By Amulya Ganguli*

There will be a wide measure of agreement with former external affairs minister Yashwant Singh’s comment that the India-Pakistan talks are a dialogue of the deaf. If these nevertheless continue, albeit sporadically and accompanied by unfriendly exchanges outside the conference hall, the reason, according to him, is that successive Indian prime ministers have been seeking the Nobel peace prize by resolving the longstanding disputes between the two countries.

Indeed, there have been prime ministers who went so far as to give up the “deep assets” which the Indian intelligence agencies had built up inside Pakistan. Although this act of self-sacrifice has long been known, it was made public recently by defence minister Manohar Parrikar, who refused to name the responsible person or persons, but pointed out that it takes 20/30 years to build up these “assets”.

As the latest contretemps over the meeting between the National Security Advisers of the two countries show, any hope of discussions in a calm atmosphere is futile if only because of Pakistan’s insistence on raising the Kashmir issue and India’s assertion in favour of confining the talks only to terrorism.

There was a time when the US quietly asked India to make some concessions on Kashmir with an interlocutor, Robin Raphael, even questioning the terms of the state’s accession to India. But, post-9/11, Washington has been more appreciative of India’s argument that yielding ground on Kashmir will only help the jehadis expand the areas under their control.

But, even after America has more or less washed its hands off the India-Pakistan affair, or perhaps because of it, Pakistan has seemingly become more paranoid. The Pakistan army now probably believes that it will have to aggressively pursue its agenda of grabbing Kashmir on its own since external help is no longer available.

Hence, its ire when it found that Kashmir had not been mentioned in the Ufa statement issued by prime ministers Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif. If the latter has the advantage of outsourcing his policy initiatives to the Pakistan army, as the talks between him, Sartaj Aziz and the army chief, Raheel Sharif prior to the Delhi talks showed, the Modi government has to make up its mind on its own on the next course of action with an increasingly intransigent and belligerent neighbour.

The Pakistan army’s obduracy comes from the realization that unless it can make perceptible gains vis-à-vis Kashmir, its hold on the country’s government and polity will gradually begin to weaken. After all, it cannot continue to arm and train terrorists and send them across the border for an indefinite period, especially when some of them are being caught alive by the Indian forces.

Moreover, any more Mumbai-style operations by the so-called “non-state actors” will earn Pakistan more infamy. As Husain Haqqani recalls in his book, Magnificent Delusions, when the Pakistani NSA of the time, Mahmud Durrani, told the American deputy secretary of state, John Negroponte, that the courts will determine the legality of giving access to the LeT operatives involved in 26/11, the US official said: “We know about Pakistan’s courts. They order the hanging of elected prime ministers when the army asks them and don’t look at legal niceties”

Since the Pakistan army’s obsession with Kashmir is not going to subside any time soon, India can be said to be reaching the end of the road where a dialogue with its neighbour is concerned. The most that India can offer with regard to Kashmir is what Manmohan Singh said about making the borders irrelevant between the two halves of the state. But, such a placatory initiative is not safe for India when jehadis are being armed and trained in the Pakistani half.

Considering that Modi expressed the view before last year’s general election that talks cannot be held against the backdrop of gunfire, he can be said to have gone the extra mile in search of keeping the channels of communication open.

If Nawaz Sharif had not been a puppet in the Pakistan army’s hands, it might have been possible to sustain the negotiations even if no change in the existing territorial realities is feasible. All that can be done are allowing greater trade and travelling facilities across the line of control.

Since such moves to ease mutual tension will not be to the Pakistan army’s liking, the two countries are seemingly at a dead end. At this juncture, a prolonged period when the Ufa-type initiatives are abjured may be advisable if only to avoid the bitterness which an attempt to restart the dialogue entails.

There can be back-channel negotiations, but formal talks have to be kept in abeyance till a meeting ground has been reached with the Pakistan army’s concurrence. Otherwise, there will be a repetition of the present stalemate over Pakistan’s provocative invitation to the Kashmiri separatists.

For a hardliner, Modi has shown considerable resilience, especially when there are elements in his party and the Sangh parivar who had opposed the “moderate” Atal Behari Vajpayee’s 1999 road trip to Lahore, saying that he should have gone in a tank and not a bus.

Modi has been more accommodative presumably because he wants to include Pakistan in his successful diplomatic forays. But, he is dealing with a neighbour who has openly announced its intention to bleed India to death with a thousand cuts.

*Amulya Ganguli is a political commentator. He can be contacted at editor@spsindia.in

By Adam Patterson*

Despite the fact that al-Qaeda is responsible for the deadliest attack on U.S. soil, and that dismantling the terror apparatus was Washington’s primary motive for occupying Afghanistan, the burgeoning of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is a development that has eluded much of the American public. Yet, since the Saudi Arabian-led military coalition launched “Operation Decisive Storm” on March 26 of this year, Osama bin Laden’s former cohorts in AQAP have effectively transformed their organization into an occupying militia. This development has largely escaped the U.S. mainstream media’s radar.

Lacking significant oil reserves, Yemen has not experienced an influx of wealth as have neighboring Saudi Arabia and other nearby Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states. As a result, it has become increasingly insular. Yemen has long attracted Sunni revivalists and assorted religious purists. The Yemeni strain of Arabic is believed to be the closest to that spoken during the times of the Prophet. Those with an especially austere, fundamentalist vision of Islam have flocked to Yemen believing that the area remains uncorrupted. The world’s most reactionary Sunni Muslims (frequently labeled Wahhabis or Salafists) share a special reverence for their vision of the early Muslim caliphate. Those who migrate to Yemen on these grounds do so to invoke the past and to promote a revival of their absolutist interpretation of Islam.

AQAP’s strong presence in Yemen long predates the country’s 2011 breakdown of civil authority, when the group constituted more of a hostile nuisance than a martial threat. According to reports, the al-Qaeda branch began germinating in the Arabian Peninsula during the 1990s and gradually rose to prominence as a regular instigator of violence following the escalation of Washington’s war on terror during the 2000s.

Fertile Land for Global Jihadists

This unique situation drew Anwar al-Awlaki, the influential preacher and al-Qaeda recruiter, to Yemen in 2004. Hardline jihadists view the impoverished country as fertile ground in an ideological sense, while petroleum speculators have long regarded Yemen as barren. American-born Anwar al-Awlaki was a gifted agitator for Sunni jihadism, speaking English fluently in addition to commanding a poetic grasp of Arabic. He ultimately chose Yemen in which to exhibit his disreputable talents, which included the skill of attracting Anglophone recruits.

Al-Awlaki’s relocation to Yemen was part of a greater tide, one that has been met with increasing retaliation from both U.S. intelligence and Yemen’s local authorities. Drone strikes in Yemen became common early in the Obama administration, one of which killed al-Awlaki in 2011. Certain analysts suggested that the al-Qaeda recruiter became a regional commander within AQAP and was instrumental in overseeing the logistics of terror attacks, including the failed explosion aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253. Despite his ignominious death, al-Awlaki’s presence still lingers in the jihadist psyche.

Yemen’s collapse into civil war was a catalyst for AQAP’s regional ambitions, plans that would have likely remained unrealized had the country not splintered itself into mutually antagonistic pieces. Evidence suggests that hundreds of foreign jihadists have filtered into Yemen since unified rule collapsed in 2011, drawn by the opportunities presented by a fractured central government in a failed state awash with arms caches. In a series of decisive skirmishes, AQAP began rapidly claiming territory outside of major cities and overcoming government forces. As of July 2015, AQAP holds terrain in the northern hinterlands of the Hadramaut Governorate (situated along the Saudi Arabian border) and in much of the Abyan Governorate (situated along Yemen’s southern coast). Al-Qaeda’s growing control in Yemen can be compared to the rise of AQAP’s Syrian counterpart, Jabhat al-Nusra, and of Daesh (“Islamic State”), which followed the rebellion against the Damascus regime in 2011.

One of the interesting components of the jihadists’ shift in priorities is the diminished emphasis on attacking the West. The previous generation of terror organizations have transformed from sleeper cells and shadow elements into openly declared militias. The focus of their aggression has been capturing and occupying contested territories in failed states. As a result, violence against the West is often waived off to copycats and supporters in Europe and North America determined to execute improvised lone wolf attacks. In recent weeks, AQAP has doubled down on this tactic, issuing two proclamations in early August that praised lone-wolf style attacks and exhorted aspiring jihadists to “strike America in its own home and beyond.”

In an extension of this doctrine, the organization has prioritized planned terror attacks in areas they hope to directly influence. AQAP’s bombings appear localized and often symbolic with an August 6 attack obliterating a 700-year old Sufi mosque in the Yemeni province of Lahj. In this case the perceived enemy is close both in terms of geography and religion with the target being a mystical order of Islam that is heretical according to AQAP’s worldview.

In contrast to the more reckless jihadi groups claiming territory in Syria and Iraq, AQAP’s style of operations appears more measured and procedural. They are less prone to the abrupt gains and losses that have characterized Daesh’s campaigns. Keeping in mind that Yemen is a different theater than the Levant, AQAP’s expansion in the area has been one of gradual encroachment. Yet, like Daesh, AQAP is comprised of opportunists, though they seem much more astute at calibrating logistical boundaries. In contrast to the recent blindsiding of Daesh at the hands of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, AQAP appears less likely to overextend itself.

AQAP’s Prospects in Yemen

The return of a unified civil authority in Yemen would serve as the most effective counter to AQAP’s expansion. Unfortunately, all signs point to this being unlikely in the immediate future. Terror organizations by definition function in the least observable fringes, generally being unable to expose themselves in the face of disciplined martial and policing oversight. AQAP appears to have picked up steam in Yemen because their status as marginal figures has enabled them to bide their time and emerge only when more powerful factions with governmental roots began engaging one another.

Corralling al-Qaeda’s Yemeni branch has become less of a priority for locals now that Sunni and Shi’ite/Zaydi factions have turned their guns upon each other. Saudi Arabia’s military incursion into Yemen bodes poorly for the defeat of AQAP. Riyadh’s aggression breaks down largely along sectarian lines, with their hostility focused primarily on the Houthi rebels. Recent evidence suggests that AQAP has become an ally of convenience for the House of Al Saud, with terrorist militants fighting alongside Saudi-backed militias during open skirmishes. As long as al-Qaeda remains antagonistic toward the local Shi’ite/Zaydi Muslims of Yemen, AQAP will remain well out of Saudi Arabia’s line of fire. Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, the president of Yemen’s ousted government, currently rules in exile from Riyadh. His ongoing protection under the Saudi banner practically guarantees that the Houthis will have to contend with AQAP as a tactical ally of the kingdom.

Unless the Houthis and their Sunni enemies reach a détente, or one side scores a decisive victory on the ground, AQAP is well poised to continue asserting control over portions of territory in Yemeni hinterlands by simple virtue of exploiting the martial chaos. Peace by any means would constitute the clearest threat to AQAP’s power because this would force local Sunnis to contend with pressure from Washington to either suppress or eliminate the al-Qaeda branch. Considering that the crisis in Yemen is escalating by the day, however, al-Qaeda is likely to sustain its position as a major power in the war-torn country, a thorn in the side of Houthi rebels, and a beacon for militant jihadists.

About the author:
*Adam Patterson is a Washington, DC-based analyst of international security topics, with a special focus on insurgency and conflict in Arab states.

Source:
This article was originally published by Gulf State Analytics.

A key axis for Europe: free-market advocates in Western Europe ally with those in former communist countries.

By Chris Miller*

To observers of European politics, it came as no surprise to see France and Germany taking opposing positions as talks over Greece’s new bailout deal came down to the wire in mid-July. The Franco-German engine has driven European politics for decades with separate visions for economic policy: Berlin demands greater fiscal and monetary discipline, and Paris focuses instead on using government spending to stimulate growth.

That much remains true today – but the constellations of countries supporting the German and French positions have shifted. No longer is Europe’s main divide between austere northerners and profligate southerners. The key axis dividing the continent today is east-west, a curious alliance between free-market advocates in Western Europe and those in former communist countries.
Critics used to refer to Europe’s economically weak southerners as the PIGS: Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain. Those countries still wrestle with large budget deficits and weak competitiveness. But their main critics are not so much Europe’s north, but its east. The geography of the euro plays a role: Many northern European countries, such as Denmark, the UK, Norway and Sweden, do not use the euro, and so have been disengaged from debates about how to keep Greece in the single currency zone. The roots of the east-west divide are deeper, stemming from Eastern and Central Europe’s painful transition from communism since 1991, and those countries’ interpretations of the factors driving growth since then. Ask many from Europe’s east, and people concede that the 1990s were an unpleasant period. The collapse of state communism left destruction in its wake. The transition to capitalism was marked by high unemployment, inflation and widespread fear of economic insecurity.

Since then, however, most countries in Eastern Europe have become far better off. Throughout the late 1990s and 2000s, GDP growth rates in countries such as Slovenia, Slovakia, Estonia and Latvia were often several times higher than the EU average. As Western European economies lumbered along, the East sped ahead. The Baltics and Slovakia even managed to post Chinese-style double-digit growth rates during the mid-2000s, improving living standards for their populations. Today, the region’s economies remain far more dynamic than their peers in the West. Poland, to give another example, was a rare country that did not even suffer a recession in 2008.

When thinking about Europe’s debt crises in Greece and elsewhere, most Eastern Europeans emphasize the reforms they undertook in the 1990s. Their argument is straightforward. They took tough economic medicine in the 1990s – including privatizing business, raising retirement ages and cutting back social programs – painful at the time, but which yielded a significant payoff. The Greeks, Easterners argue, need a similar treatment. The only way to achieve economic growth is through tough reform, say Easterners.

Eastern Europeans also point to their own performance after the 2008 crisis as evidence that Greece should accept austerity measures. In response to the recession, Greece spent heavily on countercyclical measures, heaping new debt on to its already ballooning obligations. What Greece should have done, Easterners say, is what Latvia did in the face of similar deficits in 2008. The government in Riga adopted swinging budget cuts that pushed the economy into a more painful recession. Yet Latvia’s recession was as short as it was deep. Soon, the country was back in black, with its economy growing steadily since. Latvia managed to adopt the euro even as Greece was considering casting off the single currency. Easterners urge a program of tough love and reforms for Europe’s stragglers.

Critics argue that this narrative is too simplistic, and they have a point. Eastern European countries did embrace structural reforms during the 1990s that boosted efficiency and productivity, and they have kept budgets balanced since then. But Eastern Europe also benefited from a wave of aid from the European Union, averaging 300 euros per person per year, designed to help unite their economies with the rest of Europe’s and bring living standards to the European average. Similarly, some of Eastern Europe’s economic growth of the 1990s may have had more to do with the establishment of new links with Germany’s manufacturing powerhouse rather than structural reforms.

It is also debatable whether the social makeups of eastern and southern Europe are sufficiently similar to assume that policies that work in one region are transferable to others. Eastern Europe, for example, generally lacks strong labor movements. Many of its most controversial structural reforms, including factory closings and pension cuts, took place immediately after the collapse of communist regimes in the late 1980s. Political leaders could credibly describe painful reforms as necessary steps in overcoming the communist legacy.

In Southern Europe labor unions are comparatively strong, making it difficult to regain competitiveness by reducing wages. Because wages are higher than in Europe’s east, Southern Europe is less able to attract investment by offering low labor costs to manufacturers or outsourcing firms. Meanwhile, the region also suffers from the financial legacy of the previous generation. When Greece, Spain and Portugal were transitioning to democracy from military rule during the 1970s and 1980s, deficit spending was used as a means of “buying” social peace through welfare spending. Part of these countries’ debt burden is the legacy of this democratic transition. Much of Eastern Europe, by contrast, benefited from debt write-offs when communist regimes collapsed.

Perhaps the most telling divide between Eastern and Western Europe is political. Few voters anywhere in Europe are excited about bailing out Greece’s government. In many countries, bailout critics have pointed to what they describe as Greece’s overly generous welfare provisions. Western Europeans’ unhappiness over Greece’s impecuniousness, however, is tempered by fear that their expensive welfare states might someday face a similar fate. That is not only true of Southern Europe. Countries such as France and Belgium have relatively high ratios of debt to GDP. In Belgium, the debt-to-GDP ratio is higher than that of Spain – a fact that led many to predict in the early days of the eurozone crisis that Belgium might find itself in a similar situation as had the debt-ridden countries of Europe’s south. Belgian and French voters, therefore, have been far more sympathetic to Greece’s plight.

