Category: World

  • Islamic Republic: What Does It Mean?

    Islamic Republic: What Does It Mean?

    Islam and Republic: Two philosophies or political systems that seem situated at opposite ends, with different views and morals, appear incompatible in the eyes of many. However, in politics, anything is possible, and some politicians have combined these ideas to form a unique system known as an Islamic Republic. This term now refers to a sovereign state that takes a compromise position between a purely Islamic caliphate and a secular, nationalist republic. The nature of this compromise can be defined by the constitution makers, so it varies from country to country, but they all claim to be Islamic republics. Every Islamic Republic administration emphasizes a stronger cultural identity rooted in Islamism, as it is neither a traditional Islamic monarchy under a king  nor a modern secular republic. Confused? So is everyone, from the constitution makers to the common people.

    Currently, three countries officially claim to be Islamic Republics: the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. All of them emphasize Islam and Sharia law but do not have a monarchy to lead them. Instead, politicians, mostly Islamists are the policy makers, prefer not to emulate Western republics and aim to preserve their cultural identity. Thus, these three crafted their constitutions under the title of Islamic Republic, each being unique and distinct. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is a federal parliamentary republic, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania is a unitary semi-presidential republic, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is a unitary theocratic republic. They have different governing systems and were formed in different situations. 

    There have been other short-lived Islamic Republics in history, such as those in Bangladesh, Comoros, Afghanistan, Gambia, and in Central Asia and the Caucasus, but all were forced out soon after their establishment. Thanks to the people of Pakistan, Mauritania, and Iran for enduring challenges and keeping their regimes alive.

    Pakistan, a country formed in response to the long-standing demands of Islamists in the Indian subcontinent, established its first Islamic Republic constitution in 1956. This move was considered revolutionary in the Islamic world. At that time, newly formed countries in the Islamic world were opting to be secular republics rather than monarchies. As a result, Pakistan gained prominence in the Islamic world for adhering to Islamic principles, unlike other new republics such as Turkey, which embraced secularism. With this move, Pakistan effectively created a new Islamic cultural identity, which it had previously lacked, skillfully differentiating itself from its Indian heritage with diverse languages and ethnicities. 

    However, many political scientists believe that Pakistan’s Islamic Republic constitution was a product of the divergence between British-educated Islamists, like the founding president Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and conservative Islamists. To solve this, they combined Sharia with modern British laws to appeal to the populace. The case of Mauritania is somewhat similar, but instead of British influence, French influence shaped its Islamic Republic constitution.

    Perhaps the Islamic Republic of Iran, which brands itself as an Islamic Republic across all sectors from the military to the media, is the most notorious example of such a state. Founded after the 1979 Islamic Revolution that overthrew the unpopular Shah regime, the Islamic Republic has led to a steep economic and cultural decline for Iran, which was more developed at that time compared to Pakistan and Mauritania. With the new constitution to protect Sharia and Islamism coming into force under the Shia Supreme Leader, the country has been ruined by poor diplomacy, tough sanctions, and harsh living conditions over the past 45 years. As a result, many citizens harbor hatred towards the Islamic Republic and resent the government’s harsh actions against any demands for change or protests against Islamic law. While the Islamic Republic is not an Islamic monopoly like Saudi Arabia, it enforces a more extreme form of Islamism, resulting in significant resistance from the people.

    The Islamic Republic can be considered a failed administrative system, as evidenced by the deep economic and cultural struggles of countries. The system favors corruption and poor governance, and the lack of skilled people has led to economic and diplomatic collapse. Strict Islamic laws, without supervision as in a monarchy, lead to outdated practices like mob lynching and blasphemy incidents. The rift between hard believers and mild believers is very high, and in countries where even mild believers and non-believers are hunted, minorities have no role. Overall, people are forced to suffer under these governments because they are protecting Islam. Pathetic!

  • Has an Asian NATO Already Evolved?

    Has an Asian NATO Already Evolved?

