Author: Caracal

  • Japan to Get New Prime Minister as Fumio Kishida Steps Down

    Japan to Get New Prime Minister as Fumio Kishida Steps Down

    Japan is poised for another prime ministerial change as Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who took office two years ago, has decided to step down in September. With Japan’s next general election scheduled for October 31, 2025, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) is making every effort to restore its image with the public, considering a prime ministerial change as part of this move. The current government and prime minister have a poor reputation among the public, according to polls.

    Kishida, 67, made a surprise announcement on Wednesday that he would step down as LDP leader in September and would not seek re-election as president of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) next month. His decision concludes a three-year tenure defined by scandal, escalating living costs, and unprecedented defense spending. Media reports suggest that Kishida faced pressure from within the LDP, with some members doubting his ability to lead the party to electoral victories. The party has struggled to manage rising criticism over the funding scandal, while soaring prices have left his cabinet’s support levels hovering around 25% this year, occasionally dipping below 20%.

    Conservative yet named liberal, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has no shortage of potential leaders. Among the likely successors are Shigeru Ishiba, a centrist and former defense secretary, and Taro Kono, the charismatic digital minister. The race for the LDP presidency may also feature female candidates, raising the possibility that Japan could have its first female prime minister. Ultra-conservative economic security minister Sanae Takaichi and former internal affairs minister Seiko Noda, both of whom ran against Kishida in the 2021 leadership race, might consider running again, though it’s unclear if either can secure the support of the 20 lawmakers needed to enter the race. Foreign minister Yoko Kamikawa is also mentioned as a potential candidate. The leader selected in next month’s party polls will become the new prime minister. 

    Kishida was elected president of the LDP in September 2021 for a three-year term, and went on to win a general election. Under his leadership, Japan bolstered its alliances with U.S. partners to address China’s expanding influence. However, public dissatisfaction increased due to the LDP’s links with the former Unification Church, which became evident after Abe’s assassination. Additionally, scandals involving slush funds and the yen’s decline, which contributed to inflation, further eroded trust. Kishida also faced criticism for failing to ensure that wages kept up with rising living costs as Japan moved past years of deflation.

    Kishida’s successor will be Japan’s third prime minister since Shinzo Abe, the longest-serving leader in the country’s history, stepped down in September 2020. Although the new prime minister will have the advantage of a strong LDP majority in parliament, he will need to prove his capability to secure a longer term. The incoming leader will face increasing international uncertainty, including the election of a new U.S. president, and growing domestic concerns over the cost of living crisis. Opposition parties are likely to intensify their campaigns, given their current best opportunity to challenge the administration after being out of power since Abe’s first term in 2012. 

    Japan is in urgent need of strong leadership amid rising threats from China, shifting U.S. leadership, and a declining economy. Therefore, the LDP’s upcoming election is a crucial event for both Japan and Asia.

  • Is Russia Going to Lose the War?

    Is Russia Going to Lose the War?

    While Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, following a series of military operations that had previously annexed significant parts of Ukraine and involved multiple instances of intimidation, everyone expected that the mighty superpower, Russia – the heir to the great Soviet Union – under the strong leadership of Putin, would complete its objectives in a matter of months. It was widely assumed that they would overthrow the Zelensky government and erase any trace of Ukrainian identity from the earth. The initial momentum seemed to confirm this, as almost the entire coast of the Black Sea and the capital, Kyiv, were severely struck, with buildings reduced to rubble, people dying, and many fleeing the country. When the western cities of Ukraine were also attacked, many predicted that Russia’s victory was inevitable and Ukraine was doomed.

    However, the Ukrainian soldiers, along with the government led by Zelensky, a former comedian determined to defy Putin’s ambitions, resisted fiercely. With full support from the United States and Europe, in the form of money and weapons, Ukraine forced Russia to retreat from the captured territories, including areas near the capital. Now, Russia finds itself confined almost entirely to the areas it had seized before 2022. In a remarkable turn of events, and perhaps the biggest blow to Russia, a superpower once considered capable of challenging even the United States, Ukrainian forces have begun entering Russian territory and capturing land. This has become a major humiliation for Russia. And yet, it still seems unbelievable – could Russia actually lose this war?

    Ukraine’s top commander, Oleksandr Syrskyi, reports that his forces have captured 1,000 square kilometers of Russia’s Kursk region, a strategically important area for Russia. Footage has surfaced showing Ukrainian troops waving their flags on Russian soil, delivering a significant humiliation to the once-mighty Russia – Goliath brought low by David. After initial confusion, Russia acknowledged the attack. Alexei Smirnov, the acting regional governor of Kursk, estimated that Kyiv’s forces had taken control of 28 settlements in an incursion approximately 12 kilometers deep and 40 kilometers wide. While this is less than half of Syrskyi’s estimate, Smirnov’s statement represents a notable public admission of a major Russian setback more than 29 months after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The claims made by both sides could not be independently verified.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged the situation and vowed a strong response to the attack, ordering his troops to dislodge the enemy from Russian territories. However, a week into the surprise assault, Russia is still struggling to repel the Ukrainian forces. Kyiv’s strategy of maintaining silence stands in sharp contrast to last year’s counteroffensive, which was widely anticipated for months and ultimately faltered against Russia’s defensive lines.

