Author: Caracal

  • How Afghanistan Still Impacts U.S. Presidential Campaigns

    How Afghanistan Still Impacts U.S. Presidential Campaigns

    Afghanistan is indeed considered one of the biggest blunders in United States foreign policy. This state, with a distinct identity deeply influenced by Persian and Indian cultures, often seen as a mix of both, was infused with extremist Islamic ideology by the United States, with the help of Pakistan, once their biggest ally in the region, to counter the Soviet Union. The notorious Islamic extremist organization, the Taliban, was nurtured with U.S.-supported funds, but they eventually became foes, leading to the famous U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, which overthrew the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate that had become a threat to humanity. After the U.S. withdrawal and the Taliban’s reestablishment of the Islamic Emirate in 2021, strict Islamic Sharia law was reimplemented, women were banned from public life and schools, ancient cruel punishments became common, and Islam permeated all aspects of the state.

    The United States chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan was due to enormous spending and the loss of American lives. The U.S. allowed the Taliban to take over the country, orchestrating meetings in Qatar, the Taliban’s biggest ally, and even releasing Taliban terrorists to facilitate the coup. Afghanistan is now under Taliban control, and though the U.S. has been absent for three years, the situation still impacts American politics. It remains a significant talking point in the ongoing presidential clash between former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris.

    The United States’ operation in Afghanistan spanned both Republican and Democratic administrations, making both parties equally responsible for the war and the resulting deaths of U.S. soldiers and Afghan civilians. Although the issue had nearly faded from American consciousness, it has resurfaced in the mainstream as former President Donald Trump on Monday linked Vice President Kamala Harris to the chaotic Afghanistan War withdrawal. This occurred on the third anniversary of the suicide bombing that killed 13 U.S. service members, an event Trump called a humiliation. Trump also laid wreaths at Arlington National Cemetery to honor Sgt. Nicole Gee, Staff Sgt. Darin Hoover, and Staff Sgt. Ryan Knauss, who were killed, along with more than 100 Afghans, in the suicide bombing at Hamid Karzai International Airport on August 26, 2021.

    President Joe Biden’s administration was actually following a withdrawal commitment and timeline that the Trump administration had negotiated with the Taliban and Qatar in 2020. A 2022 review by a government-appointed special investigator concluded that decisions made by both Trump and Biden were key factors leading to the rapid collapse of Afghanistan’s military and the Taliban takeover. However, Trump accused Biden and Kamala Harris of causing the humiliation in Afghanistan, claiming it triggered the collapse of American credibility and respect worldwide. In his speech to the National Guard in Detroit, Trump stated that leaving Afghanistan was the right decision but criticized the poor execution. While the Taliban’s resurgence and the U.S. withdrawal were planned, the execution was a significant failure that severely damaged the United States’ image and cost many lives.

    Kamala Harris largely dismissed Trump’s remarks about the poor execution of the Afghanistan withdrawal. In her statement marking the anniversary of the Kabul airport attack, Harris expressed her mourning for the 13 U.S. service members who were killed, stating that her prayers were with their families and loved ones, and that her heart broke for their pain and loss. She also honored and remembered all Americans who served in Afghanistan. Harris reiterated that President Biden made the courageous and correct decision to end America’s longest war. She mentioned that over the past three years, the administration had demonstrated that they could still eliminate terrorists, including the leaders of al-Qaeda and ISIS, without deploying troops into combat zones. Harris emphasized that she would never hesitate to take whatever action was necessary to counter terrorist threats and protect the American people.

    Under Trump, the United States signed a peace agreement with the Taliban aimed at ending America’s longest war and bringing U.S. troops home. Biden later used this agreement to shift blame for the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan, contending that it required him to withdraw troops and set the stage for the subsequent chaos. The Biden administration’s review acknowledged that the evacuation of Americans and allies should have started earlier, blaming delays on the Afghan government and military, as well as U.S. military and intelligence assessments. The top U.S. generals overseeing the evacuation criticized the administration for inadequate planning. Gen. Mark Milley, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers earlier this year that he had recommended keeping a residual force of 2,500 troops for support. Instead, Biden chose to maintain a much smaller contingent of 650 troops, solely for securing the U.S. embassy.

    While Harris emphasizes American lives and Trump focuses on American pride, the plight of Afghan citizens, who have suffered under the Taliban’s medieval rule, is largely overlooked by U.S. presidential candidates. There has been little offered in terms of help for the suffering Afghans, a situation also exacerbated by the United States. The success of the Taliban has aided many extremist organizations in spreading their vision across various countries, which could eventually pose a significant threat to the U.S. Meanwhile, without addressing these core issues, presidential candidates are focusing on the emotions of American citizens.

