'ISIS is an American myth'

Many European countries — including France, Germany, Denmark and Britain — have asked the Bashar al-Assad government to ‘take care’ of Europeans who have been radicalised and are fighting in Syria.

These startling revelations were made by the Syrian ambassador to India, Riad Kamel Abbas, on Wednesday. “Intelligence leaders of many European countries came to Syria to meet officials”, Abbas said, and offered to not press charges of human rights violation on the Assad government if Damascus made sure that they (European citizens fighting in Syria) did not return to Europe. They fear that these fighters might return to their countries and radicalise more people at home.

Speaking at an interaction with the media arranged by the Indian Women’s Press Corps in New Delhi, Abbas was critical of the role of Turkey, the US and its West Asian allies. “ISIS is an American myth, which gets direct support from Tayyip Erdogan’s Turkey and is funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar”.

“Al Qaeda appeared in Syria after the US invaded Iraq. Before that there was no al Qaeda in Syria. It is clear that al Qaeda was created by the US and it is supporting ISIS.” Abbas also said that the UN was not helping Syria and is under the US’ control.

As fierce fighting is underway in Kobane, Abbas expressed little hope in the government in Ankara.

The ambassador, however, appreciated the Modi government’s stand of not joining the US’ coalition against ISIS.

(This news report appeared in the HindustanTimes on October 17)

A united West Asia to fight ISIS: It's easier said than done

The Islamic State (ISIS), by beheading two American citizens, has drawn international attention and has made US President Barack Obama send American troops as military advisers to Iraq. In his speech last week, Mr Obama stressed the need for a coalition of countries to tackle ISIS. Britain has decided not to be directly involved but France and Australia have extended support. US secretary of state John Kerry is in West Asia, stitching together a coalition of regional players. Several Arab countries have reportedly reciprocated, expressing willingness to join in airstrikes on ISIS. The details are yet unclear, but forging a grand coalition amid the complex politics of West Asia is easier said than done.

John Kerry with Arab leaders after the Jeddah meet on ISIS

The role of Arab governments, especially Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE, in the growth of ISIS is well known. So why would they now want to destroy ISIS? The rise of ISIS, a Sunni terror group, which targeted Shias and other minorities, was acceptable  — even desirable — for Sunni kingdoms in West Asia. For them ISIS’ anti-Shia drive meant the ultimate weakening of Iran, the Shia heavyweight in West Asia. However, the equation changed the moment ISIS revealed its grand plans for an Islamic caliphate. Put differently, the snakes in the backyard have turned homeward. Also many countries fear that their local Sunni population might get influenced by ISIS. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others put their forces on alert in July since the caliphate was declared.
The US does not want Iran and Syria to be part of the coalition, thereby making it a largely Sunni group. Turkey’s reluctance to join the coalition also weakens the drive against ISIS. Ankara is wary of the Kurdish resistance in the country and 49 Turkish diplomats are in ISIS’ custody. But it shares a 1,200-km-long border with Iraq and Syria and can choke ISIS by tightening its border and stopping the flow of oil from ISIS-controlled areas. It needs to be seen how much the US and its allies will be willing to attack ISIS in Syria without aiding the Bashar al-Assad government. The regional coalition should also check terror groups in, say, Libya, Egypt, etc. Focusing solely on ISIS and leaving other groups is half the job done. ISIS, through its call for an Islamic caliphate, is hoping to rekindle the passion for Arab nationalism. More importantly, it wants West Asia to unite and oppose Western powers that have ‘subjugated’ the region for more than two centuries. Given this, there is a grain of truth when Mr Obama said that “…this is not our fight alone” and “nor can we take the place of Arab partners in securing the region”. The success of the coalition depends on a united West Asia that overlooks sectarian and national differences. Unless the Arab nations take up the fight, the attack on ISIS will be viewed as Western propaganda against Islam and the region — and ISIS will continue to terrorise the world.

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)

ISIS in Iraq is bad news for NaMo government

With the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) capturing key towns in northern Iraq, including Mosul and Tikrit, and the democratically elected Nouri al-Maliki government seemingly clueless about what to do, the prospects of peace and normalcy returning to the war-torn West Asian country in the near future are slim. Even though United States’ President Barack Obama has sent in Marines to safeguard its consulate in Baghdad and has ordered the USS George HW Bush to move towards the Persian Gulf, it is doubtful whether he has the stomach to send troops again to Iraq. Washington is mulling air strikes and is in talks with neighbours, like Iran, to overcome this crisis.

India’s concerns lie mainly in two areas: First, the safety of Indians who are working in Iraq, and second, the probable rise in oil prices if the sectarian violence spreads to the rest of the country and if the US steps in. The uncertainty in the country could see oil prices going northward, adversely affecting India’s economy. The ministry of external affairs should use its clout with Baghdad and the neighbouring countries to secure the safe exit of Indians from Iraq. India’s good ties with Iraq date back to the 1950s and since then economic and cultural ties between the two have grown. The good relations between New Delhi and Baghdad helped India especially during the 1990 Gulf War: Indians in Kuwait could safely exit via Iraq.

