Asad Mirza, Author at Lokmarg

Drawing The Line Between Freedom of Expression & Hate Speech

By Asad Mirza 23rd September 2023

Recent incidents of burning copies of the Holy Quran in Sweden and Denmark by the far right elements has forced the two Scandinavian countries, besides several others to introspect their stand on the freedom of expression and hate speeches and crimes.

Reportedly the Swedish government is concerned about national security following several incidents involving the burning of the Holy Quran that have provoked demonstrations and outrage from Muslim-majority countries.

On 25^th August, Denmark’s government said it would “criminalise” desecration of religious objects and moved a bill banning the burning of scriptures.

Denmark and Sweden are among the most secular and liberal countries in the world, and have long allowed trenchant public criticism of religions. Politicians across Denmark ‘s political spectrum said an outright ban would compromise citizens’ constitutionally inscribed right to freedom of expression as new laws could stop or at least restrict them.

While freedom of expression is a fundamental human right in liberal democracies, the right to express one’s opinion can become complex when expressing one’s views clashes with the religious and cultural beliefs of others and when this rhetoric veers into hate speech.

In many European countries, lawmakers and others are asking whether these religious book burnings should be seen as exercises of free expression or more as incitement based on religion. A few countries are already introducing new legislation to curb hate speech against religious communities, as per a report by Armin Langer, for The Conversation.

But here we also have to acknowledge the fact that such tendencies grew in Scandinavian countries, which have a far better societal edifice. This suffered cracks when a large number of migrants from various, mostly Muslim Arab and Asian countries, to these developed nations began. As a result of their old customary and religious belief and with little help from government’s side, these migrant communities were not able to assimilate themselves properly in the mainstream of these countries and were seen more of a problem, rather than an asset.

As per census figures the migrants in Sweden constitute about 1.8 to 4.4% of the population, in numbers these transform to 250,000 to 400,000 in a country of 9 million people. On the other hand, 5% of Denmark’s population consists of migrants or descendants of migrants.

Historically, since medieval times, because of the dominant role of Christianity in political and cultural life, blasphemy against Christian beliefs in European countries was severely punished.

Even now various European countries retain blasphemy laws, though the laws may not prevent present-day acts like dishonouring of religious texts.

Russia, introduced a federal law in 2013 criminalising public insults of religious beliefs. The German Penal Code of 1969 has forbidden the public slander of religions and worldviews.

Both, Austria and Switzerland have laws in this regard. In 2011, a person in Vienna was fined for calling the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) a paedophile. This case later went up to the European Court of Human Rights, which supported the Viennese court’s decision. The court said that the person wasn’t trying to have a useful discussion but instead just wanted to show that Prophet Muhammad shouldn’t be respected.

Spain, also takes a strong stance against religious disrespect. Its penal code makes it a crime to publicly belittle religious beliefs, practices or ceremonies in a way that could hurt the feelings of followers of other religions.

Italy, punishes acts deemed to be disrespectful to religions. Its penal code has been used to punish actions that insult Christianity. For example, in 2017 authorities charged an artist for depicting Jesus with an erect penis.

Even in the U.S., there’s an on going debate about the boundaries of free speech. The First Amendment of the Constitution allows free speech, which some can interpret as the right to burn holy books.

If we analyse closely, based on our interpretation of societal mores and democratic principles, these acts of hatred against one particular religious community seems to be a part of a broader agenda of targeting Muslims by far-right groups across Europe and elsewhere, too.

Lawmakers, social scientists, academicians, politicians all are intent on getting a plausible definition of defining whether these acts of book burnings should be seen as exercises of free expression or more as an incitement based on religion.

On the other hand in India, a country which has seen a steady increase in cases of hate crimes and hate speeches over the past few years, the real intervention has come from the judiciary, not the political class.

In reality, if we really want to put an end to such fissiparous tendencies then we’ll have to change our focus. The cases of burning copies of the Holy Quran or religious books of other religions or the increasing rise in Islamophobia across the world, could be resolved with the help of the political class but we need to adopt a more humane and social approach to resolve the anti-religious acts through finalising a more clearer definition of free speech, hate speech and hate crimes. Only this would help in dealing with them in a more proactive manner rather than a reactive manner, as is evident by the Danish decision to review laws relating to free speech in Denmark.

A few countries are introducing new legislation to curb hate speech against religious communities. For example, in 2006 England got rid of the blasphemy law and introduced The Racial and Religious Hatred Act, which makes it an offense to stir up religious hatred. After repealing its blasphemy law in 2020, Ireland has been discussing the introduction of a hate speech law, which will criminalise any communication or behaviour that is likely to incite violence or hatred.

Sweden passed a hate speech law in 1970 protecting racial, ethnic, religious and sexual minorities. Swedish authorities pointed to this legislation when they took action against a Quran-burning incident that occurred in front of a mosque in June 2023.

(The writer is a Delhi-based senior political and international affairs commentator)

Draw The Line on Freedom of Expression & Hate Speech

By Asad Mirza 22nd September 2023

On 25^th August, Denmark’s government said it would “criminalise” desecration of religious objects and moved a bill banning the burning of scriptures.

But here we also have to acknowledge the fact that such tendencies grew in Scandinavian countries, which have a far better societal edifice. This suffered cracks when a large number of migrants from various, mostly Muslim Arab and Asian countries, to these developed nations began. As a result of their old customary and religious belief and with little help from the government’s side, these migrant communities were not able to assimilate themselves properly into the mainstream of these countries and were seen as more of a problem, rather than an asset.

