Author: Caracal

Will More Recognition Make Palestinian Statehood A Reality?

The core of the Israel-Palestine issue is religion, a very sentimental issue, but everyone outside these religious fundamentalisms finds a two-state solution feasible: Israel for Jews and Palestine for Muslims – two independent states. Plans for this have existed since the beginning of the conflict. While the 1948 plan for Arab statehood was supported by Israel, it was rejected by the Arabs, who sought full control of the land in the name of Palestine. Now, Palestine is suffering for that bad decision. It is widely understood that the lack of statehood or UN membership for Palestine is one of the main reasons there are no significant diplomatic efforts to quickly resolve Israel’s war in Gaza. Since it is a conflict within Israel’s borders, other countries have limits on intervening in their domestic matters. Many believe that recognizing Palestine, which includes Gaza and the West Bank, as an independent country would make Israel and Palestine equal and help avoid further conflicts.

However, unlike in 1948, Israel is not ready to recognize Palestine in modern times, and it has influenced Western countries to refrain from recognizing Palestine. Islamic countries, as well as Asian, African, and Latin American countries, have previously recognized Palestine, but until Israel does, Palestinian statehood remains distant. Mutual reluctance to acknowledge each other’s existence, a highly fragmented Palestinian leadership, and the rising influence of terrorist organizations like Hamas have nearly ended the scope of the two-state solution. However, in a turn of events, some European countries with strong ties to the United States and Israel are now moving to recognize Palestine, providing a significant blow to Israel and hope for Palestine.

The Norwegian, Spanish, and Irish governments have made headlines by announcing their intention to recognize the state of Palestine, and they have commenced actions for diplomatic procedures. These European countries, which have traditionally allied with the United States and have strong diplomatic relationships with Israel, are now choosing not to follow the usual pattern of Western countries that align with the United States. Although European Union countries like Poland, Hungary, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Sweden, as well as NATO member states like Turkey, have previously recognized Palestine, Western European countries have generally avoided doing so. The recent decisions by these three governments, Norway, Spain and Ireland, to recognize Palestine were influenced by their respective policies and increasing protests against Israel’s actions in solidarity with Gaza.

Norway, which has always advocated for human rights, decided to recognize Palestine in connection with the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. They have shown interest in this issue for years, having hosted the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations in the early 1990s that resulted in the Oslo Accords, which gave Palestine sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza. Norway has played a crucial role in Middle East diplomacy. Amid the Gaza conflict, Norway emphasized that recognizing Palestine is essential to support moderate voices. Prime Minister, Jonas Gahr Støre, advocated for a two-state solution and peaceful coexistence.

Spain’s Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, a leftist leader who has been vocal against Israel’s actions for months, has frequently accused Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, of carrying out a “massacre” in Gaza and jeopardizing the two-state solution. These statements are usually not expected from Western leaders, and his actions are seen as a continuation of his statements.

The third country following this momentum is the Republic of Ireland. The Irish Prime Minister, Simon Harris, expects other countries to join Ireland, Spain, and Norway in recognizing a Palestinian state in the coming weeks. However, he also supports Israel’s call for neighborhood safety and the return of hostages

While these government decisions are made in the context of the ongoing Gaza war, experts believe that Hamas’ attacks on Israel and Israel’s retaliation have severely affected Palestine’s statehood dreams. When the Abraham Accords, brokered by the Trump administration, prospered and Arab countries increasingly started to recognize Israel, many believed it would lead to peace in the region. There were even reports that Saudi Arabia, the big, rich, powerful Arab country, was closer to starting official relations with Israel and demanded recognition of Palestine from Israel. That was the best move for Palestine to date. Many believe that if the momentum induced by Trump in the Israel-Arab relationship had continued, or if there were a second Trump administration, there would be a high chance for Palestine’s statehood in return for Saudi Arabia and others recognizing Israel and more treaties in the region regarding safety. But this collapsed when Iran-linked Hamas, the rulers of Gaza, conducted a terrorist attack in Israel. Now Israel believes that even with its recognition, Hamas will still pose a threat to Israel, and tragic incidents like October 7th will happen again. So there is no chance for giving recognition to Palestine in return for normalization with Saudi Arabia. Additionally, during the flourishing of the Abraham Accords, there were reports that Western countries like the UK were likely to recognize Palestine, which would have been a huge leap for Palestinian statehood.

Now, three important European states have unilaterally decided to recognize Palestinian statehood. Though the movement may not immediately bring about the realization of a Palestinian state, as of now, around 140 of the 193 UN member states have recognized Palestinian statehood and yet Palestine has not been established. However, there will be several political impacts. For Israel, amidst protests about prolonged war, Israelis are now aware that their country is increasingly being treated as a pariah and becoming ever more diplomatically isolated. Western countries, the long term allies are also ready to work against them. A big warning for Israel. In Europe, this movement will further deepen political divisions, as there are predictions of far-right progress in upcoming general elections, with most of them harboring animosity towards Muslims and migrants. In Spain, the split will further evolve due to serious discontent over the President’s recent actions. Therefore, there will be political implications for these countries in both domestic and international politics. For Palestine, the free state will only work with the recognition of Israel; otherwise, there is no chance. The Western European countries that recognize Palestine will merely add some numbers to their supporter’s list.

