Canadian allegations against India put United States in a pinch

The United States is caught in the middle of a diplomatic war between India and Canada, after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegations that Indian agents were behind the killing of a Sikh Separatist leader in the country.

The explosive allegation comes amid the Biden administration’s charm offensive toward India as a key bulwark against China, with many questioning the US relationship with India’s controversial Prime Minister, Narendra Modi.

The US reportedly worked closely with Canada in investigating the apparent murder on its soil. President Biden has not publicly commented on the allegations, highlighting the tricky balancing act of standing by Canada without alienating India.

All eyes are now on whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will present evidence to support his claims and just how bad relations between Ottawa and New Delhi will get before the US is forced to step in.

Since Trudeau’s public allegations against India on Tuesday, relations between the two countries have hit rock bottom. Canada has received no public support from its allies backing up the claim. 

Vivek Dehejia, professor of economics and an India-Canada policy expert at Carleton University in Ottawa, told The Hill that Canadian officials and Trudeau assumed they would get unconditional support from their allies and from the US in particular. 

“They have been disappointed by the level of support that they have received. If you look carefully at National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s recent comments, he’s walking a tightrope because Canada’s very dramatic allegations have put the US and other NATO allies in a bind,” he added.

On Thursday, Sullivan offered a vague statement in support of Canada’s undertaking in this investigation and said the US has also been in touch with Indian government.  

“It is a matter of concern for us. It is something we take seriously. It is something we will keep working on, and we will do that regardless of the country,” he told reporters at the White House on Thursday.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US was coordinating with Canada on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly on Friday, and called for India to cooperate in the ongoing probe.

“We want to see accountability. And it’s important that the investigation run its course and lead to that result,” Blinken told reporters in New York.

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that several senior officials of Canada’s Five Eyes allies, of which the US is a member, were informed of the allegations ahead of the G20 summit in New Delhi. Nevertheless, no public comment was made by any senior leaders among the group’s members, which also include the UK, Australia and New Zealand.

According to Sadanand Dhume, a senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based American Enterprise Institute, the Biden administration has no intention of sacrificing its relationship with India over an ill-judged accusation by Trudeau.

Biden has made closer ties with India a foreign policy priority in its efforts to counter China’s influence in Asia, inviting Modi for an official state visit in June, when he also addressed Congress. 

That was the same month that masked gunmen killed Hardeep Singh Nijjar outside a Sikh temple in Vancouver. The 45-year-old separatist leader had previously been designated as a terrorist by India. 

India has long maintained that Canada has turned a blind eye toward extremist elements against India, especially Khalistani secessionists who demand a separate homeland for Sikh in the Punjab region. 

“The fact is that the Canadians have allowed some pretty dodgy people to use Canadian soil and to spread violent messages,” Dhume said.

“It’s not as though there’s deep sympathy for Canada given that Trudeau has not handled this really well. He’s really been forced into a corner here.”

Trudeau has also come under scathing criticism from some former officials back home. 

Omer Aziz, a former foreign policy advisor for Trudeau’s administration in Canada, wrote in The Globe and Mail that Ottawa’s foreign policy initiatives have never understood South Asia or India, but were instead aimed at winning over the sizable ethnic Sikh vote at home. 

“Under Trudeau, the foreign policy choices have been subordinated to domestic diaspora politics, given the importance of the Sikh diaspora in Canada, which have been important liberal voters. Trudeau, who has a minority in Canadian parliament, is only in power because of the New Democratic Party led by Jagmeet Singh,” Dehejia told The Hill.

Singh is the first Sikh to lead a major federal party in Canada, and helped Trudeau form a minority government last year after the Liberals failed to win a majority in parliament. 

In New Delhi, the Canadian allegations have united a fractious political landscape. 

“The Indian response has been ferocious, and it’s been uniform,” said Dhume, adding that it has dredged up memories of the assassination of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1984 and Air India bombing the next year, both of which were linked to Sikh separatists. 

