Jacques Cheminade, spoke with Christian de Boissieu, President of the Economic Analysis Council for President Sarkozy on France's 24 Monde.
The interview was aired today, in English, in several English speaking countries, as French President Nicolas Sarkozy arrived in Washington to discuss the Global Economic crisis with U.S. President Bush.
Cheminade and de Boissieu discussed the notion of a New Bretton Woods Conference to overhaul the hopelessly Bankrupt World Financial System.
October 18, 2008
CHINA AVOIDS NSG WAIVER INITIATIVE IN FAVOUR OF PAKISTAN
B.RAMAN
President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, who paid a bilateral visit to China from October 14 to 17,2008, was to return to Pakistan on October 17 and go back to Beijing on October 23 to attend the summit of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) being held in Beijing on October 24 and 25,2008. It remains to be seen whether he goes back himself as originally scheduled or deputes Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani to attend it.
2. Coinciding with his visit, one of the Chinese engineers kidnapped by the Swat branch of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on August 29,2008, reportedly managed to escape from custody and was picked up by a helicopter of the Pakistan Army before the TTP could re-capture him. However, the other engineer, who also managed to escape, was reportedly re-captured by the TTP before he could be picked up by the Pakistan Army.
3. This kidnapping incident, coming in the wake of three other incidents directed against Chinese nationals in Pakistan last year, is learnt to have figured prominently in the one-to-one discussions of Zardari with important Chinese investors and businessmen during which he invited them to invest more in Pakistan. Among those who called on him were Ma Zhigeng, Chairman of the NORINCO, Zhang Liansheng, Chairman of the Poly Technologies, Liu Minkang, Chairman, Chinese Banking and Regulatory Authority, and Fan Jixiang, President of the Sinohydro.
4.In an interview to the "People's Daily", Zardari claimed that the Chinese business executives, who met him, had expressed no security concerns about Pakistan. “I met with heads of many companies and 99.9 per cent told me how secure they were feeling,” he said. He added that though Pakistan had some problems, the Government was giving full attention to address the situation. He also said that he was trying to convince everyone that terrorism was a regional as well as an international problem and that the international community should come forward as Pakistan could not fight it alone. “We are looking towards the world for cooperation in curbing this menace.”
5. Jin Zheping, the Deputy General Manager of the China International Water and Electricity Corporation (CWE), is reported to have assured Zardari that the CWE would invest $1.7 billion for generating low-cost hydel electricity in Pakistan. A memorandum of understanding has already been signed for CWE assistance to one hydel project (the Bhasa dam) and CWE assistance for another (the Kohala dam) is under negotiation.
6. The visit also saw the announcement of Chinese assistance for launching a telecommunication satellite, named PakSat-1R, for Pakistan in 2011. The assistance will be provided by the China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC).
7. Among important Chinese leaders whom Zardari met were President Hu Jintao, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, and Wu Bannguo, Chairman of the National People's Congress. While the atmosphere of the visit and meetings had the usual warmth and friendliness marking China-Pakistan bilateral exchanges, in terms of concrete outcome the visit was not quite satisfactory from the Pakistani point of view.
8. Zardari was expecting three concrete results relating to an immediate Chinese credit to enable Pakistan meet its payment difficulties and avoid default of its international obligations due early next year, a Chinese initiative to get for Pakistan a waiver of the restrictions on nuclear trade from the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG) similar to the initiative taken by the US to get a waiver for India and a firm declaration of Chinese interest in the three pending proposals for a petrochemical complex in Gwadar and a railway line and a gas pipeline connecting Gwadar with the Xinjiang region of China.
9. Briefing the media after Zardari's meeting with Wen Jiabao on October 16, Qin Gang, a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Office, said: "As a long friend of Pakistan, China understands it is facing some financial difficulties.We’re ready to support and help Pakistan within our capability.” But he did not mention any specific figure of the credit which China would be prepared to extend. China had agreed to provide $500 million in a concessional loan to help Pakistan meet its balance of payment needs in April last.
10.Before Zardari's arrival in Beijing, Masood Khan, Pakistan's Ambassador to China, had claimed that an agreement on civilian nuclear co-operation with China could be reached during the visit. No such agreement figures in the list of agreements signed by the two countries during the visit as released by the Xinhua, the Chinese New Agency. (Annexure).
11. It is, however, learnt from reliable sources that while the Chinese reiterated their commitment in principle made to Pervez Musharraf to supply two more nuclear power stations (Chashmas III and IV ), they avoided any commitment on Pakistan's request for a Chinese initiative to get an NSG waiver. Without such a waiver, Chashmas III and IV would remain non-starters. In view of the expected US opposition to any waiver till Pakistan allows the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to have Dr.A.Q.Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist, interrogated by an independent team of investigators on his non-proliferation activities, China is not confident of a waiver in favour of Pakistan till the A.Q. Khan issue is resolved. It reportedly does not want to take any initiative in this matter lest it face an embarrassment if its proposal is rejected by the NSG. The present Government in Pakistan, like the previous Government of Musharraf, is opposed to any IAEA interrogation of Khan. The Chinese are also not very keen on that since Khan knows a lot not only about the proliferation activities of Pakistan, but also of China.
12. Farhan Bokhari, the Islamabad correspondent of the CBS News of the US, has reported as follows: "China has privately agreed to follow a "step-by-step" approach to fulfilling Pakistan’s aspiration for an expanded nuclear energy program, rather than sign an ambitious civil nuclear program of the kind recently struck between the U.S. and India, senior Pakistani and Western officials said on Thursday (October 16). Private discussions are believed to have been held on expanded nuclear cooperation between Pakistan’s president Asif Ali Zardari and Chinese leaders during Zardari’s four-day visit to China.A senior Pakistani government official, familiar with discussions between Zardari and Chinese officials, claimed Thursday that China had agreed to “consider further nuclear power reactors to fulfill our needs. The relationship (on the nuclear issue) remains intact”. Speaking to CBS News on condition of anonymity, the official added, “there is now a complete understanding on our future cooperation”. However, a second Pakistani official who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity said China is eager to avoid a direct confrontation with the West on its nuclear energy cooperation with Pakistan. “China is not seeking a head-on clash with anyone. It wants to broaden its relations with Pakistan but without the risk of a stiff U.S. reaction,” said the official.
U.S. reluctance to offer a civil nuclear power agreement to Pakistan stems mainly from revelations in 2004 that Abdul Qadeer Khan, the founder of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, traded nuclear secrets and technology with Iran, Libya and North Korea. Khan has remained effectively under house arrest since then. Requests from the Western officials, notably the U.S., to interview Khan have all been denied by the Pakistani government."
13. There was no reference to the pending Gwadar proposals during the visit. The bilateral trade between the two countries touched US$7 billion last year ($ 30 billion between India and China). It was agreed that the two countries would try to increase it to US$15 billion by 2011.(18-10-08)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE
Text of Pakistan-China joint statement
The following is the text of the joint statement between China and Pakistan issued on October 16, 2008, after the end of the formal talks between the leaders of the two countries.
“On the invitation of President Hu Jintao, President Asif Ali Zardari paid a state visit to China on 14-17 October 2008.
President Hu Jintao held talks with President Zardari. Wu Bangguo, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, Wen Jiabao, Premier of the State Council, and Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, met Zardari respectively.
Talks between the two presidents and Zardari’s meetings with other Chinese state leaders were characterized by traditional warmth, friendship and mutual understanding. The two leaders reached broad agreement on strengthening China-Pakistan strategic partnership of co-operation and on international and regional issues of mutual interest under the new circumstances. The Pakistani president also held wide-ranging discussions with the leaders of Chinese corporations and financials institutions.
The leaders of the two countries reviewed with satisfaction the growth of China-Pakistan relations over the past 57 years since the two countries established diplomatic ties. They agreed that the friendship between China and Pakistan has withstood the test of time and practice, notwithstanding changes in the international, regional and domestic environments.
The all-weather friendship and all-round cooperation have become the distinctive features of China-Pakistan relations.
Both sides agreed that it is essential that the two sides make continuous efforts to strengthen good neighbourly relations and friendship, develop mutually beneficial cooperation and deepen strategic partnership of co-operation between China and Pakistan which serves the fundamental interests of the two peoples and contributes to peace and development in the region.
Both sides agreed that the Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation and Good-neighbourly Relations between the People’s Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (Treaty) signed in April 2005 is of great historic and immediate significance, laying a solid legal foundation for the long-term, stable and healthy growth of China-Pakistan relations. Both sides decided to abide by the policies and principles enshrined in the Treaty, earnestly implement the bilateral legal documents signed since the two countries established diplomatic ties and further intensify cooperation in the areas of economy, defence, science and technology, people to people contact, thus constantly advancing the China-Pakistan strategic partnership of co-operation.
China stressed that Pakistan is China’s good neighbour, close friend, dear brother and trusted partner. China will continue to view China-Pakistan relations from a strategic and long-term perspective, and make joint efforts with Pakistan to lift China-Pakistan Strategic partnership of co-operation to a new high.
Pakistan stressed that Pakistan-China relationship is the cornerstone of its foreign policy, and friendship with China represents the common desire of all Pakistani people. Pakistan appreciated the strong support and assistance provided by the Government and people of China to Pakistan in its economic development. Pakistan remained committed to continuing its policy of friendship towards China and making unremitting efforts to promote the healthy and steady growth of relations between the two countries.
Pakistan unequivocally upholds the one-China policy and considers Taiwan as an inseparable part of the People’s Republic of China and supports all efforts made by the Chinese government to realize national reunification.
China appreciated Pakistan’s long-term and staunch support to China on issues concerning China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, reaffirmed its support for Pakistan’s effort to uphold its sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, and appreciated Pakistan’s important role in promoting regional peace, stability and security and strengthening international counter-terrorism efforts.
Both sides opposed to all forms of terrorism, extremism and separatism, resolved to co-operate with each other to fight the above-mentioned three forces. China conveyed its complete support to Pakistan’s commitment and efforts to fight terrorism and appreciated the sacrifices made by the government and people of Pakistan in this regard.
The two sides agreed that economic co-operation is an important part in the strategic partnership between the two countries. The two countries enjoy great economic complementarity and should fully tap the potential and comprehensively deepen mutually beneficial co-operation in the economic field.
Both sides agreed to fast track the implementation of the Five Year Development Programme on Economic Co-operation and make full use of the Free Trade Agreement in Goods and Investment and Pakistan-China Joint Investment Company. In this regard, they agreed to convene a meeting of Pakistan-China Economic Co-operation Group under the Five Year Development Programme on Economic Co-operation at an early date. They also agreed to hold the next meeting of the Joint Economic Commission at the convenience of both countries.
Both sides agreed to enhance co-operation to further develop and boost Pakistan’s Mineral and Energy sectors as well as broaden financial and banking sector co-operation. They also agreed to further enhance ‘connectivity’ by developing new communication links including fibre optic links. They agreed to explore the concept of Integrated Border Management, overland trade and development of trans-border economic zones.
Both sides agreed to maintain communication and co-ordination on major international and regional issues to safeguard their common interests. Both sides agreed to continue to co-operate closely on issues such as the reform of the United Nations, climate change and energy and food security to promote world peace and development.
Zardari offered congratulations to the Chinese government and people on the successful hosting of the Beijing Olympic Games and the successful completion of Shenzhou VII’s mission. Hu Jintao congratulated Zardari on his election as the president of Pakistan and thanked Pakistan for its valuable assistance in the wake of the devastating earthquake in Wenchuan, China. He also appreciated Pakistan’s support to ensure the success of the Beijing Olympics and Paralympics Games. Pakistan applauded the outstanding achievements China has made in the 30 years of reform and opening-up and believes that China’s development will contribute to world peace and prosperity.
Zardari invited Hu Jintao to visit Pakistan once again at his convenience. Chinese president thanked Pakistani president for his kind invitation.
Both sides signed the following agreements and memoranda of understandings (MoUs) during the visit:
1. Agreement on economic and technical co-operation between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China.
2. Amending protocol to free trade agreement between the Government of the People’s Republic of China and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
3. Framework Agreement on co-operation in the field of minerals between the national development and reforms committee of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources of Pakistan.
4. MoU on co-operation between the Ministry of Land Resources of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources of Pakistan.
5. Agreement on environmental protection co-operation between the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Environment of Pakistan.
6. Framework agreement for co-operation in the field of radio and television between the state administration of radio, film and television, Government of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
7. Paksat-1R satellite procurement contract by and between China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC) and Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO).
8. MoU on scientific collaboration in agricultural research and technical co-operation between Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences and Agricultural Research Council of Pakistan.
9. Agreement on properties exchange between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
10. Co-operation agreement between Beijing Museum of Natural History of the People’s Republic of China and the Museum of Natural History of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
11. MoU on co-operation between the cricket association of the People’s Republic of China and the Cricket Board of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
12. MoU regarding the project of x-ray container and vehicle inspection system between NUCTECH Company Limited, Tsinghua University, the Ministry of Education of the Peoples Republic of China and the Ministry of Interior of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, who paid a bilateral visit to China from October 14 to 17,2008, was to return to Pakistan on October 17 and go back to Beijing on October 23 to attend the summit of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) being held in Beijing on October 24 and 25,2008. It remains to be seen whether he goes back himself as originally scheduled or deputes Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani to attend it.
2. Coinciding with his visit, one of the Chinese engineers kidnapped by the Swat branch of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on August 29,2008, reportedly managed to escape from custody and was picked up by a helicopter of the Pakistan Army before the TTP could re-capture him. However, the other engineer, who also managed to escape, was reportedly re-captured by the TTP before he could be picked up by the Pakistan Army.
3. This kidnapping incident, coming in the wake of three other incidents directed against Chinese nationals in Pakistan last year, is learnt to have figured prominently in the one-to-one discussions of Zardari with important Chinese investors and businessmen during which he invited them to invest more in Pakistan. Among those who called on him were Ma Zhigeng, Chairman of the NORINCO, Zhang Liansheng, Chairman of the Poly Technologies, Liu Minkang, Chairman, Chinese Banking and Regulatory Authority, and Fan Jixiang, President of the Sinohydro.
4.In an interview to the "People's Daily", Zardari claimed that the Chinese business executives, who met him, had expressed no security concerns about Pakistan. “I met with heads of many companies and 99.9 per cent told me how secure they were feeling,” he said. He added that though Pakistan had some problems, the Government was giving full attention to address the situation. He also said that he was trying to convince everyone that terrorism was a regional as well as an international problem and that the international community should come forward as Pakistan could not fight it alone. “We are looking towards the world for cooperation in curbing this menace.”
5. Jin Zheping, the Deputy General Manager of the China International Water and Electricity Corporation (CWE), is reported to have assured Zardari that the CWE would invest $1.7 billion for generating low-cost hydel electricity in Pakistan. A memorandum of understanding has already been signed for CWE assistance to one hydel project (the Bhasa dam) and CWE assistance for another (the Kohala dam) is under negotiation.
6. The visit also saw the announcement of Chinese assistance for launching a telecommunication satellite, named PakSat-1R, for Pakistan in 2011. The assistance will be provided by the China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC).
7. Among important Chinese leaders whom Zardari met were President Hu Jintao, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, and Wu Bannguo, Chairman of the National People's Congress. While the atmosphere of the visit and meetings had the usual warmth and friendliness marking China-Pakistan bilateral exchanges, in terms of concrete outcome the visit was not quite satisfactory from the Pakistani point of view.
8. Zardari was expecting three concrete results relating to an immediate Chinese credit to enable Pakistan meet its payment difficulties and avoid default of its international obligations due early next year, a Chinese initiative to get for Pakistan a waiver of the restrictions on nuclear trade from the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG) similar to the initiative taken by the US to get a waiver for India and a firm declaration of Chinese interest in the three pending proposals for a petrochemical complex in Gwadar and a railway line and a gas pipeline connecting Gwadar with the Xinjiang region of China.
9. Briefing the media after Zardari's meeting with Wen Jiabao on October 16, Qin Gang, a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Office, said: "As a long friend of Pakistan, China understands it is facing some financial difficulties.We’re ready to support and help Pakistan within our capability.” But he did not mention any specific figure of the credit which China would be prepared to extend. China had agreed to provide $500 million in a concessional loan to help Pakistan meet its balance of payment needs in April last.
10.Before Zardari's arrival in Beijing, Masood Khan, Pakistan's Ambassador to China, had claimed that an agreement on civilian nuclear co-operation with China could be reached during the visit. No such agreement figures in the list of agreements signed by the two countries during the visit as released by the Xinhua, the Chinese New Agency. (Annexure).
11. It is, however, learnt from reliable sources that while the Chinese reiterated their commitment in principle made to Pervez Musharraf to supply two more nuclear power stations (Chashmas III and IV ), they avoided any commitment on Pakistan's request for a Chinese initiative to get an NSG waiver. Without such a waiver, Chashmas III and IV would remain non-starters. In view of the expected US opposition to any waiver till Pakistan allows the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to have Dr.A.Q.Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist, interrogated by an independent team of investigators on his non-proliferation activities, China is not confident of a waiver in favour of Pakistan till the A.Q. Khan issue is resolved. It reportedly does not want to take any initiative in this matter lest it face an embarrassment if its proposal is rejected by the NSG. The present Government in Pakistan, like the previous Government of Musharraf, is opposed to any IAEA interrogation of Khan. The Chinese are also not very keen on that since Khan knows a lot not only about the proliferation activities of Pakistan, but also of China.
12. Farhan Bokhari, the Islamabad correspondent of the CBS News of the US, has reported as follows: "China has privately agreed to follow a "step-by-step" approach to fulfilling Pakistan’s aspiration for an expanded nuclear energy program, rather than sign an ambitious civil nuclear program of the kind recently struck between the U.S. and India, senior Pakistani and Western officials said on Thursday (October 16). Private discussions are believed to have been held on expanded nuclear cooperation between Pakistan’s president Asif Ali Zardari and Chinese leaders during Zardari’s four-day visit to China.A senior Pakistani government official, familiar with discussions between Zardari and Chinese officials, claimed Thursday that China had agreed to “consider further nuclear power reactors to fulfill our needs. The relationship (on the nuclear issue) remains intact”. Speaking to CBS News on condition of anonymity, the official added, “there is now a complete understanding on our future cooperation”. However, a second Pakistani official who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity said China is eager to avoid a direct confrontation with the West on its nuclear energy cooperation with Pakistan. “China is not seeking a head-on clash with anyone. It wants to broaden its relations with Pakistan but without the risk of a stiff U.S. reaction,” said the official.
U.S. reluctance to offer a civil nuclear power agreement to Pakistan stems mainly from revelations in 2004 that Abdul Qadeer Khan, the founder of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, traded nuclear secrets and technology with Iran, Libya and North Korea. Khan has remained effectively under house arrest since then. Requests from the Western officials, notably the U.S., to interview Khan have all been denied by the Pakistani government."
13. There was no reference to the pending Gwadar proposals during the visit. The bilateral trade between the two countries touched US$7 billion last year ($ 30 billion between India and China). It was agreed that the two countries would try to increase it to US$15 billion by 2011.(18-10-08)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
ANNEXURE
Text of Pakistan-China joint statement
The following is the text of the joint statement between China and Pakistan issued on October 16, 2008, after the end of the formal talks between the leaders of the two countries.
“On the invitation of President Hu Jintao, President Asif Ali Zardari paid a state visit to China on 14-17 October 2008.
President Hu Jintao held talks with President Zardari. Wu Bangguo, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, Wen Jiabao, Premier of the State Council, and Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, met Zardari respectively.
Talks between the two presidents and Zardari’s meetings with other Chinese state leaders were characterized by traditional warmth, friendship and mutual understanding. The two leaders reached broad agreement on strengthening China-Pakistan strategic partnership of co-operation and on international and regional issues of mutual interest under the new circumstances. The Pakistani president also held wide-ranging discussions with the leaders of Chinese corporations and financials institutions.
The leaders of the two countries reviewed with satisfaction the growth of China-Pakistan relations over the past 57 years since the two countries established diplomatic ties. They agreed that the friendship between China and Pakistan has withstood the test of time and practice, notwithstanding changes in the international, regional and domestic environments.
The all-weather friendship and all-round cooperation have become the distinctive features of China-Pakistan relations.
Both sides agreed that it is essential that the two sides make continuous efforts to strengthen good neighbourly relations and friendship, develop mutually beneficial cooperation and deepen strategic partnership of co-operation between China and Pakistan which serves the fundamental interests of the two peoples and contributes to peace and development in the region.
Both sides agreed that the Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation and Good-neighbourly Relations between the People’s Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (Treaty) signed in April 2005 is of great historic and immediate significance, laying a solid legal foundation for the long-term, stable and healthy growth of China-Pakistan relations. Both sides decided to abide by the policies and principles enshrined in the Treaty, earnestly implement the bilateral legal documents signed since the two countries established diplomatic ties and further intensify cooperation in the areas of economy, defence, science and technology, people to people contact, thus constantly advancing the China-Pakistan strategic partnership of co-operation.
China stressed that Pakistan is China’s good neighbour, close friend, dear brother and trusted partner. China will continue to view China-Pakistan relations from a strategic and long-term perspective, and make joint efforts with Pakistan to lift China-Pakistan Strategic partnership of co-operation to a new high.
Pakistan stressed that Pakistan-China relationship is the cornerstone of its foreign policy, and friendship with China represents the common desire of all Pakistani people. Pakistan appreciated the strong support and assistance provided by the Government and people of China to Pakistan in its economic development. Pakistan remained committed to continuing its policy of friendship towards China and making unremitting efforts to promote the healthy and steady growth of relations between the two countries.
Pakistan unequivocally upholds the one-China policy and considers Taiwan as an inseparable part of the People’s Republic of China and supports all efforts made by the Chinese government to realize national reunification.
China appreciated Pakistan’s long-term and staunch support to China on issues concerning China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, reaffirmed its support for Pakistan’s effort to uphold its sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, and appreciated Pakistan’s important role in promoting regional peace, stability and security and strengthening international counter-terrorism efforts.
Both sides opposed to all forms of terrorism, extremism and separatism, resolved to co-operate with each other to fight the above-mentioned three forces. China conveyed its complete support to Pakistan’s commitment and efforts to fight terrorism and appreciated the sacrifices made by the government and people of Pakistan in this regard.
The two sides agreed that economic co-operation is an important part in the strategic partnership between the two countries. The two countries enjoy great economic complementarity and should fully tap the potential and comprehensively deepen mutually beneficial co-operation in the economic field.
Both sides agreed to fast track the implementation of the Five Year Development Programme on Economic Co-operation and make full use of the Free Trade Agreement in Goods and Investment and Pakistan-China Joint Investment Company. In this regard, they agreed to convene a meeting of Pakistan-China Economic Co-operation Group under the Five Year Development Programme on Economic Co-operation at an early date. They also agreed to hold the next meeting of the Joint Economic Commission at the convenience of both countries.
Both sides agreed to enhance co-operation to further develop and boost Pakistan’s Mineral and Energy sectors as well as broaden financial and banking sector co-operation. They also agreed to further enhance ‘connectivity’ by developing new communication links including fibre optic links. They agreed to explore the concept of Integrated Border Management, overland trade and development of trans-border economic zones.
Both sides agreed to maintain communication and co-ordination on major international and regional issues to safeguard their common interests. Both sides agreed to continue to co-operate closely on issues such as the reform of the United Nations, climate change and energy and food security to promote world peace and development.
Zardari offered congratulations to the Chinese government and people on the successful hosting of the Beijing Olympic Games and the successful completion of Shenzhou VII’s mission. Hu Jintao congratulated Zardari on his election as the president of Pakistan and thanked Pakistan for its valuable assistance in the wake of the devastating earthquake in Wenchuan, China. He also appreciated Pakistan’s support to ensure the success of the Beijing Olympics and Paralympics Games. Pakistan applauded the outstanding achievements China has made in the 30 years of reform and opening-up and believes that China’s development will contribute to world peace and prosperity.
Zardari invited Hu Jintao to visit Pakistan once again at his convenience. Chinese president thanked Pakistani president for his kind invitation.
Both sides signed the following agreements and memoranda of understandings (MoUs) during the visit:
1. Agreement on economic and technical co-operation between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China.
2. Amending protocol to free trade agreement between the Government of the People’s Republic of China and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
3. Framework Agreement on co-operation in the field of minerals between the national development and reforms committee of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources of Pakistan.
4. MoU on co-operation between the Ministry of Land Resources of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources of Pakistan.
5. Agreement on environmental protection co-operation between the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Environment of Pakistan.
6. Framework agreement for co-operation in the field of radio and television between the state administration of radio, film and television, Government of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
7. Paksat-1R satellite procurement contract by and between China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC) and Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO).
8. MoU on scientific collaboration in agricultural research and technical co-operation between Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences and Agricultural Research Council of Pakistan.
9. Agreement on properties exchange between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
10. Co-operation agreement between Beijing Museum of Natural History of the People’s Republic of China and the Museum of Natural History of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
11. MoU on co-operation between the cricket association of the People’s Republic of China and the Cricket Board of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
12. MoU regarding the project of x-ray container and vehicle inspection system between NUCTECH Company Limited, Tsinghua University, the Ministry of Education of the Peoples Republic of China and the Ministry of Interior of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
INDIA AT LONG LAST WISER TO MARITIME THREATS FROM THE WEST
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR---PAPER NO. 457
B.RAMAN
"Maritime counter-terrorism has received considerable attention in India, but till now the focus has naturally and mostly been on maritime counter-terrorism and security in the waters off Sri Lanka and in the Malacca Strait. There has been inadequate attention to terrorist threats of a strategic nature from the seas to the west of India---- whether from the Gulf, the Arabian Sea, the Strait of Hormuz or the Mediterranean.
Over 80 per cent of the terrorist organisations with a capability for maritime terrorism operate in the areas and seas to the West of India. Over 90 per cent of successful maritime terrorism strikes have taken place in the areas and seas to the West of India. Israel has been the largest single victim of maritime terrorism in the Mediterrannean, with nearly 60 strikes by organisations such as the Hamas, the Hizbollah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) etc. The only two successful strikes and one unsuccessful attempt by Al Qaeda were off Aden. Almost our entire energy supplies come from this area. The security of the Malacca Strait has limited relevance for our energy security, whereas our entire energy security depends on maritime security in the areas to the West of India. One would have, therefore, expected that the concentration of our maritime counter-terrorism efforts would have been on building a database of capabilities, threats and risks from the areas and seas to the West of India, adopting a vigorous proactive policy of co-operation with the navies of this region and developing preventive and termination capabilities, which would have relevance in the areas to the West of India. Unfortunately, this is not so.The Americans do not want our Navy playing any proactive role in maritime security in the waters to the West of India lest it cause any undue concern in the minds of Pakistan. They, therefore, try to keep our Navy confined to the East and the Malacca Strait. We seem to be happy to go along with this role. This has to change. It is high time the Indian Navy starts paying more attention to threats of maritime terrorism that could arise from the West. Presently, the deployment of a large number of naval ships belonging to the US-led coalition has thwarted any other serious incident of maritime terrorism after the suspected Al Qaeda attack on Limburg in October, 2002 and the attacks on oil terminals in Iraq post-April, 2003. We should not leave the protection of our shipping and our energy supplies totally in the hands of the US-led coalition. We should develop our own capabilities and networking with the countries of the region."
---Extract from my article dated December 28,2005, titled MARITIME COUNTER-TERRORISM: NEED TO LOOK WEST at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers17/paper1655.html
----------------------
"The Malacca Strait is not India's life-line. It is the life-line of China and the ASEAN countries. Our presence in the Malacca Strait tickles our ego and gives us a feeling of being a great power, but it does not help in protecting the lives and property of our citizens and our maritime trade. The major threats to our maritime security are from the seas to the West of us and not to the East of us. Ninety per cent of our foreign trade in terms of volume and 77 per cent in terms of value and practically all our energy imports pass through the seas to the Weast of us. There are more Indian and foreign ships with Indian crew in the seas to the West of us than to the East of us. We should reduce our over pre-occupation with the security of the Malacca Strait and devote more attention to our maritime security in the seas to the West of us."
2. This has been a point repeatedly stressed by me in my presentations on maritime security since 2004. I always found myself in a minority of one. This was so even in a seminar on South-East Asia held at Vizag earlier this year.
3. After a recent increase in the incidents of piracy off the Somali coast and the hijacking of ships with Indian crew by the pirates, the Government of India has at long last been forced to take action to fill up the gaps in our maritime security in the seas to the West of us. One would have seen on the CNN-IBN news channel two days ago dramatic scenes of the relatives of the crew of a hijacked ship accusing the Government of India of inaction in the face of the threats to the lives of their relatives. Of what consolation to them that our naval ships had in the past rescued some Japanese and Indonesian seamen in the seas to the East of us when we are not able to fulfill the obligation of protecting our mercantile seamen in the seas to the west of us? Today, the danger has arisen in a dramatic manner from pirates. Tomorrow, it could be from Al Qaeda or pro-Al Qaeda terrorist groups.
4.On August 15,2008, Somalian pirates hijacked a Japanese-owned merchant vessel MV Stolt Valor with 18 Indians among the 22 sailors on board. Since then, the 18 Indian crew members are being held hostage at a Somalian port and the shipping company is holding negotiations with the pirates for their release. India is not the only country to suffer due to the activities of the pirates in this area. Ships carrying foodgrains and medicines for the starving people of Somalia have also been the targets of attacks by the pirates.
5. In a recent interview, Josette Sheeran, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme, said: "Time is running out for Somalia. As many as three million people — one-third of the country — live under threat of starvation. Their lifeline is the sea, from which food, medical supplies, and other aid arrives. And there lies the problem. Heavily armed bands of modern-day pirates in speedboats are terrorising ships in Somalia’s coastal waters. So far this year they have raided more than 50 vessels, stealing cargos and hijacking ships, from private yachts to oil tankers, and extorting some $100 million a year in ransom. Just a few weeks ago, a Ukrainian freighter carrying heavy weaponry, including tanks, was hijacked. A Greek petrochemical carrier was seized, and another attacked, as was an Iranian oil tanker. These pirates currently hold more than a dozen ships hostage in Somali ports. Ships laden with tens of thousands of tons of maize, sorghum, split peas, and cooking oil from the United Nations World Food Programme and other international aid organisations must navigate these dangerous waters. Keeping Somalia’s sea-borne supply line open is imperative. It carries 90 per cent of the humanitarian assistance delivered by the WFP, which in turn supplies nearly 90 per cent of the aid that feeds so many Somalis.These pirate terrorists are not particularly powerful. Estimates put their number at around 1,200. But they are growing increasingly brazen, all the more so when not confronted.
Since November 2007, following a series of pirate raids, Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, and France deployed naval frigates to escort WFP aid ships safely into harbour. Under their protection, not a single ship has come under attack, ensuring the uninterrupted flow of assistance. Yet despite that clear success, the future is uncertain. The Canadian naval mission ends in late October, and no country has stepped forward to replace it. Without naval escorts, food aid will not get to Somalia. The WFP has stockpiled sufficient supplies to keep relief flowing for some days. But once those warehouses are empty, the country and its people will be on their own. I am optimistic that some nation will come to the rescue — but we must not risk this happening too late, or not at all. Beyond that, we need a long-term plan. We at the United Nations are duty-bound to do what compassion and human decency demand of us. Is the world really going to stand by and watch more children die of starvation? Somalia’s political future is uncertain at best. Yet we need to set to work on a plan for deploying a viable multinational force to help secure peace there, or at the very least sustain its people. There is a clear way to begin. The first step is for some country or countries to volunteer the naval force needed to preserve Somalia’s humanitarian lifeline. The next is to develop a comprehensive strategy, in conjunction with the UN Security Council, to eliminate piracy in Somali waters. "
6.According to news agency reports, Somali pirates have seized more than 30 ships this year and attacked many more. Most attacks have been in the Gulf of Aden between Yemen and north Somalia, a major global sea artery used by about 20,000 vessels a year heading to and from Suez, including Gulf oil shipments. The most dramatic incident has been the hijacking of an Ukrainian ship MV Faina carrying 33 tanks bound for an unidentified destination. The Kenyan and Ukrainian authorities have claimed that these tanks are meant for Kenya, but the Americans seem to suspect that the ship was carrying these tanks for the autonomous government of South Sudan, in possible contravention of a UN arms embargo.The pirates ,estimated to be 50 in number, are reportedly demanding a ransom of US $ 20 million for releasing the ship with its cargo and crew. An American and a Russian naval ships have reached the area, but have refrained from intervening so far---- probably due to some unconfirmed reports that the ship was also carrying some chemicals.
7.A spokesman for the US Navy's 5th Fleet, Lt Nathan Christensen, has been quoted by news agencies as saying that the USS Howard was within 8km (5 miles) of the Ukrainian vessel, but refused to say whether they were preparing to attack the pirates. He said the ship's cargo of battle tanks made it a particularly worrying situation. "We're concerned that this might end up in the wrong hands, such as terrorists or violent extremists," he said.
8. In the wake of these developments, the Government of India announced on October 16,2008,the deployment with immediate effect of an Indian naval warship with helicopters and marine commandoes on board in the Gulf of Aden to carry out anti-piracy patrols on the route usually followed by Indian commercial vessels between Salalah ( Oman) and Aden (Yemen). A Government spokesperson said: " The presence of the Indian Navy warship in this area will be significant as the Gulf of Aden is a major strategic choke point in the Indian Ocean region and provides access to the Suez Canal through which a sizable portion of India's trade flows. This anti-piracy patrol will be carried out in co-ordination with the Directorate-General of Shipping , who will keep Indian flagship vessels informed in case they want to travel in the Indian Ocean along with the Indian Navy ship. The presence of the Indian Navy in the area will help to protect our seaborne trade and instil confidence in our seafaring community as well as function as a deterrent for pirates."
9. This statement and other clarifications by the Government spokespersons have highlighted the following:
This is a permanent measure to protect vessels with Indian flags and Indian crew carrying goods for India.
It is not a one-shot measure triggered off by the hijacking of a Japanese ship with Indian crew.
The deployment of more ships for the anti-piracy patrol is not ruled out.
The deployment is not a prelude to intervention by the Indian ship to rescue the Indian crew.
10. While this welcome action will to some extent take care of the protection of Indian commercial ships transiting this area, it does not address the problem of controlling and eradicating piracy in this area. India alone will not be able to address this menace. It will have to act jointly with the navies of the US, the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf countries and possibly, one day, even Pakistan. This requires careful study. There is a need for more and sustained joint anti-piracy patrolling and exercises in this area. (18-10-08)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
B.RAMAN
"Maritime counter-terrorism has received considerable attention in India, but till now the focus has naturally and mostly been on maritime counter-terrorism and security in the waters off Sri Lanka and in the Malacca Strait. There has been inadequate attention to terrorist threats of a strategic nature from the seas to the west of India---- whether from the Gulf, the Arabian Sea, the Strait of Hormuz or the Mediterranean.
Over 80 per cent of the terrorist organisations with a capability for maritime terrorism operate in the areas and seas to the West of India. Over 90 per cent of successful maritime terrorism strikes have taken place in the areas and seas to the West of India. Israel has been the largest single victim of maritime terrorism in the Mediterrannean, with nearly 60 strikes by organisations such as the Hamas, the Hizbollah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) etc. The only two successful strikes and one unsuccessful attempt by Al Qaeda were off Aden. Almost our entire energy supplies come from this area. The security of the Malacca Strait has limited relevance for our energy security, whereas our entire energy security depends on maritime security in the areas to the West of India. One would have, therefore, expected that the concentration of our maritime counter-terrorism efforts would have been on building a database of capabilities, threats and risks from the areas and seas to the West of India, adopting a vigorous proactive policy of co-operation with the navies of this region and developing preventive and termination capabilities, which would have relevance in the areas to the West of India. Unfortunately, this is not so.The Americans do not want our Navy playing any proactive role in maritime security in the waters to the West of India lest it cause any undue concern in the minds of Pakistan. They, therefore, try to keep our Navy confined to the East and the Malacca Strait. We seem to be happy to go along with this role. This has to change. It is high time the Indian Navy starts paying more attention to threats of maritime terrorism that could arise from the West. Presently, the deployment of a large number of naval ships belonging to the US-led coalition has thwarted any other serious incident of maritime terrorism after the suspected Al Qaeda attack on Limburg in October, 2002 and the attacks on oil terminals in Iraq post-April, 2003. We should not leave the protection of our shipping and our energy supplies totally in the hands of the US-led coalition. We should develop our own capabilities and networking with the countries of the region."
---Extract from my article dated December 28,2005, titled MARITIME COUNTER-TERRORISM: NEED TO LOOK WEST at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers17/paper1655.html
----------------------
"The Malacca Strait is not India's life-line. It is the life-line of China and the ASEAN countries. Our presence in the Malacca Strait tickles our ego and gives us a feeling of being a great power, but it does not help in protecting the lives and property of our citizens and our maritime trade. The major threats to our maritime security are from the seas to the West of us and not to the East of us. Ninety per cent of our foreign trade in terms of volume and 77 per cent in terms of value and practically all our energy imports pass through the seas to the Weast of us. There are more Indian and foreign ships with Indian crew in the seas to the West of us than to the East of us. We should reduce our over pre-occupation with the security of the Malacca Strait and devote more attention to our maritime security in the seas to the West of us."
2. This has been a point repeatedly stressed by me in my presentations on maritime security since 2004. I always found myself in a minority of one. This was so even in a seminar on South-East Asia held at Vizag earlier this year.
3. After a recent increase in the incidents of piracy off the Somali coast and the hijacking of ships with Indian crew by the pirates, the Government of India has at long last been forced to take action to fill up the gaps in our maritime security in the seas to the West of us. One would have seen on the CNN-IBN news channel two days ago dramatic scenes of the relatives of the crew of a hijacked ship accusing the Government of India of inaction in the face of the threats to the lives of their relatives. Of what consolation to them that our naval ships had in the past rescued some Japanese and Indonesian seamen in the seas to the East of us when we are not able to fulfill the obligation of protecting our mercantile seamen in the seas to the west of us? Today, the danger has arisen in a dramatic manner from pirates. Tomorrow, it could be from Al Qaeda or pro-Al Qaeda terrorist groups.