  • Why Doesn’t India Have More States?

    Why Doesn’t India Have More States?

    Uttar Pradesh, a northern state of India, has a population of 240 million. If it were an independent country, it would be the sixth largest in the world by population. The state spans 243,286 square kilometers and has a legislative assembly of 403 members. It’s difficult to imagine how the administration functions effectively when the chief minister can’t review even one constituency a day, let alone remember each one. This challenge isn’t unique to Uttar Pradesh – other large states like Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh face similar issues. Despite the size and population of these states, there are no significant movements at the administrative level for division and the formation of new states, although the idea is active on social media. Any political effort to propose new states faces significant opposition. While the U.S., with a population of 330 million, has 50 states, India, with 1.4 billion people, remains with only 28 states. This situation creates enormous challenges in governance, public administration, and even public health.

    When the modern Republic of India was formed in 1950, after a long period of Ottoman and British colonization, it faced a significant challenge in dividing the country into provinces due to its multi-ethnic and multi-cultural population. At the time, many people were uneducated, deeply emotional, and strongly tied to their cultural identities. The framers of the Constitution feared that dissatisfaction with the division of states could lead to riots or even secession movements to form new countries. To address this, they decided to use language as the primary criterion for state formation, leading to the creation of 14 states based on linguistic lines while continuing some of the provinces established during British rule. This approach worked to some extent, but over time, demands for statehood grew for various reasons, including the desire to recognize different ethnic groups and cultures. Many new states were formed as a result, but in the 21st century, only four states have been created, primarily for administrative purposes.

    It’s clear that managing such large states presents administrative challenges, but the issue is primarily political. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which currently rules India, is opposed to dividing states and forming smaller ones. The party prioritizes nationalism over localism and doesn’t want to create new states that might foster regional identities. Another concern for the BJP is the rise of local parties; they fear that smaller states would become breeding grounds for parties that push local agendas, which could threaten national interests. Additionally, demographics play a role—the BJP is wary that smaller states might give more importance to Muslim votes, which the party may struggle to secure. Smaller states with smaller populations would likely elevate the significance of minority votes. There’s also the concern about the lack of resources and revenue in smaller states.

    The Indian National Congress and the Samajwadi Party, the second and third largest parties, are also against the division of states. Public opposition to dividing states is another major issue, often leading to violent protests. People are emotionally connected to their states, and any move to divide them can be exploited by politicians for their own interests. However, another national party, the Bahujan Samaj Party, supports the creation of smaller states for more effective administration and the rule of law. In fact, in 2011, they even passed a bill in the Uttar Pradesh state assembly to divide the state, but it was halted by both the then and current central governments.

    As the population becomes younger and more educated, many believe that emotional attachments to states will diminish, leading to a growing demand among younger generations for smaller states and more efficient administration. The call for new states is gaining support on social media, where several campaigns are gathering momentum. However, the central government has shown little interest in these demands. It is evident that the division of large states would lead to smoother administration and better enforcement of the law, since the government has not prioritized birth control. It is likely that public demand for smaller states will intensify in the near future, especially as people grow frustrated with poor government services and a lack of jobs, eventually forcing the government to act.

  • Will China Push the Thai Land Bridge Project to Reality?

    Will China Push the Thai Land Bridge Project to Reality?

    China’s interest in the Indian Ocean is as strong as its interest in the South China Sea. The Indian Ocean connects China to Europe, the Middle East, and its future key market, Africa. However, China’s route to the Indian Ocean is increasingly threatened, as it relies on major U.S. allies in the region – Singapore and Malaysia, along with Indonesia, which share the Malacca Strait. This narrow passage connects the South China Sea and Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean. Interestingly, at the entrance of the Malacca Strait, India is establishing a strategic presence by building a port city, effectively positioning itself as a gatekeeper for this vital route.

    In this context, the discussion of the Thai Land Bridge Project has resurfaced as an alternative passage that connects the Gulf of Thailand, part of the South China Sea, with the Andaman Sea, part of the Indian Ocean. The project promises to reduce distance and costs for ships navigating traditionally congested routes. For China, it offers greater access to the Indian Ocean, bypassing Singapore and U.S.-controlled gates. For Thailand, the project could bring significant economic benefits, boosting its wealth and positioning it as a leading player in Southeast Asia, potentially diminishing the strategic importance of Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore.

