Chinese soldiers may enter Afghanistan after departure of US troops

A very interesting, but equally perturbing situation is likely to emerge in Afghanistan. As the United States has announced to completely withdraw troops by 11 September, China has expressed its intentions to deploy its troops.

According to a report, Beijing may consider sending a peacekeeping force to Afghanistan if the security situation in the South Asian country poses a threat to the neighboring Chinese province of Xinjiang after American troops pull out.

US President Joe Biden said on Wednesday that he would withdraw all remaining US troops – about 2,500 – from Afghanistan by 11^th September, the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attack on the United States.

The withdrawal may pose a threat to Afghanistan’s security and stability, which could spill over into Xinjiang and disrupt China’s counterterrorism efforts.

In 2018, China trained Afghan troops and helped set up a mountain brigade. The training took place in China and the aim of the brigade was to counter possible attacks by al-Qaeda and Islamic State.

“The security forces of the Afghan government are not capable of ensuring Afghan security,” said Sun Qi, an international relations specialist at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences.

“The situation in Afghanistan might go further into chaos in the future. Cross-border crime, drug trafficking and smuggling of firearms may proliferate,” he said.

China may send peacekeeping troops to Afghanistan under the terms of the UN Charter, according to an international relations specialist at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences.

While Beijing would not station troops in Afghanistan, it might work with other countries in the region to promote political stability and reduce the security risk to China, Sun said.

 “If the security situation poses a significant threat, China may send peacekeeping troops along with humanitarian assistance to the region under the terms of the Charter of the United Nations to ensure the safety and interests of Chinese people and companies there,” he said.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian informed that foreign troops stationed in Afghanistan should withdraw in a “responsible and orderly manner” to prevent terrorist forces from taking advantage of the chaos.

“The United States is the biggest external factor affecting the Afghan issue. The relevant decisions and actions of the United States should fully respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Afghanistan, earnestly take responsibility for maintaining the results of peace and reconstruction in Afghanistan,” he said.

Soon after Biden’s announcement, Nato secretary general Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance planned to withdraw its troops – about 7,000 – from Afghanistan by next month. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said on Thursday that Australia would also complete its military withdrawal from Afghanistan in September.

Other experts said China was unlikely to push too hard to gain influence in Afghanistan as there was already fierce competition in the region.

“A number of countries, including Pakistan, India and Russia, want to exert their influence in the region, so China really needs to be careful of getting involved in the chaos,” said Wang Jin, a research fellow at the Charhar Institute think tank in northern China.

China and the US were unlikely to engage in any significant cooperation in Afghanistan after the US troop withdrawal, given the tensions between the two countries, he said.

“We can see from the withdrawal of US troops that the willingness of the US to intervene in Afghanistan’s affairs is declining,” he said.

“Primarily the idea of solving local conflicts by establishing a Western-style democracy in Afghanistan has failed.”

Sun said the US was likely to withdraw its military deployments from Central Asia and redeploy them to the Asia-Pacific.

“The withdrawal from Afghanistan allows the US to boost its military presence in Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean regions, with the aim of containing China,” he said.

“The US is highly likely to increase its military activity in the South China Sea and China-Indochina peninsula.”

Can secret talks between India and Pakistan yield any result?

It is believed that both India and Pakistan are busy in minimizing tension on the instructions of some external forces. This may bring a temporary calm for a while, but just can’t establish sustainable peace. The lingering on of Kashmir issue can be attributed to super powers fighting a sort of proxy wars in the region, including Afghan war going on for nearly twenty years.

Analysts say that now besides United States, China and Russia are also controlling the string. Ironically, these super powers don’t wish to engage in any direct encounter but want the proxies to hit strategic interests of each other.

Let everyone keep in mind that Russia and other Central Asian countries want access to warm waters, though Afghanistan and Pakistan. Similarly, China wants full control and security of projects being constructed under the auspicious of CEPC.

According to a Reuters news, top intelligence officers from India and Pakistan held secret talks in Dubai in January this year in a new effort to calm military tension over the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir.

While the super powers are pursuing their agenda, hawks present in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan continue to play the role of ‘spoilers’. Ironically the status of these hawks keeps on changing from friend to foe to friend.

Having read the preamble, now let us talk about secret talks going on between India and Pakistan on the behest of United Arab Emirates or to be little rude China and United States.

Keeping a few points in mind that over the last 74 years Kashmir issue has not been resolved, both the countries have fought numerous wars and attained the status of atomic powers to stain supremacy on each other, while millions of people on both sides of the border live below the poverty line, maintaining peace and tranquility in the regions seems only diabolic thinking

Both the Pakistan and Indian governments have re-opened a backdoor diplomacy aimed at a modest roadmap to normalizing ties. Such meetings have taken place in the past too, especially during times of crises but never been publicly acknowledged.

 It is not loner a secret that Indian and Pakistan intelligence officials have been meeting for several months in third countries. It is believed that these meeting have been held in Thailand, Dubai and London between the highest level people.

There is a lot that can still go wrong, it is fraught that is why nobody is talking it up in public, we don't even have a name for this, it's not a peace process, one can call it a re-engagement.

"It’s better for India and Pakistan to talk than not talk, and even better that it should be done quietly than in a glare of publicity," said Myra MacDonald, a former Reuters journalist who has just published a book on India, Pakistan and war on the frontiers of Kashmir.

Analysts don't see these meeting going beyond a basic management of tensions, possibly to tide both countries over a difficult period - Pakistan needs to address the fallout of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, while India has to confront a far more volatile situation on its disputed frontier with China.

Joe Biden faces resistance on withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan

President Joe Biden announced on Wednesday of a complete withdrawal of United States from Afghanistan by 11^th September this year. The announcement aims at closing the longest war of the United States.

However, many analysts, even within the US, remain skeptical of sustainable peace in Afghanistan, which has reduced to rudiments in two decades of fighting.

