Category: Asia

  • Why Isn’t India Controlling the Population?

    Why Isn’t India Controlling the Population?

    India is overpopulated. More than 1.4 billion people, one out of every eight people in the world, live in this country. The figures included here are not precise because the government has not taken a census in the last 13 years. While these numbers and the position as the world’s most populous country make many Indians proud, they significantly impact their quality of life. Many people continue to have more and more children even though they don’t have the means to feed them, making India a tough place to live.

    While this population size helps the economy in many ways, such as making India a big market with cheap labor and low production costs, it also has negative impacts. The lack of jobs and the decline in quality of life are starting to affect the population very deeply. Even though India had a GDP worth $3.94 trillion in 2024, the fifth biggest in the world, when it comes to GDP per capita, it is just $2,700, ranking 136th by the IMF. Despite India’s resources, overpopulation causes this difference. People can’t find jobs. Graduates do not have jobs or are forced to take any job to survive. This leads to people not valuing their lives or their surroundings, and the dream of escaping is prevalent.

    India has become an emigration hotspot. While parents are ready to suffer to increase their caste or religion’s follower count by having more children, young people are not. They are leaving the country, and slowly, the mindset towards population control is changing in a favorable way. But Indian political parties do not seem very interested in addressing this issue.

    According to an estimate published by the United Nations on Tuesday, India’s population growth will continue, and it will reach almost double China’s figure by 2100. Though the pace is slowing according to this projection, when we compare it to the current quality of life in India, we can expect it to be terrible. This will be a blow to Narendra Modi and Hindu nationalist dreams of making India a developed country by 2047.

    In 2019, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated that a large population was obstructing India’s development and emphasized the need to consider if we can fulfill our children’s aspirations. He stressed the importance of having broader discussions and raising awareness about population explosion. Many leaders of the BJP, including Ashwani Dubey and Yogi Adityanath, echo these sentiments. They advocate for a two-child policy and propose that loan waivers and government support should be restricted to those adhering to this policy.

    However, this has led to deep discontent among different communities, especially the Muslim population, who are more radical in India and believe that reducing the number of children or using any type of contraceptive will result in divine punishment. Additionally, Muslim women have a higher rate of illiteracy and unemployment compared to the general female population. So the fertility rate, number of children increased in this community. This situation has actually fueled a population conflict because many Hindu organizations believe that Muslims are aiming to Islamize India and argue that Hindus must have more children to counteract this, thereby making life miserable for the next generation.

    Muslim-based political parties and caste-based political parties have always opposed the idea of a population control bill, arguing that it contradicts the Supreme Court’s ruling on forced population control and infringes on basic rights allowed by the Indian constitution. These community based political parties promote population growth because more people in their communities translates into more votes for their candidates, increasing their chances of winning elections. These political parties also gain more bargaining power in forming alliances when their communities have larger numbers in many constituencies, enabling them to mobilize more supporters for rallies.

    The low-income individuals who follow their community leaders directions, despite having limited income, accept the duty of increasing their numbers while struggling to provide basic facilities or education for their children. This often leads to their children developing anti-social mindsets and gradually becoming involved in criminal activities for political parties. Such individuals, known as “Gundas”, become assets for political parties that use them to intimidate people and suppress opposition. Given these dynamics, why would Indian politicians support population control?

    Many political experts believe that the lack of nationwide population policies and laws creates a significant disparity in population management at the federal level. We can observe a growing divide between the North and South in terms of population management. South India, which has better-controlled population growth and a comparatively better quality of life, has become a destination for people from overpopulated northern states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and West Bengal. The education levels, quality of life, and population policies differ significantly between these regions, leading to major differences and conflicts among the people.

    This regional disparity is seen as a significant threat to India as a federal republic in the future. It should prompt national-level parties to seriously consider adopting a comprehensive population control policy. Although it may be late, it is crucial for them to act now. The dream of a developed India, as envisioned by Modi, will never materialize without population control. 

  • Will the Turkic States Group Become a Major International Player?

    Will the Turkic States Group Become a Major International Player?

