Author: Caracal

  • How Imminent is the Israel-Lebanon War?

    How Imminent is the Israel-Lebanon War?

    There was a time when all Arab Islamic neighbors were a threat to Israel. There was a time when all Arab Islamic neighbors surrounding Israel decided to vanish the Jewish country from the Earth. There was a time when all the neighbors were the hope for an Islamic country in a land now called Israel. But now, it all seems like sleeping in history books. Arab Islamic nations, once advocated for Islamic solidarity and the liberation of Palestine from the river to the sea, now merely issue statements in support of Palestinians who face retaliation from Israel for terrorist attacks by Hamas, the rulers of Gaza. Egypt, once a major Arab power, is no longer prominently involved. Jordan and Syria are not capable without Egypt. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran, though they all claim to be the leader of Islamic nations, have not challenged Israel like Egypt once did, and possibly never in future. So Israel’s borders with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan are all safe now. But the border with Lebanon, which is home to a large Palestinian population and the terrorist organization Hezbollah, which has close ties with Hamas, poses a heavy risk for Israel. It’s certain that while Israel works on security issues with Hamas, they will also deal with threats from Hezbollah, possibly leading to cross-border attacks into Lebanon, and another Israel-Lebanon war soon.

    The Israeli Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, affirmed a possible escalation of war with Lebanon, stating that a decision on an all-out war with Hezbollah was imminent. Israeli generals announced late on Tuesday that they had finalized plans for an offensive into Lebanon. These statements are considered as part of Israel’s efforts to ensure public support for the war before the attack in Lebanon, where Hezbollah is perceived, a threat to people in Israel. The escalating rhetoric followed the release of video footage from a Hezbollah surveillance drone’s overflight of the northern city of Haifa, which included images of sensitive sites and civilian neighborhoods. The broadcast of the footage was widely interpreted as a thinly veiled threat against Haifa and comes amid ongoing cross-border exchanges between the two sides. Northern Israel faced the most intense barrage of the conflict from Hezbollah last week following the Israeli operation that resulted in the death of a senior Hezbollah commander. Following threats by Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah to target Haifa’s ports, Katz stated in a post on X: “We are approaching the moment of deciding to change the rules of the game against Hezbollah and Lebanon”. He stated that, In a full-scale war, Hezbollah will face destruction, and Hezbollah’s host Lebanon will endure serious consequences.

    Israel’s military later announced, “Operational plans for an offensive in Lebanon have been approved and validated, with decisions made to further increase troop readiness in the field”. Minister Katz’s comments came as the IDF announced on Tuesday that it had approved battle plans for Lebanon. During an assessment, IDF generals approved “Operational plans for an offensive in Lebanon”, including “Accelerating the readiness of forces on the ground”. Israel is considering the Hezbollah drone footage as a warning that they are capable of an attack similar to what Hamas carried out last year. The warnings came hours after Hezbollah released nine minutes of drone footage gathered from its surveillance overflight of locations in Israel, including residential areas. The distribution of the footage was highlighted by the Lebanese armed movement, including on its Telegram channel, urging viewers on several platforms to “Watch and Analyze” what it described as “Important Scenes.”

    Even though a full-scale war between Israel and Lebanon has not occurred since the 2006 war, tension between Israel and Hezbollah has always been present despite their agreements on ceasefire. Since the Hamas attack on Gaza, there have been ongoing skirmishes between them. Over the past eight months, Hezbollah has deployed surveillance and attack drones into Israel, engaging in fire exchanges with the Israeli military concurrently with the Gaza conflict. The decision to broadcast footage, which included images of residential and military sites in and around Haifa, including port facilities, seemed aimed as much at an Israeli audience as at a wider international one. Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah stated in November that they had been sending surveillance drones over Haifa. Curiously, the release of this footage seemed to coincide with the visit of US envoy Amos Hochstein to Lebanon, which followed his meetings with senior Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the day before. The US called for “urgent” de-escalation of the cross-border exchanges of fire between Hezbollah and Israeli forces that have been ongoing since the start of the Gaza conflict. However, tensions escalate without showing down. Last week, Hezbollah launched hundreds of drones and rockets, with more than 200 fired on a single day, prompting Israeli military strikes on Hezbollah targets in response.

    The latest exchange of threats between the two sides came as the US and France worked on a negotiated settlement to the hostilities along Lebanon’s southern boundary with Israel. The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah has endured for an extended period. It’s best to resolve it quickly and diplomatically, that is both achievable and urgent. However, Israel’s mission for safety will not be completed if they only tame Hezbollah. Hamas, Hezbollah, and Shiite militias in Syria can all be seen as a threat to Israel. But The level of support from Western countries for an escalation of war will be crucial. Netanyahu has dissolved the war cabinet to gain more control in the conflict, enjoying support in opinion polls. Upcoming conflict may also serve to deflect attention from previous corruption charges and public discontent during Netanyahu’s rule extension. Therefore, a possible conflict with Hezbollah is imminent and it seems likely and could lead to an Israel-Lebanon war, causing further destruction in Lebanon.

