Pakistan cuts a sorry figure at the UN as its ploy to tarnish India through a fake picture gets exposed

India exposed Pakistan at the United Nations saying it has callously exploited the picture of an injured Palestinian girl to spread falsehoods about India and divert attention from Islamabad’s role as the hub of world terrorism. Paulomi Tripathi, a First Secretary in India’s UN Mission, held up the photograph of the body of Lt. Umar Faiyaz, a young soldier from the Indian state of Kashmir who was tortured and killed by Pakistan backed terrorists, surrounded by mourners, and a picture of Paalestinian girl claiming she was Kashmiri.

Tripathi told the Assembly the photograph of Faiyaz “is a true picture” and it “reflects the real pain inflicted by the nefarious designs of Pakistan on India,” contrasting it with the fake picture used by Lodhi on Saturday while reacting to External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj.

The picture of the injured girl that Lodhi displayed was that of Rawya Abu Jom’a taken in July 2014 and published by The New York Times in March 2015 under the caption, “Conflict, Courage and Healing in Gaza,” Tripathi pointed out. Caught using a fake picture, a Pakistani diplomat made the bizarre statement that “backing up debates with pictures has backfired” on India while responding to Tripathi.

Tipu Usman, a Counselor at the Pakistani Mission, told the Assembly, “India is seeking to hide behind a picture.”

Asked at his daily briefing if the President of the General Assembly (PGA), Miroslav Lajcak could do anything about fake pictures being used at the Assembly as was done by Lodhi, his spokesperson Brian Varma said, “I don’t think the PGA has a role, but I will look into it.”

Tripathi help up both pictures and directed attention to the photograph of the Indian soldier and said, “This is a real picture and not a fake picture of Lt. Umar Faiyaz. A young officer from the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, Umar Fiayz was kidnapped at a wedding reception. He was brutally tortured and killed by Pakistan-supported terrorists in May 2017.”

“This is a true picture,” she said. “It portrays a harsh reality. A picture of terror emanating from across our borders that the people of India, especially in the Jammu and Kashmir have to struggle with everyday.”

“This was the reality that the Permanent Representative of Pakistan sought to obfuscate,” Tripathi said.

– OE News Bureau

For decades after formal independence in 1947, Congress completely dominated the Indian political stage at the national and state levels. Until it was ousted in 1996, the party had held office continuously at the national level with the exception of two terms collectively expanding over three years. Today, the party is a shadow of its former self. Its claims to stand for the interests of the masses are in tatters and its bases of support are rapidly dwindling.

The Indian National Congress is a “sinking ship”; many of us have heard that by now. Yet it’s a bit astonishing to think how far the political party has fallen. After all, until recently the history of Congress ran almost in parallel with the history of modern India itself, to an extent where the line between these histories seemed blurred. Leaders of Congress were the leaders of India and a large part of the Indian Freedom Movement owed its existence to this “grand old party,” which was not just a political party, but an umbrella organization where different schools of thought used to co-exist together.

From Gandhi to Jinnah, from Nehru to Bose, from Tilak to Gokhale, Congress itself contained people poles apart from each other ideologically. And yet it not only remained as one party, but went on to define the political system itself in India, leading Dr. Rajani Kothari to coin the term “Congress System.” The organizational structure of Congress was so deep-rooted and entrenched that it reached to the grassroots level, to the last man, as a part of Gandhian idealism.

But Congress couldn’t uphold these ideals of working on the ground for as long as the people of India hoped it would. Much of Congress’ dominance at the centre as well as the state level was due to the fact that people voted in the name of Congress, which had won freedom for the country. People felt almost indebted to the party and continued to bring them back to power in the hope that Swarajya (self-rule) would actually be realized on the ground and the days of Ram Rajya (the idyllic rule of Rama), which Gandhi used to mention in his

speeches and writings, would come. People waited for years, but neither Swarajya nor Ram Rajya came about. Instead, the people realized, nepotism and corruption were increasing day by day in the political system. It was not Ram Rajya, but the Raaj of one family  the Gandhi family. The family alone accounts for three prime ministers, who ruled the country for around 37 years, while another 10 years of governance in the 21st century was also largely led by the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty.

Despite the challenges, Indira Gandhi, who was mockingly referred to as “Goongi Gudiya,” emerged as a strong and decisive leader, under whose leadership India won a decisive war against Pakistan in 1971. The war resulted in Congress reclaiming its place as the most dominant player in the Indian political system, so much so that its power became increasingly unchecked. In a democracy, a government with unchecked power is quite problematic.

India belatedly learned this lesson. At midnight on June 26, 1975, an emergency was proclaimed in the country by her government, thereby suspending all democratic rights of the people and concentrating all the power in the hands of Indira Gandhi. This was done to subvert the decision given against Indira Gandhi by the Allahabad High Court Bench in the case of fraudulent electoral practices in the 1971 elections. The emergency was the darkest period in India’s independent history. The government had become authoritarian; the opposition was decimated as most political opponents were put behind bars; the press was under extreme censorship.

The 21-month emergency proved to be costly for Congress. In the 1977 elections, for the first time, a non-Congress government was formed at the centre. Though, the new government, led by Morarji Desai, couldn’t stay in power for the full five years, the period was definitely a paradigm shift in Indian politics. Both people and political par- ties started believing that there could be an alternative to the Congress. However, it took another two decades after the Janata government for a non-Congress party (this time the BJP) to come to power and stay for a full five-year term.

In 2004, Congress made a come- back again in quite an astonishing fashion by defeating the incumbent BJP in power. Congress would spend the next decade fully in control of India’s central government. This decade, especially the second half, was marred by corruption. Telecom, railways, coal, land, sports, and various other ministries saw their names tarred under charges of corruption. Popular resentment against the regime grew prevalent among the public due to the increasing corruption within the government and the party’s inability to take any affirmative action against it. Then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was largely seen as a weak leader, who couldn’t take tough action against corrupt members within his party and government.

As a result, the party lost pathetically in the 2014 general elections, where it won only 44 seats in the Lok Sabha out of the 543 up for grabs — an all-time low. Since then, the party still hasn’t settled into a new role. It has been losing election after election across many states in India. The most notable recent loss came from Uttar Pradesh, the most populated state in India, where the party got just seven seats in an assembly of 403 seats.

Most political observers are of the opinion that Congress lacks a genuine mass leader, of which it used to have in dozens in its glory days. The vice president of the party, Rahul Gandhi, has been somewhat seen as a reluctant politician due to his lack of leadership skills and his inability to win elections. To sum up, the Congress has lost its sheen and doesn’t look to be in a position to even pose a challenge to the current BJP regime in the 2019 general elections. If they manage to do so, the party would be pulling a rabbit out of a hat!

Worryingly, the demise of Congress means the demise of a balanced political system in India. Congress and the BJP, the two most dominant powers, used to balance off each other in Indian politics. With this balance lost, the earlier Congress System is being replaced by a newly emergent “BJP System.”

In the upcoming elections, Congress is not expected to make any significant gains, despite growing hostility to the NDA government’s program of economic restructuring, which has led to a widening gulf between rich and poor. The failed demonetization decision of Modi government and poor GST implementation has dented the economic growth in India. The 2% GDP is wiped out due to faulty economic policies of the government. Despite this economic debacle, according to the London- based Economist magazine, even Congress party strategists say the maximum it can achieve is around 90-105 [seats] in 2019. The party could, however, do considerably worse. It is likely to be routed in state elections this year in Himanchal Pradesh, Gujrat & Karnataka, last few Congress ruled states except Gujrat.

