Pakistan’s fiendish diplomatic stunt of humiliating Jadhav’s family

There seems to be no end to the trails of the deplorable acts of Pakistan. Plummeting to a new low, Islamabad under the ruse of honoring “humanitarian considerations”, humiliated the mother and wife of alleged spy Kulbhushan Jadav. Jadav was kidnapped by Pakistan officials from the Baluchistan province of Iran in March 2016 was lodged in jail ever since. While Pakistan claimed that Jadhav was arrested as a part of the counter intelligence operations in Mashkar, Baluchistan, Iranian foreign officials confirmed that Jadhav who was in Iran on business purposes was abducted. Though Pakistan continued to maintain that the former Naval Officer was a spy, they failed to produce any evidence to support the allegations of any subversive activities. Pakistan military slapped charges of terrorism against him. Despite India’s repeated requests for consular access, Pakistan denied access to Jadav. Meanwhile, a Kangroo court, Field General Court Marshal pronounced death sentence for espionage after a botched up three and half month trial on April 10th. Indian doubts of a farcical trial are reinforced with Pakistan failing to provide a certified copy of charge sheet and judgement. Pakistan so far turned down India’s request 13 times for a consular access, which Jadhav is entitled to under the Vienna Convention.

Pakistan’s intransigence accentuated Indo-Pakistan rivalry leading to suspension of maritime talks. Subsequently, India took up egregious violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR), for detention, whimsical trial and farcical conviction with the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Since both India and Pakistan are party to Vienna Convention, India prayed that detainee is entitled to consular access under the article 36(1) of VCCR. India urged ICJ that it has jurisdiction to hear its appeal in matters of dispute. Pakistan, on the other hand contended that VCCR is not applicable to espionage or terrorism related issues. In May, ICJ called for stalling of death sentence of Jadhav and declared that military trial is in violation of VCCR and international human rights. The case has now entered the second stage after Pakistan presented paper on December 13^th. Ahead, of submission of papers Pakistan consented to India’s repeated requests of family meet for December 25^th to strengthen its case before next hearing. Meanwhile, Jadhav filed an appeal for clemency with Pakistan army chief Qamar Bajwa which is still pending.

Acceding to Indian appeals, Pakistan made every attempt to highlight the so-called largesse of granting permission for family meet into a high-level propaganda activity. Pakistan military, dismayed by Jadhav’s family meeting him, wanted to inflict causalities on Indian army. Replete of duplicitous actions, Pakistan army, ratcheted up cross-border firing leading to killing of three soldiers and an Army major in the early hours of December 25^th.  Obsessed with embarrassing India, Pakistan had extended most contemptuous treatment to Jadhav’s family. Jadhav’s mother and wife were forced to remove bhindi, bangles and mangalsutra, the quintessential possessions of married Hindus and were asked to change their clothes. Reports now emerge that they were strip-searched. The meeting arranged in a glass ship container was videographed and monitored. The distraught family which was meeting Jadhav after 22 months could see him through a glass partition and were not allowed to talk in mother tongue. Jadhav’s old mother, who was desperately waiting to speak few words with son couldn’t even had a heartful exchange as officials prevented them from talking in Marathi, the language she was comfortable. With humane touch missing and dignity stripped, the distressed family could just continue their conversations for mere 40 minutes. Even deputy high commissioner accompanying him was separated from the family and upon pressing the issue with higher authorities, he was kept behind an additional partition. After the meeting, Pakistan officials refused to give back Mrs Jadhav’s footwear. The family was heckled by the media which posed insensitive questions. The “series of insults” arranged by Pakistan government caused outrage among Indians who felt betrayed, cheated, and humiliated. Latest reports now confirms the obnoxious intent of Pakistan, whose Foreign Affairs Ministry has even sent a thank you note to it media for a “job well done”.

This calibrated fiendish diplomatic stunt of Pakistan is aimed at disgracing India. The humiliation meted out to the family of Jadhav and intentional denigration of religious and cultural sentiments reflects Pakistan’s deep-seated hatred towards India in general and Hindus in particular. Pakistan’s deplorable PR strategy and deliberate intimidation further exemplifies its malevolent reputation. With its despicable treatment, Pakistan mortified the self-respect of more than billion plus Indians.

Notwithstanding its inhumane behavior, Pakistan in a self-congratulatory tone, noted that it being an Islamic nation, believed in compassion. Refuting Pakistan’s stance of abiding by all its commitments, Indian foreign ministry lashed out saying “we regret that the Pakistani side conducted the meeting in a manner which violated the letter and spirit of understanding. We also regret that contrary to assurances; the overall atmosphere of the meeting was intimidating in so far as family members are concerned” and added “this exercise lacked any credibility”. But clearly, Pakistan is murderous country which hardly understand the language of words.

What is clearly outrageous is that Pakistan’s contempt, mockery of religion and Indian culture failed to incense the liberal brigade and the aman ki asha gang who at the drop of the hat would carry out dharnas, rallies, signature campaigns and candle light marches over petty remarks and bans over movies. The deafening silence of this elite group towards the humiliation suffered by an Indian family is truly demoralizing. The award wapsi and advocacy groups who castigated government at the prospect of a ban on Pakistan actors, maintained stunned silence towards Jadhav issue. Even the political establishment is divided. Irresponsible and reprehensible remarks of our politicians dubitably confirmed that real threat to India is internal. Jadhav represents India and the country should firmly stand behind him and support his family. Ironically the pro-Pakistan lobby in cahoots with the western neighbor hasn’t condemned the disgraceful treatment extended to Jadhav’s family. Though it is wide and clear that India and Pakistan have nothing in common, the Pakistani apologists in India continue to push the delusionary agenda of sustaining and fostering ties with the rogue neighbor. It is time, political leadership of India, refuses to buy the nasty stratagem driven by the elite brigade of apologists and evolve a robust plan of countering and annihilating the nefarious manifesto of Pakistan.

In the meanwhile, India should clearly reiterate that any let down by Pakistan in Jadhav’s case can’t be tolerated. India should seriously mull imposing trade, financial and military sanctions. It is intriguing that while Pakistan has been unrelenting on its murderous spree, India hasn’t relegated the MFN status designated to Pakistan nor even made serious bargains on Indus Water Treaty.   While Indian forces has retaliated for the murder of the soldiers killed in Rajouri sector, Pakistan’s unabated brutal savagery of mutilation of bodies and desecration continues to torment the families of brave hearts who laid down lives for the country. The endless list of shameless brutalities, subterfuge and lies of Pakistan continues to ravage India. In the recent past, has intensified efforts to globally isolate Pakistan, but the attempts would be counterproductive if Indian parliament fails approve a resolution declaring Pakistan as a terror state. Last year, MP Rajeev Chandrasekharan moved “The Declaration of Countries as Sponsor of Terrorism Bill, 2016” for consideration in Rajya Sabha on February 3^rd. The bill seeks to declare any country that “continues to associate, promote, patronize and sponsor terrorism against our nation” as state sponsor of terrorism. It called for “withdrawing economic and trade relations with such country and to create legal, economic and travel sanctions for citizens of that country and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto”. But unfortunately, discussions weren’t initiated and there were no takers for this Private Members bill. Pakistan is now brutally shameless of its depravities, it is high time, India mulls punitive action. Else the sordid saga of Pakistan’s inhumanities would continue to haunt India.

@ Copyrights reserved.

India’s indiscreet decision of voting against Trump’s Jerusalem Move

Trump’s decision of recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has opened a Pandora’s Box. The Arab League and Muslim countries denounced the move. Even American allies critically flayed Trump’s decision. While Trump maintained that the conflict surrounding Jerusalem must be resolved through negotiations between warring factions and retained the option of shifting American Embassy, his decision was marred by protests, rallies and sparked deadly violence. Palestine refused to accept American mediation in Israeli-Palestine conflict and called off talks with Mike Pence. Turkey and Egypt called upon the Muslim nations and Arab League to join hands in condemning Trump’s move.

