The Yom Kippur War of 1973 - A Quick Note

The fourth and last Quick Note focuses on the Yom Kippur War of 1973 (the Fourth Arab-Israeli War). As mentioned earlier, the Quick Notes series reflects, for the sake of brevity, an 'overview' of this most significant West Asian conflict.

When: 6–25 October 1973

What happened: Coalition of Arab Muslim nations, led by Egypt & Syria launched attack on Israel on the Yom Kippur holy day (6 October); Israel beat back the invasion. Israel reached within 100 km of Egyptian capital, Cairo, and within 32 km of Syrian capital, Damascus.

Outcomes: 
(a) Israel, though victorious, chose to take the diplomacy route to build lasting peace with the Arab Muslim states in its neighbourhood.

(b) Israel and Egypt signed the Camp David Accords in 1978 and later the 1979 Egyptian–Israeli peace treaty, which led to significant outcomes: Egypt became the first Muslim nation to recognize the State of Israel while Israel relinquished its occupation of the Sinai Peninsula which it taken in the 1967 Six–Day War.

 

The Six-Day War (Third Arab–Israeli War) - A Quick Note

The third Quick Note  focuses on the Six-Day War, also called the Third Arab–Israeli War. As mentioned earlier, the Quick Notes series reflects, for the sake of brevity, an 'overview' of this most significant West Asian conflict.

When: 5–10 June 1967

What happened: Coalition of Arab Muslim nations, comprising Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq attacked Israel; however, Israel trounced the Arab Muslim nations by occupying the following: Golan Heights (from Syria), West Bank & East Jerusalem (from Jordan), Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula (from Egypt).

Outcomes: 
(a) The myth of the Arab Muslim unity was forever broken.

(b) Around 21,000 Arab Muslims and 1,000 Israelis were killed in the war.

(c) Egypt closed the Suez Canal till 1975. This blockade led to a disruption in oil and gas supply, leading to the energy crisis, including the Oil Shock of 1973.

(Map from here)

The Second Arab–Israeli War (Suez Crisis) - A Quick Note

The second Quick Note focuses on the Second Arab–Israeli War (also called the Suez Crisis). As mentioned earlier, the Quick Notes series reflects, for the sake of brevity, an 'overview' of this most significant West Asian conflict.

(Strait is a narrow channel of water that separates two land bodies; example: Palk Strait separates India and Sri Lanka.)

When: 29 October 1956–7 November 1956

What happened: Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal in 1956; the United Kingdom and France encouraged Israel to attack Egypt to regain control of the important waterway. Israel’s main goal was to reopen the blocked Straits of Tiran, which was strategically important for it. Israel attacked and occupied the Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula, both belonging to Egypt.

Outcomes: 
(a) Under intense pressure from the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Nations, the United Kingdom and France retreated from the war.

(b) Israel scored an important strategic victory as it lifted the blockade to the Straits of Tiran. 

(Map from here)

The First Arab–Israeli War of 1948 - A Quick Note

In a series of four Quick Notes, I will bring to you the major wars fought between Israel and the Arab Muslim World. It is always difficult to simplify very complex issues like the Israel–Palestine conflict. However, the Quick Notes series reflects, for the sake of brevity, an 'overview' of this most significant West Asian conflict. 

In 1947, the UN Partition Plan delineated the formation of two states: an independent Arab State and a separate Jewish State. 

When: 15 May 1948–10 March 1949

What happened:
Israel declared the formation of the world's first Jewish State on 14 May 1948.

The next day, a coalition of Arab Muslim nations, comprising Egypt, Palestinian Protectorate, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Transjordan, and Yemen invaded the newly formed Jewish State with the avowed aim of expelling the Jews and destroying the State of Israel.

Outcomes:
(a) Israel defeated the coalition of Arab Muslim nations, expanded its territory by 60% by capturing the territory given to Palestine under the 1947 UN Partition Plan.

(b) The 1949 Armistice Agreements, which established the armistice lines between Israel and its neighbours, also known as the Green Line, was signed (see the map).

(c) Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip while Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 

The Arab Muslim nations failed utterly in achieving their goals. To their misery, they lost 60% of the land allotted to Palestine under the UN Partition Plan to Israel.

The reader should note that this massive defeat did help bring the Arab Muslim nations together under the banner of Pan-Arabism.  

Also, it was the Arab Muslim nations which occupied the three territories (Egypt, West Bank, and East Jerusalem) which make up today's Palestine.

(Map from here)

If Hamas Goes, Iran will be the 'Biggest Loser'

Israel's aerial blitzkrieg against Hamas is unrelenting even as it is getting ready to launch a full-scale ground assault in Gaza with a single goal: put Hamas out of existence by taking out its top leadership and destroying its massive arms and ammunition. 

