Gaza attack: World nations watch as Israel 'wins'

                                                                                                                Pic: WSJ

The scoreline says it all: 1814-67. Israel 'won', Palestine battered black and blue. This latest round of Israel-Palestine conflict started with the abduction and killing of three Israeli youth in June 30. Israel began a manhunt for the people behind the killing and started bombing what it called 'Hamas targets'. On July 17, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) invaded Gaza and on August 5 withdrew its forces. On Friday, hours before a 72-hour ceasefire was to end, two rockets were fired into Israel by militants from Gaza. Hamas has denied firing the rockets. The Cairo-brokered ceasefire was has come to an end with Israel and the Hamas not reaching an agreement.

After nearly 30 days of violence more than 1,814 Palestinians, mostly innocent civilians, have been killed. On Israel's side, it lost 64 army personnel and three civilians. That's roughly 27 Palestinian lives for every loss Israel suffered.

For those who enjoy the spectacle of warfare this is how comfortable it gets. A news report that is widely circulated and called the 'Sderot Cinema' shows how Israeli residents climb a hillock, sit on chairs and cheer as bombs fall on Gaza. For those who are shaken by its horrors, this is what 21st century massacres look like.

While Israel is guilty of using disproportionate force, Hamas cannot escape blame. Its use of human shields, keeping weapons in schools and firing rockets from densely populated civilian areas has jeopardised the safety and security of Palestinians — who the organisation claims to serve and protect.

Guilty of complacence

World nations have expressed grief at the events and have asked for peace to prevail but have stopped short of condemning Israel for its attack on innocent civilians (however, many nations have condemned the Hamas for its atrocities).

The United States has always showed unwavering support to the Zionist cause and this time also it stood by its ally. However, two instances stood out that showed a bit of insensitivity on Washington's side. First was on July 14 when President Barack Obama hosted prominent American Muslims at the White House Iftar dinner. Obama probably chose a wrong occasion to reiterate Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Hamas, especially at a time when scores of innocent Palestinian children and women were dying. The second was on the next day, on July 15, when a shipment of 4.3 ton US-manufactured arms arrived at the Port of Haifa, Israel.

Former US President Jimmy Carter in an article co-authored with former Irish President Mary Robinson for 'Foreign Policy' said, "There is no humane or legal justification for the way the Israeli Defence Forces are conducting this war… Hamas cannot be wished away, nor will it co-operate in its own demise". Carter and Robinson go on to say that only by recognising Hamas as a political player can the West provide it incentives to lay down arms. But it seems Obama is in no mood to listen to Carter.

 

BRICS leaders at Fortaleza

Playing both sides of the fence

New Delhi, it seems, is playing both sides of the fence. In mid July in a strong-worded statement released at Fortaleza, Brazil, India, along with other BRICS nations, censured Israel. However, a discussion on the Gaza conflict was not permitted in Parliament. Following this, on July 23, India voted in Palestine's favour at the UNHRC.

No friends in West Asia

Though the grand visions of a United Arab Republic and Arab Federation have more or less perished, the fault-lines that drove such ambitions during the mid-20th century are visible. If Arab socialism and nationalism were the threats to the monarchies in West Asia then, today it is democracy and variant Islamic schools of thought. That's why even though Saudi Arabia will not break bread with Israel it will not lend a hand to the Palestinian cause in which Hamas is a player. Add to this Syria's historical claim that Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine are part of Greater Syria (Damascus disapproves the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916) and the hostility the Palestinians have faced from Jordan's Hashemites, the Palestinians have few friends in the region.Read: Militants fire rockets at Israel as Gaza truce expires

John Kerry

So it's not surprising that there was not much condemnation from the Arab world against Israeli action, except for token statements calling for a ceasefire and peace from the Arab League. The 21-member league was, however, critical of US secretary of state John Kerry's meeting with officials from Qatar and Turkey (two countries that back Hamas) in Paris.

Far from a solution

While Israel maintains that it cannot lower its guard, the Palestinians are replete with stories of atrocities and injustice by Israel that 'occupies' its territory. Israel's violation of international norms, especially its spree of new settlements in the occupied territories (in 2013 there were about 540,000 Israelis living here), has made it hard for even its well-wishers to defend its cause. On the other hand, Hamas, which is ruling the Gaza Strip, without shunning its violent ways has not made it easy for the people of Palestine.

