✌✌✌✌ THE HINDU ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ A chance for peace in Syria ✌✌
The coming together of Russia, Turkey and Iran to discuss a diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis is a welcome development. That they decided to go ahead with Tuesday’s Moscow summit despite the assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey, Andrei Karlov, the previous day, demonstrates their commitment to stay the course, something that was missing in previous efforts. The summit also marks a shift in Russia’s approach, which initially involved negotiations with the United States about possible diplomatic options for Syria. Washington has been kept out of both the deliberations on the Aleppo evacuations and the Moscow conference. The last time Russia and the U.S. reached an agreement, in September 2016, there had been great hope that they could mentor a sustainable ceasefire. But within days of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announcing the deal, the American-led coalition killed dozens of Syrian soldiers. Though the U.S. later “regretted” the strike, the peace process had been hit. The wider bilateral tensions between Moscow and Washington were also an impediment to finding a breakthrough in Syria.
The current initiative appears to be more promising. Russia and Iran have direct leverage over the regime in Syria, while Turkey still helps several militant groups. Besides money and arms, the militants need Turkey’s help for any communication with the other side. And there is a reason for Turkey coming forward for talks. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan appears to have realised that his anti-regime Syria policy has backfired. Turkey faces severe security challenges, from both Islamic State jihadists and Kurdish militants. If Syria remains at war and the instability spawns more radical militia groups, it could worsen Turkey’s security problems, while Kurds on the Syrian side could grow in strength. Russia, on the other side, has pursued a ‘war and talk’ approach since its intervention — it will continue to defend the regime militarily, while looking for avenues to deal with other stakeholders. The recent improvement in relations between Ankara and Moscow, which had hit a low after Turkey shot down a Russian aircraft last year, has also helped get the peace process going. But this convergence of interest for both sides in stabilising Syria doesn’t mean that peace is within reach. Turkey is only one of the countries backing the rebels. The others include Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Jordan, all allies of the U.S. The Saudis were instrumental in ending the civil war in Lebanon in 1989. Like Lebanon, Syria too is a regional problem that needs a regional solution. For this, Arab stakeholders may have to give up their ‘Assad-must-go’ precondition and join the peace process, as Turkey did.
✌✌ Ending the Manipur blockade ✌✌
The blockade of the national highways leading to the Manipur valley, called by the United Naga Council (UNC), has been in place since November 1. This has severely affected life in the State, with shortages and escalating costs of essential supplies such as fuel and food, even as demonetisation has exacerbated problems. Blockades like this are not new to Manipur. In 2011, there was initially a hundred-day-plus blockade enforced by Kuki-led groups, and countered later by Naga groups, which together had a debilitating effect on life in Manipur. This time the blockade is in place to oppose the creation of new districts by the Okram Ibobi Singh government. On December 9 it issued a gazette notification for the creation of seven new districts by bifurcating seven (of a total of nine) districts. This decision had as much to do with long-pending demands — in particular, for a new Kuki-majority district to be carved out of the larger Senapati hill district — as with easing administrative access to far-flung areas from the district headquarters. With State Assembly elections around the corner, the decision by the Congress-led government was also a desperate measure to woo the hill residents. While residents and groups in the new districts have welcomed the decision, the UNC has protested, alleging that areas with a Naga population have been divided and that the lack of consultation is a violation of commitments made by both the Centre and the State in various memoranda of understanding.
Already, just as in 2011, counter-blockades have been called by other groups, this time in the Meitei-dominated valley, and there has been violence both in the hills and in the valley. The State government last month sought the Centre’s assistance to end the blockade, given that New Delhi has been in peace talks with the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah) group that supports the UNC. While the Centre has sent paramilitary forces to both Nagaland and Manipur, the inaction in clearing the blockade of the national highways is puzzling. Efforts to impose a political solution through blockades that cut arterial routes supplying essential goods to various areas of Manipur are a cynical ploy. Such action heightens ethnic polarisation and threatens, once again, the fragile peace in the State. Ideally there should be a dialogue that involves all major stakeholders — the State government, groups that support redistricting, the UNC and the Centre. But first, there should be zero tolerance towards all such blockades.
✌✌✌✌ THE ECONOMIC TIMES ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ When radical ideas bury official duty ✌✌
Two things stand out about the assassination of Andrei Karlov, Russia’s ambassador to Turkey, at a public event by a 22-year-old off-duty Turkish policeman: one, Russia’s mature recognition of the attack as an attempt to strain bilateral ties that should not be allowed to succeed, and two, the vulnerability of diplomats and other high-profile individuals to people least expected to turn hostile, such as security personnel of the host country. Ideologies of transnational religious solidarity, hypernationalism, political instability, war and isolationist views in industrialised democracies all contribute to this. The probability of countries seeking to send their own security personnel along with official representatives to foreign countries has gone up.
The gunman in Ankara, Mevlut Altintas, shot the Russian ambassador as retribution for Russia’s role in anti-rebel military strikes in Aleppo and its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Given Turkey’s support for rebel forces in Syria, Altintas could well be representative of a more popular sentiment — that Russia is pro-Shia and anti-Sunni, and thus an enemy. Pak Punjab governor Salman Taseer had been shot dead by his bodyguard in 2011 on religious grounds. A Sri Lankan sailor had attacked the visiting Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1987, driven by a sense of affronted nationalism.
When a nation’s security forces contain rogue elements that can turn on the nation’s vital guests whom they are deployed to protect, it means a malaise runs through the nation. This is one of the dangers of identity politics that political leaders practise to get elected to office, only to find they no longer control the fallout. Security personnel must watch their own ranks better, and politics turn more responsible.