If Hamas Goes, Iran will Lose Big Time
I believe that the biggest loser in the current West Asian situation is Iran. The daily threats and warnings emanating from Tehran mean nothing; the Clerics in Tehran may threaten Israel with doomsday rhetoric – but it is just that.

Tehran will not participate directly in the ongoing Israel–Hamas War. Tehran is beset by several handicaps: an economy in doldrums, widespread prevalence of unemployment, especially among the youth, rising domestic dissent for funding various actors in Syria (President Bashar Al-Assad), Iraq (a Shia dominant country and purportedly a playground for Iran’s strategic play), Lebanon (Hezbollah), Yemen (Houthi), and Palestine (Hamas).

Iran hates Israel more than it loves Hamas. For Tehran, Hamas is just a shoulder from which it fires at its archenemy Israel. However, if Israel takes down the top leadership of Hamas and destroys its sizeable weapons arsenal in the Gaza Strip, Iran may lose its political and military influence in Palestine and its voice in advocating the Palestinian cause in the wider Islamic world.

Tehran’s most powerful external militia arm is Hezbollah. Though militarily powerful, Hezbollah’s home country, Lebanon, is in political and economic ruin. If Hezbollah launches a full-scale attack against Israel, it may stretch the Israeli military on two fronts—along the Gaza Strip and the Lebanese border—but this will invite a heavy reprisal from Israel. There is a great deal of anger among the beleaguered Lebanese against any military action by Hezbollah against Israel. To me, two things confirm the idea that Hezbollah looks like it is paying attention to the ground situation in its home country: it has launched very few rockets against Israeli targets and the top leadership of Hezbollah, led by Hassan Nasrallah, has been eerily silent ever since the Israel–Hamas war broke out.

(To be concluded.)

The MbS Phenomenon

 

In this Explainer, I will focus on the ambitious Mohammed Bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. MbS, as he is usually referred to, has, in a very short time, come to dominate the tangled political landscape of West Asia (I prefer this term to the usual Middle East).

An aside on the name: In Saudi society (and generally in the Arabian Peninsula), a man’s name includes the name of his father (pretty much like in large parts of India). Bin means ‘son of’; so, Mohammed bin Salman means son of Salman.

Also, in this article you would find ‘Mohammed’ spelt in two different ways; I have taken the Saudi government accepted spellings of the names of the leaders.  

Who is Mohammed bin Salman?

Mohammed bin Salman is the Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. As the Crown Prince, he is next in line to succeed his father and King, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. (Understanding the name of the King: Salman, son of Abdulaziz; Al Saud is the name of the ruling house/dynasty.)

Virtually unknown in the corridors of power before his meteoric rise, MbS was appointed the Crown Prince in June 2017. Soon after his father became the King, MbS was appointed the Deputy Crown Prince; his cousin and the son of King Salman’s brother Mohammad bin Nayef, was forcibly relieved of his office by MbS.  

Today he is also the kingdom’s Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Defence, Chairman of the Council for Economic and Development Affairs, and Chairman of the Council of Political and Security Affairs.

MbS is the most powerful person in today’s Saudi Arabia. The King, his father, trusts him blindly and has stood by him even as the calls for the Crown Prince’s removal for his involvement in the botched Yemen War and the Jamal Khashoggi murder saga grow louder.

MbS is seen as an ardent reformer by his supporters, while his detractors describe him as megalomaniacal and impetuous. His supporters point to the several reforms he has ushered in the deeply conservative country: lifting the ban on women drivers, allowing cinemas and music concerts, and introducing a spate of economic reforms.

MbS’ detractors, and there are many, cite his campaign in Yemen and the ill-planned embargo against Qatar as examples of his whimsical behaviour.

They also describe him as power-hungry who cannot tolerate dissent; the jailing of thousands of political dissidents, including women activists is a case in point. It is interesting to know here that the women activists were jailed for demanding driving rights for women. Ironically, MbS lifted the ban on women drivers and yet the women activists were jailed for calling for the same reform! Now, you may find this behaviour difficult to decipher. Well, it is easy if you understand the purport of MbS’ game plan: you cannot demand rights and get them; you will get rights ONLY if the King or the Crown Prince decide to give you rights – in other words, so it is the top-down approach that’s at work here.  

Another example is his treatment of the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri. When Hariri arrived in the Kingdom to meet King Salman, he was bundled to an unknown location; there was a complete blackout of the news concerning Hariri, a leader of a sovereign nation. One week later, Hariri was forced to tender his resignation from the prime minister’s post of his country from the soil of a foreign nation.

A Luxury Prison
The incident that shook the ground beneath the feet of elite Saudis took place in November 2017. Around 200 prominent Saudis, including the former Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef and Bakr bin Laden, the head of Saudi Binladin Group (a construction giant), were rounded up and detained for several months at the Ritz-Carlton Palace Hotel on the orders of MbS. The entire operation was described as a campaign against corruption and embezzlement; the detained were accused of enriching themselves at the cost of the Saudi State. It is believed that a few of those detained were tortured and forced into giving up their wealth. Bakr bin Laden and his two brothers were forced to transfer their 36 per cent shareholding in Saudi Binladin Group to a state-controlled company, overseen by MbS.    

