Wednesday, 28 August 2024

Indian dockworkers’ strike averted

The latest showdown between dockworkers in India and their employers appears to be ending without any significant disruptions.

Port employees’ unions in India agreed to a new five-year wage deal with government officials, averting a planned nationwide strike scheduled to start Wednesday, Bloomberg’s Rajesh Kumar Singh and Weilun Soon report.

The new deal halts a walkout that could have involved nearly 20,000 workers and brought widespread disruption to cargo operations at some of the nation’s busiest ports.

Unions at India’s 12 major state-run ports have been negotiating with the government since 2021 to try to increase pay.

Under the newly agreed terms, unions accepted an 8.5% wage increase over five years, backdated to January 01, 2022, said Narendra Rao, a working committee member of the Centre of Indian Trade Unions.

P.M. Mohammed Haneef, president at All India Port and Dock Workers’ Federation, said management has agreed to conclude the proceedings of the wage negotiations panel within 15 days.

Earlier this year, labor disruptions at Germany’s biggest ports threatened to worsen shipping delays, and a French union called a series of strikes to protest government pension reforms, potentially slowing grain export terminals.

In March, Finland’s ports and rail networks faced strikes over labor market reforms.

The following month, port workers in Chile staged protests that disrupted the loading and unloading of ships in one of the biggest exporters of raw materials from copper and lithium to pulp and fruit.

Perhaps the biggest potential problem with maritime labor is unfolding in the United States, where talks between East and Gulf Coast dockworkers and their employers are at a stalemate, a little over a month before the current contract expires September 30, 2024.

 

Bangladesh Floods: Natural Calamity or Manmade Disaster

The recent floods in Bangladesh have underscored the complex and often contentious nature of water management in South Asia. As the region faces increasing challenges from climate change and population growth, the need for cooperation and mutual respect between nations has never been more urgent. The disaster serves as a wake-up call, highlighting the critical importance of regional collaboration in managing shared resources and ensuring the well-being of all people in the region.

Bangladesh, frequently affected by natural calamities, is now enduring one of the worst floods in recent memory. While floods are common in this region, the current catastrophe is not solely attributable to nature’s wrath. Instead, it is being increasingly linked to the actions of neighboring India.

The recent and abrupt release of water from the Dumbur Dam in India’s Tripura State, located upstream of the Gumti River, has sparked unprecedented flooding in Bangladesh’s eastern border districts. This incident has intensified long-standing tensions between the two countries, with Bangladesh accusing India of negligence and poor management of their shared water resources.

The flood’s impact has been nothing short of catastrophic. More than three million people have been affected, with vast areas of farmland, homes, and infrastructure swallowed by the surging waters. The districts of Feni, Parshuram, Fulgazi, and Chhagalnaiya have suffered the most, as the Chhota Feni River, along with the Muhuri, Silonia, and Kahua rivers, swelled beyond control.

Residents of these regions are in shock, noting that such severe flooding has not been witnessed in over three decades. The immediate trigger for this disaster, as widely believed in Bangladesh, was India’s decision to release water from the Dumbur Dam.

Indian authorities, however, have pointed to heavy rainfall in the Gumti River’s catchment areas as the primary reason for the dam’s release. Nonetheless, Bangladeshi officials and local media remain adamant that the scale of the flooding could have been mitigated with better management and communication from the Indian side.

In response to the growing accusations, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has defended its actions, stating that the water release from the Dumbur Dam was an automatic response to the heavy inflow caused by intense rainfall.

According to the MEA, real-time flood data was shared with Bangladesh until the floods disrupted communication channels. Indian officials maintain that the crisis was an unavoidable consequence of natural forces and that they are not to blame for the resulting devastation.

Despite these explanations, Bangladesh remains skeptical. Officials in Dhaka argue that India’s handling of the dam and the subsequent communication breakdown significantly worsened the situation. They believe that India could have taken additional steps to minimize the impact of the water release, including better coordination with Bangladeshi authorities and ensuring contingency plans were in place for such emergencies.

The fact that communication between the two countries failed at a critical moment has raised alarm bells in Dhaka. This disruption has exposed serious flaws in the existing bilateral protocols, particularly in how emergency communications are managed. Whether due to inadequate preparedness or a lack of priority given to emergency communication, this failure has clearly exacerbated the disaster.

The flood crisis is not merely an environmental catastrophe; it carries significant political and diplomatic repercussions as well. The incident has strained the already fragile relations between India and Bangladesh, with public opinion in Bangladesh increasingly viewing India as an unreliable and negligent neighbor. This growing sentiment could have lasting effects on bilateral relations, particularly in areas such as water-sharing agreements, border management, and regional cooperation.