    Turkic and Turkey might sound confusing, like Turkey the bird and Turkey the country, but there’s a distinction. Turkey is a Turkic state, but not all Turkic states are Turkey. Let’s not drag this into more confusion: Turkic states are a group that includes Turkey. They share a common ethnic background, similar language, cuisine, and almost identical culture, extending from Kazakhstan to Turkey. This includes most Central Asian countries except Tajikistan, the Caucasian state Azerbaijan, and Turkey (Türkiye). Some even include Hungary due to historical and linguistic ties.

    Currently, these countries are part of an evolving group that can influence Asian politics, global politics, and the global economy. They support and care for each other, with kebabs being a beloved symbol of their shared culture. Historically, the political evolution of this group was limited due to Russian influence. Now, they are free and more united.

    The Organization of Turkic States (OTS) is the union of Turkic states that we are discussing. It includes Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, and Turkey as full members, with Turkmenistan, Hungary, and Northern Cyprus as observers. The OTS was founded in 2009 to strengthen the bond between these countries. During the 8th summit in 2021, the organization was restructured to enhance cooperation, with refreshed objectives ranging from trade to extradition agreements. While many believe the OTS’ main aim is cooperation and growth, others think the organization’s main objective is the cultural revival of Muslim Turkic culture and protection from external influences, such as Russia’s historical cultural integration with Central Asian countries. As OTS eagerly pursues expanded trade relations with the West, the leaders of Turkic states in Eurasia are cautious about importing Western values. 

    The latest summit of the OTS was held in Azerbaijan, showcasing the dichotomy of interests among the Turkic heads of state. Hosted by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in the Nagorno-Karabakh town of Shusha, a region recently recaptured from Armenia, Aliyev highlighted in his opening remarks his vision for the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) to become an influential global entity capable of protecting regional interests from outside influence. He emphasized that the OTS should become one of the prominent international forces, stressing the commitment of their peoples to traditional values and shared ethnic roots that closely bind their countries. According to him, the 21st century must be a century of progress for the Turkic world.

    After praising traditional values and shared heritage, Aliyev stressed the significance of enhancing trade, declaring, “Expanding the East-West transport corridor is among our foremost priorities”. His sentiments were echoed by other participants, including Kazakhstan’s president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, who stressed the need to utilize the full potential of the Trans-Caspian international transport route. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who attended the Shusha summit, referred to the OTS as a “Very important organization for cooperation between the West and East”.

    Aliyev urged his fellow heads of state to show greater commitment to the OTS through increased budget allocations, noting Azerbaijan’s recent $2 million contribution to enhance the OTS secretariat. They recognize the economic potential of the bloc, as member countries are rich in minerals and generate significant revenue from their resources. With Russia’s influence weakening, superpowers such as China, India, Korea, and the United States are keen to explore opportunities in the region. It is believed that uniting these countries will increase their scope and opportunities.

    Political scientists believe that the OTS represents a solution for Turkic leaders to navigate their complex political relationships. Aliyev’s efforts to bolster the OTS come at a time when Baku’s relations with the West have deteriorated. Over the past year, Aliyev and other top Azerbaijani officials have openly expressed grievances against the U.S., France, and major European bodies. In his inaugural address in February, Aliyev signaled further divergence from the West, speaking enthusiastically about pan-Turkic cooperation. Although Aliyev appreciates ties with Russia, they maintain a certain distance. Azerbaijan frequently boasts of its friendship with Pakistan, considers Turkey a brother, and is open to cooperation with India and Iran for trade. While trade is welcome, maintaining Turkic identity is their top priority. This sentiment is shared by other Turkic states, which rely on trade with various superpowers  but prioritize their cultural unity and Turkic identity.

    It’s certain that the OTS has great potential. With its strategically important location, population, economy, minerals, and everything necessary to grow into a superpower, they can impact world dynamics akin to the impact of the EU on global dynamics. United, they will gain more bargaining power and can effectively utilize their resources, particularly minerals currently in high global demand. The geographical area, intersecting important trade routes across all directions, west to east and north to south, will promote their growth. So, if they remain united, as Aliyev said, it’s a century for the Turkic world. 

  • What is Jordan’s role in the latest Arab-Israeli conflict?