As officials disclosed Biden’s pullout plans, the US intelligence community renewed deep concerns about the outlook for the US-backed government in Kabul, which is clinging to an eroding stalemate.

“The Afghan government will struggle to hold the Taliban at bay if the coalition withdraws support,” said the US assessment, which was sent to Congress.

Kabul continues to face setbacks on the battlefield, and the Taliban are confident that they can achieve military victory.

The Democratic President had faced the 1st May withdrawal deadline, set by his Republican predecessor, Donald Trump, who tried but failed to pull the troops out before he left office.

Biden’s decision to keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan past that 1^st May 1 deadline, but officials suggested troops could fully depart before 11^th September, the US troop numbers in Afghanistan peaked at more than 100,000 in 2011.

“There is no military solution to the problems plaguing Afghanistan, and we will focus our efforts on supporting the ongoing peace process,” a senior administration official said.

It remains unclear how Biden’s move would affect a planned 10-day summit about Afghanistan starting on 24^th April in Istanbul that is due to include the United Nations and Qatar.

Taliban, which were ousted from power in 2001 by the US-led troops, said they would not take part in any summits that would make decisions about Afghanistan until all foreign forces had left the country.

Critics said the departure plan appeared to surrender Afghanistan to an uncertain fate, something that experts say was perhaps inevitable.

 “There is no good way that the US can withdraw from Afghanistan. It cannot claim victory, and it cannot wait indefinitely for some cosmetic form of peace,” said Anthony Cordesman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington.

Democratic Senator Jack Reed, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called it a very difficult decision for Biden.

“There is no easy answer,” Reed said.

US officials can claim to have, years ago, decimated al Qaeda’s core leadership in the region. But ties between the Taliban and al Qaeda elements persist.

By withdrawing without a clear victory, the United States opens itself to criticism that a withdrawal is a de facto admission of failure.

The war began as a search for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden following the Islamist militant group’s 9/11 attacks, when hijackers slammed airplanes into the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon outside Washington, killing almost 3,000 people.

Successive US presidents sought to extricate themselves from Afghanistan, but those hopes were confounded by concerns about Afghan security forces, endemic corruption in Afghanistan and the resiliency of a Taliban insurgency that enjoyed safe haven across Afghanistan.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell accused Biden of planning to “turn tail and abandon the fight in Afghanistan.”

“Precipitously withdrawing US forces from Afghanistan is a grave mistake,” McConnell said, adding that effective counterterrorism operations require presence and partners on the ground.

Even Biden’s allies in Congress fretted about the impact a withdrawal would have on human rights, given the gains - particularly for women and girls - in Afghanistan in the past two decades.

The senior administration official said US troops were not the best solution for preserving human rights gains, saying that aggressive diplomatic, humanitarian and economic measures are needed instead.

Ship stuck in Suez Canal still held by Egyptian authorities to recover US$ one billion

The world cheered when Evergreen cargo vessel was freed from the sides of the Suez Canal on March 29, 2021, but it is still held as ‘hostage’ to recover a king's ransom. The ship is still inside the Suez Canal, in a wider area called the Great Bitter Lake.

Egyptian authorities say they will let the mega ship go only after the ship's owners pay US$ one billion to compensate for the week that the canal was shut down. 

It seems that there are other reasons for detaining the ship. First there was little concern when ship grounded. Then work to afloat the ship moved at snail’s speed. And now the ship is being held as hostage to recover the booty.

The investigation can be completed in a few hours simply by listing to the captain of the ship, its key crew members and Egyptian pilots.

On the face value the Suez Canal authority (SCA) seems at fault and should be held liable to pay all others including the ship owners. It was their responsibility to use efficient pilot boats to escort this mega ship. If the weather was bad and visibility was poor they should have not pushed the ship into the Canal. And if they were confident of their skills, they should have also kept the control with them; they just can’t put the blame on the ship crew.

The SCA can still fight the case in a competent court of law, but holding the ship indefinitely tantamount to ‘Marine Terrorism’.

Osama Rabie, Chairman, SCA said on Egyptian state television that the country will hold onto the ship while it investigates what happened and until the ship's owner pay US$ one billion.

The losses for the period ending March 29, that the ship was stuck and blocked traffic flow through the canal comes to less than US$100 million in lost transit fees and there are also the costs to free the ship and other expenses to reimburse.

"The vessel will remain here until investigations are complete and compensation is paid," he said, according to The Wall Street Journal. 

"The minute they agree to pay the compensation, the vessel will be allowed to move."

It's not just Egyptian authorities who are asking for money. The Wall Street Journal said insurance claims for the boat's week in the spotlight could include losses for perishable goods as well as supply-chain disruptions.

Interestingly, Japanese company, Shoei Kisen Kaisha that owns the ship told the Journal it is in discussions with Egyptian authorities and cooperating in the investigation but has not officially, heard about the billion-dollar ransom.

The Company has started liability-limiting court proceedings in London. A representative of the International Transport Workers Federation, also based in London, told the Wall Street Journal that the crew appears to be well treated while they remain on board the ship.

Drying US oil pipelines

According to a Reuters report, pipeline companies in the United States went on a construction spree throughout 2018 and 2019 to handle blistering growth in crude production that touched a record 13 million barrels per day (bpd). 

However, the coronavirus pandemic crushed both fuel demand and oil production, and neither has recovered fully, leaving many pipelines unused.

Major pipeline companies are exploring ways to ship other products in those lines and considering selling stakes in operations to raise cash.

The coronavirus pandemic upended the global energy supply system and worldwide fuel demand. Gasoline consumption in the US is now estimated to be past its peak and as refiners process less crude, producers are not filling pipelines used to transport it.

By the fourth quarter, total utilization of the largest oil pipelines from the Permian is expected to drop to 57%, consultancy Wood Mackenzie said. The nadir during the last market bust in 2016 was roughly 70%.