Historically, since medieval times, because of the dominant role of Christianity in political and cultural life, blasphemy against Christian beliefs in European countries was severely punished.

Even now various European countries retain blasphemy laws, though the laws may not prevent present-day acts like dishonouring of religious texts.

Russia, introduced a federal law in 2013 criminalising public insults of religious beliefs. The German Penal Code of 1969 has forbidden the public slander of religions and worldviews.

(The writer is a Delhi-based senior political and international affairs commentator)

India Under Threat From Global Terror Groups

By Asad Mirza 3rd August 2023

A recent UN Report on global operations of Al Qaeda and Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) by the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team of the UN Security Council says that Al Qaeda is regrouping in Taliban-led Afghanistan. But what is more worrying is that around 200 fighters of the Al Qaeda in Indian Subcontinent (AQIS), the South Asia-focused branch of the parent terrorist organisation, are still active, and who might be planning operations in Jammu and Kashmir, Bangladesh and Myanmar, the report says.

The report says that the AQIS is grooming an affiliate for Kashmir operations. Plus, it also raises concern on Taliban-ruled Afghanistan becoming the epicentre of global terrorism, with around 20 militants groups operating from its soil.

While developing their network at home in India, The Islamic State supporters also provides recruits to join jihadi organisations, outside India. According to reports, as many as 200 have left India, a significant number of these are from Kerala. Although this number might look surprisingly low considering India’s large Muslim population, the participation had an impact on the domestic network, forming an important conduit for advice and communication with the organisation in Syria and in Afghanistan.

As per the Washington-based United States Institute of Peace (USIP) report, one of those who benefited from this link was Umar Nisar Bhat. Nisar was a central figure in the pro-Islamic State network in India from the inception of ISJK, playing a major role in the network’s propaganda dissemination until his arrest in July 2021.

But the threat here is multi-organisational, not just from Taliban or the Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), but also from the Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), which has emerged as one of the dominant terrorist organisation in Afghanistan.

The Islamic State’s presence in South Asia is not limited to Afghanistan and Pakistan but extends to include “periphery” territory, including India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, the Maldives, and Sri Lanka.

Reportedly, Al Qaeda uses Afghanistan as an ideological and logistical hub to mobilise and recruit new fighters while covertly rebuilding its external operations capability. According to the UN report, the Al Qaeda core in Afghanistan remains stable at 30 to 60 members, while all Al Qaeda fighters in the country are estimated to be 400. The report also mentions Osama Mehmood being the AQIS chief.

One of the most alarming aspect of the UN report is that Al Qaeda is maintaining “a close and symbiotic” relationship with the Taliban government. Under the patronage of high-ranking Taliban officials, Al Qaeda members “infiltrate law enforcement agencies and public administration bodies”, ensuring the security of the group’s cells across Afghanistan. Though, Al Qaeda’s capability to conduct large-scale terror attacks “remains reduced while its intent remains firm”.

The report says that Al Qaeda is also working to strengthen cooperation with non-Afghan terror groups such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP) and Jamaat Ansarullah.

Meanwhile, a war of words between TTP and ISKP has also been reported, with each blaming and criticising the other having ties with regional intelligence agencies.

The UN report also assessed the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant-Khorasan Province (ISIL-KP) as the “most serious terrorist threat in Afghanistan and the wider region.” The ISIL-KP has actually in recent years developed close links with AQIS and many recruits from India and Pakistan have worked for this terror network.

For the Indian government, the most alarming aspect is the aspirations of the AQIS targeting India and Kashmir, which has been on its radar since 2010 onwards. However, as per another UN report of 2017, Al Qaeda has not been able to make significant inroads into the Kashmir theatre. The new threat, as evident from the UN report, may be a renewed effort by the terror group to reinvigorate its network.

However, as per the USIP report the Islamic State has largely failed to mobilise large numbers of supporters in India to migrate to the Levant or to engage in extremist activities at home. The group’s presence in India started with the establishment of several pro-Islamic State groups operating in the Indian-administered region of Jammu and Kashmir.

In July 2017, these supporters took the name “Islamic State in Jammu and Kashmir” (ISJK), yet it was not until May 2019 that the Islamic State officially established a separate province in India, also covering Kashmir, as per the USIP report.

The USIP report further says that the nexus of AQIS-ISIL-KP has already made its foray into India. This terror network poached some youth from Kerala who went missing and then were reported to have joined ISIL. Similarly, many youth who were arrested between 2013 to 2016 from various locations like UP, Gujarat, Delhi and Odisha were supposed to be members of the AQIS.

The UN report has also expressed concerns that the outlawed TTP could become a regional threat if it continues to have a safe operating base in Afghanistan.

Part of the reason why India, despite its large Muslim population, has seen fewer attacks than other countries in the region are due to India’s counterterrorism capabilities, which have considerably improved since the devastating 2008 Mumbai attack. A report published by Hindustan Times in September 2021 reported that according to India’s counterterrorism agency, the National Investigation Agency (NIA), 168 individuals have been accused of association with the Islamic State across 37 cases. Though the figure might look very low compared to the Muslim population of India, yet it is a cause of concern for the community and the government too, as it raises the spectre of radicalisation in the country.

The USIP report suggests that to counter radicalisation, states can promote political pluralism and respect for minorities. Government policies that discriminate against, marginalise, and even violently repress minorities are fostering severe domestic cleavages in South Asian countries, alienating groups to the extent that some of their members look to the Islamic State to help them fight back. To mitigate the risks associated with such policies, India should promote political and religious pluralism respecting all minorities.