There is far less sympathy in Europe’s East. In these countries, criticism that Greece’s government is overly generous is far more potent because average incomes in Eastern Europe are lower than in Greece. According to World Bank data, GDP per capita in Greece in 2014 was around $21,000, compared with $19,000 in Estonia, $18,000 in Slovakia and $16,000 in Latvia. By seeking a bailout from eurozone countries, in other words, Greece is asking poorer neighbors for aid. Needless to say, many in Eastern Europe wonder why Greece merits a bailout when some Greeks are living better than they are.

Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, announced in August that she views Greece’s debt as “unsustainable and that Greece cannot restore debt sustainability solely through actions on its own.” She urged commitments from Greece’s European partners to provide “significant debt relief.”

Europe’s new economic divide is unlikely to disappear soon. It is driven in part by differing ideologies, but the key splits are structural. The countries in Europe’s east and west have varying economies and histories. As Europe begins the next phase of addressing its never-ending debt crisis, the east-west divide will play an ever larger role.

*Chris Miller is associate director of the Grand Strategy Program at Yale and a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He is currently finishing a book manuscript on Russian-Chinese relations.

By Anne Hammerstad*

If tabloid headlines are anything to go by, the United Kingdom is fighting off the greatest invasion force threatening the island since the Blitz. The invaders this time are migrants and asylum seekers sneaking a ride on lorries, trains and ferries to get across – or underneath – the English Channel.

News footage of groups of young men climbing fences and breaking into trucks at Calais look dramatic, but the ‘swarm’ of migrants at Calais, as depicted by British Prime Minister David Cameron, is in fact 3,000 to 5000 people, many of whom are not actually trying to get into the UK at all. A sizeable minority have applied for asylum in France and are staying in the informal settlement near Calais known as the Jungle while waiting for the outcome of their application.

All over Europe, fences are going up, physically and metaphorically. Hungary expects to complete its new border fence by the end of August. Macedonia announced a state of emergency and deployed riot police at the border last week. Until then it had dealt with the influx by giving migrants 72-hour transit papers, enough time for them to buy a ticket, cram onto a train and cross further into Europe to become somebody else’s problem. First among those ‘somebody else’ is Germany, which expects to receive more than 750,000 new asylum applications in 2015.

A Europe unable to cope?

The challenge is certainly great for Germany, where new arrivals are sleeping on floors in makeshift accommodation. But it is in southern Europe that a real humanitarian crisis is unfolding. The EU border agency, Frontex, have recorded 340,000 ‘migrants detected’ from January to July this year, almost three times as many as the same period last year. Of those, around 160,000 have taken the relatively new route from the Middle East and Turkey to the easternmost islands of Greece. More than 50,000 have arrived in Greece in the month of July alone. Wracked by economic and political crisis, Greece is rife with xenophobic attitudes towards migrants.

But the people arriving on Greek holiday islands in leaky dinghies are not migrants. While those taking the route from Libya to Italy have tended to be a mix of refugees, especially from Syria and Eritrea, and economic migrants, particularly from West Africa, the composition of the boat people arriving in Greece this August has been, according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, over 80% Syrians, 15% Afghans and the rest mostly Iraqis. The vast majority will qualify for refugee status.

The crisis Europe is not facing

The United Kingdom is not facing an invasion of illegal immigrants launched from Calais. Nor is the rest of Europe facing a migration crisis. Certainly, there are well-established economic migration routes from the poorer parts of the world to the richer. Since there are no longer any legal ways for low-skilled migrants to enter Europe, many choose to travel irregularly.

The journey they make has been made both easier and more dangerous for the migrants by the political collapse of Libya and turmoil in Egypt. Human smuggling networks can work with near impunity in both countries, mistreating migrants en route, before packing them onto unseaworthy vessels and steering them towards European waters in hope of rescue. An estimated 2,500 people have perished in the attempt so far this year.

A humanitarian crisis

Southern and South-Eastern European countries, particularly Greece, are facing a humanitarian crisis, where saving lives and providing food and shelter must take precedence over immigration control, regardless of whether those arriving are ‘illegal’ economic migrants or refugees. Despite the rush to build fences, secure borders and pass the buck, there is a growing appreciation across European capitals that ‘illegal migration’ is not a crime punishable by a watery death sentence. Prompted by one of the largest Mediterranean disasters in history, where 800 people drowned, the EU relaunched a large-scale search-and-rescue operation in April.

A global displacement crisis needs global solutions

The reason for the enormous rise in the number of people making the perilous journey across the Mediterranean is not economic migration, but war, persecution and violence. In short, Europe is experiencing its share of a global displacement crisis driven by an upsurge in conflict across the world, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. The world has not seen so many people uprooted by conflict and persecution since the end of World War Two.

More than 80% of all refugees remain in their near region, many in refugee camps, others self-settled in nearby urban centres. But life in camps is getting increasingly destitute and devoid of hope for many refugees, particularly those fleeing never-ending conflicts, like those in Somalia, Syria and Iraq. Syria’s neighbours are coping with around four million refugees – in Lebanon refugees make up one in four of the country’s population. Humanitarian aid, while at record levels, does not cover the basic needs of refugees.

If European governments want to see a sustainable and ethically viable end to the chaotic and deadly passage across the Mediterranean, a first step would be to provide more financial support to refugee hosting countries, not only to support refugees, but to bolster domestic stability in host-countries. Beyond that, a global burden-sharing mechanism for resettling refugees would both alleviate the pressure on countries of first asylum and make refugee arrivals in Europe more orderly and manageable.

For this to happen, European governments must first acknowledge that the situation at Calais, Lampedusa and Kos are not a European migration crisis, but a global refugee crisis.

About the author:
*Dr Anne Hammerstad is a research associate of the South African Institute of International Affairs, and an Honorary Senior Research Fellow in the School of Politics and IR, University of Kent, Canterbury. She is the author of The Rise and Decline of a Global Security Actor: UNHCR, Refugee Protection and Security.

Source:
This article was published by SAIIA

Total said Thursday it has signed an agreement to sell all of its interests in the FUKA and SIRGE gas pipelines and the St. Fergus Gas Terminal to North Sea Midstream Partners for £585 million (around $905 million), subject to the customary approvals.

“The sale of these midstream transportation assets is another example of Total’s strategy of active portfolio management and the strong potential to unlock value from a range of infrastructure assets,” said Patrick de La Chevardière, Chief Financial Officer at Total. “Transferring ownership to an entity specializing in midstream UK assets creates value for us and ensures a long and bright future for the facilities.”

The Frigg UK Pipeline (FUKA) is a 362-kilometer, 32” gas pipeline that was originally constructed in 1977 to connect the Frigg Field on the UK – Norway median line to the St. Fergus Gas Terminal in Scotland. The Frigg Field is now decommissioned but the FUKA pipeline is still operational, delivering gas from some 20 fields in the Northern North Sea to the terminal at St Fergus. Total holds a 100% operated interest in the FUKA pipeline.

The St. Fergus Gas Terminal is a three-train processing plant with a capacity of 2,648 million cubic feet of gas per day (Mmscf/d), currently serving over 20 fields. Total holds a 100% operated interest in the terminal.

The Shetland Island Regional Gas Export System (SIRGE) is a 234-kilometer, 30” gas pipeline with a capacity of 665 Mmscf/d connecting the Shetland Gas Plant to the FUKA pipeline. Total holds a 67% operated interest in the SIRGE pipeline alongside Dong E&P (UK) Limited (18.3%), Chevron North Sea Limited (7.2%) and OMV (UK) Limited (7.5%).

Following the completion of the sale, North Sea Midstream Partners will have an agreement with px Group for the operation and maintenance of the assets.

Technology touches every aspect of society and it is changing dramatically. Education, a very important and indispensable part of society, has also been tapped by new innovations and discoveries.

Like all other areas, urban areas are influenced to a greater extent than rural in this field too. Much more could have been done to bring the revolution in learning process in rural areas of India. The real question is: Have we ever taken a second to wonder if it’s leaving a positive impact on our work, or is it just that we have been relying too much on it so that we’ve become habitual to it, ignoring the direction of its impact?

For instance, is technology causing education to improve over time or have we just been catching up with the trend of educational technology. Earlier, technology in education was a debatable topic amongst the society. Everyone had their own views on modernizing education and making it technology aided. There were a huge number of positives and negatives to education technology. But, gradually as technology was embraced by the educational institutes, they realized the importance of technology in education. Its positives outnumbered the negatives and now, with technology, education has taken a whole new meaning that it leaves us with no doubt that our educational system has been transformed owing to the ever-advancing technology. Technology and education are a great combination if used together with a right reason and vision.

Technology in Education

The rapid and constant pace of change in technology is creating both opportunities and challenges for schools. The opportunities include greater access to rich, multimedia content, the increasing use of online course taking to offer classes not otherwise available, the widespread availability of mobile computing devices that can access the Internet, the expanding role of social networking tools for learning and professional development, and the growing interest in the power of digital games for more personalized learning.

At the same time, the pace of change creates significant challenges for schools. To begin with, schools are forever playing technological catch up as digital innovations emerge that require upgrading schools’ technological infrastructure and building new professional development programs. Some schools have been adept at keeping up with those changes, while many others are falling far behind, creating a digital divide based largely on the quality of educational technology, rather than just simple access to the Internet.

The rapid evolution of educational technologies also makes it increasingly challenging to determine what works best. Longitudinal research that takes years to do risks being irrelevant by the time it is completed because of shifts in the technological landscape. iPad, for instance, became popular in schools soon after it was released and well before any research could be conducted about its educational effectiveness. Following is a look at some of the hottest issues and trends in educational technology and how they are creating opportunities and challenges for K-12 schools.

Technology Infrastructure

Recognizing the increasing importance of technology in education and employment, the Indian government has a scheme that grants every public school district, regardless of the number of schools it contains, Rs. 5 million every year to invest in educational technology. Districts have to submit a proposal in order to be granted the funds. The government estimates that 22 percent of primary schools have a computer, but the reality is that many schools aren’t using the equipment they have. Moreover, students at a various government school know their school has a computer centre, but none of them can remember using it. In India’s booming private education sector, technology is being adopted much more quickly. As many as 400 educational technology firms have launched in the past 10 years, yet the quality and longevity of their products is far from uniform.

Schools and districts continue to battle to keep pace with ever increasing demands to upgrade their technological infrastructure. But the demands themselves have changed during the past decade, from a focus on simply gaining connectivity to finding enough bandwidth to run more complex applications in classrooms such as, for example, streaming audio and video.

The majority of schools across the country have Internet connectivity. Far fewer, however, were able to successfully meet the need for higher speed access, because of demand as one reason. The Government should subsidize school purchases for Internet connectivity, to allow schools to gain connectivity via dark fiber networks, among other reforms. The stated theory behind the reform was that by allowing more options for connectivity, schools could in theory gain more bandwidth while at the same time drive down cost because increasing the speed of fiber networks generally involves a one-time upgrade rather than consistent, periodic expenditures to secure more bandwidth via other connections. Yet even before all this action had a chance to take effect, it appeared some schools were already making progress meeting infrastructure demands on their own.

Restrictive Internet filtering was the top student complaint about Web use in the recent past, whereas five years earlier, the chief complaint was connectivity speed. And anecdotal evidence suggests more schools are providing, or at least considering providing, high-speed wireless networks on their campuses, and reaping savings in some cases by allowing students who own their own laptops, notebook or mobile phones to use those devices rather than purchase new school hardware.

But because technology infrastructure needs vary widely between districts, and indeed between schools within the same districts, the government’s perceived desire to focus its efforts as a facilitator of infrastructure access has become somewhat controversial among education technology advocates. This was especially evident when it became clear that the Enhancing Education through Technology program was in jeopardy. Huge differences in technology infrastructure remain among schools. No doubt, school infrastructure is improving, but many openly doubt that capability will catch up with demand, since new digital tools used in education are requiring ever-increasing amounts of bandwidth.

Research

While there is much on-going research on new technologies and their effects on teaching and learning, there is little rigorous, large-scale data that makes for solid research, education experts say. The vast majority of the studies available are funded by the very companies and institutions that have created and promoted the technology, raising questions of the research’s validity and objectivity. In addition, the kinds of studies that produce meaningful data often take several years to complete—a timeline that lags far behind the fast pace of emerging and evolving technologies.

For example, it is difficult to pinpoint empirical data to support the case for mobile learning in schools—a trend that educators have been exploring for several years now—let alone data to support even newer technologies such as tablet computers like the iPad. The studies that do look at the effects of mobile technologies on learning are often based on small samples of students involved in short-term pilots, not the kind of large-scale, ongoing samples of students that educators and policymakers would like to see.

However, there are a handful of large-scale studies that do point to trends and observations in the education technology field. Majority of the schools that have integrated laptops and other digital tools into learning are not maximizing the use of those devices in ways that best make use of their potential.

A meta-analysis of more than a thousand studies regarding online learning concluded that students in online-only instruction performed modestly better than their face-to-face counterparts, and that students in classes that blended both face-to-face and online elements performed better than those in solely online or face-to-face instruction. However, the researchers cautioned that the vast majority of the studies in the meta-analysis were from students in higher education, and as a result, the conclusions drawn may not be applicable to K-12 education.

The Speak Up survey, which is conducted annually by Project Tomorrow—a nonprofit research organization—and Blackboard, Inc., surveyed nearly 300,000 students, parents, teachers, and other educators about their views on technology in education. Findings from the 2010 survey found an increased interest from educators in mobile learning, as well as an increase in the number of students who own mobile devices such as smart phones, regardless of economic or demographic differences. The survey also found an increased interest in online learning and blended learning opportunities, as well as electronic textbooks.
While these studies represent some of the more large-scale research conducted in this field, education advocates emphasize the need for a wider range of well-researched, longitudinal, and ethically sound data on education technology.
E-Learning

Online learning in many forms is on the rise in schools of all types across the country. Students in many parts of the country now have a long list of choices when it comes to e-learning. The menu of options often includes full-time, for-profit virtual schools; state-sponsored virtual schools; supplemental online learning courses offered by brick-and-mortar schools; and charter schools presenting a hybrid option of digital material coupled with face-to-face instruction.

Options for full-time virtual schools are growing. Students from kindergarten through high school can seek out online schooling opportunities, which usually include virtual teachers and a combination of synchronous and asynchronous online learning. These schools are starting to focus more on the issue of socialization for their students and some are incorporating more face-to-face instruction into their array of services to allow for student interaction both online and in person. They’re forming clubs, holding proms, and creating school newspapers.

But full-time virtual schools also face the reality that for many students with two parents working outside the home such a scenario is not an option. Such students often cannot tap into full-time online schools for that reason, and virtual school providers acknowledge that their version of education works best, particularly in the lower grades, when an adult is present to assist.

In addition to courses that offer an online instructor, some researchers say students have had the most success with hybrid or blended education. That can mean that students use digital content with a face-to-face instructor, or an online instructor and an in-class teacher may work together to assist students. Hybrid charter schools, which use mostly digital curriculum with face-to-face support and instruction—sometimes even combined with an online teacher—are gaining a foothold in K-12.

At the same time, a growing number of students now have access to online courses in their brick-and-mortar schools. Schools are tapping into e-learning for a variety of reasons. Some schools say it saves money and allows them to offer a wider variety of courses, including Advanced Placement classes. Others say it can help with scheduling conflicts when a face-to-face class is provided only at a time when a student already has another obligation. In addition, online courses can provide highly qualified teachers for classes otherwise not offered by a school.

One of the fastest growing areas of e-learning, and a category that mainstream schools are increasingly turning to, is credit recovery. These online courses allow students to retake classes they haven’t passed, but in a new and different format. Many of these credit recovery courses give students a brief evaluation, then permit them to skip concepts they already know to focus on ideas they haven’t yet grasped. However, some educators and education experts have questioned the quality and academic rigor of these programs.

So where are traditional schools getting these online courses? Some are developing their own, others are purchasing them from for-profit vendors and a growing number are able to tap into state virtual schools or state-led online learning initiatives that currently exist in 38 states. Some schools find it easier to use courses developed by a state-run virtual school, since it is already aligned with their state standards.

