the other units, while they distinguished their day with clear desert military uniforms and the ‘Green Marines’ shield that showed their identity. They were the first to reach and penetrate east Rankous after the fall of the hills.

Homs

In neighbourhoods of Old Homs they had a footprint as well. There they participated in the final battles in these neighbourhoods. A number of martyrs fell for them (around 12). In the announcement of their deaths in Syria they were mourned as National Defence Forces, but they were buried in their villages draped with the banner ‘Hezbollah in Syria’ and the Syrian flag, pointing to their true affiliation.

Aleppo and East and West Ghouta

In Aleppo as well as East and West Ghouta they had and still have a presence. Sources do not conceal their participation in the Ramousa and Khanaser battles as well as the eastern countryside front from the city. Further they have participated in groups in the operations to advance towards the central prison, while other units have concentrated in the villages. The sources also do not conceal the role of these units in the West Ghouta and South Damascus battle, and currently their participation in the Darayya battles, while West Ghouta has become a military base for Quwat al-Ridha in the field, and the Aleppo front the practical military field framework.

Deraa

Quwat al-Ridha have entered into Southern Syria too: the Quneitra and Golan areas. In the Deraa countryside al-Ridha fighters are found participating in the Busra al-Harir and Busra al-Sham and the connected expansion will occur towards Quneitra and the furthest south of Syria under the wing of the Syrian army to support it in resisting the assault of opposition forces.”

It is of interest to compare these remarks with the testimony of a media activist for Quwat al-Ridha who spoke to this author. According to this source, the recruits for Quwat al-Ridha primarily come from the Homs area, with a more limited number from other areas such as Aleppo and Kafariya and Fou’a (the latter two are the Shi’a villages in Idlib currently under assault from Jaysh al-Fatah). This seems to be corroborated somewhat by the known ‘martyrdoms’ for Quwat al-Ridha. At the same time, it should also be noted that the media activist sought to downplay connections with Lebanese Hezbollah, portraying Quwat al-Ridha as an independent “Syrian resistance” force. Such formal distancing ought to be taken with a pinch of salt. Indeed, the leader of Quwat al-Ridha during the important stage of development for the militia in the battles of Homs city was Lebanese Hezbollah commander Hamza Ibrahim Hayder (Abu Mustafa), who was from Kafrdan in the Beqaa Valley and died fighting in al-Khalidiya in Homs on 29 June 2013. The actual connections with Hezbollah also explain why Quwat al-Ridha’s primary recruitment base seems to be Homs province, particularly in and around Homs city. For on account of the area’s proximity to the border with Lebanon and its importance to Assad regime interests, it is a natural and logical place for Hezbollah to project influence into the remaining Syrian rump state as a native Syrian force.

Below are some notable ‘martyrs’ of Quwat al-Ridha. The most notable developments since the al-Hadath News report partly translated above are the multiple ‘martyrdoms’ declared in Idlib province and Palmyra. This might undermine the initial impression of the fighting in Idlib province and Palmyra, which have seen rapid losses for the regime, that the regime forces were largely conventional and not backed up by irregular forces (as opposed to e.g. Aleppo). The Syrian Hezbollah presence in the Idlib fighting in particular is also corroborated by Jabhat al-Nusra media output for the Idlib offensives, which found Syrian Hezbollah insignia left behind among the routed forces. In these ‘martyrdoms’, note the distinct Hezbollah in Syria flag, as well as the use of the familiar Hezbollah/Shi’a militia slogans and motifs of defending Sayyida Zainab whose shrine is located in Damascus (e.g. “Zainab won’t be taken captive twice”- i.e. preventing the shrine from falling into rebel/jihadi hands and being destroyed). Note also Quwat al-Ridha announced a fallen fighter on 14 July 2015: Mustafa Hamada Hamada, who was originally from Homs province and died fighting in the al-Ghab Plain in north Hama countryside.

Conclusion

The development of Quwat al-Ridha and Syrian Hezbollah as an important irregular actor should pose a challenge to those who might see war-weariness in Lebanese Hezbollah and no benefit to its intervention in Syria. Rather, it is apparent that this phenomenon fits in with what Matt Levitt deems the transformation of Hezbollah into a major “regional player,” projecting power beyond Lebanon and potentially influencing the political landscapes of its zones of intervention in important ways. The media activist for Quwat al-Ridha may downplay the question of political ambitions for Syrian Hezbollah, saying there is no political wing “but the state” and affirming a goal of “popular defence formation only,” but that only conceals the reality of political fragmentation in what remains of regime-held Syria as different actors carve out their own spheres of influence on the basis of contributions to the war effort and defence of vital areas. A similar trend is happening in Iraq with the growth of the different Hashd Sha’abi factions and their competing affiliations.

This is a slightly edited version, the original article may be found here.

Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)
2236 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington DC 20515

Representative Ron DeSantis (R-FL)
308 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH)
1524 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representatives Chaffetz, DeSantis, and Jordan,

The taxpayers elected you – and therefore pay your salary – with the expectation that you would be responsible legislators, but your behavior as Committee and Subcommittee chairs, along with that of House Speaker Boehner, regarding the IRS has been wholly irresponsible.

Following Representative Darrell Issa’s (R-CA) example, you have made mountains out of molehills in regards to the charges of IRS bias against right wing, tax-exempt, political groups. These charges have been rebutted item by item by the IRS Inspector General, congressional witnesses who have no political ax to grind, and by  Rep. Issa’s counterpart, Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD), most recently on July 27, 2015 (available at http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/cummings-issues-statement-on-republican-video-letter-and-press-conference-on-irs). (See http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/investigations/investigation-of-irs for more information.)

Remember that when these 501(c)(4) PACs have overtly politically partisan names and rhetoric, whether from a Tea Party or progressive viewpoint, the IRS should give them closer scrutiny.

In this letter, I wish to address your constituents about your utter ignorance or hypocrisy – you choose – in complaining about government deficits while strip-mining the already small tax collection budget of the IRS, which is supposed to collect over $3 trillion for all three branches of the federal government. Cutting the IRS budget to the bone means it cannot adequately address and collect more of the roughly $300 billion in tax evasions each year.

When the Republican’s yearly reductions in the IRS budget angers someone like conservative economist Jerry Jasinowski, who served as the President of the National Association of Manufacturers for 14 years, and was a frequent witness at congressional hearings, you’d better listen.

Mr. Jasinowski says that cutting the IRS budget for five consecutive years by a total of $1.2 billion and lowering the budget to $10.9 billion –its lowest level, adjusted for inflation, since 1998 – “promotes cynicism [and] encourages cheats.”

He continues: “As a result, the IRS has lost 13,000 employees, 11 percent of the total [employees],” initiated “19 percent fewer criminal investigations than the year before,” and completed “46,000 fewer audits.” Consequently, billions of dollars will, of course, go uncollected every year.

People cannot reach the IRS with their questions. There are not enough IRS agents to answer the phones; millions of calls go unanswered. You have helped cause this mass irritation and waste of time for the people back home.

The increased complexity of the tax laws and the surging number of identity thefts are putting more burdens on the diminishing number of IRS staff, who are resorting to spending their own money on office supplies in order to keep things running. (The Affordable Care Act alone has generated many questions for the taxpayers.)

Mr. Jasinowski charges that “Congress is undermining that trust [known as voluntary compliance], shortchanging the treasury and encouraging illegal behavior. This is a serious mistake.”

It is more than a mistake. Republicans are to blame here because they are running the Congress and passing these cuts despite the opposition from the Democrats. They are knowingly and willfully making it impossible to have the IRS crack down on big corporate tax evasion and large individual violators. No doubt some of these tax cheats are gratefully contributing to the campaign coffers of the Republicans.

It gets worse. While the Republicans are calling for the impeachment of the capable, turnaround expert, John Koskinen, the Commissioner of the IRS, these same Republicans have fashioned a tax code that allows dozens of major corporations, like GE and Verizon, to pay no income taxes at all on billions of yearly profits in the U.S. (see http://www.ctj.org/ for more information).

Republicans do not hesitate when taking money from commercial interests in return for providing tax laws with so many lucrative loopholes that the rich and powerful can become legal tax avoiders instead of remaining illegal tax evaders. The tax code has been wholly shaped by political influence. Fewer tax dollars are being collected even though our country has a huge federal deficit, leaving taxpaying Americans to ultimately pay the price for the flaws in the tax code.

How can you collect your sizable pay check with that kind of grotesque performance? Try disagreeing with Mr. Jasinowski, who accuses the Congress of presiding over an indecipherable tax code that results in “big time tax cheats getting off scot free.”

The rumble from the people gets louder and louder in Left-Right alliances. The gerrymandering of single-party congressional districts that allows members of Congress to avoid the consequences of these actions is ripe for change.  Your day of reckoning is approaching. You will be held accountable for your ruinous actions.

Meanwhile, enact President Obama’s partially restored IRS budget to slightly over $12 billion next year – still less expensive than the cost of the latest, redundant aircraft carrier.

Sincerely,

Ralph Nader

As of today, approximately 900 Christians and 50 Muslims from the pre-2011 population of 5000, of whom 80% were Christian and 20% Muslim, have returned to Ma’loula, their 90 AD ancient village that many consider the second most historic Christian village, after Jerusalem.

Over the past five weeks, this observer has been surveying and updating data as part of an archeological research project, on a modest selected number of the 152 archeological sites here in Syria that have been severely damaged over the past four years.   Ma’loula, is among the nearly 7000 historic places in Syria that have been looted, burned, or bulldozed or subjected to mindless jihadist iconoclasm as being ‘un-Islamic,” or which have sustained war damage from more than one source.

In some ways it has been a daunting task to visit some sites, given the security situation and need for securing various required permissions-which takes time, given currently conditions in Syria. Plus issues such as intense heat, finding a driver willing to make the trip for a reasonable fee, lining up crucial local experts at the site so one gets solid information and related matters.

On 7/27/2015, this observer and his friends and guides/historians from Ma’loula, Jesus and Moses (Issa and Musa) were delayed for two hours as we sat at the Ministry of Information waiting a green light from the Syria army that the road was now safe, following a night (7/26/2015) of heavy jihadist shelling from the East Gouta\Jobar suburb of Damascus with some mortars hitting near our planned M-5 route north.

Despite losing a few hours of daylight, this observers delayed third visit to Ma’loula, just 35 miles northwest of Damascus, turned out to be a spectacular heritage restoration ‘seminar’ during which we examined firsthand the results to date of the restorative work being done to the town and its religious sites. The experience was exhilarating to say the least.

One does not want to minimize the enormous preservation, restorative and protective work urgently required to salvage our shared global cultural heritage in the custody of Syria for ten millennia. Nor the effort also required in order to ready these sites for the return of international visitors including the archeologists who have work here for many years. But there is some very good news coming out of Ma’loula on this subject. And it is due to the efforts of the local returning villagers who are deeply connected to this cradle of civilization and who are not waiting for the end of hostilities to begin restoration and repair work of their homes and of our shared heritage sites.

The assaults on Ma’loula began in September 7 2013 when jihadists, without warning swarmed into and above Ma’loula and quickly controlled much of the rugged surrounding hills which rise up from the desert to 1,700 meters above sea level. The siege ended when the jihadist were finally driven out of Ma’loula on April 14, 2015 by a combination of the Syrian army, Hezbollah fighters and approximately 70 men from Ma’loula.

Most of the jihadists, after striping the village of much of its antiquities and then torching it, retreated to Lebanon or to the suburbs of Damascus while others made their way north to Aleppo and Idlib.

Christian clerics and scholars worry that Ma’loula’s priceless medieval icons and other works of art may have been destroyed or looted and will never be recovered. But some items are being founds and returned.

Residents who have returned recently to Ma’loula and who are today salvaging and repairing what they can, perhaps ten percent of the village, nearly unanimously emphasized to this observer their shock that the town was attacked at all and that the tight-knit community, where Christian and Muslim women dress alike in traditional Ma’loula and in this sense are indistinguishable. Their children often attend the French Institute in Ma’loula that teaches Aramaic, the language of Christ which is still spoken here and in parts of Afghanistan and elsewhere.  And they always celebrated each other’s holidays.

In Ma’loula, as in most Syrian communities, pre-conflict religious issues rarely existed. The town never had the strategic value of other nearby areas, such as the city of Yabroud to the north, but it does possess vivid symbolic religious importance and has long been a signature site for Syria’s diverse assemblage of faiths and ethnicity. Our guides suggested that this is perhaps the main reason the unprotected and unsuspecting village was invaded, occupied and severely damaged. Three Muslim families from Ma’loula, who became infected with the spreading poisonous hate-filled sectarianism sweeping this region, one being Ktaiman Kamar who reportedly boasted to his Christian neighbors “We will crucify all of you” along with the Rafic Al Shami and Souhail Fadel families are still fighting with rebels and are forbidden to return to their former homes in Ma’loula. As of today, approximately sixty Muslims have returned to Ma’loula and they appear to be living in harmony with their Christian neighbors if amidst some mutual residual suspicion.

But there is good news from this incomparable community. The group of 13 nuns abducted by Jabhat al Nusra Islamic rebels who have been freed in a prisoner exchange are they now regularly visiting Ma’loula to help restore the Nunnery and St. Teccla Monastery as well as the orphanage that they operate. This observer was advised that they plan to return and live full-time in Ma’loula by late August and will re-open the orphanage. Several of the 40 damaged Churches and affiliated religious sites are being restored in a good workmanship manner with respect to the installation of new electric line, water pipes, roof and window repairs and painting. Local and an occasional foreign volunteer are helping.

