Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog Page 132

Legal and Diplomatic Liability for Holding G-20 Summit in IIOJK

0

The decision to hold the G-20 Summit in Jammu and Kashmir, a disputed territory recognized by the UN, is seen as an attempt to conceal the ongoing war crimes in the region by India. On April 11th, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed its strong disapproval after India amended its G-20 schedule to include gatherings in Srinagar and Leh.

Pakistan condemned India’s actions as irresponsible and serving its illegal occupation of Jammu and Kashmir in violation of the UN Security Council resolutions and international law.

In addition, Pakistan also denounced India’s oppressive measures against the people of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), including attempts to alter the region’s demographic composition. China has also opposed India’s plan to hold the Summit in Jammu and Kashmir and urged the “parties concerned to avoid unilateral moves that may complicate the situation.” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian emphasized the need for “settling the Kashmir dispute through dialogue and consultation to maintain regional peace and stability.”

In August 2019, the Indian government unilaterally abolished Kashmir’s special status; and divided it into two separate union territories – Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir; and Buddhist-dominated Ladakh. The move has eroded autonomy of the region and has pushed it towards de facto recognition. For the first time since then, an international event is being hosted in the region. India’s actions in the IIOJK have drawn widespread condemnation from human rights organizations. The Indian government’s imposition of a communication blackout and curfew in the region has led to extensive human rights violations, including arbitrary arrests, extrajudicial killings, and instances of torture.

Hosting the Summit in the disputed territory is seen as a smokescreen aimed at diverting global attention away from the underlying issue of war crimes being committed by the Indian security forces in the region.

It is a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Conventions. Article 32 of the Convention prohibits the use of torture against civilians in occupied territory. It states that “The High Contracting Parties specifically agree that each of them is prohibited from taking any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishment, mutilation and, medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person, but also to any other measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents.” Article 27 reads that “Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity.”

The decision to hold a high-profile Summit in the IIOJK, known for its disputed status, has raised questions regarding New Delhi’s intentions and the ulterior motives behind the move. In tandem, the silence of the G-20 nations on the rampant human rights abuses in the region is a tragedy in itself. The lack of reaction from the international community to India’s selection of Kashmir and Ladakh as G-20 venues could be interpreted as a tacit approval of India’s decision, implying that the region is no longer considered disputed.

It is widely held that India is attempting to divert attention from the war crimes committed by its security forces in the region and present a façade of normalcy in the IIOJK through an investment conference and now hosting a G-20 Summit. It is believed that the Summit in Kashmir is a ploy to deceive the international community regarding the actual situation in the region.

The potential participation of the G-20 nations in the Summit could undermine the credibility of the UNSC resolutions; advocating for the right of self-determination for the Kashmiris, and giving credence to the Indian claims while overlooking the human rights abuses in the region.

So, before undertaking a potentially contentious path, it would be wise for the heads of G-20 states to exercise prudence.

The BJP government – fixated on Hindutva ideology, with Narendra Modi at the helm, appears determined in exploiting the G-20 Summit to advance its own geopolitical and domestic political objectives. This act is believed to be a move towards promoting the dangerous settler colonialism project, which entails the displacement of Kashmiris and the unlawful occupation of their land. The recent display of posters in Srinagar was to raise awareness among G-20 nations regarding India’s motives behind the Summit.

Pakistan expresses deep concern over India’s decision to host the G-20 meetings, particularly the events centered on tourism in the IIOJK. From Pakistan’s standpoint, this is a troubling development as it dilutes the UN’s auspices and infringes on the right to self-determination of the Kashmiri people. While Pakistan has been drawing attention to the human rights situation in the region, India is attempting to counter Pakistan’s narrative on Jammu and Kashmir, projecting a sense of normalcy through the Summit. However, this approach disregards the ongoing war crimes and fails to address the underlying issue of the internationally recognized Jammu and Kashmir dispute.

Fumble of Indian Security Apparatus

0

The extrajudicial murder of Atiq Ahmed on April 15, raises a two-throng dilemma in terms of the prevalent security apparatus in the state of India as well as possible state complicity specifically when it comes to prejudice against its minorities.

Uttar Pradesh (a state where the unfortunate incident took place) has seen the deaths of more than 180 civilians in some 9000 alleged police encounters by police officials, in the past six years.

It is horrendous how the handcuffed brothers, Atiq Ahmed and Ashraf Ahmed were gunned down amid the massive police cordon and a huge media gaggle. The brothers were killed when they came out of the hospital after their mandatory checkup required by a Supreme Court order. Atiq was already jailed in Gujarat and was brought to Prayagraj for a court hearing concerning the Umesh Pal murder case. Umesh Pal was killed on February 24, following which his wife Jaya Pal registered an FIR against the duo with 12 others. Jaya claims that Umesh was an eye witness in the murder case of MLA Raju Pal of the Bahujan Samaj Party. Raju was killed after he won by-elections in Atiq’s stronghold of Allahabad after later resigning as MLA on becoming Member of Parliament MP from the Phulpur Lok Sabha constituency, also in Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.

Umesh Pal had previously registered an FIR against Atiq alleging him for his kidnapping in February 2006 for which Atiq was handed life imprisonment in March this year. It was his first conviction in some 101 cases registered against him, that are also seen as an element of political engineering against him. Atiq Ahmed denied all charges. His extrajudicial murder now showcases the rough and tumble of the state of India that has gone further astray under the government of the Hindutva-led BJP.

