Category: Asia

  • Why Pakistanis Were Targeted In Kyrgyzstan

    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.

  • How Could Taiwan’s New President Escalate Tensions With China?

    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.

  • Iran After Ebrahim Raisi

    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.

  • Vietnam’s Spratly Reclamation Impact on Dispute

    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.

  • What’s behind Malaysia’s Orangutan Diplomacy?

    What’s behind Malaysia’s Orangutan Diplomacy?

    The tradition of exchanging animals as part of friendship has been observed by many countries in the past. However, China transformed this practice into a continuous diplomatic strategy. Panda diplomacy, the act of sending adorable, giant pandas from China to other countries for diplomacy and wildlife conservation purposes, serves as a strategy to demonstrate their appreciation for friendships and their dedication to nature preservation. Panda diplomacy catches the news headlines because of the exceptional rarity of the species, fascination that pandas evoke. Now, Malaysia, a country heavily criticized for its deforestation for large-scale palm cultivation, is also adopting China’s strategy to demonstrate its commitment to nature. Although Malaysia doesn’t have pandas, they possess another rare species, the orangutan.

    Malaysia faces pressure from the EU, one of its largest trade partners, which last year approved an import ban on commodities linked to deforestation. The action will severely impact the Malaysian economy, which relies on palm oil exportation. Malaysia criticized the law as discriminatory and began working with states that are consumers of their palm oil to reduce obstacles and continue trade. Thus, Malaysia adopted a strategy widely known as orangutan diplomacy, as it plans to give orangutans as gifts to countries that buy its palm oil to ease concerns over the environmental impact of the commodity. This commodity is prevalent in more than half of supermarkets from food to cosmetics. Over the years, media and environmental workers have accused the global demand for palm oil of fueling deforestation in Malaysia and neighboring Indonesia. According to Malaysia’s Plantations and Commodities Minister, Johari Abdul Ghani, the act of gifting the rare species orangutans to trading partners such as the EU, China, and India would demonstrate Malaysia’s commitment to biodiversity conservation to the global community. He emphasized that the country could not take a defensive approach to the issue of palm oil. Instead, they need to show the world that Malaysia is a sustainable oil palm producer committed to protecting forests and environmental sustainability.

    The Bornean orangutan, which is endemic to the island of Borneo, is listed as critically endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature, akin to Giant Pandas in China. Besides Malaysia’s part of the Borneo island, orangutans are visible in the Indonesian part of Borneo and Sumatra. The numbers of orangutans are noted to be decreasing while the governments of Malaysia and Indonesia make efforts to conserve them. As the threat orangutans face from the shrinking of their natural habitats, rainforests, wildlife organizations have taken different stances on Orangutan diplomacy. Many have called on the Malaysian government to consider other ways to signal its commitment to protecting the species. On the other hand, many welcomed the government’s commitment to supporting coexistence with Malaysian wildlife, believing it will be a success like the panda diplomacy model, which has successfully promoted the conservation of species. Panda diplomacy led the species to be a talking point in western nations, and funds were raised for saving pandas from extinction. The Chinese government started to work more for their ambassador, and western nations also looked to support the preservation of Giant Pandas. Many wildlife conservators believe that through orangutan diplomacy, the problems facing orangutans will come into the spotlight, and the Malaysian government will work more for orangutan conservation.

    Palm oil holds significant importance in the Malaysian economy, serving as the cheap and widely available cooking oil in India and Pakistan, and used in food and cosmetics across Europe and the Americas, and even as biofuel in some countries, making it an indispensable commodity. Malaysia’s palm oil cultivation extends over roughly 5,000,000 hectares (19,000 square miles) of land, which was once forested. In light of concerns regarding deforestation, the Malaysian government pledged to curb the expansion of palm oil plantations by ensuring that at least half of the nation’s land remains covered by forests. Nonetheless, this effort faces significant challenges, particularly with rising demand leading to the expansion of plantations in Indonesia, and subsequent deforestation in Indonesia. The rainforests of both these countries are crucial for the world, and their loss would considerably impact global climate patterns. Therefore, reducing the usage of Palm oil is the strategy evolved to reduce the reliance on Palm oil, with the European Union leading this effort, which will likely extend to the USA and many other countries. 

