President Donald Trump has ruled out talks with the Taliban and vowed to “finish what we have to finish” in Afghanistan, following the wave of deadly terrorist attacks in recent days, killing over 130 people and wounding hundreds more.

“They’re killing people left and right,” Trump said at a meeting with UN Security Council members at the White House on Monday. “Innocent people are being killed left and right …. bombing, killing all over Afghanistan:’ So we don’t to talk with the Taliban.”

“So we don’t want to talk with the Taliban. There may be a time, but it’s going to be a long time,” Trump commented, declaring: “We’re going to finish what we have to finish. What nobody else has been able to finish, we’re going to be able to do if’

The total number of American troops in Afghanistan is expected to grow to about 15,000 in coming months, with some 4,000 of them sent to the war-torn country under President Trumps watch.

Prior to the recent wave of attacks, Washington had entertained hopes of a negotiated political settlement to the persisting Afghan crisis.

Several attempts in the past to hold peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban have failed. The most prominent effort was in 2013, when the Taliban opened an office in Qatar for the talks, but the Taliban’s move to hoist its flag derailed the negotiations.

At his luncheon meeting with representatives from the 15-member Security Council, including ambassadors to the US from China, France, Russia and Britain, Trump also discussed other security challenges, including the North Korean nuclear challenge.

“We will discuss our cooperation on a range of security challenges, including the denuking of North Korea, very importantly; countering [ran’s destabilization activities in the Middle East; ending the Syrian conflict; and confronting terrorism,”Trump said in remarks ahead of the meeting.

A political thriller played out in Saudi’s royal family

The recent turn of events in Saudi Arabia have been nothing short of a Hollywood thriller with Family, King, Princes, neighbouring countries and missile attacks all thrown into the mix for good measure. Eighty-year-old King Salman Abdulaziz Al Saud, in a political liquidation, rounded up 11 princes of the royal House of Saud, along with various Ministers and officials in what was marketed as an “anti-corruption” initiative in which prominent royal members were arrested and “jailed” in Riyadh’s notoriously luxurious Ritz Carlton hotel. This included globally influential names such as billionaire investor Alwaleed Bin Talaal, who has close ties with various American industrialists and owns five per cent of social media site Twitter. Over the span of 72 hrs starting November 3, a purge was underway, ballistic missiles were fired towards the Saudi capital Riyadh from Yemen, Lebanon’s Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned (on television) from his post from Saudi Arabia, accusing Iran of medaling in internal Arab affairs before disappearing from public eye, Yemen’s incumbent President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, who also took up refuge there months ago, was reported to be under ‘house arrest’ (Saudis released pictures of a meeting with Hadi in attempts to refute such rumors). Two other princes were reportedly killed, one in a curiously timed helicopter crash near Yemen and another, rumored to have been shot while resisting an ‘attempted arrest’. This tragedy-ridden Shakespearean theatre makes King Salman the conductor of a never seen before ‘tripurge’, orchestrating political changes in his own country, Lebanon and Yemen simultaneously.

Understanding the politics of the Saudi monarchy is no easy task, with over 9,000 members in the royal family, Saudi politics is a never ending series of internal turmoil and power struggles.

However, most analysts agree that the recent events are King Salman’s strategy to clear way for the 32-years old heir apparent, Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. It is believed King Salman has already started the process of aiding Prince Salman to the throne, his son from his third spouse, transferring power by the end of 2018. The start of the said process was highlighted by social reforms with Saudi Arabia agreeing to allow women to drive, a long standing issue of contention. It has also allowed women to attend sports events at stadium. These changes come on the back of waiting for the accession of a young King, who will preside over a very-young and globally well-connected Saudi population on the cusp of a post oil economic and social order, and a corrupt royal system against which sentiments had been latently bubbling for a long time.

The challenges for the Saudi monarchy in the decades to come are plenty. Currently, the Saudi youth have it relatively easy, with various social schemes keeping them occupied, thanks to the petro-dollars, however, Riyadh has (finally) decided to move beyond its dependence on a singular mode of finance and approach models, such as those embraced by its neighbours, specifically Dubai.

