Category: World

  • Xi Jinping’s Euro Trip: A Political Analysis

    Xi Jinping’s Euro Trip: A Political Analysis

    Chinese President Xi Jinping is on an important visit to Europe. Xi will engage in extensive discussions with European leaders, as Europe is actively seeking a truce in Ukraine and, in return, China is expected to reduce tariffs on Chinese products. The Chinese President’s visit marks the first time since 2019, with five eventful years having passed since then. The visit, just before the European election, is gaining importance as a trade war continues between China and Europe. Xi’s trip includes stops in France, the heart of Europe; Hungary, China’s closest ally in Europe; and Serbia, considered the unwanted child of Europe. Despite signs of growth in the Chinese economy, the ongoing disputes with their second-biggest trading partner, the European Union, are causing huge losses for China, prompting an emphasis on more trade agreements at the meetings. It is expected that the meetings will also be influenced by Russia’s demands.

    Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, and Emmanuel Macron, the President of France, will meet with the President of China in Paris. Von der Leyen has expressed the European Union’s continuous dissatisfaction with China, citing the latter’s significant manufacturing subsidies. She denounced China for its unfair trade policies and the unacceptably distorted markets brought forth by these substantial subsidies. Such actions might cause Europe to become less industrialized and result in a large loss of jobs, especially in the German auto sector.  Last September, the EU commenced an investigation to consider imposing punitive tariffs. The aim is to protect EU producers from the influx of cheaper Chinese Electric Vehicle (EV) imports, which benefit from state subsidies. This investigation, part of a series initiated by Brussels, covers various supplies to Europe, including medical devices and wind turbines. These products are being sold at half the cost of those made in Europe. The European Commission’s trade chief hinted that tariffs on Chinese EVs could be imposed by June, following an investigation into state support for electric car manufacturing in China. The European Union expresses concerns about the possible circumvention of sanctions against Russia by Chinese enterprises engaging in trade with their neighbor. However, China argues that the trade investigations are driven by political motives and that the consumer would be the lone casualty of a tariff war.

    Regarding the war in Ukraine, Xi acknowledged the impact it has had on the people of Europe, emphasizing that China is not directly involved in the conflict but is actively pursuing a peaceful resolution. One of Europe’s long-standing requests of China, particularly from Macron, has been to exert pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the war. However, after two years, Europeans have come to realize that this is unlikely to happen, especially considering Russia’s support from China and its robust economy. Despite this, China has prioritized its stance on Taiwan, appreciating Macron’s independent position on the matter. During Macron’s visit to China last year, he emphasized France’s independent stance on Taiwan, which China respects. This stance might explain why Xi chose France over Germany for his visit. Macron will likely attempt to dissuade Xi from retaliating over the EV investigation, possibly by discussing import duties on French cognac and agricultural goods. France also aims to advance discussions on opening the Chinese market to its agricultural exports and resolving issues related to intellectual property rights in the French cosmetic industry. Additionally, during Xi’s visit, China may announce an order for approximately 50 Airbus aircraft.

    China cannot afford increasing restrictions in the European market, especially considering the potential tariffs on electric vehicles (EVs), which would pose significant challenges for Beijing. According to Rhodium Group, EU imports of EVs from China reached $11.5 billion last year. Thus, China is aiming to mitigate tensions with its visit to Europe. In addition to visiting France, Xi will also travel to Serbia and Hungary during his Euro Trip. China has proposed deepening law enforcement ties with Hungary, expanding their relationship beyond the economic sphere to include a security cooperation agreement, raising concerns in other EU countries. Hungary already serves as Huawei’s largest base outside China, and it will soon host carmaker BYD’s first European factory. Orbán, the Prime Minister of Hungary, has consistently supported China in international forums and opposed EU motions critical of China on human rights issues. The trip also includes Serbia, a state in Europe known for its favorable stance towards Russia and China. Efforts will be made to further strengthen the China-Serbia relationship. While the outcome of the trip remains unclear as both parties focus on their interests, Xi’s visit will contribute to the European Parliament election. 

  • What Led Turkey to Suspend Trade with Israel?

    What Led Turkey to Suspend Trade with Israel?

    The encampment protests for Gaza are making huge waves around the globe. Western nations like the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia are witnessing the protests on a large scale, and countries like Colombia are openly starting to criticize Israel. On this occasion, there was criticism that many protests are not visible from Muslim countries, especially from the Middle East. However, now Turkey, which claims Ottoman hereditary so proudly under the Islamist politician Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is taking strong actions against Israel by halting all trades with Israel and accusing it of humanitarian tragedy in Gaza. Turkey’s decision is a huge and brave step, considering Turkey had an amicable relationship with Israel and is a NATO member and ally of the United States. Historically, Turkey recognized Israel when they announced independence, while many Muslim countries were reluctant to do so. The fruitful relationship started to sour during the Erdogan regime and was taken to its lowest level by Turkey’s imposition of a trade embargo, overthrowing trade agreements, and foreign relations in the area.