✌✌ A chance for peace in Syria ✌✌
The coming together of Russia, Turkey and Iran to discuss a diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis is a welcome development. That they decided to go ahead with Tuesday’s Moscow summit despite the assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey, Andrei Karlov, the previous day, demonstrates their commitment to stay the course, something that was missing in previous efforts. The summit also marks a shift in Russia’s approach, which initially involved negotiations with the United States about possible diplomatic options for Syria. Washington has been kept out of both the deliberations on the Aleppo evacuations and the Moscow conference. The last time Russia and the U.S. reached an agreement, in September 2016, there had been great hope that they could mentor a sustainable ceasefire. But within days of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announcing the deal, the American-led coalition killed dozens of Syrian soldiers. Though the U.S. later “regretted” the strike, the peace process had been hit. The wider bilateral tensions between Moscow and Washington were also an impediment to finding a breakthrough in Syria.
The current initiative appears to be more promising. Russia and Iran have direct leverage over the regime in Syria, while Turkey still helps several militant groups. Besides money and arms, the militants need Turkey’s help for any communication with the other side. And there is a reason for Turkey coming forward for talks. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan appears to have realised that his anti-regime Syria policy has backfired. Turkey faces severe security challenges, from both Islamic State jihadists and Kurdish militants. If Syria remains at war and the instability spawns more radical militia groups, it could worsen Turkey’s security problems, while Kurds on the Syrian side could grow in strength. Russia, on the other side, has pursued a ‘war and talk’ approach since its intervention — it will continue to defend the regime militarily, while looking for avenues to deal with other stakeholders. The recent improvement in relations between Ankara and Moscow, which had hit a low after Turkey shot down a Russian aircraft last year, has also helped get the peace process going. But this convergence of interest for both sides in stabilising Syria doesn’t mean that peace is within reach. Turkey is only one of the countries backing the rebels. The others include Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Jordan, all allies of the U.S. The Saudis were instrumental in ending the civil war in Lebanon in 1989. Like Lebanon, Syria too is a regional problem that needs a regional solution. For this, Arab stakeholders may have to give up their ‘Assad-must-go’ precondition and join the peace process, as Turkey did.
✌✌ Ending the Manipur blockade ✌✌
The blockade of the national highways leading to the Manipur valley, called by the United Naga Council (UNC), has been in place since November 1. This has severely affected life in the State, with shortages and escalating costs of essential supplies such as fuel and food, even as demonetisation has exacerbated problems. Blockades like this are not new to Manipur. In 2011, there was initially a hundred-day-plus blockade enforced by Kuki-led groups, and countered later by Naga groups, which together had a debilitating effect on life in Manipur. This time the blockade is in place to oppose the creation of new districts by the Okram Ibobi Singh government. On December 9 it issued a gazette notification for the creation of seven new districts by bifurcating seven (of a total of nine) districts. This decision had as much to do with long-pending demands — in particular, for a new Kuki-majority district to be carved out of the larger Senapati hill district — as with easing administrative access to far-flung areas from the district headquarters. With State Assembly elections around the corner, the decision by the Congress-led government was also a desperate measure to woo the hill residents. While residents and groups in the new districts have welcomed the decision, the UNC has protested, alleging that areas with a Naga population have been divided and that the lack of consultation is a violation of commitments made by both the Centre and the State in various memoranda of understanding.
Already, just as in 2011, counter-blockades have been called by other groups, this time in the Meitei-dominated valley, and there has been violence both in the hills and in the valley. The State government last month sought the Centre’s assistance to end the blockade, given that New Delhi has been in peace talks with the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah) group that supports the UNC. While the Centre has sent paramilitary forces to both Nagaland and Manipur, the inaction in clearing the blockade of the national highways is puzzling. Efforts to impose a political solution through blockades that cut arterial routes supplying essential goods to various areas of Manipur are a cynical ploy. Such action heightens ethnic polarisation and threatens, once again, the fragile peace in the State. Ideally there should be a dialogue that involves all major stakeholders — the State government, groups that support redistricting, the UNC and the Centre. But first, there should be zero tolerance towards all such blockades.
✌✌✌✌ THE ECONOMIC TIMES ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ When radical ideas bury official duty ✌✌
Two things stand out about the assassination of Andrei Karlov, Russia’s ambassador to Turkey, at a public event by a 22-year-old off-duty Turkish policeman: one, Russia’s mature recognition of the attack as an attempt to strain bilateral ties that should not be allowed to succeed, and two, the vulnerability of diplomats and other high-profile individuals to people least expected to turn hostile, such as security personnel of the host country. Ideologies of transnational religious solidarity, hypernationalism, political instability, war and isolationist views in industrialised democracies all contribute to this. The probability of countries seeking to send their own security personnel along with official representatives to foreign countries has gone up.
The gunman in Ankara, Mevlut Altintas, shot the Russian ambassador as retribution for Russia’s role in anti-rebel military strikes in Aleppo and its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Given Turkey’s support for rebel forces in Syria, Altintas could well be representative of a more popular sentiment — that Russia is pro-Shia and anti-Sunni, and thus an enemy. Pak Punjab governor Salman Taseer had been shot dead by his bodyguard in 2011 on religious grounds. A Sri Lankan sailor had attacked the visiting Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1987, driven by a sense of affronted nationalism.
When a nation’s security forces contain rogue elements that can turn on the nation’s vital guests whom they are deployed to protect, it means a malaise runs through the nation. This is one of the dangers of identity politics that political leaders practise to get elected to office, only to find they no longer control the fallout. Security personnel must watch their own ranks better, and politics turn more responsible.
No comments:
Post a Comment