    It is certain that Russia will fight back with all its force to reclaim its territory and will likely launch further attacks in Ukraine to restore its strong image. Although Russia is a nuclear power with a strong arsenal, it seems that something is amiss in the Kremlin. Decisions are not being made swiftly, and there appears to be a lack of planned moves or coherent strategy from the Russian side. The Kremlin seems confused and not in a sound state of decision-making. Wagner’s who made initial momentum are sidelined after they attempted a coup, leading to the death of their leader, and the shortage of weapons and manpower on the Russian side has become evident, while Ukraine continues to advance each day.

    Even though we can’t predict who will win the war, analyzing the current situation suggests that the Ukraine war increasingly looks like a major blunder by Russia. Their economy has stalled, businesses have suffered, their superpower status is being questioned, and it now seems like Goliath is being humbled by David. From now on, Russia may need to respect Ukraine as a Slavic power capable of challenging the Russian Federation. Putin might start seeking a peace deal because they lack the manpower to deploy more troops to Ukraine and need to protect their vast country. Additionally, they don’t have enough funds to sustain the war effort indefinitely. If Ukraine continues to advance further, the Russian sphere of influence could collapse. There may even be secessionist movements within Russia if Moscow weakens, which would be easier in such a large country. Crucial times lie ahead for the Kremlin, and it is likely that the ongoing war will have a greater impact on Russia than on Ukraine.

    The chances of an all-out war, as anticipated by Russophiles, now seem to be simmering down. It appears that Putin doesn’t have strong support from Russian authorities, and the image of Russia has been damaged. Kyiv’s current actions seem to be aimed at gaining a stronger negotiating position in potential talks to end the war and halt Moscow’s offensive in eastern Ukraine. However, one thing is clear: the United States and NATO’s strategy has proven effective. They avoided a world war and further empowered Russia, but Russia has been humbled. While Russia will not surrender, as doing so would mean the loss of its superpower status, it is now being forced into negotiations.

  • Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Palestine is an emotional issue for global Muslims. People who support Muslim solidarity across borders, from the United States to Indonesia, are now feeling angered. So-called rich Islamic countries and secular nations can’t do anything about the Gaza conflict, while the media in these countries continue to report Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide. The governments follow the strategy of avoiding animosity with Israel or the United States, but they are not blocking media coverage of the conflict in Gaza, and the media continue to celebrate it as usual. While Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, the state outlets of Middle Eastern governments, strongly propagate the Gaza issue, their own governments can’t do anything about it. Political analysts believe this situation will drive more young Muslims, who are desperate due to various conditions including the situation in Gaza, towards radical Islam, and they are easily swayed by Islamist organizations that fight against mainstream opinions, laws, and governments. The Islamic population feels betrayed by the world, and the media stoke emotional factors, which, combined with tough living conditions and unemployment, as well as patriotic far-right movements opposing Islamism in the West, create what is considered the perfect ground for the revival of the Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, and similar groups.

    Security services across the Middle East, including the Gulf countries, fear that the ongoing conflict may lead to a flow of radicalized youth to ISIS and al-Qaeda through social media groups. These individuals might travel to regions controlled by these groups, where they could receive training and indoctrinate more young people to conduct terrorist attacks. The United Nations has published a series of reports highlighting how major extremist groups are exploiting the war in Gaza to attract new recruits and mobilize existing supporters, even though both al-Qaeda and ISIS have condemned Hamas as apostates for decades.

    Officials and analysts are reporting an increase in Islamic militant extremism in various areas. An ISIS branch in the Sinai desert has recently become more lethal, and rising attacks by the group in Syria have raised concerns, with several plots thwarted in Jordan. In a recent attack, seven Syrian soldiers were killed in an ISIS ambush in Raqqa province, northern Syria, with 383 fighters from government forces and their proxy militias killed since the beginning of the year, according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Last month, Jordanian security services uncovered a plot in Amman when explosives detonated while being prepared by extremists in a poor neighborhood. Subsequent raids led to the detention of a network of predominantly young men who were apparently radicalized by ISIS propaganda. Reports from India indicate that the Islamic State is trying to recruit Muslim youth willing to fight against the nation and Israel. In Turkey, authorities arrested dozens of people last month to combat an increased threat from an ISIS affiliate with a strong presence there. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen has launched a new effort to inspire followers to attack Western, Israeli, Jewish, and other targets. The issue extends beyond existing terrorist organizations, as increasingly radicalized youth may choose to join new groups or form their own in areas historically free from such threats, due to the borderless nature of the internet.

