Current Projects
Pakistan Tensions Loom over India-China Strategic Economic Dialogue
Pakistan may not be officially included in this year's round of talks between India and China, but it's certainly high up on the agenda. The world's number two economy has so far attempted to remain neutral amid the current geopolitical crisis in Kashmir, where New Delhi and Islamabad have revived a decades-old territorial conflict. But as the fourth annual India-China Strategic Economic Dialogue (SED) begins in New Delhi on Thursday, Beijing could intervene further. China may lean on India to moderate tensions in the disputed Himalayan region, Nicholas Consonery, senior Asia-Pacific director at advisory firm FTI Consulting, told CNBC's "The Rundown." While Beijing has historically maintained a deeper alliance with Islamabad, the mainland calls itself a close friend to both South Asian nations. In a press conference on Friday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said his country remained a friendly neighbor to both India and Pakistan and called on the two sides to exercise restraint and avoid further tensions. The nuclear-armed rivals exchanged more fire across their de-factor border in Kashmir—known as the Line of Control—on Wednesday, after Indian military officials said they conducted "surgical strikes" inside Pakistan-controlled Kashmir last week. Prime Minister Narendra Modi' sadministration had accused Islamabad of attacking an Indian army base in the conflicted zone last month, but his counterpart Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has denied the claims. The India-China dynamic has certainly become testier than before, C. Raja Mohan, Carnegie India director at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said. There's a sense in New Delhi that China had not been supportive when it cames to India-Pakistan tensions, while China believes Delhi is growing too close to Washington, so it's using Pakistan as leverage, he told CNBC's "Squawk Box Asia." The geopolitical triangle is further entangled by reports out this week that the Shanghai Stock...
Are We Sure About India?
Chief Minister Narendra Modi has done it. In his typical, inelegant manner, he has raised the curtain on Saarc’s lifeless cadaver. What else could one expect from a man who was in fact considered responsible for the 2002 Gujarat riots that killed over 2000 Muslims and who was blacklisted as persona non grata by the EU and the US? What now remains is Saarc’s final burial and the best locale for the unceremonious event would be the place where it was born 31 years ago. Ironically, Modi’s best partner in this inauspicious event will be none other than his Bangladeshi counterpart who is known for executing those sympathetic to Pakistan. But when it comes to Saarc’s demise, it is India alone that should take the credit. Here I am reminded of an interesting tweet three summers ago from a friend in Kathmandu which said: “Monsoon has arrived in Dhaka, Kathmandu, Delhi and Lahore. Monsoonal unity of South Asia is impressive (and) needs to transfer to geopolitics.” Sitting in Kathmandu, with the Himalayan overview of monsoonal rainbows, one could not have come out with a more romantic theme for resuscitation of the lost South Asian charm and unity. But one must understand why my friend was agonising over this enigmatic region’s unpalatable geopolitics. Home to one-fifth of humanity, South Asia offers so much to the world; yet, it is held back by perennial conflict and poverty. Despite the monsoonal commonality, it remains one of the poorest regions of the world with a vast majority of its peoples still living in grinding poverty and sub-human conditions. Five of the eight Saarc members – Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives and Nepal – belong to the UN’s category of Least Developed Countries or LDCs. With rare exceptions, these countries also lag behind in genuine democratic tradition and good governance. What, after all, is wrong with this region? It is not just poverty and backwardness, it is its geopolitical deformity. Geographically, a structural crack...