    Turkey’s trade ministry announced late on Thursday that export and import transactions related to Israel have been stopped, covering all products. The ministry emphasized that these measures would be strictly and decisively implemented until the Israeli government ensures an uninterrupted and sufficient flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza. Turkey’s trade ministry had previously announced restrictions on exports to Israel in early April, halting the export of iron and steel products and construction equipment. The decision has a huge economic impact because as of 2023, the two countries had a trade volume of $6.8 billion. This trade embargo by Turkey will also cause harm to the Turkish economy, as Turkey’s exports mostly go to western countries with close ties to Israel, and Israel itself is a top importer of Turkish goods. And as expected, Israel drew strong criticism of Turkey’s decision. Israel’s foreign minister, Israel Katz, accused Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, of acting like a “Dictator” in response to the reported restrictions. This dispute is likely to deepen tensions between the two former close allies. Katz accused Erdoğan of “Violating agreements by obstructing ports for Israeli imports and exports” alleging that he disregards the interests of Turkish citizens and businessmen, and ignores international trade agreements. Katz also stated that Israel would attempt to replace any lost products through local production and imports from other countries. Last month, he had criticized Erdoğan for publicizing his latest meeting in Istanbul with the head of Hamas’s politburo, Ismail Haniyeh.

    The reason behind Turkey’s decision, or Erdogan’s decision, is political. Turkey knows this action could sour relationships with Israel and, consequently, the West. However, the West will not take any action against Turkey now. There are several reasons for this. There is global sentiment against civilian killings in Gaza, which is also present in the West. Following the killings of aid workers and university protests, Western media are not actively supporting Israel anymore; they are maintaining a neutral stance instead of siding against Hamas, the terrorist organization responsible for brutal killings in Israel and taking hostages. This shift in Western mindset is providing Erdogan with a sense of security, as there is support for Turkey’s decision among Western populations. It’s evident that there is significant sentiment among Muslims worldwide in support of fellow Muslims in Palestine, and there is also resentment toward wealthy Gulf countries that have not taken significant steps to support Palestine, despite their close ties with Israel and the US. Erdogan can leverage this sentiment to portray himself as a true Ottoman leader, as he desires. As a seasoned politician, Erdogan can navigate this sentiment to push his agenda of Islamism In Turkey, especially as the country’s opposition makes progress and wins elections. He sees an opportunity and frames it well, presenting it at the opportune moment. So, this action will definitely impact Turkish domestic politics where Erdogan faces challenges.

    Israel’s revenge mission for the deaths of 1,136 Israeli citizens on October 7th and the taking of about 250 people hostage shows no signs of stopping nearby. The Israeli military is currently in Gaza and has bombarded the territory, resulting in the deaths of more than 34,000 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry. This situation has provided many politicians with leverage. Netanyahu doesn’t need to worry about protests against him, Iran has taken advantage by increasing calls for reform after Mahsini’s death, and European right-wing politicians have found an opportunity to showcase the increased Muslim population in Europe. Additionally, Turkey is now seeking an opportunity to quell discontent against Erdogan and gain an advantage over the opposition by increasing solidarity with Palestinian Muslims. So, everyone benefits except for the common people who lose their lives and property. Turkey’s decision to impose a trade embargo will not have any impact on Israel or the new world order; however, it is a win for Turkey and Erdogan.

  • What is Driving the Increase of Gaza Protests in Western Countries?

    What is Driving the Increase of Gaza Protests in Western Countries?

    Global Muslim solidarity has kept Palestine alive, or Palestine has kept alive global Muslim solidarity. Sunnis, Shias, and Mujahideen all share common thoughts for Palestine. Deep sentiments for Palestine have been created by Muslim writers. Muslim countries have joined together, even launching attacks for Palestine. Muslim journalists have penned articles in various languages, English, French, German, Hindi, to garner support for protests for Gaza. Muslim students have organized massive rallies in Dhaka, Karachi, Mumbai, Baghdad, and many other places, all orchestrated like a finely conducted concert for Palestine and people, who are suffering there. All of this has presented global support for Palestine, despite Israel and the United States supporters leading most influential institutions and newspapers. However, it’s interesting to note that this harmony for Palestine is not as evident after the recent attack in Gaza. Muslim countries are issuing statements but not taking significant actions against Israel. Palestine-related articles featuring images of suffering people are not prevalent in Eastern newspapers, even though casualties are high. Furthermore, students in Pakistan, India, and Arab countries are not as active on the streets for Palestine. Meanwhile, protests for Gaza are intensifying on the US campuses and in the streets of European cities. It’s interesting,  There are more big protests in London than in Karachi.

