AFGHANISTAN
Karzai elected President
On November 1, 2009, Afghanistan's Presidential challenger announced he would not participate in the run-off election because his demands for measures to prevent fraud were rejected. He stopped short of calling on his supporters to boycott the balloting.
Abdullah made no mention of agreeing to take part in any future unity government with President Hamid Karzai, which the US and its international partners believe is the best hope for curbing the Taliban insurgency.
In an emotional speech, Abdullah said he did not believe a free and fair election was possible without changes in the leadership of the electoral commission, which ran the fraud-marred first-round ballot on August 20, 2009. Abdullah said the Afghan people should not accept results of a ballot run by the current group.
A run-off was ordered after the UN auditors threw out nearly a third of Karzai's votes in the first round ballot, dropping him below the 50 per cent threshold for victory in the 36-candidate field.
Afghanistan's election commission declared Hamid Karzai elected as President on November 2, 2009 after it called off a run-off following the withdrawal of his only rival, Abdullah Abdullah. With this move the political uncertainty in Kabul came to an end.
US officials hope to help restore legitimacy to Karzai's government by encouraging him to build a reform-minded government that is ethnically representative and includes Abdullah's followers. US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton released a statement that hinted at Abdullah's group having some voice in the government. She praised Abdullah for running a "dignified and constructive campaign that drew the support of Afghan people across the nation. We hope that he will continue to stay engaged in the national dialogue and work on behalf of the security and prosperity of the people of Afghanistan."
Hamid Karzai was sworn in for a second term as Afghan President on November 19, 2009. The 51-year-old has pledged to fight corruption and take control of his country's security before his five-year term ends.
His inauguration came against the backdrop of an ever more deadly Taliban insurgency, doubts over his legitimacy after the tainted election, and demands from Western donors that he address rampant corruption and mismanagement.
BANGLADESH
Hindu property confiscated during 1965 war to be returned
On November 2, 2009, the Bangladesh cabinet approved a proposed law to return Hindu property, which were confiscated during the 1965 Indo-Pak war, when the country was eastern wing of Pakistan, ending a major violation of the rights of minorities in the country.
The proposed law is meant to redress the long-disputed law of the Pakistani era, which was widely criticised as a major violation of the minority rights. During the Pakistan period, the law was called as the Enemy Property Act.
The then Pakistani regime enacted the law to confiscate the property of the Hindu families who fled the country when the India-Pakistan war broke out in 1965 while the post-independent Bangladesh government renamed it as the Vested Property Act 1974.
Officials familiar with the process said under the amended proposal, the government would publish lists of “returnable and non-returnable vested property” within a certain period of times while the claimants could also seek review about “non-returnable” property. Under the law, government committees at district and upzila or sub-district levels would settle disputes regarding the disputed property.
The Awami League had enacted the law to return the minority property at the fag end of its previous 1996-2001 tenure setting a two-year implementation deadline but the subsequent Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) sat on it exposing it to a natural death. The 2001 law stipulated that land that was seized be returned to its original owners, provided that the original owners or their heirs remained resident citizens.
Mujib’s murderers convicted after 34 years
On November 19, 2009, Bangladesh's Supreme Court rejected the appeals of five former army officers and confirmed death sentence on seven others, who are living abroad, for killing the country's founding father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his family members 34 years ago.
A five-judge bench of the apex court delivered the judgement amid tight security on the court premises and key establishments across the country, bringing to an end a long court battle on an emotive issue.
Sheikh Mujib, officially referred to with the honorific Bangabandhu, who was then the country's President, was killed in a coup on the morning of August 15, 1975, less than four years after he led a movement that culminated in the emergence of Bangladesh after its violent separation from Pakistan.
In its judgement, the apex court ruled that the incidents of August 15, 1975, were “a simple murder and it was not a result of mutiny”. Also gunned down or bludgeoned in three separate attacks were most of Mujib's family members, close relatives, political associates, Mujib's security chief and personal staff.
Referred to as “killer majors”, since most of them were junior officers, the condemned men had later openly claimed to have carried out the killings in what they described as national interest.
