Indian PM Modi’s visit to Russia and Central Asia to boost India’s multi-directional strategy! (A report)

Indian PM Modi’s visit to Russia and Central Asia to boost India’s multi-directional strategy! (A report)
-Dr. Abdul Ruff
_________________

I
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has resumed his foreign tours and went to Eurasia (Russia and Central Asia) from July 6-13 that saw a packed schedule with the prime minister spending about a business day in each country. He was on a 3-day visit to Russia to attend the seventh meeting of BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summits and also simultaneously made his first ever visit of Central Asian countries, making Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan after the two summits in Russia.
Modi first visited Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan from July 6-8, after which he attended the summits of the BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in Russian city of Ufa from July 8-10. In Ufa, in the Republic of Bashkortostan, over 1,300 km from Moscow, Modi met his peers from the other nations of the BRICS grouping — Chinese President Xi Jinping, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is the host, and South Africa’s Jacob Zuma – during the summit. After the two summits, Modi left for Turkmenistan (July 10-11), followed by Kyrgyzstan (July 11-12) and finally Tajikistan (July 12-13) before returning to India.
In Uzbekistan, the highlight would be Modi’s interaction with Indologists and Hindi language students in Tashkent. In Kazakhstan, Modi addressed the Nazarbayev University and also inaugurated the India-Kazakhstan Centre for Excellence in ICT, where India has stationed a Param supercomputer, Sarna said. In Almaty (Kazakhstan), Modi attended a business event, where leading CEOs from both countries were present. In Turkmenistan, the prime minister inaugurated a centre for traditional medicine and yoga, with the participation of the Tukmen government, said Sarna. In Kyrgyzstan, Modi had a packed schedule, including the inauguration of an e-health link, under which one hospital in Bishkek will be linked with a hospital in India. “This is a pilot project and can be replicated,” the top official said. In Tajikistan, the final leg of the tour, Modi held talks with President Emomali Rahmon, besides other engagements. Modi paid a visit to India owned Ayni air base in Tajikistan, where it has set up a field hospital.
The Modi’s visit to the five nations, which are part of India’s extended neighborhood, are of strategic importance politically and economically.
PM Narendra Modi said on his arrival in Ufa, Russia: “It is very special to be in Russia, a nation whose remarkable friendship with India has always been known,” . He was accorded a warm welcome at the Ufa Airport and was hopeful of productive meetings and interactions at the BRICS and SCO Summits, forums India said attaches immense importance to.
The BRICS, which is an acronym for its five member countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, meant for decision taking on enhancing cooperation in the economic front, – launched its new development bank with a $100 billion contingency reserve. The first head of the bank would be an Indian. At the summit of the SCO, a security bloc led by China and Russia, India and Pakistan were accorded full membership of the six-nation grouping that currently also includes former Soviet republics Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. India has so far only had Observer status in the SCO grouping, the focus of which is boosting connectivity, counter-terrorism cooperation, bolstering cooperation in the energy sector, enhancing trade and dealing with drug trafficking. With the BRICS Development Bank already set up, the summit also looked at the possibility of starting trade and credit facility in local currency. The BRICS Summit in 2014 was productive with interactions of BRICS leaders with captains of industry and leaders of other invited countries.
On the sidelines of the summits, PM Modi held bilateral talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. He met Chinese President Xi Jinping today and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on Friday, July 10. With President Xi, the PM discussed bilateral ties at a time when India has expressed unhappiness over the proposed $46 billion economic corridor that would pass through Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, and also over China’s support to Pakistan over the release of Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi whose name was linked with the two day Mumbai attack drama.
All eyes , however, were on PM Modi and Sharif’s scheduled meeting on the sidelines of SCO summit in Ufa. Officials from India and Pakistan had been tight-lipped on the details and structure of the meeting. Modi and Sharif last met at the SAARC summit in Kathmandu last November; they did not hold formal talks so far. Sources have said PM Modi’s phone call to Sharif at the start of the holy month of Ramzan set the tone and broke the ice. However, sources have said this is no way indicates the resumption of dialogue just yet. At the Ufa meeting PM Modi was expected to raise India’s concerns on terrorism, including the release of the prime suspect Zaki-ur-Rahman Lakhvi, the 26/11 mastermind who has walked free earlier this year. Economic ties and trade negotiations found dominance in the talks between the two nations. PM Modi has also accepted Pakistan’s invitation to attend the SAARC Summit in 2016 to be held in Islamabad. Both agreed on a significant cooperation to counter terrorism, targeting Muslims in Pakistan and maybe in Kashmir.

Indian PM also solicited, as usual, the support of these countries in an effort to secure a permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council. PM Modi said as he left Delhi that he expects positive outcomes in economic cooperation and cultural ties among the BRICS nations.

II
Ever since PM Narendra Modi took charge at the helm of the Indian government, he has undertaken a number of strategic tours: from Bhutan to USA, including Canada, France, Germany and China and now Russia and Central Asian nations. The Indian PM has become known for his high-profile visits – each with the mission to build economic and strategic ties across the world and the visits are highly publicised by the PMO and corporate media syndicates. .
India’s move to counter Chinese game in Central Asia has prompted Modi to target Central Asia with the Russian support. Following the ‘Great Game’ of the 19th century, when the Russian and British empires contended over Central Asia, and the Cold War era when the Soviet Union and America locked horns, the last two decades have witnessed China entering as a formidable player in energy and infrastructural development in the five Central Asian republics of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.
The central Asian countries that PM Modi shall be covering in this tour are all extremely important in terms of the natural resources they hold and in their potential to form strategic alliances. These nations have been key suppliers of oil and natural gas for China and are now looking for a diverse market. Oil, natural gas, and energy are at the center of the trade ties between India and these Central Asian countries which are rich in natural resources and share a cultural legacy with India. Modi had promised to bring solidarity to Indian ties with these nations. PM Modi underlined India’s historic ties with Uzbekistan – that land of Babur’s birth and its importance in the Silk Route. With Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov, Modi discussed various investment opportunities for India such as in the fields of tourism, and culture. Cyber security is one key field where the two countries have decided to build a strong partnership and work together. Another key point of discussion was the implementation of uranium supply from Uzbekistan. 2000 metric tonnes of the mineral is to be imported by India. A similar Uranium pact was also signed with Kazakhstan; India will now import 5000 tonnes of the yellow mineral in the next four years. Kazakhstan and India also inked a number of MoUs related to trade and culture. India made a renewed effort at securing some of Turkmenistan’s natural gas reserves – previous attempts having been waylaid by China.
Cultural ties formed one of the highlights of PM Modi’s agenda. Student exchange, linguistic developments, and religious tolerance were all discussed by the PM with the heads of these states. Yoga was discussed too.
Focusing on military partnerships, India has signed agreements on military and security cooperation, military exchange, joint exercises, and formation of a joint anti-terrorism unit. Tajikistan is already a significant military ally since 2002 when it built an air base near the town of Farkhor. This base is a support centre for US terror operations in Afghanistan and a counter point to any possible malevolent advances by Pakistan.
American military operations in Afghanistan which is culturally closer to Central Asia than South Asia have meant that the region has been subjected to essentially a three-horse race.
III
India moves according to its own plan and agenda. After ‘Act East’, ‘Link West’ and proactive Indian Ocean diplomacy to the South of India’s landmass, PM Modi, fond of visiting foreign countries, has turned attention to Eurasia in order to connect North. His super fast trips to all five countries of Central Asia in one go, as well as Russia, from July 6 to 13, have boosted India’s multi-directional strategy. They have strengthened our presence in a geopolitically vital region labeled historically as the ‘heartland’ determining the fate of the world.
The International North–South Transport Corridor is a trade route (using various modes such as ship, road, and rail) between India, Iran, Russia, and other Central Asian, and European nations. Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan are other routes, currently under consideration for addition to the existing corridor. PM Modi made a significant pitch to the heads of these countries to join the freight corridor. India also sought support from the Central Asian countries for India joining the Ashgabat Agreement – another strategic cooperation for movement of freight and a transit route between Uzbekistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Oman, and Kazakhstan.
The post-Soviet Central Asian space is stuck between the dominant power of yesterday, Russia, and the dominant power of tomorrow, China. Despite the advancing strategic partnership between Russia and China, Russia dominates and even dictates its terms to Central Asia- a former block of republics in the erstwhile USSR. Central Asians confront after becoming sandwiched between Russia and China. India takes full advantage of its traditional military links with Moscow. The palpitation that countries like Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan have been undergoing under the looming Chinese shadow over their energy sectors has generated an opening that Modi is trying to exploit.
The setback to ONGC in 2013 in Kazakhstan, which blocked Indian acquisition of a prized oil well, has been made up via a new oil concession in the north Caspian sea where our energy major holds minority stakes. Modi has also extracted commitments from Kazakhstan for additional mature blocks for Indian investment, besides fresh contracts for uranium supply.
Modi’s energetic diplomacy in Central Asia demonstrated that India can be very important seeker of influence in the region, where Russia, USA and China calls all energy shots.
PM Modi has taken his first step cementing the ties by visiting Eurasia though the outcomes are not to the satisfaction of New Delhi since the countries Modi visited are very strong and, unlike his previous visit to South Asian nations, do not depend on India for anything.

Implications of nuclear deal for Saudi Arabia!

Implications of nuclear deal for Saudi Arabia!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff

__________________

US President Barack Obama, as he sought support from his countrymen over the issue, told Americans today that the agreement reached between Iran and six major powers to limit its sensitive nuclear activities will make America and the world safer and more secure. “That’s why we’re going to seize it today – and keep America a beacon of hope, liberty, and leadership for generations to come”, Obama added.

Iran’s deal with USA and other major powers should make Saudi and entire Arab world genuinely happy while Israel would naturally feel cheated by USA and but would also refuse to accept the “defeat”.  Of course, Israel has reasons to cry and shout as much as it wants because it had hoped that the deal would not take place and Iran-West relations would get strained further, leading to terror attacks on Iran. Israel could not control  the outcome of the talks over nuclear deal.

While many Arab leaders, including UAE President Sheikh Khalifa, were quick to welcome the historic deal bringing Iran back into the international fold, Saudi Arabia’s silence spoke volumes. Although it welcomed the deal, it still stressed the need to continue the sanctions on Iran for its “support of terrorism” State-run Arab newspapers were even more critical of the deal. The “Riyadh” warned that the lifting of sanctions will allow Iran to “persist in its expansionist policies and extend their influence in the Arab region” and “spread conflict” – a theme that has become the Saudi narrative. “Saudi Arabia will not allow Iran to take advantage of this deal.” They say so.

The successful nuclear deal by US led western powers will lift tough sanctions on Iran that would help Iran, almost starving for years  owing to western sanctions, to emerge now strong,  economically, diplomatically and politically. The nuclear deal also would help promote and streamline Iran’s ties with Western powers, especially USA which in turn would rebuild relationships with Islamic world and will also enable Iran to expand its influence in the region through diplomacy and negotiations.

The nuclear deal has left the Saudis scrambling to try and make as many battlefield gains in neighboring states as possible before sanctions are lifted over the next year, potentially leaving Iran flush with more than $100 billion in unfrozen funds and new revenues – resources they say Tehran will use to expand its proxy wars.

However, Saudi Arabia seems to be planning to turn the tide against its other regional rivals in Yemen and Syria before Iran makes an economic recovery. The military component of the Saudi offensive might include the use of Special Forces on the ground in Yemen, and a potentially widened use of Saudi and allied Sunni air power in Syria.

Arab world looks to beyond the nuclear deal. The Saudis are cultivating better diplomatic ties with Russia and China would be a strong indication of how the Iran nuclear deal could impact the regional order in the Middle East. Riyadh will now put substantial resources and effort into its own diplomacy to expand its influence beyond the US and Europe – namely with Russia and China. Saudi kingdom wants Russia and China to lessen their support for Iranian-backed Shiite proxies in Syria and Yemen.

