Support Us

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Writers Pool
About Us

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog Page 129

Resurgence of Brotherhood : Syria’s Redemption into the Arab League

By
Asma Khan Durrani
-
0

Syria’s journey within the Arab League has been a tumultuous affair, marked by its historical entry, subsequent suspensions, and potential reintegration. This narrative is inherently intertwined with the political, socio-economic, and cultural fabric of the Middle East.

The Arab League, founded in 1945, is a regional organization that aims to strengthen ties among its member states, coordinate their policies, and promote their common interests. It currently consists of 22 members, with Syria being one of the founding members. Syria’s entry into the Arab League was a significant event in the post-colonial history of the Middle East. At the time of its founding, the Arab League was seen as an expression of Arab nationalism, a movement that sought to unite all Arabs under a common cultural and political banner. This movement was a response to the shared experiences of colonialism and imperialism that Arab nations had undergone.

Syria’s entry into the Arab League was a natural step in this direction. In the aftermath of its independence from French mandate in 1946, Syria, like other Arab states, was striving to assert its sovereignty and identity. The Arab League offered a platform for this assertion, allowing Syria to engage in collective decision-making with other Arab states and to project its voice on regional and international platforms. However, Syria’s journey in the Arab League was not always smooth. In November 2011, in the wake of the Arab Spring, Syria was suspended from the league due to its government’s violent crackdown on peaceful protesters. This was a crucial moment in the Arab League’s history, marking the first time that a member state had been suspended for violating the league’s charter, which calls for the protection of human rights.

The suspension of Syria was a reflection of the evolving nature of the Arab League, which has become more assertive in addressing internal issues within member states. However, it also sparked a controversy as some member states argued that the Arab League should not interfere in the internal affairs of its members, while others supported the suspension as a necessary step to uphold human rights.

The question of Syria’s reintegration into the Arab League has become a subject of intense debate.

Over a decade since its suspension, the question of Syria’s reintegration into the Arab League has become a subject of intense debate. Some member states, notably Algeria and Iraq, have called for Syria’s reinstatement, arguing that its continued isolation only exacerbates the country’s ongoing humanitarian crisis. However, other member states, particularly those from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), have opposed Syria’s reinstatement. They argue that the Syrian government’s actions during the civil war, including alleged war crimes, make it unfit to rejoin the league.

Despite this, there are indications of a possible thawing in relations. Several Arab states, including the UAE and Bahrain, have re-established diplomatic relations with Syria. This is a significant development that allow Syria’s reintegration into the Arab League.

The Arab League’s crossroads manifests itself in how member states grapple with the decision to reintegrate Syria. The path forward is fraught with potential implications for the future of the league and the broader geopolitical dynamics of the region.

For proponents of Syria’s reintegration, the argument largely revolves around practicality and realpolitik. They contend that Syria’s isolation has not led to any substantive change in its government’s behavior. Instead, it has pushed Syria closer to non-Arab powers like Iran and Russia, altering the balance of power in the region. Furthermore, they argue that reintegration would provide an avenue for the Arab League to exert influence over Syria and facilitate a political solution to the ongoing conflict.

Detractors, however, stress the moral and legal implications of reintegration. They argue that readmitting Syria would essentially legitimize a regime accused of committing atrocities against its own people. This, they contend, would undermine the credibility of the Arab League, setting a worrying precedent for the acceptance of such behavior by member states.

Syria’s entry into the Arab League, its suspension, and reintegration are emblematic of the wider complexities and challenges facing the Arab world. The Arab League, as a regional organization, is at the heart of these challenges, trying to balance the principles of sovereignty, human rights, and regional cooperation.

The question of Syria’s reintegration into the Arab League transcends the immediate issue and forces a reflection on the nature and purpose of the Arab League itself. Should the league be a forum that primarily respects the sovereignty of its member states, or should it uphold certain standards of behavior, even if this means intervening in internal affairs? This debate will shape the future of the Arab League, determining its role and relevance in a rapidly changing Middle East. It will decide whether the league evolves into an active regional organization, capable of influencing member states’ behavior, or remains a largely ceremonial body that prioritizes consensus and non-interference over decisive action.

Syria’s entry into the Arab League, its suspension, and reintegration are emblematic of the wider complexities and challenges facing the Arab world. The Arab League, as a regional organization, is at the heart of these challenges, trying to balance the principles of sovereignty, human rights, and regional cooperation.

Syria’s reentry into the Arab League after a decade carries significant implications for the wider Middle East region, some key considerations:

  • Regional Dynamics: Syria’s reinstatement in the Arab League could impact the regional dynamics by reshaping alliances and diplomatic relations. It opens doors for potential collaboration and dialogue among Arab nations, promoting stability and cooperation.
  • Regional Security: Syria’s reentry could have implications for regional security. The country’s political stability and active participation in regional security initiatives can contribute to addressing shared challenges such as terrorism, extremism, and the refugee crisis. Cooperation within the Arab League can enhance collective efforts to ensure peace and security in the Middle East.
  • Conflict Resolution: Syria’s return to the Arab League can facilitate efforts towards conflict resolution within the country and the wider region. The League can provide a platform for dialogue, negotiations, and mediation, promoting peaceful solutions to ongoing conflicts and crises.
  • Economic Cooperation: The Arab League’s members engage in various economic initiatives, such as trade agreements and investment partnerships. Syria’s reinstatement can foster economic cooperation, trade opportunities, and investment prospects, promoting economic growth and development in the region.
  • Humanitarian Considerations: Syria’s reentry may have implications for humanitarian efforts in the region. The Arab League, along with international organizations, can work together to address the urgent humanitarian needs of the Syrian people and support post-conflict reconstruction and stability.
  • Geopolitical Balance: Syria’s reentry could influence the balance of power and interests in the wider Middle East. It may impact the dynamics between regional players, including neighboring countries, and global powers involved in the region. It is essential for all stakeholders to manage these dynamics carefully to ensure stability and peaceful coexistence.
  • Arab Unity and Solidarity: Syria’s return to the Arab League can be seen as a step towards fostering Arab unity and solidarity. It reinforces the principle of collective decision-making and coordination on regional issues, promoting a sense of shared purpose among Arab nations.

Syria’s reentry into the Arab League after a decade has implications that extend beyond its borders. It can impact regional dynamics, security, conflict resolution, economic cooperation, humanitarian efforts, geopolitical balance, and the promotion of Arab unity. The collective engagement of Arab nations in addressing shared challenges and pursuing common interests becomes crucial in shaping the future of the Middle East.

