The Gaza war is completing seven months, a war that was launched as a retaliation to the Hamas terror attack into Israel on October 7, 2023. During the course of this war, Israeli strikes have already killed more than 32,000 Palestinian civilians. These include more than 13,000 children, many of them infants. Except for a brief humanitarian pause in November last year, there has been no letup in the war. After four failed attempts, the UN Security Council finally passed a resolution on 25th March asking for an immediate ceasefire and unconditional release of hostages, but neither Hamas nor Israel have come to any common ground to effect a ceasefire in the war.

<h2>The Iran-Israel Direct Spat</h2>

Meanwhile, the war took a dangerous turn when on April 1, Israeli fighter jets targeted the Iranian Consulate in Damascus resulting in the death of seven members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, the senior-most commander in Lebanon and Syria. Iran vowed revenge and responded in the form of a simultaneous strike of around 300 drones and ballistic missiles into Israel on April 13.

While most of the drones and missiles were intercepted mid-air, 7-8 missiles found their mark and struck the Nevatim Israeli air base in the Negev desert. This was the first time that Iran had struck Israel from its own territory, something which it had avoided earlier despite many severe provocations in the past. Vowing to strike back, Israel struck with drone/missile strike in the early hours of April 19 when loud explosions were reported in the vicinity of the city of Isfahan.

Reports indicated that the Iranian air defences had shot down ‘three drones’ over the skies of the city. Although some media outlets later presented satellite pictures to show that some part of the Air Defence Battery in Isfahan was damaged, but neither Iran, Israel nor the US commented anything on it. Iran dismissed the attack as small and insignificant while Israel maintained stoic silence.&nbsp;

While it is being presumed that both countries would call it quits as far as directly targeting each other’s territory is concerned, the threat of escalation remains alive. Days later, on April 23, Iran’s President Raisi, during his visit to Pakistan, was quoted saying that the ‘Zionist regime’ will be destroyed if Israel attacks again in Iran.

The Israel-Iran direct spat in the past few weeks has not only raised the levels of threat of an escalating conflict but has also brought to the fore an issue that had been forgotten in the fury of wars for the past two years, the Iran nuclear issue. In case of any further escalation between Iran and Israel in the ongoing conflict, the threat of Iran’s nuclear programme being weaponised is a possibility that needs to be examined in detail.&nbsp;

Can Iran go nuclear? Does it have the capacity to do it? If yes, how much time and help is required before Iran can actually declare a nuclear weapon? To answer these difficult questions, one needs to step back and see how Iran got where it is, in its nuclear programme.

<h2>Iran Nuclear Deal- A Recap</h2>

Iran’s nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was a result of six years of continued and labored negotiations between Iran and P5 plus 1, which resulted in the signing of the nuclear deal in July 2015.

The JCPOA put very strict and crippling restrictions on Iran’s nuclear programme, making it virtually impossible to have a nuclear weapons programme. As a part of the deal, Iran could not operate more than 5,000 first-generation IR-1 centrifuges to enrich uranium, that too, only up to 3.67 percent. All uranium enriched to 20 percent was to be scrapped or shipped out and the core of its Heavy Water Plant at Arak was to be demobilized.&nbsp;

Most importantly, Iran agreed to ‘anywhere, anytime’ inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA and UN inspectors. Iran stuck to the deal and on January 16, 2016, designated as the Implementation Day, the IAEA verified that Iran had met its all nuclear-related commitments, triggering the lifting of sanctions on Iran.

The joy was short-lived as Donald Trump who was strongly opposed to the deal, won the US presidential elections in November 2016 and immediately announced that he will impose “the highest level of economic sanctions” on Iran. Following up on his threat, in May 2018, President Trump pulled the plug on the nuclear deal. Despite pressure from other members of P5 plus1, the UN, and the IAEA, he did not relent and Iran was pushed back into a strict sanctions regime.

Barack Obama, whose administration had negotiated the deal, condemned Trump’s violation of the agreement and said that without the JCPOA, the US could eventually be left with a losing choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the Middle East.

Efforts to revive the nuclear deal could only commence once Biden became US President. The talks commenced in April 2021 and continued till January 2022 when the eighth round was concluded with an understanding that that most of the technical issues have been agreed to and the deal is now possible within the parameters of ‘political decisions’. However, the Ukraine war broke out on February 24, 2022 and put the Iran nuclear talks on the backburner.

<h2>Iran’s revives the Nuclear Programme</h2>

Despite Trump pulling out of the deal, Iran stuck to the nuclear deal at least till March 6, 2019, the last time when the IAEA reported that Iran was implementing all its nuclear-related commitments. However, with the US pulling out of the deal and then designating Iran’s IRGC as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on April 8, 2019, Iran decided to break the shackles. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani soon announced that Iran will resume its nuclear enrichment and install a cascade of 20 IR-6 centrifuges at Natanz.&nbsp;

Following on, Iran's Guardian Council approved legislation on December 2, 2020, mandating the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran to increase enrichment levels to 20 percent and to suspend implementation of the Additional Protocol in 60 days if sanctions are not revoked.

Few months later, on April 13, 2021, soon after a cyber-attack on the Natanz nuclear plant, Iran announced its intention to enrich uranium now to 60 percent. Within six months, in November 2021, Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi was quoted stating “We have more than 210 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20%, and we have produced 25 kilos at 60 percent, a level that no country apart from those with nuclear arms are able to produce”.

These developments were obviously alarming for the West as well as the IAEA. On June 6, 2022, the IAEA passed a resolution formally criticizing Iran for a lack of cooperation and on failure to explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites in Iran. Iran promptly followed up by shutting down IAEA’s surveillance cameras recording data beyond the Safeguards Agreement.

Six months later, on January 21, 2023, an IAEA report indicated that its inspectors discovered that the two cascades of IR-6 centrifuges in the Fordo nuclear plant in Iran had been configured in a way “substantially different” to what had been previously declared. The samples collected showed particles up to 83.7 percent enriched uranium, very close to 90 percent required for weapon-grade uranium, raising alarm bells in global capitals. Iran dismissed the concerns stating that in the process of enrichment, small particles do get highly enriched.

Meanwhile, indirect talks continued between the US and Iran and there were reports in June 2023 that Iran had slowed the pace of 60 percent Uranium enrichment to about 3 kg in a month from the previously estimated 9 kg a month, in anticipation of some deal with the US. Surely enough, the US and Iran sealed a deal, but not nuclear, for a prisoner exchange on September 18 and the US also released US$ 6 billion of Iran’s money that was frozen for years in South Korea in compliance with unilateral US sanctions on Iran. Interestingly enough, this was just three weeks before the Hamas initiated the Gaza war on October 7.