The gradual policy shift began in the lead-up to the nuclear deal, with Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman making a high-profile visit to St. Petersburg in June and inviting Russian President Vladimir Putin to Riyadh. “After four decades, we are finally realizing the importance of world powers beside the US – and this is the key to ending the Iranian-supported conflicts in the region,” the Saudi military official said.

Yemen is the red line for Saudi Arabia. Saudis say they would see military escalations in Yemen in the coming days in order to prevent what Saudi sees as an Iranian foothold in the Gulf, The first priority for Riyadh’s new offensive is Yemen, observers say, where it has been embroiled in a mostly ineffectual but deadly four-month campaign of airstrikes to secure a foothold for the pro-Saudi government of Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, currently in exile in Saudi Arabia.  Pressured by the Iranian deal, Riyadh is set to dispatch dozens of Special Forces to Yemen to take part in a ground fight to capture and secure the southern port city.

Since King Salman assumed the throne in January, the desert kingdom has spearheaded a coalition of nine nations against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. The coalition’s aerial bombing campaign has left more than 2,600 people dead since it began in March. Saudi Arabia also has set aside differences with Qatar and Turkey over Syria policy.

Once the Saudi-led coalition makes headway in Yemen, Riyadh and its Sunni allies will shift their focus to Syria, where Iran has dispatched an estimated 7,000 troops and is providing billions of dollars in annual support to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Riyadh is willing to use air power to provide cover for the anti-Assad Free Syrian Army, which currently receives funding and arms from the Saudis, and to target “Hezbollah and Iranian targets.” US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter to announce a trip to Riyadh designed to allay the House of Saud’s fears and avert any military escalation.

Saudi Arabia, concerned by the nuclear deal between Iran and international powers, is charting a new and unusually robust course aimed at checking what it sees as the Islamic Republic of Iran’s expansion of influence across the Middle East. Under King Salman, the Saudis have pursued a robust course of action in Yemen, cooperated with allies on Syria, and revealed they have even talked secretly to Israel about their common foe, Iran.

Perhaps, the most telling sign of Saudi displeasure with Iran emerging strong is the recent revelation that Saudi Arabia and Israel have been holding secret talks since the beginning of 2014 to discuss their common enemy.

There was a widespread assumption across much of the Middle East that the Obama administration placed its desire to reach a nuclear deal with Iran above the interests of its traditional regional partners.

US officials, however, argue that Iran’s leaders face domestic pressure to use the sanctions relief to rebuild the shattered economy rather than fund expansionist policies across the region. Obama‘s statement defending the deal makes it clear it would promote peace between West and Islamic world, peaceful environment in the region and elsewhere.

Iran says the Saudis are basically challenging us in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, but “we are not challenging Saudi Arabia in those countries because we don’t see them as a threat”

The Saudi misgivings over Iran are misplaced and exaggerated. The six Arab countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council have the support of a superpower, all the weaponry, the oil resources … why do they seem to feel vulnerability? The Saudis and their allies in the Arab Gulf fear that a cash windfall from the lifting of sanctions following a nuclear deal will embolden Iran to pursue an aggressive foreign policy agenda in the Arab world.

The Saudi-led campaign in Yemen has failed to defeat the Houthis, who remain in control of the capital, Sanaa, and the port city of Aden in the south.  In Syria, there are indications that the Assad regime could withdraw in the coming months to a more defendable line that incorporates Damascus and the coastal region, posing a tougher obstacle for Syrian rebel groups and potentially leading to a de facto partition of the country.

Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran are in constant competition for influence in the region, via proxy conflicts in Iraq, Syria, and most recently Yemen. Israel exploits the Sunni-Shi’a divide.

Israel and Saudi Arabia have no diplomatic relations. The Saudi government does not recognize the state of Israel and their disputes over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remain unsolved.  Yet, the two countries recently discussed how they are both focusing on the Islamic Republic. For a long time Israel was the only country in the region constantly expressing concern over Iran, mainly about its nuclear program. But since the beginning of the Arab Spring in 2010, Saudi Arabia has started to publicly share concern with Israel.

Israel sees Iran’s nuclear program as a threat to its own nukes, while, Saudi Arabia is unhappy with possible, unfounded Iranian “expansionism” in the Middle East.   Israel and Saudi Arabia see Tehran’s nuclear negotiations with the UNSC5+1 group (China, Russia, France, Britain, and the United States plus Germany) as a sign of a more powerful Iran. Many Arabs feel Israel and Saudi Arabia would join forces to fight Iran.

It not  just Israel which has got the only nukes in West Asia  that was opposed to any possible  nuclear deal between Iran and Western nuclear powers ,  but even Saudi Arabia has nurtured similar ambitions,  demands.

Arab world would have easily forgotten what Iran had pledged to willingly share its nuclear achievements with Arab world. That is the display of generosity and magnanimity on the part of Iran towards fellow Muslim nations in West Asia.  Iran obviously is not a rogue state as it has been claimed by the enemies of Iran but it has a duty to defend its legitimate interests without meaning anything against Arab nations.

Unlike Arab world, Israel cannot forget that because pledge and it has reasons to feel a fish out of water now. It is not because Iran would emerge as the nuclear competitor in the region but because Saudi and Iran would come closer; not only Iran can help Arab world and cultivate good relations with them, but above all, the deal naturally brings Iran closer to USA and EU – a proposition that annoys Tel Aviv and Mossad agents in Washington more than Iranian future nukes. True, Iran had been an ally of USA until the Iran-Iraq war.

Saudi Arabia needs to reset its foreign policy priorities and try to shed its anti-Iran ideology nurtured on some assumptions and move closer to Iran.  That would benefit both as well as Islamic world.

Today’s anti-Islamic world and its anti-Islamic media, spreading Islamophobia and other profitable theories, unity among Muslim nations is the paramount need of the time.  Both Saudi Arabia and Iran must seize the opportunity for the sake of defending Muslims, Islamic world, and Islam from the enemies of Islam.

Muslims and major nations of Muslim world alone can save themselves. Others cannot be expected to guarantee peace in Islamic world.

Neocons driven foreign policy of USA

Neocons driven foreign policy of USA
-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal
__________
1. Bushdom era and Obama times
As the only global super power, USA wants the world to listen to Americans as earth’s lords, carryout the tasks entrusted to them by Washington with full dedication; serve the US causes and interests with commitment because the Americans are democrats seeking to make peaceful democratic world. Above all, USA expects the world nations and leaders to trust what Americans and their media lords say day in and day out. Truth and nothing but truth! And anyone who does not accept or oppose this “truth” should be ready for deadly punitive measures.

The Sept-11 hoax was manipulated by Washington to the extent that all militaries and intelligence wings of the world are now under US control.

The hawkish Neocons foreign policy experts, mainly of Americans and Jews, that controlled the Bushdom era, unfortunately continues to decide the foreign policy course of the Obama regime as well. An innocent looking and first ever black American president Barak Obama, after assuming power at the historic White House allowed himself a brief relaxation period and reverted back to the Bush era polices because that is the easiest thing to do while shifting the responsibility to the Bush Jr and other Republicans.

Not only Obama continued with the arrogant and militaristic policy of Bush era, but he also expanded it to include more Muslim nations for the purposes of destabilization, genocides and loots.

Obama’s valiant efforts to limit US involvement in the region are under attack not just from the usual bunch of right wing Republicans but from opinion makers in Washington and New York.
Americans continue to pursue a pro-Zionist policy in Mideast that work for advantages in trade with Arab nations. Apart from Israel, USA does not have any clear foreign policy.

Until all Muslim nations follow the US commandments, placing their resources and services to Washington’s Pentagon-CIA duo scheme terror attacks on them.

The fact is that USA-Israel terror twins are a compound danger to all kinds of regimes in the region – Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, even Turkey and Egypt but they can do nothing to over the challenge. .
2. Fake threat perceptions
Many Asian countries expected huge gains from US announcement of tilt toward Asia though Obama pivotal but are disappointed now as Americans want them only to join Washington to contain the Chinese influence in Asia and other regions.

Obama shamelessly state that the biggest external threat to the US super power that has the world’s largest terror arsenals, is Islamists in Iraq and Syria who had scarcely been heard of a year ago. His Asia pivotal remains a big joke as Obama is not interested to contain the rise of an expansionist mega state, China or even an angry Russia which has, through Ukraine, openly challenged US supremacy.
Islamists, who want make Muslim societies as far as Islamic in content, are the easiest softest target of the Obama regime. Moreover, Obama is eager to make full use of the global media, now ill focused on Islam.
China which subsidizes capitalist US economy by loans is not that easy to challenge today. .
US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and General Martin Dempsey assert that the nascent Islamic State is “an imminent threat to everything we have,” saying the USA must use “all means at our disposal” to wipe it off the face of Syria, and a former commander of US forces in Afghanistan calls on President Obama to do whatever is necessary to kill it.

Saudi Arabia, which feels threatened to lose its importance to ISIS, already endorsed the Obama desire to attack ISIS and divert the insulting attention from Russian humiliation of Americans in Ukraine last few months.

The USA as the global chief policeman helped to create a Middle East quagmire over years of fascist operations and now it wants to escape. With the second invasion of Iraq the US seems determined to launch itself back into the middle of this extremely complicated fray.
Washington has been creating a foreign policy driven by media headlines and the urgings of American plus Jewish politicians with minimal knowledge of the outside world and its complexities. Hence the top threat has moved from Al Qaeda to Iran’s nuclear program, to China and its ambitions in the east and South Seas, to Ukraine and Russian revanchism and now back to Iraq.

In fictitiously targeting Islamic ISIS, US military strategists hope to make Russia soft on USA over Ukraine by reminding the post-Sept-11hoax scenario when Russia quickly extend its support to US drive against Islamic regime in Afghanistan, a nation that Russian had lost for ever. Russia, however, refused to accept the NATO as the necessary evil.

However, the chief beneficiary of US strikes against ISIS in Syria will be Syrian president Bashir el-Assad, the brutal suppressor of an uprising that the USA had pledged to support.
There is no chance that Assad could be forced out now with reinvasion of Iraq. Obama and Pentagon know that too well.

3. US predicament

The US does not seem to want to learn from past mistakes. It does not allow others to offer counsels. Because advices come on a big cost and it is Americans who advise others and reap the huge benefits.

While USA does not have consistent policy abroad, it militarism has stayed as the consistent factor in US war policy planning. Using Sunni leaders against Shiite leaders has definitely harmed Islam but has not made any significant headway for USA in terms of foreign policy its own agenda, except in energy resources gains. .

Like Palestinians, Americans have difficulty maintaining focus on one task as they, wanting to shine always, get easily distracted, miss details, forget things, and frequently switch from one activity to another. It seems Americans get bored with a task after only a few minutes, unless doing something enjoyable. As a superpower existential result, they have difficulty focusing attention on organizing and completing a task.

_______

*د. عبد راف *

(Humanity has a right to know the truth which does not require
endorsements) Unfortunately, today there is not even one Muslim nation
today practicing truly Islamic faith and life.
(Account: No 62310377429* -* CIF No:
78215311481- State Bank of Hyderabad, India) Phone: 91-8129081217

_____________________

Russia meets Ukraine amid standoff!

Russia meets Ukraine amid standoff!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

__________________

 

 

 

After all there were together fighting the enemy of socialism during the cold war and have some basic understating about their problems and the can find solutions. Russia and Ukraine were part of Russia for centuries and separated as the mighty Soviet state crumpled and dissolved into 15 independent republics.

