According to prosecutors, the trial of Patrick Ho was simply business. The Chinese financier, found guilty of orchestrating a multi-million dollar bribery scheme in Africa, wasn’t the victim of a US smear campaign as his defense claimed. No, he was simply brought to justice for violating US laws while working for an US-based organization.
Yet no matter what the prosecution says, it’s impossible to ignore the wider significance of the affair. By jailing one of China’s key international promoters for his role in the country’s ‘Belt and Road’ trade strategy, the US has shown its concerns at the shady practices Beijing is using to secure an advantage overseas. While Ho’s dealings appear to have posed little threat to the US, they epitomize a ruthless global strategy which, in many parts of the developing world, challenges US hegemony and is now forcing Washington to act.
To critics of President Xi Jinping’s regime, Ho summed up their ruthless attempts at economic imperialism. The former Hong Kong politician’s trial heard that, while working for a think tank funded by Shanghai-based CEPC China Energy, he offered $2.9 million in bribes to political leaders in Chad and Uganda to secure oil and development rights. Senegalese politician Cheikh Gadio, the prosecution’s key witness, claimed this included a gift-wrapped $2 million presented to Chadian President Idriss Deby in a rural village.
The case offered an insight into how China is building influence in Africa and Asia through Belt and Road, a $4 trillion funding program that has been likened to ‘WTO 2.0’. The program has long been the subject of rumor and innuendo, particularly in Africa, where Chinese businesses are routinely accused of buying contracts with kickbacks. A McKinsey report published last year found that nearly 90% of Chinese companies were using bribes in some African countries.
These reports, often accompanied by tales of bullying and the humiliation of local workers, are troubling enough. Yet they are mirrored by the Chinese government’s own coercive strategy, which, critics claim, is fundamental to Belt and Road.
Debt diplomacy
Chinese banks have lent money to developing countries at a furious rate – around $20 billion has been extended since last summer alone. The money is typically provided with attractive repayment rates and little scrutiny, perfect for unscrupulous regimes. But the evidence suggests China is simply laying a series of debt traps, which could be used to snare prime strategic assets in regions which previously fell under US control.
A prime example is Sri Lanka, where China provided the money for former president Mahinda Rajapaksa to build the huge port of Hambantota, widely derided as a personal vanity project. The port proved a disaster (in 2012 it attracted only 34 ships) and the financial arrears proved too much for Rajapaksa’s government, which surrendered Hambantota to Beijing on a 99-year-lease. Although the terms specifically forbid the military use of Hambantota, fears are mounting that this condition could be loosened in exchange for further debt relief.
The strategic importance of Hambantota to the US appears relatively low, but nonetheless it’s a headache Washington could do without. American strategists are already worried about China’s maritime buildup, and the ongoing US activity in the Middle East means the Indian Ocean, which has harbored a significant American presence since World War II, is a key artery. China has already invested heavily in the region through its economic corridor with Pakistan – prompting the Trump Administration to show its concern by imploring South Asian nations not to follow Sri Lanka’s lead by surrendering their sovereignty.
Meanwhile, 4,000 kilometers away, fears are growing that China will repeat the Hambantota trick in an area far more important to the US; the Horn of Africa. Beijing has already established a military base in Djibouti, near America’s monolithic Camp Lemonnier, and now appears poised to accept the neighboring Doraleh container terminal as a gift. With his country’s debt to China pushing 90% of GDP, President Ismail Guelleh has already ejected Doraleh’s previous operator, Dubai’s DP World, and allowed China to build a free trade zone.
Xi’s officials would doubtless claim that Doraleh, perched alongside one of the world’s busiest sea lines, is vital to the Maritime Silk Road, the aquatic branch of Belt and Road. Yet for the US, which uses Djibouti as a jump-off for operations against groups such as Al-Qaeda and Islamic State, there’s a clear military significance, heightened by evidence that Guelleh’s regime is abetting weapons smuggling between Yemen and Somalia. The decision to pick a fight with Beijing in May, after claiming Chinese forces pointed lasers at US planes in Djibouti’s skies, demonstrates how much China’s incursion has rattled decision-makers in Washington.
As Belt and Road expands, so new countries will become pawns in China’s push for global supremacy. In the Indo-Pacific region, for example, Beijing pledged $4 billion to a cluster of islands including Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Vanuatu just last year. Like Djibouti and Sri Lanka, the islands are plagued by corruption and weak government. According to Australia, previously the region’s top donor (and a key US ally), China’s loans have been wasted on “roads to nowhere”, echoing the folly of Hambantota.
Although the populations of these islands typically fall below 1 million, their location makes them strategic. The Indo-Pacific is not only vital in maintaining sea lines between East and West, it is close to the South China Sea, where the US and China have been locked in a regional struggle for years, both building new bases in a prolonged game of one-upmanship. Reports in April that China is planning a base in Vanuatu were hastily denied – but Beijing will surely have noted with interest the discomfort they caused.
Against this backdrop, it’s easy to see why the US was so keen to jail Ho. His activity was straight from the Belt and Road playbook, which arguably poses the greatest threat to US global superiority since the fall of the Soviet Union, and his American connection allowed the Department of Justice to land a blow. Prosecutors may claim there was nothing political about it, but when it comes to China and America, nearly everything is.
The post New York trial casts new scrutiny on China’s Belt and Road Initiative appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
http://www.quiz-maker.com/Q3YD732
The post Foreign Affairs Quiz appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
Additions to Australia’s recently formed Cabinet have attempted to mend a somewhat fractious relationship between Canberra and Beijing, and economically, there is no relationship more important to Australia. But has the efforts of these ministers been a success, or will the negative actions taken towards China by Australia’s former government caused irreparable damage?
Australia’s sixth change of Prime Minister in eight years brought about a cabinet reshuffle. The recently appointed Foreign Affairs minister Marise Payne met with her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi in Beijing in a meeting that ran an hour longer than scheduled, a seemingly positive sign. Payne claimed, “we remain absolutely committed as a government to welcoming foreign investment into Australia. It supports jobs, it helps to increase living standards.” Foreign Minister Wang echoed the sentiments, stating “I think the most important outcome of this dialogue is that we have reaffirmed the course of this relationship.”
Payne’s visit followed Australia’s trade minister Simon Birmingham attending the China International Import Expo in Shanghai, bringing to an end a year long diplomatic freeze by Beijing on visits by Australian officials. Minister Birmingham spoke warmly of the event, claiming “The CIIE is an incredible opportunity to highlight the strength of the Chinese economy since it began to open up to the world.” The expo was an opportunity for Australia to showcase its best products to Chinese markets, with around 150 Australian companies sending representatives. Businesses from Down Under will have “the added benefit of many products entering tariff free from January 1 next year, an attractive proposition for the thousands of domestic buyers attending the Australian stands”, exclaimed AustCham Shanghai chief executive Jack Brady.
Key indicators show how crucial a positive diplomatic relationship between Beijing and Canberra is to Australia. In 2017, Australia’s trade with China was valued at $US133 billion, up 16 percent on 2016 figures, accounting for 24 percent of Australia’s total trade, making it Australia’s biggest trading partner in terms of exports and imports.
The superpower’s presence can be felt throughout various sectors of Australia’s economy. And while the property investment and luxury consumer good sales have had contrasting fortunes recently, they give a snapshot of the magnitude of Chinese activity taking place.
Although the level of investment in the property market has fallen by 26 percent in the financial year 2016/17, leading Chinese global property investment portal, Juwai.com, reported that $US 17.4 billion was still ploughed into the Australian real estate market. The two main factors for the decline have been due to capital controls from Chinese regulators limiting the amount of money that can leave the country, and the introduction of a fee by Australia’s Foreign Investment Review Board on property investment applications. These measures have also resulted in a sharp decline in residential real estate application approvals from 40,149 in the 2015/16 financial year, to 13,198 in the following financial year.
The luxury consumer goods market has brought about tangible changes felt across high-end shopping districts in Australia. Industry insiders estimate Chinese shoppers are responsible for two-thirds of sales in the sector. Tim Starling, head of commercial property services company CBRE’s Australian retail occupier team, claims, “Over the past 12 to 18 months we’ve seen this push towards Australia, a lot of that’s being driven by the success of the stalwarts – Louis Vuitton, Chanel and Prada – who have been here for quite a long time.” A $US 517 million redevelopment to Australia’s largest shopping centre in Melbourne’s east saw the number of luxury brands double to 38, with concierge and in-store customer staff featuring a number of Mandarin speakers and shoppers in stores such as Gucci and Chanel speaking Mandarin. The shopping centre’s tourism manager Anita Donnelly also estimates visits from Chinese tourists doubled in 2017, from 102,400 in 2016, highlighting another burgeoning industry with a Chinese presence – tourism. Examining these industries helps to understand the scale of China’s significance on the Australian economy.
Additionally, the geopolitical tensions of territorial disputes in the South China Sea, along with the US trade war with China has meant the relationship and predictability of future actions by Beijing are as sensitive as they have been since the end of the Cold War.
The cause of tension between the two countries began in earnest at the end of 2017, when then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced legislation to counter foreign influence in domestic affairs, including a mandate for foreign governments to identify themselves on a pubic register. Turnbull admitted his decision was influenced by “disturbing reports about Chinese influence”, an assertion strongly denied by Beijing.