The overlap between organized crime and the Indian political system has garnered contempt from various spheres of influence in India with Gilles Verniers, a political science professor at Ashoka University in New Delhi, whose research has focused on electoral and party politics in Uttar Pradesh, calling it “a break-down of the very concept of the rule of law”, while talking to CNN.

“The larger significance is what this means for the rule of law and the transformation of the meaning of the rule of law from a system of justice that is supposed to follow due process and be impartial and not be arbitrary into a form of self-justice in the hand of the executive (with an implicit reference to Uttar Pradesh’s Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath) that is fundamentally arbitrary, violent and partisan,” Verniers said.

Adiyanath has previously vowed to destroy “Atiq”, something he has achieved ostensibly. It is skeptical as to how his entire family has been chased if not gunned down in the ensuing hare and hounds, with the state not even sparing his minor sons and putting them in juvenile jails. It becomes a problem to be interrogated as to what law, national or international allows hounding the entire strata of relatives for the crime committed by a single individual.

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 43/173 (endorsed by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), rather stipulates an entire “Body of Principles” for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment. Principle 6, in this regard clearly envisages that “No person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. No circumstance whatever may be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”, following which principle 7 calls upon states to ensure compliance with the aforementioned principle. India miserably fails at both, compliance and ensuring justice, and this is something the International Community shall be taking note of.

As far as India is concerned scapegoating Pakistan for its own misgivings will only fester the state’s gullibility and populace grievance.

On one account, Uttar Pradesh presented a charge sheet before the court in which it found a reprieve in forcefully forging a linkage between Atiq and the ISI of Pakistan. The concocted charge sheet also claims that Atiq agreed to acquire weapon supplies from Pakistan via drones coming from the Punjab border. Even if this is believed to be the case, it again suggests military and intelligence failure on the part of the Indian army.

Moving forth, India is also trying to instigate skepticism and falsified rhetoric that Zigana, a gun used to kill Atiq might have come from Pakistan. While the origins of the pistol are not clear, it is pertinent to mention here that this gun costs nearly Rs. 6 lacs in India’s own underground market, as reported by Indian Express.

Hence blame-gaming Pakistan for India’s own misgivings would not do. And if any such proclamations by India bear any weight, it shall come up with concrete proof rand not merely fabricated proclamations.

World has taken an arduous journey post-2001 to counter religious-based terrorism. This is while the fascist Hindutva regime in India continues its drive to bolster state-sponsored terrorism in the region and beyond. In this case, for instance, assailants were seen chanting ‘Jaisheri Ram’ or ‘Hail Ram’. India therefore needs to understand, analyze and address its own foiled security fabric and systematic misgivings (against minorities) that continue to fester and inflict the entire region, in return.

The Ascendance and Subsequent Decline of Kurdish Dominance in Iraq

0

Despite the KRG’s noteworthy accomplishments over the last 30 years, its unrelenting pursuit of economic independence has only helped to deepen internal conflicts and a corrupt system of government while shifting its reliance from Iraq to Turkey and from foreign assistance to oil income. The power balance that formerly favored the KRG is now changing in favor of Baghdad as Kurdish divisions widen and security in the rest of Iraq improves. Since the vote, disagreements have occurred between the ‘Regional States’ leaders on their positions in Iraq and strategies for reviving the region’s struggling oil industry.

As an oppressed ethnic minority, the Kurds in Iraq have always felt fundamental suffering as they fight for autonomy. By preserving Kurdish rights, the rulers of Kurdistan won acceptance. Nevertheless, this revolutionary image was supplanted with democratic legitimacy during the first Gulf War and the 1992 elections. The Kurdistan Regional Government was established as a consequence of the elections, which also officially ushered in the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdistan Democratic Party as political parties. Since that time, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), both of which are currently led by members of their second and third generations, to be specific, have each been closely linked to a particular family.

In fact, between 2004 and 2014, the KRG successfully tapped into post-invasion prospects to achieve economic development. The capital, Erbil, had its area more than double due to the development boom at that time. According to the KRG, ethnic cleansing’s “Anfal campaign” in 1988 devastated 65 percent of Kurdistan’s rural districts.

Two international airports were developed by the KRG in Sulaymaniyah and Erbil by 2005, deregulating the area’s isolation and allowing it to trade with the rest of the globe. The Iraqi government did not start enforcing this rule for foreign travelers until 2021.

Two international airports were developed by the KRG in Sulaymaniyah and Erbil by 2005, deregulating the area’s isolation and allowing it to trade with the rest of the globe. The Iraqi government did not start enforcing this rule for foreign travelers until 2021. Public employment programs in their entirety have decreased unemployment, but foreign workers have mostly filled the skilled labor need. Additionally, the Investment Law of 2006, which gave investors benefits including property ownership, tax exemptions, and profit repatriation, assisted the KRG in luring significant amounts of local and international funding. Over 3,000 international businesses are now registered in the area. The KRG is home to 42 consulates and maintains 14 representative offices across the globe.

A significant regional commerce route and destination, Iraqi Kurdistan has also benefited from its strategic position and stability. The “regional government’s” top commercial partner is Turkey, which shares its only land border with Iraq with the “Kurdistan region.” About $2.5 billion in commerce was conducted between Turkey and “Iraqi Kurdistan” in 2017, accounting for nearly one-third of Ankara’s overall trade with Iraq. Likewise, Iraqi Kurdistan receives a third of Iran’s estimated $2.4 billion in annual imports to Iraq. Furthermore, the KRG-controlled border crossings are used by 50% of Iran’s exports to Iraq.