 

Splitting the Soviet Union had been one of the major agenda of US led NATO>and they did succeed in making the Soviet system crimple.

 

 

Conflict

 

 

The post-Crimea military tension in Ukraine shows no signs of abating. The United Nations Human Rights Committee concluded that separatists and Ukrainian forces have both committed an array of abuses. According to the findings the rebels have engaged in murder, torture and abductions that were “disproportionately targeting civilians”. They receive a steady supply of sophisticated weapons and ammunition from Russia. Violations by the Ukrainian military and Interior Ministry special battalions include “arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances and torture. Most of the fighting, which has cost at least 2,000 lives, has been concentrated in Ukraine’s industrialized Donbass region and the key rebel strongholds of Donetsk and Luhansk, which separatists have declared as independent states.

 

The fighting in eastern Ukraine began in mid-April, a month after Russia annexed Crimea. It has killed over 2,000 people and forced over 340,000 to flee, according to the U.N. Russian Defense Ministry as saying the soldiers were patrolling the border and probably crossed the border inadvertently. Russia reportedly has tens of thousands of troops positioned in areas near the Ukrainian border, leading to persistent concerns that Moscow could be preparing an invasion.

 

Putin has so far ignored requests from the rebels to be annexed by Russia — unlike in March, when he annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula. But Associated Press journalists on the border have seen the rebels with a wide range of unmarked military equipment — including tanks, Buk missile launchers and armored personnel carriers — and have run into many Russians among the rebel fighters. It was the second straight day that attacks were reported in the vicinity of Novoazovsk, which is in eastern Ukraine’s separatist Donetsk region but previously had seen little fighting. Novoazovsk lies on the Azov Sea on the road that runs from Russia to the major Ukrainian port of Mariupol and west to Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula annexed by Russia.

 

Now after the war conflict in east Ukraine, when the leaders of Russian Ukraine met an impression was  created that  they want to sort out differences. Even as tensions have ramped up after Russia for the first time admitted that its troops had crossed onto Ukrainian soil after Kiev released footage purporting to show 10 Russian soldiers captured on its territory, the presidents of Russia and Ukraine (Vladimir Putin and Petro Poroshenko) shook hands ahead of key talks in Minsk on 26 August, though with little hope for a breakthrough to end the raging conflict pitting Kiev against pro-Moscow separatist rebels..

The soldiers from a Russian paratrooper division were captured around Amvrosiivka, a town near the Russian border. Towering columns of smoke rose Tuesday from outside a city in Ukraine’s far southeast after what residents said was a heavy artillery barrage. Ukraine accused separatists and their Russian backers of trying to expand the conflict. It was the second straight day that attacks were reported in the vicinity of Novoazovsk, which is in eastern Ukraine’s separatist Donetsk region but previously had seen little fighting.

 

Ukraine’s forces accused Russian troops of trying to open a “new front” after an armoured convoy crossed onto government-held territory Monday in the south of Donetsk region. Ukrainian officials said artillery was fired from the Russian side of the border. A Ukrainian soldier who declined to give his name suggested that the shelling could have come from rebels aiming to take out a Ukrainian rocket launcher. In Kiev, Col. Andriy Lysenko blamed the shelling on “Russian mercenaries.” Novoazovsk lies on the Azov Sea on the road that runs from Russia to the major Ukrainian port of Mariupol. That same road goes west to Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula annexed by Russia in March.

 

Ukraine also accused Russian army helicopters of launching a ferocious missile attack on a Ukrainian border position further to the north, killing four border guards and bringing the death toll to 12 soldiers in the past 24 hours. Local authorities in the main rebel bastion of Donetsk said three civilians were killed in shelling overnight as the army pummels insurgent fighters.

The rebels previously announced the launch of a counter-offensive after losing swathes of territory to a push by government forces. Officials from the EU and Russian-led Customs Union were set to discuss the crisis and trade issues after Ukraine’s new pro-Western leaders signed a landmark deal with the European Union in June that riled Russia.

Russia unilaterally sent about 230 lorries carrying what it claimed was 1,800 tonnes of humanitarian aid to the rebel-held city of Lugansk on Friday after accusing Kiev of intentionally delaying the mission. Kiev condemned the move as a “direct invasion”. Some 400,000 people have fled their homes since April in fighting that has left residents in some besieged rebel-held cities without water or power for weeks.

Ukraine said a small column of Russian tanks and armored vehicles crossed into Ukraine north of Novoazovsk, raising the possibility that pro-Russia separatists were aiming to take control of a strip of land that would link up Russia with Crimea. “Russia is trying from its side to open a new front. The new columns of Russian tanks and armor crossing into Ukraine indicates a Russian-directed counteroffensive may be underway,” U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt said there were enough forces and equipment in Mariupol to defend the city of more than 450,000. An AP reporter saw excavators digging deep trenches on the eastern edge of the city.

Ukrainian media aired footage purporting to show captured Russian soldiers confessing to crossing into Ukraine in armoured convoys.  Kiev has long accused Moscow of stoking the separatist insurgency raging in its east — charges the Kremlin has repeatedly denied — but this is the first time it has claimed to have captured Russian soldiers on Ukrainian soil.”Officially, they are at exercises in various corners of Russia. In reality, they are participating in military aggression against Ukraine”, Defence Minister Valeriy Geletey said  A Russian defence ministry source on Tuesday said the captured soldiers had crossed into Ukraine accidentally. The soldiers had been “taking part in patrolling a section of the Russian-Ukrainian border. They crossed it most likely by accident, on an unequipped, unmarked section”.

 

 

Meeting

 

 

The presidents of Russia and Ukraine met face-to-face on 26th August for the first time since June to talk about the fighting that has engulfed Ukraine’s separatist east. From their opening remarks, it appeared unlikely that Vladimir Putin and Petro Poroshenko would find common ground. Meanwhile, a Moscow military source claimed they had crossed into Ukraine “by accident”. Pressure soared after Kiev’s security service said that paratroopers from Russia’s 98th airborne division had been captured by Ukrainian forces about 50 kilometres (30 miles) southeast of the main rebel stronghold of Donetsk.

The two leaders sat on opposite sides of a large round table and were joined by the presidents of Belarus and Kazakhstan and three senior officials from the European Union. Contrary to some expectations, they did not meet one-on-one ahead of the talks. They did stage a handshake for the cameras.

The presidents of Russia and Ukraine who arrived to attend a conference in the Belarusian capital about the development of the Eurasian Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, representatives of the European Commission and the Russian Federation, met face-to-face for the first time since June on the fighting that has engulfed Ukraine’s separatist east. They were joined by the presidents of Belarus and Kazakhstan and three senior officials from the European Union in the Belarusian capital of Minsk.

The meeting came as Ukraine said its forces had captured 10 Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine and the shelling spread to a new front in the far southeast. Ukraine has repeatedly accused Russia of supporting and arming the rebels, which Russia denies daily. “The fate of peace and the fate of Europe are being decided in Minsk today,” Poroshenko said as the talks began.

The leaders spent two hours discussing bilateral concerns after a regional economic summit in Minsk, Belarus, in which Putin said there is no military solution to the crisis in Ukraine. It was their first formal meeting since a chilly encounter in June during D-Day commemorations in Normandy, France.  Poroshenko said in a statement afterward that a “road map” for a possible cease-fire in eastern Ukraine would be prepared as soon as possible. He and Putin agreed to begin consultations about border guards.

The meeting in the Belarusian capital of Minsk came as Ukraine said it had captured 10 Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine and shelling spread to a new front in the country’s southeast. Ukraine has repeatedly accused Russia of supporting and arming the pro-Russian rebels fighting government troops, which Russia always denies. “The fate of peace and the fate of Europe are being decided in Minsk today,” Poroshenko, a billionaire chocolate magnate, said as the talks began, his manner unusually restrained. Poroshenko told the gathering in Minsk that “the fate of the world and Europe” is being decided there. 10 soldiers from a Russian paratrooper division were captured Monday in the area of Amvrosiivka, near the Russian border in the Donetsk region. Russian Defense Ministry said that the servicemen were patrolling the Russian-Ukrainian border area and probably crossed the border by accident. Ukraine rejected any claims of an accident.

Putin devoted most of his opening remarks to trade, arguing that Ukraine’s decision to sign an association agreement with the 28-nation EU would lead to huge losses for Russia, which would then be forced to protect its economy. Russia had been counting on Ukraine joining a rival economic union it is forming with Belarus and Kazakhstan. Ukraine is set to ratify the EU association agreement in September. On the fighting, Putin said he was certain the conflict “could not be solved by further escalation of the military scenario without taking into account the vital interests of the southeast of the country and without a peaceful dialogue of its representatives.”

 

Poroshenko said the purpose of his visit was to start searching for a political compromise and promised that the interests of Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine would be taken into account. Ukraine wants the rebels to hand back the territory they have captured in eastern Ukraine, while Putin wants to retain some sort of leverage over the mostly Russian-speaking region so Ukraine does not join NATO or the European Union.

 

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko urged both sides to “discard political ambitions and not to seek political dividend.”

 

No compromise

The refusal by Kiev’s former president Viktor Yanukovych to ink the EU deal last year in favour of Moscow’s economic bloc sparked the protests that eventually led to his ouster and sparked a chain of events that saw Russia annex Ukraine’s Crimea region and sparked the pro-Moscow insurgency.

 

On the ground there appeared no end in sight to the four months of conflict that has already claimed some 2,200 lives and has plunged relations between Russia and the West to levels not seen since the end of the Cold War in 1991.

 

Ukraine wants the rebels to hand back the territory they have captured in eastern Ukraine, while Putin wants to retain some sort of leverage over the mostly Russian-speaking region so Ukraine does not join NATO or the European Union.

 

Petro Poroshenko and Vladimir Putin met in Belarus with top EU officials and the leaders of Kazakhstan and Belarus in a bid to defuse the conflict some fear could trigger all-out war between Kiev and its former Soviet master Moscow. Poroshenko told Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko that “peace is the priority” ahead of the group meeting.

Putin called their discussions “positive” and said Russia would do everything it could to help achieve peace between Kiev and pro-Moscow separatists in eastern Ukraine. He said a cease-fire was never discussed with Poroshenko. Putin devoted most of his opening remarks to trade, arguing that Ukraine’s decision to sign an association agreement with the EU would lead to huge losses for Russia, which would then be forced to protect its economy.

 

Putin has so far ignored requests from the rebels to be annexed by Russia — unlike in March, when he annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula. But the rebels are seen with a wide range of unmarked military equipment — including tanks, Buk missile launchers and armored personnel carriers — and have run into many Russians among the rebel fighters.

 

 

Russia had been counting on Ukraine joining a rival economic union that it is forming with Belarus and Kazakhstan. Ukraine is set to ratify the EU association agreement in September. On the fighting, Putin said he was certain the conflict could not be solved by further escalation of the military scenario without taking into account the vital interests of the southeast of the country and without a peaceful dialogue of its representatives.

 

Ukraine said a small column of Russian tanks and armored vehicles crossed into Ukraine north of Novoazovsk, raising the possibility that pro-Russia separatists were aiming to take control of a strip of land that would link up Russia with Crimea. Ukraine accused the separatists and Russia of trying to expand the conflict. Towering columns of smoke rose from outside a city in Ukraine’s far southeast after what residents said was a heavy artillery barrage.

 

Poroshenko would be unlikely to agree to Russia’s frequent call for federalization — devolving wide powers to the regions from the central government — but could agree to allow them to have some expanded powers. He also has spoken against holding a referendum on Ukraine’s joining NATO; Russia’s desire to keep Ukraine out of the military alliance is seen as one of Moscow’s key concerns.