    The revived Kra Canal project, now known as the Land Bridge Project, proposes an alternative to digging a canal similar to the Panama Canal through the Kra Isthmus, the narrowest part of the Malay Peninsula. Instead, it plans to build two deep-sea ports in Ranong and Chumphon provinces. These ports would be connected by 90 kilometers of highways, railways, and pipelines across the Kra Isthmus. The project requires substantial investment, time, and engineering. China, with its engineering capabilities and funding, is well-positioned to support the project. The Land Bridge Project has gained renewed enthusiasm for its expected boost to the southern Thai economy. And The passage would alleviate some of the congestion in the Malacca Strait, a crucial transport route for a significant portion of China’s crude oil imports from the Middle East and raw materials from Africa, with approximately 94,000 ships passing through or using its 40-plus ports each year.

    As political events in Thailand unfold and the gap between the royal-backed government and the public widens, it is anticipated that the new Thai Prime Minister, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, from a prominent political family with royal support, will take extensive measures to gain public support. The Thai government under Paetongtarn is expected to pursue large infrastructure projects to enhance her public image and contribute to Thailand’s economy. It is also clear that Paetongtarn is likely to continue her predecessors’ efforts to strengthen economic ties with Beijing. Therefore, the current political climate in Thailand appears favorable for China to intervene and advance the project.

    The Thai government is seeking financing for a project estimated to cost at least $28.6 billion. The Bangkok Post reported last October that the state-owned China Harbour Engineering Co was considering a contribution, according to the Thai government. Additionally, Hong Kong property developer New World Development has shown interest. Without the government’s push for the project, contractors may not need to appear immediately, so it is important to consider that China is taking it seriously. However, challenges may arise at the administrative level, even if China supports the project. China would likely seek a favorable deal similar to other Belt and Road Initiative projects, while stakeholders from Bangkok to Washington may question it. But It is clear that Thailand’s ambitious project will not advance without Chinese assistance. If China invests some money, it stands to gain significant political, economic, and strategic benefits.

  • Putin Still Seeks to Mediate Peace in the Caucasus

    Putin Still Seeks to Mediate Peace in the Caucasus

    A notable shift in sentiment is occurring among the populations of former Soviet countries, commonly known as the Russosphere. Younger generations, largely unexposed to Soviet propaganda, are increasingly influenced by Western ways of living. Eastern Europe, with the exception of Belarus, which still has a pro-Russian government, appears to be slipping away from Russia’s influence. Russia now fears it may lose its grip on the Caucasus next. The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine has exposed Russia’s weaknesses, leading many to question its ability to act as the heir of the Soviet Union. Despite initiating the war two years ago, Russia has struggled to invade Ukraine and achieve its objectives, facing repeated humiliations. The Caucasus, a compact yet geopolitically pivotal region bridging Asia and Europe, once firmly under Russia’s sway, is now drifting towards Europe. In Georgia and Armenia, a growing Europhile sentiment is visible, as the people increasingly look westward, aligning their aspirations more closely with Europe Any significant move in this direction could pose a serious challenge to Moscow. Putin and the Kremlin seem to have recognized this changing mood and appear to be taking steps to address it.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent two-day visit to Azerbaijan makes it clear that he intends to maintain his role as a powerbroker in the Caucasus. However, whether he still has the influence to do so remains uncertain. Putin’s trip to Baku on August 18th and 19th occurred against the backdrop of Russia’s deteriorating strategic partnership with Armenia, where Yerevan has increasingly strengthened its political and security ties with the West, and a continuing Ukrainian offensive in Russia’s Kursk region. Despite these challenges, Putin adopted a business-as-usual attitude throughout his visit, highlighting the economic advantages of the Declaration of Alliance between Russia and Azerbaijan signed in 2022, just days before Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine. Putin mentioned that cooperation could extend beyond energy to include industrial collaboration, transport, logistics, and light industry. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, in turn, highlighted Azerbaijan’s commitment to preserving and promoting the Russian language, noting that over 160,000 students were enrolled in more than 300 Russian schools in the country. He also acknowledged Russia’s peacekeeping role in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

    With Russia’s strained relations with Armenia, the central question during Putin’s visit was whether Moscow could still play a meaningful role in brokering peace between Baku and Yerevan. Putin certainly seems eager to try. At one point, he expressed to Aliyev his willingness to facilitate efforts to delimit and demarcate the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, as well as to broker a peace deal. Putin clearly does not want to see himself-or Russia-sidelined in the peace negotiations.