The weakness of the political parties in the area has led to disputes between the two governing dynasties in Iraqi Kurdistan in recent years. Jalal Talabani, the founder of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, passed away in 2017, and his oldest son and nephew jointly took over the party’s leadership. The cousins Pavel and Lahore Talabani fought in 2021, and the first one was able to depose the second. These internal conflicts reveal systemic flaws and a deterioration of democracy in the Kurdistan Region.

The “regional government’s” institutions were ineffective and totally equipped to handle the “economic tsunami” that started in 2014. A budget was last authorized by the “Kurdistan Region” parliament in 2012.

For instance, the “regional government’s” institutions were ineffective and totally equipped to handle the “economic tsunami” that started in 2014. A budget was last authorized by the “Kurdistan Region” parliament in 2012. Out-of-control inflation drove employment from the private sector into the public sector. By 2017, the KRG was the biggest employer in Kurdistan, paying $750 million a month to employ half of the labor force or over 1.4 million people. While the embryonic private sector is dependent on holding businesses owned or controlled by members of the two governing families of Kurdistan, corruption and incompetence have warped employment in the public sector, resulting in thousands of ghost workers, multiple positions, pensions, and unjustified retirees. The KRG’s energy industry grew more secretive and unaccountable in order to avoid showing Baghdad its cards.

The Peshmerga forces have a high level of respect and influence and have maintained strong public and political support, particularly since they joined the coalition headed by the US to fight ISIS. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdistan Democratic Party’s enormous political split, however, diminished the importance of the “Kurdistan region” as an ally of the United States and curtailed Kurdish influence in Baghdad. The number of Peshmerga combatants is still being determined with any degree of accuracy, although it is assumed to be between 160,000 and twice that amount. Masrour Barzani, the regional prime minister, stated that the Peshmerga forces had more generals than the American or Chinese armies. Since the beginning of the fight against ISIS, the US has paid the “Peshmerga” groups wages and given training in return for a commitment to bring them together under the control of the “Kurdistan Regional Government” rather than the two dominant parties. However, the PMF has signaled that it supports the KDP and PUK in their refusal to give up control of their units.

The decades of war, genocide, and neglect, post-invasion Kurdish politics have returned, but they have not been able to resolve long-standing internal conflicts. The most established institutions in the area that may sustain an independent Kurdistan are still the economy and the Peshmerga forces.

Despite the persistent narrative of the complaints and victimization of Iraqi Kurds, they have exercised tremendous authority and freedom of choice throughout the last three decades. The decades of war, genocide, and neglect, post-invasion Kurdish politics have returned, but they have not been able to resolve long-standing internal conflicts. The most established institutions in the area that may sustain an independent Kurdistan are still the economy and the Peshmerga forces. The power balance that formerly favored the KRG is changing in favor of Baghdad as Kurdish divides widen and the security situation in the rest of Iraq improves. Since the vote, there have been disagreements among “regional government” officials on visions for their involvement in Iraq and strategies for reviving the region’s struggling oil industry. This raises the question of whether the Kurdish economy should continue to rely on international assistance, oil, and budget transfers from Baghdad or if it can develop a robust economy via reform and diversification.

The Potential Effects of Saudi-Iran Détente on Pakistan’s Regional Stability

5

Recent diplomatic progress between Saudi Arabia and Iran has raised hopes for lasting peace in the Middle East. Despite years of animosity, both states have expressed a willingness to engage in talks and find common ground.

The Saudi-Iran deal could have positive implications for Pakistan, a key player in the region, which has historically managed to maintain a delicate balance between its relationships with Saudi Arabia and Iran.

While Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have enjoyed a strong bond due to shared religious and cultural interests, Saudi Arabia has also provided vital economic aid during tough times. Meanwhile, Iran shares a long border with Pakistan and has deep cultural ties, making it an important neighbor.

Additionally, the protracted hostilities in Yemen may be subject to the vicissitudes of the ameliorated relations between both states. Therefore, a new agreement, facilitated by China, for peace between Saudi Arabia and Iran recently strengthened the Yemen agreement. To reach an agreement that restores air connectivity between Riyadh and Tehran, re-establishes diplomatic missions, and strengthens economic cooperation, the foreign ministers of the two countries met in Beijing.

Recently, the erudite Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, engaged in a telephonic discourse with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, and conveyed his warm felicitations on the commendable normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, as espoused in the “Trilateral Joint Statement.” The Foreign Minister lauded the sagacious leadership of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in this positive development.

Meanwhile, the Foreign Minister also held a telephonic colloquy with the esteemed Foreign Minister of Iran, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, and commended the resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which stands as a testament to the sagacity and foresight of the leadership of both states. Furthermore, he applauded the instrumental role China played in facilitating this process, as expressed through the Joint Trilateral Statement signed by Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China on March 10 in Beijing.

Moreover, a plausible convergence between Saudi Arabia and Iran has substantial implications for Pakistan’s foreign policy. Should the two regional powers succeed in reconciling their long-standing animosity, Pakistan could potentially forge closer relationships with both states, founded on common economic and strategic interests.