  • Vladimir Putin bolsters his relationship with North Korea

    Vladimir Putin bolsters his relationship with North Korea

    There are only a few countries left in the world that Russian President Vladimir Putin can visit without fearing arrest due to the ICC’s warrant against him. North Korea, a traditional ally of Russia, is among them. North Korea remains steadfast in its relationship with Russia while becoming increasingly isolated from the West. As the war in Ukraine shows no sign of ending, Russian munitions are failing to hit their targets, and Russia is even relying on soldiers, mostly trafficked from South Asia. In this situation, the relationship with North Korea will be mutually beneficial. North Korea, known to possess nuclear weapons and to have displayed various other dangerous weapons before, is causing concerns in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Japan and South Korea regard North Korea as a dangerous enemy and are on high alert due to the growing relationship between Putin and Kim.

    Vladimir Putin has arrived in North Korea for an important summit with Kim Jong-un, according to sources. Making his first visit to the reclusive country since 2000, the Russian president flew to Pyongyang early on Wednesday and was greeted by huge welcome banners and Russian flags, as reported by Russian state media. His plane touched down in Pyongyang at about 2:45 am local time after a stopover in Russia’s far east. Putin and Kim held a brief meeting shortly after his arrival and are scheduled to meet again on Wednesday to sign agreements aimed at deepening their relationship, which has significantly strengthened since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

    Kim is not involved in the Russia-Ukraine war but has expressed support for Russia. Some Western media have reported that they have already provided munitions to Russia. The US and South Korea assert they have evidence that North Korea has supplied Russia with dozens of ballistic missiles and over 11,000 containers of munitions for use in Ukraine. They have also highlighted evidence of Korean-made artillery in Ukraine. However, both Russia and North Korea have denied these allegations. North Korea could provide more to Russia with ongoing supplies of artillery, guided rockets for multiple rocket launchers, and short-range missiles to support its operations in Ukraine. Kim, who met Putin in the Russian Pacific city of Vladivostok during a week-long visit to Russia last September, is among the few world leaders to have expressed unequivocal support for the war. Putin has described the pair as “comrades-in-arms” against Western attempts to isolate them through sanctions.

    North Korea is highly reliant on Russia, who has closed all relationships with the world and is only open to Russia and China. Both countries support the communist regime in North Korea, so welcoming Putin isn’t merely ceremonial; without support from Russia, North Korea can maneuver independently. However, for Russia, the president’s visit signifies more than symbolic gestures; it entails securing deals and ensuring continued support from North Korea to maintain a hassle-free eastern border. The vast eastern part of the elongated country is distant from Moscow, and any signs of Russia’s weakness could lead to trouble in this region. Therefore, maintaining a militarily strong ally in the east is crucial for Korea. Perhaps Putin’s first visit to the country in 24 years is driven by Russia’s insecurities. Currently, it appears that Russia is favoring North Korea more. Putin has even praised Kim for defying UN Security Council sanctions, measures that Moscow had supported until recently, aimed at curbing his regime’s nuclear ambitions.

    North Korea’s state KCNA news agency said Putin’s visit proves that ties between the two countries “are getting stronger day by day” and would lend “fresh vitality to the development of good-neighborly cooperative relations between the two countries”. However, the media in South Korea, Japan, and the West raised concerns. The US expressed concern that the visit could impact security in Ukraine and on the Korean peninsula, which has recently experienced tension along the heavily fortified border separating North and South Korea since the end of the notorious Korean War.

    Putin’s trip showed he was “Dependent” on authoritarian leaders. North Korea, Iran, and China are the closest friends and biggest supporters of the Russian war effort. The Russian government is now taking all steps to bolster these relationships. The Russian delegation to Pyongyang is said to include Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the heads of the Russian space agency and railways, and Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak, who is Putin’s key representative for energy. Putin’s North Korean hosts have not released any details of his itinerary. However, according to Russia’s Interfax news agency, the visit will feature one-on-one discussions between Putin and Kim, a gala concert, a state reception, honor guards, document signings, and a statement to the media.

  • Netanyahu to Gain More Power by Dissolving War Cabinet

    Netanyahu to Gain More Power by Dissolving War Cabinet

    Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister for over 15 years, is a seasoned politician known for his strategic moves to tighten his grip on the administration. It is certain that someone who has been in power for this long will always crave more authority, and Netanyahu is now taking control by dissolving the war cabinet formed after the Hamas attack on Israel. This move reflects his increased confidence, which has risen along with his poll numbers since the departure of opposition leader Gantz from the war cabinet amidst disputes. The war cabinet had been a source of friction between Netanyahu and other members, particularly over the issue of hostages held in Gaza by Hamas and other groups. Now free from consulting with opposition leaders and those with differing political views, Netanyahu’s power is strengthened.

    Even though the war cabinet had functioned effectively, convening numerous times since Hamas’s surprise attack on southern Israel’s Gaza border communities on October 7, the move comes amid divisions of opinion between Netanyahu and senior Israel Defense Forces commanders. With the announcement of the dissolution to ministers, the Prime Minister stated that the war cabinet had been established as part of an agreement when the moderate politician Benny Gantz and his political party, the National Unity Party, joined an emergency coalition last year. This move managed the conflict in Gaza, blocked Netanyahu’s far-right allies attempts to secure seats, and seemingly consolidated his decision-making control over the fighting with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah across the Lebanese border.