    Large-scale protests for Gaza are ongoing in reputable US universities like Columbia University and on major European streets, as well as in Australia, amid police arrests and clashes with other groups in an unprecedented manner. Despite these countries alignment with Israel and the continued support of popular politicians for Israel, many Muslim communities, human rights supporters, sympathizers, and left-leaning individuals are joining together to create large-scale protests in Western countries to oppose war and uphold humanity. This movement is unprecedented in scale. Some universities have been forced to cancel their graduation ceremonies, while others have witnessed entire buildings being occupied by protesting students. Police intervention has exacerbated the situation. Interestingly, in the Middle East and South Asia, traditional centers for protests remain relatively calm. The Gulf states do not support democratic protests and enforce strict laws against them, while Arab republics like Iraq and Egypt have tight controls due to links with extremist radicals among protestors. In populous Muslim countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh in South Asia, there is fear that protests for Gaza could become targets for looming terrorist organizations in the country. Additionally, in India, traditionally a home for intellectual Muslims, the government under Narendra Modi is taking a hardline stance against protests for Gaza and Palestine.

    So, the looming protests in Western nations are occurring only because they can be conducted safely and publicly there. A large number of people, especially students and intellectuals, have migrated to these countries from Arab states and South Asia. They can express their anger and sympathy for Israel’s actions against Palestinian Muslims through protests for Gaza. Moreover, they will receive support from human rights and left-wing groups, which is not as readily available in Arab and South Asian countries. Conducting rallies in Pakistani and Bangladeshi cities will garner less news value. However, many critics argue that the mounting protests will have a reverse effect in Western countries. Social media is already displaying animosity towards Islamist people who have migrated to the West. These protests will likely exacerbate such animosity, with right-wing politicians exploiting it to cast doubt on and wonder about the large-scale protests led by Muslim intellectuals in support of Gaza. Consequently, there is a fear that mounting protests for Gaza will fuel racism and anti-Islamic sentiments.

    The shift of “Protests for Gaza” from east to west is a clear indication of recent migration patterns as well. Eastern countries tend to restrict free speech or expression for Muslims, prompting known Muslim intellectuals and individuals to migrate to the West, where they can utilize freedom of speech to advocate for Muslims. This trend is evident, for example, in India, which was once a hub of protests for Gaza but has significantly changed in the last 10 years under the Hindu nationalist government of Narendra Modi, which favors Israel and takes stringent actions against Palestine protests. Muslim intellectuals from such countries have migrated to the West, where they have the freedom to protest. This trend is also visible in Pakistan and Arab countries. Therefore, these shifts in the locations of protests for Gaza not only signify the emergence of voices for the suffering people in Gaza but also highlight changes in global politics.

  • How to Understand the United States Military Exercises in China Seas

    How to Understand the United States Military Exercises in China Seas

    The world is once again experiencing a gradual polarization, yet unlike the past century, the shift is not unfolding primarily in Europe; rather, it is unfolding in Asia. Washington and Beijing have emerged as two major power centers, increasingly prioritizing their relationships with Asian countries. Military exercises are on the rise, with the United States continuously conducting such drills in waters surrounding China. These military exercises may form part of a multi-year training plan, such as those jointly established by defense authorities like the drills involving the US, Korea, and Japan. Some Military exercises are conducted annually, like those carried out by the United States and the Philippines, but they all contribute to escalating tensions in the region. The choice of locations and the actions within these drills exhibit heightened aggression, collectively sending a clear message to Beijing. Furthermore, China, Russia, and North Korea are actively preparing to counter US influence in the region.

    In recent days, the South Korean navy conducted joint naval drills with the United States and Japan in international waters south of Jeju Island, an island located in close proximity to China. The aim of these military drills was to improve joint operability against the nuclear and missile threats presented by North Korea. The military exercise comprised six warships, including the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier, three Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers, and two Aegis destroyers from South Korea and Japan. The primary emphasis of the military exercise lay in anti-submarine warfare training and improving responsiveness to North Korean underwater threats, including submarines and submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Moreover, the three nations engaged in maritime interception training to curb the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction, alongside conducting search and rescue exercises.

    Since the Camp David summit in August, Washington has been strengthening military alliances with Seoul and Tokyo, stressing the importance of “Regularizing defensive exercises” to enhance trilateral responses to North Korean threats. The recent joint military drill follows naval exercises in January, during which a US aircraft carrier was similarly positioned south of Jeju in the East China Sea. While these trilateral naval exercises primarily aim to address North Korean threats, both Beijing and Moscow are closely monitoring the deepening military cooperation among the three allies. The area south of Jeju Island in the East China Sea holds strategic importance for China, as its navy must navigate near the island and the Japanese archipelago to access the Pacific Ocean. From the perspective of the United States, the southern part of Jeju serves as a strategic vantage point for monitoring North Korea, but its geopolitical significance also positions it as a potential means of checking China’s influence. From China’s viewpoint, the North Korean nuclear issue is not new, and the joint training exercises conducted by the three countries signify an attempt to assert influence and limit China’s regional aspirations. From Russia’s view, Vladivostok is situated closer to Jeju Island in the East China Sea than Moscow. 

    Military exercises in the South China Sea are also on the rise. China conducted military “Combat Patrols” in the disputed region, as confirmed by its army. This activity coincided with joint military drills conducted by the Philippines, the United States, Japan, and Australia. Moreover, next week will witness extensive naval drills between the Philippines and the US, occurring amid escalating tensions in the South China Sea. With preparations underway, the possibility of military confrontations from the Chinese side cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, the United States and its allies currently maintain clear dominance over the waters, as evidenced by their repeated naval exercises. China and its partners are shown their combined power and preparedness through these military drills.

