Syria Reentering Arab League Brings US Down Another Notch

Syria Reentering Arab League Brings US Down Another Notch

                                                                                        Saeed Naqvi

The irony of Volodymyr Zelensky making an appearance at the Arab League Summit in Jeddah to witness Syria’s President, Bashar al Assad reoccupy his chair in the League, appears to have been lost on most. Arab leaders, accustomed to US hegemony, have switched because they are convinced of American decline. Syria is the beneficiary of this appraisal.

After 20 years of occupying Afghanistan, 10 years of total control of Iraq, Americans came a cropper in a most humiliating fashion. How then did they dream up a scenario that they would be able to bring about a regime change in Damascus, by mobilizing regional Arab countries to embark on cross border terrorism? The other name for such action is “proxy war” which has not yet bruised Vladimir Putin.

As Ukraine is being destroyed so were the ancient Biblical sites of Syria. But Western failure in weakening the regime was manifest in several episodes. For example, take the grilling Gen. Lloyd Austin was subjected to by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, for having botched up a $500 million project to train “moderate militants” who would be set upon Assad’s forces. What happened was something of a tragi-comedy.

After having received rigorous training plus expensive weaponry, the soldiers for the Free World vamoosed in the cover of darkness along with weapons and ammunition. Intelligence agencies tracked the treacherous trainees in the ranks of Jabal al Nusra, which represented ghoulish Islamism on the scale of Al Qaeda or the Islamic State. The officer in charge of the training was the then Gen. Austin, now Secretary of Defence. During the Senate hearings Austin was asked: “How many of the militants trained by us are still fighting for our cause?” Austin was tongue tied. After a long pause he mumbled. “Four or five.” Ashton Carter, Obama’s Secretary of Defence, was in tears, all in front of cameras.

The moral that Zelensky should have grasped was this: Well entrenched regimes cannot be toppled by proxy wars and Vladimir Putin is several times more powerful than Assad.

“Putin cannot be brought down by a proxy war.”

The other major lesson for Kiev is the change of heart in the Arab world. Assad’s arrival in Jeddah was no tepid entry. The Syrian flag fluttered all along the route. Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has wisely concluded that efforts to dethrone Assad have failed. Strong head winds in that project came in the form of Russian intervention in 2015.

Russian intervention in Syria was, in its audacity, comparable to their taking control of Pristina airport a little ahead of NATO in 1999. A clash was prevented and Pristina airport became a unique venue where Russia and NATO coexist since 1999.

Gen. Wesley Clark, the NATO commander was determined to reverse the situation at the airport. His Deputy Mike Jackson, part of the British contingent in NATO refused to obey Clark. “I am not going to start World War III for you.” Gen. Clark’s almost uncontainable anger and determination to teach the Russians a lesson was, to my mind the earliest military demonstration of the “Sole Super Power” mind set.

So complicated had this little known episode in far-off Kosovo become that secretary of State Madeline Albright persuaded her Policy Planning Chief, Morton Halperin to launch a major study of the recent history of Kosovo. Halperin invited his scholar friend from Princeton, Richard Ullman to lead the study for which space was created in the State department. The point to note is the Russians refusal to back down even as the Sole Super Power proclaimed its arrival. In fact NATO had already been brought into play in 1995. This was when Serbian excesses against the Kosovo Muslims had increased. That’s another story.

Southern Slavic ethnic links between Serbs and Russians plus their affiliation to the Orthodox Church have already been factored into Zelensky’s retaliatory moves. For instance, he ordered Orthodox Priests to leave the centuries old Kiev Church compound. The accusation is that these Priests and worshipers have links with Churches in Moscow. This is a sensitive matter. Balkans may well be the turf where the Ukraine war will be pushed by Zelensky.

Since it is presumed that Zelensky is still being directed by the US, could he, in desperation, unilaterally push the fighting outside Ukraine, possibly even into the Balkans. My guess is that President Biden is so preoccupied with internal crises that he will not have the attention span to improvise on Ukraine, particularly since the script so far has gone woefully against all the media boast and bluster.