The US crude output is currently about 11 million bpd, and is not expected to grow much until 2022. But more pipelines were already set to come online, growing the gap between production and capacity covered by long-term contracts to a record over one million bpd in February, according to energy research firm East Daley Capital.

"We do not expect to be at pre-COVID production levels by end-2022," said Saad Rahim, chief economist at Commodities Merchant Trafigura.

The top three Permian pipeline companies are offering discounts to entice shippers and stem the fall in volumes. Companies rely on long-term contracts that require customers to ship a certain volume of oil or pay a penalty. Now companies are renegotiating those agreements at lower rates when they are close to expiring, to keep their customers.

Magellan Midstream Partners LP’s transportation and terminals revenue slid 9% to about US$1.8 billion in 2020, the lowest since 2017. The Company has only enough long-term contracts to fill its 275,000-bpd Longhorn pipeline to 70% capacity over the next six years, Magellan said.

With more pipelines adding to competition, Magellan expects daily volumes on Longhorn to drop to an average 230,000 bpd this year versus 270,000 bpd in 2020. A Magellan spokesman said the company could use its marketing arm to buy space on the Longhorn line and sell it to ad-hoc buyers.

Plains All American Pipeline LP’s transportation revenues fell about 13% to $2 billion in 2020, and warned that earnings could suffer further if production declines. Plains did not comment for this story.

Pipeline companies can make some money even when oil is not flowing through pipelines. Producers pay what are known as deficiency payments - penalties for not shipping oil. Still, those payments are small. Plains reported $71 million in deficiency payments in 2020, less than 4% of its overall transportation segment revenue.

Some companies are considering retrofitting pipelines to ship liquids besides crude, such as renewable fuels.

Enterprise Products Partners LP’s co-Chief Executive Jim Teague recently told analysts that he was fielding queries from a petrochemical company that needs pipeline transport and storage for potential hydrogen projects.

Enterprise’s crude pipelines and services revenues plunged 35% in 2020. In February, it said it has long-term contracts to ship about 1 million bpd through 2028 and beyond, compared with average volumes of 2 to 2.2 million bpd over the past two years.

The company did not comment for this story.

As pipeline companies have struggled, investor returns have suffered. The Alerian MLP index, which tracks the performance of midstream companies, is down 24% since the beginning of 2020, compared with a 27% return for the S&P 500.

“A lot of companies had to cut their dividends,” said Rob Thummel, senior portfolio manager at TortoiseEcofin. “It has created some skepticism on the investor base about the sustainability of the sector.”

Rising remittances prove issuing Eurobonds was a bad decision for Pakistan

In one of my recent blogs I had opposed the idea of flotation of Eurobonds. It was based on two premises: 1) the issue will add to debt servicing and 2) the rate of return being offered is fabulous. I had also suggested that whatever amount Eurobond will provide would be mobilized in less than a month.

A review of remittance received indicates that receipts extended their unprecedented streak for the 10th consecutive month in March 2021 and rose to US$2.7 billion for the month, 20% higher than earlier month and 43% higher than March 2020. 

Cumulatively during first 9 months of current financial year (FY 21) remittances rose to US$21.5 billion, up 26% over the same period of FY20.

Remittance inflows during the period under review were mainly originated from Saudi Arabia (US$5.7 billion), United Arab Emirates (US$4.5 billion), United Kingdom (US$2.9 billion) and the United States (US$1.9 billion).

Proactive policy measures taken by the Government of Pakistan (GoP) and State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) to encourage inflows through official channels, limited cross border travel due to the COVID-19 and orderly foreign exchange market conditions contributed to this sustained rise in workers’ remittances.

I am still concerned about deteriorating balance of trade situation of Pakistan. The deficit during first nine months of FY21 swelled to US$21.241 billion from US$17.352 billion over the corresponding months of last year, reflecting an increase of 22.4%. The surge in trade deficit has been mainly led by higher growth in imports and lower growth in exports.

During the period under review, import bill increased by 14.68% to US$39.91 billion, from US$34.799 billion. This hike was contributed by import of raw material as well as import of wheat, sugar and cotton. As against this, export proceeds rose by 7% to US$18.669 billion, from US$17.447 billion.

I am also inclined to draw a conclusion that Pakistan would have faced serious balance of payment crisis, had there been not so huge influx of remittances. Even IMF tranches and borrowing from friendly countries would have proved too paltry.

Therefore, it is suggested that GoP must look into the problems faced by overseas Pakistani, particularly those living in UAE and Saudi Arabia. Similarly, efforts should also be made to convince these countries to resolve problems faced by Pakistanis.

 

Israel attacks Iranian nuclear facility at Natanz

Mossad was reportedly behind the cyberattack at the Natanz nuclear plant on Sunday that caused extensive damage to Iran’s main uranium enrichment facility.

Western sources quoted in Israeli media said the attack, which was initially referred to as an accident by Iran, was carried out by the Mossad.

Iran admitted on Sunday evening that the accident was the result of a terrorist act.

The country’s nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, said the international community and the International Atomic Energy Agency needed to deal with what he called nuclear terrorism. Iran reserves the right to take action against the perpetrators, he was quoted as saying.

The incident at Natanz was not an accident, and the damage was worse than what Iran had initially presented to the public, a source confirmed to The Jerusalem Post. Western sources said the facility was hit by a cyberattack.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kohavi gave a rare strong hint pointing to Israeli involvement on Sunday.

 “The IDF’s actions throughout the Middle East are not hidden from our enemies’ vision, who are observing us, seeing our capabilities and carefully considering their next steps,” he said in a speech honoring Israel’s fallen soldiers.

“By virtue of clever operational activities, the past year was one of the most secure years that the citizens of the State of Israel have known,” Kohavi said.