Naturally, this lack of credibility was viewed negatively by their Asian neighbours, with China’s ambassador to Australia, Cheng Jingye, warning that a “Cold War mentality” would undermine relations. In May, disdain was also shown when Australia’s then-Trade Minister Steve Ciobo’s attempt to meet with his Chinese counterpart was rebuffed.
With efforts to ease tensions by the newly appointed ministers, does this indicate diplomatic relations between Beijing and Canberra are on the mend? Not exactly – in late August, Canberra denied the right for Chinese tech giants Huawei and ZTE involvement in the national rollout of 5G telecommunications upgrades taking place in Australia. Minister Payne defended the decision prior to being sworn in as Foreign Affairs minister, citing the protection of Australia’s national security as the motive, as Chinese law requires organisations and citizens to support, assist and cooperate with intelligence work, making Huawei’s equipment a conduit for espionage. Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang claimed that China expressed “serious concern”, adding that “Australia should not use excuses to artificially erect barriers.” Chinese state media echoed these sentiments, describing it as a “stab in the back” to Huawei, and “disappointing and poisonous” to bilateral cooperation.
So will the olive branches extended by these ministers simply be in vain? Only time will tell.
The post Are China and Australia beginning to mend a frayed relationship? appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
Aslam Chowdhury, a prominent Muslim minority and human rights activist who also serves as the BNP Central Joint Secretary General in Bangladesh, was displayed arrested recently in the Bangladeshi media and is presently in jail after being disqualified from running in the elections later this month. According to the report, the Police surrounded his home for three hours when a meeting was being held there and 25 leaders were arrested. Later on, Mr. Chowdhury revealed that he was not arrested but his elder brother Nizam Uddin Chowdhury and 17 other members of his political team were.
This incident came after the Bangladeshi Election Committee cleared Mr. Chowdhury to run for Chattogram 4 in the upcoming elections. Mendi Safadi, who presently heads the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights, heavily criticized the incident: “When the election committee prevents Aslam Chowdhury and other opposition politicians from running for elections, in order to increase the chances of winning the elections, under international law, this is equivalent to falsifying elections. This is the conduct of an unfit election campaign and we will consider our actions in this case.”
“It is not enough that the government announced without warning in mid-November that the elections would be held at the end of December, and immediately afterwards, there was an unprecedented wave of arrests of tens of thousands of political activists, which was carried out to rig the election results in favor of the corrupt Sheikh Hasina government,” Safadi proclaimed, noting that 15,000 opposition activists were recently arrested and most of the detained are Hindus. “She refuses to face popular candidates from the opposition and this goes against any democratic value.”
Safadi declared in response: “We will turn to the United Nations and the European Parliament in the coming days and submit a special report to each of the parliaments in Europe, the Kremlin and the US Congress in order to give protection to the opposition in Bangladesh so that opposition candidates will be able to vote and to be elected transparently and legally.”
A couple of years ago, Chowdhury was arrested after meeting with Safadi, who formerly served as Ayoob Kara’s chief of staff. The Bangladeshi government alleged that he was part of an Israeli plot to topple the Bangladeshi government but Safadi related that the real reason he was arrested was due to his role in the country’s opposition. Bangladesh has no diplomatic relations with Israel and Bangladeshi citizens are barred from visiting the Jewish state.
According to the Gatestone Institute, during every Friday sermon, the Jewish people are cursed from more than 250,000 mosques in the country. In addition, Sheikh Hasina declared that Bangladesh is an Islamic state: “Anyone who pronounces offensive statements against it or against the Prophet Muhammed will be prosecuted according to the law.”
The post Bangladeshi media: Prominent Muslim human rights activist arrested appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
In 2014 Local Election and the Presidential Election in 2016, Tsai Ing-wen and her pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party(DPP) swiped Taiwan, from Parliament to local governments. This Saturday, the first local election after Tsai’ s administrations came to power will be held. From 2014 to 2016, DPP’s power grew rapidly as President Ma from Nationalist Party (KMT) floundered over several political issues and also the economies. However, after Tsai became the president of Taiwan, or formally the Republic of China (ROC) in 2016, the support rate for the DPP continued to decrease. On the one hand, Tsai’s administration did not improve the economic situation as promised and even involved in some political scandals. On the other hand, the bad Cross-Strait Relations damage not only Taiwan’s power on the international stage but also the domestic economy. And The bad performance of the central government has badly affected the local election.
Cross-Strait Relations after 2016
After Tsai became the president of ROC, there was barely any official communication between Beijing and Taipei as Beijing refuses to talk to the latter. The reason given by Beijing is very simple, that Tsai’s administration does not recognize the “1992 Consensus” which stresses the idea of ” One China, different expressions”: Beijing recognizes People’s Republic of China and Taipei recognizes the Republic of China. The DPP contends that it recognizes the historical facts of 1992 Conferences between representatives from both sides but not the so-called “1992 Consensus” which was not invented until 2004.
As Beijing is not satisfied with Tsai’s policies toward the mainland, it started to pressure Taiwan from multiple fronts. The first one is on countries which maintain formal diplomatic relations with Taipei. Since Tsai came to power, 5 countries including São Tomé and Príncipe, Panamá, Burkina Faso, Dominican, and Salvador stopped their diplomatic recognition of ROC and switched to PRC. So far, there are only 17 countries left which still recognizes Taipei as the legitimate government of China. Taipei contends that it is a systematic strategy by Beijing to constrain the international space for Taiwan. Even the U.S., after Salvador, switched its diplomatic recognition to PRC, criticized Beijing for its pressure on Taiwan.
Beijing’s strategy also includes the pressure on international organizations which reserve seats for Taiwan. For example, Taiwan was allowed to participate in the World Health Organization as an observer from 2009 to 2016 during pro-mainland President Ma’s administration. However, it was forced to quit after Tsai came into power. Another case would be the International Civil Aviation Organization, which Taiwan was permitted to join in 2013 but again be forced to leave in 2016. Pressures can be also observed in organizations where Taiwan wants to change its name from “China Taipei” to Taiwan. One example is the International Olympic Committee which in earlier this year warned Taipei that it will not allow “China Taipei” to be changed. It should be noted that Beijing does not necessarily directly put pressures on these organizations, but they do not want to anger Beijing anyway.
The bad Cross-Strait Relations has political implications in both domestic politics and foreign policies. In contrast to the DPP, the KMT still recognizes the 1992 consensus and maintains a good relationship with Beijing as the delegation of the KMT, led by its former president Lian can still meet with President Xi in Beijing despite the current situation. As a result, the KMT attacks the DPP that its foreign policy has led to the loss of diplomatic relations and also the opportunities to participate in international organizations.
Since the mainland became increasingly aggressive, Tsai’s administration tries hard to seek help from the U.S. Soon after Donald Trump won the election, Tsai called Trump (and Trump answered the phone), triggering the diplomatic tension between China and the U.S. concerning the “One China” policy that the U.S. promises to follow. The crisis ended up with the State Department reassures that the U.S. recognizes Beijing, not Taipei. This year, as the trade dispute between China and the U.S. escalated, Taiwan seeks a closer tie with the U.S, culminating in the pass of Taiwan Travel Act which allows high-level American officials to travel to Taiwan.
To counter Taiwan’s strategy to drag Americans in, Beijing launched numerous military exercises near Taiwan including dispatching the latest carrier battle group near the island. Such aggressive approaches triggered severe anti-China sentiment in Taiwan and Beijing stopped military actions since about 6 months ago, fearing negative effects on the local election. Interestingly, Tsai’s administration seems to be unhappy with this and the coast guard just started a military exercise in the South China Sea which will last for 3 days and end only one day before the election. So far Beijing does not respond to this, but it will probably not make any comment until the election ends.
Economic issues
The most essential problem for Tsai’s administration is the economic development and the. Although she said in public that “Nowadays, Taiwan’s economy is the best for the past 2 decades.”, the economic data does not support her view. It is now struggling to maintain a GDP growth rate of around 2% and hard to attract foreign investment.
The bad Cross-Strait relationship is certainly one important factor. In 2008, Nationalist administration finally signed documents with Beijing, allowing tourists groups travel directly to Taiwan. (Before that, mainlanders need to transfer at Hong Kong to fly to Taiwan.) In 2011, individual tourism was also permitted. Since then, the number of mainland visitors to Taiwan skyrocketed, as well as the income for tourism. After the DPP started to rule in 2016, visitors from the mainland decreases dramatically. We do not know for sure whether Beijing did something to discourage tours to Taiwan, but mainlanders’ opinions about Taiwan did deteriorate due to pro-independence rhetoric. Tourists related industries did not immune from this. Restaurants, souvenir, transportations, and agriculture suffer in varying degrees. Additionally, foreign investors are discouraged from investing in Taiwan due to the unstable regional environment.
To compensate for the loss of mainland travelers, Tsai’ administration proposed the so-called New Southbound Policy (NSP) to attract tourists from Southeast Asian and Oceanian countries. But to what extent can this policy bear fruits is still questionable. In 2017, tourists from PRC (including the mainland, Hong Kong and Macao) contributed about 40% of total foreign income for tourism, while those from countries included in NSP contributed around 22%.