Deconstructing Modi Agenda for Afghanistan
President Ashraf Ghani made an unexpected visit to India on the Eves of Eid-ul Adha to meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi. After the meeting, Indian Prime Minister pledged an astounding one billion dollar in economic aid to Afghanistan. This tightening ties between the two countries is in a serious of sequences that has begun with President Ghani vision of investing in regional cooperation rather than relying solely on the so called international community. But cozying up to India at such a critical era at the expense of jeopardizing relation with Pakistan is not a wise policy decision. Modi is no messiah and his Agenda for Afghanistan must be critically assessed and cautiously approached. Modi's India is in the mildest of economic progress and the steady growth of incomes to what might be called nationalists patriotic mobilization. Critics of Modi believe that in the last two years since he was elected Prime Minister, his stock of political capital has fallen considerably at home. It is increasingly becoming clear that his hyper-promises in the campaign are no longer attainable, as such an outright looking hawkish foreign policy can serve as a timely scapegoat for Modi and his party. The critics argue that Modi’s India has been revealed to be at a depressing stage on which the demons of religious bigotry and hyper-nationalism hover unsleepingly over the vital debates of a society in transition. In the view of Chandrahas Choudhury, Hindu nationalism, an organized political force is actually the spiritual parent of Bharatiya Janata Party which Modi first joined as a teenager. Hindu nationalism holds that Hinduism is the real unifying thread of the Indian past, and the Hindu way of life should continue to be the motor that stabilizes and drives the present. Being hammered at home by his opponents, Modi tries to gain on his foreign policy, thus, India’s pivot east will redefine regional politics. Narendra Modi is thinking of “Act East” policy, replacing the previous...
EU To Sign Off on 1-Billion-Euro Aid Pledge to Afghanistan
Representatives from 70 countries are set to attend a two-day summit in Brussels to agree on a new aid package for Afghanistan. Ahead of the meeting, the EU sealed a deal to return failed Afghan asylum seekers. The two-day international aid conference in Brussels, which kicks off on Tuesday, is expected to see the EU pledge a total of 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) a year to Afghanistan until 2020. Ahead of the summit, the European Commission said it would commit an extra 200 million euros ($224 million) a year to strengthen state structures in the war-ravaged country. In a statement, the Commission said the funds could be used by the Kabul government "to finance their own strategic development priorities." Dozens of other countries - including the US, Russia, China and India - are also expected to increase their aid commitment to Afghanistan, which is not able to fully support itself after four decades of conflict, and amid a resurgence of the Taliban. As well as seeking a total of 2.68 billion euros a year for the next four years, EU leaders said the meeting would also push for a realistic time frame for a peace process. That fundraising figure is lower because Afghanistan has begun raising its own revenues, but also due to so-called donor fatigue amid multiple high-profile conflicts. Deal to return failed asylum seekers Earlier Monday, the EU sealed a deal with the Afghan government to speed up the deportation of Afghan citizens who do not qualify for asylum in the bloc. Under the plan, the EU will bear the costs of returning the migrants, including travel expenses and re-integration programs, while Kabul has promised to readmit citizens and supply travel documents for migrants without papers within a month. The EU said special cases, such as single women, unaccompanied minors, the old and the sick can only be deported if they have families to return to and their safety can be guaranteed. Germany, which has accommodated more Afghan migrantsthan any other...
Update on the Human Costs of War for Afghanistan and Pakistan, 2001 to mid 2016
Afghanistan and Pakistan have been engaged in their current wars for nearly 15 years, and the cost in human lives and health has been enormous: the combined death toll is 173,000 dead and more than 183,000 seriously wounded. The wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan remain interrelated, not least because the border is porous between the two countries, but also because the United States has put resources into the fighting on both sides of that border. On 6 July 2016, U.S. President Barack Obama announced that the planned reductions of U.S. troops in Afghanistan would be delayed. He said, "I strongly believe that it is in our national security interest, especially after all the blood and treasure we’ve invested in Afghanistan over the years, that we give our Afghan partners the very best opportunity to succeed." The war has cost the United States more than $800 billion in direct appropriations to the State Department and Department of Defense. As the Costs of War project has documented, there are many other economic costs in the US, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Over the past nearly 15 years, approximately 111,000 people have been killed and more than 116,000 people have been injured in the war in Afghanistan. Of these, more than 31,000 of the dead are Afghan civilians. The war in Pakistan, which began as Al Qaeda and the Taliban fled from Afghanistan into the northwest region of Pakistan in 2001, has caused almost 62,000 deaths and an additional 67,000 injuries. These numbers are approximations based on the reporting of several sources. The focus in this report is on direct deaths and injuries caused by wartime violence. Indirect deaths, due to the effects of war damage to infrastructure and livelihoods, and usually more numerous than direct deaths, are discussed elsewhere. Afghan Civilian Death More than 31,000 civilians have been killed in direct violence in Afghanistan since the 7 October 2001 invasion by the United States. But this number is necessarily an...
