US-Iran stand-off and the heightening of ‘world disorder’

Sayyid Ali Hosseini Khamenei-June 26, 2019, 8:54 pm 

In these years of heightening ‘international disorder’ a military confrontation between the US and Iran could prove quite devastating for the Gulf region in particular. Hopefully, the relevant governments and their political leaders are alert to this possibility. While diplomacy of the finest and most astute kind is needed to defuse current tensions between the countries, one is compelled to agree with some Iranian quarters that the latest sanctions clamped on Iran by the US could spell ‘the permanent closure of the path to diplomacy’ between the countries.

The impending dangers are aggravated by the current climate of ‘world disorder’. Gone are the Cold War days when the international balance of power between the US and the Soviet Union could have prevented a major flare-up between intensely contending states or groups of states. The ‘certainties’ and relative stability of those times, resulting from the super powers counter-balancing and check-mating each others moves aimed at shoring-up their influence and control world wide, made for a comparatively safe world. That is, ‘mutually assured destruction’ proved its effectiveness even then.

However, the present international situation is a far cry from those safer years. To begin with, since there are no easily-definable or ideologically identifiable contending mega power blocs of the Cold War kind currently, multi-polarity rather than bipolarity has emerged as a chief structural feature of the world situation that states need to come to terms with. Besides, state actors aspiring for big power status could go about achieving their aims with relative freedom and with pronounced unaccountability. The end result is a more unsafe and unstable international political situation.

Against this backdrop, rising antagonisms between the US and Iran, over the present US sanctions-linked issues in particular, place the Gulf region at a rising risk of uncontrollable war. The US under President Donald Trump could be said to be prone to a degree of military adventurism but it could be making a fatal mistake by seeing Iran as a lesser power that could be treated dismissively. It is quite some time since Iran emerged as a dominant regional power. It would be short-sighted not to take cognizance of this basic fact in Gulf power relations.

Looking back, the Ronald Reagan administrations of the eighties too were, generally speaking, on a confrontational course with Iran, but the US of those times followed a more nuanced and discreet policy towards Iran. Iran had just emerged as a number one Islamic power and was in no mood to tone down its assertiveness, while the US under President Reagan was all out to recapture its prestige and power as the foremost super power, subsequent to the US’ defeats in the numerous proxy wars it was engaged in all over the Third World. There was also the humiliating military debacle in Vietnam that was having a depressive impact on the US.

The Reagan administration was all out to avenge these defeats but it was compelled to constantly look over its shoulder at the looming contending presence of the Soviet Union and its military alliance, the Warsaw Pact. The US was compelled to act with a greater degree of circumspection in these circumstances.

Needless to say, the world lacks a clearly-identifiable global power system today. Iran remains a regional power to contend with. Russia has made a quick come-back, after the break-up of the Soviet Union in the nineties, as a principal world power and China is fast catching-up with the US as a number one economic and military power. In the South Asian theatre India has bourgeoned into a great power but it is unlikely to cherish the prospect of being an unquestioning ally of the US.

Global power relations are at their most complex in South East Asia where almost every state within the ASEAN grouping would like to see itself as a power in its own right. Notable among these are Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and the Philippines. In North-east Asia, Japan and South Korea are being seen as US allies but they too would not like to play second fiddle to the US in matters that figure most in foreign relations. Besides, all these mentioned states are substantial economic powers who have a decisive impact on the world power system.

So, it is a world rife with security issues and uncertainties. Disorder rather than order is the international system’s chief feature. The US’ latest anti-Iran move of slapping punitive sanctions on a number of Iranian high profile figures, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is likely to be seen by Iran as highly provocative. Any strong retaliatory moves by Iran could aggravate tensions in the Gulf, leading to military hostilities between the US and Iran.

In the case of a US-Iran military confrontation, Britain at most, would like to team-up with the US but none other of the major states, North or South. The reason for this is the growing independence and power of these countries in relation to the US, and the pursuit by these powers of their national interests to the exclusion of other considerations, since the majority of current major powers are not obliged to ally with the US at a time of military conflict. In Cold War times ideological considerations compelled the majority of states referred to here of Asia in particular to ally with the US, but the Cold War rationale, of course, exists no longer.

Besides, Russia and China in particular would be on the ready to check-mate the US in the event of proliferating military tensions. Their common interest in containing US power would incline them to back Iran, although there is unlikely to be unconditional, unreserved support for Iran from them. However, there will be almost no takers for the US cause because the majority of countries would not like to endanger their oil supplies in the Gulf by encouraging the US in its military adventures.

Thus, it is vitally important that the US focuses on managing in a constructive manner the rising tensions in the Gulf. If there is going to be a military confrontation the US may find itself almost alone but Iran is likely to be backed by the majority of major powers since they have a common interest in containing the US.