Another reason contributed to the lack of investment is the lack of power. One of the biggest initiative by Tsai’s administration is to abandon all nuclear plants in 2025 while developing green energy, such as wind-power and gas. The problem with this initiative is that the development of wind-power and gas plants is still on-going, hence is not able to compensate for the decrease in nuclear powers. The lack of power badly damaged Taiwan’s investment environment as the memory of the island-wide power outage in summer 2017 is still vivid.
The government admitted that the power operating reserves are lower than the set standard and turned to traditional fossil fuel plants, triggering waves of critics as the air pollution became severe in several cities where power plants concentrate. In Taizhong, the air pollution is so serious that KMT’s candidate main rhetoric is brought the blue sky back. Also in New Taipei City, the DPP’s plan to expand a traditional plant was intensively attacked by KMT and was renounced about a month ago.
Domestic politics
So far, the most notorious political scandal of the current administration is the one of Transitional Justice Committee. This special committee was set up to vindicate political prisoners during the “White Terror”, the KMT’s authoritarian rule in the second half of the 20th century. However, in September, one of researchers in the committee leaked the voice recording of a secret meeting held by the vice president with some other officials and researchers, in which the participants planned to attack KMT’s candidate of New Taipei City by contending that he involved in political persecution during the “White Terror” without evidence. Moreover, the vice president claimed that the committee now became “Dong Chang (東廠)”, the secret police composed of eunuchs during Ming dynasty of China. After the leakage, the president of the committee and those members who participated in the meeting resigned, including the one who leaked the recording.
The rise of populist politicians also threats DPP. Four years ago, DPP supported the independent politician Ke and defeated KMT in Taipei’s mayor election. Ke, at that time, was, in fact, new to politics as he was a doctor before the election. As people, especially the young generation became tired of traditional vicious fights between the KMT and the DPP, Ke won the election rather easily. However, this alliance eroded over time and finally broke up as DPP nominated its own candidate for Taipei’s mayor early in this year. So far, the DPP’s candidate was marginalized and Ke still takes the lead in the polls. (Although KMT’s candidate is catching up.)
Surprisingly, another rising star, Han Guoyu, comes from KMT, competing for the mayor of Gaoxiong, the homeland of the DPP. Although he looks new to the public, he actually served as the legislator from 1993 to 2001 but quit politics since then. Several years ago, he was invited to serve as the CEO of Taipei Agricultural Marketing Corporation and gained a reputation for good management capability, making him nominated by the KMT. During the campaign, Han advocated for a “clean” election with no personal attacks on other candidates which is absent from Taiwan’s politics for a long time. In addition, he claims that he can attract investment and visitors, especially from the mainland to Gaoxiong as he recognized the 1992 Consensus. So far, the supporting rate for Han and the DPP’s candidate Chen is very close and the DPP started to treat Han seriously as almost all leaders of the DPP publicly criticized Han.
The common strategy for DPP is to portray its competitors as agents of Beijing. Earlier this year Ke said in public that “People from two sides of Taiwan Strait are one family. (兩岸一家親)”. Later on, some DPP politicians contended that Ke receives assistance from the mainland and even participated in the illegal trade of organs conducted by Beijing. For Han, it is much easier to attack as he wants more cooperation with the mainland. One famous pro-DPP TV show host said that Han “will sell Taiwan (to the Communist) if he wins”. Some rumors on SNS even contend that Han studied in Beijing many years ago and was secretly trained by the Communist to unify Taiwan.
So far, DPP seems to pay more attention to Gaoxiong than Taipei. For the DPP, as long as KMT does not win, it wins. However for Gaoxiong, if Han became the mayor, an internal conflict is likely to break out as it is the base for the DPP which it has ruled for more than 2 decades. President Tsai, who is also the president of the DPP, probably will resign. The No.2 in the DPP, Chen Ju who was the mayor of Gaoxiong for 12 years will also suffer from the defeat. If both Tsai and Chen lose ground, it would be very difficult for DPP to come up with a proper leader.
Although the supporting rate of the DPP decreases dramatically, it is not necessarily that pro-unification rhetoric is ascending. In fact, even the KMT gave up its platform of seeking unification of China earlier this year. Moreover, last week, when former President Ma suddenly addressed that he changed his policy of “no unification” to “not refuse unification”, all KMT candidates for city mayors refused to respond or simply disagreed with Ma. Besides, Mayor Ke also “apologized” for his pro-mainland statement and never mentions it again.
According to Taiwan’s election law, it is illegal to publish polls’ results starting 10 days before the election date. As a result, it is very hard to predict the result for those hot spots, such as Taipei and Gaoxiong. However, no matter which party will more mayors or city councilors, both the KMT and the DPP needs to reform as they need to rebuild public confidence in traditional party politics. In terms of cross-strait relation, if the KMT wins the local election and hence the presidential election 2 years later, there may be a turning point as the “good old days” during President Ma’s rule return, but unification would be still very unlikely in the foreseeable future.
The post DPP’s Mid-term Exam appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
The annual Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit recently took place in Papua New Guinea. Controversy has shrouded the build-up to the event; the local government decided it was a good idea to purchase 40 Maseratis to chauffeur attending dignitaries, in a country where poverty is rampant, while two cruise ships were docked in the harbour because there wasn’t enough accommodation available in Port Moresby to house summit attendees.
The typical pomp was shown by delegates and world leaders, with one particular world leader conspicuous by his absence – the United States represented by Vice President Mike Pence, rather than President Trump. In the build-up to this event, a well-worn line being thrown out there by social commentators and current affairs observers was, “if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.” But if Mike Pence’s address to the summit was anything to go by, the United States were making sure they did their utmost to maintain control within the Asia Pacific region, ensuring they’re very much “at the table”.
While watching the address, there were two main points with which one can draw conclusions from. Firstly, it was the warm nature in which Vice President Pence spoke of ExxonMobil’s presence in PNG, boasting about the American multinational oil and gas company investing over $16 billion into the country, while building 450 miles of pipeline and creating 2,600 jobs in the process.
Unfortunately, there were other facts that seemed to slip from the minds of Pence and his script writers. With an expected flood to tax revenues from the venture, PNG went on a debt-fuelled spending spree, with the country’s prime minister Peter O’Neill stating at a mining and petroleum conference in 2012, “we are borrowing now certain in the knowledge the revenue inflows from mining and LNG projects will make repayments manageable.” Somewhat unsurprisingly, ExxonMobil paid about one-thousandth of its expected share of 2016 LNG sales from the project in royalties to the country, resulting in sharp public debt, and undoubtedly a contributing factor in government expenditure falling. It seems the Trump Administration’s catch-cry of “America First” is being heard loud and clear, by ExxonMobil at least.
Secondly, the arguably more significant statement from Pence’s address was the joint agreement between PNG, the US and Australia of a military base being built on Manus Island, and there were a number of reasons that made this announcement noteworthy.
The most obvious motive behind another military installation being established in the Asia Pacific region is one of containment. Throughout his speech, there was a tangible element of pessimism towards China’s geopolitical influence, with Pence accusing Beijing of intellectual property theft, unprecedented subsidies for state businesses and “tremendous” barriers to foreign companies entering its giant market.
Additionally, the Vice President offered assurances to those countries with Chinese offers on the table – “know that the United States offers a better option. We don’t drown our partners in a sea of debt, we don’t coerce, compromise you independence,” claimed Pence. He added, “we do not offer constricting belt or a one-way road,” a phrase not-so-subtly taking a diplomatic swipe China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative. The address showed that Washington does not appreciate Beijing’s intentions on gaining power within the region, whether it be in the sovereignty battles in the South China Sea, or its support for Pacific countries such as Vanuatu.
The site’s proposed location is also sure to have gained attention from Australian observers. Manus Island was home to a notorious detention centre for refugees and asylum seekers aiming to enter a country with some of the most strictest immigration policies of any developed nation. To date, some 600 individuals remain on the site due to the precarious nature of their lives, without any assistance. Allegations of rape, child abuse, and psychological and physical assault were not uncommon, and the PNG Supreme Court ruled the facility unconstitutional in 2016. Australia’s then-Immigration minister Peter Dutton initially rejected the ruling, but later agreed to a relocation plan. One can ascertain that if the ruling was not brought to Canberra in the first place, Manus Island could possibly have been both home to a facility that persecutes society’s less fortunate, and an installation that promotes tension between the world’s two great superpowers.
The main cause for concern however isn’t the fact that this base increases geopolitical tensions within the region, nor is it that Manus Island is becoming a magnet for negative aspects of our society. Pence’s announcement signalled yet another addition to the number of US military installations around the globe, increasing the 770 or so that currently exist. The effects of this vast network of US military sites include numerous cases of pollution and environmental degradation, cases of indigenous cultures being eliminated and, of course, the $150 billion it costs the US taxpayer.
There are many reasons to be wary of Mike Pence’s address at APEC, but they all seem to boil down to one motive – control. It can be described in different terms – an assertion of global hegemony, an overt display of hard power, or a further expansion of the Military Industrial Complex that US President Eisenhower warned of in the 1960s, it all signifies Washington’s unwavering intentions that will seemingly never cease.