                                                                Pic: Twitter

In its zeal to 'protect' Israel's interests the IDF have forgotten the number of innocent Palestinians killed by its mindless bombings. In the din of new settlements coming up Tel Aviv has forgotten UN Resolution 242. Washington has shown double standards in defining human rights, and the world in general has remained a mute spectator. Hamas, which claims to represent the voice of a section of the Palestinian people, has been exposed and has done disservice to the Palestinians.

Israel has retreated to 'defensive positions' around Gaza claiming that its objective of destroying tunnels in Gaza has been achieved. But this is a pyrrhic victory — if at all there is a victor.

If Carter's words are uninspiring and violence is the preferred way, Israel and the US should consider another US president, John F Kennedy's words: Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.

(This article appeared in the Hindustan Times on August 8)

Lesson for Narendra Modi from Lionel Messi

Lionel Messi

The curtain call at Estádio Maracanã on Sunday night put a lid on a month-long football extravaganza. The final, played between arch-rivals Germany and Argentina, was a befitting tribute to a wonderful cup - by many means the best World Cup to be held till date.
Throughout the tournament, media scrutiny along with the weight of expectation hovered over some players like dark monsoon clouds. Brazil's Neymar was one such player. Given that the World Cup was hosted in Brazil, a lot of expectations were riding on him. But an injury and the subsequent (humiliating) defeat to Germany in the semi-finals put an end to what could have been a fairytale ending.
Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo was also one such player - but given a relatively weak team and the 4-0 loss to Germany in its first game not many expected miracles to happen.
But Argentina and thousands of football fans around the world expected miracles from Lionel Messi. While he didn't find the net as much as expected, he played pivotal roles when it mattered the most-the 118th minute dribble and pass to Di Maria against Switzerland stands out.
However, Sunday night a lone goal from Mario Götze saw the Germans lifting the Cup. A Messi bereft of emotion reflected a million shattered dreams.
Comparisons are often tricky, especially if they are across different spectrums, and preposterous as this may sound there are a lot of similarities between Lionel Messi and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Both are leaders of their sides and have won the hearts of their people. They captain their sides and have earned the respect and honour of their teammates.
While Messi has shown that he was born to be a footballer, and an excellent one at it, Modi has shown in Gujarat that he is a politician and an exceptional one at it. Messi's genius at league football and Modi's success story of the much-talked about 'Gujarat model' have soared expectations to such a dizzying height that each time both are expected to not just win but win in a thumping manner.
There are also lessons Modi can learn from the situation Messi found himself during the World Cup. Messi came to Brazil carrying the hopes and wishes of a whole nation and they saw in him a hero after Diego Maradona. Modi has brought the BJP back to power after a decade. In the resounding victory, the party has received lie the hopes of millions of Indians. Many see in Modi a Prime Minister like never before. Part of the victory is because of the poor show of the earlier government but majority of it is on the hope that Modi can spin the fortunes of the nation.

Narendra Modi

Predictably Sunday's defeat has not gone well with many La Albiceleste fans who are blaming Messi's poor form for the defeat. Social media is abuzz with strong views calling Messi 'selfish' and he winning the Golden Ball has not helped his case -'Messi won while Argentina lost'.
A bad monsoon, the crisis in West Asia and a dull global economy are only some of the problems that are beyond Modi's control - but, nevertheless, if he falls short of anything but spectacular the people will feel let down.
The BRICS summit, currently underway in Fortaleza, Brazil, is important on many counts as it is Modi's first international engagement after assuming office. What he takes away from the summit is important to sustain the people's hope in the 'Modi magic'. Messi left Brazil with a heavy heart. It is hoped that Modi does not follow.
It's a difficult spot to find oneself in, but it is triumph in such situations that create legends. Messi and Modi have set the bar too high and now the challenge is to live up to it.
(This article appeared in Hindustan Times on July 14)

Commonwealth: Stephen Harper’s boycott throws light on defunct world bodies

“I never worry about action, but only inaction.” This Winston Churchill quote sums up the problem the Commonwealth is facing today. After the recent exit of Gambia, on Monday, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper confirmed that he would be boycotting the November Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), in protest of the human rights record of the host nation Sri Lanka. That this will be the second high profile leader giving the November summit a miss is definitely not good news for the Mahinda Rajapaksa government, which has been working overtime to play the good host and divert the UNHRC heat over its questionable human rights record. Queen Elizabeth II, citing the distance of travel, will be missing the summit for the first time in 42 years.