Wife voices ‘concern’ for Australian missing in N. Korea

This photo taken on February 8, 2018 and released on February 9, 2018 by North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) shows North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un (2nd R) attending a military parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the Korean People's Army at Kim Il Sung square in Pyongyang. Source: KCNA via KNS/ AFP

@AsCorrespondent-27 Jun 2019

THE wife of an Australian man who has gone missing and is feared detained in North Korea said she had no hint that anything was wrong before his disappearance.

Japanese Yuka Morinaga, 26, told Australia’s News Corp that Alek Sigley’s disappearance in Pyongyang was “very concerning” and there was not “anything weird” last time they spoke on Monday.

Sigley, who speaks fluent Korean and is one of only a handful of Western students living in Pyongyang, has not been heard from since Tuesday.

His family said Friday they have no news about whether he has been detained.

SEE ALSO: What killed Otto Warmbier?

The 29-year-old’s social media sites — which usually have a stream of apolitical content about everyday life in one of the world’s most secretive nations — have fallen silent since Tuesday.

“He is always trying to demystify North Korea unlike the typical Western media. He tries to understand the people there,” Morinaga said.

The pair married at an elaborate ceremony in Pyongyang last year.

Morinaga is a software developer living in Tokyo and usually communicates with her husband daily via WhatsApp, News Corp said.

Sigley’s disappearance comes at a time of heightened tensions with North Korea and as world leaders gather in Osaka, Japan for a G20 summit.

SEE ALSO: Australian student feared detained in North Korea

Speaking at the summit, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said he had received “expressions of support and assistance” from other nations which had been “very welcome”.

“We will continue to focus very sharply on that and seek to clarify what exactly has occurred and then take steps from there,” he told national broadcaster ABC.

Morrison on Thursday met US President Donald Trump, who will travel to South Korea later this week as talks with North Korea have stalled.

Sigley, from Perth in Western Australia, had been studying Korean literature at Kim Il Sung University for around a year, while running a company specialising in tours of North Korea.

© Agence France-Presse

Biometric Identification Of The Traveller – Emerging Issues

While there is no gainsaying the invaluable use of biometric technology, it is hoped that the issues discussed above are also addressed

 

by Dr Ruwantissa Abeyratne-27/06/2019

Writing from Montreal

 

Things have been, says the legal mind, and so we are here. The creative mind says we are here because things have yet to be. ~ H.G. Wells, Discovery of the Future (1902)

 

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is currently conducting it 15th annual Traveller Identification Programme Symposium (TRIPS) which runs from 25 to 28 June on the theme “Bridging the Digital-Physical Document Divide”. Many international entities such as the World Travel and Tourism Council, The International Air Transport Association, Airports Council International and Organization for Security and Cooperation of Europe presented interesting reports and news of progress made by them in techniques of digital identification of the traveller through facial recognition that are calculated to enhance facilitation and security in border crossing.

 

 

It was indeed encouraging to learn of the advancements made by these entities, all of whom had the common objective of making the international transportation experience easier for both the traveller as well as the State in which traveller arrives. The World Economic Forum spoke of its Known Traveller Digital Identity (KTDI) concept aimed at providing answers to challenges posed to seamless and secure travel through a passenger centric approach using biometrics, blockchain, cryptography and mobile devices.

 

KTDI is calculated to apply predictive intelligence to the emergent challenges and opportunities presented by evolving technology and its relevant to cross border movements of people across the globe. KTDI as a digital identity process also addresses the varied needs and expectations of border crossers which would enable States to anticipate challenges presented by travellers crossing their borders. In this process the passport is the seminal document which would provide data to both the Advance Passenger Information (API) and Passenger Name Record (PNR) practices.

 

Just one example of the intrinsic link between aviation and the digital world is Blockchain - – a relatively new technological initiative in the business process – which promises “smart contracts” and is shaping modern business management in how businesses are managed and how value is created within enterprises, bringing to bear a distinct correlation between aviation and Blockchain. Inasmuch as the internet moves information and transmits the flow of data, Blockchain moves value which could assist industries in aviation to transact business faster; and improve tracking of passengers and freight while eliminating transaction costs. The networks based on Blockchain serve products and services better, making it a better tool for moulding the air transport product and enabling airports to become “smart airports”. Blockchain could well be the platform in various areas of aviation and is insulated from deleterious hacking, thereby offering security and immutability.

 

Since air transport in the digital world is heavily reliant on algorithms which make assumptions that are sometimes driven by biases, the possibility of a clash between algorithmic thinking and culture stands out as a possible conundrum that warrants serious consideration. Would the experts gathered at TRIPS think that it would be prudent to globally introduce an organizational culture driven by best practices to protect the passenger when algorithms might go wrong?