    The Gaza war may serve as a seminal cause for radicalizing the next generation of jihadis, as they are increasingly exposed to volatile images and videos from Gaza through the internet. Although the immediate consequences may not be apparent, they are likely to manifest over the coming years. The conflict has significantly heightened the terrorism threat and elicited a strong emotional reaction. Regional officials emphasize the impact of continuous exposure to images of suffering from Gaza, available 24/7 on television and the internet, describing the conflict as a ‘Push Factor’ that encourages extremist violence across the Middle East and beyond. According to Palestinian health officials, more than 38,000 people have died in the Israeli offensive into Gaza, with about half of those identified being women and children. 

    A vast regional occupation by the Islamic State, similar to their previous control stretching from Iraq to Syria, is expected to reestablish itself. Despite the opposition forces in this area being highly equipped and prepared for battle, ISIS has launched over 100 attacks on government forces and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Syria in recent months, with violence peaking in March at levels not seen in several years. ISIS cells are operating at higher levels than before. Kurdish forces opposing ISIS face severe challenges from the armies of Turkey, Iraq, and Syria. In this complex war zone, combined with poor governance, the presence of individuals willing to fight and die for the cause could contribute to the creation of a caliphate and expansion into new areas. As more Islamic factions demand separate regions and attempt to overthrow democratic governments, anarchy is resulting. Consequently, the emergence of a more effective caliphate can be expected.

    Islamic extremist groups are inundating the internet with material that supports Gaza, Hamas, and Islam, while inciting anger towards Jews, Israel, the United States, and even Islamic Gulf countries. They are spreading instructions for bomb-making, violence, coups, and Islamic methods of killing, which easily influence the youth. The foundational ideas of Islamizing the world and killing infidels are more aggressively propagated through the internet than ever before. A new generation is growing up with an ideology that threatens peaceful coexistence in many countries. As more Muslim countries descend into anarchy, radicalization becomes increasingly feasible, and the revival of notorious Islamist terrorist organizations seems imminent, posing a growing risk to global stability.

  • How Foreign Influence Shapes Bangladesh?

    How Foreign Influence Shapes Bangladesh?

    Even though Bangladesh claims a constructed identity of Islamic Bangla, it is actually a product of conflict between the region’s superpowers, India and Pakistan. This former part of Pakistan became an independent state in 1971 with the intervention of India. The conflict nearly escalated into a world war, as Pakistan received strong support from the United States, while the Soviet Union aligned with India. Even after independence, Bangladesh has remained entangled in power politics, with foreign powers interfering and causing various political incidents, including assassinations, coups, and student protests. Political analysts point to this foreign interference as a cause of the recent wave of protests that led to the toppling of the government. Why is Bangladesh subject to such interference, and who is making it prone to unrest?

    Bangladesh, a small and densely populated country, has highly congested living conditions. A spark can lead to mass unrest that can affect the administration in Dhaka. This is why Bangladesh is often in turmoil, with mass mob actions being common, making it susceptible to foreign interference. India’s and Pakistan’s involvement in Bangladesh stems from their mutual fears. India is particularly concerned that any instability in Bangladesh could destabilize its eastern regions. Since Bangladesh shares the majority of its border with India, any conflict within Bangladesh could result in a significant influx of refugees into India, posing substantial political and economic challenges. Many districts in India have become Muslim-majority due to this influx, leading to cultural tensions as Hindus and tribal communities feel outnumbered. Many immigrants to India are reportedly attracted to Islamist organizations and become radicalized. Consequently, India has consistently supported Sheikh Hasina and her Awami League party to stabilize the country and its borders and promote cultural ties. Through this alliance, India has emphasized a Bangla identity over an Islamist identity, enhancing cultural exchange between Bangladesh and the Indian state of Bengal.

    Pakistan, which lost the war with India and was forced to grant independence to Bangladesh, has never given up on the country. They have attempted to disrupt Bangladesh’s growing ties with India by supporting the anti-Indian Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and its leader, Khaleda Zia. While India has promoted a Bangla identity, Pakistan has pushed for an Islamic identity and anti-Indian propaganda. Pakistan also supported Jamaat-e-Islami, an organization advocating for the Islamization of the Indian subcontinent, which has worked to promote Islamic values in Bangladesh. Many accuse the recent riots that led to Sheikh Hasina’s ousting of being influenced by Pakistan-supported Islamic factions. Indian media have reported on these accusations and are investigating whether the riots involved persecution of minorities in Bangladesh.