    However, it’s clear any regulation  will significantly impact the Malaysian economy. In this context, Malaysia, seeking to continue in the European market and others, is demonstrating its dedication to nature and wildlife conservation through Orangutan diplomacy. By showcasing their commitment to nature, they expect to retain the market with them. Therefore, the Malaysian government’s Orangutan diplomacy will contribute to preserving the Malaysian economy and wildlife simultaneously.

  • Is Iran losing grip on Iraq?

    Is Iran losing grip on Iraq?

    Iraq is in the midst of a power struggle between two power houses: one is their neighbor, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the other is the United States. Both parties are heavily interested in this country, which is divided between Shia, Sunni Muslims, and Kurds, situated in a volatile location in the Middle East. After turbulent years under Saddam Hussein and a subsequent power vacuum, Iraqi politics became heavily influenced by Iran due to the rise of Shia-based political parties. The interests of Shia, Sunni, Iran, and the US  have led to the near disintegration of the state, with the country nearly fragmented and the northern Kurdish territory almost functioning as an independent nation. However, in recent years, it is noted that this Shia-majority country is shifting away from Iran-oriented politics. Many believe that Iraq is drawing closer to the US and distancing itself from Iran.

    Iraq operates as a federal parliamentary representative democratic republic. It follows a multi-party system where executive authority rests with the Prime Minister of the Council of Ministers, serving as the head of government, and the President of Iraq, who serves as the head of state. The Council of Representatives holds legislative power. Abdul Latif Rashid, an ethnic Kurd, currently holds the presidency, wielding significant executive authority. He appointed the Council of Ministers, functioning as the cabinet or government. Mohammed Shia’ Al Sudani, a Shia leader, serves as the current prime minister. Despite its democratic framework, Iraq exhibits signs of an increasingly authoritarian regime. But As regional tensions escalate, Washington will enhance its relationship with Iraq and may consider Iraq’s prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani as a potential intermediary in its dealings with Iran.

    Both the United States and Iraq find themselves in a period where they need each other. Al-Sudani recently visited Washington, DC, meeting President Joe Biden and other top US officials. From the White House, al-Sudani addressed the regional tensions and expressed his encouragement for all efforts to stop the expansion of the conflict area. Iraqi officials state that their country was among a handful informed by Iran of the attack on Israel, which followed an Israeli strike on the Iranian Embassy in Damascus. For the US, the Iran-Israel clash highlighted the necessity of maintaining US troops in Iraq for the time being and emphasized the need for the Iraqi government to do more to prevent Iraq from being used as a base of operations against the US and Israel by Iran and allied groups. More than 20 years after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 aimed at removing former leader Saddam Hussein, 2,500 US troops are still stationed in the country, primarily undertaking counter-ISIL (ISIS) roles. Amid regional tensions, al-Sudani appears to prioritize Iraq’s domestic issues, and aims to attract investment in the country’s private sector. Iraq’s economy remains highly reliant on the United States and its financial infrastructure. Al-Sudani is advocating for fewer American restrictions on the Iraqi banking system, increased investments, and enhanced security ties.

    Iran-aligned groups, such as the militias that constitute the Islamic Resistance in Iraq (IRI), pose a threat to both Iraq and US troops stationed there, with many expecting them to become the next al-Qaeda. US troops became targets in the aftermath of Israel’s war on Gaza. There is reason to fear Iran-aligned groups in the country remobilizing if regional tensions expand.  Finding a balance between Iran’s influence and US interests is not easy, with al-Sudani pushed to call for a complete withdrawal of US troops in January, seemingly in response to some 53 US attacks on Iran-aligned groups in Iraq. It’s made clear that al-Sudani doesn’t want to provoke enmity with Iran either. However, his warming connection with the US suggests a weakening of Iran’s control over Iraqi politics. Iraq is set to hold elections in 2025, and the prime minister needs the support of his domestic backers as well as the US if he wants to renew his mandate.

    As for the US, Biden will have both domestic and regional concerns regarding Iraq. The Biden administration is seeking to counter Iranian influence in Iraq at a regional level. The US would seek commitments to ensure Iraq’s sovereignty by minimizing Iranian influence across all levels of decision-making, including politics, economics, and security. And the US will aim to persuade al-Sudani to cooperate with US allies in Erbil, the capital of the Kurdish region of northern Iraq. In the last six months, officials from the Kurdish regional government have made several visits to Washington, aiming to enlist the Biden administration’s support in mediating with Baghdad. The Kurdish leaders generally view Sudani favorably and see him as genuine in his efforts to resolve Baghdad-Erbil issues.