 

Moscow also said it seeks a negotiated settlement and not a military victory. Poroshenko would be unlikely to agree to Russia’s frequent call for Ukraine to federalize — devolving wide powers to the regions from the central government in Kiev — but could agree to give the regions some expanded powers. Poroshenko also has spoken against holding a referendum on Ukraine’s joining NATO.

 

Meanwhile, Washington claims Russian-directed counteroffensive may be underway and Russia is trying from its side to open a new front. Russia reportedly has tens of thousands of troops positioned in areas near the Ukrainian border, leading to persistent concerns that Moscow could be preparing an invasion. Ukrainian officials said artillery in the region was fired from the Russian side of the border. Later in the day, reporters saw Ukrainian troops and equipment moving on the road west of Novoazovsk, and heard the rumbling of what sounded like artillery fire in the distance.

As Ukraine’s political transition continues, Poroshenko announced long-awaited early parliamentary elections for October 26. The Kremlin also ratcheted up the pressure by announcing plans to send another aid convoy into eastern Ukraine “this week”.

 

 

Of course, there wasn’t any peace talk between Putin and Poroshenko and hence real peace in Ukraine is far away. .

 

 

Global Warming and Scientific Warning

 

Global Warming and Scientific Warning

-DR. ABDUL RUFF COALCHAL

____________

 

 

If the world powers are bent upon destroying the world and all living beings along with it, it seems, nothing can stop them. They can achieve the devastating objective but would not be existing to recount the tragedies impact on them.

The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) synthesis report on the global scientific community’s assessment of human-caused global warming offers the starkest and most strongly-worded warning yet of the dangers ahead for the earth and humanity.

Aspects of future climate shifts are probably already irreversible but, however, Climate change will be significantly more dangerous, deadly, and expensive if nothing is done to correct humanity’s course

Climate change is the most important environmental threat at par with nuclear weapons. Climate change is real and around us. The IPCC assessment seeks to tie together previous reports the panel has released over the last year and offers a stark assessment of the perilous future the planet and humanity face due to global warming and climate change.

The world’s leading scientists have reached a clear and overwhelming consensus that the failure to adequately acknowledge and act on previous warnings has put the planet on a path where “severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts” of human-caused climate change will surely be felt in the decades to come. Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann wrote: “The report tells us once again what we know with a greater degree of certainty: that climate change is real, it is caused by us, and it is already causing substantial damage to us and our environment. If there is one take home point of this report it is this: We have to act now.”

Using blunter, more forceful language than the reports that underpin it, the new draft highlights the urgency of the risks that are likely to be intensified by continued emissions of heat-trapping gases, primarily carbon dioxide released by the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas.

It cited rising political efforts around the world on climate change, including efforts to limit emissions as well as to adapt to changes that have become inevitable. But the report found that these efforts were being overwhelmed by construction of facilities like new coal-burning power plants that will lock in high emissions for decades.

From 1970 to 2000, global emissions of greenhouse gases grew at 1.3 percent a year. But from 2000 to 2010, that rate jumped to 2.2 percent a year, the report found, and the pace seems to be accelerating further in this decade.

 

Continued emission of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and long-lasting changes in all components of the climate system, increasing the likelihood of severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts for people and ecosystems The IPCC draft paints a harsh warning of what’s causing global warming and what it will do to humans and the environment. It also describes what can be done about it.

The IPCC report  is designed to integrate the findings of the three working group contributions to the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report and two special reports” and provide policymakers with a scientific foundation to tackle the challenge of climate change. Taken together, the IPCC reports and their recommendations are designed to help governments and other stakeholders work together at various levels, including a new international agreement to limit climate change.

It mentions extreme weather and rising sea levels, such as heat waves, flooding and droughts. It even raises, as an earlier report did, the idea that climate change will worsen violent conflicts and refugee problems and could hinder efforts to grow more food. And ocean acidification, which comes from the added carbon absorbed by oceans, will harm marine life, it says.

Without changes in greenhouse gas emissions, “climate change risks are likely to be high or very high by the end of the 21st century

 

The risk of abrupt and irreversible change increases as the magnitude of the warming increases. The draft includes not new information per se, but employs stronger language and contains a more urgent warning than the previous reports from the IPCC which it attempts to synthesize and summarize.

The report found that companies and governments had identified reserves of these fuels at least four times larger than could safely be burned if global warming is to be kept to a tolerable level. That means if society wants to limit the risks to future generations, it must find the discipline to leave a vast majority of these valuable fuels in the ground

The final report, rather final warning will be issued after governments and scientists go over the draft line by line in an October conference in Copenhagen late October. In September, the United Nations is hosting its next international climate summit in New York City and climate campaigners are hoping to capitalize on the meeting by planning what they are calling the “People’s Climate March” during the same week as a way to apply pressure on world governments to finally act on the issue.

Politicians have come together too many times with nothing more than rhetoric and empty promises in tow. Next month, thousands of true leaders will be marching on the streets of New York demanding real action. The question is, will our elected leaders follow.

The IPCC draft report should serve to galvanize and add weight to the climate justice movement, which has consistently demanded that world leaders respond to the crisis with action—not words.

Save climate!

Save world!

Save humanity!

Anti-Islam, Islam and ISIS!

Anti-Islam, Islam and ISIS!
-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal
_________________

Muslim nations need to usher in an era of Islamic democracy that will
positively replace the deformed corruption based western criminal
democracy in order to illuminate the Holy Quran and fulfill the ideals
of Prophet of Islam – may peace upon Him..

Giving life to or enliving the Holy Quran by practicing what is said
in this Word of God and properly implementing the Islamic law or
Shari’a in a gradual and peaceful manner as part of his duty towards
humanity and Islam is what a Muslim ruler is expected to focus on
rather than crony wealth for themselves by corrupt means.
One major reason for the collapse of Islamic regimes is the inability
of the new rulers
to understand the inner currents of international politics and failure
to make the necessary compromises in the initial stages of
Islamization process. This is necessary to save the newly established
Islamic regime from the conspiratorial attempts of the enemies.  The
success of Islamization of Muslim societies depends heavily on the
flexible approach of the rulers.
As the enemies of Islam are so powerful Muslim youths have been forced
to take arms to achieve the Islamic objectives.
On the contrary, direct imposition of Shari’a even on Muslims in the
modern age would be detrimental to the speedy realization of goals for
Islamic rule as that provides easy access and justification for the
enemies to interfere to destabilize the Islamizing nation.  The best
example is the first ever attempt for establishing an Islamic system
in Afghanistan where the Taliban was very harsh and ruthless that
invited the NATO intervention by engineering the bogus terror attack
called Sept-11 hoax.
US president Obama joined last week in forcing out Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri
al-Maliki, who served the US masters with full dedication, though
Obama blamed him for alienating Iraq’s Sunnis and Kurds and giving
rise to the Islamist radical militants.  Haider al-Abadi claims he won
the mandatory US endorsement as the new premier, is trying to form a
new government and looking up to Washington for directions.
In defence
Islam and Muslim are misunderstood by anti-Islamic world,
anything associated with them is quickly branded in the USA, Israel
and Europe as terrorism, although the real terrorists who initiated
the terror menace live in Israel and USA but operate globally
through powerful networks.
All anti-Islamic nations and their media lords are determined to
defeat Islam as they consider themselves as the only humans and target
Islam, Muslims and their organizations as terrorists. ISIS is one of
latest expressions of survival of anti-Islamic onslaughts in a world
of hatred for it and obviously it is being targeted by the enemies of
Islam, including modernized Muslims who want all wealth and pleasures
at par with Americans. The problem with ISIS is that it is also linked
to USA that seeks to use it against Islam.
Although global Muslims look forward to seeing a truly Islamic global
organization or a new Islamic sect to bring all Muslims of all
denominations together and defend them against powerful existential
threats from the enemies of Islam led by USA and Israel, they also
know the  anti-Islamic forces are quite capable of stalling all
efforts of Islamic organizations to protect Muslims.  It is quite
natural that one suspects ISIS as a hidden US organization to
discredit Islam and terrorize Muslims as the organization also appears
to leave scope for CIA-Mossad to enter to create confusion.
Muslim nations need to usher in an era of Islamic democracy that will
positively replace the deformed corruption based western criminal
democracy to illuminate the Holy Quran and fulfill the ideals of
Prophet of Islam.
Giving life to or enliving the Holy Quran by practicing what is said
in this Word of God and properly implementing the Islamic law or
Shari’a in a gradual and peaceful manner is what a Muslim ruler is
expected to do for Muslims as part of his duty towards humanity and
Islam.
If a Muslim ruler refuses to seriously approach Shari’a and Islam can
always harm Muslims and Islam, and for which he will be held
accountable.
It has been a positive trend in our times, perhaps as an important
unintended outcome of terrorization of global Muslims by the enemies
of Islam that majority of Muslim youths are increasingly committed to
Islamic or Islamist form of regimes in Islamic world so as to enable
at least the future generations to follow the truly Islamic way of
life.
Failures
In many parts of globe, the Islamic parties have come to power
recently but not all of them could survive the strong pull of
anti-Islamic joint strategy led by USA-Israel twins and their equally
powerful media networks.  One major reason for the collapse of Islamic
regimes is the inability of the new rulers to understand the inner
currents of international politics and failure to make the necessary
compromises in the initial stages of Islamization process. This is
necessary to save the newly established Islamic regime from the
conspiratorial attempts of the enemies.  The success of Islamization
of Muslim societies depends heavily on the flexible approach of the
rulers.
Most of Islamic nations have not been able to or not willing to
implement Shari’a maybe because of pressure tactics from USA and
Europe that give them some weapons as aid. Muslims live with an
Islamic nation but living like non-Muslims.  In fact this kind of
existence is preferred by most Muslims who see Islam a threat to their
freedom to live as freely as drunkards.
As a result, all Muslim nations, not excluding Saudi Arabia, present
Islam as a set of mere rituals while Muslims continue to misbehave.
The Islamic regimes have no clear-cut ideas and agenda for Islamic
rule. Dr. Mohammad Morsi the Muslim Brotherhood leader who assumed
power in Egypt of was ineffective president who by his refusal to
declare emergency or use the military to quell the anti- Muslim
Brotherhood demonstrations, quickly fell into the waiting military
trap and ended up in jail. But his exit for the sake of peace in Cairo
caused serious problems for the Palestinians besieged by Israel and
Egyptian military.  Morsi, though educated, proved to be a fool and
failed to read the military mind. And, USA which makes loud speeches
about democracy and popular government has supported the Egyptian
military instead of standing behind the first ever elected president
of Egypt Morsi who wanted to give democracy and peace a chance.
While similar small scale experiments in Pakistani Swat region failed
because USA forced Pakistani regime to dislodge the Islamic rule in
that region and Islamabad had it dutifully to make USA happy,  the
horrible experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere
is important as it is a well knit party that controlled Egypt in full
after a poll.