Even Modi’s main opposition, the Indian National Congress has backed his government’s stance on Trudeau and Canada in a rare show of unity. 

“The Congress reiterates that the country’s fight against terrorism has to be uncompromising, especially when it threatens India’s sovereignty, unity and integrity,” it said in a statement.

Pressure is now on Trudeau to reveal how Canada obtained the intelligence that led it to so publicly suggest the Indian government was behind the killing. 

The prime minister doubled down on his claims Thursday, again saying Canada had credible reasons to believe that agents of the government of India were involved in the killing of a Canadian on Canadian soil.

Canada may not be in a position to reveal where it got the information, Dhume said, but the Indian view is that if you’re not in a position to corroborate … then don’t make the allegation in public.

Yet ultimately it may depend on the US to settle the growing feud, which has resulted in India halting new visas for Canadians and expelling a Canadian diplomat. 

“Only the US has the ability to solve this as only they have both trust and influence in both Ottawa and New Delhi,” Dhume added. 

 

 

 

 

 

Why can’t Pakistan buy oil and gas from Iran?

The United States first imposed sanctions on Iran in 1979 on the pretext of radical students storming its embassy and taking staff hostage. Since then sanctions have remained in force, in fact new sanctions have been imposed over the years.

While the United States continues to play the mantra that Iran is busy in the production of nuclear warheads, it hasn’t come up with any credible proof. Many doubt it is a hoax call like presence of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and Iraq busy in the production of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

The growing perception is that the United States considers Iran a hurdle in the creation of its hegemony in the region, the major source of crude oil.

There is also growing impression among Pakistanis that the successive governments in Pakistan due to the US pressure stopped buying crude oil from Iran and didn’t go ahead on the construction of Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline.

The US administration is fully cognizant of the fact that Pakistan’s GDP growth is being pegged due to looming energy crisis. However, Pakistan is not allowed to buy crude oil and gas from Iran.

It is on record that India has been buying crude oil from Iran and also from Russia, despite imposition of sanction.

It is high time Pakistan should ask the United States to allow it to import crude oil and gas from Iran.

To be honest, the United States has no legal or moral authority to restrict any country from buying Iranian energy products.

Lately, the United States has not only swapped prisoners with Iran, but also allowed transferred US$6 billion to Iran. This was in fact Korean money payable to Iran, against crude oil already purchased.

Is it not the height of hypocrisy that United States has used money which it never owned for the exchange of prisoners, but didn’t release the funds when Iran needed it the most during COVID-19 pandemic?

The time has come Pakistanis should assert themselves and convince the US that buying energy products from Iran bodes well for Pakistan. If India can pay Russia in different currencies, Pakistan should also be allowed to buy energy products from Iran against supply of food.

On may recall that during sanctions on Iraq, the country was allowed to export certain quantity of crude oil and use the proceeds for buying food under “Oil for Food Program”.

Peace must include Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as capital

Saudi Arabia has said that any solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict would need to include an independent Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital.

The statement was made by Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Furhan Al-Saud at the UN General Assembly on Saturday night.

He spoke the day after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave his address, during which he touted the idea of a "New Middle East" with normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

In interview that the prime minister gave in America, he hinted at the possibility of his coalition considering concessions to the Palestinians as part of their efforts to secure such a peace agreement.

The prime minister spoke to CNN and Fox News on Friday, telling reporters that if he agreed to concessions, he believed his far-right party members would follow.

"Would you be willing to blow up your coalition, essentially, to get this deal with Saudi done?" CNN's Kaitlan Collins asked Netanyahu. 

"I don't think it'll require that," he said. "You think they'll go along with it?" Collins continued. "It's whether I go along with it," Netanyahu responded, deriding statements made by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich that no concessions would be made. 