    What is Jordan’s role in the latest Arab-Israeli conflict?

    As civilians in Gaza receive warnings and reports emerge of Israel preparing for more offensives, the reactions from Arab countries that have historically fought with Israel, such as Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, are interesting to watch. Jordan, the country with the longest border with Israel, and Egypt, now in a treaty with Israel, have no interest in further conflict and have become good neighbors, like Saudi Arabia. Lebanon and Syria are expected to be drawn into war soon due to the increased presence of Islamic terrorist organizations sympathetic to Gaza and their domestic collapses. Since the October 7 Hamas attack in Israel and the subsequent Israeli invasion of Gaza, few regional states have faced challenges as acute as Jordan, with its substantial Palestinian-origin population and prominent roles within the Arab and Muslim world. Once fiercely fighting Israel for Muslim solidarity, Jordan now appears to have understood its limitations in war, despite ongoing protests amid tight government control. As regional war tensions escalate with the potential involvement of Lebanon and Syria, can Jordan remain a friend of Israel or stay neutral?

    As casualties have mounted in Gaza, outrage in Jordan, as elsewhere in the Muslim populated countries, has grown. Regular Friday protests, after the prayer,  led by the kingdom’s Islamists, have brought participants close to the rare act of publicly criticizing King Abdullah, who has ruled Jordan since 1999. Though Jordan is relatively liberal compared to many other states in the region, reports noted that the “Regime’s red lines” on what can be published without repercussions have tightened “Dramatically” since the war began. In the first month of the conflict, at least 1,000 protesters were detained in the capital city, Amman, particularly at demonstrations near the Israeli embassy, which some tried to storm. People are angry not only at Israel’s actions in Gaza and Jordan’s inaction but also at the perception that Jordan is aiding Israel and the United States for economic gains, betraying Islam and Palestine. Jordan, with US assistance, shot down many of the more than 300 Iranian missiles and drones launched at targets in Israel as they flew over the kingdom. Officials stated that Jordan was defending its sovereignty and keeping its population of 12 million safe, but it is evident this was in the interest of the United States. Though lauded by Western powers, the kingdom’s actions have led to accusations at home that it was protecting Israel.

    The King and the Jordanian government are amidst numerous pressures from different directions. The kingdom now navigates a “Tricky balancing act” as King Abdullah II and his advisers skillfully juggle the demands of citizens calling for tough action and punishment in the Gaza war, alongside the kingdom’s close ties to Washington and a 30-year-old peace treaty with Israel. King Abdullah has made statements and repeatedly called for international action to halt the conflict in Gaza, accusing Israel of war crimes, while Queen Rania has criticized the West’s “Complicity”. The kingdom’s diplomats have proposed multiple plans for governing Gaza, and its military has opened field hospitals in the territory and airdropped aid. In Amman’s corridors of power, debates are ongoing over whether the relationship with the US, which has thousands of troops in Jordan and provides $1.5 billion in economic aid annually, should be downgraded or reinforced. However, it is clear that Jordan is not capable of exerting enough pressure on the US to influence Israel, given its economic reliance on these countries. Interestingly, unlike in previous times, the absence of a unifying leader in the Arab world means Jordan must navigate these challenges alone. Therefore, it remains to be seen if the government is merely making statements to appease the dissatisfied populace.

    Jordan consistently followed an anti-Zionist policy between 1948 and 1994 and both countries clashed on several occasions before 1994. In 1994, Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty that normalized relations and resolved territorial disputes, including water sharing. The treaty resolved land and water issues and encouraged extensive cooperation in tourism and trade. Following the agreement, Israel and Jordan opened their borders, establishing several crossings that facilitated travel for tourists, businessmen, and workers between the two countries.

    However, there have been several disputes between the two governments even after the treaty, and the public has not fully trusted each other. Now, Jordan faces a dilemma: If the war escalates to a regional level or if Israel’s actions in Gaza intensify, it is certain that the people will not obey the government, or the government will be forced to act. However, they know well that they are not capable of fighting without Arab unity as before, which makes them realize they cannot engage in conflict. A fight would have devastating effects on the country, which lacks the resources like other Arab nations. Definitely, tough times lie ahead for Jordan.