However, by November again, Iran was enriching Uranium to 60 percent at a scale of 9 kg per month. Most of this high enrichment is taking place at its Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP) in Natanz and the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), which is dug deep into a mountain and tucked away from direct targeting by most missiles and aircraft.

<h2>Can Iran Weaponise its Nuclear Programme?</h2>

To examine whether Iran can and will weaponise its nuclear programme, there are three important steps to check. Firstly, does it have enough weapon-grade uranium? Secondly, does it have a warhead to carry a nuclear payload? Thirdly, what are the delivery systems?

Theoretically, every one tonne of natural uranium fed into the centrifuges, produces about 120-130 kg of Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), ie 4-5 percent enrichment which is fuel for power reactors, about 26 kg of Uranium enriched to 20 percent which is typical research reactor fuel and possibly up-to 5.5 to 6 kg of weapons-grade material, enriched to 90 percent.

Also, nuclear experts claim that the major technological challenge and time required is to enrich Uranium to 20 percent where it enters the category of HEU ie Highly Enriched Uranium. After that, with modern and high-capacity centrifuges like the ‘IR6’ which Iran is presently using, it is only a matter of time and ‘political will’ before it enriches to 60 percent (which Iran is officially doing) or even 90 percent, when weapon-grade uranium is produced.

In February 2024, the IAEA estimated in its quarterly report that Iran’s total enriched uranium stockpile was at 5,525 kilograms, an increase of 1,038 kilograms since the last quarterly report in November 2023, and that Iran now has an estimated 121.5 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60 percent&nbsp;purity. By the IAEA's theoretical definition, around 42 kg of uranium enriched to 60 percent&nbsp;is the amount at which making a nuclear bomb with it cannot be excluded. By this calculation, Iran already has the required enriched Uranium to make weapon-grade Uranium for three bombs.&nbsp;

With regards to the warheads, there are very clear indications that Iran has the know-how of it already. Israeli intelligence agencies have often produced blueprints of such devices. It has been probably made possible through decades’ long work, reverse engineering processes and a very close nexus with North Korea and China. In fact, on April 24, North Korea’s state-run Korean Central News Agency reported a sudden visit of a North Korean economic delegation led by Minister of Economic Relations Yun Jung Ho to Iran.

With no details on the purpose or agenda of the visit, it does raise eyebrows, coming so close on the heels of a direct Israel-Iran spat a few weeks back. The recent statement of Ahmad Haghtalab, the IRGC Commander in Iran responsible for safeguarding Iran’s nuclear programme that, in case of Israel’s threat on Iran’s nuclear sites, Iran may revise its nuclear doctrine and policies, too is a strong indicator towards Iran’s capability to have a potential warhead design.

As regards delivery systems, Iran’s array of missiles is the largest and most diverse in the region. Many Iranian missiles, especially solid fuel-based MRBMS are reported to be inherently capable of carrying nuclear payloads, which has long been an international concern too. In fact, UN Security Council Resolution 2231 had called upon Iran “not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons”. Plus, reports of Russia possibly delivering Su-35 fighter aircraft to Iran in the near future add to the potential as they too can carry nuclear payloads.

<h2>Conclusion</h2>

Few things are therefore clear from the above arguments. Firstly, with Iran’s nuclear deal talks off for almost two years now, the nuclear programme has silently and steadily progressed to unprecedented levels. Secondly, with two wars going on and the US presidential election cycle, it is very unlikely for any nuclear talks to be revived soon.

Thirdly, the potential for Iran to develop a nuclear weapons programme&nbsp;is very much there. Finally, any miss-step in the Gaza conflict, especially targeting of Iranian nuclear sites could set a chain of events that could then be uncontrollable and have disastrous results for the region.&nbsp;

With Iran having shed its strategic patience, any serious threat to its regime or its sovereignty may force Iran to cross the threshold and turn nuclear. With potent military options and effective proxies, it may not be required for Iran to reveal this trump card yet. However, if and when that happens, West Asian and perhaps the global security landscape will change forever and possibly for the worse.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

The Gaza war is completing seven months, a war that was launched as a retaliation to the Hamas terror attack into Israel on October 7, 2023. During the course of this war, Israeli strikes have already killed more than 32,000 Palestinian civilians.