ISIS  Philosophy
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), an Islamist group fighting
the enemies of Islam spread world over in various guises came into
existence when  many other such  Islam defensive organizations have
failed. .
Like Islam and Muslim are misunderstood by anti-Islamic world,
anything associated with them is quickly branded in the USA, Israel
and Europe as terrorism, although the real terrorists who initiated
the terror menace live in Israel, UK and USA but operate globally
through powerful networks.
When the US led NATO rogue states invaded Islamic nations one by one,
the western word media refused to publish the photos or video horrors
of America in Muslim nations but now they are shamelessly posting all
fictitious photos to defame Islam and insult and undermine ISIS.
In its self-proclaimed status as a caliphate, it wants to protect
Islam, claims religious authority over all Muslims across the world
and aspires to bring much of the Muslim-inhabited regions of the world
under its direct political control, beginning with territory in the
Levant region, which includes Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon,
Cyprus, and an area in southern Turkey that includes Hatay. The group,
in its original form, was composed of and supported by a variety of
Sunni Arab insurgent groups, including its predecessor organizations

ISIS’s original aim was to establish a caliphate in the Sunni-majority
regions of Iraq. Following its involvement in the Syrian Civil War,
this expanded to include controlling Sunni-majority areas of Syria. A
caliphate was proclaimed on 29 June 2014, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi—now
known as Amir al-Mu’minin Caliph Ibrahim—was named as its caliph, and
the group was renamed the Islamic State
However, in order to weaken and suppress it, the ISIS is widely
regarded as a terrorist organisation. The group has been officially
designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the United States,
the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia and
has been described as a terrorist group by the United Nations and
Western and Middle Eastern media sources.
ISIS is known for its own interpretation of the Islamic faith and
sharia law and its violence, which is directed at Shia Muslims,
indigenous people who oppose it as a terrorist organization.
Generally, ISIS follows the attack strategy and methods of NATO and
Israel that are directed against Muslim populations from Afghanistan
to Syria and Palestine.
The ISIS grew significantly as an organization owing to its participation
in the Syrian Civil War and the strength of its leader, Abu Bakr
al-Baghdadi. Allegations of economic and political discrimination
against Arab Iraqi Sunnis since the fall of the secular Saddam Hussein
also helped it to gain support. At the height of the 2003–2011 Iraq
War, its forerunners enjoyed a significant presence in the Iraqi
governorates of Al Anbar, Nineveh, Kirkuk, most of Salah ad Din, parts
of Babil, Diyala and Baghdad, and claimed Baqubah as a capital city.
In the ongoing Syrian Civil War, ISIS has a large presence in the
Syrian governorates of Ar-Raqqah, Idlib and Aleppo.

ISIS believes Islamic world and Muslims globally have lost practical
guidance due mainly to the absence of a central leadership, or
Caliphate to  protect and  care for global Muslims and nations and
this lacuna is used by the enemies of Islam to defame Islam, insult
and attack Muslims and their nations, destabilize Islamic nations one
by one. Hence the ISIS is eager to establish the much needed Caliphate
for Muslim world.

Meanwhile, out of his vacation spot, US President Barack Obama vowed
to pursue a long -term strategy to turn the tide against Islam and the
Islamic State (ISIS) and US warplanes began air raids on a Friday on ISIS
targets near the Mosul Dam, Iraq’s largest. The US warplanes have
conducted a total of 68 strikes on IS targets since Aug 8, with 35 of
them in support of Iraqi forces near the Mosul Dam

Many watchful commentators have appreciated the  goals of
ISIS as their legitimate rights to make Muslims Islamic, have vouched
for the possible emergence of ISIS as the powerful regime in the
region to serve the cause of Islam and Sharia’. Quite likely the
Islamic Muslims globally will benefit from the ISIS rule as much as
from the Islamist AKP rule in Turkey which is fast emerging as
effective shield against anti-Islamic tendencies.

Anti-Islam

As usual, the anti-Islamic media in Christian countries in the West
and elsewhere , thriving at the cost of terrorizing Muslims and Islam
and seeking
large scale conversions, have begun a systematically scathing attack
on ISIS by talking filth about it in order to terrorize the
populations. They bluff the usual way of projecting Islam and ISIS as
terrorist things while they, who kill invade Muslim nations and kill
Muslims in millions, themselves claim to be innocent democrats.

It is atrocious and hence unacceptable that the anti-Islamic rogue
states frantically want all Muslims to swear link with Islam and imbibe
anti-Islamic liquor values to be modern and civilized. These nations
hate and hence fear Islam and force Muslims to shed their Islamic
culture and join the deformed western cultural pursuit. Not only
European nations  deny basic  Islamic rights to Muslims in  pursuing
Islam, especially in prayers and dress  code, but also military regime
like in Burma target Islam and Muslims.

Sept-11 hoax launched by USA has made things extremely difficult for
Muslims all over the world, millions of Muslims have been slaughtered
by NATO and allies like Israel, their valuables worth trillions of US
dollars have been looted and destroyed by the rogue militaries
claiming to be democratic and seeking regime change in Islamic world
with huge energy resources.

Unfortunately, imperialist powers and allies consider Islam as the
formidable threat to capitalism and therefore capitalist world targets
Islam, seeking to weaken Islamic economy.  This explains why Saudi
Arabia led semi-capitalist Arab rulers are still at the feet of
anti-Islamic western dollaristic powers, worshiping them as real gods.
.

Non-Islamic as well as anti-Muslim nations need not unnecessarily
worry too much about what kind of society Muslims try to establish for
themselves and they must end their animosity with Islam and Muslims
for the sake of peace on earth.

It is unfair if the forces operating against Islam and Muslims want to
fail Islamic path to God just because all other religions having
utterly failed have become mere socio-cultural and sociopolitical
organizations pursuing spiritual goals.

Non-Muslims are most welcome to join the great journey for discovery
of the truth – Islam.

Success of ISIS will be very useful for the future genuine Islamic
course globally.

Clearly, the ISIS now spearheading an Islamic state has to learn from
the failures of similar attempts by others so that it does not fail in
its efforts to establish an Islamic state to advance Islamic law and
life.

__________________________

Kashmir and denuclearization: India versus Pakistan or together?

 

 

Kashmir and denuclearization: India versus Pakistan or together?

-DR. ABDUL RUFF COLACHAL

____________________________

 

 

As nuclear powers there is one thing common between India and Pakistan: both appreciate praises and hate any criticism of their wrong doings.

Clearly, it is not just the Kashmir issue that alone makes them vulnerable to illogical assertions about their respective military postures. But more than that,  their nuclear arsenals  that have given them special terror status along with other  nuke giants in the world, like  all powerful USA, Russia, China, Germany, Briton, France, among others, including those  that still refuse to admit their  stolen illegal nukes, like Israel.

In fact, it is their nuclear status that has given “honorable” position, among big powers to India and Pakistan where, most people are poor and starving for food, clothing and shelter, and both consider this as a great prestige.

Recently, the Indian government called off the foreign secretary-level talks on the August 25, calling Pakistan’s continued engagement with the Kashmiri freedom fighter groups unacceptable. India slammed it as Islamabad’s continued efforts to interfere in its internal affairs.  India strongly objected to consultations Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit had with Hurriyat leaders Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Yasin Malik from India occupied Kashmir on August 19 triggering protests in New Delhi.

 

However, neither India nor Pakistan even mention about the nuclear difficulty in resolving the Kashmir dispute. India lets Pakistan know that it does not appreciate the meeting of Pakistan High Commissioner in India Abdul Basit met Hurriyat leaders despite being specifically asked by New Delhi not to do so.  In order to show its unhappiness, India unilaterally called off the bilateral talks. At a time when serious initiatives were being undertaken by the Government of India to move bilateral ties forward, including towards the resumption of a regular dialogue process for energy route and transit, India felt the invitation leaders of the Hurriyat by Pakistan’s High Commissioner does indeed raise questions about Pakistan’s sincerity, and shows that its negative approaches and attempts to interfere in India’s internal affairs continue unabated.

Angered by the meeting, people protested outside the Pakistan high commission in New Delhi with some protesters being detained. Clashes were also reported between the police and protesters outside the high commission. The protesters wanted the Pakistan high commissioner to be sent back.

A day after India cancelled Foreign Secretary-level talks over Pakistani envoy’s meeting with Kashmiri separatists, Pakistan reacted strongly saying it was “not subservient” to New Delhi and was a “legitimate stakeholder” in the Kashmir dispute.   Arguing that High Commissioner Abdul Basit did not interfere in India’s internal affairs, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Tasnim Aslam claimed that Kashmir was not part of India. That is just a pretext. It was not the first time that meetings with Hurriyat leaders took place. It is been happening for decades, the High Commissioner of Pakistan did not interfere in India’s internal affairs. Pakistan is not subservient to India. It is a sovereign country, a legitimate stakeholder in the Jammu and Kashmir dispute Aslam, who has previously served in India, asserted that “Kashmir is not part of India”. “It is a disputed territory. There are numerous UN resolutions,” she said.

 

Nukes

 

When India cancelled the planned August 25 talks between Foreign Secretaries in Islamabad, telling Pakistan bluntly to choose between an Indo-Pak dialogue or hobnobbing with the “separatists” seeking sovereignty back, Pakistani regime just took it casually as it knows India is not eager to return sovereignty to Kashmiris and both want the dialogue cannot go on for another very important reason.

 

Both India and Pakistan do not want to  go denuclear by dismantling all nuke arsenal that they have managed to build up for decades of their  mutual animosity and by misusing the resources meant for  utility by the people, especially common people.

Interestingly, by agreeing for credible friendship and mutual trust based relations, these South Asian nations will have to agree to US controlled IAEA to dismantle the nuclear  installations- a situation both Indi and Pakistan do  not  want.

Already USA has asked India and Pakistan to quit nuclear regimes to make South Asia a peace zone, but they still refuse to denuclearize. .

While it could not send military to Indian soil to make entire India a safe haven for NATO terrorist gangs like in Pakistan, USA has been trying to steal, like Libyan oil, all Pakistani nukes by continuing NATO- Pakistani war and fueling the civil war but have so far failed. .

 

With a peaceful atmosphere in the region, USA would push for denuclearization of entire world, of course minus the veto powers. In order to escape the situation and seeing nukes as its prerogative, New Delhi has been pestering all western powers to make it also a veto power. India thinks if can get the support of many countries it can enter the veto regime comfortably. However, Americans have their own ideas to sustain its superpower status with the terror veto. .

India and Pakistan have obtained nuclear arms thanks to the status of Jammu Kashmir as occupied nation – jointly by India, Pakistan and China.   Both consider the nukes as their real strength, rather than deadly danger to lives. Both don’t want to lose nukes by giving sovereignty to the Kashmiris.

And both want the dialogue cannot go on for another very important reason.

And, like on Palestine, on Kashmir also the UN and Security Council have not take any worthwhile position, thereby leaving the explosive issues to the mercy of global dictator USA and regional military powers to decide.

The role and relevance of UN and UNSC have been denied by the world which remains the target of colonialist imperialist forces like NATO.

And those Kashmir Muslims who sacrifice their valuable lives for freedom should have the right to know the nuclear truth.

In other words, neither India nor Pakistan would return the Kashmiri lands to Kashmiris unless their nuclear arsenals are destroyed or taken away the international nuclear watch dog. Both have set up the necessary additional “safeguards” to prolong the occupation and related crimes. For India, the pundits act as a powerful force to support Indian case, while Pakistan has got many Kashmiris of Azad Kashmir to side the official occupation.

It is strange that while India and Pakistan continue to work to retain their dangerous nuclear arsenals by sustaining the illegal occupation of the then neighboring Jammu Kashmir jointly, the Kashmiris do not seem to know that truth. Of course, those Kashmiris who know or have an idea of the hidden nuclear problem also do not open their mouths to fellow Kashmiris.

 

Defense

 

While underlining that Pakistan had termed the cancellation of talks as a “setback”, the envoy stressed that the time has come for the two countries to move from confrontation to co-operation. Pakistan stands by its commitment to peace and attaches enormous importance to peaceful bilateral relationship, he added. “We are convinced that our problems with India can only be resolved by result-oriented and meaningful dialogue,” Basit said further.

 

While his move to meet Jammu and Kashmir separatist leaders has drawn immense criticism, the Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit defended the meeting.  Emphasizing on the need for effective dialogue to find peaceful solutions to the problems, Pakistan envoy  said that Kashmiris are legitimate stakeholders in finding a peaceful solution to the issue, they stand committed to improving ties with India and he did not breach any protocol by holding talks with Kashmiri separatist leaders. “We are convinced in Pakistan that problems with India can only be resolved through peace process and meaningful dialogue.  We have been reaching out to Kashmiri leaders for the last 20 years. Kashmir is a dispute which needs to be resolved peacefully, both countries committed to resolving it. It is not an ordinary property or other local issue that could be solved by interim arrangement.