Now, however, Congress is desperate for partners and in last election has accepted a subordinate status in several key states. In its alliance with the Rastriya Janatha Dal (RJD) in Bihar, Congress had to be satisfied with just four of the state’s 40 seats in the national parliament far less than the 14 it had demanded. Congress has also forged alliances in Andhra Pradesh, Maharasthra and Tamil Nadu. But in the most populous state, Uttar Pradesh, Congress is on ventilator seeking external life support from either Bahujan Samaj Party or Samajwadi Party to survive. Currently, Congress only holds two of the state’s 80 seats. In West Bengal, Mamta has virtually hijacked the original Congress party leaving nothing for the grand old party. Today Congress will be approaching General Elections 2019 without any presence in U.P. ( 80 seats ) Bihar ( 40 seats ), West Bengal ( 42 seats) T.N. ( 39 seats ) & A.P. ( 27 seats ), surely with almost 50% unrepresented seats, Congress can’t do miracle in rest of the seats to win with a conversion ration of 100%.

Nothing underscores the party’s bankruptcy more than its dependence on the Nehru- Gandhi dynasty. Not only has Sonja Gandhi, the Italian-born widow of assassinated prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, been pressed into leading the party, but her two children have also been enlisted in the campaign.

Her son Rahul is standing as the Congress candidate in the Uttar Pradesh seat of Amethi since 2004, in an effort to lift the party’s standing in that state. His sister Priyanka is also campaigning prominently in the seat.

The party’s tenuous links to the leaders of the anti-colonial movement Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru are all that remain of its claims to represent the interests of the working masses of India. Congress was always a party of the Indian bourgeoisie, which ensured that the vast movement against the British rule never threatened private property and became the means for securing its own privileged position. At the same time, through its leadership of the anti-colonial opposition, Congress established deep local roots and a reputation as a party of progressive change that enabled it to dominate the political stage after the end of the British rule

Congress’s ability to maintain its increasingly tarnished image was a product of the peculiar global economic and political conditions that followed World War II. Successive Indian governments were able to maintain a highly regulated national economy, based on import substitution, and make limited concessions to workers and the oppressed masses. In the context of the Cold War, Congress leaders were able to balance between Washington and Moscow, and with the assistance of the Stalinist bureaucrats, posture as anti-imperialists. India was one of the leaders of the so- called non-aligned movement.

However, in the 1980s and 1990s, the processes of globalization undermined all forms of national economic regulation the sharpest expression being the collapse of the Soviet Union. The impact was no less profound in India where, in the early 1990s, the Congress government of Prime Minister Narasimha Rao initiated the first stage of market reforms and opened up the country’s huge reserves of cheap labor to foreign investors. While a layer of business and the middle class benefited, the economic restructuring resulted in savage attacks on the living standards of the working class and op- pressed masses. The mounting resentment was the main reason for the party’s defeat in the 1996 elections.

No alternative to the BJP: While it capitalized on the disaffection with Congress, the BJP has implemented the same programme of restructuring since 1998. Foreign investors have exploited India’s supplies of low-cost, educated, English-speaking labor to create a range of computing, research and office services, and produce a spurt of growth that has benefited layers of the Indian middle class. The BJP election campaign in 2004 has centered on a government-funded “India Shining”media blitz designed to portray the party as bringing India economic growth and international recognition.

The slick media campaign glosses over the fact that the government’s economic policies have led to a widening of the deep social divide between the rich and the vast majority of the population who remain mired in poverty. In seeking to attack the BJP’s record, Congress faces a fundamental problem: its policies are no different from those of the government. As a result, its campaign is fraught with contradictions: Congress attempts to convince big business of its ability to continue the open market agenda, while trying to dupe the masses with empty promises to improve their living standards.

– By Prakhar Prakash Misra (Political Editor, Opinion Express)

Mother Earth is facing its acutest phase of a ‘forced metamorphosis’ due to a human propelled climate change

Rains battering Mumbai and devastating lives and livelihoods have raised a local administrative quandary but also have addressed a global one too. The weather catastrophes around the world have been wreaking havoc on mankind. While category 3+ storms continue to pound the Caribbean and East coast of the US, droughts have ravaged Australia- here at home an estimated 10 million have been adversely effected by the floods and incessant rains in central and North East India and landslides devastate the hilly states of Uttarakhand, Himachal and J and K. Painful as this grim scenario is, what makes it even more excruciating is attitude of the policy makers world wide which is palpably myopic and disastrous when it comes to planning and execution. Mother Earth is facing its acutest phase of a ‘forced metamorphosis’ due to a human propelled climate change. The environment and the atmosphere have been altered critically to the point of no return and due to that the weather anomalies will continue to get severe each passing day. Mankind and all life forms will face the flak of these disruptions. The solution to this diabolical predicament has come in form of a feeble symptomatic response by mankind, which seems to be satisfactory only in digits but a disaster on ground.

We need a paradigm shift in our concept of development a migration from the current anthropocentric model to an all encompassing and holistic one which treats the Earth and nature as living entities. Secondly Eco sensitive zones should be identified across the globe and recognized as international heritages, and a no tolerance for human interruption policy should be followed in this zone. For example the higher zones of Himalayas, which are not only a magnet for the monsoon and thus control the weather of the entire subcontinent, but also are the fountain head of the rivers that nourish close to 1 billion people should be declared a zone for no massive constructions. Thirdly a joint Eco task force for the protection of the environment should be established by all nations, with more teeth to this force than what the current conventions on climate change impart, because as per experts by 2025 the world would have more than a billion climate refugees.

Lastly and most importantly a holistic environment education should be made compulsory in the schools, where the value of interconnections present in the web of life and how to protect and preserve it must be taught to the future generations .

 – By Deana Uppal ((Writer is an Indo- British Model & Entrepreneur))

India remains Pakistan’s primary target

Today, India is ringed by turbulent states – Pakistan (land boundary with India 3,310 km in the north west), Nepal (land boundary with India 1,751 km in the north), Bangladesh (land boundary with India 4,095 km in the south- east) and Myanmar (land boundary with India 1,463 km in the north east).

Turbulence has percolated through India’s porous borders in the form of arms and narcotics to finance insurgents, militants, terrorists and religious fundamentalists.

India remains Pakistan’s primary target and operating ground for Islamic fundamentalists and terrorist groups who infiltrate through Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), Nepal and Bangladesh and carry out anti-Indian activities with impunity.

Nepal is vulnerable to China’s influence. Its extremists have linkages with the People’s War Group in India. In its bid to expand its influence, the PWG has carved a corridor ringing the states of Andhra Pradesh-Madhya Pradesh-Chhattisgarh-Orissa- West Bengal-Jharkhand-Bihar.

This endless internal turbulence in India is also inter-linked with external factors. To the north, India shares a 3,440-km long border with China, which can pose the entire spectrum of conventional, nuclear and missile threats. It can also influence and use as proxy India’s neighbors to weigh India down in every possible way.

In short, India’s 14,058-km long land frontier is impacted by a perpetually hostile or semi-hostile environment. Indian security stands threatened by demographic assault, arms and drug smuggling, and the safe havens that the insurgents have in  Fundamentalist-religious groups in Bangladesh under Pakistani tutelage, West Asian finance and China’s patronage have synergized sufficiently to add to India?s security headache. The grim reality is that the unending turbulence will continue to afflict our land and sea frontiers and airspace.

AVERAGE INDIAN IS HIGHLY INDIVIDUALISTIC

By nature, the average Indian is highly individualistic and an entrepreneur. In every endeavor, his calculation is simply based on, “What’s in it for me?” He does not have the time or the inclination to actively get involved with the intricacies of the nation’s security.