4.On August 15,2008, Somalian pirates hijacked a Japanese-owned merchant vessel MV Stolt Valor with 18 Indians among the 22 sailors on board. Since then, the 18 Indian crew members are being held hostage at a Somalian port and the shipping company is holding negotiations with the pirates for their release. India is not the only country to suffer due to the activities of the pirates in this area. Ships carrying foodgrains and medicines for the starving people of Somalia have also been the targets of attacks by the pirates.
5. In a recent interview, Josette Sheeran, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme, said: "Time is running out for Somalia. As many as three million people — one-third of the country — live under threat of starvation. Their lifeline is the sea, from which food, medical supplies, and other aid arrives. And there lies the problem. Heavily armed bands of modern-day pirates in speedboats are terrorising ships in Somalia’s coastal waters. So far this year they have raided more than 50 vessels, stealing cargos and hijacking ships, from private yachts to oil tankers, and extorting some $100 million a year in ransom. Just a few weeks ago, a Ukrainian freighter carrying heavy weaponry, including tanks, was hijacked. A Greek petrochemical carrier was seized, and another attacked, as was an Iranian oil tanker. These pirates currently hold more than a dozen ships hostage in Somali ports. Ships laden with tens of thousands of tons of maize, sorghum, split peas, and cooking oil from the United Nations World Food Programme and other international aid organisations must navigate these dangerous waters. Keeping Somalia’s sea-borne supply line open is imperative. It carries 90 per cent of the humanitarian assistance delivered by the WFP, which in turn supplies nearly 90 per cent of the aid that feeds so many Somalis.These pirate terrorists are not particularly powerful. Estimates put their number at around 1,200. But they are growing increasingly brazen, all the more so when not confronted.
Since November 2007, following a series of pirate raids, Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, and France deployed naval frigates to escort WFP aid ships safely into harbour. Under their protection, not a single ship has come under attack, ensuring the uninterrupted flow of assistance. Yet despite that clear success, the future is uncertain. The Canadian naval mission ends in late October, and no country has stepped forward to replace it. Without naval escorts, food aid will not get to Somalia. The WFP has stockpiled sufficient supplies to keep relief flowing for some days. But once those warehouses are empty, the country and its people will be on their own. I am optimistic that some nation will come to the rescue — but we must not risk this happening too late, or not at all. Beyond that, we need a long-term plan. We at the United Nations are duty-bound to do what compassion and human decency demand of us. Is the world really going to stand by and watch more children die of starvation? Somalia’s political future is uncertain at best. Yet we need to set to work on a plan for deploying a viable multinational force to help secure peace there, or at the very least sustain its people. There is a clear way to begin. The first step is for some country or countries to volunteer the naval force needed to preserve Somalia’s humanitarian lifeline. The next is to develop a comprehensive strategy, in conjunction with the UN Security Council, to eliminate piracy in Somali waters. "
6.According to news agency reports, Somali pirates have seized more than 30 ships this year and attacked many more. Most attacks have been in the Gulf of Aden between Yemen and north Somalia, a major global sea artery used by about 20,000 vessels a year heading to and from Suez, including Gulf oil shipments. The most dramatic incident has been the hijacking of an Ukrainian ship MV Faina carrying 33 tanks bound for an unidentified destination. The Kenyan and Ukrainian authorities have claimed that these tanks are meant for Kenya, but the Americans seem to suspect that the ship was carrying these tanks for the autonomous government of South Sudan, in possible contravention of a UN arms embargo.The pirates ,estimated to be 50 in number, are reportedly demanding a ransom of US $ 20 million for releasing the ship with its cargo and crew. An American and a Russian naval ships have reached the area, but have refrained from intervening so far---- probably due to some unconfirmed reports that the ship was also carrying some chemicals.
7.A spokesman for the US Navy's 5th Fleet, Lt Nathan Christensen, has been quoted by news agencies as saying that the USS Howard was within 8km (5 miles) of the Ukrainian vessel, but refused to say whether they were preparing to attack the pirates. He said the ship's cargo of battle tanks made it a particularly worrying situation. "We're concerned that this might end up in the wrong hands, such as terrorists or violent extremists," he said.
8. In the wake of these developments, the Government of India announced on October 16,2008,the deployment with immediate effect of an Indian naval warship with helicopters and marine commandoes on board in the Gulf of Aden to carry out anti-piracy patrols on the route usually followed by Indian commercial vessels between Salalah ( Oman) and Aden (Yemen). A Government spokesperson said: " The presence of the Indian Navy warship in this area will be significant as the Gulf of Aden is a major strategic choke point in the Indian Ocean region and provides access to the Suez Canal through which a sizable portion of India's trade flows. This anti-piracy patrol will be carried out in co-ordination with the Directorate-General of Shipping , who will keep Indian flagship vessels informed in case they want to travel in the Indian Ocean along with the Indian Navy ship. The presence of the Indian Navy in the area will help to protect our seaborne trade and instil confidence in our seafaring community as well as function as a deterrent for pirates."
9. This statement and other clarifications by the Government spokespersons have highlighted the following:
This is a permanent measure to protect vessels with Indian flags and Indian crew carrying goods for India.
It is not a one-shot measure triggered off by the hijacking of a Japanese ship with Indian crew.
The deployment of more ships for the anti-piracy patrol is not ruled out.
The deployment is not a prelude to intervention by the Indian ship to rescue the Indian crew.
10. While this welcome action will to some extent take care of the protection of Indian commercial ships transiting this area, it does not address the problem of controlling and eradicating piracy in this area. India alone will not be able to address this menace. It will have to act jointly with the navies of the US, the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf countries and possibly, one day, even Pakistan. This requires careful study. There is a need for more and sustained joint anti-piracy patrolling and exercises in this area. (18-10-08)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
October 17, 2008
American Indians Fight for Their Rights
SOURCE: STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION
15.10.2008
Nil NIKANDROV
Western Hemisphere: American Indians Fight for Their Rights
“The population of the pre-Columbus America was about 100 million, but during the next 150 years 95% of the indigenous peoples disappeared. I`d like to ask whether this can be called colonization, civilization, culturalization or evangelization? We must dispel the myth! Genocide! That's what it was!”
President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez told this at the opening ceremony of an aqueduct in one of the God`s forgotten villages in the state of Zulia on October, 12th. The event was timed to the celebrations of the Indian Resistance Day (which used to be called ''Columbus Day''). In recent years Chavez has repeatedly commented on the genocide against the American Indians and accused not only European crusaders but the US invadors as well.
Washington also has plenty of reasons to blame Chavez, who is viewed in the US as the one who wants to found an ''anti-imperialist Indian front» in Western hemisphere and involve the indigenous US citizens residing in Arizona, Minnessota, Nebraska, North and South Dacota, Oklahoma and other states.
The pro-American Indian activists from US are permanent guests at numerous forums and seminars held in Venezuela and other countries of Latin America. Those people are viewed as especially dangerous for the Bush administration as CIA and FBI experts say these activists are being regularly brainwashed by Chavez's ''Bolivarian commissioners''. An attempt to use “last of the Mohicans” is said to be one of the means the ''Venezuelan dictator'' keeps in mind to undermine U.S.
That is why the U.S intelligence agents are working hard in Latin America to find any evidence of Chavez`s plans to revive progressive pro-American Indian organization in the United States by providing financial assistance to them so that they could instigate violence. Under Bush, the U.S special services took up the habit of wishful thinking, so there will be no surprise if the ''evidence'' is found. There is hardly anything the U.S intelligence agents can't do to succeed in career.
Is there really a Chavez`s trace in the revival of the pro-Indian movement on the continent? Yes, there is. First of all, Venezuela offers a plan how to settle the problem with American Indians. The rights of the indigenous peoples are protected by the Constitution of 1999 in practice. Their native lands have the untouchable status. Their communities are quickly developing as huge sums are allocated for health care, education, housing and culture. Even minor American Indian peoples have their written language. Their commercially unprofitable books are also published by the state. Where else this can be found amid the global dictatorship of market economy? While doing his military service, Chavez lived in a hut with the aborigines, enjoying their cuisine, way of life and religious rites. That is why each time he meets the American Indians, he focuses all his attention on their traditions.
Chavez is also preoccupied with the consolidation of the American Indian movement on the continent. And this happens not because of his attempt to undermine democratic governments but due to this belief that historical justice must be restored.
American Indians are facing hardships not only in the United States. In Columbia thousands of them have become victims of a home conflict. To save their lives they flee to Venezuela. In a Mexican state of Chiapa they had to use arms to protect themselves and defend their rights for the territories. Hundreds of thousands of Mapuche (Araucano) people have been fighting for the autonomy but the government believes they do not differ anyhow from other Chileans. The same thing happened during the Pinochet dictatorship.
However, there were some moments of optimism during those 500 years of fight: a representative of the Aymara ethnic group, Evo Morales, became the first indigenous president of Bolivia, although the local oligarchs and the US Embassy in Bolivia did everything to prevent his victory. This encourages American Indians in Peru, Guatemala and Ecuador to stand up for their rights. Hugo Chavez decided that to form the Indo-Andean Federation (Federacion Indo-Andina), comprising all the countries from Bolivia to the Caribbean Sea, would be the right thing in that situation. He also keeps a close watch on the work of the American Indian parliament in America as its mere existence inspires hopes for the renaissance of all indigenous peoples on the American continent. Hugo Chavez takes steps to create the Pan American TV. And the chances are very high as the TeleSur channel, which owes its appearance to Chavez, now is CNN`s major Spanish-language competitor.
At the First Congress of Indian and Anti-Imperialist Warriors of the Americas, held in Venezuela on August 8-9, 2007, the delegates discussed the question raised by Chavez: “North American Imperialism: its danger to the indigenous people of Abaya Ayala”. There is nothing mysterious in the last two words. That's how the continent was called long before the arrival of Columbus on October,12, 1492. In many countries of the Western hemisphere this day is marked as the America Day, the Race Day or even Hispanic Day (Dia de la Hispanidad). The initiative to rename the holiday into the Indian Resistance Day was backed by all Chavez supporters from Canada to Chile.
Indeed, whether the US imperialism is so dangerous for the present-day American Indians? The cases of inhuman treatment of the “natives” by “educated” Anglo-Saxons have been almost forgotten. The creation of the most powerful state could hardly be devoid of such kind of incidents. The US Conservative politicians and historians quite often name the genocide of the American Indians among them, using, of course, a politically correct interpretation of those events. According to it, the natives had begun the confrontation as they won`t share lands, forests, rivers and lakes with the invaders. Official reports say mainly the indigenous peoples demonstrated their aggression while the white settlers only defended themselves, sometimes with the help of the army. So no kind of genocide of the indigenous people, which has long become one of the most disgusting periods in human history, took place in the US.
Driven into ghettos, the natives never recognized the fact of the invaders` victory. Indifferent at first sight, they were actually very insulted and humiliated, and passed on the legacy to restore the justice by all means from fathers to sons. One of the best known activists for the rights of American Indians, the leader of the Sioux tribe, Russel Means, made an attempt.
On February, 27th, 1973, he organized the coup in the town of Wounded Knee in South Dacota (Pine Ridge Indian Reservation) to topple the local corrupt regime and begin the tribal rule. The rebellion lasted for more than 2 months and attracted attention worldwide. The attempts made by the FBI agents to compromise the insurgents and accuse them of Communist-like ideology and cooperation with criminal groups were in vain. The federal authorities persuaded the natives to surrender. During the judicial process all the extremism and terrorism charges were proved groundless. Means and his supporters were freed and continued to stand up for the rights of American Indians peacefully.
Thirty years after the Wounded Knee incident, on December, 19th, 2007, members of the Lakota tribe, Russel Means among them, denounced all 33 deals with the federal authorities (“useless words on useless paper”, that is how they called it), and proclaimed the creation of an independent state of American Indians. “We are no longer US citizens, and everyone who lives in one of the five states which belong to our country, can join us”, - they said.
The proclamation of the Republic of Lakotah can mark the beginning of the process leading to the formation of other independent countries on the US territory which can thus result in a confederation. Some experts predict that the process can receive a boost if a Republican John McCain wins the November presidential election in US. The most radical analysts do not rule out that the American Indian headmen may use arms again, like it was at Wounded Knee. Others say they would either do this if Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua or any other country of the Bolivarian project faces foreign aggression. “Chavez's gold” or his “propaganda” are not the reasons. The American Indians just can easily distinguish between friends and enemies. That is why a portrait of smiling Chavez (and never George W. Bush) is often encountered in their houses in the Republic of Lakotah.
15.10.2008
Nil NIKANDROV
Western Hemisphere: American Indians Fight for Their Rights
“The population of the pre-Columbus America was about 100 million, but during the next 150 years 95% of the indigenous peoples disappeared. I`d like to ask whether this can be called colonization, civilization, culturalization or evangelization? We must dispel the myth! Genocide! That's what it was!”
President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez told this at the opening ceremony of an aqueduct in one of the God`s forgotten villages in the state of Zulia on October, 12th. The event was timed to the celebrations of the Indian Resistance Day (which used to be called ''Columbus Day''). In recent years Chavez has repeatedly commented on the genocide against the American Indians and accused not only European crusaders but the US invadors as well.
Washington also has plenty of reasons to blame Chavez, who is viewed in the US as the one who wants to found an ''anti-imperialist Indian front» in Western hemisphere and involve the indigenous US citizens residing in Arizona, Minnessota, Nebraska, North and South Dacota, Oklahoma and other states.
The pro-American Indian activists from US are permanent guests at numerous forums and seminars held in Venezuela and other countries of Latin America. Those people are viewed as especially dangerous for the Bush administration as CIA and FBI experts say these activists are being regularly brainwashed by Chavez's ''Bolivarian commissioners''. An attempt to use “last of the Mohicans” is said to be one of the means the ''Venezuelan dictator'' keeps in mind to undermine U.S.
That is why the U.S intelligence agents are working hard in Latin America to find any evidence of Chavez`s plans to revive progressive pro-American Indian organization in the United States by providing financial assistance to them so that they could instigate violence. Under Bush, the U.S special services took up the habit of wishful thinking, so there will be no surprise if the ''evidence'' is found. There is hardly anything the U.S intelligence agents can't do to succeed in career.
Is there really a Chavez`s trace in the revival of the pro-Indian movement on the continent? Yes, there is. First of all, Venezuela offers a plan how to settle the problem with American Indians. The rights of the indigenous peoples are protected by the Constitution of 1999 in practice. Their native lands have the untouchable status. Their communities are quickly developing as huge sums are allocated for health care, education, housing and culture. Even minor American Indian peoples have their written language. Their commercially unprofitable books are also published by the state. Where else this can be found amid the global dictatorship of market economy? While doing his military service, Chavez lived in a hut with the aborigines, enjoying their cuisine, way of life and religious rites. That is why each time he meets the American Indians, he focuses all his attention on their traditions.
Chavez is also preoccupied with the consolidation of the American Indian movement on the continent. And this happens not because of his attempt to undermine democratic governments but due to this belief that historical justice must be restored.
American Indians are facing hardships not only in the United States. In Columbia thousands of them have become victims of a home conflict. To save their lives they flee to Venezuela. In a Mexican state of Chiapa they had to use arms to protect themselves and defend their rights for the territories. Hundreds of thousands of Mapuche (Araucano) people have been fighting for the autonomy but the government believes they do not differ anyhow from other Chileans. The same thing happened during the Pinochet dictatorship.
However, there were some moments of optimism during those 500 years of fight: a representative of the Aymara ethnic group, Evo Morales, became the first indigenous president of Bolivia, although the local oligarchs and the US Embassy in Bolivia did everything to prevent his victory. This encourages American Indians in Peru, Guatemala and Ecuador to stand up for their rights. Hugo Chavez decided that to form the Indo-Andean Federation (Federacion Indo-Andina), comprising all the countries from Bolivia to the Caribbean Sea, would be the right thing in that situation. He also keeps a close watch on the work of the American Indian parliament in America as its mere existence inspires hopes for the renaissance of all indigenous peoples on the American continent. Hugo Chavez takes steps to create the Pan American TV. And the chances are very high as the TeleSur channel, which owes its appearance to Chavez, now is CNN`s major Spanish-language competitor.
At the First Congress of Indian and Anti-Imperialist Warriors of the Americas, held in Venezuela on August 8-9, 2007, the delegates discussed the question raised by Chavez: “North American Imperialism: its danger to the indigenous people of Abaya Ayala”. There is nothing mysterious in the last two words. That's how the continent was called long before the arrival of Columbus on October,12, 1492. In many countries of the Western hemisphere this day is marked as the America Day, the Race Day or even Hispanic Day (Dia de la Hispanidad). The initiative to rename the holiday into the Indian Resistance Day was backed by all Chavez supporters from Canada to Chile.
Indeed, whether the US imperialism is so dangerous for the present-day American Indians? The cases of inhuman treatment of the “natives” by “educated” Anglo-Saxons have been almost forgotten. The creation of the most powerful state could hardly be devoid of such kind of incidents. The US Conservative politicians and historians quite often name the genocide of the American Indians among them, using, of course, a politically correct interpretation of those events. According to it, the natives had begun the confrontation as they won`t share lands, forests, rivers and lakes with the invaders. Official reports say mainly the indigenous peoples demonstrated their aggression while the white settlers only defended themselves, sometimes with the help of the army. So no kind of genocide of the indigenous people, which has long become one of the most disgusting periods in human history, took place in the US.
Driven into ghettos, the natives never recognized the fact of the invaders` victory. Indifferent at first sight, they were actually very insulted and humiliated, and passed on the legacy to restore the justice by all means from fathers to sons. One of the best known activists for the rights of American Indians, the leader of the Sioux tribe, Russel Means, made an attempt.
On February, 27th, 1973, he organized the coup in the town of Wounded Knee in South Dacota (Pine Ridge Indian Reservation) to topple the local corrupt regime and begin the tribal rule. The rebellion lasted for more than 2 months and attracted attention worldwide. The attempts made by the FBI agents to compromise the insurgents and accuse them of Communist-like ideology and cooperation with criminal groups were in vain. The federal authorities persuaded the natives to surrender. During the judicial process all the extremism and terrorism charges were proved groundless. Means and his supporters were freed and continued to stand up for the rights of American Indians peacefully.
Thirty years after the Wounded Knee incident, on December, 19th, 2007, members of the Lakota tribe, Russel Means among them, denounced all 33 deals with the federal authorities (“useless words on useless paper”, that is how they called it), and proclaimed the creation of an independent state of American Indians. “We are no longer US citizens, and everyone who lives in one of the five states which belong to our country, can join us”, - they said.
The proclamation of the Republic of Lakotah can mark the beginning of the process leading to the formation of other independent countries on the US territory which can thus result in a confederation. Some experts predict that the process can receive a boost if a Republican John McCain wins the November presidential election in US. The most radical analysts do not rule out that the American Indian headmen may use arms again, like it was at Wounded Knee. Others say they would either do this if Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua or any other country of the Bolivarian project faces foreign aggression. “Chavez's gold” or his “propaganda” are not the reasons. The American Indians just can easily distinguish between friends and enemies. That is why a portrait of smiling Chavez (and never George W. Bush) is often encountered in their houses in the Republic of Lakotah.
Russia - Georgia cyber war : Project Grey Goose’s report I
Source:
Infowar Monitor The Infowar Monitor and Citizen Lab participated in an Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) initiative to investigate the Russia - Georgia cyber war of August, 2008. Project Grey Goose sought to establish whether the Russian government was involved in coordinating the DDOS attacks on Georgia's internet infrastructure, or if it was a emergent, grass roots "social movement" led by patriotic Russian hackers . .
Project Grey Goose’s remit was to utilize a combination of open sources, tools and human skill sets to probe the matter from new angles with fresh evidence. It is an entirely volunteer effort with no funding . .
The Grey Goose team worked inside Palantir Technologies' data visualization and analytics platform, pushing the state of the art in search, collaboration, and Human-Computer Interaction.
This report was generated from data collected from two Russian hacker forums, cross-referenced with network log files detailing 29,000 status events indicating the Up/Down status of 149 Georgian web sites. Our collection effort was done manually in Russian, and then machine-translated to English.
DOWNLOAD REPORT
You can read the report here.
Key findings:
We assess with high confidence that the Russian government will likely continue its practice of distancing itself from the Russian nationalistic hacker community thus gaining deniability while passively supporting and enjoying the strategic benefits of their actions.
We assess with high confidence that nationalistic Russian hackers are likely adaptive adversaries engaged in aggressively finding more efficient ways to disable networks.
We judge with moderate confidence that a journeyman-apprentice relationship will continue to be the training model used by nationalistic Russian hackers.
We estimate with moderate confidence that hacker forums engaged in training Russian cyber warriors will continue to evolve their feedback loop which effectively becomes their Cyber Kill Chain.
Infowar Monitor The Infowar Monitor and Citizen Lab participated in an Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) initiative to investigate the Russia - Georgia cyber war of August, 2008. Project Grey Goose sought to establish whether the Russian government was involved in coordinating the DDOS attacks on Georgia's internet infrastructure, or if it was a emergent, grass roots "social movement" led by patriotic Russian hackers . .
Project Grey Goose’s remit was to utilize a combination of open sources, tools and human skill sets to probe the matter from new angles with fresh evidence. It is an entirely volunteer effort with no funding . .
The Grey Goose team worked inside Palantir Technologies' data visualization and analytics platform, pushing the state of the art in search, collaboration, and Human-Computer Interaction.
This report was generated from data collected from two Russian hacker forums, cross-referenced with network log files detailing 29,000 status events indicating the Up/Down status of 149 Georgian web sites. Our collection effort was done manually in Russian, and then machine-translated to English.
DOWNLOAD REPORT
You can read the report here.
Key findings:
We assess with high confidence that the Russian government will likely continue its practice of distancing itself from the Russian nationalistic hacker community thus gaining deniability while passively supporting and enjoying the strategic benefits of their actions.
We assess with high confidence that nationalistic Russian hackers are likely adaptive adversaries engaged in aggressively finding more efficient ways to disable networks.
We judge with moderate confidence that a journeyman-apprentice relationship will continue to be the training model used by nationalistic Russian hackers.
We estimate with moderate confidence that hacker forums engaged in training Russian cyber warriors will continue to evolve their feedback loop which effectively becomes their Cyber Kill Chain.
The case against Musharraf
By Sanaullah Baloch
IN the last six decades a significant number of so-called state leaders have been prosecuted and
brought before various domestic and international courts and tribunals for their official and unofficial
crimes against humanity and genocide.
Unfortunately, the most unpopular state leaders have enjoyed lifetime immunity in domestic and
foreign courts for their sanctioned and unsanctioned crimes. Many of them enjoyed personal immunity
that lasts during their tenure for all unofficial acts such as looting state coffers or murdering political
rivals.
After creating political and economic disarray and committing atrocities, the majority of detested world
leaders moved to different countries that offered them protection and pleasure. But, including Pakistan’
s former military dictator Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf, a great number of the world’s reviled state heads
have remained in their countries, benefiting from their institutional connections, an incapable judicial
system and the state’s lack of will to try former and sitting rulers for unlawful and inhuman acts.
The lack of legal and institutional capacity and willingness to try dictators and corrupt civil-military bureaucrats has resulted in an endless crisis of
governance and trust in Pakistan. Deliberate ignorance by the legal and state institutions have benefited human rights violators, corrupt and criminal
prime ministers, presidents, and miscreant dictators to escape justice, to live in cosy retirement, often with wealth dishonestly accumulated.
But internationally a positive change of approach has been experienced, to try rogue leaders for their crimes. Consensus also has been developed
among the legal community around the world that all those involved in crimes against humanity must be prosecuted domestically and internationally,
because some of these crimes are so disgraceful they can never be considered a part of any leader’s official duties. The statutes of the International
Criminal Court and other international tribunals specifically declare that an official capacity or rank by itself is no defence against prosecution.
This month in Poland the country’s former communist leader and head of state, Gen Wojciech Jaruzelski, who is now 85 and in poor health, has gone
on trial accused of committing a crime by imposing martial law in 1981. Reading the charges, the prosecutor said the men had violated their own
communist constitution when they created what he called a “criminal military organisation” to implement martial law in Dec 1981. Eight other former
officials will also be tried for the clampdown against the opposition Solidarity movement, during which dozens of people were killed.
However, there is little hope among the marginalised people and victims of Musharraf’s rule that the former military dictator will be persecuted for
looting, treason and grave human rights violations. No doubt, there is a general perception among the marginalised people of Pakistan that ethnically
dominant and superior leaders in Pakistan are above any law and protected for all their crimes. This time round there is a need that an ex-army man
must be held accountable for his evident and committed crimes.
There is little disagreement among Pakistani citizens that the Musharraf era is marked with state highhandedness against citizens. Undermining the
constitution, bombing Balochistan, killing and persecuting Baloch veteran leaders, kidnapping political activists, sacking judges, killing lawyers,
promoting centre-province confrontation and corruption are enough to prosecute Mr Musharraf in domestic and international courts.
In the recent past, a number of the world’s errant leaders have been brought before the domestic and international courts for human rights abuses.
Some have been convicted, others are on trial.
Internationally there is a growing trend to make all leaders accountable and prosecute rogue rulers. Radovan Karadzic has been recently arrested
and shifted to ICC at Hague to face criminal charges. Sudan’s president Omar Al-Bashir has also been summoned by the International Court of
Justice for his human rights crimes and genocide in Darfur.
We have an entire history of cases where war criminals and human rights abusers have been brought before tribunals and convicted for their sins.
During 1945-49, the Nuremberg trials, the largest in history, that lasted four years, brought the Nazi regime and the engineers of the Holocaust to
justice. Major war criminals were sentenced to death. In the 12 other cases that followed, 65 defendants were convicted and more than 20 executed.
In 1948 under the watch of US Supreme Commander Douglas MacArthur, an international military tribunal prosecuted and executed Japan’s former
Prime Minister Hideki Tojo and 28 high-ranking Japanese leaders for war crimes. In 1989 after almost 25 years of communist reign in Romania,
President Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife, Elena, were found guilty of crimes against humanity by a secret military tribunal. The two were executed
on Christmas Day 1989. Rwanda’s former prime minister, Jean Kambanda, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment by the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Argentina’s military dictator Captain Adolfo Scilingo (1976-1983) was convicted in April 2005 by the
Spanish court (1995-2005) almost 10 years after his alleged human rights crimes. The late Chilean leader Pinochet was prosecuted by the country’s
supreme court in 2004.
The UN-Sierra Leone joint tribunal was set up in 2002 to try Liberia’s former President Charles Taylor and those most responsible for crimes against
humanity, for war crimes and attacks against UN peacekeepers. Musharraf including his team must be put on trial before domestic and international
courts for official and unofficial crimes. All victims must be provided an opportunity to come forth with evidence before the judicial institutions. This
process will not only assist the overall failed state system to improve its stained image, it will also strengthen the people’s trust in institutions.
The Supreme Court Bar Council of Pakistan, the HRCP, vibrant civil society and other concerned organisations need to go for a fresh strategy, to
discourage human rights violators and take their cases to world bodies. The legal community must activate its professional capacity to surround the
high-profile culprits taking them before domestic and international courts of law for their unforgettable crimes.
The writer is a former member of senate.
balochbnp@gmail.com
Related Links:
http://dawn.com/2008/09/22/op.htm#3
Gazprom’s Expansion in the EU – Co-operation or Domination?
This report outlines the key aspects of natural gas trade cooperation between the EU and Russia. The first part presents the scope and character of Gazprom’s economic presence in the EU member states. The second part shows the presence of the EU investors in Russia. It provides the factual base and data and concludes with policy recommendations.
© 2008 Centre for Eastern Studies (CES)
Download: English (PDF · 23 pages · 3.0 MB)
Author:Agata Łoskot-Strachota, Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz, Tomasz Dąborowski, Joanna Hyndle
Publisher: Centre for Eastern Studies (CES), Warsaw, Poland
© 2008 Centre for Eastern Studies (CES)
Download: English (PDF · 23 pages · 3.0 MB)
Author:Agata Łoskot-Strachota, Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz, Tomasz Dąborowski, Joanna Hyndle
Publisher: Centre for Eastern Studies (CES), Warsaw, Poland
October 15, 2008
John Perkins Speech : Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
John Perkins, Part 1 The first of a three part speech given to the Veterans For Peace National Convention, Seattle, WA in August 2006. Author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, in this part John discusses, from a hit mans perspective, the reasons and background to why we are at war in the Middle East
The second of a three part speech given to the Veterans For Peace National Convention, Seattle, WA in August 2006. Author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, in this part John discusses, from first hand experience, the globalization efforts of the corporatocracy in Central and South America
John Perkins, Part 3. The third of a three part speech given to the Veterans For Peace National Convention, Seattle, WA in August 2006. Author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, in this part John takes Q & A and discusses actions which can be taken to counter the globalization efforts of the multi-national corporation
The second of a three part speech given to the Veterans For Peace National Convention, Seattle, WA in August 2006. Author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, in this part John discusses, from first hand experience, the globalization efforts of the corporatocracy in Central and South America
John Perkins, Part 3. The third of a three part speech given to the Veterans For Peace National Convention, Seattle, WA in August 2006. Author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, in this part John takes Q & A and discusses actions which can be taken to counter the globalization efforts of the multi-national corporation
Repercussions, Alternatives To World Financial Crisis
This interview appears in the October 17, 2008 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
LAROUCHE IN DIALOGUE WITH ECUADOR'S PÁEZ
Repercussions, Alternatives
To World Financial Crisis
Lyndon LaRouche was interviewed on Quito, Ecuador Radio 530 AM on Oct. 6, along with Pedro Páez, Ecuador's Minister of Economic Policy Coordination. Their host was Patricio Pillajo. LaRouche appeared on the same program with Mr. Páez on Jan. 30, 2008 (see EIR, Feb. 7, 2008). Translation from Spanish was supplied by EIR's Dennis Small. Here is an edited transcript.
CLICK TO READ
LAROUCHE IN DIALOGUE WITH ECUADOR'S PÁEZ
Repercussions, Alternatives
To World Financial Crisis
Lyndon LaRouche was interviewed on Quito, Ecuador Radio 530 AM on Oct. 6, along with Pedro Páez, Ecuador's Minister of Economic Policy Coordination. Their host was Patricio Pillajo. LaRouche appeared on the same program with Mr. Páez on Jan. 30, 2008 (see EIR, Feb. 7, 2008). Translation from Spanish was supplied by EIR's Dennis Small. Here is an edited transcript.
CLICK TO READ
Financial crisis — What India needs to do
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/10/15/stories/2008101550530800.htm
Though abundant caution was exercised by the RBI Governor to insulate the country from a major financial crisis, a further lowering of CRR and reduction in the repo rate would be in order, not only to infuse greater liquidity but also to lower interest rates.
It is also time for the RBI to initiate measures to ease liquidity in the economy as the commercial banks are finding it difficult to meet genuine credit requirements of industry and trade.
S. D. Naik
The financial crisis in the US, the worst since the Great Depression of 1929, is threatening to reach perilous proportions. The collapse of the big five financial giants on Wall Street — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch — with revenues totalling nearly $322 billion in 2007, followed by two of the largest banks — Washington Mutual (WaMu) and Wachovia — has sent shock waves through global financial markets.
GRAVITY OF THE CRISIS
The gravity of the financial crisis that has hit the US economy can be gauged from the fact that the cost of the rescue of these financial giants to the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department has been estimated at close to a trillion dollars (equivalent to India’s national income).
According to some analysts, the total cost on this count could go up to $2 trillion since the financial turmoil is not likely to end anytime soon. Most of these banks had created debts to the tune of 30-40 times their equity against the prudential norm of not exceeding ten times.
According to some estimates, the derivatives trade had grown five times between 2002 and 2007 to exceed $500 trillion, thus making this ‘shadow’ economy almost ten times bigger than the real economy of the world.
After a tense week and prolonged debate, the US Congress on October 3, finally passed the $700-billion financial bailout plan to avert a major national crisis.
However, even after the clearance of the bailout package, the stock markets, world over, have plunged further as the feeling of uncertainty continues. The financial turmoil is fast spreading to Europe, whose economies are also showing signs of sliding into a recession, and the ripple effects are bound to have some adverse effects on the rest of the world, including China and India.
IMPACT ON INDIA
What is more worrisome, tIn India, the Reserve Bank of India has been pumping in liquidity into the system and local banks have been borrowing at least Rs 70,000 crore on an average over the past three weeks under its liquidity adjustment facility (LAF). Even so, liquidity has been drying up.
Recently, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) down-scaled the growth expectations of many Asian economies, including India’s, in its half yearly report: Asian Development Outlook 2008.
The ADB attributes this to the worsening conditions in major industrial economies that will weaken demand for goods and services. “The myth of uncoupling has been exploded”, the report says.
India’s GDP growth estimate for the current fiscal (2008-09) has been downgraded from 8 per cent to 7.4 per cent and, for the next financial year (2009-10), from 8.5 per cent to 7 per cent.
ADB bluntly states that “very large fiscal imbalance created by the current level of subsidisation of oil, fertiliser and food, as well as other off-budget items, sets a daunting task for economic management.”
With the financial turmoil in the US and Europe showing signs of worsening since the publication of ADB’s half-yearly report, one need not be surprised if GDP growth in India turns out to be even lower than that projected by ADB — just around 7 per cent or so for the current fiscal. In line with the falling capital markets across the world, which have already wiped out investor wealth of over $10 trillion this year so far, the Indian stock market has witnessed an unprecedented fall over the past few weeks. Not surprisingly, FIIs have been pulling out from the stock market in a big way, corporate borrowings from the global markets are becoming increasingly difficult, raising money for new investments through public issues is on hold, and liquidity in the economy is fast drying up.
SOME LESSONS
At the outset, it must be admitted that the abundant caution exercised by the former RBI Governor, Dr Y. V. Reddy and going slow on opening up new complex financial products helped to insulate the country’s from a major financial crisis.
Following the sub-prime crisis in the US over a year ago, his approach was cautious (non-reformist according to critics) on all fronts — whether in allowing the hedge funds to invest in Indian equities and real estate, greater FDI in the banking sector or allowing excessive capital inflows.
Dr Reddy has received compliments from a number of experts, including the Chief Economic Advisor, Dr Arvind Virmani. This is, of course, not to suggest that India should not go ahead with financial sector reforms. But such reforms should be accompanied by prudential norms, efficient regulatory systems, and above all, sticking to healthy capital adequacy norms.
The ongoing upheavals in the banking and financial sectors worldwide, have thoroughly exposed the inadequacies in the system to contain huge losses, solely because of the absence of a healthy risk assessment and management system and a strong capital base to absorb the shocks of these losses.
Meanwhile, the growing trade and current accounts deficits following a steep rise in oil and non-oil imports, slowdown in capital inflows and services exports, call for appropriate policy response. Evidently there is a need to go slow on capital account convertibility. It is also time for the RBI to initiate measures to ease the liquidity position in the economy as the commercial banks have been finding it difficult to meet the genuine credit requirements of industry and trade.
True, in a welcome measure, it has announced a 1.50 basis point cut in the cash reserve ratio (CRR) from a record 9 per cent to 7.5 per cent to infuse Rs 60,000 crore into the system.
But this is far from adequate. A further lowering of CRR as well some reduction in the repo rate will be in order not only to infuse more liquidity but also to lower interest rates to ensure that the growth of the economy is not hampered.
For, there is already evidence that the relentless monetary tightening by the RBI for quite sometime to rein in inflationary pressures has been hurting the growth prospects of the economy
Though abundant caution was exercised by the RBI Governor to insulate the country from a major financial crisis, a further lowering of CRR and reduction in the repo rate would be in order, not only to infuse greater liquidity but also to lower interest rates.
It is also time for the RBI to initiate measures to ease liquidity in the economy as the commercial banks are finding it difficult to meet genuine credit requirements of industry and trade.
S. D. Naik
The financial crisis in the US, the worst since the Great Depression of 1929, is threatening to reach perilous proportions. The collapse of the big five financial giants on Wall Street — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch — with revenues totalling nearly $322 billion in 2007, followed by two of the largest banks — Washington Mutual (WaMu) and Wachovia — has sent shock waves through global financial markets.
GRAVITY OF THE CRISIS
The gravity of the financial crisis that has hit the US economy can be gauged from the fact that the cost of the rescue of these financial giants to the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department has been estimated at close to a trillion dollars (equivalent to India’s national income).
According to some analysts, the total cost on this count could go up to $2 trillion since the financial turmoil is not likely to end anytime soon. Most of these banks had created debts to the tune of 30-40 times their equity against the prudential norm of not exceeding ten times.
According to some estimates, the derivatives trade had grown five times between 2002 and 2007 to exceed $500 trillion, thus making this ‘shadow’ economy almost ten times bigger than the real economy of the world.
After a tense week and prolonged debate, the US Congress on October 3, finally passed the $700-billion financial bailout plan to avert a major national crisis.
However, even after the clearance of the bailout package, the stock markets, world over, have plunged further as the feeling of uncertainty continues. The financial turmoil is fast spreading to Europe, whose economies are also showing signs of sliding into a recession, and the ripple effects are bound to have some adverse effects on the rest of the world, including China and India.
IMPACT ON INDIA
What is more worrisome, tIn India, the Reserve Bank of India has been pumping in liquidity into the system and local banks have been borrowing at least Rs 70,000 crore on an average over the past three weeks under its liquidity adjustment facility (LAF). Even so, liquidity has been drying up.
Recently, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) down-scaled the growth expectations of many Asian economies, including India’s, in its half yearly report: Asian Development Outlook 2008.