Storm Shadow Cruise Missiles: Geopolitical Fallout of U.K’s Advanced Weapons to Ukraine

By
Asma Khan Durrani
-
0
A member of the military walks past storm-shadow-scalp cruise missile

The UK has provided numerous “Storm Shadow” cruise missiles to Ukraine, providing the country with a new long-range attack capability ahead of a widely expected counteroffensive against Russian forces. The Kremlin has threatened a military strike in retaliation to this move.  With long-range Storm Shadow missiles in its arsenal and other crucial military aid, Ukraine’s capabilities have been significantly enhanced. The UK transferred Harpoon anti-ship missiles or Storm Shadow cruise missiles to Ukraine. This gives Ukraine the ability to launch cross-border strikes against Russia which could lead to an escalation of the conflict. Storm Shadow missiles can be launched from the ground, although they are more likely to be placed aboard Ukrainian aircraft. A western missile launched from a Soviet Warplane because Storm Shadows do not require fire control instructions from the launching fighter, they are very simple to integrate into the Ukrainian Air Force’s Soviet-era aircraft.

The UK has provided numerous “Storm Shadow” cruise missiles to Ukraine, providing the country with a new long-range attack capability ahead of a widely expected counteroffensive against Russian forces.

The United Kingdom has broken the long-standing taboo by transferring “a number” of Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles as a “proportionate response” to Russia’s ongoing air strikes on civilian targets in Ukraine. Storm Shadow is officially marketed as having a range “exceeding 250km,” or 155 miles, with some even claiming a maximum range of 250, or even 350, miles. While not as swift as Russia’s Kinzhal airborne ballistic missile, the Storm Shadow’s five-meter-long stealth, AI-driven image-matching terminal guidance system, and bunker-busting two-stage payload set it apart.

Harpoon missiles cost about £1.2 million each and have a maximum range of 240 kilometers. The Storm Shadow missiles cost about £2.2 million and can hit targets up to 560 kilometers away, although modified versions for export have a much shorter range.

Western nations were concerned that Ukraine might utilize long-range missiles to launch politically provocative assaults on Russian land, triggering escalatory response but storm shadows were supplied with assurances from Ukraine that they would only be used for strikes on Russian-occupied parts of the country The real bullseye, though, is Russia’s massive military infrastructure on the Crimean Peninsula, which includes airbases and a large portion of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Given that the UK’s donation of missiles appears to be restricted in quantity, the UK’s Storm Shadow may be more of a political manoeuvre than a military one, similar to when the country gave western-designed main battle tanks.

Storm Shadow’s effectiveness against Russia’s technically superior air defenses will be determined in part by its stealth capabilities. Because the missile’s terminal guidance is based on image matching rather than GPS

Storm Shadow does not rely on input from the carrying aircraft either before or after launch. Instead, it’s pre-programmed on the ground to follow waypoints to the target region autonomously using inertial and GPS navigation typically skimming at just 100-130 feet over the ground to limit radar detectability even more. It flies just below the speed of sound, propelled by a tiny TRI 60-30 turbojet engine, and has a low radar-cross section due to its non-reflective shape.

While Russian air defenses fell short to take down supersonic HIMARS rockets, Storm Shadow is a subsonic cruise missile a type of weapon that Ukraine’s air defense system has itself mastered in shooting down. Storm Shadow’s effectiveness against Russia’s technically superior air defenses will be determined in part by its stealth capabilities. Because the missile’s terminal guidance is based on image matching rather than GPS.

Storm Shadow and similar weapons might be used to attack Russian depots and headquarters since they fall into the convenient precision-strike range of these missiles, which could be deadly if timed to coincide with Ukraine’s projected 2023 counteroffensive. And this time, to avoid the Storm Shadow’s reach, those stores and command centers may have to shift all the way to Russian land. This might pose a particular threat to Russian soldiers in southern Ukraine, which is the furthest from the Russian border.

The potential geopolitical implications United Kingdom providing Ukraine with advanced military equipment like Storm Shadow cruise missiles constitute. Foremost, of which would be Russia’s reaction as Russia considers Ukraine as part of its sphere of influence and has already been involved in a conflict with Ukraine in the form of the ongoing crisis in eastern Ukraine. If the UK provides advanced military equipment to Ukraine, including cruise missiles, it would likely escalate tensions between Russia and the Western world. Russia views this move as a direct challenge to its interests and security, leading to a heightened response.

Secondly, NATO and Western Response the UK being a member of NATO, an alliance committed to collective defense. If the UK’s transfer to Ukraine with advanced military equipment, is seen as a signal of increased support from NATO for Ukraine’s security. This may further solidify Western support for Ukraine and potentially result in an increase in military aid from other NATO members.

If the UK provides advanced military equipment to Ukraine, including cruise missiles, it would likely escalate tensions between Russia and the Western world. Russia views this move as a direct challenge to its interests and security, leading to a heightened response.

The regional stability and the provision of advanced military equipment to Ukraine has broader implications for regional stability. It might encourage other countries involved in territorial disputes or conflicts to seek similar assistance from Western powers, leading to an arms race or further destabilization in the region.

The diplomatic fallout because of the provision of such advanced weaponry to Ukraine could strain diplomatic relations between the UK and Russia. There could be retaliatory measures taken by Russia, such as diplomatic expulsions, economic sanctions, or the downgrading of bilateral relations.

The impact on peace negotiations could be severe as the conflict in eastern Ukraine has seen attempts at peaceful resolution through negotiations and ceasefires. The provision of advanced military equipment might undermine these peace efforts by signaling to Ukraine that a military solution is being supported, potentially prolonging the conflict.

It is essential to note that the geopolitical fallout resulting from this scenario depends on various factors, including the context, timing, and the specific response of the involved parties. Thus this development is bound to have far reaching geopolitical implications on the security of Europe and beyond.

Eurasia’s Pivot: The Shifting Power Dynamics in Central Asia, Russia, China, and the G7

By
Corinna Perini
-
0

Central Asia, the heart of the Eurasian continent, has long been a focal point of geopolitical contention. It comprising Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, serves as a nexus for economic, political, and cultural connections. It’s a region rich in natural resources, including vast reserves of oil, gas, and minerals. The strategic location of Central Asia, providing a gateway between East and West, North and South, has recently seen an intensification of geopolitical maneuvering by global powers, namely Russia, China, and the G7 countries.

Russia, historically, has held a strong influence over Central Asia, dating back to the Tsarist era and later the Soviet Union. Post the Soviet Union’s dissolution, Russia’s approach has been to maintain its influence through the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Russia’s interest lies in maintaining political stability in the region, securing its southern borders, and ensuring the continued flow of Central Asian natural gas through Russian pipelines.