For years, Bangladesh has advocated for fair and equitable water-sharing agreements with India, given its reliance on trans-boundary rivers like the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Teesta. The recent floods have reignited these concerns, with calls growing louder for a more transparent and accountable system for managing shared water resources.

In the wake of this disaster, there is a strong push within Bangladesh for a reevaluation of its water-sharing arrangements with India. Many are demanding stricter regulations and more effective safeguards to prevent a recurrence of such incidents. Additionally, there is increasing support for greater international involvement in overseeing the management of these critical resources, considering the potential for cross-border disputes.

While the political and diplomatic fallout is significant, the human toll of the floods is devastating. Millions of people have been displaced, with many losing their homes, livelihoods, and, tragically, loved ones. The affected regions are now facing severe shortages of food, clean water, and medical supplies, as relief efforts struggle to address the magnitude of the disaster.

The floods have also deepened existing vulnerabilities in Bangladesh’s rural areas, where poverty and inadequate infrastructure make communities particularly susceptible to natural disasters. The long-term impact of the floods will likely be felt for years, as Bangladesh undertakes the arduous task of rebuilding and recovering from this calamity.

As Bangladesh contends with the aftermath of the floods, it is evident that the country must bolster its disaster preparedness and resilience. This involves not only improving infrastructure and early warning systems but also ensuring that neighboring countries are held accountable for actions that have cross-border consequences.

Bangladesh must continue to assert its rights and interests in regional discussions, particularly concerning water management and disaster response. For India, this incident should serve as a critical reminder of the importance of maintaining transparent and reliable relationships with its neighbors. Effective communication, collaboration, and a genuine commitment to resolving shared challenges are essential to preventing similar disasters in the future.

 

Tuesday, 27 August 2024

Gaza: Prolonged and Inconclusive war

Israeli army officials have become increasingly exasperated with the prolonged and inconclusive war against Gaza over last eleven months. Their frustration is being compounded due to the mounting casualties of Israeli soldiers. 

The Gaza war may ultimately come to an end but the complicity of Western countries in Israel’s carnage in the Palestinian territory will never slide into oblivion.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched the war on Gaza on October 07, 2023 after Hamas carried out the Al-Aqsa Storm, a surprise military operation in southern Israel. More than 1,100 people were killed during the operation and about 250 others were taken captive. 

Netanyahu has repeatedly vowed to continue the war until achieving “total victory” over Hamas and “destroying” the Palestinian resistance movement. 

Despite receiving large amounts of weapons from Western countries, in particular the United States, the Netanyahu regime has failed to make good on its promise.  

Israel’s failures on the Gaza battlefield once again came to the fore after an army general acknowledged the regime’s inability to defeat Hamas. 

“For almost a year now, we have not been able to fully defeat even our smallest enemy,” Major General Israel Ziv told Israel’s Maariv news site.

Ziv, who previously headed the Israeli military’s operations directorate, added that there are still 20,000 Hamas fighters regrouping in Gaza.”

He admitted that Israel will not be able to get involved in a broad war with Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, citing the regime’s inability to defeat Hamas. 

“Israel certainly cannot take on the task of fighting everyone when it can’t even close the simplest front,” he said.

Ziv’s statements echo a speech delivered by war minister Yoav Gallant earlier this month. 

Speaking during a closed-door hearing before a Knesset committee on August 12, Gallant dismissed Netanyahu’s “total victory” slogan as “nonsense” and “gibberish”.  

Gallant also said Netanyahu’s “total victory” goal amounts to a “beating of war drums” not backed up by actions.

On June 19, the Israeli military spokesman also disputed Netanyahu’s war aim of defeating Hamas. 

“The idea that it is possible to destroy Hamas, to make Hamas vanish — that is throwing sand in the eyes of the public,” Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari told Israel’s Channel 13. He added, “Hamas is an idea, deeply rooted in the hearts of the residents of Gaza”.

Netanyahu has been accused of derailing talks aimed at ending the Gaza war to keep himself in power. The premier believes that a permanent state of war will help him avoid accountability for failing to prevent the Al-Aqsa Storm. However, he remains under fire for failing to secure the release of the remaining captives in Gaza.

More than 100 of those who were taken captive on October 07 were freed following a swap deal with Hamas in November last year. Dozens still remain in Gaza. Dozens of others have lost their lives during Israeli strikes on the territory. 

Besides, the Gaza war has taken a heavy toll on the Israeli military which has put immense pressure on Netanyahu.  

According to Israeli media, more than 700 Israeli troops have died since October 07.

Despite Israel’s claims of dismantling Hamas, the group’s attacks still claim the lives of the regime’s soldiers on the battlefield. 