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Mujib's elder daughter and one of the two survivors, revived the court trial after she returned to power in January 2009. Sheikh Rehana, the other surviving daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, in her reaction, said it was important that the verdict had been upheld by the Supreme Court.
EUROPEAN UNION
Belgian PM chosen first President
On November 19, 2009, European Union leaders have named Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy as the bloc’s first President and appointed Briton Catherine Ashton as its foreign affairs chief.
A consensus was reached at a summit in Brussels after Britain dropped its insistence that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair should become President, ending weeks of deadlock and opening the way to agreement on Van Rompuy.
The appointments are intended to bolster the EU’s standing and help it match the rise of emerging powers such as China following the global economic crisis.
Van Rompuy, 62, and Ashton, 53, are low-profile compromise candidates little known outside the EU and at least initially will not have the clout in foreign capitals that an established statesmen such as Blair would have had.
PAKISTAN
Zardari hands over ‘nuke button’ to Gilani
Pakistan's embattled President Asif Ali Zardari has transferred control of the country’s nuclear arsenal to Premier Yousuf Raza Gilani and said he intended to strip the Presidency of more powers soon.
The President gave up his control over the nuclear arsenal by re-promulgating the National Command Authority Ordinance and amending it, a move described as a “giant leap forward to empower the elected Parliament and the Prime Minister.”
Zardari also said in an interview with a TV news channel that the 17th Constitutional amendment which gives President sweeping powers to dismiss the Premier and dissolve Parliament will also be done away with soon.
Meanwhile, a controversial law which scrapped graft cases against Asif Ali Zardari and his key allies expired on November 28, 2009, but the Pakistan President felt it will not affect him as the Constitution provides “indemnity” to the person holding the top post in the country.
PHILIPPINES
Emergency imposed after massacre
On November 24, 2009, Philippines President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo placed two southern provinces and a city under emergency rule after 24 people were killed in the worst-ever election related violence in the country.
The orders were issued as troops, using shovels and bare hands, dug up hastily covered graves on a grassy hillside in Maguindanao to recover the victims of the massacre. Some of the dead men had their hands tied behind their back and one of the women was pregnant. Eight of those found dead were local journalists. They were part of a group of 40 people abducted by gunmen when on their way to file a candidate's nomination to contest the governorship in elections May 2010.
Elections in the Philippines are usually marred by violence, especially in the south, where security forces are battling communist rebels, Islamic radicals and clan rivalries.
SWITZERLAND
Voters approve ban on minarets
Swiss voters approved a ban on construction of new minarets on November 29, 2009, a surprise result that is certain to embarrass Switzerland’s neutral government and could also damage its economic ties with Muslim States.
About 57.5% of voters and all but four of the 26 cantons approved the proposal in the nationwide referendum, which was backed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP). The government said it would respect the people’s decision and declared construction of new minarets would no longer be permitted. “Muslims in Switzerland are able to practise their religion alone or in community with others and live according to their beliefs just as before,” it said in a statement. Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said the outcome of the vote reflected a fear of Islamic fundamentalism, but the ban was “not a feasible means of countering extremist tendencies”.
Both the government and Parliament had rejected the initiative as violating the Swiss constitution, freedom of religion and the nation’s cherished tradition of tolerance. The UN human rights watchdog had also voiced concerns.
The SVP, Switzerland’s biggest party, and Federal Democratic Union gathered enough signatures to force the vote on the initiative opposing the “Islamisation of Switzerland”. The move has stirred fears of violent reactions in Muslim countries and an economically disastrous boycott by wealthy Muslims who bank and vacation in Switzerland.
The right-wing campaign to outlaw minarets on mosques has received an unlikely boost from radical feminists arguing that the tower-like structures are “male power symbols” and reminders of Islam’s oppression of women. Julia Onken, a prominent feminist, warned that failure to ban minarets would be “a signal of the State’s acceptance of the oppression of women”.
WORLD ECONOMY
G-20 launches framework to boost global economy
The finance ministers of G-20 nations have agreed on a timetable for the new framework for balanced and sustainable growth of the global economy, but made a little progress on financing efforts to reduce global warming.