“We will continue to act, combining power and discretion, determination and responsibility – all of this to guarantee the security of the State of Israel.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at an Independence Day event on Sunday with the heads of the security branches, said, “The struggle against Iran and its proxies and the Iranian armament efforts is a huge mission.”

In a possible reference to the reported Mossad operation taking the uranium enrichment machines off-line within hours of their launch, he said: “The situation that exists today will not necessarily be the situation that will exist tomorrow.”

Natanz has in the past been targeted by Israeli cyber operations, according to foreign reports. In 2010, the Stuxnet virus attacked the facility in a joint operation with the US, destroying more than 1,000 centrifuges.

Iran said there no injuries or pollution were caused by the incident on Sunday. Malek Shariati-Niasar, an Iranian MP and spokesman for a parliamentary energy commission, wrote that the incident was highly suspected as being “sabotage,” being that it occurred on Iran’s National Nuclear Technology Day and amid the renewal of talks between the Islamic Republic and Western nations on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal of 2015.

The Iranian parliament was following the details of the incident and would announce an opinion on the matter after receiving and summarizing the information, he said.

Earlier on Sunday, Iran said a problem with the electrical distribution grid of the Natanz site had caused an incident.

Iranian MP Ali Haddad placed the blame for the incident on Israel.

“Yesterday the assassination of a nuclear scientist and today the attack on the Iranian ship Saviz and the sabotage of the Natanz nuclear facility,” he tweeted.

Haddad called for deterrence and not restraint. “When commitment is translated as restraint, the Zionist enemy dares to strike more blows,” he said.

The attack against Natanz took place a day after Iran began injecting uranium hexafluoride gas into advanced IR-6 and IR-5 centrifuges at Natanz and was revealed as US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin was visiting Israel.

It also came less than a month after the IAEA reported that Iran had restarted enrichment at the Natanz facility and less than a year after Israel was blamed by foreign reports for an alleged attack on the facility, which reportedly had significantly impacted Iran’s nuclear program.

Iran is still nowhere near having recovered to the point where it had been before that July 2020 explosion in terms of its capacity for assembling new advanced centrifuges, the Post recently reported.

In the alleged attack last year, Iranian reports originally referred to the explosion as an incident without providing further details.

“The centrifuge assembly hall was blown up by the enemy a few months ago, but we did not stop and temporarily set up the hall that made up for the lost hall,” Iranian nuclear chief Salehi said Saturday, according to Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency. He did not specify which “enemy” was behind the attack last year.

Iran is working to move sensitive facilities at Natanz further underground and hopes the new underground halls will be ready next year, Salehi said.

Tensions are rising between Israel and Iran amid a number of attacks on Iranian and Israeli maritime vessels, with recent reports claiming that Israel has hit dozens of Iranian ships in recent years.

On Tuesday, a spokesman for the Iranian military blamed Israel and the US for causing an explosion on the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ Saviz vessel in the Red Sea, Sputnik news reported last Thursday.

“The United States undoubtedly has a hand in all attempts to undermine and harm Iran,” the spokesman said in a statement, adding that Tehran was not accusing any of the Gulf states of being involved in the incident.

Iran is meeting with European and American officials to discuss a possible return to the JCPOA.

Netanyahu has warned multiple times in the past week that Israel would defend itself against Iranian threats, stressing that Jerusalem would work to combat Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Can Iran become a new hub of copper?

In this blog, I am talking about an important base metal, copper. Many of the readers may be aware that copper mines around the world are facing closure due to one or the other reason. As a result prices of this important industrial metal are going up in the global markets.

Industries using copper are desperately looking for alternative sources of supply. My today’s blog has been inspired after reading a report about discovery of huge copper reserves in Iran, Pakistan’s next door neighbor.

Managing Director of National Iranian Copper Industries Company (NICIC) has announced the discovery of one billion tons of new copper reserves in Iran.

NICIC carried out deep drilling to identify new copper reserves across the country, which resulted in the discovery of one billion tons of new reserves, Ardeshir Sa'd-Mohammadi said in a press conference. He put the value of the discovered reserves at about US$8.3 billion.

The official put the country’s total copper reserves at 40 billion tons, saying that Iran currently has the world’s seventh-largest copper reserves, and hopefully the country will climb to sixth place shortly.

Sa’d-Mohammadi further mentioned the new record achieved in the country’s copper cathode production and noted that over 280,000 tons of the commodity were produced in the country during the previous year which was 12 percent more than the preceding year.

Pointing to the NICIC’s new projects for the current year, the official noted that three major copper-related projects will go operational in the current year which is going to add more than 400,000 tons to the country’s copper concentrate output, boosting the company’s annual incomes by US$800 million.

He further noted that the country’s copper exports increased in the previous year despite the negative impacts of the coronavirus pandemic and the US sanctions.

Pakistan Refinery should not be allowed to import second hand refinery

It is worth noting that Pakistan Refinery Limited (PRL) intends to buy a second-hand refinery to upgrade its operations and increase output to meet rising demand of POL in the country. 

PRL has placed an advertisement to purchase a second-hand refinery complex for relocation to Pakistan. Offers from interested bidders have been invited with a closing date of April 23, 2021.

Please allow me to say that this entire episode seems a dubious attempt, simply looking at the closing date and the rational provided. It is right that PRL may succeed in doubling its capacity to 100,000 bpd, but the unit/units being imported will be outdated and/or obsolete. Another limiting factor is that PRL will be able execute plan for upgrading and expanding Euro V specification and high speed diesel oil production.

The report highlights two important points: 1) Pakistan’s total refining capacity is 19.37 million tons per year, while the country consumes 19.68 million tons of petroleum products annually and 2) the Government of Pakistan (GoP) says refining capacity is not being fully utilized on account of financial as well as technical problems, and is supplying only 11.59 million tons per year, while the remaining demand is met through imports.

The Finance Ministry, in a report released in March 2021 said that import volume of crude increased by 13.8% during the first eight months of FY21. Import volumes of petroleum products increased by 27.7% in the same period.