​To the credit of Lebanese authorities the 1,700 year old door of St. Trecla, shown below which was stolen on 9/13/2013 was returned in February 2015 when it was discovered in Lebanon’s Bekaa valley.

Approximately 65,000 archeological artifacts stolen by terrorists over the past for years have been recovered so far. This is roughly estimated to be around 10% of the total looted from Syria during this period with the two countries receiving the greatest number of stolen antiquities being Turkey and Lebanon.

During the occupation of Ma’loula, the jihadists removed just about every cross of any size they came upon. Many have already been replaced and work continues on painstakingly restoring, wherever possible, art work and icon which were slashed with knives and carved with chisels digging out the eyes from portraits of Christ, his mother Mary, and the disciples among others.

Some townspeople advised this observer that the obsession with gouging out eyes of pillars of Christianity was so that Jesus could not see what they were doing and punish them. Others speculated that much of their time in Ma’loula the jihadist were high on drugs such as captagon and drank regularly from the wine cellars which contained thousands of bottles of wine in this community which in Roman times was dedicated to the pagan god of wine, Bacchus. One thing this observer has repeatedly become aware of it that some jihadist “religious” militia around here who condemn alcohol on U-tube are among its most fervent partakers. Many also appear to be addicted to courage enhancing drugs- including cocaine and  , sometimes fighting 24 hours for two days straight or more and then collapsing on their battlefield spot, only to be discovered by their enemies fast asleep or in a drugged out stupor.

Space does not allow here for a fuller detailed report chronicling all the work being done by the noble returning citizens of Ma’loula or by the Syrian people across this cradle of civilization, to restore our damaged cultural heritage. Without any international aid and not much local funding while facing massive survival problems.

Future reports may.

But what is a fact beyond peradventure is that the noble Syrian people, deeply connected to our shared cultural heritage, are achieving nothing less than preserving our identity as a specie and our cultural heritage past for those who will follow us.

Bless every one of them and may the hell that they are enduring end now.

By Anouar Boukhars*

The Sahel-Sahara faces a cluster of security challenges. The upsurge in ethnic radicalisation and its growing overlap with violent militancy are only the most visible signs of the troubles hanging over this vast region. This locus of insecurities mushrooms at the periphery of national boundaries where government writs rarely run. The permeability of borders, and proliferation of zones of political vacuums and economic marginalization in the hinterlands, fuel irredentism and enable the geographical expansion of violent extremists and their networking in excluded border communities. Violence spilling over from neighbouring conflicts often expedites the gradual transformation of such border communities into malignant epicentres of radicalized ethnic claims, cross-border militancy, and organized crime.

Understanding this deadly interplay of political grievances, social exclu- sion, and hinterland neglect is necessary for tackling the underlying causes of militancy in the Sahel/Saharan border regions. Mapping the dynamics that prompt radicalisation and drive individuals into the orbit of violent extremist networks also requires a keen understanding of the pull of social networks, ideology, and human agency. Conflicts in the Sahel Sahara show that while an abundance of structural factors such as weak governance, social exclusion and state repression creates enabling environments for radicalisation, they remain insufficient to pulling individuals into violent extremism in the absence of the pull exercised by extremist networks, inspirational ideologues, or political entrepreneurs. The spread of external fundamentalist ideas, the appeal of charismatic recruiters, and the material and emotional benefits generated from affiliation with radical social networks play a critical role in producing violent extremism.

MILITANT ENTRENCHMENT IN THE PERIPHERY

An appreciable number of criminal networks, violent extremists and armed groups are concentrated in the Sahel/Saharan border regions. Transnational extremist groups, such as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) – whose roots go back to Algeria’s 1990s civil strife – have generally found it easier to operate in desert hinterlands that are widely traversed and historically tied to major trade routes and trafficking networks. An amalgamation of institutional weakness, high levels of corruption, inter-ethnic and intra-ethnic divisions and hinter- land neglect has given succour to extremists’ goals of entrenching themselves at the local tribal and ethnic structure.

For example, despite their militant agenda and internal divisions, AQIM and its affiliates managed to gain the sympathy of clan power brokers and support of tribal hosts. Through local marriages and business ventures, they built networks of solidarity and skilfully exploited the maelstrom of Saharan tribal and ethnic rivalries to implant themselves in the porous societies of Saharan peripheral territories. The Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO), a splinter of AQIM that emerged in 2011, quickly blended with southern Saharans. Its leader, Abou Walid Al Sahrawi, a military strategist who hails from the Reguibat, the largest of the Sahrawi tribal confederations, proved quite successful in appealing to Arab Mauritanians, Sahrawis, Malian nationals of Songhay ethnicity and Arab tribes of Lamhar Tilemsi.

Drawing on ethnicity and religion, Al Sahrawi and like-minded terrorists try to provide an alter- native to failing secular, ethno-nationalism and a response to state shortcomings in the hinterlands. To be sure, contextual factors drive some Sahelian

Arabs and Tuaregs craving a sense of belonging, personal empowerment, social status, or material resources to rally behind violent extremist organizations that are flush with cash from ransom payments and heavily armed with weapons emanating from Libya’s vast arms bazaar. At times of heightened inter-group rivalries and intra-factional struggles over socio-economic gains, political entrepreneurs or charismatic leaders become appealing to their tribal and ethnic sub-groups because they promise the installation of an Islamic order that delivers competitive advantages and political stability.

For example, after their decisive loss of political authority in the 2009 local elections, an appreciable number of young Ifoghas Tuareg in Northern Mali, fearful of the dramatic upsetting of the traditional hierarchies of power, threw their support or at least acquiescence behind the radical Tuareg group Ansar Dine. Iyad ag-Ghali, a historic figure of Tuareg rebellions and a founder of Ansar Dine, capitalized on intra-Tuareg tensions to portray himself as the preeminent defender of Ifoghas’ ethno-religious interests. In this case, ethnic self- protection trumped ag-Ghali’s association with regional terrorist groups like AQIM and criminal organizations (see Ivan Briscoe, Crime after Jihad: Armed groups, the state, sand illicit business in post-conflict Mali, Clingendael, May 2014).

Violent Islamist militancy in other theatres of conflict has also an ethno-religious character. Radical Islamist groups like Al-Shabaab in Somalia uses nationalist and religious slogans to mobilize support that transcends clan divisions, and dovetails with perceptions of cultural and sectarian threats emanating from Christian-majority neighbouring countries, especially Ethiopia and Kenya. Appeals to religious nationalism and ethnic or clan identification help forge collective identity among some of the aggrieved Somalis and Muslim Ethiopian and Kenyan nationals.

Local violent insurgent groups like Boko Haram in Nigeria employ the same tactics by tapping into popular legitimate grievances, manipulating contentious sectarian identities, and providing a default form of salvation from relative deprivation, dispossession and fragmentation of social relations. Like the extremist Tuareg group of Ansar Dine in northern Mali, Boko Haram’s surge in Nigeria’s marginalized north-east is fed by corrupt and feckless politics. The group might offer little to the ethnic constituencies it claims to represent, but its aggressive tactics, uncompromising sectarian ethno-nationalism and relentless certainty make it appear as unswervingly resolute and supremely confident.

THE PULL OF IDEOLOGY

Ideology is also an important driver of violent extremism. Most violent extremist movements are rooted in radical Salafi movements that first emerged in the 1970s. “The very fact that these movements define themselves in religious terms,” writes Terje Østeb (in Islamic Militancy in Africa, Africa Security Brief, 2012), “makes it imperative to recognize their ideological content”. Boko Haram, for example, draws ins- piration from a Nigerian Wahhabi movement created in 1978 under the name Izala or ‘eradication of heresies’. “Its model of revolution,” writes Marc-Antoine Pérouse de Montclos, “was the jihad of Usman dan Fodio and the Sokoto caliphate established in 1804”. The military successes of the caliphal system and the endurance of its political machinery in much of Muslim West Africa are major referents for those dreaming of recreating a powerful Islamic regional polity (Marc- Antoine Pérouse de Montclos, Nigeria’s Interminable Insurgency? Addressing the Boko Haram Crisis, Chatham House, September 2014).

In northern Mali, the penetration of Wahhabi ideas appears to have shaken the tradition of religious tolerance in the country. Imported radical religious ideas justifying the recourse to armed struggle have also contributed to the radicalization of religious discourse and rising intra and inter-communal tensions. Radical strains of Islam can be socially attractive in countries still weighed down by caste hierarchies and the vestiges of old slavery. Indeed, embracing doctrines that are intent on combating the “heterodox” practices of the more traditional Sufi orders can easily become a means for some inferior-status clans and tribes to challenge stratified social structures.

For the politically disgruntled and socially dislocated groups, ‘purified’ Islam holds out the promise of decisive answers to modern society’s social ills and inequities. Indeed, in the 1990’s, Islam, argues Jean-Francois Bayart in an interview with French journalist Catherine Goueset, became the last refuge of populations devastated by the adjustment programmes prescribed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Islamic institutions, some bankrolled by Arab Gulf largesse, became a source of comfort to the afflicted. Unlike the ‘false’ prophets of austerity, Saudi charities and schools seemed to put their money into the most neglected and blighted areas. The diffusion of Wahhabism and the growing popularity of Pakistani preachers in the 1990s are also attributed to their projected construction of Islamic law as a real counterweight to judicial corruption and the arbitrariness of the state. Shariah law is appealing in northern Nigeria precisely because it is seen as able to rein in the excesses of the security services and gross violations of legal rights and fundamental freedoms. In 2012, parts of the population of northern Mali welcomed the arrival of radical Islamist groups like Ansar Dine and MUJAO. To be sure, this welcome quickly wore thin as extremist groups violated their ground rules and subjected the territories under their control to brutal forms of (in)justice.

This growing influence of Salafism coincided with a general surge in the visibility of religion. The irrepressible advance of Pentecostal Christianity has, for example, transformed the religious landscape across the African continent. This particular strain of Christianity has moved from a peripheral position vis-a-vis the Catholic Church to one of assertive influence in both private lives and the public realm. Like Salafism, Pentecostalism seems to better respond to the social grievances and cultural concerns of Africans. This is clearly evident in Nigeria where both Pentecostalism and Salafism have been aggressively seeking to reshape the orientations of Nigerian Christianity and Islam. It is important to note that neither movement represents a homogenous global movement (Catherine Goueset, ‘Pourquoi l’islam et le djihadisme s’étendent en Afrique’, L’Express, February 25, 2013). Salafism, for example, comes in shapes and forms other than violent jihad. Most Salafists are quiet advocates of doctrinal purity. The most vocal and visible though are radical revolutionaries or Salafi-jihadists who are spear-heading a mutiny against traditional forms of religion and failing state secularism.

In Mali, the new social positioning and rising political mobilisation of Salafism can be seen in the increasing influence of the Wahhabi strain of Islam within the Islamic High Council of Mali (HCI), an influential umbrella organization rep- resenting the most important Muslim organizations. To be sure, HCI and its affiliated organizations can’t be reduced to mere Saudi Salafi doctrines. Though different from traditional West African Sufi Islam, socio-political faith movements like HCI practice, to use the words of Jean-Francois Bayart, a ‘reinvented’ Islam that exists in a symbiotic relationship that is certainly moulded by both Saudi Salafi scholars and the particularity of local traditions.

This amalgamation of local and imported cultural mores and religious interpretations can be seen in the HCI’s growing conservatism and concomitant firm rejection of violence and terrorism. Mahmoud Dicko, leader of the HCI, for example, denounced the jihadis’ brutal rule and strongly supported the January 2013 French military intervention in northern Mali. The implementation of Islamic principles, argues Dicko, must be based on concord through persuasion and compromise-seeking.

RADICALISATION AND TERRORIST RECRUITMENT

Experience suggests that the drivers of violent extremism are multilayered and have many overlapping causes. This makes it hard to determine which push factors (bad governance, government repression, social fragmentation, political and economic marginalisation of peripheral areas, cultural threat perceptions) or pull factors (appeal of a radical guru, extremist networks, personal bonds, etc.) drive individuals or groups to sup- port radical ideas or join violent extremist organizations. Usually, it is a combination of both. Contextual conditions such as poverty, relative deprivation, endemic corruption, and historical abuse influence trajectories to violent extremism. But these factors alone are not enough to produce violent extremism. Otherwise, most of the states of West Africa and the Sahel, which consistently rank at the bottom of the United Nations (UN) Human Development Index and the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators, would have been infected by violent extremism. The fact that most countries have not suffered the same fate that has befallen Mali and Nigeria is partly due to the weak pull of factors resulting from the presence of charismatic recruiters, violence spilling over from neighbouring conflicts or external influences.

The 2006 Ethiopian invasion of Somalia for example acted as both a push and pull factor, galvanizing resistance to the occupation and contributing to the emergence and violent radicalization of al-Shabaab. This catalytic event facilitated al-Shabaab’s goal of creating a powerful narrative of victimization that blended memories of past injustices with present wrongs. The greater the perception that a culture is under siege, the greater the propensity that some individuals might join social movements or violent extremist networks. The craving for a sense of belonging and purpose at times of existential crisis and the prospect of glory fighting a common enemy lured a number of disaffected young Somalis, at home and from the diaspora, into al-Shabaab’s net.