The world’s leading developed and emerging economies committed to have peer review and “more specific policy recommendations” in place by November 2010. The Finance Ministers, during the two-day meeting at St Andrews in Scotland, on November 8, 2009, hoped that if all countries put political weight behind the negotiations over the next year, the world can recover without developing the huge trade and financial imbalances of the past decade.
But there was no agreement on a specific set of common objectives, nor a mechanism to resolve disputes. On the climate change issue, the Finance Ministers agreed only to keep working for an ambitious outcome at meeting in Copenhagen but could not agree on the amount of money developed countries will offer to poorer countries to help them reduce their carbon dioxide emissions.
The meeting was also overshadowed by a dispute about the possibility of a global tax on financial transactions. Addressing the meeting, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown floated the idea of such a tax would help banks to pay for the insurance they receive from taxpayers. Within hours of the suggestion, the idea appeared still-born when US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said: “A day-to-day financial transaction tax is not something we are prepared to support.” But some of the other measures mentioned by Brown—an insurance fee to reflect the risk of some banks, a pre-funded pool of money to support orderly bank bankruptcies and contingent capital arrangements-have more international support. The US is supportive of efforts to ensure banks cannot rely on taxpayers to bail them out in future.
Eurozone pulls out of recession
Europe's deepest recession since the second world war has officially ended after the world's biggest single trading bloc joined Japan and the United States in returning to growth. Both the 16-nation eurozone, and the 27-nation European Union as a whole, expanded their economies in the third quarter, with a 0.4 per cent increase in the single currency area and a 0.2 per cent rise across the bloc as a whole.
But despite exiting five quarters running of economic retreat, analysts said that the improvement is unlikely to be robust enough to allow governments to end State support measures, particularly with unemployment continuing to rise.
The eurozone economy had shrunk by 0.2 per cent between April and June after a record collapse of 2.5 per cent in the first three months of 2009. But growth of 0.7 per cent in Germany, Europe's most powerful economy, and 0.3 per cent in France, in the third quarter lay behind the improvement.
Britain, with a 0.4 per cent contraction and Spain, with a 0.3 per cent decline, contributed to the lower figure for the EU as a whole.
The European figures compare with a 0.9 per cent improvement in third-quarter economic output in the United States, with Japan having already exited from recession in the second quarter with 0.6 per cent growth.
Hoarwd Archer, the chief economist at IHS Global Insight, poured some cold water on the news when he said the the emergence into daylight came "at a trot rather than a canter". Cautioning that "consumer spending likely saw little or no growth," Archer warned that the recovery "could well lose momentum for a time in 2010 before growth starts to gradually pick up again".
But he forecast overall eurozone growth of one per cent in 2010. Clemente De Lucia of BNP-Paribas, a French bank, said the rebound was due mainly to the industrial sector and warned that the recovery "might fade in 2010" once the impact of schemes, such as help for boosting new car sales, was fully withdrawn. He also pointed to high unemployment, running at more than 22 million at the last count across the EU, acting as a brake on expansion for some time yet.
OECD doubles 2010 forecast
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has doubled its growth forecast for the leading developed economies in 2010 and predicted a further acceleration in 2011 as China powers a global recovery.
The economy of the group’s 30 member countries will expand 1.9% in 2010 and 2.5% in 2011, the Paris-based organisation said in a report. Output will contract 3.5% in 2009. The OECD, which advises members on economic policy, forecast 2010 growth of 0.7% in June.
But the recovery will be marred by high unemployment and huge government debt across the industrialised countries, the OECD said. Central banks and governments in major Western economies should prepare for a gradual upwards shift in ultra-low interest rates and for fiscal consolidation once recovery is stronger, but they will only need to move in late 2010 at the earliest given that inflation is so low.
Output in the OECD economies will only return to the level achieved in the first three months of 2008 in the third quarter of 2011, underlining the damage done by the banking crisis.
The OECD gave 2011 growth forecasts for the first time. The US will grow 2.8%, the euro area 1.7% and Japan 2%. The Chinese economy will expand 9.3%, it said. The global growth forecast includes emerging giants China, Brazil, India and Russia with the mostly industrialized economies of its own 30-country membership and in all covers some 80% of world output.