May 28, 2024
West Bengal And Its Criminal Politics

West Bengal, an eastern province in India, was once considered the think tank of the country, producing a row of talents that India was proud of, including Rabindranath Tagore, Asia’s first Nobel laureate in literature, and Oscar-winning director Satyajit Ray, among many others. However, now West Bengal is infamous for politically affiliated criminal gangs and their lethal conflicts. Almost every month, there are reports of violent political gang wars, with the government led by Mamata Banerjee, leader of the All India Trinamool Congress, frequently accused of supporting these criminal activities. Following last year’s notorious Panchayat (Local Body) elections, it was reported that almost 50 people lost their lives. Political violence in rural Bengal continues unabated. Local body leaders are being killed, party offices are being set on fire, and opposition party workers are being brutally attacked. Events like those in Sandeshkhali, where party leaders turn into powerful authorities and rule through criminal activities, preventing other parties from conducting political activities, are not isolated incidents. These issues persist as West Bengal faces another significant election for the Lok Sabha in Delhi.

Along with Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, West Bengal is one of the few states in India where polling is spread across all seven phases of the marathon election, largely due to security concerns arising from political feuds. The Election Commission chose to conduct elections by selecting a small number of constituencies in each phase to provide tight security for the election process and to allow security agencies to take complete control of violence-prone hotspots, thus avoiding deadly fights. Despite tight security by different state and central agencies, sporadic incidents of violence were reported across the state during the six completed phases. The Election Commission of India reported receiving nearly 1,000 complaints following the last phase alone, and police noted clashes and threats in various areas. Each phase has witnessed significant violence, whereas the rest of the nation, including volatile Kashmir, has hosted elections peacefully. Interestingly, despite the high political tensions, a higher voter turnout was recorded in Bengal, in contrast to the lower responses seen in the rest of India.

West Bengal is a crucial battleground in the Lok Sabha elections, contributing 42 seats to the 545-seat Lok Sabha (House of Commons), making it the third-largest contributor after Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), aiming for a third consecutive term, needs to secure more seats from the state, having won only 18 out of 42 seats previously. The All India Trinamool Congress (AITC), the current ruling party in the state, is also strongly contesting the ongoing general election. The intense rivalry between these parties is leading to disastrous street fights and other criminal activities in the state. Formerly dominant parties like the Indian National Congress, and India’s biggest communist party, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), are also contesting the Lok Sabha election, but this time as allies, turning it into a three-way fight between the BJP, AITC, and the CPIM-Congress Alliance.

While the ruling All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) and BJP are now leading the violent politics, many experts believe that the past Communist years, which lasted for a long time, laid the groundwork for the current situation. The Communist Party of India (Marxist), or shortly CPIM, dominated the political sphere from the 1960s onward, displacing the Indian National Congress (INC) in the state. Like most communist governments worldwide, CPIM established groups capable of quashing political opposition in their strongholds. In some places, these groups evolved into more violent factions, including Naxals, who opposed the Indian Union. Even though CPIM distanced itself from Naxals, CPIM-supported groups, criminal gangs became increasingly common in West Bengal. The long rule of a single party, the bureaucratic culture of communism, economic decline of the state, and lack of employment all contributed to the evolution of political gang culture in Bengal. When CPIM was removed from power after a long tenure, many of these gangs migrated to the All India Trinamool Congress, where they continued their criminal activities. Interestingly, these gangs then started to target CPIM, their former supporters. However, with Narendra Modi’s seismic entry into national politics, the Bengal landscape was also shaken. The BJP replaced CPIM as the prime opposition party, possessing the finances, ideology, and power to challenge Trinamool Congress. And Bengal became the arena for these two heavyweights, further splitting the gangs into AITC-linked and BJP-linked factions. Many analysts fear that the BJP’s entry into Bengal may escalate political gang wars along communal lines, as the party represents Hindu nationalism, while Bengal’s large Muslim population, many of whom migrated from Bangladesh, stands firmly with the Trinamool Congress, paving the way for a potential communal clash in the future.

We cannot deem it democracy when violence becomes the means to seize power. However, in Bengal, violence is increasingly becoming a tool for political parties to assert control and uphold their dominance. Political parties shamelessly nurture individuals associated with violence. Police and judiciary intervention is limited due to extensive support for gangs from lawmakers. We cannot expect an end to this cycle as both state and central governments are complicit in using these criminals, regardless of their party affiliations. However, The decline of Bengal persists, with no concerted efforts to rectify the situation.

May 27, 2024
Why Pakistanis Were Targeted In Kyrgyzstan

Former Soviet Union republics are well-known destinations for South Asia’s medical education aspirants. Students from South Asian countries fly in large numbers to Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan to pursue medical degrees at a cheaper rate and with better quality than in their home countries. The governments in the former Soviet Union countries promote this because these students provide a significant amount of money to their economy. However, although South Asian countries value and respect doctors educated in former Soviet states, the poor living conditions and overpopulation lead many of these doctors to seek opportunities in other countries or to stay in the countries where they graduated. While Indian students, who are comparatively better off financially, often move to other countries, most Pakistanis prefer to stay. As a predominantly Muslim former central state, Kyrgyzstan, is a popular destination for Pakistani students, who are there in significant numbers. Although, the Kyrgyz people, struggling with economic difficulties and a lack of jobs, are not happy with this situation.

Long-simmering xenophobia in Kyrgyzstan erupted in a violent clash between Kyrgyz youth and Pakistani students. The harmful fight left dozens injured and prompted hundreds of Pakistani students to flee from the country. According to a statement issued by the Kyrgyzstan Ministry of Internal Affairs, the issue began on the night of May 12, when a comparatively minor incident on the street led to the mishappenings. Following the issues on the street, four Kyrgyz youths allegedly pursued the Pakistani nationals into their dormitory and proceeded to cause mayhem. According to reports, the four Kyrgyz youths who entered the dorm stole an estimated $2,800 in cash as well as personal property of the residents. The Pakistani version of events claims the issue ensued when the Kyrgyz youths allegedly began harassing female dorm residents, which developed into a violent clash between the Kyrgyz youth group and Pakistani students. Kyrgyz individuals too injured in the fight, a videos went viral through social media, it sparked outrage among some Kyrgyz people who consider the May 12 incident as a “Humiliation for their Nation”. At the elevation of Rage, One week later, on the night of May 17, a mob of about 700 people approached the same dormitory, demanding justice. They proceeded to attack any foreign student they could find, instilling significant fear in the foreign population.