The Jamal Khashoggi Saga
Jamal Khashoggi was a Saudi Arabian journalist and an insider in the Saudi royal court. He fled to the U.S after running afoul of the current royal administration in Saudi Arabia. A vociferous critic of the Saudi Arabian royal house, especially the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, he was a columnist for the Washington Post newspaper and head of an Arab news channel. MbS had accused Khashoggi of working with the Kingdom’s rivals like Iran and Qatar.

On 2 October 2018, he visited the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul to collect documents pertaining to the dissolution of his marriage to a Saudi Arabian woman; the documents were necessary for him to get married to his Turkish fiancée. He was murdered inside the consulate by Saudi Arabian intelligence officials. Till date, no trace of his body has been found.

The murder of Jamal Khashoggi has since thrown West Asia into turmoil. The Khashoggi saga has embroiled Saudi Arabia and Turkey in a war of words, with the U.S. squeezed between its two important allies. The following are the major players in the Khashoggi saga: Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United States, Iran, Qatar, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Erdogan's Wicked Glee
Turkey directly implicated Saudi Arabia of carrying out the murder on its soil, even pointing a finger at MbS for his involvement. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claimed the possession of unimpeachable evidence of the involvement of the Saudi Crown Prince, suggesting that the order for the murder “came from the highest authorities in the Saudi administration”.

Why did the Turkish President get so worked up about the murder of a Saudi dissident? The answer to this seemingly distasteful question lies in the ‘great power’ ambitions of the two countries.

We know that Saudi Arabia is the de facto leader of the Muslim World; however, Turkey, under Erdogan, wants to become the centre of the Muslim World, just like the Ottoman empire was before its eventual collapse in 1922. Erdogan, an Islamist, has a grand vision of becoming the voice of the Muslim World, and he has made no effort to conceal his ambitions.

Erdogan is a firm supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian extremist Islamist organization with a wide support base in the Muslim World. The Muslim Brotherhood is an anti-monarchy, pro-Sharia group. The Muslim Brotherhood came to power after its newly floated political party won the Egyptian elections in 2012, a development that rang loud alarm bells in the capitals of the monarchies in the Muslim World.

The anti-monarchy, pro-Sharia core ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood raised the hackles of the Saudi monarchy who felt threatened by the hardcore Islamist who was now the president of Egypt, a neighbouring country. Alarmed by the spectre of the spread of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Arabia royal house instigated the Egyptian army to oust the Muslim Brotherhood from power and take over the country. Thus, in July 2013, barely a few months after coming to power, the Islamist President of Egypt was ousted and jailed on charges of terrorism.

The Saudi Arabian involvement in the ousting of the democratically elected government in Egypt angered Erdogan, a die-hard supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. The murder of Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul, Turkey’s largest city, came as a blessing to put the Saudis on the mat. He leaked evidence of the involvement of the Saudi Crown Prince in the Khashoggi murder case in a calibrated manner; in fact, the method was so effective that it has been called “death by a thousand leaks”.

Saudi Arabia botched its response to the Khashoggi murder saga; from firmly denying its involvement to calling it a rogue intelligence operation without concurrence of the royal house, the Saudi Arabian government came across as confused and unprepared for the massive backlash from the international community.

To begin with, the United States called on the Saudi Arabian royal house to come clean on its role in the Jamal Khashoggi murder. Since then, the U.S. has spoken in multiple tongues; this is because the Donald Trump White House stood by MbS, even while the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the U.S. premier external spy agency, pointed to the direct involvement of the Crown Prince in the murder of the journalist. It is well known that there is no love lost between Trump and the country’s numerous spy and security agencies.

So, why did the U.S. stand by Mohammed bin Salman? The most important reason for this is Washington’s Iran policy. The U.S. policy in West Asia is centred around Iran; Washington has been categorical in stating that it will do all to stop Iran’s “wave of regional destruction and global campaign of terror”.

An enemy’s enemy is a friend. This truism defines the relationship between the U.S. and the Sunni nations in West Asia. The Sunni Muslim nations, like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, deeply distrust Shia Iran, accusing it of fomenting terrorism in their nations. So, to counter Iran, the U.S. needs Saudi Arabia, the region’s most powerful nation and the fulcrum of the Sunni Muslim World. Saudi Arabia, under MbS, is at the forefront of the anti-Iran brigade; the Saudis see Iran as an existential threat. In fact, Saudi Arabia even backs Israel (Saudi Arabia and Israel do not have diplomatic relations, owing to the Palestinian issue) in the latter’s covert and overt operations against Iran, spread across the region, especially in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon.