The OECD said it expected world trade to grow 6.0% in 2010 and 7.7% in 2011 after a plunge of 12.5% in 2009. China and India are poised to accelerate due to strong stimulus measures, the OECD projected.
The Paris-based group hiked its growth forecast for China to 9.3% in 2009 and 10.2% in 2010. In March, it projected China's growth at 6-7% in 2009. For India, the OECD boosted its growth forecast to 6.1% in 2009 and 7.3% in 2010, rising to 7.6% the following year. The OECD, in March, projected 4.3% expansion for India in 2009. India's recovery appeared to be only “modestly hampered” by the driest monsoon in nearly four decades and economic data suggested the growth “momentum is strengthening,” the OECD said. But a resurgence of inflationary pressures pose a “key challenge” to Indian policymakers in deciding when to withdraw stimulus in order to tackle the large public deficit, it said.
Dubai rattles global scrips with its woes
Global markets from Sydney to Sao Paulo trembled on November 26, 2009, on fears that Dubai’s attempts to reschedule loans might trigger a fresh round of financial troubles in a world just emerging from the worst economic crisis since the 1930s and which may be amplified in India as thousands of expats stare at job losses and reduced trade.
India, which gets nearly a quarter of its remittances from the United Arab Emirates and has lakhs of labourers working in the region, may be worse off than most other nations if the crisis escalates into a full-blown one like the Russian or Argentinian crises of the past.
Indian shares and the rupee fell in sync with the rest of the global markets where investors are fleeing for safety after Dubai World, the government investment company with $59 billion of liabilities, sought to delay repayment on much of its debt. Investors believe that there could be more trouble spots in emerging markets after Vietnam devalued its currency and raised rates. The Bombay Stock Exchange’s Sensex fell 2% to 16,854.95, and the rupee fell 24 paisa to 46.55 against the dollar. The MSCI Emerging Markets Index lost 1.4%.
Dubai, which borrowed $80 billion in a four-year construction boom to transform its economy into a regional tourism and financial hub, suffered the world’s steepest property slump in the global recession. Home prices fell 50 percent from their 2008 peak, according to Deutsche Bank AG. Banks around the world have written off more than $1.7 trillion as the credit crisis trashed the value of their assets.
Dubai World’s lenders include Credit Suisse Group AG, HSBC Holdings, Barclays, Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland Group.
ENVIRONMENT
China announces ambitious emission caps
Green NGOs were elated after China announced ambitious cuts in the carbon intensity of its economy by 2020 in a major boost to the global effort to tackle climate change. China announced a 40-45 percent reduction in the carbon intensity from the business-as-usual scenario by 2020. Carbon intensity measures the amount of carbon dioxide—the main greenhouse gas that is causing global warming—emitted per unit of industrial output. India's carbon intensity is one of the lowest among emerging economies.
International NGO Greenpeace also welcomed China's announcement but said it was not enough. "Given the urgency and magnitude of the climate change crisis, China needs stronger measures to tackle climate change," said Ailun Yang of Greenpeace China. "This is a significant announcement at a very important point in time. But China could do more."
Since 2007, China is the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, though almost all the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now has been put there by developed countries since the start of the Industrial Age.
Yang noted that the announcement by China is yet another commitment for the climate coming from a major developing country ahead of the UN Copenhagen Climate Summit. "This is another challenge to the industrialised world, particularly the US, which has just announced an inadequate emissions reduction target of only 4-5 percent by 2020."
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—a grouping of over 2,500 scientists from around the world—has said the developed world should cut emissions by at least 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce 80-95 percent by 2050.
For China, a low carbon path is a national priority and a sure way to keep up its economic tempo. China can ill-afford to let ‘invisible’ carbon denominated process and production methods (PPMs) standards shackle its export offensive.
More than India, it is China that should be worried about the current efforts to re-interpret Article XX (e) of GATT to keep out ‘goods based on carbon intensive processes’. In reality, China has been under greater pressure to stave off the ‘climate related threat’ from the WTO window. By sending a ‘concrete’ signal of commitment to emission intensity reduction, the People’s Republic is doing its best to keep the trade dragon from getting into the FCCC fold.