The Commonwealth is facing a lack of credibility and ceases to command the respect it did a few decades back. This is not a problem unique to the Commonwealth, but is faced by many similar groups. The eight-member South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is a prime example of how futile can a group be if its objectives are hijacked by member nations. For a greater part of its 27 years of existence, the SAARC has been a forum where ties between India and Pakistan have been more in focus, than the proceedings of the group. In such a situation, the very purpose of the group is lost in the cacophony of the narrow agendas pushed by the dominant members in the group. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is still afloat — never mind that the Cold War is over and that many member nations have warmed up to the two superpowers.
In contrast to this, as a sign of the times, groups formed on an economic-trade objective seem to wield more power and sway than groups formed for ‘promoting peace, co-operation and justice’. The BRICS — consisting Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — is an example. And so is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which has created forums, like the East Asia Summit. The fact that larger non-member nations like the United States, Russia, China, India, etc attend such forums reflects the prominence of the group. Similarly groups like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Gulf Cooperation Council have prominence because they remain relevant in the present scheme of things. The same cannot be said of the Commonwealth, NAM, or even the SAARC.
The purpose and necessity of these relics of a bygone era should be assessed. These groups have been rendered obsolete in the present world order and, more often than not, tend to stick on like a bad habit. Rather than sticking on to their objectives, they tend to take the middle path, in order to avoid differences and harsh actions on member states that violate the group’s core principles. For these groups to remain in the reckoning, it is essential that they reassert the principles for which they were formed. Failing which, they are best remembered for past actions.

Global AgeWatch Index: Ageing gracefully is not an option in India

In a country that has more than 50% of its population under the age of 35 years, it is expected that the older people are taken good care of, if not revered. That, sadly, is not the case in India where the older people are often seen as cheap labour or as a liability. Instances of children abandoning their parents by the roadside or at old age homes reflect this. The economic pressure and the breakdown of the joint-family system have adversely affected the dignity of life of older people. This plight is worsened as, unlike many developed Western nations, the safety net of social security is absent. As is always the case, when faced with a crisis, it is the older women who doubly suffer.

Given this, it is not surprising that India is ranked at an unimpressive 73 among the 91 countries surveyed as ideal for older people to live. HelpAge International launched on Tuesday the first-ever Golbal AgeWatch Index ranking ‘countries according to the social and economic well-being of older people’. The parameters for developing the index were: the income status (including the pension coverage, poverty rate in old age), health (including life expectancy at 60, and psychological wellbeing), education and employment (including educational status of old people) and the living environment (including physical safety, civic freedom and access to public transport). Sweden tops the list, followed by Norway and Germany. India can take cold comfort in the fact that Pakistan (ranked 89) and Afghanistan (91) are at the bottom of the table. On the other hand, China (35) and Sri Lanka (36) have fared much better. Colombo’s long-term investments in education and healthcare have paid off providing a better standard of living for its older people, and New Delhi should take note of this achievement. The study dispels the myth that the wellbeing of older people is better in wealthier economics. None of the BRICS nations — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — that accounted for 40% of the global population and 25% of the world’s GDP based on the purchasing power parity in 2012, figured in the top 20 nations on the index. The high ranking of countries like Bolivia and Mauritius showed that smaller economies could also be good places for the old. The West, especially Scandinavian countries, has done well and this is mainly because the system is geared towards the demographic shifts taking place.

India has at present about 8% of its total population above the age of 60 and in the coming decades this is set to increase. The index shows that India’s rank in health is low. This is mainly attributed to the lack of availability of good healthcare facilities in rural India where most of the country’s ageing population resides. Some states, like Kerala, already have a significant number of older people and in the coming decades, unless farsighted policies are implemented, the quality of life for older people will not improve.