Kyrgyz authorities are trying to defuse tension that could severely impact their foreign relations and reassure the foreign students who contribute significantly to the economy. Kyrgyzstan, in a poor economic condition since the collapse of the Soviet Union, is actively seeking investments to exploit its valuable minerals and needs foreign collaboration to improve its economic situation. They are engaging in discussions with representatives from China, the United States, India to attract more investments. Despite Pakistan’s economic challenges, its middle-class population can help support Kyrgyzstan’s educational institutions. However, the targeting of Pakistani students, who have been reported in criminal activities in other countries they migrate to, is a significant blow to Kyrgyzstan and could further damage the country’s image and deter potential investors. Understanding the gravity of the situation, the deputy head of the Kyrgyz Cabinet, Edil Baisalov, visited the dormitory on May 19, offering an apology and extending a security guarantee. “Your parents and relatives should know that there is no threat to you in Kyrgyzstan, and that authorities bear full responsibility for your well-being. The events of one night do not reflect the attitude of our people towards you”, Baisalov assured the students and teachers present.

The problem escalated to the diplomatic level as well. When the media, especially social media, spread attack visuals and student comments rapidly, it filled their home countries with fear. The day after the attack, Pakistani Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif expressed concern on Twitter about “The situation of Pakistani students in Bishkek” and directed the country’s ambassador to assist the victims. Pakistani authorities also organized charter flights to bring home any student who felt unsafe continuing their studies in Bishkek. Over 20000 Pakistani students in Kyrgyzstan had opted to return home. Kyrgyzstan President Sadyr Japarov announced that Pakistani students injured in the melee would not have to pay for medical care. He also blamed unnamed opposition forces for stoking the xenophobic outburst and vowed that any repetition of such violence would be swiftly crushed. However, it seems that more xenophobic incidents have been reported, targeting Indian and other foreign nationals as well.

There are reports that resentment is building among Kyrgyz people over the perception that foreigners, especially from South Asia, are displacing Kyrgyz workers in some sectors of the economy. While Kyrgyzstan is a major source of labor migrants working in Russia, the Persian Gulf, and elsewhere abroad, the Central Asian nation is also attracting labor migrants to fill some of the most menial jobs. Lack of jobs and prosperity often leads to hatred and xenophobia toward foreigners in many countries, and it is the same underlying reason for the violence in Kyrgyzstan. Pakistani students have become scapegoats for this violence, which is essentially an outburst of frustration from people leading difficult lives.

May 26, 2024
Does ICC’s Arrest Warrant Against Netanyahu Matter?

Gaza is crumbling into rubble in revenge by Israel. For approximately 1,200 Israeli citizens’ lives, 35,000 Palestinian lives have been taken by Israel, and the violence persists. It is found that no one can rein in Netanyahu’s wish to completely destroy Hamas and harshly punish Hamas-supporting civilians in Gaza. Ceasefire talks are looking completely halted now. The United Nations has proven once again to be a waste of money. On this occasion, where the world can’t do anything except watch the wrath of Israel, an important move happened in the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Chief Prosecutor, Karim Khan, has demanded the arrest of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other important leaders of Israel and Hamas.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a permanent tribunal with jurisdiction for prosecuting individuals for charges such as international crimes, crimes against humanity, genocides, wars, aggression, and more. With headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands, and more than 120 member states, it is considered a major step towards justice and human rights. Even though it was formed just two decades ago in 2002 as a continuation of the Rome Statute, it has faced severe criticism for being Eurocentric, racist, and biased. Many people have criticized the ICC as an organization that targets leaders of third-world countries and authoritarian regimes. Many believe it is another useless body like the United Nations. However, recently, at a time when the world seeks intervention from an international body to stop the bloody conflict between Israel and Palestine, the ICC has taken an important step against these leaders. This marks the first of its kind from the ICC against a Western-style democracy.

In a predicted vitriolic response, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, reacted to the accusations by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against him and the Israeli Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant. Netanyahu’s response was filled with evasions as he called the proposed charges “An attempt to deny Israel the basic right of self-defense”. The Israeli government does not recognize either operation in Gaza as a war; they are simply operating against a devastating terrorist organization, which is a proven threat to their people. Netanyahu stated that they are conducting the operation in accordance with all laws and claimed that Israel had taken unprecedented measures to ensure humanitarian assistance reaches those in need in Gaza. However, this claim is deemed unfounded in light of the evidence showing Israel’s obstruction of the delivery of food, medicine, and other vital supplies to the civilian population of Gaza, leading to famine and malnutrition in certain areas of the region. Israel’s claim does not seem to have impressed its biggest ally, the US, which has suggested making a port near Gaza to pass aid to Gaza and has often condemned the Netanyahu government for obstructing humanitarian aid and its some aid workers also killed in Israel’s attacks. In his reply to the ICC’s move, Netanyahu also played the usual card of antisemitism, accusing Khan of “Callously pouring gasoline on the fires of antisemitism that are raging across the world” and claiming that “Khan takes his place among the great antisemitism in modern times”.