This would require relaxed norms and a better global positioning to attract foreign investments, foregoing its rigid and suffocating rules that curtail freedom and basic human rights for its citizens, specifically women. The announcement of Saudi Aramco, the country’s national oil company, which at a point few years ago was worth more than India’s GDP, going partially public to raise money came as a surprise to many. However, it implanted the narrative of slow but drastic changes taking place in the kingdom, both politically and socially. This is highlighted by examples such as the steadily increasing domestic oil consumption in the country, thanks to domestic population growth. A robust and rich domestic economy is critical for Riyadh, both to keep a check on its young population and till a certain degree secure the House of Saud’s own future.

Geo-politically, the Saudis are continuing to make attempts to rein in the growing Iranian influence in the region, something that Prince Salman, the world’s youngest Defense Minister, has reiterated during the purge in an effort to stamp his own authority. Saudi concerns in regional West Asian dynamics have heightened over the past few months with Iranian influence growing at a rapid pace. The question around Syria and future of the said conflict has now been pretty much decided, with President Bashar al-Assad expected to stay, with the help of the Russians and Iranians. Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Hezbollah-backed militias are today already prevailing interest groups in large parts of Syria, with Tehran also wielding significant power in Iraqi and Lebanese politics along with running a indirect war in Yemen. The recent failed Kurdish referendum also saw Iran’s influence shine through over contentions between Baghdad and Erbil regarding the control of Kirkuk after its liberation from ISIS, while the Saudi Qatar diplomatic standoff pushed Doha to increase its engagements with Iran as well.

Despite collusion of regional interests, the exact reasons and future outcomes of this purge remain unclear. The narrative of an anti-corruption drive remains strong, but also begs the question whether this is the start of greater transparency in Saudi Arabian affairs or greater turmoil. Riyadh is banking on US President Donald Trump to back it to the hilt, specifically against Iran, on the pretext of which its regional overtures could be marketed as legitimate political tinkering to an often- naive new White House. How this purge plays out in reality, is anyone’s guess at the moment.

Courtesy The Pioneer ( The writer is an Associate Fellow with the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi)

OE Political Bureau & Agencies

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Ivanka Trump, US President Donald Trump’s daughter and presidential adviser, attended a gala dinner at the Falaknuma Palace last week. The dinner was hosted by the Union government as part of the ongo- ing Global Entrepreneurship Summit (GES) 2017.

Famous for its huge Nizamera table which can seat 101 guests at a time, the palace-turned-plush hotel is one the key landmarks of the city.

Telangana chief minister K Chandrashekhar Rao was among those present for the dinner. A separate dinner was arranged for around 1,500 delegates of the GES on the lawns of the palace.

Modi, on his day-long visit to the city today, inaugurated the first phase of the Hyderabad Metro Rail at Miyapur station here, and the GES at the Hyderabad International Convention Centre.

A senior police official said a five tier security has been provided to Ivanka.

Telangana DGP M Mahendar Reddy had said earlier that a total of 10,400 security personnel drawn from various wings have been deployed as part of security arrangements for the summit.

It includes personnel from Traffic Police, Central Armed Reserve, Telangana State Special Police, Intelligence Security Wing, commandos of Grey- hounds anti Naxal force and the elite OCTOPUS antiterror force.

More than 2,000 police personnel have been deployed around the Falaknuma Palace, the official said, adding the police conducted a door-to-door search at 3,500 houses in surrounding areas and sanitised the areas in the run- up to the summit.

JINPING EMERGES AS CHINA’S MOST POWERFUL LEADER SINCE MAO

In October 18, Beijing organised a week-long 19th National Congress of Communist Party of China, an event that the world is following closely. The summit — being attended by 2,287 party members from various provinces — is important as it will select its new brand of leadership, agendas and goals for the next five years and ahead.

Moreover, the 19th National Congress is a significant political event for Chinese President Xi Jinping himself. Since assuming power in 2012, he has envisioned a “national rejuvenation” programme for China under the theme of “Chinese dream”. This is attached to two major centenary goals: To make China moderately prosperous society by 2020, a year before centenary celebration of the Communist Party of China (CPC), and to aim to establish a prosperous and powerful nation by 2049 to commemorate the centenary year of the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

These goals have been planned to be fulfilled with a number of reform programmes and the highlights are: Reforms in the army, fight to root out corruption from political, military and public spheres, and poverty eradication.

Xi in his October 18 speech at the Congress highlighted that in the last five years China has made drastic progress through these reforms. It aims to lift total 98 million people from poverty trap in eight years, which shall be a remark- able feat. In addition, China has worked towards right-sizing of military and its modernization. The country’s fight against corruption has seen prominent military and political bigwigs falling from the grace. Progress in reforms in the last five years under Xi’s leadership has been promising, however the road ahead is fraught with daunting internal and external challenges, primarily concerning the economic slowdown, the promotion of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), North Korean crisis, etc.