Noting that Pakistan wants to improve ties with India, he said there was no need to be “pessimistic” about cancellation of the Foreign Secretary-level talks and that both the countries should move forward. So the setback should not disappoint us, discourage us to finding ways and means as to how to take the process forward in line with our leadership’s visions on both sides of the border. He said Pakistan understands that it was a “complex situation” but added it was positive and will not allow distractions to come in the way of finding solutions to the problems.

The envoy, meanwhile, informed that no meeting has been finalised between PM Modi and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif in New York next month. Recalling Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s comment that SAARC countries needed to work together in tackling regional challenges, Basit said if Pakistan and India work together and if SAARC is vitalised, the  sky is the limit.” Dialogue is not a favour by Pakistan to India or vice-versa. Both countries need to work together,” the envoy stated.

 

Criticism

 

 

In exercising its diplomatic rhetoric, Pakistan had described the cancellation of next week’s Foreign Secretary-level talks as a “setback” to Indo-Pak ties. Pakistan cannot bluntly to choose between an Indo-Pak dialogue and hobnobbing with the separatists.

 

Yes, not only Pakistan but some Indian leaders, like senior CPI (M) leader Sitaram Yechury criticized the government for calling off the Indo-Pak talks after Kashmiri separatists met Pakistan High Commissioner, saying the decision was “inexplicable” as these meetings could be held only after the authorities permitted them.  “Whenever some Pakistani leaders come, the separatists meet them and they do so in our country itself.  And this is not possible without the permission of our government”

Why did it permit the meeting first? And after giving the permission, to call off the (Indo-Pak) talks is inexplicable. It can’t be understood.

 

It looks India cancelled the talks as a usual; gimmick, raising strong objections to consultations held with separatist Hurriyat leaders by Pakistan’s High Commissioner.  Pakistan also criticized India as a usual tactic.

 

Kashmir and Palestine

 

Like in Israel-Palestine peace talks, Indo-Pakistani peace talks also have succeeded owing mainly to the Kashmir flashpoint.

It appears both India and Pakistan play a joint political game with Kashmiris since they jointly occupy major pats of Jammu Kashmir. While Indian regime and media blame Pakistan and its military for failures in talks and deficit of trust between them, Pakistan blames India and ultra fanatic media and thus both continue the mutually blaming game.

Just like in Mideast where Israel and Palestine prolong talks and mutual attacks, India and Pakistan also deliberately prolong the occupation by military -media tactics.

And, like on Palestine, on Kashmir also the UN and Security Council have not take any worthwhile position, thereby leaving the explosive issues to the mercy of global dictator USA and regional military powers to decide.

The role and relevance of UN and UNSC have been denied by the world which remains the target of colonialist imperialist forces like NATO.

Time is overdue to establish a special international court to exclusively decide the freedom related issues, including genocides, destructions, and war crimes!

While Palestine in West Asia is burning with the a series of Israeli terror attacks on Gaza strip to effect holocaust of Palestinians in a step by step and quick phased manner, in down South Asia, Kashmiri Muslims seeking sovereignty back from occupation forces of India, Pakistan and China – thousands of Muslims also have lost their valuable lives in these parts of Asia and face similar existential predicament due to illegal, brutal occupational methods of colonialism.

 

Interference?

True, Kashmiris are legitimate stakeholders in peaceful and viable resolution of the problem. But are India and Pakistan really serious plan for an early withdrawal of forces from both sides of Jammu Kashmir?

Both India and Israel claim ownership of Kashmiris and Palestinians, respectively,  and kill them to quell their freedom movements and silence them.

Since bilateral talks have yielded any fruits so far, it is better India and Pakistan agrees to include a couple of Kashmiri representatives in their talks hereafter so that they could thrash out the illegal occupation issue once for all.

India has called off the foreign secretary level talks with Pakistan talks (between Indian foreign secretary Sujatha Singh and her Pakistani counterpart AA Chowdhury)  after the Pakistani envoy in New Delhi Abdul Basit had invited Kashmiri separatists to the talks.

In doing so, Indian government has given a clear message to Pakistan, stating that they must engage with the official government and not “separatists”

In order to show anger, the Indian government called off the August 25 foreign secretary-level talks, calling Pakistan’s engagement with the Kashmiri separatists unacceptable. India slammed it as continued efforts to interfere in its internal affairs.

All these years the freedom groups Hurriyat have demanded to include representatives of Hurriyat in Indo-Pak talks, but India turned down that plea, saying that Kashmiri representatives are not needed as India represents Kashmiris as well.

A readymade answer and a big full stop!

 

Syed Ali Shah Geelani said that Kashmir is an international issue and not an internal issue of India. He said India is not trying to resolve the issue and suppressing it. Kashmiri separatist leader Shabir Shah who had met Pakistan envoy Abdul Basit told reporters after his meeting that there was need for trilateral talks to resolve Kashmir issue. India is not trying to resolve the issue and suppressing it.

It is a fact that Kashmiris in Sri Nagar who fight for freedom from India yoke don’t say anything about  Jammu and Leh regions as if they exist at all,  maybe because these regions  have  lots of  Hindus ad  Buddhists, respectively and Kashmiris perhaps  want to establish an Islamic republic .

Indian foreign secretary conveyed to the Pakistan High Commissioner in clear and unambiguous terms that Pakistan’s continued efforts to interfere in India’s internal affairs were unacceptable.  Pakistan cannot bluntly to choose between an Indo-Pak dialogue and hobnobbing with the separatists.

 

Observations

 

As a usual; gimmick, India cancelled the talks, raising strong objections to consultations held with separatist Hurriyat leaders by Pakistan’s High Commissioner.  Pakistan also criticized India also as a usual tactic. In exercising its diplomatic rhetoric, Pakistan had described the cancellation of next week’s Foreign Secretary-level talks as a “setback” to Indo-Pak ties.

One gets the impression that there are more security forces and related personnel than Kashmiris in India occupied Kashmir with special law for military brutalities. In Pakistan occupied Azad Kashmir there are  no such heavy militarization or genocides.

Kashmiris are also humans deserving dignity and they should be allowed to live in peace. That is to say there should a credibly comprehensive solution for the Kashmir issue. All three parts of earlier Kashmir should be brought together and returned to Kashmiris.

Yes, it is high time Pakistan should step in to break the ice by declaring its intention to arrange for the peaceful transfer of power of Azad Kashmir to Kashmiris on both sides if India  agrees to  quit military occupation of Jammu Kashmir, enabling  the Kashmiris in JK to rejoin their  brethren in Azad Kashmir on northern  border.

Also, China should also make similar declaration of returning to Kashmiris the part of Kashmir now under their occupation. Musharraf had no authority to hand over a part of Kashmir in Azad Kashmir to China as a friendly gesture in return for the China favors or for any other reason.

That is to say there should a credibly comprehensive solution for the Kashmir issue. All three parts of earlier Kashmir should be brought together and returned to Kashmiris.

It is now clear, unless India as well as Pakistan get rid of their nukes, there is no chance for regional peace, no chance for the resolution of Kashmir issue.

Denuclearizaton would eventually lead to demilitarization of Kashmir as well. Conversely, demilitarization of Kashmir valley could also lead to denuclearize the region.

 

Ukraine: USA and Europe shaky, Russia firm!

Ukraine: USA and Europe shaky, Russia firm!

-DR. ABDUL RUFF COLACHAL

________________________

Notwithstanding all pressure tactics including economic sanctions by the USA and EU, Russia has remained bold to slap ban on imports from USA and EU countries, causing heavy economic losses.

After all Russia has never been a weak nation ever since it built an empire in Eurasia even before the mighty Soviet Union came into existence after the WW-II.

Arms trade and energy sales made Russia a strong economy. Russia has large currency reserves and little foreign debt, giving it a transitional period of at least two years that is enough time to find new buyers and distribution routes for Russian gas.

Russia annexed in March Ukraine’s southern autonomous republic of Crimea, after a referendum. Residents of two restive regions in eastern Ukraine engulfed by a pro-Russian insurgency successfully cast ballots on the 10th May in contentious and hastily organized independence referendums – a move condemned by the Ukrainian government and the West. The ballots sought approval for declaring so-called sovereign people’s republics in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, where rebels have seized government buildings and clashed with police and Ukrainian troops

Earlier, Ukraine’s caretaker government came to power in February following the ouster of Russia-friendly president Viktor Yanukovych after months of protests in Kiev. Moscow and many in Ukraine’s east denounced the new government as a nationalist junta and alleged that it intended to trample on the rights of eastern Ukraine’s Russian-speakers.

Crimea was formally annexed by Russia days later. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had asked the referendums’ organizers to delay the vote as he bargained with Western powers on conditions for defusing the worst crisis in relations between Russia and the West since the Cold War. The insurgents, knowing it is just a mere rhetoric without any meaning, however, have refused to heed his call.

Ukraine and the West have accused Russia of fomenting or even directing the unrest in the east Ukraine, with the goal of destabilizing Ukraine or finding a pretext for invasion. Russia has rejected the accusations. Ukraine’s authorities and the West have rejected the referendums as illegal. Ukraine’s interim pro-US president said supporters of independence for the east don’t understand that this would be a complete destruction of the economy, social programs and general life for the majority of the population.

In fact, it appears, it is USA and EU that are seeking to weaken Ukraine so that Kiev remains dependent on them. They seem to be eager to make Kiev from where Russia originated to become a strong military power to challenge Russian holdover its former Soviet space.

The punitive sanctions by USA and EU, imposed in March after Russia annexed Crimea include visa bans and the freezing of any US assets for nearly 50 political and business allies of Putin. All these are primarily symbolic acts that affected people close to Putin and intended to make Russian president Putin back down while the sanctions imposed no real burden on the Kremlin and EU. NATO is now targeting key sectors of Russian economy for further sanctions. The energy and banking sectors, plus military arms sales, are among the most likely targets.

Many people have been reported killed since Ukrainian forces began mounting offensives to retake some eastern cities now under control of the insurgents. New violence involving pro-Russian forces in eastern Ukraine suggests the measures are not curbing the Kremlin. Many EU governments, therefore, are skeptical that the sanctions could actually get Putin to back down. Since Europeans have ruled out the use of military means, these mild economic sanctions are the most powerful weapon that they have in the battle over Ukraine’s future.

Even as the Kremlin continues to be persistent with its agenda in Ukraine, western powers have resorted to strong rhetoric as their collective answer to what they view as Moscow’s expansionist push. Earlier, USA tried best to fix Russia in Georgian standoff but failed.

US president Barrack Obama warned that Putin Russia will face increasing costs as well as growing isolation for destabilizing Ukraine. Appearing with German Chancellor Angela Merkel the leader of EU at a joint news conference in the White House Rose Garden, Obama said the two nations are united in unwavering support for Ukraine, and of penalizing Russian leaders for fomenting unrest there. Obama urged Moscow to press pro-Russia militants to free the US military observers taken hostage. Both Obama and Merkel (USA and EU) said they want to see a diplomatic resolution to the crisis.

Obama and Merkel discussed the need for Europe to diversify its energy sources and make Europe less depend on Russia gas.

During meetings, the two leaders also discussed the US National Security Agency’s spy program, which targeted Merkel’s phone conversations and caused tension between the two allies.

EU leaders had warned Russia it faced further sanctions if Ukraine’s presidential election fails to go ahead. However, Ukrainian election went off and a new president who is not pro-Russia has assumed office. Russia does not want any pro-west president in Ukraine but the president has to be neutral. .