This kind of entrepreneurial society requires a steel frame of military, naval and air power to ensure that India’s accommodative temperament and societal characteristic of gentleness remains protected from the turbulent violence that as- Field Marshal Wavell who was India’s British Viceroy in 1946, was prophetic when he said “… the stability of the Indian Army may perhaps be a deciding factor in the future of India.”

MANPOWER SHORTAGE MUST BE REMOVED SPEEDILY

For a number of reasons, and despite considerable efforts, the armed forces remain short of the manpower they need. It is imperative that this manpower shortage be removed speedily before the system buckles under the ageing profile of its leadership.

There is only one viable strategy to attract the kind of talent that is needed and that is to assure military personnel of assured lateral induction into the paramilitary and police forces, the intelligence services and the civil administration.

Unfortunately, a consensus has not been achieved that “lateral induction” is the best way to attract India’s young but savvy population to the tough profession of arms where risk to faults the values of our democratic polity.

INDIA’S ARMED FORCES

On attaining Independence in 1947, India inherited possibly the best instrument of war in Asia a fine battle ready military machine with a formidable reputation of winning wars in distant lands. Britain had employed it skillfully for over a century to sustain her empire and treasured it as the jewel in its crown.

In the years after Independence, India’s Army has been unending deployed for internal policing tasks to cope with the complex security situation. This deployment has kept the Union of India physically intact. But it is sad that 60 years after Independence, the stability of India still depends directly on the stability of the Indian Army.

life is an everyday affair. Major benefits will accrue from lateral induction. First, the transfer of highly disciplined, trained and skilled manpower to the civil setup will contribute towards the creation of a ‘discipline culture’ the country. Second, the superior training standards of lateral inductees will aid civil and paramilitary forces in combating terrorism and internal violence. However, placing a large segment of a young Army on the land borders cannot entirely ensure security of India. There are two aspects to it.

First, if a football team defends only its half of the field, it is certain that an adversary determined to create mischief, short of going to war, will create opportunities for its irregular forces (jihadis) to score goals through infiltration, smuggling and creeping invasion. The hostile environment that impacts India’s long frontiers re- quires that the role of military power to defend strategic frontiers must be firmly embedded in India’s foreign policy. The second aspect is the need for political will to project the power of Armed Forces beyond the Indian subcontinent to se- cure the sea-lanes for external trade and ensure the security of imported energy supplies.

INDIA NEEDS A RUTHLESS WINNING ATTITUDE

India’s geostrategic location with its 7,500 km-long peninsular coastline jutting into the Indian Ocean makes India a continental as well as a maritime power.?India impacts directly on East, West and Central Asia. As a rising economic power dependent almost entirely on foreign energy supplies, a time may come when India has to project its military power to protect and preserve the energy resources from Central and West Asia, and Africa.

For India, with its pacifist temperament, this may sound imperial. But without a ruthless winning attitude, India’s multi-religious and multi-cultural society cannot survive endless undermining by disaffected elements. The world has already recognized that with its democratic institutions, its liberal philosophy and its unique strategic location, India’s influence will extend beyond South Asia and directly affect Asia’s well being.

DOVETAILING FOREIGN-ECONOMIC- MILITARY OBJECTIVES?

A Nations foreign policy is dependent primarily on the strength of its economic and military power. The ability and the will to wield military power ruthlessly, to defend and advance national interests, when combined with the capacity and resolve to create wealth, constitute the proven route for every aspirant seeking recognition as an eminent power.

India has the potential and the prerequisites of becoming a great power within the next few decades, provided it can dovetail its foreign, economic and military objectives and mainstream its military power. The crucial question is whether India will be a surrogate power or be a ‘great power’?

INDIA’S FREE MEDIA CAN BE INTELLIGENTLY HARNESSED

Ostensibly our national objectives are to have a peaceful neighborhood. What should be the strategy to achieve it? Statements like a “stable and secure neighbors are in India’s interest” are well meant. The fundamental question, however, is – “Will India’s neighbors ever be stable and secure?” Appeasement of neighbors cannot constitute a strategy for any country.

India’s larger objective in Asia is to emerge as a geoeconomic hub that can integrate and influence its extended neighborhood through mutually beneficial economic linkages and military relationships. As a benevolent power that has no external territorial interests, India is uniquely located — geographically and culturally to play this role effectively. India’s free media can be intelligently harnessed to further these national objectives and develop the complementarities that influence Asia.

To attain eminence in Asia, India needs to move simultaneously on three axes. These are India-West Asia, India-Southeast Asia and India-Central Asia. Of these, the critical one is the India- Afghanistan-Iran-Russia axis. Today, Russia is reacting firmly to intruders into its neighborhood. Her economic and military resurgence presents an opportunity for a relationship which would lend stability to the region. Moreover, as the second largest consumer of oil and gas in Asia, the assurance of uninterrupted energy supplies is a vital factor in India’s security calculus. By 2010, a substantial amount of oil and gas will be sourced from Central Asia

INDIA’S ‘NEAR ABROAD’ IS UNDER TURMOIL

This resource-rich region will succumb to fundamentalist-religious Talibanisation if India and like- minded countries do not preempt it. In such an eventuality, American oil corporations will be expelled, particularly with the Chinese gaining ground and occupying positions that could dictate the future agenda in Central Asia. It is therefore timely for American capitalists to join hands with Indian counterparts in joint ventures.

CREATE MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCES         

India’s ‘near abroad’ is under unprecedented turmoil. Pakistan is almost split into two states. The Pakistan Army controls one par t and the other it ceded to Radical Islam. Pakistan Army appears to be under retreat. In Bangladesh the war between Pakistan backed radical Islam threatens to undermine the present regime. Maoists in Nepal look up to China. Beijing successfully out manoeuvred New Delhi’s influence in latter’s back- yard. These regimes being authoritarian in one way or the other have more in common amongst themselves than a multi-cultural democratic India.

They are also technology deficit regressive states. Therefore, to preserve its values, India needs to create an international alliance with like minded technologically surplus ‘far abroad’ to out manoeuver the inimical intentions of the ‘near abroad’.?The international community, including Russia in near future, will be compelled to wage the next Great War against forces of Radical Islam threatening the world at large. As the core of jihad is located in a State wielding nuclear weapons, the evolving scenario appears to be more threatening than witnessed during Nazi Germany. New Delhi’s support in the looming next Great War will be a critical element for swift victory for democracies and others. India’s strategy must be to strengthen existing friendly relationships while decisively cementing mutually advantageous new relationships in the favorable geopolitical scenario now emerging.

– Bharat Verma  (The columnist is the Editor of the Indian Defense Review )

When seeking to place an attack like the April 15 Boston Marathon bombing into context, it is helpful to classify the actors responsible, if possible. Such a classification can help us understand how an attack fits into the analytical narrative of what is happening and what is likely to come. These classifications will consider such factors as ideology, state sponsorship and perhaps most important, the kind of operative involved.

In a case where we are dealing with an apparent jihadist operative, before we can classify him or her we must first have a clear taxonomy of the jihadist movement. At Stratify, we generally consider the jihadist movement to be divided into three basic elements: the AL Qaeda core organization, the regional jihadist franchises, such alas Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and grass roots operatives who are radicalized, inspired and perhaps equipped by the other two tiers but who are not members of either.

Within the three tier jihadist movement there exist two distinct types of operatives. One of these is the professional terrorist operative, a person who is a member of the AL Qaeda core or of one of the regional franchises. These individuals swear loyalty to the leader and then follow orders from the organization’s hierarchy. Second, there are amateur operatives who never join a group and whose actions are not guided by the specific orders of a hierarchical group. They follow a bottom-up or grassroots organizational model rather than a hierarchical or top-down approach.