    India and Pakistan are not the only interested parties in Bangladesh. The United States and the UK, which did not support Bangladesh’s independence and even opposed India for backing it, are also implicated according to some political analysts. Sheikh Hasina has consistently blocked U.S. attempts to acquire St. Martin’s Island, which was reportedly part of a U.S. plan to establish a military base and boost its military dominance in the region. Some believe that the United Kingdom has plans to create a Christian nation in the Indian subcontinent while forming a Muslim nation elsewhere, and sees an opportunity in Bangladesh. Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which have supported Islamist factions in Bangladesh, have helped to bolster the Islamic identity of the country. China, which seeks to reduce India’s dominance in the Bay of Bengal, also disapproves of Hasina’s alignment with India and has therefore been accused of intervening in Bangladesh as well.

    Bangladesh is currently in a transitional phase, and foreign countries are closely watching the situation. Despite previous authoritarian tendencies during Sheikh Hasina’s tenure, Bangladesh has recorded growth and emerged from India’s shadow. It will be interesting to see what Bangladesh will be like after Hasina. The country is now under an interim government led by Younus, who has the support of the West. The upcoming election will be a battleground for various parties with different agendas and foreign influences. If Bangladesh cannot form a strong government, foreign interference will likely continue.

  • What Caused So Much Anti-India Sentiment in the Indian Subcontinent?

    What Caused So Much Anti-India Sentiment in the Indian Subcontinent?

    Bollywood and Indian policymakers dominated the Indian subcontinent until the last decade. The Indian subcontinent, including Islamic countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan, maintained a good relationship with India. Countries like the Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan acted more like India’s satellites. They developed and evolved using India as a model, and India was generous to its neighbors, offering assistance in areas from education, health, to the satellite services. This collaboration led to the formation of SAARC, which was one of the most effective regional bodies.

    The people of these countries shared a strong cultural bond, enjoying the same movies, music, and cricket and admiring stars from each other’s nations. Despite nationalism, there was a sense of fondness and unity. However, in 2024, the scenario has changed dramatically. The union and sentiments that once bound them together are no longer present. Politicians, people, and even artists are expressing hostility toward each other, with social media filled with hate comments. Anti-India factions are ruling in Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Maldives, and have gained strength in Sri Lanka and Nepal. Recently, a violent riot in Bangladesh toppled an India-supported government, revealing a clear rise in anti-India sentiment. Now, it seems only Bhutan remains allied with India in the subcontinent. What caused such a split between these countries that once seemed as close as in a Bollywood drama?

    India, as the largest secular democratic republic, was a role model for its fellow South Asian states. Even when they had disputes with India, they admired it. While some Islamist countries and the United States, which was opposed to Russia, propagated against India, people in these countries were fond of India, its secularism, and its culture. Indian Bollywood movies facilitated this cultural exchange significantly. Bollywood films, with their family values and cultural closeness, attracted large audiences in these countries, creating hardcore fans who cherished Bombay dreams. Bollywood produced content that appealed to these audiences and included more artists from Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and other countries, resulting in significant box office collections for Bollywood movies in these regions. At one point, despite border tensions, Pakistan was one of the largest contributors to Bollywood’s box office revenue.

    Cricket was also a unifying factor, as India provided facilities to promote the sport in these countries. Indian cricket and hockey stars were admired across the region. A similar cultural exchange occurred in reverse, with Pakistani musicians and Sri Lankan cricketers becoming big stars in India. Together, they formed a friendly alliance. The wars at the borders and foreign interests did not disturb this friendly environment.

    But things began to change over the last decade, specifically after Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), came to power in 2014. The rise of the Hindu nationalist party caused widespread concern in Islamic countries, leading them to question India’s secular image among their own people. Comments from BJP leaders were widely circulated, giving more spotlight to Islamic factions in countries like Pakistan, the Maldives, and Bangladesh. The public in these countries slowly began to fall out of love with India. Economic downturns in these countries were also redirected into India-hatred by local politicians, who blamed India for various problems. Jealousy played a role as well; in the past, everyone seemed to grow together, but now only India was progressing, leading to the perception that India didn’t care about them and was taking away their opportunities and overshadowing them on the global stage.

    The decline of Bollywood also contributed to this cultural divide. As Bollywood started producing more propaganda-based movies instead of the traditional romantic dramas, the films lost their connection with markets in Pakistan and other regions. Meanwhile, the youth, especially Gen Z, began exploring Hollywood and Korean movies instead of Indian content, further weakening cultural ties.

    But political analysts point to another important factor: the influence of social media on a predominantly young population. As social media spaces are heavily utilized by propagandists, minor incidents in distant places, which mainstream media usually neglect, have started to be highlighted and shape the national mood. This has further strained the already deteriorating connections between people and policymakers. Additionally, outsiders with vested interests have begun to exploit the situation. The United States and the United Kingdom have been culturally disseminating anti-India narratives in the surrounding countries, while Saudi Arabia and Qatar are advancing Islamic interests. Meanwhile, China has heavily invested in the region through infrastructure projects that small-income countries cannot afford to repay, pulling them out of India’s sphere of influence. Anti-Indian groups in these nations are taking advantage of this situation by fostering a new and distinct identity that previously did not exist.