There could be an interpretation that the Chinese concession is an implicit acceptance of NAMA. Given the fact that China is still coal dependent and looks towards safe and cost-effective carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, it does not make sense for it to accept NAMA commitments without quid pro commitments on the technology transfer front. It is important that India and China have a concerted position on this issue.
Earlier in the month of November, Brazil had offered to reduce its emissions if it was provided international funding to control deforestation of the Amazonian forests. The move was interpreted by some as a sell-out to industrialised countries. And, now India faces the challenge of how to escape being seen as a global hurdle.
The Chinese move came a day after the US administration, that held out for long, announced that it would offer a target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions "in the range of" 17% by 2020 as compared to 2005 levels. When converted to benchmarks set under Kyoto Protocol, this works out to 4% reduction below 1990 levels—almost seven times less than what the EU has offered and less than 1/10th of what the UN IPCC requires industrialised countries to do to check catastrophic climate change.
One senior official said: "China’s offer are not absolute reductions, please note, and they are purely voluntary, China has not offered them as a commitment towards international compact. This is along lines that China had informed us of. But they leave a positive impression internationally." In fact, the Chinese are aiming to earn goodwill without doing much. The industrialized countries are obliged under the existing UN treaty to reduce their emissions by absolute levels below a fixed benchmarked year. China, in comparison has offered a purely voluntary reduction in its carbon intensity. The carbon intensity target also provides enough leverage for ‘creative accounting’ in measuring success of targets.
NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION
Chinese N-shopping mall helped Pakistan
China supplied Pakistan with enough weapons-grade uranium for two atomic bombs in 1982 and continued to help Islamabad out with its nuclear programme, according to a report in The Washington Post.
Outing China as a nuclear proliferator, the report, which sourced the narrative from accounts written by disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan, said that a Pakistani military C-130 left the western Chinese city of Urumqi with the “highly unusual cargo" in 1982.
That China supplied Pakistan with nuclear know-how has always been suspected, but this is the first time that a detailed account of how it took place has come out and that too straight from the accounts of A.Q. Khan. The uranium transfer was reportedly part of a secret nuclear deal approved years earlier by Mao Zedong and Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in the 1976, four years after India tested its first nuclear weapon.
But it was realised only during the time of Zia ul-Haq, who after taking power and hanging Bhutto was struggling under rumours of a pre-emptive strike by India. So Khan and a Pakistani general were sent to Beijing "to borrow enough bomb-grade uranium for a few weapons." Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping gave the approval and Khan and his team flew aboard a Pakistani C-130 to Urumqi where Khan says they enjoyed barbecued lamb while waiting for the Chinese military to pack the small uranium bricks into lead-lined boxes to be flown to Islamabad.
“Upon my personal request, the Chinese Minister . . . had gifted us 50 kg [kilograms] of weapon-grade enriched uranium, enough for two weapons,” Khan wrote in an 11-page narrative of the Pakistani bomb programme that he prepared after his January 2004 detention. “The Chinese gave us drawings of the nuclear weapon, gave us 50 kg enriched uranium,” he said in a separate account sent to his wife several months earlier. China in effect supplied a "virtual do-it-yourself kit that significantly speeded Pakistan’s bomb effort."
Even before that, China sent Pakistan 15 tons of uranium hexafluoride (UF6), a feedstock for Pakistan’s centrifuges, whose designs Khan has stolen. But it was also a give and take with Khan sharing Europe’s best centrifuge technology in the 1980s with the Chinese in an effort to help China’s uranium-enrichment programme.
India votes against Iran on IAEA resolution
On November 27, 2009, India joined 24 other countries at the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to vote against Iran on its nuclear programme. India’s censure was based on IAEA director-general Mohammed El Baradei’s report on Implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in Iran which said all efforts to negotiate with Iran to address the international community’s concern over its ‘clandestine enrichment programme’ has reached a “dead-end.”
This was the third time that India has voted against Iran’s alleged clandestine nuclear weapons programme at the IAEA, the last two occasions being in September 2005 and February 2006. This decision had kicked off a massive political storm in the country. The Left parties, which were offering critical outside support to the UPA government at that time, had come down heavily on the ruling combine and accused it of being arm-twisted by the US into voting against Iran.