Earlier this week, an urgent UNSC meeting was convened wherein Egypt put forth a resolution “calling upon all states to refrain from the establishment of diplomatic missions in the Holy City of Jerusalem”. For the first time in six years, US vetoed the move, while all the 14 members voted in favor. This clearly implied that even US allies, considered Jerusalem as the shared capital of Israel and Palestine. Isolated at the UNSC, US lashed out terming the proceedings “an insult” that “won’t be forgotten”. American government’s current stand is in sharp contrast to President Obama’s abstention when the US affirmed that East Jerusalem has no legal validity. Protesting US veto at the UNSC, Turkey and Yemen requested for an emergency UN General Assembly meeting calling for a vote to reject Trump’s Jerusalem move. Having suffered a defeat at the UNSC, Trump threatened countries to withhold aid, if they vote in favor of vote rejecting Trump’s decision of recognizing Jerusalem as capital of Israel.  In unequivocal terms, Trump warned, “Let them vote against us, we’ll save a lot. We don’t care. This isn’t where it used to be where they could vote against you and then you pay them hundreds of millions and nobody know what they are doing”. Invoking “the Uniting for Peace” procedure where General Assembly can make appropriate recommendations when UNSC fails to act, the tenth Emergency Special session was convened. The resolutions passed under this procedure are non-binding. India has voted in favor of the UN resolution calling US to roll back Trump’s move on Jerusalem. The resolution was passed with two-thirds majority with 127 countries including India voting in favor of the resolution. 35 countries abstained from voting, 21 countries including Ukraine didn’t vote at all. Mere nine countries-Guatemala, Honduras, Marshall Islands, Naura, Palau, Toga and Micronesia including the US and Israel voted against. Countries that abstained included- Argentina, Australia, Bhutan, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Rwanda, and Romania.

India’s vote at UNGA has come under serious scrutiny for various reasons. After Trump’s decision on Jerusalem, Middle East erupted into protests and India home to sizeable Muslim population maintained, “India’s position on Palestine is independent and consistent. It is shaped by our views and interests and not determined by any third party”. With India refusing to take sides, ambassadors of Arab countries sought clarification on Trump’s decision of recognizing Jerusalem as capital of Israel. India, one of the earliest champions of Palestinian cause but later pursued ties with Israel refrained from making any assurances. Though India recognized Israel in 1950, New Delhi established diplomatic relations in 1992. For long India reluctantly underwrote bilateral ties with Israel for the fear of irking Muslim countries. Modi’s stand-alone visit to Israel in July, the first ever by any Indian Prime Minister heralded a new beginning. He stayed at the King David’s Hotel in the West Jerusalem boosting Israel’s claims over Jerusalem. Earlier in May during Palestine President Mahmoud Abbas visit to India, Modi assured India’s support to Palestinian cause but carefully avoided any references to East Jerusalem. Indeed, India maintained a similar position at the Xiamen BRICS summit as well. But the Arab countries wary of Modi’s Hindutva proclivity believed NDA regime would favorably foster relations with Israel. In 2015, India abstained on a resolution at UNHRC, condemning Israel for the war crimes committed during 2014 Gaza conflict. Interestingly, on a resolution that undermined Jewish rights over the Temple Mount and the Western wall in April at UNESCO, India initially voted in favor of Israel in initial rounds but later abstained as a result Israel narrowly lost substantiating India’s vacillating position.

In the UNGA voting yesterday, subjugated by its cold war impasse, hamstrung by non-aligned compulsions, in line with Nehruvian doctrine India voted against Israel. Compulsive Nehruvites hailed India’s position for siding with the Muslim countries and repudiating US authority. While experts who lauded assertive Modi doctrine balked India’s move. Despite India’s unstinted support to Palestine and Muslim pandering, the later never supported New Delhi at the UN on Kashmir issue. On the other hand, Israel and Armenia always supported India on Kashmir issue. Succumbing to pompous ideological thoughts, apprehensive of economic turbulence since India interests are critically linked to Arab nations, India refrained from making rapprochements to Israel. But Israel helped India during the 1962, 1965, 1971 and 1991 wars. While arguments are afoot, India may have voted against UNGA resolution under strategic and diplomatic compulsions. India is now seriously betting on the Chabahar port to enhance its accessibility to Central Asian countries, Russia and Eurasia.  Iran is a bitter rival of Israel and India’s tacit approval of resolution is quite a balancing act.

Indeed, the countries which supported Trump’s decision are members of Compact of Free Association (COFA). US in 1986, signed an agreement with South Pacific Islands to provide economic aid and defence support in return US can use these islands for installing military bases. It must be noted of all the countries, Micronesia with dominant Judea-Christian tradition, has an unparalleled record of supporting Israel at UN. Members that abstained from voting included countries like Canada and Australia, who tried to delicate balance. Embittered by allies voting against Trump’s move at UNSC, America considered voting at UNGA as a criterion to gauge its global influence. Besides, just days ahead of UNGA meeting, US unveiled National Security Strategy which stated, “We will expand our defence and security cooperation with India, a major defence partner of the United States, and support India’s growing relationships throughout the region” and “we will seek to increase quadrilateral cooperation with Japan, Australia and India” and finally “we encourage India to increase its economic assistance in the region”. UNGA’s rejection of Trump’s decision is a huge setback for US. Evincing anger, Nikki Haley, US Ambassador to UN stated, “United States will remember this day. America will put embassy in Jerusalem. No vote in the United Nations will make any difference on that. But this vote will make difference on how Americans look at UN and on how we look at countries who disrespect us in the UN”. Though the resolution is non-binding support will have immense political gains. With Israel Prime Minister scheduled to visit between Jan 14-18, India is now hard pressed to defend its position.

@ Copyrights reserved.

China foraying into American sphere of influence

Having consolidated its overwhelming presence in the Indian Ocean Region by formally taking over Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port on a 99-year lease, reports now emerge that China is all set to enter American backyard. Making a leap from the “century of humiliation” to an “era of rejuvenation” China is continually expanding its global presence. China is making gigantic strides in reaching out to various countries. The iconic, global connectivity network of One Belt One Road (OBOR), encompassing 60 nations exemplifies China’s aspirations. At a time, when America is questioning China’s penetrative expansionism in the South China Sea and its eventual coercion of smaller neighbors, Beijing is silently wooing Caribbean Countries. Besides, brandishing American hegemony in the Caribbean region as big-power chauvinism to counter American charges, China is markedly increasing its ties with them. Beijing which has extensive trade and infrastructure investments in Latin America started engaging with Caribbean islands in a big way. The economic recession of 2008 crippled US economy and subsequently American investments in Caribbean region ebbed. Marking the decline of American and European Community engagement, China steadily stepped up investments and bilateral trade with Caribbean. US-China Economic and Security Review Commission reports validate burgeoning Chinese presence.

Owing to its proximity to United States and major maritime routes, China realized strategic importance of Caribbean. In 2013, President Xi made his first overseas trip to Latin America and Caribbean. Moreover, China believed that the region home to over two dozen countries would be highly valuable for exercising significant diplomatic clout at the UN and its allied agencies. Soon, China emerged as the single largest investor in Caribbean. In Jamaica, China built a $720 million highway, constructed a deep port to serve as transshipment hub for Chinese container ships traveling to Panama Canal. To further augur access to ports, China Harbor Engineering signed an $1.5 billion agreement with Jamaican authorities to develop a deep-water port. As in Latin America, China provided scholarships to Caribbean countries to study in Chinese Universities. Guyana, Bahamas, and Barbados received aid and investments. Soon, these countries turned into lucrative markets for Chinese goods, arms and weapons.  

The latest to join the Chinese club is Grenada, a nation invaded by American. Grenada, a British Colony gained independence in 1974. But by 1978, a dominant leftist movement seized power, suspended the constitution and jailed ruling dispensation. In 1983, military junta launched a coup and executed the leftist Prime Minister plunging country into internal strife. Grenada had close ties with Cuba and Russia and America overpowered by fears of plausible Russian takeover led an attack against with Caribbean Coalition. President Ronald Raegan launched “Operation Urgent Fury”. After 7 days of intense struggle, peace was restored, and elections were called. Over 100 countries, denounced American invasion at the UN. But owing to immediate restoration of democracy protestations against America soon faded out. Currently, China is designing a new development plan for Grenada. Reports indicate that Grenada is on the verge of accepting the multibillion dollar plan which includes economic assistance. The plan includes construction of massive infrastructure development projects like highways, railways, and special economic zones. The island which is four times the size of Hong Kong has a population of 100,000 is divided into 6 zones. The blue print of the development plan is believed to include plans for renewable energy, agriculture, medical tourism, fishing, fruit processing. Sources indicate that the plan include a clause mandating Grenadian government to ensure protection to foreign investments. China has plans of turning the island into a tax haven.