What about the U.S.’ professed love for the protection of rights of freedom of expression, right to dissent, and religious freedom? Well, in international politics, respect for democracy, human rights, morality, ideology are matters of convenience; they can be expended at the altar of national interest.

 

Sunday Reads: CIA+Mossad and Cheap Oil

• CIA & Mossad killed senior Hezbollah figure (Washington Post)

• Japan's Abe's vision under threat. (AlJazeera)

• All about ways of expressive articulation. (Hindu Open Page)

• Seven reasons cheap oil cannot stop renewables now. (Bloomberg)

The Explainer: What triggered the Gaza Crisis? (Israel-Hamas, Part 2)

Last week I wrote The Explainer: Gaza, Hamas, & Israel - Part I. Here is the second part of this Explainer series on the Gaza conflict.

What triggered the current crisis in Gaza?

Tensions between Israel and Hamas have been simmering for several years now. The latest conflict appears like just another episode in the long-running conflict between the two entities.

In the second fortnight of June, three Israeli Jewish teenagers, who were on their way from school, were abducted and killed. Their dead bodies were found a week later. Israel accused Hamas of abduction and killing of the Israeli teenagers, though the Israeli Government could not furnish any proof to substantiate their charges. 

While Hamas has consistently denied any role in this episode, many security experts believe it to be the handiwork of the Islamic Jihad, an extremist terror outfit. Islamic Jihad has major differences with Hamas, which it accuses of being too soft on Israel.

Soon after the dead bodies of the Israeli teenagers surfaced, a Palestinian Muslim teenager was killed by extremist Jews. (The perpetrators of this heinous crime were later arrested by Israeli security forces.)

Source: Mirror

How did Israel respond?
Israel launched a full-scale military assault against Hamas and other radical outfits in the Gaza Strip. 

For several days, Israel unleashed sophisticated weaponry against the radical terror groups. Hamas traded fire for fire; it launched hundreds of rockets into Israel from Gaza. However, Hamas' firepower is no match for the highly advanced weaponry used by the Israeli defence forces. Also, Israel uses the highly effective Iron Dome interceptor to ward off the threat of Hamas' rockets.

While ground assaults backed by air sorties helped destroy terror infrastructure, there has been massive civilian deaths. Unfortunately, over 2000 civilians, mostly innocent women and children, have been killed in the conflict. 

Hamas accused Israel of deliberately targeting schools, hospitals and mosques. But Israel blames Hamas of storing rockets in civilian venues, like schools and religious places.

After fighting bitterly for several weeks, currently there is a ceasefire between the two adversaries. The ceasefire was brokered by Egypt, a key member of the Muslim World and a neighbour of both Gaza and Israel.

More on the crisis in the Next Explainer.

One Million Page Views + Sunday Reads

This blog, www.bjnocabbages.com, was started in May 2011. Today, this blog has hit One Million page views! Thank you very much for visiting this blog. 

From today, there will be more posts, more sharing, and more learning.

Here's the collection of Sunday Reads.

• What is the most blatant lie taught through Pakistan textbooks. (Dawn)
• Israel, Gaza, War & Data. (Medium)
• When she talks, banks shudder. (NYT)
• From 1947-2014: India celebrates independence - a slideshow. (Hindu)

The Explainer: Gaza, Hamas, & Israel - Part I

This is the first of the Gaza Explainers.

What is Palestine?

Palestine, almost entirely populated by Muslims, comprises two major chunks of territory: West Bank and Gaza Strip.

West Bank
At 3,620 sq. km., West Bank is the larger of the two Palestinian territories. The territory has a population of 2.44 million, with an additional 2.6 lakh Israeli settlers.

West Bank, located between Israel and Jordan, was occupied by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War.

Currently, West Bank is under the control of Palestinian Authority (PA), which is a direct political rival of Hamas.

Gaza Strip

Gaza Strip is a narrow stretch of land (of about 360 sq. km.) located between Israel and Mediterranean Sea, with Egypt on the south. It has an estimated population of 16 lakh. Occupied by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War, Gaza is controlled by Hamas.

Is Palestine an independent country?

No. Let’s put it this way. Palestine is more of a territory fighting for independence from Israeli occupation of some parts of its territory. Palestine is not sovereign in the true sense of the term; large swathes of its territory are controlled by Israel, including within the West Bank, where there are Jewish settlements.

What about Hamas?
In 1987, radical Islamist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin founded Hamas, an acronym of the Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamaiyya (Islamic Resistance Movement).

The birth of Hamas can be attributed to the aspirations of extremist Palestinians to build a movement like Hezbollah, an extremist Shia Muslim outfit which operates out of Lebanon.
These extremist elements felt that there should be a similar home-grown Sunni movement, i.e., one that would operate from Palestinian soil.