The vote had also raised serious concerns within the ruling Congress, which feared that this vote would erode its minority support base. Explaining New Delhi’s third vote on the governing body resolution Vienna, External Affairs Ministry spokesperson said: “Our support for the resolution was based on the key points contained in the Report of the Director General.”
The IAEA has come to the conclusion that Iran was not transparent about its nuclear programmes and concluded that it was pursuing clandestine nuclear weapons programme. In September, Iran confirmed the doubts about its weapons programme when it disclosed the existence of a second uranium enrichment plant in Fordo, not very far from Tehran.
India, on its part, has been doing a tightrope walk on the sensitive issue. It has consistently opposed Tehran on this issue in multi-lateral forums but continued to engage with Tehran bilaterally. The reasons for this were explained by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh when he pointed to the ancient civilization links between the two countries, New Delhi’s dependence on Iran for energy and the presence of five million Indians living in Iran.
Continuing with its balancing act, India was quick to strike a conciliatory note after its censure of Iran at Vienna. It pointed out that this resolution should not be used to renew punitive action or new sanctions against Iran.
The latest resolution was backed by all five permanent members of the UN Security Council. The three countries that opposed the anti-Iran IAEA resolution were Cuba, Venezuela and Malaysia, while Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Turkey, South Africa and Brazil abstained from voting.
Iran to build 10 new enrichment plants
On November 29, 2009, Iran announced plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants in a major expansion of its nuclear programme—a clear show of defiance after the UN nuclear watchdog rebuked Tehran over secret such work. The decision by hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government will further aggravate tensions between the Islamic Republic and major powers seeking a diplomatic solution to a long-running dispute over Iranian nuclear activities.
It may speed up discussions in the West about possible new sanctions on Iran over its repeated refusal to halt uranium enrichment, which the US and its allies suspect is part of a covert bid to develop nuclear bombs. Iran denies this.
The new enrichment facilities would be the same size as Iran's main enrichment complex at Natanz.
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Visit of US President to China
On November 17, 2009, in a delicate balancing act during his visit to China, US President Barack Obama supported early resumption of talks between China and the Dalai Lama’s representatives while describing Tibet as part of this country. Taking note of the sensitivities of China and the exiled Tibetan leader, Obama, during his maiden visit to China as President, said: “We did note that while we recognise that Tibet is part of the People’s Republic of China, the US supports the early resumption of dialogue” between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing.
Obama’s remarks came after his meeting with his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao during which the two sides discussed a host of issues including India-Pakistan relations, Iran’s controversial nuclear programme, Afghanistan, terrorism and climate change.
The US and China agreed to work together to bring about stable and peaceful relations in all of South Asia, Obama said during his joint briefing with Chinese president Hu Jintao in Beijing. Hu, who spoke first, didn’t mention Pakistan or South Asia. This was a rare occasion when a US president acknowledged that Beijing has a role to play in the India-Pakistan relationship. The move, if serious, runs counter to predictions of US foreign policy experts that the US would not acquiesce in a future Chinese hegemony in the region.
While the joint statement was met with silence by New Delhi, it infuriated officials in the foreign office because it brought back nasty memories of another US-China joint statement by Bill Clinton and Jiang Zemin on June 29, 1998. Then too, it was Clinton and Jiang, in what India considered “offensive” language, scolding India and Pakistan for their nuclear tests. India had reacted sharply then, buffetted by general international condemnation after the tests.
But latest statement cut at the heart of an Indian effort to build a relationship with the US without China complicating the issue. The reality is perhaps that the joint statement was drafted by Obama’s China officials who don’t read India’s sensitivities. But that it was allowed to go through signals to many Indian strategists that Obama may be more than pliant to China, giving it a role in a region where it’s bound to come into conflict with a country Obama says is a strategic US partner, India.
SUMMITS
CHOGM
Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) was hosted in the city of Port of Spain in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago on November 27-29, 2009. The Opening Ceremony of the Meeting included an address by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Head of the Commonwealth.