(Asad Mirza is a Delhi-based senior political and international affairs commentator. He can be contacted at at www.asadmirza.in)

Implications of Uniform Civil Code

By Asad Mirza 27th July 2023

On 9th December 2022, Kirodi Lal Meena, a Rajya Sabha M.P. of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) introduced a private member bill on India’s Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in the Rajya Sabha that fuelled a fresh debate on an issue, which saw no resolution even in pre-Independence India and continues to haunt the political climate of India even today.

The sensitive nature of the issue besides giving political mileage to the BJP, affects various political parties, with respect to their stand on the issue. Plus, it also puts various religious communities coming under the purview of the UCC to give up their respective Personal Laws, particularly the Muslims, which are the largest religious minority in the country.

Let’s dissect the political motives first and then the response of the affected communities.

First, the audacious move of tabling the Private Member Bill in the Rajya Sabha came just one day after the BJP secured victory in the Gujarat assembly polls in December last. It reinforced the BJP’s political manifesto of enforcing Hindutva, which may also serve as the lynchpin of its political strategy for the upcoming general elections in 2024, by polarising the public.

Further, the second move to seek public opinion on the proposed UCC, in absence of any Draft of the proposed Bill, was a very astute move by the BJP. As it came within a week of the opposition parties’ meeting in Patna in June to formulate a united front and strategy to counter the BJP in the upcoming 2024 elections. As expected the move sowed division within the opposition’s ranks. Further, it saw an immediate half-baked response from the so-called leaders of the religious minorities – particularly the Muslims.

Muslim religious and community leaders without batting an eyelid immediately started opposing the UCC, and didn’t stopped to dwell on what grounds they were protesting and we saw a plethora of sentimentally rich and logically poor responses coming forth from them. The only common stand they took was that they oppose any interference in the Muslim Personal Law.

But I’m sure, neither the leaders nor their supporters know which Muslim Personal Law they are talking about. The one codified by any Muslim rulers like the Mughals, the Khiljis or the Tughlaqs or the ones before them? The answer is NO. In fact, the British colonialists codified the prevailing Muslim Personal Law, without any consultations from any Islamic jurist or scholar.

Before 1937, Muslims of all denominations, all over India, followed the uncodified local Hindu customs, practices and usages in addition to their personal law as per the Sharia. So the British just concurred on codifying the prevalent practices relevant to the marriage, divorce etc., but changed the ones relating to succession and division of property, in the case of Muslims.

It would be interesting to know at whose behest the colonial rulers codified the Muslim Law of Succession and Inheritance. It was none other than MA Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League.

The Shariat Act of 1937 was imposed on Indian Muslims as a win-win political deal between the British, keen to divide Hindus and Muslims, and the Muslim League, keen to lure the Muslims away the Congress. In a manner this also suited Jinnah’s political strategy on how to secure a separate country for the Muslims, but it had an added personal angle also to it.

MA Jinnah’s daughter Dina married Nevile Wadia – a Parsi, against his wishes, though he himself had married a Parsi lady, Rattanbai Petit. To disown Dina and leave no inheritance for her, Jinnah made use of the recently introduced Shariat Act 1937 and nominated his sister Fatima as his successor. The Act, a joint strategy of the British and the League, contained provisions to sabotage the Islamic Sharia, by secretly smuggling the Hindu customs and usages into the 1937 Act to save the property rights of the Muslim leaders, Jinnah and the zamindars from harm by the Islamic Sharia. Did the Shariat Act of 1937 — now acclaimed as the holy law of Islam — contain Hindu law provisions to secure the property rights of the League leaders? Yes, it does.

Historian, KK Abdul Rahiman in The History of the Evolution of Muslim Personal Law in (1986) says the British gave strength to customs and usage that had long been adhered to particularly in matters of succession by sections of Indian Muslims.

Further, we have to realise that the UCC would not only affect Muslims but also Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Jews, Parsis and other minorities and scheduled tribes in the country. And at the moment it is just a political gimmick of the government to polarise the electorate and also sow seeds of discord amongst the unified opposition. Muslim leaders need to bring other communities leaders at the same platform and also inform their Hindu brethren that the UCC will abolish the HUF provisions for filing Income Tax, thus it would increase the tax liability of Hindus also.

The UCC Bill has been introduced as a political reform by the BJP, guided by principles of Hindutva, as a response to replace the existing complicated set of personal laws. These personal laws are so complicated that even the Britishers didn’t dare to interfere with them. Further, the Constituent Assembly, besieged by two schools of thought, one supporting the UCC argued that it provided for the emergence of a secular and progressive nation, while the opponents felt it to be conflicting with the ideas of inclusiveness and pluralism, deemed it fit to circumvent the issue and leave it at the moment and thus chose to include it under the Directive Principles of the constitution, under Article 44 of the Constitution, and leaving it for the future generations to sort it out.

A realistic and practical understanding of how personal laws operate will indicate that the state’s organs and the Indian society are yet not ready, even after 73 years for the substantial revamp that such legislation would bring. Instead of gunning for political gains we should try to reflect the rich Indian diversity of traditions and their importance in common Indians’ daily life.

Lastly, the manner in which the Muslim leadership responded to the government’s move, shows its complete immaturity and the set manner of its traditional, out of touch with reality reactive response, completely bereft of any political nuances and strategy, which was also evident during the Babri Masjid movement, Triple Talaq issue etc.

Though it is high time but still there is time for the Muslim leaders to formulate a Unified Strategy and response to the UCC, in consultation with leaders of other religious minorities and political parties, so that this time they don’t get defeated by the government in its anti-Muslim campaign, though the chances of any such endeavour seem very remote.