Mindful of the region’s proclivity to Leftist ideology, China has promised not to interfere in domestic affairs of the country. But, Beijing’s avowal of non-interference is truly misleading given its inimical influence in the recently concluded Nepalese elections.  China’s major push to forge investment alliances with the Caribbean can be truly intimidating. Indeed, China initially entered the South Asian region on the pretext of forging economic ties with India’s immediate neighbors. In less than a decade Beijing successfully pulled all South Asian countries encircling India into its orbit. Considering China’s dubitable history, America must be cautious of Beijing’s nefarious attempts of infiltrating into its region of dominance.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Unravelling Gujarat Assembly Elections

The much-awaited assembly elections results for the states of Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh went in favor of BJP. With this latest electoral triumph, the tally of the BJP ruled states has reached 19. The mainstream media, mincing no words summarized the results as an “electoral victory” for the BJP and “moral victory” for the Congress. Of the two elections, political establishment of the country and the media bestowed unprecedented attention towards Gujarat elections terming it as litmus test for BJP. Owing to a series of resplendent electoral victories and the ability to form governments, the winning partnership of Prime Minister Modi and BJP president Amit Shah garnered much attention. With Gujarat being home turf of BJP’s wining duo with an enviable election winning spree, the assembly polls by consequence are regarded as a barometer to assess the popularity of BJP. Also, ever since Modi’s ascent to power, every other election be it a panchayat election or an assembly election, performance of BJP is closely monitored terming it as referendum on Modi. The novel trend of dissecting the polls as a measure of gauging the mileage and ground presence of BJP has become a norm after the NDA-2’s ascension. Consequently, the never-ending saga of polls across India and its vivisection has become a new vocation of sorts for political party apologists.

BJP won both the state elections convincingly. While a sweeping victory of BJP in Himachal Pradesh is hardly endorsed as a measure of Modi’s pan-India influence, a clear majority in Gujarat was derided. Attributing the decrease in the numbers of seats won as waning of Modi’s influence, Congress leaders proclaimed, “whatever the election results, the Congress and Rahul Gandhi are real winners”. The verdict which came two days after Rahul Gandhi’s coronation as the President of Congress party, is now regarded as a great revival since strike rate of Congress compared to 2012 elections increased by 9 points. With general elections less than two years away, electoral verdict is now critically analyzed to assess plausible outcomes of 2019. But ideally, vote share in assembly elections can’t be extrapolated to interpret pan-Indian elections since voting pattern in states based on local issues. Nearly 12% of voters who voted for Congress in Gujarat indicated their preference for BJP in general elections. Hence comparing the vote share of assembly elections as against general elections are counterproductive.

Clearly, a win for BJP in Gujarat reaffirmed that Modi is still the most admired leader of India. Despite a decrease in the number of seats won in Gujarat, vote share of BJP increased to 49.1%. Usually 49% vote share fetches a two-third or even three-fourth majority in elections. It must be recalled that with a vote share of 41.35%  in UP assembly elections, BJP obtained a three-fourth’s majority in a multi-party contest. Gujarat had a two-party cornered contest. In the current elections, BJP and Congress registered an increase in vote share due to decimation of the Keshubhai fraction which contested last year. Interestingly, an increased vote share failed to translate into number of seats won. Additionally, while the victory margins were huge for BJP, it lost seats with narrow margins. Further, demographic statistic too played a crucial role. The regions where Congress witnessed a swing were least populated meaning a small swing translated into huge gains in terms of seats won. Though BJP failed to reach the three-digit mark, its victory in Gujarat is truly historic for it has managed to come to power for a phenomenal sixth time in a row. Despite a 22-year anti-incumbency, farmer distress, farmer loan waiver issues, patidar agitation, disturbing financial reforms like demonetization and GST, BJP pulled off a major victory which is no mean effort. The situation truly confounds worst fears of a democracy, of BJP’s near complete decimation of opposition.

On the other hand, the defeat of Congress, which it fails to admit is its consecutive 7^th loss in a row. Congress last formed government in Gujarat in 1985 and the prospect of reclaiming power still eludes the grand old party. Ironically, the Congress instead of contemplative introspection, bolstered by its marginally better performance is hell bent on undermining BJP’s win. Indeed, the recently concluded elections could have been Congress’s best bet to tap the disenchantment of the Gujaratis. Instead of attacking the BJP for failing to address the farmers distress, it frittered away a propitious opportunity by indulging in divisive politics and plummeting the political discourse to a new low. Obsessed with divisive strategies, it roped in aggrieved local leaders, Patidar leader Hardik Patel, OBC leader Alpesh Thakor and Dalit leader Jignesh Mevani to contest Gujarat elections. It not only failed to offer prospective policies or a vision document for a better Gujarat, but invariably relied on divisions of the society.  In part, the new gains accrued by Congress have been sudden shift of allegiance of a section of patidars in rural areas. Adorning the veil of soft Hindutva and the dubious temple runs have been part of Congress party’s poll exercise. Indian political establishment for long categorized any party catering to Hindu aspirations as communal. Perhaps, new amendments might now be brought into such categorization with Congress suddenly making fresh overtures to appease Hindus.

While BJP deserves credit for retaining Gujarat, the elections should be a wakeup call for party riding high on the wave of victory. In the first election after Narendra Modi’s exit as chief minister of the state, Gujaratis voiced their disconcertment towards the government for failing to address the local issues. Though BJP has retained its urban popularity, growing resentment of farmers and disgruntlement of rural populace have dented their electoral prospects. More so, the Patidars of rural areas of the Saurashtra and Kutch area have punished BJP. Contrastingly, BJP is still popular among the Patidars of the Urban areas. Though BJP made inroads into the tribal regions and increased its vote share among the ST’s the grouse of Patidars have crippled BJP’s polls prospects partially. While timely, roll back of GST charges saved BJP from a likely disaster, it is time, Gujarat evolves long term strategy to address the issues of Cotton farmers. Further, BJP vote share is not uniform across the rural areas, it is concentrated in few urban conglomerates and hence the margins of victories in urban sectors have been marginally high. BJP must now strive hard to strengthen its popularity at the grassroots. Besides, NOTA registered third largest vote share reiterating Gujaratis disapproval of state government but held on to BJP but for Modi. BJP’s supposed marginal win is celebrated by opposition with West Bengal Chief Minister singularly congratulating the electorate of Gujarat for a balanced voting. Miffed opposition is eagerly waiting for an opportunity to pounce back on BJP. Party offices of TMC celebrated a marginal slump in BJP’s poll performance. With assembly elections close on heels in Karnataka, Congress party will be keenly exploring strategies to checkmate BJP. This will be followed by state elections for Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand. While BJP’s cadre commitment is unparalleled any minor rift or a misstep can hinder BJP’s prospects in 2019 elections. Gujarat elections are thus a wake-up call. Moreover, Congress has brazenly pursued caste mobilization politics to salvage their come back in Gujarat. With this traditional time-tested strategy of Congress making some impact on the electoral outcomes, it is likely they might overwhelming go ahead with the same in ensuing elections. This leaves BJP with no choice other than Hindu mobilization and consolidation of Hindu votes.   

@ Copyrights reserved.

Trump’s Jerusalem move has opened the region for new players

President Trump’s announcement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on December 6^th has stoked global dissension. Interestingly, December 6^th which is remembered in India for dubious reasons will forever be reckoned by Israelis with immense pride. Reiterating his commitment towards fulfilling election promise, Trump said, “Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital. Acknowledging this as a fact is necessary precondition for achieving peace”. He added, “Jerusalem is Israel’s capital. This is nothing more, or less, than a recognition of reality. It is also the right thing to do. It is something that has to be done”. Simultaneously, Trump unequivocally clarified that US is committed towards facilitating the peace agreement between Israel and Palestine and that US is not taking any sides. He emphasized that US is not defining the boundaries of sovereignty of Israel over Jerusalem and that parties involved are free to resolve the contested borders. He urged, “we call for calm, for moderation, and for the voices of toleration to prevail over purveyors of hate”. Though Trump asserted that US will favor the two-state theory and announced that Vice-President Mike Pence will travel to Palestine to reaffirm US’s commitment, his announcement regarding Jerusalem drew sharpest condemnations from Muslim Council members and European leaders as well. Hours before Trump’s announcement, UK closet ally UK, warned that he would “effectively declare war” by recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

But for contentious debate regarding Jerusalem, it has been functioning capital of Israel with working Parliament (Knesset) capital, Supreme Court and official residences of Prime Minister and President. Though US Congress adopted Jerusalem Embassy Act, in 1995, requesting the federal government to shift embassy to Jerusalem and to recognize the city, for the past two decades, US presidents exercised waiver. Fearing backlash and wrath of the Arab countries, US presidents delayed the move.