The CHOGM is the supreme body of the Commonwealth. It is convened every two years to review global, political and economic developments and to conduct a strategic overview of the Commonwealth’s work in support of the interests of member countries.
The objective of this Summit was to engage leaders of the Commonwealth in discussing global and Commonwealth issues and to agree upon collective policies and initiatives.
The leaders agreed to admit Republic of Rwanda as the 54th member of Commonwealth.
Climate change was a major topic of discussion at 2009 CHOGM, due to the proximity of the meeting to the Copenhagen climate change summit, but also because many Commonwealth States are particularly vulnerable to the effects of global warming.
The 53 member States of the Commonwealth called for an “internationally legally binding agreement” on climate change to be agreed at the Copenhagen conference in December 2009. Leaders also pledged support for a fund to help poorer countries tackle climate change.
Heads of government endorsed the Report of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), covering the Group's deliberations in the period since last meeting in Kampala in November 2007. They commended CMAG's work, which has contributed significantly to the protection and promotion of the Commonwealth's fundamental political values in member countries.
Heads of government also welcomed the reinstatement of Pakistan in the Councils of the Commonwealth following the conduct of credible elections in the country in February 2008 and the assumption of office by an elected, civilian government in April 2008. However, they expressed deep concern at the further deterioration of the situation in Fiji Islands with regard to its adherence to fundamental Commonwealth values, including the abrogation of the Constitution in April 2009, ongoing restrictions on human rights, including freedom of speech and assembly, and the Interim government’s decision to further delay elections until 2014. They noted that these actions had led to the full suspension of Fiji from the Commonwealth on September 1, 2009.
Heads of government once again acknowledged the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and reaffirmed their commitment towards ridding the world of these weapons. Recognising that the ultimate objective is general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, Heads reaffirmed their commitment to the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, which should be achieved in accordance with the United Nations Charter. Heads reaffirmed the rights of States to nuclear energy for peaceful uses in conformity with their international obligations. They also noted the ongoing efforts towards the negotiation of a comprehensive Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in respect of conventional weapons, and the proposed ATT conference to be held in 2012. They called for the finalisation of a robust and comprehensive ATT based on consensus.
CHOGM reaffirmed unequivocal condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, committed by whomever, wherever and for whatever purposes, as criminal and unjustifiable. They reiterated that acts of terrorism cannot be justified or legitimised by any cause or grievance whatsoever.
Continuing need for comprehensive efforts at all national and international levels to counter terrorism, including efforts to build respect and understanding among peoples was stressed. The Heads also emphasised the need to conclude negotiations on a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism on a priority basis, preferably during the Sixty-Fourth Session of the UN General Assembly and called upon all member States to accede to the UN Counter-Terrorism Conventions and Protocols, and to effectively implement these as well as the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and relevant Security Council Resolutions, and to prevent the use of their territories for the support, incitement or commission of terrorist acts in other States.
Recognising that corruption in its various forms undermines good governance, public security, respect for human rights and economic development, CHOGM urged member States which had not already done so to consider becoming parties to the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), and to implement its provisions, including those addressing asset recovery, to help them combat systemic corruption at both national and international levels.
Heads expressed their support for the commitment to avoid protectionism, and to strengthen financial supervision and regulation. They emphasised the importance of renewing the contract between financial institutions and the society they serve, and the need to ensure the sector bears the full cost of the risk associated with their activities. They encouraged the IMF to consider the full range of options in their review and welcomed the steps taken by many countries to mitigate the impact of the economic crisis, and the fragile signs of growth in the global economy. They expressed concern, however, that the social and economic impact of the crisis would continue to affect a vast majority of the developing countries, particularly the smallest and most economically vulnerable members of the Commonwealth, including LDCs and SIDS.
Australia will host the 2011 CHOGM. Sri Lanka and Mauritius will host the 2013 and 2015 CHOGMs, respectively.
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
Italy arrests two for aiding 26/11 attacks on Mumbai
Tracing new links to the Mumbai carnage, a Pakistani father-son duo were arrested from Italy for allegedly managing money transfer to finance phone communications of the attackers following leads from Indian and US investigators.