The ADB attributes this to the worsening conditions in major industrial economies that will weaken demand for goods and services. “The myth of uncoupling has been exploded”, the report says.
India’s GDP growth estimate for the current fiscal (2008-09) has been downgraded from 8 per cent to 7.4 per cent and, for the next financial year (2009-10), from 8.5 per cent to 7 per cent.
ADB bluntly states that “very large fiscal imbalance created by the current level of subsidisation of oil, fertiliser and food, as well as other off-budget items, sets a daunting task for economic management.”
With the financial turmoil in the US and Europe showing signs of worsening since the publication of ADB’s half-yearly report, one need not be surprised if GDP growth in India turns out to be even lower than that projected by ADB — just around 7 per cent or so for the current fiscal. In line with the falling capital markets across the world, which have already wiped out investor wealth of over $10 trillion this year so far, the Indian stock market has witnessed an unprecedented fall over the past few weeks. Not surprisingly, FIIs have been pulling out from the stock market in a big way, corporate borrowings from the global markets are becoming increasingly difficult, raising money for new investments through public issues is on hold, and liquidity in the economy is fast drying up.
SOME LESSONS
At the outset, it must be admitted that the abundant caution exercised by the former RBI Governor, Dr Y. V. Reddy and going slow on opening up new complex financial products helped to insulate the country’s from a major financial crisis.
Following the sub-prime crisis in the US over a year ago, his approach was cautious (non-reformist according to critics) on all fronts — whether in allowing the hedge funds to invest in Indian equities and real estate, greater FDI in the banking sector or allowing excessive capital inflows.
Dr Reddy has received compliments from a number of experts, including the Chief Economic Advisor, Dr Arvind Virmani. This is, of course, not to suggest that India should not go ahead with financial sector reforms. But such reforms should be accompanied by prudential norms, efficient regulatory systems, and above all, sticking to healthy capital adequacy norms.
The ongoing upheavals in the banking and financial sectors worldwide, have thoroughly exposed the inadequacies in the system to contain huge losses, solely because of the absence of a healthy risk assessment and management system and a strong capital base to absorb the shocks of these losses.
Meanwhile, the growing trade and current accounts deficits following a steep rise in oil and non-oil imports, slowdown in capital inflows and services exports, call for appropriate policy response. Evidently there is a need to go slow on capital account convertibility. It is also time for the RBI to initiate measures to ease the liquidity position in the economy as the commercial banks have been finding it difficult to meet the genuine credit requirements of industry and trade.
True, in a welcome measure, it has announced a 1.50 basis point cut in the cash reserve ratio (CRR) from a record 9 per cent to 7.5 per cent to infuse Rs 60,000 crore into the system.
But this is far from adequate. A further lowering of CRR as well some reduction in the repo rate will be in order not only to infuse more liquidity but also to lower interest rates to ensure that the growth of the economy is not hampered.
For, there is already evidence that the relentless monetary tightening by the RBI for quite sometime to rein in inflationary pressures has been hurting the growth prospects of the economy
Festival time for Pakistani Hindus
By M Ilyas Khan
BBC News, Rama Pir, southern Pakistan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7667850.stm
Festival in pictures
Jodha, a Hindu woman from the nomadic Jogi tribe of snake-charmers, made a vow at the temple of Rama Pir in southern Pakistan that if blessed with a son, she would make a pilgrimage to the temple every year for the rest of her life.
That was just after her wedding, more than four years ago, when her husband took her to the temple fair in Tando Allahyar town of Sindh province.
Her son was born a year later.
Before the partition of India, the Jogis, one of several low caste Hindus, or Dalits, roamed from the Tharparkar desert in Sindh, now Pakistan, to Gujarat and Rajasthan in India.
They still travel vast distances between Sindh's south-western industrial city of Karachi and the agrarian and desert communities they inhabit in the areas eastwards towards the Indian border.
But no matter where she is, when the time comes for the annual fair in honour of Rama Pir, a holy man who lived some 400 years ago, Jodha heads to Tando Allahyar, with her son and husband in tow.
Extra money
The family is among tens of thousands of Dalits that make the pilgrimage.
There is an atmosphere of celebration in the air
Some, like Reshma and her family, come to do business that would earn them a little extra money besides paying homage to Rama Pir.
Others combine religious duty with fun and games as an entire amusement park - complete with mechanised merry-go-rounds and roller-coaster rides - appears in an open space behind the temple.
Most of them come to seek deliverance from one worldly ordeal or another.
Basanti, a Dalit woman from the Bheel sub-caste, is childless after three years of marriage.
She has bought several kilograms of sweets from the market outside the temple for distribution among the pilgrims as prasad, or offering.
"I will keep doing it until Rama Pir blesses me with a child; I don't mind if it is a boy or a girl," she says.
'Dalit event'
A chemistry graduate from Tharparkar, Pratap Rai, has been distributing prasad on all three days of the fair for the last five years.
"My brother was critically ill, but he miraculously recovered when I made a vow at the temple that I will offer sweets to pilgrims every year for as long as my legs carry me from Tharparkar to Tando Allahyar," he said.
A good time is had by all
Unlike the vast majority of pilgrims, Pratap Rai is not a Dalit, but an upper caste Brahmin.
According to the Pakistan Hindu Council, there are approximately three million Hindus in Pakistan. Nearly 2.5 million of them live in Sindh province and more than 80% of the total are Dalits.
Local people describe Rama Pir's festival as a nearly exclusive Dalit event, even though the caretaker of the temple is a Brahman.
Arjun Solanki, a local Dalit who is studying medicine at Sindh University, offers an explanation for this.
"Rama Pir was a Dalit convert to the Ismaili Shia faith. He organised lower-caste Hindus against the exploitative Brahmanic and Bania classes of medieval Rajasthan. He was a secular, revolutionary leader," he says.
But after his death, the upper-caste Hindus Brahanised his cult by declaring him as an ethnic Rajput - an upper-caste Hindu warrior clan, says Arjun.
Rama Pir lived and died in Ranuja, a town some 150km (93 miles) from Jodhpur, the capital of Rajasthan.
The temple in Tando Allahyar, according to a local tradition, was built by a native Dalit in the latter half of the 19th Century in fulfilment of a vow he had taken during an earlier pilgrimage to Ranuja.
Like Jodha, he had wished for a son, which was granted to him.
'Wrong religion'
The three-day festival commemorates that event. It falls in the Hindu solar month of Buddo - the last month of the Indian monsoon cycle - when the winter crops have been sown.
Basanti is still childless after three years of marriage
Its actual date is calculated from the new moon occurring in this month. As a result, the fair falls either in September or October.
While many claim their wishes have been granted by Rama Pir, the major beneficiary of the fair appears to be the shopkeepers of the market outside the temple.
More than 90% of them are Muslim, and an increasing number have grown beards in keeping with the increasing influence of Islamists in the region.
A Hindu festival, where non-Muslim women go about without a veil, is not to the liking of some of them.
"These people are poor and ignorant, they follow the wrong religion," comments one shopkeeper when I introduce myself as a BBC reporter.
He has a word of advice for me.
"Do your duty as a Muslim. Don't give them coverage."
But he wouldn't stop selling his merchandise to the pilgrims.
"I have been selling an average of 150 crates (1,800 bottles) of Pepsi each day since the fair started," he comments in an unguarded moment.
Intelligence in India's Sri Lanka War
Col R Hariharan
(This article is based on a presentation made at the seminar "Indian Experience in Force Projection" organised by the Centre for Joint Warfare Studies (CENJOWS) at New Delhi on September 15 and 16, 2008).
Introduction
A review of India's military intervention in Sri Lanka (1987-90) now after two decades has the benefit of hindsight. During those two decades a number of global developments have enlarged the concept of strategic security. As a result, Military Intelligence (MI) has undergone changes in form, content and expectations.
When Indian forces operated in Sri Lanka, the Cold War confrontation between the Soviet Union and the U.S. was at its peak after the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan. The US-Pakistan relations were perhaps at the closest, making India's Pakistan-centric security focus more acute. Only two months before signing of the India-Sri Lanka Agreement (ISLA) in July 1987, Operation Brass Tacks, in which the two countries almost went to war, had concluded. Indian army suffered from this Pakistan-centric preoccupation and Indian army had to pay a price for it in Sri Lanka.
Viewed in the overall context of India-Sri Lanka relations, India's war in Sri Lanka might be termed as Indian state's reactive military response to a largely internal political situation in Sri Lanka that affected India's interests also. Unfortunately, at that time the nation did not have a structural frame work to plan, conduct and monitor such overseas response. There was no integrated body with accountability to take informed decisions on national security issues. Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) was the only forum to carry out this task. During the Sri Lanka operations, a Core Group was formed to look after the day to day issues. This empowered group functioned under the Chairmanship of the Minister of State, External Affairs.
Sri Lanka operation was India's first -ever overseas force projection. Before that Indian troops had operated overseas only as part of United Nations forces. For the first time all the three services were involved in an overseas joint operation. Perhaps it was also the first time Indian army was drawn into a counter insurgency operation for which it had either planned or prepared in advance. To cap it all, the counter insurgency conflict involved operating in urban as well as jungle settings.
Communication technology was just making its early breakthroughs. The battlefield competencies of armed forces were yet to benefit from them. The MI did not enjoy the advantages imparted by information technology and its applications. It was essentially a HUMINT and COMBATINT operation.
MI had limited organic HUMINT capability and what little was there was focused on Pakistan. By modern standards, the then available ELINT and SIGINT resources would be considered primitive. However, over the years the MI had gained certain amount of expertise in HUMINT operations and interrogation in counter insurgency setting. The divisional intelligence units deployed in insurgency affected regions were the main sources of this expertise.
When the Sri Lanka army's crackdown on Tamil militants reached a critical stage in Jaffna Peninsula around April 1987, Directorate General of Military Intelligence (DGMI) moved a small MI team to Chennai to cover Sri Lanka. It had very limited capability. Thus till Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) was inducted into Sri Lanka, this MI team was DGMI's sole organic source of intelligence. Of course, it had access to some of the inputs of the external intelligence agency Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) and the counter intelligence service Intelligence Bureau (IB). The IB had been keeping a watchful eye on the activities of thousands of Sri Lanka Tamil refugees present in Tamil Nadu. It also had very good knowledge of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)'s activities in Tamil Nadu. However, the DGMI had no access to the Tamil Nadu State Police (Q Branch) which was yet another rich source of intelligence on Sri Lanka Tamil militancy.
Intelligence before the outbreak of war
Southern Command based in Pune established the Operational Force Commander's Headquarters (OFC HQ) at Chennai to for the task of overseeing the operation when India decided to send troops to Sri Lanka to help implementation of the ISLA. As soon as the ISLA was signed on July 29, 1987, opposition to the Agreement snowballed in Sri Lanka threatening the stability of the regime of President JR Jayawardane. 54 Infantry Division (less most of the support arms) was hastily despatched to Sri Lanka in the first week of August 1987 as a show of support to the President and the Tamils. The Southern Army Commander as the OFC had an ambiguous mandate on Sri Lanka. As a corollary 54 Infantry Division also was not given a clear role at that stage.
The DGMI attached a dozen Tamil speaking Intelligence Corps officers and NCOs to the OFC HQ at Chennai to assist the OFC. The attachment of the MI team was fire fighting measure as it had neither exposure to Sri Lanka nor had a briefing on its task. The team moved to Jaffna (Palali) in the first week of August, a few days after 54 Infantry Division arrived there. The OFC HQ assigned no specific task to the MI team except to 'keep an eye' on the happenings there. The team was provided no functional resources
The MI team tasked itself to study and understand the environment in north-eastern Sri Lanka. It familiarized itself with the terrain, and important personalities and decision makers among militant groups notably the LTTE. The team forwarded its reports directly to DGMI under whose command it operated. There was very little intelligence input from either DGMI or from civil intelligence agencies to either OFC HQ and as a result 54 Infantry Division had only marginal information.
From September 1987 onwards the LTTE showed marked reluctance in implementing the ISLA refusing to surrender of the arms it held. As the IPKF task looked a long haul, DGMI moved 57 Mtn Div Int & FS Company to Palali to augment MI resources in the island. Tamil speaking officers and NCOs were posted to man the unit.
The Divisional Headquarters in Palali perhaps due to the confusing command and control structure of the MI team did not use it. In fact the Divisional Headquarters kept the MI team out of all its interactions and political parleys with the LTTE. The Division Headquarters also did not project specific intelligence requirements of any kind to the MI team. For reasons not very clear, the services of the MI team were never used during the Division's operational planning process prior to the Jaffna operations. (According to the RAW, the Army Headquarters also did not take the RAW into confidence or sought its advice prior to the Jaffna operations). Thus the Division launched the Jaffna operation on its own steam.
Intelligence during the operations
Only after the Jaffna operation commenced and troops were rapidly inducted from mainland, the Division asked the Officer Commanding, 57 Div Int & FS Coy to brief the troops prior to their induction into the war zone! Similarly, as the operation progressed, the intelligence unit was tasked to interrogate suspected civilians and prisoners.
There was no advance planning at either the OFC HQ, or the Divisional HQ for screening of civilian population or holding prisoners. This was in direct contrast to 1971 operational experience in eastern theatre when we had meticulously planned in advance the handling and interrogation of prisoners. Short duration training was also imparted to NCOs from infantry units on combat interrogation. This resulted in the failure to gain tactical information through interrogation in the early stages of operation.
However, by the time Jaffna operations ended, the force level of IPKF was increased with the induction of two more divisions. The command and control structure of the Advance Headquarters of the OFC at Chennai was also streamlined. In addition to the 57 Int and FS Coy, another intelligence unit was specifically raised for the IPKF operations and inducted. The unit had both intelligence acquisition and interrogation capabilities. The unit had its headquarters in Chennai; one team and an interrogation centre each from this unit were deployed in Vavuniya, Trincomalee and Batticaloa. 57 Int and FS Coy provided the intelligence cover for 54 Div sector including Kilinochchi. Both the units served under the command of Col GS (Int) of the Advance HQ OFC.
Communication intelligence was provided by the SIGINT detachments and EWCP. Though they were under Army Headquarters, they worked closely with forward troops and provided accurate real time information.
The RAW after its initial false start, improved its linkages with the Advance HQ OFC, after the Jafffna operations commenced. From then onwards, the Chennai RAW unit maintained close touch with the Advance HQ OFC, and provided valuable inputs particularly on political developments in Sri Lanka. Though RAW provided up to date information on overall developments, it could not provide specific information on the LTTE's military capabilities or cogent assessments on their likely course of action.
Despite the MI officers enjoying excellent rapport at the senior level, both the Q Branch of the Tamil Nadu State Police and the IB at Chennai provided no information to the IPKF throughout the period of operation. Their information resources on the LTTE activities in Tamil Nadu could have helped the IPKF in planning and conduct of its operations. Thanks to the vehement opposition of the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party to the IPKF operations, the Tamil Nadu government issued no formal orders to the Q Branch on sharing of information relevant to the IPKF. The IB fared no better. It usually fobbed off our requests saying that they had no military information, though political information had a lot of relevance to IPKF operations.
MI performance: Army Headquarters level
There was practically no intelligence sharing between the three services intelligence wings at the functional level in Sri Lanka. Perhaps the confusion in the overall command and control equation among the three services was the reason for this aberration. The DGMI also probably did not identify and articulate its needs to the other two services.
The DGMI had built no intelligence assets on Sri Lanka before the ISLA. It is surprising that this requirement was not visualised, despite India's close political involvements there since 1983. This was only symptomatic of the lack of mission clarity that had marked Indian army's foray into Sri Lanka. Thus DGMI could not provide timely information to the forces in Sri Lanka either during the political parleys with the LTTE or before Jaffna operations. However, once the role of the IPKF was crystallised, the DGMI rose to the occasion. It made available maximum possible intelligence resources within the first few months. It also assisted in recruiting Sinhala knowing Tamils migrants from Sri Lanka to help MI and SIGINT units.
But the biggest failure of the Army HQ and the DGMI was in their inability to change the Tamil Nadu government's negative attitude not only on information sharing but also in taking follow up actions requested by the IPKF on specific LTTE activity in the state. During the entire period of operations, the LTTE had an unprecedented freedom to operate with impunity in Tamil Nadu despite being at war with Indian state. This not only exposed the troops traversing the state to potential LTTE threat but reflected the callousness with which the whole operation was treated. This created a great feeling of insecurity among Tamil sources, who felt the MI did not have enough "influence" to ensure their security even at home. This lack of confidence affected MI's performance.
The DGMI's also showed its inability to provide down assessments to the IPKF, even though it received regular inputs from RAW, IB and other agencies at the Army HQ. Similarly the HQ Southern Command GS (Int) also failed to provide useful assessments or inputs, presumably because it had no operational responsibility. The absence of such top down assessments handicapped the MI planning and collection process at the Advance HQ OFC. The DGMI could have helped the IPKF to assess the situation better with appropriate and timely inputs on developments at home that had impacted MI's intelligence operations in Sri Lanka.
MI performance: OFC MI
At the field level, OFC MI had set itself the task of keeping abreast of three strategic developments that could destabilise the IPKF operations. These were: the acquisition of MANPADS by the LTTE, contacts between the LTTE and the Marxist Sinhala militant group Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) operating in other parts of Sri Lanka, and collaboration between the LTTE and elements of the Government of Sri Lanka. In all the three aspects, the OFC MI all along kept abreast of the developments. Despite the initial glitches of command and control and limited resources, the MI units in Sri Lanka made some positive contributions. Their assessments were generally more accurate than any other national intelligence agency.
OFC MI had used the period of troubled peace from August to October 1987, to create useful assets both within the LTTE and among influential pro-LTTE elements in Jaffna and Trincomalee. These assets came in handy when the operations started. They provided valuable inputs on political and strategic moves of the LTTE as well as Sri Lanka government. During the IPKF's consolidation phase, after Jaffna was cleared, the OFC MI's was able to provide useful information on movement of LTTE pistol groups within Jaffna and in eastern Sri Lanka. It also provided clinching evidence of collusion between elements of the Sri Lankan government and army, and the LTTE. These helped us to understand the changing operational environment and assess the depth of the emerging equation between the Sri Lanka President and the LTTE.
Generally frontline troops had high expectation of tactical intelligence from OFC MI units. To certain extent these were met wherever close coordination existed between the MI elements and troops, notably in Jaffna, Trincomalee, and Batticaloa sectors. Unfortunately this could not be achieved fully in Vavuniya and Mullaitivu districts where the jungle terrain made HUMINT operations difficult. Troops in those areas had to depend upon their own combat intelligence. However, the front line infantry units lacked adequate intelligence awareness to successfully carry out combat intelligence tasks. On the other hand, Para Commando units showed excellent response and added some 'muscle' to MI operations conducted with their help. And naturally their operational performance was far superior to regular infantry units.
The OFC MI established useful links with Sri Lanka's National Intelligence Bureau (NIB). Though some of the NIB information was misleading, it helped in understanding the official line of Sri Lanka. The OFC MI had to maintain constant vigilance against NIB efforts to thwart its operations, particularly in the year 1988-89.
Communication and electronic intelligence produced valuable inputs. However, such information was not validated adequately due to paucity of intelligence staff. In future operations of force projection such inputs are likely to increase enormously. In order to get the overall picture, intelligence staff at the formation level would require better training to evolve realistic assessments combining HUMINT, ELINT and SIGINT inputs.
There was practically no input from Air and Naval Intelligence sources. Presumably MI failed to seek specific information from them. Navy could have been useful particularly in gaining information on the LTTE's supplies from Tamil Nadu across the Palk Strait. MI did not fully tap the Tamil media both in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka that were rich open sources of information.
Coordination with civil intelligence agencies
Coordination between the MI as the user and the RAW as the provider had always been one sided. The RAW usually did not meet DGMI's military intelligence requirements in a usable form. Presumably RAW's own priorities were different from those of the armed forces. Ideally when the IPKF was inducted, the RAW had the capability to produce a comprehensive handbook on Sri Lanka containing all the information forces required. Probably the DGMI did not project such a requirement nor did the RAW anticipate it. This speaks for the limited coordination that had existed between the Army and the RAW. However, after initial hiccups on this count in Sri Lanka, the RAW – Army cooperation improved once the Advance HQ OFC was created.
Though over a period of time, some form of top level agency coordination emerged in New Delhi it never percolated down to formation level in Sri Lanka. At present interaction between the Army and RAW counterparts is based only on personal equation established between the two in the absence of standard operating procedures for information sharing. Thus officers on both sides grow up in a culture of denial rather than sharing. Perhaps we can take a leaf out of the Japanese industrial management practice of forming Small Group Activity for the user and producer to understand the user's problems to evolve workable solutions.
As far as the IB was concerned, internal political intelligence appeared to be their focus. Functionally in critical internal situations in India the IB representatives had been forthcoming in sharing information of military interest. However, this does not apply to IB's political intelligence sharing with the army even in counter insurgency situation in India. However, in the case of counter insurgency operations in Sri Lanka, the fine line dividing political and operational intelligence got blurred. Perhaps the IB was not able to appreciate this need for forces operating in alien environment. That would explain its reluctance to share information of any kind relating to Sri Lanka with the IPKF.
The failure of the State police machinery to share intelligence relevant to the IPKF represented the dissonance in our national security perceptions. The failure of the Tamil Nadu Home Department to act in the interest of national security for political reasons had kept up the morale of LTTE fighting with our forces in Sri Lanka. This has been well documented in the Jain Commission report. The precedent set by Tamil Nadu Government during the IPKF operations on this count taking roots now in the political culture cannot be ruled out. To avoid a similar contingency arising in our future overseas operations, it would be prudent for the armed forces to handle with more alacrity by demanding clear mandates in advance with clear guidelines and responsibilities.
Intelligence in overseas operations of the future
The IPKF operations in the early stages were hastily conceived, inadequately planned and executed because there was a lack of role clarity. This was mainly due to the absence of an empowered national decision making body on national security at the government level. Similarly there was an inadequate framework for conducting combined operations overseas at the joint services level. Remedial action has been taken since then to address these limitations, though they might not be wholly satisfactory as the Kargil war had demonstrated. However, it is likely to improve as the nation gradually gains more experience in handling strategic security issues on a global perspective.
Intelligence on a real time basis will be the catalyst of success of armed forces in future overseas operations. MI will be required to meticulously plan and be ready to meet the intelligence requirements in overseas operations before and after the induction of troops. As sources of information have enlarged in scope and width, MI should be in a position to provide reasonable assessments in real time to forces operating in battle fields dominated by larger force levels, great mobility and high fire power. This would require a greater degree of intelligence integration of MI with its counterparts in other services as well as civil intelligence agencies. Thus there is an urgent need to integrate this need in perspective planning of operations for such contingencies.
To achieve such readiness, MI will require clear policy formulations applicable to the three services as well as civil intelligence agencies, better integration and coordination of inputs and assessments through a structured mechanism. It will also require coordinated advance planning by all the intelligence stakeholders at various levels.
Over the long term, MI will also have to build its own expertise in areas of potential operational interest. Ideally, a defence university will be the appropriate forum to create such knowledge banks. In the absence of such an institution, repositories of knowledge can be created in selected academies of excellence like university departments of defence studies so that there is continuity of effort. Intelligence Corps officers should be encouraged to specialise in regions or countries of national interest. Unless MI plans and evolves such an integrated intelligence matrix, success in future overseas operations will come only at great cost of men and material.
Military intelligence is a specialised job that requires the application of military knowledge to understand the information needs of the battle field and provide useful assessments to the fighting forces. In future operational environments, MI staff will be required to make real time assessments to assist operational decision making. No doubt the quantum jump in communication and information technology provides useful tools for the MI to meet this requirement. However, much of its success would depend upon the training imparted to intelligence staff to be technologically savvy in keeping with the dynamics of the emerging battle field needs.
With the nation poised to emerge as a regional power in the near future, MI has to transform itself into a technology driven organisation to meld TECHINT, ELINT, SIGINT and HUMINT inputs to meet the requirements of force projection overseas. Focus on intelligence management rather than mere information management has become the order of the day. That will remove the aberrations of intelligence acquisition and coordination at all levels and contribute meaningfully to operational planning and execution.
(Col. R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served as the head of intelligence of the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka 1987-90. He is associated with the South Asia Analysis Group and the Chennai Centre for China Studies. E-mail:colhari@yahoo.com)
(This article is based on a presentation made at the seminar "Indian Experience in Force Projection" organised by the Centre for Joint Warfare Studies (CENJOWS) at New Delhi on September 15 and 16, 2008).
Introduction
A review of India's military intervention in Sri Lanka (1987-90) now after two decades has the benefit of hindsight. During those two decades a number of global developments have enlarged the concept of strategic security. As a result, Military Intelligence (MI) has undergone changes in form, content and expectations.
When Indian forces operated in Sri Lanka, the Cold War confrontation between the Soviet Union and the U.S. was at its peak after the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan. The US-Pakistan relations were perhaps at the closest, making India's Pakistan-centric security focus more acute. Only two months before signing of the India-Sri Lanka Agreement (ISLA) in July 1987, Operation Brass Tacks, in which the two countries almost went to war, had concluded. Indian army suffered from this Pakistan-centric preoccupation and Indian army had to pay a price for it in Sri Lanka.
Viewed in the overall context of India-Sri Lanka relations, India's war in Sri Lanka might be termed as Indian state's reactive military response to a largely internal political situation in Sri Lanka that affected India's interests also. Unfortunately, at that time the nation did not have a structural frame work to plan, conduct and monitor such overseas response. There was no integrated body with accountability to take informed decisions on national security issues. Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) was the only forum to carry out this task. During the Sri Lanka operations, a Core Group was formed to look after the day to day issues. This empowered group functioned under the Chairmanship of the Minister of State, External Affairs.
Sri Lanka operation was India's first -ever overseas force projection. Before that Indian troops had operated overseas only as part of United Nations forces. For the first time all the three services were involved in an overseas joint operation. Perhaps it was also the first time Indian army was drawn into a counter insurgency operation for which it had either planned or prepared in advance. To cap it all, the counter insurgency conflict involved operating in urban as well as jungle settings.
Communication technology was just making its early breakthroughs. The battlefield competencies of armed forces were yet to benefit from them. The MI did not enjoy the advantages imparted by information technology and its applications. It was essentially a HUMINT and COMBATINT operation.
MI had limited organic HUMINT capability and what little was there was focused on Pakistan. By modern standards, the then available ELINT and SIGINT resources would be considered primitive. However, over the years the MI had gained certain amount of expertise in HUMINT operations and interrogation in counter insurgency setting. The divisional intelligence units deployed in insurgency affected regions were the main sources of this expertise.
When the Sri Lanka army's crackdown on Tamil militants reached a critical stage in Jaffna Peninsula around April 1987, Directorate General of Military Intelligence (DGMI) moved a small MI team to Chennai to cover Sri Lanka. It had very limited capability. Thus till Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) was inducted into Sri Lanka, this MI team was DGMI's sole organic source of intelligence. Of course, it had access to some of the inputs of the external intelligence agency Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) and the counter intelligence service Intelligence Bureau (IB). The IB had been keeping a watchful eye on the activities of thousands of Sri Lanka Tamil refugees present in Tamil Nadu. It also had very good knowledge of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)'s activities in Tamil Nadu. However, the DGMI had no access to the Tamil Nadu State Police (Q Branch) which was yet another rich source of intelligence on Sri Lanka Tamil militancy.
Intelligence before the outbreak of war
Southern Command based in Pune established the Operational Force Commander's Headquarters (OFC HQ) at Chennai to for the task of overseeing the operation when India decided to send troops to Sri Lanka to help implementation of the ISLA. As soon as the ISLA was signed on July 29, 1987, opposition to the Agreement snowballed in Sri Lanka threatening the stability of the regime of President JR Jayawardane. 54 Infantry Division (less most of the support arms) was hastily despatched to Sri Lanka in the first week of August 1987 as a show of support to the President and the Tamils. The Southern Army Commander as the OFC had an ambiguous mandate on Sri Lanka. As a corollary 54 Infantry Division also was not given a clear role at that stage.
The DGMI attached a dozen Tamil speaking Intelligence Corps officers and NCOs to the OFC HQ at Chennai to assist the OFC. The attachment of the MI team was fire fighting measure as it had neither exposure to Sri Lanka nor had a briefing on its task. The team moved to Jaffna (Palali) in the first week of August, a few days after 54 Infantry Division arrived there. The OFC HQ assigned no specific task to the MI team except to 'keep an eye' on the happenings there. The team was provided no functional resources
The MI team tasked itself to study and understand the environment in north-eastern Sri Lanka. It familiarized itself with the terrain, and important personalities and decision makers among militant groups notably the LTTE. The team forwarded its reports directly to DGMI under whose command it operated. There was very little intelligence input from either DGMI or from civil intelligence agencies to either OFC HQ and as a result 54 Infantry Division had only marginal information.
From September 1987 onwards the LTTE showed marked reluctance in implementing the ISLA refusing to surrender of the arms it held. As the IPKF task looked a long haul, DGMI moved 57 Mtn Div Int & FS Company to Palali to augment MI resources in the island. Tamil speaking officers and NCOs were posted to man the unit.
The Divisional Headquarters in Palali perhaps due to the confusing command and control structure of the MI team did not use it. In fact the Divisional Headquarters kept the MI team out of all its interactions and political parleys with the LTTE. The Division Headquarters also did not project specific intelligence requirements of any kind to the MI team. For reasons not very clear, the services of the MI team were never used during the Division's operational planning process prior to the Jaffna operations. (According to the RAW, the Army Headquarters also did not take the RAW into confidence or sought its advice prior to the Jaffna operations). Thus the Division launched the Jaffna operation on its own steam.
Intelligence during the operations
Only after the Jaffna operation commenced and troops were rapidly inducted from mainland, the Division asked the Officer Commanding, 57 Div Int & FS Coy to brief the troops prior to their induction into the war zone! Similarly, as the operation progressed, the intelligence unit was tasked to interrogate suspected civilians and prisoners.
There was no advance planning at either the OFC HQ, or the Divisional HQ for screening of civilian population or holding prisoners. This was in direct contrast to 1971 operational experience in eastern theatre when we had meticulously planned in advance the handling and interrogation of prisoners. Short duration training was also imparted to NCOs from infantry units on combat interrogation. This resulted in the failure to gain tactical information through interrogation in the early stages of operation.
However, by the time Jaffna operations ended, the force level of IPKF was increased with the induction of two more divisions. The command and control structure of the Advance Headquarters of the OFC at Chennai was also streamlined. In addition to the 57 Int and FS Coy, another intelligence unit was specifically raised for the IPKF operations and inducted. The unit had both intelligence acquisition and interrogation capabilities. The unit had its headquarters in Chennai; one team and an interrogation centre each from this unit were deployed in Vavuniya, Trincomalee and Batticaloa. 57 Int and FS Coy provided the intelligence cover for 54 Div sector including Kilinochchi. Both the units served under the command of Col GS (Int) of the Advance HQ OFC.
Communication intelligence was provided by the SIGINT detachments and EWCP. Though they were under Army Headquarters, they worked closely with forward troops and provided accurate real time information.
The RAW after its initial false start, improved its linkages with the Advance HQ OFC, after the Jafffna operations commenced. From then onwards, the Chennai RAW unit maintained close touch with the Advance HQ OFC, and provided valuable inputs particularly on political developments in Sri Lanka. Though RAW provided up to date information on overall developments, it could not provide specific information on the LTTE's military capabilities or cogent assessments on their likely course of action.
Despite the MI officers enjoying excellent rapport at the senior level, both the Q Branch of the Tamil Nadu State Police and the IB at Chennai provided no information to the IPKF throughout the period of operation. Their information resources on the LTTE activities in Tamil Nadu could have helped the IPKF in planning and conduct of its operations. Thanks to the vehement opposition of the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party to the IPKF operations, the Tamil Nadu government issued no formal orders to the Q Branch on sharing of information relevant to the IPKF. The IB fared no better. It usually fobbed off our requests saying that they had no military information, though political information had a lot of relevance to IPKF operations.
MI performance: Army Headquarters level
There was practically no intelligence sharing between the three services intelligence wings at the functional level in Sri Lanka. Perhaps the confusion in the overall command and control equation among the three services was the reason for this aberration. The DGMI also probably did not identify and articulate its needs to the other two services.
The DGMI had built no intelligence assets on Sri Lanka before the ISLA. It is surprising that this requirement was not visualised, despite India's close political involvements there since 1983. This was only symptomatic of the lack of mission clarity that had marked Indian army's foray into Sri Lanka. Thus DGMI could not provide timely information to the forces in Sri Lanka either during the political parleys with the LTTE or before Jaffna operations. However, once the role of the IPKF was crystallised, the DGMI rose to the occasion. It made available maximum possible intelligence resources within the first few months. It also assisted in recruiting Sinhala knowing Tamils migrants from Sri Lanka to help MI and SIGINT units.
But the biggest failure of the Army HQ and the DGMI was in their inability to change the Tamil Nadu government's negative attitude not only on information sharing but also in taking follow up actions requested by the IPKF on specific LTTE activity in the state. During the entire period of operations, the LTTE had an unprecedented freedom to operate with impunity in Tamil Nadu despite being at war with Indian state. This not only exposed the troops traversing the state to potential LTTE threat but reflected the callousness with which the whole operation was treated. This created a great feeling of insecurity among Tamil sources, who felt the MI did not have enough "influence" to ensure their security even at home. This lack of confidence affected MI's performance.
The DGMI's also showed its inability to provide down assessments to the IPKF, even though it received regular inputs from RAW, IB and other agencies at the Army HQ. Similarly the HQ Southern Command GS (Int) also failed to provide useful assessments or inputs, presumably because it had no operational responsibility. The absence of such top down assessments handicapped the MI planning and collection process at the Advance HQ OFC. The DGMI could have helped the IPKF to assess the situation better with appropriate and timely inputs on developments at home that had impacted MI's intelligence operations in Sri Lanka.
MI performance: OFC MI
At the field level, OFC MI had set itself the task of keeping abreast of three strategic developments that could destabilise the IPKF operations. These were: the acquisition of MANPADS by the LTTE, contacts between the LTTE and the Marxist Sinhala militant group Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) operating in other parts of Sri Lanka, and collaboration between the LTTE and elements of the Government of Sri Lanka. In all the three aspects, the OFC MI all along kept abreast of the developments. Despite the initial glitches of command and control and limited resources, the MI units in Sri Lanka made some positive contributions. Their assessments were generally more accurate than any other national intelligence agency.
OFC MI had used the period of troubled peace from August to October 1987, to create useful assets both within the LTTE and among influential pro-LTTE elements in Jaffna and Trincomalee. These assets came in handy when the operations started. They provided valuable inputs on political and strategic moves of the LTTE as well as Sri Lanka government. During the IPKF's consolidation phase, after Jaffna was cleared, the OFC MI's was able to provide useful information on movement of LTTE pistol groups within Jaffna and in eastern Sri Lanka. It also provided clinching evidence of collusion between elements of the Sri Lankan government and army, and the LTTE. These helped us to understand the changing operational environment and assess the depth of the emerging equation between the Sri Lanka President and the LTTE.
Generally frontline troops had high expectation of tactical intelligence from OFC MI units. To certain extent these were met wherever close coordination existed between the MI elements and troops, notably in Jaffna, Trincomalee, and Batticaloa sectors. Unfortunately this could not be achieved fully in Vavuniya and Mullaitivu districts where the jungle terrain made HUMINT operations difficult. Troops in those areas had to depend upon their own combat intelligence. However, the front line infantry units lacked adequate intelligence awareness to successfully carry out combat intelligence tasks. On the other hand, Para Commando units showed excellent response and added some 'muscle' to MI operations conducted with their help. And naturally their operational performance was far superior to regular infantry units.
The OFC MI established useful links with Sri Lanka's National Intelligence Bureau (NIB). Though some of the NIB information was misleading, it helped in understanding the official line of Sri Lanka. The OFC MI had to maintain constant vigilance against NIB efforts to thwart its operations, particularly in the year 1988-89.
Communication and electronic intelligence produced valuable inputs. However, such information was not validated adequately due to paucity of intelligence staff. In future operations of force projection such inputs are likely to increase enormously. In order to get the overall picture, intelligence staff at the formation level would require better training to evolve realistic assessments combining HUMINT, ELINT and SIGINT inputs.
There was practically no input from Air and Naval Intelligence sources. Presumably MI failed to seek specific information from them. Navy could have been useful particularly in gaining information on the LTTE's supplies from Tamil Nadu across the Palk Strait. MI did not fully tap the Tamil media both in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka that were rich open sources of information.
Coordination with civil intelligence agencies
Coordination between the MI as the user and the RAW as the provider had always been one sided. The RAW usually did not meet DGMI's military intelligence requirements in a usable form. Presumably RAW's own priorities were different from those of the armed forces. Ideally when the IPKF was inducted, the RAW had the capability to produce a comprehensive handbook on Sri Lanka containing all the information forces required. Probably the DGMI did not project such a requirement nor did the RAW anticipate it. This speaks for the limited coordination that had existed between the Army and the RAW. However, after initial hiccups on this count in Sri Lanka, the RAW – Army cooperation improved once the Advance HQ OFC was created.
Though over a period of time, some form of top level agency coordination emerged in New Delhi it never percolated down to formation level in Sri Lanka. At present interaction between the Army and RAW counterparts is based only on personal equation established between the two in the absence of standard operating procedures for information sharing. Thus officers on both sides grow up in a culture of denial rather than sharing. Perhaps we can take a leaf out of the Japanese industrial management practice of forming Small Group Activity for the user and producer to understand the user's problems to evolve workable solutions.
As far as the IB was concerned, internal political intelligence appeared to be their focus. Functionally in critical internal situations in India the IB representatives had been forthcoming in sharing information of military interest. However, this does not apply to IB's political intelligence sharing with the army even in counter insurgency situation in India. However, in the case of counter insurgency operations in Sri Lanka, the fine line dividing political and operational intelligence got blurred. Perhaps the IB was not able to appreciate this need for forces operating in alien environment. That would explain its reluctance to share information of any kind relating to Sri Lanka with the IPKF.