What Is Important?
We were at a counter-radicalisation workshop in Washington (September 29) when the news of the Indian “surgical strike” struck us all — a few subject specialists drawn from Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia and of course the United States. Some reacted with surprise, others with a sense of shock and fear. Discussions with other experts on conflict evoked similar responses. But most concurred around the question as to whether such brinkmanship was necessary in a region, where according to the World Bank, hundreds of million live below the poverty line. The majority of experts, particularly those from the Middle East and Africa — all familiar with the debilitating consequences of conflict and jingoism — wondered whether India needed to take the extreme step with an inherent risk of things spinning out of control. Some questioned the Indian claim about the surgical strike, others wondered about the rationale if it at all were a strike as such because it didn’t involve either precision weapons such as guided missiles or combat helicopters. A former US colonel explained that the term was not part of the US military’s and the only thing the US Department of Defense recognises as a surgical strike similar to what the Indians have been claiming is called a “raid.” “Modern technology affords militaries the capabilities to use precision guided weapons in “surgical strikes.” That was not the case in this latest incident between India and Pakistan as far as I know,” the colonel said. But regardless of what this was, the World Bank report “Poverty and Shared Prosperity,” released in September, offers statistics for all those leaders, particularly Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who vow to fight poverty; on the state of poverty in South Asia; it puts the number of this population in India at 21.25 per cent (over 240 million), and 8.3 per cent in Pakistan (over 16 million). Some 58 per cent Indians make $3.10 a day, compared to 45 per cent in Pakistan. Drawing on this report,...
Full Text of Agreement Between The Government Of Islamic Republic Of Afghanistan (Goira) & Hezb-E-Islami Of Afghanistan Led By Gulbuddin Hekmatyar
(Signed Monday September 26, 2016) Article One: With strong and unshakable faith to Allah the Almighty and sincere believe in holy religion of Islam, both parties oblige themselves to unconditional obedience of the lofty principles of this religion and set it as their goal. Article Two: Both parties believe that the religious principles and guidelines would be the main pillar of all laws and government performances, as the second and third articles of the country’s constitution emphasize too that the holy religion of Islam is the official religion of the Government of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and no law could be against the believes and orders of Islam, the holy religion in Afghanistan. Article Three: Both parties believe that all people both man and woman enjoy equal right and responsibility before law indiscriminately and without concession. The single and united Afghanistan belongs to all brave tribes and people of this territory and national sovereignty is the unquestionable right of nation that enforces it directly or through its elected representatives. Article Four: Both parties support withdrawal of foreign military forces based on agreements for strengthening of national sovereignty and interests of the country and believe that through this unity and solidarity, the inhabitants of Afghanistan can halter crisis stem from war and confront threats. Second Chapter The parties’ commitments First section: commitments of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Article Five: The GoIRA guarantees that with the signing of this agreement, in contact with the UNSC and all concerned governments and bodies starts removal of sanctions imposed on the HIA, its leader and members with submitting of official request for removal of sanctions for permanent termination of war and restoration of a sustainable peace and security in Afghanistan. The Afghan government is also obliged to make all possible efforts using all available resources in this direction...
Full Text of Agreement Between The Government Of Islamic Republic Of Afghanistan (Goira) & Hezb-E-Islami Of Afghanistan Led By Gulbuddin Hekmatyar
(Signed Monday September 26, 2016) Article One: With strong and unshakable faith to Allah the Almighty and sincere believe in holy religion of Islam, both parties oblige themselves to unconditional obedience of the lofty principles of this religion and set it as their goal. Article Two: Both parties believe that the religious principles and guidelines would be the main pillar of all laws and government performances, as the second and third articles of the country’s constitution emphasize too that the holy religion of Islam is the official religion of the Government of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and no law could be against the believes and orders of Islam, the holy religion in Afghanistan. Article Three: Both parties believe that all people both man and woman enjoy equal right and responsibility before law indiscriminately and without concession. The single and united Afghanistan belongs to all brave tribes and people of this territory and national sovereignty is the unquestionable right of nation that enforces it directly or through its elected representatives. Article Four: Both parties support withdrawal of foreign military forces based on agreements for strengthening of national sovereignty and interests of the country and believe that through this unity and solidarity, the inhabitants of Afghanistan can halter crisis stem from war and confront threats. Second Chapter The parties’ commitments First section: commitments of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Article Five: The GoIRA guarantees that with the signing of this agreement, in contact with the UNSC and all concerned governments and bodies starts removal of sanctions imposed on the HIA, its leader and members with submitting of official request for removal of sanctions for permanent termination of war and restoration of a sustainable peace and security in Afghanistan. The Afghan government is also obliged to make all possible efforts using all available resources in this direction...
