An overview of the current global political situation...

An overview of the current global political situation, the instability that it is creating, and the reformation of the global world order.

In recent years, the world has witnessed a growing trend of political instability, fuelled by a range of factors such as rising inequality, growing authoritarianism, and escalating geopolitical tensions. This instability is creating significant challenges for the global community, as it threatens to undermine the stability of the current global order and exacerbate global issues like climate change and international economic growth.

One of the key drivers of political instability is the rise of authoritarianism in countries around the world. From Russia and China to Turkey and Egypt, and to USA and Canada, authoritarian regimes are increasingly using their power to suppress opposition and limit civil liberties. This has created a climate of fear and uncertainty, as citizens in these countries are often unsure of their rights and the future of their democracy.

Another factor contributing to global instability is the growing economic inequality within and between countries. As the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen, many people are feeling left behind and are turning to populism and liberalism in response. This has led to the rise of political movements and parties that prioritize national interests over global cooperation, and which often espouse xenophobic or discriminatory views.

At the same time, the world is facing a growing number of geopolitical tensions, which are threatening to destabilize global politics. These include the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, tensions between China and the United States over trade and territorial disputes, and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

The conflict in the Middle East is a complex and multifaceted issue that has been ongoing for several decades. There are several factors that have contributed to the conflict, including historical grievances, ethnic and religious differences, geopolitical tensions, and struggles for power and control.

One of the key factors contributing to the conflict in the Middle East is the historical legacy of colonialism and imperialism in the region. During the 19th and early 20th centuries, many countries in the Middle East were colonized by European powers, which often drew arbitrary borders and imposed their own political and economic systems on the region. This created a legacy of resentment and mistrust that continues to fuel conflicts in the region.

Another factor contributing to the conflict in the Middle East is the complex mix of ethnic and religious differences that exist in the region. The Middle East is home to a diverse range of ethnic and religious groups, including Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Jews, Christians, and Muslims. These groups have different languages, cultural practices, and historical grievances, which can create tensions and conflict.

Geopolitical tensions have also contributed to the conflict in the Middle East. The region is home to some of the world's most important strategic resources, including oil and gas reserves. As a result, many powerful countries, including the United States, Russia, and China, have sought to exert their influence in the region, often through support for various regional actors and proxy conflicts. Many countries in the region have experienced political instability, civil war, and violent conflict, as various groups seek to gain or maintain control over territory and resources.

The ongoing conflict in the Middle East has had a significant impact on the region and the world as a whole. It has led to significant loss of life and displacement of people, as well as political and economic instability. It has also fuelled the rise of extremist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS, which have carried out acts of terrorism and violence in the region and around the world.

To address the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, there is a need for a comprehensive and coordinated approach that addresses the root causes of the conflict. This will require addressing historical grievances, promoting greater understanding and respect between different ethnic and religious groups, and finding ways to promote economic development and political stability in the region. It will also require greater cooperation between regional and global actors, to promote peace and stability and address the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the region.

The rise of these political and economic pressures is causing significant disruptions to the global order, which is leading to the need for a reformation of the global world order. This is not an easy task, as it requires addressing the underlying causes of instability and creating a new framework for cooperation that can help to address these challenges.

One of the key challenges that must be addressed in the reformation of the global world order is the need to balance national interests with global cooperation. As countries become increasingly focused on their own domestic issues, it is becoming more difficult to build consensus and cooperation on issues that affect the world as a whole. This requires a new approach to global governance, one that prioritizes collaboration with competition and recognizes the interconnectedness of global issues like climate change, economic growth, and security.

Another challenge that must be addressed is the need to build a more inclusive and equitable global understanding. This requires addressing the root causes of economic inequality, including the unequal distribution of resources and access to education and healthcare. It also requires addressing the systemic discrimination and prejudice that exists in many societies, including racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination.

The reformation of the global world order must also address the need for a more effective system of international governance. This includes the need for more effective global institutions, such as the United Nations, to help coordinate international efforts on issues such as climate change, economic growth, and security. It also requires addressing the need for better regulation of global trade and financial systems, to ensure that these systems are fair and equitable for all.

To achieve this, people across the world must work to build societies that are based on the principles of equality, justice, and mutual respect. This requires building an effective global dialogue, which can help to coordinate international efforts on key issues and promote global cooperation.

To address these challenges, there is a need for a reformation of the global world order that can balance national interests with global cooperation, promote inclusivity and equity, and build more effective institutions. This will require a new approach to global governance, one that prioritizes collaboration over competition and recognizes the interconnectedness of global issues.

Ultimately, achieving this vision will require a shared sense of universal responsibility, one that recognizes our interconnectedness as a world community and works together to address the challenges we face. While the road ahead will not be easy, by working together, we can build a more stable, equitable, and just global order that can meet the challenges of the 21st and 22^nd centuries.

 

Emerging Khalistan: A Potential Danger to Free Societies and Western Countries

Emerging Khalistan: A Potential Danger to Free Societies and Western Countries

Over the past four years, the resurgence of the Khalistan movement, which is an idea that advocates for an independent Sikh state through the partition of the Republic of India, has gained unforeseen traction in certain Sikh diaspora communities across Western countries. While the movement itself is not new, its re-emergence in free societies like Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and more recently in Australia and New Zealand poses political and social challenges that extend beyond its historical and regional roots. This raises critical questions about national security, social cohesion, and the abuse of democratic freedoms.

The Background of the Khalistan Movement

The Khalistan movement, seeking to establish a separate Sikh state originated in the Punjab region of India during the 20th century, especially the pre and post partition periods of 1947 when Greater India was partitioned by the British and their lackeys into Pakistan and India.