  • Will there be any reforms when Iran gets a reformist President?

    Will there be any reforms when Iran gets a reformist President?

    The reformist Masoud Pezeshkian, an independent candidate, has achieved a stunning victory in the Iranian presidential runoff, reflecting deep dissatisfaction with the country’s direction in recent years. Pezeshkian, a heart surgeon and former health minister, garnered 16,384,403 votes, defeating the ultra-conservative Saeed Jalili, who received 13,538,179 votes, with a final turnout of 49.8%, a significant increase from the record low turnout of 39% in the first round, the lowest in the history of the Islamic Republic founded after the 1979 revolution. In the first round, Pezeshkian emerged as the frontrunner, surpassing three conservative rivals. Although no candidate secured the required percentage of votes, in the second round conducted on July 4th, concerns arose about late-stage rigging and a high number of invalid votes. However, these issues did not sway the outcome in favor of Pezeshkian, highlighting a significant public desire for change.

    The path ahead is difficult for Pezeshkian, who has advocated for allowing women to choose whether to wear the hijab in a country with one of the toughest records on human rights and poor women’s rights under a highly Islamist regime. He has stated, “Girls and women belong to us, not to foreign powers. We have no right to enforce citizenship rights on them. We cannot cover women’s heads through coercion”. Iran witnessed a huge wave of protests after the death of Mahsa Amini, who was killed in connection with the hijab issue, which caused significant discontent in the country.

    Under the slogan “For Iran”, Pezeshkian promised to be a voice for the voiceless and said that democratic protests should not be met with police batons. The regime’s police treated protests very cruelly under Raisi’s tenure, and deaths were often reported. There were immediate calls from Pezeshkian’s supporters to release political prisoners, symbolizing the pent-up demands he may struggle to satisfy. He also advocated for ending internet restrictions that force the population to use VPN connections to bypass government censorship.

    Pezeshkian is also notable for his support of multi-ethnicity. He frequently reflects on his Azeri heritage despite being from a predominantly Kurdish city, emphasizing his view of Iran as a unitary state. He advocates for ethnic rights as a means of maintaining national unity. Though The biggest hurdle for Pezeshkian will be the country’s struggling economy. During the campaign, he argued that Iran had become economically trapped due to its foreign policy and needed to adopt a more cooperative stance to explore the lifting of sanctions.

    Despite these variations from the regime’s conventional presidents, how much he can move with it is in doubt. Previously, when Iran had reformist presidents, they seemed to continue with the regime’s direction and did not question the conventional decisions that restricted human rights and women’s rights. The system of Iran works like this. Pezeshkian will also likely lead in this direction. However, as the regime understands the anti-regime mindset in the country, there are some reports that the regime will loosen up and present Pezeshkian as the changing face of the regime to the people. 

    The West now faces a decision: whether to support Pezeshkian or continue with the blanket of sanctions in response to the ongoing escalation of Iran’s nuclear program and its support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Yemen’s Houthi rebels. Reports indicate that Iran is enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels and has a stockpile sufficient to build several nuclear weapons, though it lacks the warheads or missile technology. Additionally, Iran is providing Russia with drones for use in Ukraine and reportedly assisting Armenia in the conflict with Azerbaijan. Both actions are against the interests of the West. The U.S. State Department has stated that Pezeshkian’s election will not alter the U.S. approach to Iran. U.S. officials highlighted the election boycott by a significant portion of Iranian voters and remarked, “The elections in Iran were not free and fair. As a result, a significant number of Iranians chose not to participate at all.” However, in the case of Europe, there is a chance of deviation. We are awaiting moves from Germany and Hungary, who might potentially establish a relationship with Iran. It is certain that Pezeshkian will continue fostering warm relationships with Russia, India, and China.