If the unrest escalates, it will affect the oil prices, signs of which were seen on Monday when crude prices hit a nine-month high after growing speculation of a US strike on Iraq. After Saudi Arabia, Iraq is the largest supplier of oil  to India, with an annual trade of around $20 billion. Reserve Bank of India governor Raghuram Rajan said India was closely monitoring the situation and that the domestic economy is well prepared to face shocks from the external sources. That said, with more than 75% of its oil imported, soaring energy prices will exert pressure on the rupee. A below-average monsoon will affect the summer crops and this will push prices upwards, causing further food inflation. These two factors will have a telling effect on the economy and that’s not good news for the Narendra Modi government, which has made controlling inflation a priority. The Centre, meanwhile, must take all the necessary steps to ensure the safe exit of Indians from Iraq and at the same time figure out ways to tackle a possible rise in oil prices.

Iraq: As the ISIS marches ahead, the US waits and India...

What is happening in Iraq now is essentially the Shia-Sunni war that has gone out of hand. From Saddam Hussein’s death in 2006 and since America’s establishment of a weak government in Baghdad, the sectarian differences between Shias and Sunnis have come to the front.
A Shia Iran’s influence over Iraq has got many of the countries in the region, especially Saudi Arabia, with a Sunni majority, uncomfortable.
Many, especially Riyadh, see Iraq PM Nouri al-Maliki as a Tehran man. The rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a breakaway al Qaeda faction that has set its goal at establishing a Sunni Islamist state in West Asia and that is anti-Shia should be seen in this context.
The ISIS came to prominence during the takeover of Fallujah in January and the following month Washington recognised ISIS as a terrorist group. Nevertheless, it has been overtly and covertly been supported by pro-Sunni groups in Saudi Arabia and other GCC countries. The funding of radical groups like Jabhat al-Nusra have given the ISIS more firepower.
On June 10, the ISIS captured Mosul, the second largest city in Iraq. It has descended — and at an alarming pace — from the northwest of the country and is taking town after town, reaching about 60 miles from the capital Baghdad. Such has been the pace of its advancement that by the time the international community took notice and condemned it the ISIS had made great progress.
The ISIS has also taken control of Tikrit. Earlier they had taken control of Ramadi and Samarra—two important towns. PM Maliki has failed to bring even a semblance of democracy and governance in Iraq and there are groups that see the advance of ISIS as a reply to his misgovernance. The Mosul takeover has further weakened Baghdad’s influence in the northern regions. This has given the Kurds an advantage in its standoff with the Maliki government.
US President Barack Obama has, in a White House statement, said that the US will not be sending troops to Iraq. He calls it a “wake up call” for Iraqi leaders to iron out their mistrust and sectarian differences and demonstrate a willingness to join hands for the Iraqi people. Obama has said that the US will help only if the local leaders are showing progress. However, in a move that can change the dynamics of the events unfolding in Iraq US aircraft carrier (USS George HW Bush) has arrived in the Persian Gulf.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration has come in for some severe criticism for his ‘responsible withdrawal’. In 2011, then secretary of state Hillary Clinton claimed that the “responsible withdrawal” of the US from Iraq would be replaced by Washington’s biggest diplomatic programme since the Marshall Plan. Nothing actually happened.
Kori Schake, a fellow at the Hoover Institution, recently wrote: ‘The president is so spooked by the prospect of "a third American war in the region" that he has compromised our security to prevent it. He ought to have understood that he wasn't starting a third American war in the region — he needed to finish the first one.’
Unrest in West Asia is bad news for the region and India in multiple ways. First, if the violence breaks out into a full-fledged war it will affect the millions of Indians working in the region (Some estimates say that there are about 18,000 Indians in Iraq).
Second, if the ISIS manages to topple the Maliki government and capture Baghdad it will inspire many splinter groups of al-qaeda in the region and world over.
Third, unrest in the region will affect oil prices and given the economic climate a war is in no one’s interest. Fourth, there are ominous signs of similarities between the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The war on terror brought the US to Iraq and Afghanistan. After giving it a semblance of democracy the US withdrew from Iraq. The local government has not been able to check terrorist organisations. If the same script is seen in Afghanistan, India will have reasons to be concerned.
(This article appeared in the Hindustan Times on June 17)