The most successful radical groups are those that offer young men the chance of becoming a part of something larger than themselves. Radicalisation therefore becomes a sociological phenomenon driven by moral outrage, identity, group dynamics, peer pressure, and search for a sense of meaning. A most common denominator of recruits is age, alienation and exposure to radical, charismatic leaders. The presence of a charismatic ideologue or extremist organisations that can frame grievances in religious terms and channel them into violent actions is crucial in moulding young extremists.

Structural factors like dispossession, region-specific exclusion, and group discrimination create grievances and contribute to radicalisation. But according to a USAID 2009 report, titled Counter Extremism and Development in Mali, it is social networks and radical institutions or charismatic gurus that draw individuals into the orbit of violent extremist groups. The strong pull of human agency helps explain why for example Boko Haram sprang up in particular locations and not in others known for their extreme poverty or past association with religious radicalism or violence. Rather, writes Pérouse de Montclos, it is circumstantial factors linked to the movement’s charismatic founder Mohamed Yusuf, and political collusion or manipulation by local politicians that prompted recruitment into the group.

The security forces’ brutal crackdown on Boko Haram at Maiduguri in 2009 and the execution of its founder while in police custody accelerated the movement’s radicalisation and transition into terrorism. The repression also hastened the fragmentation of the group and the ascendancy of its militant wing. Indeed, the survivors of the military’s assault went into hiding before popping up one year later consumed by a thirst for vengeance. Under the new leadership of Abubakar Shekau, whose ruthlessness seems to make up for his lack of charisma, Boko Haram has become more decentralized and daring in its raids on mosques, churches and schools. Recently, it jumped on the bandwagon of Daesh (also known as Islamic State) while dissenting militant groups like Ansaru, created in 2012, have become more ideologically aligned with Al-Qaeda.

This evolution of Boko Haram and its autonomous cells is not necessarily tantamount to the internationalisation of the movement’s violent insurgency. The emphasis on the international dimension of Boko Haram’s activities and linkage with Daesh is therefore misguided. Boko Haram is still a local phenomenon and defeating it requires more than regional coordination and international military assistance. As Pérouse de Montclos aptly put it, the solution lies with “the performance of critical state institutions, in particular with regard to local government, policing and criminal justice, and the armed forces”.

CONCLUSION: MITIGATING RADICALISATION

There are specific remedies that governments and the international community can undertake to alleviate specific push and pull factors of radicalization. Some are developmental in nature and require a governance oriented response, along with a determined effort to invest in neglected geographic areas and ensure equal access to economic opportunity of aggrieved subpopulations. In northern Mali, very little progress has been registered in improving governance and promoting economic development. Current strategies to contain conflict and mitigate radicalism are doomed to fail unless they are accompanied by a serious and sustained effort to address the political, socio-economic and identity-based grievances that roil the north of Mali. In addressing these sources of grievance, the Malian government and the international community must take great care that their engagement in the north does not worsen group rivalries nor imperil the very fragile social and political equilibrium of ethnic activities in the region.

The same applies in the north of Nigeria where the state’s strategies to ‘drain the swamp’ of violent extremism are in urgent need of revamping. Former president Goodluck Jonathan failed to understand that the implementation of emergency rule and brutal counter-terrorism tactics would end up leading to the expansion and radicalisation of Boko Haram, intensification of violence, alienation of local communities and demoralisation of his security forces. The use of force can be crucial in fighting insurgencies like those in Nigeria, Somalia or Mali. But it must be targeted, proportional and consistent with the rule of law. In training the region’s armed forces and law enforcement, the United States and European governments must focus not only on improving fighting skills, intelligence gather- ing and security coordination. Such programmes also need to enhance civil-military relations and respect for human rights.

In cases where governments are overwhelmed by militant groups, outside military intervention is needed. But such military action needs to be legal and have local support. It must also be buttressed by sustained political and economic engagement that helps address the root causes of the violence. Only inclusive political and economic institutions can lead to peace and stability. In Sahelian countries where the international community has lever- age, it must press local governments to reduce endemic corruption, improve poor governance, and engage credible civil society actors and religious leaders. Mitigating violent extremism involves the empowerment of socio-cultural institutions of tolerance and support for local media outlets that emphasize an effective counter-narrative against extremism. Rehabilitation of radicalised prisoners is also crucial. Mauritania for example has designed a relatively successful programme of de-radicalisation aimed at reforming detainees convicted of terrorist crimes. In sum, finding a solution to the mounting insecurities in the border regions of the Sahara-Sahel requires the adoption of a full spectrum approach that balances kinetic engagement of violent extremists with non-kinetic activities such as governance-enhancement, justice and security sector reform, and rehabilitation programmes for former fighters.

About the author:
*Anouar Boukhars is associate fellow at FRIDE and non-resident scholar in the Middle East programme of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is also associate professor of International Relations at McDaniel College in Westminster, Maryland.

Source:
This article was published by FRIDE as Policy Brief Number 206, July 2015 (PDF)

This Policy Brief belongs to the FRIDE project ‘The Fragile Sahel: A challenge for Europe’, carried out in cooperation with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. We acknowledge the generous support of DIMES. For further information on this project, please contact Clare Castillejo (ccastillejo@fride.org).

NATO Allies have agreed on a defense capacity building package for Iraq, which according to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg will help strengthen the country’s security and defense sector by providing support in areas where NATO is best-placed to add value.

“This decision, taken today by the North Atlantic Council, underscores NATO’s commitment to deepening our partnership with Iraq,” Stoltenberg said.

The program has been developed upon Iraq’s request and in close consultation with the Iraqi authorities.

According to Stoltenberg, the package includes measures of support in seven priority areas: advice on security sector reform; countering improvised explosive devices, explosive ordnance disposal and de-mining; civil military planning; cyber defense; military medicine and medical assistance; military training; and civil emergency planning.

Stoltenberg said, “NATO and Iraqi experts will now work on the details of the training programs which will be held in Turkey and Jordan.”

Stoltenberg added that, “NATO’s support for Iraq has been designed to complement efforts carried out by the Global Coalition against ISIL, the European Union, the United Nations and bilateral efforts by individual Allies.”

The defense capacity program for Iraq is part of the Alliance’s Defense Capacity Building Initiative, launched at the NATO Summit in Wales. Its aim is to enable the Alliance to assist its partners in building their defense and security.

Greece’s ruling Syriza movement backed a call on Thursday (30 July) from Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras to hold an emergency party congress as he seeks to assert his control over rebel lawmakers balking at new bailout talks.

At a meeting of the Syriza movement’s 200-member central committee held in an old cinema hall, Tsipras defended his decision to accept harsh bailout terms as the best deal anyone could win for Greece.

He threw down the gauntlet before his critics by proposing an immediate membership ballot on the bailout negotiation, but said his preference was for Syriza to hold an emergency congress in September to deliberate strategy.

After hours of debate, the committee backed his proposal in a show of hands. The emergency congress will allow Tsipras to bring in new members and capitalise on the wider public support he has secured over the past two years, making it easier to defeat the far-left camp.

“We are telling the Greek people, loud and clear and with no remorse, that this is the deal we managed to bring to them and if there is someone who thinks that they could have achieved a better deal, let them come out and say that,” he told the session that included dissenters like parliament speaker Zoe Konstantopoulou.

Greece narrowly averted an exit from the euro zone when it struck an 11th-hour deal with lenders this month, but that cost Tsipras the support of a quarter of his lawmakers who accuse the party of betraying its anti-austerity roots.

Deepening crisis

The deepening crisis within Syriza is the most serious political challenge to Tsipras, who otherwise enjoys unrivalled domination of Greek politics and remains popular despite his sudden U-turn to accept stringent bailout terms.

Failure to quash the far-left revolt could plunge Greece back into turmoil and risk derailing talks now quietly underway in Athens with the European Central Bank, International Monetary Fund and the euro zone’s rescue fund on a new 86 billion euro loan package.

In another potential setback for the talks, the Financial Times reported that IMF staff had recommended to the Fund’s executive board that it should not take part for now in a third bailout because of Greece’s poor compliance record and the unsustainable level of its debt.

Only if Athens improved its track record of implementing reforms and its euro zone partners agreed to a substantial debt restructuring would the IMF consider joining the programme at a later stage, the FT reported, citing a confidential summary of a board meeting held on Wednesday in Washington, D.C.

An IMF official said the Fund would approve new loans for Greece only if Athens reached a deal with European governments that would ensure it can pay its debts, and there was “no expectation” that talks over the next couple of weeks would get to the point where the Fund could approve a new programme.

Greek Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalotos is due to hold his first meeting with senior representatives of the country’s creditors, including the IMF, in Athens on Friday.

Germany, Greece’s biggest creditor, has insisted on IMF participation in any further aid program.

Damaged relationship

As the all-day Syriza meeting proceeded in a rare public session, party officials spoke openly of a widening rift between those who want the country to stay in the euro area despite painful sacrifices, and leftists who would prefer a return to the drachma currency.

“At the moment there are two different strategies competing in the same party: one that wants Greece inside the euro and the other that wants Greece outside euro,” Olga Gerovasili, the government spokeswoman told reporters as she arrived.

“These two can’t exist together at the government level.”

Deputy Prime Minister Yiannis Dragasakis said the hardliners were behaving like a party-within-the-party and suggested the time may have come to part ways.

“You reap what you sow and I hope that we are heading for the refoundation of a new party.”

While most speakers criticised the bailout and government actions, many said the left should move on and not waste the historic opportunity of being in power.

But Left Platform leader Panagiotis Lafazanis said the bailout deal betrayed the party’s principles.

“Syriza is at risk of humiliation because of the bailout transformation,” he told the meeting. “In this country there is no democracy … but the dictatorship of the euro.”

Left Platform is demanding Syriza abandon talks with lenders immediately and had proposed an ordinary party congress to determine the party’s course.

A regular congress would have favoured the far-left, with the same members who attended two years ago returning to vote on Syriza’s future.

Forced to rely on opposition support in parliament to pass austerity and reform packages, Tsipras is widely expected to call early elections to consolidate his grip on the party once he has agreed the third bailout package with lenders.

His government wants to wrap up negotiations with lenders on that package in time for a major debt payment due on August 20, before moving on to sorting out his party’s troubles.

“Our priority is the (bailout) deal,” Gerovasili said. “After this we can deal with party issues.”

Source: EurActiv

In this week’s address, US President Barack Obama celebrated the fiftieth birthdays of Medicare and Medicaid, which together have allowed millions to live longer and better lives. These programs are a promise that if we work hard, and play by the rules, we’ll be rewarded with a basic measure of dignity, security, and the freedom to live our lives as we want. Every American deserves the sense of safety and security that comes with health insurance. That’s why the President signed the Affordable Care Act, and that’s why he will continue to work to ensure that Medicare and Medicaid, programs that are fundamental to our way of life, stay strong.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
August 1, 2015

Hi, everybody. This week, there was a big birthday you might have missed. Medicare and Medicaid turned 50 years old. And that’s something worth celebrating.

If one of the best measures of a country is how it treats its more vulnerable citizens — seniors, the poor, the sick — then America has a lot to be proud of. Think about it. Before Social Security, too many seniors lived in poverty. Before Medicare, only half had some form of health insurance. Before Medicaid, parents often had no help covering the cost of care for a child with a disability.

But as Americans, we declared that our citizens deserve a basic measure of security and dignity. And today, the poverty rate for seniors is less than half of what it was fifty years ago. Every American over 65 has access to affordable health care. And today, we’re finally finishing the job — since I signed the Affordable Care Act into law, the uninsured rate for all Americans has fallen by about one-third.

These promises we made as a nation have saved millions of our own people from poverty and hardship, allowing us new freedom, new independence, and the chance to live longer, better lives. That’s something to be proud of. It’s heroic. These endeavors — these American endeavors — they didn’t just make us a better country. They reaffirmed that we are a great country.

And a great country keeps the promises it makes. Today, we’re often told that Medicare and Medicaid are in crisis. But that’s usually a political excuse to cut their funding, privatize them, or phase them out entirely — all of which would undermine their core guarantee. The truth is, these programs aren’t in crisis. Nor have they kept us from cutting our deficits by two-thirds since I took office. What is true is that every month, another 250,000 Americans turn 65 years old, and become eligible for Medicare. And we all deserve a health care system that delivers efficient, high-quality care. So to keep these programs strong, we’ll have to make smart changes over time, just like we always have.

Today, we’re actually proving that’s possible. The Affordable Care Act has already helped secure Medicare’s funding for another 13 years. The Affordable Care Act has saved more than nine million folks on Medicare 15 billion dollars on their prescription medicine. It has expanded Medicaid to help cover 12.8 million more Americans, and to help more seniors live independently. And we’re moving our health care system toward models that reward the quality of the care you receive, not the quantity of care you receive. That means healthier Americans and a healthier federal budget.

Today, these programs are so fundamental to our way of life that it’s easy to forget how hard people fought against them at the time. When FDR created Social Security, critics called it socialism. When JFK and LBJ worked to create Medicare, the cynics said it would take away our freedom. But ultimately, we came to see these programs for what they truly are — a promise that if we work hard, and play by the rules, we’ll be rewarded with a basic measure of dignity, security, and the freedom to live our lives as we want.

It’s a promise that previous generations made to us, and a promise that our generation has to keep.