(Asad Mirza is a Delhi-based senior political and international affairs commentator)

Syria Welcomed Back Into Arab League

By Asad Mirza 3rd June 2023

Apparently it seems that the Arab League has lost its meaning and purpose and it is demonstrated by the manner in which member states takes its sessions in a non-serious manner. Morocco declined to host a summit in 2016, calling the event a waste of time. The Saudi crown prince Muhammad bin Salman, skipped last year’s gathering in Algeria on medical grounds. Heads of state are sometimes spotted falling asleep at the fora meetings.

But it seems that at the moment no one would relish the regional Arab body more than the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, who seemed euphoric to be invited to the Arab summit, last week. Syria was suspended from the league in 2011, when Assad began a brutal crackdown on anti-government protests that plunged the country into a civil war

Assad’s deployment of chemical weapons against his own people along with mass arrests, torture and disappearances and killing of more than 3 million civilians in the country have no parallel elsewhere. This is a legacy, which he inherited from his father, Hafez al-Assad, who reportedly massacred more than 10,000 people in the city of Hama during a 1982 siege.

On 7th May, however, the regional Arab body agreed to readmit Syria to its fold. Though an invitation from a dull talking shop crammed with dictators may seem unappealing to many but to Assad, it is the culmination of a long effort to end his Arab isolation – and, he may hope, another step towards acceptance in the West.

US stand on Syria

However, Assad’s regional Arab acceptance creates a “problem” for the United States, which continues to oppose any sort of normalising ties with the Syrian government but has not been able to force its Arab partners from restoring ties with Damascus.

US officials maintain that though they do not back normalisation with al-Assad, they share the objectives that restored relations could bring, including expanding humanitarian access to conflict-torn regions, combating ISIL/ISIS, reducing Iran’s influence and countering the trafficking of the drug Captagon.

Mona Yacoubian, vice president of the Middle East and North Africa centre at the US Institute of Peace (USIP), a think tank funded by the US Congress, told Al Jazeera that the US position under President Joe Biden reflects a “tricky, gnarly, complex challenge”.

But without accountability for Syrian government abuses, she added, Washington will not normalise its relations with Damascus or ease its heavy sanctions, including the blocking of foreign reconstruction funds.

Making the US stand quite clear, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said last week, “We do not believe that Syria merits readmission to the Arab League.”

Still, Blinken said Washington and its Arab allies have broader common objectives in Syria.

Last week, a group of bipartisan House representatives introduced a bill dubbed the Assad Anti-Normalisation Act, which aims to “hold the Assad regime, and its backers, accountable for their crimes against the Syrian people and deter normalization with the Assad regime”.

The bill is a sign that Congress will likely push Biden and future administrations to fully enforce Syria sanctions.

Syria’s Ostracisation

Syria was suspended from the Arab League and left isolated by regional power brokers in 2011 after its crackdown on protests during the Arab Spring, a wave of anti-government demonstrations across several countries in the region that year.

That heavy-handed security approach in Syria turned into a protracted war, killing hundreds of thousands of people and displacing millions.

In recent years, government forces recaptured much of Syria with the aid of Russia and Iran, and local ceasefires have maintained relative calm as parts of the country remain under the control of various rebels and armed groups.

Emerging Scenario

As to why Arab states are keen to bring Syria among their fold, there are many plausible reasons. One is to forge a broader spirit of detente. The Saudis struck a deal in March with Iran to restore diplomatic ties and reopen embassies. this came after years of proxy wars in Syria, Yemen by both and now both seems to have forgotten the past. Turkey and Egypt, mired in mutual economic crises, are trying to end a decade of animosity. Gulf states have ended their embargo of Qatar, which accomplished little. Old foes across the region are keen to pretend they are friends.

When it comes to Syria, however, they want something bigger in return. Its neighbours hope to get rid of millions of Syrian refugees. The 2 million or so in Lebanon, with a population of just 5 million, are seen as a burden, blamed unfairly for the country’s economic collapse. In Turkey the mood has also turned hostile. Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the main opposition candidate in the election on 26th May has vowed vows to send Syrians packing within two years if elected.

In addition, the West hope that mollifying Syria may result in it controlling its Captagon trade. Syria has become the world’s leading producer of Captagon, an amphetamine that is a popular recreational drug in the Gulf. The scale of the Captagon trade is often exaggerated. Unconfirmed estimates put its annual value at $57bn. The real figure is probably an order of magnitude smaller – but that is still large enough to make it Syria’s top export.

Regardless of the future of US policy on Syria, the fact that Arab states are normalising with al-Assad is also a sign of the receding US political influence in the region.

Indeed, this seems to be a sad commentary on the Arab world and its dictatorial leaders who basically conspired to crushed the Arab Spring 12 years ago, instead of working for the betterment of their people. In reality the pro-democracy, pro-rights movement has not fizzled out; rather, it was clubbed to death by a conspiracy of the dictators.

The writer is a Delhi-based senior political commentator. He can be contacted at www.asadmirza.in

Indo-Pak Relations to Remain Strained

By Asad Mirza 12th May 2023

Coming soon after the recent Shanghai Cooperation Council’s (SCO) Defence Ministers’ Summit in New Delhi, India last week hosted the Foreign Ministers of the SCO at Goa. The common thread between these two summits was the tough posturing by India against its two neighbours Pakistan and China.

At the Goa meeting, India’s External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar, revealed that India had twice called out China and Pakistan at the summit for violating India’s sovereignty through their connectivity projects. The statement was made in response to a question on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which runs through Indian territory currently under Pakistan’s illegal occupation.