Jerusalem is a sacred place for three major faiths-Jews, Muslims, Christians. Historical records in Hebrew Bible indicate that Jerusalem was capital of King David of Israel where his son Solomon built his temple. Babylonians invaded Jerusalem, destroyed the temple and sent Jews into exile. Later, Persian King Cyrus invited Jews back and King Herod redeveloped the second temple. For the next few centuries, the place was ruled by different groups. Jesus was also crucified in Jerusalem around 30 CE following which Christians began to make pilgrimages to the place. In 70 CE Romans destroyed the temple. For over a century Christian Kings retained control over Jerusalem. Arabs also revere the place as it is believed that Mohammed last flew to Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem from Mecca overnight before ascending heavens on a mythical creature in 632 CE. It is considered as the third most sacred place for Muslims. Till the World War I, Jerusalem was under Ottomon Empire. After World war I, British ruled over Jerusalem till Israel became independent in 1948. After the establishment of Israel, it controlled western part of Jerusalem. Jordan during Israel’s war of independence occupied the Eastern part of Jerusalem. Israel won, lost territories from Jordan in the six-day 1967 war.

Eastern Jerusalem has the Temple Mount that has three structures- Al Aqsa Mosque, the dome of rock, the dome of chain and the four minarets. Currently, Temple Mount is controlled by Muslim Waqf board, while Israel overlooks its security. Of the eleven entry gates for Temple Mount, ten are reserved for Muslims and one for non-Muslims. As per Bible, Jewish Temples stood on the Temple Mount. Indeed, the first temple built by Solomon and the restructured second Jewish temple were constructed in the same place. The Jews firmly believe that a third temple will also be built in the same place. The New Testament of Bible indicates that Jesus visited the walls of Herod. During the period when Christian rulers held the reigns of Jerusalem, a Church of the Holy Sephulcare was constructed at the Dome of the rock. Church was razed by the Muslim invaders who built the silver-domed al-Aqsa mosque over it. Quran has prophesized that Jerusalem will be one of the cities where end of world will begin. The wall, remnant of the second Jewish temple, located at the western side of the Temple Mount, also referred as the “The Western Wall or the Wailing Wall” is considered as holiest place for Jews. Ever since Israeli independence, Jerusalem has become the seat of intense conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. In 1980, Israel declared Jerusalem as its capital, but international community hasn’t recognized the move. Indeed, Second Palestinian Intifada in 2000 occurred in response to Likud party chief Ariel Sharon’s visit to Temple Mount. In May 2017, Hamas proposed formation of Palestine state with Jerusalem as capital. Israel rejected the idea as Hamas refused to recognize Israel state. More recently in July, Arabs killed two Israeli policemen guarding the temple Mount leading to cancellation of prayers at the mosque. Due to the deep historical, religious, and cultural significance of Temple Mount, Jerusalem had been the major aspect of contention in reaching peace agreement.  Trump’s endorsement of Israeli desideratum has thus triggered anger among the Arabs.

Trump’s latest decision is in sharp contrast to anti-Israeli stance adopted by President Obama wherein US abstained from voting on a resolution initially introduced by Egypt but later tabulated by New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela on the legality of Israeli settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem. US didn’t veto the resolution and Israel lost it 14-0. Consequently, settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem lost legal validity with UNSC ruling them as occupied territories. The resolution indirectly implied that Jerusalem is no longer the holiest place for Jews. Obama’s enmity with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu changed the status quo of Jerusalem and complicated the peace process. Trump’s recognition has strengthened Israeli claims over Jerusalem.

Prior to 1967, Jews were forbidden from worshipping at the Western wall and access to hospitals and synagogues on the Mt. Scopus were denied. In the battle between Israel and the Arab coalition that ensued a day of Israeli independence, Jordan occupied entire West Bank, the region assigned for Arab State and Jerusalem (Egypt occupied Gaza Strip). Between 1948 and 1967, UN neither intervened nor condemned Jordanian occupation, who destroyed all Jewish monuments of worship. Israel later won back all these occupied territories in 1967 war. But now UN and US refused to recognize Israel’s legitimate claims over Jerusalem. The latest move boosted Israeli position with Trump clearly indicating that US will not take any stand regarding the final resolution of boundaries of Jerusalem. Arab countries criticized US for siding with Israel by acknowledging Jerusalem as capital of Israel. While Arab countries criticized Trump for his biased stand, it is an open secret that US has been a strong ally of Israel. Irked by US’s position, Palestine has cancelled talks with Mike Pence, permanently bulldozing America’s longstanding role as mediator of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

While recognition of Jerusalem is long overdue, Trump’s announcement consolidated his support among domestic evangelists who believed that establishment of modern Jewish state, construction of third Jewish temple at Jerusalem will lead to Jesus’s return. Evangelists were ecstatic about Trump’s move and this domestic support keep in good stead amidst institutional investigations against him.

Ever since, Trump’s announcement, Muslim majority countries issued series of threats and staged protests after the Friday prayers. Calling it a “day of Rage” Palestinians intensified protests and clashed with Israeli security forces. Marked display of anger was witnessed from Malaysia to Somalia. In an emergency UNSC meeting, members condemned Trump’s move. Arab League summoned an emergency meeting of 22 Arab states wherein leaders denounced the decision of US to recognize Jerusalem as Israeli capital calling it “dangerous and unacceptable and a flagrant attack on a political solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. But interestingly, Egypt and Turkey spear-headed attacks against US as opposed to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain which are mired by domestic tensions. Experts now argue, other than domestic protests and incidents of violence, Trump’s decision may not evoke strong diplomatic response from the Arab countries cutting of trade links as Muslim leaders are largely disunited. Middle East has been a breeding ground of commotion, instability, and fundamentalism and Jerusalem will obviously elicit a violent response which in any case will not escalate into catastrophic levels. Intuitively, Trump by pulling the trigger of gun by provided new impetus to Israel and Palestine to engage in peace process. But with US having lost the role of a mediator, it has created a power vacuum. Russia’s enthusiastic forays into the Middle East and President Putin’s sudden visit to Egypt, Turkey and Syria coinciding with the new turmoil may culminate in Moscow seeking a role in mediation. In a Press conference Putin said, “Both Russia and Turkey believe that the decision doesn’t help regulating the situation in the Middle East but instead destabilizes already complicated atmosphere”. President Erdogan, who considers himself as savior of Palestinian cause has called for meeting of members of Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on December 13^th to mobilize world. Turkey, a member of NATO has fallen apart with US over the issue of America supplying weapons to Kurds has revived ties with Russia is taking a lead role Syrian talks mediated by Russia. Turkey even warned Israel of severing ties. Russia-Turkey-Iran alliance of convenience has reduced the relevance of US in the middle east. Iran and Turkey spewing venom against Israel might escalate tensions. Iran warned that it will not tolerate aggression against holy Islamic sites. Both Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei and President Rouhani strongly denounced Trump’s decision. Rouhani said, “Today, the enemies have launched a new conspiracy against the Muslims and have targeted the great goal of liberation of Holy Quds (Jerusalem). The Holy Quds belongs to Muslims and Palestinians, and it is not a place in which anyone can stand against the thoughts and feelings of people. This is a new adventure of the global arrogance in the region”. Iran have shunned the reference to Palestine as Arab state and called it a Muslim country in an attempt to rally for the support of Muslim nations to raise against America.

Interestingly, even China is not lagging in the race to assert power in the Middle East.  China’s mouth piece Global Times carried out a scathing piece titled “Trump kicks hornet’s nest again”. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang expressed concern and said that Trump’s decision would “potentially flare-up regional tensions”. He added “China firmly supports and advances the Middle East peace process. We support the just cause of the Palestinian people to restore their legitimate national rights and stand behind Palestine in building an independent full sovereignty state along the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. We call on all parties to remain committed to resolving disputes through negotiations and promoting regional peace and stability in accordance with the relevant UN resolutions”. To this end, China has even presented a four-point program at UN towards resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict. China offered financial assistance including “supporting Chinese companies to invest in Palestine and build industrial parks and solar powers” to Palestine during President Mahmoud Abbas visit to Beijing. With China planning to expand the OBOR to Middle East, it is planning to closely work with Israel and Palestine. It is proposing to launch the China-Palestine-Israel tripartite dialogue.