The two men, who ran a money transfer agency, were arrested in an early morning raid from the northern Italian city of Brescia, police said. The duo have been identified by the police as Mohammad Yaqub Janjua, 60, and Aamer Yaqub Janjua, 31. They have been accused of aiding and abetting international terrorism as well as illegal financial activity.
On November 25, 2008, a day before the attacks, they transferred $ 229 to activate an internet phone account that was used by the attackers and their accomplices, said Stefano Fonzi, the head of anti-terror police in Brescia.
The funds that enabled the terrorists to be in touch with their handlers in Pakistan were transferred under the identity of another Pakistani man who had never been to Italy and was not involved in the attacks, reports from Italy said. The two managed a money transfer agency where it is reported to be a common practice to transfer funds using false identities. The Italian police arrested the two men in an early morning raid in Brescia, the police said in a statement.
Italian police started their investigation the following month after being alerted by Indian authorities and the FBI that funds had been transferred from Italy.
Pak court names Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi as 26/11 mastermind
In what is being seen as a clever move by Islamabad to bury LeT founder and Jamaat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed’s role as the prime strategist behind the 26/11 attacks, a Pakistani trial court, while framing charges against seven accused on its soil, has instead named Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi as the mastermind.
Exactly a year after the Mumbai assault, on November 25, 2009, the special anti-terror court set up in Adiala jail in Rawalpindi framed charges against all the seven accused in Pakistan’s custody, reportedly confirming Lakhvi as the mastermind and Zarar Shah, Abu al-Qama, Hamad Amin Sadiq, Shahid Jamil Riaz, Jamil Ahmed and Younas Anjum as handlers/facilitators. All seven had pleaded not guilty. They have been reportedly charged under the anti-terrorism act and the Pakistani penal law. The charges include providing training, financial support, accommodation, equipment and communication gear to the 10 terrorists who had attacked Mumbai, including the lone survivor Ajmal Amir Kasab, who is now in India’s custody.
Interestingly, the dossier submitted by India on the 26/11 investigations to Pakistani names JuD chief Hafiz Saeed as the mastermind behind the Mumbai plot. Zaki-ur-Rehman, Zarar Shah, Abu Qama and others, now facing trial in Pakistan for their involvement in the 26/11 attacks, were only acting under the instructions of Saeed. Saeed is alleged to have personally overseen the preparations and events leading up to the major assault on India’s financial capital. Senior officials of the security establishment are obviously disappointed over the absence of any reference by the Pakistani court to Saeed’s role in the 26/11 conspiracy. The assessment in India is that the Pakistani court’s move, timed to coincide with the eve of the 26/11 anniversary, was essentially to exhibit to the world its “commitment” to punish the attacks’ perpetrators on its soil while ensuring a complete cover-up of Hafiz Saeed’s role as the key conspirator.
INTERNATIONAL TREATY
Arms Trade and Transfer Treaty
On November 1, 2009, even as the crucial global Arms Trade and Transfers (ATT) treaty, which seeks to regulate the $55 billion arms trade and promote democracy, found overwhelming support from 153 member countries at the UN. India was among the 19 who abstained from the meet. These 153 countries—including top arms suppliers like US, Britain, Germany and France—supported a UN disarmament committee resolution which will lead into negotiations for the treaty starting 2010.
While India may still take part in negotiations, the treaty in its present form was not in India’s interest. Certain binding clauses on social issues like violation of human rights and restrictions on arms sale expanding into controls on export of advanced technologies could work against India.
The US under George Bush in 2006 had opposed the treaty but it came round to supporting it under Barack Obama. The fate of the UN sponsored treaty still hangs in the balance as the list of 19 who abstained includes China and Russia, as also Pakistan.
The proposed treaty calls upon States involved in arms trade to not violate human rights, promote democracy and refrain from getting into any armed conflict. It also calls for ban on sale of arms to countries which promote terrorism.
The fact that India is still dependent on conventional weapons and imports a large number of these is another major concern. The proposed treaty will seek to set up export controls on transfers of advanced weapons, thereby extending the present Western-inspired controls on export of advanced technologies. This could impinge on the interests of India.
No comments:
Post a Comment