 

This issue becomes all the more pertinent in the face of the exponential increase in air travel that show leaps and bounds increase. For example, ICAO has said that in 2017 an unprecedented 4.1 billion passengers were carried by the aviation industry on scheduled services This indicated a 7.1% increase over 2016. At TRIPS Airports Council International observed that, whereas in 2017 around 7.5 billion passengers passed through the world’s airports, this figure was going to more than double to around 17 billion in 2034. Various aspects of traveller identification, not to single out biometric identification, bring to bear issues of privacy and the right to privacy of the individual. The Economist states (correctly) that: “[F]acial recognition also has the potential to merge the tracking that happens in the digital and physical realms. It turns the face into an address that links behaviour in the real world with online profiles and vice versa”. One commentator says: “[D]igital technology-computing, databases, the Internet, mobile communications, and the like-thus calls for further evolution of privacy rights, both conceptually and in law. Unlike previous technological changes, however, the scope and magnitude of the digital revolution is such that privacy law cannot respond quickly enough to keep privacy protections relevant and robust.

 

On 18 December 2013 The United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 68/167 - The right to privacy in the digital age. This Resolution calls upon States to respect and protect the right to privacy, including in the context of digital communication; to take measures to put an end to violations of those rights and to create the conditions to prevent such violations, including by ensuring that relevant national legislation complies with their obligations under international human rights law. It also calls upon States to review their procedures, practices and legislation regarding the surveillance of communications, their interception and the collection of personal data, including mass surveillance, interception and collection, with a view to upholding the right to privacy by ensuring the full and effective implementation of all their obligations under international human rights law; and to establish or maintain existing independent, effective domestic oversight mechanisms capable of ensuring transparency, as appropriate, and accountability for State surveillance of communications, their interception and the collection of personal data.

 

Finally, on the conflict between algorithmic thinking and culture, a key consideration would be how to manage artificial intelligence. In an earlier article I quoted Sutapa Amornvivat, who runs an AI driven company in Thailand, who cautions that AI has to be managed well as: “with the right tools and technology, crucial insights can be unlocked from data. At the same time, we should be aware that the blind spots and biases within can lead us to the wrong conclusions. Real limitations to data-driven approaches exist and necessitate human oversight to ensure that they are utilized correctly and to their fullest protection”.

 

Eleonore Pauwels, Research Fellow on Emerging Cybertechnologies at United Nations University (UNU), says about AI: “AI is already ubiquitous, but will affect people differently, depending on where they live, how much they earn, and what they do for a living. Scholars from civil society have started raising concerns about how algorithmic tools could increasingly profile, police, and even punish the poor. On the global and political stage, where corporations and states interact, AI will influence how these actors set the rules of the game. It will shape how they administer and exert power on our societies’ collective body. These new forms of control raise urgent policy challenges for the international community.

 

While there is no gainsaying the invaluable use of biometric technology, it is hoped that the issues discussed above are also addressed.

 

Dr. Abeyratne is Senior Associate, Air Law and Policy at Aviation Strategies International. He teaches air law and policy at McGill University and is former Senior Legal Officer at The International Civil Aviation Organization.

India's current account gap narrows in fiscal fourth quarter on improved trade balance

An Indian Rupee note is seen in this illustration photo June 1, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas White/Illustration/File Photo

Swati Bhat-JUNE 28, 2019

MUMBAI (Reuters) - India’s current account deficit narrowed to just 0.7 percent of gross domestic product in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended March 31, from 1.8 percent in the year-earlier period as the nation’s merchandise trade deficit contracted and its services surplus rose.

The Reserve Bank of India said on Friday that the current account deficit was $4.6 billion, against $13.0 billion in the quarter ended March 31, 2018.

The trade deficit is offset by private transfer receipts, mainly remittances back home by Indians employed overseas. They fell by 0.9 percent to $17.9 billion from a year earlier.

The central bank also said that foreign portfolio investment increased to a net inflow of $9.4 billion in the fiscal fourth quarter from just $2.3 billion in the year-earlier quarter.

 

The fiscal fourth quarter numbers were helped by dollar inflows into the country on expectations of Prime Minister Narendra Modi winning a second term at the general elections, as he did in a landslide at the April-May polls.

For all of the fiscal year ended March 31, the current account deficit widened to $57.2 billion, or 2.1 percent of GDP, against $48.7 billion, or 1.8 percent in 2017-18.

Some economists expect a further slight deterioration this financial year. Yes Bank’s Shubhada Rao sees it at 2.2 percent on the back of expectations of a wider trade deficit.

Recent signs of weakness in consumption, continued uncertainty over the global trade picture, and concerns about the impact of late monsoon rains on the rural economy may keep foreign portfolio investors cautious.

 

Separate and more recent data also issued on Friday showed India’s trade deficit widened to $15.36 billion in May versus $14.6 billion in May 2018.

The rupee has firmed by 1 percent so far this year, recovering some of its lost ground from last year.