Mobile Computing

Increasing access, growing acceptance, and decreasing cost are all helping to make the use of mobile devices a popular and increasing trend within the world of educational technology.

While the digital divide between the affluent and disadvantaged still exists, mobile devices appear to have the potential to close it, at least in terms of access. The game-based learning will be widely adopted by mainstream classrooms within three to five years. Instead of educational software, e.g. Math Blaster or Reader Rabbit, students and teachers are much more likely to incorporate Web-based educational games into classrooms, which are often available for free.

Some educators hope that games and simulations will provide a way for students to picture themselves in career paths they may otherwise would not have chosen, especially in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) subjects, and some argue that games and simulations offer students a way to connect what they are learning in class to (simulated) real-world situations in a safe and low-cost environment. Furthermore, games and simulations may help students learn by helping them visualize processes they otherwise could not see, such as the flow of an electron or the construction of a city. Games can also promote higher-order thinking skills, such as collaboration, communication, problem-solving, and teamwork.

However, creating a healthy marriage of an engaging and entertaining game with educational objectives and goals is a challenging process that has yet to be perfected. To create and design games with the kind of high-resolution graphics and complex situations that children are used to seeing in commercial games takes a large amount of funding and time that educators often do not have. And finding the time and resources to train teachers who may not be familiar with game-based learning is a challenge for majority of schools. Despite these challenges, efforts are on for developing educational games and incorporating game-based learning into classrooms.

Social Networking

Many schools are no longer debating whether social networking should play a role in education. Instead, debate has shifted to what social networking tools work best and how to deploy them. Some schools are using mainstream social networking tools, like Face book, for everything from promoting school events to organizing school clubs as well as for more academic purposes related to assignments and class projects.

But educators are wary about security, advertising, information-sharing, and social interaction in such an environment are often seeking out social networks designed specifically for learning instead. These sites, like e-Pals and e-Chalk, are more restrictive, often allowing teachers and school officials to limit not only who can join, but who students can talk to and interact with. Some educators also say students seem to take these sites more seriously and treat them with a more academic focus and tone than they would a site they routinely use for socialization with their peers. These sites also often provide safety features that can detect foul language or bullying phrases and alert a teacher.

Many educators are of the view that the academic benefits of social networking are real. They allow students to work cooperatively on projects in an online environment that feels familiar to students. Teachers often report that a student who does not speak up in class will be more engaged on a social networking site and that these sites allow instructors to extend the school day.

By Col R Hariharan*

After the din of recently concluded general election in Sri Lanka is over, the United National Party leader Ranil Wickremesinghe has been sworn in as Sri Lanka’s prime minister. He is poised to work with a national unity government. There are eight takeaways from the election and its aftermath that can help in visualising the future course of events in the island nation.

1. Positive trends: A number of positive trends have emerged both in the conduct and in the aftermath of elections. People have shown that whipping up of Sinhala nationalist rhetoric or holding up the bogey of revival of Tamil separatism is not enough to win elections. They would rather prefer clean governance than ostentatious of display of power by the rulers. The peaceful conduct of elections holds a lesson for other South Asian nations: if the national leadership is determined it can ensure the government, administration and election commission come together, without working at cross purposes, to conduct peaceful elections. The abhorrent trend of local politicians was waving pistols and intimidating the public that had invaded the body politics in recent times. The election has shown they will have to change their act.

2. Rajapaksa’s fault lines: The electoral defeat of the former president for a second time within six months showed that he had not understood the dynamics of change that had become embedded in public discourse to win elections. Comparatively, Sirisena despite his low profile and soft rhetoric had done better. Of course, Rajapaksa will continue to be respected as a national hero for eliminating the Tamil Tigers. Yes; Southern Sinhala Buddhist constituency will probably continue to vote for him. No; that will not be sufficient to win an election without an inclusive agenda. And the bogey of revival of terrorism of the LTTE kind probably carries only limited credibility. The failure of Rajapaksa coming to power showed the limitations of banking upon personality cult. But that is not enough to recoup credibility in public life; integrity in action is equally important. His reputation appears to have been badly bruised by allegations of corruption, misuse of office, family politics and cronyism. So Rajapaksa has to clean up his act rather than depending upon his cronies’ advice if he does not want to fade away from political limelight. And keep the family at arm’s length; they have already done enough damage to him.

3. Sirisena’s strengths: President Sirisena has demonstrated that he was unfazed by political obstacles in the run up to the election. Probably other Rajapaksa and other SLFP leaders had underestimated his courage of conviction to pursue his end goals with doggedness and push aside political obstacles. Though he was not strong within the party to prevent Rajapaksa hijacking the SLFP and the UPFA alliance, Sirisna showed enough mettle to express his determination to prevent Rajapaksa coming back to power. Probably this created enough confusion among the leaders who jumped to the Rajapaksa camp to carry out damage control. Sirisena dissolved the Central Committee which was working against his interests as party leader at the first opportunity without the usual political palaver. If he can build upon his credibility, chances for the durability of the national unity government are bright. And that is necessary to fulfill the promises he made to get the January 8th mandate from the people.

4. Ranil’s tough task table: The smooth-talking Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has a tough task ahead. From his interview to The Hindu, he appears to be aware of it. Completion of the structural change process to improve integrity of national institutions; improve accountability of the government and administration to the people; complete corruption investigations and bring the culprits to book; refine the election process; resume the political process with Tamil leadership to bring it to a logical conclusion; and last, but not least, build national consensus to produce a constitution to embed the changes made. This a tall order for any political leader to fulfill. Ranil had failed to take the peace process 2002 to a satisfactory conclusion; and President Kumaratunga and Prabhakaran were there to share the blame. But he has none now. Can he succeed? He appears to be clear that the UNP and SLFP have to come together to fulfill his tasks. Though President Sirisena is with him, will SLFP stop sharpening their axes and rise up to the occasion to help the prime minister? Even the famous court astrologers would not dare to answer this question; so it’s wait-and-watch time now.

5. Muslim polity: The election has shown that the Muslim voter is no more the meek follower of their leaders. They cannot take the peoples support for granted any more. That means in future the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) and the All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) will think twice before going along with Rajapaksa. Rajapaksa’s failure to attend to the concerns of Muslim community during anti-Muslim violence by fringe elements has cost him dearly in both the elections he faced. It could haunt him for some time despite all his skill at political maneuvering.

6. Tamils want positive action: The Tamil voter wants action-oriented approach than an emotional approach to improve his lot now. He is getting tired of empty rhetoric glorifying Tamils, notwithstanding the indelible and grim memories of the LTTE armed struggle for separate Eelam. The moderates within the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) leadership had excluded former LTTE cadres in their electoral discourse. But they cannot ignore their genuine grievances highlighted by their independent group, in any political dialogue with the Wickremesinghe government. To sum up, TNA should work on an action plan to immediately improve the quality of life of the war-affected population still living on the fringe as well as take up development work without any delay. For this they need to adopt a nuanced approach than solely depending upon resumption of political dialogue process. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has indicated that his willingness to rework the federal format within the ambit of 13th constitutional amendment. Though this may not meet Tamil aspirations fully, Tamils should use this opportunity to work with him rather than against him lest they miss the opportunity when the constitution is recast. In a nut shell, Tamil leaders will have to be pragmatic rather than dogmatic in their approach.

7. No corruption: Rajapaksa’s failure showed people are probably not going to forget the allegations of massive corruption against him soon. This would come as a surprise for many because corruption is an endemic problem in Sri Lanka, just as it is in India or any other South Asian country. So political leaders of all hues will have to clean up their style of backroom politics. Such an environment would enable President Sirisena to introduce checks to root out not only corruption in public life and government but also break up the politico-bureaucrat-business nexus that had been the bane of Sri Lanka.

8. Time for positive action from Tamil Nadu: The defeat of Rajpaksa has deprived Tamil Nadu politicians and TV anchors of their favourite whipping horse. The soft profile of Sirisena, and lack of fireworks in Sri Lanka politics now and conciliatory noises at the UNHRC have pushed Sri Lanka from mainstream political discourse in Tamil Nadu. The success of Sirisena-Wickremesinghe combine in the parliamentary election has further downscaled Sri Lanka from visual media’s TRP quest. Time has come for the ruling AIADMK to get away from political rhetoric and to produce a broader positive action agenda to benefit Sri Lankan Tamils. They could expand upon the positive vibes created in the wake of Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Jaffna to benefit Tamils trying to pick up their normal life. As a first step AIADMK should interact not only with Sri Lankan Tamil leaders but also the people to understand their pressing needs. Tamil Nadu has the resources to undertake this; what is needed is the will. Some of the areas that come to mind are increasing job opportunities for widows and youth by investing in new enterprises and opening up educational institutions in Tamil Nadu. Such positive action could reinforce the AIADMK’s political strength particularly at a time when opposition parties are in total disarray and state elections are in the horizon.

*Col R Hariharan, a retired MI specialist on South Asia, served as the head of intelligence with the Indian Peace Keeping Force (1987-90). He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-mail for feedback: haridirect@gmail.com Blog: http://col.hariharan.info

By D. S. Rajan*

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, during the National People’s Congress Session (Beijing, March 5,2015), called for holding a celebration to mark the 50th founding anniversary of the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) which falls on September 1, 2015.

Accordingly, hectic preparations are afoot in Lhasa to observe the event some time in that month. In the run up to the event, steps are being taken to ensure high level security in the TAR including troop movements. The Chinese state media announced holding of a joint military drill with live firing and participation of units belonging to army, air force, artillery, armed police, intelligence, reconnaissance and electronic warfare, on August 10 on the Tibetan plateau in Sichuan by Chengdu Military region which oversees Tibetan areas including the sensitive border with India. Code-named ‘Joint Action-2015D’, it is being officially described as the “first of five similar drills that will involve a total of more than 140,000 soldiers from over 140 PLA regiments of various types.” Under the drill, tanks or heavy artillery in convoys of more than 200 vehicles, have been observed in different parts of Tibet. It requires to be noted that internal security is not the only purpose of the drill; as part of about 100 planned Chinese military exercises being planned, it looks meant for testing the military capability to fight and win battles around China’s periphery, if necessary. These exercises will integrate different branches of the Chinese military, for which a Special Command on joint exercises was set up in 2014.

According to sources in media of exiled Tibetans, the date of the celebration is yet to be fixed, but it can be held sometime in coming September, for which an organizing committee under the chairmanship of Li Baorong, a senior official of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) State Council, has been formed. Restrictions are being imposed on the movement and activities of Tibetans, the issue of travel permits to the region has been stopped, entry into the TAR of arms and ammunitions, knives, explosives including dangerous chemicals, leaflets and other political publications, and remote-controlled toy planes, has been banned and surveillance of Internet activities has been ordered. Also, a ‘Clean Sweep and Strike’ campaign aimed at providing postal security is in progress; being closely monitored under it are postal exchanges between Beijing and the TAR. The organizing committee in its meeting on August 1, 2015, has said that an “image of a harmonious and stable Tibet within the country and abroad” will be projected during the celebration.

The ongoing efforts to ensure tight security in the TAR have given rise to speculations that a high level central team is to visit Lhasa to attend the anniversary and that may include the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the President of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) Xi Jinping himself. The theme for this year’s anniversary, according to official media, will be “countering separatism and encouraging the people in the TAR to closely unite around the CCP Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping as General Secretary.”

The pre- TAR anniversary scenario in China is marked by sure signs of fresh initiatives with regard to Centre’s Tibet policy. Primarily, the need for such initiatives seems to have arisen from a change in Beijing’s perceptions with regard to challenges for China’s sovereignty over Tibet. Beijing has come to view the Dalai Lama’s comments on his reincarnation of late as “an important issue concerning sovereignty and national security” (Xinhua, July 19, 2015).

The first sign was the issuing of a White Paper on Tibet (April 2015) which contained a harder line on the Dalai Lama than before. The paper in particular rejected the Dalai Lama’s Middle Way approach, which advocates a genuine autonomy for Tibet without challenging sovereignty of the PRC.

As next step, a conference of the United Front Work Department of the CCP Central Committee was convened (May 20, 2015); Xi Jinping stressed on the occasion that “Now, our Party is facing significant changes in the internal and external situation and in missions and tasks. The more we change and the more the United Front develops, the more the United Front work will do well”. This makes clear that Xi wants a change in the present United Front work which deals with Tibet.

The third sign was the visit (July 9-12, 2015) of the present Director of the CCP Central Committee’s United Front Work Department, Ms Sun Chunlan to Tibetan areas in Gansu, Sichuan and Qinghai. The leader demanded Tibetan Buddhists should ‘promote patriotism’, and Buddhist teachings should be “adaptable to core values of socialism in order to become an important force for national unification, ethnic unity and social stability.” This means the stand of Beijing that Tibetan Buddhism should serve the CCP’s interests.

Fourth comes the holding of a top level ‘Strategy Forum’’ in Lhasa on July 10,2015, which took important decisions on coordinating activities to ensure ‘political stability’ in the TAR as well the Tibetan Autonomous Prefectures incorporated into Yunnan, Sichuan, Qinghai and Gansu provinces. Such a cross-regional approach is notable.

Most significant is the deliberation at the subsequent CCP Politburo meeting on July 30, 2015. In a statement issued after the meeting, the party “vowed to safeguard national unity, strengthen ethnic unity, unswervingly carry out the anti-separatism battle, and promote patriotism in the region, in order to achieve long term stability”. The repetition of emphasis on ‘stability’ is notable. The statement said that “the authority of the central government has always been important in the reincarnation process. Historical precedents have clearly shown the central government’s vital role in the process. Since then, all confirmations of the Dalai Lama have required approval by the central Chinese government, which has deemed the process an important issue concerning sovereignty and national security. ” The State media did not report this. A particular report (Italian language Christian News service-Asia News) quoted an anonymous source as telling at the end of the meeting that Xi Jinping said as follows on the occasion- “the CCP would pick the next Dalai Lama period; if things do not go well, we are ready to take corrective action.”

An initiative which is going to define the future directions of Xi Jinping administration towards the exiled spiritual leader is the post-Politburo meeting decision to form a ‘’Leading Group” for United Front Work. This group will especially decide on resumption of talks with the Dalai Lama’s representatives; the talks remain stalled since January 2010. It is being seen as indicating an up gradation of the United Front Work Department of the CCP Central Committee so far looked after by Yu Zhengsheng , a politburo standing committee member.

As next initiative, officers with Tibet experience have been promoted to the rank of full general on the occasion of the 88th anniversary of the People’s Liberation Army on August 1, 2015. The promotions may mean increased level of attention on the part of Xi Jinping regime to the need to protect internal security in Tibet as well as the sensitive border with India.

Next important PRC’s move on Tibet issue was holding of the Sixth Forum on Work of Tibet in Beijing by the CCP Central Committee at Beijing on August 24-25, 2015 which focused on “the research and deployment of the work for the economic and social development and long-term stability of Tibet” (“Why the Sixth Forum on Tibet is held now?”, China Tibet Online, http://eng.tibet.cn/2012sy/xw/201508/t20150826_3928217.html China, August 26, 2015).

Xi Jinping said at the Forum, “The work of Tibet concerns the overall work of the Party and the state, and the CCP Central Committee has always attached great importance to it. More efforts are needed to promote economic growth and all-round social progress in Tibet and Tibetan-inhabited areas in four other provinces, for which sustainable measures and continued preferential policies will be adopted. Tibet and Tibetan-inhabited areas in four other provinces have entered a critical stage toward fulfilling the country’s goal of building a moderately prosperous society in a comprehensive way. Special financial, tax and investment policies should continue to be in place in the future in the TAR and Tibetan-inhabited areas in Sichuan, Yunnan, Gansu and Qinghai provinces. Development, which aims to improve living conditions for various ethnic groups and beef up social cohesion, should be advanced in a prudent and steady manner, and all measures taken should be sustainable. Bettering basic public service and adopting targeted measures to alleviate poverty and solving key problems which lead to poverty and improve living conditions for the impoverished as soon as possible, are a must. More active employment policies should be carried out to help residents of all ethnic groups to walk out of their farms and pastors to work in towns and companies and start businesses. Efforts should also be made to incorporate education on socialist core values into courses in schools at various levels, popularize the national commonly-used language and script, and strive to foster Party-loving and patriotic builders and successors of the socialist cause.”