    According to the Islamic Republic constitution, which aligns closely with Sharia law and maintains the Supreme Leader as the final authority, the president has limited room for maneuver. There is no expectation that these elections will lead to a fundamental change in Iran’s trajectory or an increase in respect for citizens’ human rights. As the candidates themselves have acknowledged, Iran’s policies are dictated by the Supreme Leader. Therefore, any reforms initiated by a reformist president are likely to encounter significant obstacles. He faces an uphill task in uniting the country, as his conservative opponents strongly objected to being compared to the Taliban by the reformists and viewed him as a Western agent, along with his supporters who are seen as individuals who have succumbed to Western influences, particularly in breaking internet filters. Additionally, he will need to decide whether and how to reconcile with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. However, even small improvements in people’s lives and rights could benefit the populace.

  • Why Does Cambodia Target Their Environmentalists?

    Why Does Cambodia Target Their Environmentalists?

    Environmentalists don’t hold the same old reputation or importance as far-right groups, which have captured the public sphere. They are often targeted as anti-nationalists or individuals opposed to national progress. This phenomenon is visible worldwide, and in authoritarian countries, they are undoubtedly one of the prime targets of the rulers. Cambodia, a Southeast Asian country with the worst phase of democracy, is seeking infrastructure development with Chinese funds and is among those countries.

    Even though the state is a constitutional monarchy, elections are highly manipulated, and opposition parties are severely weakened. Last year, former military general, Prime Minister, and ongoing President Hun Sen, who had tightly controlled the country for decades from different positions, handed power to his son Hun Manet. Hun Manet was named Prime Minister after an election in which the only major opposition party was banned from contesting, and independent media outlets and criticisms were closed down or blocked online. This is the reality of Cambodian democracy, and now they have found a new opposition in environmentalists, whom they have also begun to target.

    On Tuesday, Ten activists from a prominent environmental group named Mother Nature in Cambodia were sentenced to between six and eight years in jail. Four of the defendants were arrested outside the court in the capital city, Phnom Penh, after the verdict was delivered on Tuesday morning. Others were sentenced in absentia. In a place where people are arrested for protests, an absentia court does not block sentencing. The charges in the case are intriguing; they were found guilty of plotting against the government, while three were also convicted of insulting the king (Lèse-majesté). 

    Among those sentenced on Tuesday were Thun Ratha, Long Kunthea, Phuon Keoraksmey, Binh Piseth, and Pork Khoeuy, who received six years in prison for plotting, according to Amnesty International. Three others, Gonzalez-Davidson, Sun Ratha, and Yim Leanghy, were sentenced to eight years for both plotting and insulting the king, and also face a fine of KHR 10,000,000 (£1,900). The convicted individuals denied the charges.

    Mother Nature, one of the few remaining environmental groups in Cambodia, has gained a presence among youth through its use of viral videos and training programs to engage young Cambodians. As freedom of expression has become increasingly restricted, many Mother Nature activists have faced imprisonment and intimidation. Despite this, the group’s activities have garnered global support and recognition. In 2023, Mother Nature earned the Right Livelihood Award from the Swedish charity, the Right Livelihood Award Foundation, for its fearless and engaging activism. This recognition alone is enough to provoke discontent from the authorities.

    The group recently gained acclaim for successfully campaigning against the Chinese-led construction of a hydroelectric dam in Areng Valley, southwestern Cambodia, which posed threats to an indigenous community and rare species. They also played a crucial role in ending the environmentally damaging and often corrupt practice of sand export from the coastal estuaries of Koh Kong. These actions have led to the group being marked as opposing the country’s ambitious projects and progress and being labeled as anti-national. Regarding the accusations, Alejandro Gonzalez-Davidson, the group’s founder and a Spanish national deported from Cambodia in 2015, told Reuters that the claims of plotting against the state were never clarified in court. 

    It looks like Cambodia doesn’t mind its reputation, even though it has an interest in tourism. The country is notorious for corruption, with Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (2021) ranking Cambodia 157th out of 180 countries, one of the worst in the continent. Yet, in the July 2023 election, the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) easily won by a landslide in a flawed election. Following the election, Hun Manet, son of Hun Sen, was sworn in as the new Cambodian prime minister. However, this change in leadership does not signify any real change in governance. The recent crackdown on environmentalists deals a severe blow to Cambodia’s civil society, as the government opts to imprison dissenters rather than heed the voices of young environmental leaders. It’s clear that Cambodia’s leadership is not only targeting environmentalists but also any opposition.