Thanks, and have a great weekend.

By Laura V. Natera and Sofia Rada*

The escape of notorious drug trafficker Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán from Mexico’s highest-security prison has brought a wave of criticism over the Mexican government’s judicial procedures. However, it has also brought to the spotlight how some sectors of Mexican society have romanticized social banditry in recent years.[1] This connotation of social bandits or “narco saints” has sometimes been given to these drug traffickers due to the direct support that they have provided to disadvantaged communities in many areas of Mexico. In the particular case of “El Chapo,” many Mexicans have voiced publicly that they believe that the fugitive has done more for the Sinaloa region than the administration of current Mexican president, Enrique Peña Nieto.[2] Yet, regardless of the questionable moral validity of this view, the current government’s severe weaknesses are undeniable and cover all spheres of constituted power. Simply examining the elaborate way in which “El Chapo” was able to escape from Mexico’s highest security prison suggests that there is extensive corruption and conspiracy not only within the prison, but also within the highest level of the Mexican bureaucracy.[3]

Weary of this reality, many individuals have given their ostensible loyalty to Mexican drug lords instead of the national police because they see this as the most effective way of guaranteeing their own security. Abel Meza Sandoval, a human rights defender and expert on drug trafficking in the Sinaloa region, highlighted the degree of distrust Mexican public opinion has in police due to their lack of effectiveness.[4] In fact, survey results from Mexico’s National Institute of Statistics and Geography revealed that 69.6 percent of Mexicans over the age of 18 think that Mexican authorities are ineffective in preventing crime.[5] Meza Sandoval argues that this perception among the population has developed because politicians have used government institutions for their own benefit rather than using them to serve the needs of constituents[6]. Drug lords, on the other hand, are sometimes perceived as being more interested in the wellbeing of citizens, aside from also being much more powerful in economic terms. José Antonio Sevilla, an auto mechanic from Sinaloa interviewed by the New York Times, said that “El Chapo is more of a president than Peña Nieto,” referencing the current Mexican president.[7] Genero Reyes Martínez, another Mexican interviewed by The New York Times, went even further when saying that “The government is Chapo’s.” [8]

Citizens such as Sevilla and Reyes Martínez are only two of the thousands of ordinary middle class and lower income Mexicans from Sinaloa that are grateful to Guzmán for all the economic and moral support he has provided them. Many Sinaloa residents speak of how Guzmán has helped families to cover medical expenses of a sick relative and provided people with employment opportunities.[9] René Jiménez Ornelas, a researcher at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) argues that Guzmán and the Sinaloa cartel are praised not only for having provided people in the region with jobs and smaller economic favors, but going so far as to pay for holiday, parties and Christmas presents.[10]

Yet, the most alarming aspect of this situation is not necessarily the gratefulness that the Mexican people have for “El Chapo”, but how common it is to find Mexicans whose ultimate aspiration is to become like him. Jiménez Ornelas took this issue even further when suggesting that if you ask Mexican children about their future aspirations, many will say, “I want to be a narco.”[11] On the other hand, Julio Hernández Barros, from the Department of Law of the Iberoamerican University (UIA) has added that “El Chapo” sends the message that “crime pays off,” especially in these regions where the government has done little to cure socioeconomic ills. Guzmán is a sort of legendary character for many, who are inspired by the story of a man who started off as an orange vendor, but was able to gain power and eventually being listed by Forbes as one of the world’s wealthiest men, all while evading the law.[12] Many interpret the moral of this story to be that the way out of poverty is not through law-abiding work, but rather through organized crime. However, the true message at the core of this story is that no matter how many drug traffickers are jailed, unless the problem of socioeconomic inequality is addressed, new drug lords will emerge and low-income Mexicans will continue to see criminal behavior as a means out of poverty.

In spite of the indisputable culpability of the Mexican government, the US government is also deeply responsible for Mexico’s current situation.[13] Much of the socioeconomic inequality present in states like Sinaloa can be traced back to the ratification of NAFTA in 1994 as this trade agreement led to the entrance of subsidized U.S. corn into the Mexican market and consequently the deep erosion of Mexico’s agricultural sector. Although NAFTA was meant to aid the economy, by 2012 a total of 14.3 million more Mexicans were living below the poverty than in 1994.[14] This corresponded with an increase in numbers of unemployed and disaffected young people, many of whom were later recruited by the drug cartels. Despite having contributed to the rise of drug trafficking in Mexico in this way, the United States has not addressed these issues in its fight against the drug cartels.

Instead, it has relied primarily on providing security assistance and intervention and has even collaborated with drug traffickers. The United States collaborated with the Sinaloa cartel between 2000 and 2012 in an arrangement that allowed the organization to smuggle billions of dollars of drugs and provided some criminals with immunity in exchange for information on rival cartels.[15] Despite this, U.S. officials have expressed concern over a lack of Mexicans interested in collaborating with the United States in the recapture of “El Chapo.”

Yet, what the United States fails to consider is that the recapture of “El Chapo” will not make a difference if the demand for drugs remains the same.[16] Currently, drug rehabilitation is a luxury only a select few have access to in the United States.[17] According to the CIA, the United States is the world’s largest consumer of cocaine, Colombian heroin, and Mexican heroin and marijuana.[18] This demand is a strong driving force of the drug trade, therefore Washington needs to re-evaluate its war on drugs and allocate funds proportionally, to not only prosecute criminals, but to also treat addiction as a public health problem by stepping up treatment and rehabilitation efforts. Washington should also consider supporting the Mexican government in efforts to curtail socioeconomic inequality as a means to prevent the expansion of the drug trafficking business and the rise of potential new drug traffickers in disadvantaged communities of Mexico.

*Laura V. Natera and Sofia Rada, Research Associates at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Notes:
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/18/world/americas/safe-haven-for-drug-kingpin-el-chapo-in-many-mexicans-hearts.html

[2] Ibid.

[3] http://www.businessinsider.com/el-chapos-escape-house-was-already-built-in-february-2015-2015-7

[4] http://www.noroeste.com.mx/publicaciones.php?id=931425&id_seccion

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/18/world/americas/safe-haven-for-drug-kingpin-el-chapo-in-many-mexicans-hearts.html

[8] Ibid.

[9]http://www.noroeste.com.mx/publicaciones.php?id=931425&id_seccion

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/18/world/americas/safe-haven-for-drug-kingpin-el-chapo-in-many-mexicans-hearts.html

[13] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-faux/nafta-and-the-narcos-what_b_4760372.html

[14] http://www.cepr.net/documents/nafta-20-years-2014-02.pdf

[15] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-government-and-the-sinaloa-cartel-2014-1; https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/01/14/is-the-u-s-secretly-backing-a-mexican-drug-cartel-probably-not/

[16] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/20/mexico-drugs-trade-el-chapo-arrest-joaquin-guzman-sinaloa-cartel

[17] http://www.countthecosts.org/sites/default/files/Human_rights_briefing.pdf

[18] https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2086.html

By Rens Lee*

The thinking behind the much-discussed Iran nuclear deal reflects broad foreign policy considerations — the expectation that better relations with Iran will reduce the threat of war in the Middle East, contribute to the fight against ISIS, and advance a peace settlement in Afghanistan. But how good is the deal as a nuclear agreement? Will it really prevent Iran, now defined as a nuclear threshold state, from getting a nuclear bomb, as the Administration claims? Or might Iran already, in some measurable sense, have crossed that threshold, and — if so — is the international inspection regime contemplated under the agreement adequate to uncover evidence to this effect?

Negotiations leading up to the deal have focused on limiting Iran’s own production, including covert production, of highly-enriched uranium (HEU) and weapons-grade plutonium, as well as activities related to the design and fabrication of a nuclear device. These are legitimate objectives, and the stipulations of the agreement will severely crimp Iranian ambitions to develop a sizable nuclear arsenal (comparable to, say, Israel’s or Pakistan’s). But while supporting and complementing its indigenous nuclear materials production, Iran has made wide-ranging forays into the international marketplace to obtain nuclear weapons-related goods and services — an effort encompassing Pakistan in the 1980s and (more consequentially) the states of the former Soviet Union in the early and mid-1990s. A vitally important task before the IAEA inspectors is to clarify issues regarding the “possible military dimensions” of Iran’s nuclear program — which could reveal weaponization activities incompatible with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran belongs.

The inspectors have their work cut out for them. The (stated) baseline justification for the Iran deal seems to reflect the conclusion of a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iran had halted aspects of its nuclear weapons program in 2003. The NIE also judged with moderate to high confidence that Iran did not have a nuclear weapon. But the NIE may have underestimated the scope, stealth, and sophistication of Iran’s external procurement programs, as well as important contextual factors such as the conditions that existed in the newly independent states of the former USSR and their newly insecure nuclear complexes — certainly a potential supply-side bonanza for an aspiring nuclear power. Iran, in fact, may have crossed the nuclear threshold some years before its program was allegedly halted. In a June 2002 news conference, Russian general Yury Baluyevsky reportedly acknowledged that “Iran does have nuclear weapons. Of course, these are non-strategic nuclear weapons; I mean they are not ICBMs within a range of more than 5,500 kilometers and more.” He went on to say that he saw no danger of aggression against Russia by Iran, not exactly a comfort for Iran’s regional adversaries. Baluyevsky, then Deputy Chief of Staff (and later Chief) of the Russian Armed Forces hardly qualifies as your average CIA walk-in. To be sure, the general might have been pulling our chain — perhaps to deter a US-Israeli strike on Iran. Yet he could well have been referring to some tactical nukes that had strayed from Soviet or Russian control as the USSR unwound, and been sold by unscrupulous persons or entities to third parties, including Iran. (If Iran’s military lacked the launch codes needed to activate the weapons, they probably would try to extract the component uranium or plutonium cores to fashion weapons of their own design.)

Alternatively, the Iranians might have assembled a weapon from stolen and smuggled fissile materials. The end of the Cold War and Soviet communism as well as the loss of state orders for nuclear goods ushered in a period of crisis in much of Russia’s vast nuclear archipelago — one that persisted more or less to the end of the 1990s. Soviet-era controls evaporated, workers went for long periods without pay, and security barriers such as perimeter fences and alarm systems were left untended or simply disintegrated. A manifestation of the general malaise was a massive leakage of nuclear and radiological materials from Soviet legacy enterprises and the emergence of a black market of sorts for such substances. Much of this flow was radioactive junk, useless for making a weapon, but the desperation that it symbolized presented an important opportunity for the Islamic Republic’s military procurement networks. Iranian front organizations could have relied on trusted intermediaries to bid for weapons-quality HEU and plutonium or other WMD components, or sent representatives to liaise directly with corrupt Russian managers and officials who had access to the materials Iran wanted. Unlike other aspiring nuclear states at the time, such as Iraq, Iran enjoyed wide-ranging nuclear-technical-commercial relations with Russia, which in the turbulent post-Soviet years, may have provided a convenient cover and justification for deal-making applicable to a nuclear weapons program.

In any event, the IAEA and its inspectors shouldn’t exclude the possibility that by the end of the 1990s Iran had stockpiled enough fissile material to produce one or more bombs, and perhaps a small number of fractional-yield nuclear charges — so-called battlefield weapons. Such weapons would suit a deterrence strategy against an invading army, but might also be configured (with additional design work) to fit onto a medium-range ballistic missile (like Iran’s Shahab-3) capable of reaching almost anywhere in the Middle East. Naturally, such a possibility or scenario imposes a huge burden on the inspection regime. The agreement, in theory, subjects Iran’s past and present work toward a bomb to an unprecedented degree of intrusive monitoring, and this includes access to sites of suspected “undeclared nuclear materials and activities.”

Yet, even with unimpeded access to rogue sites and a full range of verification procedures, it would be hard to detect the existence of a finished nuclear device or the fissile components of one — unlike, say, a covert enrichment facility, which would leave more obvious signatures. (Reliable and timely human intelligence supported by national technical means will need to complement the evolving inspection-verification process.) Also, the IAEA is obligated to provide a final report on “the resolution of past and present outstanding issues” by mid-December of this year, an amazingly short time in which to expose whatever post-threshold capability the Islamic Republic might have developed over the years. On a more positive note, the implied prospect of a US-Iranian détente might work in favor of the implementation of what is not a particularly good agreement. The Iranian authorities — anticipating the end of punishing sanctions, a reviving economy, and a conditional restoration of international legitimacy— could decide to roll back their weapons program even before IAEA inspectors and other international monitors descend upon them. Ultimately, the hope of a change in Iran’s behavior as it re-engages the international community may be the best argument for proceeding with the deal, though major risks remain.

About the author:
*Rensselaer Lee is Senior Fellow of the Foreign Policy Research Institute and author of Smuggling Armageddon: The Nuclear Black Market in the Former Soviet Union and Europe.

Source:
This article was published by FPRI.

By Mohammad Javad Zarif*

We – Iran and its interlocutors in the group of nations known as the P5+1 – have finally achieved the shared objective of turning the Iranian nuclear programme from an unnecessary crisis into a platform for cooperation on nuclear non-proliferation and beyond. Thenuclear deal reached in Vienna this month is not a ceiling but a solid foundation on which we must build. The joint comprehensive plan of action, as the accord is officially known, cements Iran’s status as a zone free of nuclear weapons. Now it is high time that we expand that zone to encompass the entire Middle East.