Most European nations do not want any conflict with the Kremlin that supplies gas to them, while getting Europe to agree to tougher sanctions has been a challenge for Obama. Economies of Eastern Europe are intertwined with that of Russia and would suffer the most. These are afraid of the economic costs a trade boycott could bring. So they expect the West European nations to take the lead. UK, however, wants big sanctions.

Some European nations have tight economic ties to Russia and many of them depend heavily on Russian oil and gas imports. Some of Germany’s largest businesses have voiced strong opposition to broader sanctions against Russia. They include Deutsche Bank, Volkswagen, Adidas, chemical giant BASF and engineering and electronics conglomerate Siemens, all with operations in Russia.

Russian ban tactics has put Europe in distress.

The EU members, being the sufferers of the sanctions, are individually worried about the impact of the sanctions no so much on Russia as on themselves. In fact, during consultations about sanctions many EU partners are most interested in talking about how to secure exceptions for their own economies. The French and the Germans don’t want sanctions. Germany as EU boss is betting on financial sanctions, which would mean using the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank Reconstruction and Development to exert pressure on Moscow. France and Britain sought tough new sanctions to be imposed. Many other EU members also contributed to this stuff.

Germany is eager to see that Putin would not accomplish one of his important goals, dividing the Europeans. The German government is grasping for “go slow” signals, because they may serve as a reason not to implement the third level of sanctions.

USA-Russia relations suffered a jolt and US President Barack Obama has warned if Moscow continues fueling unrest in Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin and others in his leadership circle will face increasingly broad sanctions with devastating consequences for the Kremlin. Ukraine’s parliament had voted in February to remove Victor Yanukovych as the country’s leader. Obama said any Russian attempts to interfere with Ukraine’s May 25 presidential election would prompt new pressure on Russia’s energy sector.

Russia is estimated to have some 40,000 troops near the border, but has said it has no plans to cross into mainland Ukraine. Moscow says the troops have been pulled back, but NATO says it has seen no sign of this.

Moscow has indicated it is willing to use its gas supplies as leverage in the dispute over Ukraine. Russia has substantially raised the price of gas to Ukraine and threatened to reduce the amount it supplies.

Putin’s determination to secure his influence over eastern Ukraine is also related to the region’s importance to the Russian armaments industry. The Russian army’s airplane motors, gear boxes and rocket equipment are in large part built in eastern Ukraine.

Uncle Sam who plays the chief policeman in international politics to maintain its iron fist over Europeans, among others, needs to let peace prevail in every region.

—————————–

Turkey comes to Russia’s rescue in food stuff supply

_______________________

Turkey comes to Russia’s rescue in food stuff supply
DR. ABDUL RUFF COLACHAL
_____________

 
Earlier this month Russia imposed a one-year embargo on meat products, fruit, vegetables and dairy products from the European Union (EU’s 28 member states), the USA, Australia, Canada and Norway – a major exporter of salmon- in response to Western sanctions against Moscow over its role in the Ukraine crisis.
In an environment of positively emerging bilateral ties, Turkey has begun exporting food stuff to offset the scarcity of food in Russia as Moscow’s ban on imported Western foods caused abrupt short supply in the country. Turkey was the 5th leading supplier of food to Russia with $1.68 billion worth of trade in 2013. Demand from Russia for Turkish products increased after limits to trade with the USA and EU were introduced.

As food shortages sent some local food prices soaring in Russia and opened a gap in many markets , the Russia’s food tycoons look set for a windfall. Wholesale prices have already risen; they are already earning. Russian officials warned food producers against price rises, but days after the bans were imposed salmon was up 60 percent at over $22 per kilo in some shops. According to distributors, beef and cheese prices will also rise by at least 30 percent as imports had been meeting 30-50 percent of local consumption. Shares in fish firm Russkoe More, or Russian Sea, jumped 70 percent in the days after the ban. Oil-to-banking tycoon Gennady Timchenko, a friend of President Vladimir Putin, bought a 30 percent stake in the firm in 2011, betting on rising demand for salmon. Privately owned enterprises like held Miratorg, Russia’s biggest pork producer, with annual sales of over $1.5 billion, unusually for an agricultural business, stand to gain from import shortfalls caused by the bans.

The impression created by western media that Russia has the economic advantages from the Western nations has been proven wrong. Facts have come to light now that USA and EU enjoyed benefits by economic ties with Russia which has become the world’s biggest consumer of EU fruit and vegetables by far, the second biggest buyer of US poultry and a major global consumer of fish, meat and dairy products, so the ban opens up big opportunities for others.
As Russia has imposed ban on fruit, vegetables, fish, meat products, cheese, milk and dairy in retaliation against Western sanctions against Russia over its policy in Ukraine. Turkish companies are enjoying a rise in orders from Russia as their government eyes a lucrative long-term opportunity. Mehmet Buyukeksi, head of the Turkish Exporters Assembly, said he expected a significant increase in poultry and seafood exports to Russia, and that Turkey could also meet increased Russian demand for fruit and vegetables. Buyukeksi said his organization was working closely with the Economy and Agriculture Ministries to simplify procedures for exporting to Russia. “We expect a Russian delegation to visit Turkey next week within this framework,” he said.
Economy Minister Nihat Zeybekci said Moscow’s ban – a response to Western sanctions over the Ukraine crisis – provided an opportunity for Turkey to bolster its exports not only of food, but also of consumer goods. “I see Russia as an opportunity for Turkey, I don’t think the problems between Russia and the West are long-term and sustainable,” Zeybekci told Reuters. “We should make this opportunity a strong, long-term, permanent and corporate one…We are in talks to meet their needs and make the most of this opportunity,” he said.
Not only Turkey but also Latin American nations like Brazil look likely to emerge as key winners from Russia’s decision to ban most EU and US food imports.
Turkish poultry companies such as Banvit and Pinar Et would benefit from the start of processed white meat imports to Russia from Turkey. Long-time rival Greece accuses Turkey, an EU candidate nation and member of the NATO military alliance, of seeking to exploit the situation and of behavior that does not befit a country seeking membership in the European Union.
Turkey had been in talks with Russia on deepening trade long before the ban, including on Turkey’s possible involvement in a Customs Union between Russia and Central Asian states including Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.
As soon as the ban struck, commentators on both sides said that the Kremlin’s retaliatory measures were a shot in the foot: Russia depends heavily on foreign produce imports, especially during the winter months.
EU member nations that oppose Turkey’s rightful entry into EU now blame Turkey for exporting food to Russia. They complain that it is not possible for partners in NATO and the European Union or candidate countries for the EU, Turkey among them, to be exploiting this trade war and to not follow the policy of the EU
Russia has the potential to be a large consumer of agricultural commodities, not just meat. Moscow has looked to Latin America for alternate supplies to mitigate the impact on Russian consumers. Russia’s state agricultural watchdog, the Federal Veterinary and Phytosanitary Inspection Service, held talks with representatives of Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador and Chile on the prospect of increasing food imports from the region. The move is already bearing fruit: Brazil in particular has authorized the immediate export of chicken, beef and pork from 90 meat plants to Russia, and expects to boost exports in other categories as well. Another country expected to benefit from the ban is Chile, which could take over from Norway as a major exporter of fish to Russia.
Meanwhile EU is working over night taking steps to stop imports from South American nations to Russia. The European Union plans to lobby countries that could benefit from Russia’s bans on Western food imports, such as Brazil and Chile, to refrain from bumping up their exports and stick to the international party line on Russia’s conduct in Ukraine. A senior EU official said at a briefing that the 28-state bloc will be talking to the countries that would be potentially replacing our exports to indicate that we would expect them not to profit unfairly from the current situation. Another official said that the talks would be “political” in nature, emphasizing the importance of a united international stance on Russia’s alleged aiding and abetting of separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.

While the initial impact on some European producers, such as Greek peach farmers, has been dramatic, an EU agriculture official said during the briefing that he believes the situation will not be as dire as anticipated, as any country diverting its exports to Russia will most likely open up new markets for EU producers in other parts of the world. Agricultural experts representing all 28 EU member states will meet in Brussels on Thursday to draw up a comprehensive response to Russia’s import bans.

A group of businessmen with Kremlin connections are emerging as likely beneficiaries of the tit-for-tat sanctions in the escalating dispute between Russia and the West over Ukraine.
After Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev announced the one-year ban on meat, fish, dairy, fruit and vegetables from the US western block of nations, most European nations felt the pinch too unbearable. The blow comes at a bad time for Europe, which is teetering on the brink of a recession, figures released by the EU earlier this month indicate.
Specialists have estimated that Russia’s food ban could eventually cost Europe 6.7 billion Euros ($8.9 billion) and result in 130,000 job losses. Dutch bank ING said the food import ban will be particularly painful for Poland, which could lose about 23,000 jobs in agriculture. Poland, the EU’s second-largest apple producer, used to sell 700,000 tons of fruit to Russia annually. Last year Poland’s overall food exports to Russia were worth about $1.5 billion. The Baltic states will also be hit hard by the freeze on trade relations, according to ING, with Lithuania facing a possible loss of 0.4 percent of its GDP, Estonia — 0.35 percent and Latvia — 0.2 percent.
Earlier this week, the EU said it will provide its farmers with financial aid to the tune of 125 million Euros ($167 million) to offset the ill-effects of the food ban.
Obviously, there is a rift within the NATO and EU on sanctions on Russia that led to drastic ban step from the Kremlin, former superpower. Turkey’s balancing step has annoyed Europe. .
It is quite likely that EU will have to backtrack on its obnoxious sanctions on a powerful Russia that has threatened their own economies badly.
Delay would be rather disastrous for entire Europe.
_________________

 

 

Kashmir and Denuclearization: India versus Pakistan or together?

 

 

Kashmir and Denuclearization: India versus Pakistan or together?

-DR. ABDUL RUFF COLACHAL

____________________________

(Draft)

 

There is one thing common between India and Pakistan: both as nuclear powers appreciate praises and hate any criticism.

Clearly it not just the Kashmir issue that makes them vulnerable to illogical assertions about military postures.

But more than that,  their nuclear arsenals  that have given them special terror status along with other  nuke giants in the world, like  all powerful USA, Russia, China, Germany, Briton, France, among others, including those  that still refuse to admit their  stolen nukes, like Israel.

In fact, it is their nuclear status that has given “honorable” position to India and Pakistan where  most people are poor and starving for  food, clothing and shelter, among big powers, and both consider this as great prestige.

While Palestine in West Asia is burning with the a series of Israeli terror attacks on Gaza strip to effect holocaust of Palestinians in a step by step and quick phased manner, in down South Asia, Kashmiri Muslims seeking sovereignty back from occupation forces of India, Pakistan and China – thousands of Muslims also have lost their valuable lives in these parts of Asia and face similar existential predicament due to illegal, brutal occupational methods of colonialism.

Just like in Mideast where Israel and Palestine prolong talks and mutual attacks, India and Pakistan also deliberately prolong the occupation by military -media tactics.

It appears both India and Pakistan play a joint political game with Kashmiris since they jointly occupy major pats of Jammu Kashmir. While Indian regime and media blame Pakistan and its military for failures in talks and deficit of trust between them, Pakistan blames India and ultra fanatic media and thus both continue the mutually blaming game.

And, like on Palestine, on Kashmir also the UN and Security Council have not take any worthwhile position, thereby leaving the explosive issues to the mercy of global dictator USA and regional military powers to decide.

The role and relevance of UN and UNSC have been denied by the world which remains the target of colonialist imperialist forces like NATO.

All these years the freedom groups Hurriyat have demanded to include representatives of Hurriyat in Indo-Pak talks, but India turned down that plea, saying that Kashmiri representatives are not needed as India represents Kashmiris as well.