  • Is Armenia’s Defense Strategy Changing with US Military Aid?

    Is Armenia’s Defense Strategy Changing with US Military Aid?

    Armenia was humiliated when Azerbaijan captured the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which had long been under the rule of Armenian Christians. It’s a historical rivalry between these former Soviet republics, but this time Armenia’s anger at the loss in the war was directed towards their Christian brother Russia, which provided military, economic, and political assistance to Armenia but considered staying neutral or allowing the takeover of Nagorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan. The Armenian government accepted defeat and chose not to make comments against it, despite some protests and anger towards Russia. There was a general perception in Yerevan that the Kremlin had not lived up to its security obligations to Armenia. However, people with deep ties to Russia or those in geopolitically isolated situations refrained from making further protests against Russia.

    But Armenians are not only in Modern Armenia; they have a larger population in the United States and Western countries than in Armenia itself. They are angry. They believe Russia preferred richer Azerbaijan and strategically important Turkey and their interests over Armenia. They believe it’s time to shift their allegiance from Russia to the West. And when Russia weakens or is perceived as weak, Armenian politicians are removing the redline they aspire to join in Europe, and they have won some impressive military assistance from the Eagle, the United States.

    The European Union and the United States swiftly responded to Armenian overtures for closer security and economic ties. In early April, they jointly proposed an assistance package totaling over $350 million for Yerevan. Following this initiative, US Ambassador to Armenia Kristina Kvien stated that the relationship between the US and Armenia is expanding. She noted that Washington’s engagement with Yerevan has broadened and deepened across various sectors over the past year, including military cooperation. Kvien highlighted significant developments in this area, such as the joint US-Armenian military exercises held in early September in Armenia. Additionally, she mentioned plans for an American military advisor to collaborate with the Armenian Defense Ministry to implement reforms aimed at enhancing planning and operational standards to modern levels. This is enough to consider Europe’s interest is expanding to Armenia and the Russosphere is shrinking and Armenia leading to deep trouble. Ukraine’s desire to join NATO is perceived as motivation for Russia’s war on the nation. 

    Though Ambassador Kvien echoed they don’t have plans to disrespect Relationship with Russia , emphasizing that US assistance to Armenia does not come with a condition to sever ties with Russia. She highlighted the importance of having multiple allies and trade partners for Armenia’s strength and resilience, stating that diversification, rather than exclusion, is the goal. However, it’s evident that if Armenia strengthens its ties with the United States or Europe, it could strain its relationship with Russia, given the historical tensions between these countries. And Russia is already concerned about the United States growing interest in the former soviet republics. Russia and Azerbaijan responded strongly to the EU-US aid package announced on April 5th for Armenia. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan addressed concerns in the Armenian parliament by emphasizing increased economic and security cooperation with the West.

    The possibility that the United States was going to provide significant military support to Armenia seemed unthinkable just a few years ago. However, situations have changed, and Washington is moving cautiously in its efforts to remove a geopolitical red line in the Caucasus, painted by the Soviet Union. While Russia and Iran will likely face increased confrontation with the expanding Eurosphere in the Caucasus, the region will become more unstable. The two spheres are evolving in this tiny region, with Georgia, Armenia, and Europe on one side, and Russia, Iran, and Azerbaijan on the other side. Turkey’s involvement will only add complexity to the situation.

  • How The New Foreign Agents Bill Affects Georgia’s European Dreams

    How The New Foreign Agents Bill Affects Georgia’s European Dreams

    Georgia, a southern Caucasian country geographically located at the crossroads of Asia and Europe, is one of the latest candidate members of the European Union. The country, which was long under the Soviet Union and is the birthplace of the famous Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, is now joining the pro-Europe movement in Eastern Europe. Georgia suffered humiliation during the war against Russia in 2008, resulting in the loss of territory, including Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Doubt among people towards Russia is further exacerbated in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Armenia’s humiliation in the war with Azerbaijan. From the protests in support of Ukraine to the recent celebration of Euro qualification, events have served as venues for pro-European sentiment. However, the government of Georgia and several prominent leaders are not willing to break away from their Soviet and pro-Russian past. The Georgian parliament recently passed a new Foreign Agents bill that highly resembles or mirrors Russia’s democratic bill aimed at restricting people from accessing information. During the Soviet era, this was one way of keeping knowledge under government control. But, of course, this has dealt a significant blow to this West Asian nation’s path to the European Union.

    Georgian lawmakers’ passing of a controversial Foreign agents bill, igniting fresh street protests. The ruling Georgian Dream party, which has a majority in the parliament ,voted 78 to 25 to advance the draft of Foreign Agents bill for further debate. Thousands of people gathered in front of the Georgian parliament building in Tbilisi, causing traffic disruptions on the capital city’s main road. Opposition to the legislation wasn’t confined to the streets; even the country’s president spoke out against it. Georgia’s president, Salome Zurabishvili, who is at odds with the ruling party, condemned the move as “Against the will of the population”. The proposed law, if adopted, would require any independent media outlet or NGO receiving more than 20 percent of its financing from abroad to register as an “Organization pursuing the interests of a foreign power”. This represents a departure from last year’s bill, which used the term “Agent of foreign influence”. Following widespread protests last year, the ruling party was compelled to rescind the similar bill.