Earlier, India had sort of reprimanded the Chinese Defence Minister at the New Delhi meeting, on the issue of the stalled talks over the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

India’s critique of Pakistan

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari was in Goa to represent Pakistan at the SCO-CFM. A visit, which happened after a 12 years gap. The last Pakistani foreign minister to visit India was Hina Rabbani Khar, when she met her Indian counterpart SM Krishna in Delhi in 2011.

However, what soured the atmosphere this time in Goa, was references made by Zardari over Kashmir and Pakistan being a victim of terrorism itself. Though he also called for reviving the stalled talks.

India, in a strongly worded response to Pakistan’s overtures for talks, said victims of terrorism do not sit together with perpetrators of terrorism to discuss terror.

Rebutting each of the points made by Zardari, EAM S Jaishankar said he (Zardari) was “a promoter, justifier and spokesperson for a terrorism industry which is the mainstay of Pakistan. The tough Indian response came after the news of death of five Indian Army soldiers in a terrorist attack near the Line of Control (LoC) on Friday, Jaishankar said Bilawal’s suggestion to sit together and talk was “hypocritical” and said India was feeling “outraged” by the incident.

India’s stand on China

Jaishankar had a similar position on China whose readout on the bilateral between him and its Foreign Minister described the situation on the boundary as stable. Jaishankar said that, there is an abnormal position in the border areas. We have to take the disengagement process forward. I have made it very clear. India-China relations will not be normal if peace and tranquillity in the border areas is disturbed. This message was on the same lines as delivered by the Indian defence minister to his Chinese counterpart, a fortnight ago.

Responding to Zardari’s diatribe, Jaishankar said Bilawal’s opposition to a G-20 meeting to be held in Kashmir had no basis since Pakistan was not even a member of that grouping. On Bilawal’s opening address at the SCO conference where he said the issue of terrorism should not be used to score diplomatic points, the minister said: “We are not scoring diplomatic points. We are exposing Pakistan. As a victim of terrorism, we are authorised to do so. We have put up with it. It speaks so much about the mindset of that country.”

He asked Pakistan to “smell the coffee” regarding its grouse about the abrogation of Article 370 as a violation of international agreements. “370 is history. Sooner the people realise it, the better.” Jaishankar said.

Indian response to CPEC

EAM Jaishankar also took an exception at the mention of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) at the SCO meeting, both by Pakistan and China. And rightly so, as SCO is a multilateral forum, not a bilateral one and further India’s adversarial stand on the CPEC has been very clear from the beginning, as it passed through the PoK. India has consistently opposed the Belt and Road Initiative and CPEC, as these projects violate India’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Jaishankar very clearly stated that connectivity is good for progress, but connectivity cannot violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of nations.

Bilawal’s overture

On his part Bilawal Bhutto Zardari blamed India’s Kashmir policy for the “frozen peace” between India and Pakistan. The India-Pakistan relationship soured significantly after India announced the withdrawal of special powers from Jammu and Kashmir and the division of the state into two union territories in August 2019.

India has always maintained that it wants regular neighbourly ties with Pakistan while emphasising that the onus is on Islamabad to create a safe environment for such an engagement.

The tough Indian response to both Pakistan and China, mainly stems from its exhaustion with its neighbours, who in spite of several Indian initiatives to better relations, prefer to stick with their age-old stands on the contentious issues, preferring not to respond positively to any Indian efforts in this regard.

The SCO meet also showed yet again that body language speaks volumes in geopolitics and diplomacy. The distance between the two foreign ministers while posing for photographs was noticeably gaping. However, the cold Indian demeanour, a departure from customary diplomatic niceties, and continuing with its old parroting by the Pakistani minister were more targeted at their respective domestic audiences.

The Indian leadership in view of the forthcoming elections in Karnataka wanted to be seen as acting tough, while the Pakistani minister wanted to showcase his ability to rake-up old issues in the backdrop of the economic woes of Pakistan. But overall this posturing does not augurs well for friendly relations between the neighbours in the foreseeable future.

Asad Mirza is a senior political commentator based in New Delhi. He can be contacted at www.asadmirza.in

Saudi-Iran Agreement: A Victory for China

By Asad Mirza 27th March 2023

A major diplomatic coup was staged by China earlier this month, when Beijing announced the results of its successfully mediated efforts, of bringing two arch foes on the negotiating table and signing a friendship deal. The Chinese-brokered Saudi-Iran rapprochement comes as a major diplomatic breakthrough between two regional neighbours after years of mutual animosity, suspected attacks and tales of rivalry between the two countries.

The move also represents Beijing’s first foray into Middle Eastern politics, an area that has always been regarded as a prerogative of the US, since when most of these nations become a free and independent entity, after the end of the colonial era.

On 10 March, both Riyadh and Tehran announced that after seven years of severed ties they would reopen embassies and missions within two months and implement security and economic cooperation agreements signed more than 20 years ago.

Much of the world was stunned when the two arch-rivals announced they were restoring diplomatic relations, this was not only because of the breakthrough after years of mutual animosity, but because of the mediator, who played a key role in bringing the foes to the negotiating table, i.e. the Chinese government.

By this move China has ostensibly taken up a role that the U.S. could not have fulfilled, or it never tried to perform that role. In addition this also comes as Beijing’s first major diplomatic foray into the Middle East mediation, an area where often rivalries are built around nuances and subtleties, which are hard to fathom for an outsider, though in the recent times they have up the shape of hardnosed economic and strategic interests.