A readymade answer and a big full stop!

Recently, India has called off the foreign secretary level talks with Pakistan talks between Indian foreign secretary Sujatha Singh and her Pakistani counterpart AA Chowdhury after the latter’s envoy in New Delhi Abdul Basit had invited Kashmiri separatists to the talks.   In doing so, Indian government has given a clear message to Pakistan, stating that they must engage with the official government and not “separatists”

Separatist leaders Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Yasin Malik met Pakistan high commissioner Abdul Basit in Delhi on August 19 triggering protests in New Delhi.  Angered by the meeting, people protested outside the Pakistan high commission in New Delhi with some protesters being detained. Clashes were also reported between the police and protesters outside the high commission. The protesters want the Pakistan high commissioner to be sent back.   Syed Ali Shah Geelani said that Kashmir is an international issue and not an internal issue of India. He said India is not trying to resolve the issue and suppressing it.

When India cancelled the talks between Foreign Secretaries in Islamabad on August 25, telling Pakistan bluntly to choose between an Indo-Pak dialogue or hobnobbing with the separatists, Pakistani regime just took it casually as it knows India is also not eager to return sovereignty to Kashmiris

And both want the dialogue cannot go on for another very important reason.

India and Pakistan obtained nuclear arms thanks to Jammu Kashmir which occupy jointly along with China. Both don’t want to lose nukes

India strongly objected to consultations Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit had with separatist Hurriyat leaders from Indi occupied Kashmir. .

Yes, not only Pakistan but some Indian leaders, like senior CPI (M) leader Sitaram Yechury criticized the government for calling off the Indo-Pak talks after Kashmiri separatists met Pakistan High Commissioner, saying the decision was “inexplicable” as these meetings could be held only after the authorities permitted them.  “Whenever some Pakistani leaders come, the separatists meet them and they do so in our country itself.  And this is not possible without the permission of our government”

Why did it permit the meeting first? And after giving the permission, to call off the (Indo-Pak) talks is inexplicable. It can’t be understood.

In order to show anger, the Indian government called off the August 25 foreign secretary-level talks, calling Pakistan’s engagement with the Kashmiri separatists unacceptable. India slammed it as continued efforts to interfere in its internal affairs.  A day after India cancelled Foreign Secretary-level talks over Pakistani envoy’s meeting with Kashmiri separatists, Pakistan reacted strongly saying it was “not subservient” to New Delhi and was a “legitimate stakeholder” in the Kashmir dispute.   Arguing that High Commissioner Abdul Basit did not interfere in India’s internal affairs, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Tasnim Aslam claimed that Kashmir was not part of India.  “That is just a pretext. It was not the first time that meetings with Hurriyat leaders took place. It is been happening for decades, the High Commissioner of Pakistan did not interfere in India’s internal affairs. Pakistan is not subservient to India. It is a sovereign country, a legitimate stakeholder in the Jammu and Kashmir dispute,” she said replying to Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh telling Basit to not to go ahead with the meeting in New Delhi and to choose between dialogue with India or with the Kashmiri separatists.  Aslam, who has previously served in India, asserted that “Kashmir is not part of India”. “It is a disputed territory. There are numerous UN resolutions,” she said.

As a usual; gimmick, India cancelled the talks, raising strong objections to consultations held with separatist Hurriyat leaders by Pakistan’s High Commissioner.  Pakistan also criticized India as a usual tactic. In exercising its diplomatic rhetoric, Pakistan had described the cancellation of next week’s Foreign Secretary-level talks as a “setback” to Indo-Pak ties.

Pakistan cannot bluntly to choose between an Indo-Pak dialogue and hobnobbing with the separatists.

Both India and Pakistan do not want to  go denuclear by dismantling all nuke arsenal that they have managed to build up for decades of their  mutual animosity and by misusing the resources meant for  utility by the people, especially common people.

Interestingly, by agreeing for credible friendship and mutual trust based relations, these South Asian nations will have to agree to US controlled IAEA to dismantle the nuclear  installations- a situation both Indi and Pakistan do  not  want.

Already USA has asked India and Pakistan to  quit nuclear regimes to make South Asia a peace zone.  but they refuse.

 

While it could not send military to Indian soil to make entire India a safe haven for NATO terrorist gangs like in Pakistan, USA has been trying to steal, like Libyan oil, all Pakistani nukes by prolonging NATO- Pakistani war targeting Muslims for clearing energy routes to benefit the prospective customers, and fueling the civil war but have so far failed.

With a peaceful atmosphere in the region USA would push for denuclearization of entire world minus the veto powers.

In order to escape the situation and seeing nukes as its prerogative, New Delhi has been pestering all western powers to make it also a veto power. India thinks if can get the support of many countries it can enter the veto regime comfortably. However, Americans have their own ideas to sustain its superpower status with the terror veto. .

Yes, it is high time Pakistan should step in to break the ice by declaring its intention to  arrange for the peaceful transfer of  power of Azad Kashmir to Kashmiris on both sides if India  agrees to  quit military occupation of Jammu Kashmir, enabling  the Kashmiris in JK to rejoin their  brethren in Azad Kashmir on northern  border.

 

Also, China should also make similar declaration of returning to Kashmiris the part of Kashmir now under their occupation. Musharraf had no authority to hand over a part of Kashmir in Azad Kashmir to China as a friendly gesture in return for the China favors or for any other reason

 

That is to say there should a credibly comprehensive solution for the Kashmir issue. All three parts of earlier Kashmir should be brought together and returned to Kashmiris.

 

It is now clear, unless India as well as Pakistan get rid of their nukes, there is no chance for regional peace, no chance for the resolution of Kashmir issue.

Denuclearizaton would eventually lead to demilitarization of Kashmir as well. Conversely, demilitarization of Kashmir valley could also lead to denuclearize the region.

It is strange that while India and Pakistan r continue to work to retain their dangerous nuclear arsenals by sustaining the illegal occupation of the then neighboring Jammu Kashmir jointly, the Kashmiris do not seem to know that truth. Of course, those Kashmiris who know or have an idea of the hidden nuclear problem also do not open their mouths to fellow Kashmiris.

And those Kashmir Muslims who sacrifice their valuable lives for freedom should have the right to know the nuclear truth.

In other words, neither India nor Pakistan would return the Kashmiri lands to Kashmiris unless less their nuclear arsenals are destroyed or taken away the international nuclear watch dog. Both have set up the necessary additional “safeguards” to prolong the occupation and related crimes. For India, the pundits act as a powerful force to support Indian case, while Pakistan has got many Kashmiris of Azad Kashmir to side the official occupation.

Both India and Israel claim ownership of Kashmiris and Palestinians, respectively,  and kill them to quell their freedom movements and silence them.

Since bilateral talks have yielded any fruits so far, it is better India and Pakistan agrees to include a couple of Kashmiri representatives in their talks hereafter so that they could thrash out the illegal occupation issue once for all.

Kashmiris are also humans deserving dignity and they should be allowed to live in peace.

One gets the impression that there are more security forces and allies than Kashmiris in occupied Kashmir with special law for military brutalities.

Time is over due to establish a special international court to exclusively decide the freedom related issues, including genocides, destructions, and war crimes!

_______________

Observation: Let them now try trilateral talks

___________

 

Pakistan High Commissioner in India Abdul Basit went ahead and met Hurriyat leaders despite being specifically asked by New Delhi not to do so.  In order to show its unhappiness, India unilaterally called off the bilateral talks. The Ministry of External Affairs in New Delhi had this angry response to Pakistan envoy’s actions: “At a time when serious initiatives were being undertaken by the Government of India to move bilateral ties forward, including towards the resumption of a regular dialogue process, the invitation to so-called leaders of the Hurriyat by Pakistan’s High Commissioner does indeed raise questions about Pakistan’s sincerity, and shows that its negative approaches and attempts to interfere in India’s internal affairs continue unabated.

Indian foreign secretary conveyed to the Pakistan High Commissioner in clear and unambiguous terms that Pakistan’s continued efforts to interfere in India’s internal affairs were unacceptable.  Singh had told Basit over the phone that Pakistan needs either to engage with the Indian government or with the Hurriyat, failing which consequences would follow and it followed.

Emphasizing on the need for effective dialogue to find peaceful solutions to the problems, Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit said that they stand committed to improving ties with India and he did not breach any protocol by holding talks with Kashmiri separatist leaders. . “We have good neighborly relations with India. We are convinced in Pakistan that problems with India can only be resolved through peace process and meaningful dialogue” Basit said, Kashmiris are legitimate stakeholders in finding a peaceful solution to the issue. We have been reaching out to Kashmiri leaders for the last 20 years. Kashmir is a dispute which needs to be resolved peacefully, both countries committed to resolving it. While his move to meet Jammu and Kashmir separatist leaders has drawn immense criticism, the Pakistan envoy defended the meeting. ” Basit also said that he was disappointed that the Foreign Secretary-level talks have been cancelled but added it should not discourage the two countries to find a peaceful solution to the the Kashmir issue. “We understand it is a complex situation. We in Pakistan are very positive and will not allow distractions in normalising ties,” he said.

 

India had called off the talks between Foreign Secretaries, telling Pakistan bluntly to choose between an Indo-Pak dialogue or hobnobbing with the separatists.

The Kashmiri separatists for freedom are themselves unfazed by the talks being called off. Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Geelani said: “Despite this development, we will go to New Delhi and meet the Pakistan high commissioner.” He added that India doesn’t want peaceful solution to the Kashmir issue. The moderate Hurriyat chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq too slammed Delhi over the decision and he too will be meeting the Pakistan envoy today and said that they will put forth their view on Kashmir. They met the Pakistani high commissioner as scheduled. Jammu and Kashmir’s ruling National Conference meanwhile termed the decision to call off the talks “strange” while the opposition Peoples Democratic Party called it “a negative development”.  Kashmiri separatist leader Shabir Shah who had met Pakistan envoy Abdul Basit told reporters after his meeting that there was need for trilateral talks to resolve Kashmir issue

 

Noting that Pakistan wants to improve ties with India, he said there was no need to be “pessimistic” about cancellation of the Foreign Secretary-level talks and that both the countries should move forward. So the setback should not disappoint us, discourage us to finding ways and means as to how to take the process forward in line with our leadership’s visions on both sides of the border. So we will try our maximum to see as to how this process can be taken forward,” Basit said. He said Pakistan understands that it was a “complex situation” but added it was positive and will not allow distractions to come in the way of finding solutions to the problems.

 

It is a fact that Kashmiris in Sri Nagar who fight for freedom from India yoke don’t say thing about  Jammu and Leh regions a maybe because these regions  have  lots of  Hindus ad  Buddhists, respectively and Kashmiris perhaps  want to establish an Islamic republic .

While underlining that Pakistan had termed the cancellation of talks as a “setback”, the envoy stressed that the time has come for the two countries to move from confrontation to co-operation. Pakistan stands by its commitment to peace and attaches enormous importance to peaceful bilateral relationship, he added. “We are convinced that our problems with India can only be resolved by result-oriented and meaningful dialogue,” Basit said further.

Recalling Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s comment that SAARC countries needed to work together in tackling regional challenges, Basit said if Pakistan and India work together and if SAARC is vitalised, the  sky is the limit.” Commenting further on the peace dialogue, Basit stressed that there is no reason why we should lose hope on building a strong bilateral relationship. “We would not allow this process to be distracted,  Dialogue is not a favour by Pakistan to India or vice-versa. Both countries need to work together,” the envoy stated.

The envoy, meanwhile, informed that no meeting has been finalised between PM Modi and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif in New York next month.

True, Kashmiris are legitimate stakeholders in peaceful and viable resolution of the problem. But are Indi and Pakistan serious?

____________