Although rooted in cultural and religious identity, the demand for Khalistan as a separate and independent state took a violent turn during the 1980s. The period was marked by militant uprisings, terrorism, the very foolish Operation Blue Star attack on the Golden Temple in 1984, and the subsequent political turmoil. While the Indian state quelled the violent insurgency by the 1990s, the idea of Khalistan persisted, largely among a segment of the Sikh diaspora, both in India as well as in foreign countries, specially the UK and Canada.

For decades, this movement remained a dormant ideological pursuit. However, with the advent of digital platforms and the growing influence of diaspora groups in Western democracies, Khalistan advocates have found new arenas to propagate their message, often framing it as a fight for "human rights" and "self-determination."

Khalistan proponents abuse the freedom of expression in Western countries to gain political traction. Western societies, with their strong protections for freedom of speech, assembly, and expression, have inadvertently provided fertile ground for Khalistan ideologues. These militant individuals often exploit these liberties to spread divisive narratives under the pretext of activism. The main reasons for the increased activities of these groups in the Western nations is due to Diaspora advocacy where second and third-generation Khalistan loving Sikh communities, removed from the realities of Punjab, have started to idealize the concept of Khalistan without fully understanding its historical and socio-political consequences. This advocacy is fuelled by digital propaganda where social media platforms amplify extremist narratives, often through disinformation and inflammatory rhetoric which leads to the exploitation of multiculturalism, where western countries' commitment to diversity and inclusion allows such groups to position themselves as representatives of Sikh identity, despite the fact that the majority of Sikhs worldwide reject Khalistan.

This gives rise to the potential dangers to free societies, and while western democracies pride themselves on safeguarding civil liberties, the misuse of these freedoms by radical elements are creating significant risks where the emergence of the current Khalistan movement’s activities poses potential dangers.

The Khalistan movement heavily relies on narratives that vilify Indian institutions and, by extension, certain ethnic or religious groups. This rhetoric can foster divisions within multicultural societies, as seen in violent clashes between pro-Khalistan supporters and other community members. The glorification of militancy also risks alienating moderate voices within the Sikh community, further polarizing the diaspora, and leading to the erosion of social cohesion.

The rise of Khalistan propaganda has been linked to incidents of violence and vandalism targeting Indian diplomatic missions and community centres, leading to National Security concerns. With verified reports of fundraising for extremist activities including support for militant organizations, and their connections to criminal activities like illicit drug trade and human trafficking, have highlighted the activities of these groups, to be conduits for terrorism and organized criminal activities. Intelligence agencies in India, as well as in the UK and Canada have raised concerns about individuals radicalized in western countries planning or supporting violent acts in India, and have strained international relations between countries, as can be seen in the current situation between Canada and India.

The misuse of democratic freedoms to promote a separatist agenda poses a paradox for free societies, and undermines democratic principles. While supporting human rights is a cornerstone of democracy, the allowing of unchecked hate speech, disinformation, and incitement for violence, are undermining the very values these societies uphold. The challenge lies in distinguishing between legitimate advocacy and extremist propaganda without eroding constitutional freedoms.

The unchecked activities of the Khalistan movement have had a negative effect in the Western countries. In 2023, tensions flared between the Indian and Canadian governments after allegations surfaced about foreign interference linked to pro-Khalistan activities. Vandalism at Hindu temples and calls for violence against Indian officials raised alarm about the growing radicalization in some Sikh diaspora segments in Canada. The Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has chosen to not only ignore these dangers to Canadian society, but has staked his political career on supporting the Khalistan movement. This has led to his drop-in popularity among the Canadian voters and has encouraged the Khalistan movement proponents to now start claiming that they are the rightful owners of Canada, and that the white people should go back to Europe and UK. Sounds hilarious, but it is not. With these outlandish claims, the leaders of the Khalistan movement are planting the seeds of a future revolt of their supporters against the elected Government of Canada.

In the United Kingdom, protests outside the Indian High Commission in London, that included the vandalism of the Indian flag, have highlighted the disruptive potential of Khalistan supporters in the UK. The British authorities have expressed concern over the movement's extremist agenda, but have failed to take any action. Maybe the UK politicians hope that the growing violent activities of the Khalistan will not affect their society. However, in reality, it will definitely bring about deep divisions in their society that will lead to increased violence on the streets of that country.

In the United States, the vandalism of the Indian consulate in San Francisco has sparked a debate about whether sufficient measures are in place to curb extremist activity in America. Law enforcement agencies there have warned of online radicalization efforts targeting younger members of the Sikh diaspora.

The recent activities by the leaders of the Khalistan movement in Australia and New Zealand, where they held a “referendum” of their supporters for creating a Khalistan state in India should have been an eye-opener for the governments of these countries. The public calls by the Khalistan leaders to “Kill Modi”, a call to assassinate the democratically elected Prime Minister of India, have not been prosecuted by the governments of Australia and New Zealand, which is a clear indication that these, mostly leftist–liberal governments, are encouraging and maybe even supporting the idea of Khalistan, in the hope to destabilize the nation of India.

It is crucial to emphasize that the Khalistan movement represents a fringe ideology and is rejected by the mainstream Sikh community. The vast majority of Sikhs worldwide, including those in Punjab and the diaspora, are proud Indians and value their cultural and spiritual identity within the framework of a unified India. Sikhism, a faith rooted in principles of equality, service, and communal harmony, is often misrepresented by extremist narratives that use religion as a tool for political agendas. Prominent Sikh leaders and organizations across the world have consistently distanced themselves from the Khalistan movement, highlighting its divisive nature. Moreover, the state of Punjab today enjoys peace and prosperity, a testament to the resilience of its people in overcoming the dark period of militancy.