Addressing the same meeting, Premier Li Keqiang said among others that building of local infrastructure in the TAR should be sped up, including transportation networks, water conservation projects, power grids. He added that Tibet should be made an important tourism destination in the world, and that commerce and trade with South Asia should be promoted to boost the Tibetan economy. All other five politburo standing committee members attended the meeting.

The party and state media in China did not say anything about the Dalai Lama issue coming under discussion in the Forum. They however gave publicity to a signed Commentary published at the end of the Forum in the official website of the Department of United Front Work (“ China Will never go the Dalai Lama’s Middle Way”, Kelsang, China Tibet online, August 26,2015 http://eng.tibet.cn/2012sy/xw/201508/t20150826_3928554.html). The Commentary, apparently reflecting the party’s policies, asserted that “the Central Government did not in the past, nor is now and will not in the future accept the Middle Way solution to the Tibet issue. The essential intent of the ‘Middle Way’ is to split China. The Dalai group refuses to accept China’s sovereignty in Tibet and wants to seize the reins of power and set up a semi-independent political regime. In particular, China is against the Dalai Lama’s proposal for a high degree of autonomy in Tibet; the essence of a high degree of autonomy is to set up a state within a state, free of any control from the central government”. On Tibetan Buddhism, the commentary asked for promotion of “political unity and respecting religious belief”, saying the government is against intervening and limiting Tibetan’s religious freedom.

What do the new initiatives mean? They, in particular Xi’s observations made at Tibet Work Forum, certainly look indicators to the leader’s Tibet policy which now stands finalized. Its key elements are – ensuring development, opposing ‘separatism’ and in this way establishing stability in the TAR and other Tibetan-inhabited areas. The clubbing of TAR with other Tibetan areas by Xi in his speech at the Forum seems to be interesting suggesting that the Government itself has come to favor a cross-regional approach on development of all Tibetan areas including the TAR. In political sense however, this may not mean that on “Greater Tibet” demand, the government is bridging the gap with the Dalai Lama side. Their differences still persist. As another point, the published material on the Tibet Work Forum have so far not said anything on resumption of talks between the Centre and the Dalai Lama side. This may still happen; much would depend on the assessment of the situation in the TAR by the newly constituted Leading Group.

For known reasons, India has a stake in the Tibet situation; New Delhi should therefore carefully watch the emerging scenario with regard to Tibet issue.

*The writer, D.S.Rajan, is Distinguished Fellow, Chennai Centre for China Studies, Chennai, India.

Since January 2007, the government of Ecuador, under the leadership of President Rafael Correa, has pursued economic reforms that have alleviated poverty, built sustainable cities, reduced pollution, reduced unemployment and brought transparency and the war against corruption at the forefront.

President Correa, an economist educated in Europe and United States, has garnered popularity through his administration’s successes in funding large public works projects, improvement of public schools’ infrastructure and has increased oil prices.

According to Nick Miroff of the Washington Post, President Correa: “represents a new model of Latin American leadership: economically populist, socially conservative …and seemingly unbeatable at election time. Polls consistently put his approval rating between 60 and 85 percent, making him one of the region’s most popular leaders.”[1] When elected president for the third time, Mr. Correa won by a landslide majority and won 57% of the votes.

President Rafael Correa has been very successful to position his country at a global stage by applying a very effective Foreign Policy, a broad presence of international trade offices extending from China to South Africa and from almost every European Country to Australia and South Asia.  Under his leadership, Ecuador joined the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas in June, 2009 and has emerged as one of the most influential and popular leaders in Latin America’s regional organizations and beyond, even the government of Italy has expressed an interest to become more familiar with Quito’s domestic policies embraced over the last seven years.

These reforms have made a major positive impact, nationwide, as Mr. Verselino Noteno, a beneficiary residing in the city of Putumayo,states: “we also need to live with dignity, to have schools and health services.  We are happy with the government and it has kept its word, they gave us housing.  There are many of us who refrain to live in misery.  In Putumayo 85 percent of the population is illiterate, with these projects we aspire to have our kids as young professionals and in the future they would support their local communities.”

Since April 30^th, 2013, The Government of Ecuador has had Mr. Patricio René Rivera Yánez as the new Minister Coordinator for Economic Policies.  As a 34 years old economist, Mr. Rivera Yanez was Deputy Undersecretary of Public Investment and Corporate Management in the Ministry of Planning and National Development (SENPLADES). Minister Rivera’s objectives are to reduce poverty, promote social justice, improve the national economy and increase its productivity.[2]

On July 2^nd, 2014, the National Secretariat for Public Administration announced that Ecuador had improved its ranking by 19 points in the United Nations’ Electronic Government Survey namely: “E-GOVERNMENT FOR THE FUTURE WE WANT”, now Ecuador is ranked in the 83^rd position among the 193 countries worldwide, while in 2012 index was ranked as the 102^nd.  Additionally, the same study has recognized the government of President Rafael Correa, as one of the top twenty countries in the Americas that have experienced a medium-high economic development.  The UN ranking system gathers relevant information from all member countries that are connected to the development of information technology and communications tools that are considered to be strategic in order to enable efficiency and transparency in the governing institutions.

Since May 2014, Ecuadorian Ministry of Public Administration has embraced new trends and has adopted new technologies which make government offices more relevant to all Ecuadorians and local businesses.  Thanks to these dynamic initiatives, Quito aspires to broaden the public participation in the decision making process, improve access to information, improve transparency, remove bureaucratic barriers to public services, and strive to secure a well inclusive economic growth and sustainable development nationwide.[3]

In 2013, studies undertaken by the UN Economic Commission for Latin America have claimed that Ecuador’s prosperity has been further strengthened due to its expansion of public investments. The government of President Rafael Correa is one of the largest investors in the region trailed by the governments of: Bolivia, Cuba, Panama, Peru and Venezuela.

In recent years, Ecuador has experienced an overall dynamic growth and President Correa’s economic reforms have had a positive impact in the strengthening of the construction and public works sectors.   Quito has accomplished the highest public investment levels in the national history, not as a result of maintaining high prices of oil, but thanks to other positive factors such as: the renegotiation of external debt (by reducing or eliminating the interest rate the government saves US$ 300 million annually), the elimination of trusts to ensure the debt payment, return of public savings, improving the trading and marketing of its crude oil reserves as well as the implementation of a transparent procurement system.

President Correa’s government aims to further strengthen its public investments in key strategic sectors which contribute towards a sustained economic growth. After January, 2007, when President Rafael Correa took the oath of office, his government begun to promote projects in strategic sectors while securing lucrative loans from the People’s Republic of China and other regional multilateral organizations.  Such actions have helped Ecuador to revive its economy and withstand the shocks of the global financial crisis.

In 2012, the government invested US$4,800 million that were destined to finance the construction of various hydroelectric power stations, social projects in several parts of the country for the vulnerable sectors of society and technology for national security and the justice system. In 2011 public investments reached approximately US$ 4.698 million.  In 2013, the public investment in Ecuador represented 22 percent of the national budget reaching US$7.052 million.

According to the National Secretariat of Planning and Development (SENPLADES), the public investment represented around 14 percent of the Gross Domestic Product.  The 2013 Annual Investment Plan (PAI) prioritized the capacity building programs: allocated US$ 2,041.66 million in the Social Development sector (29% of total PAI) and US$ 1,250.08 million to the production sector (18%), especially for a new employment generation and development of the domestic industry.  Ecuador invested US$ 1,974.33 million (28%) for Strategic Sectors: public works, technological breakdown and infrastructure.  The Promotion of knowledge, research, development and innovation reached US$ 646.85 million (9%) it was intended for the sector of acquiring new talents and promote professional training.  In 2013, investments were allocated according to President Correa’s National Plan of Good Living (2013-2017). [4]

Some of the most important projects executed in 2013 are: Metro system of Quito, Tram of Cuenca, New Education infrastructure, Hydroelectric projects, National Road Infrastructure System and The city of Knowledge which is designed to promote technological innovation, negotiations and knowledge, were cutting edge infrastructure meets human talent.  This is the first Hub in Latin America that will be focused on research and technology.  It will have the first University of Investigation of Experimental Technology, with participation of public and private institutions; there will be centers of technological transfer, enterprises of advanced technology in agricultural and agro industrial sectors of Ecuador.

According to various national experts, this center will generate applications and innovative processes that will be beneficial to the whole world.  [5]

In 2012 Ecuador grew up to 6.5 percent and its economy expanded by 5.35 percent, indeed it was one of the highest rates in the region.  In a press conference, President Rafael Correa said that public investment in Ecuador, during the period of 2007 – 2011, almost doubled the amount of oil revenues received by the central government. In 2011, the net revenues of the state were US$ 12,772,000 while investment in this period reached US$ 23,803 million therefore Ecuador became “the country with the largest public investment sector in Latin America.”

The industrial and agricultural production sectors acknowledge the ever increasing purchasing power that Ecuadorian population has currently attained.  In 2012, minimum wage was raised from US$ 264 to US$ 292 per month.  The reduction of urban poverty reached 4.8 percent, the economic growth of GDP was up to 9 percent and President Correa’s administration accomplished the lowest unemployment rate in Latin America, reaching the level of 5.5 percent.  Furthermore, with a coefficient of 0.495, Ecuadorian society has become better inclusive than Colombia (0,578), Brazil (0,576), Chile (0,524) or Panama (0.521).

Henry Kronfle Kozhaya, president of the Guayaquil Chamber of Industries, said that the current stability, “which has been embraced in the last five years by the executive branch, has been very important for the economic growth of the country, as for many years a chief of state could not complete his term in office.”

Mr. Kronfle adds: “The socio-economic inclusion policy promoted by this government has had a big impact because it has increased the purchasing power of the population.”  According to Mr. José Centeno, president of the Chamber of Construction Companies, the government’s investment in public works proved to be very important in order to invigorate this sector in recent years and maintain a 14% annual growth: “the government, with its housing plans for the working class, makes home ownership an easy process. There is a high demand for building materials because of a large scale implementation of public works.”

The construction sector is among the most developed sectors that make up a significant percentage of Ecuador’s GDP.  The National Housing policies, construction of new bridges and other public works have generated jobs for thousands of citizens.[6]

On November 5-7, 2012, during the “Second Regional Meeting of People’s and Nationalities by Sumak Kawsay, plurality, intercultural values, UNASUR, ALBA and CAN United for life and harmony,” Fabricio Proaño the Minister of Political Coordination, gave a presentation on the implementation of public policies in Ecuador.  This event was held at the plenary hall of the National Assembly of Ecuador.  In his statement, Minister Proaño stated that Latin American people are with a matured conscience and have decided to escape from the centuries old oppression, as of now their direct and real participation in the socio-political processes is always required. Minister Proaño explained that the Plurinational State proposes a permanent participation and social control in the decision making process, leaving behind the separation between state and civil society and recognizes diversity and autonomous pluralism, economic diversity and reliable justice system – political in the context of a having a new state model, which requires that pluri-nationality be taken as a reality and intercultural reality as a tool for action.

“One of the implications of Sumaj Kawsay was to recognize the values of ancient thought and return its space that was taken away from the hegemonic positions, without considering, for example, the green revolution that proposes the Good Living in order to combat the environmental catastrophe of today’s world.”  This meeting was organized by the Government of the Republic of Ecuador and the Embassy of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, it included the participation of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) and the Andean Community of Nations (CAN), they all seek to develop and strengthen the active participation of social organizations of peoples and nations of the region, while discussing in the context of Sumaj Kawsay paradigm the ancestral knowledge and practices in a intercultural environment.

Some of the other topics discussed in this forum were:  “Indicators of Sumaj Kawsay”; “Development of Public Policies based on the guidelines of Sumaj Kawsay”; “Plurinationallity and Inter cultural aspects”; “Actions for the development of Public Policies based on the guidelines of Sumaj Kawsay”; “actions and rights for the development and defense of Mother Earth”; “Ensuring Food Security and autonomy” and “Constitutional Justice of Sumaj Kawsay”.[7]

On March 2014, Sustainable Trip, a tourism information website, certified by Rainforest Alliance, announced that Ecuador has become the Country of Fashion. This article highlights the five reasons to visit Ecuador, while reaching a record number of tourists and having a 20 percent increase compared with the previous year (2013).  The report states that Ecuador is one of the hottest destinations of 2014, for newspapers, travel magazines, websites and blogs of travelers have affirmed over the past months.Among the reasons why Ecuador was chosen by the World Travel Awards as “the Green Destiny of the Year,”are:  the country is home to 33 natural reserves protected by the Government, it is home to many other areas of tropical forest possessing considerable biodiversity; the immense wealth of natural and cultural diversity, species of birds, butterflies, orchids, reptiles, amphibians, mammals and other species;  the natural values of the Sangay reserves and Galapagos Islands and 27 nationalities living in the country. It must be remembered that business generated by tourism is also supported closely by the State in order to promote sustainable practices that have transformed Quito into a regional leader in sustainable tourism.

The publication also dedicates a whole paragraph only to the Galapagos, which by its beauty and diversity need no introduction, but always will be remembered that it was the natural laboratory where Charles Darwin developed his theory of evolution of the island of species.  It also emphasizes that Ecuador is the new Latin American King of chocolate, both because it is the leading exporter of fine cocoa with aroma, such as fine chocolates made ​​by Ecuadorian hands, many of which can be found on the Cocoa Route while taking a scenic train on the Durán–Yaguachi route. Finally, the last reason to visit Ecuador, according to the Rainforest Alliance, is the variety that any type of traveler including natural hideouts housed in the Amazon, the majesty of the Andes, the beauty of the coast, or because Ecuador sits on the Equator, where there is located a tourist town, without neglecting the many other beautiful cities the country possesses, many of which can be discovered on a trip with a luxurious Train ride linking the two major cities of Ecuador. [8]

On June 25th, 2013, Ecuador led the XII Meeting of Foreign Ministers of the Organization of the Treaty of Cooperation in the Amazon (Organización del Tratado de Cooperación Amazónica (OTCA)), together with eight other countries in order to develop the Amazon region.  In this meeting the member nations discussed the academic and scientific research and the improvement of sustainable projects of the Amazon region.  There was also discussed the creation of the Amazon Research Centers and on May 3^rd, in the ACTO was reached a multilateral agreement that ensured the exchange of information and research within the research center directed by all member countries. These centers are expected to collect data concerning the existing natural heritage in the Amazon basin for research and documentation.Furthermore, the delegations committed themselves to validate and update the research and knowledge acquired through the area study of the Amazon as well as achieves academic mobility for students, teachers and academics and establishes a network of researchers focused on the Amazon region.[9]

On March 5th, 2013, the Ministry for Knowledge and Human Talent Coordination signed an agreement of academic and research cooperation with Yasuní-ITT, in which the Regional Amazonian University (IKIAM) was also included, as it is a national scientific institution.  The objective of this agreement was to join the efforts to initiated scientific research as a basis for conservation projects and promote sustainable use of natural resources in the Amazon region. The interest of the two institutions is to integrate the Amazonian region in an area where research and sustainable development are conducted at the national level and prepare students to assume the tremendous challenge of intelligent exploitation of natural resources and adopt ways to improve environmental conservation.

Tania Lozada, IKIAM project manager, expressed her satisfaction at the signing of the document that brings together two major initiatives led by the national government dedicated to the conservation and intelligent use of natural resources and research. This agreement set the framework to work upon the consolidation process of the Initiatives pertaining to the Amazon and future involvement of foreign agencies.

Ivonne Baki, Secretary of State of this Initiative, stated that this partnership enables academic and scientific discovery in the Yasuni ITT, as a national laboratory for the world. Meanwhile, Augusto Espinosa, Minister for Knowledge and Talent Coordination, said that the signing of this agreement also aims “to have the Amazon emerge as a place that is marked by new careers focused towards science, research and sustainable development.”The central goal of the Yasuní-ITT Initiative is not to exploit the oil rich block of Ishpingo-Tambococha-Tiputini in Yasuni National Park, in order to conserve biodiversity, avoiding the emission of 407 million tons of CO2 in the atmosphere.  Ecuador has requested to the international community, under the principles of shared responsibility, a compensation equivalent to at least US$ 3,600 million, which is half of what the country would get from the operation of such oil rich sites. These funds are destined to be used for changing the national energy matrix; effective conservation of protected areas; reforestation of one million hectares of forest; increasing energy efficiency; social development in the Amazon where this initiative is focused; and technological research and development.