Yes Bank’s Rao said that easy availability of liquidity because of dovish stances by major central banks together with India’s attractiveness under a strong and stable government able to push growth-focused reforms “is expected to accelerate the dollar inflows into the economy.”

28 June 1914: The gunshot that changed history

Saturday, 29 June 2019 

Before the guns of August (1914) blew it to smithereens, to the casual observer, Europe was a   picture of solidity, successful and stable. Having created the ground for the industrial revolution, Europe now carried limitless potential; enjoying high productivity, global trade, broadening literacy, strengthening of the rule of law and the rapid advancement of both public as well as personal rights; the small but dominant continent epitomised progress.

For a few centuries preceding, European abilities and methods had dominated the world. Relatively small countries like Portugal, Holland, England and Spain had built themselves world-wide empires, several times larger and numerous. They were not always won by a feat of arms; the hollowness as well as the corruption of the old societies made them untenable in a changing world. Advancements   in transport and communication shrank the globe, laying bare the pathetic state of many countries. History tells us that decay and vacuity is an invitation, invariably pulling in a stronger force.

The conquistadors did subjugate and plunder, but it was not all fire and sword. In many places, the local community welcomed the takeover, hoping for an improvement in their forlorn lives. And, it was not only military prowess that won the day. With the conqueror came a wealth of new ideas plus advances; parliaments, legal systems, science, education in addition to developed technology; concepts, which to this day guide these countries. Even mighty China, at least putatively, claims its moral legitimacy on the basis of the philosophy of Karl Marx, a German Jew. In the model that created an economic juggernaut out of that country, there is very little of the indigenous. It seems that in the centuries of conquests, Europe was so pre-eminent that it virtually made the rest of the world, in their own image.

When Queen Victoria passed away in 1901(born 1819), British power was at its zenith, famously claiming that the sun never set on their globally spread empire. Victoria reigned from 1837, for 63 years, the longest reign for a British monarch, and the longest reigning queen in the world, until surpassed by her great-great-grand daughter, Elizabeth II, in 2015.

During her rule, the Empire faced many challenges, including the costly Boer War (1899-1902) in what is now South Africa. The Boers (European farmers settled there from the 17th century), well-armed and well-led, gave the British soldiers a determined fight. During what was referred to as the ‘black week’ they caused such high casualties among the British soldiers that consternation spread throughout the British Empire.  Queen Victoria rallied her men, telling a crestfallen Balfour, “Please understand that there is no one depressed in this house. We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. They do not exist.”

At her deathbed (on 22 January 1901), were her son and successor King Edward VII, and her eldest grandson, Emperor Wilhelm II, who was to later lead Germany during World War 1.

Unbeknown to them, the door was about to close on this familiar world.

A gathering storm

Europe was not only England, there were several equally powerful empires; the German, the French, Austro-Hungarian, Russian, Ottoman; powerful, ambitious and competing powers. The rapid economic/industrial rise of Germany, combined with the masterful manoeuvring of Bismarck, its renowned Chancellor, had created a powerhouse in the centre of Europe that would not be denied. These different empires sought to further their interests by alignments and treaties with each other, and if necessary, by waging war.

On 28 June 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir presumptive to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, was visiting the Bosnian capital of Sarajevo. A former Ottoman territory, Bosnia/ Herzegovina had been annexed by the Austro-Hungarian Empire to the displeasure of Slavic Serbia, and consequently was a troubled area. A group of conspirators, encouraged by Serbia, was determined to assassinate the Archduke during his visit.

The original assassination plan for the 28 June failed; the grenade thrown by an assassin only injured some bystanders. Unharmed, the Archduke insisted on visiting the injured at the Sarajevo hospital. While returning an hour later from the hospital visit, his convoy took the wrong turn, going down a street where, coincidently, one of the assassins was passing by. This time there was no mistake, the assassin shot dead both the Archduke and his wife.

Those shots on 28 June 1914, a terrorist act committed by a small gang of Serbian nationalists in an insignificant corner of Europe, were to set in motion a series of actions and reactions which led to a World War, changing the course of history, shattering a familiar and long established world order for good.

The dogs of war 

Outraged by the assassination, Austro-Hungary demanded satisfaction from Serbia. Undeterred, Serbia rejected the harsh demands as unacceptable, whereupon Austro-Hungary declared war on it. This led to the Russian Empire, ethnically as well as politically aligned to Serbia, coming to its aid, mobilising the massive Russian army. The German Kaiser Wilhelm II, bound by treaty as well as ethnicity to assist Austro-Hungary, asked his cousin, the Czar Nicolas II to call off the Russian mobilisation. Russia refused, which led to the mobilisation of Germany. France, committed to come to Russia’s aid, declared war on Austro-Hungary and then Germany.