Unless it is the political geopolitical agenda of the ‘Five Eye’ countries; the USA, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand; to avoid any confrontation with the Khalistan movement and allow it to grow without any challenges in the hope that this will create obstacles for the economic growth of India, they will have to take strong steps to find a balance between protecting free speech and curbing the misuse of these freedoms by extremist elements. While free societies must uphold their commitment to civil liberties, they cannot afford to ignore the potential dangers posed by extremist ideologies that exploit these freedoms.

For their own protection, they will require to be vigilant, commit themselves to community engagement, and act strongly to protect democratic values and social harmony. Western democracies must ensure that their freedoms are not weaponized to propagate hate or disrupt peace within their own societies. The one realistic fact is that Khalistan will not be created in the country that is today the strong and vibrant nation called the Republic of India. However, if the countries of Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand ignore the dangers posed by the Khalistan movement, their own countries will soon face civil war from these very terrorists. The USA, being a country of daily violence through its very nature of a society that freely carries firearms and is willing kill to protect its society, will not face too much danger from Khalistan proponents.

 

Proportionate Response to terrorism, or overkill? - West against Middle-East

On 11^th September 2001, 19 Islamic terrorists divided into four teams carried out a targeted attack against the United States of America that killed 2,977 people immediately and thousands suffered health disorders due to the toxic dust spread from the debris of the attack sites. In retaliation, USA invaded Afghanistan to hunt down the al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, who they had identified as the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. The Afghanistan invasion by the USA and its allies led to other conflicts worldwide and the total fatalities of this 22 years War-on-Terror is estimated by the ‘Costs of War Project’ is over 4.5 million. [Let that number sink into our minds – 4.5 million dead over a period of 22 years].

Not satisfied with the invasion of Afghanistan, the USA, under then President George W. Bush began actively motivating their leadership and their allies for a military intervention in Iraq in late 2001. In the lead-up to the invasion, the United States and the United Kingdom falsely claimed that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction, covertly supporting al-Qaeda and that he presented a threat to his neighbours and to the world community. Throughout the years of 2001 to 2003, the Bush Administration worked to build a case for invading Iraq, and the Iraq War officially began on 20 March 2003, when the US, joined by the United Kingdom, Australia, and Poland, launched a "shock and awe" bombing campaign. Shortly following the bombing campaign, US-led forces launched a ground invasion of Iraq.

Shortly after the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, the U.S. Defence Intelligence Agency, and the British M.I6 publicly discredited the evidence related to the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (which never existed) as well as Iraq’s alleged links to al-Qaeda. At this point George W. Bush and his co-conspirator Tony Blair (the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) shifted to secondary rationales for the war, such as Saddam Hussein’s human rights record, and as per GW Bush, the holy crusade of the West to promote democracy in Iraq. There is no doubt that the vast reserves of highly pure crude oil did set the stage for the Western armies’ invasion of Iraq, greatly increasing the incentives to take over Iraq by any means possible. In this political greed for controlling the oil reserves in Iraq, the USA lost 4,507 soldiers, the UK lost 179, and other countries that comprised the ‘coalition of the unwilling’ lost 139, bringing the invading forces total to 4.825 lives sacrificed.  On the other side, the Iraqi forces lost 17,690 soldiers, and over 100,000 civilians were killed.

As the world knows, the USA and its allies had to vacate Iraq by 2011; losing men, materials and any semblance of honour, having handed the country of Iraq to a local government supported by Iran. In 2014, with the rise of the Islamic State in that region, the USA sent in 5,000 troops to “assist” the Iraqi government, however the Iraqi parliament voted to have the US military presence removed in 2020.

In an almost identical fashion, the USA vacated Afghanistan in a hurry on 30 August 2021, a withdrawal that was seen across the world in the media. In the early hours of 31 August, the Taliban (whom the US had declared as terrorists in 2001 and had tried hard to defeat for 22 years) marched unopposed into Kabul and declared that Afghanistan was finally free of the invaders.

Coming to the present war of Israel against HAMAS, Hezbollah, the Yemen Houthis and Iran itself.

The war began on 07 October 2023, when Hamas–led terrorists groups launched an attack that breached the Gaza–Israel barrier, attacking Israeli civilian communities and military bases. During this attack 1,139 Israeli and foreign nationals were killed and 251 were taken hostage and kidnapped into Gaza. In retaliation Israel invaded Gaza on 27 October 2023 and to date, their military campaign has killed over 40,000 Palestinians in Gaza. Exchange of strikes between Israel and Lebanese militant group Hezbollah have been occurring along the Israel–Lebanon border and in Syria and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights since 8 October 2023. It is currently the largest escalation of the Hezbollah–Israel conflict to have occurred since the 2006 Lebanon War. Significant escalation in this conflict occurred in Sept 2024 with the Hezbollah being targeted by Israeli air-strikes and targeted assassinations of Hezbollah commanders. More than 1,000 people have been killed in the last two weeks of September in Lebanon and more continue to die as Israel keeps up its assault.

So, the moot question is: How many lives being destroyed can be defined as a “proportionate response” to terrorism? The USA’s war-on-terror killed over six million civilians, the current Israel–Hamas war will claim many thousands more. It is very clear to any geo-political observer that Israel will not stop till it runs out of money or military munitions, or both. Unlike the USA, UK or EU countries that have faced terrorist attacks, Israel is fighting for its very existence as a country and a negotiated peace with terrorists is not on their agenda. The Israeli Prime Minister has been very clear in his recent address to the United Nations. Only the complete surrender of Hamas (and possibly Hezbollah) will bring this conflict to an end, and there might – just might – be a fractured peace.