    The law contradicts the democratic reforms that the EU asserts Tbilisi must enact to progress on its path to EU membership. The EU has previously implored Tbilisi not to proceed with the Foreign agents bill. “The draft law on transparency of foreign influence is not aligned with Georgia’s EU aspirations and its accession trajectory”, remarked European Council President Charles Michel on Tuesday, echoing Brussels’ criticism of the bill. Furthermore, he emphasized that instead of bringing Georgia closer to the EU, the draft bill would distance it. He continued to express that the rights to freedom of expression and association would be directly threatened by the new law. Last December, the EU granted Georgia official candidate status but stipulated that Tbilisi must reform its judicial and electoral systems, diminish political polarization, enhance press freedom, and limit the influence of oligarchs before membership negotiations can commence formally. But it looks like Georgia is working against the directions.

    Opposition parties and civil society activists argue that the mechanism for this takeover is being facilitated by Georgia’s ruling party, Georgian Dream. Despite ostensibly seeking EU membership, the party is seen to be aligning more closely with Moscow. Video footage was trending in which the head of the parliamentary group of the ruling Georgian Dream party and a major supporter of the Foreign Agents Bill,  was punched in the face by opposition MP Aleko Elisashvili while delivering a speech from the dispatch box. Leading players in Georgia’s national men’s football team, the new national heroes, have also voiced their support from the public. They have backed mass protests sparked by a Foreign agents bill criticized for mirroring a repressive Russian law. They wrote: “Georgia’s path is to Europe. The European way unites us!! Forward to Europe!! Peace to Georgia” .

    Georgia, which was formerly regarded as spearheading the democratic transition among the former Soviet states, has come under fire recently for what is thought to be a democratic regression. This further adds to the doubts for the leaders of Georgia, as they risk their dreams of joining the euro by pushing for Russian-type laws. In addition to losing territory, they are maintaining friendlier relations with Russia. As a former Soviet republic, Georgia has sought for years to deepen relations with the West, but the current ruling party is accused of attempting to steer the Black Sea nation towards closer ties with Russia.

  • How Israel’s Gaza Attack Revealed New Global Order

    How Israel’s Gaza Attack Revealed New Global Order

    There is no doubt that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world order is led and directed by the Mighty United States. However, after three decades of US supremacy, the last three years have seen considerable shifts in the United States’ supremacy in the global order. As the Gaza attack and Ukraine war continue without seeming a possible end, some points are clear: the UN is an ineffective waste of money, the United States can no longer participate in direct wars, Russia appears weak, China can only fight with words, and Muslim solidarity among nations for Palestine has waned. Yes, this is the new world order. Even the policymakers are confused about the new developments around the world. The Gaza conflict is actually shedding light on the shaken world order. And this new world order is curious with some important happenings that could never previously be expected. The United States is not vetoing the resolution against Israel. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and other important Muslim countries are no longer interested in Palestine. While the embassy is attacked in Syria, Iran Remains calm.

    Every war reshapes history and presents significant challenges to international relations. Two days after the Hamas massacre in Israel that ignited the conflict, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the region would be reshaped to Israel’s advantage. Six months later, nobody believes they’ve lost yet. However, these events pose challenges to international relations. Interestingly, the United States is now taking a strong stance against Israel’s aggression, demanding a ceasefire and withdrawing from vetoing the UN Security Council resolution. While this stance doesn’t directly impact the relationship, it generates discontent among political figures and is also considered part of an internal issue in Israel. As a country deeply intertwined with the money and politics of the United States, experts suggest that the United States’ recent actions reflect discontent stemming from long-standing rule and corruption allegations against Netanyahu 

    And another important development is the freezing of the progress of the United States mission in the Middle East to unite Sunni Arab countries and Israel, which initially appeared successful. It was a significant achievement by Donald Trump, leading to successful agreements between many Arab countries such as the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco with Israel. This movement is undoubtedly part of the evolving agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel, resulting in the relationship between Jews and Sunni Islamic countries reaching an all-time high. However, Israel’s Gaza attack has unsettled the populace in the region, causing countries to distance themselves from further progress in building relationships with Israel. Additionally, there is discontent among Turkey and Egypt who have already established relationships with Israel. Iran, the sponsor of Hamas, is not only gaining support from Shia countries like Lebanon and Syria but also from the global Muslim population, thus strengthening its position in international politics. Despite making strong statements, Iran has not taken any action to de-escalate tensions in Gaza, actions they are capable of. Furthermore, Pakistan, another country seeking domination in Islamic countries and the largest ally of the United States, is becoming increasingly irrelevant in international politics.