Central Asia in natural resources, including vast reserves of oil, gas, and minerals. The strategic location of Central Asia, providing a gateway between East and West, North and South, has recently seen an intensification of geopolitical maneuvering by global powers, namely Russia, China, and the G7 countries.

China, on the other hand, has been escalating its influence in Central Asia through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), aiming to create an extensive network of railways, highways, oil pipelines, and telecommunication infrastructure. For China, Central Asia serves as a critical hub for its westward expansion and an essential source of energy to fuel its massive economy. Beijing’s expanding footprint has been viewed with caution by Russia, wary of China’s growing influence in what Moscow has traditionally considered its sphere of influence.

Meanwhile, the G7, consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, has its interests and stakes in Central Asia. The G7 countries have sought to promote democratic governance, human rights, and market economy reforms in the region, often in direct competition with Russian and Chinese models of authoritarian governance and state-led economic development. Additionally, the G7’s interests are tied to energy security and countering terrorism, with Central Asia serving as a crucial front in these efforts.

The flashpoint in Central Asia arises from these overlapping interests and competing visions for the region’s future. Russia, while still a dominant player, is grappling with China’s economic might. At the same time, the G7, despite its distance, seeks to assert its influence, promoting democratic norms and securing its energy needs.

The complexities in Central Asia have been exacerbated by a myriad of challenges. The region suffers from governance issues, economic inequality, environmental degradation, religious radicalization, and the threats of terrorism and drug trafficking. These challenges provide ample opportunities for external powers to exert their influence, further fueling competition.

The flashpoint in Central Asia arises from these overlapping interests and competing visions for the region’s future. Russia, while still a dominant player, is grappling with China’s economic might.

Russia, China, and the G7, while pursuing their respective interests, have also sought cooperation where possible. There have been instances of cooperation in counter-terrorism efforts, managing trans-boundary water resources, and even in certain economic projects. However, these instances of cooperation are overshadowed by the overarching strategic competition.

The future of Central Asia is contingent on how these powers navigate their relationships. If Russia, China, and the G7 can find areas of mutual interest and collaboration, it could lead to a more stable and prosperous Central Asia. However, if competition continues unabated, it could destabilize the region, with repercussions far beyond its borders.

The key to managing this geopolitical flashpoint lies in diplomacy. The involved powers need to recognize that while they have competing interests, they also share common concerns, such as regional stability, combating terrorism, and climate change. By focusing on these shared challenges, Russia, China, and the G7 have the potential to convert competition into cooperation.

Moreover, the countries of Central Asia should not be passive actors in this geopolitical game. They have agency and can leverage their strategic location and resources to their advantage. By diversifying their relationships and seeking balanced engagement with all external powers, Central Asian countries can play a significant role in reducing tensions and fostering regional stability.

Engagement with civil society and support for democratic reforms should also be a part of the strategy. This approach, which is often espoused by the G7, can address some of the root causes of instability in the region, including corruption, human rights abuses, and the lack of political freedom. However, this must be done with sensitivity to the region’s unique cultural and historical context.

There is a need for institutionalized multilateral dialogue involving Russia, China, the G7, and the Central Asian states. Such a dialogue can facilitate communication, promote understanding, and prevent misperceptions that can escalate tensions.

Lastly, there is a need for institutionalized multilateral dialogue involving Russia, China, the G7, and the Central Asian states. Such a dialogue can facilitate communication, promote understanding, and prevent misperceptions that can escalate tensions. This dialogue could take the form of a formal multilateral forum or be integrated into existing regional frameworks like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization or the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia.

In conclusion, the flashpoint in Central Asia is a complex interplay of historical influences, geopolitical interests, and regional challenges. The stakes are high, not just for the countries directly involved, but for global peace and stability. It is a situation that calls for nuanced diplomacy, strategic collaboration, and a commitment to the long-term development and stability of Central Asia. If managed wisely, the flashpoint in Central Asia can be transformed from a potential source of conflict into an opportunity for cooperation, fostering a stable and prosperous region that contributes positively to global peace and prosperity. A balanced and cooperative approach to Central Asia, which respects the region’s sovereignty and addresses its developmental challenges, could pave the way for a new era of Eurasian geopolitics.

Beyond the Greenback: The Global Monetary System in Transition

By
Dr. Usman
-
0

As the global economic structure evolves, one significant development has been the shifting status of the United States Dollar (USD) as the world’s primary reserve currency. Since World War II, the USD has held a dominant position in international trade and finance. However, recent trends suggest a relative decline in the USD’s market share, indicating a transition in the global monetary system.

The shifting status of the United States Dollar (USD) as the world’s primary reserve currency. Since World War II, the USD has held a dominant position in international trade and finance.

A reserve currency, fundamentally, is a foreign currency held by central banks and other major financial institutions as a means to pay off international debt obligations or influence their domestic exchange rate. The attractiveness of a reserve currency primarily lies in the economic stability of the country issuing it and the depth and liquidity of its financial markets.

The USD became the principal reserve currency in the mid-20th century, largely because of the economic and political clout of the United States. The Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944 solidified this position, establishing the USD as the reference currency for global trade. Since then, the USD has played a pivotal role in international commerce, facilitating cross-border transactions, and acting as the preferred currency for many commodities, including oil. This system has provided the US with significant advantages, such as the ability to borrow at lower costs and having considerable influence over global economic policies.

The increasing economic power of other nations, most notably China, is driving this change. The Chinese Renminbi (RMB) was included in the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Special Drawing Rights basket in 2016, marking its arrival as a global reserve currency.

However, the tides are shifting. There are increasing signs that the USD’s share as a reserve currency is dwindling, triggered by various factors. Firstly, the increasing economic power of other nations, most notably China, is driving this change. The Chinese Renminbi (RMB) was included in the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Special Drawing Rights basket in 2016, marking its arrival as a global reserve currency. Although the RMB’s share in global reserves is still comparatively small, it has been steadily increasing, reflecting China’s growing economic influence.

Another key factor is the escalating national debt in the United States. The protracted use of deficit spending, particularly in response to the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, has resulted in an unprecedented level of national debt. This has raised concerns about potential inflation and the long-term economic stability of the United States, tarnishing the allure of the USD as a reserve currency.

The advent of digital currencies and cryptocurrencies is also contributing to the USD’s dwindling market share. Countries like China have already launched pilot programs for a digital Yuan, and the European Central Bank is exploring a digital Euro. This trend towards digital currencies, if adopted globally, could further erode the USD’s dominance.

Furthermore, the gradual shift towards a multipolar world order has resulted in nations diversifying their reserve holdings away from the USD. For instance, the Euro, Japanese Yen, and British Pound Sterling have gained more recognition as reserve currencies over the past few decades. This diversification reduces dependence on the USD, particularly for countries seeking to minimize their exposure to US policy decisions and economic conditions.