Apparently, the Saudis had been engaged in talks with Iran from around the same time as Al Ula Summit held in Saudi in 2021, which ended the blockade of Qatar and mended the internal rifts of the Gulf Cooperation Council. In the two years since, the United Arab Emirates has restored its diplomatic relations with Iran and even replaced China as Iran’s top import partner; Kuwait, too, has returned its ambassador to Tehran.

The negotiations between Iran and Saudi Arabia since 2021 largely took place in Iraq and Oman. Other regional countries, including Kuwait and Pakistan, had attempted to arrange for talks between Tehran and Riyadh on numerous occasions in the past seven years, which were largely unsuccessful.

As tensions simmer between the world’s two largest economies: the U.S. and China, the U.S. policymakers had sounded an the alarm over competition and security concerns with China, but what does Beijing’s ascendance in the region mean for the Middle East – and for the larger U.S. interests?

In recent times, China has been pushing for reconfiguring the regional security architecture in the Persian Gulf since 2020. In a U.N. Security Council meeting arranged by Russia in October of that year, China presented its proposal for security and stability in the Gulf region, arguing that with a multilateral effort, the region can become “an Oasis of Security.”

Apparently the edifice of this Chinese plan to transform into a global peacemaker seems to be the Global Security Initiative – GSI, which was unveiled by Chinese President Xi Jinping in February 2023. It is portrayed as a banner for China to reform the current international security order, especially at a time when the U.S. is prioritising alignment with countries that share the same political system and ideology, through its Democracy Summit.

Mainly, with growing power and influence China’s to have a fair say in international peace and security architecture building. The GSI Concept Paper released by China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in February 2023 identified “bringing about security changes through political dialogue and peaceful negotiation” as core concepts and principles.

China’s successful brokering of the peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran has given it the confidence that this track could work. The aspiration is that China can fill the gap in regions the U.S. has failed to lead or ignore.

According to the Chinese understanding of the region, Iran and Saudi Arabia are “pivot countries” whose political, economic, and military power make them indispensable partners for Beijing, making balance between the two the most consequential strategy.

For both countries, China is the largest trading partner. Beijing has granted Tehran and Riyadh the status of comprehensive strategic partners – the highest in China’s partnership diplomacy in the Middle East.

But China’s balancing act is more articulated than just signing similar partnership agreements with both partners. While economic relations are unequivocally unbalanced in Saudi Arabia’s favour, China guarantees Iran political support and a financial lifeline in the face of U.S. pressure. Yet, offering different goods to equal partners often shakes the balancing act. In December, the joint China-GCC communiqué that followed Chinese President Xi Jingpin’s trip to Saudi Arabia generated anger in Iran, exposing the limits of China’s diplomacy from the sidelines.

The GSI Concept Paper also emphasises the need to support political settlements of hotspot issues such as the war in Ukraine. Therefore, President Xi’s efforts to promote a political settlement to the Russia-Ukraine conflict would be essential to watch. If another success is achieved after his Russia visit, it may lend more credence to the GSI.

(Asad Mirza is a political commentator based in New Delhi. He can be contacted at www.asadmirza.in)

Read More Article: http://13.232.95.176/

Why Saudi’s ‘Mukaab’ Project Riles Muslims

By Asad Mirza 3rd March 2023

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) announced the launch of the New Murabba Development Company, last week. The new company will oversee developing a new downtown area spread over 19 sq. km. in capital Riyadh

Authorities claim that plans have been created keeping sustainability and environment in mind. The project would include green spaces, walking and cycling pathways, to improve the quality of life by encouraging active, healthy lives and social interaction.

What is Mukaab?

The main feature of the project has been named The Mukaab, a gigantic cube structure has been described as the future ‘face of the city’, and critics say it may even be the face of a new Saudi Arabia, focussing and generating more revenue through tourism than petroleum. At present, the plan is to fill the cube with 100,000 residential units as well as 9,000 hotel rooms.

In addition, it will also have over 80 entertainment and cultural venues. A renowned museum, and a campus for a technology and design university. The 19 km space will accommodate thousands of people. The 25 million sq.mt. floor area is divided strategically into 104,000 residential units, 9,000 hotel rooms & 620,000 sq.mt. of leisure assets. Additional 980,000 sq.mts. will be covered by retail and 1.8 million sq.mt. will be dedicated to recreational facilities.

The building, will be 20 times bigger than the New York City’s Empire State Building, and will be a one-stop location for shoppers and business owners, with more than 980,000 square metres of retail shops and 1.4 million square metres of office space.

The Mukaab’s core structure will be an atrium, allowing for tons of natural light and foliage to thrive inside. The government brief promises an immersive ‘gateway into another world’ that is completely powered by the latest digital, virtual, and holographic technologies.

In recent years, Saudi Arabia’s abundance of oil money has sparked the design of some absolutely insane architectural projects. In 2021, MbS announced his $500 billion futuristic Neom city in the northwest of the country, with promises of robot maids, flying taxis, and a giant artificial moon. And last year, he unveiled a giant linear city, The Line, which aims to stretch over 106 miles and house 9 million people. The one-trillion-dollar project will essentially be its own massive city in the middle of a desert once it’s finished.

A New Kaabah?

Authorities claim that the project will add 180 billion riyals ($48 bn) to the Saudi economy and “create 334,000 direct and indirect jobs,” though the cost of the gargantuan project has not been mentioned.

New Murabba (square) and The Mukaab were widely ridiculed by social media users, both within and outside Saudi Arabia, apart from a large number of Muslims all across the globe, as soon as the plans were announced.