Indeed, Zelensky should know that the entire Arab World has switched away from the US camp for a very simple reason. Whatever residual hope there was of US hegemony surviving has evaporated with leaders like Emanuel Macron already proceeding on a world order sans western dominance. Arabs, Africans, Latin Americans, even South Asians, all have seen a multipolar world swim into their ken. This explains Saudi-Iranian rapprochement, or the Syrian return to the Arab League. After Turkish election results are announced after May 28, an Ankara-Damascus rapprochement is also in the cards.

It takes my breath away, the rapidity with which events have loosened American control everywhere except, presumably, the UK. In this last instance it is always difficult to find who is controlling whom. Are the experience of Empire and exhausted imperialism in competition?

Let me place myself in Assad’s most elegant adviser, Bouthaina Shaaban’s office in the Presidential Palace. I have seen US ambassador, Stephen Ford and his French counterpart join dissident groups in Homs, Hama and Dera. “Don’t you have any rules for diplomats?” Bouthaina’s response is astonishing. “Just shows how penetrated we are.” That was 12 years ago.

A former US ambassador to West Asia, Ed Peck said something which I am tempted to repeat.

“I have been dismayed by the accolades and support given to Ambassador Ford, our man in – and now out of Syria, for stepping well out of the traditional and appropriate role of a diplomat and actively encouraging the revolt/insurrection/sectarian strife/outside meddling”.

#          #          #          #

Is India Truly “Bad Bet” For US As Ashley Tellis Alleges?

Is India Truly “Bad Bet” For US As Ashley Tellis Alleges?

                                                                                       Saeed Naqvi

The signals were out much before President Biden cancelled his participation in the QUAD summit in Sydney due on May 24.

After two decades of intense India-US courtship the American foreign policy expert who has more or less chaperoned the suitors, has come to the dire conclusion that India likes to be cuddled but will not consummate.

In a revealing article in Foreign Affairs magazine earlier this month, Ashley Tellis, Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Tata Chair for International Peace, has said it quite bluntly in the headline itself: “America’s Bad Bet on India”. He clarifies further: “New Delhi will not side with Washington against Beijing.”

The importance of the statement lies in the author’s background. When President George W Bush handpicked an experienced China hand, Robert Blackwill, as his Ambassador to New Delhi, a key member of the envoy’s entourage to New Delhi was the brilliant Mumbai born student who proceed to do his Ph.D. in Political Science from Chicago University.

“Striking Asymmetries”, Tellis’ masterly book on nuclear transitions in the South Asian region and beyond qualified him to play a key role in helping draft the landmark Indo-US nuclear deal on 2005. The central figure in the Indian team negotiating the deal was S.Jaishankar, today India’s foreign minister.

The intricacies in the policy document required expertise of the highest order, which is what Tellis and Jaishankar provided at hand. Once in the course of normal bureaucratic transfers, Jaishankar was posted as High Commissioner to Singapore. So indispensable had he made himself to the nuclear deal that bureaucratic procedures were subverted. Jaishankar was reverted back to the South Block to see the nuclear deal through.

This elaborate background is to establish Tellis as an insider who has a grip on the details of the Indo-US relations at least since the Bush years. When he describes India as a bad bet for America’s Indo-Pacific policy, New Delhi better take note.

The timing of Tellis’ article is also important. He has blown the whistle at a time when the administration of President Joe Biden was not only moving along the path of Indo-US relations which Tellis has grown so skeptical about, but the Biden administration has launched “an ambitious new initiative to expand India’s access to cutting edge technologies.”

Further the administration has deepened its defence co-operation and made the QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) a pillar of its regional strategy. Tellis is worried that the US has overlooked “India’s democratic erosion and the unhelpful policy choices such as refusal to condemn Moscow’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine.” Washington has done “all this on the presumption that New Delhi will respond favourably when Washington asks for a favour during a regional crisis involving China.” The reality is quite to the contrary: Is Washington being cuckolded?

Tellis is convinced that Washington’s current expectations of India are misplaced. He cites reasons for this state of affairs: “India’s significant weaknesses compared with China, its physical proximity to it, guarantee that New Delhi will never involve itself in any US confrontation with Beijing that does not directly threaten its own security.”

“India values co-operation with Washington for the tangible benefits it brings but does not believe that it must, in turn, materially support the United States in any crisis – even one involving a common threat such as China.”

A section of the China punditry in India, on the other hand, veers around to the view that India is in Fool’s paradise if it imagines that the US would come rushing to its rescue should a real conflict break out with China. To the contrary, the US may goad India into a conflict in pursuit of its effective encirclement of China.