What lessons can the Govt of India take from the actions of Israel to counter and destroy the terrorist activities that are being constantly financed and promoted by Pakistan. There is no doubt that the funding for Pakistan’s terrorism activities comes from Qatar and to a large extent from the USA. While Qatar wants to impose Islamic influence on Indian continent, the USA wants to destabilize this region. The current forced change of government in Bangladesh is a clear example of the American strategies in the region. Well, our government can no longer afford to be either a neutral observer or respond passively to threats to our unity and democracy.

There is an urgent need for a three-fold strategy to secure our region from these influencers. The first is a precision armed strike on Pakistani Army formations. The second is the targeted assassinations of all Pakistani senior officials who are associated with or have been associated with the Pakistani ISI. The third strategy is to have a squadron of the Indian navy’s missile cruisers patrol the international waters close to Qatar, with a clear diplomatic message to the ruling al-Thani family. “Sponsor terrorism at their own risk.”

However, the above will remain nothing but flights of fancy if the Government of India does not act. The ‘bear-hug’ diplomacy is meaningless if it gives a clear message that India is afraid of conflict, which many observers like me believe to be true. And finally, Government officials, especially from the MEA should stop taking about Pakistan on public forums. It is our Babus who are giving more importance to Pakistani leaders, than the Pakistani people themselves.

So, we must ask this crucial question. 

Is overkill a proportionate response to terrorism?

 

 

 

 

Geopolitics of terrorism and it’s rising threat

October 07, 2023 can be considered as a major turning point in the world of terrorism, when Hamas [Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya] aka the ‘Islamic Resistance Movement’ attacked Israel. For the first few hours Hamas terrorists rampaged through the border territory that separates the Gaza strip from Israel and carried out atrocities against humanity through their targeting of civilians, killing over 1200 and kidnapping 248 in this initial attack. Hamas adheres to an extreme ideology of Islamic terrorism blended with Palestinian nationalism that gives a veneer of legitimacy in the Arab world while being dedicated to the destruction of Israel; and its preferred methods to achieve dominance include rocket attacks, random shootings, kidnappings and suicide bombings. However, since Hamas has not been designated as a terrorist organization by the United Nations, it receives constant funding from Qatar and Iran that allows it to build grassroot support among the Palestinians in Gaza, while constantly upgrading its military capacity.

Qatar has been regularly accused of allowing financers of terrorism and the leaders of terrorist organizations to live and operate freely within their country. According to U.S. Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence recent statement, “There are U.S and internationally designated terrorist financers in Qatar that have not been acted against by Qatari authorities”. Qatar’s response to these allegations are that, ‘Qatar does not consider those organizations to be terrorists’. The reality is that Qatar is the prominent terrorist financer and safe sanctuary provider to Hamas; and today while a devastating war is raging in the Gaza strip, Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh (Political Bureau Chief), Salih al-Aruri (Deputy Chief), and Yahya al-Sinwar (Gaza Political Bureau Chief) are directing the war from the safety and luxury of their Qatar based homes. “Qatari finance” is synonymous with the funding of global terrorism and one of its effects is the current Hamas–Israel war.

The Qatari government, which essentially means the ruling al-Thani family, has financed global terrorism without any oversight or restrictions for years. Besides Iran; which provides funding, weapons, training, coordination, direction, and more to support Hamas terror activities, Qatar is Hamas’s largest political and financial patron. Qatar’s publicly reported annual support to Hamas ranges from $120 million to $480 million depending on the year and information source. These funds benefit Hamas leaders directly through payroll and kickback schemes and indirectly through social services and government operations that help Hamas maintain political control over Gaza. All the while, Qatar’s state-sponsored media channel, Al-Jazeera, spreads antisemitism, hatred towards the western countries, and incitement to violence throughout the Arab world.

Going backwards in time, it was on 15 August 2021, that the Taliban marched into Kabul and took over Afghanistan as the U.S. military and its allies hastily evacuated that country. This victory of the Taliban over the great Western powers was a major morale boost to every terrorist organization across the globe. Regardless of the Doha accord that was brokered by Qatar between the Taliban and USA; the consensus between all terrorist organizations is that the Taliban won a protracted 20-years war against the Western military might and most importantly that the modern military of the western powers could be defeated. In the West, there is a growing consensus that Afghanistan has become a center of terrorist activities that is already affecting the neighboring regions, with terrorists’ groups having greater freedom of activities without any hindrance from the de-facto administrators of that country.  The influence of the Taliban is today an integral part of the global Islamist terrorist narrative, while it is Qatar that leads the efforts to become the global mediator between the Taliban and the West, having allowed the Taliban to open a political office in Doha in 2013. With a UN visa ban and the UN General Assembly’s rejection of the Taliban regime’s request to take over Afghanistan’s seat at the UN, the Taliban is heavily reliant on the Qatari government’s political assistance to conduct global diplomatic activities outside Afghanistan. Beyond this, the Qatar authorities, with the tactic approval of the USA, paid members of the Taliban leadership with monthly stipends worth thousands of dollars, to “help facilitate” peace talks with the West. Taliban officials are also provided luxury vehicles, free health care, free food and freedom to decide Taliban policy in Afghanistan from the comfort of their Qatar based homes.

Since retaking control of Afghanistan, the Taliban has transformed the schools into religious madrassas (Islamic schools), where boys are indoctrinated by mullahs in extremist ideology that includes hatred for USA, Israel, and Europe. Women are banned from any opportunities of education and employment. Former terrorists from Arab states are tasked with drilling recruits in military training and ideological instructions. Their efforts are focused on producing a new generation of well-trained and radically educated extremists. In this context, Hamas had been the first to congratulate the Taliban on their victory in 2021 and the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, in a telephone conversation with Abdul Ghani Baradar, the deputy Prime Minister of Afghanistan and a senior Taliban leader had stated that “the end of the U.S. occupation was a prelude to the demise of all occupation forces, foremost of which is the Israeli occupation of Palestine”.