China- Pakistan: CPEC- A New Powerhouse
Since its inception in 1951 the Sino Pakistan relationship, after some initial coughs, has always been on a rising curve. The strength in their ties comes from mutuality of strategic interests, tested interdependency in moments of despair and need, willingness to transform relations to meet new and emerging challenges and finally unstinting public support in both countries for each other. In this context, each of the tired cliché used for Sino China relations are not far off from reality, and thus the relations remain an envious model of inter state relations. No other country including Saudi Arabia enjoys this kind of undivided support in Pakistan. Out of the six decades of friendship, two decades were mostly utilized to deepen mutual perceptions to secure each other’s trust and how best they could help each other at the regional as well as global level. This period was utilized to establish the rock solid foundation to bilateral relations. The remainder decades, starting from mid 70s, witnessed physical manifestation of commitments and vows emanating from strategic understanding in the earlier phase. The depth of the conflict free multidimensional bilateral relations defies historic trends. Between two neighbors such deep relations are an exception rather than a norm. No change in government or leadership in either of the two countries, or the demise of the Cold War era and its associated alliances or subsequent readjustments affected their relationship. As time passed, the friendship assumed the status of strategic permanency. Both iron friends are now looking beyond the status quo, as their legitimate interests demand, in parallel with strategic partnership, to ensure a tangible improvement in trade, mutual access to economic factors beyond the region and connectivity with other countries. Beijing is pursuing its visionary project namely “one belt-one road” (OBOR). President Xi Jinping’s dynamic vision of prosperity through connectivity is re-defining the...
The Drone War – September 2016
Controversial strikes hit both Afghanistan and Somalia in September, with allegations of civilian casualties and friendly fire incidents. Several Afghan officials said that two strikes killed eight policemen in Afghanistan on September 18. Another strike on September 28 killed 15 civilians, according to the UN. Also on September 28, the US military announced it had killed nine al Shabaab in a "self-defence strike". But Somali officials said that a US drone strike killed 22 soldiers and civilians in Somalia. Afghanistan Fifteen civilians were killed and 13 others were injured in a US drone strike in Achin district, Nangarhar province, according to the UN mission in Afghanistan. The US at first denied the civilian casualties but has since changed its position. The Bureau is collecting data on individual strikes in Afghanistan, summarised above. However not all strikes are reported in open source material. The US Air Force publishes an aggregate summary of strikes in Afghanistan without any casualty information, which we have reproduced below. The figures for September will be released in October. The Bureau's timeline of events in the drone war in Afghanistan so far in 2016. A database of all US strikes recorded by the Bureau in Afghanistan since 2015. Yemen Four US strikes were recorded by the Bureau in Yemen, killing at least 15 alleged Al Qaeda members. The Bureau's timeline of events in the drone war in Yemen in 2016. A database of all US drone strikes, air strikes and missile strikes recorded by the Bureau in Yemen since 2001. Somalia US drones hit Somalia four times in September, killing at least 17, as the US air war against al Shabaab continued apace. The first drone strike hit the country in January 2007. There were six more in the following seven years. There was a marked change in January 2015 - there have been 25 strikes since the start of last year. A strike on September 28 has proven controversial - Somali officials claim it killed 22 local...
TOP STORIES
TESTIMONIALS
“
I am also a member of National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Information and Broadcasting. Recently, we held a meeting with the Director General of Radio Pakistan and we told them to initiate such local programs (like Constituency Hour) in regional languages to educate and inform people. Even Indian Radio can be heard in FATA which is being used for propaganda purposes and must be closed. Therefore, we should launch some standard and quality programs like CRSS that will change the taste of the listeners.