As of 2013, the Yasuní Initiative has raised US$ 330 million, from 19 countries and 20 international organizations while the fundraising goal was to obtain an additional US$ 244 million. Meanwhile IKIAM has prepared its academic statutes, curricula and waiting for its prompt enactment to become one of the most important, ambitious and strategic projects of the Ecuadorian nation, as a higher education center of excellence and a world-class research located in the Amazon. [10]

On October 24-26, 2012, the Government of Ecuador and the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO conducted an international meeting entitled “World Heritage and Extreme Poverty” in order to reflect on the importance that cultural assets have in Ecuador towards the fight against poverty.In this event, many experts from France, Bolivia, Mexico and United States, discussed the relationship between the national heritage and sustainable development.Maria Fernanda Espinosa, the Minister Coordinator for Cultural Heritage stated that:  “UNESCO established an alliance with Ecuador in order to calculate the numbers to the economy of cultural patrimony within the fight against poverty.”

Thus recalling how the train system could benefit the country towards job creation and economic development.  Minister Espinosa said that the Government has invested US$250 million in asset development. She also recalled that the Citizen Revolution was responsible for recovering the memory of citizens, for example, extolling the culinary art, music, or more tangible objects Ecuadorian heritage.

Minister Espinoza stated that President Correa’s government has invested US$ 250 million in cultural assets development.  She also recalled that citizens’ revolution was responsible for recovering the memory of citizens, for example cherishing the culinary art, music or more tangible objects of Ecuadorian cultural heritage.

The event was attended by Nuria Sanz, head of the Unit for Latin American and the Caribbean of the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO, Rémy Prud’homme, professor at the University of Paris XII, Janice Perlman, president of The Mega-Cities Project, and other international guests.  Ecuador has also a vibrant Afro Ecuadorian Community which is an important part of the cultural diversity in the Andean nation.  Every year this community holds an annual celebration which has become the hallmark of their cultural activities and an attraction point for international visitors and anthropologists. [11]

In his latest visit to Quito, in May 27^th, 2013, the Italian Deputy Foreign Minister, Mario Giro, expressed his government’s interest to become more familiar with the economic development model of Ecuador, as President Correa’s reforms are considered unique in the World, especially the National Plan of Good Welfare which is being implemented under his second presidential mandate (2013-2017).

After attending President Correa’s official ceremony of the oath of office, Mr. Giro had a meeting with Mr. Fander Falconi, the Minister of National Planning and Development, with whom he touched upon the accomplishments and challenges that the Ecuadorian government has to tackle in order to deepen the positive changes, continue with the fight against poverty, promoting new ways of production through changing the production matrix.

Mr. Pabel Muñoz, the Undersecretary for the Democratization of the State, emphasized that this policy of development is accompanied from a different type of government which is consolidating the public’s voice, its capacity to plan and bring a new breed of development that has an emphasis in redistribution that overcomes a bourgeoisie country and establishes democratic public policies. [12]

An important aspect of President Correa’s reforms in the development of ecological tourism centers so that they generate income for local communities and improve their welfare.  Ecuadorian government officials are undoubtedly becoming an example of effective leadership in the region, while pursuing a vibrant agenda towards improving transparency, adopting best practices in sustainable development and implementing environmental friendly policies that have a positive impact regionally and globally. [13]

References:

[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/ecuadors-popular-powerful-president-rafael-correa-is-a-study-in-contradictions/2014/03/15/452111fc-3eaa-401b-b2c8-cc4e85fccb40_story.html

[2]http://www.politicaeconomica.gob.ec/patricio-rivera-es-el-nuevo-ministro-coordinador-de-politica-economica/

[3] http://www.administracionpublica.gob.ec/ecuador-escala-19-puestos-en-indice-de-desarrollo-de-gobierno-electronico-de-naciones-unidas/

[4] http://www.planificacion.gob.ec/la-inversion-publica-representa-alrededor-del-14-del-pib-ecuatoriano/

[5] http://www.yachay.gob.ec/yachay-la-ciudad-del-conocimiento/

[6] http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/noticias/informacion-general/item/inversion-publica-apuntala-la-prosperidad-de-ecuador.html

[7] http://www.elciudadano.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/discurso_30.pdf

http://www.politica.gob.ec/fabricio-proano-el-estado-plurinacional-propone-una-permanente-participacion-y-control-social-en-la-toma-de-decisiones-publicas/

[8] http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/el-mundo-cada-dia-habla-mas-de-la-belleza-de-ecuador/

[9] http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/ecuador-plantea-la-creacion-de-centros-de-investigacion-de-la-cuenca-amazonica/

[10] http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/yasuni-itt-y-universidad-ikiam-se-unen-para-la-investigacion-y-el-desarrollo/

[11] http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/el-gobierno-y-la-unesco-analizaran-la-mediacion-de-la-riqueza-patrimonial-en-el-combate-de-la-pobreza-2/

[12] http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/gobierno-italiano-manifiesta-su-interes-por-el-modelo-de-desarrollo-de-ecuador/

[13] http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/el-buen-vivir-amazonico-es-una-realidad/

http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/el-buen-vivir-amazonico-es-una-realidad/

http://www.politica.gob.ec/autoridades-locales-de-pichincha-se-capacitaron-en-estrategias-de-desarrollo-y-en-el-buen-vivir/

http://www.politica.gob.ec/conversatorio-sobre-politicas-publicas-para-el-pueblo-afroecuatoriano/

http://www.politica.gob.ec/conaice-y-gobierno-nacional-juntos-en-la-construccion-de-politicas-publicas-para-alcanzar-el-buen-vivir/

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission Federica Mogherini met with the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko as part of the President’s visit to Brussels on Thursday.

President Poroshenko, who was accompanied by Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin, provided an update on the security situation in eastern Ukraine, where the recent escalation of fighting was of particular concern, as well as harassment of the OSCE’s Special Monitoring Mission by separatists.

Mogherini underlined the European Union’s continued support for the full implementation of the Minsk agreements, starting with respect for the ceasefire and the withdrawal of heavy weapons. The EU would continue its support notably for the OSCE, the facilitation of ongoing trilateral discussions with Ukraine and Russia on energy security and continuing trilateral talks on the implementation of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement’s provisions on a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area.

Mogherini welcomed President Poroshenko’s update regarding the country’s progress on constitutional reform enabling decentralisation, as well the announcement of an agreement reached between Ukraine and its ad-hoc creditor committee on debt, which should allow for the continued vigorous pursuit of economic and political reforms. Both the President and the High Representative hoped for further rapid progress on the path to visa-free travel between Ukraine and the EU.

Mogherini reiterated her position for the release of Nadiya Savchenko, Oleg Sentsov, Oleksandr Kolchenko and other Ukrainian prisoners in the Russian Federation and their safe return to Ukraine.

Mogherini accepted the President’s invitation to visit again Ukraine in the near future.

Cop Block co-founder Pete Eyre released a new video this week that, in just four minutes, explains clearly why telling children just to dial 911 is not the best means to ensure children’s safety in emergencies. Just as important, Eyre presents in the video several suggestions of other actions parents can take to prepare their children to deal with emergencies.

Eyre starts off giving examples of when a family member calling 911 led to the death of a child or pet. He then states this sad but true fact:

The most vulnerable among us — children — are frequently told by adults to call 911 in case of a problem. But, as too many families have learned, calling 911 often itself brings tragedy and death.

Eyre proceeds through several thought-provoking suggestions of ways parents can help prepare their children to deal with potentially dangerous situations. Discussed actions include developing and practicing a safety plan, teaching children situational awareness and how to handle fire extinguishers and firearms, and providing children with technology they can use to assist them in emergencies or in potentially dangerous interactions with police.

Watch the complete video here:

This article was published by the RonPaul Institute.

It is obvious that Bernie Sanders functions as the political “sheepdog” of the 2016 presidential election. The sheepdog makes certain that otherwise disillusioned Democrats are energized enough to stay in line and support the eventual candidate, in this case Hillary Clinton. That is reason enough to oppose his campaign but it isn’t the only one. A hard look at Sanders on foreign policy issues shows that he is a progressive poseur, a phony, a conservative Democrat, and not a socialist by any means.

The Sanders website looks like every other candidate’s with a bio, donation information and of course “Bernie on the issues.” But it seems that Bernie doesn’t have any opinions on foreign policy because they are nowhere to be found. How can he be a serious presidential contender if he doesn’t discuss foreign policy? How does he differentiate himself from Hillary Clinton or Republicans if he won’t state for the record how his foreign policy differs from theirs? The truth is obvious. He isn’t a serious contender and his foreign policy views are no different from those of the other candidates.

Sanders’ candidacy is as grave a danger to the rest of the world as that of his rivals. In no way does he challenge the belief that the United States has the right to determine the fates of millions of people without regard to their human rights. He doesn’t believe that other nations have the right to oppose what the United States chooses to impose upon them.

Sanders makes quite a big deal about voting against the invasion of Iraq in 2002 and says he wants United States troops to leave that nation for good. But he never says that this intervention was wrong. He never said that the United States had no right to destroy that country or kill its people. He never said that these interventions are war crimes and violations of international law. Instead he speaks of the efficacy of particular interventions and how they impact Americans.

A presidential campaign should be an opportune moment to say that the Islamic State, ISIS, is a creation of the United States. Instead Sanders repeats that the United States must defeat this force but he only differs slightly in saying that he wants the Saudis to spend their money doing it. “I’ll be damned if kids in the state of Vermont – or taxpayers in the state of Vermont – have to defend the royal Saudi family, which is worth hundreds of billions of dollars.” That mealy mouthed opinion does nothing to end the premise of an American right to do what it wants anywhere in the world. Imagine if Sanders was willing to talk about support for jihadists going back nearly forty years and how each one delivers a more terrifying result.

In 2011 Obama was bombing Libya and planning to kill its president but Sanders didn’t see it as being particularly problematic. He repeated almost verbatim the rationales that assassinated a president and destroyed a nation. “Look, everybody understands Gaddafi is a thug and murderer. We want to see him go, but I think in the midst of two wars, I’m not quite sure we need a third war, and I hope the president tells us that our troops will be leaving there, that our military action will be ending very, very shortly.” Libya’s obliteration was no problem for Sanders as long as the process didn’t take very long.

In 2015 the Bernie Sanders foreign policy still does not digress from American political orthodoxy. He doesn’t question American policy towards Russia. “Well you totally isolate him [Putin] politically. You totally isolate him economically.” “Freeze assets that the Russian government has all over the world.” At no time did Sanders oppose the American policy of intervening in Ukraine and expanding NATO in eastern Europe, the actions which created the current confrontation with Russia. He doesn’t question why the United States has the right to dictate policy to another nation or interfere in its sphere of influence.

Sanders supports the Iran nuclear energy agreement with the P5+1 nations, but issues the same dishonest rationales about it expressed by president Obama. Sanders doesn’t say that Iran was never a nuclear power, an easily provable fact. He doesn’t question the sanctions which forced Iran to the table or point out that the 25 years of inspections called for in the agreement are a violation of Iran’s sovereignty. Instead he repeats the discredited mantra that the United States must make war in order to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear nation when even the CIA said that it never had that capability.

The big elephant in the room, Israel, gets the standard Bernie Sanders treatment. When Israel killed 2,000 people in Gaza in 2014 he would only say that Israel “over reacted.” He didn’t like being questioned about his stance either. When protesters interrupted a speech he told them to shut up and repeated nonsense about Hamas missiles that rarely hit their targets while Israel massacred a civilian population.

When Sanders speaks out against American interventions he couches his opposition in terms of spending money at home instead of abroad. That is somewhat admirable, but there is no reason to cut the defense budget as he says he wants to do, if there is no change in how this country attempts to dominate the rest of the world.

The Sanders campaign may be an interesting footnote, but it won’t bring about needed conversation about United States imperialism. The supposedly socialist senator never even uses that word. There is blatant dishonesty in claiming to want a changed domestic policy in the United States without also changing foreign policy. The two are linked, and American workers can’t have a living wage or health care as long as imperialism goes unchecked. Liberals can’t claim superiority to followers of Donald Trump if they consent to war crimes and human rights violations. Their only requirement seems to be that Democrats ought to be in charge of the carnage. Sanders wouldn’t be a very good sheepdog if there weren’t so many willing sheep.

In the year since the 2014 Gaza war, little has been done to alter the conditions that precipitated it. The so-called Palestinian government of national consensus, formed in June 2o14 and seated in the West Bank, has been reconstituted without Hamas’s consent. Viewing Gaza as a trap, it refuses responsibility for governing it. Though it lacks the ability and desire to exercise authority there, it continues to collect tax revenues on all Gaza imports as the internationally recognised power. The Hamas government relied on taxes from goods smuggled through Gaza-Egypt tunnels, but those, together with the sole border crossing with Egypt, were shut after President Abdelfattah el-Sisi took power in Cairo in July 2013. To forestall another conflict, Israel has loosened the closure regime somewhat. But this does not address Gaza’s needs: the acting government lacks funds; its economy is a shambles; and most Gazans have no access to the outside world. More must be done on these, or the next war is probably just a matter of time.

A solution to Gaza’s problems is unlikely to be found in Cairo or Ramallah. Both view Hamas, or its parent organisation, the Muslim Brotherhood, as an existential threat. They do not want to rescue Hamas or help Israel in its years-long policy of severing ties between Gaza and the West Bank. Instead both are content to ignore Gaza and watch Hamas drown in its mounting financial problems. If a new war erupts, they calculate, it will be Israel and Hamas that pay the price.

For many leaders of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah, returning to Gaza makes little sense: the PA would be blamed for almost certain future Israeli-Palestinian violence, without the tools to prevent it. True control over the territory and war and peace decisions are likely to remain elsewhere. With no solution to the shortage of money with which to pay all Gaza public-sector salaries, an already weakened PA is being asked to take on additional problems that currently weigh on Hamas. Even were solutions to these troubles to be found, there is the question of contestation and dissent within Fatah, President Mahmoud Abbas’s ostensible power base. Given his highly antagonistic relationship with former Fatah Central Committee member and movement stalwart Muhammad Dahlan, who is from and enjoys substantial support in Gaza, the challenges to Abbas from within his own movement may be even more daunting than those Hamas poses.

For many in Israel, a reversal of its policy of separating Gaza from the West Bank is viewed as a serious security threat, as Gaza’s separation is thought to prevent Hamas from transferring knowledge, weapons, funding and political influence to the West Bank, where its increased power would come at the expense of Israel’s security partner, the Fatah-dominated PA. To significant parts of the governing coalition, furthering the separation of the territories also serves demographic interests, as Israel has not relinquished its claim to the West Bank. Even those willing to ease Gaza’s closure will do so only insofar as the steps do not threaten to empower Hamas in the West Bank.

Neither Israel nor Hamas considers a new war imminent, but both understand that an eventual resumption of fighting is likely if conditions do not significantly change. Hamas may find itself facing growing internal challenges – Salafi-jihadi attacks, a collapse of government services, popular protests – from which war appears to be an exit that offers a chance to consolidate power, reestablish military credentials and perhaps relax the closure by reaching a new ceasefire agreement.

Short of renewed fighting or using large carrots and sticks to push a weakened PA into taking responsibility for Gaza, Israel’s main options are either to improve conditions there unilaterally, so the Hamas-run administration can govern sustainably, thereby giving Hamas greater incentive to continue enforcing the current ceasefire, or to reach a more robust, extended ceasefire with Hamas. The latter would be very difficult to achieve. Substantive differences are large: Hamas and Israel have different ideas about a potential ceasefire’s territorial scope (whether it includes the West Bank), duration, obligations regarding Hamas weapons (smuggling and production) and extent of Israeli measures to end or reduce the closure.

Because a war is thought to be far off, there is little pressure on the Israeli government to make progress in indirect negotiations over Gaza – which Israel and Hamas committed themselves to begin within one month of the 26 August 2014 ceasefire – much less to change its policies significantly or permit a maritime corridor through which Gazans could access the outside world.

Israeli officials see great drawbacks to an agreement with Hamas. They fear a new ceasefire would weaken or destroy the international boycott of the Islamist movement, strengthen it in the West Bank and harm Israel’s relations with the PA and Egypt. Even indirect negotiations are politically risky for both Hamas and most Israeli politicians. Israeli officials worry that a deal with Hamas would be a “death blow” to Abbas, whom most do not see as a peace partner but consider a non-threatening, violence-abhorring strategic asset.