    Netanyahu reportedly told ministers that the war cabinet was no longer needed following Benny Gantz’s resignation from the cabinet a week ago. Gantz, one of the members of the war cabinet, quit the coalition along with Gadi Eisenkot, one of the three observers in the body. David Mencer, a spokesperson for the prime minister’s office, said the war cabinet was a “Prerequisite” for Gantz, a former army chief and defense minister, to join a unity government. He added, “So with Mr. Gantz leaving the government, there is no need for the cabinet. War cabinet’s  duties will be taken over by the security cabinet”. This move appears to be a deliberate snub to Netanyahu’s far-right allies in the coalition, including National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who had been seeking a seat in the war cabinet since Gantz’s departure, and reportedly  recently threatening Netanyahu that they will resign if the ceasefire bring by Netanyhau with swap deal and had complained about being excluded from key decisions.

    Despite pressure from the Biden administration to keep the war cabinet intact, seen by some as a more moderate forum, Netanyahu’s decision to sideline Ben-Gvir and the finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, was interpreted by analysts as a way to uphold his intent to persevere with the conflict. The disbanding of the war cabinet was confirmed by Israeli officials amid mounting discontent over the conduct of the war in Gaza and calls from anti-government groups for a week of daily protests. There are also Netanyahu-supported opinion polls reporting support for his actions. Netanyahu is now expected to hold consultations about the Gaza war with a small group of ministers, including the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and the strategic affairs minister, Ron Dermer, who had been in the war cabinet. Reports in the Israeli Hebrew-language media suggested that Netanyahu plans to make key decisions in meetings with his own advisers, excluding Ben-Gvir, before presenting them to the security cabinet. In the immediate aftermath of the war cabinet’s dissolution, the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth speculated that some key decisions would now be made by an expanded cabinet, sometimes including up to 50 participants, where more hawkish voices dominate, providing Netanyahu with greater political cover for the ongoing conflict.

    Despite Israel facing pressure from the Islamic world and the West, including the United States, to maintain its objective of making Gaza Hamas-free, the issue of Hamas holding hostages remains contentious in Israel. Opposition groups critical of Netanyahu’s leadership during the war have launched a week-long series of daily demonstrations, demanding a ceasefire, efforts to secure the release of hostages, and upcoming elections. The dissolution of the war cabinet is not expected to have a substantial impact on the conflict; decision-making will revert to the security cabinet. However, the political ramifications may be significant, and now the war will be more under Netanyahu’s control, with all the credit for the Hamas destruction project going to him.

  • Iran to Hold Election Ensuring No Changes

    Iran to Hold Election Ensuring No Changes

    The Islamic Republic of Iran is set to conduct the first round of its presidential election on June 28th. This swift election follows the unexpected death of President Ebrahim Raisi in a helicopter crash. According to the Islamic Republic’s constitution, a new election must be held within fifty days to fill the vacant presidential post. No one expects Ebrahim Raisi’s successor to bring significant political change, and Iran’s unpopular elections, characterized by highly vetted candidates and low voter turnout, are intended to maintain the regime’s priorities of continuity and stability.

    As the regime is well aware of the public mood against them, politicians with views divergent from the Islamic Republic are banned from public politics, so they cannot even think about participating in elections. In the last race, in 2021, the Guardian Council, an elite body appointed by Khamenei that vets candidates, banned all reformists, although they do not oppose the Islamic Republic. This time, however, one has made the cut. More options have been provided by the authorities. Masoud Pezeshkian, a doctor, MP, and former health minister whose father was Azeri and mother was Kurdish, is an interesting candidate. Cynics assume he has been picked precisely because he is unlikely to win, viewing the parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, as the likeliest victor among the six men running. Saeed Jalili, a former national security adviser known for his hardline religious views, is another contender. However, the ceremonial election winner is likely to be predetermined by the authorities.

    Mr. Qalibaf, widely predicted to win, has repeatedly faced corruption allegations, though he is favored by the regime. He helped oversee violent crackdowns on students both as a general and as a police chief, making him indispensable to the regime in suppressing protests against it. Iran’s most powerful entities, the supreme leader’s office and the country’s military Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, with whom he has served and maintains strong connections, are expected to support him for the presidential role. Analysts suggest he might steer Iran towards what they regard as its inevitable future: increasingly dominated by the military rather than the clerical establishment. Qalibaf is also a former mayor of Tehran with a reputation as a technocrat, raising hopes that he might improve living conditions, despite the challenges posed by the mounting sanctions. 

    Even though the Islamic Republic has numerous issues to address in an election,such as women’s rights, human rights, and economic misconditions, the selection of candidates who lack the courage or obedience to the regime is the primary reason for candidate approval. This may lead to neglecting the issues facing Iran. Since most participants in the election are conservative, the candidate chosen is often the most conservative Islamist leader or the leader with the closest connection to the regime. Although candidates’ behavior towards the public and their public image also matter, the outcome of the last election, which resulted in the selection of the last president, Ebrahim Raisi, known as the butcher of Tehran due to his tough stance for the republic.

    But of course, tough times are waiting for the new president. The possible hostility of a second Trump administration and the regime facing widespread discontent at home, following the suppression of the massive Women’s, Life, Freedom protests, are all factors to consider. Actions towards the people who celebrated the death of the butcher will also be interesting to watch. The evidence of recent years suggests that the regime is more concerned about conservative consolidation at the top than about legitimacy from below.