    Iraq, one of the oldest places of civilization, has the third richest oil reserve after Saudi Arabia and Iran. However, it’s true that the country has never fully utilized its potential. There are many blames attributed to the United States, who removed Saddam Hussein for his alleged weapons of mass destruction. Iran has also been blamed for pushing its interests and causing political turmoil in the country. Islamist organizations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS also played a role in the destruction of Iraq. There are many parties to blame, but ultimately, the people are the ones who suffer the most, and they witness the failing of their beautiful state. However, recent developments in politics, moving towards a more neutral stance and cooperating with the United States and its wealth, offer hope for improvements in Iraq.

  • China’s Efforts for Palestine and Its Effects in the Middle East

    China’s Efforts for Palestine and Its Effects in the Middle East

    As over six months have passed since Hamas attack on Israel and Israel’s ongoing retaliation, we understand some important trends. Firstly, neither Israel nor Hamas currently wishes for a ceasefire. Secondly, the US doesn’t hold much power over Israel. Indeed, Biden has asked several times for a ceasefire in Gaza, though Israel doesn’t seem to obey it. In the latest development, the US has warned that they will stop providing weapons, but Israel seems unfazed. If the United States can’t take action, Europe remains merely an observer. Saudi Arabia and Iran have demonstrated their weakness in international politics. Russia, engaged in another unending war, likely won’t be inclined to talk peace. India appears to be leaning heavily towards Israel. Qatar, the usual Muslim intermediary, has failed in its efforts. So, who is left to conduct mediation talks on the world stage? We’ve overlooked one significant player: China, rising super power.

    The Soviet Union, once the second pole, was the biggest supporter of Palestine, but they don’t exist now. After three decades of a power vacuum created by the disintegration of the Soviet Union, now we have a significant contender: the dragon, China. During the time of the power vacuum, many things happened in Palestinian politics. The first was the split in administration between the West Bank and Gaza, which severely weakened Palestine. Sensing a diplomatic opening, Chinese President Xi Jinping is stepping up China’s intervention in the Middle East crisis. Beijing’s primary aim is to facilitate reconciliation between the two primary Palestinian factions: the secular Fatah and the Islamist Hamas. Last week, it hosted talks between these two groups. Palestinian unity is seen by China as the most probable and practical solution for Palestine. If Palestine becomes a recognizable country, they will gain more power, and probably China can lead them to more positions in the UN and other bodies. If China accomplishes this, there is no doubt China will be the winner in the Middle East. There has been actual improvement with China’s mediatory efforts. Musa Abu Marzouk, the head of Hamas’s international relations office, stated in a Sunday interview that he anticipates Fatah and Hamas returning to Beijing soon for a second round of talks. He also disclosed that Hamas had wanted China, Russia, and Turkey to act as co-guarantors of any peace deal between Hamas and Israel, signaling Hamas’s distrust of the US’s inability or unwillingness.

    Some analysts perceive China’s engagement as an attempt to supplant the US’s traditional role in between Israel and Palestine. However, China regards its actions as a continuation of the role it played last year in resolving the nine-year diplomatic standoff between Saudi Arabia and Iran. China’s good fortune may be its timing. There is a weak administration currently in the US, and even Japan’s president said last month that the US is in doubt on their own world leader role. In this situation, the initiative made by China is a more practical way to bring about change in Palestine and establish an authorized body as the first step in negotiations with Israel. Both Fatah and Hamas find themselves in difficult situations. Fatah has become significantly unpopular, while Hamas is actively hunted by Israel. Both parties are in need of peace and a resolution. However, there are many hurdles. Just prior to the negotiations, Hamas launched a critique against the new Fatah-led government in the West Bank, asserting that it was not consulted on its formation. Fatah hit back, saying it had not been consulted about Hamas’s attack on Israel. But if they all get into the structure of government and show some unity, they can be presented to Israel for more talks.  As China can fix the Saudi Arabia-Iran issue they can fix this also. 