Coming to present times, the most surprising part of Hamas’ devastating cross-border attack was its complexity. Rarely in history has a terrorist organization been able to fight from the air, sea, and land; leaving no doubt that members of the Hamas were trained in battle tactics by various experienced terrorists and that a large number of Taliban and other Arab-origin fighters might have been part of the attackers in this operation.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stated on 12 October that “Hamas is ISIS and Hamas should be treated exactly the way ISIS was treated”. There is no doubt that the 07 October attack was comparable with those of ISIS in the past, in terms of planning and its brutality against unarmed civilians. However, any comparisons between these two terrorists’ organization does miss an important point. Hamas is not affiliated with ISIS, nor is there any history of collaboration between these two. Rather, ISIS is an opponent of Hamas and both consider each other as rivals in the global jihadi movement. It is important to study the positioning of ISIS and al-Qaeda in relation to the Hamas campaign since 07 October and its ongoing military operations. It is also necessary to evaluate the risk of ISIS and al-Qaeda potentially getting involved in this ongoing violence, a desire already expressed by both terrorists’ groups.

The common shared view of all three organizations is that Israel is illegally occupying Muslim lands on its whole state territory and it should be erased as an independent state. Thus, violence against Israeli citizens is considered as commendable and framed as ‘heroic resistance’ against occupation. In this regard, the total rejection of Israel as an independent state corresponds with their severe opposition towards the process of normalization of relationships between Israel and various Arab states in recent years. However, despite the similar views on these issues there is a fundamental disagreement between the two globally oriented terrorist organizations and Hamas, which propagates an Islamic nationalist agenda focused on the Palestinian issue rather than the larger vision of creating a global Islamic caliphate. For al-Qaeda and the ISIS, the desired liberation of Palestine represents a strategic first-step opportunity to unite the world’s Muslims in a global struggle; while for Hamas, the Palestinian struggle is the sole goal. Furthermore, both ISIS and al-Qaeda condemn democracy as an un-Islamic concept, while Hamas has participated in the 2006 legislative elections in the Palestinian territories and has shared elected power with its rival, the Fatah party which is secular, social and democratic in its political beliefs. These decisions at that time were opposed by al-Qaeda, which considered these actions of Hamas as an acceptance of the existing nation-state political process and thereby indirectly accepting and legitimizing the existence of Israel.

Beyond these issues, both al-Qaeda and ISIS have criticized Hamas for its failure to implement Sharia based legislation in Gaza, and for Hamas’s repression of the al-Qaeda-leaning Jaysh al-Ummah and the pro-IS Jama’at Ansar al-Dawla al-Islamiyya fi Bayt al-Maqdis, the Salafi-jihadi factions in Gaza. The dilemma for al-Qaeda and ISIS is that Hamas has been acting as a precursor of Islamic violence in a conflict that bears a huge symbolism for Muslims including the formers very own target audiences. Thus, these two global terrorist organizations are praising the Hamas attack on Israel as an attack on a shared enemy, while also trying to frame this event in-line with their global agenda rather than just a Hamas nationalist vision. While al-Qaeda is attempting to present this latest  Hamas attack on Israel as part of the former’s global campaign against the “crusader, Zionist” forces and has called upon Muslims across the world to support the people of Palestine by whatever means possible, including attacks on US targets; ISIS has been cautiously arguing that only by striking all of Israel’s external allies simultaneously, can Israel be fully defeated.

In its ‘al-Naba’ propaganda magazine, in the article “The Road to Jerusalem” it condemns Hamas (never mentioned by name) as a proxy of Shiite Iran and as part of its axis of “resistance.” Hamas’s warfare was not to be considered jihad as it served the interests of the Iranians and their plot for regional domination. “The difference between jihad and resistance is as the difference between truth and falsehood,” the editorial read. “Whoso allies with those who curse the Prophet’s wives [i.e., the Shia] will never liberate Jerusalem … and whoso differentiates between the Rejectionists [i.e., the Shia] and the Jews will never liberate Jerusalem … Indeed, we consider the mujahid who lies in wait for the Rejectionists in Iraq to be closer to Jerusalem than those who show loyalty to the Rejectionists and burnish their image.” The editorial went on to claim that all of the Islamic State’s battles “east and west are in fact steps in the direction of Jerusalem, Mecca, al-Andalus, Baghdad, Damascus, and all other captured Muslim lands.” In other words, it is the Islamic State, and not Hamas, that holds the promise of liberating Jerusalem.

Although, al-Qaeda and ISIS are seeking opportunities to gain an operational foot-hold in the Palestinian areas, to what extent they will be able to do so is unclear. Not only is Hamas opposed to their presence there, but also all states that border Israel and Palestinian territories (Egypt, Lebanon including Hezbollah, Jordan and Syria) are hostile towards them. They also have to contend with the presence of Iran’s various Shi’ite proxy groups in the region, who do not look favorably upon the Wahhabi–Sunni ideology of al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Terrorism has the power to destroy peace processes, dangerously escalate volatile situations and push countries onto the path of long and destructive wars. It is said that “Those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it.” It was an assassin’s bullet in Sarajevo that resulted in World War I and produced 40 million casualties, and it was the 3,000 persons killed in New York on Sept 11, 2001 that launched the U.S. led global war on terror in which an estimated 3.6 to 3.8 million have since perished. This current Hamas-Israel conflict already has ramifications far beyond the Middle-East. This terrorist attack should be ringing alarm bells across the world. Every country has its own enemies who seek an opportunity to exploit that country’s social and political divisiveness, civil distractions and security challenges. Fomenting domestic political violence would be one of the foremost strategies, alongwith cross-border terrorism.