The German strategists confront a historical dilemma, imposed by its geography. With two very powerful neighbours, France on its West and Russia in the East, in the event of a war, Germany would be compelled to fight on two fronts, with hundreds of miles in between. Grappling with the problem, Alfred von Schlieffen, Germany’s outstanding Chief of General Staff (1891-1906) came up with a plan which was predicated upon a superlative performance from the German soldiery.

In essence, the eponymous plan envisaged a quick victory in the West before transferring the army to the East to deal with that theatre. Accordingly, nearly 80% of the German army were to be committed to the West in order to gain a decisive victory against France and her allies, while the balance would act as a ‘screen’ in the East, playing for time. After the issue is decided in the West, necessary forces could be transferred to the East. The Germans, true to their methods, had developed a superb railway and transport system for the purpose. Ten years later, this was basically the plan that the German army used in the Great War.

For the plan to work, a quick and decisive victory in the West was crucial. In the Schlieffen Plan the attack on France had two prongs. The left prong, a thrust in the Alsace-Lorraine area was a feint, calculated to draw the French forces there, while the main effort was the right prong, a massive concentrated attack through Belgium going right up to Paris, while also closing the north coast to British intervention. Here again, overwhelming forces were to be concentrated on the right prong.

Schlieffen’s successor, Helmuth von Moltke the junior (of the illustrious military family), apprehensive of the risks inherent in a weak left prong, subsequently changed the ratio of forces considerably between the two wings. And, eventually as real fighting (in the World War) would show, this weakening of the right wing left it just a little too weak to fulfil the decisive task of vanquishing France in one single thrust.

Great Britain could ignore neither the German trampling over of Belgium, nor its attack on France. Any move thus by the Germans in the West, necessarily drew in Britain.

Like a gigantic engine that cannot be stopped once started, the World moved inexorably to the Great War, engulfing the whole of Europe, spreading eventually to other continents, Africa, Asia and the Middle East, causing the deaths of roughly 40 million in the four years of fighting (the world population then was much less, making this a horrendous blood bath).

Tilted scales 

Despite their angry declaration of war, Austro-Hungary did not fare well against the Serbs, needing a military “stiffening” from their German allies. Initially, the Russians too performed well, requiring a greater German effort in the East than anticipated to contain them. But it was the Western Front which soon developed into a stalemate, giving rise to the horrible trenches that came to epitomise the agony of the war.

This was the war that demonstrated with bloody clarity the horrific killing power of science and technology. Heavy guns that could fire highly destructive missiles, tanks, fighter planes, submarines all made their entry during this gigantic struggle. A most pernicious weapon was used by the combatants in the form of poison gas. There was universal despair, human beings were massacring each other like never before, and there was no end in sight.

In 1917, the Americans joined the allied powers, tilting the balance somewhat. Then in mid-1918 the Germans launched an all-out attack in the West, helped by the Russian pull-out from the war, post- Bolshevik revolution. When this offensive failed, the wind went out of the German sails. There were revolts and unrest in Germany. The Kaiser abdicated, paving the way for the Weimar Republic. On 11 November 1918 Germany signed the armistice.

Many Empires which stood like immovable features collapsed after the war; the Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman empires went out of history. For the first time in history, we saw in Russia the establishment of a socialist government, holding allegiance to neither a king nor a religion. Austro-Hungary broke up into several countries. Many new countries emerged. Germany lost territory, burdened with huge war reparations, went into a period of instability ending in the emergence of the Nazis in 1933. Britain was badly battered. America emerged ever stronger. In the colonies, men’s thoughts were moving towards independence. But that had to await another war to bear fruit.

An orderly, seemingly fixed world was turned into a chaotic, uncertain place by the First World War. Worldwide, the millions affected by the war were profoundly impacted by the carnage, disturbed by the human capacity for cruelty. In their hearts and minds something changed, and an intense   questioning of faith and a loss of innocence ensued. 

We Should All Make Documentation Of Torture A Global Priority

Following state issued by International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims ( IRCT), a pioneering organisation on torture prevention and victims' reparation, on the occasion of  International Day in Support of Victims of Torture

 

27 Jun 2019

Today, on the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, the IRCT calls on everyone – states, the international community, and civil society – to make documentation of torture a global human rights priority. Torture is one of the gravest crimes and it is our collective obligation to investigate it, document it and expose it wherever we meet it.

 

Effective documentation of torture is essential for victims to have evidence of the wrongs done to them, to seek justice and gain rehabilitation, to identify victims in places of detention and to ensure that torture victims claiming asylum get the support and protection they are entitled to. Nevertheless, quality documentation practices are as rare as they are important.

 

To address this, the IRCT has teamed up with other prominent anti-torture NGOs and UN experts to update the global standards for documentation and investigation of torture established in the Istanbul Protocol almost two decades ago. The Istanbul Protocol guides medical, legal and other professionals on how to document and investigate torture with a specific focus on forensic medical and psychological examinations of victims.