    Even though Russia can influence Armenian politicians with business ties to Moscow, significant discontent remains among the Armenian population. Many Armenians view the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh as a betrayal by Russia, believing that Russia now favors Azerbaijan, thus undermining their historical Orthodox alliance. It is important to recognize that public sentiment may differ from the views of their politicians. Putin and Russia have a vested interest in Azerbaijan due to its rich natural resources and its strategic position as a route from Turkey and the Middle East to Russia for money and investments. This interest aligns with Putin’s ambitious North-South Corridor project, which aims to boost direct trade with Iran and India, bypassing intermediaries. This initiative could help offset the loss of business with Europe and reduce Russia’s current overreliance on China, which greatly benefits from this dependence. Thus, Azerbaijan is a top priority in the Caucasus for Russia, even though Moscow does not want to lose Armenia entirely. If Russia cannot settle its issues with Armenia, it is likely that Armenia will turn more towards the West. With both Georgia and Armenia moving away from Russian influence, Russia faces severe security risks.

    Russia’s historical involvement in the South Caucasus underscores the necessity of its participation in the peace process. However, Armenian officials, who have accused Moscow of failing to uphold security guarantees during the Second Karabakh War, appear reluctant to accept further Russian involvement. On August 19, a representative from the Armenian Foreign Ministry criticized Russian diplomats for making biased and disrespectful remarks about Armenia and questioned Russia’s commitment to fostering constructive engagement between Armenian and Azerbaijani officials. It also seems that as countries increasingly challenge Putin and Russia in the region. On this occasion,  Putin is attempting to maintain a presence and their importance through his diplomatic meetings in Baku.

  • Jammu and Kashmir Set to Elect Assembly After 10 Years

    Jammu and Kashmir Set to Elect Assembly After 10 Years

    Jammu and Kashmir, one of three Muslim-majority union territories in India along with Lakshadweep and Ladakh, has long been a focus of global interest. Both Pakistan and China, along with several Western diplomats, have expressed a desire to annex the territory to Pakistan, and Pakistan has conducted several wars and militant operations to achieve this goal. The global Muslim population has repeatedly raised the Kashmir issue, emphasizing Muslim solidarity worldwide and accusing the Indian government of suppressing Islamic rights. Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, has taken a particular interest in the region and has increased central government control over Kashmir during his tenure. Jammu and Kashmir, which was previously granted special constitutional status and a separate constitution with elements such as Sharia law and its own flag, removed these privileges under Modi’s government. The dissolution of the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly and the removal of Article 370 from the Indian Constitution by parliament ended the region’s special status. Elections in the union territory are now scheduled to take place in four stages from September to October, marking the first time since 2014. Given the region’s significant Islamist extremist threats, the election poses a challenge for India, as  terrorists may threaten potential voters.

    Jammu and Kashmir, a former state and now a union territory, has deep historical ties with India and was part of various great kingdoms that ruled the Indian subcontinent. Over the years, it became a Muslim-majority region, but it still has a significant Hindu, Sikh, and Buddhist population that strongly supports Indian rule, along with Shia and Ahmadiyya communities. The region is now divided into four parts: the Kashmir Valley, which has a Sunni majority and faces the most extremist threats to elections; Jammu, which has a considerable Sikh and Hindu population; the territory under Pakistan’s control, annexed during the 1950s war – India does not recognize this occupation, and seats for it remain vacant in the assembly; and Ladakh, which was once part of Jammu and Kashmir but is now a separate union territory.

    The Jammu and Kashmir union territory elections are set to occur in three phases: Phase I on 18 September 2024, Phase II on 25 September 2024, and Phase III on 1 October 2024. Results will be announced on 4 October 2024. These elections will choose the 90 members of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly. Four major political parties, along with several smaller contenders, are vying for the assembly seats.

    In the complex political landscape of Jammu, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which holds the reins of power in India, stands out as the preeminent force. In the most recent assembly elections, the BJP clinched 25 of the 87 available seats, reinforcing its dominance. The party further solidified its position by capturing two of the five Lok Sabha constituencies in the recent general election, underscoring its significant influence in the region. The BJP is focusing on major infrastructure projects funded by the central government, including new railway lines, roads, hospitals, and other developments that were previously unavailable in the region. They are appealing to voters who felt disadvantaged under the previous special constitutional status, which was accused of favoring certain families and religious groups, and they are capitalizing on the rise of nationalism in the state. However, as the party lacks strong support in Muslim-majority areas, the BJP has been accused of backing smaller pro-Muslim parties in certain regions. The BJP aims to surpass the 45-seat mark for a majority in the 90-member assembly, with some seats expected to come from these smaller parties.

    The Indian National Congress, the main opposition party in the Indian parliament, is contesting the election in alliance with the region’s largest state-level party, the National Conference, and the Communist Party of India (Marxist). This alliance has a strong presence in both the Kashmir Valley and Jammu and is demanding the restoration of statehood and special status for the region. In the last election, all parties in this alliance contested individually, collectively winning 28 seats, which was more than the BJP’s tally. Another significant party is the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which secured the most seats in the last assembly election with 28 seats. They are expected to contest individually this time. Other national parties, including the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), are also participating in this election, along with numerous state parties and independent candidates, who also play a crucial role in forming the government in the state.