  • How the North – South Corridor is Saving Russia?

    How the North – South Corridor is Saving Russia?

    While Russia lost its major markets in Europe and the United States following the Ukraine war, everyone predicted that Russia would suffer; at least, Biden believed so. But after two years of war, the Russian economy has not suffered as predicted and is not ready to cease its war in Ukraine. Even though the Russian economy has been blocked from the international financial system, it is slowly getting back on track despite the sanctions remaining in place.

    How is this possible? The two big markets, China and India, the second and fifth largest economies respectively, with more than a billion people each, along with satellite countries, including Iran, are keeping the Russian economy relatively unaffected by US sanctions. As the war shows no signs of ending soon, Russia is strengthening its relationships with these countries. The trade routes between China and India are becoming more streamlined thanks to government efforts to ensure a smooth flow of goods and link their economies.

    With China, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), also known as the Silk Road, provides good connectivity and facilitates smooth trade. However, with India, which is not part of the BRI and does not have a good relationship with China, there are issues with trade due to infrastructure limitations. To address this issue, Russia and India are working on improving infrastructure. The International North–South Transport Corridor, a 7,200-km-long multi-mode network of ship, rail, and road routes for transporting freight stretching between India, Iran, Azerbaijan, Russia, and Central Asia, is integral to these efforts. Russia and India are making significant investments to link up with each other and these countries to facilitate smoother trade, and these efforts are starting to show promising results.

    Trade along the North-South corridor is off to a strong start in 2024, a boon and relief for the Kremlin. The route received a significant boost from a jump in Russian trade turnover with Iran. During the first quarter of this year, trade turnover between Russia and Iran grew by 48 percent compared to the same period in 2023, a year in which overall commerce between the two countries lagged. While trade increased between Russia and Iran, it decreased by 6 percent year-on-year between Russia and Azerbaijan during the first four months of 2024. Meanwhile, turnover between Russia and India, the countries at each end of the network of road, rail, and sea links, set a new quarterly value record during the first three months of this year, totaling about $17.5 billion, Russia’s RIA Novosti news agency reported.

    As the total trade balance with export country China is not beneficial for the Russian economy in the long term, the trade balance with Iran and India is expected to be more advantageous for Russia in the long run. The North South transport corridor avoids the conventional route that passes through many countries with U.S. involvement and is expected to grow as infrastructure development flourishes. The route, passing through Russia, Azerbaijan, Iran, and India, connects major cities such as Mumbai, Moscow, Tehran, Baku, Bandar Abbas, Astrakhan, and Bandar Anzali, which is expected to boost the economies of these cities as well. This new route is anticipated to significantly reduce costs in terms of time and money compared to the traditional route currently being used.

    In early June, Russian leader Vladimir Putin praised the North-South trade network as a more efficient international trade route compared to the Suez Canal. Intent on maintaining growth momentum, Putin recently approved an agreement on free trade between members of the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union and Iran. Beyond laying the groundwork for new infrastructure and improved logistics, the TASS news service reported that the pact could save Russian exporters up to $300 million in export duties and other costs. On June 16, Russia, Azerbaijan, and Iran announced the creation of a working group to improve logistics arrangements along the North-South route, TASS also reported.

    India, a populous country and one of the fastest-growing economies, which has high demand for Russian oil and natural gas, is also looking to invest in speeding up the linking process. Last year, Indian Foreign Minister Subramanyam Jaishankar stated that the North-South corridor is one of India’s top priorities. During a state visit to Turkmenistan, Prime Minister Modi, recognizing Turkmenistan’s natural gas wealth, formally invited the country to become a member of the project. He proposed that Turkmenistan become a member of the International North-South Transport Corridor. The interest of India is clearly visible. The North-South corridor project is of interest to everyone.

    While the United States is doing its best to reduce Central Asia’s dependence on Russian dominance by offering trade benefits to these countries, Russia knows that it must invest more to maintain its influence in the region. They also work towards fostering more cooperation between China and India. Russia is well aware of the importance of China and India for its future and understands how the US can exploit disputes between these countries.  Russia and Iran, along with their allies, are highly capable of challenging the sanctions imposed by the US. If these countries further unite to form an effective trade bloc, it would deal a significant blow to the West.

