By Nina Shea*

A report by a renowned journalist states that Christians are to be excluded from an impending official United States government declaration of ISIS genocide. If true, it would reflect a familiar pattern within the administration of a politically correct bias that views Christians — even non-Western congregations such as those in Iraq and Syria — never as victims but always as Inquisition-style oppressors. (That a State Department genocide designation for ISIS may be imminent was acknowledged last week in congressional testimony, by Ambassador Anne Patterson, the assistant secretary of the State Department’s Near East Bureau.)

Yazidis, according to the story by investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, are going to be officially recognized as genocide victims, and rightly so. Yet Christians, who are also among the most vulnerable religious minority groups that have been deliberately and mercilessly targeted for eradication by ISIS, are not. This is not an academic matter. A genocide designation would have significant policy implications for American efforts to restore property and lands taken from the minority groups and for offers of aid, asylum, and other protections to such victims. Worse, it would mean that, under the Genocide Convention, the United States and other governments would not be bound to act to suppress or even prevent the genocide of these Christians.

An unnamed State Department official was quoted by Isikoff as saying that only the attacks on Yazidis have made “the high bar” of the genocide standard and as pointing to the mass killing of 1,000 Yazidi men and the enslavement of thousands of Yazidi women and girls. To propose that Christians have been simply driven off their land but not suffered similar fates is deeply misinformed. In fact, the last Christians to pray in the language spoken by Jesus are also being deliberately targeted for extinction through equally brutal measures.

Christians have been executed by the thousands. Christian women and girls are vulnerable to sexual enslavement. Many of their clergy have been assassinated and their churches and ancient monasteries demolished or desecrated. They have been systematically stripped of all their wealth, and those too elderly or sick to flee ISIS-controlled territory have been forcibly converted to Islam or killed, such as an 80-year-old woman who was burned to death for refusing to abide by ISIS religious rules. Pope Francis pronounced their suffering “genocide” in July. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and a broad array of other churches have done so as well. Analysis from an office of the Holocaust Museum apparently relied on by the State Department asserts that ISIS protects Christians in exchange for jizya, an Islamic tax for “People of the Book,” but the assertion is simply not grounded in fact.

ISIS atrocities against Christians became public in June 2014 when the jihadists stamped Christian homes in Mosul with the red letter N for “Nazarene” and began enforcing its “convert or die” policy. The atrocities continue. Recently the Melkite Catholic bishop of Aleppo reported that 1,000 Christians, including two Orthodox bishops, have been kidnapped and murdered in his city alone. In September, ISIS executed, on videotape, three Assyrian Christian men and threatened to do the same to 200 more being held captive by the terrorist group. Recent reports by an American Christian aid group state that several Christians who refused to renounce their faith were raped, beheaded, or crucified a few months ago.

Knights of Columbus’ genocide advert.

Christian women and girls are also enslaved and sexually abused. Three Christian females sold in ISIS slave markets were profiled in a New York Times Magazine report last summer. ISIS rules allow Christian sabaya, that is, their sexual enslavement. Its magazine Dabiq explicitly approved the enslavement of Christian girls in Nigeria, and the jihadist group posted prices for Christian, as well as Yazidi, female slaves in Raqqa.

In recent weeks, the stalwart Knights of Columbus have been placing emotionally searing ads in Politico and elsewhere advocating the passage of House Resolution 75.

This bipartisan bill was initiated by Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R., Neb.) and Representative Anna Eshoo (D., Calif.) to declare that genocide is being faced by Christians, Yazidis, and other vulnerable groups. The ads — depicting a mother and child, who appear as the very personifications of grief, against a landscape of ISIS destruction — might strike a nerve within the Obama administration. But as of now, the administration looks poised to preempt the bill and render a grave injustice to the suffering Christians of Iraq and Syria.

About the author:
*Nina Shea, Director, Center for Religious Freedom

Source:
This article was published by National Review Online and the Hudson Institute.

By K. P. Fabian*

Apart from the horrible loss of innocent lives, the crash of a Russian aircraft carrying tourists returning from Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula on October 31, 2015, killing all 224 on board, has wide ranging political consequences and implications, directly impinging on the mindless and seemingly endless carnage in Syria.

Within hours of the crash, the Sinai Province of the Islamic State (IS) claimed responsibility categorically stating that it had brought down the plane “in response to Russian airstrikes that killed hundreds of Muslims on Syrian land.” This claim of responsibility was discredited in the Western media with “experts” pointing out that the IS had no such missile which could hit a plane at 30,000 feet. They did not want to think of any other way the IS could have brought down the plane. The experts changed their view only after the flight recorder showed that the last recording was of a big sound, similar to that of an explosion.

The United States (US) might have, not entirely unpardonably, derived some well-concealed malicious pleasure from the crash. It was the first to share with the United Kingdom (UK) two pertinent intelligence findings. One, there was a big heat flash in the sky before the plane split and came crashing down. Two, there was “chatter” among the IS operatives just before and after the crash. Further, two or three days before the crash, they had told each other to expect ‘something big to happen.’ The obvious conclusion was that there was a bomb inside the plane that went off.

Though Egyptian President Abdel Fatteh el-Sisi was due to land in London for a state visit within hours, the UK announced on November 05 the suspension of flights to Sharm el-Sheikh adding that special planes with security equipment and staff would be sent to evacuate the 20,000 and odd UK tourists at the Egyptian resort. The clear message was that Egyptian security arrangements at the airport are unreliable. Egypt responded angrily describing the UK’s decision as “premature” and delayed giving permission for the flights.

Russia also initially sided with Egypt by arguing that it was too early to come to any conclusions about the exact cause of the crash. But soon it had to change course and suspend all flights to Egypt. There are about 80,000 Russians currently holidaying in Egypt. Incidentally, Russia took the decision only after the US and UK shared intelligence with it. Both had agreed to share the intelligence only after Russia publicly complained and asked for it. The latest is that Russia has requested the US agency Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to help with the investigation. It is a positive development that the US is slowly coming round to the view that Russia cannot be kept out in the cold if its cooperation is needed to resolve issues.

The investigation into the crash is being conducted by a team of officials from Egypt, Russia, France, Ireland, and Germany. Egypt alone is authorised to make public statements on the findings as it is the lead investigator. However, Egypt has been rather reticent even after examining the flight recorder. Meanwhile, French officials involved with the investigation as the aircraft was manufactured in France gave out that the flight recorder clearly showed that the flight was normal for the first 23 minutes, till a sudden explosion was heard leading to the conclusion that there was a bomb in the cargo hold of the plane. Egypt has admitted that there was a big noise, but argues still that nothing more can be said till the investigation is completed.

Exactly sixteen years ago, again on October 31, Egypt Air Flight 990 from Los Angeles to Cairo had crashed into the Atlantic. The investigation showed that the co-pilot under investigation for sexual offences had deliberately brought down the plane as the senior manager of the airliner who had told him that he would not be permitted to fly into the US again was on the plane. Egypt adamantly refused to accept the finding and persisted that there was a mechanical failure. We do not know how long Egypt will take before coming out with the findings in this case. But, we do know that Egyptian security is vigorously searching for the IS mole, if any, working at the airport. It is reported that some of the closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras were not functioning the day the ill-fated plane took off.

For Russian President Vladimir Putin, this crash is a serious setback. He had justified his bombing campaign in Syria, starting from September 30, stating that it is better to take on and kill the terrorists in Syria itself rather than wait till they carried out operations in Russia. He did not have much popular support when he ordered the bombing campaign. According to reasonably reliable reports, three Russians have been killed in Syria so far. Will domestic support for the bombing be eroded because of the crash? Not unlikely. The Egyptian Red Sea resorts at about $100 a day, all inclusive with flight, are very popular among not so affluent Russians. However, it remains to be seen how long Russia can go on bombing unless there are clear gains for Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria in terms of regaining the lost territory. For now, the question is if the IS has done it once, how can it be prevented from doing it again?

Egypt is clearly in a difficult situation. Tourism is crucial for generating employment and foreign exchange. How long will it take for Egyptian tourism, already ailing after President Mohamed Morsi was overthrown in 2013, to recover from this blow? This is all the more regrettable as Egypt has so much to offer to the travellers and the tourists. Even foreign investment in Egypt might be affected adversely if it remains unsafe to go there.

A more serious question poses itself: How will the Egyptian Government respond to the tragedy? Egypt has repeatedly declared that it has full control over the Sinai, though not many seem to be convinced about it. Since 2011, the Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis (ABM) or the “Supporters of Jerusalem” has been carrying out attacks in Sinai against Egyptian security forces. After the democratically-elected government of President Morsi was overthrown in 2013, the attacks became more frequent and more lethal.

The key question is whether the rather harsh measures taken by the Sisi Government against its adversaries, including the Muslim Brotherhood and ABM, will deliver the intended result of making Egypt more peaceful leading to more jobs and an inclusive growth. The participation of voters in the first phase of the parliamentary election held recently was disappointingly low at 26 per cent.

In conclusion, as far as Egypt is concerned, it is unlikely that President Sisi will undertake a serious introspection about the political viability of using violence at the command of the state to repress political dissent and adopt the correct course-correction measures. But, in politics, nothing is impossible.

As regards Syria, the air crash might prod the US and its allies to seek a political accommodation with Russia on Syria, and a grand coalition might emerge against the IS. But, even such a coalition will take long to dismantle the IS through military and other means, assuming it were doable.

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/crash-of-metrojet-9268-insinai_kpfabian_131115

By Christine Philippe-Blumauer*

On November 1st, Azerbaijan held its fifth parliamentary elections since independence. In the days that followed, those browsing the internet for reports on conduct and outcome of the elections might have found the following headlines:

Azerbaijani NGO calls on citizens to be active at parliamentary election

Over 300 int’l observers to monitor parliamentary election in Azerbaijan

Socio-political stability in Azerbaijan creates basis for fair election – AVCIYA

OSCE/ODIHR not attending Azerbaijan’s election due to its weakness – Russian FM

Exit-poll: No incidents recorded at Azerbaijani parliamentary election

French observers happy with Azerbaijani parliamentary election

Parliamentary election in Azerbaijan fully meets int’l standards – ICAPP

Looking at these titles, it seems like democratic prospects are all shiny and bright on the Caspian shore. Or are they really? One may have noticed that all of these articles were issued by Azerbaijani state-controlled media. Those interested in post-Soviet Eurasia, and Azerbaijan more specifically, may actually not be that surprised by the overflow of English-speaking Azerbaijani propaganda about the elections but rather by the absence of strong European and U.S. official condemnation of what can only be hailed as a “democratic masquerade.” One can wonder if this lack of adequate response is Europe and the United States’ way of admitting to their own failure in encouraging Azerbaijan to truly engage with democratization. Or if it just attests to the fact that Azerbaijan’s democratic fate is no longer on their strategic radars.