The Gaza war is completing seven months, a war that was launched as a retaliation to the Hamas terror attack into Israel on October 7, 2023. During the course of this war, Israeli strikes have already killed more than 32,000 Palestinian civilians. These include more than 13,000 children, many of them infants. Except for a brief humanitarian pause in November last year, there has been no letup in the war. After four failed attempts, the UN Security Council finally passed a resolution on 25th March asking for an immediate ceasefire and unconditional release of hostages, but neither Hamas nor Israel have come to any common ground to effect a ceasefire in the war. The Iran-Israel Direct Spat Meanwhile, the war took a dangerous turn when on April 1, Israeli fighter jets targeted the Iranian Consulate in Damascus resulting in the death of seven members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, the senior-most commander in Lebanon and Syria. Iran vowed revenge and responded in the form of a simultaneous strike of around 300 drones and ballistic missiles into Israel on April 13. While most of the drones and missiles were intercepted mid-air, 7-8 missiles found their mark and struck the Nevatim Israeli air base in the Negev desert. This was the first time that Iran had struck Israel from its own territory, something which it had avoided earlier despite many severe provocations in the past. Vowing to strike back, Israel struck with drone/missile strike in the early hours of April 19 when loud explosions were reported in the vicinity of the city of Isfahan. Reports indicated that the Iranian air defences had shot down ‘three drones’ over the skies of the city. Although some media outlets later presented satellite pictures to show that some part of the Air Defence Battery in Isfahan was damaged, but neither Iran, Israel nor the US commented anything on it. Iran dismissed the attack as small and insignificant while Israel maintained stoic silence. While it is being presumed that both countries would call it quits as far as directly targeting each other’s territory is concerned, the threat of escalation remains alive. Days later, on April 23, Iran’s President Raisi, during his visit to Pakistan, was quoted saying that the ‘Zionist regime’ will be destroyed if Israel attacks again in Iran. The Israel-Iran direct spat in the past few weeks has not only raised the levels of threat of an escalating conflict but has also brought to the fore an issue that had been forgotten in the fury of wars for the past two years, the Iran nuclear issue. In case of any further escalation between Iran and Israel in the ongoing conflict, the threat of Iran’s nuclear programme being weaponised is a possibility that needs to be examined in detail. Can Iran go nuclear? Does it have the capacity to do it? If yes, how much time and help is required before Iran can actually declare a nuclear weapon? To answer these difficult questions, one needs to step back and see how Iran got where it is, in its nuclear programme. Iran Nuclear Deal- A Recap Iran’s nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was a result of six years of continued and labored negotiations between Iran and P5 plus 1, which resulted in the signing of the nuclear deal in July 2015. The JCPOA put very strict and crippling restrictions on Iran’s nuclear programme, making it virtually impossible to have a nuclear weapons programme. As a part of the deal, Iran could not operate more than 5,000 first-generation IR-1 centrifuges to enrich uranium, that too, only up to 3.67 percent. All uranium enriched to 20 percent was to be scrapped or shipped out and the core of its Heavy Water Plant at Arak was to be demobilized. Most importantly, Iran agreed to ‘anywhere, anytime’ inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA and UN inspectors. Iran stuck to the deal and on January 16, 2016, designated as the Implementation Day, the IAEA verified that Iran had met its all nuclear-related commitments, triggering the lifting of sanctions on Iran. The joy was short-lived as Donald Trump who was strongly opposed to the deal, won the US presidential elections in November 2016 and immediately announced that he will impose “the highest level of economic sanctions” on Iran. Following up on his threat, in May 2018, President Trump pulled the plug on the nuclear deal. Despite pressure from other members of P5 plus1, the UN, and the IAEA, he did not relent and Iran was pushed back into a strict sanctions regime. Barack Obama, whose administration had negotiated the deal, condemned Trump’s violation of the agreement and said that without the JCPOA, the US could eventually be left with a losing choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the Middle East. Efforts to revive the nuclear deal could only commence once Biden became US President. The talks commenced in April 2021 and continued till January 2022 when the eighth round was concluded with an understanding that that most of the technical issues have been agreed to and the deal is now possible within the parameters of ‘political decisions’. However, the Ukraine war broke out on February 24, 2022 and put the Iran nuclear talks on the backburner. Iran’s revives the Nuclear Programme Despite Trump pulling out of the deal, Iran stuck to the nuclear deal at least till March 6, 2019, the last time when the IAEA reported that Iran was implementing all its nuclear-related commitments. However, with the US pulling out of the deal and then designating Iran’s IRGC as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on April 8, 2019, Iran decided to break the shackles. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani soon announced that Iran will resume its nuclear enrichment and install a cascade of 20 IR-6 centrifuges at Natanz. Following on, Iran's Guardian Council approved legislation on December 2, 2020, mandating the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran to increase enrichment levels to 20 percent and to suspend implementation of the Additional Protocol in 60 days if sanctions are not revoked. Few months later, on April 13, 2021, soon after a cyber-attack on the Natanz nuclear plant, Iran announced its intention to enrich uranium now to 60 percent. Within six months, in November 2021, Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi was quoted stating “We have more than 210 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20%, and we have produced 25 kilos at 60 percent, a level that no country apart from those with nuclear arms are able to produce”. These developments were obviously alarming for the West as well as the IAEA. On June 6, 2022, the IAEA passed a resolution formally criticizing Iran for a lack of cooperation and on failure to explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites in Iran. Iran promptly followed up by shutting down IAEA’s surveillance cameras recording data beyond the Safeguards Agreement. Six months later, on January 21, 2023, an IAEA report indicated that its inspectors discovered that the two cascades of IR-6 centrifuges in the Fordo nuclear plant in Iran had been configured in a way “substantially different” to what had been previously declared. The samples collected showed particles up to 83.7 percent enriched uranium, very close to 90 percent required for weapon-grade uranium, raising alarm bells in global capitals. Iran dismissed the concerns stating that in the process of enrichment, small particles do get highly enriched. Meanwhile, indirect talks continued between the US and Iran and there were reports in June 2023 that Iran had slowed the pace of 60 percent Uranium enrichment to about 3 kg in a month from the previously estimated 9 kg a month, in anticipation of some deal with the US. Surely enough, the US and Iran sealed a deal, but not nuclear, for a prisoner exchange on September 18 and the US also released US$ 6 billion of Iran’s money that was frozen for years in South Korea in compliance with unilateral US sanctions on Iran. Interestingly enough, this was just three weeks before the Hamas initiated the Gaza war on October 7. However, by November again, Iran was enriching Uranium to 60 percent at a scale of 9 kg per month. Most of this high enrichment is taking place at its Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP) in Natanz and the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), which is dug deep into a mountain and tucked away from direct targeting by most missiles and aircraft. Can Iran Weaponise its Nuclear Programme? To examine whether Iran can and will weaponise its nuclear programme, there are three important steps to check. Firstly, does it have enough weapon-grade uranium? Secondly, does it have a warhead to carry a nuclear payload? Thirdly, what are the delivery systems? Theoretically, every one tonne of natural uranium fed into the centrifuges, produces about 120-130 kg of Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), ie 4-5 percent enrichment which is fuel for power reactors, about 26 kg of Uranium enriched to 20 percent which is typical research reactor fuel and possibly up-to 5.5 to 6 kg of weapons-grade material, enriched to 90 percent. Also, nuclear experts claim that the major technological challenge and time required is to enrich Uranium to 20 percent where it enters the category of HEU ie Highly Enriched Uranium. After that, with modern and high-capacity centrifuges like the ‘IR6’ which Iran is presently using, it is only a matter of time and ‘political will’ before it enriches to 60 percent (which Iran is officially doing) or even 90 percent, when weapon-grade uranium is produced. In February 2024, the IAEA estimated in its quarterly report that Iran’s total enriched uranium stockpile was at 5,525 kilograms, an increase of 1,038 kilograms since the last quarterly report in November 2023, and that Iran now has an estimated 121.5 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity. By the IAEA's theoretical definition, around 42 kg of uranium enriched to 60 percent is the amount at which making a nuclear bomb with it cannot be excluded. By this calculation, Iran already has the required enriched Uranium to make weapon-grade Uranium for three bombs. With regards to the warheads, there are very clear indications that Iran has the know-how of it already. Israeli intelligence agencies have often produced blueprints of such devices. It has been probably made possible through decades’ long work, reverse engineering processes and a very close nexus with North Korea and China. In fact, on April 24, North Korea’s state-run Korean Central News Agency reported a sudden visit of a North Korean economic delegation led by Minister of Economic Relations Yun Jung Ho to Iran. With no details on the purpose or agenda of the visit, it does raise eyebrows, coming so close on the heels of a direct Israel-Iran spat a few weeks back. The recent statement of Ahmad Haghtalab, the IRGC Commander in Iran responsible for safeguarding Iran’s nuclear programme that, in case of Israel’s threat on Iran’s nuclear sites, Iran may revise its nuclear doctrine and policies, too is a strong indicator towards Iran’s capability to have a potential warhead design. As regards delivery systems, Iran’s array of missiles is the largest and most diverse in the region. Many Iranian missiles, especially solid fuel-based MRBMS are reported to be inherently capable of carrying nuclear payloads, which has long been an international concern too. In fact, UN Security Council Resolution 2231 had called upon Iran “not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons”. Plus, reports of Russia possibly delivering Su-35 fighter aircraft to Iran in the near future add to the potential as they too can carry nuclear payloads. Conclusion Few things are therefore clear from the above arguments. Firstly, with Iran’s nuclear deal talks off for almost two years now, the nuclear programme has silently and steadily progressed to unprecedented levels. Secondly, with two wars going on and the US presidential election cycle, it is very unlikely for any nuclear talks to be revived soon. Thirdly, the potential for Iran to develop a nuclear weapons programme is very much there. Finally, any miss-step in the Gaza conflict, especially targeting of Iranian nuclear sites could set a chain of events that could then be uncontrollable and have disastrous results for the region. With Iran having shed its strategic patience, any serious threat to its regime or its sovereignty may force Iran to cross the threshold and turn nuclear. With potent military options and effective proxies, it may not be required for Iran to reveal this trump card yet. However, if and when that happens, West Asian and perhaps the global security landscape will change forever and possibly for the worse. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Iran’s nuclear programme: The forgotten deal but a lurking threat