    NATO, one of the most successful international military collaborations, has helped Europe and the United States defend against communism and the Soviet Union, maintaining a stalemate in Europe and avoiding a possible third world war. Its importance in bringing peace to Europe is undeniable, even though the left and anti-war groups may disagree. While the Soviet Union ended, the might of Russia has kept NATO alive. However, Russia has proven not to be a significant threat to NATO, and the United States now sees the primary threat coming from Asia. The continent is on a journey back to prominence, with Communist China, the world’s second-biggest economy, along with its communist allies and Russia, deciding to challenge the United States and its influence. The United States recognizes these risks and is shifting its focus from the Atlantic to East Asia, strengthening military relationships with Asian countries. 

    The bilateral military relationships that the United States maintains with countries in the region are slowly evolving into regional ones. Although no official multilateral military organization like NATO has been created, political scientists believe such a coalition is already in effect in East Asia. North Korea, a communist ally of China, has no doubts about this development. North Korean state media have connected it to a recent joint military exercise by South Korea, Japan, and the US, claiming that these drills demonstrate that the relationship among the three countries has evolved into “The Asian version of NATO”.

    The three countries recently launched large-scale joint military drills near China, called “Freedom Edge”, involving navy destroyers, fighter jets, and the nuclear-powered US aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt. These exercises aim to enhance defenses against missiles, submarines, and air attacks. Conceived at the three-way summit at Camp David last year, the exercise is designed to strengthen military cooperation amid rising tensions on the Korean peninsula due to North Korea’s weapons testing and increasing military ties among Russia, North Korea, and China. Thus, the joint exercise’s mission extends beyond North Korea to include China and Russia.

    North Korea’s foreign ministry declared that Pyongyang would not overlook the strengthening of a US-led military bloc and would safeguard regional peace with an aggressive and overwhelming response, according to the KCNA news agency, on Sunday. It is certain that the Chinese government will take note of this development, especially given the increasing number of joint military exercises in the water near China and the disputed South China Sea, which China considers crucial.

    According to political analysts, beyond merely connecting allied countries in the region to NATO, the US has cultivated a group of nations capable of forming an inter-military collaboration in Asia similar to NATO. The United States, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Australia, and Singapore all fall under US military security in the region, effectively countering China’s influence. For more effective cooperation, a NATO-like body with a secretariat and other administrative structures could be established by the US soon. However, cost remains a significant issue, as there is already criticism from US citizens regarding US spending on NATO, while other member countries contribute less. It is clear that if the Soviet Union was the primary threat last century, China is seen as the primary threat to the United States in this century. Taming China will likely be a priority for the US despite spending issues in the coming decades.

    So, it’s not only North Korea’s comments; the United States is likely to move in this direction to prevent potential aggression from China and North Korea in the region. The rapid movements from the US side, including numerous diplomatic talks, military exercises, and weapons trade agreements, all indicate this. Given the failure of SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization), a US initiative modeled after NATO in Asia, due to disagreements among members, adding new members will likely involve close scrutiny and consideration of their importance.

    It will be interesting to see how this process progresses, especially since Chinese investments are significant in Asian countries, and the United States is expected to engage with them. Many Asian countries, which lean toward authoritarianism, may not prefer to align with the US if it means cutting ties with the Russia-China alliance. Only if an aggressive China emerges will a NATO-level multinational inter-military collaboration spanning vast regions be smoothly established.

  • What Led to Armenia’s Recognition of Palestine?

    What Led to Armenia’s Recognition of Palestine?

    Armenia and Israel, countries founded on religious identities, have had a historically strong relationship. Predominantly Christian Armenians and predominantly Jewish modern Israelis have maintained diplomatic relations, and their histories date back centuries. Both nations have experienced persecution under various kingdoms and share many similarities, including suffering from genocides that shocked the world with their cruelty. Many Jews lived in Armenia, and Israel still hosts Armenian Christians and a Jewish diaspora. There is even a quarter dedicated to Armenians in the holy city and disputed capital, Jerusalem.

    However, their relationship has not been entirely smooth. There has been reported discontent between the populations regarding each other’s history. Israel’s reluctance to recognize the Armenian genocide and its recent arming of Azerbaijani troops against Armenia have caused friction. Conversely, Israel perceives Armenia as aligning with Palestine and joining Muslims in the effort to establish a free Palestine. The latest development, with modern Armenia recognizing the State of Palestine after 30 years of its formation, is worsening the relationship with Israel.