Closer ties with KSA could generate much-needed investment and bilateral economic collaboration, while improved ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran could grant Pakistan access to Central Asia, thereby bolstering its energy security.

Undoubtedly, enhancing bilateral relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia would yield significant economic benefits for Pakistan. As Iran and Saudi Arabia represent two of Pakistan’s principal trade partners, forging closer economic ties could potentially unlock novel business prospects for the country. Moreover, a thaw in relations between these two regional powers would facilitate the stabilization of crude oil prices, which would immensely benefit Pakistan’s energy sector.

Despite Pakistan’s traditionally dispassionate position on the conflict, the progression of cordiality between Saudi Arabia and Iran could potentially give Pakistan an opportunity to assume a more proactive role in the search for a resolution. The economy of Pakistan will benefit, however, if the relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran improve. Pakistan’s largest trading partner, Saudi Arabia, provides significant trade and investment opportunities in the infrastructure and energy sectors, particularly in Iran. For businesses and entrepreneurs in Pakistan, a more stable and cooperative relationship between these two states may open up new opportunities.

Meanwhile, given the participation of Pakistan and India in important infrastructure projects in Iran, improved relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia could benefit the region’s economic growth. One of these initiatives is the development of the Chabahar port in southeast Iran, which India has already committed to assisting as part of a larger connectivity corridor intended to reach Afghanistan and Central Asia. Similarly, another significant project that may be able to provide Pakistan with the much-needed energy security it needs is the completion of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, which is currently only partially built. Although there have been many obstacles in the way of this project’s completion in the past, such as sanctions against Iran and security issues in Pakistan’s Balochistan province, a warming of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia might make things easier.

However, if the long-standing conflicts between the two nations are not resolved, Pakistan’s security and stability may be in jeopardy. Pakistan has suffered significantly as a result of the ongoing proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran in Yemen. Any intensification of hostilities between the two countries could have serious ramifications for Pakistan by escalating sectarian tensions and fanning the flames of extremism and violence.

India’s Strategic Hedging and Rapprochement with China

3

India, historically espoused neutrality in its relations with great powers. The robust evidence of this can be found in Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) during the Cold War period, India was part of which. Despite that India was categorically a part of the non-aligned 120 countries, it had also envisaged its policy to engage USSR partially, upgrading its defense through Russian technology.

The past few years have witnessed a shift in Indo-China relations, promoting cooperation in many fields.

A decade before, Indian Former Premier Manmohan Singh had ruled out the “old theories of containment” addressed at the Chinese Communist Party’s School in 2013. Singh was lauded by the audience, and received a huge standing ovation in a speech on ‘India, China-A New Era’. Later on, despite aggressive election campaigns, Premier Modi generated an amicable relationship with Beijing. The premier hosted President Xi with Red Carpet at his house in Gujrat and visited to Xi’s house in China. In the meantime, the Indian Prime Minister also visited Washington in 2014. India remained a partner with the US in its global campaign to contain China, becoming part of all US-led alliances such as Quad, etc. Such a strategic competition led to a strategic rivalry at LAC, facing standoffs at Doklam in 2017 and Galwan Valley in 2020 successively.

However, India’s trade volume with China is cascading to a historic high in the post-Galwan era. The year 2021 witnessed a 44% increase in trade crossing the benchmark of US$ 100 billion for the first time in history. Meanwhile, the trade volume surged by 8.4 % reaching $136 billion, passing the 100 billion mark for the second consecutive year in 2022.

What are the reasons behind this Rapprochement? And what impetus became a driving force to bring the fighting rivals economically close to each other? These are the specific questions, the answers to which will be explored below.

New Delhi’s approach harkens back to its historic policy of strategic hedging, an instrumental third policy option for the middle powers during a contest between great powers.

Modi’s successive governments dealt with Beijing with multipronged engagements. For instance, on the one hand, they had joined JAI-Japan, America, and India summit, while on the other joined Russia-India-China (RIC) summit at the side-line of the G20 Osaka Summit in 2019.

India affixes with China vis-à-vis the US in different Institutional frameworks. Since the day, Premier Modi took the oath, he receives an extension of the US-India Defence Cooperation agreement for ten years, and signed many defense and security-related pacts and agreements including the launch of Defence Space Exchanges in 2022 through US Space Command and India’s Defence Space Agency, Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) in 2016, and Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) in 2020.

Beijing is also skeptical of India’s centrality in Washington’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, preventing the Indo-US alliance in the region. Yun Su a director of the China Program at Stimson Center noted the Chinese wariness of India in the wake of its historic influence in South Asia. He argued the interdependence in seeking interests has categorically brought the two rivals close to each other as both, are willing to expand their influence while ‘bolstering their vitality’ through Belt and Road Initiative and Modi Doctrine respectively.

India ostensibly has been having two kinds of sentiments among its community. One is the business-oriented people forging enhanced business activity between the neighbors. While others are nationalism-oriented people igniting the boycott China campaign. The former dominates over the latter causing a quick hike in trade volume, after the Galwan clashes. Moreover, even though the people in India and the political parties had protested to boycott China, the sentiment was the least economic cantered. People still believed that the campaign was more of a nationalist perspective led by the people having the least economic interests or trade with China.

India and China have realized the regional solidity of their relationship and learned the positive engagement in the wake of strategic and economic competition which has helped them to improve their trade volume.