What does Hamas think about Israel?
Hamas does not recognise the existence of Israel. In fact, Hamas denies the latter’s right to exist. One unique feature of Hamas is that it lays great emphasis on religion, which is in serious contrast to the secular Fatah party, which rules the West Bank.

Hamas’ charter explicitly mentions that the fundamental aim of its existence is the destruction of the State of Israel and the establishment of a sovereign Palestine.

In short, Hamas is a radical Sunni extremist group, which is anti-Israel and one which is fighting for an independent, sovereign Palestine.

Who supports Hamas?

From its inception and till recently, Hamas was funded by Iran and Syria and a range of Islamic charities, many of which are listed as fronts for Islamic terror groups, and are hence banned in many countries of the world.

The irony is that both Iran and Syria are controlled by Shia Muslims while Hamas is a radical Sunni Islamist organisation. Iran and Syria also do not recognise the State of Israel; Iran has repeatedly called for ‘wiping Israel off the map of the world’.

However, since the beginning of the civil war in Syria a lot has changed in the political equations involving Hamas.

For several years, Hamas ran a major office in the Syrian capital, Damascus. However, the deeply sectarian conflict in Syria has impacted the Hamas-Iran-Syria equation as well.

Short backgrounder on Syrian conflict
Syria is predominantly populated by Sunni Muslims while the president, Bashar al-Assad, is a Shia Muslim, backed by Iran (the world’s biggest Shia Muslim country).

Read The Explainer: Syrian Crisis Part I and Syrian Crisis Part II.

As the Sunni rebel movement against the Shia ruling dispensation gathered pace, Hamas, a Sunni radical group, found itself in a difficult situation. In this sectarian conflict, Hamas’ natural sympathies lay with the Sunni rebels in Syria. Unable to digest the fact that its principal backers, Syria and Iran, are waging a relentless campaign against Sunni rebels, Hamas moved out of Damascus. It is also believed that Hamas was forced to move out of Damascus by the Syrian regime itself.

Hamas shifted base to Doha, capital of Qatar, a Sunni kingdom. Qatar is stridently anti-Iran and anti-Syria (read anti-Bashar). Today, Qatar has emerged as the principal political and financial backer of Hamas.

More short Explainers on the Gaza Crisis to follow. 

Self-Immolation & Dhoni needs to speak

• Remembering the Ibrahimi Mosque Massacre (AlJazeera)

• Will Pranab Boro's self-immolation spur Assam into land reforms? (First Post)

• Oral sex could be leading to greater incidence of throat cancer in Chhattisgarh. (TOI)

• Why Dhoni needs to speak out. (Cricinfo)

Sunday Reads - The Martian Chroniclers & Getting behind Israeli frankness

This Sunday's installment of some interesting reads.

• Getting behind Israeli frankness. (BBC Magazine)
• How geography explains the U.S. (Foreign Policy)
• The Martian Chroniclers. (New Yorker)
• Religion & human trafficking: Freedom for the captives. (Economist) 

Sunday Reads - Kill Him Silently & The Myth of Long Working Hours

Food for thought for your Sunday!

• The myth of long working hours. (The Rodin Hoods)
• Kill him silently: The story behind Mossad's bungled bid to assassinate Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal. (AlJazeera) 
• Mali Army, Riding U.S. Hopes, Is Proving No Match for Militants (NY Times)
• The Resource Race: China Dips Toes in Arctic Waters (Der Spiegel)

Check out this slideshow of 20 terrific pictures of the U.S. Air Force.

Video - Top Ten Global Threats in 2013

... and so let me go back to what I do best on this blog: share learning!

We begin with a video on the Ten Biggest Global Risks in 2013. Ian Bremmer of the Eurasia Group lists his top ten geopolitical and global economic risks. 

In Bremmer's list, India comes in at No 9!



Source: Reuters

Sunday Reads - Losing Omar & Pussy James Bond?

The last two installments of the Reads Series were not published; here's resuming the series.

• Losing Omar: The pain of a parent whose child was killed in Gaza. (BBC) 

• Why does James Bond never go to the really dangerous places? (ForeignPolicy)

• Five Statistics problems that will change the way you see the world. (Atlantic)

• The box and the keyhole. (New Yorker)

Hat tip for the last article: Mohan Ramiah, my colleague and friend from Chennai.

Israel and the Palestinian territories are once again engaged in a major battle; Hamas fires rockets, Israel pounds Gaza with air strikes and so the story goes around. Israel's Iron Dome missile shield has been a major success and India is planning to buy this to ward off similar threats from Pakistan and its proxies like LeT.

Source: Reuters

Mid-Week Reads - The Best of Politics, Economics, & Ideas

Here's your Mid-Week installment of interesting reads.