Nevertheless, it’s crucial to note that while the USD’s market share is declining, it remains the predominant reserve currency. As of 2021, the USD constituted over 60% of global reserve holdings, according to the IMF, far exceeding any other currency. Its deeply entrenched role in the global financial system, coupled with the sheer size and depth of the US financial markets, ensures its continued relevance.

The diminishing market share of the USD as a reserve currency is indicative of a gradual, not abrupt, shift. This slow transition provides an opportunity for policymakers worldwide to prepare for a changing global financial landscape. It also offers a chance for the United States to implement economic reforms and responsible fiscal policies to mitigate any potential fallout.

In the future, we may see a more balanced distribution of reserve currencies, reflecting the multipolar nature of the world economy. This could lead to a more resilient global financial system, less susceptible to shocks from any one economy, including the United States.

However, it’s important to recognize the potential pitfalls of this transition. A rapid decline in the USD’s status could lead to financial instability, given the world’s deep-seated reliance on the USD for trade and finance. Similarly, the rise of digital currencies and their potential adoption as reserve currencies pose new challenges in terms of regulation, security, and monetary policy. As we move forward, it will be critical for international financial institutions and policymakers to manage this transition carefully. This includes fostering international cooperation, enhancing financial system resilience, and promoting policy and regulatory frameworks that can accommodate the increasing diversity of reserve currencies.

A rapid decline in the USD’s status could lead to financial instability, given the world’s deep-seated reliance on the USD for trade and finance. Similarly, the rise of digital currencies and their potential adoption as reserve currencies pose new challenges in terms of regulation, security, and monetary policy.

While the USD’s declining market share as a reserve currency marks a significant shift, it is not a cause for alarm, but rather a call for adaptation. The evolving global financial landscape necessitates forward-thinking policies, flexible economic structures, and a willingness to embrace change. The future might not belong to any single currency but to a diversified, multipolar global financial order that is more representative of the world’s economic structure.

In conclusion, the USD’s decline as the dominant reserve currency reflects the evolving dynamics of the global economy. While the transition presents challenges, it also opens up opportunities for other economies to take on greater roles in the global financial system. Amid this shift, it’s essential for nations to foster economic stability and robust financial markets, the foundational attributes of a desirable reserve currency.

China’s Diplomatic Oasis: Navigating the Israel-Palestine Conflict

By
Usman Zulfiqar Ali
-
0

The melting of Ice between Iran and Saudi Arabi has enthusiastically drawn China’s aspirations to enhance its role as a peace mediator in the region. Beijing’s successive launch of the peace-making plans from February to April shows its struggle for the global good.

China offered a 12-point peace plan for Russo-Ukraine Conflict in February, followed by a successful détente between Iran and Saudi Arabia in mid-March.

Extending the Global Security Initiative, the concept paper of which has been published earlier this year, China has ambitiously taken charge to bring peace to the historic Palestine-Israel conflict. Beijing offered mediation to solve the conflict after stressing restraint during the clashes that erupted in al-Aqsa between Palestinians and IDF. Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang held separate phone calls with the counterparts from Israel and Palestine, offering lasting peace in the region.

Ostensibly, China has no rivalry or tension with Israel. The relations between Israel and them has begun after the Middle East Peace Conference and the Gulf War in 1991. On the part of Palestine, Beijing held a strong stance on the two-state solution. Chinese aspirations of bridging the gap between two ancient civilizations are not nascent, yet a repackaging of a two-decades-long peace mediation plan. Beijing for the first time proposed a 5 points peace plan in 2003, a draft provided by the first-ever Chinese Special Envoy to the Middle East. Although with the same content but President Xi had also proposed its Four-Point Peace Plan in 2013, a year after he took office. Diplomacy had also managed to bring the two on the table for a symposium in 2017 after President Xi Jinping in his personal capacity proposed to resume talks. The delegates of both countries took part in the discussion, finding little success in endorsing Beijing’s key role in promoting peace talks.

Why is China extending its role to bring peace between the historic rivals such as Israel and Palestine and to what extent Beijing would become successful? are the questions, answers to which can be found below.

Chinese call for mediation to resolve a frozen conflict came from its enthusiasm after the successful détente signed between KSA and Iran. China has placed its foothold where America was influential for the last 30 years. In recent times, Beijing’s ambitions have out-classed Washington’s strategy to hold influence on the oil exporting countries. And the successful thaw in Iran-Saudi Arabia between Israel and Palestine will enhance its credibility in the region. Earlier, America mediated between the rivals reaching a consensus at least once in the form of the Oslo Accord. Latter, American President Donald Trump also proposed the Middle East Peace Plan. Unfortunately, the plan couldn’t bring a wave of lasting peace to the region.

If China succeeds in its ambitions to bring normalization between Israel and Palestine, it will manage to do what the US couldn’t for years.

China has been ascending to global power status through its initiatives for public goods, presenting itself as a responsible world power. The successive global initiatives for Security and Civilization show their aspirations to bring global peace. The ‘Indivisible Security’ concept from the Global Security Initiative (GSI) which reinforces the security and just environment not at the expense of other countries, is backing up the lasting peace and reducing geopolitical security dilemmas between the arch-rivals such as KSA-Iran and Israel Palestine. Similarly, Global Civilization Initiative (GCI) proposes a people-to-people connection between the International civilizations respecting each other’s values and diversity. So, the expected re-engagements between the historic rivals and the regional foes are enhancing the scope of these initiatives for the Public good.

Middle East is also a part of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project. So, any attempt to bring peace to the region will sturdy China’s investment in the region. When America decided to bring Abraham Accord into the region, normalizing the ties between Arabs and Israel it bypassed the Palestinian people. Although UAE and Bahrain had normalized their ties with Israel, the plan is dormant since then.

The normalization of ties between Arabs can only go through the solution proposed under the UNSC resolutions and China has espoused the right direction to bring stability in the region by bringing peace between Israel and Palestine.

This will enhance China’s investment in the region, building an incentivized partnership with GCC countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Although China has reinstated the offers for peace mediation for Israel-Palestinian Conflict, the success of its ambitions is still uncertain. It is not that easy for Israel to bring peace to Palestine with Chinese mediation. Israel is the key ally and trade partner of the United States of America. The mighty iron dome technology of Israel has been supplemented by Washington. Going in peace with Palestine will give an impetus to diminishing the US role in the region. Similarly, If the mediation occurs with China in the middle, Israel will have to negotiate on equitable terms with Palestine which is not suitable for them. And last but not least, Israel would never minimize its position on the issue. Doing everything in which Palestine would get benefit or accepting Jerusalem as an International city will represent Israel stepping back and minimizing its position. So, no political leader whether it is Netanyahu or Beny Gentz will do a political suicide as the right winger in Tel Aviv is still holding their foot.