Hamas’s terrorist attack on Israel has significant repercussions on the Ukraine-Russia war. While both Russia and Ukraine are seeking political and diplomatic support from international communities, the Hamas–Israel war is taking global attention and resources away from Ukraine’s war efforts. This change of focus by the global community could lead to a diminished economic and military assistance for that country, even though the USA has reconfirmed that it will maintain military and economic support for Ukraine as its strategic priority. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy was quick to condemn Hamas’s actions in an effort to clearly align his policy with that of the USA’s position of supporting Israel, but at the same time he wants to avoid alienating the Arab world, especially Saudi Arabia.

Russia, as a part if it’s multi-polar sphere of influence policy has not condemned Hamas directly, and has blamed the policies of the USA for this current Middle-East crisis. Russia has a longstanding relationship with Hamas. By offering to serve as a mediator between Israel and the Palestinians, Russia shows that it is aligning explicitly with the global south, seeking to erode the USA led liberal world order and pushing forth the concept of a growing multipolar world of global politics, calling for a ‘just solution’ to the Palestinian problem, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry. In early December, Russia’s President Putin hosted the President of Iran Ebrahim Raisi in Moscow, where the war in Gaza was discussed alongwith efforts to boost oil prices. Apart from Qatar, Iran provides rockets, arms, ammunition and training to Hamas; and is ready to provide military hardware to Russia for its war in Ukraine, where Russia has is already using Iranian drones extensively.

The two wars of the world; Russia fighting Ukraine, and the Hamas-Israel conflict has pushed up the cost of living across the world and severely diminished the heath and well-being of people, specially those mired in poverty. With growing food insecurity, over 258 million people in 58 plus countries are in a food crisis or in a moderate to severe food insecurity. European countries are facing soaring energy prices, leading to a decline in economic growth. There is also the impact on global financial markets. European countries have suffered large losses, with East Europe affected through disrupted trade links and West Europe affected through their ownership investments. There is an opinion that Europe will feel the long-term financial impact of the war more severely than other countries. However, such opinions overlook the fact that the many policies of the West are actually enabling Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Russian imports of high-priority battlefield items, which include micro-electronics, satellite navigation systems and other critical parts which are subject to the Western sanctions imposed on Russia have reached pre-war levels; with the leading suppliers being Intel and Analogue Devices (semiconductor manufacturers), AMD, Texas Instruments and IBM; all of which are American companies. The EU is equally complicit in ignoring sanctions that it has itself imposed on Russia, importing commodities worth US$ 195.56 Billion from Russia in 2022. These include oil products, mineral fuels, Iron and Steel, Fertilizers, Precious metals, Inorganic and organic chemicals, Nuclear reactors and boilers, Slag and ash ore, food items, fruits, vegetable products, and a host of other items. Essentially, the EU stands accused of the same activities that it is accusing countries of the global South; supporting the Russian war effort. EU countries are estimated to have spent nearly €5.3bn buying over half of all Russia’s LNG during the first seven months of 2023, with Spain and Belgium the second and third largest buyers worldwide. It can be safely assumed that a substantial part of this income by Russia is delivered to Iran for military supplies and Iran in-turn uses part of this income to fund the terrorist organizations Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis’ of Yemen. 

The Gaza-Israel conflict has already led to a tragic loss of lives and is a severe risk to the fragile peace in the middle-east. The economic repercussions of this crisis will depend on the extent and duration of the fighting, the associated geo-political effect and the strong possibility of increased terrorist attacks. From the global economic perspective, energy security is the most important issue. The developing situation might lead to severe supply disruption, particularly if the crisis brings Iran into the war directly, or if the general unrest and terrorist attacks in Iraq reduces the oil production there. Apart from the fact that the Middle-east is a crucial supplier of energy, it is also a key shipping passageway. Whether the hostilities remain confined to Gaza and Israel, or escalates to a direct military confrontation between Israel and Iran; the result will be the same; increased cost of energy supplies, slower economic growth and higher inflation. There is no doubt that West bank and Gaza are affected the most, but the neighboring countries of Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon are already feeling the economic impact. Tourism, which accounts for between 35 ~ 50% of the goods and services exports of this countries’ economies is already hard-hit with visitors cancelling travel to this region amid concerns of threat escalation.

The conflict has had a modest impact on energy prices with the oil prices remaining relatively stable and the natural gas prices at slightly elevated levels. The impact on Government Bond yields has been minimal to date and have mostly returned to pre-conflict levels. Despite this, there is a growing uncertainty that is eroding consumer confidence, which could result in a reduced spending and investment. As the war continues, the regional growth could deteriorate as hesitancy starts to affect investment decisions. This crisis would expose the underlying vulnerabilities of fragile economies of countries like Somalia, Sudan and Yemen as borrowing costs rise. There would be a decline in the flow of critical aid as donors refrain from their usual level of contributions and if the aid efforts do not expand to the growing needs. Against this background, any escalation in the Hamas-Israel conflict would have far-reaching ramifications. The economic impact would start affecting the neighboring countries of Iraq, Syria and Jordan with the most impact on trade, tourism and investments. The flow of refugees would increase significantly, adding to the social and fiscal pressures on the countries that receive them and potentially cause a long-term financial distress. Regardless of how this conflict continues, any hope for a stable Middle-East has suffered a set-back, maybe for a long time. Without a doubt, this crisis will reshape the region’s future. With an expected acute economic impact and highly elevated risks, pragmatic crisis management and carefully crafted policies will be critical in the short term, to prevent this crisis from causing high levels of uncertainty in the region.