• How Thomas Edison, Mark Zuckerberg and Iron Man are holding back American innovation. (WaPo)
  

• An idea worth at least 40 nanoKardashians of your attention. (Ethan Zuckerman) 

• Indian economy: 2004-14 will be as damaging as mid 60s, 70s. (ET Blog) 

• Teaching the language of the enemy. (NYT)

A Thomson Reuters infographic depicting neat comparison between smartphones.

7 Sunday Readings - The Best of Politics, Economics, & Ideas

Sunday readings for you!

• Israel has gained access to airbases in Azerbaijan. Is the secular Muslim-dominated country of Azerbaijan turning into Israel's staging ground in the war against Iran? (Foreign Policy)

• “Business has really become the de facto substitute for Indian diplomatic engagement. And that works out nicely for India.” The growing role of India's private sector in determining the country's foreign policy. (New York Times)

• Nothing gives a man more of a sense of purpose, and there remains nothing more dignified, than hauling yourself out of bed and going to work. But some of those jobs that went away in the recession — some whole professions — are never coming back. What happens when you lose your job? (Esquire)

• Realpolitik, economic interests, ideals and the quest for freedom will shape the great game playing out in Myanmar, says Jaswant Singh, India's former foreign minister. (Al-Jazeera)

• The rise and fall of the world's most dangerous arms dealer. (New Yorker)

• Should Apple buy Twitter? (Business Week)

• Sharda Ugra says that the Bharat Ratna is bestowed for a lifetime of dedicated work to a cause. And so, Sachin Tendulkar will have to wait. (Outlook)

Last week, the Government of India stopped the death sentence of Balwant Singh Rajoana, the killer of former Punjab chief minister, Beant Singh. In some sense this government action reflects the pursuit of communal politics, even at the cost of national security. Sudhir Tailang caricatures votebank politics in this brilliant cartoon. 

The Explainer: The Syrian Crisis - Part II

In The Explainer: The Syrian Crisis - Part I, published in this space on March 6, I focused on the presidency of Hafez al-Assad and the demographics of Syria. 

In this second and final part, I will focus on the presidency of Bashar al-Assad and the rebel movement that is raging across Syria against his dictatorship. 

Enter Bashar al-Assad
Bashar al-Assad, an Ophthalmologist, is the current president and youngest son of Hafez al-Assad. He was not the chosen heir to his father's presidency; it was his older brother, Bassel al-Assad, who was groomed to succeed Hafez. However, Bassel died in a car accident when he rammed his Mercedes at high speed into a roundabout.

At the time of his father's death, Bashar was 34; however, the Syrian constitution stipulated that the president must be 40 years of age. To overcome this constitutional hurdle, the Syrian parliament amended the constitution within 48 hours of the death of Hafez al-Assad, to lower the minimum age for the president from 40 to 34. This way Bashar became the president of Syria. 

This can be looked at in another way: Bashar forced the parliament, populated by his father's lackeys, to change the eligibility for president's office by tweaking the constitution. You do not expect a person who becomes president through force and manipulation to respect the will of the people of his nation. 

The Paranoid Dictator
All dictators are paranoid by nature. Bashar al-Assad is no exception. With the help of the secret police, he crushed all political opposition, denied basic freedoms to his people, while repression, nepotism and economic corruption became the order of the day. Thousands of opposition political activists were sent to jail without trial. 

In fact, Bashar would always romp home with more than 98 per cent of the vote, like in the 2007 presidential election. It is nobody’s guess that the elections were a one-sided affair, with all legitimate opposition leaders either disqualified or put in jail. In short, Bashar continued his father's policy of subverting the system to perpetuate his rule.  

The Demographic Bomb
While the political and military elite are enjoying the fruits of Bashar's dictatorship, life is nothing less than a living hell for the ordinary Syrian. About 50 per cent of the total population of 23 million is below 30 years of age, a feature that demographers call the 'youth bulge'. 

As the population expands while the economy stagnates because of official apathy, unemployment numbers are rising by the day. With an overall unemployment rate of over 20 per cent and youth unemployment rate at over 40 per cent, the Syrian youth are frustrated at lack of economic opportunity, social security, and employment. Today it is the youth who are taking to the street, calling for political and economic reform.  

To summarise, a high degree of youth unemployment, widespread corruption, lack of basic freedoms, discrimination against certain groups of people (like Sunnis) and the all-pervasive shadow of a totalitarian state have all come together to explode in the face of Bashar. 

Current situation
Inspired by the success of the popular movements against dictators in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen, the marginalised and frustrated people of Syria took to the streets, first peacefully and later violently, demanding that Bashar al-Assad step down from the presidency.  

As Syrians came out in thousands to hold protests in major towns (like Damascus and Homs), Bashar’s response was on predictable lines: shoot at sight, arbitrary detention without trial, and charge the arrested protesters with draconian provisions like treason, all aimed at crushing any form of dissent against his regime. 