Aside, US, a staunch ally of Israel, President of Czech Republic, Zemen favored movement of embassies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and reinforced that anti-Israeli stance of EU is cowardice. Clarifying India’s position on Jerusalem MEA spokesperson said, “India’s position on Palestine is independent and consistent. It is shaped by our views and interests and not determined by any third country”. India exercised caution and reaffirmed its commitment towards Palestine.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Crisis in Yemen deepens with the killing of Abdullah Saleh

Yemen war, by and large remains the least underreported humanitarian crisis for various reasons. The poorest Gulf country suffered massive death, starvation, and devastation. Latest UNICEF report indicate that a child dies every 10 minutes in Yemen, around 400,000 children are at risk of starvation and another 2.2million are in dire need of urgent care. Ever since February 2015, over 10,000 people were killed and 3.3 million were displaced. But still Yemen war shows no signs of respite with warring factions stubbornly reluctant to engage in peaceful negotiations. On December 4^th former President Abdullah Saleh, who ruled Yemen for 33 years was killed by the Houthi rebels. On Saturday, Saleh, who had allied with the Houthi rebels publicly announced his willingness to engage in talks with Saudi Arabia to end fighting and blockade in Yemen. It is now believed that Houthi’s angered by the pro-Arab stance of Saleh have launched rocket propelled grenade and attacked his car killing him and his personal security guard.

Establishment of Unified Yemen

Because of its fertile lands, vast coast line and proximity to sea, both Ottoman Kings and the British eyed Yemen. The British successfully gained control over the Aden located along the Red Sea in 1839 before opening of the Suez Canal for strategic purposes. While parts of North Yemen were annexed by the Ottoman Empire in 1500s which gained independence after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. Soon the Northern Yemen was taken over by the Zaydis represented by Imam Yahya. He signed treaties with various tribes in the region culminating in the recognition of Yemen as sovereign state. In the meanwhile, minor skirmishes between Saudi Arabian state formed in 1932 and Yemen tribes in the South snow-balled into a full-fledged war. Yemen and Saudi Arabia signed a treaty in 1934 that ended the war, but Saudi Arabia annexed three provinces it won during the fighting. Ever since Saudi Arabia feared about the security of its southern borders.

After the assassination of Yahya in 1948, Ahmad bin Yahya became Imam of Yemen. He was an inconsistent ruler and forged alliances with China, Russia and Egypt who provided finances and military help in his attempts to drive away British from Aden. After his death in 1962, he was succeeded by his son Muhammad al-Badr who was ousted in a military coup. Abdullah Saleh who steadily rose to higher ranks military was instrumental in the removal of King al-Badr. This coup reduced the dominance of the Royalists designated as “sayyids”, whose origins can be traced back to Mohammed Prophet. Consequently, all the Northern tribes who supported Badr lost significance. This change of regime led to the establishment of Yemen Arab Republic (YAR) or North Yemen. By 1969, Saleh became major and led troops of YAR backed by Egypt against the royalist forces backed by Saudi Arabia and Jordan leading to the North Yemen war and was appointed as governor of Taizz in 1977. After the assassination of Ahmed bin Hussain Al-Ghasmi, President of YAR, Saleh was elected by parliament as the President of YAR in 1978. Saleh always had an unstinted support of two major tribes-Sanhan and Hamdan.

Around the same time in 1967, the British withdrew from Aden and Peoples Democratic Republic of Yemen (PDRY) or South Yemen was formed which adopted communist form of government. PDRY established close ties with Soviet Union, Cuba, China and Palestine. Due to massive crackdown on the dissidents by the Marxists, thousands fled to North Yemen. Clashes erupted between the North and South Yemen in 1972. Saudi Arabia brokered cease fire restored peace.  For the next decade, North and South Yemen indulged in intermittent wars. With the weakening of Soviet Union, South Yemen agreed for unification. As per agreed terms and conditions, Abdullah Saleh became the President of Republic of Yemen and leader of South Yemen Ali Salman al-Baidh became the vice-president in 1990.

Saleh’s Political Life

Saleh won the first parliamentary elections held in 1993. Soon, Parliament unanimously promoted him to the post of Field-Marshal. All Muslim majority countries have three centers of power- head of state, military and Imam/Priest. After his elevation to highest position in military, Saleh, already a head of the state enjoyed unparalleled authority and power. In the Presidential elections of 1999, he obtained an overwhelming majority whereby he extended the tenure of President from five years to seven years. His tenure as the President for 33 years is best termed as Kleptocracy for he plundered several billions. A UN report pegs his personal fortune as $60 billion. Having mastered the art of outmaneuvering political rivals Saleh remained in power for over three decades and inept financial management has reduced the country to tatters. Inadequate government funding choked engines of growth and problems festered in the country. North Yemen, home to sayyid dynasties alleged discrimination. Poverty, unemployment soon triggered public angst. Houthi family (it is one of the most prominent sayyid dynasties) or the Ansar-Allah Islamic religious-political group, under the leadership of Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, spearheaded anti-government protests leading to eruption of clashes in 2004. In the subsequent military raids by Yemeni military Hussein al-Houthi was assassinated. His death strengthened the resolve of the Northern tribes paving way for armed insurgency against government led by Abdul Malik al-Houthi. With time, Houthi Movement spread extensively in the North Yemen.

In the meanwhile, Saleh who initially pledged not to contest in the Presidential elections 2006, made a massive flip-flop and won the elections with much lesser majority. A sinking economy, poor governance made people restless and the youth began to detest the dictatorial regime of Saleh. Legitimacy of Central government slowly declined. By 2009, terrorist outfit Al-Qaeda in Arab peninsula (AQAP) started gaining more space and settled in Southern Yemen. Simultaneously Houthi movement began to position itself as a formidable force in North Yemen.

Swept off by the promising new waves of change of 2011, the “Arab Spring”, which overturned corrupt regimes in Egypt and Tunisia Yemeni youth took to streets of Sanaa in large numbers demanding regime change. Houthi rebels unequivocally supported protesting youth. Under the heat of the relentless protests, Saleh vowed that he wouldn’t seek re-election in 2013 but people were skeptical. Protests continued and finally in November Saleh signed a deal brokered by Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) plan for political transition, Saleh resigned and in return sought immunity from criminal prosecution. Saleh ceded power to his deputy Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi in February 2012. Hadi was appointed as President for a two-year period which was later extended for a year. By 2014, Yemeni leaders came up with a plan of writing new constitution and dividing the country into six provinces. UN envoy overseeing the development in Yemen insisted on instituting democratic governance based on rule of law, human rights, and equality. Believing that such a change would undermine their power, Houthis rejected the new plan, protested against the government and captured Sanaa in September 2014. Post dethronement, Saleh silently joined hands with Houthis. It was widely believed Saleh’s “hidden hand” guided Houthi’s Sanaa siege.  By January 2015, Houthis dismissed the parliament, President Hadi was forced to resign and was kept under house arrest. A revolutionary committee replaced Yemeni government. Hadi managed to flee Sanaa, exiled to Riyadh and sought Saudi Arabia’s help.

Saudi Arabia Intervention

Since 1960, Saudi Arabia is wary of Houthis cross-border skirmishes along the Southern border relentlessly devised plans to weaken Yemen regime. Indeed, it offered military and financial aid to pro-Saudi forces. Saudis considered Houthis as allies of Iran and feared their formidable rise. Raising to the call of support by Hadi, Riyadh mooted military intervention under the rationale of protecting the Arab countries from “Persian subversion”. Earlier, Saudi Arabia, invoking similar grounds, muscled in Bahrain, Yemen was no exception. Reiterating its motive of containing Iranian hegemony, in March 2015, Saudi launched “Operation Decisive Storm”. Riyadh convinced the GCC and US of the impending dangers of Iranian expansionism and won their support. The Saudi-led coalition comprising of Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, UAE, Egypt, Morocco, Senegal, and Sudan began air strikes to restore Hadi government. US provided logistics and intelligence support to the coalition. In the meanwhile, AQAP and the IS cadres who fled Levant, under the umbrella of chaos seized smaller regions in South and ramped up attacks on Aden.

Humanitarian Crisis in Yemen

Ever since, Saudi imposed curbs on movement of men and material. Trade was subverted, and economy collapsed due to land and naval siege. Indiscriminate aerial raids and bombings destroyed the infrastructure of Yemen. Public service system collapsed.  Drains choked, sewage and rubbish accumulated on the roads and the contaminants slowly leached into water supply sources leading to chronic infections. Thousands of children have thus succumbed to Cholera plunging the country into a worst humanitarian crisis. Two-thirds of Yemen population now don’t have access to drinking water. UN reports warned that urban regions of Yemen will face severe water shortages from 2018. The aid agencies are unable to reach Yemen due to the blockade imposed by Saudi-led coalition. Until unless, normalcy is restored reconstruction can’t begin. As of now, situation in Yemen reached a deadlock with no side making rapid advances nor any attempts to start peace process.