While at war with Ukraine, Russia has to deal with its own internal strife caused by the mercenary group Wagner and the Russian Imperial Movement [RIM]. While the Wagner group is a private military organization that had become the main force of the Russian government’s invasion and has been recently designated as a terrorist organization by the EU and USA; RIM is a loose confederation of Russian far-right groups that fight alongside Wagner. Called the ‘ultra–patriots’, these extreme nationalist imperialist groups insist on conducting a more aggressive military campaign in Ukraine, including the possible use of nuclear weapons. Created in 2002, RIM believes in the revival of the Russian Empire and also that Ukraine is a part of greater Russia. In 2014, the group created a military wing called the Imperial Legion to fight in the conflict zone. It is reported that RIM is actively involved in the fighting in Ukraine alongside the Wagner group. However, while the majority of Wagner’s fighters are former prisoners, the RIM forces have military experience and a strong nationalist motivation to participate in the war.

While participating actively in the Ukraine war as part of the Russian government forces, RIM presents itself to be in opposition to the same Russian government, blaming the ruling party and Vladimir Putin personally for ruining the country. Putin’s government treats RIM as a potential political threat, due to its strong connections with far-right movements in Europe and especially in Spain; and yet there are close collaborative links between the two for Russia’s foreign policy strategies. The Putin government lets RIM exist without a harsh crackdown on Russian territory in exchange for using them as proxies abroad. The purpose of using RIM in the EU is clear, to intimidate Europe and to broadcast the message that support of Ukraine will have consequences.    

Ukraine is not without its own mercenary fighters. Their “Azov regiment” is a far-right all volunteer infantry military unit whose 900 odd members are ultra-nationalists and are suspected to be neo–Nazis’ who believe in the ideology of white supremacy. The unit was initially formed as a volunteer group in May 2014 out of the ultra-nationalist Patriot of Ukraine gang, and the neo-Nazi Social National Assembly (SNA) groups. Both groups engage in xenophobic and neo-Nazi ideals and have physically assaulted migrants, the Roma community and people opposing their views. The organization was founded by Andriy Biletsky, who has publicly announced that the group’s purpose was to ‘lead the white races of the world in a final crusade against Semite–led Untermenschen (inferior races led by the Jews). He was elected to Ukraine’s parliament in 2014 and was a MP until 2019. The OCHA (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) have accused the Azov regiment of violating international humanitarian law. The OCHA report details incidents where Azov had entered civilian buildings with force, displaced residents and looted properties. In Donbas region, the Azov are accused of rape and torture of detainees. In 2019, members of the United States Congress had called upon the US State Department to designate Azov as a ‘foreign terrorist organization”. Their submissions have been ignored by the Biden administration. There is a wide trans-national support for Azov and Ukraine has emerged as a new hub for battle-field training for far-right groups across the world. Outside Ukraine, Azov is the central magnet for a network of extremists’ groups stretching from USA, Europe and all the way to New Zealand, attracting young men who are eager for combat experience. It is estimated that over the last six years, more than 17 thousand foreign fighters from over 50 countries have come to Ukraine for join Azov.

Interestingly, Azov has been recruiting, radicalizing and training American citizens for a long time, which has been confirmed by Christopher Wray, the Director of the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation), in his testimony to the U.S. Senate, where he further stated that American white supremacists are traveling abroad to be battle trained. The question that law-enforcement are not asking in the Western countries is that; how does Azov, which was an obscure militia in 2014 become so influential in the global web of far-right extremism? Investigators like Ali Soufan, a former FBI agent and a security consultant in the USA, found that the key to its international growth was its extensive use of the social media, especially Facebook.  Apart from offering a place for foreign radicals to study the strategies of war; the Azov movement through its online propaganda, has fueled a global ideology of hate that now inspires more terrorist attacks in the USA than Islamic extremism and is a growing threat throughout the Western world.

The Republic of Bharat (India) has charted its own course during these turbulent times. Bharat has stood firm in its policy of public neutrality towards every country involved in these conflicts, either directly or though the support structure on behalf of the participants. Bharat has consistently called for the “respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states” and for “an immediate cessation of violence and hostilities”. It is constantly advising that “dialogue is the only answer to settling differences and disputes”. Bharat has ascended to the international stage as a great power without committing to any economic or military alliances that might entangle its progress. This ascent is best guaranteed through the path of peace and goodwill when surrounded by competing power centers that can be leveraged to derive benefits amid their mutual rivalries, while keeping its own interests in mind and without forming any alliances to realize its geopolitical objectives. Essentially, Bharat prefers a multipolar global order that allows it to maneuver between several diverse blocs, exploiting their differences depending on the issues-at-hand, to secure gains for itself while avoiding permanent alignments with anyone.

Bharat is on the front-line in the fight against terrorism. In 2022 – 23, terrorism affected the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), the northeastern states, and parts of central India. Terrorist groups active in India include Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Hizbul Mujahideen, ISIS, al-Qa'ida, Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen, and Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh. Pakistan, especially its army, is the sponsor of cross-border terrorism into India. With the sole exception of ISIS which is funded out of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, all other Wahhabi–Islamic terrorist groups based in Pakistan are constantly funded and sponsored by the Pakistan Army in their constant effort to destabilize the state of Jammu & Kashmir and spread anarchy in other parts of Bharat. The Pakistani sponsored cross-border terrorism takes a high toll on the lives of our Army, Border Patrol and Kashmir police personnel, alongwith loss of lives of civilians. Apart from sponsoring Islamic terrorists against Bharat, Pakistan has restarted its funding and support to the Sikh separatists who are demanding an independent country of Khalistan within the borders of Bharat. Two more countries have joined in to support the Khalistan terrorists who reside within their territories; Canada and the USA.