G20 Summit 2023: The 18th G20 Summit in New Delhi&nbsp;is proving to be a mega event, perhaps the largest in the history of G20. Attended by more than 30 heads of State/Government, it discussed issues that are not only relevant to the G20 countries but hold significance to the future of the entire planet, duly justifying the theme of this year’s G20 i.e. ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’. &nbsp;The ‘Delhi Declaration’ issued on the first day&nbsp;of the summit was an apt reflection of the priorities that India proposed, key among them being the focus on inclusion of the Global South in the G20, inclusive and human-centric development, climate preservation models through ‘just transition’ and a new model for financial inclusion for the developing world. The joint declaration was also a result of deft diplomacy from India, which had to navigate through several disagreements and conflicting views, prominent among them was the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and the resultant stand-off between Russia and the West. &nbsp;

The G20, which consists of the world's major powers and important economies, has 19 countries plus the EU and now the African Union as members and represents&nbsp;more than 85% of global GDP, 75% of international trade and more than two-thirds of the world's population. Among the 19 countries are the P5 of the UN Security Council, others being Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, &nbsp;Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Türkiye with Spain as a permanent invitee. In addition, prominent forums like the World Bank, and IMF too are permanent invitees. The presidency is a rotational responsibility, on an annual basis.&nbsp;

From an Indian standpoint, this was India’s first G20 presidency and coincided with the celebrations of its 75th year of independence. It was also the largest-ever gathering of world leaders hosted in India. It also came at a time when the world is looking for answers to serious global issues like Covid-19 pandemic which has adversely affected global supply chains, the Russia-Ukraine war which has split the world vertically between the ‘West and the Rest’ as well as the continued threat posed by China’s aggressive designs in East and South East Asia. In all of this, if there is one country that emerged above the gloom, it is India, which not only provided Covid-19 vaccines to its people but also to more than 100 countries in the world. Its resoluteness and exercise of its strategic autonomy in the face of extreme pressure posed by the West on Russia-Ukraine war, was acknowledged world over and later reluctantly accepted by the West too. India’s proactive steps in tackling climate disasters and promotion towards renewable energy have been taken note of&nbsp;by the world. In the midst of all this, India quietly climbed the ladder to become the fifth-largest economy and has been projected to continue its northward trajectory as the fastest-growing economy in the coming years. All this gave India prominence and the required fillip to set a proactive and futuristic agenda&nbsp;for its G20 presidency which is aptly reflected in the Delhi Declaration. &nbsp;

<h2>The Many Firsts and Unique Outcomes&nbsp;</h2>

Perhaps the most significant outcome of India’s G20 has been the inclusion of the African Union as a G20 member. Right through its presidency, India has been vocal about becoming the ‘Voice of the Global South’. India hosted the first ever ‘Voice of Global South Summit’ on 12-13 January 2023. The Summit was held in a virtual format, with the participation of 125 countries of the Global South. India has constantly held the position that the concerns and needs of the Global South are essential to seek equitable solutions to global problems and thus inclusion of the African Union as a permanent member was an exclusive initiative and success of India.&nbsp;

India’s emphasis on LIFE (Lifestyle for Environment) and climate preservation and getting the G20 nations to agree on a ‘just transition’ to save the planet is yet another huge achievement of the Summit. It now involves a country-specific climate assessment and transition rather than the earlier ‘one size fits all’ approach. The joint declaration aptly stated that ‘Just energy transitions can improve jobs and livelihoods, and strengthen economic resilience. We affirm that no country should have to choose between fighting poverty and fighting for our planet’.

India has already demonstrated its commitment by surpassing its renewable energy target nine years ahead of the 2030 target set at the 2015 Paris Climate Summit, where India had pledged that 40% of its power capacity would be met by non-fossil fuels by 2030, a target that was met in December 2021 itself. In addition, India’s global initiatives like the International Solar Alliance set up in 2015 and which now has over 100 countries as members, and the now proposed Global Bio Fuels Alliance are huge steps towards preserving the climate. Over the year of its presidency, India also showcased its traditional ‘living in harmony with the nature’ as an effective measure to safeguard the climate. Another Indian initiative, setting up the Coalition for Disaster Resilience so that countries across the world, especially developing countries, learn from each other and build infrastructure that is resilient even during disasters, was widely acknowledged and applauded at the Summit.&nbsp;

Promotion of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) has been another landmark achievement of India’s presidency. India through its DPI has been able to pull millions out of poverty by ensuring financial inclusion and ‘direct benefit transfer’ stopping leakages. The digital payment system has caught global attention with advanced economies like Japan, Singapore, France, Germany, UAE looking at ways to adopt it. Noting India’s expertise and rapid growth in DPI, the joint declaration welcomed India’s plan to build and maintain a Global Digital Public Infrastructure Repository (GDPIR), a virtual repository of DPI, voluntarily shared by G20 members and beyond. It also welcomed Indian Presidency’s proposal of the One Future Alliance (OFA), a voluntary initiative aimed at building capacity, and providing technical assistance and adequate funding support for implementing DPI in Low and Middle-Income economies.&nbsp;

India also placed emphasis on addressing the global challenges posed by debt vulnerabilities, especially for nations in the Global South. G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors have acknowledged the problem and the need to establish strong mechanisms to help the affected nations. Towards this, the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable, a joint initiative of the IMF, World Bank and the G20 Presidency has been launched this year. India has already helped Sri Lanka in its debt restructuring while the G20 has now taken note of cases of Zambia, Ethiopia and Ghana for progressing their cases. &nbsp;