Election Results

On Sunday, November 1st, 5,093,289 registered Azerbaijani voters were called to elect their legislature. The Milli Mejlis–Azerbaijan’s single-chamber National Assembly–is composed of 125 members elected in single-member constituencies using the first-past-the post system (each electoral district has one elected representative).

The elections were boycotted by the main opposition parties: National Council of Democratic Forces (NCDF), the Musavat party, and the Democratic Party of Azerbaijan. Isa Gambar, the Leader of Musavat, claimed “that a win for Aliyev’s party was a foregone conclusion “in the absence of strong opposition candidates and amid widespread violations”.”

In addition, the electoral system is shaped so as to favor President Aliyev’s New Azerbaijan Party (known by its Azerbaijani acronym YAP). Jonathan Bach, a journalist and research fellow with the University of Oregon-UNESCO Crossings Institute for Conflict-Sensitive Reporting and Intercultural Dialogue, explains:

“The electoral system is fixed in favor of the ruling party. Three commissions constitute the system through which elections are administered. The problem is: the most powerful commission, the Central Election Commission (CEC), is elected by whoever holds a majority in parliament. Constituency-level commissions are selected by the CEC. And the smaller and more multitudinous precinct-level commissions are selected by the ConECs. A number of people from political parties and society told the OSCE/ODIHR assessment mission cohort that ‘this formula, in practice, gives pro-government forces control of all commissions, undermining trust in the impartiality of the election commission.’”

According to Al Jazeera the final voter turnout was 55.7% and 700 candidates from 13 political parties and one bloc participated in the race. YAP won 70 out of the 125 seats. Other parties present in parliament are all somewhat aligned with the ruling party as opposition parties have been absent from parliament already since the 2010 elections.

Gearing-up international lobbying campaigns and silencing opponents

About five years ago, in conjunction with the 2010 parliamentary elections, a shift occurred in Azerbaijan: regime strategies to silence opposition voices were improved all the while the government’s lobbying efforts abroad–particularly in Europe and the U.S.–were significantly augmented.

Ever since, to the outside world, Azerbaijan has promoted its religious tolerance, location at the crossroads between the East and West, and modernity. More importantly, it has repeatedly used its membership in international organizations such as the OSCE and the Council of Europe to self-congratulate itself on its democratic progress. In parallel, the Azerbaijani government has, with great consistency, emphasized Azerbaijan’s strategic relevance for its European and U.S. partners as a producer and hub for energy supplies but also as military ally securing access routes in and out of Afghanistan. It has also played the card of being sandwiched between Russia and Iran–two countries with which the West has tense relations.

It looks like the Azerbaijani elite’s patience is beginning to pay off. In fact, according to French MP Thierry Mariani who travelled to Azerbaijan to monitor the elections, they were conducted in full compliance with democratic standards. But from the sidelines, one may want to ask Thierry Mariani a few questions. For instance: How large was the delegation? How were the visited electoral districts selected? Who accompanied the delegation on these visits? Did the delegation stay in the capital only or did it also go to other cities? And, maybe most importantly, who paid for this visit to Azerbaijan? Without answers to these questions, it is indeed very hard to take this MP’s word as an actual thorough assessment of the conduct of the latest parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan.

That being said, the emphasis here is on the bigger picture that emerged over the past five years, in which officials throughout the West gradually ceased to voice their concerns on authoritarian backlash in the Land of Fire. This is not to suggest that all foreign officials have neglected to criticize Azerbaijan’s democratic regression. But many of those who have tried to properly investigate some of the most pressing issues in Azerbaijan, have been marginalized. One such good example is the case of German MP Christoph Straesser who, in 2012, was entrusted with two tasks by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE). His first task was to provide the Council of Europe (CoE) with an official definition of political prisoners; his second, to report on political prisoners in Azerbaijan. Both tasks, which resulted in resolutions on which PACE eventually voted on, were connected. In fact, the issue of political prisoners within CoE member states arose when Azerbaijan and Armenia joined the Council in 2001. By 2012, their number had seemingly increased in Azerbaijan.

The official definition Straesser presented to PACE in September 2012, was in essence the one the Council had been using de facto since 2001. In December 2012, Straesser then presented his report on the situation of political prisoners in Azerbaijan. Straesser encountered a major issue while drafting this latter report though: Azerbaijan repeatedly denied him an entry visa. Consequently, he had to write his report without being able to assess the situation on the ground.

The debate to adopt the resolution pertaining to the official definition of political prisoners took place on October 3, 2012 in Strasbourg, France where the CoE is based. “Several delegates then argued that PACE did not have the authority to assess such human rights violations; that task belonged to the European Court of Human Rights. Their attempt to block the definition was defeated by the narrowest of margins. It followed lobbying by Azerbaijan that one delegate described as ‘unmatched in its brazenness’.”

On January 23, 2013, the debate over the resolution on the situation of political prisoners in Azerbaijan followed. As The Economist put it, “Some delegates called Azerbaijan’s refusal to let Mr. Straesser visit unacceptable; others claimed his report therefore lacked credibility.” PACE eventually rejected Straesser’s report. Three days later, Azerbaijani courts sentenced another five demonstrators to prison.

Closer to the November 2015 parliamentary elections, the fate of Azerbaijani journalists critical of the government was sealed again. In early August, the journalist Rasim Aliyev, known for his critical stance towards the regime, was beaten to death in the most bizarre circumstances after having criticized a Gabala FK soccer player. Aliyev’s death was most certainly the culmination of the dangers independent journalists and activists face in today’s Azerbaijan. In fact, the same month, “a Baku court has sentenced Azerbaijani human rights activists Leyla Yunus to eight and a half years in jail and her severely ailing husband Arif to seven years after judging them guilty of economic crimes”–a trial that was reported to be all but fair as it was politically motivated. On September 1st, investigative journalist Khadija Ismaylova was also sentenced to seven and a half years in prison as she was found guilty of tax evasion, illegal business activity, and abuse of power. Ismaylova has been instrumental in unveiling wide-scale corruption schemes incriminating Azerbaijan’s ruling elite–most notably the presidential family.

Ousting OSCE/ODIHR election observers and controversies within PACE

In August 2015, an OSCE/ODIHR Needs Assessment Mission (NAM) was sent to Azerbaijan. This is a routine procedure for OSCE/ODIHR which permits the organization to define the scope and size of its electoral observation mission to a member state for a given election. OSCE/ODIHR issued its NAM report on August 31st.The report recommended that “30 long-term observers would be sent to follow the election process countrywide, as well as 350 short-term observers to follow election day procedures”. On the same day, Azerbaijan’s Permanent Mission to the OSCE issued a statement indicating that its government was only ready to accept six long-term and 125 short-term observers. A two-week period of negotiations between the OSCE and Azerbaijan followed, at the end of which OSCE/ODIHR decided not to send an election observation mission to Azerbaijan. According to Michael Georg Link, Director of OSCE/ODIHR, “the restriction on the number of observers taking part would make it impossible for the mission to carry out effective and credible election observation.” “Regretfully, we are compelled by these actions to cancel the deployment of ODIHR’s observation mission for the parliamentary elections,” he continued.

In one of the article titles above, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov suggested that OSCE/ODIHR did not cover the elections because of “its weaknesses”. Maybe the OSCE indeed demonstrates some institutional weaknesses that made it possible for one of its member states to ultimately avoid scrutiny over its non-democratic practices. In any case, ODIHR is the most recognized electoral observation body in the OSCE region and it is highly unfortunate that, in this case, it was not able to proceed with the mission all the OSCE member states had initially entrusted it with. For certain though, given the number of electoral districts–125, only six long-term and 125 short-term observers as suggested by the Azerbaijani government would clearly have been insufficient to implement ODIHR’s thorough electoral observation missions’ methodology.

Conversely, PACE sent a 28 member delegation to observe the elections. Three of its members distanced themselves from the rest of the official PACE statement on the elections which was surprisingly positive given ODIHR’s complaints. MPs Ute Finch-Kraemer, Germany, Michael McNamara, Ireland, and Frank Schwabe, Germany’s were straightforward:

“(We) express our regret that the we cannot regard these elections as a step towards free, fair and democratic elections. Though we acknowledge the technical and logistical achievement that mark these elections, the situation in the country with respect to political freedoms, freedom of expression and media, and freedom of assembly and association does not provide conditions for holding free and democratic elections.”

In fact, elections may be soundly conducted from a technical and logistical point of view, but without a sufficient level of political freedom and an actual pluralistic competition among political opponents, they are and will remain void of any democratic meaning.

According to the Azerbaijani Central Election Commission, about 300 international observers from 42 countries as well as 50,000 local observers covered the November 1st elections. In fact, observers from the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and the International Conference of Asian Political Parties (ICAPP) praised the conduct of the elections. Yet, most Asian and CIS countries are rather famous for their own undemocratic traits, thus undermining the validity of such statements. On the other hand, Ukrainian media denounced the undemocratic nature of the elections.

Timid Western responses and prospects for the future role of civil society inside Azerbaijan

The European Union and the U.S. State Department both issued very timid and short statements about the November 1st elections in Azerbaijan. This can leave democracy defenders with much frustration and several questions. The most prominent one being: how could things get this far? This is especially important because of the amount of European and U.S. development aid money being granted to Azerbaijan to strengthen its democracy. Is Azerbaijan really of such strategic relevance that Europeans and Americans alike have more interest in toning their concerns down rather than speaking up? If Azerbaijan has indeed played a strategic role for the West until now, this may no longer be completely accurate: developments in global energy markets decrease Azerbaijan’s relevance for Western energy security and so does the prospect of improved relations between Iran and the West.

In the absence of innovative European and U.S. approaches to further strengthen true political pluralism in Azerbaijan, prospects are dire. As former U.S Ambassador Richard D. Kauzlarich pointed out: “In illiberal democracies like Azerbaijan, governments will shut down the foreign organizations and persecute local partners. New approaches including creative use of social media must be considered to minimize the risk to local partners—the individuals and organizations who become the targets of the regimes.”

In the context of renewed authoritarianism, dissidents on the ground need to be protected. But they also need to be encouraged and reinforced in their fight for freedom and democracy. If democratic voices are literally dying in Azerbaijan, it is not solely a result of internal processes; it is partly due to the fact that their alleged democratic allies abroad have failed them.

About the author:
*Christine Philippe-Blumauer is a Research Associate at PDT. She holds a Master’s degree in Peace and Security Studies from the University of Hamburg, Germany; and a French-German B.A. in Political Science/European Studies from Sciences Po Lille, France and the Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität in Münster, Germany. Her previous professional experiences include work on conflict analysis in the South Caucasus (with an emphasis on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict), Turkish-Armenian relations, and regional peace-building initiatives among Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

Source:
This article was published by FPRI

Following the Valletta Migration Summit, Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said we must manage both the consequences of the migrant crisis and, “more importantly”, its underlying causes. Among the results of the summit, he highlighted the creation of a Trust Fund for Africa with a provision of 1.8 billion euros.