US-Saudi ties: Iran is just one of the elephants in the room

King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (Left)
and Barack Obama

United States President Barack Obama really has his task cut out for him. On a three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, he will have to delicately balance human rights issues and realpolitik in Riyadh, where he will be meeting King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. More than 50 representatives, both Republicans and Democrats, have signed a petition asking Mr Obama to publicly address human rights violations in the desert kingdom. One of the suggestions by Amnesty International is that Mr Obama has a female Secret Service personnel drive his car. While there was much debate, and rightly so, about the Twitter ban in Turkey, little focus has been given to the way the Saudi authorities have been harassing citizens who have been critical of the government. A group of three lawyers, who had criticised the legal system, have been sued by the justice ministry and have been accused of ‘defying the regime’.
Though human rights are a major issue the US would like to talk about, it is unlikely that the ban on women drivers or policing of public opinion in Saudi Arabia will be on the top of the list. Washington-Riyadh ties have run into rough weather ever since the former eased up on Tehran over its nuclear programme. Washington’s perceived support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Washington saying no to airstrikes on Syria have worsened the ties. Rebuilding confidence and whittling down differences would be Mr Obama’s priority. Moreover this meeting takes place at a time when there is not one but at least four countries waiting for a power change in the region — Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Lebanon. The US and Saudi Arabia have varying interests in these countries. Put into the picture the interest Iran has in these four nations and its conflict with Saudi Arabia.

Bashar al Assad (Left), Barack Obama and Hassan Rouhani

Mr Obama’s meeting is expected, in ‘word and deed’, to shape a new phase of engagement in West Asia. How well it will succeed is yet to be seen. Peace and stability in West Asia are very important not only for the US but also for many countries, India included. Any tension in the region can cause a spike in oil prices, adversely affecting economies around the world.

Death Penalty: India moves a step closer to justice

The Supreme Court of India

It is the most inviolate of all rights, the right to life. This is why the death penalty raises such extreme emotions in those opposed to it. The penalty itself is a violation of Article 3 and 5 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that ‘Everyone has the right to life’ and the right to not be subject to ‘torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’. While the death penalty is yet to be abolished in India and is awarded only in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases, the Supreme Court on Tuesday gave a landmark verdict which can be seen as moving a step closer to abolishing it. The apex court, while commuting the sentences of 15 death row prisoners to life imprisonment, said the “inordinate and inexplicable” delay in executing the sentences was akin to “torture” of the prisoner and was in violation of Article 21. The three-judge Bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam, Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Shiva Kirti Singh has also done a signal service in overruling the court’s earlier decision in the Devinderpal Singh Bhullar case that a delay on deciding on a mercy petition was not a ground on which a death sentence could be commuted. The apex court verdict, which makes it mandatory to give a gap of 14 days between the rejection of the mercy petition and execution, is definitely a welcome step as it will help the convict and the family to prepare for the final act.

Devinderpal Singh Bhullar

That the gallows are no deterrent to preventing crimes is proven fact if one looks at the nations that still resort to this medieval form of justice year after year. China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and even the United States, with 39 in 2013 alone, have a high number of  executions per year and yet there is little evidence to prove that it is acting as a deterrent. Given that there is a possibility of executing people who have been wrongly convicted, the cry for abolishing capital punishment is on the rise. Experts are of the opinion that given the cost involved and the amount of resources required for the process, it is wiser and much more effective if the State focuses on the prevention of crime.
Taking the life of a person with the sanction of the State, no matter the method of execution, is a reminder of how the system has failed. If India wants to grow and mature as a strong democracy, it should take befitting actions that earn it the respect of other nations. It is quite natural that the largest democracy in the world would seek more humane methods of preventing or punishing crime and set an example for others.

The Price to Pay for Good Looks

Omar Borkan Al Gala (photo from open source)

History has it that the abduction of Helen of Troy by Paris was the reason for a thousand ships to be launched, which eventually led to the Trojan Wars. Faustus in Christopher Marlowe’s famous novel waxes eloquent about Helen’s beauty: “Was this the face that launched a thousand ships…” A lot has also been sung about the captivating beauty of Cleopatra. Perhaps in a fear that history might repeat itself — albeit with a gender twist this time — authorities in Middle East kingdom of Saudi Arabia deported three men who were attending the annual Jenadrivah Heritage & Cultural Festival in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. First reported in the online Arabic newspaper Elaph, the news soon caught the interest of the international press and the fascination of people — especially women — around the world. Of the three men, the identity of one is known: Omar Borkan Al Gala, who is an actor and poet. If the hysteria surrounding Omar’s facebook page is anything to go by, the moral police in Saudi have turned Omar into an international sensation.
Though doubts can be raised questioning the veracity of such news, one is tended to believe it, especially since it comes from a country where intolerance towards mingling between the sexes is sky high. The Elaph reported that ‘…three Emiratis were taken out on the grounds they are too handsome and that the Commission members feared female visitors could fall for them’. More than anything the actions of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vices, which sent the three Emiratis pack back to the UAE, is an indictment against women and a statement that suggested Saudi women are too weak-kneed that they would “fall” for good looks. What else could one expect from a regime that still deems its women unfit to drive cars and where its religious police get into a tizzy when women interact with men?
It’s not that we in India are alien to this concept of ‘moral’ policing. Come February 14 and the ‘save-Indian-culture’ band goes about trashing boys and girls at the slightest of an excuse. But even by their standards we are yet to hear someone targeting a man for being ‘too handsome’. Being too handsome, it seems, is a crime in certain parts of the world.
(An edited version of this appeared in the Hindustan Times on May 6)