    Israel’s Gaza attack has also been seized upon as a golden opportunity for Russia, which is facing humiliation in Ukraine. The Ukraine war has receded from the main headlines, allowing Russia to present double standards to Western countries. However, many doubt the capabilities of Russia. Even their closest ally, China, the globally overrated power, appears to be keeping its distance from the latest developments. Additionally, countries like Brazil, South Africa, and Spain have made headlines by advocating peace in various forums. India, previously distant from Israel and the US, has conventionally supported Palestine and a two-state solution. However, it is now emerging as one of the biggest supporters of Israel, with the friendship between Modi and Netanyahu strengthening this stance.

    No doubt, the United States remains the sole superpower in the world. Russia, China, or any other nation cannot match the effectiveness of the Soviet Union in foreign policies and military strategy development. However, recent incidents mark a weakness in the United States’ political strategy. US diplomacy is experiencing continuous setbacks, particularly during the Biden era. They struggle to direct Israel, influence Europe, confront adversaries, and execute effective campaigns. Biden has failed to achieve his aims in renovating political relationships damaged during the Trump era. The new global order exposes the weaknesses of the United States. Additionally, the Middle East is transitioning from an era defined by religion to one driven by business.

  • UN’s Surprise Selection: Saudi Arabia to Head Women’s Rights Commission

    UN’s Surprise Selection: Saudi Arabia to Head Women’s Rights Commission

    It is indeed true that under the leadership of Mohammed bin Salman, there have been some advancements in women’s rights in Saudi Arabia. Women are now allowed to drive vehicles independently, and they can enter public spaces without wearing head coverings. However, despite these seemingly progressive decisions, the irony remains glaring. Saudi Arabia, notorious for its oppressive anti-women laws, has been chosen to lead the UN Commission on the Status of Women uncontested. This decision has drawn condemnation from human rights organizations due to the kingdom’s abysmal track record on women’s rights.

    Abdulaziz Alwasil, the Saudi ambassador to the UN, was unanimously elected as the chair of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) during its annual meeting in New York. With no opposing candidates and no dissent among the attendees, Alwasil’s appointment was met with approval from the group of Asia-Pacific states on the commission. When Antonio Manuel Lagdameo, the outgoing chair and Filipino envoy to the UN, sought objections from the 45 members present, the chamber remained silent, prompting Lagdameo to declare, “I hear no objection. It is so decided”.

    Traditionally, a country holds the chairmanship for two years; however, pressure from other members of the Asia group led the Philippines to split its tenure and pass the position to another country after just one year. While Bangladesh was initially expected to assume the role, Saudi Arabia intervened late in the process and lobbied for the chairmanship, widely interpreted as an effort to enhance the kingdom’s reputation.

    However, human rights advocates, who do not receive funding from Arab sources, were quick to highlight the irony of the Commission on the Status of Women being led by a country where the disparity between men’s and women’s rights, even on paper, is so pronounced.

    In Saudi Arabia, women are still obligated to seek approval from a male guardian before marrying, and wives are anticipated to adhere to their husbands’ directives in a “Reasonable Manner”. The provision of financial assistance from husbands is conditional upon the wife’s adherence, and neglecting certain obligations, such as declining sexual relations or not residing in the marital home without a “Legitimate Excuse”, may lead to the cessation of support.

    These laws provide insight into the restrictive nature of Saudi Arabia’s legal system, which is grounded in Sharia law and often viewed as detrimental to women’s rights in more progressive societies. While some Muslim women may assert that Sharia law ensures their safety and satisfaction, those who challenge its tenets may face severe consequences from authorities. Indeed, there have been numerous cases of women seeking asylum simply for expressing dissenting views on social media platforms.

    Last year, UN Women, the UN’s agency for gender equality, reported a worsening of gender disparities worldwide, citing examples from Afghanistan, China, Poland, the United States, and beyond. The organization projected that it could require 286 years to eliminate the global gender gaps in legal protections for women and girls. Moreover, many are concerned about the increasing trend of rolling back women’s rights, even in developing countries, which adds to the discomfort surrounding the decision to appoint Saudi Arabia.

    Sherine Tadros, the head of Amnesty International’s New York office, emphasized that Saudi Arabia will assume the chair next year, coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration, a significant framework for advancing women’s rights globally. “Whoever holds the chair, which is currently Saudi Arabia, holds a pivotal position to shape the planning, decisions, assessments, and forward-looking initiatives in a crucial year for the commission”, Tadros stated. “While Saudi Arabia is now leading, its own track record on women’s rights falls far short of the commission’s mandate”.

    Human Rights Watch’s (HRW) UN director, Louis Charbonneau, criticized the choice as well, saying, “A nation that jails its women for standing up for their rights has no business heading the UN’s main platform for gender equality and women’s rights. The Saudi authorities ought to show that this classification was not wholly unjustified by freeing all incarcerated advocates for women’s rights, doing away with male guardianship, and guaranteeing women’s total equality with men”. 