    On July 23, Armenia became the ninth country since April to recognize Palestine as a direct response to the Gaza war. This was a unilateral decision, unlike many other countries. The Armenian Foreign Ministry highlighted that the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza and the ongoing military conflict are key issues on the international political agenda that demand resolution. However, many believe this situation is different.

    Despite ties between Armenia and Israel existing since Armenia’s independence from the Soviet Union, their relationship has not been smooth, with many diplomatic issues between the two countries. Tensions worsened significantly following the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Armenia feels betrayed after losing long-held Armenian heritage cities in Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan, which received support from Armenia’s long-time rival, Turkey. To exacerbate the situation, Armenia believes that Russia and Israel, the only nearby non-Muslim countries, did not provide sufficient support. Since Russia cannot be targeted, Armenia’s fury is directed towards Israel. In a post-interview, Armenia’s ambassador to Israel, Arman Akopian, stated that Azerbaijan has been utilizing Israeli weapons to bolster its control over Nagorno-Karabakh.

    From Israel’s side, they consider Armenia’s relationship with Iran a threat. Political ties between Armenia and Iran are growing increasingly robust, extending beyond typical neighborly relations. Recently, Iranian media reported that Armenia plans to construct a new highway connecting to Iran. Additionally, Armenia has signed an arms deal with India, stipulating that the arms will be transported to Armenia through Iran. In 2023, reports emerged indicating the presence of Iranian soldiers stationed along Armenia’s border with Azerbaijan. Such activities make Armenia a questionable ally for Israel.

    Israel believes Armenia’s decision to recognize Palestine as a state reflects underlying antisemitic sentiments within certain segments of Armenian society. There are reports of many Armenians in Israel believing they are considered third-class citizens and that Armenians prefer Muslims over Jews. This recent recognition can also be seen as a deepening relationship between Armenia and Shia countries in solidarity with the Palestinian population. Many anti-Israel social media groups celebrated Armenia’s decision, pointing out that Christians in Palestine are also suffering, emphasizing that it is not solely a Muslim-Jewish issue.

    “The Republic of Armenia has joined the resolutions of the UN General Assembly calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza”, the Armenian Foreign Ministry stated following the recognition of Palestinian statehood. This move is likely to impact Armenia’s aspirations to join the EU and align with the United States, signaling a shift towards closer relations with Iran and Russia.

  • How Bad Is the India-Canada Relationship Now?

    How Bad Is the India-Canada Relationship Now?

    India, the most populous country in the world, is experiencing an era of emigration. Many people from India are moving to different countries for various reasons, including a lack of opportunities, poor wages, and substandard living conditions. Canada, an English-speaking country in need of manpower, has become one of the preferred destinations for many Indians seeking a new life. The two countries had a good relationship, given that both are former British colonies, advocates of democracy, and have a history of Indian Prime Ministers being invited to participate in the Canadian Parliament. Immigration processes have been smooth, as Canada needed workers, and India provided them. Over time, technically skilled Indians and wealthy individuals chose Canada as their second home, and they were welcomed there, unlike many from the Middle East and Africa, whose impact on the economy was perceived differently.

    However, later migrations included individuals with anti-Indian sentiments, Islamists, extremist Sikhs, and those who had committed crimes in India. These groups found a home in Canada and became a major problem for India, ultimately straining relations between the two countries to their lowest point. Extremist Sikhs can be said to be the focal point of recent tensions between India and Canada. Sikhism, an independent religion that can be considered influenced by both Hinduism and Islam, has a significant presence in the Indian state of Punjab, Delhi, and the Pakistani part of Punjab. There is also a considerable Sikh population in the UK and Canada dating back to the 19th century.

    Sikhs have been demanding a separate country in the Indian subcontinent since Muslims garnered a separate nation, Pakistan, in the region. This movement gained momentum in Punjab, driven by various Sikh groups that began demanding the creation of a state called Khalistan, which the Indian Union opposed. This led to numerous deadly conflicts between the Indian Union and these groups, with some turning into highly dangerous terrorist organizations. These groups conducted various terrorist activities in Punjab, including the assassination of India’s Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi.

    The West was also part of this issue. The Sikh population in Canada and the UK were strong supporters of the separatist Khalistan movement and heavily funded these organizations. Western countries, not favoring a potential superpower in Asia that might support the Soviet Union, were keen to destabilize the Indian Union. They supported separatist organizations in Pakistan, Kashmir, and even Portuguese continuation in India. These countries also played a role in fostering Sikh sentiments in their regions, contributing to the tensions surrounding the Khalistan issue.