While on the other, China can use the economic leverage to convince Israel of the resumption of talks with Palestine. Both countries are advancing for the Free Trade Agreement and are expected to sign in 2023. In addition to it, China has also taken over Israel’s infrastructure Industry. China has invested US$ 19 billion in Israel from the year 2000 to 2020. Moreover, China is also importing arms and defense technology from Israel.

Despite that Beijing’s clout in the middle has been growing significantly, but it seems uncertain that it will harness a major diplomatic thaw in the region. Israel and China are interdependent in some respects yet, there seems to be little influence of China over Israel to bring them to the table.  As Compared to Beijing’s US$ 19 billion, the US has invested US$ 150 billion, and “China is not an ally of Israel. The United States is” as said by Dr. Calabrese quoted by Mathew Jaber Stiffler, Director of the Centre for Arab Narratives (CAN).

China has an enthusiastic character to rise as a global power and a responsible actor in the Middle East.

But what China is expecting is not so easy to get. Beijing wanted to enhance its role as it requires to protect its investment under BRI and for this, it has been transcending for global peace and public good.

High-Stakes 2023 Election in Turkiye

By
Dr. Usman
-
0

Turkey is heading towards one of the most important elections in its history in 2023, as the country is facing serious economic, social, and political challenges that have put significant pressure on President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government. The elections will be a significant test for Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), as it struggles to maintain its grip on power amid growing dissatisfaction among the Turkish people.

The elections will be a significant test for Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), as it struggles to maintain its grip on power amid growing dissatisfaction among the Turkish people.

One of the key challenges facing Erdogan’s government is the economic situation in the country. Turkey has been facing high inflation rates, rising unemployment, and a weakening currency in recent years, which has had a significant impact on the daily lives of Turkish citizens. Erdogan has promised to address these issues through economic reforms, but many Turks are skeptical of his ability to do so, and there is growing frustration over the government’s handling of the economy.

Another challenge facing Erdogan’s government is the deteriorating human rights situation in the country. Turkey has been criticized by human rights organizations for its crackdown on political opposition, civil society, and media in recent years. Erdogan has been accused of using the judiciary to silence dissent and of violating basic freedoms such as freedom of expression and assembly.

The upcoming elections in 2023 will be crucial in determining the future direction of Turkey. Erdogan’s AKP has been in power since 2002, and has won every election since then, with the exception of the Istanbul mayoral election in 2019. The AKP has traditionally relied on its strong base of support in rural areas and conservative religious groups to win elections. However, there are signs that this support is beginning to erode, as many Turks are becoming disillusioned with the party’s performance and policies.

The outcome of the 2023 elections will have significant implications for Turkey’s future. If Erdogan and the AKP win, they are likely to continue with their current policies, including their crackdown on opposition and civil society.

The main opposition parties in Turkey, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), are both hoping to capitalize on this dissatisfaction and win the upcoming elections. The CHP has been making significant gains in recent local elections, particularly in Istanbul, where it won the mayoral election in 2019. The HDP, which has faced significant pressure from the government in recent years, is hoping to increase its representation in parliament.

The outcome of the 2023 elections will have significant implications for Turkey’s future. If Erdogan and the AKP win, they are likely to continue with their current policies, including their crackdown on opposition and civil society. If the opposition parties win, they are likely to pursue a more liberal and democratic agenda, including reforms to the economy and the judicial system.

Turkey has been facing growing pressure from its Western allies over its human rights record, its role in Syria, and its relationship with Russia. The government’s crackdown on opposition and civil society has also led to growing concerns about the state of democracy in the country.

One of the factors that will play a significant role in the 2023 elections is the role of Turkey’s youth. Turkey has one of the youngest populations in Europe, with over half of its population under the age of 30. The country’s youth have been at the forefront of protests against the government in recent years, particularly in 2013 during the Gezi Park protests. The youth vote will be a key factor in the upcoming elections, and the opposition parties are hoping to capitalize on the dissatisfaction of young Turks with the AKP’s policies and performance.

Another factor that will play a significant role in the 2023 elections is Turkey’s relations with the international community. Turkey has been facing growing pressure from its Western allies over its human rights record, its role in Syria, and its relationship with Russia. The government’s crackdown on opposition and civil society has also led to growing concerns about the state of democracy in the country. The international community will be watching the 2023 elections closely, and the outcome will have implications for Turkey’s relationship with its Western allies and its place in the international community.

The COVID-19 pandemic is also likely to have an impact on the 2023 elections. Turkey has been hit hard by the pandemic, with a significant number of cases and deaths. The government’s handling of the pandemic has been criticized by some, and there is growing frustration among the population over the government’s response. The pandemic has also had an impact on the economy, with many businesses struggling to survive. The AKP’s ability to address these challenges will be a key factor in the upcoming elections.

In conclusion, the 2023 elections will be a crucial moment in Turkey’s history. The country is facing significant challenges, including economic problems, human rights violations, and growing dissatisfaction among the population. The elections will be a test of whether Erdogan’s government can address these challenges and maintain its grip on power, or whether the opposition parties can capitalize on the government’s weaknesses and win the election. The outcome of the election will have significant implications for Turkey’s future, including its relationship with the international community and its place in the world. The international community will be closely watching the election, and the pressure will be on the Turkish government to ensure a free and fair election.

 

China’s Tri-Ring” Strategy for Afghanistan Crisis and Beyond

By
Dr. Zukun Lyu
-
0

In the aftermath of the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan, China has adopted a “tri-ring” approach to the issue. This approach involves three key strategies: engagement, non-interference, and security cooperation. The tri-ring approach is an attempt by China to promote stability in Afghanistan and the wider region, while also protecting its own interests.

The first ring of China’s tri-ring approach is engagement. China has been engaging with the Taliban and other political forces in Afghanistan in an attempt to promote dialogue and reconciliation. This has included hosting Taliban representatives in China for talks and offering to play a role in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. China has also been engaging with other regional powers, such as Russia and Pakistan, in an attempt to coordinate efforts to promote stability in Afghanistan.

The second ring of China’s tri-ring approach is non-interference. China has been emphasizing the importance of respecting Afghanistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This has been a key element of China’s foreign policy in recent years, as the country seeks to avoid becoming embroiled in conflicts and disputes in other parts of the world. China has also been urging other countries to respect Afghanistan’s sovereignty and refrain from interfering in its internal affairs.