    The last presidential election, held in 2021, recorded the lowest turnout ever, with only 48% of electors bothering to cast their votes. Therefore, the regime needs to appear credible and re-engage at least parts of the public. Reformists had warned of an election boycott if their candidates were barred from running. Some also speculate that the supreme leader may hope to curb factionalism and infighting within conservative ranks. However, the widespread assumption is that Mr. Pezeshkian is permitted to participate because Iran’s powerbrokers are confident he will not win. In the past, Hassan Rouhani ascended to the presidency with the backing of former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani; Mr. Pezeshkian does not have a similarly influential supporter. Ali Larijani, a moderate conservative who was barred from running, might have been a more formidable threat as a heavyweight figure. However, whoever wins, those in power remain confident that he will not pose a problem. Thus, the Islamic Republic will be preserved.

  • How Beijing’s New Trespass Laws Will Affect the South China Sea?

    How Beijing’s New Trespass Laws Will Affect the South China Sea?

    The politics of the South China Sea are interesting to observe because we often witness numerous measures that appear to escalate towards war, only for tensions to suddenly diminish. This has been a frequent occurrence since the 2010s, during which China has re-emerged as a political and economic superpower. China harbors strong desires for control over Taiwan and the entire South China Sea but clearly fears direct conflict with the United States. Consequently, China introduces measures or claims to assert authority in these disputed areas, even though it cannot effectively implement or enforce them, merely to maintain its claims.

    However, the recent trespass laws, which allow foreigners accused of illegally entering Chinese waters to be detained for up to 60 days without trial, mark a further escalation in tensions in this fiercely contested waterway. The term “Chinese Water” is confusing. China’s Coast Guard Law, introduced in 2021 and serving as the basis for current regulations, applies to “maritime areas under Chinese jurisdiction” but lacks a clear definition. Maritime areas typically refer to the shores and economic zones of the country, but according to China, they encompass the entire South China Sea and the waters around Taiwan. This ambiguity creates significant confusion and tensions among neighboring countries and their fishing communities.

    As the law came into effect on Saturday, the neighboring Philippines, which strictly opposes China’s claim on the South China Sea, has stepped up patrols in the region ahead of the rollout of a new Chinese regulation empowering its coast guard to detain foreigners accused of trespassing. Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has previously characterized the new Chinese regulations as concerning and an escalation of the situation. He has also stated that any deliberate killing of a Filipino citizen would be very close to “An Act of War”. There will be no doubts about that. Already, there are concerns that as maritime confrontations near the shores of the Philippines increase, so does the risk of a miscalculation that could inadvertently provoke conflict. There have been reports of Philippine vessels being humiliated by water cannons from the Chinese coast guard. Representatives of fishing groups, who are likely to be most affected by the recent regulation, have told Philippine media this week that they fear being detained at sea but have no option but to continue, as their livelihoods depend on it. This situation puts pressure on the Philippine government to enhance security measures in their waters. Other countries around the South China Sea are also observing the situation to understand China’s intentions behind the law.

    Even though there is much tension, the South China Sea remains devoid of disastrous war primarily due to the political stalemate unfolding in the region. China, the superpower seeking control over the entire region under Beijing’s authority, finds itself deadlocked by counter moves from the United States, which have strengthened neighboring countries along the coasts of the China Seas such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Countries like Indonesia and Vietnam, remaining neutral, would lean towards the US if a conflict were to arise. Incidents such as firing water cannons at Philippine vessels have prompted warnings from the US, which has affirmed it would defend the Philippines, a treaty ally, in the event of an armed attack on its public vessels, aircraft, armed forces, or Coast Guard in the South China Sea. Therefore, a full-scale war would ultimately be detrimental to China, a fact acknowledged by China itself. Thus, China attempts to maintain its objectives through laws and unsupported claims.

    As neighboring countries protest the trespass law, China’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Mao Ning, has stated that the trespass laws are intended “To standardize the administrative law-enforcement procedures of Coast Guard agencies and better uphold order at sea”, and reassured that “Individuals and entities have no need for concern as long as they have not done anything illicit”. However, they have not defined what constitutes illicit.

    Even though the chance of a full-scale war remains low in the current situation, it is certain that the new trespass law will open up a “Lawfare”. The implementation of the new law could also prompt the Philippines to advance its own legal challenges against China. The Philippines has previously indicated it is considering filing a new legal challenge against China in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, accusing it of environmental damage within the Philippine’s exclusive economic zone, the waters that stretch for 200 nautical miles (370 km) from a state’s coastline, where a country has special rights to exploit resources and build. Though From the Chinese perspective, the trespass laws are expected to maintain China’s aspirations alive.

  • South Korea Joins the Race for Minerals in Central Asia

    South Korea Joins the Race for Minerals in Central Asia

    Central Asia now resembles a woman whom everyone desires to engage with. As the curtains imposed by the Soviet Union and Russia are loosening, Central Asia is starting to expose itself to the world. More and more countries are making diplomatic efforts with Central Asian countries to secure valuable mineral resources, including lithium, which is considered the “Vibranium” of the electric vehicle era, to benefit their economies.