The failure of the State police machinery to share intelligence relevant to the IPKF represented the dissonance in our national security perceptions. The failure of the Tamil Nadu Home Department to act in the interest of national security for political reasons had kept up the morale of LTTE fighting with our forces in Sri Lanka. This has been well documented in the Jain Commission report. The precedent set by Tamil Nadu Government during the IPKF operations on this count taking roots now in the political culture cannot be ruled out. To avoid a similar contingency arising in our future overseas operations, it would be prudent for the armed forces to handle with more alacrity by demanding clear mandates in advance with clear guidelines and responsibilities.
Intelligence in overseas operations of the future
The IPKF operations in the early stages were hastily conceived, inadequately planned and executed because there was a lack of role clarity. This was mainly due to the absence of an empowered national decision making body on national security at the government level. Similarly there was an inadequate framework for conducting combined operations overseas at the joint services level. Remedial action has been taken since then to address these limitations, though they might not be wholly satisfactory as the Kargil war had demonstrated. However, it is likely to improve as the nation gradually gains more experience in handling strategic security issues on a global perspective.
Intelligence on a real time basis will be the catalyst of success of armed forces in future overseas operations. MI will be required to meticulously plan and be ready to meet the intelligence requirements in overseas operations before and after the induction of troops. As sources of information have enlarged in scope and width, MI should be in a position to provide reasonable assessments in real time to forces operating in battle fields dominated by larger force levels, great mobility and high fire power. This would require a greater degree of intelligence integration of MI with its counterparts in other services as well as civil intelligence agencies. Thus there is an urgent need to integrate this need in perspective planning of operations for such contingencies.
To achieve such readiness, MI will require clear policy formulations applicable to the three services as well as civil intelligence agencies, better integration and coordination of inputs and assessments through a structured mechanism. It will also require coordinated advance planning by all the intelligence stakeholders at various levels.
Over the long term, MI will also have to build its own expertise in areas of potential operational interest. Ideally, a defence university will be the appropriate forum to create such knowledge banks. In the absence of such an institution, repositories of knowledge can be created in selected academies of excellence like university departments of defence studies so that there is continuity of effort. Intelligence Corps officers should be encouraged to specialise in regions or countries of national interest. Unless MI plans and evolves such an integrated intelligence matrix, success in future overseas operations will come only at great cost of men and material.
Military intelligence is a specialised job that requires the application of military knowledge to understand the information needs of the battle field and provide useful assessments to the fighting forces. In future operational environments, MI staff will be required to make real time assessments to assist operational decision making. No doubt the quantum jump in communication and information technology provides useful tools for the MI to meet this requirement. However, much of its success would depend upon the training imparted to intelligence staff to be technologically savvy in keeping with the dynamics of the emerging battle field needs.
With the nation poised to emerge as a regional power in the near future, MI has to transform itself into a technology driven organisation to meld TECHINT, ELINT, SIGINT and HUMINT inputs to meet the requirements of force projection overseas. Focus on intelligence management rather than mere information management has become the order of the day. That will remove the aberrations of intelligence acquisition and coordination at all levels and contribute meaningfully to operational planning and execution.
(Col. R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served as the head of intelligence of the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka 1987-90. He is associated with the South Asia Analysis Group and the Chennai Centre for China Studies. E-mail:colhari@yahoo.com)
US standing in Caspian drips away
Source : Asia Times Online
By M K Bhadrakumar
On Sunday, en route to Astana, Kazakhstan, after a "very nice trip to India", US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters accompanying her, "I just wish I could have stayed longer in India". New Delhi must be one of a handful of capitals where officials from the George W Bush administration receive an expectant welcome, and the doomsday warnings emitted from New York and Washington do not seem to matter.
But there was another reason for Rice's trepidation as her jet descended to Astana - US influence and prestige in Central Asia and the Caspian region has again plummeted. Rice realizes there is hardly any time left to retrieve lost ground, and the Bill Clinton administration's legacy in the Caspian and Central Asia has largely dissipated. Central to this has been the failure of the Bush
administration to handle relations with Russia. The stocktaking has already begun.
Writing in The Washington Post on Wednesday, former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George Shultz rebuked the Bush administration for its "drift towards confrontation with Russia" and pointed out that "isolating Russia is not a sustainable long-range policy". They said much of Europe is "uneasy". Their target was Rice, a self-styled "Sovietologist", and her inexcusably vitriolic attack on the Kremlin in a speech at the Marshall Fund of Germany in Washington on September 18.
Confrontational diplomacy
Kissinger and Shutlz particularly cautioned the Bush administration against encouraging confrontational diplomacy towards Russia by its neighbors, which would be counter-productive. Most certainly, there is already a backlash in the region. Azerbaijan, which the Bush administration once regarded as close regional ally, snubbed Vice President Dick Cheney during his visit to the capital, Baku, last month. Washington pretended not to notice, and deputed to Baku last week yet another top official - Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte - whom the State Department's website describes as Rice's "alter ego".
On arrival on October 2, Negroponte forthwith said he was carrying a "simple message" - that the US has "deep and abiding interests" in Azerbaijan and these are "important interests" which hold implications for regional and international security. He implied Washington that was not going to roll over and give way to Moscow in the southern Caucasus.
Against the backdrop of the conflict in the Caucasus in August, the Caspian Sea basin has become a focal point. This was inevitable. At the core lies Washington's determination to avoid Russian participation in the European energy-supply chain. To quote Ariel Cohen of US conservative think-tank the Heritage Foundation, "Since August, US diplomats have been busy trying to shore up Washington's geopolitical position all around the Caspian, including Baku, [Turkmenistan capital] Ashgabat and Astana."
Russia is gaining the upper hand in the region. Despite robust US diplomacy in Ashgabat - over 15 American delegations arrived there in the past year - Turkmenistan, which already exports around 50 billion cubic meters of its gas through Russia, has responded well to Moscow's overtures. It has decided to stick to the terms of an April 2003 deal whereby virtually all its exports are handled by Russia "up through 2025", and Turkmen gas exports to Russia are expected to rise to 60-70 billion cubic-meters by 2009, leaving hardly any surplus for Western companies. Ashgabat has also committed to the construction of a pipeline to Russia via Kazakhstan along the eastern coast of the Caspian Sea.
The clincher was Russia's offer to buy Turkmen gas at "European prices" - the same approach that Moscow adopted for securing control of Kazakh and Uzbek gas exports. Russia has since made a similar offer to Azerbaijan, which Baku is considering. Azerbaijan was the true success story of US oil diplomacy in the post-Soviet era. Clinton literally snatched it from Russia's orbit in the 1990s by pushing through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan [BTC] oil pipeline against seemingly impossible odds. Azerbaijan is now edging back toward Moscow.
It is negotiating with Russia an increase in the annual capacity of the Baku-Novorossiisk pipeline. Azerbaijan reducing its commitment to the US-supported Baku-Supsa and BTC pipelines, which have a massive capacity of 60 million tonnes annually and could easily handle Azeri oil exports, is a breakthrough for Russia.
Russia's resolute stance in the Caucasus has caught Baku's attention. Baku understands Russia's resurgence in the southern Caucasus, and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev dislikes the mercurial personality of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. Azerbaijan might have lost $500 million in revenues due to the suspension of oil transportation via the Baku-Supsa and Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipelines in August due to the conflict, and Baku's new interest in the Russian pipeline stems from a desire to protect its relationship with Moscow.
The implications are quite serious for Washington. Any reduction in the Azeri exports via BTC could impact the viability of the pipeline, which has been a cornerstone of US oil diplomacy in the Caspian, pumping early 1 million barrels of oil per day from Azerbaijan to Turkey's Mediterranean coast, where most of the supply is then shipped to Europe. The BTC pipeline looks secure for now, but has come under the increased watch of Russia.
Again, question marks have appeared regarding the future of the Nabucco gas pipeline, which, if constructed, would bypass Russian territory and bring Caspian gas from Azerbaijan via Georgia and Turkey to the European market. What if Azerbaijan accepts the Russian offer to buy gas at "European prices"? Has the Caucasus conflict fatally hurt Nabucco's prospects?
Russia comes out on top
There is indeed a new ambivalence in the geopolitics of the region. All across Western Europe, Eurasia and China countries are assimilating what happened in the Caucasus in August and are assessing their stakes vis-a-vis a resurgent Russia. They seek accommodation with Russia. Moscow has come out very much on top.
The war in Georgia has somewhat clouded the relations between Russia and the European Union. The final declaration of the EU summit on September 1 underscored the need to reduce energy dependence on Russia. But the EU's options, too, are limited. Europe has pinned its hopes on Nabucco, but it can only be implemented with Russian participation. Claude Mandil, former head of the International Energy Agency, said recently in an interview with the Russian daily Kommersant, "There is much oil and gas in Central Asia, but still less than in Russia or Iran."
Mandil, who advises French President Nicolas Sarkozy on energy issues, was critical of the US pressure on Europe to isolate Russia, calling it "counter-productive". He said, "The EU alone should decide the issue of energy security. The US itself is highly dependent on oil imports from Venezuela, but no EU members tell Washington that it's time to attend to that problem".
China also recognizes the Russian consolidation in the Caspian-Central Asian region. A commentary in the People's Daily in early September took note that Russia's Central Asia diplomacy has been "crowned with great success". It noted that visits by Russian leaders to Central Asian capitals in August helped "consolidate and strengthen" Moscow's ties with the region and achieved "substantial outcomes" in energy cooperation.
The Chinese commentary concluded: "Against a global backdrop of Russia's growing contradictions with the West � the high-level shuttle diplomacy of Russian leaders will further enhance Russia's strategic position in Central Asia, beef up the control of oil and gas resources and help coordinate the positions of Russia and these Central Asia nations on the Transcaucasia issue". Beijing has obviously made a realistic assessment of its own options in Central Asia.
In fact, during Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's visit to Tashkent on September 1-2, Uzbekistan and Russia agreed to build a new pipeline with a capacity of 26 to 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) annually to pump Uzbek and Turkmen gas to Europe. Such a pipeline will undermine the US efforts to develop a trans-Caspian energy route bypassing Russia. Again, Russia's LUKoil has announced plans to produce 12 bcm gas in Uzbekistan's Kandym and Gissar fields annually.
All in all, therefore, Rice's visit to Kazakhstan took place against a grim backdrop. Neither Azerbaijan nor Kazakhstan appears interested in US entreaties to re-route energy exports to bypass Russia. Both hope to maintain good relations with the US but that cannot be done by picking a quarrel with Russia. At a press conference with Rice in Astana on Sunday, Kazakh Foreign
Minister Marat Tazhin stressed relations with Russia will remain a top priority. "Our relationship with Russia, I can formulate, is just excellent. We have very good political relations. Russia is our strategic partner� At the same time, I should underline that our relationship with the United States has a stable, strategic character."
Neither Tazhin nor Kazakh President Nurusultan Nazarbayev apparently made any commitments to Rice regarding US-sponsored pipelines. On the contrary, addressing the media jointly with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev following the Russian-Kazakh border region forum in Aktyubinsk, Kazakhstan, on September 22, Nazarbayev said Kazakhstan will be increasing its oil production by 12 million metric tons in 2009 and it proposes to pump the additional oil via Russia. "It is very important that Kazakh oil should pass through Russia", he said.
Kashagan puzzle
Nazarbayev hinted Astana would use the Russian-controlled Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) to carry Kazakh crude from the Kashagan deposit in 2012-2013 to the Russian terminal on the Black Sea. Nurlan Balagimbayev, adviser to Nazarbayev, said on Thursday that Kazakhstan is interested in buying an additional 13.7% of stakes belonging to both BP and Oman in the CPC, in which Russia holds 24% besides Chevron, Shell and ExxonMobil.
Rice would have utilized her visit in Astana to check out Kashagan. Kazakhstan and a group of Western oil companies led by Italy's Eni are due to finalize details on Kashagan's future by October 25. A new operating company is expected to be formed and individual companies - Eni, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Japan's Inpex Holdings and Kazkhstan's KazMunaiGas - are likely to control different aspects of the operation such as production or shipping.
Kashagan is estimated to hold 7 billlion to 9 billion barrels of recoverable reserves and is undoubtedly the jewel in the crown of the Caspian Sea Basin. Several different routes are likely to be needed for delivering oil from Kashagan to customers, involving the construction of major new oil pipelines. Rice would have easily anticipated the keen rivalries that lie ahead in advance of the 2013 production start date of Kashagan. The battle for Kashagan is about to be joined.
The transportation route for the Kashagan will have a vital bearing on the long-term economic viability of the BTC pipeline. But Astana has shown no hurry so far in committing Kashagan oil to the BTC. Kazakhstan may well be playing for time and synchronizing with Russia's expected completion of the pipeline from East Siberia to the Pacific (ESPO) by 2012 for routing oil to the Asian markets.
Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko said on Wednesday that Kazakhstan's state-owned oil pipeline operator KazTransOil is interested in transporting Kazakh oil through the ESPO. "Our Kazakh partners are looking at the project with great interest and enthusiasm. We are happy about that", he said at a function launching a section of the ESPO between Talakan and Taishet. The Taishet-Talakan section of the ESPO line was completed in September, while the remaining stretch to Skovorodino, near the Chinese border, is scheduled to be completed by end-2009.
Will Astana decide to ship its projected oil output - 150 million tons a year by 2015 - through ESPO? If that happens, China will be a huge beneficiary and the geopolitics of the Caspian will undergo a historic transformation.
Russian-Kazakh "oil alliance"
Rice put on an appearance, saying, "This is not some kind of contest for the affection of Kazakhstan between the countries of the region". But it is very obvious that Washington is nervous Kazakhstan is showing alarming signs of shifting towards Moscow. Astana supported the Russian action in the Caucasus and cut down its investment in Georgia. If Rice was hopeful of encouraging Kazakhstan to stand up to Russian "bullying", she was disappointed.
On the eve of Rice's arrival in Astana, Nazarbayev said, "I personally was a witness to the fact that Georgia attacked first. I was in Beijing on August 8 with Mr Putin, when we first heard the news. I think the coverage of those events was biased. Whoever you may blame for the conflict, the facts are bad enough."
Since assuming office in the Kremlin on May 7, Medvedev has visited Kazakhstan three times. During his last visit, he promised, "We [Russia and Kazakhstan] will keep building up the production and the export of hydrocarbon raw materials, build new pipelines when it is beneficial and necessary, and attract large-scale investment into the fuel and energy sector."
On Wednesday, while on a visit to Almaty, Kazakhstan's largest city, the influential head of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) committee of the Russian parliament, Vadim Gustov, floated a new idea that the two countries needed to develop a common energy market. He said an "oil alliance" would be mutually advantageous.
"A common energy market of Russia and Kazakhstan would help develop energy cooperation, supply cheap energy resources to the domestic markets and increase energy supplies to third countries", Gustov said. According to him, Russia and Kazakhstan should develop and adopt a joint concept of the energy market, which could serve as basis for Euroasian Economic Community space.
Evidently, Washington is barely keeping pace with the Russian diplomacy. To make matters worse, the financial crisis at home has eroded US credibility. An entire ideology of economic development that US diplomats propagated in the region stands discredited.
There is huge political symbolism when Iceland expresses "disappointment" with the Western world and turns to Moscow for a 4 billion euro (US$5.5 billion) loan to salvage its economy from imminent bankruptcy. Such images make a lasting impression on the Central Asian steppes.
M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for more than 29 years, with postings including ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-98) and to Turkey (1998-2001).
(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)
By M K Bhadrakumar
On Sunday, en route to Astana, Kazakhstan, after a "very nice trip to India", US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters accompanying her, "I just wish I could have stayed longer in India". New Delhi must be one of a handful of capitals where officials from the George W Bush administration receive an expectant welcome, and the doomsday warnings emitted from New York and Washington do not seem to matter.
But there was another reason for Rice's trepidation as her jet descended to Astana - US influence and prestige in Central Asia and the Caspian region has again plummeted. Rice realizes there is hardly any time left to retrieve lost ground, and the Bill Clinton administration's legacy in the Caspian and Central Asia has largely dissipated. Central to this has been the failure of the Bush
administration to handle relations with Russia. The stocktaking has already begun.
Writing in The Washington Post on Wednesday, former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George Shultz rebuked the Bush administration for its "drift towards confrontation with Russia" and pointed out that "isolating Russia is not a sustainable long-range policy". They said much of Europe is "uneasy". Their target was Rice, a self-styled "Sovietologist", and her inexcusably vitriolic attack on the Kremlin in a speech at the Marshall Fund of Germany in Washington on September 18.
Confrontational diplomacy
Kissinger and Shutlz particularly cautioned the Bush administration against encouraging confrontational diplomacy towards Russia by its neighbors, which would be counter-productive. Most certainly, there is already a backlash in the region. Azerbaijan, which the Bush administration once regarded as close regional ally, snubbed Vice President Dick Cheney during his visit to the capital, Baku, last month. Washington pretended not to notice, and deputed to Baku last week yet another top official - Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte - whom the State Department's website describes as Rice's "alter ego".
On arrival on October 2, Negroponte forthwith said he was carrying a "simple message" - that the US has "deep and abiding interests" in Azerbaijan and these are "important interests" which hold implications for regional and international security. He implied Washington that was not going to roll over and give way to Moscow in the southern Caucasus.
Against the backdrop of the conflict in the Caucasus in August, the Caspian Sea basin has become a focal point. This was inevitable. At the core lies Washington's determination to avoid Russian participation in the European energy-supply chain. To quote Ariel Cohen of US conservative think-tank the Heritage Foundation, "Since August, US diplomats have been busy trying to shore up Washington's geopolitical position all around the Caspian, including Baku, [Turkmenistan capital] Ashgabat and Astana."
Russia is gaining the upper hand in the region. Despite robust US diplomacy in Ashgabat - over 15 American delegations arrived there in the past year - Turkmenistan, which already exports around 50 billion cubic meters of its gas through Russia, has responded well to Moscow's overtures. It has decided to stick to the terms of an April 2003 deal whereby virtually all its exports are handled by Russia "up through 2025", and Turkmen gas exports to Russia are expected to rise to 60-70 billion cubic-meters by 2009, leaving hardly any surplus for Western companies. Ashgabat has also committed to the construction of a pipeline to Russia via Kazakhstan along the eastern coast of the Caspian Sea.
The clincher was Russia's offer to buy Turkmen gas at "European prices" - the same approach that Moscow adopted for securing control of Kazakh and Uzbek gas exports. Russia has since made a similar offer to Azerbaijan, which Baku is considering. Azerbaijan was the true success story of US oil diplomacy in the post-Soviet era. Clinton literally snatched it from Russia's orbit in the 1990s by pushing through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan [BTC] oil pipeline against seemingly impossible odds. Azerbaijan is now edging back toward Moscow.
It is negotiating with Russia an increase in the annual capacity of the Baku-Novorossiisk pipeline. Azerbaijan reducing its commitment to the US-supported Baku-Supsa and BTC pipelines, which have a massive capacity of 60 million tonnes annually and could easily handle Azeri oil exports, is a breakthrough for Russia.
Russia's resolute stance in the Caucasus has caught Baku's attention. Baku understands Russia's resurgence in the southern Caucasus, and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev dislikes the mercurial personality of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. Azerbaijan might have lost $500 million in revenues due to the suspension of oil transportation via the Baku-Supsa and Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipelines in August due to the conflict, and Baku's new interest in the Russian pipeline stems from a desire to protect its relationship with Moscow.
The implications are quite serious for Washington. Any reduction in the Azeri exports via BTC could impact the viability of the pipeline, which has been a cornerstone of US oil diplomacy in the Caspian, pumping early 1 million barrels of oil per day from Azerbaijan to Turkey's Mediterranean coast, where most of the supply is then shipped to Europe. The BTC pipeline looks secure for now, but has come under the increased watch of Russia.
Again, question marks have appeared regarding the future of the Nabucco gas pipeline, which, if constructed, would bypass Russian territory and bring Caspian gas from Azerbaijan via Georgia and Turkey to the European market. What if Azerbaijan accepts the Russian offer to buy gas at "European prices"? Has the Caucasus conflict fatally hurt Nabucco's prospects?
Russia comes out on top
There is indeed a new ambivalence in the geopolitics of the region. All across Western Europe, Eurasia and China countries are assimilating what happened in the Caucasus in August and are assessing their stakes vis-a-vis a resurgent Russia. They seek accommodation with Russia. Moscow has come out very much on top.
The war in Georgia has somewhat clouded the relations between Russia and the European Union. The final declaration of the EU summit on September 1 underscored the need to reduce energy dependence on Russia. But the EU's options, too, are limited. Europe has pinned its hopes on Nabucco, but it can only be implemented with Russian participation. Claude Mandil, former head of the International Energy Agency, said recently in an interview with the Russian daily Kommersant, "There is much oil and gas in Central Asia, but still less than in Russia or Iran."
Mandil, who advises French President Nicolas Sarkozy on energy issues, was critical of the US pressure on Europe to isolate Russia, calling it "counter-productive". He said, "The EU alone should decide the issue of energy security. The US itself is highly dependent on oil imports from Venezuela, but no EU members tell Washington that it's time to attend to that problem".
China also recognizes the Russian consolidation in the Caspian-Central Asian region. A commentary in the People's Daily in early September took note that Russia's Central Asia diplomacy has been "crowned with great success". It noted that visits by Russian leaders to Central Asian capitals in August helped "consolidate and strengthen" Moscow's ties with the region and achieved "substantial outcomes" in energy cooperation.
The Chinese commentary concluded: "Against a global backdrop of Russia's growing contradictions with the West � the high-level shuttle diplomacy of Russian leaders will further enhance Russia's strategic position in Central Asia, beef up the control of oil and gas resources and help coordinate the positions of Russia and these Central Asia nations on the Transcaucasia issue". Beijing has obviously made a realistic assessment of its own options in Central Asia.
In fact, during Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's visit to Tashkent on September 1-2, Uzbekistan and Russia agreed to build a new pipeline with a capacity of 26 to 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) annually to pump Uzbek and Turkmen gas to Europe. Such a pipeline will undermine the US efforts to develop a trans-Caspian energy route bypassing Russia. Again, Russia's LUKoil has announced plans to produce 12 bcm gas in Uzbekistan's Kandym and Gissar fields annually.
All in all, therefore, Rice's visit to Kazakhstan took place against a grim backdrop. Neither Azerbaijan nor Kazakhstan appears interested in US entreaties to re-route energy exports to bypass Russia. Both hope to maintain good relations with the US but that cannot be done by picking a quarrel with Russia. At a press conference with Rice in Astana on Sunday, Kazakh Foreign
Minister Marat Tazhin stressed relations with Russia will remain a top priority. "Our relationship with Russia, I can formulate, is just excellent. We have very good political relations. Russia is our strategic partner� At the same time, I should underline that our relationship with the United States has a stable, strategic character."
Neither Tazhin nor Kazakh President Nurusultan Nazarbayev apparently made any commitments to Rice regarding US-sponsored pipelines. On the contrary, addressing the media jointly with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev following the Russian-Kazakh border region forum in Aktyubinsk, Kazakhstan, on September 22, Nazarbayev said Kazakhstan will be increasing its oil production by 12 million metric tons in 2009 and it proposes to pump the additional oil via Russia. "It is very important that Kazakh oil should pass through Russia", he said.
Kashagan puzzle
Nazarbayev hinted Astana would use the Russian-controlled Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) to carry Kazakh crude from the Kashagan deposit in 2012-2013 to the Russian terminal on the Black Sea. Nurlan Balagimbayev, adviser to Nazarbayev, said on Thursday that Kazakhstan is interested in buying an additional 13.7% of stakes belonging to both BP and Oman in the CPC, in which Russia holds 24% besides Chevron, Shell and ExxonMobil.
Rice would have utilized her visit in Astana to check out Kashagan. Kazakhstan and a group of Western oil companies led by Italy's Eni are due to finalize details on Kashagan's future by October 25. A new operating company is expected to be formed and individual companies - Eni, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Japan's Inpex Holdings and Kazkhstan's KazMunaiGas - are likely to control different aspects of the operation such as production or shipping.
Kashagan is estimated to hold 7 billlion to 9 billion barrels of recoverable reserves and is undoubtedly the jewel in the crown of the Caspian Sea Basin. Several different routes are likely to be needed for delivering oil from Kashagan to customers, involving the construction of major new oil pipelines. Rice would have easily anticipated the keen rivalries that lie ahead in advance of the 2013 production start date of Kashagan. The battle for Kashagan is about to be joined.
The transportation route for the Kashagan will have a vital bearing on the long-term economic viability of the BTC pipeline. But Astana has shown no hurry so far in committing Kashagan oil to the BTC. Kazakhstan may well be playing for time and synchronizing with Russia's expected completion of the pipeline from East Siberia to the Pacific (ESPO) by 2012 for routing oil to the Asian markets.
Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko said on Wednesday that Kazakhstan's state-owned oil pipeline operator KazTransOil is interested in transporting Kazakh oil through the ESPO. "Our Kazakh partners are looking at the project with great interest and enthusiasm. We are happy about that", he said at a function launching a section of the ESPO between Talakan and Taishet. The Taishet-Talakan section of the ESPO line was completed in September, while the remaining stretch to Skovorodino, near the Chinese border, is scheduled to be completed by end-2009.
Will Astana decide to ship its projected oil output - 150 million tons a year by 2015 - through ESPO? If that happens, China will be a huge beneficiary and the geopolitics of the Caspian will undergo a historic transformation.
Russian-Kazakh "oil alliance"
Rice put on an appearance, saying, "This is not some kind of contest for the affection of Kazakhstan between the countries of the region". But it is very obvious that Washington is nervous Kazakhstan is showing alarming signs of shifting towards Moscow. Astana supported the Russian action in the Caucasus and cut down its investment in Georgia. If Rice was hopeful of encouraging Kazakhstan to stand up to Russian "bullying", she was disappointed.
On the eve of Rice's arrival in Astana, Nazarbayev said, "I personally was a witness to the fact that Georgia attacked first. I was in Beijing on August 8 with Mr Putin, when we first heard the news. I think the coverage of those events was biased. Whoever you may blame for the conflict, the facts are bad enough."
Since assuming office in the Kremlin on May 7, Medvedev has visited Kazakhstan three times. During his last visit, he promised, "We [Russia and Kazakhstan] will keep building up the production and the export of hydrocarbon raw materials, build new pipelines when it is beneficial and necessary, and attract large-scale investment into the fuel and energy sector."
On Wednesday, while on a visit to Almaty, Kazakhstan's largest city, the influential head of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) committee of the Russian parliament, Vadim Gustov, floated a new idea that the two countries needed to develop a common energy market. He said an "oil alliance" would be mutually advantageous.
"A common energy market of Russia and Kazakhstan would help develop energy cooperation, supply cheap energy resources to the domestic markets and increase energy supplies to third countries", Gustov said. According to him, Russia and Kazakhstan should develop and adopt a joint concept of the energy market, which could serve as basis for Euroasian Economic Community space.
Evidently, Washington is barely keeping pace with the Russian diplomacy. To make matters worse, the financial crisis at home has eroded US credibility. An entire ideology of economic development that US diplomats propagated in the region stands discredited.
There is huge political symbolism when Iceland expresses "disappointment" with the Western world and turns to Moscow for a 4 billion euro (US$5.5 billion) loan to salvage its economy from imminent bankruptcy. Such images make a lasting impression on the Central Asian steppes.
M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for more than 29 years, with postings including ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-98) and to Turkey (1998-2001).
(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)
October 14, 2008
JALGAON MURDER CASE: More on the Jalgaon case and Pratibha Patil
Source OFFSTUMPED
• CBI wilts under intense questioning by Bombay High Court
• Court not satisfied with CBI’s investigation of the role of Dr. G.N. Patil, brother of Smt. Pratibha Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil, “masterminds” in the murder of Congress leader Prof. V.G. Patil
MUMBAI – 14 October 2008
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) today had a difficult time answering questions raised by a division bench of the Bombay High Court hearing a petition by Smt. Rajni Patil, widow of Prof. V.G. Patil, president of the Jalgaon District Congress Committee, who was murdered on 21 September 2005.
Smt. Patil, in her petition filed in the Bombay High Court on 17 July 2007, has accused that the real conspirators behind the crime are Dr. G.N. Patil, brother of the President of India Smt. Pratibha Patil and a political rival of Prof. V.G. Patil, and Dr. Ulhas Patil, former Congress MP from the city. She has also held that although Raju Mali and Raju Sonawane were the actual assailants, Damodar Lokhande and Leeladhar Narkhede were the intermediaries who gave them the ‘supari’ at the behest of Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil.
The Bombay High Court admitted the petition and has been monitoring the investigation by the CBI.
In June 2008, the CBI filed a chargesheet against Mali (who died in mysterious circumstance while in judicial custody in April 2007) and Sonawane. Shri Mahesh Jethmalani, counsel for Smt. Patil, had argued that the CBI was acting under political pressure to exonerate not only the two “masterminds” but also the two “intermediaries”. He then filed comprehensive Written Submissions showing the involvement of all four in the murder.
On 6 October 2008, the CBI filed a supplementary chargesheet naming Lokhande and Narkhede also as the accused. The agency informed the Court that, with this latest chargesheet, it had completed its investigation and wanted the Court to end its monitoring of the same. In the hearing on 10 October, Shri Jethmalani had argued that, in exonerating G.N. Patil and Ulhas Patil, the CBI was again engaged in a cover-up under pressure from powerful and highly placed individuals.
The division bench comprising Justice F I Rebello and Justice Ashutosh Kumbhakoni had assured the petitioner on that day that they would examine all the statements and documents furnished by the CBI so far. It also allowed the petitioner to file an additional affidavit on 14 October.
When the matter came up for hearing today, the Court asked CBI Counsel Shri U.D. Salvi a pertinent question arising out of the witness statement of Smt. Rekha Mali, wife of the deceased principal assassin. According to her, Raju Mali, while in jail, had asked her in early 2006 to contact G.N. Patil for assistance in getting bail. She has affirmed that she met G.N. Patil, who assured her that bail would be granted to her husband within a short period.
The Court asked CBI Counsel: “If G.N. Patil had nothing to do with the case, why did Raju Mali ask his wife to meet him for bail and why did he give her assurance in the matter? And did the CBI interrogate G.N. Patil to get his response to Rekha Mali’s statement?”
CBI Counsel admitted that the agency did not interrogate G.N. Patil in the matter. At this point, the Court observed: “When a major witness says something important and the agency does not even follow up on it, how can you be satisfied with your own investigation? And if you cannot satisfy the Court, how can you satisfy the petitioner who has lost her husband?”
The CBI also had no satisfactory explanation when the Court asked questions about the “motive” behind the murder.
In addition to the petitioner, two other crucial witnesses — Shri Rajiv Patil, former Working President of DCC Jalgaon and Shri Avinash Bhalerao, President of the District Youth Congress Jalgaon — also filed affidavits today. All three have questioned the CBI’s contention that G.N. Patil and Ulhas Patil had nothing to do with the murder.
Interestingly, the CBI had used the witness statements of Shri Rajiv Patil and Shri Avinash Bhalerao as the basis for naming Lokhande and Narkhede as the accused, while absolving G.N.Patil and Ulhas Patil.
The matter has been adjourned to 21 November to enable the CBI to give an explanation on the questions asked by the Court and also to file its reply to the affidavits of Rajni Patil and others.
• CBI wilts under intense questioning by Bombay High Court
• Court not satisfied with CBI’s investigation of the role of Dr. G.N. Patil, brother of Smt. Pratibha Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil, “masterminds” in the murder of Congress leader Prof. V.G. Patil
MUMBAI – 14 October 2008
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) today had a difficult time answering questions raised by a division bench of the Bombay High Court hearing a petition by Smt. Rajni Patil, widow of Prof. V.G. Patil, president of the Jalgaon District Congress Committee, who was murdered on 21 September 2005.
Smt. Patil, in her petition filed in the Bombay High Court on 17 July 2007, has accused that the real conspirators behind the crime are Dr. G.N. Patil, brother of the President of India Smt. Pratibha Patil and a political rival of Prof. V.G. Patil, and Dr. Ulhas Patil, former Congress MP from the city. She has also held that although Raju Mali and Raju Sonawane were the actual assailants, Damodar Lokhande and Leeladhar Narkhede were the intermediaries who gave them the ‘supari’ at the behest of Dr. G.N. Patil and Dr. Ulhas Patil.
The Bombay High Court admitted the petition and has been monitoring the investigation by the CBI.
In June 2008, the CBI filed a chargesheet against Mali (who died in mysterious circumstance while in judicial custody in April 2007) and Sonawane. Shri Mahesh Jethmalani, counsel for Smt. Patil, had argued that the CBI was acting under political pressure to exonerate not only the two “masterminds” but also the two “intermediaries”. He then filed comprehensive Written Submissions showing the involvement of all four in the murder.
On 6 October 2008, the CBI filed a supplementary chargesheet naming Lokhande and Narkhede also as the accused. The agency informed the Court that, with this latest chargesheet, it had completed its investigation and wanted the Court to end its monitoring of the same. In the hearing on 10 October, Shri Jethmalani had argued that, in exonerating G.N. Patil and Ulhas Patil, the CBI was again engaged in a cover-up under pressure from powerful and highly placed individuals.
The division bench comprising Justice F I Rebello and Justice Ashutosh Kumbhakoni had assured the petitioner on that day that they would examine all the statements and documents furnished by the CBI so far. It also allowed the petitioner to file an additional affidavit on 14 October.
When the matter came up for hearing today, the Court asked CBI Counsel Shri U.D. Salvi a pertinent question arising out of the witness statement of Smt. Rekha Mali, wife of the deceased principal assassin. According to her, Raju Mali, while in jail, had asked her in early 2006 to contact G.N. Patil for assistance in getting bail. She has affirmed that she met G.N. Patil, who assured her that bail would be granted to her husband within a short period.
The Court asked CBI Counsel: “If G.N. Patil had nothing to do with the case, why did Raju Mali ask his wife to meet him for bail and why did he give her assurance in the matter? And did the CBI interrogate G.N. Patil to get his response to Rekha Mali’s statement?”
CBI Counsel admitted that the agency did not interrogate G.N. Patil in the matter. At this point, the Court observed: “When a major witness says something important and the agency does not even follow up on it, how can you be satisfied with your own investigation? And if you cannot satisfy the Court, how can you satisfy the petitioner who has lost her husband?”
The CBI also had no satisfactory explanation when the Court asked questions about the “motive” behind the murder.
In addition to the petitioner, two other crucial witnesses — Shri Rajiv Patil, former Working President of DCC Jalgaon and Shri Avinash Bhalerao, President of the District Youth Congress Jalgaon — also filed affidavits today. All three have questioned the CBI’s contention that G.N. Patil and Ulhas Patil had nothing to do with the murder.
Interestingly, the CBI had used the witness statements of Shri Rajiv Patil and Shri Avinash Bhalerao as the basis for naming Lokhande and Narkhede as the accused, while absolving G.N.Patil and Ulhas Patil.
The matter has been adjourned to 21 November to enable the CBI to give an explanation on the questions asked by the Court and also to file its reply to the affidavits of Rajni Patil and others.
When Corporations Spy
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/09/when-corporations-spy/
by Tom Burghardt / September 24th, 2008
As if illegal spying and dirty tricks by state agencies weren’t threat enough to democratic institutions and grassroots activist organizations, hundreds of corporate spy outfits are doing their part–to defend the “homeland” and the bottom line–for the multinational grifters who plunder the world’s wealth.
SourceWatch revealed that Hakluyt & Company, Ltd., a “British private intelligence agency … staffed almost entirely by ex-intelligence services staff,” was outed by a freelance journalist after the company sought to recruit her “services.” The group reported in August:
Melissa Sweet, a freelance Australian health journalist, reports that she recently received an email from a staffer with Hakluyt. In it she was asked if she would like to become part of a “network of well-placed individuals around the world who are able to provide us, very discreetly, with intelligence on specific commercial or political issues that may arise.” In particular, they were seeking her assistance for an anonymous “financial institution” client on “a new project on the new Australian government’s healthcare policy–how realistic their reform ambitions really are”, “the role of the private sector” and other matters. Sweet responded by pointing out that she was a journalist not a consultant. Undeterred, the Hakluyt staffer wrote back explaining that as a journalist she was likely to have “dozens of well-placed sources in the field” and that the company already has “a number of quality, usually specialist journalists that we deal with”. In 2001 Hakluyt was outed for infiltrating Greenpeace in Europe. (”Hakluyt & Company Limited,” SourceWatch, August 1, 2008)
The Sunday Times reported in 2001 that Hakluyt hired Manfred Schlickenrieder, a German foreign intelligence operative tasked by the firm to spy on Greenpeace at the behest of oil giants BP and Shell. According to The Sunday Times:
His political credentials seemed impeccable: he had once been chairman of the Munich branch of the German Communist party and the bookshelves of his office held the works of Bertolt Brecht, the Marxist playwright and poet.
Behind the facade, however, Schlickenrieder was a spy working for both the German secret service and for Hakluyt, a private intelligence agency based in London’s West End and set up by former officers of MI6, the secret intelligence service. His codename was Camus after Albert Camus, the existentialist author of L’Etranger.