    The upcoming election is a crucial juncture for the state. If the BJP wins, they will grant statehood but not restore special status. If the BJP loses, it is likely that other parties will join forces to demand special status. Additionally, if the BJP forms a  coalition government, there might be pressure to address this demand. The election will also attract international attention, especially from Pakistan. As Jammu and Kashmir moves towards greater democracy and development, it could impact the already troubled state of Pakistan and its part of Kashmir, leading to serious impact in the region. Therefore, the assembly election of Jammu and Kashmir is not only important for the union territory but also for the entire South Asia.

  • Significance of Narendra Modi’s Visit to Ukraine

    Significance of Narendra Modi’s Visit to Ukraine

    There was significant uproar from the Western world when India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, visited Vladimir Putin in July, despite his bold criticism of Russia’s actions during the meeting. The Indian opposition also condemned Modi, viewing the visit as a clear departure from India’s long-standing non-alignment strategy, upheld since the Cold War. However, Modi defended his decision, stressing the importance of the India-Russia relationship and highlighting several agreements that would benefit the Indian economy. By choosing Russia for his first bilateral meeting after securing his third term as Prime Minister, Modi underscored the significance he places on this relationship, but it drew heavy criticism from Ukraine and the Western world.

    As a counter to his trip to Russia, Narendra Modi made a historic visit to Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine, on Friday. During the visit, he assured Volodymyr Zelenskiy of his readiness to act as a friend in facilitating a peace deal to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. Modi’s visit has sparked hope among peace advocates, as he is seen as having significant influence with Vladimir Putin, unlike other Western leaders who have previously attempted to broker a peace agreement.

    This trip marks the first visit to Ukraine by an Indian leader since the country gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. It comes after a period of strained relations, as Zelenskiy had criticized Modi’s recent visit to Moscow, which coincided with a Russian missile strike on a children’s hospital in Kyiv. During his visit at Kyiv, Modi expressed respect and support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, calling it India’s highest priority. He also emphasized that he had told Vladimir Putin during their July meeting that problems cannot be resolved on the battlefield and that the war could only be ended through dialogue and diplomacy.

    Zelenskiy warmly embraced Modi and described his support for Ukraine’s sovereignty amid Russian aggression as critical. Zelenskiy posted on X that history was made with Modi’s friendly and symbolic visit, which coincided with the eve of Ukraine’s Independence Day celebrations. The two leaders stood together in front of a memorial dedicated to Ukrainian children killed by Russian missiles. During their official talks, they discussed Zelenskiy’s 10-point peace plan, which he has presented to the international community, according to India’s foreign ministry. The plan includes the withdrawal of Russian troops from occupied territories, reparations, and war crime tribunals for Russian generals and political leaders. Ukrainian officials are also preparing to organize a second peace summit this year, with Saudi Arabia being considered as a possible venue. Ukraine views building effective relations with countries of the global south as crucial, believing that a just resolution to the war is in everyone’s interest.

    Reports indicate that Indians have been recruited from both sides to fight in the war, with casualties reported. With high unemployment remaining a significant issue in the overpopulated country, more Indians are reportedly ready to join the conflict. However, India’s economy has benefited substantially. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the subsequent Western sanctions, India has imported large volumes of discounted Russian oil, which has been processed by Indian refineries and sold globally.

    Although India has gained economically, Modi has consistently sought to portray his government as a neutral peace broker. Critics accuse India of merely performing a balancing act with Russia, provoking considerable anger among Western countries. Nevertheless, some political analysts believe that India’s actions are a strategic response to the Kremlin’s growing partnership with China, India’s primary geopolitical rival, leading to a reassessment of its foreign policy.

    Modi’s visit comes as both Russian and Ukrainian forces are making notable advances. Recently, Ukraine launched a surprise incursion into Russia, and its forces now control a 1,250 sq km area within Russian territory, around the town of Sudzha. Around 130,000 Russians have fled the region, with fierce fighting continuing in Korenevo and other frontline villages. This incursion – the first by foreign troops into Russia since World War II—has been more successful for Kyiv than expected. The Russian military’s response to the Kursk incursion remains unclear. As the conflict escalates into a new phase, Modi’s visit to Ukraine is likely to have a significant impact on India’s relations with both Russia and the West.