Politically, the 19th National Congress will entail selection of around 200 full members and 100 alternate members, finalization of 25-member Politburo Committee and seven-member Politburo Standing Committee and lastly the members of the anti-corruption watchdog CCDI, currently being headed by Xi’s loyalist Wang Qishan.

In 1980, President Deng Xiaoping had put in place the concept of collective leadership to prevent or guard re- turn to arbitrary abuses of Mao’s final decades (the cultural revolution). Similarly, the Article 79 of the party constitution restricts tenures of President and Premier to 10 years, however there are no restrictions on general secretary of the CPC and chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC). There has been an unofficial but consistent rule called “seven up, eight down” according to which if a Politburo Standing Committee member is 68 or older at the time of a party Congress, he must retire, but if he is 67 or younger, he may still enter the committee.

In the current situation, five of the seven PSC members are about to complete 68 years of age. However, the speculation is rife that the “seven up, eight down” rule will be violated to allow Wang Qishan, head of the CCDI, to stay put beyond the retirement age. As per certain analysts, this could be indicative of President Xi’s intention to retain power beyond 2022.

President Xi has amassed much control and his predominance is clearly established in the Chinese political spectrum. He is now regarded as the most powerful leader in decades after Mao. He has taken charge of most of the portfolios and ruling through the leading small groups and has placed his key aides at various nerve centers.

The communique of the sixth plenum of the 8th Congress clearly insists that the principles of collective leadership must always be followed and should not be violated by any organisation or individual under any circumstances or any reasons.

Such statements accentuate the hypothesis above. As regard the chain of succession is concerned, the concept of patronage underscores in China’s Communist Party. The senior party members identify promising stars/ protégés and nurture them for higher dispensations. This ensures loyalty in the lineage. As per certain political analysts, 23 politburo members are of the fifth generation (1953 born like President Xi), and there is speculation that President Xi may block their advancement to the Politburo Standing Committee, while promoting own sixth generation protégés or loyalists to fill the politburo, thereby creating conditions to extend the tenure beyond the 20th Congress, in the absence of qualified members.

It may be pertinent to mention that the erstwhile Soviet Union too faced similar conditions of slowing economy and systemic corruption in political, military and military spheres, which lead to its final collapse. President Xi, out of concern or fears, has perhaps taken actions to guard China against such situations.

All these assumptions and conjectures will be put to rest by the end of the 19th National Congress, which would have selected the members of the politburo committee, Politburo Standing Committee and members of the Central Military Commission.

Speculation, however, is mounting rapidly in favor of President Xi that he may be nominated as the general secretary of the CPC and chairman of the CMC for life-term to steer the nation towards achieving the momentous centenary goals.

BY Gaurav Misra | in Oped

Fighting terror with terror is failing drastically

Another terror attack jolted Europe and it was London again, not long after the incident in Catalonia, Barcelona. Western Europe has been an easy target for terror mongers in the past few years with a spate of scattered incidents being reported. And, if some sources are to be believed India is under the radar of the ISIS too while the terror group has openly con- fessed its desire to target Europe.This has bred a feeling of uncertainty in Europe and has instilled fear among citizens and governments. While, it is not hard to trace the roots of such acts of violence the sporadic nature makes it hard to predict and prevent them.

International powerhouses like The United States of America with their constant meddling in other nation’s affairs for oil or for geopolitical gains have brought down stable regimes and have set in motion the wheel of unrest and chaos particularly in west Asia. A commingling of ideological and cultural differences, politics and largely the fear of alienation has contributed to the rise of groups like ISIS, which have bombed trains, public spaces, structures all around the world. Talking of the ISIS particularly, how the volatile state of affairs has ravaged Syria, Iraq and neighboring areas and how actively people across continents have joined forces paints a grim picture with dangerous undertones. Tracing the journey from the past one can logically attribute volatility in Middle-East and West Asia to politics of isolation and extraneous intrusion by western countries specifically the United States of America. The refugee crisis is a grave example of the looming instability in these areas. There have also been reports and stark evidences of funding for terror groups coming from trade with nations in the middle-east and the role of diverse factors in its growth like oil trade in the black market.