    The Gaza conflict resulted in a strengthening of China’s pro-Palestinian stance in the Middle East. Within a week of the Hamas attack on 7th October, the Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, described Israel’s bombardment of civilians in Gaza as actions that “have gone beyond the scope of self-defense” in a call with the Saudi Foreign Minister, Faisal bin Farhan al-Saud. Xi commented on the crisis after the Third Belt and Road Forum in late October. He restated China’s long-standing support for a two-state solution and pushed for the creation of a humanitarian corridor to aid the Gaza Strip. In February, Beijing pressed the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to weigh in on the legality of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories, which China deemed unlawful. It appears that China is exerting more effort compared to what is being contributed by so-called Muslim allies.

    China has been a net importer of oil since 1993, with about half coming from the Middle East. China has become reliant on a region that the US continues to dominate. But as per latest geopolitical happenings, The Middle East now feels the advantage of having an alternative to Washington’s supremacy. Gulf states are heavily investing in China, driven by their desire to free themselves from oil dependence, wean themselves off their over-dependence on the US, and embrace emerging countries, industries, and markets. The US is resisting this trend, for instance, challenging Middle Eastern countries not to invest in Huawei. One of the factors driving Washington’s desire to strike normalization deals with Saudi Arabia is the belief that it can help marginalize Chinese influence in sensitive security and energy sectors. Though, as part of the power game, China now gives hope to Palestine and peace lovers through their efforts.

  • How will “Squad” be beneficial for the Philippines?

    How will “Squad” be beneficial for the Philippines?

    Amid rising tensions, more regional blocs are emerging in East Asia and the Pacific. In addition to the Quad, consisting of Australia, India, Japan, and the US, and AUKUS, a defense pact among Australia, the United Kingdom, and the US, a new regional bloc linking Australia, Japan, the Philippines, and the United States is getting advanced into a more permanent alliance. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin met counterparts from Australia, Japan, and the Philippines last week as Washington sought to deepen ties within the rising regional group, which Pentagon officials had privately nicknamed the “‘Squad”. The quadrilateral marks the latest regional partnership Washington has forged to counter Beijing’s growing assertiveness in the region, and the formation of the alliance holds importance in the region’s evolving landscape as the United States expects imminent tensions in the region.

    The Philippines confronts substantial risks in the South China Sea, owing to its geography and close proximity to the Chinese shore. Nevertheless, the informal alliance referred to as the Squad offers a significant opportunity for the country. The Philippines will receive security assistance including both hardware and human resource training. Analysts suggest that this alliance will enable Manila to “Borrow the Strength” of the other three nations in countering challenges from China and in elevating the Philippines status beyond that of a “Junior Partner”. The Squad is expected to undertake more maritime exercises and provide greater security assistance to the Philippines, which in recent months has been involved in several naval skirmishes with Chinese vessels in the South China Sea. Washington has made it clear to all nations, including China, that Beijing’s recent behavior in the disputed waterway is “Irresponsible” and “Disregards International Law”. 

    The Squad will not just provide Manila with enhanced “Diplomatic Assurances” and assistance in building its capabilities but also guarantee increased interoperability between the Philippines and its allies. The absence of the Philippines in the Quad, formed between Asia-Pacific superpowers like Australia, Japan, India, and the United States, was notable. When India, traditionally allied with Russia, joined forces to counter China, the Philippines, the United States key ally in the region, was not included. This omission appeared to disregard the importance of the Philippines in the regional tensions, but the new alliance appears to rectify this.  Many believe there will be the move to  integrate the Philippines into the Quad to turn it into a five-member grouping, and some believe the United States forming an Asia-Pacific version of NATO. There are more countries in the region facing the threat of China and have entered into separate pacts with the US, such as Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Singapore. They could join with them when analyzing the tensions in the region.

    However, there are also dissenting voices; some argue that likening China to the Soviet Union or Russia is a mistake, suggesting that these agreements primarily benefit US interests. Chinese analysts warned that the Philippines had become increasingly manipulated by the US, losing its autonomy and becoming a pawn of the US in the region. Countries like India, never an ally of the US, have joined with them only to counter China, and they hold separate interests in the region. The integrating security pact will not agree with India, as they have been seeking separate relationships, including with the Philippines. India has forged ties with Manila, as seen in the recent sales of BrahMos missiles to the Philippines, noting that India-Philippines ties were likely to progress in non-traditional security areas such as cybersecurity, anti-piracy, and anti-terrorism. Last month, India delivered its first batch of supersonic cruise missiles to the Philippines under a $375 million deal signed in 2022. However, the recent aggression of China on Philippines vessels is validating the Philippines moves and bringing the country to the center of tensions. 