Iran’s push for a ban on weapons of mass destruction in its regional neighbourhood has been consistent. The fact that it precedes Saddam Hussein’s systematic use of WMDs against Iran (never reciprocated in kind) is evidence of the depth of my country’s commitment to this noble cause. And while Iran has received the support of some of its Arab friends in this endeavour, Israel – home to the Middle East’s only nuclear weapons programme – has been the holdout. In the light of the historic nuclear deal, we must address this challenge head on.

One of the many ironies of history is that non-nuclear-weapon states, like Iran, have actually done far more for the cause of non-proliferation in practice than nuclear-weapon states have done on paper. Iran and other nuclear have-nots have genuinely “walked the walk” in seeking to consolidate the non-proliferation regime. Meanwhile, states actually possessing these destructive weapons have hardly even “talked the talk”, while completely brushing off their disarmament obligations under the non-proliferation treaty (NPT) and customary international law.

That is to say nothing of countries outside the NPT, or Israel, with an undeclared nuclear arsenal and a declared disdain towards non-proliferation, notwithstanding its absurd and alarmist campaign against the Iranian nuclear deal.

Today, in light of the Vienna deal, it is high time that the nuclear “haves” remedied the gap by adopting serious disarmament measures and reinforcing the non-proliferation regime.

It is time for the “haves” to finally come to terms with a crucial reality; we live in a globalised security environment. The cold war era asymmetry between states that possess nuclear weapons and those that don’t is no longer remotely tolerable.

For too long, it has been assumed that the insane concept of mutually assured destruction would sustain stability and non-proliferation. Nothing could be further from the truth. The prevalence of this deterrence doctrine in international relations has been the primary driving force behind the temptation by some countries to acquire nuclear weapons, and by others to engage in expanding and beefing up the strength of their nuclear arsenals. All this in blatant violation of the disarmament objectives set by the international community.

It is imperative that we change this dangerous and erroneous security paradigm and move toward a better, safer and fairer arrangement. I sincerely believe that the nuclear agreement between my country – a non-nuclear-weapon state – and the P5+1 (which control almost all nuclear warheads on Earth) is symbolically significant enough to kickstart this paradigm shift and mark the beginning of a new era for the non-proliferation regime.

One step in the right direction would be to start negotiations for a weapons elimination treaty, backed by a robust monitoring and compliance-verification mechanism.

This could, in an initial phase, occasion the de-alerting of nuclear arsenals (removing warheads from delivery vehicles to reduce the risk of use) and subsequently engender the progressive disarmament by all countries possessing such WMDs. It is certainly a feasible goal to start this global project with a robust, universal and really genuine push to establish a WMD-free zone in the Middle East, if the relevant powers finally come to deem it not just a noble cause but a strategic imperative.

Such a new treaty would revive and complement the NPT for nuclear “haves”. It would codify disarmament obligations for nuclear-armed regimes that are not party to the NPT – but that are nonetheless bound – politically, by the international non-proliferation regime and, legally, by preemptory norms of customary international law to disarm.

Iran, in its national capacity and as current chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement, is prepared to work with the international community to achieve these goals, knowing full well that, along the way, it will probably run into many hurdles raised by the sceptics of peace and diplomacy. But we must endeavour to convince and persist, as we did in Vienna.

*Mohammad Javad Zarif is Iran’s Minister of Foreign Affairs

Jimmy Carter called a war waged in Vietnam by the United States — a war that killed 60,000 Americans and 4,000,000 Vietnamese, without burning down a single U.S. town or forest — “mutual” damage. Ronald Reagan called it a “noble” and “just cause.” Barack Obama promotes the myth of the widespread mistreatment of returning U.S. veterans, denounces the Vietnamese as “brutal,” and has launched a 13-year, $65 million propaganda program to glorify what the Vietnamese call the American War:

“As we observe the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War, we reflect with solemn reverence upon the valor of a generation that served with honor. We pay tribute to the more than 3 million servicemen and women who left their families to serve bravely, a world away . . . They pushed through jungles and rice paddies, heat and monsoon, fighting heroically to protect the ideals we hold dear as Americans.”

Which ideals might those have been? Remember, this was the bad war in contrast to which World War II acquired the ridiculous label “good war.” But the Pentagon is intent on undoing any accurate memory of Vietnam. Members of the wonderful organization, Veterans For Peace, meanwhile have launched their own educational campaign to counter the Pentagon’s at VietnamFullDisclosure.org, and the Vietnam Peace Commemoration Committee has done the same at LessonsOfVietnam.com. Already, the Pentagon has been persuaded to correct some of its inaccurate statements. Evidence of the extent of the killing in Vietnam continues to emerge, and it has suddenly become universally acceptable in academia and the corporate media to acknowledge that presidential candidate Richard M. Nixon secretly sabotaged peace talks in 1968 that appeared likely to end the war until he intervened. As a result, the war raged on and Nixon won election promising to end the war, which he didn’t do. There would seem to be at work here something like a 50-year limit on caring about treason or mass-murder. Imagine what it might become acceptable to say about current wars 50 years hence!

And yet, many lies about Vietnam are still told, and many truths are too little known. After Nixon sabotaged peace negotiations, U.S. and Vietnamese students negotiated their own People’s Peace Treaty, and used it to pressure Nixon to finally make his own.

“Suppose Viet Nam had not enjoyed an international solidarity movement, particularly in the United States,” writes Madame Nguyen Thi Binh. “If so, we could not have shaken Washington’s aggressive will.”

The People’s Peace Treaty began like this:

“Be it known that the American and Vietnamese peoples are not enemies. The war is carried out in the names of the people of the United States and South Vietnam but without our consent. It destroys the land and people of Vietnam. It drains America of its resources, its youth and its honor.

“We hereby agree to end the war on the following terms, so that both peoples can live under the joy of independence and can devote themselves to building a society based on human equality and respect for the earth. In rejecting the war we also reject all forms of racism and discrimination against people based on color, class, sex, national origin, and ethnic grouping which form the basis of the war policies, past and present, of the United States government.

“1. The Americans agree to the immediate and total withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Vietnam.

“2. The Vietnamese pledge that, as soon as the U.S. government publicly sets a date for total withdrawal, they will enter discussions to secure the release of all American prisoners, including pilots captured while bombing North Vietnam.”

Nine leaders of the U.S. antiwar movement of the 1960s have put their current thoughts down in a forthcoming book called The People Make the Peace: Lessons from the Vietnam Antiwar Movement. The movement of the 1960s and early 1970s was widespread and dynamic beyond what we know today. It was part of a wider culture of resistance. It benefitted from the novelty of televised war and televised protest. It benefitted from hugely flawed but better-than-today economic security, media coverage, and election systems, the impact of the draft, and — of course — the creativity and courage and hard work of peace activists.

Those contributing to this book, and who recently returned to Vietnam together, are Rennie Davis, Judy Gumbo, Alex Hing, Doug Hostetter, Jay Craven, Becca Wilson, John McAuliff, Myra MacPherson, and Nancy Kurshan. Their insights into the war, the Vietnamese culture, and U.S. culture, and the peace movement are priceless.

This was a war that Vietnamese and Americans killed themselves to protest. This was a war in which Vietnamese learned to raise fish in bomb craters. This was a war in which U.S. peace activists illegally traveled to Vietnam to learn about the war and work for peace. This is a war in which people still die from weapons that explode these many years later or from poisons that take this long to kill. Third-generation victims with birth defects live in the most contaminated areas on earth.

Nixon recorded himself fretting about the People’s Peace Treaty with his staff. Two years later, he eventually agreed to similar terms. In the meantime, tens of thousands of people died.

And yet the Vietnamese distinguish clearly, as they always did, U.S. peace advocates from the warmongering U.S. government. They love and honor Norman Morrison who burned himself to death at the Pentagon. They carry on without bitterness, hatred, or violence. The rage still roiling the United States from the U.S. Civil War is not apparent in Vietnamese culture. Americans could learn from Vietnamese attitudes. We could also learn the lesson of the war — and not treat it as a disease called “the Vietnam syndrome” — the lesson that war is immoral and even on its own terms counter-productive. Recognizing that would be the beginning of health.

2022 is promising to be the year of mega sporting events that potentially fly in the face of values professed by international sporting events and defy logic.

Consensus is near unanimous that temperatures in Qatar are too high for a summer World Cup. Similarly, Beijing lacks the snow needed for a Winter Olympics. That didn’t deter the International Olympic Committee (IOC) from awarding the 2022 tournament to Beijing.

If environmental concerns were not reason enough for pause, Doha and Beijing illustrate an equally disturbing trend: international sporting associations like the IOC and world soccer body FIFA are happy to give autocrats a global platform that allows them to polish their tarnished images and project themselves on the international stage.

Qatar is plagued by criticism of its controversial labour regime that puts workers at the mercy of their employers and raises questions about their safety and security. China is witnessing a crackdown on dissent.

Granted, it’s easy to level criticism at the hosting choices of international sporting associations. Achieving a balance between upholding the lofty values of international sporting associations and their choices of hosts of mega events is far more intricate and complex.

Those choices are determined to a large extent by the criteria potential hosts have to meet to qualify, legal intricacies, political concerns, and a need to ensure a level playing field on which countries are not disadvantaged because of their size or natural environment. International sporting associations have so far done a poor job in managing these issues.

Critics argue that the 2008 Beijing Olympics demonstrated that mega sporting events do little to advance an opening up of autocratic societies. China was accused of forced evictions without proper compensation and unwarranted arrests of human rights advocates in the walk-up to and during the tournament.

Moreover, China in the last two months has arrested more than 260 activists. A Chinese human rights group reported that authorities have “”arbitrarily detained” some 1,800 human rights activists since President Xi Jinping took office two years ago.

The arrests cast doubt on Chinese assurances that China will respect human rights as part of its successful bid to host the 2022 event. The Olympic Evaluation Commission said China’s “written assurances” included a commitment to press freedom, the right to demonstrate, labour rights and environmental protection in the context of the Games.

The Commission further expressed concern about Beijing’s air quality, noting that the Chinese government had promised measures to mitigate air pollution.

China’s track record is not the only reason to take those assurances with a grain of salt. The track record of international sporting associations is no more stellar. A German television documentary earlier this year that investigated the awarding of the 2018 World Cup to Russia and the 2022 tournament to Qatar disclosed a guarantee by Russia as part of its contract with FIFA to suspend labour legislation related to World Cup projects.

Potentially, Qatar could offer a counter argument. Its successful World Cup bid despite persistent questions about its integrity has already produced change. Qatar, since winning, has broken ranks with its autocratic Gulf partners to become the only country in the region to engage with its critics rather than either imprison them or bar entry to the country. In cooperation with human rights and labour activists, it has developed far-reaching standards for the working and living conditions of its majority migrant labour population.

Whether Qatar indeed proves to be a rare case study of a tournament that drives social and economic, if not, political change will depend on whether it matches its words with deeds and on whether it follows through with further reforms.

The contrasting examples of China and Qatar complicate decision making. It’s hard to judge in advance of the awarding of a mega event what impact that decision will have. In China’s case, one of the world’s foremost powers determined to reshape the international order, it’s fair to assume that it will not be easily persuaded to change its ways. China’s sway is vested in its hard power.

The contrary is true for Qatar, a small country sandwiched between regional behemoths Saudi Arabia and Iran for which sports is a key tool to enhance its soft power in the absence of the kind of credible hard power that could deter its foreign distractors. As a result, Qatar is more susceptible to pressure to ensure that its soft power strategy of building friendships and alliances it can fall back on in times of emergency works.

While making those judgements is ultimately a question of assessment, there are things international sporting associations can do to reverse the trend evident in the IOC’s choice of only Almaty or Beijing of autocrats dominating bids for mega events. One such step would be to ensure that expenditure required justifies the results rather than reaffirming the legacy of debt and white elephants that many mega events leave behind.

Not dissimilar to Qatar, the IOC has promised change but has yet to implement it. Its Olympic Agenda 2020 adopted in Monaco in December envisions a more flexible bidding process and sports program, lower costs for hosting the games, and the creation of a digital channel to promote Olympic sports and values. If implemented it could lead to more cities following through on their bids. Four cities, including favourite Oslo and Boston, bowed out of the bid for the 2022 World Olympics largely because of cost.

Creating a level playing field is no less difficult than judging an event’s potential to drive change. Qatar no doubt has some of the world’s highest summer temperatures. Its proposed solution for air conditioning of stadiums remains untested and was written off by its detractors even before it had a chance to be tested.

Moreover, whether the World Cup is held in the winter when temperatures are lower or in the summer is primarily a European, not a Qatari problem. Similarly, Beijing’s need to artificially produce snow is likely to have an environmental impact. Exactly what that is remains unclear.

Bahrain, host of a Formula One race and another state with the hard power to crack down on its domestic critics but not to defend itself against external military threats, is like Qatar an example where pressure can produce some result.

Bahrain, a country that has flagrantly violated human rights since the brutal crushing of a popular revolt in 2011, is however also an example of the legal difficulty involved in balancing the values of international sporting associations with partnering with autocrats.

Formula One Group promised in April in ajoint statement with advocacy group Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB) to “strengthen its processes in relation to human rights in accordance with the standards provided for” by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

The guidelines include respect for the human rights of those affected by a multinational’s activities consistent with a host government’s international obligations and commitments. “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights obligations of the government concerned are of particular relevance in this regard,” the guidelines say.