Hakluyt paid him thousands of pounds to inform on the activities of Greenpeace, Anita Roddick’s Body Shop and other environmental campaigners. The BND, the German equivalent of MI6, allegedly paid him £3,125 a month living expenses. (Maurice Chittenden and Nicholas Rufford, “MI6 ‘Firm’ Spied on Green Groups,” The Sunday Times, June 17, 2001)
Also in 2001, after the Greenpeace scandal exploded, Christopher James, Hakluyt’s Managing Director, wrote to the disgraced CEO of Enron, the convicted felon Jeffrey Skilling, bragging of Hakluyt’s unique “services”:
The range of deployments we have completed for core clients is wide. In all cases we guarantee complete confidentiality. And, although we work for divisional directors on tactical issues, we have found our most rewarding work in personal dealings with CEOs who wish–for whatever reason–to have a confidential agency at their own disposal. It was this, which prompted Phil Carroll to write to you about us in April as he has found our work of considerable value to him personally. We look at people and the issues, which often drive them to make the decisions or act as they do. All our work is unattributable. [sic]
To sweeten the pot, James told Skilling,
We also have an association with Kissinger/McLarty Associates for although our work is very different the services we both provide can be complementary. Our US client base is increasing well but at the same time we wish to remain small and discreet. (Confidential email from Christopher James to Jeffrey Skilling, posted by Enron Explorer, July 8, 2001)
Talk about a small (and very greedy) world!
But Hakluyt wasn’t the only firm engaged in corporate espionage targeting green groups. As investigative journalist James Ridgeway reported last April,
A private security company organized and managed by former Secret Service officers spied on Greenpeace and other environmental organizations from the late 1990s through at least 2000, pilfering documents from trash bins, attempting to plant undercover operatives within groups, casing offices, collecting phone records of activists, and penetrating confidential meetings. According to company documents provided to Mother Jones by a former investor in the firm, this security outfit collected confidential internal records–donor lists, detailed financial statements, the Social Security numbers of staff members, strategy memos—from these organizations and produced intelligence reports for public relations firms and major corporations involved in environmental controversies. (”Cops and Former Secret Service Agents Ran Black Ops on Green Groups,” Mother Jones, April 11, 2008)
The firm, the now-defunct Beckett Brown International, provided a “range of services” for heavy-hitting corporate clients including Allied Waste, the Carlyle Group, Halliburton and Monsanto. Headquartered in Easton, Maryland, BBI “worked extensively” for public-relations firms Ketchum, Nichols-Dezenhall Communications, and Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin. According to Ridgeway,
At the time, these PR outfits were servicing corporate clients fighting environmental organizations opposed to their products or actions. Ketchum, for example, was working for Dow Chemical and Kraft Foods; Nichols-Dezenhall, according to BBI records, was working with Condea Vista, a chemical manufacturing firm that in 1994 leaked up to 47 million pounds of ethylene dichloride, a suspected carcinogen, into the Calcasieu River in Louisiana.
BBI was apparently good at what they did until the firm ran to ground in 2001, provoked by “infighting between the principals.” But don’t despair, Ridgeway tells us that “the firm’s officials went on to work in other security firms that remain active today.” Call it another prime example of keeping the “homeland safe”–and profitable–for the corporate grifters who ceaselessly labor to destroy “our way of life.” Their dream, our nightmare.
Big Budgets, Global Reach
With global reach, seemingly limitless budgets and often staffed by ex-military and security operatives, the world of private spying is a big business with a huge growth potential, particularly when citizens revolt against the sordid schemes of corporate polluters, defense contractors and resource grabbers.
Indeed, as legendary researcher Frank J. Donner documented in his landmark books, The Age of Surveillance and Protectors of Privilege, “a more functional public-private linkage is often found on the urban and state levels” where connections amongst right-wing groups, corporations and the government abound.
Historically, this nexus included organizations such as the semi-official Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit (LEIU), ultrarightist outfits such as the John Birch Society, Church League of America, the Minutemen, Legion of Justice, the American Security Council, and “legitimate” private detective agencies such Pinkerton, Kroll, Burns and Wackenhut.
But as the corporatist state totters on the brink of economic collapse, in no small part the result of greed and gross criminality by top-flight financial institutions, banks, investment firms and other corporate grifters linked to the Bush administration and the Republican and Democratic parties, the capitalist state will require a vast legion of private spooks to “keep the rabble in line.”
There certainly are plenty of them.
In 2006, the World Socialist Web Site reported that high-tech powerhouse Hewlett-Packard was caught red-handed in a corporate spies-for-hire scheme to stanch leaks.
The spying campaign, launched by H-P board Chairwoman Patricia Dunn in response to leaks to the press of internal corporate discussions, included surreptitiously obtaining the phone records of H-P board members and employees, surveillance of board members and journalists, and the emailing of spyware to journalists in an effort to learn the identity of their sources within the company.
Private telephone records on hundreds of cell and home telephones were obtained by a method called “pretexting,” in which investigators made repeated calls to telephone companies, pretending to be the individuals targeted, until they were able to convince a phone company employee to release the information. (Patrick Martin, “Hewlett-Packard spying scandal sheds new light on U.S. corporate ‘ethics’,” World Socialist Web Site, 2 October 2006)
The corporate spooks, their tradecraft acquired through years of practice as dodgy state operatives, were hired through a series of “cutouts” designed to provide top company officials with “plausible deniability” should their cover be blown.
Among the firms employed by H-P were the Boston-based Security Outsourcing Solutions (SOS). According to Martin, the “dirty work” was outsourced to Action Research Group (ARG) of Melbourne, Florida. A blurb on SOS’s website claims that the company will “work with internal security departments that do not have the expertise and or resources to address all of their organization’s security concerns.”
That’s rich, considering that H-P clocks in at No. 14 on the 2008 Fortune 500 list and recently agreed to pay $12.6 billion to buy out Electronic Data Systems! An additional subcontractor, Eye in the Sky Investigations, described itself as providing (as of 2004) “skip tracing services” for “the licensed private investigator, finance company, collection agency, recovery agency, bail bondsman, info brokers.” A handy list of charges for company “services” was even listed on Webspawner.
While ARG’s website is blocked, a simple Google search uncovered a “Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief” filed February 14, 2007 by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in United States Federal District Court, Orlando Division, against ARG and Eye in the Sky Investigations.
The complaint against corporate officers of the firms charged the companies with gross violations of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 for illegally obtaining “customer proprietary network information.”
Indeed the FTC accused ARG and other defendants in the suit with engaging in an egregious “invasion of privacy” of confidential customer phone records “likely to cause substantial harm to consumers.” According to court documents:
The account holders have not authorized Defendants to access or sell their confidential customer phone records. Instead, to obtain such information, Defendants have used or have caused others to use, false pretenses, fraudulent statements, fraudulent or stolen documents or other misrepresentations, including posing as an account holder or as an employee of the telecommunications carer [sic], to induce officers, employees, or agents of telecommunications carers [sic] to disclose confidential customer phone records. Defendants have sold the confidential customer phone records that they have obtained to their clients or others.
Sounds like business as usual to me!
The San Francisco Business Times reported in May that the named defendants agreed to pay some $600,000 to settle the case with the FTC for their role in the illegal H-P spying operation. Keep in mind, this is but one case in what must be a tsunami of illegal covert operations by American corporate behemoths!
Wal-Mart and Raytheon: Best Friends Forever!
While the hunt for “subversives,” often under the direction of corporate associations such as the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Chamber of Commerce and related “defense” industry trade and lobby shops, occupied corporate spooks during the McCarthy period, by the late 1970s and down to the present moment, environmental, labor, antiwar, antinuclear, antiglobalization and increasingly, civil liberties and privacy advocates have entered the frame, often with a vengeance.
Indeed, according to Wal-Mart Watch, the retail giant’s Threat Research and Analysis Group conducted extensive spying operations against critics and employees until it was revealed by a whistleblower. Bruce Gabbard told The Wall Street Journal,
Wal-Mart began beefing up its electronic call surveillance after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in response to government requests to employers in general to help find terrorist cells. Mr. Gabbard says he was directed by two former FBI agents working for Wal-Mart to set up a system that could track any calls to and from Syria, Yemen and Iran, among other countries. The search was unsuccessful, only flagging an apparent call from Iran that turned out instead to be from an Indian jeweler, according to Mr. Gabbard.
Later, he says, he used the same equipment to intercept and record calls from the New York Times. (Ann Zimmerman and Gary McWilliams, “Inside Wal-Mart’s ‘Threat Research’ Operation,” The Wall Street Journal, April 4, 2007, Page B1)
Wal-Mart whistleblower Gabbard said the electronic surveillance “accelerated” in 2005 when leaked documents began appearing on the website of the pro-union group Wal-Mart Watch. One memo “suggested” that because of rising healthcare costs and criticism of the corporate giant’s policies “the retailer should revise its policies by hiring healthier workers and requiring all jobs to perform physical activity, such as retrieving shopping carts.”
According to the Journal, Wal-Mart began working with Oakley Networks Inc., a developer of “insider threat management” gear to surveil employee computer usage over the retail giant’s network. Indeed, the Journal reports that one Oakley system is capable of recording an employee’s keystrokes “and deliver a TiVo-like replay of his or her computing activities.”
While confirming the “advanced capabilities” of its system, Oakley Networks refused to identify its customers “apart from the U.S. Defense Department.” Zimmerman and McWilliams reported that “the system goes beyond keystroke capture products and email filtering packages” providing “a view of content” moving across a targeted network.
Oakley Networks Inc., now a wholly owned subsidiary of Raytheon (Raytheon Oakley), was founded in 2001 and “acquired” in 2007 by the defense giant. It is now a major component of Raytheon’s “Intelligence and information Systems (IIS) business.” According to a blurb on their website, “Raytheon Oakley protects 10 of the Fortune 100 banking, technology, manufacturing and other critical commercial infrastructure companies.” Washington Technology reported “terms [of the deal] were not disclosed.”
And with “security” in the heimat the latest frontier to be conquered by “war on terror” corporate profiteers, is it any wonder that private surveillance has become a lucrative growth industry. Indeed, there’s even a trade association, the Homeland Security Industries Association (HSIA)! A Washington, D.C.-based lobby group, HSIA describes its mission as providing “a mechanism for government and the private sector to coordinate on a wide range of homeland security issues.”
And do they ever coordinate!
Members include corporate heavy-hitters such as Bechtel, Fluor Corp., Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Textron and Washington Group International. Mid-sized firms such as E.J. Krause & Associates, Intelsat Government Solutions, Galileo International, Shaw Group, and Worldwide Security Associates. Additionally, smaller firms and universities include AR Challenges, Georgetown University, Intelliorg, the John Hopkins Applied Physics Lab, and QED are saddled-up in HSIA’s stable.
As USA Today reported back in 2006,
Without another major terrorist attack like those of 9/11, Homeland Security Research, the industry tracker, expects the market for security goods and services to increase to $178 billion in 2015, or triple its current value.
But a major attack in the United States, Europe or Japan could increase the global market in 2015 to $730 billion, more than a twelvefold increase, the company says.
Most of the growth this decade will come from building what Homeland Security Research calls “a homeland defense infrastructure.” Growth areas are likely to include technology for surveillance and for detection of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. (Gary Stoller, “Homeland security generates multibillion business,” USA Today, September 10, 2006)
As can be seen from this overview, corporate spying like “outsourcing” state security and intelligence functions to corporatist “partners” are another means of providing “plausible deniability,” global reach and maximum capabilities in the subversion of democratic institutions in the service of imperialist Empire.
We can be certain of this: as the American economic house of cards continues its epochal collapse, a viper’s nest of state and private intelligence operatives will be unleashed upon the American people.
Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly, Love & Rage and Antifa Forum, he is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military "Civil Disturbance" Planning, distributed by AK Press. Read other articles by Tom, or visit Tom's website.
by Tom Burghardt / September 24th, 2008
As if illegal spying and dirty tricks by state agencies weren’t threat enough to democratic institutions and grassroots activist organizations, hundreds of corporate spy outfits are doing their part–to defend the “homeland” and the bottom line–for the multinational grifters who plunder the world’s wealth.
SourceWatch revealed that Hakluyt & Company, Ltd., a “British private intelligence agency … staffed almost entirely by ex-intelligence services staff,” was outed by a freelance journalist after the company sought to recruit her “services.” The group reported in August:
Melissa Sweet, a freelance Australian health journalist, reports that she recently received an email from a staffer with Hakluyt. In it she was asked if she would like to become part of a “network of well-placed individuals around the world who are able to provide us, very discreetly, with intelligence on specific commercial or political issues that may arise.” In particular, they were seeking her assistance for an anonymous “financial institution” client on “a new project on the new Australian government’s healthcare policy–how realistic their reform ambitions really are”, “the role of the private sector” and other matters. Sweet responded by pointing out that she was a journalist not a consultant. Undeterred, the Hakluyt staffer wrote back explaining that as a journalist she was likely to have “dozens of well-placed sources in the field” and that the company already has “a number of quality, usually specialist journalists that we deal with”. In 2001 Hakluyt was outed for infiltrating Greenpeace in Europe. (”Hakluyt & Company Limited,” SourceWatch, August 1, 2008)
The Sunday Times reported in 2001 that Hakluyt hired Manfred Schlickenrieder, a German foreign intelligence operative tasked by the firm to spy on Greenpeace at the behest of oil giants BP and Shell. According to The Sunday Times:
His political credentials seemed impeccable: he had once been chairman of the Munich branch of the German Communist party and the bookshelves of his office held the works of Bertolt Brecht, the Marxist playwright and poet.
Behind the facade, however, Schlickenrieder was a spy working for both the German secret service and for Hakluyt, a private intelligence agency based in London’s West End and set up by former officers of MI6, the secret intelligence service. His codename was Camus after Albert Camus, the existentialist author of L’Etranger.
Hakluyt paid him thousands of pounds to inform on the activities of Greenpeace, Anita Roddick’s Body Shop and other environmental campaigners. The BND, the German equivalent of MI6, allegedly paid him £3,125 a month living expenses. (Maurice Chittenden and Nicholas Rufford, “MI6 ‘Firm’ Spied on Green Groups,” The Sunday Times, June 17, 2001)
Also in 2001, after the Greenpeace scandal exploded, Christopher James, Hakluyt’s Managing Director, wrote to the disgraced CEO of Enron, the convicted felon Jeffrey Skilling, bragging of Hakluyt’s unique “services”:
The range of deployments we have completed for core clients is wide. In all cases we guarantee complete confidentiality. And, although we work for divisional directors on tactical issues, we have found our most rewarding work in personal dealings with CEOs who wish–for whatever reason–to have a confidential agency at their own disposal. It was this, which prompted Phil Carroll to write to you about us in April as he has found our work of considerable value to him personally. We look at people and the issues, which often drive them to make the decisions or act as they do. All our work is unattributable. [sic]
To sweeten the pot, James told Skilling,
We also have an association with Kissinger/McLarty Associates for although our work is very different the services we both provide can be complementary. Our US client base is increasing well but at the same time we wish to remain small and discreet. (Confidential email from Christopher James to Jeffrey Skilling, posted by Enron Explorer, July 8, 2001)
Talk about a small (and very greedy) world!
But Hakluyt wasn’t the only firm engaged in corporate espionage targeting green groups. As investigative journalist James Ridgeway reported last April,
A private security company organized and managed by former Secret Service officers spied on Greenpeace and other environmental organizations from the late 1990s through at least 2000, pilfering documents from trash bins, attempting to plant undercover operatives within groups, casing offices, collecting phone records of activists, and penetrating confidential meetings. According to company documents provided to Mother Jones by a former investor in the firm, this security outfit collected confidential internal records–donor lists, detailed financial statements, the Social Security numbers of staff members, strategy memos—from these organizations and produced intelligence reports for public relations firms and major corporations involved in environmental controversies. (”Cops and Former Secret Service Agents Ran Black Ops on Green Groups,” Mother Jones, April 11, 2008)
The firm, the now-defunct Beckett Brown International, provided a “range of services” for heavy-hitting corporate clients including Allied Waste, the Carlyle Group, Halliburton and Monsanto. Headquartered in Easton, Maryland, BBI “worked extensively” for public-relations firms Ketchum, Nichols-Dezenhall Communications, and Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin. According to Ridgeway,
At the time, these PR outfits were servicing corporate clients fighting environmental organizations opposed to their products or actions. Ketchum, for example, was working for Dow Chemical and Kraft Foods; Nichols-Dezenhall, according to BBI records, was working with Condea Vista, a chemical manufacturing firm that in 1994 leaked up to 47 million pounds of ethylene dichloride, a suspected carcinogen, into the Calcasieu River in Louisiana.
BBI was apparently good at what they did until the firm ran to ground in 2001, provoked by “infighting between the principals.” But don’t despair, Ridgeway tells us that “the firm’s officials went on to work in other security firms that remain active today.” Call it another prime example of keeping the “homeland safe”–and profitable–for the corporate grifters who ceaselessly labor to destroy “our way of life.” Their dream, our nightmare.
Big Budgets, Global Reach
With global reach, seemingly limitless budgets and often staffed by ex-military and security operatives, the world of private spying is a big business with a huge growth potential, particularly when citizens revolt against the sordid schemes of corporate polluters, defense contractors and resource grabbers.
Indeed, as legendary researcher Frank J. Donner documented in his landmark books, The Age of Surveillance and Protectors of Privilege, “a more functional public-private linkage is often found on the urban and state levels” where connections amongst right-wing groups, corporations and the government abound.
Historically, this nexus included organizations such as the semi-official Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit (LEIU), ultrarightist outfits such as the John Birch Society, Church League of America, the Minutemen, Legion of Justice, the American Security Council, and “legitimate” private detective agencies such Pinkerton, Kroll, Burns and Wackenhut.
But as the corporatist state totters on the brink of economic collapse, in no small part the result of greed and gross criminality by top-flight financial institutions, banks, investment firms and other corporate grifters linked to the Bush administration and the Republican and Democratic parties, the capitalist state will require a vast legion of private spooks to “keep the rabble in line.”
There certainly are plenty of them.
In 2006, the World Socialist Web Site reported that high-tech powerhouse Hewlett-Packard was caught red-handed in a corporate spies-for-hire scheme to stanch leaks.
The spying campaign, launched by H-P board Chairwoman Patricia Dunn in response to leaks to the press of internal corporate discussions, included surreptitiously obtaining the phone records of H-P board members and employees, surveillance of board members and journalists, and the emailing of spyware to journalists in an effort to learn the identity of their sources within the company.
Private telephone records on hundreds of cell and home telephones were obtained by a method called “pretexting,” in which investigators made repeated calls to telephone companies, pretending to be the individuals targeted, until they were able to convince a phone company employee to release the information. (Patrick Martin, “Hewlett-Packard spying scandal sheds new light on U.S. corporate ‘ethics’,” World Socialist Web Site, 2 October 2006)
The corporate spooks, their tradecraft acquired through years of practice as dodgy state operatives, were hired through a series of “cutouts” designed to provide top company officials with “plausible deniability” should their cover be blown.
Among the firms employed by H-P were the Boston-based Security Outsourcing Solutions (SOS). According to Martin, the “dirty work” was outsourced to Action Research Group (ARG) of Melbourne, Florida. A blurb on SOS’s website claims that the company will “work with internal security departments that do not have the expertise and or resources to address all of their organization’s security concerns.”
That’s rich, considering that H-P clocks in at No. 14 on the 2008 Fortune 500 list and recently agreed to pay $12.6 billion to buy out Electronic Data Systems! An additional subcontractor, Eye in the Sky Investigations, described itself as providing (as of 2004) “skip tracing services” for “the licensed private investigator, finance company, collection agency, recovery agency, bail bondsman, info brokers.” A handy list of charges for company “services” was even listed on Webspawner.
While ARG’s website is blocked, a simple Google search uncovered a “Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief” filed February 14, 2007 by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in United States Federal District Court, Orlando Division, against ARG and Eye in the Sky Investigations.
The complaint against corporate officers of the firms charged the companies with gross violations of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 for illegally obtaining “customer proprietary network information.”
Indeed the FTC accused ARG and other defendants in the suit with engaging in an egregious “invasion of privacy” of confidential customer phone records “likely to cause substantial harm to consumers.” According to court documents:
The account holders have not authorized Defendants to access or sell their confidential customer phone records. Instead, to obtain such information, Defendants have used or have caused others to use, false pretenses, fraudulent statements, fraudulent or stolen documents or other misrepresentations, including posing as an account holder or as an employee of the telecommunications carer [sic], to induce officers, employees, or agents of telecommunications carers [sic] to disclose confidential customer phone records. Defendants have sold the confidential customer phone records that they have obtained to their clients or others.
Sounds like business as usual to me!
The San Francisco Business Times reported in May that the named defendants agreed to pay some $600,000 to settle the case with the FTC for their role in the illegal H-P spying operation. Keep in mind, this is but one case in what must be a tsunami of illegal covert operations by American corporate behemoths!
Wal-Mart and Raytheon: Best Friends Forever!
While the hunt for “subversives,” often under the direction of corporate associations such as the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Chamber of Commerce and related “defense” industry trade and lobby shops, occupied corporate spooks during the McCarthy period, by the late 1970s and down to the present moment, environmental, labor, antiwar, antinuclear, antiglobalization and increasingly, civil liberties and privacy advocates have entered the frame, often with a vengeance.
Indeed, according to Wal-Mart Watch, the retail giant’s Threat Research and Analysis Group conducted extensive spying operations against critics and employees until it was revealed by a whistleblower. Bruce Gabbard told The Wall Street Journal,
Wal-Mart began beefing up its electronic call surveillance after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in response to government requests to employers in general to help find terrorist cells. Mr. Gabbard says he was directed by two former FBI agents working for Wal-Mart to set up a system that could track any calls to and from Syria, Yemen and Iran, among other countries. The search was unsuccessful, only flagging an apparent call from Iran that turned out instead to be from an Indian jeweler, according to Mr. Gabbard.
Later, he says, he used the same equipment to intercept and record calls from the New York Times. (Ann Zimmerman and Gary McWilliams, “Inside Wal-Mart’s ‘Threat Research’ Operation,” The Wall Street Journal, April 4, 2007, Page B1)
Wal-Mart whistleblower Gabbard said the electronic surveillance “accelerated” in 2005 when leaked documents began appearing on the website of the pro-union group Wal-Mart Watch. One memo “suggested” that because of rising healthcare costs and criticism of the corporate giant’s policies “the retailer should revise its policies by hiring healthier workers and requiring all jobs to perform physical activity, such as retrieving shopping carts.”
According to the Journal, Wal-Mart began working with Oakley Networks Inc., a developer of “insider threat management” gear to surveil employee computer usage over the retail giant’s network. Indeed, the Journal reports that one Oakley system is capable of recording an employee’s keystrokes “and deliver a TiVo-like replay of his or her computing activities.”
While confirming the “advanced capabilities” of its system, Oakley Networks refused to identify its customers “apart from the U.S. Defense Department.” Zimmerman and McWilliams reported that “the system goes beyond keystroke capture products and email filtering packages” providing “a view of content” moving across a targeted network.
Oakley Networks Inc., now a wholly owned subsidiary of Raytheon (Raytheon Oakley), was founded in 2001 and “acquired” in 2007 by the defense giant. It is now a major component of Raytheon’s “Intelligence and information Systems (IIS) business.” According to a blurb on their website, “Raytheon Oakley protects 10 of the Fortune 100 banking, technology, manufacturing and other critical commercial infrastructure companies.” Washington Technology reported “terms [of the deal] were not disclosed.”
And with “security” in the heimat the latest frontier to be conquered by “war on terror” corporate profiteers, is it any wonder that private surveillance has become a lucrative growth industry. Indeed, there’s even a trade association, the Homeland Security Industries Association (HSIA)! A Washington, D.C.-based lobby group, HSIA describes its mission as providing “a mechanism for government and the private sector to coordinate on a wide range of homeland security issues.”
And do they ever coordinate!
Members include corporate heavy-hitters such as Bechtel, Fluor Corp., Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Textron and Washington Group International. Mid-sized firms such as E.J. Krause & Associates, Intelsat Government Solutions, Galileo International, Shaw Group, and Worldwide Security Associates. Additionally, smaller firms and universities include AR Challenges, Georgetown University, Intelliorg, the John Hopkins Applied Physics Lab, and QED are saddled-up in HSIA’s stable.
As USA Today reported back in 2006,
Without another major terrorist attack like those of 9/11, Homeland Security Research, the industry tracker, expects the market for security goods and services to increase to $178 billion in 2015, or triple its current value.
But a major attack in the United States, Europe or Japan could increase the global market in 2015 to $730 billion, more than a twelvefold increase, the company says.
Most of the growth this decade will come from building what Homeland Security Research calls “a homeland defense infrastructure.” Growth areas are likely to include technology for surveillance and for detection of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. (Gary Stoller, “Homeland security generates multibillion business,” USA Today, September 10, 2006)
As can be seen from this overview, corporate spying like “outsourcing” state security and intelligence functions to corporatist “partners” are another means of providing “plausible deniability,” global reach and maximum capabilities in the subversion of democratic institutions in the service of imperialist Empire.
We can be certain of this: as the American economic house of cards continues its epochal collapse, a viper’s nest of state and private intelligence operatives will be unleashed upon the American people.
Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly, Love & Rage and Antifa Forum, he is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military "Civil Disturbance" Planning, distributed by AK Press. Read other articles by Tom, or visit Tom's website.
Hakluyt : Rod Eddington quits British intelligence firm
Eddington quits British intelligence firm over 'conflict'
Nick McKenzie and Richard Baker
October 15, 2008
The Age , Australia
PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd's chief infrastructure adviser, businessman Rod Eddington, has resigned from the advisory board of a secretive British corporate intelligence firm after accusations that the dual roles amounted to a conflict of interest.
The resignation of Sir Rod, who is the head of Infrastructure Australia, comes after The Age reported yesterday that he had an unpaid role advising Hakluyt & Co. The firm, founded in the 1990s by former British intelligence officers, provides companies with high-level business and political intelligence on investment opportunities around the world.
Hakluyt has been embroiled in several corporate spying scandals and was caught in 2001 paying a former German intelligence agent to infiltrate green groups in Europe on behalf of the Shell and BP oil companies.
Sir Rod told The Age yesterday he had resigned from the Hakluyt advisory board "to remove any perception of future conflict of interest".
"The work of Infrastructure Australia is too important to be distracted by this issue," he said, stressing that he had never advised Hakluyt about Australian Government policy.
Although its Australian client base remains secret, Hakluyt is active in Australia. Its Australian director is Sydney-based former British diplomat Philip Morrice.
Sir Rod was appointed to Hakluyt's advisory board in 2005. Since February he has been chairman of Infrastructure Australia, a Federal Government body charged with modernising the nation's water, transport, communications and energy assets through the $20 billion Building Australia fund.
Before his resignation from Hakluyt yesterday, Sir Rodd's dual roles were attacked by Greens leader Bob Brown, who labelled them a "clear conflict of interest" and demanded the respected businessman sever ties with Hakluyt.
Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Andrew Robb said yesterday he assumed the Government had no problems with Sir Rod's role on the Hakluyt advisory board when it appointed him as chairman of Infrastructure Australia.
"These perceived conflicts of interest are all the more reason why it is important that the decision-making process of Infrastructure Australia is transparent and the detailed analysis of each project is made public prior to the Rudd cabinet making decisions on which projects to fund," Mr Robb said.
Nick McKenzie and Richard Baker
October 15, 2008
The Age , Australia
PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd's chief infrastructure adviser, businessman Rod Eddington, has resigned from the advisory board of a secretive British corporate intelligence firm after accusations that the dual roles amounted to a conflict of interest.
The resignation of Sir Rod, who is the head of Infrastructure Australia, comes after The Age reported yesterday that he had an unpaid role advising Hakluyt & Co. The firm, founded in the 1990s by former British intelligence officers, provides companies with high-level business and political intelligence on investment opportunities around the world.
Hakluyt has been embroiled in several corporate spying scandals and was caught in 2001 paying a former German intelligence agent to infiltrate green groups in Europe on behalf of the Shell and BP oil companies.
Sir Rod told The Age yesterday he had resigned from the Hakluyt advisory board "to remove any perception of future conflict of interest".
"The work of Infrastructure Australia is too important to be distracted by this issue," he said, stressing that he had never advised Hakluyt about Australian Government policy.
Although its Australian client base remains secret, Hakluyt is active in Australia. Its Australian director is Sydney-based former British diplomat Philip Morrice.
Sir Rod was appointed to Hakluyt's advisory board in 2005. Since February he has been chairman of Infrastructure Australia, a Federal Government body charged with modernising the nation's water, transport, communications and energy assets through the $20 billion Building Australia fund.
Before his resignation from Hakluyt yesterday, Sir Rodd's dual roles were attacked by Greens leader Bob Brown, who labelled them a "clear conflict of interest" and demanded the respected businessman sever ties with Hakluyt.
Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Andrew Robb said yesterday he assumed the Government had no problems with Sir Rod's role on the Hakluyt advisory board when it appointed him as chairman of Infrastructure Australia.
"These perceived conflicts of interest are all the more reason why it is important that the decision-making process of Infrastructure Australia is transparent and the detailed analysis of each project is made public prior to the Rudd cabinet making decisions on which projects to fund," Mr Robb said.
London feels Russian oligarchs' losses
14:48 | 11/ 10/ 2008
LONDON, October 11 (RIA Novosti) - London may get a sharp taste of Russia's financial crisis as the country's billionaires see their paper wealth tumble along with Russian stock markets, The Times newspaper reported Saturday.
London has become a second home for many Russian oligarchs, who own multimillion-dollar homes in the city and surrounding counties, but the paper says new purchases are unlikely for the immediate future.
"Analysts familiar with Russia's leading businessmen believe that they will hold on to these as a way of keeping wealth outside of the Kremlin's control," the paper wrote. "However, estate agents in Chelsea and Kensington are unlikely to see many Russian buyers in the coming months."
The Bloomberg news agency estimated Friday that Russian billionaires lost more than $230 billion in the last five months.
The agency arrived at the figure by looking at stock-market falls for the known assets of the 25 richest Russians, as listed by Forbes magazine.
Oleg Deripaska, the richest Russian on the list, lost more than $16 billion according to Bloomberg, as his Basic Element holding company gave up stakes in Hochtief AG and Magna International Inc. Chelsea owner and former Chukotka governor Roman Abramovich "lost $20 billion, based on assets excluding property and cash," the agency said.
Russia's stock markets have been hit particularly hard by the financial crisis, with tens of billions of dollars being taken out of the country since the summer. The MICEX index has shed more than 60% of its value since peaking in May.
Russia's two stock exchanges, the MICEX and the RTS, did not open for full trading Friday on instructions from federal regulators following considerable falls at previous sessions.
President Dmitry Medvedev said Friday that Russia had taken sufficient steps to shore up the domestic financial market, describing the measures as "rather serious."
The lower house of parliament, the State Duma, approved Friday anti-crisis packages worth a total of $86 billion. The government has earmarked $50 billion of budget funds to banks and firms to refinance foreign debt, and some $36 billion to key banks in subordinated loans.
LONDON, October 11 (RIA Novosti) - London may get a sharp taste of Russia's financial crisis as the country's billionaires see their paper wealth tumble along with Russian stock markets, The Times newspaper reported Saturday.
London has become a second home for many Russian oligarchs, who own multimillion-dollar homes in the city and surrounding counties, but the paper says new purchases are unlikely for the immediate future.
"Analysts familiar with Russia's leading businessmen believe that they will hold on to these as a way of keeping wealth outside of the Kremlin's control," the paper wrote. "However, estate agents in Chelsea and Kensington are unlikely to see many Russian buyers in the coming months."
The Bloomberg news agency estimated Friday that Russian billionaires lost more than $230 billion in the last five months.
The agency arrived at the figure by looking at stock-market falls for the known assets of the 25 richest Russians, as listed by Forbes magazine.
Oleg Deripaska, the richest Russian on the list, lost more than $16 billion according to Bloomberg, as his Basic Element holding company gave up stakes in Hochtief AG and Magna International Inc. Chelsea owner and former Chukotka governor Roman Abramovich "lost $20 billion, based on assets excluding property and cash," the agency said.
Russia's stock markets have been hit particularly hard by the financial crisis, with tens of billions of dollars being taken out of the country since the summer. The MICEX index has shed more than 60% of its value since peaking in May.
Russia's two stock exchanges, the MICEX and the RTS, did not open for full trading Friday on instructions from federal regulators following considerable falls at previous sessions.
President Dmitry Medvedev said Friday that Russia had taken sufficient steps to shore up the domestic financial market, describing the measures as "rather serious."
The lower house of parliament, the State Duma, approved Friday anti-crisis packages worth a total of $86 billion. The government has earmarked $50 billion of budget funds to banks and firms to refinance foreign debt, and some $36 billion to key banks in subordinated loans.
TALIBAN’S SHADOW OVER ZARDARI’S CHINA VISIT
B.RAMAN
President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan is leaving Islamabad on October 14,2008, on an official visit to China. Thereafter, he will be attending the Asia Europe Summit, whis is being hosted by China this year before returning home. He is to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the margins of the summit for bilateral discussions during which he is expected to take up, inter alia, Pakistani allegations of a decrease in the supply of water from the Chenab river by India. There have been complaints in Pakistan that its farmers have been affected because of the alleged diversion of the waters by India to fill up the reservoir of the Baglihar hydel power station in Jammu & Kashmir, which was inaugurated by Manmohan Singh last week.
2.The fact that Zardari’s first bilateral visit as the President has been to China has been highlighted by spokesmen of both the countries as indicative of the continuing importance attached by Pakistan to its relations with China. Zardari has said that he intended visiting China every three months to learn from the Chinese development experience.
3.Pakistan’s efforts to have the two Chinese engineers kidnapped by the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on August 29,2008, released before Zardari’s visit have not succeeded. These engineers are believed to be in the custody of the TTP in the Swat Valley of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). They were working in a project of a Chinese mobile telephone company in the Dir District of the NWFP. The TTP has been demanding, inter alia, the release of its members in the custody of the Pakistani authorities. The Pakistani authorities have not agreed to this. Nor have they been able to mount an operation to rescue them. This incident, coming in the wake three other instances last year of targeted attacks on Chinese nationals working in Pakistan, have added to the concerns of the Chinese authorities regarding the security of their personnel working in Pakistan. This is one of the subjects, which the Chinese are expected to take up with Zardari.
4.Of major interest to Pakistan is the possibility of Chinese assistance in helping Pakistan acquire a waiver of the restrictions on nuclear trade with it by the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG), similar to the waiver granted to India by the NSG at the instance of the US on September 5,2008. Before the visit of President Hu Jintao to India and Pakistan in November 2006, the then Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had taken up with China the question of Chinese assistance for the construction of more nuclear power stations in Pakistan.
5. China has already supplied one 300 MW nuclear power station to Pakistan named Chashma I. This is already functioning. A second power station named Chashma II, also of 300 MW, is presently under construction. The NSG restrictions did not apply to them. It has reportedly agreed in principle to supply two more to be named Chashma III and Chashma IV, provided the NSG grants a waiver to Pakistan from the restrictions. Zardari is expected to discuss with the Chinese the adoption of the same procedure as was followed by the US and India, with China taking the initiative for getting a waiver from the NSG. The problem will be whether the US would be willing to support a waiver in view of Pakistan’s continuing unwillingness to allow the interrogation of Dr.A.Q.Khan, its nuclear scientist involved in nuclear proliferation to North Korea, iran and Libya, by a team of investigators of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) at Vienna.
6. The other major issue that would come up for discussion relates to the Gwadar commercial port on the Makran Coast in Balochistan constructed by China and already handed over to Pakistan. Musharraf was keen that the Chinese should construct a petrochemical complex at Gwadar and a gas pipeline and a railway line connecting Gwadar with the Xinjiang province of China. The idea was this would enable China to use the port for its external trade from western China and also get some of its gas tankers to Gwadar and from there have the gas taken by the proposed pipeline to Xinjiang.
7. It is more than a year since the Gwadar port was commissioned by Musharraf. Its performance has been disappointing. It has been reported that only one ocean-going ship used it during its first year. The poor security situation in the area due to the activities of the Baloch freedom-fighters of the Baloch Liberation Army and the failure of the Pakistani engineers to construct in time the road and other infrastructure connecting Gwadar with the rest of Pakistan have come in the way of the port taking off. The expectations that some of the ocean-going trade could be diverted from Karachi to Gwadar have been belied so far. Shippers and businessmen continue to prefer Karachi in spite of the delays in cargo handling there because of the better security situation there and the better infrastructure connecting Karachi with the rest of the country.
8.Till now, the Chinese have not shown much enthusiasm for the proposals for the construction of a petrochemical complex, a pipeline and a railway line. One reason for their lack of enthusiasm is the poor security situation in Balochistan. Another reason is the poor security situation in Xinjiang due to the activities of the Uighur militants. Till the security situation improves in Xinjiang, the Chinese are reported to be not too keen to encourage too much trans-border movement with Pakistan. Moreover, it has been reported that the Chinese have not been convinced of the economic viability of these proposals. In the meanwhile, Pakistan has been trying to make the Chinese take interest in the extension of the proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline to Xinjiang, if India continues to drag its feet on the project. (14-10-08)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
.
President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan is leaving Islamabad on October 14,2008, on an official visit to China. Thereafter, he will be attending the Asia Europe Summit, whis is being hosted by China this year before returning home. He is to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the margins of the summit for bilateral discussions during which he is expected to take up, inter alia, Pakistani allegations of a decrease in the supply of water from the Chenab river by India. There have been complaints in Pakistan that its farmers have been affected because of the alleged diversion of the waters by India to fill up the reservoir of the Baglihar hydel power station in Jammu & Kashmir, which was inaugurated by Manmohan Singh last week.
2.The fact that Zardari’s first bilateral visit as the President has been to China has been highlighted by spokesmen of both the countries as indicative of the continuing importance attached by Pakistan to its relations with China. Zardari has said that he intended visiting China every three months to learn from the Chinese development experience.