The US followed suit; Joe Biden called the charges “Outrageous”, and the equivalence of Israel and Hamas made him even more angry. The US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, downplayed. The US government had long opposed the power granted to the court by its founding Rome Treaty to prosecute crimes committed in the territory of member states by nationals of non-member states, but Biden did not express any anger or confusion about welcoming ICC charges against the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, for war crimes in Ukraine. The United States and Israel’s mood were echoed by European countries, the majority of which are member states unlike the US and Israel. The German government repeated the “False Equivalence” charge, criticizing treating the Democratic state of Israel and the notorious terrorist organization, Hamas, the same. Acknowledging the autonomy and significance of the International Criminal Court, certain European governments, particularly France and Belgium, have issued statements endorsing it. While all major European leaders accepted the arrest warrant for Putin over war crimes in Ukraine, the government’s response this time has been more muted. The double standard is clear.

The whole scenario with ICC started with the petition filed by South Africa alleging Israel was breaching the genocide convention. The ICC’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, a British lawyer, has applied for warrants for the arrest of five people in connection with events in Gaza and Israel since Hamas’s October 7 attacks. Khan stated that he had “Reasonable grounds to believe” three Hamas leaders, Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif, and Ismail Haniyeh, bore criminal responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including extermination, murder, taking hostages, rape and sexual violence, torture, and cruel treatment. Furthermore, Khan declared that he had “Reasonable grounds to believe” that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, and Yoav Gallant, the Israeli Defense Minister, bear legal responsibility for war crimes committed during the ongoing conflict. These alleged crimes include “Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare”, intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population, and “Extermination and murder,” including deaths caused by starvation. Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas have all rejected these allegations.

The application now proceeds to one of the ICC’s pre-trial chambers for consideration by a panel of three judges. The arrest warrants may be approved in full, in part, or rejected. Many argue that the ICC doesn’t have much power because it lacks support from superpowers like the United States, Russia, China, and India. Though the blame will fall on Netanyahu’s shoulders if he is issued a warrant. That’s why US politicians threatened sanctions against ICC officials when the Trump administration was in charge. The Biden administration is willing to work in the same way with Congress to potentially impose sanctions against International Criminal Court officials over the prosecutor’s request for arrest warrants for Israeli leaders regarding the Gaza war. The US knows that even though it’s a mere body, the description of war will completely change after the ICC moves for the arrests of the Israeli Prime Minister.

Although Israel never ratified the court’s founding treaty, the ICC-recognized state of Palestine did sign up, and the court has jurisdiction over nationals of member states and crimes committed in their territory. The 124 states that do, however, are obliged to honor court arrest warrants if they are issued, which could severely curtail the ability of Netanyahu and Gallant to travel abroad. It is expected that the ICC’s arrest warrant will further deepen the country’s growing international isolation over its conduct in the war in Gaza. At the same time, domestic politicians support the president. Many in Israel, including staunch critics of Netanyahu, are outraged by what they see as a false equivalence between a terrorist organization and a democratically elected government. In the short term, it may well rally domestic support for the unpopular Prime minister.

May 25, 2024
How Could Taiwan’s New President Escalate Tensions With China?

Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te, took charge on Monday at the presidential office in central Taipei. Lai won January’s election in a three-way race, but his party, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), does not have a legislative majority. Instead, the two major opposition parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), now hold the most seats. Lai took over from his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen, whom he had served as vice-president. Both Lai and the new vice-president, Hsiao Bi-Khim, who previously served as Taiwan’s top envoy to Washington, and championed Taiwan’s sovereignty. Lai, known for his tougher stance against Beijing in the past, called for an independent Taiwan. However, now he seems to advocate a more moderate policy path focused on protecting the status quo, maintaining Taiwan’s sovereignty, and deterring Chinese aggression. During his inauguration speech at the Imperial Stadium, he did not avoid criticizing China and its interest in Taiwan, which assured discontent in mainland China.

Lai Ching-te urged China to “cease their political and military intimidation against Taiwan and to keep the world free from the fear of more war” in his inauguration speech. This strong warning could preclude the possibility of diplomatic resolutions through talks between Chinese and Taiwanese leaders. Lai’s speech affirmed the administration’s plans to build up its defensive and deterrent measures as tensions rise in the region and the United States increases its efforts to counter China. The President also cautioned his people not to harbor any delusions about China, especially as protests against bills in parliament, which the government considers influenced by China, continue to rise.

Many experts believe that through his inauguration speech, Lai promotes Taiwanese identity over Chinese identity. Tsai, Lai’s predecessor, often relied on the ambiguities within the Taiwan Constitution, especially regarding the concept of “One China”. Beijing asserts that this concept includes Taiwan under PRC rule, with both sides identifying themselves as China. She often referred to the “two sides of the Strait” instead of using the names of the two countries, avoiding complications since both countries officially use the name “China”. In contrast, Lai’s speeches rejected some of these ambiguities in favor of explicit statements. He asserted that the constitution clearly says “ The Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are not subordinate to each other”. However, Lai has previously demonstrated skepticism regarding the Republic of China (ROC) constitution as the basis for cross-strait affairs. While Lai promoted greater Taiwanese pride during his inauguration speech, he also stated that he would work towards resuming tourism between Taiwan and China, which is currently under tight restrictions. Many people in Taiwan have social, cultural and business ties with Mainland China and desire a return to a friendly relationship, even though they do not support Beijing’s unification plan.

Lai’s takeover and inauguration speech definitely made Beijing uncomfortable. China has reportedly set a goal of being capable of militarily taking over Taiwan by 2027, and the recent Two Sessions continue to work towards reunification. This timeframe falls within Lai Ching-te’s first term, and having a leader like Lai in Taipei during this period will surely challenge the Chinese dream. In the past, Beijing has employed various methods to pressure Taiwan into accepting annexation, including economic coercion, propaganda drives, diplomatic isolation, and military showdowns. All these actions are expected to continue. China claims democratic Taiwan as a province and has labeled Lai a “Dangerous Separatist” who will bring “War and Decline” to the Chinese island. The Chinese Communist Party and People’s republic of China established in 1949 has never ruled over Taiwan, but Xi Jinping has declared that what he terms “Reunification” is inevitable, as communist party wishes to extend China with all Sinosphere including the regions now including neighboring states.