    Despite the ineffectiveness of these UN-based organizations and forums, it is alarming that nations have not expressed concern or opposition to Saudi Arabia’s bid. This lack of action is not limited to the UN; even in highly prominent events such as the bidding for the 2034 FIFA World Cup, there has been no challenge to Saudi Arabia’s bid, despite criticism of the country’s mistreatment of labor rights. Logic of some selections is very illogical, and will lead to many doubts, like Qatar’s selection for running the World cup football. Money decides the winner, as always. And that brings the Hope Taliban Ruling Afghanistan will not be assigned in the future.

  • Surprising Development: UN Approves Gaza Ceasefire Resolution as US Abstains

    Surprising Development: UN Approves Gaza Ceasefire Resolution as US Abstains

    The United States faced a critical decision amid the worsening situation in Gaza, with escalating retaliatory actions leading to a humanitarian crisis. Despite feeling powerless to halt the violence, the US initially contemplated vetoing the UN Security Council’s call for a ceasefire in Gaza during the Israel-Hamas conflict. However, it ultimately chose to abstain from the vote. The resolution passed unanimously, leaving Israel significantly isolated on the international stage. The chamber erupted in cheers upon the ratification of the ceasefire resolution, indicating widespread support for peace efforts.

    After vetoing three previous resolutions, the United States found itself at the center of attention once again as the United Nations Security Council convened on Monday to push for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, especially during the remaining weeks of Ramadan. In a surprise move, as no one expected, The resolution finally received the green light after the Biden administration withdrew its veto threat, choosing instead to abstain from the vote. This decision marked a notable shift in the US’s diplomatic approach towards Israel, albeit temporary. With the conflict’s grim toll revealing over 32,000 lives lost, mostly women and children, and more than 75% of Gaza’s population displaced, the urgency for the resolution became undeniable. Interestingly, on the same day the US refrained from vetoing the UN ceasefire vote, allowing its passage, the Biden administration also affirmed that Israel hadn’t breached international law or hindered humanitarian aid to Gaza’s residents, despite ongoing concerns.

    The US continues to remain firmly committed to its partnership with Israel while juggling allegiance with a more sophisticated understanding of its behavior. The Biden administration has chosen to believe Israel’s assurances throughout the conflict, even in the face of strong evidence suggesting possible violations of international law. 

    It’s quite notable how swiftly the US adopted this position, especially considering that just a week prior, the UN’s foremost authority on food security had issued a dire warning about an imminent famine in northern Gaza. This area, housing 1.1 million individuals – almost half of Gaza’s population – is grappling with severe malnutrition and acute food shortages. Despite consistent alerts raised by humanitarian organizations and UN officials since December, shedding light on Israel’s deliberate policies exacerbating starvation in Gaza and the looming famine threat, the Biden administration has largely overlooked these concerns. 

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu conveyed strong displeasure regarding the Biden administration’s choice not to veto the latest UN resolution. In a retaliatory move, he called off a planned visit by a high-level Israeli delegation to Washington later that week. This delegation, consisting of Israeli military, intelligence, and humanitarian officials, aimed to discuss alternatives to a potential ground invasion of Gaza’s southern city of Rafah, where over a million Palestinians have sought refuge. Despite persistent warnings from the US, Netanyahu remains resolute in his intentions for a military intervention in Rafah, disregarding the grave consequences for civilians.

    However, Netanyahu tempered some of his frustration towards Biden by refraining from recalling Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who is currently visiting Washington. Gallant advocates for expediting the processing of a substantial arsenal of US weapons requested by Israel. These include thousands of bombs and other munitions crucial for Israel’s ongoing conflict in Gaza, as well as more advanced weaponry like new F-35 and F-15 fighter jets and Apache attack helicopters, which have extended production timelines.

    Netanyahu’s strategic response – simultaneously resisting US pressure regarding civilian protection in Rafah while persistently seeking additional American weaponry – captures the intricate dynamics of the US-Israeli relationship under the Biden administration. It underscores a reality that the Biden administration has sought to downplay: the ongoing violence in Gaza heavily relies on deep complicity and support from the United States.

    White House spokesperson John Kirby clarified that the UN vote didn’t signal a shift in US policy, but it did indicate a notable divergence between the Biden administration and the Israeli government. This resolution marked a long-awaited display of international solidarity on the Gaza issue, especially given the dire humanitarian situation, with over 32,000 reported Palestinian casualties, thousands missing, and UN agencies warning of an impending famine. 

    Meanwhile, in Washington, Israeli Defense Minister Gallant reiterated Israel’s commitment to continue fighting until the release of hostages held in Gaza. “We cannot morally justify halting the conflict while there are still hostages in Gaza,” Gallant stated ahead of his initial meeting with US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. He cautioned that a lack of a decisive victory in Gaza could escalate tensions and potentially lead to conflict in the northern regions.

    Israel’s desire for retaliation is understandable, as they prioritize the safety of their innocent citizens and seek to reclaim hostages, including women and children, held by the terrorist organization Hamas. While their actions may be justified in this regard, the operation to eradicate terrorism and rescue hostages has tragically resulted in the deaths of over 30,000 Palestinian individuals and left many others facing famine. Regardless of the reasons behind support for Hamas or the celebration of violence against Israelis, Israel’s response has unfortunately led to the loss of innocent lives as well.