The post Pence’s statement of US intent at APEC appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
The post Summary of Large October-November 2018 Political Poll in Ukraine: Tymoshenko and Her Fatherland Party Are, so far, Clear Front-Runners for the 2019 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
http://www.quiz-maker.com/QYLTAHI
The post Foreign Affairs Quiz appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
The President of the International Criminal Court, Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji, addressing the UN General Assembly during an official visit to the seat of the United Nations
The 4th of July is sacred in the civic culture of Americans. On that day of 1776, their forefathers formally terminated allegiance to King George III. Prominent among their grievances against him was that he ‘made Judges dependent on his Will alone’ – by pulling the strings of term and pay. It is this judicial independence that lies at the heart of America’s idea of constitutional democracy; an enduring ideal, emulated around the world, wherever the rule of law truly matters.
We insist on this ideal with pride at the International Criminal Court (ICC). It is confusing then to behold an American official declare intent to unleash economic sanctions and malicious prosecution upon the ICC functionaries (judges notably included) for doing their job in accordance with the law – just because their work may not please those making that threat. Not even King George III would go that far.
Still, that profound paradox should not obscure the need to address underlying anxieties concerning the ICC. There are now 123 countries that are members of the ICC. They represent all regions of the world. They include France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Ireland, UK and all of America’s closest and traditional allies in Europe (old and new). We miss America’s leadership and presence at the ICC for it is a global project that represents America’s caring instincts for humanity. Its purpose is to ensure that our civilization no longer suffers millions of children, women and men to fall victim to unimaginable atrocities committed with impunity.
It was the Rwandan genocide in 1994 and the ‘ethnic cleansing’ in the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s that gave the immediate impetus to the adoption of the ICC’s founding treaty in Rome in 1998, and the U.S. played a part in formulating its text in many important respects. Before 1998, the U.S. played a leading role in the international efforts to establish ad hoc international criminal courts to bring justice to the victims of the atrocities in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. Those courts were heavily influenced by American judicial ideals. But it was even earlier that the U.S. commenced its leading role in international efforts to use the law to mend tears in the fabric of civilization caused by rampant acts of inhumanity. At Nuremberg, the U.S. was uncompromising that Nazi criminals (however highly placed) must face trial: for the holocaust, for other crimes against humanity, and for sundry war crimes. Robert H. Jackson, the American Chief Prosecutor at Nuremberg, was at the spearhead, rightly insisting that an object of the proceedings was ‘to redress the blight on the record of our era.’
In 1998, the world felt a need for a permanent international court that will be on hand, both to try crimes of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression; and to serve as an urge of second-thought to the minds of those inclined to commit such crimes. The ICC is that permanent international court.
Current examples of the ICC’s investigations and cases include the alleged or – as the case may be – established atrocities committed in Darfur; by an insurgency group in Uganda; or by Al-Qaeda affiliates in Mali. The charges include crimes against humanity and war crimes. Their details comprise, among other things, rapes and other manners of sexual violence and murder, committed on a widespread or systematic basis. The charges in the Darfur situation include allegations of genocide. A Chamber of the Court has recently held that the Court may exercise jurisdiction over the plight of the Rohingya people, which a recent UN report alleges as possibly including genocide. It must be stressed, of course, that all the suspects and accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Precisely as in American courts, charges at the ICC must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and due process (including, most importantly, the right to defence) is fully respected.
An important question was asked about the meaning of ‘complementarity’ – which is a condition built into the ICC’s exercise of jurisdiction. Complementarity captures the idea that the ICC is only a court of last resort. As such, its jurisdiction serves only to complement the national jurisdiction. In both legal and functional terms, this means that the ICC does not usurp the sovereign jurisdiction of any country. The Court operates on the basic principle that every country has the primary obligation – indeed the sovereign right – to investigate and prosecute crimes committed by its citizens or on its territory. It is only when the country proves unable or unwilling to do so that the ICC steps in. To the victims, then, the ICC serves only as an insurance policy against injustice. So, when a country like the U.S., with its reputation for a competent and robust judicial system, is investigating or prosecuting genuinely a case falling within the American jurisdiction – or has done so already, – the ICC will not interfere. This is the law at the ICC.
I am confident that American interests and popular opinion do essentially unite with those of the world in creating and supporting the ICC. The prospect of the ‘death of the ICC’ would make the world a more horrid place for caring Americans, who cannot help but be confronted by the plight of victims of heinous crimes around the world: victims who may otherwise be without hope of justice. It is a modern legend of America to step up to the plate for the powerless. With military might she did so in the two world wars. But using the rule of law, she has also intervened with other countries to redress instances of gross atrocities around the world in modern times, when righteous might did not prevent them. That American instinct finds its place in the reality of the ICC. As with every other human institution, including the most exalted ones in America, the ICC is not perfect. But it is the only one of its kind that we have. Let us all work together to improve it – for humanity’s sake.
In the words of a great American patriot, Eleanor Roosevelt, ‘Our own land and our own flag cannot be replaced by any other land or any other flag. But you can join with other nations, under a joint flag, to accomplish something good for the world that you cannot accomplish alone.’ It is truly time for America to aim to fortify – not weaken or wreck – the ICC as the only seawall that now stands against the man-made tides of barbarity that frequently assault humanity in its weakest parts.
By: Chile Eboe-Osuji, the President of the International Criminal Court
The post Op-Ed: The U.S. Should Join the ICC – for Humanity’s Sake appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
Can We Put It In Words?
Marking the centennial Armistice Day, Emanuel Macron called nationalism the opposite of patriotism. Whatever his inspiration, his comment should spur Americans to consider what nationalism means to us.
Macron may have been channeling historian Timothy Snyder, in his cite of novelist Danilo Kis: “… nationalism ‘has no universal values, aesthetic or ethical.’” Snyder quoted Kis in “On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From the Twentieth Century.” This 2017 book is his warning from the “bloodlands” of his expertise, and the swamping of personal identity in chauvinistic tribalisms that has brought totalitarians to power. His examples are almost all European, from the Nazis, Soviets, or Vladimir Putin.
America’s is an unusual nationalism. The nation created itself in an explicit Declaration of Independence. Most nationalities arose from mythical origins; no American nation existed until it declared itself. The North American colonies shared only British nationality before the Continental Congress, and the Declaration’s signers divorced those roots.
The Declaration announced that a “people” was dissolving its bonds to another. It only identified the new people as “we,” who “hold” certain “self-evident” truths. Something that “we hold” – credimus in Latin – constitutes a creed. America conceived itself in this creed.
The Declaration’s creed alone defines the American nation. The rest of the Declaration only lists British violations. Americans commonly cite the Constitution. But that document actually promulgated the nation’s second state, effecting a “more” perfect, already existing union, by better “secur(ing) the blessings of liberty” – as the Declaration charges governments to do. The Constitution is the nation’s essential edifice of state, but the Declaration’s creed sets the nation’s foundation.
America’s creed provides little of a traditional national identity. It asserts only the unalienable rights of all persons, and that government exists to secure them. It expressly defers to free individuals, each to discover and shape their personal identity by their own lights, be those traditional, avant-garde, or something else. It actually fits one of Snyder’s lessons: to “establish a private life,” as totalitarianism is the “erasure of the difference between private and public life.”
This nationality is radical, and odd. For almost all of history people lived hand-to-mouth, life was easily lost, and nations addressed human needs and fears. Government represented an exchange, of persons’ fealty and obeisance for order and security. Religions and ethnicities were co-opted, and traditions adopted, sanctifying the tradeoff. Rights were conferred as privileges, by rulers. That nationalism fits Snyder’s warning, and seems the real target of Macron’s concern.
French nationality has both an ethnic component, and its universalist tradition of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.” Macron may have been arguing French domestic politics on Armistice Day, advocating universalist tradition over ethnic identity. America’s divide is not between patriot and nationalist. American nationalism rests on the universal tenets in which the nation conceived itself. America faces a different question. Patriotism is love of country. Just how does a patriot love an abstract principle like America’s creed?
Love is an emotion, felt as part of a person’s organic constitution. Its objects are people, families, communities, places and personal ties, and the ways and means by which each pursues Happiness. These objects of love are not separate from American patriotism. They are, after all, fruits of Americans’ exercise of the unalienable rights. But neither do they carry the full meaning of patriotic love, even when viewed under the waving flag. People’s freedom for their pursuits is, Americans recognize, the national bottom line. Even outright racists have learned to argue only against what they see as special privileges for minorities, and to profess respect for everyone’s rights. Even in their virulent emotional attachments and resentments, they sense the primacy of the Declaration’s creed.
The racist’s deference does not equate to love, but most Americans sense how the things they love have the protection of government charged to protect rights – and bristle when they feel that charge misapplied or violated. We feel the unbreakable connection of flag to universally endowed rights, and the democracy, equality, and due process that guard them.
The political trick for Americans is to discern how any policies, mandates or actions fit, or fit better or worse, with America’s creed. Judging, or arguing, the fit is a complex exercise, topic for another essay. But America’s nationality rests in its creed, the bedrock object of American patriotism. It sets a common standard for all Americans, offers fundamental guidance for national conduct, and signals an endemic commitment to individual liberty. The Declaration’s creed defines a nationalism that merits a place above political difference, and American patriots should learn it all the better.