    While Russia dominated Central Asia for three decades after the region broke away from the Soviet Union, they did not put much effort into utilizing the mineral resources that could have brought wealth to these countries. Instead, Russia bound them with political influence, which damaged their relationships with the West and hindered investments that could have funded projects. As a result, these countries remained poor despite having valuable mineral resources.

    The entry of China, which has a voracious appetite for minerals as raw materials for its vast manufacturing hubs, marked a significant shift. By leveraging its friendship with Russia, China started to explore the potential of Central Asia. Their investment through the Belt and Road Initiative became a wake-up call for Central Asian countries to welcome parties other than Russia, leading to more opportunities.

    Following Russia’s war in Ukraine and its subsequent weakening, Central Asian countries are now eagerly looking to collaborate with multiple parties. The United States has launched efforts to facilitate integration with these countries, aiming to reduce Russia’s influence. Turkey, which already maintains emotional ties to Central Asia, and India, aspiring to become a superpower, are also setting up measures to explore opportunities in the region. Additionally, South Korea, a small resource-poor country with a large production sector highly reliant on mineral imports, is the latest entrant seeking opportunities in Central Asia.

    South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol is currently on a trip to Central Asia, starting Monday, to hold talks on strengthening diplomatic ties and cooperating in areas such as energy and minerals. Yoon already visited Turkmenistan, a country largely isolated from the outside world but rich in important minerals, with the first lady for a state visit before heading to Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. In Kazakhstan, Yoon discussed with President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev measures to expand supply chain cooperation for critical minerals such as lithium and uranium, which are in high demand for the technology industry in South Korea. Yoon’s  office announced the signing of 35 memorandums of understanding (MOUs) in areas such as supply chain cooperation and lithium exploration and commercialization. The trip started in the Turkmen capital of Ashgabat and will conclude in Uzbekistan.

    While for Central Asia, Korea is another important partner to invest in and improve infrastructure, Yoon’s trip to Central Asia represents Seoul’s latest global effort to expand diplomatic ties and partnerships, aiming to secure access to markets, energy supplies, and other resources. Yoon’s office announced plans to host a summit with leaders of five Central Asian countries next year in South Korea. It’s interesting that the United States, Seoul’s key ally, has assured a similar plan in Central Asia, aiming to create a bloc that can counter political and economic dependence on Russia. While the United States has made deals with Central Asia, the benefits will also naturally extend to Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, as they are key allies of the United States in Asia. However, South Korea has taken an additional step in its relationship; it represents the country, booming with electronics, batteries, and semiconductors, placing high value on its relationship with Central Asian countries.

    Many believe South Korea is counteracting China’s influence in the region. Like China, South Korea is warming diplomatic relationships and leading summits with countries that can contribute to its economy and where it can introduce its soft power. Before leaving for Central Asia, Yoon declared a policy vision, the “K-Silk Road,” which he said would combine South Korea’s technical expertise with Central Asia’s resource wealth. And it must be considered as the continuation of South Korea’s hosting of its first summit with the leaders of 48 African nations this month, during which it vowed to increase development aid for Africa to $10 billion over the next six years as it looks to tap the continent’s mineral resources and potential as an export market.

    South Korea’s entry is definitely a hopeful sign for Central Asia. The region, rich in resources but lacking the necessary investments and infrastructure, can benefit significantly from South Korea’s involvement and reduce its reliance on Chinese money, which has already created dependency. In return, resource-poor South Korea can gain an advantage in the global race for technology domination. However, South Korea has taken an additional step in its relationship; it represents the country, booming with electronics, batteries, and semiconductors, placing high value on its relationship with Central Asian countries.

    In recent years, South Korea has experienced shortages of key materials, including graphite and urea solution, when China decided to restrict exports. In both cases, authorities scrambled to find alternative sources to limit disruptions to businesses. Thus, it has become crucial for Korea to seek new sources, then why not untapped Central Asia?

  • What’s Happening Between Modi and the RSS?

    What’s Happening Between Modi and the RSS?

    India’s general election is completed, and Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP)  have formed a government. However, the result is still causing wonder among political analysts in India. Everyone predicted a third Modi government, but no one expected BJP to fall below the majority. When we analyze the election results in India, we can understand that there was no significant anti-incumbency and the opposition was not strong enough to challenge Modi. Yet, Modi did not achieve a single-handed majority like his previous two terms. Indian media have been searching for reasons from the day of vote counting, and one interesting factor they found is that the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh), the parent Hindu nationalist organization of BJP, did not cooperate with BJP as they did in previous terms. This is evident from the dipping vote percentages, the loss of votes in strongholds, and the failure of BJP candidates who were selected over RSS nominees.