Rajoy pointed out that the goal of the Valletta Summit was to discuss the current migrant crisis, “one of the main challenges for our society”. As he explained, the European Union is a “community based on solidarity and shared values”, which include “dignity and people’s basic fundamental rights both within our borders and beyond”.

With this in mind, “extraordinary relocation and resettlement mechanisms” have been adopted to “accept and distribute 160,000 refugees among the Member States of the EU over the next two years”.

Spain strengthens national refugee intake system

Rajoy said that Spain will accept over 17,000 refugees and process close on 200,000 asylum applications. “The most important aspect of this operation is to show solidarity but also to do so effectively, in a coordinated fashion and with the ability to channel the admirable solidarity initiatives of Spanish society in an orderly manner”, he said.

Rajoy said that Spain is strengthening and redefining the national refugee intake and integration system, “both in terms of material and human resources”. The initial budget has also been increased “significantly”, while “50 Spanish civil servants specialized in migratory flow management” have been made available to FRONTEX and the European Asylum Support Office.

In this regard, Rajoy recalled that “an initial pilot project to relocate refugees from Italy” began last week, a project that “will help us effectively organize the intake of over 17,000 people in need of international protection”.

One of the Paris attackers inside the Bataclan concert hall reportedly shouted “this is for Syria” and “Allahu Akbar”, AFP reports.

Witnesses said they heard a gunman shout the comments inside the venue where some 100 hostages were being held.

Police battled with militants in the concert hall during the early hours of Saturday, where gunfire was heard and two attackers were reportedly killed.

Local media said the death toll from the siege was incredibly high while police have confirmed at least 100 people have been killed.

The gunmen were allegedly unmasked and carrying Kalashnikov style weapons during the concert by American band Eagles of Death Metal.

One witness told The Guardian: “It looked like a battle field, there was blood everywhere, there were bodies everywhere. I was at the far side of the hall when the shooting began. There seemed to be at least two gunmen. They shot from the balcony.”

French President Francois Hollande declared a state of emergency and ordered the closure of the country’s borders after the multiple attacks across Paris, which left at least 100 people dead.

A whopping 3.5 million people in the Kingdom suffer from diabetes, which is 23.5 percent of the population, one of highest ratios in the world, according to a report in an online newspaper.

Saleh Al-Jasse, a consultant in endocrine diseases and diabetes and vice president of the Saudi Society for Endocrinology and Metabolism, said that there are 400 million adults (above 20) suffering from diabetes in the world.

He was speaking to the newspaper on the sidelines of preparatory meetings for the third international conference on endocrinology and diabetes to be held in Riyadh on Nov. 17.

The conference, which will conclude on Nov. 19, will include 16 international speakers and 1,500 health practitioners who would present papers.

Three workshops would be held on various health issues.

A series of coordinated terror attacks in the heart of Paris have left as many as 142 dead and paralyzed the French capital.

French police arrested one man who claimed to have been recruited by ISIS alongside three other extremists, it has been reported.

Amid the “unprecedented attacks” that have resulted in dozens of deaths, French President Francois Hollande has declared a state of emergency and announced that France will close its borders, as well as deploying 1,500 extra troops to the capital.

Around 112 were massacred at the Bataclan concert hall alone, where terrorists were holding around 100 people hostage, and another 11 at a restaurant shootout.

It is reported that terrorists with AK47s burst into the Bataclan concert hall, where rock band Eagles of Death Metal were performing. They sprayed bullets and threw grenades into thousands of people before they started slaughtering people one by one.

Police raided the theater at around midnight, killed the terrorists inside and freed the remaining hostages.

Just five miles away, two suicide bombers blew themselves up outside the Stade de France sports stadium where the French football team was playing a friendly match against Germany.

Addressing the nation, President Francois Hollande called on everyone to remain strong and show “compassion and unity.”

“There is much to fear, but we must face these fears as a nation that knows how to muster its forces and will confront the terrorists,” the president said.

Russia has condemned the “series of monstrous terrorist attacks in Paris,” with President Putin offering deepest condolences to the French people, as well as his counterpart. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov added that Russia will offer any help it can to bring those responsible for attacks to justice.

US president Barack Obama also offered “full support” to France to overcome what he said appeared to be a terrorist attack, and noted that the US and France shared the bonds of “liberte, egalite and fraternite.”

(RFE/RL) — The U.S. military says it is “reasonably certain” that a British Islamic State (IS) militant nicknamed by the media as “Jihadi John” was killed in a drone strike.

Army Colonel Steve Warren, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition conducting air strikes against IS fighters, said on November 13 that Mohammed Emwazi, the man’s real name, is thought to have been killed in the Syrian city of Raqqa but that the military was still seeking confirmation.

Warren said the drone strike was a “fairly routine operation” to kill Emwazi, whom he called a “human animal.”

The BBC has quoted a senior British military official who says there is a “high degree of certainty” that “Jihadi John” was killed in the drone strike.

An unnammed U.S. official was quoted earlier as saying the air strike was “flawless” and the infamous British militant was “evaporated.”

However, British Prime Minister David Cameron said it remains unclear whether the man who beheaded several Western hostages in IS videos had been killed.

A Kuwaiti-born British citizen believed to be in his 20s, Emwazi has been described by a Spanish journalist who was a former hostage as a bloodthirsty psychopath who enjoyed threatening Western hostages.

The journalist, Javier Espinosa, who had been held in Syria for more than six months after his abduction in September 2013, said those being held by three British-sounding captors nicknamed them “the Beatles,” with Jihadi John a reference to Beatles member John Lennon.

Among those beheaded by Islamic State militants in videos posted online since August 2014 were U.S. journalists Steven Sotloff and James Foley, U.S. aid worker Abdul-Rahman Kassig, British aid workers David Haines and Alan Henning, and Japanese journalist Kenji Goto.

Britain’s intelligence community had Emwazi on its list of potential terror suspects for years, officials said, but was unable to prevent him from traveling to Syria. He had been known to the nation’s intelligence services since at least 2009, when he was connected with investigations into terrorism in Somalia.

The strike to get Emwazi coincided with the beginning of a major U.S.-backed offensive against IS in northern Iraq.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said while on a visit to Tunis on November 13 that the IS’s “days are numbered.”

Meanwhile, in Istanbul, a suspected associate of Emwazi was detained by Turkish authorities on November 13.

The man is reportedly thought to be Briton Aine Lesley Davis, who worked for the IS as a guard for foreign hostages in Syria.​

By Hossein Bozorgmanesh*

More than four years after the beginning of the ongoing crisis in Syria, which has led to enormous human casualties and destruction of the country’s infrastructure while causing millions of people to flee their homes, the United States and Western countries have finally made two strategic decisions. Firstly, they are not insisting on Syrian President Bashar Assad to immediately relinquish power anymore and, secondly, they have invited Iran, as one of the powerful actors in Syria developments, to take part in the latest talks on Syria in Vienna, which was aimed at finding a solution to the crisis in the Arab country. Major factors that can be enumerated as having influenced the attitude of the United States and European countries about Iran’s role in the Syria crisis include such instances as the resistance of the Syrian government in the face of the opposition; the rising tide of refugees, mostly Syrian, toward European countries; as well as Russia’s military intervention in Syria; failure of such projects as enforcing a no-fly zone over border regions of Syria; failure of the US plan to train and arm Syrian opposition; and disappointing performance of the anti-Daesh coalition, which is led by the United States.

However, the question is what role is Iran playing in Syria and what factors have caused the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) to succeed, despite the depth and scope of the Syria crisis, in providing Syrian government with advisory services, make militant groups withdraw from the suburbs of the Syrian capital, Damascus, and help Syrian government hold its grip over relatively vast parts of the country in a guerrilla warfare?

The answer to this question can be sought in the valuable experience that the IRGC gained during domestic clashes in Iran’s Kordestan Province. Those clashes, which were in fact the first war between Iran’s armed forces and armed secessionist groups, can be considered as the first experience of the IRGC in engaging in an asymmetric and guerrilla war. That bloody war inside the country provided valuable experiences to the IRGC and its top commanders, including General Qasem Soleimani, and General Hossein Hamedani, who later used those experiences in Syria in view of special cultural and geographical conditions in that country. A few instances of key strategies used by Iranian commanders in Syria are as follows:

1. When fighting against terrorist and militant groups, coordination between armed forces and other governmental institutions is of special importance. Iran has succeeded to not only transfer its experiences to Syria in this regard, but also create suitable coordination and solidarity among Syria’s army, volunteer forces and other groups.

2. One of the most important advisory services provided to Syria by Iran was Tehran’s emphasis on differentiation between civilians and armed opposition. The goal of this policy was to inflict the lowest degree of casualties and damage on civilians in the war zones. Implementation of this policy by Iran in the Kordestan war played a key role in ending the crisis in Kurdish regions. Unlike Iran, countries like Iraq and Turkey have adopted a scorched land policy in the face of this issue and have been grappling with the consequences of this incorrect policy up to the present day.

3. The Syrian army was facing two major problems in its fight against militant groups. Firstly, the Syrian army had been trained to engage in classic war, not guerrilla warfare, and secondly, after the army purged a region of militant elements and left those regions, they were attacked again by armed opposition groups and were re-occupied by them. However after the establishment of voluntary forces in Syria, which was carried out through taking advantage of the IRGC’s experience and advices and based on the model of Iran’s Basij and Kurdish Peshmerga forces, a large number of Syrians practically entered the Syria war in the form of fighting battalions. Syria’s volunteer forces have been active in such areas as defense, offence and consolidation of areas retaken from militant groups and as such, have assumed a large part of the responsibility that should have been shouldered by the Syrian army.

4. The area of psychological warfare is considered as one of the most important areas of any guerrilla warfare. In this area, Iran has designed and implemented psychological war schemes, which address friendly forces, domestic enemies, ordinary people as well as regional and transregional powers. In doing this Iran made a great effort to manage the mentality of its addressees.

5. In the political field, Iran not only supports Assad remaining in power, but also backs political reforms in Syria and believes that if a charismatic figure like Assad is deposed from power, this will practically weaken the morale of the Syrian armed forces and, finally lead to collapse of the Syrian government.

6. Iran has also taken part in designing and implementing military operations in rural, urban and border areas of Syria as well as along primary and secondary roads according to the formula of offensive (sudden attack, pursuit, blockade, taking advantage of fire support), and defensive (purging militants followed by establishment of stability and security in region) operations. The final stage is normalization of critical areas by transferring control of the war zone to military and paramilitary forces, restoring local officials to their posts, and reducing security measures.

Despite all problems and complexities in the Syrian civil war, which are the result of violent and unprofessional behavior of Syrian army and security forces in the early stages of the crisis as well as the widespread intervention by regional countries in the Syrian civil war, the presence of the Islamic Republic in that country can be assessed as very successful. This is true because if Iran had not intervened and Damascus had fallen into the hands of radical groups, this development would have been followed by large-scale ethnic cleansing of Alawites, Christians and other religious groups of Syria by religious radicals, finally leading to total disintegration of Syria.