  • How Thailand is Helping Myanmar’s Junta Hold on to Power

    How Thailand is Helping Myanmar’s Junta Hold on to Power

    It has been three years since Myanmar witnessed a coup d’état that overthrew the democratically elected government. We all remember the viral video of a girl dancing while military vehicles approached the presidential palace to take control of the state. After three years, the military rule is still in power despite many democratic protests and military opposition. Major democracies around the world expressed concern and introduced tough sanctions in solidarity with democracy. Interestingly, despite Western sanctions, Myanmar, unlike resource-rich Russia, has managed to sustain itself. This has raised doubts about neighboring countries helping the junta by staying neutral. These suspicions were cemented by a recent United Nations-sponsored investigation revealing that Thailand has emerged as the leading source of banking services for Myanmar’s military junta and a key financial conduit for procuring arms and other military equipment.

    Tom Andrews, the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, authored a report detailing the military junta’s adaptive strategies amidst sanctions from foreign governments. It describes how the State Administration Council (SAC), Myanmar’s military leadership, has altered financial and military suppliers to sustain arms procurement and its opposition campaign. The report identifies that despite international sanctions, SAC maintains crucial banking ties, with 16 banks across seven countries processing military transactions, and 25 banks providing correspondent services to Myanmar’s state-owned banks since the coup. Andrews highlights a significant shift in arms procurement, noting a decline in formal banking system transactions to $253 million in 2023 from $377 million the previous year, particularly citing decreased Chinese arms transfers from $140 million to $80 million. An interesting part of the report is how Thailand, which remains neutral and has not condemned the military takeover of the regime, has emerged as the major source for military supplies, surpassing Singapore, historically a major partner in trade and finance with Myanmar’s military and associated entities.

    As per the report published by Andrews, last year documented that despite Singaporean government opposition to arms transfers to Myanmar, entities based in Singapore had become the military junta’s third-largest source of weapons materials, following Russia and China. There are many reports that there are companies linked to military junta working in Singapore.  In 2022, the advocacy group Justice for Myanmar identified 38 Singapore-based companies involved in supplying weapons to the military, both pre and post the 2021 coup. Following a subsequent investigation by Singaporean authorities, Andrews reported in the document that the flow of weapons and related materials to Myanmar from Singapore-registered companies plummeted by nearly 90%, from $110 million to just $10 million. Total payments processed by Singaporean banks also declined sharply, from $260 million to approximately $40 million.

    However, the decline in business with Singapore led to an increase in transactions with Thailand, where business shifted due to easier administration and a junta-friendly government. In Thailand, the numbers moved in the opposite direction to Singapore, with transfers of weapons and related materials from companies registered in Thailand doubling from over $60 million in 2022 to nearly $130 million last year. These transfers included the purchase of spare parts for Mi-17 and Mi-35 helicopters and K-8W light attack aircraft, which were previously sourced via Singapore-based entities and used to conduct airstrikes on civilian targets. Thai banks have been pivotal in facilitating this shift. For example, Siam Commercial Bank facilitated just over $5 million in transactions related to the Myanmar military in the fiscal year ending March 2023, but the figure jumped to more than $100 million the following year.

    While the report demonstrates the junta’s ability to adapt to increasing financial restrictions, it also suggests that the campaign of Western sanctions is beginning to have an impact. Andrews notes that after the U.S. imposed sanctions on two state-owned banks last year, the Myanma Foreign Trade Bank (MFTB) and the Myanma Investment and Commercial Bank, the junta shifted most of its banking functions to Myanma Economic Bank (MEB), a state-owned bank that remains unsanctioned. Since then, MEB has processed tens of millions in payments for military procurement, receipt of international taxes and fees, and repatriation of foreign revenues from state-owned enterprises. Although Australia and Canada have also imposed sanctions on the first two banks, no foreign government has yet targeted MEB. The report emphasizes the need for the international community to shut down MEB’s international banking access through coordinated sanctions.