    The United States, often seen as the big brother or father figure to Israel, has typically been protective and overlooked its actions. However, it’s a hopeful sign that, for the first time in recent history, the father figure isn’t making excuses for the son’s misdeeds. At Least some people hope that abstaining from voting on the UN resolution will pave the way for peace in Gaza and the release of all captives held by Hamas.

  • Moscow Attack: How Secular Central Asian States Become Recruitment Hubs for Terrorist Organizations

    Moscow Attack: How Secular Central Asian States Become Recruitment Hubs for Terrorist Organizations

    Four individuals faced court proceedings in Moscow, accused in connection to the tragic terrorist assault on the Crocus City concert hall last Friday, which resulted in the loss of 137 lives. According to the TASS State news agency, the defendants, confirmed as Tajikistan citizens, were ordered to be held in custody for a duration of two months following a hearing on Sunday.

    The international media focused on the Tajikistani nationality of the suspects, moving away from allegations against Ukraine. This situation prompts a reconsideration of Central Asian nations, known for their peaceful tendencies and reluctance towards Islamic extremism, despite Islam’s prevalence. Unlike certain Islamic countries, Central Asian societies have shown a more flexible approach to religious practices, often influenced by Soviet-era perspectives. Nonetheless, recent events suggest a changing landscape in the region.

    Extremists from Tajikistan and various other Central Asian countries have been implicated in a series of recent ISIS assaults across Europe and Iran. In January, a tragic bombing during an Iranian commemoration ceremony resulted in approximately 100 fatalities. Now, in March, individuals from Tajikistan are suspected of involvement in the Moscow attack. Both Iran and Russia have vehemently opposed the Islamic State, actively engaging them in the Middle East. This casts doubt on ISIS’s claim of responsibility. Initially, Iran accused Israel and the US of the attack, but later, their intelligence ministry identified the mastermind and bombmaker as Tajik nationals. According to reports from the Iranian government press agency, the suspect entered Iran from the southeast border, departing just two days prior to the attack after constructing the bombs. Additionally, one of the suicide bombers was also Tajik.

    US and European intelligence agencies have observed a notable surge in global plots associated with ISIS-K, with some analysts considering it the most formidable ISIS affiliate outside of Africa. According to a UN report, in July and August, seven individuals from Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan, linked to ISIS-K, were apprehended in Germany while plotting significant terrorist attacks, actively acquiring weapons and identifying potential targets. German authorities apprehended three Tajik individuals and one Uzbek national on December 31, suspecting them of planning an attack on Cologne Cathedral on New Year’s Eve. These men were linked to ISIS by investigators. Tajik nationals have been implicated in various other plots across Europe and Turkey in recent years. In January, two ISIS militants from Tajikistan and Russia carried out an attack on a church in Istanbul, resulting in one fatality and one injury. Additionally, earlier this month, Russian security forces eliminated two Kazakhstan nationals believed to be orchestrating an ISIS-KP-associated assault on a synagogue in the Kaluga region, southwest of Moscow. This shift towards international targets may be attributed to directives from senior IS leadership in Iraq and Syria, where the organization has suffered significant setbacks.

    The UN report underscored the potential for extremist Islamist groups to recruit amid the conflict in Gaza. However, IS has grappled with balancing its animosity towards Hamas while desiring to incite violence against longstanding adversaries. The report noted IS’s cautious public communications in response to events in Israel and Gaza, aimed at exacerbating religious intolerance. Despite this, IS maintains staunch opposition to Hamas, labeling its members as apostates. IS’s media campaigns have focused on exploiting the situation in Gaza to provoke potential lone actors into carrying out attacks.

    Presently, the Islamic State (IS) justifies indoctrinating minds, portraying itself as a champion of Islam and savior of Islam from suffering. Economic stagnation and widespread unemployment fuel the interest of disillusioned youth, priming them for participation in what they perceive as a holy war. They consider anyone opposed to their ideology, including Muslims, Christians, and Jews, as enemies.

    In Central Asian countries, societal dynamics are becoming increasingly volatile as the influence of Soviet remnants diminishes among the younger generation, who are now gravitating more towards their Islamic identity. With Russia’s influence waning, other external actors, including the Islamic State and various competing factions, are seizing the opportunity to exert influence in the region. Economic growth has been sluggish, compounded by pervasive authoritarianism, corruption within the government, high unemployment rates, and a lack of prosperity for the common populace, with benefits accruing primarily to politicians and businessmen. This socioeconomic landscape provides fertile ground for extremist ideologies to flourish.

    Failure by the government to address these pressing issues not only jeopardizes the country’s reputation and diaspora but also exacerbates the risk of radicalization. Reports indicate growing apprehension within the Tajik diaspora in Russia, with social media glorifying Tajik and Central Asian identities of terrorists. Such developments threaten to erode the secular image of Central Asia, potentially aligning them with the likes of Pakistan and Afghanistan, further entrenching their misery.