* Hossein Bozorgmanesh
Expert on Middle East Issues

In the 19th century, Darwin’s most vocal scientific advocate was Thomas Henry Huxley, who is also remembered as a pioneer of the hypotheses that birds are living dinosaurs. He noticed several similarities of the skeleton of living birds and extinct dinosaurs, among them, a pointed portion of the anklebone projecting upwards onto the shank bone (aka drumstick).

This “ascending process” is well known to specialists as a unique trait of dinosaurs. However, until the late 20th century, many scientists were doubtful about the dinosaur-bird link. Some pointed out that the ascending process in most birds was a projection of the neighbouring heel bone, rather than the anklebone. If so, it would not be comparable, and would not support the dinosaur-bird link. Some argued that in bird embryos, the ascending process develops from the anklebone in dinosaur-like fashion, while others considered that its development in birds is unique and different from dinosaurs.

Nowadays, the dinosaur-bird link is mainstream science, thanks to new methods of data analysis, and a dense series of intermediate fossils (including feathered dinosaurs). However, the disagreements about the composition and embryology of the avian ankle were never clarified fully. A new study in Nature Communications by Luis Ossa, Jorge Mpodozis and Alexander Vargas, from the University of Chile, provides a careful re-examination of ankle development in 6 different major groups of birds, selected specifically to clarify conditions in their last common ancestor. It also utilizes new techniques that allow three-dimensional analysis of fluorescent embryonic skeletons, using advanced spin-disc confocal microscopy and software.

This work has revealed that the ascending process does not develop from either the heel bone or the ankle bone, but from a third element, the intermedium. In the ancient lineage of paleognath birds (such as tinamous, ostriches and kiwis) the intermedium comes closer to the anklebone, producing a dinosaur-like pattern. However, in the other major avian branch (neognaths), which includes most species of living birds, it comes closer to the heel bone; that creates the impression it is a different structure, when it is actually the same.

“It puts the final nail in the anti-dinosaur coffin” says Jacques Gauthier, a vertebrate paleontologist and professor at Yale University “The dinosaurian ascending process is retained in all birds, though it has changed its association from ankle to heel bones in neognath birds”.

More remarkably, however, this finding reveals an unexpected evolutionary transformation in birds. In embryos of the landegg-laying animals, the amniotes (which include crocodilians, lizards, turtles, and mammals, who secondarily evolved live birth) the intermedium fuses to the anklebone shortly after it forms, disappearing as a separate element. This does not occur in the bird ankle, which develops more like their very distant relatives that still lay their eggs in water, the amphibians (See Figure). Since birds clearly belong within landegg-laying animals, their ankles have somehow resurrected a long-lost developmental pathway, still retained in the amphibians of today – a surprising case of evolutionary reversal. The study also presented fossil evidence from juvenile specimens of toothed birds from the Cretaceous period. These show that, at this early stage of bird evolution, the ascending process already developed separately.

Evolutionary reversions have always generated much discussion among scientists, because ancient traits can occasionally re-appear in a highly transformed context. A recent paper in BMC Evolutionary Biology (Diaz and Trainor, 2015) has revealed that chameleons also re-evolved an independent intermedium, in the specialized functional context of a climbing reptile. The reappearance of this long-lost developmental pattern in highly evolved organisms like birds and chameleons could be compared to finding primitive clockwork gears inside your latest smartphone. These intriguing discoveries are bound to renew discussion about the interplay between the evolution of new functions and the resurrection of old developmental patterns.

High-performance lithium ion batteries face a major problem: Lithium will eventually start to run out as batteries are deployed in electric cars and stationary storage units. Researchers from Empa and ETH Zurich have now discovered an alternative: the “fool’s gold battery”. It consists of iron, sulfur, sodium and magnesium – all elements that are in plentiful supply. This means that giant storage batteries could be built on the cheap and used stationary in buildings or next to power plants, for instance.

There is an urgent need to search for low-priced batteries to store electricity. Intermittency of green electricity is affecting the power grids, calling for stationary storage units to be connected into a smart grid. Electric cars are of increasing popularity, but are still to explensive. Efficient lithium ion batteries we know are not suitable for large-scale stationary storage of electricity; they are just too expensive precious lithium is too scarce. A cheap alternative is called for – a battery made of inexpensive ingredients that are available in abundance. But electrochemistry is a tricky business: Not everything that’s cheap can be used to make a battery.

Safe, durable and affordable

Maksym Kovalenko, Marc Walter and their colleagues at Empa’s Laboratory for Thin Films and Photovoltaics have now managed to pull off the unthinkable: by combining a magnesium anode with an electrolyte made of magnesium and sodium ions. Nanocrystals made of pyrite – more commonly known as fool’s gold – serve as the cathode. Pyrite is crystalline iron sulfide. The sodium ions from the electrolyte migrate to the cathode during discharging. When the battery is recharged, the pyrite re-releases the sodium ions. This so-called sodium-magnesium hybrid battery already works in the lab and has several advantages: The magnesium as the anode is far safer than highly flammable lithium. And the test battery in the lab already withstood 40 charging and discharging cycles without compromising its performance, calling for further optimization.

The biggest advantage, however, is the fact that all the ingredients for this kind of battery are easily affordable and in plentiful supply: Iron sulfide nanocrystals, for instance, can be produced by grinding dry metallic iron with sulfur in conventional ball-mills. Iron, magnesium, sodium, and sulfur are amongst hold 4th, 6th, 7th and 15th place by the abundance in the Earth’s crust(by mass). One kilogram of magnesium costs at most four Swiss francs, which makes it 15 times cheaper than lithium. There are also savings to be made when it comes to constructing the cheap batteries: Lithium ion batteries require relatively expensive copper foil to collect and conduct away the electricity. For the fool’s gold battery, however, inexpensive aluminum foil is perfectly sufficient.

Potential for storing the electricity produced annually at Leibstadt power station

The researchers primarily see potential in their development for large network storage batteries. The fool’s gold battery is not suitable for electric cars – its output is too low. But wherever it boils down to costs, safety and environmental friendliness, the technology is a plus. In their paper recently published in the journal Chemistry of Materials, the Empa researchers propose batteries with terawatts of storage capacity. Such a battery might be used to temporarily store the annual production from the Swiss nuclear power station in Leibstadt, for instance.

“The battery’s full potential has not been exhausted yet,” said Kovalenko, who teaches as a professor at ETH Zurich’s Department of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences alongside his research at Empa. “If we refine the electrolytes, we’re bound to be able to increase the electric voltage of the sodium-magnesium hybrid cell even further and to extend its cycling life.”

He added, “We also look for investors willing to support research into such post-Li-ion technologies and bring them to the market”.

By Bryan Riley and Ambassador Terry Miller*

On November 5, text of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement between the United States and 11 other countries was made public.[1]

That text, including tariff-cut schedules and annexes, is thousands of pages long. The agreement took seven years to negotiate, and it will take time to provide a comprehensive analysis of its potential impact. The most important consideration is whether the agreement increases economic freedom and opportunity.

Impact on U.S. Prosperity

Countries with low trade barriers are more prosperous than those that restrict trade. It is for this reason that The Heritage Foundation has always been a strong supporter of free trade. Countries that lower or eliminate their barriers to trade and investment benefit from inflows of resources and technology from around the world, and they gain access to the most competitively priced goods and services available. The result is faster growth, more jobs, and better and more varied products.

The 12 countries engaged in the TPP process have agreed to reduce thousands of individual tariffs and non-tariff barriers to trade. They have insisted on maintaining others. The countries that have made the deepest cuts will enjoy the most benefits from the agreement. Those that have retained protectionist measures will find their benefits muted.

Impact on Individual Freedom

The free-market system, which emphasizes voluntary commercial interactions among individuals and organizations, promotes win-win solutions. It is important to remember that it is not countries per se that trade with one another; it is individuals. The United States does not trade with Canada, for example. Instead, millions of American individuals and companies trade with millions of Canadian individuals and firms. There is not one trade relationship across the U.S.–Canada border; there are millions. Individual buyers and sellers agree to a cross-border transaction when it benefits them both.

The essence of a good trade agreement, really the only criterion by which it should be judged, is whether it makes it easier for individuals to engage in commercial transactions with people from other countries. Good trade agreements promote Americans’ individual sovereignty by making it difficult for governments to maintain special-interest barriers against trade and investment that promote the interests of a few by restricting the activities of others.

There are many potential areas of concern. The TPP text’s 30 chapters contain a wide variety of provisions regulating various aspects of international commerce, ranging from specific sectors, such as agriculture, telecommunications, and the Internet, to more general concepts, such as sanitary regulations, competitiveness, or the movement of workers. In many of these chapters, the TPP agreement restricts the most odious forms of regulation while legitimizing more modest but sometimes quite rigorous forms of market management. Each of these chapters will require the most careful scrutiny by Congress to determine its actual impact on trade. For those who believe in the free market, concerns about regulatory overreach must be front and center.

Specific Areas of Concern

In addition to these general concerns, Congress will have to obtain answers to a number of specific questions, including:

• State-owned enterprises. Will the agreement reduce the harmful impact of state-owned companies in TPP countries?
• Telecommunications and e-commerce. Will benefits resulting from reductions in barriers to international e-commerce be offset by the potential imposition of regulations in areas such as net neutrality?[2]
• Intellectual property. How will Americans be affected by provisions relating to data protection, copyright provisions, and other intellectual property issues?
• Labor. It is not clear that Congress intended for the Obama Administration to negotiate a “trade” agreement that includes provisions[3] on minimum wages, too. Has the Administration overstepped the provisions of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) by including language pertaining to minimum wage rules?
• The environment. The agreement commits parties to implement environmental agreements, and also to cooperate in developing “low emission economies.” Will the agreement’s Environment Committee infringe on U.S. sovereignty in dealing with controversial issues, such as climate change?
• Regulatory issues. Will the agreement promote good practices for regulations and reduce non-tariff trade barriers without leading to international regulatory impediments to commerce? Are the provisions on regulatory coherence an invitation to impose other countries’ standards and regulatory approaches on the United States?
• Immigration. Does the agreement have any impact on immigration policy?
• Corporate social responsibility. This international movement to encourage or even require companies to invest their shareholders’ resources in social projects that may be remote from their core business interests is endorsed in several places in the text. How does the Administration intend to operationalize this concept, if at all?
• Agriculture. How will the agreement reduce harmful agricultural trade barriers, and what is the impact of allowing some protectionist schemes to remain in place?
• Dispute resolution. How will the details of new dispute-resolution guidelines affect administration of the agreement?
• Exceptions. To what extent will exceptions to reductions in tariff and non-tariff barriers—including tariff cuts, government procurement laws, and state-owned enterprises—undermine the agreement’s potential benefits?