The situation in Syria is slowly veering toward civil war. Security forces, loyal to Bashar's regime, have killed more than 8000 protesters. However, even in the face of an unrelenting onslaught by troops loyal to Bashar, the rebels are not giving up. 

Regional impact
As is the case with most conflicts today, what happens in one country does not stay there. This is especially true in the case of Syria. The al-Assad regime is close to Iran, Iraq, and the Hezbollah, the terror outfit-cum-political party in neighbouring Lebanon. What connects the four is their common sectarian identity: Shia Islam. (As mentioned in The Explainer: The Syrian Crisis - Part I, the Assads belong to the Alawi branch of Shia Islam.) 

There has been growing condemnation from the international community against Bashar's atrocities against the rebels. Efforts by the Unites States, EU and Israel to impose punishing sanctions against Bashar's regime have been stymied by Russia and China.

Recently, Saudi Arabia sent arms to the rebels to fight the regime in Damascus; the irony of the situation would not be missed on anyone who knows the autocratic and despotic royal house in Saudi Arabia. While Saudi Arabia muffles any voice that rises against the royal house, it is 'helping' the rebels in Syria. 

Why? 

Because Saudi Arabia is Sunni, the Syrian rebels are Sunni, while Bashar al-Assad is an Alawi Shia. Now bring in the larger regional picture: Bashar is backed by Shia Iran, a sectarian and ideological rival of Saudi Arabia. In a simple sense, great power politics is underpinned by regional, ideological and sectarian power struggles.

What if Bashar goes? 
There is great anxiety in the United States, EU, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Lebanon about the outcome of this massive rebel movement in Syria. Will Bashar al-Assad end up like Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, and Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen? If yes, what will be the impact of the outcome?

If Bashar al-Assad is booted out of power, then we should look at its impact on:

• Syrian domestic politics, which has no credible opposition except for an umbrella rebel body which is beset with infighting among its various constituent parties;
• neighbours like Iran, Lebanon, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq;
• dictators in the wider Arab World (like King Hamad of Bahrain);
• global economy, which might witness revival problems because of energy supply disruption and spike in oil prices in case the conflict takes on a regional shape;
• rise of Islamists, like the radical Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the moderate Ennahda party in Tunisia, and 
• strategic realignment, especially with regard to the role of the United States in the wider Arab World and Middle East.

However, not withstanding these scenarios, Bashar al-Assad may yet survive to live another day, a day that may come to signify the triumph of sheer brute power over people power.

The Explainer: Will Israel attack Iran?

In the early years of the last decade, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) shocked the world when it uncovered Iran’s clandestine pursuit of nuclear weapons programme. However, the IAEA exposé merely confirmed the worst fears of the international community that was all along merely suspecting such a possibility.

Today, the European Union, the United States, and Israel are convinced that Iran’s is out to develop nuclear weapons. The international community, including India, has made it amply clear that it does not want a nuclear Iran. The usually restrained Government of India has clearly stated that it does not want another nuclear power in the neighbourhood.

As was expected, Iran denied the accusations listed in the IAEA report and has maintained that its nuclear programme is for civil energy generation. Tehran maintains that it has no interest in nuclear weapons, but that as a member of the NPT it has an inalienable right to peaceful nuclear energy. According to the Nuclear Threat Initiative, critical parts of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure “include a VVER-1000 MWe light water reactor at Bushehr, a uranium conversion facility at Esfahan, an enrichment facility at Natanz, a heavy water production plant, and a heavy water reactor at Arak”.

Sanctions
The United States has imposed oil embargo against Iran, under which any country/entity which does trade with Iran’s central bank (most of the revenue transactions for energy sales by Iran are handled by its central bank) for purchase of its energy resources will face serious penalties in the United States. 

The EU has also boycotted purchase of oil and gas from Iran, which will take six months for full implementation. It is believed that if these sanctions are fully carried out, they could help isolate Iran’s central bank and effectively choke off the sale of Iranian oil by obstructing the means of payment, which in turn will force Iran to abandon its nuke weapons programme.

The new U.S.-EU oil embargo is in addition to the sanctions imposed by the United Nations. The UN sanctions prevent all members and international financial institutions from entering into new commitments for grants, financial assistance, and concessional loans, to  Iran, except for humanitarian and developmental purposes. Exports of arms from Iran have also been banned and member states are told to exercise restraint in selling major arms systems to Iran.

Impact of Sanctions
The current international sanctions and conflict with the West could push Iran deeper into an economic morass, which it can ill-afford. In fact, not only will such a conflict stop the flow of any foreign investment into the country, it could also lead to a flight of capital from the country. In fact, the sanctions are already having a debilitating impact on the Iranian economy. It defaulted on payment for about 200,000 tonnes of rice from India. India is considering not exporting any more rice to Iran on credit, as suppliers such as those in Thailand, Vietnam and Pakistan had already stopped doing so.