The Mukaab was also denounced for its likeness to the most important cube-like structure in Saudi Arabia and the Islamic world: the Kaabah. During Namaaz Muslims around the world face towards the structure in the centre of the Grand Mosque in Makkah, and circumambulate it during Hajj and Umrah pilgrimages.

Though one would have expected a much more vociferous outcry from the clerics in Saudi Arabia, but it has not happened as they can’t unyoke clutches of the ruling dispensation and have lost free voice and expression.

In India, the All India Shia Personal Law Board has condemned the project. In a statement, general secretary of the Board Maulana Yasoob Abbas said the Saudi government was deeply hurting the religious sentiments of Muslims across the globe by building a structure that resembles the Kabaah which is the holiest sites of Islam. Maulana Abbas said a massive movement would be launched to oppose this project. The first protest will be held at the Imambara in Lucknow on 5 March.

Why this new developmental push?

Apparently it seems that Saudi Arabia, has embarked on an ambitious project to diversify the economy away from oil and shed its image as a conservative, closed-off state. Besides promoting new narratives of development and progress.

Additionally, it has serious regional competition from neighbouring Dubai and the Qatari capital Doha, both of which have for decades tried to position themselves as regional tourism and investment hubs.

The kingdom already has an $800 billion plan to double the size of the capital in the next decade, as well as transform it into a cultural and economic hub for the region, according to Saudi media.

Over the years Saudi Arabia, which has seen an economic boom and a desert country transformed into a modern developing country was essentially based on the petroleum industry.

In addition it earns billions in revenues through the Umrah and Hajj pilgrimages. In recent years, it has made travel to the kingdom friendlier for the pilgrims and expansion plans in the two holy cities of Makkah and Madinah are underway to accommodate more number of tourists.

As a strategy it also is promoting the Umrah pilgrimage more than the annual Hajj, as the revenues through Umrah pilgrims flows throughout the year and the government is not forced to spend more on providing facilities and security to the Umrah pilgrims, whose stay is much shorter as compared to the Hajj pilgrims.

So far, the government was focussing more on promoting tourism, but with the ascension of MbS, it seems to have changed tracks. As his critics say he is pursuing a growth plan which seems more unIslamic than his parleys with the Israelis.

(Asad Mirza is a political commentator based in New Delhi. He can be contacted at www.asadmirza.in )

Renewed Push to Revitalise Abraham Accords

By Asad Mirza 25th January 2023

It seems as if the United States has taken another step towards being a relevant player in the Middle East, after an ill thought hiatus, leading to relations with regional players like Saudi Arab hitting rock bottom. The latest American initiative in this regard is through vitalising the Abraham Accords. This may also lead to it normalising its strained ties with Saudi Arabia besides efforts to contain Iran.

The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with the visiting White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan a fortnight ago, in Jerusalem. The two discussed ways to broaden the Abraham Accords and reach a breakthrough that could lead to the normalisation of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

After becoming the prime minister for the third time in December 2022, hard-right Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has set normalising ties with Saudi Arabia as one of his two main foreign policy goals. Though the Israelis admit that it won’t be possible if relations between Riyadh and Washington remain tense.

Reports say that Sullivan and Netanyahu also discussed the Iranian nuclear programme, Iran’s actions in the region and its military assistance to Russia in its war in Ukraine, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the normalisation process between Israel and its neighbours.

Abraham Accords

The Abraham Accords, which were signed on 15 September 2020, normalised diplomatic relations between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco, and so far have achieved mixed results.

As anticipated, normalisation has opened new opportunities for defence and security cooperation, especially among Israel, Bahrain, and the UAE, which share a common perspective on the security threat posed by Iran.

But there are shortcomings at the level of bilateral cooperation. Most notably, despite the initial goal of the Arab nations, cooperation between Israel and its Arab partners has failed to produce tangible improvements in the Israeli-Palestinian conundrum.

In reality, the Israelis are now, arguably, more cautious about managing relations with the Palestinians to avoid conflict with their newfound Arab partners, affecting trade ties.

The Palestinians have not yet embraced the American vision. 86% of Palestinians believe the normalisation agreement with the UAE serves only Israel’s interests and not their own. There is indeed a possibility that the Palestine quest might be ignored further.

Netanyahu told Sullivan that the latest Palestinian moves in the international arena, especially the Palestinian Authority’s push for the International Court of Justice to issue a legal opinion on the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, “are an attack on Israel and oblige us to respond”.

Sullivan also met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah. Abbas is reported to have warned Sullivan that the new Israeli government’s policy could have dangerous consequences and stressed the Biden administration must intervene “before it is too late”.

Abbas told Sullivan that the Israeli government’s policy and the recent sanctions it has imposed on the Palestinian Authority, destroy the way to two-state solution, violate the agreements between the parties and ruin the chances that are left for achieving peace and stability in the region.

Getting the Israeli government and PA agree to any understanding, might be a bit tough, as the issue has many intertwined political and legal elements to be resolved, but on the other hand, Abraham Accords have been a boon to both Israel and other Gulf nations to bolster economic and trade ties.

Economic Growth

Statistically speaking, the Abraham Accords seem to have made a positive impact on entrepreneurs and investors in Israel and the Gulf.

Besides facilitating a pro-business environment in the region, it has indirectly brought positive momentum to deals such as the maritime border agreement between Israel and Lebanon, reached last year, which was mainly driven by local economic interests.

In particular, the economic and trade ties between Israel and UAE have grown substantially, besides notable steps in strengthening the economic relations between both countries, like the decision by the Dubai International Chamber to open up an office in Tel Aviv.