    Narendra Modi entered the public space as an ordinary worker of the RSS, and the RSS supported him in attaining all the positions he got in his political career. He still works with the RSS’s agendas, no doubt about it. However, a strong, disciplined organization will never like individuals who grow larger than the organization itself. Over the last two terms, Modi has grown larger than the RSS, and of course, larger than the BJP. The last government was criticized for not being an NDA (Alliance led by BJP) government or a BJP government, but a Modi government. All decisions were taken single-handedly by Modi and his team. Modi was raised as an idol, and all the campaigns for the last general election were in the name of Modi, like “Modi ki Guarantee”, Some people started chanting his name with slogans for Hindu gods, like “Har Har Modi” instead of “Har Har Mahadev”, which definitely hurts a Hindu organization. This idolization became more evident when Modi took the priest role in the inauguration of the Ayodhya temple, the biggest election topic raised by the BJP. Modi himself even announced during the campaign that he is a representative of God. Further worsening the situation, during the campaign, the BJP chief and Modi supporter, JP Nadda, publicly stated that the BJP had grown to a level where they did not need assistance from the RSS. This was definitely a statement that could hurt RSS associates, who were already angry that Modi did not do enough with the RSS’s agendas, despite having a superior majority in Parliament. This resulted in dipping vote percentages and losses in the BJP’s secure seats.

    Many believe the tiff between BJP and RSS is a result of ego clashes among leaders of both organizations. Despite RSS maintaining calm during the election period and avoiding statements, after the results, they criticized the bitter campaigning by both the ruling party and the opposition in the recent general election. In a rare public comment on politics, though it included criticism of the opposition, it was clear the target was BJP. Mohan Bhagwat, the chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), also demanded urgent attention to be given to the strife-torn remote state of Manipur, a security failure during Modi’s rule that has often been reported as neglect by Modi. In his first comments after the election results last week, Bhagwat said the election should be viewed as a competition and not a war, and criticized parties for comments that stoked religious divisions. He stated on Monday in Nagpur that the kind of statements made in campaigns, the manner in which both sides criticized each other, and the lack of concern for social divisions resulting from their actions raised serious concerns about the country’s operation. “The opposition is not an opponent”, he said, in what appeared to be a dig at the BJP, which sharply criticized the opposition and even called “Congress Mukt Bharat ”, which means  the washing out of the main opposition party from Indian Politics. 

    Analysts believe that within BJP, a group has developed under the leadership of Modi and Shah, which is cornering the RSS leadership. Interestingly, RSS has not maintained the same level of firmness against the Indian National Congress in previous times. Therefore, if the relationship between RSS and BJP worsens, it will have a seismic impact on Indian politics, although the likelihood of this happening is low. Both parties know they need each other. Even though Modi garners neutral votes, there are not many other leaders in BJP who can cultivate the same popularity among the common people. Considering this is Modi’s last term according to BJP’s age limit program, BJP cannot sustain its machinery and leadership without RSS. Possibly, the successor of Modi will be decided by RSS. For RSS, if BJP is not in power, they will face challenges similar to those during the Indian National Congress’s time. Therefore, both RSS and BJP need each other, and despite any discontent between leaders, it is believed, they will ultimately cooperate with each other.

  • How the Hostage Deal Splits the Israeli Government

    How the Hostage Deal Splits the Israeli Government

    The prolonged war and failure to save hostages are troubling Israeli politics. The ongoing conflict in Gaza, which began as a retaliation against Hamas’ terrorist attack on October 7, is not seeing an end in the near future, and the hostages taken by Hamas are still in their custody. Israel’s mission in Gaza aims to eliminate future threats and rescue the hostages. However, many months have passed, and Israel is not any closer to achieving its objectives. The death toll in Gaza has risen, and international pressure for a ceasefire is mounting, with protests emerging against the prolonged war within the border. Consequently, the war-time cabinet, formed after the Hamas attack, is showing signs of division. For Israel, rescuing the hostages held by Hamas is paramount. The pressure to release them might lead Israel to propose the current hostage deal, a deal with terrorists, which Hamas has yet to agree to. Even though the people of Gaza suffer under harsh conditions and Hamas shows no willingness to cooperate, the mounting death toll adds to the global criticism faced by the Israeli government. 

    As the war drags on, the government’s unity is fracturing, leading to expected splits and resignations. In the latest incident, the far-right Israeli war cabinet member Bezalel Smotrich, upon whom Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu now relies to maintain the government after the resignations of more moderate ministers who actively sought a post-war Gaza plan, declared his opposition to the proposed hostage deal over the weekend. Smotrich’s remarks, made during a Knesset (Parliament) committee meeting, came amid the fallout from the resignation of former army chief of staff, critical of Netanyahu, Benny Gantz, from the war cabinet. Gantz’s departure, as the leader of the center-right National Unity party, leaves Netanyahu with enough seats in his coalition but makes him even more dependent on the support of Far-right allies, such as Smotrich, serving as the finance minister, and Itamar Ben-Gvir, holding the position of national security minister. These allies have repeatedly threatened to withdraw support over any ceasefire deal that involves hostage negotiations. Relying on these far-right, war-demanding factions will also disturb the United States and other Western countries.

    Smotrich’s concern reflects a common concern among Israel’s right wings: Hamas demanding the release of hundreds of murderers and terrorists in Israeli custody in exchange for freeing the hostages. He labeled the negotiated deal as “Collective Suicide”, fearing it would result in the murder of Jews. According to Smotrich, when Hamas seeks to end the war while still thriving in Gaza, it indicates the group is arming itself, digging tunnels, and acquiring rockets, posing a threat to Jewish lives. 