Why not military action?
If there is any one thing that’s discouraging the U.S. and other major powers from taking military action against Iran, it is oil. Iran has more than 9 per cent of the world’s oil and gas reserves. It has threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz through which nearly one-third of global oil supply passes every day. Any major disruption in global oil supply could lead to a serious spike in the cost of oil. Even if we discount the current global slowdown, a rise in the cost of oil (because of the fear of disruption in supply) could jeopardize any chance of a quicker recovery of the world economy.

War by covert means?

Apart from direct military intervention, it is widely speculated that the U.S. and Israel have launched a phantom cyber war to scuttle Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. 

In January 2011, The New York Times published an article on the Stuxnet virus, which is believed to have been a joint American-Israeli project to sabotage the Iranian nuke programme. The Stuxnet is believed to be the most sophisticated cyber-weapon ever deployed. The computer worm has set reportedly wreaked technological havoc on the Iranian nuke programme; in fact, the U.S. and Israeli intelligence establishments believe that because of the worm, Iran has already run into technological difficulties that could delay a bomb until 2015.

It is also believed that Israel, in preparation for the air attack, already has special forces in place in Iran. Also, it is likely that they were behind the killing of five key Iranian scientists (all related to the nuke programme) over the last two years. 

What are the plausible air routes that Israel could use to attack Iran?

In the light of the geographical location of Israel and Iran and the geopolitical reality of the region, there are three plausible air routes that Israeli air force may use to attack Iran.

Jordan-Iraq Route. The most ‘comfortable’ route for Israeli aircraft to attack Iran will be through Jordanian and Iraqi airspace. Jordan, which is pro-West and not comfortable with the idea of a nuclear Iran, in unlikely to react in any major way. Iraq lacks any major air disruptive capability. In other words, Iraq, after the U.S. withdrawal, lacks the military infrastructure to stop Israel from using its airspace to attack Iran. However, a Shia-dominated Iraqi government, which is close to Iran, has already warned Israel to avoid violating its airspace, which may make flying through Iraqi airspace difficult.

Turkey-Syria northern route. Initially when Israel was planning for the attack on Iran, one potential route they considered was the northern route: flying through the Mediterranean Sea (along Lebanese and Syrian coasts) and then close to the Turkey-Syria international border. Now let us look at why this will not work:

(a) Syria is a sworn enemy of Israel; it, along with Iran, supports the Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which are anti-Israel. Also, Israel had occupied the Golan Heights from Syria in the 1967 Six Day War.

(b) Till a few years ago, Turkey was one of the very few allies Israel had in the Muslim World. However, deteriorating bilateral relations (because of a host of reasons like the botched Israeli raid on a Turkish aid ship, destined for the Gaza Strip) have put the Turkey-Israel bonhomie in cold storage.

In the light of these facts, the northern route will not work for the Israeli military operation against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Jordan-Saudi Arabia route. The third and most plausible route would be through the Jordan-Saudi Arabia air corridor. This would call for flying through Jordan and entering Saudi airspace.

Why this route may work? Saudi Arabia is Sunni while Iran is the world's largest Shia republic. For decades now, Iran has been challenging the Saudi hegemony in the Islamic World. Iran's rising power ambitions threaten Saudi Arabia's leadership of the Islamic World at large and the Arab World in particular. In short, Saudi Arabia is an ideological, sectarian, and power rival.

Established as a Jewish State in 1948, Israel is the first theocratic State in the post-Second World War world. Judaism (the religion of the Jews) and Islam have been at loggerheads for centuries. 

Also, Israel is an undeclared nuke weapons power; in this regard, Israel follows an 'ncnd' policy, i.e., it neither confirms nor denies its nuke status. Its nuke weapons make it the only nuke weapons state in the Middle East.

Ever since the Islamists brought in an Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran has called for the destruction of Israel. It is in this context that reports of Israel’s planned strikes against Iranian nuke plants should be understood. Israel believes that Iran, in a moment of sheer desperation, may launch a nuclear weapons attack against it.

In this regard, in highly secretive meetings, it is learnt that Saudi Arabia has given permission to Israel to use its northern air corridor for flyover to strike at Iran’s secretive nuclear plants. 

The U.S. is not in favour of an Israeli air strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. It believes that an air strike may achieve limited gains, as most of the Iranian nuclear facilities are located in secret underground bunkers. Also, any attack against Iran may rally Islamists and liberals in the Muslim World against not just Israel but also the U.S., which many see as the Jewish State’s principal backer. Such attacks also raises the dangerous possibility of attacks against U.S. citizens in various parts of the world.

In other words, the U.S. believes that an Israeli air strike against Iran may turn out to be a massive strategic miscalculation, riddled with consequences that have the potential to disrupt global economic recovery and big power status. 

(Picture sourced from here.)