3.Pakistan’s efforts to have the two Chinese engineers kidnapped by the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on August 29,2008, released before Zardari’s visit have not succeeded. These engineers are believed to be in the custody of the TTP in the Swat Valley of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). They were working in a project of a Chinese mobile telephone company in the Dir District of the NWFP. The TTP has been demanding, inter alia, the release of its members in the custody of the Pakistani authorities. The Pakistani authorities have not agreed to this. Nor have they been able to mount an operation to rescue them. This incident, coming in the wake three other instances last year of targeted attacks on Chinese nationals working in Pakistan, have added to the concerns of the Chinese authorities regarding the security of their personnel working in Pakistan. This is one of the subjects, which the Chinese are expected to take up with Zardari.
4.Of major interest to Pakistan is the possibility of Chinese assistance in helping Pakistan acquire a waiver of the restrictions on nuclear trade with it by the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG), similar to the waiver granted to India by the NSG at the instance of the US on September 5,2008. Before the visit of President Hu Jintao to India and Pakistan in November 2006, the then Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had taken up with China the question of Chinese assistance for the construction of more nuclear power stations in Pakistan.
5. China has already supplied one 300 MW nuclear power station to Pakistan named Chashma I. This is already functioning. A second power station named Chashma II, also of 300 MW, is presently under construction. The NSG restrictions did not apply to them. It has reportedly agreed in principle to supply two more to be named Chashma III and Chashma IV, provided the NSG grants a waiver to Pakistan from the restrictions. Zardari is expected to discuss with the Chinese the adoption of the same procedure as was followed by the US and India, with China taking the initiative for getting a waiver from the NSG. The problem will be whether the US would be willing to support a waiver in view of Pakistan’s continuing unwillingness to allow the interrogation of Dr.A.Q.Khan, its nuclear scientist involved in nuclear proliferation to North Korea, iran and Libya, by a team of investigators of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) at Vienna.
6. The other major issue that would come up for discussion relates to the Gwadar commercial port on the Makran Coast in Balochistan constructed by China and already handed over to Pakistan. Musharraf was keen that the Chinese should construct a petrochemical complex at Gwadar and a gas pipeline and a railway line connecting Gwadar with the Xinjiang province of China. The idea was this would enable China to use the port for its external trade from western China and also get some of its gas tankers to Gwadar and from there have the gas taken by the proposed pipeline to Xinjiang.
7. It is more than a year since the Gwadar port was commissioned by Musharraf. Its performance has been disappointing. It has been reported that only one ocean-going ship used it during its first year. The poor security situation in the area due to the activities of the Baloch freedom-fighters of the Baloch Liberation Army and the failure of the Pakistani engineers to construct in time the road and other infrastructure connecting Gwadar with the rest of Pakistan have come in the way of the port taking off. The expectations that some of the ocean-going trade could be diverted from Karachi to Gwadar have been belied so far. Shippers and businessmen continue to prefer Karachi in spite of the delays in cargo handling there because of the better security situation there and the better infrastructure connecting Karachi with the rest of the country.
8.Till now, the Chinese have not shown much enthusiasm for the proposals for the construction of a petrochemical complex, a pipeline and a railway line. One reason for their lack of enthusiasm is the poor security situation in Balochistan. Another reason is the poor security situation in Xinjiang due to the activities of the Uighur militants. Till the security situation improves in Xinjiang, the Chinese are reported to be not too keen to encourage too much trans-border movement with Pakistan. Moreover, it has been reported that the Chinese have not been convinced of the economic viability of these proposals. In the meanwhile, Pakistan has been trying to make the Chinese take interest in the extension of the proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline to Xinjiang, if India continues to drag its feet on the project. (14-10-08)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
.
Global crisis implications for labor market
17:38 | 14/ 10/ 2008
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Maxim Krans) - The global financial crisis, which has now reached Russia, is predictably expanding into a general economic recession complete with all the usual repercussions.
Employment layoffs and suspended production at major corporations, although insignificant so far, have nevertheless generated fears of further and deeper rounds of layoffs. It is hard to tell at this point whether the ominous prophesies will come true or not, and to what extent.
In any case, experts in various fields who gathered for a roundtable discussion at RIA Novosti on Thursday were unanimous that Russia's labor market is in for a major shake-up in the next few months.
The ghost of a crisis is haunting Russia. Naturally, financiers were the first people on whose door it knocked. Foreign banks promptly reacted by tightening credit programs and cutting personnel, with their Russian counterparts in close pursuit.
Next, automakers took a turn. Two weeks ago, Russia's auto giant GAZ suspended production of its Gazelle mid-sized trucks, vans and buses. Last Monday, the plant suspended production of GAZ trucks for four days, sending its workers and engineers on a forced vacation.
KamAZ, a major truck maker based in the Volga republic of Tatarstan, slowed to a four-day week, and slashed its 2008 production plan by 20%.
Foreign car manufacturers with operations in Russia have also adjusted production projections as banks tighten consumer car loan programs.
Next the crisis hit the construction industry which until recently seemed strong enough to weather any market turmoil. There was a media leak that Mirax Group, a major investment and development corporation, dropped all construction projects for the next year and began reducing the number of top managers.
Other major developers, Inteco and Sistema Gals, and Eurocement (Russia's leading cement producer) are also revising their near-term projections.
Alarming signals are also coming from large steel producers. The Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works (MMK) has announced a 25% cut in production and the lay-off of nearly 3,000 employees.
Russia's aluminum industry, according to parliament member Mikhail Tarasenko, is actually working only to fill warehouses. Dwindling lending programs naturally bring down demand, especially for cars and new housing, which means market demand for metal products is falling as well, accelerating a vicious circle.
So, do we need to brace ourselves for another collapse similar to the default crisis ten years ago, with people losing their jobs in torrents?
Labor experts invited to the RIA Novosti roundtable tried to appease the reporters' panic, but not entirely, because they didn't seem to be able to firmly rule out the possibility.
Only Yevgeny Gontmakher, director of the Center for Social Studies at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said Russia wouldn't see any apocalyptic developments like America in 1929.
Yet, analysts admit that dismissals are inevitable. Yelena Malkova, faculty at the Russian Academy of National Economy, said secretaries, drivers and other support staff would be the first to fall victim to the trend. "Less efficient" and disgraced employees will be hit next. If economic "health" isn't restored after that, middle and even top managers will be asked to go one step down or be fired.
On the other hand, some experts predict a different scenario, assuming that the country's economy doesn't go to pieces. Vladimir Gimpelson, Ph.D., Director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, said that employers facing plummeting demand for their products would naturally try to cut costs, but not by firing people, but rather by slashing salaries, bonuses and other benefits. They won't resort to dismissals, not out of compassion, but because they are constrained by legal restrictions. Some will stick to the old "socialist tradition," and some will be pressured by administrative measures taken by local officials to avoid heightening social tensions.
Federal officials responsible for the economy and finance seem to be guided by the same motives.
The windfall of petrodollars which have flooded Russia in the past decade, gave us all a feeling of false security - the government lost vigilance, led to believe that Russia's economy is as stable and shock-resistant as could be. It has made ambitious plans for the coming decades, and is reluctant to consider any less than optimistic scenario.
This is where their nonchalance has led us all: the crisis crept in stealthily, taking most government bodies by surprise.
Fyodor Prokopov, executive vice-president of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, said our labor legislation turned out to be unable to take the blow, because it had been drawn up in a completely different economic situation.
Russia's employment service is also quite unprepared - according to Prokopov, it was very ill-advisedly scattered across the regions and therefore cannot respond to the challenges of the times on a national scale.
He also said that the most recent idea to shift the bulk of the pension reform burden to employers was anything but helpful in the current situation.
Russians en masse also appear unprepared. However, a recent survey by the VTsIOM national pollster has revealed that increasing numbers of people now realize that the current financial crisis is not an abstract notion having nothing to do with Russia. Moreover, 41% said they feared it would hit their families eventually.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Maxim Krans) - The global financial crisis, which has now reached Russia, is predictably expanding into a general economic recession complete with all the usual repercussions.
Employment layoffs and suspended production at major corporations, although insignificant so far, have nevertheless generated fears of further and deeper rounds of layoffs. It is hard to tell at this point whether the ominous prophesies will come true or not, and to what extent.
In any case, experts in various fields who gathered for a roundtable discussion at RIA Novosti on Thursday were unanimous that Russia's labor market is in for a major shake-up in the next few months.
The ghost of a crisis is haunting Russia. Naturally, financiers were the first people on whose door it knocked. Foreign banks promptly reacted by tightening credit programs and cutting personnel, with their Russian counterparts in close pursuit.
Next, automakers took a turn. Two weeks ago, Russia's auto giant GAZ suspended production of its Gazelle mid-sized trucks, vans and buses. Last Monday, the plant suspended production of GAZ trucks for four days, sending its workers and engineers on a forced vacation.
KamAZ, a major truck maker based in the Volga republic of Tatarstan, slowed to a four-day week, and slashed its 2008 production plan by 20%.
Foreign car manufacturers with operations in Russia have also adjusted production projections as banks tighten consumer car loan programs.
Next the crisis hit the construction industry which until recently seemed strong enough to weather any market turmoil. There was a media leak that Mirax Group, a major investment and development corporation, dropped all construction projects for the next year and began reducing the number of top managers.
Other major developers, Inteco and Sistema Gals, and Eurocement (Russia's leading cement producer) are also revising their near-term projections.
Alarming signals are also coming from large steel producers. The Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works (MMK) has announced a 25% cut in production and the lay-off of nearly 3,000 employees.
Russia's aluminum industry, according to parliament member Mikhail Tarasenko, is actually working only to fill warehouses. Dwindling lending programs naturally bring down demand, especially for cars and new housing, which means market demand for metal products is falling as well, accelerating a vicious circle.
So, do we need to brace ourselves for another collapse similar to the default crisis ten years ago, with people losing their jobs in torrents?
Labor experts invited to the RIA Novosti roundtable tried to appease the reporters' panic, but not entirely, because they didn't seem to be able to firmly rule out the possibility.
Only Yevgeny Gontmakher, director of the Center for Social Studies at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said Russia wouldn't see any apocalyptic developments like America in 1929.
Yet, analysts admit that dismissals are inevitable. Yelena Malkova, faculty at the Russian Academy of National Economy, said secretaries, drivers and other support staff would be the first to fall victim to the trend. "Less efficient" and disgraced employees will be hit next. If economic "health" isn't restored after that, middle and even top managers will be asked to go one step down or be fired.
On the other hand, some experts predict a different scenario, assuming that the country's economy doesn't go to pieces. Vladimir Gimpelson, Ph.D., Director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, said that employers facing plummeting demand for their products would naturally try to cut costs, but not by firing people, but rather by slashing salaries, bonuses and other benefits. They won't resort to dismissals, not out of compassion, but because they are constrained by legal restrictions. Some will stick to the old "socialist tradition," and some will be pressured by administrative measures taken by local officials to avoid heightening social tensions.
Federal officials responsible for the economy and finance seem to be guided by the same motives.
The windfall of petrodollars which have flooded Russia in the past decade, gave us all a feeling of false security - the government lost vigilance, led to believe that Russia's economy is as stable and shock-resistant as could be. It has made ambitious plans for the coming decades, and is reluctant to consider any less than optimistic scenario.
This is where their nonchalance has led us all: the crisis crept in stealthily, taking most government bodies by surprise.
Fyodor Prokopov, executive vice-president of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, said our labor legislation turned out to be unable to take the blow, because it had been drawn up in a completely different economic situation.
Russia's employment service is also quite unprepared - according to Prokopov, it was very ill-advisedly scattered across the regions and therefore cannot respond to the challenges of the times on a national scale.
He also said that the most recent idea to shift the bulk of the pension reform burden to employers was anything but helpful in the current situation.
Russians en masse also appear unprepared. However, a recent survey by the VTsIOM national pollster has revealed that increasing numbers of people now realize that the current financial crisis is not an abstract notion having nothing to do with Russia. Moreover, 41% said they feared it would hit their families eventually.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
Saakashvili, a costly ally
14 Oct 2008
True allies control each other and Georgia's president has proven that he knows how to influence his friends in Washington and Brussels, Andrew D Bishop writes for ISN Security Watch.
By Andrew D Bishop for ISN Security Watch
"You've got a solid friend in America," President George W Bush once told Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili. And to an extent, this assertion remains true to this day.
Yet, what seemed like a smart-minded alliance just a few years ago has come to need some close scrutiny if the US is to keep upholding the liberal and democratic values it so cherishes.
Back in the days when he began running for president against Edward Shevardnadze, Saakashvili had all the attributes the White House sought in a foreign politician, including a top US education and an impressive track record of interest in human rights protection and anti-corruption.
Hence Washington's decision to hop on board and bury Tbilisi's old incumbent statesman when world-famous financier and philanthropist George Soros decided to back the young political maverick during Georgia's 2003 presidential campaign.
Shevardnadze had been a good partner, but Saakashvili would be a better one - so the mantra went at the time.
With the construction of a major Russia-circumventing pipeline having just started at the time of Georgia's November 2003 election, it was essential for the US to ensure that Tbilisi's stance would be lastingly and unfalteringly pro-western - something the young president clearly delivered on for many years.
Nevertheless, the honeymoon Washington has enjoyed with its Georgian mate since the Rose Revolution should have ceased a year ago almost to the day when Saakashvili headed down the slippery slope of authoritarianism.
Instead, through an impressive show of support that might have appeared like a mere excuse for engaging in a short but cathartic session of Russia-bashing, the Bush administration this summer demonstrated that its sole intention was to further cuddle with its controversial regional ally.
As Tbilisi's friend, there is a case to be made for Washington's initial decision to stand by Saakashvili in August, when Georgia launched a military operation in breakaway South Ossetia, but now that Russian troops have returned to their positions, it is well past time the White House began reining in its hot-headed ally. Failing to do so would represent both a moral and strategic mistake.
Just a few days into his confrontation with Moscow, Saakashvili understood that his only chance of defeating Russia would be to rally the West to his cause through a roaring media offensive that would include publishing incendiary editorials with one invariable message: "This war threatens not only Georgia but security and liberty around the world."
Yet the troubling aspect of Saakashvili's message was that the increasingly authoritarian style with which he has governed his country over the past year seemed to indicate that he himself had ceased to believe in the sacrosanct principles of freedom and democracy.
In November 2007, four years after winning his first presidential election, Saakashvili used brute force to break up demonstrations in denunciation of his government's corruption, and declared a nationwide state of emergency, thereby radically limiting freedom of information and of expression.
When he was re-elected just a few months later, the young political vindicator was accused of tainting the results that gave him an overwhelming victory against all opposition candidates.
While popular rallies formed to demand a run-off, even the very politically correct Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) declared that "serious problems were observed during the vote count" and that a range of other irregularities "were not conducive to increasing public confidence."
Georgia's human rights ombudsman, Sozar Subari, is also reported to have "charged that the ruling elite routinely cites the imperative of building a strong state as justification for trampling on individual rights" - a warning that echoes those of anxious opposition members who worry about their leader's desire to adopt a "US-style Patriot Act" to curb Russian influence.
For all his indisputable qualities as a statesman and reformer, Saakashvili isn't to the taste of everyone and seems to upset quite a few of his people's representatives who have called for his resignation.
Realists will argue that Russia's resurgence and the lack of a better alternative have left the US no choice but to stick with Saakashvili.
If not a moral choice, then it must be a strategic one.
However, this argument is weak as it assumes a leader's pro-western penchant is enough to make him an asset when history has proven to those who want to hear it that being associated with a tainted leader is no recipe for success.
From Iran to Afghanistan, the US needs Russia, which isn't to say Washington should bow to Moscow's most eccentric demands in exchange for support, but that beginning a second Cold War over the irresponsible behavior of one rogue ally would undoubtedly prove a mistake of historical significance - one Saakashvili has been trying to lead the West into.
The current king of the castle in Tbilisi has done little to secure western interests in the region, and that Saakashvili's promised democratic dream of a "second Rose Revolution" has yet to occur.
True allies control each other and Georgia's president has proven that he knows how to influence his friends in Washington and Brussels. Now the US and its partners need to send their friend the message that he does not have carte blanche to destabilize the Caucasus or to coerce his fellow countrymen into standing behind him.
Saakashvili is no dictator. But the White House needs to make sure he is not allowed to become one.
Andrew D Bishop is a graduate student of European politics at the London School of Economics. He is also a freelance journalist and a blogger at WhatYouMustRead.
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).
True allies control each other and Georgia's president has proven that he knows how to influence his friends in Washington and Brussels, Andrew D Bishop writes for ISN Security Watch.
By Andrew D Bishop for ISN Security Watch
"You've got a solid friend in America," President George W Bush once told Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili. And to an extent, this assertion remains true to this day.
Yet, what seemed like a smart-minded alliance just a few years ago has come to need some close scrutiny if the US is to keep upholding the liberal and democratic values it so cherishes.
Back in the days when he began running for president against Edward Shevardnadze, Saakashvili had all the attributes the White House sought in a foreign politician, including a top US education and an impressive track record of interest in human rights protection and anti-corruption.
Hence Washington's decision to hop on board and bury Tbilisi's old incumbent statesman when world-famous financier and philanthropist George Soros decided to back the young political maverick during Georgia's 2003 presidential campaign.
Shevardnadze had been a good partner, but Saakashvili would be a better one - so the mantra went at the time.
With the construction of a major Russia-circumventing pipeline having just started at the time of Georgia's November 2003 election, it was essential for the US to ensure that Tbilisi's stance would be lastingly and unfalteringly pro-western - something the young president clearly delivered on for many years.
Nevertheless, the honeymoon Washington has enjoyed with its Georgian mate since the Rose Revolution should have ceased a year ago almost to the day when Saakashvili headed down the slippery slope of authoritarianism.
Instead, through an impressive show of support that might have appeared like a mere excuse for engaging in a short but cathartic session of Russia-bashing, the Bush administration this summer demonstrated that its sole intention was to further cuddle with its controversial regional ally.
As Tbilisi's friend, there is a case to be made for Washington's initial decision to stand by Saakashvili in August, when Georgia launched a military operation in breakaway South Ossetia, but now that Russian troops have returned to their positions, it is well past time the White House began reining in its hot-headed ally. Failing to do so would represent both a moral and strategic mistake.
Just a few days into his confrontation with Moscow, Saakashvili understood that his only chance of defeating Russia would be to rally the West to his cause through a roaring media offensive that would include publishing incendiary editorials with one invariable message: "This war threatens not only Georgia but security and liberty around the world."
Yet the troubling aspect of Saakashvili's message was that the increasingly authoritarian style with which he has governed his country over the past year seemed to indicate that he himself had ceased to believe in the sacrosanct principles of freedom and democracy.
In November 2007, four years after winning his first presidential election, Saakashvili used brute force to break up demonstrations in denunciation of his government's corruption, and declared a nationwide state of emergency, thereby radically limiting freedom of information and of expression.
When he was re-elected just a few months later, the young political vindicator was accused of tainting the results that gave him an overwhelming victory against all opposition candidates.
While popular rallies formed to demand a run-off, even the very politically correct Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) declared that "serious problems were observed during the vote count" and that a range of other irregularities "were not conducive to increasing public confidence."
Georgia's human rights ombudsman, Sozar Subari, is also reported to have "charged that the ruling elite routinely cites the imperative of building a strong state as justification for trampling on individual rights" - a warning that echoes those of anxious opposition members who worry about their leader's desire to adopt a "US-style Patriot Act" to curb Russian influence.
For all his indisputable qualities as a statesman and reformer, Saakashvili isn't to the taste of everyone and seems to upset quite a few of his people's representatives who have called for his resignation.
Realists will argue that Russia's resurgence and the lack of a better alternative have left the US no choice but to stick with Saakashvili.
If not a moral choice, then it must be a strategic one.
However, this argument is weak as it assumes a leader's pro-western penchant is enough to make him an asset when history has proven to those who want to hear it that being associated with a tainted leader is no recipe for success.
From Iran to Afghanistan, the US needs Russia, which isn't to say Washington should bow to Moscow's most eccentric demands in exchange for support, but that beginning a second Cold War over the irresponsible behavior of one rogue ally would undoubtedly prove a mistake of historical significance - one Saakashvili has been trying to lead the West into.
The current king of the castle in Tbilisi has done little to secure western interests in the region, and that Saakashvili's promised democratic dream of a "second Rose Revolution" has yet to occur.
True allies control each other and Georgia's president has proven that he knows how to influence his friends in Washington and Brussels. Now the US and its partners need to send their friend the message that he does not have carte blanche to destabilize the Caucasus or to coerce his fellow countrymen into standing behind him.
Saakashvili is no dictator. But the White House needs to make sure he is not allowed to become one.
Andrew D Bishop is a graduate student of European politics at the London School of Economics. He is also a freelance journalist and a blogger at WhatYouMustRead.
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).
Iran's true masters
14 Oct 2008
Most assumed that the ascendancy of neo-rightists like Ahmadinejad spelled the return to power of Iran's traditionalist clerics, but instead the trend has been a greater erosion of clerical authority, Kamal Nazer Yasin writes for ISN Security Watch.
By Kamal Nazer Yasin for ISN Security Watch
For many years, Iran's traditionalist-oriented clergy (the majority of clerics) were the true masters of the country. As the political leaders of the anti-monarchical revolution and as the defenders of their country against Saddam Hussein's armies, they seemed to enjoy unlimited power and prestige among the populace. However, with the conclusion of the war, a different mood was set.
Ordinary Iranians were tired of war and bloodshed and were clamoring for tranquility and economic welfare; things that the country's rulers were not particularly adept at delivering. Thus began a slow but unmistakable diminution of the clerics' social and political stature.
The trend was further accentuated with the election of Mohammad Khatami in 1997. His call for reform opened up long-pent-up demands for political and social liberties of all sorts that often clashed with the traditionalists' sense of supremacy.
In 2005, a brand new coalition comprising "Young Rightists" (a euphemism for people with ties to the security establishment), hard-line fundamentalists and old-line traditionalists threw its support behind the relatively obscure mayor of Tehran, Mahmood Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad ran on a platform of clean government, economic populism and an end to all Khatami-era secularizing tendencies.
The traditionalist clergy could breathe a collective sigh of relief. Here was one of their own: a man who had proved his mettle both in peacetime and wartime and promised to a return to the glorious revolutionary days. Alas, the euphoria was rather short-lived.
In the three years since Ahmadinejad and his faction took power, a concerted effort has been underway to circumscribe the still-considerable power of traditionalist clergy - with mixed results.
The world of the new right
It is not difficult to see the reasons for this unexpected development. Despite their myriad differences in outlook and political strategy, the cadre of the former Revolutionary Guards members, which make up the new Iranian elite, have much in common: They all come from similar social and political backgrounds, are fast moving from lower echelons to the first-tier, firmly believe they are the most qualified to rule the country, and are adamantly opposed to interference from other power centers, including those belonging to the traditionalist clergy.
Publicly, Ahmadinejad and his circle of friends and advisers are quite effusive with praise and for the clergy. But when it comes to actual policy-formation or in symbol-laden public discourse, the situation is rather different.
For instance, according to Ayatollah Mohsen Doagoo, a prominent traditionalist, Ahmadinejad has broken with past tradition and refused to solicit the opinion of the traditionalist clergy in choosing his ministers or in other high-level appointments. Even Khatami had no choice but to take into account the views of the Combatant Clergy Association (CCA) and the Association of Theological Seminaries - the two pillars of traditionalists - in such matters.
Moreover, Ahmadinejad adroitly stokes popular resentment against the clergy by using politically loaded issues (like allowing women into stadiums or even a soft recognition of Israel) which raise the ire of the traditionalists and thus increase his popularity among educated voters.
Last June, one of Iran's vice-presidents, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai - also one of Ahmadinejad's top aids - created a terrific storm by declaring that Iran sought the friendship of the Israeli people. A great many traditionalists including some of Iran's most important Grand Ayatollahs immediately protested, demanding that Ahmadinejad fire the erring official. Not only did Ahmadinejad refuse to fire Mashai, he took him along with him to New York last September for his annual appearance at the United Nations.
Last July, one of his top advisors, Mohammad Norizadeh, castigated the clergy for their interference in government affairs. "Can you stay away from the work of the government and pay your collected funds (gathered from devout followers) to the Supreme Leader instead?" he asked in an interview.
Later, in his personal blog space, he asked Grand Ayatollah whether it was wise "for a great many Grand Ayatollahs to weigh in on a single issue" and create "confusion and anxiety" in the society.
But no issue has been more divisive and more irksome for the traditionalists than that of Imam Mahdi (Shias believe that their 12th and last imam, Imam Mahdi who disappeared in 874 AD will return one day to rid the world of vice and corruption).
The new right has basically hijacked the issue for its own legitimacy. Both Ahmadinejad and his faction often invoke the name of Mahdi as both protector and as a direct source of power for the government. Experts believe that doing so bypasses the intercession of the clergy as intermediaries between higher powers and ordinary mortals.
A subtle game
The new rightists realize they are risking a great deal by their cavalier attitude. Already, alarmed clerics are going on the offensive by threatening to put up a new candidate against Ahmadinejad in next year's presidential election.
According to Hussein Marashi, a prominent moderate pragmatist, discussions are under way between both the left and the right for a single moderate candidate to run against Ahamdinejad.
"Traditionalist clerics are not going to sit around waiting to be ousted completely," he told the newspaper Kargozaran.
To forestall a united clerical front from forming against it, the government is engaged in a multi-pronged strategy.
First, it is making huge increases in budgets to religious entities. In the last fiscal year, the total budget for all religious centers and institutes went up by 60 percent. The Minister of Guidance said recently that in the last three years since Ahmadinejad came to power, special allocations for mosques had gone up 20-fold.
Secondly, the government is paying for the creation of 30 new theological seminaries. This is unprecedented, since for at least the last millennium, no seminary has ever accepted money from a civilian government in Iran to avoid the risk of being beholden to them.
Thirdly, the government has entered into an unstated alliance with the followers of a hard-line cleric, the powerful Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi.
All these tactics have paid off, though it is too early to know what the final outcome may be.
In the last few months, some re-shuffling has taken place reflecting these realities. Last February, Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghadam, a clerical critic of Ahmadinejad, was forced to resign from his job as spokesman for the ACC. A few weeks later, the Chancellor of Qum Theological Center, Sayed Hussein Boshehri, also a critic of Ahmadinejad, resigned inexplicably one month before retirement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kamal Nazer Yasin is the pseudonym of an Iranian journalist reporting for ISN Security Watch from Tehran.
Publisher
International Relations and Security Network (ISN)
Most assumed that the ascendancy of neo-rightists like Ahmadinejad spelled the return to power of Iran's traditionalist clerics, but instead the trend has been a greater erosion of clerical authority, Kamal Nazer Yasin writes for ISN Security Watch.
By Kamal Nazer Yasin for ISN Security Watch
For many years, Iran's traditionalist-oriented clergy (the majority of clerics) were the true masters of the country. As the political leaders of the anti-monarchical revolution and as the defenders of their country against Saddam Hussein's armies, they seemed to enjoy unlimited power and prestige among the populace. However, with the conclusion of the war, a different mood was set.
Ordinary Iranians were tired of war and bloodshed and were clamoring for tranquility and economic welfare; things that the country's rulers were not particularly adept at delivering. Thus began a slow but unmistakable diminution of the clerics' social and political stature.
The trend was further accentuated with the election of Mohammad Khatami in 1997. His call for reform opened up long-pent-up demands for political and social liberties of all sorts that often clashed with the traditionalists' sense of supremacy.
In 2005, a brand new coalition comprising "Young Rightists" (a euphemism for people with ties to the security establishment), hard-line fundamentalists and old-line traditionalists threw its support behind the relatively obscure mayor of Tehran, Mahmood Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad ran on a platform of clean government, economic populism and an end to all Khatami-era secularizing tendencies.
The traditionalist clergy could breathe a collective sigh of relief. Here was one of their own: a man who had proved his mettle both in peacetime and wartime and promised to a return to the glorious revolutionary days. Alas, the euphoria was rather short-lived.
In the three years since Ahmadinejad and his faction took power, a concerted effort has been underway to circumscribe the still-considerable power of traditionalist clergy - with mixed results.
The world of the new right
It is not difficult to see the reasons for this unexpected development. Despite their myriad differences in outlook and political strategy, the cadre of the former Revolutionary Guards members, which make up the new Iranian elite, have much in common: They all come from similar social and political backgrounds, are fast moving from lower echelons to the first-tier, firmly believe they are the most qualified to rule the country, and are adamantly opposed to interference from other power centers, including those belonging to the traditionalist clergy.
Publicly, Ahmadinejad and his circle of friends and advisers are quite effusive with praise and for the clergy. But when it comes to actual policy-formation or in symbol-laden public discourse, the situation is rather different.
For instance, according to Ayatollah Mohsen Doagoo, a prominent traditionalist, Ahmadinejad has broken with past tradition and refused to solicit the opinion of the traditionalist clergy in choosing his ministers or in other high-level appointments. Even Khatami had no choice but to take into account the views of the Combatant Clergy Association (CCA) and the Association of Theological Seminaries - the two pillars of traditionalists - in such matters.
Moreover, Ahmadinejad adroitly stokes popular resentment against the clergy by using politically loaded issues (like allowing women into stadiums or even a soft recognition of Israel) which raise the ire of the traditionalists and thus increase his popularity among educated voters.
Last June, one of Iran's vice-presidents, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai - also one of Ahmadinejad's top aids - created a terrific storm by declaring that Iran sought the friendship of the Israeli people. A great many traditionalists including some of Iran's most important Grand Ayatollahs immediately protested, demanding that Ahmadinejad fire the erring official. Not only did Ahmadinejad refuse to fire Mashai, he took him along with him to New York last September for his annual appearance at the United Nations.
Last July, one of his top advisors, Mohammad Norizadeh, castigated the clergy for their interference in government affairs. "Can you stay away from the work of the government and pay your collected funds (gathered from devout followers) to the Supreme Leader instead?" he asked in an interview.
Later, in his personal blog space, he asked Grand Ayatollah whether it was wise "for a great many Grand Ayatollahs to weigh in on a single issue" and create "confusion and anxiety" in the society.
But no issue has been more divisive and more irksome for the traditionalists than that of Imam Mahdi (Shias believe that their 12th and last imam, Imam Mahdi who disappeared in 874 AD will return one day to rid the world of vice and corruption).
The new right has basically hijacked the issue for its own legitimacy. Both Ahmadinejad and his faction often invoke the name of Mahdi as both protector and as a direct source of power for the government. Experts believe that doing so bypasses the intercession of the clergy as intermediaries between higher powers and ordinary mortals.
A subtle game
The new rightists realize they are risking a great deal by their cavalier attitude. Already, alarmed clerics are going on the offensive by threatening to put up a new candidate against Ahmadinejad in next year's presidential election.
According to Hussein Marashi, a prominent moderate pragmatist, discussions are under way between both the left and the right for a single moderate candidate to run against Ahamdinejad.
"Traditionalist clerics are not going to sit around waiting to be ousted completely," he told the newspaper Kargozaran.
To forestall a united clerical front from forming against it, the government is engaged in a multi-pronged strategy.
First, it is making huge increases in budgets to religious entities. In the last fiscal year, the total budget for all religious centers and institutes went up by 60 percent. The Minister of Guidance said recently that in the last three years since Ahmadinejad came to power, special allocations for mosques had gone up 20-fold.
Secondly, the government is paying for the creation of 30 new theological seminaries. This is unprecedented, since for at least the last millennium, no seminary has ever accepted money from a civilian government in Iran to avoid the risk of being beholden to them.
Thirdly, the government has entered into an unstated alliance with the followers of a hard-line cleric, the powerful Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi.
All these tactics have paid off, though it is too early to know what the final outcome may be.
In the last few months, some re-shuffling has taken place reflecting these realities. Last February, Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghadam, a clerical critic of Ahmadinejad, was forced to resign from his job as spokesman for the ACC. A few weeks later, the Chancellor of Qum Theological Center, Sayed Hussein Boshehri, also a critic of Ahmadinejad, resigned inexplicably one month before retirement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kamal Nazer Yasin is the pseudonym of an Iranian journalist reporting for ISN Security Watch from Tehran.
Publisher
International Relations and Security Network (ISN)
Malaysian Indian Society in Ferment
by Dr. V. Suryanarayan
The unprecedented demonstration by Malaysian Indians before the British High Commission in Kula Lumpur at the end of November 2007, under the sponsorship of the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF), has brought into sharp focus the pathetic situation in which the Indian community finds itself today. The HINDRAF is a coalition of 30 non-governmental organizations, committed to the preservation and promotion of the Hindu identity. The coalition had been agitating against what it calls the unofficial policy of temple demolition and the steady introduction of Sharia-based law. The Memorandum, submitted to the British High Commission, demanded that the United Kingdom should move an emergency resolution in the United Nations condemning the “ethnic cleansing” taking place in Malaysia. It also appealed that the issue should be referred to the World Court and International Criminal Court of Justice for crimes against its own ethnic minority Indians. In August 2007 the Malaysian Indians had approached the Royal Court of Justice demanding compensation of US Dollars 4 Trillion, which works out to US Dollars one million to every Malaysian Indian, for bringing their forefathers as indentured labourers and failing to protect their rights and interests on the eve of Malayan independence.
The Malaysian Government, true to its authoritarian traditions, refused permission to hold the rally, arrested the leaders and used tear gas and water cannon to disperse the nearly 35,000 demonstrators. The leaders of the HINDRAF should know that historical wrongs perpetrated during the colonial era, like the indenture system, cannot be undone. Presumably their objective was to highlight the increasing marginalization of the Indian community in the social, economic, political and cultural life of Malaysia. A Malaysian Indian student, Ananthi, a Rhodes Scholar, reading for her PhD in Oxford University, echoed the feelings of the overwhelming majority of her community, in a letter widely circulated in Malaysia. To quote Ananthi, “It was about being neglected, about not having a seat at the table to bargain, about having a national and communal leadership that we do not trust and is utterly discreditable. It is about saying no to being the forgotten Indians, and not enough of us in our comfortable houses, those of us who worked to manage to work the system to our benefit – stood with the other Indians, who are not so different from us”. For the first time, the marginalized Malaysian Indians displayed the power of Makkal Shakti (people’s power).
This paper is divided into two sections. The first deals with the changing political dynamics in Malaysia and the second analyses the factors that have led to the marginalization of the overwhelming sections of the Malaysian Indian community.
It has been rightly said that every issue in Malaysia, whether political, cultural or economic, had always been and would continue to be dominated by ethnic considerations. The entire political system is based on communal politics. The ordinary Malaysian grows up and lives under a pervasive communal atmosphere. While ethnicity would continue to dominate, the nature of political discourse is changing from time to time, depending upon the changing political dynamics. In order to put the issues in proper perspective, it is necessary to highlight certain political realities.
The Malays feel that they are the indigenous people (Bhumiputra) and, therefore, they have a special claim for dominance in the political and cultural life of the country. The British colonialists upheld this claim and ruled the country in the name of Malay Sultans, on whom sovereignty vested. At the same time, as part of imperialist objectives, the British also encouraged large-scale immigration of Chinese and Indians for the economic exploitation of the country’s natural resources. The existence of a plural society prevented the growth of anti-British feelings and a sense of common nationalism in Malaya before the Second World War. As the English novelist Somerset Maugham wrote, “Malaya was a first rate country for third rate English men”.
The political awakening of the Malays, in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, following the introduction of the Malayan Union Proposals (a unitary state to which the Sultans were to cede their sovereignty) and the unity that they forged under the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) had far reaching consequences. Not only did it compel the British to withdraw the Malayan Union proposals, it also clearly revealed that the Malays would never give up their pre-eminent position in the political life of Malaya. While in later years, the Malay leaders did co-operate with the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC), in the larger interests of Malaya as a whole, the dynamic leadership of Malayan nationalism has always remained in Malay hands. The Alliance, which was voted to power in 1955, was not an alliance of equal partners; it was an alliance in which the supremacy of the Malays was clearly established. The transformation of the Alliance into Barisan Nasional in the 1970’s, with the incorporation of various Malay and non-Malay political parties, further reduced the political clout of the MCA and the MIC.
On the eve of independence in August 1957, the Malays and the non-Malays were roughly equal in numbers (Malays 49.8 per cent, Chinese 37.1 per cent, Indians 11.1 per cent and the others 2.0 per cent). Over the years the demographic structure has radically altered to the advantage of the Malays. Higher rate of natural increase and large scale immigration of Indonesian Malays have contributed to the burgeoning of Malay population. The Bhumiputras (Malays plus the indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak, which were incorporated into Malaysia in 1963) constitute nearly two thirds of the population; the Chinese constitute 23.7 per cent and the Indians 7.1 per cent.
An important clue to the understanding of the political economy is the social and political contract arrived by the elite of the three communities on the eve of independence. It was assumed that the economic predominance of the Chinese would be offset by the political supremacy of the Malays. It was believed that with the passage of time this equilibrium would give way to a more balanced one, the Malays would play a greater role in the economic life and the Chinese and the Indians would play a greater role in politics. The pre-eminent position of the Malays was enshrined in the Constitution – the retention of the Malay Sultanate, the acceptance of Islam as the State Religion, constitutional provisions safeguarding the “special rights” of the Malays and the acceptance of Malay as the national and official language. The major concession made to the non-Malays was the conferment of citizenship on them.