    As a result, India is becoming increasingly isolated in the region, posing significant economic and military risks. With satellite countries bound by Chinese debts, they cannot refuse the influx of Chinese products, causing substantial losses for Indian businesses. Furthermore, infrastructure projects in strategic locations around India provide a military advantage for China. It appears that China is now the dominant player in the region with its partners, putting India in a difficult position.

  • Myanmar Junta in Trouble as Rebels Seize Strategic Military Base

    Myanmar Junta in Trouble as Rebels Seize Strategic Military Base

    The civil war in Myanmar, involving the military junta and an alliance of ethnic armies, is intensifying. The junta, formed after the 2021 coup d’état, is losing more territory to ethnic tribal armies, which are advocating for democracy despite their previous conflicts with Myanmar’s democratic governments. The coup and subsequent suppression united these ethnic armies, leading to the formation of the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), which is now waging war against the junta.

    In a recent development, ethnic rebels in Myanmar have captured a key military base, the army’s Northeast Command in Lashio, dealing a significant blow to the military junta. This is seen as the biggest setback for Myanmar’s military government this year. The fall of Lashio’s Northeast Command underscores the growing strength and confidence of opposition forces, putting the military junta in a difficult position.

    Lashio, the largest town in Shan State, Myanmar’s biggest state, lies just 110 km from the Chinese border. As an important trading hub, Lashio will provide political and economic benefits to the opposition. Losing control of this town and state could be the junta’s most significant defeat. The MNDAA has been targeting Lashio since launching its offensive in October, initially facing several setbacks. However, among Myanmar’s 14 regional commands, the Northeast Command in Lashio is the first to fall to armed resistance groups.

    The situation is dire for the junta, as the military had recently reinforced the Lashio base with around 3,000 troops. Yet, within a month, the base fell, leading to the surrender of over 1,000 soldiers. The commander of the Northeast Military Region, along with his two brigadier-general deputies, has been captured, marking them as the highest-ranking prisoners of war to date. This setback raises concerns that the ruling military council might have to abandon its efforts to hold contested territories and concentrate on defending the central heartland. It may also increase discontent with Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, who seized power by overthrowing the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi in 2021. Doubts are growing about whether the Army can continue to function effectively under his leadership.

    On Monday, Myanmar’s military regime acknowledged losing communication with the commanders of a strategically important Army headquarters in the northeast, lending credibility to claims from a militia group that it had captured the base. Maj. Gen. Zaw Min Tun, spokesperson for Myanmar’s ruling military council, said in an audio statement on state-run MRTV television that contact was lost with the Northeastern Command headquarters on Saturday night and that there were unconfirmed reports of some commanders being arrested by the MNDAA. Min also noted that the alliance was receiving weapons, including drones and short-range missiles, from unidentified foreign sources.

    The situation has remained difficult for the military junta since last year. In October, through a campaign called Operation 1027, the MNDAA captured large areas of territory along the border with China, including numerous townships and hundreds of junta-held posts. While the MNDAA had previously taken a regional military headquarters in Laukkaing, a key city on the Chinese border, the capture of the Lashio headquarters is even more significant. Many political analysts believe that the success of recent attacks in Shan State will boost the confidence of other factions in Myanmar, with reports indicating that the Arakan Army in the Rakhine state is increasing its strikes.

    The civil war in Myanmar has claimed the lives of over 5,000 civilians since 2021. Millions have been displaced internally, and the country’s economy is in tatters. The conflict is escalating, especially in Shan State and western Myanmar. According to Myanmar’s National Unity Government, a coalition of ousted democratically elected lawmakers seeking to establish a parallel government, resistance forces controlled over 60% of the nation’s territory prior to the capture of Lashio. There is speculation that the fighting may intensify and spread as opposition groups target towns and cities long regarded as military strongholds, such as Myawaddy and Mandalay. Mandalay, an economic and cultural hub, is located just over 200 kilometers from Lashio. Additionally, Myanmar’s capital, Naypyidaw, faced an unprecedented attack that month when armed groups launched drone strikes and targeted military installations in the city. So, it looks like Junta is in big trouble. 

  • Thailand Outlaws Popular Progressive Party

    Thailand Outlaws Popular Progressive Party

    Thailand, the constitutional monarchy, once again failed its people. From the day the Move Forward Party, which aims to scrap outdated laws like lese majeste from the Thai constitution, came to light, the authorities have been working to bring it down. Even though the people voted for them and gave them the most seats in last year’s general election, they were denied administration. The party faced many cases, and finally, Thailand’s constitutional court ordered the dissolution of the country’s most popular and promising youth-led party, banning its leaders from politics for ten years over their election promise to reform the country’s strict and often cruel lese-majesty law. It seems the country doesn’t look for any chance to “move forward ”, despite people craving progress.