In astatement included in the legal notices on its website, Formula One said its human rights efforts were focussed on “those areas which are within our own direct influence.” It said it would take “proportionate steps” to monitor the potential human rights impacts of its activities, identify and assess, potential adverse human rights impacts, and “engage in meaningful consultation with relevant stakeholders in relation to any issues raised as a result of our due diligence.”

Formula One said human rights included the freedom to associate and organise and the right to engage in collective bargaining. It cautioned however that it would have to ensure that it does not violate domestic laws in cases where local “laws and regulations conflict with internationally recognised human rights.

Bahrain, a country that lacks freedom to associate and organize and does not allow collective bargaining, raises the question whether international sporting associations can balance their commitment to human rights with operations in autocratic environments. That is all the more true with Formula One races in Bahrain in recent years becoming platforms for confrontation between large numbers of protesters and security forces determined to suppress dissent.

On the surface of it, international sporting associations engage in a balancing act in which domestic laws ultimately force them to compromise their ideals. That is true in a majority of cases. Qatar is the litmus test of whether in some cases engagement does not simply mean questionable compromise but can in line with sporting ideals drive change.

By Uma Purushothaman*

US President Barack Obama might have concluded a historical deal with Iran, but rumblings of discontent against the deal can already be heard within the American political establishment. It appears that the deal with Iran will be the subject of much debate during the 2016 US elections. This election might see more focus on foreign policy on issues such as the US role in the world, the US-China relationship, the Iran deal and the continuing turmoil in the Middle East even though Americans have tended more often than not to vote on domestic issues than on foreign policy issues.

In fact, soon after the deal was officially announced, there was a race of sorts among the Republican Presidential contenders to be the first to condemn the deal and to sound tougher on Iran. Donald Trump, who has surprisingly emerged as the frontrunner in the GOP field, has called the deal an outrage and a win for Iran, saying the President negotiated from desperation. Jeb Bush denounced the deal as a “dangerous, deeply flawed, and short-sighted” package and “appeasement”. He argued that a comprehensive agreement should require Iran to “verifiably abandon – not simply delay – its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability”. Marco Rubio felt that the Obama administration had given too many concessions in its pursuit of the deal. Given that President Obama has said that he will veto any resolution by Congress disapproving of the deal, Rubio asserted that “it will then be left to the next President to return us to a position of American strength and re-impose sanctions on this despicable regime until it is truly willing to abandon its nuclear ambitions and is no longer a threat to international security.”

Scott Walker has described the deal as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures and said that he will terminate the deal if he is elected president. Senator Lindsey Graham described the deal as a nightmare for Israel, the Middle East and the world and that it amounted to “declaring war on Israel and the Sunni Arabs”. Mike Huckabee had even stronger words saying President Obama is marching Israelis to the “door of the oven”, in a reference to the Holocaust. Huckabee’s comments have sparked outrage from the Democratic Party with the head of the Democratic National Committee calling for an apology from Mr. Huckabee. Rick Santorum slammed the deal “a catastrophic capitulation” by the President, adding that it gives the Iranians “legitimacy” in the international community. Rand Paul, who has advocated a more isolationalist America, found the deal “unacceptable” and announced that he would vote against it in Congress. Ben Carson called it a historic mistake with potentially catastrophic consequences while Ted Cruz felt that the deal would legitimise and perpetuate Iran’s nuclear programme.

On the other hand, the Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton came out in support of the agreement saying it is an “important step in putting a lid” on Iran’s nuclear programme while suggesting that it will have to be “enforced vigorously, relentlessly”. Bernie Sanders welcomed the agreement calling it a victory for diplomacy as did Jim Webb who called it an important moment in American foreign policy. The lone voice of dissent from the Democratic Party was from Robert Menendez, a long time critic of the negotiations, who said that the deal will preserve Iran’s nuclear capabilities and legitimises it as a threshold nuclear state. Domestic politics over the deal have already begun. Senator Ted Cruz tried unsuccessfully to add an amendment to a long term highway bill which would have prevented President Obama from lifting some sanctions until Iran supports Israel and releases the three Americans being held in Iran.

The deal’s supposed adverse implications for Israeli security and the influence of the Jewish lobby are the reasons behind candidates opposing the deal. Their positions are also meant to capture Jewish voters, who have traditionally voted for the Democratic Party.

However, what can queer the pitch are surveys showing that American public opinion is supportive of the deal. A poll by the Los Angeles Jewish Journal shows that 28 percent Americans support the deal against 24 percent who oppose it. Interestingly, American Jews support the deal 49 percent as opposed to 31 percent even though they believe that the deal will endanger Israel. 53 percent of American Jews want Congress to pass the deal against 35 percent who don’t. At the same time, only 41 percent Americans want Congress to support the deal against the 38 percent who don’t. American Jews’ stance is reflective of them thinking as Americans first and also their growing disenchantment with Israeli polices which they feel perpetuate civilian conflict, according to a study by the Jewish People Policy Institute. Moreover, Jews are much more liberal than the overall public, and liberals largely support the Iran deal. However, several Jewish organisations have already started lobbying against the deal. For instance, the powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC launched an advocacy group called ‘Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran’, which will reportedly spend around $20 million to persuade members of Congress to vote against the accord. Jewish federations in the Miami and Boston are doing the same. But there are organisations like J Street which has launched a campaign to lobby Congress to vote for the deal. Thus, there is a clear divide between the Jewish people and their organisations on the issue just as there was during the Iraq War when the organisations supported the War and American Jews did not. So, based on these polls, it appears that American Jews’ votes will not be affected by the Iran accord. In fact, some analysts even argue that if the debate over the accord breaks along partisan lines American Jews will support the Democrats because of their Democratic and liberal leanings.

In the days ahead, as Congress scrutinises the Iran accord, partisanship on Capitol Hill might reach new heights and it will capture headlines. Whether Congress passes the Iran deal or not, it will loom large in the election debates because of its connection to American and Israeli national security though it is unlikely to be a real game changer in the elections.

*Dr. Uma Purushothaman is a Research Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Delhi

Courtesy: ORF US Monitor

Washington spied on its key ally, Japan, and passed intelligence on to Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the UK, WikiLeaks has revealed. The NSA targeted 35 high-ranking Japanese officials and top companies, and also tracked trade negotiations.

After dismantling the illusion of US relations built on mutual trust with Brazil and its European allies, Germany and France, WikiLeaks has turned to the Asian activities of the NSA. In a press release published on Friday, the website revealed “Target Tokyo” – a list of 35 of the US National Security Agency’s “top secret” targets.

The list includes Japanese Cabinet officials, major banks, and top Japanese companies, such as the natural gas division of Mitsubishi and the petroleum unit of Mitsui. There were also intercepts about “sensitive climate change strategy” and the “content of a confidential prime ministerial briefing that took place at Shinzo Abe’s official residence,” according to WikiLeaks.

“The lesson for Japan is this: do not expect a global surveillance superpower to act with honour or respect. There is only one rule: there are no rules,” Julian Assange, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief, said in the press release.

Japan is America’s closest ally in the Asia-Pacific region. They closely cooperate in trade and defense. Yet, according to the whistleblower website, some of the NSA reports were released to Australia and New Zealand, as well as to Canada and the UK – the members of the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance.

If the allegations are confirmed, Tokyo will protest the NSA’s spying activities, which date back to 2006, Kyodo news agency reported, citing sources in the Japanese government. However, it is “unlikely to have a major impact on the core of Japan-US relations,” Yoshinobu Yamamoto, a professor of international politics at the University of Niigata Prefecture, told AFP, a French news agency.

The revelations come as Japan is embroiled in a heated debate regarding a recent move by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe which is set to expand the role of the country’s military forces. The shift in policy has been greeted by Washington, but is regarded as controversial by Japan’s neighbors and the Japanese public.

“I think some interest groups and opposition parties will use this news to stick a spoke in the government’s wheel,” Celine Pajon, a Japan specialist at the French Institute of International Relations, told AFP.

While the prime minister’s phone wasn’t on the wiretapping list, WikiLeaks said that Trade Minister Yoichi Miyazawa and Bank of Japan governor Haruhiko Kuroda appear to have been direct targets NSA surveillance.

This report is particularly significant in wake of the commencement of the latest round of negotiations over the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement this week. Ministers of 12 countries in the region, including the US and Japan, the largest economies participating in the talks, have gathered on the Hawaiian island of Maui to discuss a free-trade bloc that would encompass about 40 percent of the world’s economy.

In early June 2015, on behalf of Eurasia Review, I had a lengthy conversation with Hasan Pashali, a renowned journalist of Azerbaijan who is from the Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan (Azerbaijan). Mr. Hasan Pashali was born in 1981 and studied English Literature and Economics at the Nakhchivan University and Nakhchivan State University. He is currently working as a journalist, translator and a tour guide for high level delegations in Azerbaijan.

The topic of this interview was based upon the cultural values and religious architecture of Azerbaijan, Turkey and the Caspian Sea region. Among the cultural monuments discussed was the Akhdamar Church, a religious object that has been claimed by Armenian scholars to have been built by Armenians.

In relation to this issue, Mr. Pashali noted: “historical facts prove that the Akhdamar monument belongs to Gipchag Turks who adopted Christianity. In the current chain of events there is misleading information in regards to the cultural and historical life in the region. It is clear that there are political intentions standing behind these cultural-historical discrepancies. I would like to elaborate on the two events that took place in the territory of Turkey. One of them is the interference of the Turkish Government’s decision to begin religious ceremonies in the Church of Sumela located in the city of Trabzon which belonged to the Roman Empire. At the same time we want to take a different approach to the origins of Akhdamar Church which is very interesting for the history of Azerbaijan.”

I asked Mr. Pashali whether Armenians were the legitimate founders and builders of this church and he elaborated:

“Armenians claim that Akhdamar Church located in Akhdamar Island in Van lake belongs to Armenians. Indeed Armenians want to ensure that there was an Armenian province in the eastern part of Turkey and that Armenians are the aboriginal tribes in these territories. This Christian temple was constructed even before the Ottoman Empire and Islam religion; however Armenians act as if this temple is Armenia’s ancient historical, cultural and religious monument. This is not true. Armenians’ arrival to this territories dates many-many years after the construction of this church. Based on historical facts we can say that this church is directly connected with cultural-historical, religious-ideological heritage of the Azeri People, and construction of this church and performance of ceremonies here is connected with the heritage of the Gipchaq Turks who lived in Southern Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia. Indeed this church has a greater probability to have been related with the past of Caucasus Albanians.

Famous Azerbaijan writter Yusif Vezir Chemenzeminli once said: ‘word is a home of history; word is a key of history.’

It is interesting that the word Akhdamar has no special meaning in Armenian language. In Arabic this word has no concrete meaning either. According to some claims the word “Akhdamar” means “swell” in Arabic and this does not connect with a clear meaning of church. In fact the word “ak” means “light” in Turkish. In old times, in archaic Turkish language the word “ak” is used as a term to replace nowadays the word “educated man”. Meanwhile the word light comes from Arabic and its meaning in archaic Turkish language is “ak”. As we know “Damar” means road and has also the meaning of a path.

If we translate the word “Akhdamar” into current “Samanyolu” it expresses the meaning of “Milk Way”. This is related with the ancient Turks belief in God.
As you know in 315, during the period of king Vachehan in old Albania, Vachehan officially adopted Christianity. The person close to him (is considered brother or son) named Gregory, considered to be the heir of Jesus and his religious patriot was also from the same Albanians. Because at that time Islam religion was not created and Christianity began to spread and this coincided with the Turks’ belief in God as Christianity was a monotheistic religion. For this reason the Turks adopted the Christian religion. The same Gregory from the Christian faith was killed in Azerbaijan’s current town of Beylegan because of spreading Christian religion. It is assumed that the grave of Charchis prophet in Beylegan belongs to the same Gregory. Meanwhile in ancient times, III- IV centuries B.C., Turks named Karkases who lived around Kars, Van and Sarikamish. It is assumed that city of Kars was established by Karkases. At the same time a district belongs to Karkas in the ancient city of Ani. Therefore in this period Albanians in the Caucasus and Gipchag Turks lived in these territories and they built a church for themselves and this church has no connection with Armenians.

Also we have encountered some facts that Christian Gipchags and Oguz tribes encounter in “Kitabi Dede Gorgud” epic. The character of generalized Christian Turks in the epic is Gipchag Melik. Gipchag Melik robbed khan Gazans house. This is the same period that religious identity prevailed over ethnic identity among Turks. For this reason Christian Gipchags considered themselves as another clan/group. After adoption of Islam religion Christians were oppressed.

Moreover, after the defeat of the Khurramilar movement headed by Babek in the IX century (838), Islam religion is adopted in Azerbaijan. Christian Gipchags who lived in these territories started moving to Eastern Anatolia and created their religious center there and settled around this place.

More precisely according to historical facts this church was build in 915-921.
Central-domed church was in a four-leaf clover-shaped cross plan and built with red stones. On the rural section of stone sculptures (reliefs) religious subjects from the Bible and the Torah together with worldly matters, life in the palace, hunting scenes, human and animal figures depicted. It is also interesting that we can see effects of Middle East Turks during the art period of the Abbasid caliphate (750-1258) in these stone reliefs.