There were many more outcomes in the 37-page declaration, an outcome of over 10 months of labored and thought-provoking and futuristic discussions. By organising over 200 meetings across 60 cities, India has set yet another benchmark for the future of G20. India’s vision to make it ‘peoples presidency’ has not only helped showcase the diversity and vibrancy of all parts of India to the world but has also set the tone that G20 cannot be an elitist club, to be entertained in the capital city only. When seen in context with India’s push for inclusion of the African Union in the G20, it is a clear step towards democratization of the G20. &nbsp;

<h2>Shaping the New World Order&nbsp;</h2>

India’s G20 presidency came at a critical point when the existing global order was in crisis and the established norms were being challenged. Russia Russia-Ukraine war has split the world between the ‘West and the Rest’ while China’s aggressive designs and refusal to follow the ‘rules-based order’ are causing discord. The US is no longer the single ‘pole’ and its dollar dominance is being challenged. To add to the chaos is the global crisis caused in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic which has disrupted global supply chains, causing huge shortages in food and energy in the developing and under-developed nations. The relevance and potential of international financial institutions like the Bretton Woods Institutions i.e. the World Bank, and the IMF along with several multilateral development banks etc., to tackle modern-day issues is being questioned. PM Modi’s remarks that “a mid-20th century approach cannot serve the world in the 21st century. So, our international institutions need to recognise changing realities, expand their decision-making forums, relook at their priorities and ensure representation of voices that matter”, aptly puts the issues in correct perspective.&nbsp;

In all this muddle and uncertainty, the world is looking for a nation that enjoys goodwill across ideologies, is a trustworthy partner, is technologically and economically sound, has no aggressive designs or extra-territorial ambitions and respects the ‘rule-based order’. India ticks all these boxes and more, with its vibrant democracy and diversity being added pluses. So, when India talked of the need to include the Global South in important decision-making discourse, it was accepted. When India stood firm on exercising its strategic autonomy and serving its national interests during the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it was not only accepted but gave it the status of a global leader, ‘Vishwaguru’ status. India’s G20 presidency has thus set the foundation for a new and fast-evolving world order which would be more diverse and inclusive and a world order which will witness the emergence of multiple poles, unlike the fast-eroding existing world order.&nbsp;

<h2>The Finale&nbsp;</h2>

Coming amidst huge uncertainties about the outcome of the G20 Summit, India practically pulled off a heist when PM Modi announced right in the morning session of the first day that a consensus has been reached on adopting the Delhi Declaration. It caught all the pundits by surprise, the majority of whom were doubtful of a consensus declaration and others who were hopeful of a declaration, albeit in a photo finish. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The main sticking point on the Ukraine war was deftly re-worded to state that G20 expresses deep concern about the immense human suffering and the adverse impact of wars and conflicts around the world. In line with the UN Charter, all states must refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition against the territorial integrity and sovereignty or political independence of any state. The use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible. It added that G20 is not the platform to resolve geopolitical and security issues and ended the para by stating that there were different views and assessments of the situation. With Russia on board with it, China probably had no option but to relent not only on Ukraine but also on the theme of the G20 presidency, ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’ which interestingly was the first para of the preamble of the declaration, perhaps a ‘tease or a dare’ to China!&nbsp;

As PM Modi himself stated, “India’s G20 Presidency has been the most ambitious in the history of G-20. With 112 outcomes and presidency documents, we have more than doubled the substantive work from previous presidencies." Modi emphasized on the need for inclusive human-centric development in which women get their due role and importance. India’s emphasis towards women-led development was applauded at the summit. India also proposed to launch the 'G20 Satellite Mission for Environment and Climate Observation' and also announced the launch of the Global Biofuel Alliance and urged G20 nations to join the initiative with a plea to take ethanol blending with petrol globally to 20 per cent, both perhaps cherries on the cake in the success of the Summit. &nbsp;

The G20 presidency of India has thus been spectacular and pathbreaking. The benchmarks it has set will be difficult to match in the future. It has once again re-affirmed India’s global leadership status.&nbsp;As Dr Jaishankar said at the press conference, “The G20 has contributed to making India world-ready and the world India-ready". India’s moment has truly arrived. PM Modi and his team have made it a habit of delivering against the greatest of odds and this G20 Summit was just the latest among, in a long list. Today, while the world heaves a sigh of relief at yet another day saved from the blushes, Bharat celebrates and the tricolor flies high.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

G20 Summit 2023: The 18th G20 Summit in New Delhi is proving to be a mega event, perhaps the largest in the history of G20. Attended by more than 30 heads of State/Government, it discussed issues that are not only relevant to the G20 countries but hold significance to the future of the entire planet, duly justifying the theme of this year’s G20 i.