 

The 2020 edition of the Protocol incorporates 20 years of lessons learned and best practices as well as advancements in law, medicine, and science. It introduces guidance to health professionals on their role in various settings and on how to implement the Protocol more effectively.

 

“It is inspiring to help lead this truly worldwide effort involving dozens of IRCT members and over 180 experts from 51 countries who have invested thousands of hours to make our tools to fight torture more effective,” said James Lin, IRCT’s Istanbul Protocol Programme Coordinator.

 

This project is led by representatives of four civil society organisations (IRCT, Physicians for Human Rights, the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, and REDRESS) and the four principal UN anti-torture bodies (UN Committee against Torture, UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, and the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture).

 

“Quality documentation has a significant positive impact on the lives of many of the victims we support. It enables them to tell their story and get recognition and justice for the wrongs done to them. With the updated Istanbul Protocol, we will work with health and legal professionals around the world to make sure that more victims can access this essential support”, said Asger Kjaerum, Director of Advocacy.

Seeking to Secure Power, Sudan’s Military Ruler Hires Lobbying Help

Top general brokers a multimillion-dollar deal with a Canadian firm and hosts a former U.S. congressman.

Sudanese protesters sit on a bridge during a demonstration outside the army headquarters in the capital of Khartoum on April 19. OZAN KOSE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

BY JUSTIN LYNCH, ROBBIE GRAMER-JUNE 28, 2019, 7:17 PM

Sudan’s military leaders are increasingly reaching beyond their own borders for help from lobbyists, wealthy Persian Gulf states, and even a former U.S. congressman to shore up their legitimacy and control in the aftermath of a coup.

The de facto military ruler of Sudan, Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagolo, known as Hemeti, brokered a multimillion-dollar lobbying deal to increase his sway in the United States, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and multilateral institutions and welcomed a former member of the U.S. Congress to Khartoum for meetings amid a growing power struggle in the east African country.

The posturing comes ahead of a massive pro-democracy rally in Khartoum on Sunday, which some experts and U.S. officials fear could turn violent, after forces under Hemeti killed at least 100 protesters and wounded hundreds more in a bloody crackdown at the beginning of June.

Sudan’s Transitional Military Council, which has led the country since the ouster of longtime leader Omar al-Bashir in the wake of widespread protests, signed a $6 million deal with a Canadian lobbying firm in May to curry favor in the United States, Russia, and Saudi Arabia.

The lobbying contract, which was signed by Hemeti, according to public disclosures filed last week with the U.S. Justice Department, sheds new light on the general’s shadowy behind-the-scenes push with foreign interlocutors to consolidate control and illustrates how many foreign governments have worked to stake claims in Sudan. The Canadian lobbying firm working with the military council, Dickens & Madson, seeks to secure a meeting between Hemeti and U.S. President Donald Trump and the heads of Middle Eastern governments and will work to ensure that it “attain[s] recognition as the legitimate transitionary leadership of the Republic of Sudan,” according to the contract.

The contract also outlines other priorities, including the lobbying firm working to “provide military training and security equipment”; obtain “infrastructural and food security support” from the Russian government; and even obtain funds from a Libyan general vying for power in that country in exchange for military help.

The lobbying firm is led by a former Israeli intelligence operative, Ari Ben-Menashe, and has worked in the past for the Zimbabwean and Libyan governments.

Hemeti took de facto control after Bashir was toppled in April following months of anti-government demonstrations. Bashir, wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity, remains under arrest in Sudan, but the powerful security forces and military junta that propped up his rule for three decades are still in place. Hemeti, the head of the notorious paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), implicated in war crimes in Darfur, has tried to portray himself as the one man who can bring stability to Sudan.

Main opposition groups and pro-democracy protesters have challenged the military council, insisting that it should cede power to a civilian-led democratic government, calls that are backed by the United States. Hemeti has sought support from wealthy Gulf states and other countries to shore up his legitimacy in the ensuing power struggle.

In addition to backing from a Western lobbying firm, Hemeti also received a public relations boost from a former U.S. congressman, James Moran, who visited Sudan last week and met with the Sudanese leader. Moran, now a senior legislative advisor and lobbyist at the law firm McDermott Will & Emery, spoke at what appeared to be a rally in Khartoum after meeting with Hemeti, praising his time with the general and saying he was “impressed” with everyone he met, including the Sudanese leader.

Moran’s visit gave Hemeti a potential public relations win, reinforcing the perception—at least in state media—that he is backed by the international community. During the rally, Moran was incorrectly introduced as a U.S. senator. Hemeti and the junta have shut down regular internet access in Sudan, and Moran’s visit was displayed on state television, making his speech the only information that many Sudanese have regarding the international community’s stance toward the general.
Moran and his office did not respond to multiple requests for comment from Foreign Policy, including questions on the purpose of his visit with Hemeti and who funded his trip.