    The United States can’t allow a situation like Ukraine in the South China Sea because significant suffering is occurring for the US and Europe due to the war. Additionally, as China seems to be losing momentum and facing significant challenges in its manufacturing sector, many predict that this situation will lead to an aggressive stance from China in the South China Sea, with the Philippines being a sure target in that situation. Here underscores the significance of the Squad; a bolstered opposition could prompt China to reassess its position. For the Philippines, it extends beyond security concerns; they foresee that aligning with the US can elevate them to the status of a regional power.

  • Impact of Biden’s Xenophobia Comment on Asian Politics

    Impact of Biden’s Xenophobia Comment on Asian Politics

    The United States Presidential race is heating up. President Joe Biden, appearing aged and sluggish, intends to seek another term for the presidential role. The Democrat, known for his pro-migration stance, consistently supports and welcomes immigrants. Biden’s recent comment favoring the country’s migration policy, in comparison with Asia, is emerging as a controversial topic in the political sphere. At last week’s event to raise funds for his 2024 re-election campaign, Biden remarked that their welcoming stance towards immigrants was a contributing factor to their growth of the economy. He proceeded with the economic struggles of China, Japan, Russia, and India, attributing them to their xenophobic reluctance to accept immigrants. Biden underscored the strength immigrants bring to a nation, but with negative comments on rivals China and Russia, and interestingly towards Japan and India. Such a seemingly casual remark from a seasoned politician has the potential to impact foreign relationships badly.

    Biden’s comments against Asian countries’ xenophobia, were only meant to target Trump’s policies, but they made news in the Asian political landscape. Despite Russia, China, and India being multi-ethnic countries historically welcoming foreigners, their immigration policies do not resemble those of the United States or Western countries today. These countries’ stringent immigration laws and high population numbers coupled with a low job market, make them unattractive destinations for migration. These countries have significant multi-ethnic cities, such as Hong Kong, Mumbai, and Moscow, but small cities and villages usually don’t have that multi ethnic color. Though these countries’ populations and religions are generally open to foreigners, their politicians often run campaigns against immigrants. The stringent regulations are directly linked with politics. The countries are notorious for campaigns against the US, and which is often referred to as Xenophobia. But the comments against these countries by Biden, used by politicians in these countries, are being used to further escalate anti-American sentiments. However, mentioning Japan in the comment, a staunch ally of the United States, adds an intriguing dimension to the discussion.

    Japan is more notorious for xenophobia than other countries in Biden’s comment, and historically, this trait has been visible in Japanese society. The nation, which prides itself on its homogeneity, has long been hesitant about immigration. However, its falling birth rate and rapidly aging population point to an acute labor shortage in the coming decades. Many experts believe that Japan’s lagging economy is a result of its strict regulations on immigration. In the case of Japan, Biden’s comment is actually true. However, Making a negative comment on Japan alongside comments about enemy nations is a blow for Japan. Japan has been described as “Regrettable”, the top government spokesperson said on Tuesday. Chief Cabinet Secretary of Japan, Yoshimasa Hayashi informed at a scheduled regular news conference that representations had been lodged with the United States. These representations indicated that the comment was not based on the correct understanding of Japan’s migration policy and was regrettable. Japan’s ties with its security ally, the United States, remain solid. Nevertheless, this type of comment will definitely affect people’s mood.

    Only a few weeks before, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida visited Washington for a summit with Biden and unveiled plans for military cooperation and projects ranging from missiles to moon landings to strengthen ties with an eye toward countering China and Russia. At this time, mentioning Japan was an unnecessary move by Biden. At Least it doesn’t need  to be criticized along with the enemy states. China and Russia already have strained connections with America. Regarding India, they were moved towards the direction of the U.S. during Trump. But, Biden’s comment has already made headlines in India, and it could worsen the relationship. This is certainly a blunder by Biden at a time when strong alliances with Japan and India are needed to counter the growing influence of China and Russia in the continent. While Trump was accused by Biden of damaging foreign relations, Biden’s actions may be causing even more harm to the United States’ foreign relationships.