The post Op-Ed: What Is American Nationalism? appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
The scope of the conspiracy, the magnitude of the savagery, the imbecility of the cover-up, and the subsequent cheap royal mea culpa were all appalling. Jamal Khashoggi’s death was a premeditated murder. The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, insisted that this criminal act transgressed against both Turkey-Saudi relations and all diplomatic norms, and that this could not simply be swept under the rug. He demanded that the criminals must be handed over to Turkey, and in a recent OpEd, stated that the murder order came from the highest level of the Saudi government.
The MBS Effect
Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (MBS) is a deformer disguised as a reformer. Since actual political or religious reform was never in his nor in the royal family’s interest, he instituted feeble changes in the Kingdom related to driving and attending recreational public events tailored to temporarily win the hearts and minds of the Saudi youth.
MBS’ obsession with power and his determination to consolidate political and economic power under his command by any ruthless means necessary was apparent to some objective observers in the Middle East and the West, who sounded the alarm early on.
The warnings began when he took over virtually all key ministries, when he claimed he would fight corruption with arbitrary arrests and Mafia-style shakedowns, when he started a mass execution of Saudi Shi’ites—publically executing 47 Shia activists and clerics on the same day, when he arrested the Prime Minister of Lebanon and forced him to resign while visiting Riyadh, when he put a blockade on Qatar and recklessly tried to invade it, and certainly when he turned Yemen into a hell on earth.
Within that context, some may consider the barbaric murder of Jamal Khashoggi as the straw that broke the camel’s back, while others, especially among many Muslims around the world, consider this an unfolding prophecy. Islam teaches that committing flagrant oppression and those who shamelessly dishonor their parents are tormented in this world before they are tormented in the hereafter. The Crown Prince has demonstrated both qualities.
But the Crown Prince does have his own defenders. Both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt have called on President Donald Trump, urging him to save MBS from this public disgrace because he is an indispensable strategic partner.
What Led To Khashoggi’s Martyrdom?
Jamal Khashoggi had ten qualities that MBS and his blind cohorts considered grave threats.
He was widely known and respected in the Arab world and was rapidly gaining fame in the West. He had a keen awareness of regional challenges and geopolitical dynamics that clashed with Saudi Arabia’s national interest. He was an insider who knew the strengths and weaknesses of all the royal players. He supported the Arab Spring and argued that it never died and that another wave was imminent – little did he know that he was destined to become the Bouazizi of that second wave. He propagated that freedom of speech and expression is a God-given right and when a ruler resorts to tyranny it is an Islamic obligation to counsel him, and when necessary, publically call him out. He opposed the thinly-veiled campaign of Saudi Arabia to demonize Turkey and Qatar. He was against the arbitrary arrests used to silence certain prominent figures in the country. He was a genuine patriot who loved his country and rejected the idea of being portrayed as part of the political opposition or as foreign nation’s mouthpiece. He was against Israel’s illegal unilateral decision to take all of Jerusalem as its capital city and Saudi Arabia’s silent consent on the matter. And, more importantly, he was critical of MBS’ repressive modus operandi, haphazard economic reform, and self-destructive foreign policy, especially with the catastrophic war in Yemen.
Future of Saudi/US Relations
The current US administration has a poor record of protecting the freedom of expression, human rights, and the rule of law. It also favors MBS’ decision to abandon the Palestinian aspiration for statehood and to deal directly with Jarod Kushner on Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ (or peace process hogwash). The US has strategically kept the Kingdom without a US Ambassador since 2017.
Granted, Trump will continue fighting hard for a strategic partnership with Saudi Arabia. But when American Senators are openly expressing their discontent and supporting protests regarding this mortal fiasco and how that could irreversibly damage America’s global credibility, when one of Saudi Arabia’s biggest supporters in the Senate, Senator Lindsey Graham, publically declares “I am going to sanction the hell out of Saudi Arabia”, when the global public opinion is in unison in their condemnation and outrage, when international investors boycott Saudi Arabia’s hyped Desert Davos conference, and when the Editorial Board of media powerhouses such as Washington Post calls the kingdom an “outlaw regime”, it should be obvious that resistance is simply futile.
Saudi Arabia will have to choose between becoming like the ‘smiling Hajjaj’—the most ruthless mass murderer in Islamic history—and the upholding the stability of the Kingdom.
Impact on Turkey’s Status In the Islamic World
Turkey has performed exceptionally well on the world stage. Every day that passed has confirmed the sophistication of its intelligence apparatus, diplomatic temperament, and respect for international rule of law.
Mindful of the dynamics, Turkey restrained itself throughout this international ordeal and gave Saudi Arabia enough space and time to confess and penalize those who associated with the assassination. Turkey did not want to come across as an apolitical exploiter, eager to discredit the Kingdom or stain its image.
The time is ripe for launching a campaign of internal healing and restoration in Turkey as well. Erdogan should free the thousands who were imprisoned during ‘the purge”, or during the state of emergency after the failed coup. As documented by various human rights groups, these prisoners include journalists and other civilians whose only guilt is one of association. And, unfathomable as it may seem, extending an amnesty to his nemesis, Fethullah Gulen, whom he wanted extradited for treason, might be another deed for Erdogan to accomplish to further uphold his image.
Can the Monarchy Survive This Madness?
MBS’ bloody ventures have thrown Saudi Arabia down a slippery slope, and that will ultimately create a vacuum within the Sunni world leadership, with more ramifications to follow.
This barbaric killing that crossed all international diplomatic norms will also impact the kingdom’s relationship with the West, especially with the US, UK and France – their largest weapons suppliers and their main logistical support.
Unfortunately, the monarchy’s top leadership is underestimating the magnitude of the gathering clouds in the same way that it underestimated the capacity of the Turkish government.
Saudi Arabia must commit itself to launching a profound reform program that starts with the sidelining of MBS followed by the ending of the war in Yemen, dropping the Shia crescent and Muslim Brotherhood two-headed boogieman nonsense, and empowering its local Shia community. Granted, there will be some who will fight tooth and nail to keep status quo, especially those who believe that scrutinizing the monarchy is equivalent to questioning the custodianship of the two Holy Mosques.
So far, a number of official denials made by the Saudis were, in one way or another, refuted. And each time, the Saudis came back humiliated and forced to accept the Turkish account. Yet the cover up continues, and the Turkish authorities and Khashoggi’s family are yet to find the victim’s body for forensic tests and burial. There is still no closure.
As various objective minds have suggested in one way or another, the best way to get to the bottom of what happened, how it happened, and under whose orders this horrific assassination was carried out, is for UN Security Council to mandate an international tribunal to conduct a transparent investigation.
Every delay and every attempt made to dodge culpability will only push Saudi Arabia closer to a breaking point.
The post Ramifications of Royal Psychopathy appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
In May of 2018, the European Union passed The General Data Protection Regulation, known as the GDPR and many companies worldwide took notice. If you were a company operating within the EU it was well known and services were made available so you could become compliant. Compliance meant that you were required to take diligent care of customer’s personal data, seek detailed permission within reason to access their data, and use their data in an appropriate and limited fashion. Companies and governments outside of the EU also took notice, and consulting firms and law firms outside of the EU offered compliance advice for any company that would affect the lives of any EU citizen. This also meant that companies that operated in some manner related to the EU or possible citizens of the European Union took the GDPR provisions seriously. Violating the GDPR followed much of the same deterrence methods of a competition act violation, fines, large and record breaking fines for violators of the GDPR.
The question to whether or not a foreign government’s action could violate the GDPR might come into play early in the application of the GDPR. Canada and the European Union recently signed a Free Trade Agreement, one that goes beyond most FTAs by including social and labour issues between the two parties. With so many links between the Canada and the EU beyond simple trade matters, many of the stringent EU regulations need to be considered by Canadian companies and even the Government of Canada when trading with the European Union. While many trade agreements would not seek to enforce social values or labour rights, the close cultural, commercial and legal ties between Canada and the EU made it more palatable for Canadians and Europeans alike as the values of Canadians and many Europeans share a common bond.
Recently in Canada many were shocked to find out that a government agency responsible for data and statistical analysis was using their powers to access the private banking and financial information of a large number of Canadians without their knowledge of consent. The agency of the Federal Government, Statistics Canada were forcing private banks to give over data that showed every transaction, loan, deposit, payment and piece of data collected, including names and addresses to the government. The government in parliament defended these actions and said it was their legal right to access any information at any time for statistical purposes. Even during the general census, signed permission is required, but in this case no permissions were asked, or even knowledge of requests given to the clients of the bank. With so many banks, including Canadian banks, having close connections to the EU, it is likely the case that the European Commission could investigate those banks, and in what might be an interesting application of the GDPR, the EU may be able to fine not only Canadian banks, but the Canadian government itself.
The way the law is written in applying the GDPR is that any EU citizen that has their data abused will be protected by the EU. So in the application of laws in Canada, if the client of the Canadian bank happens to be an EU citizen or perhaps even is incorporated or has commercial ties in the EU in some form, the EU may have jurisdiction over the data violation. With large Canadian cities like Toronto and Montreal having much of their diverse populations being dual citizens of countries like Italy, Portugal, Greece and a number of other EU member states, a violation by their bank as well as the Government of Canada of the GDPR may result in the EU issuing fines against firms and the Canadian government. With such a gross violation of data privacy in Canada and the uproar from citizens and even those in the privacy community in Canada itself, the excessive use of powers by the government may prompt a severe backlash against Canada’s government. Using the GDPR as a defense may prove useful to clever lawyers in Canada and the EU, but the application of a law in 2018 that completely ignores the entire world and privacy experts moving towards the GDPR is simply ignorant of how data privacy should be paramount in the EU and anywhere outside of Europe in modern times.