Reportedly, the GoP has finalized a new policy for petroleum refining, aimed at offering incentives for setting up of deep conversion refineries. Therefore, PRL project may not qualify for the incentives stipulated in the Policy.

It seems an attempt is being made to reward the favorites by stating that the incentives would also be available to the existing refineries for upgrading and modernizing their facilities. There would be no restriction on technology, equipment or process to qualify for such upgrade provided that it results in motor gasoline and diesel production to meet specifications notified by the government.

To conclude, it may be sufficient to advise the GoP not to allow Pakistan Refinery to import secondhand machinery and obsolete technology. I also invite the experts and potential investors in refineries to explore the reasons behind half a dozen foreign investors bidding farewell to Pakistan in last one decade.

Why to blame Saudi Arabia for coup in Jordan?

Reportedly, Shaker Zalloum, a Palestinian author believes that Saudi Arabia and the UAE had a key role in the coup attempt in Jordan. He has been quoted saying, “In the official statement of the Jordanian government, there is a reference to the intervention of foreign intelligence without specifying them.”

He went to the extent of saying, “I think it is most likely a coup attempt behind which Saudi Arabia and the UAE played a key role.”

Zalloum talked about two persons Bassem Awadallah, one of the advisers of Mohammed bin Salman and Sharif Hassan bin Zaid a Jordanian citizen who also holds Saudi citizenship. In the same breath he termed Bassem Awadallah, as one of the leaders of corruption in Jordan and the region.

Talking about attitude of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain towards the Palestinian cause, he said, “The following of subordination policy of the American-Zionist camp has become obvious even to the simple Arab citizen in Jordan and in most Arab countries. What happened under normalization of ties with Israel, reveals the malicious nature of the plan.”

He also gave a strange narrative, “These independent regimes were established according to specific job tasks to serve the colonial West and the Zionist ambitions in Palestine. When Britain declared its Hebrew Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932, Churchill wired to Chaim Weizmann congratulating him on the accomplishment of half of the promised state of Israel. As for the delusive independence for the rest of the Persian Gulf states, it came in the same context.”

As regards Bahrain and UAE he said, “Indeed, their cooperation with the Zionists is old, and what has appeared to the public in terms of recent normalization of ties does not go beyond the precedent illegitimate relationships. These regimes claim advocating Arabs and Islam, while they are neither Muslim nor Arab.”

After going through interview of Shaker Zalloum, my only concern is that it aims at maligning Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States. He has not made any reference to reports that alleged involvement of one of Mossad agents in the coup.  

Lifting US sanctions on Iran not an easy job

The most complicated issue in the United States-Iran relationship is the intertwined US sanctions, which were aimed at punishing the Islamic Republic on multiple counts and in the worst possible manner. 

These include from activities related to the nuclear program and support of terrorism to missile proliferation and human rights abuses. Some of Iran’s major institutions, including the Central Bank Iran, were sanctioned, both for their roles supporting the nuclear program and for aiding the alleged terrorist attacks by proxy militias.

The Biden administration wants to lift the sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program – as promised in the 2015 deal – if Tehran, in turn, rolls back recent breaches of the nuclear deal. The complicating factor in current and future diplomacy is that key Iranian institutions and individuals could remain sanctioned for secondary reasons, thus not providing Iran the economic relief it seeks.

Iran’s oil industry, the country’s main source of export revenue, is a prime example. Biden could lift sanctions on NIOC for its role in funding programs on weapons of mass destruction. But it would remain sanctioned for financially facilitating terrorism orchestrated by the Revolutionary Guards. The same problem of overlapping sanctions could arise in any future talks about Iran’s missile program because institutions involved in proliferation are also sanctioned for supporting regional terrorism.

The Biden administration has the authority to provide temporary exemption from sanctions; it would keep sanctions in place legally but nullify their effects until the Treasury formally revokes sanctions. “Iran is unlikely to be satisfied with such an approach and could demand formal removal of counter terrorism sanctions on these entities, a move that would be hugely unpopular in US domestic circles,” Brian O'Toole wrote for the Atlantic Council.

The issue of sanctions was further complicated when President Donald Trump abandoned the nuclear deal—brokered by the world’s six major powers over two years of intense diplomacy—in 2018. He then re-imposed earlier sanctions from the Bush and Obama administrations that had been lifted when the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was implemented in 2016. He also took the unusual step of sanctioning Iran’s banking and oil sectors for funding the Revolutionary Guards and extremist proxies across the Middle East.

On April 2, Iran has begun indirect talks in Vienna with the United States on returning to compliance with the JCPOA. The Iranian delegation included representatives from the Central Bank of Iran and the Petroleum Ministry, which reflected Tehran’s interest in sanctions relief.

Therefore, there is an urgent need to assess the sanction imposed on Central Bank of Iran, National Iranian Oil Company, National Iranian Tanker Company, National Petrochemical Company, Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines and 18 commercial banks. The filth of more than four decades can’t be cleaned in a few days or months.

Israeli attack on Iranian ship Saviz indicates change in modus operandi

An Iranian vessel was attacked in the Red Sea as Iran and the West resumed nuclear talks in Vienna to revive the 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major world powers. Saudi and American media outlets claimed that Israel was behind the attack. The Saudi-owned Al Arabiya reported that an “Israeli commando” attached “a magnetic explosive device” to an Iranian vessel in the Red Sea.

The Tasnim news agency confirmed the attack and identified the vessel as “Iran Saviz.” It reported “The incident happened after the explosion of limpet mines attached to the hull of the ship.”

A day later, Iran officially commented on the issue. The Iranian Foreign Ministry issued a statement confirming the attack.

“The Iranian merchant ship Saviz sustained minor damage in the Red Sea off the coast of Djibouti on April 6, 2021, due to an explosion, the cause of which is being investigated,” Saeed Khatibzadeh, the Ministry’s spokesman said. 