According to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, trade between Israel and the United Arab Emirates reached $212.6 million in August 2022, constituting a 163% increase in trade from August 2021. For the first eight months of 2022, bilateral trade was just over $1.62 billion, constituting a 121% increase in trade from the first eight months of 2021.

Israel’s new Foreign Minister Eli Cohen has said that the volume of trade with Arab countries that normalised relations with Israel under the US-negotiated Abraham Accords in 2020 broke the 10 billion-shekel ($2.8 billion) barrier in 2022. Cohen said the Abraham Accords have dramatically changed the face of the Middle East. He added that a summit would be held in March with other Arab countries to boost regional trade.

Though the Abraham Accords might not have been able to resolve the regional schisms and rivalries, yet they have indeed paved the way for greater economic and trade relations, which seems to be the way forward also.

The writer can be contacted at @AsadMirzaND

Climate Warriors Get Assertive At COP 27

By Asad Mirza 1st December 2022

It seems that Climate Change is now gaining real traction and importance for the common people more and more, but our politicians are not ready to take any notice of these changes, which are going to have immeasurable negative impact on the lives of billions of people across the globe.

Besides calls for wealthier nations to provide compensation to underdeveloped countries to cover the costs of severe damage and losses, citizens of some countries have also initiated legal proceedings against their governments for inadequately addressing the climate change fallouts.

The month of November saw two environment-related incidents taking place. First, at the latest COP summit at Sharm El Shiekh in Egypt, termed as ‘Africa’s COP’, the voice of the most-vulnerable and most-affected countries was heard with an agreement to establish a loss and damage facility.

However, progress is still snail-paced in terms of raising ambitions to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Leaders attempted to keep that goal alive at the Egypt conference, but did not increase calls to reduce carbon emissions.

November also saw hundreds of activists, including Greta Thunberg, marching through the streets of Stockholm to a court to file a lawsuit against the Swedish government for what they claim is insufficient climate action.

Lawsuit by Swedish citizens

Over 600 young activists signed an 87-page document, which would serve as the foundation for the lawsuit, which was filed in the Stockholm District Court.

They want the court to rule that the country’s climate policies violate the human rights of its citizens. According to Anton Foley, spokesman for the youth-led initiative Aurora, which prepared and filed the lawsuit, Sweden has never treated the climate crisis as a crisis. Sweden is failing to fulfil its responsibilities and is breaking the law.

Earlier, in one of the most high-profile cases, Germany’s highest court ruled last year that the government’s climate targets must be adjusted to avoid undue burden on the young.

The German government responded by pushing back its target for net zero emissions by five years to 2045 and laying out more ambitious near and medium-term steps to achieve that goal.

What emerges from this is that people all across the world are increasingly becoming aware of the damages wrought by the Climate Change, and also understanding that who is the main culprit for unleashing this catastrophe, in pursuance of greed and lucre.

What is loss and damage?

The Alliance of Small Island States at international climate negotiations in Geneva in 1991, first introduced the concept of loss and damage, but it was not seriously considered again until 2013 at the COP-19 climate conference in Warsaw, Poland.

The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage was created with the aim of enhancing knowledge of the issue and finding ways to approach it. There has been little progress since then.

The Glasgow COP, last year rejected a proposal made by members of the G-77 group of over a hundred developing countries and China for a formal loss and damage financial facility. Instead, in a bureaucratic manner, the Glasgow Dialogue was established for further discussion on the issue and it’s funding.

Critics have described the dialogue as “an excuse to delay further action.” It seems as if the rich countries are dragging their feet on financing any such endeavour.

While historically, between 1751 and 2017, the United States, the European countries and the UK were responsible for 47% of cumulative carbon dioxide emissions, as compared to just 6% from the entire African and South American continents. Yet, the culprits have been slow to make financial contributions to ease the impact on the most affected countries.

In 2010, Global North nations agreed to pledge $100 billion (€101 billion) annually by 2020 to help developing countries adapt to the impacts of climate change.

But according to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which tracks funding, in 2020 wealthy countries pledged just over $83 billion. That was a 4% increase on the previous year, but it still falls short of the agreed amount.

What’s the impediment?

Though in principle, developed nations acknowledge the need to address loss and damage, some amongst them argue for financing through existing climate funds, insurance schemes and humanitarian aid. Their reluctance is reflected in the European Union’s briefing, for example, which said that it was “open to discussing L&D (loss and damage) as a topic but hesitant about creating a dedicated L&D fund.”

Former British PM and WHO ambassador for global health financing, Gordon Brown has realistically opined that the announcement of the new initiative – the global loss and damage fund – to right historical wrongs by compensating climate-hit developing countries, might be a good feel factor but the real question is whether the developed world will really loosen its purse strings?

This breakthrough, he says, brought back memories of another initiative, the £100 billion a year agreed at the 2009 Copenhagen climate summit to help poor countries mitigate the effects of the climate crisis.

Brown says further that that money has never fully materialised. If 13 years’ experience of the £100 billion fund that never was is anything to go by, eulogies of praise will soon turn into allegations of betrayal. Far from the loss and damage fund narrowing the credibility gap on climate action, it is likely to bridge nothing if money fails to flow from rich to poor.

What is needed, however, is not less but more aid to help developing countries tackle the dramatic consequences of an unprecedented series of crises. Indeed, developing countries, unlike advanced economies, had no fiscal, monetary, or social space at the onset of these crises, to raise the issue.

One key priority for the global community should be not only to increase aid but also to make it much greener to help developing countries tackle the challenge of climate adaptation in an effective manner. Green aid encompasses financial and technical assistance to governments and direct investments in projects in both mitigation and adaptation to climate change.

The author can be contacted on www.asadmirza.in