An entire page of the national party newspaper, China Daily, was devoted to Beijing’s response on Tuesday. Beijing has warned of undefined reprisals against Taiwan and expressed their strong discontent on the inauguration speech of new president Lai Ching-te, in which he maintained his government’s position on sovereignty , uprise Taiwanese identity and did not concede to Beijing’s claim that Taiwan is a province of China. In a statement late Tuesday, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) called Lai’s speech “A downright confession of Taiwan independence”. The TAO emphasized reunification and warned they would counterattack and punish the DPP authorities for colluding with external forces to pursue “independence” provocations. Beijing also noted that any speech by a president belonging to the DPP, Lai’s party, short of capitulating to that position was likely to provoke an angry response.

While the DPP and President Lai Ching-te focus on issues with China and Tensions in the South China Sea, many believe the government is using this to cover up the real issues in Taiwan. Domestic challenges are rising, including housing costs, the wealth divide, and cost of living pressures. His inauguration was marked by large protests against the opposition over a controversial bill in parliament, foreshadowing a difficult first term for Lai, who lacks a legislative majority. There were protests against the bill in the parliament and in the streets. The government is adeptly using anti-China sentiment to suppress these protests, similar to tactics in authoritarian countries, labeling those who oppose the governments as anti-nationals. Many fear that Taiwan is sacrificing democracy in the name of protecting itself from communism.

May 23, 2024
Iran After Ebrahim Raisi

The Islamic Republic of Iran’s president and conservative Shia leader, Ebrahim Raisi, died in a helicopter crash. The tragic incident occurred on the border of Iran’s East Azerbaijan province, which is close to the Republic of Azerbaijan. Raisi was returning from the Republic of Azerbaijan, and reports indicate that bad weather and an outdated helicopter are considered the causes of the accident. An inquiry has been declared, with accusations of Israel’s involvement. Raisi, the country’s most notorious figure of the repressive regime, was well known for his conservative Islamism and was widely considered a likely successor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khomeini. As president and in other important positions, Raisi strictly implemented severe punishments for blasphemy and actions against the regime, including several death penalties, earning him the nickname “The Butcher of Tehran”. Despite his repressive policies, many people, especially in Tehran, filled the mosques for special prayers. However, at the same time, fireworks were visible, and celebration videos spread on social media. What will happen to such a divided country after Raisi?

As long as Iran remains an Islamic Republic under the supreme leadership of Shia Islamist Ayatollah Khomeini, no significant changes in administration are expected. Following Raisi’s death, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini addressed the nation, assuring that there would be no disruption to the state and government, and that people need not worry. He swiftly appointed Vice President Mohammed Mokhber to the presidential position shortly after the death was announced. This rapid appointment, a constitutional mandate, aimed to prevent any political instability in a country where less than 50% of the people vote, and there is visible discontent with the government. Just a few years ago, massive protests erupted in Iran after Kurdish Women, Mahsa Amini’s death for not obeying Islamic rules, and it’s considered as challenging the government. Raisi responded with his usual tough stance, he cracked it down with an iron fist and executed many protest-related individuals, actions which some people viewed as justice served. The government, recognizing the loss of Raisi, known for his harsh enforcement, understands the need to find a new strong leader soon. An election, required by the constitution to occur within 50 days, in tight control of the regime will be carried out soon. Candidates must be approved by the elite council, and anyone not aligned with the supreme leader cannot contest. It is expected that even former president and popular leader in the West, Hassan Rouhani, will not be allowed to run due to the fact that he is now unfavorable for the elite council.

The foreign relationships are not expected to change significantly after Raisi. There were some improvements during previous Rouhani’s period, including the nuclear deal with the United States, but Raisi has closed that chapter. Given the low chance of Rouhani’s return and the perceived lack of skilled leadership in the US, the relationship is unlikely to improve even after Raisi. Relations with Israel, their enemy state, are expected to worsen. Although there is no official proof, many believe that Raisi’s death is part of Israel’s ongoing efforts to target important Iranian figures. Iran’s connection to other countries is largely driven by Islamism, leading to continued support for Palestine, Hamas, political and military organizations in Iraq and Syria, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Due to the need to cope with Western sanctions, Iran’s relationship with Russia, China, and India has flourished under Raisi. Russia continues to have a strong relationship with the Islamic Republic, while China has emerged as a key partner and major oil importer. India, under Narendra Modi, also maintains a strong relationship with Raisi, with Modi being one of the first leaders to offer condolences on Raisi’s demise. This relationship is expected to persist, as Iran does not foresee any improvement in relations with the US. Regarding Europe, while it does not harbor the same level of animosity towards Iran as the US, it might seek to improve relations if a moderate Islamic leader comes to power. With Saudi Arabia, diplomatic relations have begun to develop, influenced by China’s interests. As Saudi Arabia reduces efforts to propagate Sunni Islamic beliefs and the Israel-Palestine conflict drags on, the likelihood of a deterioration in relations with Saudi Arabia seems low.