The canvas on the wall of Akhdamar church gives more information. If you look attentively to the face of the fighter his face looks like Gipchaq Turks. The picture of a moon on a horse saddle is a fact that this monument belongs to Turks. And all historians should accept that by turning 180º only Turks could shoot an arrow. We can find traces of Christian Turks in the epic of “Asli and Kerem”.

The priest presented at the epic is not an Armenian Catholic clergy is not at all from Ganca. He was responsible for the activity of Christian Gipchag people who lived under a Bey and was representative of the Ganca Bey for collecting taxes from people. This black priest had the origins of Christian Gipchag Turks and he did not visit Armenians while going to Erzurum and Van. He visited his co-religious community only.

This shows that the Akhdamar church was a religious center of Gipchag Turks. When the Tsar of Russia invaded Azerbaijan territories under the leadership of the Empire ambassador to Iran, Gribodeyov, Armenians migrated from Iran to Azerbaijan. In this stage some part of Armenians settled in Azerbaijan and some parts in Eastern Anatolia. East Anatolia is not Kilikiya. There are information sources that during Byzantium times, Armenians settled in Kilikiya but they are not today’s Armenians. They are ancestors of Armenians considered to have joined the Roman Empire from the Balkans. When Nero defeated Eastern Byzantium and returned to Rome, the same Armenians left these territories.

Armenians have lived in Kilikiya only 30-40 years. After that, they have not been in Kilikiya. In the next period Hay tribes settled in the Ottoman Empire and the Arab world. It is supposed that Akhdamar church belongs to the Azerbaijan culture and Gipchag Turks. Unfortunately this kind of religious ceremonies is not permitted in Turkey. Keeping this church open for religious ceremonies while Armenians visit this church is not in favor of Turkey. All this serves to strengthen Armenian’s territorial claims against Turkey. If we look attentively we will witness a chain of reactions. After opening Samuel church for the Greeks to worship in Trabzon, Akhdamar church opened for Armenian community.”

Mr. Pashali concluded his thoughts on this issue by stating that: “it is better for Azerbaijan and Turkish historians to continue working on the above mentioned details and prove that Akhdamar church has no connection with the Armenian heritage and find documents that ensure that Akhdamar church belongs to Gipchag Turks. Today there are religious-historical documents written in Armenian letters and Gipchag dialects in Echmadzin. Based in these facts, the beginning of such historical research will prove that in general, Christian churches in Anatolia do not belong to Armenian culture. Today cultural monuments and churches in Azerbaijan and monuments in Eastern Anatolia have nothing to do with the Armenians.”

It’s my honor to be the guest of the Ambassador of Albania in Ankara, Mr. Genci Muçaj, at the Embassy.

We have been meeting with him on November 28 each year at The Anatolian Hall of the Swiss Hotel. Many Albanian students from all over Turkey, many members of Parliament, business people doing business with Albania, members of diplomatic corps in Ankara and guests from different walks of life participating the celebration organized by your Embassy, just about 1000 guests.

The target is to be properly informed, rather than being opinionated only, the main purpose of such diplomatic interviews is to introduce the social, cultural life of foreign countries in Turkey well as highlighting the intersection of mutual cultural, economic, political points between Turkey and Foreign countries.

I kindly ask Diplomats to inform readers and audiences regarding the cultural, industrial, political significance, traditions of their country. Besides getting recommendations for the traveler who intent to visit those countries.

Today, this is the time for second bird’s eye view tour to South-Eastern Europe. The flag of a privileged location on the Adriatic, the flag in Balkan Peninsula namely Albania is waving on Turkish skies.

An excursion into strategic aspects of the Albania-Turkey relationship bunched within words that compose a treasury basket of sentences during our interview. We shall talk about how Albania and Turkey shall achieve brighter horizons within Turkey and globally.

Hundreds of distinguished fundamental questions coming to mind from the recipe of Trilece to dynamics and analyzes of Albania Prime Minister visit to Serbia. From the reasons of recent rattles between police in Kosovo and protesters calling for the removal of a Serb minister alleged of insulting Albanian war victims to identity of İlyran people as native Balkan people. How the recent visit of the Pope Francis in Tirana strengthened Albania’s comparative advantage in relation to other countries in the region with the messages conveyed from him.

Questions to be asked are many within limited time, so the interview must be narrowed.

Genci Mucaj is Chairman of Board of Trustees of People to People International, Co-Founder and Member, Board of Directors, Center for Albanian and American Studies, member of Rotary Club Tirana, Albania.

He joined the Albanian Foreign Service as Adviser to the Minister of Foreign Affairs who served as Chief of Staff to the Minister, and later, again as Adviser. Later Director General, for Economic Corporation and Foreign Investment, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, represented Albania as National Coordinator of the Regional Corporation Council (RCC), a Consortium of 12 Nations of the Eastern European Region Vice-President and member of Kristal University Senate, Tirana, Albania Founder and Executive Director of Language Schools in Albania, founder and CEO of Global Business Partners ltd, a consulting company with world-wide connections, based in Tirana, Albania. Ambassador Mucaj, serves on the board of numerous volunteer organizations.

He was born on 1969, graduated from the University of Tirana, with specialization in English and American History, Literature and Language studies. Married, with two children, ages 12(Fiona) and 17 (Arber). Albania Ambassador in Ankara also feels like ambassador of Turkey all over the world too.

1. Two days ago on Tuesday I was on the reception of 36th anniversary of the Islamic Republic of Iran took place on Anatolian Hall of Swiss Hotel where I have been joining Albanian National Day reception since 2013. I do remember a year ago you as Albanian non-resident ambassador to Tehran met with President Hassan Rouhani and submitted your credentials to the President. So, I suppose you as “Plenipotentiary Ambassador” your domain is not only limited with Turkey. How long have you been in Ankara as Ambassador of the Republic of Albania in Turkey and Plenipotentiary to other countries in your domain ?

I resumed duty on March 1st 2013, but in December 2012 I was decreed by the President of Albania as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Turkey (Resident), and to the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Georgia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Republic of Kirghistan (the latter Non-Resident).

2. I was impressed with the Educational and Humanitarian Missions /activities you get involved in, would you please kindly mention those a bit?

I have been and lead several Educational and Humanitarian Missions of understanding with People to People International, to the Kingdom of Nepal, Peoples Republic of China, Republic of Korea, and the Arab Republic of Egypt. Currently as family we are supporting children’s education in different parts of world.

3. Having reviewed your bio, you as “A world traveler”, the first thing my eyes caught due to selective perception as I have also been in 101 different countries. How many countries have you visited during your diplomatic, educational, business and professional life?

Probably not more than 101 but quite a lot even I have lost count on them. There are countries which I have visited numerous times. Lots of interesting things I have seen, meanwhile never forget observing people in South Korea respecting elders like we do. Ancestors are important for Albanians. Deceased family members have a sustained and persistent existence on our presence.

I take great interest in the affairs of the world and possess the ability to influence the present and future of the living in the society. We do believe, family loyalty, and permanency of the family lineage are important cultivating and nurturing affiliation values are quite important to keep the moral values of the society and nation as well.

4. How do you think that your assignment to Turkey was beneficial to your career as diplomat?

Turkey is very dynamic country. There is a noteworthy ground for triggering economic, cultural and commercial cooperation. Therefore I believe it has become very beneficial for my career.

5. What was your first impression about Turkey in the beginning and what changed within time?

I do feel like home here. I feel like I am not only the Albanian Ambassador in Turkey, but also of Turkey while visiting other countries anywhere in the world. I speak highly about Turkey and Turkish people too.

6. What are the three main areas of priority of the Embassy of the Republic of Albania in Turkey?

First, bilateral relationship,secondly Economical Diplomacy, thirdly Cultural Diplomacy.

Both Albania and Turkey are full members of NATO. Turkey and Albania have common road maps in many international issues. Cooperation in the arena of defense constitutes a robust dimension of Turkish-Albanian bilateral relations. Teams allocated by the Turkish Land, Naval and Air Forces have been training Albanian Armed Forces and supporting them in logistics and modernization aspects, while Albanian soldiers assigned to Afghanistan within NATO agenda are serving their mandate within the Turkish troops deployed in this geography.

Turkey and Albania enjoyed progressively magnificent relations for many years and entering in higher level of partnership, with Document of Strategic Partnership. Such agreements intensify political, economic and cultural relations. Currently there are 170 effective agreements between Turkey and Albania

7. What are some of the advantages for doing business in Albania?

With the implementation of a new fiscal package at the start of 2014, the Government has announced a number of new amicable business initiatives such as NO VAT(Value Added Tax) on machinery value over 360,000 € that is used to increase efficiency, NO TAXES on small businesses with an annual turnover of 2 million ALL or less (€0 – €14,000) • LOW TAXES of 7.5% for businesses with an annual turnover between 2 and 8 million ALL (€14,000 – €56,000) • NO EXCISE on the fuel used by oil-producing companies. On April 11, 2014, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services revised its outlook on the Republic of Albania to stable from negative. In the Heritage Foundation’s 2014 Index of Economic Freedom, Albania’s score enhanced to 66.9 out of 100, creating its economy the 54th freest economy in the world. Its overall score increased as a result of clear improvements in its investment and trade freedom. The improvements mean that Albania is now ranked above 18 European countries with an overall score that is exceeding the world average.

8. In this connotation how are the Albanian-Turkish business ties to be strengthened?

Globally, Albania has a good performance and is ranked 14th out of 189 economies related to investor’s protection. Though Turkey is not major economic partners (4th major country) the ties are quite strong. Free Trade Agreement between Turkey and Albania is important as well for enhancing the trade between 2 countries. Surely Albania is more open to investor after experiencing transition period from centrally planned economy to an open market economy. .With the EU ambition in concentration Government of Albania has committed itself to create a more competitive investment climate by undertaking qualitative changes in procedures and legislation together with the structural reforms

9. Currently, my attention is focused the Global Energy Projects also acting as one of Turkish Civil Society representative of EBRD, in this connotation knowing the fact that Albania is the supreme dynamic renewable energy country in Europe via strong political commitment and an ambitious national strategy, the Government has placed renewable energy at the top of the country’s development agenda?

Albania has a significant volume of oil reserves, producing more than 1.2 million tons in 2013. The government has an encouraging policy to charm foreign investment in its natural resource sector. The Albanian oil, gas and byproducts market is a free and open, liberalized market, predominately functioned and run by private companies, and where the Government of Albania plays only a regulatory role.

10. What are the other sources of energy in Albania?

Water resources are among the most imperative natural resources in Albania. Eight large rivers, fed by hundreds of smaller rivers and streams, run through the country from the mountainous East to the Adriatic and Ionian Seas in the West. The average height of the hydro graphic territory of Albania is about 700 m above sea level. As Albania is part of the Mediterranean climatic zone, with a hot, dry summer followed by a relatively short and mild winter. Thus, the country has very favorable conditions for the improvement of solar energy. Albania has untouched wind power potential, especially along the Adriatic Coast where it has a number of areas with very high wind energy potential. Key facts to note include: • Average annual wind speed of 6-8 m/s. Average energy density of 250¬600 W/m2 • Potential for at least 20 oleic electricity centrals Several domestic and foreign investors are licensed to explore wind power production in Albania with the construction of a 150 MW wind farm in the pipeline. By 2020, the Government would like to generate 5% of total electricity from wind sources

11. Again while reviewing EBRD periodicals met with several road projects in Albania. The north-south route of Albania is one of the leading arteries of the country’s road network. Beginning on the border of Montenegro and ending on the Greek border, it covers more than 80% of the populated area and 90% of industrial, agricultural and coastal activities. So what is the main objective of this “Blue-Highway Concept “project?

The objective is to establish a sustainable transport route in line with European and international standards, and to contribute to the establishment of a unique economic area on national, regional and pan-European levels. A feasibility study and detailed design for the whole corridor is required for this project.

12. How the cultural ties can be strengthened and what kind of activities are performed to enhance both Albanian and Turkish national assets?

The overall typical characteristic of the bilateral relationships between Turkey and Albania is based on mutual alliance, faith and solidarity. There are 11 sister cities in Turkey and Albania. Turkish National Language Institute is to publish Professor Necip Alpan Turkish-Albanian-Turkish Dictionary. This would be one the greatest works which will enrich both Albanian and Turkish national assets and certainly help strengthen our relation. We are actually quite happy to receive full support from President of Turkish Language Institute Prof. Mustafa S. Kacalin in publishing this life time work of 50 years.

13. I suppose the launch of Albanian Cultural Centers in Ankara, Izmir , Istanbul and Bursa are planned by Embassies of Albania and Kosova how is the recent activities pertaining to this plan ?

Albanian and Turkey have long historical bounds between our countries and these bounds are getting much resilient progressively. Each of those centers aims to strengthen the bounds. All are ongoing and realized projects, while Albanian Culture Center in Ankara (www.qksh.net) was officially opened on 19 February 2015. Foreign Affair Minister of Kosova was also present in the opening ceremony attracting a lot of Media coverage. A delegation from Albanian Parliament already visited Albanian Cultural Center in Ankara and thousands of people have visited the center already. Besides hope to launch a new Center in Izmir, on November 28th 2015 for the Albanian Flag day.

14. Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008, so far obtained international recognition as a sovereign state from about 108 countries. However, Serbia refuses to recognize Kosovo’s independence. We know Turkey and Albania recognized on the same date 18 February 2008 Does Albania have special effort for the recognition of Kosovo worldwide or any support provided to the activities of Kosovo?