Influencing young men and women into joining these groups isn’t difficult as the feeling of not being a part of the existing society gives birth to vengeance. Many conspiracy theories and rumors have indicated that the birth of ISIS and its actions are in fact a western ploy to fulfill selfish interests. Lately, there has been a sustained and concerted effort to weed out Islamic State from Syria and Iraq which has helped take back large swathes of land from ISIS’s control. The estimated strength of ISIS is now close to just a few thousand people and limited to smaller areas. However, concerns have been raised about a scattered effort by Islamic State personnel due to its gradual disintegration courtesy of the intensive group effort by international players. While, there has been an influx of people from different countries, Indian Muslims have been responsible and have vociferously voiced their anguish against the indoctrination and heady radicalization that has divided the world. As claimed by the Indian

Government, there have been negligible recruitment’s from India by the ISIS and India has largely remained safe from ISIS’s clutches. India has the second largest Muslim population and has been able to maintain harmony which indicates that terrorism is not about any specific community, religion, ethnic background, etc. and does not stem from that.

It is a paradox that while claims of being connected to everyone on the globe by the 5th degree are made, there is increasing isolation on the lines of religion, culture, race, ethnicity, etc. Divisive ideas are cultivated in impressionable minds through radicalization and the promise of a great future gives a sense of purpose to live in an unaccommodating world. There is evidently a pattern of isolation, violence, counter violence and consequent instability behind terrorism. Eliminating terrorism altogether seems like a long shot, rather a fancy dream; in spite of, sufficient ground gained by pushing ISIS back or be it by declaring Pakistan a safe haven for terror groups or any other positive step for that matter. Counter violence is only a superficial response to an age old problem, the causes of which lie deep down and so do the solutions. Governments along with the UN and other stakeholders need to come together for a sustained dialogue with an empathetic resolve to build inclusive societies focussing on achieving the sustainable development goals. As dialogue and conversations have long been the basis of any process that aims to resolve problems and build peaceful societies.

Providing safe havens to refugees who are victims of terrorism can be a great step towards inclusive development and a manifestation of humanitarian concern. Isolating ourselves from the problem which has deep roots and complexities surrounding it can further foment the crisis that looms large in forms of cross border disputes, radicalized groups demanding a caliphate, or statehood nationhood movements.

 – By Deana Uppal

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)

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

Despite worldwide criticism for its nuclear misadventure, the rogue nation is repenting

A mid international uproar over North Korea’s latest and biggest nuclear weapons test, one of its top diplomats said on Tuesday it was ready to send “more gift packages” to the United States.

Han Tae Song, ambassador of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to the U.N. in Geneva, was addressing the U.N. sponsored Conference on Disarmament two days after his country detonated its sixth nuclear test explosion.

“I am proud of saying that just two days ago on the 3rd of September, DPRK successfully carried out a hydro- gen bomb test for intercontinental ballistic rocket under its plan for building a strategic nuclear force,” Han told the Geneva forum. “The recent self defense measures by my country, DPRK, are a ‘gift package’ addressed to none other than the U.S.,” Han said.

“The U.S. will receive more ‘gift packages’ from my country as long as its relies on reckless provocations and futile attempts to put pressure on the DPRK,” he added without elaborating.

Military measures being taken by North Korea were “an exercise of restraint and justified self-defense right” to counter “the ever-growing and decade long U.S. nuclear threat and hos- tile policy aimed at isolating my country”. “Pressure or sanctions will never work on my country,” Han declared, adding: “The DPRK will never under any circumstances put its nuclear deterrence on the negotiating table.”

Army

North Korea has one of the world’s largest standing armies, with at least 1,000,000 soldiers. However, although the secretive state does not release full details about its armed forces to the rest of the world, their weapons and equipment are believed to be largely obsolete when compared to major Western nations.

tanks

The nation’s 3,500 odd tanks out number its archival South Korea’s fleet by over 1000.

Despite having a larger fleet, most of the North Korean tanks date back to the Soviet era. On the other hand, a major chunk of South Korea’s 2,414 tanks are supplied by the U.S., fitted with modern weaponry, and much more efficient.

Artillery pieces

In terms of artillery, the North Korean army is in possession of over 21,000 pieces of equipment. It is believed that out of the total artillery equipment, many are targeted at Seoul, the South Korean capital city.

Submarines

North Korea boasts of a fleet of at least 72 submarines the highest in the world. The nation’s nuclear weapons could become immune from destruction in case of an preemptive attack, if hidden on board these submarines. In fact, North Korea is reportedly learning the technique of launching nuclear warheads from submarines which, if becomes successful, would allow the country to strike any nation easily.