The demise of Ebrahim Raisi, the “Butcher of Tehran”, is significant as it reveals the true state of Iran. While the nation mourns their popular leader, many videos and comments on social media celebrating his death show that the country is deeply divided, with the protests following Mahsa Amini’s death still resonating in people’s hearts. This situation also highlights the impact of American sanctions, as Iran still uses a Bell 212 helicopter for the president, indicating a lack of technological development despite accusations of developing nuclear technology. Conspiracy theories are rising concerning Iran’s internal and external enemies, with the decision to use the helicopter in bad weather and suspicions of Mossad’s involvement raising many questions. Although the loss of Ebrahim Raisi is a significant setback for the Islamic Republic, a new president will soon be elected, and reports suggest that Mojtaba Khamenei will succeed Ayatollah Khamenei as Supreme Leader, potentially pushing the Islamic Republic into dynastic politics.

May 22, 2024
Why Is GCC Not Evolving Like The European Union?

While countries rapidly raise tariffs and sanctions, markets have become even more valuable. Forming a stable market with shared interests is seen as the solution to these increasing trade wars. The European Union, with its single market formed by the economic union, serves as a role model even in the most challenging times for international trade. Forming unified markets can bind nations together and provide more opportunities. This is evident in the growing desire to join the European Union, which continues to expand into new regions, leading them all towards economic prosperity. Together, they can compete with economic giants with massive markets like the United States and China. By taking the European Union as a model, many economic cooperation are evolving now. The Gulf countries, who formed the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), are among them. Even though they started decades ago and began implementing measures like a single visa and free border, they are still far away from forming a single market and creating a strong body like the European Union.

Challenges make countries cooperate. After the disastrous World War and the subsequent Cold War, Europe collapsed, and outsiders became prominent decision-makers in the region. To overcome these challenges, the long-time rivals of Europe began considering European cooperation by raising European identity and past European glory; eventually, this move led to the formation of the European Union and the Single European Market. They grew economically together and have now become a powerful entity capable of negotiations. The European Union, the multinational economic and political union comprising 27 European member states and is further expanding to more countries. The cooperation started with the Customs Union and then grew to establish a strong internal single market following a standardized legal framework and legislation applicable to member states. The States already joined, and Any state wishing to join the EU must agree to its policies, which ensure the free movement of people, goods, services, and capital within this “Pan-modern State”. Consequently, passport controls have been abolished at the borders within the EU. Among the European member states, twenty have formed a central bank and adopted a single currency, the Euro, which is one of the most valuable currencies now. While the European Union is progressing in economic terms, they are also developing foreign and security policies and agreements that benefit all member states. The EU maintains permanent diplomatic missions worldwide and has representatives in key organizations such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and groups like the G7 and G20.With increasing influence and acceptability, many consider the European Union a superpower, demonstrating lobbying capacity through their combined strength.

Some Arab think tanks frequently accused the EU, as a Christian Union reminiscent of Medieval Europe who fought with Muslim countries, citing the delayed entry of Turkey and Albania despite them applying years ago. They frequently promote the establishment of a counter-Arab union that would grow into a strong economic union and possibly divide the wealth of nations like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates with less wealthy surrounding Arab states. In the same way that France and Germany help the poorer European nations. Many experts think that such a union may oppose the diverse interests of the area and create an Islamic superpower. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), a regional political and economic union formed in 1981, comprises Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, and Kuwait. It is the closest multinational intergovernmental body resembling the EU and one of the first to mimic it. Discussions have taken place regarding the potential future membership of Jordan, Morocco, and Yemen. The GCC could further expand to include many Islamic countries in Asia and Africa. While the GCC has not advanced as cohesively as the EU, in earlier times, Saudi Arabia proposed transforming the GCC into a Gulf Union similar to the European Union, with tighter economic, political, and military coordination. However, objections arose from other countries due to their disapproval of leadership. And all member countries prioritized construction projects that stunning the world and hosting the glamorous events over regional interests. It’s evident that the leaders hindered the evolution of the GCC akin to the EU. While a Customs Union was established in January 2003, it has yet to thrive like the EU’s single market. The idea of a common currency also faltered due to conflicts of interest. UAE, Oman announced it would not meet the target date for a common currency, Due to the decision to locate the central bank for the monetary union in Riyadh instead of the UAE. If it was realized, the GCC monetary union would rank as the second-largest supranational monetary union in the world by GDP. It’s sure the GCC has high potential like the EU. But there are not many politicians capable in GCC.

The Gulf region boasts some of the fastest-growing economies in the world and the highest GDP per capita. This growth is largely due to a surge in oil and natural gas revenues, combined with a construction and investment boom, and an increase in the hospitality business, all supported by decades of accumulated petroleum wealth. While the Middle East faces numerous issues, ranging from the Palestine conflict to increasing foreign influences, the idea of more cooperation between the countries evolving as a European Union-like body is indeed plausible for the GCC. However, the countries do not appear inclined to set aside individual interests in favor of collective growth. If the GCC formed an Arabian superpower, capable of successfully intervening in Middle Eastern issues, including the Palestine conflict, but the lack of willingness to cooperate remains a curse for Arab countries, often relegating them to mere satellites of powerful countries.

May 21, 2024
Vietnam’s Spratly Reclamation Impact on Dispute

The multi-party dispute in the South China Sea is escalating as more land reclamation projects are being carried out on the disputed islands. It’s not only China; other parties are involved as well. International media are mainly highlighting China’s actions, including their reclamation efforts and bullying tactics in the South China Sea, which serve their demand for complete control of the territory. Reports and maps show China’s major projects to turn rocks in international waters or disputed areas into artificial islands, converting them into military bases. This gives China an advantage, allowing them to claim more land and, through that, more sea. However, in reality, other parties interested in the region or sharing borders with the South China Sea are also making efforts to claim land using the same strategy. There are reports of Vietnam reclaiming land from the South China Sea, particularly around the Spratly Islands, which is causing serious tensions in the region.