There is a great deal of variety among professional terrorists, especially if we break them down according to the functions they perform within an organization, roles including that of planners, finance and logistics specialists, couriers, surveillance operatives, bomb makers, etcetera. There is also a great deal of variety within the ranks of grassroots operatives, although it is broken down more by their interaction with formal groups rather than their function. At one end of the grassroots spectrum are the lone wolf operatives, or phantom cells.

These are individuals or small groups who become radicalized by jihadist ideology, but who do not have any contact with the organization. In theory, the lone wolf/phantom cell model is very secure from an operational security standpoint, but as we’ve discussed, it takes a very disciplined and driven individual to be a true lone wolf or phantom cell leader, and consequently, we see very few of them.

At the other end of the grassroots spectrum are individuals who have had close interaction with a jihadist group but who never actually joined the organization. Many of them have even attended militant training camps, but they didn’t become part of the hierarchical group to the point of swearing an oath of allegiance to the group’s leaders and taking orders from the organization. They are not funded and directed by the group.

Indeed, al Qaeda trained tens of thousands of men in its training camps in Afghanistan, Sudan and Pakistan but very few of the men they trained actually ended up joining al Qaeda. Most of the men the group instructed received basic military training in things like using small arms, hand-to-hand combat and basic fire and maneuver. Only the very best from those basic combat training courses were selected to receive advanced training in terrorist tradecraft techniques, such as bomb- making, surveillance, clandestine communications and document forgery. But even of the students who received advanced training in terrorist trade- craft, only a few were ever invited to join the al Qaeda core, which remained a relatively small vanguard organization.

Many of the men who received basic training traveled to fight jihad in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya or returned home to join insurgent or militant groups. Others would eventually end up joining al Qaeda franchise groups in places like Yemen, Iraq, Libya and Algeria. Still others received some basic training but then returned home and never really put their new skills into practice.

Most grassroots jihadists fall along a continuum that stretches between the lone wolf and someone who received advanced terrorist training but never joined al Qaeda or another formal militant group.

Whether the two men suspected of carrying out the April 15 Boston Marathon attack knowingly followed al Qaeda’s blueprint for simple attacks by grassroots actors, their actions were fairly consistent with what we have come to expect from such operatives. Certainly based upon what we have seen of this case so far, the Tsarnaev brothers did not appear to possess sophisticated terrorist trade craft.

For example, regarding the bombs employed in the attack and during the police chase, everything we have seen still points to very simple devices, such as pipe bombs and pressure cooker devices. From a bomb making trade craft standpoint, we have yet to see anything that could not be fabricated by reading Inspire magazine, spending a little bit of time on YouTube and conducting some experimentation. As a comparison, consider the far larger and more complex improvised explosive device Anders Behring Breivik, the Oslo bomber, constructed. We know from Breivik’s detailed journal that he was a self taught bomb maker using directions he obtained on the Internet. He was also a lone wolf. And yet he was able to construct a very large improvised explosive device.? Also, although the Tsarnaev brothers did not hold up a convenience store as initially reported, they did conduct an express kidnapping that caused them to have extended contact with their victim while they visited automatic teller machines. They told the victim that they were the bombers and then allowed the victim to live. Such behavior is hardly typical of professional terrorist operatives.

Grassroots Theory As it has become more difficult for professional terrorists to travel to the United States and the West in general, it has become more difficult for jihadist organizations to conduct attacks in these places. Indeed, this difficulty prompted groups like al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to attempt to attack the United States by dispatching an operative with an underwear bomb and to use printer cartridge bombs to attack cargo aircraft. In response to this difficulty, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula began to adopt the grassroots into their operational doctrine. They first began promoting this approach in 2009 in their Arabic-language magazine Sada al-Malahim. The al Qaeda core organization embraced this approach in May 2010 in an English-language video featuring Adam Gadahn.

In July 2010, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula launched an English language magazine called Inspire dedicated to radicalizing and equipping grassroots jihadists. Despite the losses that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has experienced on the battlefield, it has continued to devote a great deal of its limited resources toward propagating this concept. It has continued to publish Inspire even after the magazine’s founder and editor, Samir Khan, was killed in an American missile strike in Yemen.

The grassroots strategy was perhaps most clearly articulated in the third edition of Inspire magazine, which was published in November 2010 following the failed October 29, 2010, printer bomb operation. In a letter from the editor in which Khan explained what he referred to as “Operation Hemorrhage,” he wrote:

“However, to bring down America we do not need to strike big. In such an environment of security phobia that is sweeping America, it is more feasible to stage smaller attacks that involve fewer players and less time to launch and thus we may circumvent the security barriers America has worked so hard to erect. This strategy of attacking the enemy with smaller, but more frequent operations is what some may refer to the strategy of a thousand cuts. The aim is to bleed the enemy to death.”

In Adam Gadahn’s May 2010 message entitled “A Call to Arms,” Gadahn counsels lone wolf jihadists to follow a three pronged target selection process. They should choose a target with which they are well acquainted, a target that is feasible to hit and a target that, when struck, will have a major impact. The Tsarnaev brothers did all three in Boston.Implications

Yet despite this clearly articulated theory, it has proved very difficult for jihadist ideologues to convince grassroots operatives to conduct simple attacks using readily available items like in the “build a bomb in the kitchen of your mom” approach, which they have advocated for so long.

This is because most grassroots jihadists have sought to conduct huge, spectacular attacks attacks that are outside of their capabilities. This has meant that they have had to search for help to conduct their plans. And that search for help has resulted in their arrest, just as Adam Gadahn warned they would be in his May 2010 message.

There were many plots disrupted in 2012 in which grassroots operatives tried to act beyond their capabilities. These include:

• On Nov. 29, 2012, two brothers from Florida, Raees Alam Qazi and Sheheryar Alam Qazi, were arrested and charged with plotting attacks in New York.
• On Oct. 17, 2012, Bangladeshi national Quazi Nafis was arrested as part of an FBI sting operation after he attempted to detonate a vehicle bomb outside New York’s Federal Reserve Bank.
• On Sept. 15, 2012, Adel Daoud was arrested after he parked a Jeep Cherokee outside a Chicago bar and attempted to detonate the bomb he thought it contained. This was also an FBI sting operation.

But the carnage and terrorist theater caused by the Boston attack have shown how following the simple attack model can be highly effective. This will certainly be pointed out in future editions of Inspire magazine, and grassroots operatives will be urged to follow the model established by the Tsarnaev brothers. Unlike operatives like Faisal Shahzad who attempted to go big themselves and failed, the brothers followed the blueprint for a simple attack and the model worked.

It is quite possible that the success of the Boston bombing will help jihadist ideologues finally convince grassroots operatives to get past their grandiose plans and begin to follow the simple attack model in earnest. If this happens, it will obviously have a big impact on law enforcement and intelligence officials who have developed very effective programs of identifying grassroots operatives and drawing them into sting operations. They will now have to adjust their operations.

While these grassroots actors do not have the capability of professional terrorist operatives and do not pose as severe a threat, they pose a much broader, amorphous threat. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies generally do not deal well with ambiguity.

There are simply too many soft targets to protect and some of these simple attacks will inevitably succeed. This means that this low-level broad threat will persist and perhaps even intensify in the immediate future.

As we’ve previously discussed, the best defense against the grassroots threat are grassroots defenders. These include the police and alert citizens who report suspicious activity — like people testing bomb designs a frequent occurrence before actual bomb attacks. The slogan “If you see something, say something,” has been mocked as overly simplistic, but it is nonetheless a necessity in an environment where the broad, ambiguous threat of grassroots terrorism far outstrips the ability of the authorities to see everything. Taking a proactive approach to personal and collective security also beats the alternative of living in terror and apprehensively waiting for the next simple attack.