G20 Summit 2023: The 18th G20 Summit in New Delhi is proving to be a mega event, perhaps the largest in the history of G20. Attended by more than 30 heads of State/Government, it discussed issues that are not only relevant to the G20 countries but hold significance to the future of the entire planet, duly justifying the theme of this year’s G20 i.e. ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’. The ‘Delhi Declaration’ issued on the first day of the summit was an apt reflection of the priorities that India proposed, key among them being the focus on inclusion of the Global South in the G20, inclusive and human-centric development, climate preservation models through ‘just transition’ and a new model for financial inclusion for the developing world. The joint declaration was also a result of deft diplomacy from India, which had to navigate through several disagreements and conflicting views, prominent among them was the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and the resultant stand-off between Russia and the West. The G20, which consists of the world's major powers and important economies, has 19 countries plus the EU and now the African Union as members and represents more than 85% of global GDP, 75% of international trade and more than two-thirds of the world's population. Among the 19 countries are the P5 of the UN Security Council, others being Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Türkiye with Spain as a permanent invitee. In addition, prominent forums like the World Bank, and IMF too are permanent invitees. The presidency is a rotational responsibility, on an annual basis. From an Indian standpoint, this was India’s first G20 presidency and coincided with the celebrations of its 75th year of independence. It was also the largest-ever gathering of world leaders hosted in India. It also came at a time when the world is looking for answers to serious global issues like Covid-19 pandemic which has adversely affected global supply chains, the Russia-Ukraine war which has split the world vertically between the ‘West and the Rest’ as well as the continued threat posed by China’s aggressive designs in East and South East Asia. In all of this, if there is one country that emerged above the gloom, it is India, which not only provided Covid-19 vaccines to its people but also to more than 100 countries in the world. Its resoluteness and exercise of its strategic autonomy in the face of extreme pressure posed by the West on Russia-Ukraine war, was acknowledged world over and later reluctantly accepted by the West too. India’s proactive steps in tackling climate disasters and promotion towards renewable energy have been taken note of by the world. In the midst of all this, India quietly climbed the ladder to become the fifth-largest economy and has been projected to continue its northward trajectory as the fastest-growing economy in the coming years. All this gave India prominence and the required fillip to set a proactive and futuristic agenda for its G20 presidency which is aptly reflected in the Delhi Declaration. The Many Firsts and Unique Outcomes Perhaps the most significant outcome of India’s G20 has been the inclusion of the African Union as a G20 member. Right through its presidency, India has been vocal about becoming the ‘Voice of the Global South’. India hosted the first ever ‘Voice of Global South Summit’ on 12-13 January 2023. The Summit was held in a virtual format, with the participation of 125 countries of the Global South. India has constantly held the position that the concerns and needs of the Global South are essential to seek equitable solutions to global problems and thus inclusion of the African Union as a permanent member was an exclusive initiative and success of India. India’s emphasis on LIFE (Lifestyle for Environment) and climate preservation and getting the G20 nations to agree on a ‘just transition’ to save the planet is yet another huge achievement of the Summit. It now involves a country-specific climate assessment and transition rather than the earlier ‘one size fits all’ approach. The joint declaration aptly stated that ‘Just energy transitions can improve jobs and livelihoods, and strengthen economic resilience. We affirm that no country should have to choose between fighting poverty and fighting for our planet’. India has already demonstrated its commitment by surpassing its renewable energy target nine years ahead of the 2030 target set at the 2015 Paris Climate Summit, where India had pledged that 40% of its power capacity would be met by non-fossil fuels by 2030, a target that was met in December 2021 itself. In addition, India’s global initiatives like the International Solar Alliance set up in 2015 and which now has over 100 countries as members, and the now proposed Global Bio Fuels Alliance are huge steps towards preserving the climate. Over the year of its presidency, India also showcased its traditional ‘living in harmony with the nature’ as an effective measure to safeguard the climate. Another Indian initiative, setting up the Coalition for Disaster Resilience so that countries across the world, especially developing countries, learn from each other and build infrastructure that is resilient even during disasters, was widely acknowledged and applauded at the Summit. Promotion of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) has been another landmark achievement of India’s presidency. India through its DPI has been able to pull millions out of poverty by ensuring financial inclusion and ‘direct benefit transfer’ stopping leakages. The digital payment system has caught global attention with advanced economies like Japan, Singapore, France, Germany, UAE looking at ways to adopt it. Noting India’s expertise and rapid growth in DPI, the joint declaration welcomed India’s plan to build and maintain a Global Digital Public Infrastructure Repository (GDPIR), a virtual repository of DPI, voluntarily shared by G20 members and beyond. It also welcomed Indian Presidency’s proposal of the One Future Alliance (OFA), a voluntary initiative aimed at building capacity, and providing technical assistance and adequate funding support for implementing DPI in Low and Middle-Income economies. India also placed emphasis on addressing the global challenges posed by debt vulnerabilities, especially for nations in the Global South. G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors have acknowledged the problem and the need to establish strong mechanisms to help the affected nations. Towards this, the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable, a joint initiative of the IMF, World Bank and the G20 Presidency has been launched this year. India has already helped Sri Lanka in its debt restructuring while the G20 has now taken note of cases of Zambia, Ethiopia and Ghana for progressing their cases. There were many more outcomes in the 37-page declaration, an outcome of over 10 months of labored and thought-provoking and futuristic discussions. By organising over 200 meetings across 60 cities, India has set yet another benchmark for the future of G20. India’s vision to make it ‘peoples presidency’ has not only helped showcase the diversity and vibrancy of all parts of India to the world but has also set the tone that G20 cannot be an elitist club, to be entertained in the capital city only. When seen in context with India’s push for inclusion of the African Union in the G20, it is a clear step towards democratization of the G20. Shaping the New World Order India’s G20 presidency came at a critical point when the existing global order was in crisis and the established norms were being challenged. Russia Russia-Ukraine war has split the world between the ‘West and the Rest’ while China’s aggressive designs and refusal to follow the ‘rules-based order’ are causing discord. The US is no longer the single ‘pole’ and its dollar dominance is being challenged. To add to the chaos is the global crisis caused in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic which has disrupted global supply chains, causing huge shortages in food and energy in the developing and under-developed nations. The relevance and potential of international financial institutions like the Bretton Woods Institutions i.e. the World Bank, and the IMF along with several multilateral development banks etc., to tackle modern-day issues is being questioned. PM Modi’s remarks that “a mid-20th century approach cannot serve the world in the 21st century. So, our international institutions need to recognise changing realities, expand their decision-making forums, relook at their priorities and ensure representation of voices that matter”, aptly puts the issues in correct perspective. In all this muddle and uncertainty, the world is looking for a nation that enjoys goodwill across ideologies, is a trustworthy partner, is technologically and economically sound, has no aggressive designs or extra-territorial ambitions and respects the ‘rule-based order’. India ticks all these boxes and more, with its vibrant democracy and diversity being added pluses. So, when India talked of the need to include the Global South in important decision-making discourse, it was accepted. When India stood firm on exercising its strategic autonomy and serving its national interests during the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it was not only accepted but gave it the status of a global leader, ‘Vishwaguru’ status. India’s G20 presidency has thus set the foundation for a new and fast-evolving world order which would be more diverse and inclusive and a world order which will witness the emergence of multiple poles, unlike the fast-eroding existing world order. The Finale Coming amidst huge uncertainties about the outcome of the G20 Summit, India practically pulled off a heist when PM Modi announced right in the morning session of the first day that a consensus has been reached on adopting the Delhi Declaration. It caught all the pundits by surprise, the majority of whom were doubtful of a consensus declaration and others who were hopeful of a declaration, albeit in a photo finish. The main sticking point on the Ukraine war was deftly re-worded to state that G20 expresses deep concern about the immense human suffering and the adverse impact of wars and conflicts around the world. In line with the UN Charter, all states must refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition against the territorial integrity and sovereignty or political independence of any state. The use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible. It added that G20 is not the platform to resolve geopolitical and security issues and ended the para by stating that there were different views and assessments of the situation. With Russia on board with it, China probably had no option but to relent not only on Ukraine but also on the theme of the G20 presidency, ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’ which interestingly was the first para of the preamble of the declaration, perhaps a ‘tease or a dare’ to China! As PM Modi himself stated, “India’s G20 Presidency has been the most ambitious in the history of G-20. With 112 outcomes and presidency documents, we have more than doubled the substantive work from previous presidencies." Modi emphasized on the need for inclusive human-centric development in which women get their due role and importance. India’s emphasis towards women-led development was applauded at the summit. India also proposed to launch the 'G20 Satellite Mission for Environment and Climate Observation' and also announced the launch of the Global Biofuel Alliance and urged G20 nations to join the initiative with a plea to take ethanol blending with petrol globally to 20 per cent, both perhaps cherries on the cake in the success of the Summit. The G20 presidency of India has thus been spectacular and pathbreaking. The benchmarks it has set will be difficult to match in the future. It has once again re-affirmed India’s global leadership status. As Dr Jaishankar said at the press conference, “The G20 has contributed to making India world-ready and the world India-ready". India’s moment has truly arrived. PM Modi and his team have made it a habit of delivering against the greatest of odds and this G20 Summit was just the latest among, in a long list. Today, while the world heaves a sigh of relief at yet another day saved from the blushes, Bharat celebrates and the tricolor flies high. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.) You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