Conclusion

Americans will likely have many months to investigate and debate the TPP. Under TPA guidelines, changes to the law needed to implement trade agreements are subject to a majority vote by both Houses of Congress without amendment. But Congress could also consider TPP-implementing legislation under the same procedures it uses for most other bills. For example, according to the House Ways and Means Committee: “TPA sets up mechanisms for Congress to turn off the expedited procedures if the administration fails to meet its TPA obligations.”[4]

The United States already has individual free trade agreements with six of the 11 TPP partners. Reducing barriers to trade and investment with the remaining countries, including Japan, has potential benefits. Congress must weigh such benefits against the aspects of the agreement that have the potential to reduce economic freedom.

*About the authors:
Bryan Riley is Jay Van Andel Senior Analyst in Trade Policy in the Center for Trade and Economics, of the Institute for Economic Freedom and Opportunity, at The Heritage Foundation. Ambassador Terry Miller is Director of the Center for Trade and Economics and the Center for Data Analysis, of the Institute for Economic Freedom and Opportunity, and Mark A. Kolokotrones Fellow in Economic Freedom at The Heritage Foundation.

Source:
This article was published by The Heritage Foundation.

Notes:
[1] Office of the United States Trade Representative, “TPP Full Text,” November 5, 2015, https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/TPP-Full-Text (accessed November 12, 2015).

[2] James L. Gattuso et al., “Saving Internet Freedom,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 168, June 3, 2015, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/06/saving-internet-freedom.

[3] Office of the United States Trade Representative, “TPP Final Text: Chapter 19–Labour [sic],” https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-Labour.pdf (accessed November 12, 2015).

[4] House Committee on Ways and Means, “Trade,” http://waysandmeans.house.gov/subcommittee/trade/ (accessed November 12, 2015).

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the United Nations Security Council have condemned the “despicable” terrorist attacks carried out today in various locations in and around Paris, and Mr. Ban has demanded the immediate release of the numerous individuals reportedly being held hostage in the Bataclan theatre.

In a statement issued by his spokesperson, the Secretary-General condemned the “despicable” multiple attacks that took place in the French capital.

Though the situation remains fluid, media reports have suggested that a national state of emergency has been called in the wake of multiple shootings throughout Paris, including at the Bataclan arts centre in the 11th arrondissement, which appears to be one of four venues attacked and where dozens of people are reportedly being held hostage.

“The Secretary-General trusts that the French authorities will do all in their power to bring the perpetrators to justice quickly,” said the statement.

Extending his deepest condolences to the families of the victims and wishing a speedy recovery to those injured, Mr. Ban said in his statement that he stands with the Government and people of France.

In a separate statement, the UN Security Council also strongly condemned what the 15-member body referred to as “barbaric and cowardly” terrorist attacks, causing numerous deaths and injuries among civilians.

The Council underlined the need to bring the perpetrators of these terrorist acts to justice.

The members of the Council also expressed their deep sympathy and condolences to the families of the victims, as well as to the Government of France, the statement concluded.

President Vladimir Putin of Russia will meet with Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman ahead of the monarch’s visit to Russia, AFP reported on Friday.

During the meeting, the two leaders are set to discuss the ongoing Syrian conflict.

King Salman is currently in the Turkish city of Antalya, leading the Kingdom’s delegation at the G-20 summit.

Kremlin’s foreign policy aide Yury Ushakov told reporters Putin would be holding “many bilateral meetings” at the summit, which starts on Sunday, but an encounter with Obama was not on the agenda.

“But we cannot exclude the possibility that the presidents will interact within the summit’s framework.”

Putin will hold bilateral meetings with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Turkish President Recep Erdogan, IMF head Christine Lagarde and British Prime Minister David Cameron, Later this month, Putin will also travel to Iran, to attend an energy forum.

US Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh C. Johnson said Friday that the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are closely monitoring events in Paris and are in contact with counterparts in the region.

In a statement, Johnson stressed that, “At this time, we know of no specific or credible threats of an attack on the U.S. homeland of the type that occurred in Paris tonight.”

Johnson added, “As we do regularly, and out of an abundance of caution, DHS and the FBI are consulting with state and local law enforcement. We are also in communication with relevant private sector organizations to advise them of what we know, and to hear from them about security precautions they may take.”

Johnson mirrored earlier comments by US President Barack Obama, noting that the Paris attacks “are not just attacks on the people of France, but attacks on all of humanity and the universal values we share.”

Americans should mourn the loss of all those killed in Paris tonight, and we stand together with the French people in the fight against terrorism and extremism, Johnson said.

South Africans have been urged yet again to use water sparingly.

The call was made on Friday by the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) for water scarcity and drought, which is led by Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (CoGTA), Pravin Gordhan.

Briefing media in Pretoria on Friday, the committee warned that water is not an abundant commodity in South Africa.

“In Johannesburg, you have 1.4 million households and today as we stand, 8000 households has had water interruptions over the last week. Over the last week or so, some 50 000 households in Johannesburg have been impacted by water interruption,” said Minister Gordhan.

To date, 4600 household and some 5900 households in Ekurhuleni have been impacted by water shedding.

“We are the 30th driest country in the world. Water scarcity is a serious issue in South Africa,” said the Minister, who added that the increasing severity of the drought is impacting negatively on the country in both social and economic terms.

Dam levels

Member of the IMC and Water and Sanitation Minister, Nomvula Mokonyane, reaffirmed that regional water supply dams and schemes remain water secure and are sitting with a positive water balance.

The national average dam level currently is sitting at 64,3%, compared with storage last year at the same time, where it was 74.6%.

“Generally there is a downward trend, which is indicative of a hydrological and meteorological drought. The bulk of the economic nodes and national growth points are served by such schemes, totalling 238 schemes nationally.

“Currently, KwaZulu-Natal is sitting at 57%, there are however four dams which are at critical levels, which are the Hazelmere dam, Goedetrouw dam, Hluhluwe dam and Klipfontein dam where mandatory restrictions are in place. The current abnormal heatwave has increased evaporation rates significantly and this is one of the reasons for the fall off in capacity from 66% to 64%,” explained Minister Mokonyane.

In order to minimise the evaporation losses from the Vaal River system, the department has retained storage in the Sterkfontein dam for as long as possible. The dam is currently at 96% full.

The drought currently affects 173 of the 1 628 water supply schemes nationally, serving approximately 2.7 million households or 18% of the total national population.

Four provinces – KwaZulu-Natal, Free State, North West and Limpopo have declared drought as a disaster – with Mpumalanga at an advanced stage of preparation for the declaration of drought as a disaster, which will be completed soon.

El Nino phenomenon

Minister for Environmental Affairs and also a member of the IMC, Edna Molewa, said government has been doing some work to ensure the country can plan for such instances.

She said weather predictions are done on a continuous basis. They are done on a short term basis at first and then long term over a period of six months. The phenomenal is likely to last until summer season, which is next year.

The current excessive heatwave is the result of El-Nino and it has grossly exacerbated the dry and arid conditions in the country.

The El Nino phenomenon is expected to continue at least until March 2016, which means that the current hot and dry conditions are likely to persist for the next six months.

There could be some rainfall over the interior of South Africa, but it is likely to be below normal rainfall figures.

The South African Weather Services is keeping a constant watch on the state of the El Nino phenomenon, and expects that it will weaken over the winter months of 2016.

Minister Molewa noted that government understands the cycle now comes after three to five years and is an impact of climate change.

She said government’s response has taken many forms including setting up a policy framework and there is now a National Climate Change Response Policy.

“We then look at how we institutionalise ourselves to ensure that the actions we implement are making an impact,” said Minister Molewa.

She reiterated that South Africa, like all countries must adapt to a changing climate.

“Whilst this inevitably means that our water use per capita has to reduce, on average (and be equitable), the changes that are necessary must be embraced.”

Impact on farmers

Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Senzeni Zokwana, said the country has declining but sufficient stock levels of white maize until the end of April 2016, while yellow maize stocks will be very tight.

“The 2014/2015 drought affected the availability of white maize, which is a major step as well as yellow maize, which is critical for animal feed. According to the Crop Estimate Committee, the maize production estimate declined 14.2 million in 2013 to 9.8 million tonnes in 2014, 31% less.”

He said the department has allocated R66 million to implement landcare program to reduce veld and soil degradation and water loss and promote conservation agriculture practices.

The department also spent R9 million on drilling boreholes for livestock water, disseminating early warning information and providing appropriate advice to farmers.

The provincial Departments of Agriculture have allocated R36.5 million to relieve small scale and subsistence farmers in affected areas.

“The department provides R226 million through reprioritization of the conditional grant to provide the livestock feed and water to smallholder farmers to both maintain production animals and encourage the herd reduction through the market,” Minister Zokwana highlighted.

He added that the department will continue to provide farmers with weather advisories and warnings to guide future crop plantation and reduction of stock.

The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform have engaged some of the commodity organizations such as the sugar industry; Grain SA who will be in partnership with the Department ,and the provincial departments of agriculture to implement the identified short term, medium and long term draught relief interventions.

These include the provision of water for livestock in areas where boreholes can be drilled and construction of water troughs through RADP funding support and the Animal and Veld Management programme.

By Vikram Sood*

It is unfortunate that Naseeruddin Shah feels the way he does about our behaviour towards each other; or that Aamir Khan, Shah Rukh Khan and Salman Khan are deliberately asked questions that amount to them having to re-assert their Indianness. They are national icons who have excelled in their profession, done India proud and have access and ability to make themselves heard. Asaduddin Owaisi, on a visit to Pakistan, was asked the usual patronising questions about the status of Muslims in India. He turned around and told his TV host that he was safe in India because he had the protection of the Indian Constitution.

There must, however, be many persons, unknown and very vulnerable, who feel dispossessed. It is time to look at ourselves in the mirror and realise that it is not the mirror that is smudged. We are. Undoubtedly, this problem needs sustained attention, but not in the selective manner as has been done lately.

We have always had a degree of intolerance in our society, but there has been considerable talk about this in India in recent months. However, figures for the last four years say otherwise. In 2011, there were 500 incidents of communal violence and 91 people died; the figures for the next three years were 668/94, 823/133 and 644/95. Not a single award was returned by any artist or intellectual in protest at that time.

The intolerant liberal in India considers all alternative opinion to be moronic and the right-wing ideologue describes opposition to their stated position as blasphemy. Both are unwilling to listen to the other, much less understand and accept a civilised debate. Consequently, both are equally dangerous. The liberal hates to be reminded of his double standards and his pusillanimity when faced with hard choices; the right-wing ideologue feels he has exclusive rights to patriotism.

In September this year, the chief ministers of Delhi and UP cancelled a musical performance by AR Rahman because of a fatwa issued by a Barelvi group, the Raza Academy. The Jaipur Litfest had its drama in January 2012, when Salman Rushdie was not allowed to speak at the venue because of protests by Deobandhis. The show went on minus Rushdie, who did say that religious extremists who could prevent free expression of ideas and politicians were in league with such persons. No one returned any literary or other award given by the government.