    On Wednesday, the constitutional court unanimously decided to dissolve the party and ban its executive committee, including its charismatic leader Pita Limjaroenrat, from politics for ten years. This decision followed a ruling by the same court in January, which declared the party’s pledge to reform the lese-majesty law unlawful and demanded an end to such efforts. Speaking at the party’s headquarters after the verdict, Pita stated that their movement would continue and that a new party and leadership would be established. The successor party, which Move Forward MPs will join, is expected to be announced on Friday.

    Thailand’s courts have often dissolved political parties and banned politicians, and the country has faced two coups since 2006 as part of a continuing power struggle between popular parties and the conservative establishment. Move Forward’s predecessor, Future Forward, was dissolved by a court ruling in 2020 for allegedly violating election funding rules, a decision its supporters argued was politically motivated to remove them from the political landscape. The ruling sparked mass youth-led protests demanding democratic reforms and breaking a longstanding taboo by calling for changes to the royal family. Since then, at least 272 people have been charged with lese-majesty. In May, political activist Netiporn Sanae-sangkhom, 28, who was charged under the law, died in pre-trial detention after a 65-day hunger strike protesting the imprisonment of political dissidents.

    Although the dissolution might anger millions of young and urban voters who supported Move Forward and its progressive agenda, the ruling’s impact may be minimal, with only its 11 party executives facing 10-year political bans. Consequently, mass protests similar to those in 2020 may not occur. Hours after the ruling, Move Forward’s leaders announced that the remaining 143 lawmakers would establish a new party on Friday, similar to the response in 2020 when Future Forward, their predecessor, was dissolved.

    In Thailand, individuals have faced prosecution for making political speeches, wearing clothing considered to impersonate the royals, or selling satirical cartoons, all under Article 112 of Thailand’s criminal code, known as lese-majeste. In recent years, criticism of this law has grown, largely due to the mass protests that erupted in 2020. During these protests, young people demanded democratic reforms and challenged a deeply ingrained taboo by calling for changes to the monarchy’s role in public life.  their key demand was the abolition of the lese-majeste law. 

    It looks like Thailand’s youth politicians will not compromise with the authorities, and they have the support of the people, as evidenced by last year’s voter turnout. It is clear that a new party with new leadership but the same ideology will emerge in the next election. Sirikanya Tansakun, who is seen as a potential future leader, stated that while the party’s ideology would be preserved, its strategy would be dynamic and adaptable. Even if the constitutional authorities prevent them from participating in the administration and impose bans, the youth, including many from Gen Z who are globally connected through the internet, are not backing down. This cycle will continue until the people dismantle the authority. The constitutional monarchy is an absolute disgrace in the 21st century.

  • Is Turkey Really Going to Fight Against Israel?

    Is Turkey Really Going to Fight Against Israel?

    Turkey and Israel maintained a good relationship, while other Islamic countries, from Morocco to Indonesia, do not even recognize the state of Israel. Israel and Turkey formally established diplomatic relations in 1949, shortly after Israel was founded. Both countries prioritized cooperation in economics, diplomacy, military, and strategic affairs. Although disputes have arisen, diplomats from both sides have worked to keep the relationship intact.

    However, in recent decades, under the leadership of Islamist leader Erdoğan, the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated considerably. Relations worsened further after Israel’s retaliation in Gaza, with Turkey condemning Israel and supporting Hamas. As tensions escalate, many question the likelihood of Turkey intervening, given Erdoğan’s strong support for Hamas and his advocacy for global Muslim solidarity. Will Turkey fight against Israel to save Palestinians?

    During a meeting with his ruling AK Party in his hometown of Rize on Sunday, President Tayyip Erdogan suggested that Turkey might intervene in Israel, similar to its previous actions in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh. In the televised address that was trending on X, he stated that there was no reason Turkey could not undertake such actions and emphasized the need for strength to pursue these steps. Although he did not specify the form the intervention might take, he confidently highlighted Turkey’s defense industry  throughout his speech.

    Erdogan has demonstrated a readiness to engage in significant interventions in the Middle East, often citing Turkey’s strategic interests and invoking a sense of Ottoman heritage. He has participated in attacks in Nagorno-Karabakh alongside Azerbaijan, showing hostility toward Armenia and advocating for a grand Turkic ethnic union. Erdogan also supports the faction in Libya that controls Tripoli, which opposes the faction backed by France and other groups. Additionally, Turkey frequently conducts operations along the Syrian border, targeting Kurdish-controlled areas, and there are reports suggesting potential intervention in Kurdish territories in Iraq. It’s interesting that while Turkey does not support the creation of Kurdistan, it actively advocates for the Palestinian cause.