Moran, according to Sudanese opposition figures and former U.S. officials familiar with internal deliberations, also met with the opposition Sudanese Professionals Association and the top U.S. diplomat in Sudan, Steven Koutsis, the chargé d’affaires of the U.S. Embassy. The State Department did not answer questions regarding Moran’s apparent meeting with Koutsis, other than to say he is a private citizen and doesn’t represent the U.S. government.

An official trip by current members of Congress, including Democratic Rep. Karen Bass on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was canceled due to the unstable political situation in Sudan.
Powerful lawmakers in Washington are already raising alarm bells about Hemeti’s rise to power, however. On Friday, Democratic Rep. Eliot Engel, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called on the Trump administration to slap sanctions on Hemeti and the RSF for their role in violence against protesters

As recently as September 2018, Moran was a lobbyist for Qatar, according to public disclosure filings. The Gulf state paid at least $40,000 per month for Moran and his law firm to speak with journalists, engage with Congress members and their staff, and send lettersregarding Saudi Arabia’s blockade on Qatar.

Qatar is a rival to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt, which have given substantial support to Hemeti.

Moran’s visit, and Hemeti’s new lobbying contract, comes during a potential flash point in Sudan’s revolution.

Hemeti and the military council face a June 30 deadline set by the African Union to hand over power to civilians. The Sudanese Professionals Association and other civilian groups, called the Forces for Freedom and Change, eventually accepted the proposal from the Ethiopian government to share power with the military, a copy of which was obtained by Foreign Policy.

The agreement calls for the junta to chair a body of seven civilians, seven military officials, and one civilian agreed to by both sides for the first 18 months of the country’s transitional period. In the following 18 months, a civilian would lead the council, followed by national elections. The military has not yet responded to the proposal.

Two civilian negotiators told Foreign Policy that they did not expect the military to agree to the power-sharing agreement and said even if the junta signed it, it would not follow it. A million-strong march organized by civilian groups is planned for the June 30 deadline, which has experts concerned.

“There are a number of warning signs that show violence is imminent for the protest on Sunday,” said Cameron Hudson, a former White House official under George W. Bush and nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “The wheels are coming off. The military council is both losing patience and feeling emboldened by the lack of strong international response. They want to prevent a second wave of protests that could reinvigorate the whole movement.”

Central to the negotiations between the civilians and the junta is the role of Hemeti.

Some in the Sudanese Professionals Association say they will not accept a government that includes Hemeti. They demand an investigation into crimes in Darfur and responsibility for the June 3 massacre of protesters. (The general has denied responsibility for the massacre and said he launched an investigation to find the perpetrators.)

But other civilian groups, and even some inside the Sudanese Professionals Association, say they must be practical and include Hemeti in the transitional government. Still, Hudson warned that the military’s involvement in Sudan’s political future may be a formula for disaster.

“The idea that the Transitional Military Council or the Rapid Support Forces can bring stability is insane.”

Opec weighs up the risks if Russia goes it alone on prices

Vladimir Putin may relish his place at the table in Vienna but he will be tempted to cash in on rising prices

Opec headquarters in Vienna. Photograph: Leonhard Foeger/Reuters

 

Jillian Ambrose-Sun 30 Jun 2019 

The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) will meet this week in Vienna under a familiar pretext: to act as stewards of oil market stability. In practice, oil ministers from the world’s most powerful oil-producing nations will thrash out a deal to limit the amount of oil flowing into the global market and avoid an oil price collapse.

The latest pact is expected to extend a milestone deal first struck between Opec and a Russian-led alliance of nations outside the cartel in the wake of the oil price crash.

The super-alliance, known as Opec+, agreed to hold back 1.2 million barrels of oil a day to shore up prices, and with the support of Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates it is likely to agree to keep a firm grip on oil taps once again.

In reality, any pretence that the oil market will bend to the will of Opec is already blanched to a brittle hope by the fiery geopolitics beyond its control. The cartel is divided by regional rivalries and under threat from the rising market might of the US as its shale resurgence gains pace. Meanwhile, Russian patience with Opec’s policy of restraint is wearing thin.

Helima Croft, RBC Capital’s oil strategy guru and a former CIA analyst, says a rollover of the oil supply pact might be just about the only thing these countries are currently able to agree on.

It took weeks to agree to a date for the 176th Opec meeting amid a deepening security crisis over sanctions-hit Iran, and attacks targeting oil tankers and pipelines reverberating throughout the Middle East. But the decisions that are more likely to set the direction of global oil prices will take place several time zones away, before talks begin.

Opec’s Vienna gathering will take place just days after a crunch meeting of the G20 where world leaders will hope to break the impasse in the US-China trade war to lift a looming risk to the global economy.

A conciliatory signal from President Donald Trump would wield significant influence over the world’s oil demand. And oil supply is firmly within the grip of the US leader.