Muslim activists in Kerala axed college professor TJ Joseph’s hands five years ago for an alleged insult to Islam. Last month, Hindus were not allowed to perform Durga Puja in a district in Bengal. No one returned any award because of this. True liberalism would require unequivocal protest in all cases of illiberalism which does not happen in India. Instead, selective awakening of collective conscience and the act of returning awards by some, more than three decades after the massacres of 1984 and other similar incidents, raises questions about motives. One can only support Anupam Kher’s protests on this issue.

Vested interests have led to institutionalised narcissism which, fearing loss of face and power, resorts to intellectual intimidation of the ‘other’ with literary op-eds and nightly duels on the TV. Those who complain of loss of freedoms had better recall the days of the Emergency and accept they are able to complain today precisely because there is freedom of speech.

Correctives need instrumentalities. Over the years, the bureaucrat, both at the centre and, much more visibly, at the provincial level, has arrogated to himself powers and privileges of a minor potentate. For this he aligned his fortunes with that of his political masters. The politician has seen opportunism and security in keeping issues of caste and reservations alive. Progress is sought to be achieved by keeping the people backward. Consequently, we are becoming a ghettoised nation where discrimination pays.

Democracies have to be secular and the individual has to be tolerant – religious, agnostic or atheist, but always tolerant. The state must be equidistant and not proximate or supportive of any religion. The individual has to accept discussion as much as the state must accept dissent. Indulgence or appeasement are not tolerance, which is what we have been doing in the name of secularism.

We are a Hindu majority nation, but we are not, and never will be, a Hindu republic. We have politicised intolerance. Instead, all of us need to step out of our religious dogmas, as one extremism or intolerance leads to another.

*The writer is an Advisor to Observer Research Foundation, Delhi and a former chief of Research and Analysis Wing, Government of India

Courtesy: www.mid-day.com

After the heat and dust of the recent parliamentary elections in Sri Lanka, the accord between the country’s two main political parties for a ‘national unity government’ seems to offer the best chance in decades for politico-ethnic reconciliation among the various communities. But the challenge is to generate a sense of national purpose.

By Ayesha Kalpani Wijayalath*

Sri Lanka went to the polls on 17 August 2015 to elect 225 members to the Parliament for the next 5 years.2 The incumbent government, the United National Party (UNP)-led United National Front for Good Governance (UNFGG), headed by Mr Ranil Wickremesinghe – emerged ahead of all others, bagging 106 seats. The UNFGG, however, failed to secure the magical figure of 113 seats required to constitute an absolute majority in parliament. The United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) led by President Maithripala Sirisena’s Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), under which banner the former President Mahinda Rajapakse contested in this parliamentary election, won 95 seats now. The Tamil National Alliance (TNA), believed to represent a majority of voters among Sri Lanka’s Tamil-speaking minority, won 16 seats. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), considered to be the main socialist party in Sri Lanka, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) and the Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP), which also seeks to espouse the cause of the minority community of Tamils, won 6, 1 and 1 seat(s) respectively.

Table 1: A score-card for the major parties and alliances in Sri Lanka3

Proportional System at District Level
As many as 196 members of the Parliament are selected under the Proportional Representation system (PR system) from 22 electoral districts. The PR system was introduced by the Second Republican Constitution of Sri Lanka in 1978. Under the PR system, each party is allocated a number of seats from the quota for each district according to the proportion of the total vote that the party obtains in the district.4

The National List

The remaining 29 seats, known as the National List seats, are filled by the each party secretary in proportion to the island-wide vote the party obtains.5 The purpose of the National List is to enable professionals, academics and eminent persons to enter Parliament, without being disadvantaged by their lack of pre-established constituencies and networks due to not being professional politicians.6 Sri Lanka has a PR system at the district level and a PR system at the national level based on the same poll.7

Allotment of Members from Political Parties/Independent Groups

By the 14th Amendment to the 1978 Constitution the preferential voting system was introduced. Under the preferential voting system, each voter is entitled to indicate his/her preference from the list of candidates of the political party/group of his/her choice. Each voter is entitled to indicate three such preferences. The counting of preference votes takes place at the second stage of the counting process after which the particular candidates would be declared electors from each political party/independent group.8

Background to the General Election 2015

The parliamentary elections in April 2010 took place after the defeat of the independence- seeking Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in 2009. In that General election, the incumbent UPFA won a landslide victory, bagging 144 seats in Parliament. It was with that kind of absolute majority, and with the help of defecting MPs from the opposition, that former President Mahinda Rajapakse was able to get the 18th Amendment to the Constitution passed; this removed the two-term limit on the presidency.

In November 2014, Mr Rajapakse called for early presidential election (2 years ahead of schedule), seeking an unprecedented third term. In response, Mr Sirisena, the then Minister of Health, made a startling move, by introducing himself as the common opposition candidate.

In the January 2015 presidential election, Mr Sirisena won an unexpected victory, inflicting a shocking defeat on Mr Rajapakse. Mr. Sisrisena then formed a government with the help of a majority of UNP members, and, in March 2015, formed a national government, with members of the SLFP,9 too, appointed as ministers.

President Sirisena announced a ‘100-day programme’ in his election manifesto, promising good governance as the core element. At the end of the 100-day programme, the Parliament was scheduled to have been dissolved on 23 April 2015. However, Mr Sirisena’s government faced strong resistance from the opposition, as many UPFA legislators were loyal to the Mr Rajapakse. Even though Mr Sirisena could not fulfil all of his promises in the 100-day programme, he and his ‘good governance’ front received much credit for curtailing presidential powers and re-introducing the two-term limit by getting the 19th Amendment passed. With the 100-day programme falling behind schedule, Mr Sisrisena dissolved Parliament on 26 June 2015 for the latest elections.

Mr Wickremesinghe from the UNFGG and Mr Rajapakse from UPFA were seen as the two main candidates for the premiership.

17 August 2015 Polls

The August 17 general election acquired unprecedented importance, this being the first time in the political history of Sri Lanka where a former President sought a parliamentary seat in a general election.

The parliamentary election was viewed by many observers as a referendum on the deposed President Rajapakse’s come-back10 bid. His hopes of premiership and forming a government were dashed in this election. Though he won a place in Parliament, his Alliance received 95 seats out of 225 – 18 seats fewer than the minimum required for his new political ambition. Mr Rajapakse’s defeat can be attributed to various factors:

1. The minorities were ‘responsible’: the outcome was seen as a backlash of the total alienation of the minorities during Mr Rajapakse’s presidency. The eight districts where Mr Rajapakse’s alliance emerged victorious are the areas dominated by the country’s majority community of Sinhala-speaking Buddhists.11
2. Mr Rajapakse regime was alleged to have been riddled with financial corruption, nepotism and abuse of power. This is seen to have prompted a significant portion of Sinhala-Buddhists to back Mr Rajapakse’s rival and Mr Sirisena’s ally – Mr Wickremesinghe, who received the estimated backing of nearly 32% of the Sinhala- Buddhists.12 Nearly 36% of the Sinhala-Buddhists favoured Mr Rajapakse,13 but the minorities apparently tilted the scales against him.
3. Mr Sirisena’s actions immediately before the parliamentary elections may have also had a significant bearing on the final outcome. Constitutionally, it is the president who appoints the prime minister after parliamentary elections. However, Mr Sirisena sent a sharp letter to Mr Rajapakse just days before the elections stating that he would not allow the latter to become prime minister even if his party were to win, and that the new prime minister should be a senior member of the party and not Mr Rajapakse. Mr Sirisena also accused Rajapakse of fueling communal hatred and strongly advised him: “I urge you not to make statements that fan the flames of ethnic hatred”. Copies of this letter were released to the press.14 Voters were baffled by Mr Sirisena’s stance after offering Mr Rajapakse a ticket to contest in the general election.

The Final Outcome

In addition to the second consecutive electoral defeat for Mr Rajapakse, Sri Lanka emerged from the latest elections with a hung parliament and a complex array of allegiances. Mr Wickremesinghe, who leads the largest party in Parliament, was sworn in as Prime Minister on 21 August 2015. This was the fourth time he was sworn in as Prime Minister of Sri Lanka.15

The JVP was expected to win a considerable number of seats in this election, given its agitation against corruption. However, the party ended up with only 6 seats due to the intervention of the Rajapakse factor. Even though voters wanted to favour the JVP, they were more concerned about scuttling Mr Rajapakse’s comeback (as it was clear, from the start, that the JVP would not be a part of any coalition in forming the new government).16

The TNA, on the other hand, received a wider acceptance in the parliamentary elections, winning 16 seats. The TNA’s victory in the North and the East, resulting in the defeat of the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) which struck a more aggressive Tamil nationalist stance and projected a separatist agenda, is seen as a clear message from the voices of the war-weary North and East that it is time for a negotiated political solution for the national politico-ethnic problem.17

Though no single party received a majority, the significance of this election is that it resulted in the defeat of the perceivably ‘divisive actors’ such as the Rajapakse-led UPFA, the TNPF and the up-country Ceylon Workers’ Congress (CWC)18 which continued its coalition with the UPFA.19 The six troubled post-war years under the Rajapakse regime impelled the Muslims to support UNP to ensure UPFA’s defeat, and the up-country residents to vote out Mr Thondaman20 and the CWC.21

It is noteworthy that the Lankan electorate, keeping up with its democratic tradition, voted prudently in rejecting polarisation and reinforcing democracy, which gas arguably progressed with the presidential election in January 2015.22

National Unity Government

Sri Lanka’s two biggest parties, Mr Sisrisena SLFP and Mr Wickremesinghe’s UNP, have agreed to form a national unity government committed to ethnic reconciliation and to uphold the rights of the minorities. This unity government will account for about 85% of 225-member legislature.23
President Sirisena, in his maiden address to the new Parliament on 1 September 2015, outlined the policy of the proposed national unity government. He assured that the new government would enact electoral reforms, adopt an Asia-centric nonaligned foreign policy, and achieve environment-friendly economic development by fully harnessing the country’s strategic geographic location in Asia.24 The President also pledged to protect Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.25

As for Mr Rajapakse, he will be sitting in the opposition in parliament alongside his group of loyalists. The TNA, with 16 seats, will not join the unity government but has promised to offer ‘issue-based’ support to the new government.26 The TNA is currently the official opposition, a position Tamils held for six years until 1983.27 R Sampathan, TNA leader, becomes the Leader of the Opposition, the first Tamil in 37 years to occupy the prestigious position.28

However, in appointing the Cabinet, the President publicly acknowledged that there had been disagreements over the allocation of ministerial portfolios in the new national government.29 The Cabinet was sworn in on 4 September 2015, with 42 Ministers30 in it. Three more Cabinet Ministers were appointed on the 9 September 2015.31 This ‘jumbo Cabinet’ was criticised by many, including the Chairman of the National Movement for Social Justice, Maduluwavwe Sobhitha Thero who was in the forefront in bringing down the Rajapakse regime. Ven. Sobhitha Thero reacted to this large cabinet as something that the people did not expect from the Sirisena government.32

Challenges and Expectations

The aftermath of the parliamentary elections sets the ideal platform to work on a national consensus for resolving problems that has been plaguing Sri Lanka over a period of time.