According to a report by the South China Morning Post, Vietnam, which has a long shoreline along the South China Sea, has reclaimed more land in the South China Sea in the past three years. This action could complicate and expand disputes in the contested waters. The report highlighted increased construction on islands and reefs occupied by Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia in the Nansha Islands, the name in which Beijing calls Spratly islands. The Beijing-based Grandview Institution stated that until 2019, the Vietnamese government had carried out only modest reclamation efforts on the 29 disputed islands and reefs it controlled in the Spratly Islands. However, Vietnam then embarked on major dredging and landfill work. Vietnam has carried out large-scale land expansion on several islands and reefs, adding 3 sq km of new land, far exceeding the total construction scale of the previous 40 years. Reports originating from Beijing allege that Vietnam has occupied a greater number of Chinese islands and reefs, stationed more troops, and erected more facilities than any other coastal state in the South China Sea. The report also noted that after 2021, following the initial COVID-19 lockdowns, Vietnam started using large cutter suction dredgers to reclaim land. These dredgers are specialized maritime vessels equipped with a rotating cutter designed to dredge rock, clay, silt, and sand. The Grandview Institution stated that the Vietnamese government had been extremely low-key and secretive about its island construction.

The Spratly Islands, the small archipelago in the South China Sea with more than 100 reefs, islets, and islands, are the focal point of rival claims between China and Vietnam. The South China Sea islands, called the Nanshas by Beijing and referred to as Quần đảo Trường Sa by Hanoi, hold strategic significance for both countries. These islands are also subject to disputes along the Vietnamese coast. Although these communist nations currently do not engage in direct confrontations like China and the Philippines, and Vietnam avoids close cooperation with the United States, neither China nor Vietnam is willing to relinquish their claims. Both nations employ the same strategy to support their claims: extensive land reclamation. Vietnam and China are just two of the various parties claiming parts of the resource-rich South China Sea, through which important sea routes connect East Asia to Europe. Both of them know that control over these islands offers strategic dominance in the region and that the archipelago offers rich fishing grounds and potentially significant oil and natural gas reserves. These resources are crucial to the claimants in their attempts to establish international boundaries. Some of the islands in the Spratly archipelago have civilian settlements, while fewer than 50 islands are entirely occupied and contain structures suitable for military purposes. These islands are under the control of China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia, and all these nations make great efforts to secure control over their territory.

Morning Post’s report also referred to the Philippines’ increasing efforts to repair and reinforce a warship it grounded on the Second Thomas Shoal, another outcrop in the Spratlys. Coastguard vessels from China and the Philippines have clashed around the Scarborough Shoal, and tensions are brewing over Sabina Shoal. Philippines’ construction on its occupied features in the Spratlys was low-level and the defenses there were weak, so they were unlikely to pose a substantial threat to the military presence of other countries and the surrounding waters. These actions all serve to complicate and escalate the disputes, impacting peace and stability in the region. Some observers say the South China Sea presents an even greater risk of conflict than the Taiwan Strait, but many believe the water is not a priority of China as Taiwan. But everyone doing their own part makes the sea more heated.

May 20, 2024
The Hindu Rivalry in Maharashtra Politics

Maharashtra, the richest state in India, has always been a stronghold for Hindu politics. It boasts a proud history with Chhatrapati Shivaji, the king who established a strong Hindu kingdom and fought against the Islamic Mughal Empire. The Hindu Maratha Kingdom and Shivaji remain sources of pride for Maharashtrians even today. Many organizations in Maharashtra claim Shivaji’s succession. Shiv Sena, one of the biggest political parties in Maharashtra, is a group of proud followers of Shivaji, formed by Shivaji devotee Bal Thackeray. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the current ruling party of India, also supports Shivaji’s pro-Hindu ideology. Naturally, the Hindu nationalist BJP and the Hindu regionalist Shiv Sena became allies, forming joint governments in Maharashtra. However, following interesting events after the 2019 general election, a serious crack formed in the relationship. These former Hindu brothers became the worst of enemies and now find themselves on opposing fronts, engaging in fierce battles against each other to remove the other from Maharashtra Politics.

Maharashtra, including India’s financial capital, Mumbai, contributes the second-largest number of members to the Lok Sabha (House of Commons). After populous Uttar Pradesh, the 48 MPs from Maharashtra are crucial for forming the government in Delhi, making its politics always significant for Indian politics. Like many other Indian states, the Indian National Congress (INC) dominated the state after independence, continuously forming governments in the state until the 1990s. However, after Shiv Sena decided to enter parliamentary politics and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) provided strong support, forming a Hindu alliance, the political landscape in Maharashtra changed. The allies clinched power by removing INC. Then, two clear political spheres emerged: the Hindu alliance led by Shiv Sena and BJP, and the secular sphere led by INC and its schism, the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP).

With Narendra Modi’s entrance into the leadership of the BJP in 2014, the scenario changed dramatically once again. With Modi’s popularity, the BJP rose as the biggest Hindu party in Maharashtra, overtaking Shiv Sena in terms of obtaining seats in the state assembly and parliament. This eventually grew into a serious ego clash, leading to the collapse of their alliance. Shiv Sena then moved to a secular alliance with Congress and NCP, forming a government together at the state level. However, the BJP managed to split Shiv Sena, causing a significant number of Shiv Sena members in the state assembly to move to the BJP side. This led to the toppling of the Shiv Sena government with Congress and NCP. The BJP then formed a government with the splintered faction of Shiv Sena. Through these actions, reminiscent of Hindu mythologies, the rivalry between BJP and Shiv Sena intensified. Interestingly, the Election Commission granted the faction that joined the BJP official status, including the party’s symbol and colors. This marked the complete collapse of Shiv Sena and a thorough victory for Modi and the BJP. The remaining faction, led by Uddhav Thackeray, the son of founding leader Bal Thackeray, continued as Shiv Sena (Uddhav faction) and remained aligned with Congress.