He said the vessel has been deployed to the region in coordination with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and it has been involved in ensuring maritime security. 

“As already officially announced and based on the arrangements made with the IMO, the non-military Saviz ship had been stationed in the Red Sea region and the Gulf of Aden in order to ensure maritime security along shipping lanes and to counter pirates,” explained the spokesman.

“The ship practically served as Iran’s logistical station (for technical support and logistics) in the Red Sea; so, the specifications and mission of this vessel had already been officially announced to the International Maritime Organization,” he added.

Iran didn’t point the finger at anyone. But, The New York Times suggested that Israel was behind the attack. “The Israelis had notified the United States that its forces had struck the vessel,” the American newspaper quoted a US official as saying.

Although, the official said that the Israelis had termed the attack ‘retaliation’ for alleged earlier Iranian strikes on Israeli vessels, but the timing of the attack strongly indicated a link between the resumption of nuclear talks in Vienna and Israeli efforts to derail those talks.

The Times implicitly pointed to this link, saying the attack came as progress was reported on the first day of the Vienna talks, which are aimed to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) - the very deal that Israel has been working hard to sabotage since 2015.

Therefore, Israel may have intended to send a message to the Biden administration that it will do whatever it can to prevent a revival of the JCPOA. Israel’s modus operandi in the latest attack also suggests a change in Israel’s approach. Israel has reportedly been involved in a shadowy naval war with Iran in recent years.

Several Western news media reported that Israel has been attacking Iranian vessels carrying oil and other commodities since 2019 in a bid to spoil Iran’s economic ties with other countries. These attacks mostly went unnoticed and Israel refused to publicize them until most recently. 

The Israelis would often attack Iranian commercial ships deep into the night using helicopters equipped with machine guns from a distance of many kilometers, a source familiar with the matter told the Tehran Times. 

The Israeli attacks were more of a harassment nature than an operation meant to inflict real damage, according to the source. 

The attack on the Saviz, however, indicates a new modus operandi. First, it was reportedly done with a limpet mine attached to the hull of the Iranian vessel by an Israeli commando. Second, it was carried out early in the morning, a clear indication that the attacker wanted it to be publicized. Leaking the news of the attack to Al Arabiya and The New York Times left little doubt about the intention of the attacker. 

Israel seems to be busy working to prevent the US from returning to its commitments under the JCPOA. If the US is willing to revive the nuclear deal then it needs to pay more attention to Israeli machinations. 

India acquiring strength to monitor movement of Chinese vessels in Malacca Strait

The grant issued by the Japanese government just could not go unnoticed by the stakeholders of Indo-Pacific. The US$36 million in aid to install a battery energy storage system on India's Andaman and Nicobar Islands ‑ Japan's first-ever grant to the strategically located islands ‑ is much more than clean energy. 

Sitting at the mouth of the Malacca Strait, arguably the most important chokepoint in the world, the islands give India and its friends a front-row view of Chinese vessels going into and out of the narrow waterway.

On 26^th March, Japanese Ambassador Satoshi Suzuki and C. S. Mohapatra, an Additional Secretary at India's Ministry of Finance, exchanged notes in New Delhi concerning grant/aid of US$36 million to install a battery energy storage system at the Phoenix Bay Power House on the island of South Andaman to utilize renewable energy and stabilize energy supply.

"It contributes to our shared vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific, and also contributes to Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga's goal of offering climate change assistance," the official said.

"The real advantage the Andamans provide to India is the ability to conduct surveillance over critical waters," said Darshana Baruah, an associate fellow with the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"The islands offer unparalleled advantage in surveillance and monitoring the Malacca Strait. It is also close to the Straits of Indonesia, the alternate route into the Indian Ocean, especially for submarines," she said.

"A coherent monitoring and response mechanism will help India detect Chinese vessels upon their entry into the Indian Ocean."

But to maximize their potential, and to host more personnel on the islands, they will need to develop infrastructure, including water, electricity, housing and internet access. "The Japanese grant addresses a key requirement on the ground that will help India better utilize the strategic potential of the Andaman and Nicobar," Baruah said.

Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow and director of The India Project at the Brookings Institution, noted that while the power grid funded by the grant contributes to civilian infrastructure, "it serves a dual purpose."

Madan said that the grant comes at a time when India is stitching in Andaman and Nicobar into its strategic tapestry in a much more significant way and reflects a change in attitude on both the Indian and Japanese sides.

India was the first country Japan extended official development assistance to in 1958. But India has always been reluctant to bring external actors into the Indian Ocean. Japan, for its part, has been hesitant to be too active in India's strategic periphery, to avoid being unnecessarily provocative to China, Madan said.

On India's side, two things are clear, Madan said. One, there is recognition that China, including through its navy, will be increasingly active in the Indian Ocean region. Second, because India cannot tackle that growing presence on its own, "you have now seen a broader switch in Indian strategy that has involved both developing its own capabilities and welcoming other external actors."

China has been boosting its presence in the Indian Ocean, opening its first overseas military base in Djibouti and building a series of commercial ports in Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and the Maldives that could eventually serve a military purpose.

India to begin full scale operations at Iranian port Chabahar in May 2021

India is getting ready to begin full-scale operations of its first foreign sea port venture Chabahar in Iran by May end this year. This facility located on the Gulf of Oman aims at facilitating South Asia, Central Asia and West Asia trade.

Indian US$500 million investment represents a clear and potent commercial challenge to China’s massive port investment in Gwadar port located in Pakistan, a key component of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

According to a report by Asia Times, India has nearly completed development of two terminals at Chahabar’s Shahid Beheshti complex that opens onto the Gulf of Oman.

The 10-year lease agreement, a deal first clinched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Tehran in 2016, has until now been hobbled by US sanctions imposed under the Donald Trump administration.  