The Israeli army continues to strike residential buildings, schools and hospitals in Gaza under the pretext of targeting Hamas fighters in a bid to distract attention away from its failures. 

About 40,500 Palestinians including more than 16,000 children have been killed in Gaza since the start of the Gaza onslaught. 

Unfortunately, the United States and some of its Western allies continue to feed Israel’s war machine despite the rising civilian death toll. 

 

Media hype to jack up oil price

We are of the view that western media plays a role in keeping oil prices high to facilitate the fund managers to make quick buck. Media uses expressions like “fall in US strategic reserves”, “turmoil in Middle East and North Africa”, “imposition of sanctions on Russia”, “turmoil in Nigeria”, “Houthis attack oil tanker” and the latest is “oil fields shutdown in Libya”.

Oil prices slipped on Tuesday after rebounding more than 7% over the previous three sessions on supply concerns prompted by fears of widening Middle East conflict and a potential shutdown of most of Libya's oil fields.

After the jump in oil prices on the back of geopolitical risk in the Middle East and a production halt in Libya, market participants are now holding back to assess further developments.

The 7% rise in Brent and 7.6% rise in WTI in the previous three sessions bucked a broader downtrend since hitting its 2024 peak of US$91.17 in April. The downturn was driven by concern over global crude demand, particularly from China and through the summer, which is typically a peak demand period.

On Monday, authorities in the Libya's east, where most of its oilfields are located threatened to halting production and exports, after a flare-up in tensions over leadership of the country's central bank. Those fields are responsible for almost all the country's 1.17 million barrels per day of crude output.

The jump in Brent has primarily been driven by short-term supply worries at the same time the weak demand outlook, especially for diesel, has driven down refinery margins across the world, said Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank.

"It highlights an oil market that, without a prolonged Libyan supply disruption, may struggle to move much higher, with the mid-80s potentially providing a ceiling for now," Hansen added.

There was no confirmation from the internationally recognized government in Tripoli or from National Oil Corp (NOC), which controls the country's oil resources.

Oil has also been supported by an escalation in conflict between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah, with a major exchange of missiles after the killing of a senior Hezbollah commander last month.

"Markets remain on edge as skirmishes between Israel and Hezbollah intensify," ANZ analysts said in a note

A top US general said on Monday that the danger of a broader war had eased somewhat but that an Iran strike on Israel remained a risk.

Hezbollah Hybrid War Capabilities

Lebanon’s Hezbollah has kept Israel on its toes since launching a barrage of missiles and drones that targeted multiple sites including a major military intelligence base near Tel Aviv at the weekend.

Reports suggest that the Hezbollah attack dubbed Arbaeen Operation caused significant damage in Israel. The Benjamin Netanyahu regime has been accused of trying to sweep the losses and casualties under the rug.

Hezbollah fired more than 300 Katyusha rockets and a large number of drones at Israel on Sunday morning. That was an initial response to the Israeli assassination of its senior military commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut on July 30.

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said in a speech on Sunday evening that the main focus of the attack was the Glilot base north of Tel Aviv around 100 kilometers from Lebanon’s border. The facility is home to the Mossad intelligence service and the military intelligence group Unit 8200.

Nasrallah stressed that the attack struck deep into Israel in contrast to the resistance movement’s previous attacks, which largely hit northern Israel and the occupied Golan Heights.

The Arbaeen Operation dealt a devastating and crushing blow to Israel’s security and intelligence systems.

This is because Israel had been on high alert since killing Shukr and awaiting a retaliatory attack from Hezbollah. But despite taking advantage of Western satellite technology, the Netanyahu regime failed to deter the Hezbollah strike.  

Facts on the ground indicate that the Arbaeen Operation substantially eroded Israel’s deterrent power and widened gaps within the Israeli establishment which is still reeling from the shock of a surprise military operation (Al-Aqsa Storm) carried out by Hamas on October 07.

The Al-Aqsa Storm highlighted Israel’s military and intelligence failures and the Arbaeen Operation reminded the regime that it will have to brace for more tremendous shocks, this is just the tip of the iceberg. 

Israeli media have confirmed that an Israeli soldier was killed and two others were wounded on a Dvora-class patrol boat off the northern coast of occupied Palestine near Nahariya.

However, Israel claims they were hit by shrapnel from an Iron Dome interceptor missile as the regime tries to downplay the Hezbollah attack. 

Israel and Hezbollah have been trading fire since the day after the start of the Gaza war on October 07. 

Over the past months, Israel has threatened to launch an all-out war against Hezbollah if it does not stop strikes against the regime. 

Hezbollah has stressed that it will not stop its attacks as long as the Netanyahu regime continues the Gaza war which has so far claimed the lives of about 40,500 Palestinians. 