 

 

 

Persian Gulf needs homegrown security

Major General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri, Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed troops, has criticized the deployment of foreign military troops in the region and emphasized the necessity for the Persian Gulf governments to work together to secure the region.

In a meeting with Commander of Royal Army of Oman Major General Matar bin Salim bin Rashid al Balushi, General Baqeri said, “We believe that the security of the Persian Gulf region must be provided through interaction and cooperation among the regional countries.”

The Iranian commander emphasized the nations of the Persian Gulf are capable of ensuring regional security without the presence or involvement of foreigners.

He also underscored the armed forces of Iran and Oman’s operational, intelligence and training competence, saying that the two nations’ mutual experience-sharing will help improve regional security.

Inviting the Omani navy forces to participate in the Marine Security Belt naval exercises, General Baqeri also praised Oman’s regional initiatives.

Omani commander called for strengthening military ties between Tehran and Muscat.

General Salim bin Rashid al Balushi cited Oman’s initiative to strengthen connections with neighbors and noted that communications have become even more important due to Oman and Iran’s connectivity in the Strait of Hormuz.

High-level military officials from Iran and Oman signed a memorandum of understanding in April 2019 to expand military cooperation.

In recent years, the two friendly neighbors have conducted a number of joint naval exercises.

In May, the Iranian Armed Forces chief of staff paid a visit to Oman to have discussions about fostering regional security, cooperation, and peace.

Major General Baqeri slammed the presence of foreign troops in the region and asserted that collaboration between Tehran and Muscat would enhance regional security.

The general also said, “The joint actions by Iran and Oman can improve security and demonstrate that outsiders are not required in the region.”

Baqeri noted that the multipolar world order and the transfer of power from the West to Asia have an impact on West Asia and emphasized the need for closer military cooperation to maintain security in the Strait of Hormuz, the Sea of Oman, and the northwestern regions of the Indian Ocean.

The commander then praised Oman for its sensible foreign policy toward the Yemen issue, emphasizing that more work must be done to establish a fair peace and safeguard Yemen’s territorial integrity.

Pakistan: Prime Minister’s UN trip ends without big meetings

According to Dawn, a leading English newspaper from Pakistan, after the culmination of his five-day visit to the UN headquarters in New York, interim Prime Minister Anwaarul Haq Kakar headed to London on Saturday, amid speculations that he might have a ‘secret rendezvous’ with PML-N Supremo Nawaz Sharif in the British capital.

At a news conference on Friday evening in New York, Kakar indicated that he was returning home to work with the Election Commission and let the new government take charge of long-term relations, such as negotiating new terms with the IMF.

He did not respond when asked about a possible meeting with Nawaz Sharif. In response to a question about Sharif’s return to Pakistan in October, he said the former premier would be treated under the laws of Pakistan.

Kakar also did not respond to a question if he would visit Saudi Arabia on his way back to Islamabad.

Official sources said Kakar stopped over in Paris on his way to New York and visited the Eiffel Tower with his family. He also spent some quiet time with his family and friends in New York and was seen dining at a Turkish restaurant on Thursday night.

He did have a busy official schedule though, meeting global leaders. The list included Turkish President Recep Erdogan as well, but the meeting did not take place for some reason. He also did not have a separate meeting with the official US delegation.

According to the interim premier, he met business bodies in the US that showed interest in the economic revival plans of Pakistan through privatization and the Special Investment Facilitation Council.

The visit by an interim ruler was supposed to be a low-key affair but assumed greater importance when Canada publicly accused India of killing a Sikh leader on its soil.

Kakar responded promptly to the developing situation, terming it “a first-of-its-kind event after World War I”.

“An Asian country staging a murder on Canadian soil! Its impacts are felt across the Western countries who now realise how India is persecuting its minorities,” he said.

When a journalist objected to his using “genocide’ to describe the persecution of minorities in India, he said, “Genocide is a suitable word, not to call it a genocide will be a crime.”