South Korean marine corps search a North Korean combat class submarine after its discovery on the north-east coast of South Korea, some .62 mile (1 km) south of the demilitarized zone on Sept. 18, 1998.

Frigates

The nation has three frigates (several types of warship) as part of its military possessions. Conversely, the smaller sized South Korean army boasts of 14 frigates currently. Digital satellite imagery of a Soho-class missile frigate at Singyori patrol base in North Korea.

Combat aircraft

The Korean People’s Air Force has a fleet of 563 combat capable aircraft. However, in 2014, each of those planes were grounded for a short period due to low maintenance and poor service.

Aggressive military posturing

North Korea have always maintained an aggressive military posturing against countries it considers “unfriendly,” especially next-door neighbor South Korea. Most recently, tension escalated between the two countries in August 2015 when a North Korean landmine injured two South Korean soldiers. It resulted in the two countries engaging in artillery firing along the demilitarized zone, and North Korea beefing up its front-line troop strength overnight. The standoff eased after the two countries reached an agreement following discussions, and North Korea expressed regret over the landmine incident.

Military guard posts of South Korea (bottom) and North Korea (top) stand opposite each other as seen from the border city of Paju, South Korea, on Aug. 21, 2015.

Human testing for weapons

In June 2015, a North Korean scientist defected to Finland. He carried with him 15 gigabytes of information that showcased how the country’s regime used humans to test its biological and chemical weapons.

Biological weapons

Around the same time, the country released photos showing Kim Jongun touring a pesticide factory, called Pyongyang Bio-technical Institute. However, many experts believe that it could be a facility producing massive amounts of anthrax to be used in weapons.

Chemical weapons

According to Nuclear Threat Initiative, North Korea is believed to be the third largest possessor of chemical weapons.

Cyber army

Finally, North Korea’s cyber military abilities are yet to be fully discovered. It’s worth noting that the nation’s cyber-army has been blamed by the U.S. for the massive Sony hack that occurred in December 2014. U.S. disarmament ambassador Robert Wood said that North Korea had defied the international community once again with its test.

“We look forward to working with our partners in the (Security) Council with regard to a new resolution that will put some of the strongest sanctions possible on the DPRK,” he told the conference. “Advances in the regime’s nuclear and missile programme are a threat to us all … now is the time to say tests, threats and destabilizing actions will no longer be tolerated,” Wood said. It can no longer be business as usual with this regime.” The White House said on Monday President Donald Trump had agreed “in principle” to scrap a warhead weight limit on South Korea’s missiles in the wake of the North’s latest test. The United States accused North Korea’s trading partners of aiding its nuclear ambitions and said Pyongyang was “begging for war”.

– Courtesy Reuters

PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel has opened new avenues for cooperation between the two countries

Clearly  reflecting  the  impact  of  the change in Indian policy towards Israel was  the  chagrin  expressed  by  the  Palestinian envoy to New Delhi: “We were shocked…”

A curious Indian stops a passing Israeli backpacker on a New Delhi street. “Tell me,” he asks, “how many Israelis are there?”

“I’m not quite sure,” the backpacker answers. “About six million.”

“No, no no,” retorts the Indian, “not just in New Delhi. I mean all together.”

The humor of this well-known joke reflects a remarkable reality which helps understand the huge enthusiasm this week’s landmark visit of the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi generated, and clearly heralded a “change of gears” in relations between the two countries.

Hindu Jewish affinity

Each year, over 60,000 Israelis travel to India, many of them “unwinding” in the country after completing military service.  Their presence is highly visible across much of the country. Indeed, the “giant shadow” Israelis cast in India is wildly disproportionate to the minuscule dimensions of their homeland. In some outlying locations, Israelis comprise a dominant percentage of foreign visitors. Even in central sites such as the main market in Old Delhi it is not uncommon to see Hebrew signs and encounter merchants able to converse with Israeli customers in fairly fluent Hebrew.

That Israelis seem to feel an instinctive affinity for India should perhaps not be surprising.  Its history is virtually devoid of antisemitism.  Indeed, the  only  significant  incidents  were  the Moors’ attack on the Jews in 1524 and the  Portuguese  persecution  of  Jews in  Cranganore  (now  the  Kerala  coast)

On the political and diplomatic fronts, the two nations were largely estranged for the four decades following their independence in the late 1940s. Thus, although India recognized the State of Israel in 1950, the then ruling Congress Party eschewed full diplomatic relations, siding with the Palestinians and denouncing what many in its ranks termed the “Zionist enterprise” as an imperialist creation of Western colonial powers.