The fragility of the Malaysian political system came out into the open on May 13, 1969, when following the reverses suffered by the Alliance in the general elections, large-scale Sino-Malay clashes took place in Kuala Lumpur. Emergency was proclaimed and when democratic process was restored after amending the Constitution, Malay political power was further entrenched. The Royal Commission appointed to enquire into the riots was of the view that the crisis was due to the disenchantment and frustration of the Malays, who had not enjoyed the fruits of independence. In 1970, Malay corporate ownership was a meager 2.4 per cent, compared with 63.3 per cent enjoyed by the foreigners, 22.4 per cent enjoyed by the Chinese and 10.0 per cent by unknown parties. While the overall poverty incidence was high, 51.2 per cent in 1970, 76.0 per cent of them were Malays. A New Economic Policy (replaced by National Integrity Plan in 2004) was launched to bring about economic transformation, with particular emphasis on the development of the Malays. In the political sphere, democratic rights were curtailed, it was made a seditious criminal offence to challenge the special rights conferred on the Malays, the language provisions in the Constitution, institution of Sultanate and citizenship laws.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Mahathir (1981-2003) Malaysia underwent a fundamental transformation. From being a producer of primary commodities, it had become an industrialized country, virtually an economic power house in the ASEAN region. Despite occasional hiccups, for example, during the Asian economic crisis, the country registered an economic growth averaging 8.0 per cent. The absolute poverty level came down from 51.2 per cent in 1970 to 7.0 per cent in 2000. By 1990, the Malay share in the corporate capital went up to 19.2 per cent, Chinese 46.8 per cent and the Indians 1.5 per cent, the nominee companies 8.5 per cent and the balance owned by the foreigners. What further endeared Dr. Mahathir was his strong criticism of American foreign policy in West Asia and Southeast Asia.
The negative side of the story was increasing authoritarianism. In addition to continuing criticism of the non-Malays about the pro-Malay and pro-Islamic policies of the government, the discontent also spread to Malay middle class. The first to raise the banner of revolt was Tunku Razaleigh Hamzah, who in 1987 formed a secular Malay party, Parti Sengamat 46 (Spirit of 46). Subsequently Razaleigh was readmitted into UMNO. Far more important was the revolt led by Anwar Ibrahim in 1998, who formed a political party called Kedilan (Justice Party) under the leadership of his wife. The unfair trial of Anwar Ibrahim, coupled with the third degree treatment meted out to him, has earned him considerable good will in Malaysia and abroad. After his release, Anwar Ibrahim started speaking in a more democratic idiom, for widening the democratic space, tolerance of dissent and the establishment of a truly pluralist society, with emphasis on redistributive justice. He was prepared to champion the non-Malay cause when he promised to abolish the New Economic Policy and to promote equality for all. The cumulative effect was the ruling Barisan Nasional suffered serious reverses in the general election held in March 2008. In the 12th general election, the UMNO and its coalition partners in the Barisan Nasional suffered unprecedented reverses. It lost its two third majority in parliament. What is more, it was removed from power in four states – Kedah, Perak, Penang and Selangor – besides failing to regain power in Kelantan. What is more, Anwar Ibrahim re-entered parliament by winning the by election in the Permatang Pauh, with a huge majority. Anwar Ibrahim is openly making a bid for power by enticing ruling party members of parliament into his fold. Another important consequence was the decision of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to expedite the transfer of power to his deputy Najib Abdul Razak.
An important political reality must be highlighted. It is extremely difficult for opposition parties to function in Malaysia. The dracnonian Internal Security Act, which provides for detention without trial, has been frequently used against opposition leaders, Malay and non-Malay alike. The Internal Security Act is inhuman, because it denies the victim a fundamental human right, the right to a fair trial. Anwar Ibrahim underlined some of the evils of the Malaysian political system in an international conference in New Delhi, few months ago, “What is an election if the political parties in the opposition do not have access to freedom of speech, assembly and movement, necessary to voice their criticisms of the government openly and to bring alternative policies and candidates to the voters? Where I come from, the opposition is barred from the air waves, rallies are not allowed and opposition newspapers operate underground”. Prof. Harold Crouch, an astute observer of the Malaysian political scene, has remarked, “It is hard to place Malaysia in a clear cut category between democracy and authoritarianism”. He concludes “Malaysia is neither democratic nor authoritarian … as the Malaysian political system has been oscillating between repression and responsiveness”.
Let me now take up the second part of the essay dealing with the complex issues relating to the marginalization of the vast majority of Malaysian Indian community. At the end of the Second World War, the Indians (the term today includes Indians, Pakistanis, Nepalis, Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans) constituted about 14.0 per cent of the population of Malaya. Number of them returned to India during the years of the communist insurgency and the dark days following the communal riots in May 1969. By 2,000, Indians numbered 1.8 million, representing 7.7 per cent of the total Malaysian population of 21.89 million. According to the Singhvi Committee Report, the total number of Indians in Malaysia is 1,665,000, of which 1,600,000 are Malaysian citizens, 15,000 are non resident Indians and 50,000 are stateless people. Approximately, 80.0 per cent of them are Tamils; followed by North Indians (mainly Sikhs) 7.7 per cent; Malayalis 4.7 per cent; Telugus 3.4 per cent; Sri Lankan Tamils 2.7 per cent; Pakistanis and Bangladeshis 1.1 per cent and others 0.4 per cent. As far as religion is concerned, Hindus number 81.2 per cent; Christians 8.4 per cent; Muslims 6.7 per cent; Sikhs 3.1 per cent; Buddhists 0.5 per cent and others 0.1 per cent. In the specific context of Malaysia, where Islam, the religion of the Malays, is the State religion, sections of the Muslim community of Indian origin have got assimilated into the Malay society.
We should make a distinction between the middle class (mainly non-Tamils and Sri Lankan Tamils) whose standard of living is fairly high and the working class (mainly Tamil) who are poor and getting marginalized. The working class belongs to the lower castes of the Hindu society like Adi Dravidar, Vannan, Maruttuvar, Nadar, Vanniyar etc. The Indians, especially Tamils from the Madras Presidency, were the preferred labourers to develop the rubber plantations, because they displayed unquestioned loyalty and obedience, content with what they earned and were non-rebellious by nature. Most of them continue to be weighed down by low esteem, which is worsened by lack of interaction between the well-off and the less well-off sections.
A notable feature of the Indian community is its changing socio-economic profile. In 1970, 47 per cent of the Indians were engaged in agriculture, 74 per cent of them in the plantations. With rapid economic expansion and diversification of the economy, the plantations have been converted for other purposes, including the construction of luxury homes. The uprooted Indians were only paid a pittance as compensation. They naturally migrated to urban areas and joined the squatter population. Few years ago, Samy Velu, the President of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), deplored the plight of thousands of estate workers “living in squalor in slums in dozens of long-houses and squatter settlements all over Selangor”.
Aliran, the well-known journal of the Malaysian reform movement, provided statistical details, few years ago, which made alarming reading. 40 per cent of the serious crimes in Malaysia are committed by the Indians; there are 38 Indian based gangs with 1,500 active members; during the last few years, there had been a hundred per cent increase in the number of Indian gangsters; Indians recorded the highest number of those detained under the Emergency Regulations and banished to Simpang Rengamm prison. In the field of social woes, it is the same story. In Kuala Lumpur, 14 per cent of the squatters are Indians; they have the highest suicide rates; 41 per cent of the vagrants and beggars are Indians; 20 per cent of the child abusers are Indians and also 14 per cent of the juvenile delinquents.
The communal clashes that took place between the Indians and the Malays in Kuala Lumpur in March 2001 sent shock waves throughout Malaysia. It was the worst ethnic riots since the communal clashes in May 1969. Ethnic tensions in Malaysia are mainly due to Sino-Malay rivalry; but the Indian involvement in 2001 riots (five of the six killed were Indians and the other was an Indonesian) was a sad reminder that in Malaysia’s progress towards prosperity, the Indians were being left behind.
The disadvantaged status is clearly visible in the economic sphere. The Chinese are firmly entrenched in trade, business and industry. They are reconciled to the subordinate status in the political life of the country; at the same time, they have sharpened entrepreneurial skills and have become indispensable. The status of the Malays has steadily improved as a result of the energetic drive of the Malaysian Government since the introduction of the New Economic Policy. In 1970, the Indians owned only 1.0 per cent of the share capital in limited companies, while the Chinese controlled 22.5 per cent, Malays 1.0 per cent and the rest being held by the foreigners. At the turn of the century, the Indians held only 1.5 per cent, compared to 19.4 per cent of the Malays and 38.5 per cent of the Chinese, the balance being held by the foreigners.
The deplorable status of the Tamils is directly related to poor educational attainments. Though the Malaysian Government has expanded educational facilities in a big way since independence, the fruits of education have not percolated to the disadvantaged sections of Indians population. The importance of education in the development of disadvantaged sections of population has been highlighted by many writers. It is a means of upward social and economic mobility; an avenue of modernization; an instrument to enrich cultural life and, above all, in the Malaysian context, a means of national unity and integration. The Indians continue to be the most disadvantaged section at all levels of education. The Tamil medium primary schools are in a deplorable stage. Single teacher handling multiple classes; ill equipped schools with teachers having no commitment and high drop rates are some of the serious drawbacks. The family life is characterized by alcoholism, violence against women and addiction to Tamil TV Channels. They do not provide a congenial atmosphere for study. As a result, only limited number of Tamil students reaches the university stage. The current intake of Indian students in Malaysian universities is only 6.2 per cent, most of these students hail from non-Tamil and Sri Lankan Tamil sections; the few Indian Tamils, who are lucky to get admission in the Universities, are also from relatively affluent families.
Compounding the complex situation is the general perception that increasing Islamisation of the country and destruction of Hindu temples are posing grave threats to the Hindu way of life. Given below are two illustrations which took place in 2003. The first related to Shyamala Sathiaseelan. Shyamala’s husband got converted to Islam, he gained custody of their two children and had them converted to Islam without the permission of his wife. Shyamala’s appeal for help from authorities went unheeded. The second case involved Murthy Maniam, a convert to Islam, whose dead body was buried according to Muslim rites by the religious authorities despite his widow’s claim that he had remained a practicing Hindu until his death. The non-Muslim members of the Malaysian cabinet requested the Prime Minister to provide constitutional guarantees for religious freedom, but their appeal was ignored by Prime Minister Badawi. Many Hindus also were deeply hurt when, for the first time, the UMNO General Assembly was held during Deepavali. As Dilip Lahiri, former Indian diplomat has written the UMNO youth leaders brandished and kissed the Kris (dagger) and threatened to shed Chinese and Indian blood if Malay supremacy was challenged. The Hindus also began to feel that the Government was lukewarm on the sensitive question of destruction of Hindu temples. As a result, the HINDRAF and allied organizations began to take deep roots in the Hindu community.
In the preservation of the Hindu identity, in the prevailing atmosphere of increasing Islamisation, the temples do play a very big role. The temples and religious festivals are the only visible attachment to traditions and the Hindus cling to them tenaciously. Needless to say, there is a close nexus between religion and Malay politics. The policies of the Malaysian Government have been double edged. On the one hand the leaders of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) are committed to the promotion of Islam in all possible ways. Dr. Mahathir has mentioned several times that Malaysia is an Islamic State and the Islamic identity is projected in a big way both within the country and outside. Such a policy is necessary to mobilize the Malays under the UMNO banner. Otherwise, the Malays will flock to Parti Islam (PAS) for leadership and inspiration. At the same time, the realities of Malaysia and the needs of modernization dictate that the Government must encourage a less exclusivist approach towards Islam. When the desecration of the Hindu temples began in 1978, the most horrendous being the destruction of the Murugan temple in Kerling, Prime Minister Hussein Onn came down heavily on the Islamic extremists. But the situation has been allowed to drift during recent years. In its Memorandum, the HINDRAF has pointed out that in every three weeks one Hindu temple is destroyed in Malaysia, the most significant being the demolition of the Mariamman temple in Shah Alam. The Government maintains that most of these temples have been constructed in government owned lands without proper authorization. But the temples have been functioning for many years; strangely there are no reports of the destruction of Chinese places of worship. Is it because the Chinese are more organized and will hit back if their religious beliefs are tampered with?
The question should legitimately be asked – to what extent has the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), which represents the Indian community in the government, has succeeded in its primary objective of safeguarding the interests of the Indian community? An Indian observer of the Malaysian scene comes to a dismal conclusion. Factional struggle and disunity had been the major curse of the Indian community. Since its inception in 1946, fight for power, petty politicking and mud slinging had been its major attributes. The rivalry between Devaser and Sambandan; between Sambandan and Manickavasagam; Manickavasagam and Sami Velu; and among Sami Velu, Padmanabhan, Subramaniam and Panditan – it brings no laurels to the Indian community. Samy Velu is more interested in ingratiating himself with the Malay leadership rather than championing legitimate Indian interests and aspirations. What is more, self-help measures, initiated by the MIC, with much fanfare, have not led to desired results. For example, the Maika Holdings Bhd, started in 1982, as an investment vehicle for the Malaysian Indians, incurred heavy losses, resulting in the loss of savings of large number of poor Indians. Frustration and anger against the leadership found expression when the Indian youth began to disturb the functions organized by the MIC; very often Samy Velu was booed and jeered. How distant the MIC was from the ordinary Indians became evident when the results of the 2008 parliamentary elections were announced. Of the nine MIC candidates of the Barisan Nasional, only three could win their seats, and that too with slender margins, those who were defeated included Samy Velu, the President of the MIC, who lost the Sungai Siput constituency in the Perak State. The emergence of the HINDRAF has to be viewed in the backdrop of the alienation of large sections of Indians, coupled with a non-performing MIC.
The unfortunate events in Malaysia naturally attracted the attention of Indian leaders. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Foreign Affairs Minister Pranab Mukerjee and Chief Minister Karunanidhi have expressed concern and regret over the turn of events in Malaysia. Their objective is not to interfere with the internal affairs of a friendly country, but to influence the Malaysian Government to initiate immediate steps for the redressal of long pending grievances. The Malaysian response has been unfortunate. Representatives of the Malaysian Government, including the Prime Minister, have demanded that the Government of Tamil Nadu should keep off from what it considers to be an internal matter of Malaysia. What is the record of the Malaysian Government in this respect? As a leading member of the international Islamic organization, the Malaysian Government has sharply criticized many governments for pursuing policies, which have adversely affected the Moslem communities. The UMNO and the PAS, the two leading Malay parties, have, on several occasions since independence, criticized the policies of the Thai Government which has led to the alienation of the Malay minority in Southern Thailand. The Malay leaders have also criticized the Government of Singapore for pursuing discriminatory policies against the Malay minority in the island. The Malaysian criticism of India, to say the least, is an illustration of the pot calling the kettle black.
The increasing intolerance of the Malaysian Government and its vocal advocacy of OIC sponsored causes have cast a long shadow over India – Malaysia relations. As the former Indian diplomat, Dilip Lahiri has pointed out, on a range of issues affecting India-Southeast Asia relations, Malaysia had been the “most difficult” among the member states of ASEAN. The Malaysian Government is preparing itself to crack down on the HINDRAF; few government spokesmen have started leveling the unsubstantiated charge that the HINDRAF has links with the Tamil Tigers. The perceptive Indian observers of the Southeast Asian scene remember that when General Rabuka began systematically to discriminate against the Indian community in Fiji, in order to justify himself, he was quoting chapter and verse from Dr. Mahathir’s book, The Malay Dilemma. Few years ago, in Brickfields in Kuala Lumpur, few Indian expatriates, who were working in the IT industry, were rounded up and detained as illegal immigrants, though they had proper documents to prove that they had entered Malaysia through legal channels. The shocked Indian diplomats immediately protested, and the Malaysian Government had to tender an apology for its inhuman behaviour. Turbluent times are ahead in Malaysia and for the Malaysian Indians.
The Malaysian Indian community is at the cross roads today. If the present situation is allowed to drift and deteriorate, the community would suffer untold damages and would be left behind in the economic and educational advancement of the country. If the present hardships are to be overcome, it is important the Indian community must re-evaluate its role and chalk out a new destiny by sinking its differences and working as a team. The minority character of the Indian community and its vulnerable position makes such a task all the more urgent and imperative. The Malaysian Government must also view the marginalized and impoverished Indian community with greater sympathy and understanding and ensure that the Indians, to begin with, at least obtain a share equal to their proportion in the population.
(Dr. V. Suryanarayan is Senior Professor and Director (Retd), Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Madras. This paper was presented in the International Seminar on India and Asia-Pacific: Convergence and Divergence at the Centre for Southeast Asian and Pacific Studies, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati on 13th October 2008).
Back to the top
The unprecedented demonstration by Malaysian Indians before the British High Commission in Kula Lumpur at the end of November 2007, under the sponsorship of the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF), has brought into sharp focus the pathetic situation in which the Indian community finds itself today. The HINDRAF is a coalition of 30 non-governmental organizations, committed to the preservation and promotion of the Hindu identity. The coalition had been agitating against what it calls the unofficial policy of temple demolition and the steady introduction of Sharia-based law. The Memorandum, submitted to the British High Commission, demanded that the United Kingdom should move an emergency resolution in the United Nations condemning the “ethnic cleansing” taking place in Malaysia. It also appealed that the issue should be referred to the World Court and International Criminal Court of Justice for crimes against its own ethnic minority Indians. In August 2007 the Malaysian Indians had approached the Royal Court of Justice demanding compensation of US Dollars 4 Trillion, which works out to US Dollars one million to every Malaysian Indian, for bringing their forefathers as indentured labourers and failing to protect their rights and interests on the eve of Malayan independence.
The Malaysian Government, true to its authoritarian traditions, refused permission to hold the rally, arrested the leaders and used tear gas and water cannon to disperse the nearly 35,000 demonstrators. The leaders of the HINDRAF should know that historical wrongs perpetrated during the colonial era, like the indenture system, cannot be undone. Presumably their objective was to highlight the increasing marginalization of the Indian community in the social, economic, political and cultural life of Malaysia. A Malaysian Indian student, Ananthi, a Rhodes Scholar, reading for her PhD in Oxford University, echoed the feelings of the overwhelming majority of her community, in a letter widely circulated in Malaysia. To quote Ananthi, “It was about being neglected, about not having a seat at the table to bargain, about having a national and communal leadership that we do not trust and is utterly discreditable. It is about saying no to being the forgotten Indians, and not enough of us in our comfortable houses, those of us who worked to manage to work the system to our benefit – stood with the other Indians, who are not so different from us”. For the first time, the marginalized Malaysian Indians displayed the power of Makkal Shakti (people’s power).
This paper is divided into two sections. The first deals with the changing political dynamics in Malaysia and the second analyses the factors that have led to the marginalization of the overwhelming sections of the Malaysian Indian community.
It has been rightly said that every issue in Malaysia, whether political, cultural or economic, had always been and would continue to be dominated by ethnic considerations. The entire political system is based on communal politics. The ordinary Malaysian grows up and lives under a pervasive communal atmosphere. While ethnicity would continue to dominate, the nature of political discourse is changing from time to time, depending upon the changing political dynamics. In order to put the issues in proper perspective, it is necessary to highlight certain political realities.
The Malays feel that they are the indigenous people (Bhumiputra) and, therefore, they have a special claim for dominance in the political and cultural life of the country. The British colonialists upheld this claim and ruled the country in the name of Malay Sultans, on whom sovereignty vested. At the same time, as part of imperialist objectives, the British also encouraged large-scale immigration of Chinese and Indians for the economic exploitation of the country’s natural resources. The existence of a plural society prevented the growth of anti-British feelings and a sense of common nationalism in Malaya before the Second World War. As the English novelist Somerset Maugham wrote, “Malaya was a first rate country for third rate English men”.
The political awakening of the Malays, in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, following the introduction of the Malayan Union Proposals (a unitary state to which the Sultans were to cede their sovereignty) and the unity that they forged under the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) had far reaching consequences. Not only did it compel the British to withdraw the Malayan Union proposals, it also clearly revealed that the Malays would never give up their pre-eminent position in the political life of Malaya. While in later years, the Malay leaders did co-operate with the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC), in the larger interests of Malaya as a whole, the dynamic leadership of Malayan nationalism has always remained in Malay hands. The Alliance, which was voted to power in 1955, was not an alliance of equal partners; it was an alliance in which the supremacy of the Malays was clearly established. The transformation of the Alliance into Barisan Nasional in the 1970’s, with the incorporation of various Malay and non-Malay political parties, further reduced the political clout of the MCA and the MIC.
On the eve of independence in August 1957, the Malays and the non-Malays were roughly equal in numbers (Malays 49.8 per cent, Chinese 37.1 per cent, Indians 11.1 per cent and the others 2.0 per cent). Over the years the demographic structure has radically altered to the advantage of the Malays. Higher rate of natural increase and large scale immigration of Indonesian Malays have contributed to the burgeoning of Malay population. The Bhumiputras (Malays plus the indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak, which were incorporated into Malaysia in 1963) constitute nearly two thirds of the population; the Chinese constitute 23.7 per cent and the Indians 7.1 per cent.
An important clue to the understanding of the political economy is the social and political contract arrived by the elite of the three communities on the eve of independence. It was assumed that the economic predominance of the Chinese would be offset by the political supremacy of the Malays. It was believed that with the passage of time this equilibrium would give way to a more balanced one, the Malays would play a greater role in the economic life and the Chinese and the Indians would play a greater role in politics. The pre-eminent position of the Malays was enshrined in the Constitution – the retention of the Malay Sultanate, the acceptance of Islam as the State Religion, constitutional provisions safeguarding the “special rights” of the Malays and the acceptance of Malay as the national and official language. The major concession made to the non-Malays was the conferment of citizenship on them.
The fragility of the Malaysian political system came out into the open on May 13, 1969, when following the reverses suffered by the Alliance in the general elections, large-scale Sino-Malay clashes took place in Kuala Lumpur. Emergency was proclaimed and when democratic process was restored after amending the Constitution, Malay political power was further entrenched. The Royal Commission appointed to enquire into the riots was of the view that the crisis was due to the disenchantment and frustration of the Malays, who had not enjoyed the fruits of independence. In 1970, Malay corporate ownership was a meager 2.4 per cent, compared with 63.3 per cent enjoyed by the foreigners, 22.4 per cent enjoyed by the Chinese and 10.0 per cent by unknown parties. While the overall poverty incidence was high, 51.2 per cent in 1970, 76.0 per cent of them were Malays. A New Economic Policy (replaced by National Integrity Plan in 2004) was launched to bring about economic transformation, with particular emphasis on the development of the Malays. In the political sphere, democratic rights were curtailed, it was made a seditious criminal offence to challenge the special rights conferred on the Malays, the language provisions in the Constitution, institution of Sultanate and citizenship laws.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Mahathir (1981-2003) Malaysia underwent a fundamental transformation. From being a producer of primary commodities, it had become an industrialized country, virtually an economic power house in the ASEAN region. Despite occasional hiccups, for example, during the Asian economic crisis, the country registered an economic growth averaging 8.0 per cent. The absolute poverty level came down from 51.2 per cent in 1970 to 7.0 per cent in 2000. By 1990, the Malay share in the corporate capital went up to 19.2 per cent, Chinese 46.8 per cent and the Indians 1.5 per cent, the nominee companies 8.5 per cent and the balance owned by the foreigners. What further endeared Dr. Mahathir was his strong criticism of American foreign policy in West Asia and Southeast Asia.
The negative side of the story was increasing authoritarianism. In addition to continuing criticism of the non-Malays about the pro-Malay and pro-Islamic policies of the government, the discontent also spread to Malay middle class. The first to raise the banner of revolt was Tunku Razaleigh Hamzah, who in 1987 formed a secular Malay party, Parti Sengamat 46 (Spirit of 46). Subsequently Razaleigh was readmitted into UMNO. Far more important was the revolt led by Anwar Ibrahim in 1998, who formed a political party called Kedilan (Justice Party) under the leadership of his wife. The unfair trial of Anwar Ibrahim, coupled with the third degree treatment meted out to him, has earned him considerable good will in Malaysia and abroad. After his release, Anwar Ibrahim started speaking in a more democratic idiom, for widening the democratic space, tolerance of dissent and the establishment of a truly pluralist society, with emphasis on redistributive justice. He was prepared to champion the non-Malay cause when he promised to abolish the New Economic Policy and to promote equality for all. The cumulative effect was the ruling Barisan Nasional suffered serious reverses in the general election held in March 2008. In the 12th general election, the UMNO and its coalition partners in the Barisan Nasional suffered unprecedented reverses. It lost its two third majority in parliament. What is more, it was removed from power in four states – Kedah, Perak, Penang and Selangor – besides failing to regain power in Kelantan. What is more, Anwar Ibrahim re-entered parliament by winning the by election in the Permatang Pauh, with a huge majority. Anwar Ibrahim is openly making a bid for power by enticing ruling party members of parliament into his fold. Another important consequence was the decision of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to expedite the transfer of power to his deputy Najib Abdul Razak.
An important political reality must be highlighted. It is extremely difficult for opposition parties to function in Malaysia. The dracnonian Internal Security Act, which provides for detention without trial, has been frequently used against opposition leaders, Malay and non-Malay alike. The Internal Security Act is inhuman, because it denies the victim a fundamental human right, the right to a fair trial. Anwar Ibrahim underlined some of the evils of the Malaysian political system in an international conference in New Delhi, few months ago, “What is an election if the political parties in the opposition do not have access to freedom of speech, assembly and movement, necessary to voice their criticisms of the government openly and to bring alternative policies and candidates to the voters? Where I come from, the opposition is barred from the air waves, rallies are not allowed and opposition newspapers operate underground”. Prof. Harold Crouch, an astute observer of the Malaysian political scene, has remarked, “It is hard to place Malaysia in a clear cut category between democracy and authoritarianism”. He concludes “Malaysia is neither democratic nor authoritarian … as the Malaysian political system has been oscillating between repression and responsiveness”.
Let me now take up the second part of the essay dealing with the complex issues relating to the marginalization of the vast majority of Malaysian Indian community. At the end of the Second World War, the Indians (the term today includes Indians, Pakistanis, Nepalis, Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans) constituted about 14.0 per cent of the population of Malaya. Number of them returned to India during the years of the communist insurgency and the dark days following the communal riots in May 1969. By 2,000, Indians numbered 1.8 million, representing 7.7 per cent of the total Malaysian population of 21.89 million. According to the Singhvi Committee Report, the total number of Indians in Malaysia is 1,665,000, of which 1,600,000 are Malaysian citizens, 15,000 are non resident Indians and 50,000 are stateless people. Approximately, 80.0 per cent of them are Tamils; followed by North Indians (mainly Sikhs) 7.7 per cent; Malayalis 4.7 per cent; Telugus 3.4 per cent; Sri Lankan Tamils 2.7 per cent; Pakistanis and Bangladeshis 1.1 per cent and others 0.4 per cent. As far as religion is concerned, Hindus number 81.2 per cent; Christians 8.4 per cent; Muslims 6.7 per cent; Sikhs 3.1 per cent; Buddhists 0.5 per cent and others 0.1 per cent. In the specific context of Malaysia, where Islam, the religion of the Malays, is the State religion, sections of the Muslim community of Indian origin have got assimilated into the Malay society.
We should make a distinction between the middle class (mainly non-Tamils and Sri Lankan Tamils) whose standard of living is fairly high and the working class (mainly Tamil) who are poor and getting marginalized. The working class belongs to the lower castes of the Hindu society like Adi Dravidar, Vannan, Maruttuvar, Nadar, Vanniyar etc. The Indians, especially Tamils from the Madras Presidency, were the preferred labourers to develop the rubber plantations, because they displayed unquestioned loyalty and obedience, content with what they earned and were non-rebellious by nature. Most of them continue to be weighed down by low esteem, which is worsened by lack of interaction between the well-off and the less well-off sections.
A notable feature of the Indian community is its changing socio-economic profile. In 1970, 47 per cent of the Indians were engaged in agriculture, 74 per cent of them in the plantations. With rapid economic expansion and diversification of the economy, the plantations have been converted for other purposes, including the construction of luxury homes. The uprooted Indians were only paid a pittance as compensation. They naturally migrated to urban areas and joined the squatter population. Few years ago, Samy Velu, the President of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), deplored the plight of thousands of estate workers “living in squalor in slums in dozens of long-houses and squatter settlements all over Selangor”.
Aliran, the well-known journal of the Malaysian reform movement, provided statistical details, few years ago, which made alarming reading. 40 per cent of the serious crimes in Malaysia are committed by the Indians; there are 38 Indian based gangs with 1,500 active members; during the last few years, there had been a hundred per cent increase in the number of Indian gangsters; Indians recorded the highest number of those detained under the Emergency Regulations and banished to Simpang Rengamm prison. In the field of social woes, it is the same story. In Kuala Lumpur, 14 per cent of the squatters are Indians; they have the highest suicide rates; 41 per cent of the vagrants and beggars are Indians; 20 per cent of the child abusers are Indians and also 14 per cent of the juvenile delinquents.
The communal clashes that took place between the Indians and the Malays in Kuala Lumpur in March 2001 sent shock waves throughout Malaysia. It was the worst ethnic riots since the communal clashes in May 1969. Ethnic tensions in Malaysia are mainly due to Sino-Malay rivalry; but the Indian involvement in 2001 riots (five of the six killed were Indians and the other was an Indonesian) was a sad reminder that in Malaysia’s progress towards prosperity, the Indians were being left behind.
The disadvantaged status is clearly visible in the economic sphere. The Chinese are firmly entrenched in trade, business and industry. They are reconciled to the subordinate status in the political life of the country; at the same time, they have sharpened entrepreneurial skills and have become indispensable. The status of the Malays has steadily improved as a result of the energetic drive of the Malaysian Government since the introduction of the New Economic Policy. In 1970, the Indians owned only 1.0 per cent of the share capital in limited companies, while the Chinese controlled 22.5 per cent, Malays 1.0 per cent and the rest being held by the foreigners. At the turn of the century, the Indians held only 1.5 per cent, compared to 19.4 per cent of the Malays and 38.5 per cent of the Chinese, the balance being held by the foreigners.
The deplorable status of the Tamils is directly related to poor educational attainments. Though the Malaysian Government has expanded educational facilities in a big way since independence, the fruits of education have not percolated to the disadvantaged sections of Indians population. The importance of education in the development of disadvantaged sections of population has been highlighted by many writers. It is a means of upward social and economic mobility; an avenue of modernization; an instrument to enrich cultural life and, above all, in the Malaysian context, a means of national unity and integration. The Indians continue to be the most disadvantaged section at all levels of education. The Tamil medium primary schools are in a deplorable stage. Single teacher handling multiple classes; ill equipped schools with teachers having no commitment and high drop rates are some of the serious drawbacks. The family life is characterized by alcoholism, violence against women and addiction to Tamil TV Channels. They do not provide a congenial atmosphere for study. As a result, only limited number of Tamil students reaches the university stage. The current intake of Indian students in Malaysian universities is only 6.2 per cent, most of these students hail from non-Tamil and Sri Lankan Tamil sections; the few Indian Tamils, who are lucky to get admission in the Universities, are also from relatively affluent families.
Compounding the complex situation is the general perception that increasing Islamisation of the country and destruction of Hindu temples are posing grave threats to the Hindu way of life. Given below are two illustrations which took place in 2003. The first related to Shyamala Sathiaseelan. Shyamala’s husband got converted to Islam, he gained custody of their two children and had them converted to Islam without the permission of his wife. Shyamala’s appeal for help from authorities went unheeded. The second case involved Murthy Maniam, a convert to Islam, whose dead body was buried according to Muslim rites by the religious authorities despite his widow’s claim that he had remained a practicing Hindu until his death. The non-Muslim members of the Malaysian cabinet requested the Prime Minister to provide constitutional guarantees for religious freedom, but their appeal was ignored by Prime Minister Badawi. Many Hindus also were deeply hurt when, for the first time, the UMNO General Assembly was held during Deepavali. As Dilip Lahiri, former Indian diplomat has written the UMNO youth leaders brandished and kissed the Kris (dagger) and threatened to shed Chinese and Indian blood if Malay supremacy was challenged. The Hindus also began to feel that the Government was lukewarm on the sensitive question of destruction of Hindu temples. As a result, the HINDRAF and allied organizations began to take deep roots in the Hindu community.
In the preservation of the Hindu identity, in the prevailing atmosphere of increasing Islamisation, the temples do play a very big role. The temples and religious festivals are the only visible attachment to traditions and the Hindus cling to them tenaciously. Needless to say, there is a close nexus between religion and Malay politics. The policies of the Malaysian Government have been double edged. On the one hand the leaders of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) are committed to the promotion of Islam in all possible ways. Dr. Mahathir has mentioned several times that Malaysia is an Islamic State and the Islamic identity is projected in a big way both within the country and outside. Such a policy is necessary to mobilize the Malays under the UMNO banner. Otherwise, the Malays will flock to Parti Islam (PAS) for leadership and inspiration. At the same time, the realities of Malaysia and the needs of modernization dictate that the Government must encourage a less exclusivist approach towards Islam. When the desecration of the Hindu temples began in 1978, the most horrendous being the destruction of the Murugan temple in Kerling, Prime Minister Hussein Onn came down heavily on the Islamic extremists. But the situation has been allowed to drift during recent years. In its Memorandum, the HINDRAF has pointed out that in every three weeks one Hindu temple is destroyed in Malaysia, the most significant being the demolition of the Mariamman temple in Shah Alam. The Government maintains that most of these temples have been constructed in government owned lands without proper authorization. But the temples have been functioning for many years; strangely there are no reports of the destruction of Chinese places of worship. Is it because the Chinese are more organized and will hit back if their religious beliefs are tampered with?
The question should legitimately be asked – to what extent has the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), which represents the Indian community in the government, has succeeded in its primary objective of safeguarding the interests of the Indian community? An Indian observer of the Malaysian scene comes to a dismal conclusion. Factional struggle and disunity had been the major curse of the Indian community. Since its inception in 1946, fight for power, petty politicking and mud slinging had been its major attributes. The rivalry between Devaser and Sambandan; between Sambandan and Manickavasagam; Manickavasagam and Sami Velu; and among Sami Velu, Padmanabhan, Subramaniam and Panditan – it brings no laurels to the Indian community. Samy Velu is more interested in ingratiating himself with the Malay leadership rather than championing legitimate Indian interests and aspirations. What is more, self-help measures, initiated by the MIC, with much fanfare, have not led to desired results. For example, the Maika Holdings Bhd, started in 1982, as an investment vehicle for the Malaysian Indians, incurred heavy losses, resulting in the loss of savings of large number of poor Indians. Frustration and anger against the leadership found expression when the Indian youth began to disturb the functions organized by the MIC; very often Samy Velu was booed and jeered. How distant the MIC was from the ordinary Indians became evident when the results of the 2008 parliamentary elections were announced. Of the nine MIC candidates of the Barisan Nasional, only three could win their seats, and that too with slender margins, those who were defeated included Samy Velu, the President of the MIC, who lost the Sungai Siput constituency in the Perak State. The emergence of the HINDRAF has to be viewed in the backdrop of the alienation of large sections of Indians, coupled with a non-performing MIC.
The unfortunate events in Malaysia naturally attracted the attention of Indian leaders. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Foreign Affairs Minister Pranab Mukerjee and Chief Minister Karunanidhi have expressed concern and regret over the turn of events in Malaysia. Their objective is not to interfere with the internal affairs of a friendly country, but to influence the Malaysian Government to initiate immediate steps for the redressal of long pending grievances. The Malaysian response has been unfortunate. Representatives of the Malaysian Government, including the Prime Minister, have demanded that the Government of Tamil Nadu should keep off from what it considers to be an internal matter of Malaysia. What is the record of the Malaysian Government in this respect? As a leading member of the international Islamic organization, the Malaysian Government has sharply criticized many governments for pursuing policies, which have adversely affected the Moslem communities. The UMNO and the PAS, the two leading Malay parties, have, on several occasions since independence, criticized the policies of the Thai Government which has led to the alienation of the Malay minority in Southern Thailand. The Malay leaders have also criticized the Government of Singapore for pursuing discriminatory policies against the Malay minority in the island. The Malaysian criticism of India, to say the least, is an illustration of the pot calling the kettle black.
The increasing intolerance of the Malaysian Government and its vocal advocacy of OIC sponsored causes have cast a long shadow over India – Malaysia relations. As the former Indian diplomat, Dilip Lahiri has pointed out, on a range of issues affecting India-Southeast Asia relations, Malaysia had been the “most difficult” among the member states of ASEAN. The Malaysian Government is preparing itself to crack down on the HINDRAF; few government spokesmen have started leveling the unsubstantiated charge that the HINDRAF has links with the Tamil Tigers. The perceptive Indian observers of the Southeast Asian scene remember that when General Rabuka began systematically to discriminate against the Indian community in Fiji, in order to justify himself, he was quoting chapter and verse from Dr. Mahathir’s book, The Malay Dilemma. Few years ago, in Brickfields in Kuala Lumpur, few Indian expatriates, who were working in the IT industry, were rounded up and detained as illegal immigrants, though they had proper documents to prove that they had entered Malaysia through legal channels. The shocked Indian diplomats immediately protested, and the Malaysian Government had to tender an apology for its inhuman behaviour. Turbluent times are ahead in Malaysia and for the Malaysian Indians.
The Malaysian Indian community is at the cross roads today. If the present situation is allowed to drift and deteriorate, the community would suffer untold damages and would be left behind in the economic and educational advancement of the country. If the present hardships are to be overcome, it is important the Indian community must re-evaluate its role and chalk out a new destiny by sinking its differences and working as a team. The minority character of the Indian community and its vulnerable position makes such a task all the more urgent and imperative. The Malaysian Government must also view the marginalized and impoverished Indian community with greater sympathy and understanding and ensure that the Indians, to begin with, at least obtain a share equal to their proportion in the population.
(Dr. V. Suryanarayan is Senior Professor and Director (Retd), Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Madras. This paper was presented in the International Seminar on India and Asia-Pacific: Convergence and Divergence at the Centre for Southeast Asian and Pacific Studies, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati on 13th October 2008).
Back to the top
October 13, 2008
RUSSIA’S MONROE DOCTRINE: STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
Source: SOUTH ASIA ANSLYSIS GROUP
By Dr. Subhash Kapila
Introductory Observations
Russia’s assertion of its resurgence was forcefully dramatized in recent weeks not only by its military intervention in Georgia, but more significantly by its enunciation of Russia’s own Monroe Doctrine and Russia’s plans for military rearmament. Russia has already commenced major military exercises with all-out war scenarios.
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine which emerged from what is now being called the Medvedev Doctrine or Russia’s new Foreign Policy Doctrine in declaratory terms lays down the thrust lines henceforth for the conduct of Russia’s foreign policy. This was within six weeks of the assumption of office by President Medvedev.