It is also very important for people to maintain the proper perspective on terrorism. Like car crashes and cancer and natural disasters, terrorism is part of the human condition. People should take prudent, measured actions to prepare for such contingencies and avoid becoming victims (vicarious or other- wise). It is the resilience of the population and its perseverance that will ultimately determine how much a terrorist attack is allowed to terrorize. By separating terror from terrorism, citizens can deny the practitioners of terror the ability to magnify their reach and power.

(Vice President of Analysis)

Pushed out from their country, Rohingyas’ arrival put India in a dilemma

On a day Prime Minister Narendra Modi began his official visit to Myanmar, human rights organisation Amnesty International urged him to push the country’s leadership to provide assistance to Rohingyas in the violence-hit Rakhine state. The rights body also said the Modi government should “reaffirm” its commitment to protect Rohingya refugees and asylum-seekers in India instead of “threatening” them with deportation.

“Prime Minister Modi must also use his visit to push the Myanmar authorities to allow full and unfettered humanitarian assistance to people in need. Nothing can justify denying life-saving aid to desperate people,” Aakar Patel, Executive Director at Amnesty International India, said.

The Amnesty’s plea came on a day Union Minister Kiren Rijiju asserted that Rohingyas who have crossed over to India are illegal immigrants and stand to be deported. He also said that nobody should preach India on the is- sue as the country has absorbed the maximum number of refugees in the world. Around 40,000 Rohingyas are said to be staying illegally in India. Modi reached Nay Pyi Taw today on a three- day visit and called on Myanmar President Htin Kyaw.

The prime minister’s visit to Myanmar comes amid a spike in ethnic violence with Rohingya Muslims in the Rakhine state. The number of Rohingya refugees that have fled to Bangladesh to escape violence in Myanmar, which flared up late last month, has touched 1,23,000, according to the UN refugee agency. The Amnesty observed that despite being home to thousands of refugees, India is not a state party to the 1951 Refugee Convention or the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, and does not have a domestic legal refugee protection framework.

 – OE News Bureau

If Gurmeet Singh turned into a monstrous head of a dera, blame it on the subsequent political dispensations

It is a matter of great concern that in today’s well connected world, large scale violence broke out in parts of Haryana and Punjab soon after a CBI court in Panchkula convicted Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh of rape. Over 40 people had been killed in Haryana in the violence at the time of writing this story. The BJP government in Haryana stands accused of gross administrative failure. On the eve of the verdict, it allowed lakhs of Dera supporters, or Premis as they are called, to gather at Panchkula. Dera supporters also mobilized themselves at Sirsa, the Dera’s bastion. The administrative failure of the Manohar Lal Khattar government stems from its political compulsions. The BJP in Haryana enjoys close ties with Dera Sacha Sauda and this seems to have impaired it from cracking down on Dera goons on time.

Ram Rahim’s Congress relationship

In the past, Congress leader Capt Amrinder Singh has used the might of Dera Empire to win elections. Akali Dal and SGPC is bitterly opposing Dera religious overtone due to Ram Rahim’s direct challenge to the authority of Sikh panth. In fact, Badal was regularly pushing for Ram Rahim prosecution on several cases but Ram Rahim was always one up to overcome Badal’s challenge. And Capt capitalized the situation by tacitly seeking Dera support and winning previous 2002 assembly elections and in recent concluded Punjab assembly election. In the adjourning state of Haryana, BS Hooda was coordinating political management with Ram Rahim Dera cult to secure two successive victories in the two previous elections. However, Baba shifted his loyalty to BJP post 2014 General Election victory resulting in BJP’s huge electoral gains in 2014 Haryana assembly elections. Surely, Ram Rahim Dera is having large following in Haryana, Punjab, Delhi, Himanchal Pradesh and West UP but it reflects the weakness of the political system that is dependent on GOD man for easy vote bank to win elections. Modern day politicians are looking for swift and quick results by engaging money and muscle power and God Man style of quasi politics suits ’s modern day politicians.

Ram Rahim’s BJP links

Nothing embodies this failure more than Haryana education minister Ram Bilas Sharma’s comment that the Section 144 imposed in Panchkula “did not apply to Dera supporters”. He even went to the extent of defending the people who had gathered at Panchkula. He reportedly described the Dera supporters as “simple, peace-loving people” who wouldn’t “harm even a plant”. Sharma’s links with the Dera are well known. He is reported to have recently donated Rs 51 lakh to the Dera as a mark of his sup- port for the cult.

But it isn’t just Sharma. A number of leaders in the Haryana BJP have deep ties with the Dera and this close relationship has the blessings of the party’s top leadership. The other major backer of Ram rahim in the Haryana BJP is health minister Anil Vij. Vij donated Rs 50 lakh from Haryana government funds to the Dera’s sports project. Another minister, Manish Grover, who holds the portfolios of printing, stationery and urban local bodies, also donated Rs 11 lakh to the Dera from his discretionary fund. The support for the Dera extended even to the Central government, with Union minister for sports Vijay Goel also promising to support the Dera with Central funds. Between the three BJP leaders Sharma, Vij and Grover the Dera was given over Rs 1 crore. This is despite the fact that even at the time of the donations, Ram Rahim faced charges of rape and murder.

What is even more sinister is that the BJP’s Central leadership – Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well as BJP president Amit Shah were active participants in this cozy relationship of the party with Dera. During the campaign for the Haryana Assembly elections in 2014, PM Modi reportedly showered praise on the rape accused godman while addressing a rally in Sirsa. Apparently, this was the first time that a major political leader had openly invoked the Dera during an election campaign. The Congress and Akali Dal leaders, who often sought support of the Dera in the past, made it a point not to publically name the Dera or its controversial chief.

On the other hand, the 2014 Haryana election was also the first time when Dera Ram Rahim chief openly voiced his preference for a political party the BJP. Before this, Ram Rahim’s diktat to vote for one party or the other was communicated through more secretive ways to his followers, mostly through the political wing of the Dera.

According to a report, the deal with Ram Rahim was sealed by none other than BJP president Amit Shah. The report said that Shah met Ram Rahim in the first week of October and “sought his blessings” for the Assembly elections in Haryana and Maharashtra. The report said that six days after the meeting with Shah, BJP general Secretary Kailash Vijayvargiya took 44 BJP candidates for the Haryana polls to meet the Dera chief. Apparently, Ram Rahim showered his blessings on the BJP candidates during the meeting. The Modi government also used Ram Rahim to push its Swachh Bharat initiative. BJP insiders say that Ram Rahim is a valuable political ally for the party, as he commands the loyalty of over 1 crore followers across the country, particularly in Haryana and Punjab.

“Dera commands a large voter base of over a crore, with a large percentage of Dalits. They vote en bloc. BJP leaders have been in regular touch with Ram Rahim and expected him to play a major role in bringing votes the party’s way in Haryana and Punjab in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections,” a senior BJP leader told Catch on the condition of anonymity. The leader admitted that the Khattar government had no choice but to go soft on the Dera supporters and let them have their way. “Dera followers are not small in number, in fact they are huge. We have to move very, very cautiously. Patience is the need of the hour. A wrong move and things can go out of control. We have already seen that in the 2016 Jat agitation,” the leader said.

Dera and the RSS game plan

For the BJP, the Dera’s significance isn’t just related to elections. It is said to occupy a key place in the broader game plan of the BJP’s parent organisation the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. “Sangh’s aims are not always associated with the BJP. The BJP is focused on elections, Sangh works for society. Sangh has been cultivating various Deras Radha Soami Satsang, Dera Sacha Sauda etc for some years now,” a Sangh functionary based in Amritsar had told Catch during the Punjab elections earlier this year. “The Deras work with the Dalit community, particularly Dalit Sikhs, who are ill treated by Panthic Sikhs. The Deras help in bringing them back into the Hindu fold,” the functionary added.