    The rescue of hostages happened on the same weekend as Gantz’s departure, giving Netanyahu some advantage. However, Smotrich’s remarks further cast doubts on the government. It was hoped that the rescue, where Israel freed four Israeli hostages held in Gaza in an operation that resulted in the deaths of over 270 Palestinians and the injury of hundreds more according to Gaza’s health ministry, would calm down protests from others. But his remarks highlight Netanyahu’s diminishing political maneuverability just 24 hours after the Israeli media’s celebratory headlines about the hostages’ rescue. Netanyahu, initially celebrated for the operation’s success, met each hostage as cameras rolled. While there was a threat from the allies, in circumstances for freeing hostages, recent opinion polls had shown some progress in rehabilitating his image, which was previously low before the Hamas attack.

    While Hamas continues to negotiate while holding 120 hostages, the Right wing demands replicating such an operation for the remaining hostages instead of a hostage deal. Columnists in the Israeli press have cast doubt on the idea that the hostage rescue operation eliminates the need for a hostage deal. But it is expected that captives will be guarded more closely, making a negotiated deal even more crucial. Netanyahu appears to be moving to consolidate his grip on the government amid reports that he is considering scrapping the emergency war cabinet in which Gantz served. Gantz was well-regarded by some Western diplomats, particularly in the US, where he was perceived by the Biden administration as a voice of reason. The United States is also apprehensive about the growing influence wielded by Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. Besides the hostage deal issue, in further signs of tensions within the coalition, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced his intention to defy Netanyahu and Oppose a contentious bill aimed at conscripting a limited number of ultra-Orthodox men into the military.

    The split in the case of the Israel-Gaza conflict is not only within Israel but also throughout the world. The global left and liberals are calling for an end to the Gaza attack, while the right expresses concerns about negotiating with a terrorist organization and setting a dangerous precedent. Although Israel’s proposed hostage deal is a possible solution in the current situation in Gaza, the chance of carrying it out is diminishing due to political splits in Israel’s government. Linked to the political moves in Israel is how Hamas will interpret recent events, including the hostage rescue mission. Some have speculated that the raid and the high number of casualties may be a blow to the morale of Hamas, while others have suggested that Hamas leaders may be more interested in the splits in Israel’s political establishment. And these events will possibly bring blame on Israel. Israel now can’t live peacefully with Hamas-supported Gaza, and Israel’s action in Gaza will bring more global blame to Israel. Hence, Netanyahu’s optimal course forward lies in a well-structured Gaza plan complemented by a hostage deal, even in the face of opposition from his own government.

  • The Balloon War is Heating Up in Korea

    The Balloon War is Heating Up in Korea

    When considering one of the most tense borders, the border between the Koreas undoubtedly stands out. The democratic Republic of Korea, also known as South Korea, and the Communist Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, widely referred to as North Korea, epitomize the poignant saga of separated brethren, yet remain in an unyielding state of division. Both Koreas yearn for reunification, but they are adamant about maintaining their respective ruling systems, which presents a significant obstacle.

    Each Korea employs various tactics to influence people on the other side and aims for reunification. Previous military efforts in the 1950s culminated in the famous Korean War. Now, with both countries heavily armed and allied with powerful nations, war is not a viable option. Both sides understand that conflict would lead to regional collapse. Instead, they employ different strategies, one of which involves balloons. Yes, balloons are used as a weapon in a “Balloon War”, but not a lethal one. As air flows freely across both Koreas and balloons are used as a tool, South Koreans utilize them to convey information to North Koreans, who live under a tightly controlled regime that restricts access to external information sources. North Korea views this practice seriously, as it can heavily influence its people, and thus, they denounce this act as littering on their land. This tactic has undoubtedly heightened tensions between these two hostile neighbors or estranged brothers.

    The propaganda mission from South Korean activists turned into a “balloon war” when North Korea sent balloons back with waste, including litter and human waste. The balloon war is intensifying, according to the latest reports. According to South Korean media, last Thursday, the Free North Korea Movement, a group of North Korean defectors, declared that it had dispatched 10 large balloons filled with 200,000 leaflets criticizing the regime of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, along with US dollar bills and flash drives loaded with K-pop. The group further disclosed its dispatch of balloons loaded with approximately 2,000 USB flash drives containing songs by South Korean singer Lim Young-woong, along with other K-pop songs and K-dramas, into North Korea on May 10. This action potentially triggered the recent surge of garbage-filled balloons in the opposite direction.

    In retaliation, North Korea released almost 1,000 balloons containing rubbish, cigarette butts, and what appeared to be excrement to protest the groups in the South. There are reports that fears are growing that the North could resume its “Dirty” campaign in response to the activists actions. According to South Korea’s Yonhap news agency, North Korea was ready to dispatch “One hundred times the quantity of toilet paper and filth” it had previously used against the South.