On the other hand, Gaza’s continued constriction and periodic wars have not strengthened the PA in the West Bank. Instead, they have weakened it, strengthened Hamas and helped make successful diplomacy almost impossible. The policies of isolating Hamas and blockading Gaza, originated by the same international actors that guided the diplomatic process, have neither brought a political settlement closer nor dislodged Hamas. There is no reason to believe their continuation will do so.

Whatever options Hamas and Israel choose will not resolve the underlying conflict. But allowing Gazans to export goods, tax themselves and freely exit and enter the territory would at least offer Israelis and Palestinians the possibility of less bloodshed, while other possibilities, including unblocking the diplomatic impasse, are explored.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to stabilise the ceasefire; generate revenue to pay the Gaza government’s salary, overhead and service-provision costs; and provide Gazans reliable access to the outside world

To the government of Israel:

1.  Hold indirect negotiations with Hamas or a broader Palestinian delegation that includes Hamas over stabilising and extending the ceasefire, as agreed by Israel and Hamas on 26 August 2014; if Egypt is unwilling to mediate or is unacceptable to either party, seek an alternative mediator such as Norway, Switzerland, Germany, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia or the UN.

2.  Permit an internationally supervised maritime corridor (a seaport or floating pier) to be established in Gaza and connected to Cyprus or another country so Gazans can exit and enter the territory through a secure non-Egyptian and non-Israeli crossing.

3.  Facilitate, in the period before a new maritime corridor is established, increased travel from Gaza to the Allenby Crossing with Jordan, including by screening Gazans at Erez before placing them on buses directly to Allenby.

4.  Demonstrate that stabilising Gaza will not come at the expense of the two-state solution by strengthening the frayed connections between Gaza and the West Bank, including by increasing Gaza-West Bank travel and trade in ways that do not jeopardise Israeli interests and by formal declarations that Israel views Gaza as an integral part of any future Palestinian state.

5.  Consider steps to bolster the standing of the PA in the West Bank, including by:

a) extending PA territorial jurisdiction within the West Bank (eg, transferring parts of Area C to B and parts of Area B to A; and permitting the PA and Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) to operate in Jerusalem);

b) allowing new planning, investment and development in remaining parts of Area C; and

c) working with the PA on developing natural gas fields off Gaza’s shore.

To the government of Egypt:

6.  Invite Israel and Hamas or a Palestinian delegation including Hamas to negotiate a ceasefire, as they agreed would happen within one month of 26 August 2014; if Cairo is unwilling to do so, invite the parties to hold these discussions through a different mediator.

7.  Offer to reopen the Rafah crossing with regular hours, six days per week, in parallel to Israel’s opening of all its Gaza crossings.

To Hamas and the Palestinian National Authority:

8.  Commission an independent audit of Palestinian finances and taxation in Gaza and the West Bank and commit to correct imbalances in the distribution of revenues between Gaza and the West Bank based on its results.

To the European Union, the U.S. and other donors to the PA:

9.  Offer international supervision of a new maritime corridor for Gaza.

10.  Pledge to continue European Union (EU) support to a Palestinian national unity government, with Hamas and Fatah ministers, operating in both Gaza and the West Bank and committed to upholding a ceasefire with Israel.

11.  Offer to assist with and support an independent audit of Palestinian finances and taxation in Gaza and the West Bank.

12.  Appeal to Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council to facilitate the integration of Gaza and West Bank ministries and payrolls by funding salaries, welfare payments and government overhead costs in Gaza.

13.  Ensure that budget funds directed to the Palestinian people are apportioned equitably between Gaza and the West Bank, and increase if necessary direct aid to Gaza projects.

14.  Bolster the standing of the PA in the West Bank, including by increasing donor assistance, encouraging Israel to take the above steps and providing recognition by additional EU member states of the State of Palestine.

Since November 2013, 17 prisoners at Guantánamo have had their cases reviewed by Periodic Review Boards, panels consisting of representatives of the Departments of State, Defense, Justice and Homeland Security, as well as the office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The review boards are — albeit slowly — examining the cases of all the men still held who are not facing (or have faced) trials (ten of the 116 men still held) or who have not already been approved for release by the high-level, inter-agency Guantánamo Review Task Force that President Obama established shortly after taking office in January 2009 (44 of those still held).

Of these 17 men, ten have been approved for release (and two have been freed), while four others have had their ongoing imprisonment approved, on the basis that “continued law of war detention … remains necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States.” Three other decisions have yet to be taken, and 54 other men are still awaiting reviews.

In recent weeks, reviews have also taken place for two of the four men whose review boards concluded that they should continue to be held — Fayiz al-Kandari (aka Faez, Fayez), the last Kuwaiti in Guantánamo, whose ongoing imprisonment was approved last July, and Muhammad Abd al-Rahman al-Shumrani (aka al-Shamrani, al-Shimrani), a Saudi whose ongoing imprisonment was approved last October.

The second review for Fayiz al-Kandari

I have written extensively about Fayiz al-Kandari’s case over the years (see this major profile from 2009), and Tom Wilner, the co-founder with me of the Close Guantánamo campaign, was his attorney for many years. We profiled him shortly after launching Close Guantánamo in February 2012, and Tom and I also visited Kuwait at that time to try to help to secure his release (see here, here and here).

Last June, when his first PRB took place, Fayiz had been disenchanted with the review process, not believing that it could lead to anything positive — after years of enduring other review processes, under George W. Bush, that were travesties of justice. As a result, he did not engage with the process as positively as he could have done, but his opinion changed when his compatriot, Fawzi al-Odah, who had engaged more positively with it, had his release approved, and ended up being released.

Below I’m posting the opening statements of Fayiz’s personal representatives (military officers appointed to represent him) and, more thoroughly, his attorney Eric Lewis, who presented a comprehensive explanation of why Fayiz should be released, including the success of the rehabilitation program, and the hope that Fayiz has in his life.

Fayiz’s own contributions have not been made publicly available, but his attorney’s representations ought to be sufficient to convince all but the most unthinking apologists for Guantánamo’s existence that there is no case against Fayiz, and there never has been, contravening the frankly incredible allegations that have been thrown at him repeatedly during his imprisonment, and that, yet again, were wheeled out by the Pentagon in its unclassified summary for his PRB  — that he was an “al-Qa’ida recruiter and propagandist who probably served as Usama Bin Ladin’s spiritual advisor” (despite being in Afghanistan for only a month before the 9/11 attacks shut down the entire training camp network). It was, however, also noted that Fayiz “continues to deny having ever conducted terrorist acts or had extremist affiliations,” and that he “has remained compliant with the detention staff at Guantánamo since March 2014.”

Periodic Review Board Full Hearing, 27 Jul 2015
Faez Mohammed Ahmed Al-Kandari, ISN 552
Personal Representative Opening Statement

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board, thank you for hearing our case for Faez Al-Kandari. We appreciate your decision to hold a full Periodic Review Board following the File Review conducted earlier this year. We plan to demonstrate that Faez is not a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States of America.

Since Faez has been able to see his fellow countryman, Fawzi, transferred to Kuwait, and doing well, he has been excited to meet with his Personal Representatives and his Private Counsel to discuss his upcoming board, knowing he has a real possibility of going home to Kuwait. For the first time since his detention began, Faez is excited about his future; he’s excited about seeing his family, again.

As we know, the purpose of this board is to determine if Faez poses a threat to the United States. We submit that Faez is not a significant threat to the United States, and he is ready for transfer.

Once again, our team thanks the Board for this opportunity to present information and evidence on Mr. Al-Kandari’ s behalf.

Periodic Review Board Full Hearing, 27 Jul 2015
Faez Mohammed Ahmed Al-Kandari, ISN 552
Private Counsel Opening Statement

My Name is Eric Lewis, and I am pleased to appear before you this morning as Private Counsel for Fayez Al Kandari.

We are grateful that the Board has granted a full hearing after this Board’s file review earlier this year.

This Board is charged with evaluating whether Fayez will pose an ongoing security threat to the United States or American citizens or any other type of security threat. We are well aware that Fayez had a full review approximately fourteen months ago in which the Board determined that his continued detention was necessary. The Board noted three factors underlying its decision: first the Board observed that Fayez appeared to have residual anger against the United States. Second, the Board was concerned with possible extremist connections of certain family members. Finally, the Board noted a lack of history regarding the efficacy of the rehabilitation program in Kuwait.

I want to address these issues directly so the Board can understand why the concerns expressed last year have been comprehensively addressed and should no longer be viewed as obstacles to Fayez’ release. I hope that at the end of the presentation you will agree that today Fayez poses no ongoing security threat to the United States, its citizens or military personnel or anyone else and that clearing him for repatriation to his home in Kuwait is a wise, just and safe action to take at this time.

Let me begin with the efficacy of the rehabilitation program in Kuwait. Last year, I stood before this Board on behalf of another Kuwaiti, Fawzi Al Odah.

I detailed the clear legal authority of the Government of Kuwait to return Fawzi to a secure and controlled environment, and its sovereign commitment to do so. I spoke at length about the program of the Al Salam Rehabilitation Center, and the commitment of the Government of Kuwait and Fawzi and the Al Odah Family to implement an in-patient residential rehabilitation program for at least one year. The Government of Kuwait also assured at the highest levels that Fawzi’s repatriation would be accomplished with strict oversight and security guarantees. This Board credited the bona fides of the Government of Kuwait, but it did so based on trust rather than history.

Now, we have that history. Now, we know that the Government of Kuwait has fully met and fully implemented its commitments, as has Fawzi Al Odah. The rehabilitation program is in place and working. The head of the rehabilitation program and his team have provided intensive psychotherapy, spiritual counseling, and a variety of other services that will help Fawzi reintegrate into society. You will have seen Fawzi on video and see what a difference the Al Salam Rehabilitation Center has made in his life. He is optimistic; he is happy; he is ready to resume a full, useful and peaceful life. He harbors no ill will toward anyone. He just wants to move forward.

You will also have seen the head of the rehabilitation program on video and you have seen his statement during the file review. He is a highly experienced psychiatrist and a fellow of the Royal Society of Psychiatry in Scotland. He is trusted in this sensitive area at the highest levels in Kuwait. He is confident that Fayez, like Fawzi, will also participate constructively in the program, and he is committed to assuring that Fayez receives all the rehabilitation he requires and to keeping him in the facility until he and his team are satisfied that Fayez is ready to reintegrate peacefully.

It is the opinion of the head of the rehabilitation program that Fayez has truly changed. Fayez has seen that his government can help him if he cooperates. Fayez has learned, and he is cooperating fully.

The head of the rehabilitation program is committed to supervising Fayez’ care and keeping him as an inpatient at the center, on the grounds of the Kuwait Central Prison, until it is safe to release him. That’s in everyone’s interest.

Fayez has eagerly discussed religion with a leading Kuwaiti religious figure who has experience with many young people, including many extremists that he seeks to bring back to a proper, moderate view of Islam.

He views Fayez as well within the mainstream of religious thought in Kuwait, as non-violent and in no way an extremist. He has been appointed to a committee by the Minister ofInformation to develop nationwide strategies and programs to prevent extremism in young people, and Fayez is eager to work with him in the future.

The person responsible for counter-terrorism in Kuwait is a tough man in a tough business. He too has much experience in dealing with extremists. He has also noted Fayez’ progress, his optimism and his desire for a quiet private life. He will make sure that Fayez is subject to the kind of security measures that remove any material security risk. Even after his release, Fayez will be required to check in weekly at his local police station and to be visited at home on a regular basis by the rehabilitation professionals. Fayez’ internet usage, religious instruction, social networks and financial affairs, among other things, will be monitored, and he will surrender his passport and not travel. He will be subject to electronic and physical surveillance and curfew measures. Fayez understands and accepts that he will live his life subject to the scrutiny of his government.

In sum, the Board’s concern that the Kuwait program had no track record has now been addressed. There is a track record and we submit it is an excellent one.

The Board has also expressed concern in its disposition about Fayez’ residual anger against the United States, which the Board perceived during the last hearing. You will hear from Fayez that he approached the last hearing with a great deal of skepticism. After years of CSRTs and ARBs, which did not bring him any closer to home, he did not have confidence that he would get a transparent and comprehensive hearing that could result in his release. So, Fayez withdrew and tried to preserve his dignity by using this one chance to talk to officials of the United States to express his frustration and sense that his long and seemingly indefinite detention was unfair. To be candid, I do not think he was given much hope in advance that the process would be fair or transparent. So, rather than talk about the future, he used the hearing to vent, and this may have come across as hostility.

I think that when you see Fayez today, you will see someone who has learned from experience. He understands that Fawzi Al Odah, whom he thought had false hope, actually had real hope. The defensive cynicism you may have seen last year is gone. Fayez knows you will listen to him; you will inquire into his mind and spirit and take a fair and honest measure of him. No one can be happy about spending 13 [and a half] years here. No one should be. That is human nature. But Fayez bears no anger toward America or Americans. Some of the people he met, especially in the early years, did not treat him gently or with dignity. But many others did. You meet all sorts. Fayez is a proud man, but he is a man who engages with others with energy, enthusiasm and charm. He treats others with respect; of course, he asks for respect from others. He has learned fluent English. He is studying business. He laughs easily. When a man has hope, he is a different man. Fayez has hope. I trust you will get a sense of that today.

Finally, the Board noted concern about Fayez having exposure to extremists in Kuwait, including possible exposure to family members who may harbor extremist views. Fayez has not seen any of his family members for nearly fourteen years. When he left, most of his siblings and cousins were still kids. He accepts that he does not know how the thinking of his relatives may have developed over the years. But he is very clear that he has no wish to have contact with possible extremists or to be involved in political issues in any way. He wants to avoid anyone that would seek to involve him in any political issues, let alone extremism.

Fayez’s parents have made clear that when he comes home, Fayez alone will live with his mother and father. No other relatives will live at home. We have submitted statements from Fayez himself and a video of members of his family, demonstrating their commitment to care for him on his return, which has never been in doubt. The video also demonstrates a plan for his living arrangements after he completes his rehabilitation, which is designed to provide him with monitoring and supervision.

You will also have met his distinguished older first cousins, both of whom have doctorates from leading North American Universities. They will mentor Fayez to facilitate Fayez’ peaceful and constructive return to Kuwaiti society.

I would ask that the board look carefully at the statement of Fayez himself, which is most probative of his mindset, his hopes and his goals, and I invite the Board to spend time questioning Fayez and getting a sense of his mind and spirit. He acknowledges his past frustration and his occasional tendency to be uncooperative, even provocative, arising out of that sense of hopelessness. Now, he sees a realistic path to resuming his life. He acknowledges that he requires a great deal of help, having spent more than thirteen years at Guantánamo Bay. He understands that he is 40. This is a critical opportunity for him to move forward with a productive life.

In sum, Fayez is looking forward to returning to an active, caring, yet strict and responsible government, which wants very much to receive and assist him, to loving parents who yearn to have him at home, and eventually to a wife and family and to a fulfilling life, free of politics. He has spent thirteen and a half years of his life at Guantánamo. He wants only to turn the page and get on with his life. He hopes to demonstrate to you that he presents no material security risk and that his repatriation is the safe, appropriate and eminently correct step to take at this time.

More on Fayiz from Al-Jazeera

In an article for Al-Jazeera, Jenifer Fenton provided further insights into Fayiz’s case, reminding readers of his well-chronicled history of charitable work, and speaking to his cousin Abdullah, who said, “He wants to catch up on lost time. He misses his family a lot.”

Dealing with the risible claim that Fayiz was an “al-Qaeda recruiter and propagandist who probably served as Osama bin Laden’s spiritual adviser,” Fenton noted, drawing on unpublished research I conducted for Fayiz’s case back in 2012, that “[t]he only prisoner who appears to have made such allegations against Kandari was Yasim Basardah,” according to the classified military files released by WikiLeaks in 2011, a Yemeni regarded as notoriously reliable, including by US officials. As she explained, “Even a US military official voiced strong doubts about Basardah’s credibility — telling the Washington Post that he ‘should not be relied upon’ and believing Basardah ‘strains the imagination.’”