“…no other word can describe what the Kashmiris are facing. While they are being killed and raped, I cannot sit here and wonder if the word genocide may hurt someone’s feelings.”

He called for the formation of an international alliance to keep in check India’s “rough behaviour” including the attacks it sponsored inside Pakistan.

Kakar said, he had a detailed meeting with IMF officials at the UN headquarters. “The IMF was very appreciative of the interim government’s steps over illegal trade of dollars,” he said, adding, “IMF did not demand anything, rather the caretaker government was giving them confidence and [it] would abide by the agreements.”

Shedding light on Pakistan-US relations, Kakar said Pakistan had an exclusive identity and it should be seen through “regional or extra-regional prisms.”

 

Tattered Western Order

The great power competition between the United States and China is in full swing. Both the countries are embroiled in major issues of international affairs, and none of the international issues remains immune to their influence. 

Trade war, ideational war, and forging alliances are new forms of strategies crafted by Washington and Beijing. Arguably, the world no longer solely is dominated by the West materially and ideationally. The material and ideational decline by and large is contributing to enfeebling the Western hegemony.

The democratic crises in the West and the rise of China in terms of economy, becoming the world’s largest export market, and rapid rise in technology caused a great deal of consternation for the West. The deeply embedded crisis in the Western-led liberal order, ostensibly, leaves a vacuum for China.

The old Western-led liberal order looks more troubled today than at any time since the 1930s. 

Over a decade, Western free societies endured polarization, corruption, populism, inequality, and illiberal threats to the rule of law. The former US president Donald Trump's rhetoric of “America First” was not only symptomatic of attacks on liberal internationalism but also challenged US exceptionalism.

An exclusionary approach of Trump created a deep rift in international politics. The US exit from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and threat of the World Health Organization (WHO) astonished many experts. 

Joseph Nye accurately assessed Trump’s self-destructive approach and argues “I am not worried by the rise of China I am more worried by the rise of Trump” His populism, reactionary nationalism, an assault on the rule of law and openness of US society badly tarnished the American image.

Anne-Marie Slaughter states “Four years of erratic, personality-driven leadership in the United States under President Donald Trump have left the liberal order in tatters”. 

To improve the tarnished image of the US, the incumbent president Joe Biden promised to “rebuild the nation, revitalizing our democracy, and winning the future for America”.

In competition with China, the US must rebuild the social purpose of liberal democracy at home and improve the damaged image of liberal democracy abroad. The work appears to be a daunting task for the Biden administration to improve its triple crises, crisis of democracy, crisis of leadership, and crisis of multilateralism. 

The US is extremely likely to weaponize ideology in its strategic rivalry vis-à-vis China. The battle of democracy vs. autocracy will gain further momentum. Biden advises his countrymen “I predict to you your children or grandchildren are going to be doing their doctoral thesis on the issue of who succeeded, autocracy or democracy, because that is what is at stake”.

The relative rise of China in terms of economy and changing distribution of global wealth in parity between the West and East would go in favour of the East in the coming decades. The diffusion of power and transfer of global wealth will make the hegemonic decline of the West irreversible. 

The Chinese vision, a community of shared future for mankind first emerged in 2011 as a rhetorical slogan in Chinese diplomacy gained content and substance. The phrase in October 2017 after the 19th National Congress was incorporated into the Constitution of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and subsequently into the Chinese Constitution in March 2018.  

A community of shared future for mankind is aimed at building an inclusive, open, clean and beautiful world contributing to lasting peace, common prosperity and universal security, providing instructive answers to addressing the fragmentation and turbulence in international politics. China has actively advocated the phrase in public diplomacy. The Chinese vision was accepted in different UN resolutions as far as the peace and security of the world are concerned.

To be fair, the Chinese vision would confront innumerable challenges in a politically divided world community. Nadège Rolland terms the Chinese vision “looks more like a list of what Beijing advocates for its own needs, security, and position than an innovative contribution for the future of the world”.