    The tensions between Canada and India began to escalate around the same time the Khalistan issue emerged in the mainstream, with India frequently accusing Canada of allowing its soil to be used for conducting terrorist activities in India. On June 23, 1985, a terrorist attack occurred on Air India Flight 182, a passenger flight from Toronto bound for London, UK, over the Atlantic Ocean. The explosion resulted in the deaths of approximately 329 people, including 268 Canadian nationals, most of whom were of Indian origin, and 82 children. Even though it was one of the deadliest terrorist acts Canada has ever seen, the tragedy did not receive the serious attention it needed, and only one person was found guilty. India is still not happy with the way the case was handled. Over time, the issue faded from the Canadian mainstream, as India believes Canada did not want to label Khalistani supporters as terrorists.

    The longstanding tensions between Canada and India reached a critical point after Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist, gained power in India, and Justin Trudeau, actively seeking support from Sikhs, became Prime Minister of Canada. Trudeau has been actively involved in Indian internal matters, such as the farmers protests, which involved many Sikhs, and has not shied away from criticizing India. Additionally, videos from Canadian Sikhs calling for attacks on India have exacerbated the situation. Along with that, Trudeau raised allegations of Indian government involvement in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh separatist leader labeled as a terrorist in India. Trudeau made a speech  in the House of Commons about “Credible allegations of a potential link” between the Indian government and Nijjar’s killing, despite no evidence having been produced to date.

    These incidents led to a deterioration in diplomatic relations between the two nations, resulting in the expulsion of top diplomats from each side. India dismissed the charges as “Absurd” and motivated. On September 20, India issued warnings to its citizens in Canada, advising them to exercise caution due to increasing anti-India activities. The following day, India suspended visa applications from Canadians until further notice. Canada also took similar action and updated its travel advisory, warning its citizens about potential anti-Canada protests and anti-Canadian sentiments, and placed India in the high-risk country category, citing not only potential protests but also high levels of terrorism in India. India’s concerns were further heightened when Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a key leader of the Khalistan movement and spokesperson for Sikhs for Justice, advised Indo-Canadian Hindus to leave Canada.

    India asked Canada to withdraw approximately 40 of its diplomats in October, and Canadian officials confirmed that 41 diplomats and their dependents had left India, leaving 21 remaining. Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly further confirmed that India’s revocation of diplomatic privileges was unilateral and that Canada would not issue a similar mandate for Indian diplomats. As the diplomatic row deepens, a new video of Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, the spokesperson of Sikhs for Justice, surfaced in which he issued a threat to people planning to travel via Air India on November 19, the day of the cricket World Cup final, a major sporting event in Ahmedabad, stating that their “Lives would be in danger.” Despite this, the Canadian government has not taken significant actions against extremists and continues to comment on Indian internal matters, including India’s stance on minorities. This situation has led to serious mistrust between the two countries, bringing their relationship to its lowest point.

    Now, the issue is not as hot as the previous year, but the relationship remains in a bad condition, with neither side willing to withdraw from their stance and further exacerbating it. Canada and India are two countries that can help each other in various fields. India’s human resources, technological capabilities, and tremendous markets can be beneficial for Canada. Conversely, Canada is a dream destination for many Indians, and the two countries can cooperate in various sectors. However, the failed immigration policies of Canadian politicians have opened a route for some of India’s problematic elements to enter Canada. This has led to increasing xenophobia towards Indians, which is clearly visible on social media. This unregulated migration from India to Canada is also negatively affecting India. Previously, India’s best talent moved abroad, but now more people who pose a threat to India’s reputation are migrating. Leaders of both countries need to address this issue. With Narendra Modi having secured a third term, it is certain that Canada will need to work with him. If these matters are handled with a focus on temporary political gains, both countries will likely suffer.

  • What Does the European Parliament Election Mean for Asia?

    What Does the European Parliament Election Mean for Asia?