As Fenton also noted, “More than a dozen allegations against Kandari in the JTF report come from this one discredited prisoner.” She added that other allegations “come from Guantánamo prisoners who were tortured,” and whose torture was confirmed in the executive summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report about the CIA’s post-9/11 torture program, which was made publicly available in December.

Fenton also explained that former prisoner Adel al-Zamel, who also “testified” against Kandari, “told Al-Jazeera he did not know Kandari so he could not have made damning statements about him — unless he did so under duress and therefore does not recall them.”

She added that “other prisoners’ accounts in the JTF report do not square with travel dates in Kandari’s passport, according to his lawyers.”

Fenton also spoke to Fawzi al-Odah’s father, Khalid, to find out how his son is doing since his return home in November 2014, when he was sent to the Al Salam Rehabilitation Center for “reintegration counselling and physical therapy.” She noted that he is ‘by all accounts adjusting well to his life back home.” His father said, “Fawzi is doing fine. Thank God.”

Fenton also noted that, when Fawzi’s rehabilitation process concludes, probably towards the end of this year, he “will move into a flat at his father’s place and work — and hopefully start a family.” If released, al-Kandari would also be sent to the rehabilitation centre, a move he finds “acceptable,” as Fenton noted, adding that, according to his family, he “thinks the rehabilitation would help him to become a good, contributing member of his society.” She also noted that his family members “cannot bear to think about him not being cleared for transfer.”

In addition, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah al-Mubarak al-Sabah, Kuwait’s minister of state for cabinet affairs, told Al-Jazeera that the Kuwaiti government is “looking forward to receiving [Kandari] back … and is committed to making sure he reintegrates well.”

The second review for Muhammad al-Shumrani

Last May, before Fayiz’s review, Muhammad Abd al-Rahman al-Shumrani refused to attend his review, complaining, as his personal representatives put it, that he “has consistently stated his objection to the body search required to be conducted prior to his attendance at legal meetings or other appointments,” adding that he regards “the body search as conducted, which requires the guard to touch the area near his genitals,” as “humiliating and degrading.”

That, unfortunately, scuppered his chances of being recommended for release, as there was no input to counter the military’s claims, as aired in the latest unclassified summary, that he was an “al-Qa’ida recruiter and fighter,” and that he “almost certainly remains committed to supporting extremist causes, and has continued to incite other detainees against the detention staff at Guantánamo.” Although the authorities also noted that “there are no indications that he has communicated with any extremists outside Guantánamo,”  they claimed that, “Since February 2014, he has indicated possible plans to reengage in terrorist activity, and he has followed the news of ISIL’s growing strength in Iraq and Syria with apparent interest,” adding that he has also “shared little additional insight into his post-transfer plans.”

Below I’m posting the opening statements of his personal representatives, and the testimony of his attorney, Martha Rayner, who urged his release, although his own exchange with the board members is not publicly available.

Periodic Review Board Full Hearing, 04 Aug 2015
Muhammed Abd Al-Rahman Awn Al-Shamrani, ISN 195
Personal Representative Opening Statement

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen of the Board. We are the Personal Representatives of Muhammad Abd-al Rahman Bin A’wan Al-Shamrani. We will be assisting Mr. Al-Shamrani this morning with his case, aided by Martha Rayner, Clinical Associate Professor of Law at Fordham University.

Mr. Al-Shamrani has spent the last 13 and one-half years in detention at Guantánamo Bay. During this time he has endured the death of his father and witnessed from afar the decline of his mother into old-age and poor health. Mr. Al-Shamrani, himself, has slipped quietly into middle-age under detention.

As the Board is aware, this is Mr. Al-Shamrani’s second Periodic Review Board. Mr. Al-Shamrani declined to participate in his first PRB, although he did correspond via letter with his Personal Representatives and submitted his reasons for non-participation to the Board. The Board recommended, in its determination statement recommending his continued law of war detention, that Mr. Al-Shamrani pursue certain courses of action that would be beneficial to him. After reflecting on the Board’s recommendations and seeking the counsel of his family members, he decided to heed the advice of the Board. Specifically, he engaged in dialogue with the delegation representing the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and has fully engaged in the Periodic Review Process since his previous Board. He has maintained a record of perfect attendance for meetings with his Personal Representatives and counsel.

A number of Mr. Al-Shamrani’s traits have impressed us throughout our interactions over the past year:

Candor: He has proven exceedingly forthright and honest in his interactions with us. He is in no way one who will simply “tell you what want you want to hear”.

Civility: He has never failed to be anything less than polite and professional during his interactions and discussions with us.

Insight: He is a thinker who is reflective throughout any discussions he engages in.

Later, Mr. Al-Shamrani will discuss both his past life and his desire for a better life for himself and his family in the future.

We are confident that Mr. Al-Shamrani’s desire to pursue a better way of life if transferred to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is genuine. He is very eager to pursue the curriculum offered by the Kingdom’s Muhammad Bin Nayef Center for Counselling and Care.

Periodic Review Board Full Hearing, 04 Aug 2015
Muhammed Abd Al-Rahman Awn Al-Shamrani, ISN 195
Private Counsel Opening Statement

Dear Periodic Review Board Members, Thank you for providing me with an opportunity to represent Mr. al-Shimrani before you.

And thank you for granting Mr. al-Shimrani a second PRB after determining that a significant question is raised as to whether Mr. al-Shimrani’s continued detention is warranted.

Mr. al-Shimrani was taken into United States military custody at age 26. He was among the first men to be transferred to Guantánamo in January of 2002. He has spent the vast majority of his young adult life detained at Guantánamo — over thirteen and a half years. He is now 40 years old.

I have represented Mr. al-Shimrani pro bono for nine years, since 2006. He has always communicated appreciation and respect for my work on his behalf.

At the first Periodic Review Board, you concluded that detention remained necessary because of Mr. al-Shimrani’s past conduct, his “problematic” behavior since being imprisoned, and, since Mr. al-Shimrani did not attend the prior hearing, the Board’s inability to assess his current mindset. You encouraged him to fully participate in any future review and meet with any representatives of Saudi Arabia who might come to Guantánamo.

Mr. al-Shimrani has fully complied with the Board’s requests. He has participated in preparing for this hearing and will fully participate in today’s hearing by responding to any questions you may have. Mr. al-Shimrani has met numerous times with me and the Personal Representatives during which he has exhibited patience, openness and full cooperation in response to our probing questions. Mr. al-Shimrani [redacted] expressed his willingness to participate in their well-regarded reintegration and rehabilitation program [redacted].

This response to the Board’s directives demonstrates a commitment on Mr. al-Shimrani’s part to engage seriously with this process and with his future. I can assure you, having represented Mr. al-Shimrani for nine years, he is true to himself. He does not take advice or engage in a course of action unless he can engage in it sincerely and transparently. His decision to engage in this process and answer your questions is genuine on his part. He wants to return to his home country and focus on his family and building a peaceful life.

As to Mr. al-Shimrani’s past, he will address that in his statement to you. The core point he wishes to convey is that he is committed to moving on. He wishes to put his past behind him. Both his conduct that led to his imprisonment here and the many years of indefinite detention.

Mr. al-Shimrani welcomes participation in Saudi Arabia’s well established reintegration program, which has been endorsed by the U.S. government and replicated in other countries. This program is designed to be complemented by family support. Mr. al-Shimrani has strong family support. He has three brothers, four sisters, a maternal uncle who has been an integral part of his immediate family since the death of Mr. al-Shimrani’s father in 2007 and an aging mother with health problems. His family has pledged to support his reintegration home. They will provide him with a home, support in establishing employment and beginning a family of his own.

Mr. al-Shimrani will discuss his future plans in his personal statement to you. His plans are concrete and feasible, especially in light of the resources Saudi Arabia is able to provide as part of its reintegration program and in light of the moral support Mr. al-Shimrani’s family has pledged to provide.

The pieces are in place to assure that Mr. al-Shimrani will not pose a significant threat to our country in the future. His transfer to Saudi Arabia — a strong U.S. ally — will assure the mitigation of risk through its reintegration program and continued monitoring.

Respectfully,

Martha Rayner
Clinical Associate Professor of Law
Fordham University School of Law

I wrote the above article for the “Close Guantánamo” website, which I established in January 2012 with US attorney Tom Wilner. Please join us — just an email address is required to be counted amongst those opposed to the ongoing existence of Guantánamo, and to receive updates of our activities by email.

The terrorist group ISIS is institutionalising an education system that will perpetuate its violent legacy by moulding the young in its fold with ideas of bigotry and hatred. The group has been belligerent about its intention to perpetrate violence and provoke conflict globally.

By Syed Huzaifah Bin Othman Alkaff*

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has not only been promoting ideas of religious hatred and violence globally by the use of online platforms for their propaganda, the group has exploited the education systems that it has taken control of in Iraq and Syria to institutionalise its brainwashing efforts.

Clearly, the revamp is aimed at nurturing future generations of jihadists and violent militants. In June 2014, just before ISIS declaration of a self-styled Caliphate, it announced that it was restructuring the education system in areas it controlled in Iraq and Syria.

Education under Islamic State

Since then, it has revamped the syllabus and content of the subjects in schools with the help of about 400 individuals. In February this year, the group was reported to have a list of subjects that they retained and removed. The subjects kept were monotheism, mathematics, physics, chemistry, natural sciences, and Arabic and English languages, with geography recently re-added to this list. The subjects removed were music and the arts, national education, social studies, history, fine arts, sports (physical education), philosophy, psychological studies and geography.

The group, despite its throwback to the past, acknowledges the instrumental importance of the hard sciences, such as physics and chemistry, as well as the natural sciences. Indeed, ISIS is in need of engineers, doctors, accountants, and many such professionals. These sciences and their practitioners – grown organically – are deemed useful for the production and deployment of technologies to advance the group’s agenda of conflict and violence. ISIS also recognises the role of languages to communicate its propaganda to the other parts of the world, and hence its acceptance of foreign languages such as English in its education system.

A study of the changes in the syllabus and curriculum will show the most pronounced as being the social sciences, which have been effectively obliterated. The subjects that are more specifically affected are the ones that require the use of critical analyses and logical arguments. Indeed, ISIS abhors the use of logic, especially in the interpretation of Islamic teachings. In its fundamentalist view of the religion, it approaches religious sources in a dogmatic and literal sense without regard for hierarchy of values, and the need to take into account time and space.

Deconstructing identities

The rejection of critical analyses and the use of logic have their precedents in the practice of those who believe that a blueprint for a social order may be lifted from the literal stipulations of the Qur’an and Hadith. It regards as unacceptable the use of logic and reason in the approach to religious sources, and neither attempts to contextualise nor extract the moral purposes behind the scriptural stipulations. The strict rejection of the use of logic and disregard for context issue from the teachings on monotheism of the Saudi-based scholar-warrior Mohammed ibn Wahab.

In his book those whose beliefs lie outside the theological boundaries of monotheism are infidels or apostates, whose killing or subjugation into slavery constitutes a religious obligation. Juxtaposed against ISIS ‘cubs of caliphate’ project where youngsters are regularly exposed to violent images of beheadings and even taught to carry them out, one can expect only the most extremely violent and brutal militants to emerge from such a system.

In ISIS pursuit to fashion a radical utopia of an Islamic Caliphate, it has attempted to remove all manner of social identities that it regards as being the antithesis of a true Muslim and an Islamic social order. To this end, it has replaced all references to the ’Syrian Arab Republic’, ’national’, ’home’, ’Syria’, ’my nation’ with ’Islamic State’ and condemned any references to ethnicity. In short, ISIS believes that the sole identity of a person should be a religious one, in particular its understanding of who constitutes a true Muslim and the sole identity of a state as being one that implements the criminal laws of seventh century Arabia.

Moving forward

The extent of dissemination of ISIS’ ideas is extraordinary. It is reported that between an estimated six million and eight million people are living under ISIS, of which one-third are believed to be children. Imagining the success of their education on this high number of children, the brutalised future of the coming generation is worrisome to say the least.

Generations like them who are also taught to reject other values and teachings, in addition to confining themselves to selective values and teachings, will have difficulties living alongside other cultures and communities. Their instilled binary worldview – looking at the world with the distorted value of either right or wrong without considering anything in between – will create a barrier and a “group tent” mindset. The outcome for these generations will be one which will not be open to diversity of cultures, values and customs.

Knowing ISIS strategy in exploiting the education system, the international community will need to relook the counter-strategy against the group. While the communities remain vulnerable, the group continues to promote the binary worldview and shaping the young generations to continue its legacy of violence and brutality.

The longer the group stays in a conquered area, the more it can control and influence the populace. Hence, the immediate military defeat of the group is vital. Disruption of its controlled areas is also needed to curb their exploitation of the people, in this case, shaping the young ones to be like them. The group is able to achieve what it wishes for since no one is entering its territory to disrupt its day-to-day operations.

ISIS exploits children under the pretext of educating them: using them as slaves, teaching the children to kill and instil immoral values in them. If the exploitation persists, mitigating the effects of the children’s ideologies and violent thinking in the future will prove an impossible challenge.

*Syed Huzaifah Bin Othman Alkaff is a Senior Analyst with the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR), a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

The head of National Air and Climate Change at Iran’s Environmental Protection Agency reports that 500 million tons of greenhouse gases are produced by the country annually and in the next 10 years it is expected to reach 2 billion tons.

According to IRNA, Ali Rajabi told a press conference on Wednesday August 26 that greenhouse gas emissions in Iran are high and on the rise.

He said Iran should start falling in line with the rest of world in trying to reduce greenhouse gases.

Some of the chief sources of greenhouse gas emissions are power plants, transportation and oil and gas refineries.

Seventy percent of greenhouse gas emissions produced in Iran are related to road transportation.

The Rohani administration, which took power two years ago, has begun implementing some plans for reducing greenhouse gases.

There are 200 Environment Protection Projects in the Persian Gulf aimed at reducing 70 percent of air, land and sea pollution from oil production and distribution activities by 2020.

Another effort has been the improvement of gasoline quality for use in gas pumps across the country.

The government has also prepared a “low-carbon economy” plan to be fully implemented by 2020.

Complementarity between US-led and China-led institutions requires the ratification of the 2010 IMF governance reforms by the US Congress. As this is unlikely to happen any time soon, we need to start thinking of a New Bretton Woods.

By Pradumna B. Rana*

In the three-round match between the United States and China over influence in the Asian regional architecture, Round 2, which was played several months back, went in China’s favour. Countries like Britain, Korea, and Australia broke ranks with the US and 57 countries from around the world including Germany, France, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, and Nepal applied to be the founding members of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

Japan has so far stuck to the US but it has indicated that it remains interested in joining the AIIB which is the financing arm of China’s new “One Belt, One Road” policy. Initially the US had attempted to dissuade potential applicants by citing poor governance and due diligence capacity at the proposed institutions. But it made a dramatic turnaround in mid-April when US Secretary, Jack Lew visited Beijing.

Humiliation of US

Lew mentioned that while Washington remained concerned about AIIB’s governance, there was “enough infrastructure need for the new and existing institutions”. He went on to add that the US would be willing to work with the AIIB through existing financial institutions such as the ADB and World Bank. A few days later the World Bank’s US-appointed president vowed to find “innovative” ways to work with the AIIB and welcomed it as a “major new player” in the world of development finance. This is Round 2 of the humiliation of the US by China.

Less well-known is Round 1 of China’s (and Japan’s) humiliation of the US which occurred in the aftermath of the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998 when the US and US-led IMF had shot down proposals to establish the Asian Monetary Fund (AMF). At that time, IMF surveillance had failed to adequately identify the risks posed by the uneven pace of capital account liberalisation in the region and the extent of banking sector weaknesses.

The IMF had, therefore, initially misdiagnosed the Asian financial crisis and prescribed inappropriate policies which exacerbated the impacts of the crisis and led to a free-fall of currencies, fanned the contagion, and plunged the region into a sharp recession. This had led countries in the region to initiate regional “self help” measures to take things under their control.

Although the AMF was stillborn, the region has established a US$240 billion crisis management fund called the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralism (CMIM) and the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office which is the “independent surveillance unit” for the CMIM. The idea of the AMF has not been forgotten and keeps coming up every now and then.

Round 3 of the China-US game is presently being played out in the area of international trade. We have the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which locks out China and the ASEAN-led (and China-led) Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) which locks out the US.