The third ring of China’s tri-ring approach is security cooperation. China has been working to promote security cooperation with other regional powers, such as Russia and Pakistan, in an attempt to promote stability in Afghanistan and the wider region. This has included joint military exercises, intelligence sharing, and other forms of cooperation. China has also been working to promote security cooperation with other countries, such as the United States, in an attempt to coordinate efforts to combat terrorism and other security threats.

 is not just limited to Afghanistan. China has been using this approach in other parts of the world, as it seeks to promote stability and protect its own

interests. For example, China has been using the tri-ring approach in its relations with North Korea, where it has been engaging with the regime while also emphasizing the importance of non-interference and promoting security cooperation.

China’s tri-ring approach is driven by a number of factors. One of the key factors is China’s growing economic and strategic interests in the region. China has been investing heavily in infrastructure projects in Afghanistan and other countries in the region, as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. This has given China a stake in the stability of the region and has increased its interest in promoting peace and security.

Another factor driving China’s tri-ring approach is the country’s desire to project itself as a responsible global power. China has been emphasizing the importance of multilateralism and cooperation in its foreign policy, as it seeks to counter the perception that it is a destabilizing force in the world. The tri-ring approach is seen as a way for China to demonstrate its commitment to stability and cooperation in the region.

There are also challenges to China’s tri-ring approach. One of the biggest challenges is the difficulty of engaging with the Taliban and other political forces in Afghanistan, given their history of human rights abuses and support for terrorism. China’s engagement with the Taliban has drawn criticism from some quarters, who see it as a tacit endorsement of the group’s actions.

Another challenge is the difficulty of balancing China’s interests with those of other regional powers. Russia and Pakistan, in particular, have their own interests in the region, and China’s efforts to promote stability and cooperation may not always align with theirs. China will need to navigate these competing interests in order to successfully implement its tri-ring approach.

The success of China’s tri-ring approach will depend on a number of factors. One of the key factors will be the willingness of other regional powers to cooperate with China. Russia and Pakistan, in particular, will play a key role in implementing the tri-ring approach, given their own interests in the region. If these countries are willing to cooperate with China, the tri-ring approach may have a greater chance of success.

Another factor will be the ability of China to navigate the complex political landscape in Afghanistan. The country has a long history of conflict and instability, and it will not be easy for China to engage with the various political forces in the country. However, China’s experience in other conflict zones, such as North Korea, may prove useful in navigating this complex landscape.

In conclusion, China’s tri-ring approach to the Afghanistan issue and beyond is an attempt by China to promote stability and protect its own interests in the region. The approach involves engagement, non-interference, and security cooperation, and is driven by a desire to project China as a responsible global power. However, there are challenges to the implementation of this approach, including the difficulty of engaging with the Taliban, the need to balance China’s interests with those of other regional powers, and the potential backlash from other countries and organizations that view China’s engagement with the Taliban as problematic. Nevertheless, the tri-ring approach is a significant development in China’s foreign policy, as it represents a departure from the country’s previous policy of non-intervention in the affairs of other countries.

 

The United States and the CSTO in Central Asian Affairs

By
Dr. Fatime Mehdi
-
0

The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is a military alliance comprised of six former Soviet republics: Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. The CSTO was established in 1992 to promote collective security and defense among its member states, and it has been involved in a number of regional security issues in recent years. One of the key issues that the CSTO is currently grappling with is its relationship with the United States in Central Asia.

The United States has been involved in Central Asia since the collapse of the Soviet Union, with a particular focus on promoting democracy, economic development, and security in the region.

The United States has been involved in Central Asia since the collapse of the Soviet Union, with a particular focus on promoting democracy, economic development, and security in the region. The United States has also been involved in military operations in the region, including the war in Afghanistan. This has put the United States in competition with the CSTO for influence in the region, particularly in terms of security cooperation.

One of the key challenges in the CSTO’s relationship with the United States is the question of Afghanistan. The CSTO has expressed concern about the security situation in Afghanistan and the potential for instability in the region. The United States has been involved in efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, including the training and equipping of Afghan security forces. The CSTO has expressed concern about the potential for these efforts to destabilize the region, particularly if they lead to a further escalation of conflict.

The United States has been involved in a number of military training programs and exercises in the region, particularly in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The CSTO has expressed concern about these activities, particularly in light of its own military capabilities

Another challenge is the question of military cooperation between the CSTO and the United States. The United States has been involved in a number of military training programs and exercises in the region, particularly in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The CSTO has expressed concern about these activities, particularly in light of its own military capabilities and the potential for these activities to undermine its influence in the region.

Despite these challenges, there have been some efforts to improve cooperation between the CSTO and the United States. For example, the United States has been involved in efforts to promote regional security and stability, including through the C5+1 initiative, which brings together the five Central Asian states and the United States to promote economic and security cooperation in the region.

There have also been efforts to promote dialogue and cooperation between the CSTO and the United States on security issues. For example, the CSTO has held a number of meetings with representatives of the United States and other international organizations to discuss regional security issues, including the situation in Afghanistan.

However, there are significant challenges to improving cooperation between the CSTO and the United States. One of the key challenges is the lack of trust between the two sides. The CSTO has expressed concern about the United States’ intentions in the region, particularly given the history of U.S. involvement in Central Asia. The United States, on the other hand, has expressed concern about the CSTO’s relationship with Russia and its potential for undermining regional stability.

Another challenge is the question of regional alignment. The CSTO is closely aligned with Russia, and there are concerns that improved cooperation with the United States could undermine this alignment. The United States, on the other hand, has been working to promote a rules-based regional order that is based on international law and respect for sovereignty. This can put the United States at odds with the CSTO, which has been accused of violating human rights and suppressing political opposition in some of its member states.

The CSTO is closely aligned with Russia, and there are concerns that improved cooperation with the United States could undermine this alignment. The United States, on the other hand, has been working to promote a rules-based regional order that is based on international law and respect for sovereignty.

One area where the CSTO and the United States could potentially work together is in promoting regional economic development. Central Asia is home to significant natural resources, including oil, gas, and minerals, and there is enormous potential for economic growth in the region. The United States has been involved in efforts to promote economic development in the region, including through investment and trade initiatives. The CSTO could potentially play a role in promoting greater economic integration and cooperation among its member states, as well as with other countries in the region.

Another area where the CSTO and the United States could work together is in promoting

regional security and stability. This could include efforts to address common threats, such as terrorism and transnational crime, as well as promoting greater cooperation and coordination among the countries of the region on security issues. The United States has been involved in efforts to promote regional security, including through the provision of military assistance and training. The CSTO could potentially play a role in promoting greater regional security cooperation and dialogue, as well as in addressing common security challenges.