  • Public Outcry Leads to Withdrawal of Indonesia’s Pro-Dynasty Law

    Public Outcry Leads to Withdrawal of Indonesia’s Pro-Dynasty Law

    Indonesia, a country with a long history of dynastic politics, saw massive protests outside the parliament building as citizens rallied to defend democracy from the influence of powerful political families. In response to these widespread demonstrations, Indonesian legislators were compelled to abandon their plans to ratify revisions to election laws. With thousands of protesters gathered outside, lawmakers postponed an emergency session. The demonstrators set tires on fire, ignited firecrackers, and chanted slogans against President Joko Widodo, also known as Jokowi. The unrest soon spread to other cities as well.

    On Thursday, the Indonesian Parliament was poised to overturn a Constitutional Court order regarding age requirements for candidates in the upcoming regional elections. This reversal would counter a ruling that had disqualified President Joko Widodo’s 29-year-old son, Kaesang Pangarep, from running. The Constitutional Court had recently dismissed a challenge to the age limit, which prevents those under 30 from running for regional governorships and would have barred Kaesang from participating in a key contest in Central Java. If implemented, the proposed changes could further amplify the outgoing president’s political influence, drawing criticism that the move aims to establish a political dynasty. The incoming president, Prabowo Subianto, who is set to take office in October, also hails from a prominent political dynasty, leading to concerns and protests over the concentration of power between these two dynasties. In response to the escalating unrest following news of the new law that could overturn the court’s verdict, Widodo’s office has sought to ease tensions.

    This development is seen as a setback for Joko Widodo’s efforts to place his son and several relatives in key positions of power. Last year, a similar ruling allowed his eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, 36, to become Indonesia’s youngest vice president, which sparked allegations of nepotism. At that time, the court was headed by Widodo’s brother-in-law, Anwar Usman. Now, Widodo’s younger son, Kaesang Pangarep, is expected to seek a prominent role in November’s regional elections. To bypass the minimum age requirement of 30 for candidates, the president’s allies had proposed applying the age criterion at the time of inauguration, as Kaesang will turn 30 in December. However, this strategy has been blocked, thwarting Widodo’s plans. Additionally, Widodo faces criticism for allegedly supporting his successor, defense chief Prabowo Subianto, who is set to assume office in October, to maintain his family’s political influence. Furthermore, Joko’s son-in-law, Bobby Nasution, is running for governor of North Sumatra after his tenure as mayor of Medan. Experts observe that Indonesians are growing disillusioned with Widodo and his efforts to retain political influence as he prepares to step down after two five-year terms as president.

    People are deeply frustrated with the frequent and rapid manipulation of democratic system, driven by a clear desire to extend power. Protests have erupted in Yogyakarta, Makassar, Bandung, and Semarang, reflecting the so-called Generation Z revolution in Bangladesh. The government may act quickly on this issue, recognizing the parallels between the situations in Bangladesh and Indonesia, both of which grapple with political Islam. The Indonesian government is unlikely to retreat from its efforts to consolidate control and bolster its influence through political dynasties, and is expected to continue reinforcing its grip on power.

  • How Long Can Pakistan Remain a Republic?

    How Long Can Pakistan Remain a Republic?

    Pakistan, a state formed by the division of British India in response to the long-standing demands of Islamists in the Indian subcontinent, has always been a battleground between conservative Muslims and British-educated Muslims. From the country’s inception in 1947, leaders like Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who strongly advocated for Pakistan and led the movement for its creation in British India, envisioned a modern state that included Sunni and Shia Muslims, as well as Ahmadiyya, who are considered outcasts of Islam, and Dalits, the outcasts of India. However, there was strong opposition from conservatives who demanded an Islamic state based on Sharia law, which excludes rights for anyone outside Sunni Islam.

    Pakistan has never fully resolved these internal conflicts, which have even called its foundation into question. The 1956 constitution reflected these disputes by blending British modern values with Islamic principles, declaring Pakistan the world’s first “Islamic Republic.” Initially, British-supported and British-educated individuals dominated the administration, maintaining a relatively peaceful period in the country. Since the 1970s, the situation has changed dramatically. Corruption among leaders, the influx of Middle Eastern funds promoting a strict form of Islam, the Islamic Revolution in Iran that rejected modernism, the rise of the Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan, and the resurgence of Hindu nationalism in India have all fueled support for Islamist factions in Pakistan. Political parties that once championed coexistence have moved towards more radical stances. Combined with worsening living conditions in a failing state, these factors have contributed to the rise of terrorism. Pakistan, which sheltered Osama bin Laden and conducted terrorist operations in several countries, eventually became one of the hotspots of Islamic terrorism, making life increasingly difficult for seculars and liberals.