    An important election is underway in Europe for the next European Parliament. Voting is taking place in all 27 nations of the European Union (EU), with polling set to conclude on Sunday. Approximately 373 million people across Europe are participating in the election to choose 720 members of the Parliament. This election will be crucial in shaping the priorities and political trajectory of the influential European Union for the next five years. The EU is currently dealing with pressing issues such as the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as challenges related to immigration and climate change. Polls suggest that hard-right parties are expected to make significant gains in several countries, a development that could have profound long-term implications for the continent. The world’s largest multi-country election, involving influential countries like France and Germany, will also impact global politics. Furthermore, many issues affecting Asia are also being discussed in the election campaigns.

    The European Parliament is the only EU institution where representatives are directly elected, and its Members of Parliament pass laws that are applied across all member states. For any legislation to be implemented, both the Council and the Parliament must agree. The Parliament also has ultimate approval over the funds allocated in the EU budget. The European Parliament is often the final authority on major policy issues such as the budget, trade, and sanctions on foreign nationals. It can also put major international objectives on hold, in the interest of the bloc.

    There are seven main groupings in the European Parliament, ranging from the extremes of the far right to the far left. The two dominant groupings are the center-right European People’s Party (EPP) and the center-left Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D). Because of proportional representation, no single group holds a majority, necessitating the formation of broad coalitions to accomplish tasks in Parliament. While these two parties are expected to be the largest after the elections, all eyes are on the other main right-wing groups: the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and the hard-right, populist Identity and Democracy (ID). Once all the votes have been counted, each national political party will be assigned a number of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) relative to their vote share. It is up to the member states to determine how these seats are allocated. Full results are expected on Monday.

    The European market is crucial for Asian countries, making this election significant in light of the ongoing trade war with tariffs and other regulations. The trade conflict that began between the USA and China has now extended to Europe. The European market is a significant outlet for Chinese production, and additional regulations on Chinese goods will undoubtedly impact the Chinese economy and potentially the broader Asian economy as well. Right-wing groups are concerned about the loss of production to China and are advocating for more aggressive actions against market penetration by Chinese products. The push from Chinese companies in the electric vehicle (EV) market is being scrutinized by Parliament, and China is awaiting the results to gauge future trade laws against them. There is also a plan to find alternatives to China, such as Vietnam and Bangladesh, and it is expected that the European Parliament will pursue this.

    As there are many migrants from Asia to Europe, both legal and illegal, this causes concern among right-wing groups, who frequently criticize current immigration laws. Therefore, the European Parliament election results are important for shaping future immigration policies, with expectations of tighter immigration controls. The current immigration system by the EU is contributing to the rapid development of far-right politics in Europe. Climate change is a key issue in the election campaigns. While left and green parties are advocating for more stringent emission restrictions, it is expected that the right-wing will gain ground in this election and work towards rolling back climate policies. This could indirectly benefit the Asian economy, as climate change discussions and restrictions have often targeted countries like China, India, and oil producers in the Middle East. The ongoing conflict in Gaza will also be influenced by the European Parliament election. The Gaza war is currently supported by many European countries, but the European Union does not intervene much. As the conflict continues, many believe that Europe needs to take a move. The upcoming parliament may not intervene in the conflict, given that right-wing parties generally support Israel’s actions. The parliament’s approach to expanding European influence into the Caucasus will also be closely monitored, as it could significantly impact the power dynamics in Asia. 

    It is expected that the European election trend will also influence the elections in member states. A surge of far-right influence is anticipated in Europe’s upcoming elections, including in France. If they perform well in the European Parliament election, it could herald a golden age of far-right politics in Europe. This would not only influence and shape the European Union and the European continent but also have repercussions across all continents. Asia is likely to bear the brunt, especially as tensions rise between the superpowers.

  • Biden Pushes for Ceasefire in Gaza

    Biden Pushes for Ceasefire in Gaza

    Israel’s war on Gaza is continuing without an end in sight. More than a war, it’s easy to describe it as Israel’s rage against Hamas for killing their citizens and taking their people as hostages, affecting the civilians of Gaza. It’s emotional, sentimental, and religious. The world is split, with protests occurring from New York to Australia, and social media filled with hate comments. Several movements advocate for a truce, but Israel is determined to achieve complete control over Gaza and demolish Hamas from their territory. However, protests are also fuming in Israel, coupled with the prolonged war and fear about hostages, along with demands for post-war plans from the coalition government, creating disturbances for Israel.