The most important concern is a credible domestic process to address the war-time accountability. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, justified the recommendations of the OISL [Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Investigation on Sri Lanka] report to establish a special hybrid court in Sri Lanka to investigate the allegations of war crimes; a probe was, therefore, regarded as the key towards ensuring justice. He also stated that “a domestic mechanism alone could not overcome suspicions fuelled by decades of erosion of human rights in the country”.33

However, considering the high stakes of domestic socio-political atmosphere over an international inquiry, the Sri Lankan delegation had to bargain over the ‘hybrid court’ on the side-lines of the 30th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva. Sri Lanka had to convince the UNHRC members that Sri Lanka had, in the short span of time since January 2015 polls, worked towards democratisation by way of constitutional reforms such as the 19th Amendment. Sri Lanka also emphasised the capacity, transparency, and impartiality of the Sri Lankan judges34. Consequently, Sri Lanka was able to win approval for a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism. This includes the Special Counsel’s Office, Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defence lawyers and authorised prosecutors and lawyers35. An effective and meaningful process in investigating the human rights violations during the thirty-year civil war gains primacy in promoting Sri Lanka’s national purpose. Sri Lanka is to provide an oral update to the UNHRC and is required to submit a comprehensive document by March 2017 at the UNHRC’s 34th session.

During the past few years, Sri Lanka isolated itself from the West, amidst the allegations of human rights violations, growing ‘authoritarianism’ and ‘corrupt practices’. As a result, Sri Lanka’s foreign policy was heavily bent towards China. Under the new National Unity Government, Sri Lanka needs to re-establish its closer ties with India and the West, thereby following a nonaligned foreign policy.36

Another concern is the prosecution of ‘corrupt’ politicians and business tycoons who amassed great wealth during the past regime.37 As per the 19th Amendment, the Bribery Commission officials are no longer required to wait for complaints to be lodged; now the Bribery Commission is permitted to carry out investigations on its own.38 Restoring rule of law and strengthening democracy is also an integral part of the national purpose that the National Unity Government must strive to attain.

In relation to Sri Lanka’s economy, lower inflation and cheaper food are the expectations of the majority of voters, irrespective of their ethnic background. Decades of war plunged the country into economic distress, and both President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe now have a mandate to optimally manage state resources and strive to achieve socio-economic development.

Most importantly, the new National Unity Government now has a mandate to resolve decades of ethnic strife between the majority Sinhalese and the minority Tamils, perhaps, by devolving more power to the provinces. Sri Lanka has suffered from many missed opportunities in working towards equality and coexistence at home. With the conclusion of this general election, Sri Lanka is once again offered an opportunity to emerge with a new Sri Lankan identity.

Thus, the National Unity Government is essentially a political exercise in forming a more stable and performing government. Apart from running the day-to-day administrative work, the National Unity Government must aim at formulating policy for higher national purposes, to address long-term issues of ethnic strife and reconciliation, power-sharing, constitutional reforms, economic development and foreign relations.

About the author:
*1. Ms Ayesha Kalpani Wijayalath is Research Assistant at the Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS), an autonomous research institute at the National University of Singapore. She can be contacted at isasakw@nus.edu.sg. The author, not ISAS, is responsible for the facts cited and opinions expressed in this paper.

Source:
This article was published by ISAS as ISAS Insights 296 (PDF)

Notes:
2. The term of Parliament of Sri Lanka was 6 years. However, subsequent to the 19th Amendment, the term of Parliament is now 5 years.
3. Department of Elections, Sri Lanka, available at http://www.slelections.gov.lk/2015GE/province.html , the Official Government News Portal of Sri Lanka, available at http://www.news.lk/news/sri-lanka/item/9242- general-election-2015-final-results and Sri Lanka Parliamentary Elections 2015, Wikipedia, available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_parliamentary_election,_2015
4. The Electoral System, the Parliament of Sri Lanka. Available at http://www.parliament.lk/members-of- parliament/the-system-of-elections-in-sri-lanka/the-electoral-system
5. The National List was introduced by way of the 15th Amendment to the 1978 Constitution.
6. ‘Is the National List serving its purpose’, the Sunday Times, 11 May 2014. Available at http://www.sundaytimes.lk/140511/news/is-the-national-list-serving-its-purpose-98853.html
7. The Electoral System, the Parliament of Sri Lanka. Available at http://www.parliament.lk/members-of- parliament/the-system-of-elections-in-sri-lanka/the-electoral-system
8. Ibid
9. SLFP is the main constituent of the UPFA.
10. Ayub, M.S., ‘The Rajapakse Factor Made a Difference’, An analysis of the 2015 General Election, Daily Mirror, 21 August 2015. Available at http://www.dailymirror.lk/84211/the-rajapaksa-factor-made-a-difference
11. Ibid
12. Jayasinghe, Uditha, ‘Sri Lanka’s Minority Outreach Holds Risk before Vote’, The Wall Street Journal, 12 August 2015. Available at http://www.wsj.com/articles/sri-lankas-minority-outreach-holds-risks-before-vote- 1439436855
13. Ibid
14. ‘President sends urgent letter to Rajapakse’, Ada Derana News, 13 August 2015. Available at http://www.adaderana.lk/news/31956/president-sirisena-sends-urgent-letter-to-rajapaksa
15. Prime Minister’s Office, Prime Minister of Sri Lanka. Available http://www.pmoffice.gov.lk/biography.php?p_type=PM
16. Ayub, M.S., ‘The Rajapakse Factor Made a Difference’, An analysis of the 2015 General Election, Daily Mirror, 21 August 2015. Available at http://www.dailymirror.lk/84211/the-rajapaksa-factor-made-a-difference
17. Kadirgamar, Ahilan, ‘Defeat of divisive politics’, The Hindu, 19 August 2015. Available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/sri-lanka-parliamentary-election-results-defeat-of-divisive- politics/article7554530.ece
18. CWC is a political party in Sri Lanka that represents those working in the plantation sector.
19. Kadirgamar, Ahilan, ‘Defeat of divisive politics’, The Hindu, 19 August 2015. Available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/sri-lanka-parliamentary-election-results-defeat-of-divisive- politics/article7554530.ece
20. Arumugam Thondaman is the leader of CWC.
21. Kadirgamar, Ahilan, ‘Defeat of divisive politics’, The Hindu, 19 August 2015. Available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/sri-lanka-parliamentary-election-results-defeat-of-divisive- politics/article7554530.ece
22. Ibid
23. Sri Lanka’s Sirisena promises new era of clean government, Channel News Asia, 1 September 2015. Available at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/sri-lanka-s-sirisena/2092950.html
24. Bandara, Kelum and Perera, Yohan, ‘President outlines National Unity Government’, Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka), 2 September 2015. Available at lanka/20150902/281848642365682/TextView
25. Ibid.
26. Sri Lanka’s Sirisena promises new era of clean government, Channel News Asia, 1 September 2015. Available at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/sri-lanka-s-sirisena/2092950.html
27. ‘Sri Lanka’s parliament sworn in after unity government formed’, 1 September 2015. Available at http://news.yahoo.com/sri-lankas-parliament-sworn-unity-government-formed-095702242.html
28. ‘Sampathan chosen as the new Leader of the Opposition’, Colombo Telegraph, 3 September 2015. Available at https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/sampanthan-chosen-as-new-leader-of-the-opposition/.
29. ‘New Cabinet Appointed; President Sirisena admits Fracas over Portfolios’, Colombo Telegraph, 4 September 2015. Available at https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/new-cabinet-appointed-president-sirisena- admits-fracas-over-portfolios/
30. Ibid
31. ‘Three more Cabinet Ministers, 19 State and 22 Deputies Appointed’, Colombo Telegraph, 9 September 2015. Available at https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/three-more-cabinet-ministers19-state-and-22- deputy-appointed/
32. ‘So-called National Government to Appoint Around 100 Ministers’, Colombo Telegraph, 3 September 2015. Available at https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/so-called-national-government-to-appoint-around- 100-ministers/
33. ‘Zeid urges creation of hybrid Special court in Sri Lanka (Full Report)’, The Nation, 16 September 2015. Available at http://nation.lk/online/2015/09/16/zeid-urges-creation-of-hybrid-special-court-in-sri-lanka-full- report/
34. Perera, Jehan, ‘Taking Reconciliation Process Forward After Co-sponsored Resolution’, the Colombo Telegraph, 28 September 2015. Available at https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/taking- reconciliation-process-forward-after-co-sponsored-resolution/
35. Perera, Jehan, ‘Taking Reconciliation Process Forward After Co-sponsored Resolution’, the Colombo Telegraph, 28 September 2015. Available at https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/taking- reconciliation-process-forward-after-co-sponsored-resolution/
36. ‘Mahinda Misfires’, The Economist, 22 August 2015. http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21661650-rajapaksa-fails- again?zid=309&ah=80dcf288b8561b012f603b9fd9577f0e
37. Kadirgamar, Ahilan, ‘Defeat of divisive politics’, The Hindu, 19 August 2015. Available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/sri-lanka-parliamentary-election-results-defeat-of-divisive- politics/article7554530.ece
38. “19th Amendment grants separate power to Bribery Commission”, 30 April 2015. Available at http://www.lankasrinews.com/view.php?223YY552200mmBB44eeoOOllccaaMgAAddddS4MWUaaccllOOee4 4BBmm3003355YY23

At least 46 confirmed deaths as families claim the bodies of their departed loved ones and nearly 250 wounded, many seriously, are being treated at the three Shia run hospitals, Al-Sahel, Bahman and Al-Rassoul Al-Aazam in this observer’s south Beirut neighborhood of Haret Hreik. This morning, Dr. Mahmoud Mansour, the chief of the emergency department at Bahman Hospital told this observer that his hospital recorded 20 deaths, and treated approximately 100 victims, approximately 20 percent of whom are in critical condition.

All are victims of the 6 p.m. rush hour terrorist bombings deep inside Hezbollah’s security zone on 11/12/2015 that targeted civilians who were shopping at street markets or gathering at the local Husseiniyeh (Mosque) for the fourth of the five daily prayers, Salat al-Magrib, held in the early evening just after sunset.

At dawns first light on 11/13/2015 this observer returned to Ain al-Sikkeh street near the Burj al Barajneh Palestinian camp and was briefed by Hezbollah security officials and eye-witnesses. There was reportedly 4 young men suicide bombers involved. Each wore a suicide vest packed with approximately 20 kilos of high explosives including ball bearings, nails, screws, and bolts to produce maximum deadly shrapnel. One security source claimed that the plastic explosive C-4 was used and the terrorist employed a battery as a detonator. If true, this would seem to indicate a well-planned operation with a major sponsor from the escalating proxy war next door in Syria, due to the army reported difficulty these days of coming up with C-4, even in Lebanon.