Indian suppliers and engineers, some with interests in the US, were reluctant to deliver essential machinery and services to Iran on fears they could face sanctions, despite clear exemptions on Chabahar in Trump’s sanction order. That led to certain speculation that China may take over the project from India.

Now, New Delhi has accelerated the project with the shift from Trump to Joe Biden, banking like others on a new breakthrough on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and a broader US-Iran warming trend.

“I will inaugurate the fully operationalized Chabahar port in April or May,” Mansukh Mandaviya, Indian Ports & Shipping Minister, said in a recent virtual discussion on Iran’s Chabahar port.

India has supplied two large cargo-moving cranes and will deliver two more in the coming weeks before the facility’s expected ceremonial opening next month.

New Delhi is already promoting the port’s potential humanitarian role, noting it was used to send emergency shipments of wheat to Afghanistan during the COVID-19 crisis and pesticide to Iran to deal with a recent locust infestation.

Chabahar has seen limited operations since 2019 due to the US restrictions imposed on Iran’s energy exports. The port handled a mere 123 vessels with 1.8 million tons of bulk and general cargo from February 2019 to January 2021, well below its operating capacity, according to reports.

New Delhi ultimately aims to link Chabahar to its International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), a project initially proposed by India, Russia, and Iran in 2000 and later joined by 10 other Central Asian nations.

Some see the INSTC as a less talked about rival to China’s BRI, which has invested heavily in Pakistan’s road, power and trade infrastructure, including huge multi-billion-dollar investments at Gwadar port.

INSTC envisions a 7,200 kilometer-long, multimode network comprised of shipping, rail, and road links connecting India’s Mumbai with Europe via Moscow and Central Asia. Initial estimates suggest INSTC could cut current carriage costs by about 30% and travel times by half.

Iran has already started working on a 600-kilometer-long railway line connecting Chabahar port to Zahedan, the provincial capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province close to the Afghan border.

Chabahar port consists of Shahid Kalantari and Shahid Beheshti terminals, each of which has five berth facilities. The port is located in Iran’s Sistan-Balouchestan Province and is about 120 kilometers southwest of Pakistan’s Baluchistan province, where the China-funded Gwadar port is situated.

In May 2016, India, Iran, and Afghanistan signed a trilateral agreement for the strategically-located Chabahar to give New Delhi access to Kabul and Central Asia.

The original plan committed at least US$21 billion for Chabahar–Hajigak corridor, which included US$85 million for Chabahar port development, a US$150 million credit line for Iran, an US$8 billion India-Iran MOU for Indian industrial investment in a Chabahar special economic zone, and US$11 billion for the Hajigak iron and steel mining project awarded to seven Indian companies in central Afghanistan.

Hajigak is the best known and largest iron oxide deposit in Afghanistan. It is located near the Hajigak Pass, with its area divided between Maidan Wardak and Bamyan provinces.

Unlike Chabahar, which is designed more to serve the economic and trade interests of the wider region, Gwadar is more tilted toward Beijing’s ambitions, analysts and traders say.

Riaz Haq, founder and president of PakAlumni Worldwide wrote in a recent blog that “China is looking to build and use Gwadar in Pakistan as Hong Kong West to serve as a superhighway for China’s trade expansion in [the] Middle East (West Asia), Africa and Europe.”

Gwadar port’s planned capacity will accommodate a massive 300 to 400 million tons of cargo annually, comparable to the combined annual capacity of all Indian ports. It also dwarfs the 10-12 million tons of cargo handling capacity now planned for Chabahar.

In another comparison, the largest US port at Long Beach, California, handles 80 million tons of cargo, about a quarter of what Gwadar could handle upon completion of a project that is designed largely to receive and move China’s trade.

Bizarre situation in Israel: Netanyahu being asked to form government 5th time

To begin with, I am obliged to say that the situation in Israel highlights two serious faults of country's dysfunctional system, first, that the vote is split between so many parties that a clear winner does not emerge, and second, whatever is developing is ‘trading and bargaining’ which will end up in making inappropriate choices to run the ministries. 

The idea of 5th election is disgusting, but this faulty system has failed in providing a sustainable solution.

A skeptical Israeli President, Reuven Rivlin invited Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday to form a new government, after another inconclusive election deepened political stalemate in the country.

In his speech, Rivlin lamented that he could not have imagined when he was elected seven years ago that he would appoint a candidate to form a government five times during his term.

He said his main consideration is formation of a government that could receive the trust of the Knesset, but no candidate can currently obtain a majority of the Knesset.

The country’s longest-serving leader, in power consecutively since 2009, now faces the toughest challenge of enlisting enough allies for a governing coalition.

Under law, Netanyahu will have 28 days to do so, with the possibility of a two-week extension before President picks another candidate or asks parliament to choose one. Continued deadlock could ultimately result in a new election.

Israel’s election on March 23, its fourth in two years, ended with neither a Netanyahu-led right-wing and religious bloc nor a prospective alliance of his opponents capturing a parliamentary majority.

 “To my great regret, I have the impression that none of the candidates, at this stage, has a real chance of putting together a government, one that would win a confidence vote in parliament,” Rivlin said.

In his televised remarks, Rivlin said that under Israeli law, Netanyahu, as the current prime minister, was not disqualified from being assigned the task despite his indictment on corruption charges.

“The president fulfilled his duty and he had no choice, but granting Netanyahu the mandate is a shameful stain on Israel,” Netanyahu’s strongest rival, centrist politician Yair Lapid, said.

Alternative to Suez Canal: Another canal through Israel

The United States considered a proposal to use 520 nuclear bombs to carve out an alternative to the Suez Canal though Israel in the 1960s, according to a declassified memorandum. The plan never came to fruition, but having an alternative waterway to the Suez Canal could have been looked into once again, after a cargo ship stuck in the narrow path, blocking one of the world's most vital shipping routes.