To sum up, everything that has been stated so far, one can say that Modi’s close ally and Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar had given a prudent impetus to pursuing the third policy option of hedging which helped India to achieve its policy goals of defending its status in the US lead alliances and influence the Chinese power in the Indian Ocean Region. Meanwhile, the cooperation has helped India to pull off major diplomatic milestones such as hosting key summits of SCO and G-20.

Moreover, the Chinese emergence as a regional partner to India has helped enhance its influence globally, wielding its economic ambitions through BRI and presenting itself as a global peacemaker which helped as a driving force in its latest mediation in signing a détente between Iran and KSA. On the other, New Delhi’s improvement of ties with Beijing is a death to the US balancing strategy in the Indian Ocean Region.

Secret Documents Revealed – US Global Diplomacy in Crisis

3

More than 500 days have passed since the Ukraine war, but this time Russia has not been isolated in the way that the Soviet Union was isolated from the world. Most countries seem to be reluctant to oppose Russia, but at this time, apart from China, Syria, Iran and many other nations are either pro-Russia or neutral; thus, the Ukraine war is gradually sinking deeper into the economic, political and social system of Europe. In addition to the death of a former British soldier, Jordan Gately, on the front line in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk, Kyiv, and Moscow separately investigated a disturbing video announcing the beheading of a Ukrainian soldier. It is believed to have been filmed by mercenaries of the Wagner group from Russia. The alleged leak of secret US documents about the war in Ukraine is also a sign that the US is gradually losing support from its allies. These documents point to a failure of diplomacy and a lack of mutual trust among allies.

The alleged leak of secret US documents about the war in Ukraine is also a sign that the US is gradually losing support from its allies. These documents point to a failure of diplomacy and a lack of mutual trust among allies.

The FBI has arrested 21-year-old Jake Teixeira for allegedly leaking classified military intelligence documents online, revealing files that show the United States is also monitoring UN chief Antonio Guterres. He is believed to have been soft on Russia after it invaded Ukraine. The documents revealed a record of private communications between Guterres and his deputy, which focused on a Black Sea grain export deal. According to the documents, the UN secretary-general appeared eager to uphold Russian interests. Guterres emphasized efforts to improve Russian export capacity, the leaked US document said, according to the BBC. The key event was that the export agreements Ukraine and Russia signed in July included a commitment to allow grain, fertilizer, and other agricultural goods to be exported across the Black Sea during the war, Guterres and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan mediated the talks, which he said would help ease the global food crisis. The leaked document alleges that during the February talks, Guterres discussed Ukraine. They are undermining broader efforts to hold Moscow accountable for its actions. Another US document from mid-February said Guterres expressed frustration after a call with European Commission President Ursula van der Leyen in which he said that the European Union wants to increase its production of weapons and ammunition for Ukraine. Commenting on the report, Guterres’ spokesman said he was not surprised by the fact that people had been spying on his private conversations. The reaction of the spokesman shows that the leak of this sensitive information is also a preliminary document like WikiLeaks, which was made public, and a message was given to the allies.

After the release of the same secret files that circulated widely on Russian social media last week, the CIA, NSA and the US Defense Intelligence Agency had to deny the reports and launch an investigation to get to the source of the leak.

After the release of the same secret files that circulated widely on Russian social media last week, the CIA, NSA and the US Defense Intelligence Agency had to deny the reports and launch an investigation to get to the source of the leak. These reports also caused embarrassment to Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, two of America’s Middle East allies. Another leaked document is about the United Arab Emirates, which states that Abu Dhabi agreed to leak classified information from the United States and Britain to cooperate with Russia. The disclosure of these documents shows that for the Western Alliance supporting Ukraine, the question has now become important: Can Ukraine win the war? More worryingly, some declassified documents make it clear that Kyiv will not be able to succeed in its expected spring counter-offensive – its air defenses are weak. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kolyba tweeted that Blinken strongly rejected doubts about Ukraine’s ability to win on the battlefield while affirming the steely support of the United States. Russian forces are changing the so-called Syrian scorched earth strategy under which it continued to destroy buildings and places with airstrikes and artillery.

Pakistan’s Exceptional Military Diplomacy- Aiding Foreign Policy Objectives

0

Military diplomacy can be defined as a pattern of initiatives built on the application of negotiations and other diplomatic maneuvers that are primarily carried out by representatives of the defense department as well as other state institutions, with the goal of pursuing foreign policy objectives of the country to ensure successful realization of national security and defense policy.

China and Pakistan have a long-standing history of unwavering strategic alliance and mutual defense cooperation. Their partnership is largely characterized by shared values, interests, and regional perspectives.

The military relationship between Pakistan and China has developed over a period of decades and now covers a wide range of fields, including defense and security, information sharing, joint military drills, technology transfer, and weapons sales. Both nations have reaffirmed their commitment to advancing defense ties and enhancing their military cooperation. Their shared understanding of the threat that India poses to the region is one of the main drivers of Pakistan and China’s military cooperation. In order to offset India’s hostile designs for gaining regional dominance, both nations have unified their strategic objectives to provide a joint extended front to the mutual adversary.

Recently, General Syed Asim Munir, Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) met with Chinese General Zhang Youxia, vice chairman of China’s Central Military Commission (CMC), the military’s supreme command under President Xi Jinping. Both senior military leaders discussed shared security concerns and prospects for expanding military cooperation.