According to an eye witness, one of the suicide bombers was on a motorcycle when he detonated his explosive vest. Another reportedly got cold feet as happens in about 10% of these kinds of events according to a military source. The young man still died when his partner evidently sensed his failing courage and detonated his own explosive vest. He was killed by the blast but his own explosive vest did not detonate from the concussion and surely will be studied for forensic evidence. One of the 4 reportedly fled the scene, according to army guys at the camp checkpoint near Burj Barajneh Palestinian camp and one shouted “He fled back into burj.” (Burj al Barajneh camp). This has not been verified but a search has been beefed up this morning.

The bombings were the first in Hezbollah’s security zone for more than a year. Between July 2013 and February 2014, there have been18 terrorist operations in Lebanon, nine of the attacks were on Hezbollah bastions, most claimed by jihadist extremists, six of which were in this observer’s neighborhood. In every case the perpetrators claimed the attacks were in response for Hezbollah’s decision to send thousands of fighters into neighboring Syria to support forces fighting against the now Islamist-dominated uprising.

The extremist Islamic State (ISIS/Da’ish) group claimed yesterday’s attack issuing a statement within two hours of the bombings: “Soldiers of the Caliphate detonated explosives planted on a motorbike in an area frequented by Rafida (Shiites) after the apostates gathered in the area, one of the knights of martyrdom detonated his explosive belt in the midst of them.” IS subsequently issued another statement identifying three of the attackers as two Palestinians and a Syrian. More than 2000 Palestinians from Yarmouk camp and Syrian refugees from that country’s nearly five year war have moved in desperation into Burj al Barajneh camp.

One commander was quoted in Beirut’s Daily Star this morning as shouting to his men during the chaos: “I want men at every entrance of the camps” (Burj al Barajneh and Shatila). “You will stand in front of the entrance and fire in the air. I want them to be afraid,” he reportedly said, referring to the residents of the Palestinian refugee camp of Burj al-Barajneh. “The only way they could have done this is if they came from that camp,” one of the security gunmen told The Daily Star. “We will seal it. We are out for blood and we will get it.” He claimed that the suicide bombers had made their way from the Palestinian camp and headed on foot toward the husseiniyeh before detonating themselves at its doorstep. Two high-rankling officials from Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, currently in exile in Qatar, and Ismail Haniyeh based in Gaza, have reported that the Burj al-Barajneh bombers, were not from the refugee camp.

Several Sunni and Shia hotheads threaten this morning to inflame the current religious war (bellum sacrum) which continues to spread in this region. Some Shia young men were overheard arguing with their commander as he rejected their calls to attack the Palestinian camps of Burj al Barajneh and Shatila. Some Sunnis from Beirut are posting social media taunts some of which are appearing on Narhanet news outlet asking what took Da’ish (ISIS) so long to bring the fight to Hezbollah and saying it’s about time.

It appears clear that ISIS (Da’ish), has many mothers, and the cause of establishing a Caliphate is here to stay. Increasingly, global powers are coming to believe that air strikes and even troops on the ground will not defeat ISIS because it is an idea with spreading appeal among this regions massive youth population who had no stake or opportunity in the old order of the past half century. The war if Syria is now a proxy war of attrition and over the long haul, numbers historically have been determinative of who wins. ISIS and other terrorist groups continue to swell their number while their adversaries are facing severe troop depletion and dwindling resources.

Hezbollah is taking heavy casualties and their supporters in Lebanon are increasingly expressing their objections to losing their sons. Iran is facing the same problem but to a lesser yet still unacceptable degree. Iran cannot continue to pour money into this war of attrition and the US-led sanctions when they start being lifted will take at least two years to positively impact their Islamic Republic’s treasury. Longer to trickle down and benefit the average Iranian.

Russia is fast learning that they have miscalculated what they could achieve with their imprecise but intense bombing campaign in Syria. Blow-back from their adversaries has begun with the downing of Metrojet Flight 9268 in Egypt. The EU urgently needs an end to the immigrant tsunami and the GCC countries are beginning to face blow-back for their roles over the past several years. The American public is exhausted from more than a decade of misguided and criminal wars in their name that have ruined their country’s reputation and has led to ridicule of American claimed humanitarian values. These wars have cost the American people trillions of much needed dollars to rebuild their own country and face head-on serious and growing domestic problems. The Obama administration appears deeply fractured over what to do anymore in Syria and Iraq.

The Palestinians are frankly in one hell of a mess in Lebanon and Syria for all the old reasons and now more so after being caught up in the Sunni-Shia religious war that could last centuries.

Few, and certainly not this observer believe that this weekend’s international talks will agree on a plan to end Syria’s civil war, partly because the 17 countries and three international bodies, the Arab League, Britain, China, Egypt, the European Union, France, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE and the United Nations are deeply divided over the fate of President Bashar Assad. The stated aim of this latest confab is to agree on a structure for a political transition and to agree on which of the Syrian government, rebel and opposition factions, none of which will be at the talks — will take part. According to a leaked version of the latest draft Russian proposal, Moscow wants her ally President Assad to stay in office during an 18-month transitional period — a non-starter for Washington and 7 of its allies.

As John Kerr left for Vienna yesterday he commented: “The walls of mistrust within Syria, within the region, and within the international community, are thick and they are high.”

Meanwhile the much expected, and in some quarters awaited , arrival of Da’ish (ISIS) to Hezbollah’s security zone in south Beirut threatens to suck the current 270,000 Palestinians in Lebanon into the Syria maelstrom which since March of 2011 they have insisted on staying out of.

Fact: Tens of millions of Americans do not have a bank account. As a result, many of these Americans spend a reported $89 billion annually in interest and fees by using predatory services such as payday loan and check cashing services. It’s a perpetuating cycle of poverty in which the poor get poorer just by accessing their own money. Fortunately, there is an ideal solution staring us in the face. An important voice driving the conversation is Professor Mehrsa Baradaran of the University of Georgia Law School. Her excellent new book, How the Other Half Banks: Exclusion, Exploitation and the Threat to Democracy describes how, for decades, big banks have shed their social contract with the American public and transformed themselves into modern monstrosities which serve corporations and the wealthy and exploit or avoid the less affluent members of our society. Setting the stage with this historical context, Professor Baradaran makes a compelling case for a postal banking system which would greatly benefit millions of struggling “unbanked” Americans.

Predatory payday loan companies and check cashing services soared like hawks in the 1980’s to take advantage of communities where community banks and credit unions were displaced by the creep of large banking institutions. The payday lending industry now has more storefronts than McDonald’s and Starbucks combined. These alternative “fringe banks” charge outrageous interest rates and fees― millions of Americans turn to fringe banks each year, which allows them to bring in $40 billion a year in high-interest loans.

Where are the so-called large conventional banks? They are increasingly closing up shop in low-income areas. According to Bloomberg, from 2008 to 2013: “Banks have shut 1,826 branches…. and 93 percent of closings were in postal codes where the household income is below the national median.” If you are living in a low-income neighborhood, just finding a bank is difficult. In 1993, we released a detailed report offering strong evidence that 49 major mortgage lenders had engaged in racial redlining in violation of federal Fair Lending laws in 16 major U.S. cities. Redlining occurs when banks and other mortgage lenders either exclude minority neighborhoods from their “effective lending territories,” or substantially under-serve such neighborhoods.

The unbanked now pay up to 10 percent of their income just to use the money they have already earned. To put it into real world terms, an American family without a bank account, earning $25,000 a year spends about $2,400 of that income on interest and fees. To put it even more bluntly―that’s more than they spend on food! (This statistic includes the chance of unpredictable financial emergencies in which those in need turn to payday lenders to bail them out at huge interest rates―50% of Americans need to borrow money for emergencies costing over $400.)

In her book, Professor Baradaran gives some real life examples: Tanya Burke, a single mother of two, racked up more than $2,000 of debt in fees and interest by taking out $600 from a payday lender to cover rent and unexpected medical costs for her son. Thelma Fleming, a mother and grandmother, took out a $300 loan to cover costs after losing one of her jobs. Forced to take out other loans to buy herself time, she ended up paying $2,500 over the course of ten months to pay back that initial $300 loan. These stories are far too common in America.

Until the 1970’s and 80’s, usury laws used to be in place to protect consumers by capping the maximum amount of interest that could be levied. Due to financial industry lobbying efforts, many states now have no usury caps (or there are ways around them.) This deregulation gave way to the enormous growth of the payday loan industry.

Another telling example from Professor Baradaran deals with a high wage earner who experiences a different borrowing outcome. “Steven” made some bad investments and could no longer afford his daily expenses. Luckily, he found a “miracle lender” who gave him very generous loans with low interest rates, saving him from financial ruin. “Steven” is, of course, America’s big banks. When the reckless banking industry was in financial duress, it received a sweetheart deal when the American taxpayers bailed it out. Millions of struggling Americans, like Tanya Burke and Thelma Fleming, are not afforded that same luxury―and the banks have not repaid the goodwill forward by respecting their needs.

This brings us to postal banking, which could help break the cycle of madness that keeps millions of Americans in financial quicksand.

From 1911 until 1967, the Postal Savings System offered simple savings accounts to Americans who preferred an alternative to a private bank. It was a successful system until the bank lobby forced its cessation. (In many foreign countries post offices still offer simple savings accounts with no fees and reasonable minimum balance requirements.)

The United States Postal Service (USPS), which unlike the banks has an obligation to serve all communities, has more than enough retail locations to serve all of these under-served consumers. Last year, the office of the USPS inspector general released a report detailing the ways in which postal banking would be beneficial to both the public and the USPS itself, which has been made to endure an unprecedented advanced payment of $103.7 billion by 2016 to cover future health benefits of postal retirees for the next 75 years. No other government or private corporation is required to meet this unreasonable prepayment burden.

While the USPS already offers some financial services such as money orders and international fund transfers, it could expand to include paycheck cashing, pre-paid debit cards, bill payments, ATMs, savings accounts and small dollar loans. The introduction of these services would offer millions of Americans a local, reliable and affordable alternative to managing their finances. With over 30,000 locations, Post Office branches are everywhere in America.

A notable supporter of postal banking is Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has been a leading advocate on this issue. Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders also supports it, recently stating in an interview that “…the postal service, in fact, can play an important role in providing modest types of banking service to folks who need it.”

The time is ripe to implement postal banking. What is needed is a rising rumble from the people focused on Postmaster General Megan Brennan―who has the authority to act now on implementing surcharge free ATMS, payroll check cashing, bill-paying services and electronic money transfers ―and on Congress to allow loans and other new services. For more on the issue and to find out how easy it is to get active and involved, visit The Campaign for Postal Banking.

To listen to Ralph’s in-depth conversation with Professor Mehrsa Baradaran go to ralphnaderradiohour.com.