    Erdoğan has been highly critical of Israel’s actions during its conflict with Hamas, accusing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of genocide. Turkey has halted all trade with Israel and recalled its ambassador. The Turkish foreign ministry compared Netanyahu to Adolf Hitler, claiming that, just as Hitler’s reign ended, so too will Netanyahu’s. The ministry also declared that those who seek to destroy the Palestinians will be held accountable and that humanity will stand with the Palestinians, who will not be defeated.

    In response, Israel recalled its diplomats from Turkey and accused Ankara of supporting terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Iran. Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz comparing Erdoğan to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Katz suggested that Erdoğan’s threats against Israel are reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s actions and cautioned Erdoğan to remember the outcome of Saddam’s threats.

    Turkey, where about 99.8% of the population are Muslims, was regarded as secular until Erdoğan’s leadership. If Turkey were to enter the war, it could be perceived as a reestablishment of Ottoman Turkey. While the global Muslim population is frustrated by the lack of punitive action against Israel, especially as Lebanon, Syria, and Iran face frequent attacks, Turkey’s intervention could restore some of the historical significance associated with the Ottoman Empire and potentially position it as a leading force in the Islamic world.Such a move would likely have a significant impact on the global order.

    There is no doubt that Turkey is a major military power, boasting NATO’s second-largest military and advanced munitions technology, including its renowned drones. Its involvement could present a significant challenge to Israel, unlike Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia, which face geographical limitations and a lack of war experience. However, the likelihood of Turkey intervening remains low due to US influence over the country. If a conflict does occur, Turkey’s economy may struggle to sustain it, potentially leading to hardship for its people. Additionally, the US might then support the creation of Kurdistan, an expanded Armenia, or a unified Cyprus, which could threaten Turkey’s existence.

    Despite international media reports, it is more realistic to view Erdoğan and the Turkish government’s comments as part of a strategy to maintain his image as the defender of Islam. This is particularly relevant given that the Muslim population, who are staunch supporters of Erdoğan, are discontented with the situation in Gaza. If public dissatisfaction persists, Erdoğan faces a significant challenge as the opposition gains support among the people.

    Although direct confrontation is unlikely, Turkey is exploring all possible options against Israel. Reports indicate that Turkey may formally submit a declaration of intervention in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel regarding the Gaza conflict to the International Court of Justice. As a seasoned politician, Erdoğan knows that without addressing the concerns of the Islamist populace and taking a strong stance on the Palestinian issue, he cannot maintain his political position or assert Turkey’s leadership in the Muslim world.

  • Will Bangladesh Become the Next Islamic Republic?

    Will Bangladesh Become the Next Islamic Republic?

    As the nation’s founder Mujibur Rahman’s statues are dismantled and his daughter, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, flees the country, Bangladesh is entering a new era. A new generation has emerged in the country that did not witness Bangladesh’s freedom struggle, has no emotional ties to the freedom fighters or the nationalist Awami League party, and is determined to reject them all. They led the massive protests that resulted in the exit of one of history’s strongest female leaders. Bangladesh is now in a state of anarchy, but the military chief is not seizing the opportunity to establish a military government. Instead, he is engaging in talks with all parties to form a coalition interim government and organize a fresh election.

    However, the Bangladesh that emerges will not be the same as before, even though many connect current events to the massive student protests of the 1990s. Over the past 30 years, the perfect blend of Islam and Bangla, which has shaped Bangladesh’s identity as distinct from Pakistan and the Indian part of Bengal, is shifting. The mix now contains more Islam, and the influence of Bangla culture is diminishing, raising concerns that Bangladesh is entering a new experimental stage of political Islam.

    There are very few examples of democracy in Islamic countries. If it’s not a kingdom or dictatorship, the majority of Islamic countries can’t survive. However, we have seen many examples of Islamic countries where people mobilized and overthrew dictatorships. Eventually, these countries become battlegrounds between different Muslim factions with varying degrees of religious influence. This has been visible in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Egypt, Syria, and many other countries.

    Often, fundamentalist Islamic organizations lead the masses against the dictatorship, citing poor living conditions and the dictator’s lack of commitment to Islam. They promise a better life if people commit to Islamic governance. As a result, people become willing to endure anything, even death, and no dictator can withstand this pressure, leading to the establishment of Islamic governance. Many political analysts believe this pattern is also visible in Bangladesh.

    Bangladesh, a former territory of Pakistan, gained independence with the help of India in 1971. It has always been a battleground between Pakistan-supported Islamism and India-supported Bangla nationalism. The two main political parties in Bangladesh are products of this conflict: the India-backed Awami League, which advocates Bangla nationalism, and the Pakistan-backed Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which often incorporates more Islamism. Additionally, Jamaat-e-Islami, a Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization that promotes political Islam and seeks to implement Sharia across the Indian subcontinent, is very popular in Bangladesh, despite being banned by Sheikh Hasina. As Hasina’s era ends and people attack Awami League offices, it is clear that Bangladesh is increasingly embracing Islamism.