Some years  later.  Moreover,  many  Indian  Jews  achieved  great  prominence, among  them  the  Sassoons  (for  whom the  Sassoon  docks,  the  Sassoon  hospital,  and  other  well-known  sites  have been  named),  Dr.  E.  Moses  (a  Jewish mayor of Bombay), Lt. Gen. J. F. R. Jacobs (a general in the Indian Army who oversaw the Pakistani Army’s 1971 surrender  in  Bangladesh  and  later  served as governor of Goa and Punjab), Nissim Ezekiel  (a  poet/leading  Indian  literary personality),  and  Dr.  Abraham Solomon Erulkar (the personal physician/ friend of Mahatma Gandhi).

Dispersing ideo-political cloud of “post-colonial” prejudice

However, Indo-Israeli relations were not always characterized by such warmth. On  the  political  and  diplomatic fronts, the two nations were largely estranged  for  the  four  decades  following their  independence  in  the  late  1940s. Thus, although India recognized the State of Israel in 1950, the then-ruling Congress Party eschewed full diplomatic relations, siding with the Palestinians and denouncing what many in its ranks termed the “Zionist enterprise” as an imperialist creation of Western colonial powers.

Additional  factors  also  weighed against  close  and  cordial  bilateral bonds:  New Delhi’s fear of antagonizing  its  large  Muslim  population;  pressures  from  the  Islamic  world,  India’s major source of energy; the fate of the many Indian workers in the Gulf States, and the anti-Israeli attitude of the non- aligned movement, in which India was a leading member.

Moreover, in terms of strategic allegiances,  an  additional  rift  between  the two  states  existed:  Israel  aligned  itself firmly  with  the  United  States,  while India,  then  traditionally  suspicious  of American foreign policy, opted for close links with the Soviet Union. The significant disparity between the two countries hardly boded well for mutual cooperation between them. However, since the early  1990s,  with  the  fall  of  the  Soviet bloc and the accelerating liberalization of  the  Indian  economy,  considerable changes  began  to  take  place,  bringing with  them a marked convergence of Indo Israeli interests.

Removing the reticence

The establishment of full diplomatic ties between Jerusalem and New Delhi allowed the underlying Indo-Israeli affinity to express itself.  Yet, until the Modi government came to power there has been a perceptible reticence, or at least reserve, on the part of India with regard to its relationship with Israel.

One particular sore point was India’s consistent support of anti-Israel resolutions in international forums, such as the UN.  One commentator characterized the Israeli perception in the following terms: “Israel has long complained that India treats it like a mistress: glad to partake of its defense and technology charms, but a little embarrassed about the whole thing and unwilling to make the relationship too public.” But  with  the  rise  to  power  of  the Modi  government,  this  restraint  is  be- ginning  to  fade  discernibly,  and  India has ceased to support a number of motions  of  censure  against  Israel  in  several  UN  bodies.  Clearly  reflecting  the impact  of  this  change  was  the  chagrin expressed  by  the  Palestinian  envoy  to New  Delhi,  at  India’s  decision  not  to support a resolution condemning Israel:  “We  were  shocked.  The Palestinian people and the leaders were very happy with the UN resolution, but the voting of India has broken our happiness.”

physical embrace of Israeli Prime Minister  Benjamin  Netanyahu,  as  he  descended  from  the  plane  that  brought him to Israel, seems to have unequivocally melted away any residual reticence that might have remained.

Modi’s landmark visit

The  visit  of  Indian  Prime  Minister Modi  is  undeniably  a  landmark  event of  potentially  historical  proportions. Attesting to this is the virtually unprecedented attention he has been given by the media and the public in Israel far beyond that accorded most visiting heads of government.

As  the  first  Indian  premier  to  visit the Jewish state, Modi has undoubtedly cast aside any restraint in forging future relations  with  Israel.  Indeed,  despite his country’s heavy reliance on oil from the  Middle  East  (or  “Western  Asia”  as the Indians tend to call it) chiefly Iraq, Saudi  Arabia  and  Iran Modi  appears to  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that India  has  more  to  gain  from  throwing in its lot with Israel than with the Arab States,  who  seem  to  consistently  lend their support to India’s rival, Pakistan.