    The people of Myanmar are in a dire situation, as the suppression of democracy and pro-democracy movements has led to a civil war. The military regime continues to receive business and arms support from various countries, including Russia, Singapore, and now primarily from Thailand, their neighboring country and biggest supporter. While some rebel groups have connections with Western governments, there are few reports of military aid from the West. With India and China, Myanmar’s large neighbors, showing little interest in intervening in the civil unrest, Thailand’s indirect involvement becomes a significant advantage for the regime, enabling it to prolong the war and maintain its military rule.

  • Is Kazakhstan Imitating Russia by Targeting Critics

    Is Kazakhstan Imitating Russia by Targeting Critics

    Kazakhstan, often referred to as “Junior Russia”, is the second largest republic in the former Soviet Union and remains closely aligned with Russia. Kazakhstan politics are deeply intertwined with Russian politics. While the European  Russosphere countries are increasingly shifting towards the West and adopting an anti-Putin stance, Kazakhstan is not yet ready to feel this wind of change. Until now, Kazakhstan’s politics have been considered flawed, potentially placing it among a list of countries with poor democratic practices. This flawed democracy could also be seen as a binding factor between Russia and Kazakhstan. Politicians of both countries need each other to cover their undemocratic democracies. None of Kazakhstan’s elections have met Western standards for fairness; issues include ballot tampering, multiple voting, harassment of opposition candidates, and press censorship. Similar to Russia, political party winners can often be predicted early, and genuine opposition voices are not tolerated in the country. Wait, it’s all about Kazakhstan, not Russia; the similarities may indeed be genuine.

    Kazakhstan is also known for targeting critics of the regime, similar to Russia. Numerous incidents have been reported, including the recent attempted killing of Aydos Sadykov, a Kazakh opposition figure and prominent blogger with over 1 million subscribers on YouTube. Sadykov, who operates the YouTube channel named “ Base” and was granted asylum in Ukraine in 2014, was shot near his home. He has been wanted in Kazakhstan since last year. Sadykov and his wife jointly run the popular opposition social media channel in Kazakhstan, known for its strong criticism of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

    According to Natalya Sadykov, while driving into their apartment building’s courtyard on June 18 afternoon, her husband Sadykov was shot by a man wielding a pistol while seated in the driver’s seat of their car. Ukrainian police released a photo of a dark-colored vehicle with a shattered driver’s side window, stating that the search for the attacker was ongoing. Kyiv officials announced the initiation of an investigation, stating: “Preliminary information suggests that an unidentified individual approached the car containing the victim and his wife, fired a gunshot at the man, and then escaped”. Sadykov is currently in hospital in bad condition. They added that law enforcement is taking steps to identify the assailant. Sadykova later mentioned that her husband underwent surgery and remains in serious condition. She requested prayers for his recovery. She also accused President Tokayev of orchestrating the assassination.

    Sadykov was targeted by the Kazakhstani government, akin to Russia’s pursuit of Alexey Navalny. Last October, Kazakh authorities placed the Sadykovs on a wanted list, accusing them of engaging in criminally unlawful conduct by “Inciting Social Hatred”, a charge often expected from such regimes. Kazakhstan’s President Tokayev condemned the attack on June 19, describing it as a “Serious Incident”. He emphasized that all societal conflicts and disagreements should be resolved lawfully and in accordance with international norms. Tokayev also expressed Kazakhstan’s readiness to assist Ukraine in identifying the perpetrators.

    Political analysts in Kazakhstan have offered differing views on the motives and consequences of the attempted murder. Dimash Alzhanov, a political scientist known for his critical stance against the government, suggested that news of the attack sends a significant signal to Kazakhstani society. He warned that such actions could backfire, exacerbating societal anger and deepening divisions. Alzhanov emphasized the importance of constructive dialogue over destructive tactics.

    Kazakhstan is actively working to improve its image in international communities and position itself as a hub for business, while also enhancing relationships with various countries. However, repeated incidents like these could tarnish its image and potentially lead to sanctions similar to those imposed on Russia. Despite recent efforts to open up internationally, Kazakhstan’s domestic politics have seen little change. These inconsistencies may hinder cooperation with the West.

  • 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.