According to the 1963 memorandum, which was declassified in 1996, the plan would have relied on 520 nuclear bombs to carve out the waterway. The memo called for the "use of nuclear explosives for excavation of Dead Sea canal across the Negev desert."

The memorandum was from the US Department of Energy-backed Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. It suggested that an "interesting application of nuclear excavation would be a sea-level canal 160 miles long across Israel."

Conventional methods of excavation would be "prohibitively expensive," the memo said. "It appears that nuclear explosives could be profitably applied to this situation."

The memo added that "such a canal would be a strategically valuable alternative to the present Suez Canal and would probably contribute greatly to economic development."

As part of the pricing model, the memorandum estimated that four 2-megaton devices would be needed for every mile, which Wellerstein calculated as meaning "520 nukes" or 1.04 gigatons of explosives.

One possible route the memorandum proposed stretched across the Negev desert in Israel, connecting the Mediterranean to the Gulf of Aqaba, opening access to the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. 

The laboratory noted that there were 130 miles of "virtually unpopulated desert wasteland, and are thus amenable to nuclear excavation methods." 

The "crude preliminary investigation" suggested that using bombs to create a canal through Israel "appears to be within the range of technological feasibility," the memo said.

But the memo conceived that one problem, which the authors had not taken into consideration, might be "political feasibility, as it is likely that the Arab countries surrounding Israel would strongly object to the construction of such a canal."

The memo came as the US Atomic Energy Commission was investigating using "peaceful nuclear explosions" to dig out useful infrastructure, Forbes reported in 2018. There were also plans to use this method to dig out a canal in Central America, Forbes reported.

But the PNE project remained experimental, after the US found that 27 experiments with PNEs heavily irradiated the landscape. The Atomic Energy Commission was also abolished in 1974. 

The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory still exists. According to its website, it is dedicated to "ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation's nuclear deterrent."

The 1963 memorandum had also come less than a decade after the Suez crisis, a conflict for the control of the strategic waterway which was a defining event in the Cold War.

Arab League declares annexation ‘war crime’

Israeli plan to apply sovereignty to any part of the West Bank will end the two-state solution and eliminate the possibility of establishing an independent, sovereign and geographically viable Palestinian state, said Riyad Malki, Foreign Minister of Palestinian Authority.

In a speech before an emergency videoconference meeting of the Arab League foreign ministers, he said if implemented, the Israeli plan would also place al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem under Israeli control “before it is demolished and replaced by the ostensible Temple.”

The meeting was held at the request of the Palestinians to discuss the “dangers” of the Israeli plan.

The Arab ministers condemned the plan as a “new war crime” and “flagrant violation of United Nations resolutions and international law.” They urged the United States to back away from supporting the plan and said the Arab countries will support by all political, diplomatic, legal and financial means any decisions taken by the Palestinians to confront it.

The foreign ministers also called on the Quartet (United States, Russia, European Union and United Nations) to convene an urgent meeting to save the chances of peace and a two-state solution and to take a position consistent with international decisions to compel Israel to “stop implementing its colonial plans, including annexation and settlement expansion.”

Malki warned that if the Israeli plan is implemented, it would “transform the conflict from a political to a religious conflict that will go on forever because the Palestinians would not accept it and won’t accept anything less than the borders of 1967 to establish their state, with East Jerusalem as its capital.”

The Israeli plan to apply sovereignty to any part of the West Bank “would never guarantee stability, security and peace,” he said.

Malki accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of exploiting the coronavirus pandemic “to pass his decisions to annex large parts of the occupied Palestinian territory to Israel.”

 He also urged the Arab states to provide financial aid to the Palestinians as they face difficult financial conditions “due to the restrictions of the occupation.”

Any Israeli decision to annex parts of the West Bank would not change the status of these lands, Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit said in a speech during the meeting, adding that they will remain “occupied territories in accordance with international law.”

The purpose of Thursday’s meeting was to warn about the “dangers of the Israeli schemes to annex parts of the West Bank and the possible repercussions on regional stability,” he said. 

Turmoil in Jordan or coup sponsored by Israel

Former Mossad agent Roi Shpushnik was allegedly involved in the attempted coup in Jordan, according to reports in Jordan reported by Maariv, The Jerusalem Post's sister publication. According to the reports, the former Israeli agent offered Prince Hamza a plane to escape from the kingdom.

Earlier on Sunday, Jordan's Deputy Prime Minister Ayman Safadi said that Prince Hamza had liaised with foreign parties over a plot to destabilize the country.   

On Saturday the military said it had issued a warning to the prince over actions targeting "security and stability" in the key US ally. Prince Hamza later said he was under house arrest. Several high-profile figures were also detained.

"The investigations had monitored interferences and communications with foreign parties over the right timing to destabilize Jordan," Safadi said.

These included a Mossad agent contacting Prince Hamza's wife to organize a plane for the couple to leave Jordan, he said.

Many Jordanians were still grappling for answers in the aftermath of reports that Jordanian security forces foiled an attempt by Hamzah and some of his associates to topple the regime of King Abdullah.

People around Hamzah communicated with entities calling themselves “external opposition,” Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said Sunday. He did not provide details about the “external opposition.”

Sixteen Jordanians have been detained in connection with the case, including Bassem Awadallah, a former head of the royal court, and Sharif bin Zaid, a member of the royal family, Safadi said. He accused the detainees of planning to “undermine the security” of Jordan.

Safadi accused Hamzah of sending out a video message on Saturday night as part of an attempt to “distort the facts and gain local and foreign sympathy.”

Abdullah received phone calls on Sunday from the kings of Morocco and Bahrain and the emirs of Qatar and Kuwait, who expressed their countries’ “full solidarity” with Jordan.

The leaders also voiced support for all measures and decisions taken by Abdullah to safeguard Jordan’s security and stability, the Jordanian news agency Petra reported.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and the Gulf Cooperation Council also voiced full support for Abdullah in maintaining security and stability in Jordan.