During the meeting, General Asim Munir was assured by a Chinese defense official that China prioritizes Pakistan in its regional diplomacy and strongly encourages Pakistan in preserving its right to sovereignty, the integrity of the land, development interests, and national honor. The all-weather friendship will persist despite Islamabad’s current economic crisis.

According to General Zhang, the two nations’ enduring relationship and mutual trust, which are as rock-solid as they are, are crucial components of regional and even global peace, stability, and prosperity. General Zhang continued, “The Chinese military is willing to cooperate with the Pakistani military to further strengthen and broaden possible cooperation, periodically lift the military-to-military interactions to greater heights, and jointly protect the common interests of the two nations as well as the peace and stability of the region”. He made an allusion to the new era that began in 2012 when President Xi assumed office and declared that China is eager to forge a stronger China-Pakistan community based on a joint destiny.

According to General Asim Munir, Pakistan will steadfastly defend China’s fundamental interests with regard to Hong Kong, Taiwan, Xinjiang, and the South China Sea regardless of how the global and regional situation evolves- a global endorsement of China as Pakistan’s iron brother.

Since taking over as commander of the Pakistan Army in November 2022, General Munir has traveled to four different foreign countries. In January, he made his first official foreign visit since his appointment, traveling to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). A month later, at the invitation of the British Ministry of Defence, he traveled to the UK for a crucial visit to discuss security-related strategic concerns.

Pakistan’s military diplomacy under General Asim Munir has entered a new era of strategic success with the latest, now globally famous, China visit.

In Pakistan, defense diplomacy has mostly assisted state institutions in accomplishing national goals by providing economic anchoring. One of the prime examples could be taken from international cricket matches in Pakistan. It appeared that Pakistan will not be able to host international-level cricket matches anytime soon despite all necessary measures in place to maintain a secure and peaceful environment in the country. By engaging army squads from Australia, England, and Sri Lanka to participate in cricket, the occasion shifted perceptions internationally and gave international teams confidence. This tactic of preemptive defense diplomacy made it possible for international cricket to make a comeback in Pakistan.

By utilizing the soft power tools at the military’s disposal, despite having a great potential in hard power capability- the Pakistan army is expanding its footprint in the international diplomatic realm, thus, is assisting the nation to grow rapidly at different international forums. The recent Joint China-Pakistan display of fraternity and commitment to a weather defense partnership has become a testament to the Pakistan military’s strategic capability in the diplomatic domain.

The Geopolitical Landscape: Major Alliances and conflicts shaping the world Today

0
World geopolitics are changing.USA has been the enforcer of the geopolitical landscape. US disengagement has allowed the rise of global powers, such as China & Russia, who are competing with the US. Global changes have led the EU to think about defending itself.

Putin’s Grand Strategy

0

The great German Philosopher, Karl Marx once said, “History repeats itself, first as a tragedy, second as a farce”. This seems relevant even today. The mighty power of the past (Russia), in an attempt to reestablish its lost sphere of influence, is resurging again quivering the politico-economic corridors of the entire world.  Russia has historically remained an empire, first as Tsarist Russia till 1917, and then as Union of Soviet Socialist Republics till 1991, extending from Central Asia to Europe. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, philosophers like Francis Fukuyama proposed the concept of the “End of History” prognosticating that with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the ultimate triumph of Liberalism, there will be the end of conflicts in the 21st century. But the reverse happened. As it is an established principle that dissatisfied powers always wait for the opportunity to reassert their influence on international political and economic order. Russia, a dissatisfied power, refused to toe the line of the US-led world order and with the passage of time started pursuing policies focused on regaining its due place in the international system. Vladimir Putin declared the dismemberment of the Soviet Union as the greatest “geopolitical disaster of the 20th century”. To resurrect the Russian privileged sphere of influence, Putin came up with the grand project of Eurasian integration to integrate former Soviet territories.

Instruments of Putin’s Grand Strategy

The central theme of Putin’s grand strategy is to reintegrate erstwhile Soviet Republics. Invasion of Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, annexation of Crimea, and the most recent invasion of Ukraine, all reveal the single-minded focus of Putin in materializing his dream of resurrecting the Russian empire. Russia aims to be recognized as a pole in a multi-polar world and hence, Putin’s grand strategy is entirely geopolitical in its essence. One of the most effective instruments used by Putin in materializing its grand scheme is the control and manipulation of information disseminated by Russian media. Another vital instrument in Putin’s toolkit is the subversion through co-option that involves the deliberate weakening of statehood and installation of pro-Russian forces across the erstwhile Soviet territories. This strategy of subversion ranges from feeding opposition politicians to deeper penetration in government institutions, and to violent campaigns involving bombings and assassinations. Besides these, Moscow also supports opposition forces (as in the case of Georgia in 2008), extremists, and civil society in propelling Putin’s grand scheme. Furthermore, in the case of Ukraine Putin has used its ethnic affiliation as an instrument in the Donbas region of Ukraine since 2014 by fueling rebels against the state of Ukraine. Thus, Moscow appears to be an insecurity provider, rather than a security provider in the region.

Putin’s integration drive is based on ideology and pragmatic considerations. Moscow initially established a Commonwealth of Independent States that facilitated a civilized divorce among the member states, but with the passage of time, this organization proved ineffective in implementing any of its designed policies and thus failed.