  • Saudi Arabia’s Strategic Approach to Gaza Challenges

    Saudi Arabia’s Strategic Approach to Gaza Challenges

    Following Israel, Saudi Arabia stands as the United States’ foremost ally in the Middle East. The connection between the kingdom and Washington is robust and intimate, with both entities walking hand in hand towards shared goals. However, Saudi Arabia, the land of Mohammed, the site of Mecca and Medina, a country that still upholds strict Sharia law and one of the largest funders of Islamist organizations always says about a commitment to Palestine. The question arises: How long can they continue to turn their face against their fellow Muslim brothers in Gaza? The issue in Palestine has never been solely between Palestine and Israel, two countries, but has always been perceived as a conflict between Muslims and Jews, thus garnering global attention. Saudi Arabia, considering itself as the leader of Muslims, has faced significant criticism for its inaction regarding Palestine. However, recent developments suggest that Saudi Arabia is strategically moving to gain more benefits from the United States by staying with them in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

    Saudi Arabia still doesn’t have a formal relationship with Israel, even though the United States is the primary ally of both Saudi Arabia and Israel. Saudi Arabia cooperated with the Arab League against Israel in the initial years of the Arab-Israeli conflicts. However, they played only minor roles in the series of wars. Even though Hamas and Palestine maintain stronger ties to Saudi Arabia’s rivals, Iran and Qatar, Saudi Arabia did not try to publicly align with Israel, not even during the Trump administration when Saudi Arabia’s allies like the UAE and Bahrain established formal ties with Israel. However, business between them gained momentum as Saudi Arabia’s allies established diplomatic relations with Israel. But all the progress was lost when Hamas attacked Israel on October 7th of last year. The Hamas attack, Israel’s retaliation, and perceived poor administration from the US under Biden have brought the Israel-Saudi Arabia relationship to a standstill. Some even doubt if the Hamas attack on Israel was orchestrated by Iran and Russia to halt Israel-Saudi Arabia talks. If an axis develops among the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, other players will be thrown out of the scenario. However, now there is widespread anger among the Muslim population against Israel, including in Saudi Arabia. Due to strict laws, protests are unlikely, yet criticism is high as the Saudi government hasn’t intervened. Meanwhile, Iran and Turkey are using the situation to assert their roles as advocates for Islam and leaders of the Muslim world.

    Saudi Arabia is actually strategically maneuvering its position. The kingdom is presently focused on diminishing its reliance on Israel while leveraging the circumstances to secure more favorable terms with the United States. Despite encountering criticism from certain segments of the Muslim world, Saudi Arabia perceives this strategy as advantageous. With no ceasefire in Gaza and strong opposition from Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government to a Palestinian state, the Saudis are now pushing for a more streamlined alternative. Which is excluding Israel from the deals with the United States. This alternative involves bilateral defense pacts, US assistance in developing Saudi Arabia’s civil nuclear energy sector, and significant collaboration in emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence. Under Riyadh’s proposal, these agreements would not require Israel’s approval. The United States is cautious about involving Israel at this stage, fearing that Saudi Arabia might pivot towards alignment with China or Russia, which could undermine US dominance in the region and have significant economic repercussions. While the exclusion of Israel from these agreements will impact Israel, it is expected that Israeli businesses will shift to the US. A formal offer would be extended to Israel, proposing Saudi normalization, a significant objective in Israeli foreign policy, in exchange for definitive steps towards establishing a Palestinian state encompassing Gaza and the West Bank. The US aimed for this offer to become a focal point in Israeli politics, particularly during elections following the potential collapse of the Netanyahu government. 

    Saudi Arabia, one of the powerhouse of the Middle East,  ranks as the world’s second-largest oil producer after the United States and the second-largest GDP in the Middle East, trailing only Turkey. They are in an effort to transition from strict Islamic laws to a more economy-oriented perspective involving substantial investments in media, tourism, and sports. Furthermore, they aspire to host prestigious global events such as the FIFA World Cup and Olympics on their soil, underscoring their prioritizations. The support of the United States will ensure that Saudi Arabia can achieve this endeavor. However, a less assertive stance on the Gaza situation has the potential to tarnish Saudi Arabia’s reputation as the leader of Islamic states. On the other hand, it aids the United States in intensifying efforts to bolster bilateral trade, enhance security partnerships, and promote technological advancements, including the establishment of a uranium processing plant. Concerns regarding the kingdom’s human rights record and women’s rights issues, which no longer seem to trouble the United States. Instead, they aim to maintain a close alliance with Saudi Arabia, And that Saudi Arabia is keenly aware of.