The functionary was extremely categorical in saying that the interests of the Sangh were at odds with Panthic politics. “They (Panthic Sikhs) emphasise on the minority nature of Sikhs. We don’t see them in that way. Often even mainstream Sikh leaders take radical positions or appease radical elements. The Deras can help us counter this,” he added. Apparently to pursue this agenda, RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat spent some time at Mansa in South Punjab in 2014. During his visit, he reportedly met the head of the Radhasoami sect Baba Gurinder Singh Dhillon.

The Dera Sacha Sauda has its roots in the Radha Soami sect. Its founder Khema Malaka Balochistani Shah Mastana, was a disciple of Baba Sawan Singh of the Radhasoami lineage. It is clear that in Punjab’s sociopolitical landscape, RSS and the Deras are on the same side. Even Panthic outfits, mainstream as well as radical ones, realize that such an alliance has taken place. According to Punjab police, the same radical group is said to have been behind the killings of RSS leader Jagdish Gagneja last year and Dera Sacha Sauda supporters earlier this year. The violence by Dera supporters is likely to increase social tensions in Haryana and Punjab. The BJP’s political and financial support to Dera Sacha Sauda is singularly to blame for the present mess, the mere perception that Ram Rahim was larger than law has fueled the violence, The motorcade of 200 cars, over 1 lakh supporters around court, hapless administration present an extremely sorry picture of the governance that Modi has promised in 2014. It is imperative that Prime Minister must take the situation under his direct control because he is a symbol of maximum governance and people of the country trust him. The compromises in governance even at state level will hurt brand Modi simply because people of Haryana had voted for BJP keeping in view Modi’s credibility and face. Lastly, people of the country must own responsibility of following quality religious leadership. India is a land of Jagatguru Adi Shankara, Guru Nanak Dev, Ramakrishna, Vivekanand, Praramhansa Yoganand and many more. We should be careful in selection of Guru and Saints, there should be strictly no God Man policy to be adopted by people to discourage fraudulent conman taking over the physiological control of innocent people.

– By Dr Rahul Misra (Associate Editor, Opinion Express)

The 72 day standoff in Doklam is finally over. Showing an unprecedented grit and deft diplomacy, India has managed to confound the dragon. Now, she must show the same maturity to bolster its stand in border disputes with the powerful neighbor

Writing in the fifth century BC, the ancient Chinese thinker Sun Tzu gives in his all time classic on war strategy  The Art of War a fundamental principle:

“All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”

The way the Chinese government conducted itself during the recent 72 day long Doklam stand-off it would appear that they were following this advice to the letter. There were empty threats, psychological war in the media, videos of military drills, intemperate statements by official spokespersons, reminders of India’s 1962 defeat and aggressive bluster.

On the contrary, both the Indian government and media showed a far more mature response by emphasizing that the solution lay not in a call to arms but on the negotiating table. Maintaining diplomatic dignity, MEA’s statement on 28th September announcing the agreement to pull out did not in any way show the Chinese down; on the contrary, as was widely observed, India gave China plenty of face-saving room. The Chinese statement by comparison was shrill emphasizing that it was the “trespassing” Indian troops that withdrew first and that Chinese troops shall in future continue to patrol the area. There was only a muted reference to making necessary adjustments in their troop deployments. This probably force the MEA to come out with a second statement clarifying that disengagement border personnel had been almost completed under verification from both the sides. It was clarified that both troops and road building equipment had been removed by China from the face-off point, implying the PLA’s construction of the road towards Jompelri wherein the genesis of the crisis lay, had been put off. Two days later MEA announced that Prime Minister Modi would be visiting China for the up- coming BRICS Summit during 3-9 September.

What are we to make out of this in hindsight? The full details of what transpired on the negotiating table shall never be known; there are many information gaps left in the statements put out by the MEA. Has there been any commitment by China not to try building the road in the future? If the area is disputed has insisted all along by the Indian side, and of course Bhutan, why has China been allowed to emphasize that its troops shall continue to patrol the area? Why was there not a corresponding assertion from the Indian or Bhutanese side that the latter’s troops shall also patrol the area under dispute?

From the haze of diplomatic jargon some clear aspects of the issue emerge. Militarily, for most of the 4000 km long LAC, India has the advantage of holding the higher ground; such was the case in the Doklam area also. In case of an armed conflict China would have needed to vastly outnumber Indian forces, according to some experts by a ratio of 9 to 1 to push back Indian troops. And with snowfall expected in September it would have been difficult for the Chinese despite their superior roads and infrastructure to hold their ground.

China had some domestic compulsions too. In the crucial national conference of Communist Party of China in mid-October, Xi Jinping is expected to be given a second five year term at the helm and a continuing, unresolved military face-off with India would have been seen to be a mishandling of the situation and the show weakness against the country that most Chinese believe to be significantly inferior in terms of military or economic prowess.

Internationally, China would have lost face in the event of India raising the issue on behalf of Bhutan in the BRICS Summit or alternatively, sending a low level representative delegation instead of personal attendance by the Indian Prime Minister. In fact, both India and Bhutan had absented themselves from the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) meeting in May 2017 much to China’s annoyance. In fact some observers had even linked that to the Doklam standoff.

Diplomatically, there have been reports that there was Russian pressure on both China and India to resolve the issue. Overtly however the rest of the world stayed away from the imbroglio with only Japan openly supporting India on the issue. Notwithstanding the US-China tensions over North Korea there was no mention of the issue by American authorities; it could have been logically expected by India that there would be some support from US considering Chinese entities/individuals have been placed under sanctions by the Trump Administration over the North Korean issue. Also, US has been supportive of India’s role while formulating its Afghan policy.

A matter of diplomatic concern for India was that after its initial response rebutting China’s claim over Doklam, Bhutan and assiduously maintained a discreet silence throughout the face off only expressing its hope that the matter would be resolved peacefully. In fact Bhutan’s lukewarm attitude nudged Sushma Swaraj into clarifying in the Indian Parliament that apart from the dispute that Bhutan had with China and in which India was treaty bound to help the former, there were Indian security interests also which made it necessary for India to intercede in the area.

It made economic sense for China given its trade and investment imperatives vis-a-vis India’s huge market not to aggravate the crisis militarily and have a diplomatic resolution without losing face. In fact during the ongoing crisis there were some faint murmurings on the part of the Indian government proposing changes in the criteria for foreign suppliers of power plant equipment which would hit Chinese manufacturers badly. In fact, the trade imbalance is heavily tilted towards China so India can leverage on this fact to push for course correction. China can ill afford to disturb the vast market like India that offers massive market to Chinese consumer durable and infra companies. Make in India program of Modi government will push Chinese manufacturing sector to limits in the years to come, and it will offer stiff competition to Chinese manufacturing companies soon.

 – Dr Pradeep Bajpai prad.bajpai@gmail.com 

As it is diplomatically said: “There are no clear winner or loser in our language”. The Ministry of External Affairs on Monday announced “expeditious disengagement of border personnel” at Doklam, signalling that the months-long standoff at the disputed India-China-Bhutan trijunction has come to an end. In response to queries on Doklam disengagement, the Ministry of External Affairs said, “India has always maintained that it is only through diplomatic channels such matters can be addressed. Our principled position is that agreements and understandings reached on boundary issues must be scrupulously respected”.

India’s official statement is in contrast to the what the Chinese Foreign Ministry said on Doklam, insisting that India has withdrawn troops from Doklam while Chinese troops will “remain in the region” and exercise their “sovereignty over the region”. This difference in the stand on Doklam between India and China is also reflected by the global media which has reported extensively on the border dispute.