‘Bharat’ aces G20, setting new benchmarks for a 21st century world order 

The Arab League Summit is scheduled in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on 19th May 2023. Consisting of 22 members and headquartered at Cairo, it is a major regional forum for countries in West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region, especially on economy, regional politics and security. Coming at a time amidst a major churn in the geopolitics of the region, this could be a landmark summit of the Arab League. Already, the Saudi-Iran peace deal brokered by China in March 2023 is taking shape and promises to end many conflicts in the region and pave the way for a period of reconciliation and peace.&nbsp;

As regards the Arab League too, there have been positive developments. The latest development is the decision to re-admit Syria into the forum, 12 years after its membership was revoked when Syria plunged into a civil war following a violent crackdown on protesters in March 2011 during the ‘Arab Spring’ protests. On 7th May, the foreign ministers of the Arab League agreed to reinstate Syria’s membership as a part of a larger reconciliation exercise in the region. The only voice of dissent came from Qatar which stated that although it will not oppose the re-entry of Syria into the Arab League, its Ministry of Foreign Affairs asserted that it will however not re-establish relations with Syria in the absence of a political solution that addresses “the aspirations of the brotherly Syrian people.”

Watch | Syria scores big diplomatic win in 11 years, to attend Arab League meeting after 10 years

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/syria-scores-big-diplomatic-win-in-11-years-to-attend-arab-league-meeting-after-10-years-592771/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

<h2>The Arab League</h2>

The Arab League was formed in Cairo on 22nd March 1945, as a symbol of Arab unity or Pan-Arabism. Formed even before the establishment of the UN in October 1945, its founding members were Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen. It aimed to strengthen and coordinate the political, cultural, economic, and social programs among its members and to mediate disputes among the member nations. Over a period of time, new members were admitted taking it to a total of 22 members currently, which includes the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) which was admitted in 1976. In its 77 years, it has however, had a chequered history, especially on major issues/conflicts in the region, be it the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Israel-Palestine issue, the US-led Gulf war in Iraq in 2003 or even the ‘Arab Spring’ protests in 2011-12. Even Egypt, one of the founding members was expelled in 1979 after the Camp David peace treaty with Israel and its HQ shifted out of Cairo to Tunis. It was reinstated only in 1989. &nbsp;Unity or consensus has generally been an area of concern and that is one major aspect for the forum to work on, if it wants to remain relevant in the future. 
&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

<h2>Changing discourse in the region</h2>

The Saudi-Iran peace deal has already resulted in intensifying engagement between the two countries as also the assurance of early re-opening of respective embassies in the coming months. It has also resulted in the promise to end the war in Yemen. Reconciliation with Syria too is underway and President Assad has been invited to the Arab League Summit. Following the Saudi-Iran peace deal, there seems to be a wave of reconciliation among the countries in the region. Egyptian Foreign Minister SamehShoukry visited Syria on 27th February, the first trip by a top Egyptian diplomat to Syria since its civil war began in 2011. Earlier in March, Egypt’s foreign minister held talks with his Turkish counterpart MevlutCavusoglu on the possibility of restoring ties during the first visit to Cairo by Turkey’s top diplomat since relations ruptured after the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government in 2013 in Egypt. Qatar and Bahrain too have announced restoration of diplomatic ties on 13th April, an important step towards unity within the region.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/how-syrias-bashar-al-assad-got-away-with-murder-593114">Opinion: How Syria’s Bashar al-Assad got away with murder</a>

Egypt and Iran are looking to mend ties. On 16th March, the spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry, Naseer Kanaani, confirmed that Iran wants to improve relations with Egypt. Egypt and Saudi Arabia ties are also on the mend. On 3rd April, President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi made a surprise visit to Jeddah where he held talks with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The two leaders “affirmed mutual concern for promoting common cooperation in all fields” as also “coordination and consultation” on regional and international issues. Qatar has already been integrated back into the region after the landmark GCC Summit at Al Ula in January 2021, ending Qatar’s diplomatic isolation of over three years from the GCC.

The depleting influence of the US in the region has opened up space for China and to some extent, Russia to offer support, economic as well as military, to countries in the region. China’s improved ties with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt are a case in point. The Abraham Accords between Israel and Arab countries including UAE, Bahrain Morocco and Sudan have opened up avenues of engagement which were earlier thought impossible. Ongoing talks, mostly back channel, between Saudi Arabia and Israel as well as the formation of I2U2 or the West Asian Quad comprising Israel, India, UAE and the US holds the possibility of tectonic shifts in the region in future. The recent meeting of the NSAs of India, the US, Saudi Arabia and the UAE in Jeddah on 07th May where they discussed regional matters, security, ongoing developments and the feasibility of a rail link between the countries of the region as well as to South Asia via sea lanes, too is a vitally important development in the region.

<h2>What next for the Arab League</h2>

Recent developments in the region and the reality of interdependent global economies dictate that the forum has to evolve based on developing realities. The oil economies are past their prime and countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE have already undertaken measures to develop suitable alternate economic models. Arab League could be a forum for these countries to help other smaller countries in the forum too to develop modern economies.

The Arab League is also different from two other forums in the region, GCC and the OIC. While the OIC represents the Islamic world as a whole across continents and its discourse is largely limited to debating Islamic issues, the GCC which was established in 1981 after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, is restricted to six countries of the Arabian peninsula and is based solely on the countering any threat from Iran. Arab League can therefore look beyond such narrow prisms’ and work towards a larger economic and security integration of the region.

Among the countries in the region, Turkey and Iran are not part of the Arab League being ‘Non-Arab’ countries. They are however too large, significant and powerful to be ignored if the region is looking for an effective regional integration. Arab League has long outlived its original mandate based on Pan-Arabism and needs to look beyond this formative idea. One such out-of-the-box idea could be to initiate a process to slowly ease Iran and Turkey into the forum, initially maybe as an observer or a dialogue partner. The Saudi-Iran peace deal could be used as a trigger for it. Anyway, it is better to have Iran in the room and talking, than an Iran which is isolated and perceived as a threat. Remember, the ASEAN today is much bigger than originally the countries of South East Asia. Similarly, the SCO too has vastly enlarged its membership beyond Russia, Central Asian Republics and China. Arab League too could take a cue from these precedents.