The post Possible Penalties if Nation States Ignore the EU’s GDPR appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
The Druze religion is a very ancient religion that is proven in the Bible and the New Testament. It started from the days of Jethro, the priest of Median in the Bible. At that period of time, the religion consisted of tribes and united ethnic groups. It wasn’t a religion that emerged of the boundaries of the tribe or ethnic group because every group adopted a unique number of goddesses and idols that they used to pray to. Everybody respected the people’s willingness to pray to whatever goddess that they wished.
The Prophet Jethro, which is considered the first prophet, brought the words of God to his people. Jethro was the first of a number of prophets who brought the words of the lord to his people. The miracles that happened during the Exodus to the Jewish people occurred while Jethro was the figure that guided and directed Moses, who did the actions that became the miracles that saved the Jewish people.
For example, the Prophet Jethro advised Moses to hit the Red Sea and therefore, the Red Sea split. He also told Moses to hit the rock and then water came from the rock. He also advised Moses to have officers and judges that were able to take over what happened in the tribes. This was the foundation of law, authority and democracy to the present all over the world. These actions led to the Israelis receiving the Torah at Mount Sinai by believing in Moses.
The history that relates to the Druze faith contain a lot of facts that deny its foundations because most of the historians that wrote about the Druze religion were Muslim. Also, historical sources from Western countries relied upon those sources and as we know, Islam never recognized the Druze faith as a separate faith and considered them a section of Islam, which went out of it, which is actually the semi-truth and not the whole truth.
The Druze lived in the Mediterranean at a time when this area was named Israel, Bilad Al Sham, the Greater Syria and many other names. They are the only people that kept their genetic roots because they bar mixed marriages with other nations. They did not go to other countries and they stayed in the same geographic area, keeping the same genetic root that belongs to this area until the present. The believers (Muwahhidun) were living in calm and peace until the ninth century, without any fear and they lived in harmony among the neighbors. But when the Islamic faith started to spread, they were forced to join Islam under the threat of death (or you become Muslim or you die). So the leader of the tribe said, “If that nation (Islam) took over you, go after it but keep your principles and your faith.”
This is how the believers (Al Muwahhidun) entered Islam while keeping the principles of their faith. But the Prophet of Islam did not agree with their original name and changed it to the name the sons of mercy (the sons of Ma’arof) for the Muslims believed that the term believers (Al Muwahhidun) should be unique to Islam.
This is how it was kept until the 11th century, when the fight over the Caliphate heirs and the separation of the Shia from the Sunni section of Islam provided the Druze with an opportunity to leave Islam and to come back to their own principles and faith. Since the dividing of the Shia from the Sunni referred to all the sections that belonged to the Shia, the Druze are considered to be part of the Shia sect but they never had a religious bond with the Shia. For the Druze people, the name Druze is a mockery name that was attached to the Druze people but their real name is the Al Al Muwahhidun, the believers, those who believe in one God.
After they came back to the principles of the religion, the areas with a majority of Druze actually came about in order to convince people to come back to their own original faith and also to join new tribes to the Druze faith. They wanted to live together as a community. But when the messengers decided upon that mission was chosen, the military leader Nashtakin Al Darazi, who parted ways with the religious establishment, was very upset and claimed that this is an insult to send people that are lower than him on such an important mission. Since he did not accept the decision of the separation of the authorities, he decided to divide and to take whoever wants to join him. In order to survive, he started to attack tribes in order to take their belongings and this is how he was surviving. This person spread fear among the tribes.
In the beginning, the Muslims blamed the whole Ma’arof people (the Druze) since he is part of the Druze people to begin with. But afterwards, it was known that he was divided from the Druze and because of his cruelty, everyone started to call the people Druze after his name. By the years, the name of this people became to be Druze. In the beginning, it was a great insult to call the son of the Ma’arof Druze but now it has become so common that there is no need to get offended and to cause great chaos over nothing. Also, the name cannot change the nobility of a people who remain leaders until the present.
Until today, after all of the rivalries and despite all of the ethnic cleansing, the believers managed to survive but also today, the Druze people are a minority where the threat of annihilation is still upon them more than any other ethnic group. As for the separation from the Ma’arof people from Islam, resulting in the people coming back to their own principles and faith (Al Tuchaid), that action made the Muslims very upset and they chased after them in order to annihilate them.
This is why the believers (Al Muwahhidun) moved to live in the mountains, which is a strategic place in which they can defend themselves from Muslims attacks. In the hill and the mountains, they have the natural surroundings that make it difficult for the Muslims to destroy them over there. Until the present, the Druze live on the Carmel Mountains, the Galilee Mountains, the Golan Heights, the Lebanon Mountains and the Houran Mountains in Syria. Until today, they have a unique lifestyle and traditions that they hide in order to avoid a clash among the other populations that surround them.
Written by Mendi Safadi, who has formerly served as Israeli Minister Ayoob Kara’s chief of staff and presently heads the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights.
The post Special Contributor Op-Ed: The Druze religion… appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
http://www.quiz-maker.com/QS7388D
The post Foreign Policy Quiz.. appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
Hindus protesting against Hamas
In the light of the present security crisis in Israel, where Israel just agreed to a cease-fire after facing a barrage of almost 500 rockets and mortars being fired into the southern part of the country, a group of Indians decided to demonstrate in support of Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism. “Today’s demonstration in New Delhi was organized on behalf of three organizations: The Safadi Center, the World Hindu Struggle Committee and the Hindu Struggle Committee (India),” Shipan Kumer Basu, who heads the World Hindu Struggle Committee, reported.
“On behalf of the World Hindu Struggle committee, I protest against the cowardly attacks by Hamas,” Basu proclaimed. “The Hindus of Bangladesh always support Israel. Arun Upadhava, President of the Hindu Struggle Committee (India), and I stand in solidarity with Mendi Safadi, who heads the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights and the rest of the Israeli people. Many local people also partook in the demonstration.”
“I stand from New Delhi in a demonstration in support of IDF soldiers and the land of Israel in its struggle against Palestinian terrorism,” Safadi stated in an exclusive interview. “The people who stand here are pro-Israel. Many Hindus came in order to express their support and to encourage the State of Israel at this critical hour. These have been difficult times for us. We hope that now we have a mission to eradicate the terrorism.”
In recent days, a Druze IDF officer was killed during an exchange of fire in Gaza. A Palestinian man in Ashkelon was murdered when a rocket struck the apartment building where he was working. Eight other people were injured in that attack including two women in critical condition. And a rocket hit a bus, resulting in one person being critically injured. Israel has faced a barrage of constant non-stop rocket fire throughout the southern part of the country for the last couple of days, until the cease-fire was implemented last night. The Barzalai Medical Center reported that they have treated 93 patients following the latest rocket barrage on Israel.
As a result of the security situation, the IDF responded by striking 160 targets within Gaza. According to Al Jazeera, at least 5 Palestinians were killed during the IDF strikes on Gaza and 7 other Palestinians including a senior level Hamas member died during an exchange of fire with IDF forces in Gaza. One of the targets was Al Aqsa TV, a media outlet associated with Hamas.
The residents of Southern Israel are suffering greatly from this situation. According to IDF Radio, Yigal Suissa, a resident of Sderot who was injured in the leg, proclaimed, “They do not need to harm us physically. All of us are hurting mentally.” Another resident, whose home was struck in a rocket attack, reported, “Our home is a battle scene now. When you come out alive and healthy from an incident like this, the home is already less important.”
Nevertheless, even though the carnage in Israel recently was significantly worse than the violence leading up to Operation Protective Edge, Israel decided to accept a cease-fire, a move which the residents of Southern Israel protested against. According to Channel 2 News, they blocked off the Kerem Shalom Crossing due to their displeasure with the cease-fire. Meanwhile, following the implementation of the cease-fire, a Palestinian terrorist threw a grenade along the Gaza border. But Netanyahu has defended his cease-fire, claiming that it is in the best interests of the country and he stressed that Hamas essentially begged for it. He added that he loves the residents of the South but he cannot share with them all of his considerations.
Even though the move was controversial among the residents of Southern Israel, a Palestinian source explained why the cease-fire was the correct decision: “Everyone is seeking a cease-fire and I am sure that Hamas is trying to show off it is the one paid the heaviest price and is the one who is to impose the cease-fire in order to assert its authority. What happens afterwards is crucial for Hamas and their armed existence in Gaza. The Egyptian Army might get involved. The risks are rising for that to happen. They want a cease-fire for they cannot deal with a situation where the Egyptian army becomes involved in this.”
He added that everyone is focusing on the sad ghastly images coming out of Gaza and that this does not make Israel look good internationally. However, he noted that members of the community of nations do not have to deal with the barrage of violence that Israel deals with daily. According to the Palestinian source, “Only the PA wants this. The PA are sacrificing their own people. They are not gaining anything by these splits between them. They are only losing. They are losing the popularity. The people are losing. Everyone is losing on both sides. The only losers are civilians. They are losing just because they are what they are.”