We always support Kosovo from the first day both domestically and globally. Albanians in Kosovo are the predominate majority, so they are our brothers and sisters of the same family, unfortunately has divided them for almost a century. We will always be on their support. A nation can never find peace if parts of its body are not united.

15. The significant number of Turkish citizens of Albanian origin living in Turkey and of Albanians who chose to stay in Turkey owing to education, employment, health or marriage ties; the growing size of the Turkish community settling in Albania, either as employers or professionals, fortifying the cooperation potential of the two countries. How many Albanians lived in Turkey and what is your personal impression how many of them (percentage) were say “I am proud to be Albanian” if they were asked in questionnaire?

We estimate approximately 5 Million but there’s no official accurate numbers. 100% of Albanians are proud of being Albanian. No question on that.

16. How is social media strategy of the Albanian Embassy here in Turkey?

Albania is an open society where all people can live freely without fear of unequal treatment and speaks freely and use social media effectively. We do the same as Albanian Embassy with full respect to the rights of involving correspondents.

17. Roman Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy and Islam are three categories of religion in Albania. Though most are Muslim in Turkey, do members of the three different religions unite in the cultural events organized by the communities in Turkey and how?

People are born with nationality not religion. Nationality brings people together not religion. The religion of Albanians is Albanian. Although freedom of religion is protected by our constitution, religion is not a way of living in Albania but an expression of believe.

18. We are aware of the fact that, one of the Mayors of Albania was detained and arrested along with a municipal official and a construction company manager. The corruption scandals and cases have got national attention in the country determined to improve its corruption record. Now fighting corruption remains a top priority for Albania, and surely how do you avoid bullying as how do you deal with it when it happens. My question is what would be the best measure to fight with the corruption in Albania?

Having resilient policies that are very pure and specific about what to do and not do in various state of affairs is critical. Corruption is everywhere in the World. The best way to deal with corruption is to prevent poverty, grow the economy other than anti-corruption laws and legislation. In the milieu of endorsing better property management, increasing transparency and strengthening the fight against corruption, the Albanian Government has created an inventory of state assets which can be accessed online.

Meanwhile in spite of the diplomatic immunity, we are also under periodical inspection in terms of transparency and our properties well as income are controlled by the Government against any fraud and corruption.

19. Having watched your program on TRT Haber “Ambassador in the Kitchen” promoting Albanian cuisine and culture. What makes trilece so tasty ?

Tres leces cake, means , “three milks cake” constitute milk of goat, sheep and cow. Evaporated milk, condensed milk, and heavy cream.

20. Albanian cuisine is meat-oriented like Turkey what are the 3 mutual dishes with different names Turkey-Albanian comes to your mind?

Let’s make it four. Köfte, kebap, baklava, börek and perhaps many more. We also have a lot of words in common, but you need to know that it is hard to define which is whose? We lived for many years under the same empire.

21. How do you asses Albania strategic position and how they shoulder responsibilities to progress towards peace on Human Rights and Global Conflicts in Region such as Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Middle East and its fight against recurrent and inflammatory chronic disease ISIS?

Surely the conflict hot spots which have preoccupied the world, such as Syria, Iraq, Libya, Middle East and its fight against ISIS, are indisputable evidence of the major importance of human rights nowadays.

Albania, as a NATO member and EU candidate country, intensely supports the respect for human rights and their universality. Based on these successful accomplishments and after an intense diplomatic campaign on October 21, 2014, for the first time, Albania was elected member of the Human Rights Council, during the elections held at the UN General Assembly. Albania’s membership to the Human Rights Council is first and foremost a responsibility to the 193 UN member states, for the trust put in us to serve in this imperative body, as well as an impetus for the further democratization of our society.

In the UN system, human rights, accompanied by the guarantee of peace, security and sustainable development, constitute three significant pillars that are interconnected and reinforcing to each other. The principal effort of the international community with regard to the protection, respect and promotion of human rights was materialized with the establishment of the Commission on Human Rights in 1946. Albania, which for half-century witnessed one of the utmost cruel regimes in terms of violations of human rights and a tormenting transition towards a democratic state-building, aware and appreciates the prominence of respecting human rights. Our bitter experience motivates us today to unconditionally support every initiative and every country which contributes to and works for the advancement and improvement of human rights.

22. How is the critical role of Albania for peace settlement, preservation of human rights in this connotation?

My country has already a principally rich experience in terms of encouraging regional peace and security, human rights and economic development, in the internal and external dimension. Thanks to its geographical position, rich cultural heritage and tolerant spirit, Albania has become a model and promoter of dialogue, respect and religious cohabitation.

I am fully confident that membership in the Human Rights Council is another opportunity for Albania to reveal its capacities and improve the rate of implementation of national and international legislation regarding the protection, respect and promotion of human rights.

This membership is also an expression of our accomplishments in the pitch of freedom and democracy that almost a quarter-century ago, seemed impossible. This inspires us to firmly continue our Euro-Atlantic path towards building a democratic society, as the only alternative for Albania and the region.

23. Albania with such green wonders of wonders, hit by some of the worst floods it has ever seen, compounded by tree clearances and soil erosion in Albania and Europa. Reminds me a question regarding “How is the agricultural investment policy of Country?

Primarily, Turkish Disaster and Emergency Presidency AFAD donated 175.000$ in aid for the flooded families in the south of Albania and this again shows the solidarity between Turkey and Albania. I take this opportunity to thank Turkish AFAD for their ongoing support.

There are many reasons to invest in the agriculture sector in Albania: We have fertile soil, a suitable climate and an abundant supply of water, resulting in massive production potential , We produce a range of produce including fruits and vegetables, cooking oils, nuts, herbs and spices, fish and dairy products, The recent development – and future potential – of organic agriculture, The rapid growth of national markets and the accessibility of regional markets • Preferential trade agreements with the EU on the increase in exports • 20,000 ha of agricultural land owned by the government Low labor wages, and a crossroad to EU transportation roots.

İzmir Commodity Exchange (ITB) signed a cooperation protocol agreement with Albanian Agribusiness Council (KASH) to cultivate agricultural projects collectively. Madam Işınsu Kestelli, the chairwoman of the board of ITB stated that Albania and Turkey shall work cooperatively on every field related to agriculture. And “EU projects, information exchange, joint attendance to the exposures and various platforms shall be the major points of this partnership. The Electronic Platform funded by ITB is due to be signed soon with Albanian Minister of Agriculture, which will increase trading opportunities of Albanian Agriculture products in Turkey.

According KASH, there are 23 agricultural organizations, nearly 2000 agricultural entrepreneurs and more than 10.000 farmers within KASH. They have brought people from different parts of Albania so that they can tell what’s done here when they are back to Albania. So the main point is to introduce Albanian products and proliferate the trade volume between our countries. Turkey is the main market for Albania because that we can get the chance of selling our products to European countries.

I wish to express my sincere appreciation for the kind cooperation of Ambassador Genci Mucaj, during our interview.

H. Cigdem Yorgancioglu

http://www.cigdemyorgancioglu.org/

http://politikaakademisi.org/cigdem-yorgancioglu/

English version edited by: Peter M. Tase
SOURCE
http://www.cigdemyorgancioglu.org/article/49/interview-with-ambassador-of-albania-in-ankara-mr.-genci-mucaj

By Rasheed Abou-Alsamh*

The move by the United Arab Emirates to raise the price of gasoline at the pump by 24 percent from Aug. 1 was a brave one and is a sign of the times. Once again the UAE is being a trailblazer among the Gulf countries, realizing that despite our vast reserves of oil and our low production costs, compared to the US and other countries, our oil will not last forever and we can get much more for it by exporting it rather than selling it at heavily subsidized prices at home.

The initial reaction of Gulf citizens at this news most probably is one of shock and outrage. After all, most of us have grown up with dirt cheap gasoline as our birthright, costing only a few halalas a liter. Having to pay 1.72 dirhams per liter, let alone the new price of 2.14 dirhams per liter, is outrageous to your average Gulf citizen.

But with the drop in the world price of oil from over $100 a barrel over a year ago to the current average of $52 a barrel of today, our rulers have begun to realize that despite our large foreign currency reserves that we accumulated during the years of high oil prices, which are now helping cushion our budget shortcomings, we must stop wasting so much energy domestically both in our cars and in our homes.

Most citizens think that cheap gasoline and electricity have no cost to the government or to society, but they are wrong.

Today, Saudi Arabia has to use one-third of its oil production just to meet electricity demand at home, oil which could have been exported and sold to earn much more income for our government.

And our electricity consumption just keeps on growing. The main reason of course is because of our high temperatures, especially in the summer, where everything has to be air-conditioned 24-hours a day, just to make life bearable. But then our cheap, subsidized power rates encourage people to waste electricity by leaving lights on in their homes all day long, even when they are not at home, and to leave lights on in rooms, when they are at home, in rooms that they are not using.

Some families even leave their air-conditioners running constantly when they go on vacation, even though no one is left at home during that period.
Our cheap gasoline price in the Kingdom, currently 57 halalas a liter (16 US cents) leaves us with the third cheapest gasoline in the world. Only Libya and Venezuela have cheaper gasoline than ours. But is that really something to be proud of? I don’t think so as it just encourages waste. Have you seen how many of our young men drive aimlessly around the streets of our cities on the weekends and during holidays?

If gasoline were SR1.50 a liter, I doubt we would see so many of them roaming the streets as before, which would be a big relief to the young women who get harassed by them.Saving our natural resources and using them wisely should be seen as a patriotic duty and the right thing to do for our nation’s future. Our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) encouraged us not to be wasteful and to help the less fortunate. Let us follow his advice and stop wasting our oil and electricity so that we can help ourselves and our future generations.

*The writer is a Saudi journalist based in Brazil.

By Deepak Sinha*

One can be forgiven for thinking that we live in Africa, once known as the dark continent – where rape and violence and loot are not only endemic, but are also used as a tool by the politicians. We are inured to not only read horrific cases of rape and violence against women and children, but also of the increasing number of cases where rough and ready retribution by locals, merely on suspicion of wrongdoing, seems to have become the norm. In addition, we have gone better and have elected individuals to Parliament, whose actions seem to suggest that they would have been better suited for leadership of organisations like the Cosa Nostra, the Boko Haram or may be even the Islamic State. In all of this, there is no shortage of politicians, from across the spectrum, spouting their usual hypocritical ordure about how justice may take time, but will surely prevail.

But to change the tack, what has really moved this writer was the statement of a former Chief Justice of India, a few months ago that, “I have always fought for it (judicial freedom) and I will be the first person to leave this chair if it is compromised. I promise 1.2 billion people of India that independence of the judiciary will not be compromised.” While this honourable gentleman may have flitted to a post-retirement sinecure, this writer has truly taken his promise to heart, though at the present time, it is not the independence of the judiciary that worries this writer at all, but something much more mundane. It is the manner in which the august members of the judiciary seem to have taken the poet philosopher Khalil Gibran’s stark and wry observation that both the city of the living and of the dead are “for the rich and powerful men”, quite literally. The joke doing the rounds on social media that Dawood Ibrahim is considering surrendering here, because he has absolute trust in the judiciary to do the right thing, seems pretty apt, if not satirical.

Actions, as we all know, speaks much louder than words, and in these last few weeks and months, there has certainly been much action and a perception has clearly gained ground that the spate of judgments somehow seem to have benefited the rich and powerful amidst us. While undoubtedly, the absence of governance and our society’s penchant for always looking to ends and not the means, along with a general absence of moral and ethical integrity must be considered as major reasons for this state of affairs, the collapse of the criminal justice system must also share the blame in equal measure, if not more. It is indeed ironic and most certainly a fitting subject for gallows humour that judges of our higher judiciary are referred to by the honorific ‘justice’.

The judicial system of India has much to be proud of, but unfortunately, providing justice is not one of them, more so, if you happen to be one of the ‘aam janta’ or the ‘Mango People’ as one worthy once referred to that class. The fact that the judiciary is overburdened with massive backlogs caused by a variety of factors ranging from pending vacancies and excessive litigation to police inefficiency, outdated laws and even force majeure have been repeated ad nauseam over the years and no longer cut much ice. As recent elections have shown, the common man is no longer willing to be held hostage by privileged elites who trot out generic excuses at every opportunity while making every effort to preserve the status quo. If the judiciary and its other elements have not heard the clarion call to action, they may soon be in the unfortunate position of finding themselves not just ignored, but even worse, treated as irrelevant.

There have been numerous suggestions to correct the situation mooted by many eminent jurists, legislators and Commissions over the years. However, progress to reform the system has been at a pace that would put any self-respecting tortoise to shame and the judiciary, especially the higher judiciary, cannot shirk responsibility for this dismal state of affairs. The truism that justice delayed is justice denied can only be ignored at great peril as we are in the process of finding out on a daily basis. A little imagination, clarity of focus and a sense of purpose will pay us dividends and is not too much to ask of our eminent jurists.

We need to face the unpalatable truth that no amount of laws or better investigation and policing can ever change the daily carnage that we see around us without the judiciary providing us with what is its primary responsibility, the provision of speedy and equitable justice. The fact that it took 46 deaths in the ongoing Vyapam scam for the Supreme Court to act is a bleak reminder of where exactly our criminal justice system stands today.

*The writer is a consultant with Observer Research Foundation, Delhi and a former senior military officer

Courtesy: The Pioneer, July 31, 2015