Two  of  Modi’s  decisions  on  this trip perhaps more symbolic than substantive seem to distill out the essence of  the  new  Indian  approach  to  Israel: The  one,  political;  the  other,  humanitarian. The first was the Indian PM’s decision not to include the customary visit to  Ramallah,  made  by  virtually  all  visiting  senior  statesmen  to  maintain  the appearance of scrupulous even handedness in the Israel Palestinian conflict.

Thus  despite  the  fact  that  the  Indian  government  continues  to  declare its ongoing support for the “Palestinian cause” there can be no glossing over the implicit message  in  Modi’s  decision  to skip some might say, snub the Palestinian Authority by excluding any meeting  with  any  of  its  senior  representatives. courage  in  flouting  the  bonds  of  the constrictive  conventions of  political correctness and  the  willingness  to break from past patterns, which bodes well  for  the  independent  development of bilateral relations in the future.

The other defining event was Modi’s decision to visit  Moshe (Moish) Holtzberg,  the  boy  whose  parents,  Gavriel and Rivka Holtzberg, were murdered in a 2008  attack on the Chabad center in Mumbai  by  an  Islamist  terrorist group based in Pakistan. The attack was one of a dozen carried out throughout the city in late November, 2008, that left 164 dead and at least 308 wounded.

In  making  this  moving  gesture, Modi  not  only  showed  a  laudable  sensitivity  on  a  personal  level,  but  also underscored  the  common  threats/enemies  faced  by  both  countries  and  the joint  perils  that  menace  both  Israelis and Indians.   So although the visit included a dizzying  array  of  sites  and  installations, highlighting  Israel’s  capabilities  and achievements  in  culture,  technology, agriculture,  and  security  it  was  these two  events resolute  moral  clarity  on the  one  hand  and  human  empathy  on the  other that  imparted  a  distinctive quality to the visit making it one of the most memorable in years. Indeed,  as  one  scholar  of  Indo-Israeli  ties,  Souptik  Mukherjee,  pointed out:  “While the visit has many dimensions, the most important aspect is not the joint development of arms, not the prospect  of  free  trade  agreement  but rather the shared values and historical ties.”

Marrying “Make in India” with “Make with India”

The visit also produced some interesting rhetorical innovations.In  September  2015  Modi  launched his “Make in India” initiative to encourage  foreign  corporations  to  manufacture  their  products  in  India.  To date it appears to be an impressive success, with India emerging as the top destination globally for foreign direct investment, surpassing the United States and China!

In  his  effusive  welcoming  address on  Modi’s  arrival,  Netanyahu  mentioned  Modi’s “Make in India” project and  added  a  twist,  suggesting  an  additional  project:  ”Make  with  India”  in which both countries, would exploit the synergies  of  Indo-Israeli  cooperation and  engage  in  joint  ventures  across  a range of civilian and military fields.

Given  the  huge  nascent  consumer demand in India, its burgeoning middle class,  the  daunting  security  challenges it  faces  from  both  state  and  non-state actors innately hostile to Israel as well, there  is  little  doubt  that  both  formula Israeli  manufacturing  plants  in Israel, and joint Indo-Israel projects in either country offer almost boundless prospects.

Referring  to  ongoing  cooperation in the field of space, Netanyahu under- scored with a touch of hyperbole the almost  limitless  opportunities  a  marriage  of  “Make  in  India”  and  “Make with India” could create.  He recalled: “I remember what you told me in our first meeting when it comes to India and Israel relations, the sky is the limit. But now, prime minister, let me add [that] even the sky is not the limit. We are also cooperating in space.”

(Inputs from an article published in Israel Rising by Martin Sherman offers Israeli prospective)

The Prognosis:

Political leaders are driven by four considerations national interests, domestic audience or vote bank, party ideology and personal convictions. While there is normally a strong overlap between party ideology and personal convictions, in situations where there is a tussle between the two, it is the latter that prevails in the case of strong, charismatic leaders. Both Narendra Modi and Donald Trump belong to this category. Also, international relations are need driven and ideology of the visionary sort plays little role. Further, in international realpolitik the stronger party calls the shots. Given this back drop, one can well imagine that the Modi  Trump Summit will be shaped by the latter’s compulsions, predilections and if one may add, idiosyncrasies.