“We are sick and tired of war,” he proclaimed. “This got to stop once and for all. It is sickening. It is a different age. It is not the age of the First Intifada. The people have to wake up in order to enable peace. Give it a break. Every human has the right to live. No human has the right to kill, be hostile and be aggressive. I don’t see a reason to lash out at each other all of these decades. Every parent should be worried about their children’s future.” He believes that only Egypt can solve Gaza’s problems and that another war would not accomplish anything for Israel, and Netanyahu knows this.
Israeli scholar Dr. Mordechai Kedar concurred with the Palestinian source: “Israel doesn’t want a war. Israel doesn’t need a war. Israel is looking for ways on how to live alongside Hamas rather than fighting it, hoping that a day will come and Hamas in one way or another, will accept our existence and to leave us alone. This is the Israeli hope and this is why Israel will do anything that it can do to stabilize the situation in Gaza by allowing Qatar, a terror supporting country, to bring money in order to fund a terror organization. Israel will bend over backwards even at the price of supporting terror by Hamas and Qatar in order to gain strategically and to achieve peaceful coexistence for a while. The government hopes recently that Hamas does not want a confrontation and will also join some kind of agreement, which will enable a better livelihood on both sides of the border.”
Former Israel Consul General Yitzchak Ben Gad agreed, noting that Israelis who want to take action against Hamas are not considering the long-term consequences: “The people of Gaza suffer. They suffer from economic depression. They only have light in their homes for a few hours a day. Gaza within a few years will be a place where people cannot live. We don’t want to go in and take this responsibility upon us. Hamas won in free elections. People are suffering today under the dictatorship of this organization. Israel got nothing to do with it. Israel is willing to help the people of Gaza. We send them trucks heavy with loads. But we are not going to be kind and nice to these people and then get missiles on our heads.”
It is precisely for this reason that Kedar does not agree with the decision taken by the Israeli government. “The Israeli government and the army as well do not understand that living with Israel side by side is actually against the raison d’etre of Hamas,” Kedar explained. “Hamas is a terror organization, who is fully committed to the jihad until the full eradication of the State of Israel. For Hamas, the occupation is what happened in 1948, not what happened in 1967. It means the State of Israel should not exist at all. Therefore, accepting Israel and making any agreement with Israel is totally against the most basic credo of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and all of the other terror organizations in Gaza. This is why we came to this position where Israel lost its deterrence, which should have been the basis of any conversation with and about Hamas in Gaza. I support a limited operation, with a very narrow operation on the ground in order not to expose our soldiers to the giant dangers involved in urban warfare, which is very expensive and costly in terms of soldiers’ lives. The government had a very thorough discussion about what should be done and can be done, which is not always the same.”
“The time has come for them to pay the price for the provocation and the damage,” Ben Gad declared. “Hundreds of thousands of people live in Sderot, Ofakim, Ashkelon, etc. Therefore, if you continue with your provocation, you will pay a heavy price for that. What happened was a strong message to the Hamas that the price will be so heavy and painful that it is not worth it to start it again with us. The Hamas has its own ideology. Bibi cannot change overnight their philosophy. Israel has to make it clear to Hamas, think whatever you want but if you start shooting missiles and burning our fields, you will pay a heavy peace. We are not asking you to recognize Israel. Israel does not exist because of you but despite you.”
The post Indians protest against Hamas terror as Israel agrees to cease-fire appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
Composite picture of a night sky over the African continent in 2030 based on the World Energy Outlook model of affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all (the International Energy Agency).
Accessible, reliable and affordable energy is the cornerstone of transformational socio-economic development. For Africa, delivering sustainable development is dependent on meeting the continent’s energy needs in order to lift populations out of poverty, catalyze industrialization, and stimulate economic growth.
Despite the continent’s abundant energy resources, energy poverty is still rife in the continent with close to 600 million people lacking access to electricity. This sets nations back on meeting energy access goals, retards industry progress, and diminishes the continent’s economic growth by 2 to 4 percent every year.
On a positive note, energy access has improved in recent years with the number of people without access in sub-Saharan Africa falling for the first time in absolute terms, and with countries such as Ethiopia, Kenya and Rwanda leading the pace. Africa is at the forefront of distributed energy systems that can increase energy access in rural areas faster, more cheaply, and more widely than conventional grid extension, driven by innovative business models and rapidly decreasing technology costs. At the same time, renewables are on the rise across the continent with significant renewable generation capacities added in countries such as Egypt, Morocco and South Africa.
Renewable energy investments are also on the rise across the continent from Senegal, to Kenya, and Zambia. While this progress is encouraging, the pace of energy access falls far short of meeting the universal energy access target by 2030.
Closing the gap on Africa’s energy challenges presents major opportunities for investors keen on engaging with the continent, especially on helping Africa meet the shortfall in the estimated $90 billion required to achieve universal energy access by 2030.
Clearly, these financing needs are of such magnitude that no single institution is capable of meeting them in isolation. This is why development finance institutions need a pragmatic shift in how they do business and leverage scarce public resources in order to mobilize private sector financing at scale, “from billions to trillions.”
The African Development Bank is leading by example. For instance, the Bank launched the Facility for Energy Inclusion to close funding gaps in the small-scale energy infrastructure sector and catalyze last-mile energy access. Through a mix of commercial and concessional instruments, the facility provides low cost of capital, and mitigates key credit and currency risks. Additionally, the recently approved Room2Run transaction allows the Bank to effectively transfer the credit risks of selected loan portfolios to investors, which lowers the total risk consumption of the Bank.
This initiative will enable the Bank to recycle capital efficiently in order to boost lending capacity and enhance private sector investments. The transaction has already attracted major support from partners like the European Commission which will provide a $100 million guarantee to be channeled into renewable energy projects in Africa. Ultimately, this will free up around $700 million, which can be re-allocated to new projects.
Multiple barriers hinder investments and private sector participation which could potentially fast-track energy access. These include the lack of an enabling policy environment for investors and other systemic bottlenecks that slow down transactions and escalate project costs. Transforming the energy landscape calls for a multi-faceted approach to unlock private sector capital by resolving these barriers in order to create the ideal conditions for investments in the continent.
The African Development Bank in close collaboration with other development partners is perched on the apex of creating a vibrant marketplace that will deliver the energy transformation necessary to move Africa forward. The Bank is dedicated to eliminating and minimizing barriers for investors, primarily through financial instruments to de-risk transactions, disseminating knowledge and market data, and facilitating peer-to peer learning and networking. Private sector engagement is on the rise, buoyed by various partnerships such as the New Deal on Energy for Africa and the US-led Power Africa Initiative.
To sustain this momentum, the Bank convened the inaugural Africa Energy Market Place (AEMP) in Abidjan in July 2018. The AEMP is a platform for public private dialogue and is set up to address barriers to mobilizing and scaling-up private investment into the energy sector. Effectively, AEMP reviews and prioritizes transformative energy transactions, and accelerates reforms in order to attract private investments and create a pipeline of bankable projects. Five countries participated in the inaugural edition: Côte d’Ivoire, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Zambia.
The conversations that began at the AEMP are set to continue in November’s Africa Investment Forum (AIF) in South Africa. The Forum convenes project sponsors, borrowers, lenders and investors with a shared interest in closing Africa’s infrastructure gap which is estimated to be anywhere between $130–170 billion per year.
By convening and facilitating mutually beneficial dialogue amongst stakeholders who can dramatically impact Africa’s energy landscape, the Bank is creating the requisite foundation for accelerated private sector investments in Africa’s energy sector in order to achieve universal energy access.
Indisputably, this will put the continent steadily on the path to socio-economic growth and sustainable development.
By: Amadou Hott, the Vice-President of Power, Energy, Climate Change & Green Growth at the African Development Bank
The post Op-Ed: Why Financing Africa’s Energy Infrastructure is a Major Opportunity for Investors appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
The Sheikh Hasina government recently declared that Bangladesh is an Islamic state and “anyone who pronounces offensive statements against it or against the Prophet Muhammed will be prosecuted according to the law.”
Ahead of next month’s elections, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has announced that she plans to get the Saudis to build 560 model mosques and an Islamic university. In addition, she declared that Bangladesh is an Islamic state: “Anyone who pronounces offensive statements against it or against the Prophet Muhammed will be prosecuted according to the law.” These actions come after she declared that a degree from an Islamic madrassa will be on par with a university degree within the country. Analysts report that these moves were made in order to pander to radical Islamist voters but the BNP also panders to that same voter base. This means that presently, there is no secular liberal alternative running in the upcoming Bangladeshi elections. The question remains, is Bangladesh becoming the next Pakistan?
Bangladeshi dissident Sazzadul Huq thinks that Bangladesh is well on the road to being the next Pakistan: “It is true that there is no Blasphemy Law in Bangladesh. But, the ICT act (Information and Technology Act) which has turned into the Digital Security Act is just a de facto of blasphemy law. Bloggers, journalists, writers, online activists, human rights activists and LGBT activists have been under the microscope of the government and threats from Islamic fundamentalists for online materials that may have been perceived by some to have hurt their religious beliefs. As a result, peoples’ freedom of thought and expression is being violated. The conscious people of Bangladesh are being restricted from speaking the truth.”