His sanctions against Iran and Venezuela have already swept more barrels from the global market than the cuts overseen by Opec and its partners combined. Meanwhile, the US shale producers are gaining ground within the market as Opec restraint persists.

The International Energy Agency says Opec’s efforts to control the world’s supply of oil is being undermined by the “relentless” US shale boom. By next year the world will demand only 29.3 million barrels of Opec crude a day, a 600,000-barrel-a-day cut from the group’s production rate last month.

The threat to Opec’s market share is an unintended consequence of its own making. The decision to raise market prices by pulling back on oil output has effectively left the door open to US shale, leaving many in Opec+ wondering whether it may be time to change tack.

Oil market analysts at Investec believe that Russia in particular may well conclude that it has nothing to gain from keeping a throttle on oil output for another year.

President Vladimir Putin will be in no hurry to turn his back on a seat at the head of an energy alliance, but with rising concern over Russia’s “anaemic economic growth” it may decide to open its taps to take advantage of higher market prices, says Croft.

This could spell the end of Opec+, and leave the original Opec states even weaker than before.

Wildfires and power cuts plague Europeans as heatwave breaks records

A helicopter flies over a wildfire near the city of Toledo, Spain June 28, 2019. REUTERS/Juan Medina

Gus Trompiz, Joan Faus-JUNE 29, 2019

PARIS/MADRID (Reuters) - Hundreds of firefighters brought wildfires under control in southern France on Saturday as a stifling heatwave brought record-breaking temperatures to parts of Europe, killing at least six people.

In the worst-hit Gard region, where France’s highest-ever temperature was registered on Friday at 45.9 degrees Celsius (114 degrees Fahrenheit), scores of overnight fires burned some 550 hectares (about 1,360 acres) of land and destroyed several houses and vehicles.

“We came very close to a disaster,” Didier Lauga, prefect of the Gard, told reporters. “There are still firefighters in place in case fires break out again.”

A psychologically unstable man was arrested after starting a blaze in one village, but the extreme heat was likely to blame for many of the fires, Lauga said.

Fifteen firefighters and several police officers were injured in the Gard, where 700 firefighters and 10 aircraft were mobilised to contain the flames, emergency services said.

In the neighbouring Vaucluse region, authorities said a man who had been cycling in a mountainous area had died after collapsing due to the heat.

The sweltering conditions were expected to ease on Saturday in southern France but highs were still forecast at close to 40 degrees. Further north, Paris was due to experience its hottest day of the heatwave with a high of 37-38 degrees predicted.

As huge crowds took to the streets of the capital for the annual gay pride parade, firefighters sprayed water on revellers, some of whom used rainbow-coloured fans and umbrellas to counter the heat.

In Germany, organisers of Sunday’s Frankfurt Ironman made contingency plans to keep athletes from overheating in temperatures expected to reach up to 38 degrees.

“EXTREME RISK”

The World Meteorological Organization said this week that 2019 was on track to be among the world’s hottest years, and 2015-2019 would then be the hottest five-year period on record.

It said the European heatwave was “absolutely consistent” with extremes linked to the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.

Britain experienced its hottest day of the year so far with temperatures set to reach up 35 degrees, the Met Office said.

In Spain, unusually hot conditions were registered for a fourth consecutive day.

The mercury reached 43.3 degrees at a meteorological station between the Catalan towns of Vinebre and Masroig in northeastern Spain, close to an area hit by wildfires, officials said.

Forty of Spain’s 50 regions have been placed on weather alert, with seven of them considered to be at extreme risk, the national meteorological agency said.

Two people died on Friday due to heat-related complications, and the sizzling temperatures fuelled several wildfires.

New blazes started on Saturday in southern and central areas, though firefighters managed to contain 90% of the wildfires that raged across 60 sq km (23 sq miles) in the northeastern Tarragona province, the Catalan government said.

Two other fires in the central Castilla La Mancha and Madrid regions were still burning, affecting more than 30 sq km (11.5 sq miles) of land, officials said.

Slideshow (2 Images)

 

At least three people died in central and northern Italy, while hospitals in the financial capital Milan saw a 35% rise in emergency visits due to heat-related conditions, local media reported.

Demand for power in the city surged as people cranked up air conditioning causing sporadic blackouts in stores and restaurants. Temperatures are forecast to ease in the coming days but it will remain hot.

Parents fined because their SEN children won’t go to school

By Minnie Stephenson-28 Jun 2019

It’s tough enough for children with special educational needs, let alone getting the help they need from the school system.

We’re investigating the issue all this week and how getting the right support can be a long battle.

Without the right provisions, many children simply begin refusing to go to school.

Across England, three quarters of a million pupils were persistently absent in the last term of 2018.

Parents can face prosecution or fines if their children continually fail to meet attendance targets, and last year more than 27,000 parents were taken to court in England and Wales, leaving many feeling they’re being punished rather than getting the help they so desperately need.