After CIS, Central Asian states along with Russia established Eurasian Economic Community with the aim to achieve large-scale economic integration by reducing multiple trade barriers among the member states, but it also proved to be an ineffective drive like CIS. Later on, in 2011, Russia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus established Common Economic Space to deeply integrate their economies. All these integration drives were aimed to re-Sovietize the erstwhile Soviet Republics by extending Moscow’s privileged sphere of influence.

The Collective Security Treaty (CST) and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) were established with the aim to provide a collective security system to the neighboring states, but these organizations never participated in any conflict in and around Central Asia. Russia only wanted the CSTO to be recognized by the international community as an equal and legitimate partner of NATO. Hence, CSTO never participated in any conflict, neither in Central Asia, nor in the Caucasus, and just maintained an umbrella structure having a mirage of a collective security system, and never came into existence in reality.  Russia not at a single point, succeeded in using CSTO to undermine the Western encroachments in the region. Thus, an unequivocal weakness of the CSTO indicates a deep loophole in the grand integration project devised by Mr. Putin.

Is Putin’s Grand Strategy Destined to Fail?

Historical shreds of evidence reveal that once an empire (like Roman Empire, or Ottoman Empire) collapsed it could never resurrect itself with the sole exception of former Tsarist territories under Soviet rule. Putin considers the reintegration of erstwhile Soviet Republics as a process supported by history itself and he viewed himself as history’s helper. Putin’s grand strategy is basically aimed to reintegrate (politico-economically) former Soviet territories and to reestablish Russia’s privileged sphere of influence, and for this purpose, Eurasian Economic Union and Customs Union were introduced. Russia considers the Eurasian region as its strategic backyard and thus expanding NATO’s influence has remained an existential threat to its core geo-strategic interests. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has augmented its membership by encroaching on the eastern European region, thereby confining Russia almost within its own borders.

In order to materialize his grand strategy and bar any other state from joining NATO, Putin launched its full-scale offensive against Ukraine when the West in general, and the United States, in particular, did not categorically refute the possibility of membership of Georgia and Ukraine. However, two years have passed and Putin is still unable to achieve any obvious victory. Ukraine is reestablishing its control on the territories that Russia initially captured.

Putin is no longer going to achieve a decisive victory in its Ukraine gamble and the war is heading toward a hurting stalemate.

Another significant event that took place in recent times is NATO’s extension of membership to Finland. The significant expansion of NATO and the subsequent failure of Putin’s Eurasian Union Project to allure the erstwhile republics of the Soviet Union indicate that history is not in favor of Mr. Putin and he can avoid failure and the consequent demise of his grand strategy only by maintaining paramount military force or by relying on entirely new tactics. Experts opine that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will eventually prove to be the final nail in the coffin of Putin’s grand strategy, and circumstances on the ground validate their assertion.

Indian Elections, Media and Muslim Persecution

0

Mass media in general has become an inseparable part of modern society. From entertainment to politics, from television to the internet, its purpose has evolved to be more than just the dissemination of information amongst the masses. It is part of the social framework of modern society, dictating and establishing norms, as well as presenting the general character of our society and its politics.

The role of media within society is vast, particularly the impact on how we interact with one another as individuals and as nations have continued to have an increasingly significant role in our daily lives, especially in our perceptions of others.

Although mass media is a powerful means of disseminating information, it is also true that media continues to have a definitive effect on political thinking and perception not only on the internal politics of a nation but also on its foreign policy and strategic thinking.

The media has the ability to take a group of people and place them in the role of the ‘other’; the other against which their country’s own ideal is established, and a common enemy to unite against. Media-more particularly news channels and entertainment media- have become some of our main points of reference for establishing and disseminating social norms, moral codes, and political beliefs and orientations, regardless of whether or not those are just or reflect the truth.

The Modi era coincided with an exponential rise in the use of social media in India, a medium that this government exploited to the hilt to target critics, mobilize public opinion, and use tags like “anti-national,” and “anti-Muslim” to discredit anyone showing a hint of circumspection with the state narrative. The Indian government has fully grasped the impact of media on the thinking of the masses and opinion-making. The fundamentalist government of Modi in India, with the support and backing of its intelligence agencies, has ensured an iron hold on all the major media houses and has set up a huge network of social media community that they control both inside India and abroad to propagate its narrow hate infused ideology, particularly its anti-Pakistan rhetoric. The Indian media is hand in glove with the Modi government to ensure they create the hype necessary to deflect the attention of the populace from the domestic endemic problems to a threat to national security by Pakistan

Mainstream Indian media deliberately represent Pakistan in unfortunate ways as the enemy and a threat to Indian territorial integrity. This is enabled by the news media’s use of hate speech and demonizing language when speaking about Pakistan. Indian News media often portray Pakistan as a violent and dangerous nuclear power and a “threat to national security”, thereby perpetuating an “us against them” mentality. This creates an atmosphere of fear and more specifically, “Islamophobia. This is not only portraying Pakistan as an enemy to be dealt with but is also alienating and now targeting Indian Muslims residing in India sparking sectarian violence at a scale never seen before.

The Indian government is playing a dangerous game of supporting media organizations that whip up ultranationalist sentiments.

Key ministers attack journalists and media that believe in speaking truth to power. Prime Minister Modi himself has called journalists “news traders”, one minister has called them “presstitutes” and another said journalists should stop asking questions.