Canada officially and falsely accused the Bharat government of killing a known Khalistan terrorist who was also an drugs distributor against whom an international arrest warrant was existing for acts of terrorism. The Prime Minister of Canada, instead decided to call this terrorist a Canadian citizen and stated that he was ‘just a plumber’. This accusation by the Canadian PM was made in the Canadian parliament, even though there has been no evidence offered by the Canadian government to-date on this issue. Canada has a long history of allowing full freedom of all kinds of activities to terrorists’ organizations across the world; to having a presence in that country, raise funding for terrorism and direct terrorist attacks across the world, without any restrictions being imposed by successive Canadian governments. The killing of this specific terrorism-accused took place in Canada, by persons unknown and unidentified till now. What is effectively a murder in Canada has been converted by Canada into a major international embarrassment for itself. The government of Bharat as categorically denied any association with this killing, which the Canadian government refuses to accept. Further, Canada has ignored all public announcements by Khalistan leaders in their own country, calling for the assassination of Bharat’s diplomats in Canada, and termed this open threat as ‘freedom of expression’. Bharat has responded to Canada’s political and diplomatic threats by imposing certain sanctions that are affecting the economies of both countries, but more so of Canada. 

Canada’s big brother, the USA, has now decided to support Canada in sponsoring Khalistan terrorism. An American citizen of Indian origin, who has openly threatened to blow-up Indian owned passenger aircraft, and has publicly instructed his fellow Khalistan supporters to kill Bharat’s diplomats based in USA, has not been detained or investigated by the US authorities. Conversely, and not surprisingly, they have accused the Govt of Bharat of conspiring to kill this very terrorist, and are investigating this death threat. The USA has a long history of supporting terrorism across the world, most prominently in Latin America and the Middle-East, and now the Indian continent.  

The most infamous activity of U.S. terrorism was during the mid-1980s when Ronald Reagan was President and US$34 million were routed by the U.S. National Security Council, with the full support of the Reagan administration to destabilize the government of Nicaragua. The ‘Iran – Contra’ affair, as it was called in subsequent investigations facilitated the illegal sales of arms to Iran. Using secret, non-appropriated funds, the U.S. Govt started to deliver arms to Iran in the hope of releasing American hostages held by Hezbollah. The profits from these sales were then diverted to the Contras, a group of rebels fighting against their own government. To increase the level of funding to the Contras, the U.S. authorities led by the CIA (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency) helped the Contras to set-up a cocaine trafficking operation that allowed for the clandestine import of drug shipments into California and its distribution on the west coast of USA. The CIA operatives were also accused of the kidnapping and murder of a DEA (U.S. Drug Enforcement Authority) agent Enrique Camarena, because he became a threat to this covert operation by the CIA. (Please refer the book: Dark Alliance – the CIA, the Contras and the Crack Cocaine Explosion by journalist Gary Webb).

The dirty politics of criminality by the USA continued in Europe. In February 1998, the then U.S. President Bill Clinton’s envoy to the Balkans described the Kosovo Liberation Army [KLA] as a “terrorist group”; quite forgetting the recorded fact that the U.S. CIA had funded, trained and supplied arms to the same KLA in the prior years. The KLA has been accused of crimes against humanity, trafficking of human organs, and wanton killing of Serbs and fellow ethnic Albanians.

After the terrorist attack on 09 September 2001 on New York and the Pentagon (popularly known as the 9/11 attacks), the USA launched the ‘War on Terror’, a vague definition for violent revenge against weak countries. This violence was justified by a presidential memorandum of 07 February 2002, that authorized U.S. interrogators of prisoners captured during the War in Afghanistan to deny these prisoners the basic human rights protections required by the Geneva Conventions, basically authorizing war crimes against civilian populations. The terrorist activities and human rights violations by the United States of America can be defined by the singular existence of the Guantanamo Bay detention center, a symbol of human torture and indefinite detention without trial of people who are “assumed” to have been terrorists or associated with terrorism. 21 years after the opening of an offshore detention facility specifically designed to evade the rule of law, the US government continues to detain 35 men inside the Guantánamo Bay detention camp. The United Nations Human Rights office has defined this a an “Ugly chapter of unrelenting human rights violations”; and yet, not one country, nor the United Nations is willing to sanction the USA for its cruelty towards civilians and innocent people.

Recently, since March 2011, the USA has provided extensive lethal arms aid to Syrian terrorists’ groups; notably the Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham and the Southern Front. The U.S. government has provided military aid to the radical Islamist group ‘Nour al-Din al-Zenki’ which has been accused of many crimes against humanity and specifically for the beheading of a child.

The world is today mired in regional conflicts that have negative global effects. The two ongoing wars, the US-China trade war, and the rising potential for a conflict over Taiwan, shows that the world is today in a state of constant disruptions, and that multipolar geopolitics will drive the economic outcomes across regions. We can expect the financially rich countries of the world to impose global policies that will assist their economic growth, perhaps at the cost of poorer nations, which will increase the divide between the countries of the global south and the affluent global north. As the world moves towards a period of higher instability and more complexity, there could be monetary volatility and higher inflation, perhaps leading to a reduction in globalization and lesser boost in productivity.

References:   

https://foreignpolicy.com                                        https://warontherocks.com

https://www.amjmed.com                                       https://www.usip.org

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/                            https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/

https://www.economicsobservatory.com/            https://www.bloomberg.com/

https://carnegieendowment.org/                           https://www.fdd.org/

https://www.globalwitness.org/                              https://www.politico.eu/

https://www.diis.dk/en/                                            https://www.jihadica.com/

https://www.imf.org/                                                https://www.soufangroup.com/

https://www.cescube.com/                                     https://www.ohchr.org/en

https://www.ispionline.it/