Meanwhile, China initiated the Global Civilizational Initiative GCI. The initiative is believed to have been promoting diversity, plurality and dignity among nations challenging the idea's imposition and discouraging the exploitation of communities and resources that will prove instrumental for diversity, mutual understanding, and the world's economic growth.

China under GCI is trying to undermine Western democracy which is coupled with populism, polarization, racism and xenophobia. The contemporary world is going through tremendous changes, power is shifting from the West to the East. 

The Western dominance in terms of material and ideational seems to be declining. The Saudi-Iran détente brokered by China was a momentous occasion in Middle Eastern politics that caused a huge setback to the US interest. The inclusion of Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iran Egypt, Ethiopia and Argentina in BRICS would cement China’s ideational, and material strength vis-à-vis the US. 

The prevailing battle of democracy vs. autocracy will further accelerate. The United States promotes Quadrilateral Security Dialogue Quad comprised the democratic countries like the US, India, Japan and Australia in a bid to contain China.

The Ukraine crisis has brought China and Russia closer together. The US domestically and internationally faces dual challenges in the projection of democracy. Domestic crises such as populism, racism, and xenophobia pose severe threats to democracy. In the international arena, China and Russia are causing significant obstacles in the advancement of US democracy.     

 

Israel must be brought back to its original size

A little ago I have posted almost the entire text of speech of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the United Nations. He claimed, “Israel is on the verge of creating a peace with Saudi Arabia that could transform the Middle East as long as Iran’s nuclear threat is eliminated”.

Netanyahu showed two maps of Israel so that the audience could better understand the historic transformation that was about to occur.  He first showed a map from 1948, a tiny country.

Then he showed a modern map and talked about normalization of Israeli’s ties with four of its Arab neighbors under the US-backed Abraham Accords and drew a circle around those countries.

I am sure, many Muslim countries would immediately recognize Israel, if Saudi Arab normalizes its relations with Israel. However, I request all my readers to read my blog titled “Israel must be brought back to its original size” written as back as December 01, 2012, Following are the excerpts.

I wrote this blog after Israel announced to build 3,000 new settlement homes on occupied land, a slap on the face of international community that has just recognized Palestine State, accepted the philosophy of two sovereign states, Israel and Palestine. The announcement once again proved that Israel is a usurper.

I wrote, “If the international community, particularly United States wants Palestinians to behave diligently, they must asked Israel to stop construction of settlements on occupied land and also bring Israel back to its original boundaries demarcated at the time of creation of a state for the Jews”.

A cautioned, “Israel's moves serves as a harsh reminder to Palestinians that while they now have a state on paper, most of it remains very much under Israeli control, this is a doomsday scenario”.

Israel's decision also embarrassed the United States, which was among just nine countries in the 193-member General Assembly to vote against accepting Palestine as a non-member observer state.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland criticized the Israeli announcement. "These actions are counterproductive and make it harder to resume direct negotiations or achieve a two-state solution," she said.

It may be recalled that the successive US administrations have pressured Israel not to build E-1 because it would effectively cut off east Jerusalem from the West Bank, and split the northern part of the territory from the southern part. E-1 will be the death of the two-state solution.

It is on record that Tzipi Livni, Israel's former foreign minister and chief negotiator with the Palestinians warned, "The decision to build thousands of housing units as punishment to the Palestinians only punishes Israel ... (and) only isolates Israel further."

Even at that time Netanyahu was blamed for defying the whole international community and insisting on destroying the two-state solution.

 

The UN endorsed a Palestinian state in territories Israel captured in 1967, but Netanyahu refused to use the 1967 lines as a starting point. The Palestinian demand for a settlement freeze ahead of negotiations still stands.

On the Israeli side, compromise on settlements seemed unlikely as Netanyahu was seeking re-election at the helm of a Likud party had turned more hawkish and in an electoral alliance with an ultra-nationalist pro-settler party.