Recently, simmering differences in the tactical alliance between Saleh and Houthis became acute. A week ago, the alliance ended following which Saleh adopted a pro-Arab stand. Accusing Saleh of treason Houthi rebels killed Saleh. Political analysts believe that Saleh’s death will deepen chaos in Yemen. Despite his Machiavellian tactics, Saleh has been the only leader who led Yemen for over three decades, crushed several internecine wars, allied with western powers and deftly managed intervention of foreign forces supporting the warring factions.  Indeed, his long drawn political career was studded with abject volte-face. Saleh supported Saddam Hussain’s attack on Kuwait in 1990 and consequently suffered economic losses as Saudi Arabia deported million Yemeni workers. Wary of supporting him again, in 2003 Saleh sided with international community against Saddam. Similarly, he backed down from his pledge of not seeking re-election in 2006 and continued to remain in power till 2011. Saleh having escaped terrorist attack with 40% burns went to Riyadh for treatment in 2011 but later he spurned Saudis and allied with Houthis after losing presidency to reclaim power. Interestingly, Houthis considered Saleh as their worst enemy for ordering military raids in 2004 that killed Hussein Houthi. For long, Saleh played smart politics and switched sides with extreme ease. But the recent massive U-turn of seeking engagement with Saudi coalition has cost him his life. Angered by treacherous killing of his father, Saleh’s son Ahmed Ali Saleh called for “revenge” and asked his father’s supporters “to take back Yemen from the Iranian Houthis militias”. Saudi League and Mansour Hadi condemned killing of Saleh and continued with air strikes. Fresh reports indicate that Saudi-coalition has made its first gains by regaining coastal area controlled by Houthis. Parallels are now drawn between Libya and Yemen wherein killing of Muammur Gaddafi in October 2011 plunged Libya into a veritable abyss of chaos. Experts prophesy similar fate for Yemen.

Saleh’s poor administration, economic mismanagement badgered the economy making Yemen the poorest country in the Middle East.  But as of now, Yemen doesn’t have a single leader who can garner peoples support, keep country united and weave right alliances. His death has created a political vacuum.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Operationalization of Chabahar port: A new milestone for India’s pursuit for connectivity

In 2003, NDA-I charted out plans for developing Chabahar port of Iran to bolster India’s pursuit for enhanced connectivity. But for the next 13 years, sanctions and lackadaisical Indian approach failed make perceptible progress. With signing of India-Iran-Afghanistan Trilateral Agreement on Establishment of Internal Transport and Transit Corridor, Prime Minister Modi on his visit to Iran in 2016 infused fresh momentum to this project. Modi reiterated India’s fervid interest in developing strategically located Chabahar that can potentially circumvent territorial encumbrances posed by Pakistan. Owing to India’s poor reputation in implementation of projects, strategists and especially Iranians were skeptical about actualization of the project. Chabahar located in Iran’s South Coast of Sistan-Baluchistan province, lies outside Persian Gulf can be easily accessed from India’s west coast. It is 400 km from Gwadar port developed by China under CPEC, by land and 72km away by air. Strategically, Chabahar port will not only counter China’s presence in Arabian Sea but will open new vistas of economic opportunities for India. Besides, by operating in the Gulf of Oman, India can quickly mobilize help in the event of humanitarian crisis or emergency evacuation. Till now Bandar-Abbas port of Iran could process ships of 100,000 metric ton and hence larger ships are first off-loaded at Jebel Ali port of UAE. Chabahar being a deep port can handle very heavy vessels.

Afghanistan is a land-locked country and relied heavily on Pakistan and its Karachi port for sending goods to India. For long, India persuaded Pakistan to permit entry of Afghan trucks to the Indo-Pakistan Attari border at Punjab. But Pakistan out rightly refused to allow the passage of Indian goods through its territory. To smoothen hassles of connectivity between the three nations, India pushed hard for inclusion of Afghanistan in the SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation). In 2007, Afghanistan became member of SAARC. Even then Pakistan firmly stood its ground. By 2010, Pakistan and Afghanistan signed Afghanistan Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA) whereby Afghan trucks could enter till Tokhram gate while Indian goods were still denied transit through Pakistani land. All these years, Afghan goods to be shipped to India were offloaded at Torkham gate and reloaded onto the Pakistani trucks which carried them to the Wagah border. Empty Pakistani trucks returned home after delivering Afghan goods.  Pakistan’s intransigence drastically affected the trade between India and Afghanistan. In 2016, Afghanistan threatened Pakistan of blocking Islamabad’s access to Central Asia. But Pakistan refused to budge. Initially India and Iran signed an agreement to develop Chabahar port, to reduce dependence on Pakistan. But dogged by Pakistan’s implacability, India, Iran and Afghanistan signed a connectivity agreement. Intriguingly, while India bestowed MFN status to Pakistan, the later kept India out of APTTA.  Similarly, Pakistan denied overland access to India for trade with Central Asian Republic (CAR)s. As a result, for over three decades, India failed to substantially nurture trading ties with CAR since their existence in 1992. Left with no other alternative India of shipping goods to Afghanistan, India began operating expensive air freight corridors. Holding to its ground of refurbishing trade links with Afghanistan, first Indian flight carrying 100 tonnes of cargo reached Kabul in June. Efforts are now on to commence more flight services from Amritsar to Kabul.

On December 3^rd, Iranian President Rouhani inaugurated first phase of the four phase Chabahar port giving a major fillip to India’s ambitions of expanding its connectivity network. A day ahead of the inauguration, Sushma Swaraj made an unannounced stopover at Tehran on her way back from Sochi where she attended the annual summit of heads of government of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization indicating India’s commitment to build strong ties with Iran. In addition, Minister of state for finance and Shipping Ponniah Radhakrishnan represented India at the inauguration of first phase of Shahid Behesti (Chabahar) port. India has committed $500 million towards development of Chabahar port complex and SEZ complex for increased connectivity to Afghanistan, Iran, and Central Asia. Sixty representatives from 17 countries attended the inauguration ceremony and Iran offered management rights of Phase I to India. Japan is believed to collaborate with India for port development. India offered $235 million towards phase II and obtained rights to operate two berths and few terminals. The second trilateral ministerial conference decided to finalize the protocols related to transport and transit, ports, custom procedures, and consular affairs reiterating need for developing Chabahar as a commercial hub.

A month ahead of the inauguration, India sent 1.1 lakh tonnes of Wheat to Afghanistan through Chabahar port signaling its intent of significantly upgrading trading links with Afghanistan. This shipment not only exemplified India’s renewed commitment towards rebuilding of Afghanistan but diminished the stranglehold of Pakistan. The shipment which was dispatched on October 29^th from the Kandla port in Gujarat reached Nirmoz province in Western Afghanistan on November 11^th.  From Chabahar, the shipment reached Zahedan by road built by Iran. Original plan, envisaged construction of a railway line from Chabahar to Zahedan in collaboration with India’s IRCON and Construction, Development of Transport, and Infrastructure Co, of Iran. As of now, the rail line is still under construction.  Iran on its part, developed the Zahedan-Zaranj road on the Afghanistan border. India constructed $135 million Zaranj to Delaram highway in Afghanistan. By successfully harnessing the potential of the alternative connectivity circuit, Modi government for the first time phenomenally raised India’s stature by walking the talk.  India is planning to send six more shipments over next few months.

Indian efforts were lauded by America which in its recently unveiled South Asian Policy sought greater role for India in stabilizing Afghanistan. Surprisingly, Trump administration which harbored inimical approach towards Iran and sought annulment of the historic nuclear deal, raised no objections to India using Chabahar port of Iran for shipment of goods to Afghanistan. America’s acquiescence can potentially alter the regional geopolitical calibrations and may pave way for changing US’s stance towards Iran. Curiously, US didn’t raise objection to the operationalization of Chabahar, which was constructed by Iranian Revolutionary Guard affiliated company Khatam al-Anbia. Operationalization of Chabahar port seems to have deferred America’s decision of decertifying Iran for a while. By consequence, even the fear of economic sanctions has evaporated into thin airs for time being. Else, economic sanctions can critically hamper the construction and economic activity at the port.

Moreover, Iran is gateway for the International North South Transport Corridor (INSTC), an ambitious connectivity network of intricate rail and road routes to Russia, Central Asia, and Europe. India, Iran and Russia the founding members of this connectivity project signed an agreement in 2002 to develop multimodal route. But unfortunately, sanctions on Iran dented the progress. Initially countries agreed on the planned route of Mumbai in Delhi to Bandar-Abbas and Bandar-e-Anzali in Iran to Astrakhan and Moscow in Russia across the Caspian Sea. With the opening of phase I of Chabahar, INSTC might consider using Chabahar instead of Bandar-Abbas. With China making rapid inroads into the Eurasian region through the CARs Modi stressed the need for expediting the North-South corridor to realize the untapped economic potential the regions offer. INSTC is now expanded to include 11 new members-Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, Belarus, Oman, Syria, and Bulgaria. This corridor would immensely help India in consolidating economic and traditional ties with Central Asian and Eurasian countries.