    The military chief, General Wajed Ur Zaman, has stated that a coalition government is being formed, and Khaleda Zia, the major leader of the BNP, has been freed from her corruption charges. If elections were held now, it is likely that the BNP would gain power. It is expected that the ban on Jamaat-e-Islami will be lifted, allowing them to become more active in mainstream politics. Given the country’s poverty and poor living conditions, Jamaat-e-Islami is likely to become a decisive factor in future elections, promoting the idea of Islamic rule. Additionally, intervention from Pakistan is expected to increase. As Bangladesh loses its Bengali identity and embraces Islamism with stronger ties to Pakistan, the differences between Bangladesh and former Eastern Pakistan may diminish. So, the Islamic Republic of Bangladesh needs to be considered as Bangladesh’s future.

  • Iran Is Forced, But Are They Capable?

    Iran Is Forced, But Are They Capable?

    Iran is deeply humiliated by Israel’s killing of the Hamas chief in Tehran. Although it was anticipated that Israel might target him, the attack did not occur while he was in Gaza or Qatar. Instead, Israel chose to act when he arrived in Iran for the new president’s inauguration. As a major player in the Islamic world and the only country actively opposing Israel, Iran views this as a significant humiliation. This incident is not unprecedented; Israel has previously targeted several high-ranking Iranian officials, and some experts even speculate that Ebrahim Raisi might be a target. Iran’s regime feels compelled to retaliate to maintain its strong image domestically and its status as a defender of Islam globally. While previous responses have involved ceremonial missile launches, such a response may no longer suffice. But are they capable?

    Iran is undeniably a superpower in the Middle East, boasting a formidable military force. As of 2024, the Iranian Armed Forces are the second-largest in the region, surpassed only by the Egyptian Armed Forces in terms of active troops. Iran’s military consists of approximately 425,000 active-duty personnel and an additional 100,000 reserves and trained personnel available when needed. These numbers do not include the Law Enforcement Command or the Basij. Despite its numerical advantage over Israel, Iran faces more challenges than opportunities. 

    Most of Iran’s imported weapons are American systems acquired during the shah’s regime before the Islamic Revolution. Following international sanctions, Iran initiated a strong domestic rearmament program, resulting in an increasingly indigenous military inventory. By the 2000s, Iran had become an exporter of arms, although the effectiveness of its domestically manufactured items remains. The country has invested significantly in an ambitious ballistic and cruise missile program to enhance its mid-range strike capability, though updates on its progress are scarce. Additionally, Iran produces a variety of arms and munitions, including tanks, armored vehicles, drones, and an array of naval assets and aerial defense systems, which could be crucial in a conflict.

    Iran has purchased some munitions from Russia in addition to its indigenous weapons. However, since Russia is currently at war, it cannot meet Iran’s demand. It is uncertain whether other superpowers in Asia, such as China and India, will supply munitions to Iran. Supplying munitions would likely invite U.S. sanctions, so Islamic countries will probably refrain from doing so.

    The biggest challenge for Iran is that it does not share a border with Israel, so the size of its army does not provide an advantage. War through waterways is possible, but on all the routes through land and sea, U.S. allies are present and will likely stop them. Through the air, missiles are available, and they have been launched at Israel before, but Israel successfully blocked them. The only way that might work for Iran now is a joint attack with its allies in the region. However, there are doubts that these countries will cooperate with Iran now because they would suffer more than Iran if they intervened. However, it is certain that militant groups in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen will fight alongside Iran, and a joint attack with them is the only possibility for Iran. Iran is trying its best to partner with Islamic countries.

    Iran has called in foreign ambassadors to Tehran to assert its moral duty to hold Israel accountable for what it views as provocations and violations of international law following the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh. Tehran has also requested an emergency meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation on Wednesday to seek backing from Arab states for potential retaliatory measures against Israel. Many Gulf leaders have expressed their condemnation of Israel’s actions but are advising Iran to show restraint.

    Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s Security Council Secretary, arrived in Tehran on Monday for talks with Iranian leaders, including President Masoud Pezeshkian. While discussions are advancing quickly, it remains uncertain how many countries will support Iran in its war against Israel.

    Experts suggest that Iran is striving to maintain its image. To potentially promote peace, the U.S. might indirectly assist Iran by allowing a token attack, enabling Iran to claim retaliation. Iran could then shift blame to other Gulf states. At this stage, a full-scale war seems unlikely, as Iran recognizes the significant challenges and potential internal problems that such a conflict would create. Although missile strikes or proxy attacks might continue, the likelihood of a direct confrontation between Iran and Israel remains low.