On June On 12, 2018, Bangladeshi secular writer Shahzahan Bachchu was shot dead in the Munshiganj district. Bachchu had previously received threats from extremists groups due to his outspoken support for secularism. Renowned photographer Shahidul Alam criticized the government a few months ago on Al Jazeera in the wake of the student protests against the widespread road accidents within the country. He argued that the students were protesting not only against road accidents but also against the widespread government corruption within the country. Because of that, the Bangladeshi government arrested him. According to Huq, “Many teachers, writers and activists have also been arrested.”
Huq also suffered himself immensely due to the present reality in Bangladesh. On May 27, 2017, dissident Sazzadul Hoque posted on his Facebook: “I wish to live like a human and not a Muslim. Things that I was taught and made to believe are wrong.” As a result of this post, he was suspended from Facebook and got expelled from university. He faced numerous online threats, which proclaimed: “This guy renounced Islam. We are asking the authorities to apprehend this guy as soon as possible for if not, there might be religious riots like there were in the past;” “We don’t need a bastard like yourself. You should be persecuted or even killed. You don’t have a right to live on this land;” “Sisterfucker, you are making the biggest mistake of your life and let Allah cause you all kinds of misery;” “You are not a human. You are the son of a prostitute. You are a dog fucker. If you came in front of me, I would slice you. Your meat would have been distributed to the dogs, you fucking pig;” “If only I could get my hands on you, I would decapitate and slaughter you, you son of a pig.”
Islamist groups were threatening him and his friends. Hundreds of people came to visit his maternal uncle and his mother, threatening to kill him. The government did nothing to protect him. However, some Islamist teachers did attempt to get the police to arrest him. Due to this horrific situation, he left Dhaka and returned to his village but he could not stay there once the locals realized that he was there. He received phone calls stating that he would be killed wherever he was found. He moved from his home to that of his maternal aunt. When they found out where he was, they threatened to burn down her home for sheltering him so he left her home as well. As he fled from place to place, imams were preaching in the local mosques that he should be killed as an apostate. Due to these threats, he moved to India but is only allowed to stay there under his present visa for another two months. He faced numerous cyber threats and media outlets which covered his story in Bangladesh also faced numerous threats until they were forced to delete the news.
If Sheikh Hasina’s legislation comes into fruition, a horrific situation for journalists and bloggers like Huq will become even worse, thus leaving one to ponder whether the country will turn into the next Pakistan. Already, Pakistan is an unfree country where it is unsafe for journalists to openly speak and report the truth. According to dissident Repunzel Baloch, hundreds of journalists have been abducted and killed by Pakistani forces in Balochistan, Pashtunistan, Sindh and Pok. He claimed that in Balochistan alone, over 50 journalists have been abducted, tortured and killed by Pakistani military forces.
“Hamid Mir who was an honest journalist working for Pakistani TV was attacked by ISIS for reporting the truth about the Baloch cause and highlighting the crimes of the government,” Baloch added, emphasizing that Manzoor Bugti was abducted, Javed Naseer disappeared, Razzaq Gul also went missing, Haji Abdul Raqiz Baloch was abducted, and that there are many more cases of journalists who fell victim to the Pakistani government.
While Asia Bibi, a Christian mother who insulted her Muslim neighbors in Pakistan by drinking from a well, won’t be executed for blasphemy in the end and she was recently released from prison, her life is still in danger. There is a bounty that was placed on her head by various radical groups. As a result, she and her family is seeking to flee her country, where the blasphemy law is still in place. Ahmedi Muslims, Christians, Hindus and others can still face the ordeal that Asia Bibi faced in the future. If the Sheikh Hasina government is not put in check, this is what Bangladeshis have to look forward to.
The post Op-Ed: Will Bangladesh be the next Pakistan? appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
In the moral version of human history – expressed in the Quran, Bible, and Torah – corruption is considered the worst reckless impulse that caused men to fall from grace. It was the betrayal of trust and loyalty for purely selfish gains.
From that perspective, the root cause of corruption is individual moral shutdown, derailment or deficiency. On the other hand, modern-day scrutiny of corruption zooms in on institutions and good governance – professional and technocratic excellence and adherence to policies and procedures.
Much of this article will be dealing with the latter perspective, though no lasting solution to corruption can be found without considering the individual aspect. This could be the reason why corruption is scandalously ever-present in every aspect of the Somali government.
Harmonized Contradictions
Ironically, if a “Corruption Hall of Shame” were inaugurated, the majority of the top 10 list would be Muslim rulers representing nations ranking high in natural resources. Somalia would be leading the list as it has the past decade. This is the direct result of a culture of impunity and a lack of anti-corruption teachings.
However, you would not have heard this from the former UN Secretary General’s Special Representative for Somalia Michael Keating. In his briefing to the Security Council last month, he said that Somalia has “a government with a compelling reform agenda anchored in strong partnership between President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo and Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khayre.” He continued by telling the Council members that “its centerpiece is to make the country creditworthy and accountable as a step to gain full sovereignty, reduce dependency and attract both public and private investments. IMF benchmarks are being met … and debt relief is closer.”
Well, of course. Somalia’s politicians are ready for more loans and dodgy deals such as Soma Oil and Gas, whose former Executive Director for Africa is the country’s current prime minister. Never mind the glaring conflict of interests.
Being instituted a few months after Somalia emerged out of its “transitional period” in 2012, the UN Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNSOM) was established as a central bank of the donor funds and to facilitate the reconciliation process. However, UNSOM gradually morphed into the carrot-dangler that lures all across the political spectrum, the gatekeeper of the political process, and the legitimizer of any selected new government through corruption as long as it does not challenge certain dubious deals such as Soma Oil and Gas and the massive IMF and World Bank debts.
Incidentally, the United Kingdom is Somalia’s penholder at the Security Council. In other words, the U.K. has the most powerful role in all Somalia related issues. It has the exclusive authority to draft resolutions and frame any debate on the country. All three UNSOM leaders were British (guerilla) diplomats, though the latest has South African citizenship.
If I was not blunt enough in the past, let me try again. The international apparatus that was set up to “fix Somalia” is the main hoax for keeping it perpetually broken. As long as there are corrupt or pitifully credulous Somali politicians who are eager to legitimize the current system for their personal gains the schizophrenia –journey toward sovereignty– will continue but the nation will remain at the mercy of international and local predators.
On Scale
In a 2013 article titled The Corruption Tango I wrote: “While robust functioning of all governmental institutions and policies of checks and balances are crucial to fighting corruption, the most crucial is the branch that enforces such policies.” Five years later, there is not an iota of improvement towards that end. The courts remain scandalously corrupt. Cash, clan, and connections are still the three most popular currencies in Somalia. Yet the current government audaciously claims it is committed to ending corruption.
Can a government that came to power through a manifestly corrupt process of purchasing votes through dark money “eradicate that sick mentality,” as Prime Minster Khayre said in 2017? Of course not, but it can manage perceptions and put on a good show for public relations.
Selective Enforcement and Co-option
Unlike its predecessor, the current government has a clever plan for distraction. They routinely carry out public prosecutions of petty corruption cases with media fanfare and public trumpet blasts while turning a blind eye to various shady deals that involve top officials within the government.
A few mega “corporations” practically own the entire country. Over the past two decades, these companies, especially those in the telecommunication business who are granted exclusive right to use the official gateway and country code without paying licensing fees or taxes, have been investing in keeping business as usual. It is an open secret how these mega companies co-opt key political actors by bringing them on board as stakeholders or through kickbacks to ensure their silence. Meanwhile, the old lady selling tomatoes under the scorching sun is routinely harassed by the municipality to pay her “public service” dues.
This widely accepted, flagrantly unjust clan-based system, known as the 4.5 system, remains the most potent force that maintains the culture of corruption and impunity in Somalia. Certain clans are guaranteed high ministerial positions. Once inside, these ministers are expected to suck as much as they can for their respective clans, themselves or both. Nepotism continues to be the most common practice in all branches of the government.
Defusing Scrutiny
Like the previous governments, the current administration facilitates key Members of Parliament and their family members with foreign medical services, scholarships for their children, and armored vehicles for protection.
Certain elements within the international community not only tolerate this corruption but also cultivate the right environment for it. Selected Somalian ministers may be granted easy access to funds for this or that project, or may be invited to some of those never-ending conferences in foreign cities. In return, these key individuals give those in the international community priceless cover, a patronage system, and a code of silence that sustains a two-way system of corruption.
Most of the Somalian ministers are members of the parliament, and the government is aggressively using whatever is in its disposal to co-opt the parliament. Only days after President Farmajo returned from his Qatar state visit in May, his office or the executive branch offered the Somali parliamentarians a deal none of them could refuse: an early vacation or recess and $5,000 cash per MP – so much for checks and balances.
These actions are to neutralize a restless parliament bent on advancing a “no confidence” motion to oust the current prime minister, whose long affiliation with the predatory Soma Oil and Gas and his draconian policies to silence opposition groups reached a breaking point.
The post Somalia and the Houdinis of Corruption appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.