Both, Tellis and Jaishankar are aware of the depth of military relationship. Indeed the two have helped navigate large areas of this relationship. But over the years the US’s capacity to dictate terms has diminished.

Is it possible that Tellis has overlooked the fact that it was the Sole Superpower moment when discussions on the nuclear deal with India gave bilateral relations an extraordinary boost? Things have changed. Tellis came to India at a time when the neo cons around George W Bush were well and truly embarked on the American century. The US could dictate terms then.

That section of US foreign policy elite of which Tellis is a member, and which is disenchanted with what was once a key relationship must spell out the causes of this disappointment. A simple reason is that the relationship was conceived when the US was the Sole Superpower. No one could afford to be out of America’s orbit.

Tellis is giving vent to his disappointment when US dominance is more or less over. In a multipolar world, nation’s will drive harder bargains with the US.

It turns out that Tellis and Jaishankar have, even before the publication of the article, had exchanges on the theme including on the social media. Both agree that Indo-US relations have, in recent decades, reached a new high in military co-operation particularly. But a burgeoning relationship suddenly chokes on such important issues as “interoperability”. The Pentagon wants to be able to integrate foreign military in combined operations as part of “coalition warfare”.

“India rejects the idea that its armed forces will participate in any combined military operation.” In not amalgamating totally, India retains its political autonomy. That which leaves the US dissatisfied, is a matter of pride for the Indian establishment.

“Such differences will arise with a country like the US” which goes around the world in search of alliances, said Jaishankar in a TV discussion with Tellis. “Take the QUAD” for instance. Two of QUAD members, Australia and Japan, are allies of the US.” India is only a partner and would like to retain that relationship.

Are these differences in the backdrop against which President Biden has cancelled his participation in the QUAD summit in Sydney? He is attending the G7 in Japan where ironically all the QUAD leaders will be present.

#          #          #          #

Court Provides Level Playing Field: Let The Politicians Play Fair

Court Provides Level Playing Field: Let The Politicians Play Fair

                                                                                         Saeed Naqvi

The suffocating pall settled on the nation lifted in three quick bursts last week. True, for the Karnataka election results we only had exit polls but all six results favouring the Congress can’t all be wrong. And the almighty slap the Supreme Court has administered across the face of the Lt. Governor of Delhi must make his head spin. The third upset caused by the Supreme Court was in Maharashtra where the Governor and the Speaker played foul.

Few elected leaders have suffered humiliation at the hands of successive Lt. Governor’s quite clearly at the instance of the union government, as AAP’s Arvind Kejriwal. The Supreme Court has rewarded him for his courage, equanimity and vast funds of endurance. He kept his head when the Lt. Governor was losing his.

In his very first election to the Delhi Assembly in 2013, he came on top as the largest single party with 28 seats. A mortified Congress which had been in power for three terms, entangled AAP in a coalition. “Hum to doobe hai sanam, tumko bhi le doobenge” (I am sinking but will take you with me)

By coalescing with the Congress, AAP would lose some of its freshness and sheen. Also, by sheer association, some of the Congress negatives would rub off on AAP, smudging its novelty. “We will keep them nailed on the coalition until they are destroyed” said Arvinder Singh Lovely, former Delhi Congress Chief. Not just Lovely, it was every Congressman, BJP functionary’s dream to reduce this Johnny-come-Lately into an incompetent, ineffective cypher.  AAP’s sudden emergence and rise was scary.

The February 2015 results jolted not just the two ruling class parties in Delhi but the entire national political spectrum. AAP was 67 of the 70 seats – an unbreakable record. AAP’s record breaking performance induced insecurities. The Congress hated AAP more than the BJP for having displaced it. The BJP, likewise, loathed it more than the Congress. Its social welfare policies set in a deceptively capitalist frame were a danger for BJP’s corporate backers. AAP had to be stopped – by hook or by crook.

What came in most handy to pulverize the elected government was Justice Ashok Bhushan’s 2019 split verdict. Bhushan said the “services” were totally outside the purview of the State government.