The ongoing general election is taking place in this tumultuous political landscape. Long-term allies are now fighting each other by leading separate fronts. Whoever secures more seats in the general election will gain an advantage in the upcoming crucial state assembly elections. It’s a race to determine who carries the Hindu legacy and who carries Shivaji’s legacy. The volatile election is filled with toxic comments and is attracting attention throughout the country. The comment of Shiv Sena (Udhav) leaders comparing Modi to Aurangzeb and Narendra Modi’s reply all took the headlines nationwide. Shiv Sena, which lost its official status to the faction that moved to the BJP side, now known as Shiv Sena (Uddhav faction), is fighting alongside their old foes, the Indian National Congress (INC) and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP). The NCP was also split by the same strategy the BJP used on Shiv Sena. In the alliance, Shiv Sena (Uddhav) will contest in 21 seats, INC will contest in 17 seats, and NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) will contest in 10 seats. Meanwhile, the BJP’s alliance, which includes the Election Commission’s officially recognized factions of Shiv Sena and NCP, will see the BJP contest in 28 seats, the official Shiv Sena faction in 15 seats, and the official NCP faction in 4 seats. With five phases of the election in the state, only one phase remains, scheduled for May 20th.

Opinion polls are predicting a close contest for both sides. Even though Modi remains a popular leader in the state, there is considerable sympathy for Shiv Sena (Uddhav faction), NCP, and INC, which have also lost leaders to the BJP alliance. Many believe that while leaders have jumped to the BJP alliance, the supporters remain with the opposition. Election analysts point out that different vote banks in different sectors, who conventionally do not join, can be stitched together by the alliance of Shiv Sena (Uddhav) and Congress. Hindu nationalists, Muslim voters, and secular voters can join with the alliance. However, Maharashtra is crucial for Modi’s aspiration for a third term, so he is also contesting fiercely. The election result will reveal who is the true Hindu leader in Maharashtra and who is the inheritor of Shivaji’s legacy. So the result day will be a significant day in Maharashtra politics.

May 19, 2024
Who is Singapore’s new Prime Minister?

While there is one more year left before the next general election, Singapore’s long-serving Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong stepped down on Wednesday and handed power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong. This marks the first change of leadership in the Southeast Asian city-state in two decades. Lee has been Prime Minister since 2004, overseeing economic growth in one of the world’s wealthiest countries. He helped Singapore capitalize on the liberalization of the global economy through trade, particularly in finance and financial services. Throughout the turbulent years marked by power politics in the region, Lee’s leadership helped to maintain their policies, showcasing their stability and reputation to the world. His resignation was expected, as the 72-year-old had expressed his desire for retirement many years before, but the carefully managed transition was delayed due to the pandemic. Lawrence Wong, the new Prime Minister from the same ruling party, the People’s Action Party (PAP), has emphasized continuity with Lee Hsien Loong’s legacy.

Lawrence Wong, 51 years old, is a US-trained economist and former civil servant who first entered politics in 2011. He comes from a more humble background than his predecessors, who were members of dynasties. The outgoing prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, is the son of Lee Kuan Yew, widely regarded as the founder of modern Singapore. Wong is the second leader who does not hail from the founding Lee family. He grew up, like most Singaporeans, in public housing and did not attend an elite school. Wong was inaugurated in a ceremony on Wednesday night. The fourth prime minister to lead Singapore, he is the first leader born after the country’s independence in 1965. By leading one of the world’s wealthiest states, he will receive a substantial S$2.2m (US$1.6m) salary. Wong has proven his administrative skills by managing the country’s response to the pandemic. However, he is taking office at a challenging time for the city-state, with growing domestic concerns about the cost of living, inequality, shrinking birth rate and immigration.

Although there are numerous challenges, when the global order breaks down, foreign policy poses the biggest challenge. The South China Sea, adjacent to Singapore, is becoming increasingly volatile due to China’s aggressive actions and the responses from the United States. The world’s largest economies are face to face here. Singapore’s main ally, the United States, contributes almost 20% of its total foreign direct investment and maintains military linkages with the country. Additionally, Singapore hosts the Asian headquarters of many European and American businesses. At the same time, Singapore has an ethnic connection with China, as the largest ethnic group in Singapore is Chinese, and China is Singapore’s largest trading partner. Singapore conventionally maintains a delicate balancing act between these two powers, but the rivalry and potential tension will likely impact Singapore as well. As tension escalates in the region, choosing a side will not be easy for Singapore. Both countries are important. Highly dependent on foreign trade, Singapore finds itself vulnerable to instability in the region. The country is heading into a period where there is less global interest in economic integration, evident from the increasing disconnect between the US and China. It’s unclear how Prime Minister Lawrence Wong will adapt to the new challenges facing Singapore.

Wong would probably seek to make incremental changes to the political system before the General Elections, which are due to be held before November 2025. The PAP, which has been in power since 1959, was recently rocked by a rare corruption scandal, which has had a “Humbling Effect” on the party, though it has not proved fatal. There is also a desire among younger voters for a change in the style of leadership in Singapore, in favor of something less paternalistic and with more diversity of voices. Lawrence Wong has sought to present himself as a more relatable politician unlike his predecessors over recent years, even posting a video of himself on social media playing guitar to Taylor Swift’s Love Story. Many believe he is following the strategies of neighboring Indonesian presidents and Indian prime ministers by using social media wisely to engage with the youth. So, Welcome Wong, to a not an easy job.

May 18, 2024