BBC: The BBC, in its report titled ‘China claims victory over India in Himalayan border row’, says that “China says India has withdrawn troops from a disputed Himalayan border area, ending a tense stand off lasting weeks”. The BBC report says that India’s foreign ministry confirmed troops were “disengaging” at Doklam after agreement between the two countries.   The report quotes China’s official Xinhua news agency as saying that India had withdrawn its personnel and equipment “that had crossed the border back to the Indian side”.

The CNN report titled ‘India, China agree to ‘expeditious disengagement’ of Doklam border dispute’ says the standoff was “sparked after Bhutan accused China of constructing a road inside its territory in ‘direct violation’ of treaty obligations. China, which does not have formal diplomatic relations with Bhutan, denied the accusation, contending that Doklam is part of Chinese territory”.

– Prakhar Prakash Misra (Political Editor, OE)

The Summit declaration names Pak based Lashkar, Jaish as terror concerns

Narendra Modi visit to China for BRICS Summit has been a astounding success from an Indian prospective. It is surely a victory for Indian diplomacy that have scripted outstanding victory to include terror in the joint declaration of BRICS SUMMIT 2017. An end to DokaLa standoff saved Xi Jinping from an embarrassing face-to-face meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The resolution will have offered relief to the BRICS organizers too, as there was hardly any logic in talking peace and cooperation among the grouping when two of its key constituents are engaged in a military face-off. Both Xi and Modi have set the stage for talks on peace and cooperation by agreeing to move past DokaLa and work on the larger BRICS agenda on cooperation. But all is still far from well.

For India and China, the next point of contention is developing, perhaps not in the form of a military conflict, but something that has all the making of a grand start to a prolonged diplomatic standoff India’s approach to the China Pakistan Economic corridor (CPEC) and One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative. China has bet big on CPEC, which it wants to use as a tool to assert significant political and economic influence on Pakistani soil and achieve its long-term goal of regional dominance operating from that base. CPEC is also integral to the OBOR initiative anchored by China.

It wants to grow as a world leader with its economic power and military might. For both CPEC and OBOR, India’s co-operation will be crucial for China since no power in Asia can ignore Asia’s third largest economy.

But, China may have a tough time in taking India into confidence since the CPEC corridor passes through the contentious part of Kashmir, which is occupied by Pakistan and claimed by India. India has the backing of others. For instance, Sri Lanka has spoken in favor of India on this issue saying it is difficult for India to accept the CPEC since it passes through the ‘heart of Indian interests’. China would have further risked the fate of CPEC and OBOR if it escalated tensions, as India can create hurdles in the path of OBOR. It was one of the major economic reasons it had to put an end to the DokaLa conflict as pointed out earlier.

In a recent report, the Economic and Social Commission for Asia Pacific (ESCAP), the UN’s regional development arm, had warned that the CPEC running through Pakistan occupied Kashmir could create tensions with India and lead to ‘further political instability’ in the region. India has so far distanced itself from the OBOR initiative on account of this reason. It did not send a delegation to attend the OBOR meet convened by China early this year. This point of contention is likely to escalate further.

Just recently, army chief General Bipin Rawat had said that the CPEC passing through PoK challenges India’s sovereignty. “It is doing so by increasing defense and economic partnerships in the neighborhood, especially in Pakistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka and Myanmar.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) passing through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) challenges India’s sovereignty,” Rawat had said. China, on the other hand, has maintained that CPEC has no direct links to Kashmir, a claim India has not agreed to. There are good reasons for China to bat for CPEC. China has invested at least $50 billion so far in the CPEC, and has also promised further investments.

Besides, it also plans to deeply influence the Pakistan region with its power and culture, establishing “a full system of monitoring and surveillance … built in cities from Peshawar to Karachi, with 24 hour video recordings on roads and busy marketplaces for law and order. A national fibre optic backbone will be built for the country not only for internet traffic, but also terrestrial distribution of broadcast TV, which will cooperate with Chinese media in the ‘dissemination of Chinese culture’.” All this will eventually make Pakistan nothing short of a Chinese colony and a surveillance base, which is a threat to India.

The 2017 BRICS Summit may not have much to offer beyond the usual rhetoric and general statements on promise of member cooperation. Particularly for India and China, although the DokaLa problem is off for now, the damage inflicted by the standoff on bilateral trade and economic relations will linger on for a while. Even if Modi and Xi move past the DokaLa episode and shake hands in front of cameras, the CPEC issue will loom over the meet.

The Brics grouping on Monday bracketed Pakistan-based Lashkar-e- Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed with global terror groups Islamic State and al-Qaeda, marking a significant diplomatic win in India’s efforts to counter cross border terrorism. Prime Minister Narendra Modi joined Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Brazilian President Michael Temer and South African President Jacob Zuma condemned terror attacks worldwide and said those “committing, organizing or supporting” such acts must be held accountable.

This is the first time anti-India groups such as LeT and JeM have been named in a Brics declaration though the five-country grouping has denounced terror in the past. In the run-up to the summit in Xiamen, China’s foreign ministry had even suggested the counter terror efforts of its “iron brother”

ally Pakistan would not be an appropriate topic for discussion.

The 43-page Xiamen declaration, with 17 references to terrorism, made it clear that India had been able to convince others in the grouping about the threat posed by Pakistan-based organisations as the document also contained references to groups such as the Haqqani Network, Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement and Pakistani Taliban that have targeted Afghanistan and China.

“We deplore all terrorist attacks worldwide, including attacks in Brics countries, and condemn terrorism in all its forms…,” said the declaration released after the plenary session of the 9th Brics summit. “We…express concern on the security situation in the region and violence caused by the Taliban, ISIL/DAISH, Al-Qaida and its affiliates including Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the Haqqani Network, Laskar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, TTP and Hizb-ut-Tahrir,” it said.

The document did not specify which region it was referring to but added: “We reaffirm that those responsible for committing, organizing or supporting terrorist acts must be held accountable.” Monday’s statement was a marked departure from earlier Brics statements the declaration issued after last year’s summit in Goa referred to terrorism several times but only named one group, the Islamic State.

Report filed by Prakhar Misra, inputs from mainstream media.

The recent aggression shown by USA and North Korea may jeopardize world security

The two aggressive leaders of USA and North Korea have brought the entire world on its knees.

Donald Trump narrative of & fury and Kim statement of hitting US by ICBM have resulted in escalation of tensions in entire world. Japan and South Korea are living in constant fear of missile attack but unfortunately China is proceeding with its stale strategy of promoting rouge states namely North Korea and Pakistan by supporting them with funds, technology, business collaboration and nuclear technology transfer resulting in making the world a deadly place to live in. KIM Jongun may have hidden a secret message to the United States in his blustering boast that he is now ready to lob missiles at Guam. But can President Trump understand it?

Recently North Korean media stat- ed Kim had been briefed by his Missile Command on completed plans to test launch missiles and ‘bracket’ the US Pacific territory of Guam. But Kim stated he would watch the “foolish and stupid conduct of the Yankees” a little more before deciding whether to give an order for the missile test. The US has stat- ed any missiles lobbed toward Guam would be seen as a deeply provocative act. US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the United States would “take out” any such missile and declared such a launch could lead to war.

Kim’s comments, however, come with an almost hidden tone of moderation. He appears to hold out the offer to defuse the growing crisis if the United States made a conciliatory gesture. “The US Imperialists caught the noose around their necks due to their reckless military confrontation racket … (but) he would watch a little more the foolish and stupid conduct of the Yankees spending a hard time of every minute of their miserable lot,” the Pyongyang statement reads.

But the question is whether or not everybody who needs to understand that understands that. “The problem is that Kim Jonun is largely the same personality type as Trump both are paranoid, narcissistic and have huge egos,” Dr Hohnen says. “We’ve never really had leaders like that on both sides before.