The accelerated delivery of education, Health care, water and electricity as welfare measures in double quick time unnerved the compromised political class across the board. The Lt. Governors got into action. No more brownie points for AAP, they said. Ofcourse door to door delivery of food items would be blocked – any measure that enhances AAP’s popularity among the poor would be scuttled.

They, AAP, must be rendered unelectable – any further. Then Punjab was taken away from the Congress. Heels were dug in deep for the Delhi Municipal Corporation but, lo and behold, AAP came up trumps once again. By the Lt. Governor’s rule book, electoral victory in the Corporation did not mean that AAP could have its Mayor. Nominated members were brought into play to wrench the Mayorship away from AAP. Scuffles broke out in the house and the Lt. Governor, like Nero, watched. Arvind Kejriwal’s list of complaints against the union government and its representative, the Lt. Governor, would be a formidable document even if he deletes such trivia as being held back from attending prestigious conferences overseas.

One good news begets another. The Rouse Avenue Court has released on bail two persons detained in the so called Liquor license scandal. The 85 page order does not establish any financial wrong doing leave alone the alleged Rs.100 crores supposed to have been diverted by AAP for its Goa campaign.

If this is a trend setter, Kejriwal’s second in command, Manish Sisodia and Minister Satyendra Jain may soon be out on bail. Nothing has been proved against either.

Has the Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud reigned in Narendra Modi’s Ashwamedh which was freely roaming the territories to expand the Empire’s boundaries?

The restoration of legitimate power to the National Capital Region will have far reaching consequences. Power has, after all, been restored to a party which has in record time – a decade since its inception acquired the status of a national party.

Political parties in India take time to consolidate their constituencies. AAP is an exception which is one of the reasons why other parties find it dangerous. Anchored to a pragmatic welfarism, AAP is not circumscribed by an ideology which is both an advantage and a handicap. For example the party’s chilling indifference to the fate of Muslims during the communal riots which gripped North East Delhi in 2020. This alienated the party totally from Muslims. The community was already disenchanted by the temple locks opening, announcement of Ram Rajya as policy and finally the mosque demolition – all these decisively distanced the Muslims from the Congress. Indeed the Muslim abandoned the Congress enmasse.

Voting for the BJP was never an option. In the circumstance a relatively new force like AAP would have been well placed for the minorities had it not exposed itself as a shirker on the Muslim issue.

At a time when the Congress is averse to being seen even with a solitary Muslim on the platform because such a sight would be grist to the BJP’s polarization mill, was AAP’s indifference to the carnage justifiable as practical politics? Difficult to imagine civilized Indians degenerate into barbaric voters. Politics has been putrefied not by voters but politicians.

The Supreme Court has by its recent judgements established, without the shadow of a doubt, that there is muscle available to uphold the constitution and the rule of law. It is the politician who must grasp the dictum that, on a matter of principle he who fights but loses shall eventually win. Prince Lazar of the battle of Kosovo and Hussain of Karbala are two admittedly superhuman examples beyond human imitation, but model heroes nevertheless.

The Court has provided a level playing field. It is upto the politician to shift gears and play fair according to the rule book.

#          #          #          #

Congress Is Ahead In Karnataka But Hanuman May Trip Them

Congress Is Ahead In Karnataka But Hanuman May Trip Them

                                                                                        Saeed Naqvi

Salman Khan as a bhakt of Bajrang Bali, restores a lost Pakistani girl to her parents virtually on the Line of Control. Kabir Khan, the imaginative director of Bajrangi Bhaijaan, the film which brought the two countries together on an unbelievable scale, now has his role cut out for him in poll bound Karnataka.

State elections are just a few days away and Bajrang Bali has been introduced into active electioneering by the Congress whizz kid, Randeep Surjewala. He was taking a jibe at hate mongering by the Bajrang Dal. So, he said, the Congress would ban the Bajrang Dal, should it come to power in the state. He has a talent for blowing sky high such issues which can best be handled in undertones. Remember how, with the self confidence of a purohit, he declared Rahul Gandhi a “janeudhari” Brahmin, opening up a dubious caste debate.

No sooner had Surjewala mentioned Bajrang Dal than Prime Minister Modi, hovering on the state like an eagle (30 rallies and roadshows are billed for him), swooped on the “anti Hanuman tirade” whipped up by the Congress. “So, they want to imprison Lord Hanuman?” said he, grinding his teeth.