    Now, Islamist factions, including Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Islamist political parties like Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), led by Imran Khan, are more influential in the country than conventional ones, reflecting the changing mood in the state. This shift is evident in the transformation of the country’s most popular leader, Imran Khan, once the stylish captain of Pakistan’s national cricket team, who was married to a liberal British woman and has now become one of the country’s most prominent Islamic preachers. He established an Islamist party and married a wife who wears a burqa – a change visible throughout the state.

    Pakistan, once considered a potential competitor with India in science and technology with strong support from the UK, the US, and Saudi Arabia—all of whom sought to elevate Pakistan as a rival to India – now appears to be deteriorating into a more extremist Islamic state, resembling Afghanistan. However, this does not satisfy the Islamists, who demand further Islamization of the administration. Attacks on British-influenced or modern-valued administrative systems and institutions have increased under the banner of anti-colonialism. In addition to frequent terrorist attacks and bomb blasts targeting opposition groups, attacks on police stations and courts – key remnants of the British-introduced system – have become increasingly common. In the border regions near Afghanistan and Iran, where the TTP (commonly known as the Pakistani Taliban) is strong, there was a record surge in violence last year. According to Al Jazeera, Pakistan’s two border provinces have seen a 93 percent rise in attacks since the TTP ended its ceasefire in 2022. Most recently, a video trending on X shows Islamic clerics attempting to invade the Supreme Court to attack the Chief Justice, whom they accuse of supporting minorities. It is clear that, after politics, the judiciary and the law have become the latest targets of the Islamists. Even though the Islamic Republic of Pakistan already has biased Islamic codes that make life miserable for minorities, the Islamists demand the introduction of complete Sharia law, which would undermine human rights and modern values.

    The question is how long Pakistan can continue with the current constitution and Islamic Republic status, which includes many British and modern values, as extremism and radicalism rise. It is noted that people do not have much belief in the current administration system, which imposes tough living conditions. There is also little expectation of change in the administration style, as politicians are seen as embezzling money to the UK, and the country is heavily in debt to China. This creates a perfect environment for radicalism to grow. With the situation in Iran, Afghanistan, or Bangladesh not far from Pakistan, a revolution is also possible here. However, the result is unlikely to be a modern government like in many Muslim countries; it may be a more Islamic government, potentially worse than Afghanistan, as Pakistanis may feel the need to prove they are more authentic Muslims than the Arabs.

  • China-European Union Trade War Heats Up

    China-European Union Trade War Heats Up

    Europe has finally taken action to shield its market from the influx of cheap products that have devastated its industries. European-made goods have struggled due to fierce competition from high-quality U.S. and Japanese products, as well as the low prices of Chinese goods in the global market. Despite its high purchasing power, Europe has faced challenges in protecting its own domestic market. Consequently, European powerhouses have been overshadowed by producer countries, resulting in the closure of domestic industries, job losses, and deteriorating living conditions. These problems have fueled the rise of far-right movements, which pose a threat to the stability of the European Union.

    Though belated, Europe has started to act to restrict cheap and technologically advanced Chinese products to protect its domestic businesses, launching investigations that could lead to higher tariffs. At the same time, China, the target of Europe’s actions, is facing its own setbacks from declining demand following similar strategies implemented by the U.S. and its allies. In response, China has begun to counter Europe’s actions with its own investigations, mirroring the European Union’s tactics.

    As part of initial measures that could escalate into a broader trade war, Europe is targeting the Chinese government’s subsidies to certain industries, which have resulted in cheap products with strong research and development backing. Chinese-made electric vehicles, popular among European consumers for their low prices, have benefited from these substantial subsidies. After an investigation, the European Commission found that Chinese authorities had provided extensive subsidies to electric vehicle manufacturers at every stage of production, making these cars so artificially cheap that European competitors might eventually be forced to close factories and lay off workers. By the end of October, Chinese carmakers that fail to cooperate with the EU’s investigation into electric vehicles could face tariffs of up to 36.3%, in addition to the existing 10% EU duty on cars.

    For China, this is a significant setback, as the country aspires to achieve global dominance in the electric vehicle (EV) industry. In response, Chinese authorities have initiated an anti-subsidy investigation into European dairy imports. According to the China Chamber of Commerce to the EU, Beijing launched the investigation following a complaint from its dairy industry on July 29, with consultations with the EU taking place on August 14.

    China’s investigation will focus on 20 subsidy programs that support the production of milk, cream, and cheese in eight EU countries, including subsidies for dairy storage, young farmers’ allowances, and supplementary income schemes under the Common Agricultural Policy. The countries targeted in the investigation include Ireland, which receives subsidies for dairy equipment, Austria and Belgium for loan schemes, Italy for livestock insurance and dairy subsidies, Croatia for livestock producer subsidies, Finland for three types of farming support, Romania for livestock subsidies, and the Czech Republic for a subsidy scheme related to farm damage. Of these, Ireland is the largest dairy exporter to China, with €423 million in sales in 2023, including dried milk for infant formula, according to Irish government data.