Plagued by lethargy and indifference, for decades, India has been on a back foot and never made fervent efforts for painstakingly building connectivity hubs to explore potential markets. India is now enthusiastically reclaiming and restructuring various connectivity networks with renewed vigor. India’s ongoing connectivity projects in the North East, Bangladesh, Sagarmala, active persuasion of BBIN and rediscovery of the old routes to connectivity through BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral for Technical and Economic Cooperation) stands testimony to Delhi’s commitment to fast-track connectivity. Actualization of first phase of Chabahar port exemplifies India’s new approach. There are concerns of economic viability of Chabahar on long run since the region is peppered with a mosaic of ports which include-Khalifa port of Abu Dhabi, Duqm Port of Oman and Gwadar in Pakistan. Further, there are widespread speculations regarding the full-fledged development of Chabahar owing to brewing chaos and hostility in Middle East. As of now, India has undoubtedly put its best foot forward. May this propitious beginning steadily enhance trading potentialities of India and further its outreach in its sphere of influence, the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).

@ Copyrights reserved.

If religion is irrelevant, why indulge in appeasement politics?

The grand-old party of India, lashed out at BJP for casting aspersions on the faith and religious belief of Rahul Gandhi after his visit to Somnath temple. Debilitated by worst spree of electoral debacles, Congress, having won Gujarat Rajya Sabha seat through intervention and high-profile drama fervently aspired to lock horns with BJP in an electoral battle at Modi’s home turf. Rahul Gandhi, the unofficial heir to Congress began to make several tours to Gujarat to inspire the electorate with his charisma and political acumen. In the process, embarked on time-tested path of electoral appeasement by peppering his visits with relentless temple run. In a bid cast-off pro-minority image, offering prayers at the Vir Meghmaya temple in Patan, Gandhi claimed, “I am a devotee of Shiva and I believe in truth. Whatever BJP says I believe in truth”. Gandhi’s every campaigning visit to Gujarat invariably included a trip to temple. While this new-fashioned approach caught the electoral attention, the atypically trend ended in a thud with his latest visit to Somnath Temple. Minutes after his temple visit, reports emerged that Gandhi’s name appeared in the non-Hindu register prompting unprecedented storm of debates in main stream and social media. Despite huge uproar and mounting alternate evidences that irrevocably demolished false claims of Gandhi, the Party presidential candidate in waiting hasn’t come forward to clarify his stand. Apparently, his silence lent more credence to BJP’s allegations.  The Dynasty always had distinct reputation of functioning under cloud of impenetrable secrecy. With his abject defiance to come clean on religion, Rahul’s pretentious position stands exposed. This incident eventually blew lid off the decades long appeasement politics practiced by the Congress. But contrary to its avouched minority pandering, attempts to woo Hindus seems to have back fired.

At a time, when nations are rallying to usher mankind into a realm of artificial intelligence and extra-terrestrial colonization plans, is debate on personal belief system justified?  But for all practical purposes, the concept of non-existential vacuous modernism devoid of religion which the elite subscribe to is surreal. As religion is an important social marker and politics can’t divest itself from it. Religion and politics have been intricately intertwined and hence the political agenda of appeasement politics is relevant. As a matter of fact, religion has been the single driving force that caused partition of Indian sub-continent. For the first time in history, a country, Pakistan was carved out of India solely on basis of religion. Even after seven decades of independence, India is still paying huge price for a devastating partition and its concomitant outcomes that continue to threaten national security and sovereignty.

Upholding the precincts of democratic, free society every Indian can practice any religion of his choice. But Articles 25-30 of Indian Constitution favored minorities whereby “all are equal, but some are more equal”.  Inadvertently, these clauses, demarcated the society along religion lines dividing Indian society into distinct groups- majority and minority. Further consolidating these demarcations, three decades after independence, secularism was thrusted on the country deeming it to be cardinal symbol of cosmopolitanism and modernity. A Secular State is ordained to be neutral towards matters of belief, respect pluralism and enforce a uniform civil code. Contrary to the western doctrine of secularism, India allowed Muslims to practice personal law augmenting incongruities within the society. Soon, left-liberal brigade and politicians exemplified inequalities by appending tags of victimization and invoking appeasement policies. This in turn substantially enhanced the authority of religious heads who issued fatwas to vote for certain party. Over the years, this nexus began key determinant in switching the scale of electoral mandate in favor of a specific party.

The unabashed competitive urgency of political leaders to enhance quotas for Muslims more so during the electoral season further exemplifies role played by religion in politics. For that matter, census in India are carried out along religious lines. Ever since, politicians diligently studied core-demographic expansion to consolidate their vote banks. It will indeed be not an over exaggeration to say that certain political parties are in power due to their minority pandering.  Also, nothing can better explain the demand of Lingayats of Karnataka to be accorded a minority tag since it can fetch them better facilities and assured non-governmental intervention in their religious activities. As long as this special treatment is accorded to certain communities along religious lines, despite being a private affair, religion would remain utterly important.

Coming to present debate, Rahul is free to practice religion of his choice and ideally no one can ask him to divulge his religion had he stayed away from pandering to Hindu community. Now that he overtly made attempts to woo voters through his high-profile temple visits faking his identity, a clarification is needed. Though party spokesperson declared that Rahul is a “janaeu dhari Brahmin”, New York Times article of 1998 claims that Rahul was raised as catholic. Congress Party’s new revelation expectedly accentuated consternation as the party always detested Brahminism and was in cahoots with liberals in ridiculing Hindu religion. Further, in an affidavit to Supreme Court, on Ayodhya issue, Congress alluded that Bhagwan Ram is a “myth”. Hence, what explains this sudden U-turn? Religion and politics have never been exclusive. As a matter of fact, religious dictums have been bed rock for governance in theocratic states. India so far, has been a sham secular state with political parties never shying away from using religion for their political ends.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Hafiz Saeed’s release: Pakistan’s brazen mockery

In a brazen mockery, Pakistan released Hafiz Saeed two days ahead of the 9^th anniversary of 26/11 which led to killing of over 166 people including foreign nationals. Barely 10 months back under burgeoning US pressure, Pakistan maimed to entire world of having arrested Saeed initially for three months and later extended the same several times. Now the Lahore High Court (LHC), refused to detain him any further claiming “insufficient evidence”. Challenging authority of political establishment, Saeed thanked the judges of LHC after his release from house arrest.  Despite India providing irrefutable evidence and numerous dossiers to Pakistan of Saeed’s nefarious terror activities, Pakistan refused to act.  After the brutal Mumbai attacks, UN designated Saeed as globally-designated terrorist and US announced $10 million bounty in 2012.  Hafiz Saeed, Chief of JuD (Jamaat-ud-Dawa) founded two organizations- LeT (Lashkar-e-Taiba) for training personnel and JeM (Jaish-e-Mohammed) headed by Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi for planning and carrying out terror activities.

In August US administration issued a stern warning of cutting aid to Pakistan if it fails to stop “providing safe havens to agents of terror and chaos”. Responding to the threat, Pakistan rejected US claims and warned America against holding Pakistan responsible for its failures in Afghanistan. US-Pakistan relations touched a new low as both countries traded charges. But Trump administration also refrained from repealing the classification of “major non-NATO ally” ascribed to Pakistan like his predecessors. Rather, intensifying its South Asia Policy campaign, US senate passed a bill saying that Pakistan must show “it has taken steps to demonstrate its commitment to prevent the Haqqani network and LeT from using any Pakistan territory as a haven and for fund raising and recruitment efforts”. Additionally, in September India strongly prevailed at the BRICS summit that patrons of terror must be named and shamed. Accordingly, joint declaration of Xiamen BRICS Summit named JeM and LeT as terror groups operating from Pakistani soil. With Pakistan’s all-weather friend too making substantial noise about terrorism Foreign Minister Khwaja Asif at a Press Conference agreed that his country should rein in on the terror outfits to avoid “embarrassment” on global stage. He added, “I am not making any political statement…. We cannot afford to shut out eyes on the activities of these organizations in our country. If we continue to do that we will always face such embarrassments. We have no stakes involved but we are carrying the baggage of past follies. We cannot correct ourselves as long as we donot accept historical facts”.  Though Asif reiterated that Pakistan’s dependency on US has reduced, by October, Islamabad faked sincerity and released a Canadian family held captive by the Taliban in 2012. President Trump immediately thanked Pakistan and added, “I believe they have started respecting United States again”.