A journalist came running to my hotel room. “Look, the Congress has handed them an issue on which Modi will go to town.”

Every Hanuman temple in the state echoed to the sound of kirtans. Not to be left behind the Congress’s vokaliga candidate, D.K. Shivkumar raised the stakes even further. Should he become Chief Minister, he would build Hanuman Mandir in every district of Karnataka. For the formidable builders lobby this was honeyed music.

The BJP expectation is that, in the last lap of the campaign, Modi’s rhetorical talent plus Lord Hanuman will give them the tailwind to touch the finishing line. Seldom have I seen a major political party so completely dwarfed by a leader like Modi. There may be disgust with the BJP across classes. My taxi driver or that business executive smoking a Punch cigar had the same comment “Modi will win it for them.”

Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Atal Behari Vajpayee had a natural charisma. M.G.R., Jayalalitha, N.T. Rama Rao’s charisma derived from a combination of factors: cinematic glamour plus linguistic regionalism. That Amitabh Bachchan’s charisma never took off in the realm of politics was for a simple reason: his undoubted cinematic glamour did not have linguistic regionalism to boost it.

Modi’s charisma has been choreographed by the media. Every mainstream channel, English or language newspaper is captive, to his persona. For a deeply religious country, Modi’s omnipresence recalls, “jidhar dekhta hoon, udhar tu hi tu hai” (Your glory permeates any direction I look.)

This would imply that the BJP will romp home. And yet, that is not the way it works. Modi is an advantage no other party has. But the BJP government in the state has been extracting 40% of all government contract payments from state contractors, and the contractors have revealed this unchallenged truth on live TV. The burden becomes too heavy even for Modi to carry through. And the 40% scandal is only one of the negatives attached to the BJP in this campaign.

One is familiar with the exodus of Congressmen to the BJP. But in Karnataka traffic is taking place in the reverse direction – notable leaders like Jagdish Shetter and Laxman Sarvadi have left the BJP for the Congress. This is a huge psychological setback.

All of this should give the Congress an advantage, even though observers suggest the party campaign suffered from an excessive focus on Modi and his misdemeanours. What the Congress would do for the people was not persuasively put across. Even so, there is a certain bounce in the Congressmen’s tread.

There is another fly in the Congress ointment. The party has two aspirants for the job of Chief Minister: Siddaramaiah, a lower caste Uruba community, and D.K. Shivkumar, an agriculturalist vokaliga.

The assembly has 224 seats. Supposing the Congress tally is 80. Should the leadership confer the Chief Ministership on Siddaramaiah in anticipation of a coalition, why Shivkumar and his supporters would (if he has sufficient numbers) not be lured by a BJP in case the party is short of numbers. Such are the speculations in the ranks of nervous BJP sympathizers. BJP spokesman, S. Prakash spoke to me with the brazenness of someone determined to create an impression of super self confidence: “We are ruthless; ofcourse we shall splurge money to win over candidates. We have more money than all the other parties.” Such speech does not a victor make. To the contrary it betrays weakness.

There are figures galore, and any number of combinations, all pointing to a fierce election. A notable fact is this: there are many more people predicting a Congress victory than a BJP one. Yes, the third party the JDS could make for a thrilling entry should numbers encourage lengthy coalition parleys.

To Surjewala goes the authorship of the controversial statement: we shall ban the Bajrang Dal. No sooner did the story break than Shivkumar charged off to the Hanuman temple, with cameramen in tow to commit him to posterity as a Bhakt. He announced that the Congress will create an Anjanadri Development Board to develop the birthplace of Lord Hanuman on the hills of Koppal in Karnataka.

The person who must be feeling left out of the excessive Hanuman Bhakti must be AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal who first started the tradition of reciting Hanuman Chalisa at the drop of a hat.

The credit must go to the BJP for having hollowed out almost all political parties of their secular pretensions. Surjewala’s anti Bajrang Dal projection was aimed at luring Muslim votes away from the JDS which, if inflated, might play the monkey between quarrelling cats. No sooner had Surjewala shot the bolt, than the Congress was distancing itself from the controversial statement. Atleast since Indira Gandhi’s 1983 Jammu election, the Congress has learnt the lesson of shepherding Hindu votes with care and ignoring the Muslim votes proportionately.

#          #          #          #