On the other hand, we see that during the first two decades of this century, partisans’ mild dislike for their opponents has been transformed into a deeper form of animus. The Spread of democratic ideas themselves and the subsequent development of mass media enabled political leaders, including the usually marginalized fundamentalist and extremist leaders, to project a positive image of themselves onto the masses as never before. It is this enabling environment in the 21st century that has facilitated the resurgence of personality cult leaders who in the garb of nationalism have perpetrated heinous crimes against their opponents as we see being done by the BJP leader Narendra Modi in India, particularly against the Muslim.

What is even more tragic is that leaders like Modi, through the use of populism, provoking religious sensitivities, inciting latent fears, and exploiting the underlying fissures in society manage to gather steam and ride on a wave of popularity. Based on negativity Modi has managed to capture political and administrative power and put in place his goons at the helm of affairs including in ministerial and strong administrative positions with the judiciary lamely following suit and obliging.  Notwithstanding the fact that, like Narendra Modi of India, these are convicted criminals who are iconized not only by their cult following but also aided by the full potential of the political, economic, administrative, and judicial apparatus to put them on a pedestal as saviors of the Nation.

In India Modi has created a personality cult around him. Despite bad governance and several political setbacks, Modi’s charisma and popularity helped BJP return to power in the 2019 elections. BJP sought votes only in Modi’s name and won. This has created a fascist monster who is using the influence of his personality cult to destroy the secular fabric of India and create a Hindu state. Inspired by Modi’s policy of hate, otherization, exclusion, and fanaticism, his blind followers are playing havoc with the hapless minorities of India, particularly the Muslims.

All minorities alike have faced a surge in communal violence in recent years but the largest minority the Muslims have faced the worse kind of atrocities committed against them. A number of new laws have been enacted that adversely affected their daily lives and interfere with the religious garments they wear, the food they eat, where and how they worship, and even whom they marry. Many Indian journalists, lawyers, activists, and religious leaders believe that the institutions on which the country once relied to keep this kind of ethnic supremacism in check—the courts, opposition parties, and independent media—have collapsed. Many feel that it is a betrayal of the basic premise of secular India promised by the founding fathers and the constitution.

While legally speaking, all citizens might enjoy the same rights, In Indian society now minority religious groups are experiencing structural neglect and when they turn to the state for protection from violence, or indeed when they seek any form of government support they realize that the state itself is the behind the discrimination, harassment, and authorization, not only by not protecting the vulnerable but condoning the actions of the perpetrators of these crimes and raising the criminals to the status of heroes and iconizing them as role models to be emulated. State Ministers of the BJP government spread hate and incite violence from the floors of the two houses of the Indian Parliament shredding the concept of equal rights for all citizens and the now the long lost principal of secular India and are hailed as heroes by the government while the police and the judiciary not only turn a blind eye but aid the state-backed atrocities.

In the Illegally Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, the situation is even worse. Two provisions in the Indian constitution, Article 35-A and Article 370, retained Kashmir’s autonomy and recognized its special status. They formerly preserved the rights of the ‘permanent residents’ of Kashmir from displacement and any attempts to change the demographics of the state. India unlawfully annexed Jammu and Kashmir by rendering it a Union Territory on August 5, 2019, to be directly ruled by the Central Government, in violation of international law. India has violated the obligation to maintain public order in Jammu and Kashmir through flagrant human rights violations in the region.

A practical genocide is taking place in IIOJ&K, and yet there is complete silence in the international community as India becomes the favored partner of the USA as a counterweight to China.

Despite all this Modi’s ideology of strident Hindu nationalism, combined with promises of economic development, remains a big draw with voters in India. With less than a year before the next general election, Modi is already in pole position and is projecting himself as a “lone worrier” against a large number of opposition parties who all want to remove him from power. This was clearly evident from his recent statement in the upper house of parliament when roared that the nation was witnessing how an individual was strongly facing many, thus setting the tone for the 2024 elections. Modi is appealing to the voters on the slogan that he was living for the country, the directionless opposition is struggling to find a common platform to take on Modi. It suits BJP to have this narrative of one leader (Modi) taking on the fight with a long list of opposition leaders. Modi versus the rest.

The youth of India see Modi as a strong leader, who rose to lead the largest democracy in the world from humble beginnings as a tea vendor. The local flavor that Modi provides by wearing the traditional dress and speaking in Hindi both at home and abroad, makes the youth relate to him and he has become an inspirational hero to be emulated. On the other end of the political spectrum in India we see that today the opposition looks even more fragmented than it was in 2014 when the BJP first won general elections bringing Modi to power. There seems to be merit in the Indian Home Minister’s statement that there were no competitors to Modi and that the Indian nation was solidly behind Modi. Whether this is the usual political bluster before elections will only be proven when people come to vote but for the moment it is advantageous for Modi for 2024.

Media and communications can play a positive or negative role in conflict situations and peace processes. Managing this is a key question for policymakers. The digital age has made this task even more critical and urgent. Faster dissemination of news and views by multiple means at faster speeds ultimately has a profound impact on developments.

“We inhibit the peaceful and negotiated resolution of conflicts not only by the extent to which we demonize one another. We do so also by the degree to which we separate, on the one hand, the processes of politics and international affairs, and on the other hand, the moral relations between ourselves as human beings. Talking to one another and discussion must be the prelude to the resolution of conflicts.” Nelson Mandela, Capetown, 1999.

This quote by Nelson Mandela epitomizes the very essence of a successful peace process and avoiding conflict and war.