    In the latest development, the US is now working seriously towards a ceasefire in Gaza, as it faces humiliation due to its weakened power over Israel and its commitment to human rights. With the US elections six months away, many expect that Biden will lose votes due to poor performance on the Israel issue, with Democrats anticipating a loss of support from Arab Americans and young voters. This is troubling for Biden, and they are finally making some reliable moves for a ceasefire in Gaza.

    During a news conference at the White House on Friday afternoon, President Biden stated that Israel has put forward a comprehensive new proposal to end the war, which serves as a roadmap to an enduring ceasefire. Israel has agreed to a proposal that would lead to a lasting ceasefire in Gaza. Biden explained that the proposal involves three phases extending over months. The first phase would last six weeks and include a full and complete ceasefire in Gaza, as well as the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all populated areas of Gaza. Furthermore, the initial phase would entail the release of several captives held in Gaza, including women and the elderly. In exchange for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in Israel, humanitarian aid would be provided to Gaza. Israel faces deep pressure from within for delaying the rescue of captives. Biden also noted the presence of American hostages who would be released at this stage. He mentioned that Qatar, acting as an intermediary for Islamic terrorist organizations, had transmitted the proposal to Hamas.

    In the second phase, which also lasts six weeks, all remaining hostages would be released, Israel would completely withdraw from Gaza, and both parties would commit to a lasting truce. Finally, a reconstruction plan for Gaza would begin in phase three of the proposal, and the remains of any captives killed would be returned to their families. This plan appears feasible for both parties in the current scenario.

    Hamas, which created all the dilemma and actively tried for a ceasefire in Gaza and proposed a deal previously with the help of Qatar and Egypt, said it welcomed Biden’s remarks and his call for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from the Gaza Strip, reconstruction, and prisoner exchange. The group also said it was ready to respond “Positively and Constructively” to any proposal that includes those measures – as well as the return of displaced Palestinians to their homes in Gaza. They consider it a win for them because they conducted Jihad, and Israel and their well-known agencies can’t free the hostages who are kept by Hamas. 

    But on the Israeli side, it’s not easy. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office stated that he authorized the country’s negotiating team to present a proposal aiming to secure the release of captives held in Gaza. Currently, Israel considers the immediate release of hostages important. However, the Prime Minister also stated that Israel will persist with the war until all its objectives are met, including the destruction of Hamas’s military and governing capabilities. The prime minister said Israel’s conditions for ending the war have not changed: the destruction of Hamas’s military and governing capabilities, the freeing of all hostages, and ensuring that Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel.

    However, Netanyahu  is facing growing pressure from his military and intelligence chiefs, as well as the centrist members of his war cabinet, to outline a plan for administering and rebuilding Gaza when the war ends. Benny Gantz, a major rival who joined Netanyahu’s emergency unity government after 7 October, has said he will resign if the prime minister does not commit to a “Day After” plan by a deadline of 8 June. And there will be huge backlash from the Right wings too, for ending war without completely destroying Hamas. There are many who consider a ceasefire in Gaza itself a defeat.  It’s expected that the post-war situation will be challenging for Netanyahu as a leader because of a lot of corruption accusations against him. So many don’t believe the move from Israel is reliable, and it’s just a wish from Biden. The US national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, reportedly concluded from a visit to the region that he did not believe Netanyahu could or would commit to a long-term peace process.

    Biden’s announcement came as efforts to reach a ceasefire in Gaza have faltered amid the Israeli military’s push into the southern Gaza city of Rafah. The Israeli siege, which has led to dire shortages of food, water, and other humanitarian supplies, has spurred warnings of famine, but Israel is actually not looking to end the war immediately, or Netanyahu cannot do that now. It’s expected that the Gaza war will drag on for another seven months at least, but it will badly hurt Biden’s re-election prospects, who are already facing criticism for poor foreign involvement. While Biden pushes for Israel to agree to the plan, members of Netanyahu’s coalition government will disagree with the proposal and call for the war to continue. This situation makes it complex, so it is expected to once again highlight the weakness of the US government under Biden and it will continue the punishment for Gaza.

  • Will More Recognition Make Palestinian Statehood A Reality?

    Will More Recognition Make Palestinian Statehood A Reality?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Does ICC’s Arrest Warrant Against Netanyahu Matter?