Interestingly, during the same period, India’s ties with Trump administration solidified with US making India a key player in Afghan issue. US promised to strengthen cooperation in paralyzing terror networks operating in the sub-continent. Even the talks on revival of the Quad, began on a positive note in November along sidelines of EAS (East Asia Summit). Days after the summit, the US congress passed new version of National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2018, which didn’t contain name of the LeT under the list of terror networks operating in Pakistan. The Act mandates Pakistan to launch military operations against the stated terror outfits and disrupt their functioning. The bill which also includes $700 million aid from US Coalition Support Fund (CSF) stipulates that half the fund be withheld if Pakistan fails to take conclusive action against terror outfit. By removing LeT- focused on Kashmir from the list, America demonstrated its cursory interest in addressing cross-border terrorism faced by India. By seeking action against Haqqani Network from Pakistan, American clearly reiterated its priority of restoring some order in Afghanistan. American position surprised India. This unequivocal American demarcation between the terror groups gave new ideas to Pakistan. Tossing up the task of tackling Haqqani network into air, Pakistan infused fresh momentum to its good terrorist network. Pakistan’s deep state facilitated release of Hafiz Saeed who feigned “innocence” and said “I am happy that none of the allegations against me proved as three judges of LHC ordered my release…India has levelled baseless allegations against me. The LHC’s review board decision has proved that I am innocent”.  Kashmir issue has always been the bread and butter of Pakistan military and Hafiz’s release added more strength to their vicious strategies.

Moments after release, confirming India’s worst fears Saeed vowed to fight for the cause of Kashmiris. He said, “I will gather the people from across the country for the cause of Kashmir and we will try to help Kashmiris get their destination freedom”. He lashed out at the political establishment, directing his angst at former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif saying “You took oath on defending Pakistan and Kashmir, you betrayed people of Kashmir. I wanted to tell you that you were ousted from power because you committed treason of trying to develop close relations with Modi”. Saeed’s critical outburst removed veil off the nefarious strategies hitched by Pakistan deep state to create unrest in Kashmir and destabilize India.  He claimed, “I was detained on the pressure of the US on the Pakistan government. The US did so on request of India”.

Succumbing to international pressure, Sharif government ordered the arrest of Hafiz Saeed and his four aides-Abdullah Ubaid, Malik Zafar Iqbal, Abdul Rehman Abid and Qazi Khasif Hussain on January 31^st for 3 months under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 and Fourth Schedule of Anti-Terrorism Act. All of them were detained for next 6 months under “public safety law” making two extensions. Judicial Board refused extension of Saeed’s aides and they were released last month. To facilitate Saeed’s release, officials withdrew terrorism charges against him and JuD under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) rules. Political establishment of Pakistan fearing threats of military aid and limited sanctions from UN provided important information for detaining Saeed but Judicial Board refused to review.

Military-judiciary nexus inadvertently highlighted deteriorating civilian functioning of Pakistan. Daud Khattak in his article “Pakistan: The War within” ascribed this internal war to ever widening divide between military and political establishments which reached a crescendo with successfully unseating of three times Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on charges of money laundering. Deep state colluded with judicial authorities and toppled the democratically elected government. Previously, in 2012, military deposed Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani after Supreme Court disqualified him for his “state within state” remarks.

Cognizant of growing military high-handedness, Nawaz Sharif upon his re-election in 2013, tried to reassert control over areas dominated by military. Despite military’s disapproval, Sharif attended Modi’s swearing in ceremony, attempted to resurrect ties with India, refused to extend the tenure of Army Chief, Raheel Sharif who had a larger than life image and went ahead seeking punishment for President Pervez Musharraf for his unconstitutional excesses. While the military managed to downsize powers of Sharif through a vital bargain in exchange for bringing civilian unrest fomented by opposition under control. Despite the deal, Sharif made every effort to remain stubborn which in a way led to the arrest of Saeed in January. But Sharif’s authority ended in July when deep state launched a judicial coup to overthrow him. Though Sharif was disqualified, he was re-elected as the head of PML (Pakistan Muslim League). To expedite Sharif’s ouster, military wooed opposition Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf party chairman, Imran Khan. No sooner Sharif was disqualified, military pushed Supreme Court to investigate charges of incomplete disclosure of assets in nomination papers against Imran Khan. Strategically, by weakening the credibility of existing political parties, military wanted to fill the vacuum by streamlining extremist organizations into newer political outfits. 

As a trail blazer to this new strategy, military began lionizing terrorists and intensified efforts to mainstream extremists paving way for complete Islamization of Pakistan, the ultimate goal of Pakistan constitution. The original version of Pakistan Constitution of 1949 laid out that society must adhere to teachings of Quran and Sunnah. This resolution was incorporated into subsequent versions of Constitution. Giving more thrust to Islamic ideology, the 1973 Constitution, which has become supreme law of Pakistan drafted by government of Z. A. Bhutto declared Pakistan would be Islamic Republic of Pakistan. It facilitated creation of Shariat Court and Council of Islamic Ideology rendering mosques more powerful. Consequently, radicalization and intolerance swept the society and extremist groups began gaining more foothold. Chilling assassination of Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer by Mumtaz Qadri for supporting blasphemy of a Christian woman and subsequent idolization of Qadri aptly exemplifies near total Islamization of Pakistan. Particularly, a group by name Tehreek-e-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLY) glorified Qadri and built a mausoleum in his honor. This pro-Muslim, Sunni majority, religious organization headed by a Maulana Khadim Hussain Rizvi, has now turned into a political movement, and began demanding establishment of Sharia law. The same group is now holding protests across Pakistan since November 8^th calling for amending the constitution whereby politicians must swear oath affirming in the finality of prophethood (Khatm-i-Nabuwwat). They are demanding death sentence for PML leaders and dismissal of Parliament.

Interestingly, TYL secured third place in the by-election held for the NA-120 constituency following the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif. The Milli Muslim League (MML), political front of JuD secured fourth position in the contest. MML, brainchild of Pakistan military is an effort to launch banned JuD into politics. With Interior Ministry of Pakistan informing that JuD and its charity organization Falah-i-Insaaniyat are under US and UN sanctions, Election commission stalled JuD’s attempt to enter the mainstream politics by rejecting MML’s application. (Falah-i-Insaaniyat, collected funds to send supplies to Kashmir as a symbol of solidarity to valley after the death of Burhan Wani). MML formed in August is headed by Saifullah Khalid, a key member of JuD central leadership. After election commission’s rejection, MML began fielding its candidates as independent in another by-election in Peshawar.  LeT/JuD supports Sipah-e-Sabah Pakistan a banned terrorist organization. Sipah-e-Sabah a Deoband organization is part of Defah-e- Pakistan council constituted by Lt General Hamid Gul of ISI. Defah-e-Pakistan includes over 36 different extremist organizations. These appalling intricate nefarious connections between military and terrorist organizations are truly intimidating. By supporting extremist jihadi organizations, military is lending credence to religious fanaticism which is portrayed as nationalism. Penetrating military intervention is crippling the civilian supremacy and turning Pakistan into a sham democracy.

Pakistan is heading for elections in 2018 and with release of Hafiz Saeed, military is aiming to gain firm hold over political establishment by mainstreaming jihadists. Already, MML and TYL made successful electoral beginnings in recently held by-elections. With military establishment firmly behind them, the extremist jihadi organizations are expected to dent electoral prospects of mainstream political parties.  Especially, the PML which is planning to establish good relations with India. Besides by mainstreaming JuD/LeT military is exculpating of its heinous crimes and thus substantially nullifying the plausibility of additional sanctions. Also, by taming these supposedly, strategic assets, military aims to accentuate proxy war against India.

It has been a decade since 26/11, the wounds of families of victims of ghastly Mumbai attacks are still afresh and waiting with bated breath for justice. With Pakistan conveniently absolving Saeed of all his crimes, India should stop fantasizing about prosecution of Hafiz Saeed. US warnings of serious repercussions failed to deter Pakistan from releasing Saeed. Clearly, Pakistan no longer fears US with China shielding Islamabad at every possible platform. Back home, reports indicate that people of Lakhimpurkheri in Uttar Pradesh are celebrating the release of Saeed while the principal opposition taunts government of failed “hugplomacy”. India’s inaction has emboldened Pakistan and its covert supporters within the country.  It is high time and India must seriously consider inflicting damage to Pakistan where it hurts the most.

@ Copyrights reserved.