Finally, the CSTO and the United States could work together to promote greater respect for human rights and democratic governance in the region. Central Asia is home to a number of countries with poor human rights records, and there is a need for greater international attention and engagement on these issues. The United States has been involved in efforts to promote human rights and democracy in the region, including through support for civil society and political opposition groups. The CSTO could potentially play a role in promoting greater respect for human rights and democratic governance in its member states, as well as in promoting regional dialogue and cooperation on these issues.

The United States has been involved in efforts to promote human rights and democracy in the region, including through support for civil society and political opposition groups.

In conclusion, the relationship between the CSTO and the United States in Central Asia is complex and challenging, but there are opportunities for greater cooperation and dialogue on a range of issues. Improving cooperation between the two sides will require a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue and find common ground, as well as a commitment to promoting regional stability, economic development, and respect for human rights. By working together, the CSTO and the United States can help to address the many challenges facing the region and promote a more stable, prosperous, and democratic future for the people of Central Asia.

 

Reflections on Dialogue with TTP – China-Pakistan-Afghanistan Triptych

By
Asma Khan Durrani
-
0

Amidst the shifting winds of diplomacy, a trilateral bond emerges. China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, entwined in destiny’s embrace, have embarked on a voyage of shared aspirations, their interests in unison. A narrative of forging stronger ties unfolds, weaving a tapestry of unity and hope, in the realm of security, economy, and defense.

The Trilateral Foreign Minister’s Security Dialogue between China Afghanistan and Pakistan was held in which Pakistan and Afghanistan reviewed their bilateral relations in various areas including politics, economics, trade, connectivity, peace and security, and education. The Afghan Foreign Minister held meetings with Pakistani leaders. China’s Foreign Minister Qin Gang participated in the trilateral dialogue. Pakistan is committed to pursuing continuous and practical engagement with the Afghan Government and desires a peaceful, prosperous, stable, and connected Afghanistan.

China, as the third participant in the dialogue, has significant interests in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Beijing is a key economic and defense partner of Pakistan and has made substantial investments in the country, including $60 billion in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. However, in recent years, armed groups have carried out multiple attacks targeting Chinese nationals and interests in Pakistan. In response, China has requested that Pakistan ensure the safety of its citizens and investments. Chinese involvement in Afghanistan is more to do with security concerns than economic interests. China’s primary concern in Afghanistan is to reduce the threat posed by the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an al-Qaeda-affiliated armed group that has carried out attacks in China in pursuit of creating “East Turkistan” on the Chinese mainland. This is why Beijing continues to engage with the Afghan Taliban. China has maintained its diplomatic presence through the Afghan contact group and other multilateral forums under the SCO and beyond. This positions China to mitigate immediate security threats.

The Foreign Minister of Afghanistan, Amir Muttaqi, called upon both Pakistan and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to engage in dialogue. Muttaqi expressed the importance of fostering a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflicts in the region. His visit to Pakistan signifies a significant step towards diplomatic engagement between the two neighboring countries. Muttaqi urged for the resumption of discussions between Pakistan and the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Whilst analyzing, the potential fallout of the probable dialogue which may ensue could constitute the following outcomes. Positive outcomes could entail conflict resolution by engaging in dialogue with the TTP, it could provide an opportunity to address the root causes of the conflict and work towards a peaceful resolution. Open communication channels may help identify common ground and find areas for compromise. Through dialogue it could potentially lead to a reduction in violence. If both Pakistan and the TTP commit to peaceful negotiations, it could result in a decrease in terrorist attacks and a more stable security situation. Similarly, reintegration opportunities through dialogue, as it can provide a platform for the TTP to express their concerns, grievances, and demands. It may offer an opportunity for the group to explore options for reintegration into mainstream society, thereby reducing their militant activities. By Involving the TTP in dialogue it can contribute to a broader peace process in the region. If successful, it may encourage other militant groups to consider peaceful means of resolving conflicts, leading to a more peaceful and stable environment.

Furthermore, it is imperative to be abreast of the negative considerations as well, as trust and intentions when engaging in dialogue with a militant group like the TTP raises questions about their trustworthiness and their true intentions. There is a risk that the TTP may exploit the talks to buy time, regroup, or gain legitimacy without genuinely committing to peace. Likewise, there is a potential for escalation as in some cases, dialogue with militant groups can lead to an escalation of violence if the talks break down or if the group uses the opportunity to launch new attacks. There is a need for caution and robust security measures to mitigate these risks. Correspondingly there could be misconception by public perception and political backlash, as dialogue with the TTP might be faced with criticism from sections of society that view negotiations with militant groups as appeasement or a compromise on principles. Political backlash and public perception can impact the effectiveness and sustainability of the dialogue process. Moreover, inclusion of stakeholders in paramount as the success of dialogue depends on the involvement of all relevant stakeholders. If certain factions within the TTP or other militant groups refuse to participate, it may limit the effectiveness of the dialogue process and hinder the chances of a positive outcome.

FM Muttaqi discussed security issues with Pakistani officials and expressed hope that problems can be resolved through diplomatic channels and negotiations. He believes that the situation will improve in the future. He refuted claims that the TTP is launching attacks on Pakistan from Afghan territory. These comments were made in the context of a recent increase in terrorist attacks in Pakistan, many of which have been claimed by banned groups including the TTP. The increase in attacks occurred after talks between the TTP and the Pakistani government, hosted in Kabul, broke down, leading to the end of a ceasefire in 2022.

Regarding the Taliban government in Afghanistan, the minister stated that their first priority at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was to communicate their desire for a new foreign policy based on cooperation and joint interactions. Their initial focus with Pakistan was on strengthening economic ties and connectivity. Muttaqi stated that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) has fulfilled its responsibility by bringing both sides to the negotiating table and hosting talks between Pakistan and the TTP. He also sought to distance the Afghan Taliban, which came to power in Kabul in 2021, from any responsibility for the TTP. He argued that the TTP is not a new movement and mentioned that Pakistan has acknowledged that 80,000 Pakistanis have died in the past 20 years. He assured Pakistan that his government is working towards peace in the region and stated that their official policy is to prevent bloodshed in Pakistan.