2. True to his background, the issue foremost on Trump’s agenda will be US business interests. This was best illustrated recently by the whopping $ 3 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia and the supply of $7.5 billion worth of jets to Qatar in spite of their well known role in financing Islamist terrorism. As such, India will be expected to facilitate American FDI, place orders for mega defense deals and reduce protectionist barriers for US imports. The deal to supply 22 unarmed Guardian surveillance drones announced recently is a case in point; also, the proposed joint production of F-16 fighter jets in India. In fact, in his speech to the NRIs, Modi had stressed upon the business opportunities that India’s 1.3 billion strong market offers American industry and the steps taken by his government to make India a top investment destination.

3. Secondly, Trump would be interested in promoting American interests in the region and will look forward to cooperation from India in this regard. Counter terrorism operations and intelligence sharing would fall in this area. Additionally, Trump’s best option to counter China both in Af Pakistan as also in the South China Sea is to use India as a bulwark against Chinese expansionism. One can expect greater intelligence sharing as well as some support to India’s concerns.

4. From Modi’s viewpoint the expected takeaways would be greater US pressure on Pakistan so as to curb its sponsorship of terrorism in Kashmir, easing restrictions on H1B visas so as to safeguard the interests of India’s IT sector, transfer of high end defense technology, support for NSG membership, revitalization of the US India nuclear deal. As was pointed out by an American CEO after Modi’s meet with American industrialists, the Indian side has taken the right preparatory steps. Coincidentally, two nations which are often at odds with American interests and policy have provoked India on the eve of the summit China by denying Indian pilgrims access to Mansarovar and Iran by exhorting Muslims all over the world to support Kashmiri insurgency.

This affords a convenient opportunity for Modi to leverage towards greater American support in India against its two belligerent neighbours. Modi’s visit to Israel next month and that country’s warm response shall also enlist the support of the powerful Jewish lobby in India’s cause. The personal chemistry between these two strong willed leaders will have a strong bearing on the outcome and if all goes well one can expect some kind of a tacit understanding on how the Kashmir problem can be solved to India’s advantage. If so, one can legitimately expect some decisive action by the Indian government next month. The Indian home Minister too had hinted earlier this week that peace will dawn soon in the Valley.

5. India will do well to avoid at this stage any emphasis on the two thorny issues that may bedevil the negotiations US walkout from the Paris climate agreement and the restrictions on H1B visas. Both these issues are dear to Trump supporters and are likely to be red rags to the bull, to use a rather impolitic expression.

The Aftermath:

On the face of it, the Modi-Trump Summit went on expected lines. India avoided the twin thorny issues of H1B visas and climate change  an understand able tactic looking to Trump’s irascible unpredictability. India also refrained from pursuing its agenda on the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Security Council membership. There was thus a complete accommodation of American sensitivities on India’s part.

There was talk of freedom of navigation in the south east Asian region that was an outcome of the convergence of interests of the two countries visa vis Chinese expansionism there. There was an expression of their common concern for stability and orderly governance in Afghanistan.

The above would suggest that both sides were keen to avoid ruffling feathers of the other party. The concessions to each other’s interests was also reciprocal. Thus the US got the order for drones and the prospects of Westing house building nuclear reactors to India and Lockheed Martin F-16 jets. To the delight of Indian media, the US State Department designated Syed Salahuddin at global terrorist. Both these announcements came just prior to the meeting between the two leaders. From there on the one on one meeting between the two followed by the delegation level talks did not reveal any further surprises.

Thus on the surface it was a meeting between the two leaders did not alter the status quo ante in any significant manner. One can assume that the high point of the summit the personal meeting was inconsequential and to that extent Modi’s trip failed to deliver. But this would be a facile assumption, even unwarranted, given the emphasis by both leaders on curbing radical Islamic terrorism, mentioning safe havens afforded by Pakistan to terrorists and all but terming that country a terrorist state. Given the sensitive nature of the issue any headway or breakthrough in this regard would understandably be kept under wraps. Perhaps the real takeaway for India could not have been spelt out overtly in the joint statement or press meets. Behind the oblique reference to turbulence in the “Indian Valley of Kashmir” and the Pak sponsored terrorism there in the presser and the joint statement may lie the real gains of Modi’s trip to the US. If this is really so, then with Kashmir burning like never before we can expect some really decisive action by the Indian government in the coming months. And that may well sound the death knell of Kashmiri separatism.

 –  Dr Pradeep Bajpai