Although, Hezbollah did not use its strategic weapons during the Arbaeen Operation, Israel suffered a painful blow. 

Hence, in case of a full-blown conflict, the regime would have to wait for an apocalyptic scenario. 

Presently, Hezbollah is not only capable of hitting Israeli military sites on the ground but also its vessels which shows the Lebanese movement’s capability to wage a hybrid war against the regime. 

Israel failed to continue the 2006 war against Hezbollah for more than 34 days. The resistance movement’s military capabilities are currently incomparable with that year. 

Hezbollah is underpinned by its sophisticated arsenal and has increased its stockpile of missiles from 14,000 in 2006 to about 150,000. The movement has also developed precision-guided missiles and its drone programs. 

The number of Hezbollah fighters who are ready to join a possible war against Israel has exceeded 100,000, according to the Hezbollah secretary general. 

Israel is well aware of the military capabilities of Hezbollah. As a result, it only threatens the movement with a direct war as part of its psychological warfare. 
 

 

Monday, 26 August 2024

US supporting Israel in genocide in Gaza

It has been reiterated that Israel is busy in genocide in Gaza and killed over 40,000 people, mostly children and women since October 07, 2023. United States, instead of stopping unabated killing, has been supplying tons of lethal weapons to Israel. Now it is bringing in warships in the Middle East to protect Israel. It looks completely meaningless that US wants truce without asking Israel to stop the genocide.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered two American carrier strike groups to remain in the Middle East on Sunday after intense cross-border fire between Israel and Hezbollah overnight.

The decision was detailed in a Pentagon readout of Austin's call with his Israeli counterpart, Yoav Gallant.

During the conversation, Austin discussed "Israeli actions to defend against attacks by Lebanese Hezbollah" and reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself.

He also emphasized the United States' "ironclad resolve" to support Israel’s defense against threats from Iran and its regional partners and proxies, according to Pentagon spokesperson Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder.

"As part of that support, the Secretary has ordered the presence of two Carrier Strike Groups to remain in the region.

The Secretary also expressed support for completing negotiations on a cease-fire and hostage-release deal," Ryder said in a statement. He used a variant spelling for "Hezbollah."

The US had previously acknowledged the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Theodore Roosevelt Carrier Strike Groups to the region.

As reported by Reuters, on Sunday, Lebanese Hezbollah announced that it had launched hundreds of rockets and drones deep into Israel overnight Saturday as part of the “first phase” of its response to Tel Aviv's assassination of senior commander Fouad Shukr late last month.

This announcement came shortly after the Israeli army carried out large-scale airstrikes in southern Lebanon, claiming the strikes were aimed at preventing Hezbollah from launching an attack.

 


Uncertainties plague oil market

According to the Seatrade Maritime News, energy analysts point to a range of uncertainties that could influence oil demand, supply and price in the months ahead.

Unexpectedly weak oil demand in China so far this year is one of the factors that OPEC Plus members will be considering when they meet at the next Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee at the beginning of October.

But there are a number of other factors which could affect their decision on whether or not to ease the 2.2 million barrels a day (bpd) of production cuts that are currently in place.

These cuts were originally agreed in 2020 when COVID struck and oil demand fell sharply. These were steadily eased as the pandemic passed but restrictions on output were introduced again in April 2023, which will be the subject of discussion at the October meeting.

Softer Chinese demand is mirrored elsewhere as geopolitical tensions and slower growth affect many regions. Global oil demand growth has slowed down over recent quarters even as some OPEC Plus members, notably Russia, exceed OPEC Plus output quotas.

Shipbroker Gibson notes that OPEC Plus recently cut oil demand growth expectations to 2.11 million bpd this year, but so far this increase has not materialized.

Further downward revisions to projections may be required and the issue casts doubt on the cartel’s forecast of a 1.78 million bpd demand increase in 2025.

The broker notes that the International Energy Agency has a more moderate demand growth forecast of 0.95 million bpd for next year.

Meanwhile, Poten notes that more non-OPEC production has come on stream since the pandemic, with the United States, Canada, Guyana, and Brazil increasing output and eating into OPEC’s share.

More non-OPEC crude will hit the market in 2025, as the International Energy Agency forecasts that supply is likely to rise by 1.75 million bpd, significantly more than likely demand growth of 1.0 million bpd.

Owners of smaller tankers will be closely watching developments in these non-OPEC countries where output is rising.

For VLCC owners, what happens in China is the most important factor because of the long-haul nature of the trade.

But the strategy that OPEC Plus members adopt at the October meeting is a key factor too.

If the cartel members decide to ease the present production restrictions, the process will take place gradually over time.

Poten observed, “If they start to roll back their production cuts, it will be very slow and in small increments, so as not to flood the market and undermine oil prices.”