    There was a brief period when South Koreans avoided the balloon mission after the South Korean government banned the process of disturbing their neighbor. However, the court later scrapped the ban, leading to further escalation of the balloon mission from the South. North Korea’s actions have only intensified the situation. The tit-for-tat balloon campaign or balloon war  has deteriorated bilateral relations, leading South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk Yeol, to suspend a 2018 agreement aimed at easing cross-border tensions. Earlier reports suggested that North Korea agreed to temporarily halt balloon war following Seoul’s warning of “Unendurable” measures, such as the resumption of loud propaganda and pop music broadcasts via loudspeakers positioned along the demilitarized zone (DMZ), a strip of land dividing the peninsula since the end of the 1950-53 Korean War. The latest decision by Yoon Suk Yeol means that the South could resume live-fire drills, as well as restarting anti-Kim broadcasts near the border. Restarting the broadcasts would enrage the North, which has previously threatened to destroy the loudspeakers using artillery if they were not turned off. South Korea says it will restart loudspeaker propaganda broadcasts into the North after Pyongyang sent hundreds more rubbish-filled balloons across the border. “We will install loudspeakers against North Korea today and carry out the broadcast”, the president’s office said in a statement on Sunday. Both sides blame each other and escalate measures to increase the suffering of the other.

    On Saturday, the Seoul city government, along with officials in the neighboring Gyeonggi Province, issued a text alert to residents, cautioning them about potential new balloon sightings. South Koreans are quite angry at North Korea, not only because Korean content is considered trash by the North. According to Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, “North Korea is making another low-class provocation with trash balloons against our civilian areas”. At the same time, Seoul’s military calmed down citizens by stating that there were no substances harmful to safety in the latest batch of balloons, which contained waste paper and plastic. However, it cautioned the public to keep their distance and promptly report any balloons to the authorities. All these actions by the “Balloon War” have caused ties between the two Koreas to dip to one of their lowest points in years, with diplomacy long stalled and Kim ramping up his weapons testing and development, while the South draws closer to major security allies Washington and Tokyo.

  • Third Modi Government Inaugurated With a Multitude of Ministers

    Third Modi Government Inaugurated With a Multitude of Ministers

    Narendra Modi commenced his third term in the Prime Minister’s office after completing two full terms, marking him as the first prime minister to achieve this since Jawaharlal Nehru, the founding Prime Minister of the Republic. The oath ceremony took place at the Rashtrapati Bhavan, the President’s Palace, on the evening of June 9th. The Prime Ministers and Presidents of neighboring countries, including the Maldives President who has taken an anti-India stance, attended the ceremony. A large crowd, including politicians from different parties, movie stars, and businesspeople, witnessed the oath ceremony. An interesting fact is the inclusion of a mammoth 71 ministers in the third Modi government, which has many members from parties allied with the Bharatiya Janata Party. It’s clear that the third term will be more of an NDA (National Democratic Alliance) government, unlike the previous BJP-dominated NDA governments, where the BJP single-handedly had the majority.

    Modi’s new government retained key figures from the last government. Members from almost every alliance party, as well as BJP leaders from states where elections are scheduled in the upcoming months, were included. The ministries for senior ministers haven’t changed. Rajnath Singh, senior and former Home Minister, took the oath after Modi and is expected to be the second person in Modi’s ministry, continuing in the Defense Ministry.

    Modi’s right-hand man Amit Shah, the RSS (the BJP’s parental organization) nominee Nitin Gadkari, the female face of Modi’s government Nirmala Sitharaman, and bureaucrat-turned-politician Subramanian Jaishankar are all included in the new ministry with the same roles they held in the last Modi government. Other important inclusions are Shivraj Singh Chauhan, who ruled the state of Madhya Pradesh for 15 years and achieved repeated victories but was forced out from the role of Chief Minister; he is now included in Modi’s ministry. The leader, who was once expected to become Prime Minister, was awarded the important Agriculture Ministry. Other former Chief Ministers who were removed from power by the BJP Central body, like Manohar Lal Khattar from Haryana and Sarbananda Sonowal from Assam, are also included in the Cabinet. Former Chief Ministers from alliance parties, such as HD Kumaraswamy from Karnataka and Jitan Ram Manjhi from Bihar, have been awarded cabinet ranks. Another important inclusion is the current BJP President JP Nadda, who is expected to step down from his post and has been given the Health Ministry.

    Modi’s third government ensures participation from almost all states. Out of the 71 total ministers, 30 will be in cabinet rank and 41 will be Ministers of State (MoS), with 5 of those having independent charges. Among the 72 ministers, 7 will be women. As in previous terms, women are underrepresented. Modi has ensured representation of almost all major communities, including Dalits, Brahmins, Christians, Sikhs, etc., but there are no Muslims.

    Despite significant pressure from major alliance parties, the BJP has retained all important ministries. However, they were forced to scrap the decision to reduce the number of ministries and cut costs. It is expected that, as in the previous Modi government, there will be a reshuffle before state assembly elections, including ministers from the states approaching elections. So far, apart from the NCP, which was not given cabinet rank ministers, there have been no significant objections, suggesting that Modi and his team have successfully managed the demands of their alliance partners.

    Modi’s third term will be interesting as they cannot push the Hindu nationalist agendas as aggressively as in the previous term, but it’s hard to imagine a Modi rule without promoting Hindu agendas. For the most part, India’s next five years will be governed under a common minimum program, with consultation from all parties in the NDA. Political observers are predicting more horse-trading of MPs to increase the number of BJP MPs. Some believe that if Modi can’t rule independently, he might resign, and there could be another prime minister within these five years. However, it is certain that Modi will not be awarded another term because he will exceed the age limit set by the BJP. As all the potential successors, except Yogi Adityanath, are in the cabinet, the performance of these ministers will be closely monitored. In short, an important five years is impending for Indian politics.