Muttaqi also noted that the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan extends beyond being neighbors. He stated that economic and people-to-people ties have been hindered by political and security concerns, resulting in missed opportunities. He expressed his commitment to turning these challenges into opportunities for positive economic relations. The minister emphasized their efforts to increase regional connectivity through projects such as TAPI, CASA 1000, TAP-500kV, and the Afghan-Trans railway. They recently facilitated the transfer of gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan, reducing the distance to Quetta to 900km. They are committed to supporting this as a permanent route that benefits Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, and Pakistan. During a lecture at the Institute of Strategic Studies on the final day of his four-day visit to Pakistan, FM Muttaqi stated that he hopes that Pakistan’s government and the TTP can resolve their issues through dialogue. He also mentioned that trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan has doubled from US$1.1bn to $2.4bn in the past year and he hopes to increase it to over $5bn. Muttaqi emphasized the need for open communication channels and encouraged both Pakistan and the TTP to come to the negotiating table. He highlighted that dialogue is crucial to achieving stability, peace, and prosperity in Afghanistan and the wider region.

The presence of the Afghan and Chinese FM in Pakistan underscores the growing recognition of Pakistan’s role in facilitating peace talks and reconciliation efforts. Pakistan has long been involved in facilitating discussions between different Afghan factions and has been instrumental in hosting previous rounds of talks. Muttaqi’s call for dialogue with the TTP is a significant gesture towards initiating a peaceful resolution within Afghanistan. The TTP, an extremist organization, has been responsible for numerous acts of violence and instability in the region. By urging the TTP to engage in talks, Muttaqi aims to address the root causes of conflict and find a path towards reconciliation.

The international community will closely observe the response of Pakistan and the TTP to this call for dialogue. The success of such negotiations could have a profound impact on the security situation in Afghanistan and the broader stability of the region. It is hoped that all parties involved will seize this opportunity for constructive engagement and work towards lasting peace in Afghanistan.

In conclusion, the potential positive outcomes of Pakistan holding dialogue with the TTP include conflict resolution, reduced violence, reintegration opportunities, and contributing to a broader peace process. However, it is crucial to carefully consider the negative considerations, such as trust issues, potential for escalation, public perception, and stakeholder involvement. A comprehensive assessment of these factors is necessary before determining the potential for a positive outcome from such dialogue.

Together, China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan script a tale of unwavering resolve, etching their names in the annals of history. This trilateral dialogue is rooted in trust and shared interests, which pave the way for a future where security, economy, and defense unite nations alike.

Religious Intolerance in India

By
Asad Malik
-
0

Religious freedom is important part of the society. No country can flourish without giving freedom to its people. Some countries in the world are using religion as a political tool to get maximum political mileage. Religion card is being played in some countries at the behest of government by some religiously motivated organizations. India is one of the states who have been using religion (Hindutva ideology) in order to accomplish particular and politically driven objectives. The endorsement of which came from US this time around.

Religion card is being played in some countries at the behest of government by some religiously motivated organizations. India is one of the states who have been using religion (Hindutva ideology) in order to accomplish particular and politically driven objectives. The endorsement of which came from US this time around.

India has been designated as a country of particular concern (CPC) on religious freedom by US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). The USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan US federal government commission that monitors and reports on religious freedom issues around the world. India was designated as a CPC in the USCIRF’s 2021 annual report, citing concerns about Indian government’s treatment of religious minorities, including Muslims, Christians, and Sikhs. The report highlights incidents of violence against religious minorities, including mob violence and lynching, as well as discriminatory laws and policies that restrict their rights and freedoms.

The USCIRF has also been critical of India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which was passed in 2019 and provides a path to citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from neighboring countries. Critics of the law argue that it discriminates against Muslims and undermines India’s secular constitution. However, Indian government has rejected the USCIRF’s designation as baseless and biased. The government has also maintained that it is committed to protecting the rights of all its citizens, including religious minorities. However, concerns about religious freedom in India continue to be raised by human rights organizations and other groups both within and outside the country.

Indian government has rejected the USCIRF’s designation as baseless and biased. The government has also maintained that it is committed to protecting the rights of all its citizens, including religious minorities

India has been witnessing massive crackdown against non-Hindu communities under the government of PM Modi. There have been concerns raised by some individuals and organizations about religious intolerance in India under ruling BJP and PM Modi. Critics allege that the government and its supporters (Radical Hindus) have been promoting a Hindu nationalist agenda that discriminates against religious minorities, particularly Muslims.

There have been incidents of violence against religious minorities, including mob lynching and attacks on individuals for allegedly consuming beef or transporting cows, which are considered sacred by Hindus. Critics also point to the passage of laws that they say discriminate against Muslims. In addition, some have raised concerns about the government’s actions regarding religious sites, such as the Babri mosque in Ayodhya, which was destroyed in 1992 by Hindu nationalists who wanted to build a temple on the site. In 2019, Indian Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hindu claimants to the site and ordered the construction of a temple, which some saw as a victory for Hindu nationalists.

Concerns about religious intolerance and discrimination in India continue to be raised by some individuals, organizations, and international bodies.

The Indian government and BJP supporters have rejected allegations of religious intolerance and argue that the government is committed to protecting the rights of all citizens, including religious minorities. They also argue that the government’s policies are aimed at promoting economic development and national unity. It’s worth noting that opinions on this issue are divided, and there are also many who do not see the situation in the same way. However, concerns about religious intolerance and discrimination in India continue to be raised by some individuals, organizations, and international bodies.

There are certainly concerns that the Indian government has not done enough to address incidents of religious intolerance and discrimination. While the government has taken some steps to address these issues, including passing laws against hate speech and violence, critics argue that more needs to be done to protect the rights of religious minorities.

Some have also criticized the government’s response to incidents of violence and discrimination, arguing that it has been slow or insufficient. In some cases, government officials have been accused of making statements that appear to justify or condone violence against religious minorities. It’s worth noting that the Indian government has denied allegations of religious intolerance and discrimination and has taken steps to promote religious harmony and tolerance. However, the issue remains a contentious and divisive one in India, with strong opinions on both sides. Ultimately, the situation in India is complex, and there are no easy solutions to the issue of religious intolerance and discrimination. What is clear, however, is that more needs to be done to protect the rights of religious minorities and promote religious tolerance and understanding in the country.

The addressing of issues such as religious intolerance and discrimination requires a collective effort from all stakeholders, including governments, civil society organizations, and individuals.

International organizations and governments can play a role in promoting religious freedom and tolerance through advocacy, monitoring, and providing support to local organizations and individuals working to promote these values. They can also use diplomatic channels to engage with Indian government to encourage Modi government to take action to protect the rights of religious minorities and promote tolerance.

1...128129130...146Page 129 of 146

Stratheia aims to be a global pioneer in the field of strategic intelligence. Our independent team of researchers cover topics ranging from the latest geopolitical events, to public policy, cyber security, and intelligence analytics.

Share with Us

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Write for us
About Us
Writers Pool

© All Rights Reserved. Stratheia, 2024