President Medvedev followed this Declaration by the articulation of a Defense Doctrine laying down priorities for Russia’s rearmament program. Implicit in this was Russia’s intention to add more muscle to its new Foreign Policy Doctrine with specific relevance to reclaiming its spheres of influence.
Actually, both the new Russian Foreign Policy Doctrine and the Defence Doctrine are a continuation in content of the broad policies followed by former President Putin.
The dramatism, however, lies in the timing of the Foreign Policy Doctrine and Defence Doctrine. Analytically, it can be maintained that Russia was strategically and politically dismayed with the United States and Western casual indifference to Russia’s warnings on not supporting Kosavo’s unilateral declaration of independence and not put into effect US plans for missile defence deployments in Eastern Europe.
Russia’s riposte over these two issues was not slow in coming and was sharply executed in Georgia. In what can be construed as a pre-emptive bid to forestall further encroachments on Russia’s strategic turf the enunciation of the new Foreign Policy Doctrine is aimed at “putting on notice” the United States, the West and more specifically the former Republics of the Soviet Union on Russia’s periphery to stop becoming pawns of the United States strategic tussle with Russia.
The Russian Monroe Doctrine has far reaching strategic implications both at the global level and the regional level. It must therefore be seriously noted by the international community to avoid the possibilities of a second Cold War gaining momentum.
This Paper attempts to analyze the global and regional implications of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine and related perspectives under the following heads:
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Significant Features Analysed
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Global Implications
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Regional Implications
Russia’s Military Preparedness: Major War Scenarios Exercises and Defence Doctrine
Centrality of China and India in Russia’s Foreign Policy Doctrine
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Significant Features Analyzed
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine or in other words the new Foreign Policy Doctrine of Russia articulated by President Medvedev is a lengthy document whose full contents can be viewed on Russian Government's official websites. For the purposes of this Paper the five major thrusts of Russia’s new Foreign Policy Doctrine are one being touched.
The five significant principles of its new Foreign Policy Doctrine publicly declared by President Medvedev are as follows:
“Firstly, Russia recognizes the primacy of fundamental principles of international law, which define the relations between civilized nations. We will build our relations with other countries within the framework of these principles and the concept of international law.”
“Secondly, the world should be multipolar. A single pole is unacceptable. Domination is something we can’t allow. We cannot accept a world order in which one country makes all the decisions, even as serious and influential country as the United States of America. Such a world in unstable and threatened with conflict.”
“Thirdly, Russia does not want confrontation with any country. Russia has no intention of isolating itself. We will develop friendly relations with Europe, the United States of America and other countries as much as possible.”
“Fourthly, protecting the lives and dignity of our citizens, wherever they may be is an unquestionable priority for our country. Our foreign policy decisions will be based on this need. We will also protect the interests of our business community abroad. It should be clear to all that we will respond to any aggressive acts committed against us.
“Fifthly, as is the case with other countries, there are regions in which Russia has “privileged interests”. These regions home to countries with which we share special historical relations and are bound together as friends and good neighbours. We will pay particular attention to our work in these regions and build friendly ties with these countries, our close neighbours.
When these five principles are analyzed, the strategic message that Russia wants to sent out to the international community in declaratory terms, and in particular to the United States, the West and the countries on its perimeter, specifically can be said to be as follows:
Russia is no longer willing to accept the unipolar strategic dominance of the global power system by the United States. Russia sees a pronounced role for itself in the global power system.
Russia is looking for a multipolar global power configuration to offset American strategic dominance.
Russia favors an international order which operates within the framework of international institutions like the United Nations and international laws and conventions. The emphasis on “international law, which defines the relations between civilized nations” needs to be noted. It is an oblique reference to the United States.
When it is said that Russia has no intention of isolating itself internationally, it really implies that Russia will play a pro-active role in international affairs.
The fourth and fifth points made by President Medvedev are in essence the enunciation of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine.
The fourth point in the Russian Doctrine is seen to be picked from US national strategy doctrines. Is essence it means that Russia will not hesitate to intervene even militarily should an eventuality arise where security of Russian citizens abroad or even business interests are involved. This has implications for the former Republics of the Soviet Union in which reside sizeable Russian minorities. In these former Republics lie substantial Russian business interests in the form of oil and gas resources. This has to be read as a notice for military interventions.
The last point is again a declaration of the Russian Monroe Doctrine claiming “privileged interest” in a number of regions. In immediate terms this can be construed that Russia has “privileged interests” in all former Russian Republics in Central Asia and on its Western peripheries like the Baltics, with some of them now in the fold of the United States and NATO.
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Global Implications
The imperatives for enunciation of a Russian Monroe Doctrine in more ways than one marks the lowest ebb in the history of Russia-United States relations after 1991 when the Cold War ended.
The inevitability of a second Cold War emerging between Russia and the United States stands discussed in detail in this Author’s recent SAAG Papers on Russia’s resurgence.
In one of these Papers, this Author had brought out that for the United States and the West, the Cold War never ended. If it had then NATO would have gone extinct like its counterpart the Warsaw Pact. In fact the eastward creep of NATO along with the externally inspired “colour revolutions” on Russia’s periphery has prompted Russia’s ripostes including this new Doctrine to pre-empt further strategic neutralization of Russia’s power attributes and limiting her sphere of influence.
The global implications of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine have to be viewed in this light and the patterns of the earlier Cold War would necessarily get repeated once again.
The global implications of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine can therefore be summarized as under:
Russia-United States relations once again would enter a strategically competitive if not confrontational state.
Russia and the United States consequently, would harbor heightened threat perceptions of each other. Strategic mistrust would prevail.
Russia and the United States would not enter into a direct armed conflict. Their strategic rivalries and tussles would be executed through “proxies” in strategic regions of the world.
Russia is likely to indulge in a rapid military rearmament build-up to lessen its differentials in military balance with the United States.
The NATO military alliance enlargement will prompt the enlargement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Russian Collective Security Treaty Organization.
Russia would attempt “forward military presence” deployments in regions strategically sensitive to the United States.
All in all, at the global level, the revived Cold war would generate turbulence and instability in the Middle East, East Asia and even Eastern Europe as Russia strategically challenges the United States.
The global implications of the Russian Monroe Doctrine, besides the above manifestations in Russia-US bilateral equation has also to be viewed at three other levels globally in terms of strategic impact, political impact and economic impact.
The global strategic impact of the Russian Monroe Doctrine would weigh heavily on United States global image of unquestioned leadership. The United States today is in a state of “imperial overstretch” and its options to effectively deal with Russia’s revived challenge are limited. Today Russia can generate more strategic irritants globally for the United States than America can do so in response.
Politically, the global impact of the Russian Monroe Doctrine can be expected to weigh heavily on the Atlantic Alliance and the new found American allies in Eastern Europe. Political ties could loosen and alliance unity frayed when country-specific challenges are posed by Russia’s resurgence to US allies.
Russia today enjoys significant economic leverages in the energy sector which it can employ decisively to modulate comprehensively the policies of US allies both in Europe and the Asia Pacific. Besides in the ensuing strategic confrontation that may ensue, even with drop in oil prices, Russia would not be constrained in use of its economic leverages resting on the energy sector nor would its strategic armament plans be restricted.
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Regional Implications
The regional implications of the Russian Monroe Doctrine needs to be primarily examined in the context of the United States overall military and political strategy directed towards Russia in the post-Cold War era of the 1990s and thereafter.
The essentials of the United States post-Cold War strategy against Russia were as follows: (1) Establish a US military presence in Central Asia (2) Prevent a Russian foothold in the Middle East and Gulf Region more specifically (3) Eastward creep of NATO to Russia’s doorsteps (4) Dilute or neutralize Russia’s leverages over Central Asia and Caucasus energy resources.
The Russian Monroe Doctrine when fully effective would greatly neutralize US strategic objectives outlined above. The US military presence today in Central Asia is notional. With these regions claimed by Russia as “privileged interests” the United States may be hard-pressed to keep its military presence in Central Asia.
Russia has already established a strategic bridgehead in the Middle East and the Gulf Region with a number of strategic forays by former President Putin which stand covered, in this Author’s SAAG Papers so named in the period 2005-2007.
Syria seems to be emerging as hosting a major forward military presence to Russia on the Mediterranean littoral in exchange for Russian military hardware. The naval base at Tartus is being upgraded for the Russian Navy.
The most notable impact in the Middle East of Russian Monroe Doctrine has been in Israel. Israel military advisers were in Georgia with US military advisers till the Russian military intervention. With Israeli intelligence getting indication of Russian military intervention, Israel military advisers were hastily withdrawn. Israel is acutely aware that Russia could generate a host of strategic and military problems for Israel, should Israel not be careful in respecting Russian strategic sensitivities. Israel is reported to be assuaging Russian concerns on this count.
The eastward creep of NATO seems to have been halted in its tracks even before the Georgia intervention. Germany and other European nations effectively blocked the question of admission of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO strongly advocated by the United States.
American efforts to bypass Russian territory by new pipeline alignments going through Georgia etc has prompted Russia to accelerate its pipeline grid to China and Japan, both nations having pumped in billions of dollars to garner Russian oil and gas supplies. Europe has no options in this regard and hence a direct under-sea pipeline from Russia to Germany is under construction. Russia has therefore more options in the energy sector than the United States can block.
Regionally, the major impact of the Russian Monroe Doctrine will be on the Atlantic Alliance. Europe’s major nations like Germany and France do not share American perspectives of Russia. Historically, it needs to be remembered that Russia was a very much European country, much before the United States emergence as a nation. Europe today needs Russia in more ways than one and both sides are conscious of this strategic reality.
Russia’s new Monroe Doctrine and “privileged interest” in the former Soviet Republics to begin with would facilitate Russia once again weighing heavily on the regions of Central Asia, the Northern Tier of the Middle East and on Russia’s western peripheries.
Russia’s next steps in enlarging her sphere of influence could extend to countries as far as Cuba, Venezuela and re-establishing Russian presence in Cam Ranh in Vietnam.
Russia’s Military Preparedness: Major War Scenarios Exercises and Defence Doctrines
In earlier Papers of this author on the subject the following stands reflected: (1) Russia’s multi-billion dollars rearmament program (2) Introduction of new generation of strategic assets i.e. ICBMs, SLBMs and Cruise Missiles (3) Russian naval presence in the Mediterranean (4) Russian bombers flights over the Pacific and the Atlantic.
All of the above suggest that Russia has started flexing its military muscles and making its military image globally visible in keeping with her global strategic ambitions.
Russia recently held her first major military war exercise in the last 20 years on the borders near Kazakhstan. The exercise named Ex. MOBILITY 2008 was attended by President Medvedev and other Russian dignitaries.
The notable feature of this Ex MOBILITY 2008 was the military scenario that was given as the background. The scenario was of a Local Conflict in Russia’s vicinity escalating into an all out war with land, sea and air dimensions between Russia and the West.
The ultimate scenario was a global nuclear conflict between Russia and the United States.
President Medvedev referring to events in George observed that: “We have seen that an absolutely real war can erupt suddenly, and simmering local conflicts which are sometimes even called “frozen” can turn into a real military firestorm”.
The fact that needs to be registered by the international community is that Russia is very serious about her intent to emerge as a superpower once again. It is even further preparing itself for a global conflict, sensing that such an eventuality could well nigh be possible.
In continuation of the Monroe Doctrine, President Medvedev spelt out a new Defence Doctrine incorporating five major priorities for the Russian military, namely:
Russian combat formations and units to achieve “permanent readiness state” by 2020 by massive reorganization, reequipping and redeployment
Russia’s Command and Control Systems to be modernized
Modernization and upgradation of Russian military hardware
Military doctrines and training to be given high priority
Pay and allowance of Russian armed forces to be enhanced
Russia seems to have embarked in real earnest on a significant upgradation of her military capabilities which stood neglected for nearly a decade or so One can now expect that with this sort of drive and lessons learnt from its Georgia military intervention, the Russian Armed Forces to be more combat ready and combat effective.
The emphasis will be on military intervention missions in Russia's spheres of influence, global force projection and readiness for even a nuclear conflict. It needs to be remembered that Russia's strategic nuclear assets outnumber those of USA..
Centrality of China and India in Russia’s Foreign Policy Doctrine
The new foreign policy document heavily emphasizes the following in relation to China and India:
China and India are considered as of “strategic” value for Russia’s foreign policy. It is the first time the aspect stands so stressed.
China and India are viewed as top priorities for Russia’s Asian policies and global policies too.
It is but natural that Russia accords top priority in its foreign policy to China and India. China and India are emerging as leading global powers, if not superpowers, and would provide the other “poles” of the multipolar world envisaged by Russia.
Russia has a singular advantage in this direction in that it has a virtual strategic alliance with China which can be reinforced. With India, Russia enjoys a time-tested strategic partnership on which Russia can build further.
More importantly between Russia and India there are no contradictory or competing strategic interests. Russia long ago acceded South Asia as India’s sphere of influence and has refrained from any strategic or military linkages with Pakistan.
Concluding Observations
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine has far reaching global and regional implications. Russia has put the international community on notice in declaratory terms that Russia’s strategic aspirations cannot be trifled with neither by the United States or those countries on Russia’s periphery which may become tempted to become instruments of US global strategy.
A second Cold War is therefore underway now and is a distinct global strategic reality. The strategic regions of the globe like the Middle East, Central Asia and Eastern Europe would be the first to feel the pressures of the revived strategic jostling between the United States and Russia. East Asia would be the next focus.
The Russian Monroe Doctrine seems to be a serious Russian attempt to re-define the existing international order which had excluded Russia from global strategic decision- making ever since 1991.. Through this Monroe Doctrine and the attendant priorities on military rearmament and preparation for global military contingencies, Russia seems intent on re-claiming its erstwhile status as the “second pole” in the global strategic power system.
On present strategic indicators, it seems that Russia could achieve her ambitions in this direction. Russia has timed her bid opportunely at a stage when the United States is in an “imperial overstretch” strategically and her options limited in impeding Russia’s initiatives.
(The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst. He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group. Email:drsubhashkapila@yahoo.com)
By Dr. Subhash Kapila
Introductory Observations
Russia’s assertion of its resurgence was forcefully dramatized in recent weeks not only by its military intervention in Georgia, but more significantly by its enunciation of Russia’s own Monroe Doctrine and Russia’s plans for military rearmament. Russia has already commenced major military exercises with all-out war scenarios.
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine which emerged from what is now being called the Medvedev Doctrine or Russia’s new Foreign Policy Doctrine in declaratory terms lays down the thrust lines henceforth for the conduct of Russia’s foreign policy. This was within six weeks of the assumption of office by President Medvedev.
President Medvedev followed this Declaration by the articulation of a Defense Doctrine laying down priorities for Russia’s rearmament program. Implicit in this was Russia’s intention to add more muscle to its new Foreign Policy Doctrine with specific relevance to reclaiming its spheres of influence.
Actually, both the new Russian Foreign Policy Doctrine and the Defence Doctrine are a continuation in content of the broad policies followed by former President Putin.
The dramatism, however, lies in the timing of the Foreign Policy Doctrine and Defence Doctrine. Analytically, it can be maintained that Russia was strategically and politically dismayed with the United States and Western casual indifference to Russia’s warnings on not supporting Kosavo’s unilateral declaration of independence and not put into effect US plans for missile defence deployments in Eastern Europe.
Russia’s riposte over these two issues was not slow in coming and was sharply executed in Georgia. In what can be construed as a pre-emptive bid to forestall further encroachments on Russia’s strategic turf the enunciation of the new Foreign Policy Doctrine is aimed at “putting on notice” the United States, the West and more specifically the former Republics of the Soviet Union on Russia’s periphery to stop becoming pawns of the United States strategic tussle with Russia.
The Russian Monroe Doctrine has far reaching strategic implications both at the global level and the regional level. It must therefore be seriously noted by the international community to avoid the possibilities of a second Cold War gaining momentum.
This Paper attempts to analyze the global and regional implications of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine and related perspectives under the following heads:
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Significant Features Analysed
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Global Implications
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Regional Implications
Russia’s Military Preparedness: Major War Scenarios Exercises and Defence Doctrine
Centrality of China and India in Russia’s Foreign Policy Doctrine
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Significant Features Analyzed
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine or in other words the new Foreign Policy Doctrine of Russia articulated by President Medvedev is a lengthy document whose full contents can be viewed on Russian Government's official websites. For the purposes of this Paper the five major thrusts of Russia’s new Foreign Policy Doctrine are one being touched.
The five significant principles of its new Foreign Policy Doctrine publicly declared by President Medvedev are as follows:
“Firstly, Russia recognizes the primacy of fundamental principles of international law, which define the relations between civilized nations. We will build our relations with other countries within the framework of these principles and the concept of international law.”
“Secondly, the world should be multipolar. A single pole is unacceptable. Domination is something we can’t allow. We cannot accept a world order in which one country makes all the decisions, even as serious and influential country as the United States of America. Such a world in unstable and threatened with conflict.”
“Thirdly, Russia does not want confrontation with any country. Russia has no intention of isolating itself. We will develop friendly relations with Europe, the United States of America and other countries as much as possible.”
“Fourthly, protecting the lives and dignity of our citizens, wherever they may be is an unquestionable priority for our country. Our foreign policy decisions will be based on this need. We will also protect the interests of our business community abroad. It should be clear to all that we will respond to any aggressive acts committed against us.
“Fifthly, as is the case with other countries, there are regions in which Russia has “privileged interests”. These regions home to countries with which we share special historical relations and are bound together as friends and good neighbours. We will pay particular attention to our work in these regions and build friendly ties with these countries, our close neighbours.
When these five principles are analyzed, the strategic message that Russia wants to sent out to the international community in declaratory terms, and in particular to the United States, the West and the countries on its perimeter, specifically can be said to be as follows:
Russia is no longer willing to accept the unipolar strategic dominance of the global power system by the United States. Russia sees a pronounced role for itself in the global power system.
Russia is looking for a multipolar global power configuration to offset American strategic dominance.
Russia favors an international order which operates within the framework of international institutions like the United Nations and international laws and conventions. The emphasis on “international law, which defines the relations between civilized nations” needs to be noted. It is an oblique reference to the United States.
When it is said that Russia has no intention of isolating itself internationally, it really implies that Russia will play a pro-active role in international affairs.
The fourth and fifth points made by President Medvedev are in essence the enunciation of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine.
The fourth point in the Russian Doctrine is seen to be picked from US national strategy doctrines. Is essence it means that Russia will not hesitate to intervene even militarily should an eventuality arise where security of Russian citizens abroad or even business interests are involved. This has implications for the former Republics of the Soviet Union in which reside sizeable Russian minorities. In these former Republics lie substantial Russian business interests in the form of oil and gas resources. This has to be read as a notice for military interventions.
The last point is again a declaration of the Russian Monroe Doctrine claiming “privileged interest” in a number of regions. In immediate terms this can be construed that Russia has “privileged interests” in all former Russian Republics in Central Asia and on its Western peripheries like the Baltics, with some of them now in the fold of the United States and NATO.
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Global Implications
The imperatives for enunciation of a Russian Monroe Doctrine in more ways than one marks the lowest ebb in the history of Russia-United States relations after 1991 when the Cold War ended.
The inevitability of a second Cold War emerging between Russia and the United States stands discussed in detail in this Author’s recent SAAG Papers on Russia’s resurgence.
In one of these Papers, this Author had brought out that for the United States and the West, the Cold War never ended. If it had then NATO would have gone extinct like its counterpart the Warsaw Pact. In fact the eastward creep of NATO along with the externally inspired “colour revolutions” on Russia’s periphery has prompted Russia’s ripostes including this new Doctrine to pre-empt further strategic neutralization of Russia’s power attributes and limiting her sphere of influence.
The global implications of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine have to be viewed in this light and the patterns of the earlier Cold War would necessarily get repeated once again.
The global implications of Russia’s Monroe Doctrine can therefore be summarized as under:
Russia-United States relations once again would enter a strategically competitive if not confrontational state.
Russia and the United States consequently, would harbor heightened threat perceptions of each other. Strategic mistrust would prevail.
Russia and the United States would not enter into a direct armed conflict. Their strategic rivalries and tussles would be executed through “proxies” in strategic regions of the world.
Russia is likely to indulge in a rapid military rearmament build-up to lessen its differentials in military balance with the United States.
The NATO military alliance enlargement will prompt the enlargement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Russian Collective Security Treaty Organization.
Russia would attempt “forward military presence” deployments in regions strategically sensitive to the United States.
All in all, at the global level, the revived Cold war would generate turbulence and instability in the Middle East, East Asia and even Eastern Europe as Russia strategically challenges the United States.
The global implications of the Russian Monroe Doctrine, besides the above manifestations in Russia-US bilateral equation has also to be viewed at three other levels globally in terms of strategic impact, political impact and economic impact.
The global strategic impact of the Russian Monroe Doctrine would weigh heavily on United States global image of unquestioned leadership. The United States today is in a state of “imperial overstretch” and its options to effectively deal with Russia’s revived challenge are limited. Today Russia can generate more strategic irritants globally for the United States than America can do so in response.
Politically, the global impact of the Russian Monroe Doctrine can be expected to weigh heavily on the Atlantic Alliance and the new found American allies in Eastern Europe. Political ties could loosen and alliance unity frayed when country-specific challenges are posed by Russia’s resurgence to US allies.
Russia today enjoys significant economic leverages in the energy sector which it can employ decisively to modulate comprehensively the policies of US allies both in Europe and the Asia Pacific. Besides in the ensuing strategic confrontation that may ensue, even with drop in oil prices, Russia would not be constrained in use of its economic leverages resting on the energy sector nor would its strategic armament plans be restricted.
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine: The Regional Implications
The regional implications of the Russian Monroe Doctrine needs to be primarily examined in the context of the United States overall military and political strategy directed towards Russia in the post-Cold War era of the 1990s and thereafter.
The essentials of the United States post-Cold War strategy against Russia were as follows: (1) Establish a US military presence in Central Asia (2) Prevent a Russian foothold in the Middle East and Gulf Region more specifically (3) Eastward creep of NATO to Russia’s doorsteps (4) Dilute or neutralize Russia’s leverages over Central Asia and Caucasus energy resources.
The Russian Monroe Doctrine when fully effective would greatly neutralize US strategic objectives outlined above. The US military presence today in Central Asia is notional. With these regions claimed by Russia as “privileged interests” the United States may be hard-pressed to keep its military presence in Central Asia.
Russia has already established a strategic bridgehead in the Middle East and the Gulf Region with a number of strategic forays by former President Putin which stand covered, in this Author’s SAAG Papers so named in the period 2005-2007.
Syria seems to be emerging as hosting a major forward military presence to Russia on the Mediterranean littoral in exchange for Russian military hardware. The naval base at Tartus is being upgraded for the Russian Navy.
The most notable impact in the Middle East of Russian Monroe Doctrine has been in Israel. Israel military advisers were in Georgia with US military advisers till the Russian military intervention. With Israeli intelligence getting indication of Russian military intervention, Israel military advisers were hastily withdrawn. Israel is acutely aware that Russia could generate a host of strategic and military problems for Israel, should Israel not be careful in respecting Russian strategic sensitivities. Israel is reported to be assuaging Russian concerns on this count.
The eastward creep of NATO seems to have been halted in its tracks even before the Georgia intervention. Germany and other European nations effectively blocked the question of admission of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO strongly advocated by the United States.
American efforts to bypass Russian territory by new pipeline alignments going through Georgia etc has prompted Russia to accelerate its pipeline grid to China and Japan, both nations having pumped in billions of dollars to garner Russian oil and gas supplies. Europe has no options in this regard and hence a direct under-sea pipeline from Russia to Germany is under construction. Russia has therefore more options in the energy sector than the United States can block.
Regionally, the major impact of the Russian Monroe Doctrine will be on the Atlantic Alliance. Europe’s major nations like Germany and France do not share American perspectives of Russia. Historically, it needs to be remembered that Russia was a very much European country, much before the United States emergence as a nation. Europe today needs Russia in more ways than one and both sides are conscious of this strategic reality.
Russia’s new Monroe Doctrine and “privileged interest” in the former Soviet Republics to begin with would facilitate Russia once again weighing heavily on the regions of Central Asia, the Northern Tier of the Middle East and on Russia’s western peripheries.
Russia’s next steps in enlarging her sphere of influence could extend to countries as far as Cuba, Venezuela and re-establishing Russian presence in Cam Ranh in Vietnam.
Russia’s Military Preparedness: Major War Scenarios Exercises and Defence Doctrines
In earlier Papers of this author on the subject the following stands reflected: (1) Russia’s multi-billion dollars rearmament program (2) Introduction of new generation of strategic assets i.e. ICBMs, SLBMs and Cruise Missiles (3) Russian naval presence in the Mediterranean (4) Russian bombers flights over the Pacific and the Atlantic.
All of the above suggest that Russia has started flexing its military muscles and making its military image globally visible in keeping with her global strategic ambitions.
Russia recently held her first major military war exercise in the last 20 years on the borders near Kazakhstan. The exercise named Ex. MOBILITY 2008 was attended by President Medvedev and other Russian dignitaries.
The notable feature of this Ex MOBILITY 2008 was the military scenario that was given as the background. The scenario was of a Local Conflict in Russia’s vicinity escalating into an all out war with land, sea and air dimensions between Russia and the West.
The ultimate scenario was a global nuclear conflict between Russia and the United States.
President Medvedev referring to events in George observed that: “We have seen that an absolutely real war can erupt suddenly, and simmering local conflicts which are sometimes even called “frozen” can turn into a real military firestorm”.
The fact that needs to be registered by the international community is that Russia is very serious about her intent to emerge as a superpower once again. It is even further preparing itself for a global conflict, sensing that such an eventuality could well nigh be possible.
In continuation of the Monroe Doctrine, President Medvedev spelt out a new Defence Doctrine incorporating five major priorities for the Russian military, namely:
Russian combat formations and units to achieve “permanent readiness state” by 2020 by massive reorganization, reequipping and redeployment
Russia’s Command and Control Systems to be modernized
Modernization and upgradation of Russian military hardware
Military doctrines and training to be given high priority
Pay and allowance of Russian armed forces to be enhanced
Russia seems to have embarked in real earnest on a significant upgradation of her military capabilities which stood neglected for nearly a decade or so One can now expect that with this sort of drive and lessons learnt from its Georgia military intervention, the Russian Armed Forces to be more combat ready and combat effective.
The emphasis will be on military intervention missions in Russia's spheres of influence, global force projection and readiness for even a nuclear conflict. It needs to be remembered that Russia's strategic nuclear assets outnumber those of USA..
Centrality of China and India in Russia’s Foreign Policy Doctrine
The new foreign policy document heavily emphasizes the following in relation to China and India:
China and India are considered as of “strategic” value for Russia’s foreign policy. It is the first time the aspect stands so stressed.
China and India are viewed as top priorities for Russia’s Asian policies and global policies too.
It is but natural that Russia accords top priority in its foreign policy to China and India. China and India are emerging as leading global powers, if not superpowers, and would provide the other “poles” of the multipolar world envisaged by Russia.
Russia has a singular advantage in this direction in that it has a virtual strategic alliance with China which can be reinforced. With India, Russia enjoys a time-tested strategic partnership on which Russia can build further.
More importantly between Russia and India there are no contradictory or competing strategic interests. Russia long ago acceded South Asia as India’s sphere of influence and has refrained from any strategic or military linkages with Pakistan.
Concluding Observations
Russia’s Monroe Doctrine has far reaching global and regional implications. Russia has put the international community on notice in declaratory terms that Russia’s strategic aspirations cannot be trifled with neither by the United States or those countries on Russia’s periphery which may become tempted to become instruments of US global strategy.
A second Cold War is therefore underway now and is a distinct global strategic reality. The strategic regions of the globe like the Middle East, Central Asia and Eastern Europe would be the first to feel the pressures of the revived strategic jostling between the United States and Russia. East Asia would be the next focus.
The Russian Monroe Doctrine seems to be a serious Russian attempt to re-define the existing international order which had excluded Russia from global strategic decision- making ever since 1991.. Through this Monroe Doctrine and the attendant priorities on military rearmament and preparation for global military contingencies, Russia seems intent on re-claiming its erstwhile status as the “second pole” in the global strategic power system.
On present strategic indicators, it seems that Russia could achieve her ambitions in this direction. Russia has timed her bid opportunely at a stage when the United States is in an “imperial overstretch” strategically and her options limited in impeding Russia’s initiatives.
(The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst. He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group. Email:drsubhashkapila@yahoo.com)
Knowledge Workers And Intelligence (BlogTalk Radio) Share
http://sourcesandmethods.blogspot.com/2008/10/knowledge-workers-and-intelligence.html
Deborah Osborne, of Analyst's Corner, hosted a podcast recently featuring Bob Heibel, Executive Director of the Mercyhurst College Institute for Intelligence Studies (Thanks, Rex!). Bob talked about our program, of course, but also shared his insights into the the present and future of intelligence studies in academe.
Bob started the program here at Mercyhurst some 16 years ago after a long career in the FBI as a Special Agent and, finally, as the Deputy Chief of Counter-terrorism. There are few people who have the depth of operational, intelligence and academic knowledge that he does. It makes him worth listening to on a number of different levels
Deborah Osborne, of Analyst's Corner, hosted a podcast recently featuring Bob Heibel, Executive Director of the Mercyhurst College Institute for Intelligence Studies (Thanks, Rex!). Bob talked about our program, of course, but also shared his insights into the the present and future of intelligence studies in academe.
Bob started the program here at Mercyhurst some 16 years ago after a long career in the FBI as a Special Agent and, finally, as the Deputy Chief of Counter-terrorism. There are few people who have the depth of operational, intelligence and academic knowledge that he does. It makes him worth listening to on a number of different levels
October 12, 2008
GADAHN IS BACK: URGES MUJAHIDEEN IN PAKISTAN, INDIA & AFGHANISTAN TO UNITE
B.RAMAN
Adam Gadahn alias Azzam al-Amriki, an American convert to Islam who headed As Sahab, the propaganda wing of Al Qaeda and was missing since a missile attack by an unmanned US aircraft early in the morning of January 29, 2008, on a house at a village called Khushali Torikhel, 12 kilometres south of Mir Ali town, in North Waziristan, is back. The death of Abu Laith al-Libi, a Libyan national and an important Al Qaeda leader, in this missile attack was announced by a web site (ekhlas.org) associated with Al Qaeda, on January 31,2008. His so-called martyrdom was also confirmed by Ayman al-Zawahiri, the No.2 to bin Laden, in an audio message disseminated on February 27, 2008.
2. The "News" of Pakistan had reported that there was speculation in the tribal areas that Gadahn was also present in the house attacked by the missile and that there were rumours that he was also killed, but this was not confirmed. However,the disappearance of Gadahn after January 29,2008, and his non-appearance in any of the video and audio messages disseminated by As Sahab thereafter gave rise to speculation that he must have been either killed or incapacitated by the missile strike.
3. After an absence of a little over seven months, Gadahn gave sign of life again in a video message disseminated by As Sahab on October 4,2008, coinciding with the end of the Muslim fasting period. The message, which is mainly addressed to the Muslims of Pakistan, with some references to the Muslims of other countries of the South Asian region,including India and Afghanistan, refers to a number of incidents in the Pakistani tribal belt in September, the controversy over the ground attack by the US Special Forces in South Waziristan and the election of Asif Ali Zardari as the President, thus indicating that it must have been recorded in the second half of September. However, it does not refer to the explosion outside the Marriott Hotel of Islamabad on September 20,2008.
4. The message virulently criticises both political and military leaders of Pakistan for the operations undertaken by the Pakistan Army in the Bajaur and Swat areas and for their co-operation with the US. It seeks to question the sincerity of the criticism by Pakistani leaders of the US intrusions into Pakistani territory and air space and to project them as an eye-wash. He calls Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, Pakistan's Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), as a "wolf in wolves' clothing".
5. The message contains no direct criticism of India nor of Indian leaders. It does not refer to the serial blasts in various Indian cities since November ,2007. It, however, criticises the Pakistani leaders and agencies, including the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), for diverting attention away from the jihad in Jammu and Kashmir in order to carry out military operations in the tribal areas. It also calls for unity of action by the Mujahideen of Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and other countries of the region.
6.The passing references of relevance to India are given below:
"The Mujahideen and their supporters in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir, India and the region must be on their guard against the plots and conspiracies being hatched against them in the corridors of ISI headquarters, Army House and other centres of Satanic scheming in Islamabad, Rawalpindi and Kabul and must close ranks and must never allow the agents of America and the criminal regimes of the region's capitals come between them and their brothers."
"It is the interference of the hypocrites from the ostensibly helpful Pakistani agencies which has delayed victory in Kashmir for all these long years. It is the liberation of the jihad there from this interference which will be the first step towards victory over the Hindu occupiers of that Muslim land."
7. There are two intriguing sentences in the message. It says: " Someone wanted us to imagine that the same Pakistan Government, which is probably responsible for the death of more Muslims in Pakistan than the Americans are and the same Pakistan Army which is mercilessly bombing the Bajaur Agency to please its Crusader backers are both SUDDENLY PREPARED TO FIGHT KUFAR (INFIDELS) INSTEAD OF MUSLIMS. Someone wanted to imply to us that the same Pakistan Army which for seven years has left Pakistan's borders wide open in front of the Crusaders and Hindus while it fights the Mujahideen and kills defenceless innocents to please its paymasters in Washington IS NOW INTERESTED IN PROTECTING THOSE BORDERS." (Emphasis mine)
8. Who is that "someone"? Is the Pakistan Army making peace overtures to the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) by suggesting that peace in the tribal areas was necessary to enable it to go back to the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir and resume assistance for the jihad in Kashmir? He seems to caution the TTP that this is a trap and that it should not fall into it. He describes this as a "classical Pakistani propaganda with no factul basis."(12-10-08)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Adam Gadahn alias Azzam al-Amriki, an American convert to Islam who headed As Sahab, the propaganda wing of Al Qaeda and was missing since a missile attack by an unmanned US aircraft early in the morning of January 29, 2008, on a house at a village called Khushali Torikhel, 12 kilometres south of Mir Ali town, in North Waziristan, is back. The death of Abu Laith al-Libi, a Libyan national and an important Al Qaeda leader, in this missile attack was announced by a web site (ekhlas.org) associated with Al Qaeda, on January 31,2008. His so-called martyrdom was also confirmed by Ayman al-Zawahiri, the No.2 to bin Laden, in an audio message disseminated on February 27, 2008.
2. The "News" of Pakistan had reported that there was speculation in the tribal areas that Gadahn was also present in the house attacked by the missile and that there were rumours that he was also killed, but this was not confirmed. However,the disappearance of Gadahn after January 29,2008, and his non-appearance in any of the video and audio messages disseminated by As Sahab thereafter gave rise to speculation that he must have been either killed or incapacitated by the missile strike.
3. After an absence of a little over seven months, Gadahn gave sign of life again in a video message disseminated by As Sahab on October 4,2008, coinciding with the end of the Muslim fasting period. The message, which is mainly addressed to the Muslims of Pakistan, with some references to the Muslims of other countries of the South Asian region,including India and Afghanistan, refers to a number of incidents in the Pakistani tribal belt in September, the controversy over the ground attack by the US Special Forces in South Waziristan and the election of Asif Ali Zardari as the President, thus indicating that it must have been recorded in the second half of September. However, it does not refer to the explosion outside the Marriott Hotel of Islamabad on September 20,2008.
4. The message virulently criticises both political and military leaders of Pakistan for the operations undertaken by the Pakistan Army in the Bajaur and Swat areas and for their co-operation with the US. It seeks to question the sincerity of the criticism by Pakistani leaders of the US intrusions into Pakistani territory and air space and to project them as an eye-wash. He calls Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, Pakistan's Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), as a "wolf in wolves' clothing".
5. The message contains no direct criticism of India nor of Indian leaders. It does not refer to the serial blasts in various Indian cities since November ,2007. It, however, criticises the Pakistani leaders and agencies, including the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), for diverting attention away from the jihad in Jammu and Kashmir in order to carry out military operations in the tribal areas. It also calls for unity of action by the Mujahideen of Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and other countries of the region.
6.The passing references of relevance to India are given below:
"The Mujahideen and their supporters in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir, India and the region must be on their guard against the plots and conspiracies being hatched against them in the corridors of ISI headquarters, Army House and other centres of Satanic scheming in Islamabad, Rawalpindi and Kabul and must close ranks and must never allow the agents of America and the criminal regimes of the region's capitals come between them and their brothers."
"It is the interference of the hypocrites from the ostensibly helpful Pakistani agencies which has delayed victory in Kashmir for all these long years. It is the liberation of the jihad there from this interference which will be the first step towards victory over the Hindu occupiers of that Muslim land."
7. There are two intriguing sentences in the message. It says: " Someone wanted us to imagine that the same Pakistan Government, which is probably responsible for the death of more Muslims in Pakistan than the Americans are and the same Pakistan Army which is mercilessly bombing the Bajaur Agency to please its Crusader backers are both SUDDENLY PREPARED TO FIGHT KUFAR (INFIDELS) INSTEAD OF MUSLIMS. Someone wanted to imply to us that the same Pakistan Army which for seven years has left Pakistan's borders wide open in front of the Crusaders and Hindus while it fights the Mujahideen and kills defenceless innocents to please its paymasters in Washington IS NOW INTERESTED IN PROTECTING THOSE BORDERS." (Emphasis mine)
8. Who is that "someone"? Is the Pakistan Army making peace overtures to the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) by suggesting that peace in the tribal areas was necessary to enable it to go back to the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir and resume assistance for the jihad in Kashmir? He seems to caution the TTP that this is a trap and that it should not fall into it. He describes this as a "classical Pakistani propaganda with no factul basis."(12-10-08)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