    China’s commerce ministry announced the investigation on Wednesday, just a day after the European Commission revealed revised duties on Chinese electric vehicles as part of its investigation into what it sees as artificially cheap cars that threaten jobs in Europe’s automotive industry.

    The EU Chamber of Commerce in China remarked that the investigation was expected following the EU’s actions against Chinese electric vehicle exports. It seems more investigations are on the horizon, as EU officials have also launched separate anti-dumping inquiries into other renewable industries, such as Chinese-made solar panels and wind turbines. This week, EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, stressed the need to avoid a systemic confrontation with China, though he acknowledged that a trade war might be inevitable. In response, Beijing has initiated retaliatory investigations into politically sensitive European imports like pork and cognac. As with any trade war, both sides are likely to suffer, but China may be the most affected, given the current trade balance, which favors China.

  • The Story of Alice Guo, the Philippine Mayor Who Alleged Chinese Espionage

    The Story of Alice Guo, the Philippine Mayor Who Alleged Chinese Espionage

    In 2022, Alice Guo was elected as the new mayor of Bomaban, a town on Luzon, the Philippines largest and most populous island. Despite limited public information about her background, such as her birthplace or education, Guo defeated the Nationalist People’s Coalition candidate. It was clear that this independent candidate with an uncertain past heavily invested in her campaign, with expenses exceeding ₱134,000, as reported in her Statement of Contributions and Expenditures (SOCE). Although her background and activities raised doubts, Guo remained in office until last week, specifically August 13, when she was dismissed by the Ombudsman.

    In a country like the Philippines, where corruption is widespread, such events may seem plausible. However, the controversy intensified when Guo accused a Chinese spy and presented evidence of her connections to China, significantly affecting Philippine politics. As tensions between China and the Philippines rose – especially after another vessel collision – news emerged that Alice Guo, who was on trial, had escaped the country. This development was a major blow to the Philippine judiciary and political systems.

    Alice Guo’s story took a dramatic turn in March when officials raided a compound in her town and found around 1,000 workers, including victims of human trafficking, along with luxury villas, high-end cars, and expensive cognac. Investigators discovered a panic room and three underground tunnels at the eight-hectare (20-acre) site, which were believed to be escape routes for evading authorities. The Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission (PAOCC) reported that these tunnels led to a vacant plot of land owned by Guo. Guo, a controversial figure, reportedly owned 50% of Baofu, the compound where the criminal activities occurred, though she claims to have sold her share before becoming mayor. Despite these suspicious circumstances, Guo was involved in important meetings as a small-town mayor.

    In June 2024, the Ombudsman suspended Guo from her position as mayor for up to six months following graft charges filed by the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG). On August 13, 2024, the Ombudsman dismissed Guo from office. When Guo appeared before senators, she struggled to answer questions about her childhood, claiming she had grown up on a farm in Bamban. However, school records revealed by a senator contradicted her statements about her education. Additionally, the election commission discovered that the fingerprints on her election records matched those of a Chinese citizen. During the hearings, Senator Hontiveros accused Guo of possibly being a Chinese spy or criminal. Guo has since ceased attending Senate hearings, with her lawyer citing trauma from the experience and the widespread mockery of her responses on social media.

    Guo is now the subject of a Senate arrest warrant for failing to attend hearings. However, reports have surfaced that she managed to outsmart authorities and flee the country. On Monday, Senator Risa Hontiveros claimed that Guo had left the Philippines, a claim previously denied by the Department of Justice. Hontiveros provided evidence indicating that Guo arrived at Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Malaysia on July 18, prompting questions about how she could have evaded such close scrutiny. Officials allege that Guo then flew to Singapore and later took a ferry to Riau, Indonesia, on August 18. An Indonesian immigration official confirmed her entry into the country that day, according to a Reuters report. The media began to celebrate it as a perfect spy game.

    President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. expressed anger over the news, despite the Chinese spy charges against Guo being upheld in court. He announced that a full-scale investigation is underway to determine how Guo managed to leave the country, and those responsible will be suspended and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. The presidential office has also ordered the cancellation of her passport. 

    The president’s statement highlights the weaknesses and vulnerabilities in the Philippine administration system, which has long been criticized for corruption and poor rule of law. Despite Guo running as an independent candidate, she supported Marcos Jr. during the 2022 campaign, backing both Bongbong Marcos for president and Sara Duterte for vice president. As the government defends itself, it will be interesting to see if China has deployed more spies in countries of strategic interest.