Progress in TPP Negotiations

Hopes were high of a breakthrough in the TPP when the negotiators met in Hawaii end-July, because the US President had been given the fast-track authority to smoothen the way through the legislature for the TPP. Yet after much fanfare and encouraging initial reports the ministers ended their negotiations by releasing a joint statement that merely committed to further talks. The talks reportedly stalled over a range of issues, including auto, dairy and sugar exports, and protection of next-generation drugs.

Round 3, therefore, hangs in the balance. This is because unless the negotiators can conclude a deal soon, it will be impossible to get it ratified by the US Congress this year. By that stage the US presidential election is likely to overshadow trade talks and TPP approval may have to wait until the next presidential term. If TPP disappoints or worse still it is not concluded at all, it will be another major setback for the US in Asia as it is the economic arm of President Obama’s “pivot” to Asia.

Although in a game of baseball, three strikes means “out”, this is not the case in global and regional diplomacy. It only means that the US’ clout in the region will be reduced and the sparring between China and US will continue in the future. China-led institutions in Asia will also not pose a threat to the well-established IMF or the World Bank. They will, however, complicate global economic governance and make it more complex.

Complementarity or a New Bretton Woods?

What should be done? The issue could be resolved if the IMF and the World Bank could work together with China-led institutions in a complementary and seamless manner. A case in point is the troika approach in the eurozone where bailout packages are designed, financed and monitored jointly by the EC, European Commission, and the IMF. But such an approach might not be possible in Asia. This is because while Europe is special to the IMF and World Bank, Asia is not. Europe, occupies 10 out 24 chairs in the IMF and World Bank Board, while Asia is under-represented. The Managing Director of the IMF has always been a European.

It appears that the necessary approval of the US Congress of an agreement to reform the governance of the IMF reached at the G20 Summit in Korea (to give greater voice to China and other emerging markets and make the selection of its head merit-based) may be indefinitely delayed. Last December, Christine Lagarde, the Managing Director of the IMF, announced “As requested by our membership, we will now proceed to discuss alternative options for advancing quota and governance reforms…”

If US-led and China-led institutions cannot take joint decisions and work with each other in a complementary manner, 70 years after the original Bretton Woods agreement, we need a New Bretton Woods led by a select group from the truly “systemically important countries” of the world.

*Pradumna B. Rana is Associate Professor and Coordinator of the International Political Economy Programme in the Centre for Multilateralism Studies at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) has launched an innovative new online e-learning platform to help countries in the region – the world’s most disaster prone – build their capacities to withstand, adapt to and recover from natural disasters.

The Geo-referenced Information Systems for Disaster Risk Management (Geo-DRM) portal offers state-of-the-art courses on space technology, along with Geographic Information System (GIS) applications for early warning and multi-hazard risk assessment.

United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of ESCAP, Dr. Shamshad Akhtar, said the online Geo-DRM platform is part of ESCAP’s determination to advance regional implementation of the newly-adopted Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030.

“The main tenet of the Sendai Framework is that disaster risk reduction is an essential condition for achieving sustainable development,” explained Dr. Akhtar. “Over the past 45 years, natural disasters in Asia and the Pacific have affected 6 billion people, led to more than 2 million deaths and caused major economic losses totaling US$1.15 trillion.”

The online Geo-DRM portal combines socio-economic data with satellite imagery and other disaster-related data, providing the right information to the right people at the right time. It serves as an important tool to support evidence-based decision-making for disaster preparedness, response and impact assessment, from a single online platform.

Dr. Akhtar highlighted the critical role of regional organizations, such as ESCAP, in creating regional solutions to address disaster impacts at both local and national levels. This includes promoting real-time access to reliable data and the use of space-derived information, GIS, and information and communications technology.

“Disaster management requires a multi-disciplinary approach, collating and consolidating information from various sources,” she added. “Incorporating spatial data into existing socioeconomic data will help us to make more informed decisions, ultimately saving more lives.”

The platform enhances information exchange on applications, operation and policy developments in space technology and GIS applications. It also supports institutional strengthening and knowledge building by providing tools based on state-of-the-art learning design theory.

This form of online technical assistance and support has greater reach and is carbon neutral. It is also readily accessible – even in remote areas of the region.

As part of its commitment to support the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, ESCAP will continue to establish thematic online platforms related to innovative technology applications, in particular the effective use of ICT and space applications for disaster risk reduction.

By Anneliese Mcauliffe

Despite Thailand’s recent deportation of 109 ethnic Uighurs to China where they could face torture, about 60 members of the persecuted minority who remain in detention are refusing to register with the United Nations as asylum seekers.

Uighur activists say the detainees are likely reluctant to apply for asylum because they do not trust that the UN will be able to prevent their deportation, and they are afraid that personal information provided during the registration process could fall into the hands of Chinese authorities and endanger their families.

Seven weeks after Thailand deported the group of 109 to China, the future is uncertain for the remaining Uighurs, a Turkic-speaking Muslim minority from China’s western region of Xinjiang. Their forced removal sparked protests in Turkey against the Chinese embassy and the Thai consulate, as well as Chinese-owned businesses.

Thousands of Uighurs are believed to have fled Xinjiang where China has cracked down on dissent, citing concerns about terrorism and separatism. Human Rights Watch says Uighurs face “pervasive ethnic discrimination, severe religious repression, and increasing cultural suppression”.

For those who escape to other countries only to be sent back, the punishments may be even more severe. Countries including Pakistan, Malaysia, Kazakhstan and Cambodia have also forcibly returned Uighurs to China, and rights groups say that some of them were never heard from again.

Thailand’s decision to deport 109 Uighurs prompted a warning from the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, that they could face persecution and even torture after being sent back to China.

Yet the remaining detainees have chosen not to seek protection from abuses back home by applying for asylum, UNHCR has told IRIN.

Distrust of the UN is likely one reason for choosing not to apply, according to Ala Mentimin, vice president of the World Uighur Congress, a Washington D.C.-based advocacy group. While he has not been able to speak to those in detention in Thailand, he said they probably hold similar views as those he has interviewed in Malaysia and Turkey.

“They have no trust in the UNHCR, which has failed to stop deportations in the past,” he said.

The Cambodia case

Mentimin cited the 2009 deportation of 20 Uighurs from Cambodia where they had applied for asylum. Security personnel took them at gunpoint from a safe house and drove them to a military airport where they were put aboard an unscheduled charter flight to China.

A classified United States diplomatic cable sent from its embassy in Cambodia and made public by WikiLeaks suggests that UNHCR agreed that it did not do enough to protect the Uighurs.

The cable describes a meeting between US Chargé d’Affaires Theodore Allegra and other diplomats and UNHCR Regional Representative Raymond Hall.

“Hall confirmed that UNHCR had made no special accommodations for protection or processing of this group, despite the high visibility and Chinese pressure attendant to their cases, but acknowledged that with the ‘wisdom of hindsight’ the UNHCR might have handled the Uighur case differently,” the cable reads.

Nicholas Bequelin, East Asia director for Amnesty International, said another reason Uighurs who have escaped China may choose not to apply for asylum is because they are worried that personal information they provide to UNHCR could find its way back to Chinese authorities.

“The fear that their families may face persecution back in Xinjiang could be preventing them from registering with the UNHCR,” he said. “Registering with the UNHCR requires handing over a great deal of information, and they may fear that this information may not be secure.”

One more reason for refusing to register in Thailand as asylum seekers is that they are not interested in being resettled to a third country once obtaining refugee status, according to UNHCR.

“Turkey has traditionally taken them in,” said UNHCR spokesperson Vivian Tan. “They are only looking for ways to get to Turkey.”

Caught in the great game

Uighurs who flee China often pay human smugglers between US $10,000 and $30,000, according to Mentimin of the World Uighur Congress.

Uighur sources told IRIN on condition of anonymity that those detained in Thailand had travelled overland through Vietnam and Cambodia using buses and private cars.

Uighurs fleeing China are almost always trying to get to Turkey where many have already settled and where the government has an open door policy. But if they are intercepted along the way, they find themselves caught in a geopolitical power struggle in which Beijing exerts pressure on countries to ignore their obligations under international law and forcibly return them.

Days after Cambodia deported 20 Uighurs in 2009, China’s then vice-president Xi Jinping visited the country and signed off on a package of grants, loans and infrastructure development deals worth more than US $1 billion.

“UNHCR Regional Representative Raymond Hall stated that although Cambodia had tried hard over the years to assume refugee responsibilities, it was unable to withstand direct pressure from China in its first major test,” according to the US diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks.

Likewise, rights advocates say that China exerted pressure and made backroom deals with Thailand’s military government, which took power in a May 2014 coup that was condemned by the US and other countries.

“It’s quite clear that the military junta buckled under pressure from China to send the Uighurs back into harm’s way, and by doing so further trashed Thailand’s already diminished reputation as a rights respecting government,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director for Human Rights Watch.

“The big question is what did Bangkok receive in return from Beijing for this clear betrayal of Thailand’s international rights obligations under the Convention against Torture,” he told IRIN.

In the wake of the controversy, Thai authorities defended themselves, saying the government had not simply acceded to China’s request to return all 328 Uighurs who were being held in detentions centres throughout the country.

“China asked for all Uighur Muslims in Thailand to be sent back but we said we could not do it,” Colonel Weerachon Sukhondhapatipak, deputy Thai government spokesman, told reporters on 10 July.

He said authorities had determined that more than 170 Uighurs were Turkish citizens and allowed them to go to Turkey. Sukhondhapatipak said at the time that authorities were assessing the identities of those still in detention centres.

Those Uighurs remain in custody today, waiting for a decision that could send them into the welcoming arms of friends and family in Turkey, or into the black hole of China’s security apparatus.

By Abhijit Singh*

One of the more interesting aspects of Asian maritime politics is the Russia-China naval relationship. Both are major maritime powers with considerable stakes in regional security. Like Beijing, Moscow has sought to safeguard its maritime interests in strategically vital spaces in the Asia-Pacific by initiating a military modernisation programme aimed at projecting a strong national image. Significantly, despite having common areas of interest and operations, the PLA Navy and the Russian Navy have managed to maintain a smooth working relationship, which has only been getting stronger with time.

The nautical synergy was on ample display when the Russian and Chinese navies embarked on their latest maritime interaction. “Joint Sea 2015 II”, which began in the Sea of Japan on August 20, is a naval exercise of unprecedented operational integration and a workout menu that features live-firing drills, anti-submarine operations, close-support combat drills and even joint-beach landings. The sheer magnitude of the exercise – in terms of the size of the fleets involved, the duration of engagement, and the nature of joint drills – makes it a remarkable undertaking. With 16 surface ships, two submarines, 12 naval aircraft, nine amphibious vehicles fielded by the Russian navy, and six warships, six helicopters, five fixed-wing aircraft and ambitious assets from the Chinese side, this is arguably the largest maritime exercise the two navies have ever been involved in.

It is the presence of 500 Chinese marines, however, that is the event’s most striking feature. After the Chinese defence white paper announced an expeditionary template of operations in May 2015, recent PLA-N exercises have had an amphibious component, including ground assault drills by marine forces. The PLA-N has also conducted a series of island defence exercises, involving the deployment of dedicated amphibious assets in the Western and Far-Eastern Pacific. In keeping with the new focus on expeditionary operations, the participating contingents are scheduled to stage a joint amphibious and airborne landing.

A follow-up to ‘Joint-Sea 2015’ – a smaller naval exercise held in the Mediterranean Sea and Black Sea in May 2015 – the ongoing interaction is ostensibly aimed at countering America’s strategic dominance of maritime-Eurasia. Russian and Chinese leaders believe that the US is the central destabilising factor in the region’s geopolitics and that it is involved in a systemic containment of Moscow and Beijing. By staging close-combat naval exercises, they hope to warn Washington that its days of lording over maritime-Asia are numbered.

To be sure, China and Russia have their political differences. Russia has had its concerns about Chinese encroachments in the Russian Far-East and the loss of Central Asia to China’s growing influence. However, following Moscow’s isolation in Europe after its annexation of Crimea, President Putin has had to acquiesce to growing Chinese ambitions in Russia’s zone of influence. In return, he hopes to clinch massive oil and gas deals, albeit at terms favourable to Beijing. In order to diversify Russian energy export markets away from Europe, Putin has had little option but to develop an asymmetric strategic partnership with China, granting the latter vital concessions and the status of a special ally.

Yet, Russia isn’t unduly worried. Ever since Moscow and Beijing signed an agreement in December 1992 on military technology cooperation, China has purchased more defence items from the Russian Federation than from all other countries combined. These include Kilo class submarines, Su-27 aircraft, Sovremenny class destroyers, and many varieties of munitions and missiles. Although Beijing’s dependence on Moscow for military platforms has reduced since 2006, Russia has continued the supply of vital maritime stores and equipment. For Russia’s strategic elite, growing maritime operational ties with China are a logical progression of the military relationship.

The trajectory of recent maritime exercises, however, suggests that the partnership has exceeded the original template of military cooperation. The naval drills are significant not only for the size of the contingents involved, but also for the quality of interaction, which now seems as comprehensive as the US Navy’s many structured drills with its Asia-Pacific partners. Needless to add, the maritime relationship has benefited from a huge political investment. Chastened by the West for Russian aggression in Ukraine, particularly the seizure of the Crimea, Putin has taken a personal interest in nurturing maritime ties with China. Beijing, in search of an ally to mount a counter-US Pivot strategy, has been happy to play along.

The nautical parleys also reveal the abiding connection between geopolitics and maritime strategy. The Sino-Russian maritime relationship is the product of a certain geopolitical context in which both countries have been feeling strategically vulnerable to US military pressure. Their evolving maritime strategy has been a reflection of regional maritime politics, which they sense is being orchestrated to Washington’s advantage. With territorial disputes in littoral-Asia serving as a focal point of maritime strategy, Russia and China have also watched US allies – Japan Philippines and Vietnam – bolster their military presence in the Asia-Pacific with a growing sense of alarm. Russia has responded by formally co-opting China as a ‘core partner’ in its new maritime doctrine, thus signalling a desire for greater maritime influence in the Asia-Pacific.

The symbolism of recent Sino-Russian maritime engagements is both notionally and functionally instructive. The military exercises have helped bolster the Sino-Russian strategic relationship, while reinforcing deterrence against perceived adversaries. By conducting the interactions in spaces dominated by America and its allies, Russia and China have sought to defy the US-led maritime order. Their choice of venue for the joint exercises has been equally symbolic. The May 2014 interaction was held in the Mediterranean and Black Sea – a NATO preserve, and a theatre virtually alien to the Chinese navy. And the Sea of Japan where the present exercises are being held has rarely seen a full-fledged Chinese naval deployment. Not only are these theatres considered politically off-limits for the Russian and Chinese navies, these are regions where the participating contingents run the risk of an accidental skirmish with other regional navies.

In material terms too, the drills have a significant implication. Through close-combat exercises, the Chinese and Russian navies have been able to bolster their ‘interoperability’ in the Asian littorals. Harmonising equipment functioning and standard operating procedures, the two navies have gained familiarity with functional methodologies specific to each other, while also finessing maritime doctrine for territorial defence and developing a logistical plan for joint operations.

The material and operational gains are, however, dwarfed by the strategic pay-off for Russia and China. The maritime exercises have provided a framework by which Russia and China can develop their individual and collective defensive capabilities. Intensive combat-oriented operations also serve to signal a shift in the strategic balance of Asia. While the US is still the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific, growing Chinese and Russian nautical interaction heralds the beginning of a multi-polar maritime order in Asia.

For India, maritime intimacy between Russia and China holds significant implications. In recent times, both Russia and China have expanded their strategic interaction with Pakistan. China’s decision to include the development of Gwadar port in the first phase of the proposed $46 billion corridor, as well as the impending contract for the transfer of eight Yuan class submarines make it Pakistan’s principal maritime partner and patron. Russia too has been deepening its defence ties with Pakistan, much to India’s chagrin. A growing Sino-Russian-Pakistani maritime nexus in the IOR poses a challenge to India’s influence in the Indian Ocean and heralds a potential change in the Asian balance of maritime power.

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

Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://idsa.in/idsacomments/China-RussiaNavalTiesandtheBalanceofMaritimePowerinAsia_asingh_270815.html