    Does ICC’s Arrest Warrant Against Netanyahu Matter?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Why Is GCC Not Evolving Like The European Union?

    Why Is GCC Not Evolving Like The European Union?

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

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

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

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

  • Significance of Putin’s Visit to China

    Significance of Putin’s Visit to China

    Russia and China, once the fighting communist brothers, now appear to be in a great relationship. The bond between Moscow and Beijing has reached unprecedented levels. Both Presidents Putin and Xi Jinping celebrated their “no-limits” friendship, recognizing it as a counterbalance to the global influence of the US. This partnership is becoming stronger as the Biden administration seeks to isolate Russia from its Chinese lifeline following the full-scale invasion in Ukraine. While Russia increases its attacks in Ukraine and the United States increasingly expands into the Russosphere, President Vladimir Putin has arrived once again in Beijing for talks with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, as he seeks to showcase the enduring strength of the relationship and engage in further discussions with Chinese authorities. It is Putin’s second visit to Beijing in less than a year, the first after he took his fresh term, and the visit will also commemorate 75 years since the Soviet Union recognized the People’s Republic of China in 1949.

    Even Though, there are alot security issues to discuss, Experts believe business and the economy will be the main topics of discussion in Putin’s meeting with Xi. The two sides will be seeking ways to quietly circumvent US restrictions that have led to a decrease in Chinese exports to Russia following a post-war boom in both consumer products and dual-use goods, which have been crucial to the Russian war machine in Ukraine. China’s major banks are throttling payments out of concern over US sanctions, prompting Russia to propose a solution to the issue through a decentralized payment system that the West would be unable to track. Both sides will seek mechanisms that are immune to sanctions in the future. China officially opposes US sanctions, but in reality, banks and companies often find ways to comply to avoid encountering blowback from the US or being blocked from US dollar payments. Russia also aims to confront the decline in its gas exports, which have sharply dropped since its invasion of Ukraine, causing record losses for Gazprom, formerly the nation’s most profitable company. However, observers question whether Moscow and Beijing will be able to finalize an agreement on the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, a long-anticipated project that would supply China with Russian gas. Putin is bringing an expanded team of advisers and industry leaders to Beijing; the team includes a number of seasoned technocrats whom he has dubbed the Russian “A-Team”.

    Putin’s relationship with Xi first took shape in May 2014 when the Russian leader traveled to Beijing for a two-day state visit to discuss a major gas supply deal. The visit occurred shortly after Russia’s annexation of Crimea, resulting in Moscow being isolated by many Western countries. Xi promptly returned the favor by visiting Moscow and sitting alongside Putin during the city’s Victory Parade, an event boycotted by Western leaders as Russian-backed rebels seized territory in eastern Ukraine. Weeks before Putin sent his troops to invade Ukraine in February 2022, the Russian leader flew to Beijing where the two leaders famously celebrated their “no-limits” friendship. In an unmistakable show of support for Putin after his decision to invade Ukraine, Xi traveled to Moscow in the spring of 2023. For all the favors China does for Russia, in return, China gained a strong ally, as they have no more powerful allies. Xi praised Putin as his “best friend,” and many deals were signed between Russia and China. Russia provided China with oil and natural gas at a cheap rate and opened up the markets of Russia and Central Asian countries to China, which was an important move for China as they are losing European, American, and Indian markets. The United States responded fiercely. With tariffs raised by Trump, the Biden administration unveiled tariffs on $18 billion of Chinese imports last Tuesday. Tariffs were extended or introduced on a range of strategic sectors, including solar panels, electric vehicles, and semiconductors. On electric vehicles, rates were hiked from 25% to 100%, a situation that can pull them out of the flourishing market. 

    The Russian leader’s two-day trip to China comes as his country’s forces have pressed an offensive in northeastern Ukraine’s Kharkiv region, which began last week, marking the most significant border incursion since the full-scale invasion began. Russia, which has signaled it is unwilling to abandon the war, will become increasingly dependent on China as a trade partner and as a key diplomatic ally in its deepening conflict with the West. Tensions in the South China Sea, increasing blocs in East Asia, and Central Asia’s recent lean towards the United States, and possibly Gaza, will be additional talking points. However, the primary objective of this meeting will be to prove their friendship to each other and demonstrate it to their enemies.