“The unknown factor in this is not Kim, its Trump. Kim Jongun is acting as we expect him to behave.” “We’ve actually been expecting something like this,” she says. “Today’s quite an important day in North Korea (celebrations marking the liberation of Korea at the end of World War II). The North Koreans usually do something in terms of military development to coincide with such events.”

DIPLOMATIC CRISIS

Officials have told US media that satellites have observed DPRK mobile missile launcher movement, indicating an intermediate-ballistic missile may be being prepared as part of North Korea’s holiday celebrations. The move comes as the United States and South Korea plan to start annual defensive military drills that the North asserts are a severe provocation and a possible preparation for invasion. But South Kora’s Yonhap News Agency says President Moon told a gathering he will prevent war in Korea “at all costs”.

No US military action on the troubled peninsula was possible without Seoul’s consent, he said. US President Donald Trump, who today returned to his residence in New York for the first time since becoming President in January, has phoned regional leaders including Japan’s Shinzo Abe.

“We agreed that Japan, the U.S. and South Korea will coordinate closely, co- operating with Russia, China and other members of the international community to, above all else, prevent North Korea from launching missiles,” Mr Abe said about the call with President Trump. US Secretary of Defense James Mattis warned any further escalation could rapidly lead to war: “Yes that means for a lot of young troops they’re going to be in a wartime situation.”

President Kim Jongun being presented with plans to launch ballistic missiles towards the US territory of Guam. The map in front of him details the flight path of a missile over southern Japan, while the photo on the back wall shows Guam’s Andersen Air Force Base.

‘DELIGHTFUL HISTORIC MOMENT’

Pyongyang’s state media has this morning reported President Kim Jongun as “praising” his Strategic Force for drawing up a “careful” plan for a “power demonstration” to “envelop” Guam in fire. “The nuclear force of the DPRK is strong in its guts and no one can guess its muscle as the flight trajectory of medium-to-long ballistic rocket Hwasong 12, firing data and the correct hitting-point are made public at home and abroad.”

This North Korean supplied image purports to show Kim Jongun being briefed at the KPA Strategic Force HQ on plans to launch ballistic missiles to- wards the US territory of Guam.

INTERNATIONAL CONCERN

The European Union’s foreign policy chief has called for “peaceful, not military” means to resolve the Korean peninsula crisis, urging Pyongyang to avoid any “further provocative action” that could stoke tensions. “At such a critical juncture, the European Union supports diplomatic work with our partners aimed at the deescalation of the situation and achieving the complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearize of the Korean Peninsula through peaceful, not military, means,” Federica Mogherini said in a statement.

The statement was issued after a meeting of a key EU panel which agreed the bloc would reach out to North and South Korea, the United States, China, Russia and Japan. “There is an urgent need for a deescalation of tensions on the situation on the Korean Peninsula,” Mogherini said. “(…) We there fore call on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to refrain from any further provocative action that can only increase regional and global tensions.”

USA is building strategic level of co- ordination with another world power namely India to play an active role in taming rouge states like North Korea and Pakistan. So far, India has followed normal diplomatic language of restrain but the ambitious leadership of Narendra Modi is likely to take more active role in the global affairs to push for permanent t UN Security Council seat.

DUBIOUS ROLE OF CHINA

People Republic of China is gradually perceived to be the villain of the new world. China have build satellite rouge states namely North Korea and Pakistan, funded and armed them with clandestine nuclear weapon technology to serve its power balance in the new world order. Pakistan is pitted against India by China to curb India’s global emergence and North Korea is pitted against South Korea to check USA knocking its border. In the process, two rouge states with failed governance have ensured that world is no longer a safe place. There is highly likely that nukes may land up in wrong hands namely jihadi’s or terror groups that can extensively damage the humanity in any part of the world.

The unfair trade practices by PRC and reckless low cost manufacturing, dumping cheap goods in the global market have damaged many economies in the world. IPR violation and clone design are standard practice in China that has hurt many thriving multinational companies globally.

Recently US President has ordered probe against China for IPR violation. The world must unite against the Chinese unfair trade practices to secure sovereign right of many industrial nations.

America is preparing military options in case sanctions fail, says most senior US general

Joint Chief of Staffs chairman says US ready to use ‘full range’ of military capabilities to defend itself against Pyongyang. The Independent US South Korean army soldiers walk by a mock Scud-B missile of North Korea AP America is preparing military options in case sanctions imposed on North Korea fail, the most senior general in the US armed forces has warned. Joseph Dunford said a “full range” of contingency plans had been drawn up in case diplomatic and economic sanctions did not deter Pyongyang’s development of nuclear weapons. The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman told South Korean President Moon Jaein of the preparations during a 50-minute meeting on Monday, according to a US military spokesman. It comes amid heightened tensions over fears Pyongyang is close to achieving its goal of putting mainland US within range of a nuclear weapon.

The two nations exchanged military threats last week, with North Korea warning it has developed a plan to strike the US Pacific territory of Guam. Donald Trump said military solutions to the crisis were “locked and loaded”, days after vowing to unleash “fire and fury” if Pyongyang continued to threaten the US.

Mr Dunford is visiting Seoul to discuss the rising tensions in the region with President Moon Jaein and Defense Minister Song Young-moo ahead of major joint US-South Korean military drills scheduled for later this month. “He conveyed America’s readiness to use the full range of military capabilities to defend our allies and the US homeland,” said US military spokes- man Darryn James. Mr Dunford, who will also meet with leaders in Japan and China, “stressed that North Korea’s ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programmers threaten the entire global community,” the spokesman added. Mr Dunford had earlier told reporters he aimed to “sense what the temperature is in the region” and discuss military options in the event the “diplomatic and economic pressurization campaign” fails. “We’re all looking to get out of this situation without a war,” he added. Mr Moon separately called for a peaceful solution to the nuclear stand-off, urging that “there must not be another war on the Korean Peninsula”. It comes as senior US officials attempted to provide assurances with that conflict with North Korea not imminent.

The American military is ready with a plan to strike North Korean missile sites in a preemptive attack if Donald Trump decides to do so. The plan involves flying a B-1B heavy bomber from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam ac- companies by satellites, drones, higher jets, and aerial refueling warplanes. Training for the mission has been on- going, and there have been 11 practice runs for a similar mission since May when the training was accelerated.

“Of the military options … [President Trump] could consider, this would be one of the two or three that would at least have the possibility of not escalating the situation,” retired Admiral James Stavridis, the former Supreme Allied Commander Europe, told NBC.There are six B-1B bombers positioned in Guam, about 2,100 miles by air to North Korea. The bombers have been heavily used in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and have been updated since then.

The news of the potential operations comes as the relationship between the US and North Korea has become very strained. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and Mr Trump have engaged in a heated back and forth of threats. Recently, Mr Trump promised “fire and fury” if Mr Kim didn’t stop threatening the United States. In response, Mr Kim’s government signaled they were considering an attack on Guam if Mr Trump didn’t cool his tough talk. Both countries appear to be more than willing to push the other further and further with the threats, however, in spite of assurance from US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who has said that Americans have no reason to worry about an impending war.

US administration has finally realized that China is the base of North Korea and Pakistan problem. It is China that has clandestinely exported nuclear weapon technology to North Korea and Pakistan and at the same time, they have invested heavily in respective countries to keep the economy rolling ahead despite sanctions and international curbs. The world has realized that China is the backbone of unofficial terror and their irresponsible actions can lead to a major nuclear proliferation that is extremely dangerous to the civil societies globally. It is high time that the global community must put pressure on China to mend its way or get out of the new world order.

 – OE News Bureau