This summit could also help initiate a regional process towards healing and economic revival of nations which have been devastated due to prolonged conflict like Yemen, Syria and Libya as well as Iraq. The summit also offers an opportunity to resolve the ongoing deadly conflict in Sudan, one of the members of the league. Solidarity with Palestine, a cause that the Palestinians fear is losing traction in the past few years due to reconciliation attempts with Israel too could be an important aspect to be debated. 
&nbsp; 
India is already an Observer in the Arab League since December 2010 when the Indian Ambassador in Cairo was designated as India’s Permanent Representative to the Arab League with Observer Status. India and Arab League could use this re-vitalized forum to further cement ties with the region, where India already has deep and strategic ties with many major countries.

<h2>Conclusion</h2>

Arab League and the WANA region are at a point of inflection. Right initiatives and futuristic policies seeking regional integration rather than merely ‘Pan-Arabism’ could herald a new era in the region. With Saudi Arabia, the land of the two holy mosques taking over the presidency of the Arab League, there could be no better time for the Arab League to evolve anew.

Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

The Arab League Summit is scheduled in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on 19th May 2023. Consisting of 22 members and headquartered at Cairo, it is a major regional forum for countries in West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region, especially on economy, regional politics and security.

The Arab League Summit is scheduled in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on 19th May 2023. Consisting of 22 members and headquartered at Cairo, it is a major regional forum for countries in West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region, especially on economy, regional politics and security. Coming at a time amidst a major churn in the geopolitics of the region, this could be a landmark summit of the Arab League. Already, the Saudi-Iran peace deal brokered by China in March 2023 is taking shape and promises to end many conflicts in the region and pave the way for a period of reconciliation and peace. As regards the Arab League too, there have been positive developments. The latest development is the decision to re-admit Syria into the forum, 12 years after its membership was revoked when Syria plunged into a civil war following a violent crackdown on protesters in March 2011 during the ‘Arab Spring’ protests. On 7th May, the foreign ministers of the Arab League agreed to reinstate Syria’s membership as a part of a larger reconciliation exercise in the region. The only voice of dissent came from Qatar which stated that although it will not oppose the re-entry of Syria into the Arab League, its Ministry of Foreign Affairs asserted that it will however not re-establish relations with Syria in the absence of a political solution that addresses “the aspirations of the brotherly Syrian people.” Watch | Syria scores big diplomatic win in 11 years, to attend Arab League meeting after 10 years × The Arab League The Arab League was formed in Cairo on 22nd March 1945, as a symbol of Arab unity or Pan-Arabism. Formed even before the establishment of the UN in October 1945, its founding members were Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen. It aimed to strengthen and coordinate the political, cultural, economic, and social programs among its members and to mediate disputes among the member nations. Over a period of time, new members were admitted taking it to a total of 22 members currently, which includes the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) which was admitted in 1976. In its 77 years, it has however, had a chequered history, especially on major issues/conflicts in the region, be it the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Israel-Palestine issue, the US-led Gulf war in Iraq in 2003 or even the ‘Arab Spring’ protests in 2011-12. Even Egypt, one of the founding members was expelled in 1979 after the Camp David peace treaty with Israel and its HQ shifted out of Cairo to Tunis. It was reinstated only in 1989. Unity or consensus has generally been an area of concern and that is one major aspect for the forum to work on, if it wants to remain relevant in the future. Changing discourse in the region The Saudi-Iran peace deal has already resulted in intensifying engagement between the two countries as also the assurance of early re-opening of respective embassies in the coming months. It has also resulted in the promise to end the war in Yemen. Reconciliation with Syria too is underway and President Assad has been invited to the Arab League Summit. Following the Saudi-Iran peace deal, there seems to be a wave of reconciliation among the countries in the region. Egyptian Foreign Minister SamehShoukry visited Syria on 27th February, the first trip by a top Egyptian diplomat to Syria since its civil war began in 2011. Earlier in March, Egypt’s foreign minister held talks with his Turkish counterpart MevlutCavusoglu on the possibility of restoring ties during the first visit to Cairo by Turkey’s top diplomat since relations ruptured after the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government in 2013 in Egypt. Qatar and Bahrain too have announced restoration of diplomatic ties on 13th April, an important step towards unity within the region. Also Read | Opinion: How Syria’s Bashar al-Assad got away with murder Egypt and Iran are looking to mend ties. On 16th March, the spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry, Naseer Kanaani, confirmed that Iran wants to improve relations with Egypt. Egypt and Saudi Arabia ties are also on the mend. On 3rd April, President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi made a surprise visit to Jeddah where he held talks with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The two leaders “affirmed mutual concern for promoting common cooperation in all fields” as also “coordination and consultation” on regional and international issues. Qatar has already been integrated back into the region after the landmark GCC Summit at Al Ula in January 2021, ending Qatar’s diplomatic isolation of over three years from the GCC. The depleting influence of the US in the region has opened up space for China and to some extent, Russia to offer support, economic as well as military, to countries in the region. China’s improved ties with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt are a case in point. The Abraham Accords between Israel and Arab countries including UAE, Bahrain Morocco and Sudan have opened up avenues of engagement which were earlier thought impossible. Ongoing talks, mostly back channel, between Saudi Arabia and Israel as well as the formation of I2U2 or the West Asian Quad comprising Israel, India, UAE and the US holds the possibility of tectonic shifts in the region in future. The recent meeting of the NSAs of India, the US, Saudi Arabia and the UAE in Jeddah on 07th May where they discussed regional matters, security, ongoing developments and the feasibility of a rail link between the countries of the region as well as to South Asia via sea lanes, too is a vitally important development in the region. What next for the Arab League Recent developments in the region and the reality of interdependent global economies dictate that the forum has to evolve based on developing realities. The oil economies are past their prime and countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE have already undertaken measures to develop suitable alternate economic models. Arab League could be a forum for these countries to help other smaller countries in the forum too to develop modern economies. The Arab League is also different from two other forums in the region, GCC and the OIC. While the OIC represents the Islamic world as a whole across continents and its discourse is largely limited to debating Islamic issues, the GCC which was established in 1981 after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, is restricted to six countries of the Arabian peninsula and is based solely on the countering any threat from Iran. Arab League can therefore look beyond such narrow prisms’ and work towards a larger economic and security integration of the region. Among the countries in the region, Turkey and Iran are not part of the Arab League being ‘Non-Arab’ countries. They are however too large, significant and powerful to be ignored if the region is looking for an effective regional integration. Arab League has long outlived its original mandate based on Pan-Arabism and needs to look beyond this formative idea. One such out-of-the-box idea could be to initiate a process to slowly ease Iran and Turkey into the forum, initially maybe as an observer or a dialogue partner. The Saudi-Iran peace deal could be used as a trigger for it. Anyway, it is better to have Iran in the room and talking, than an Iran which is isolated and perceived as a threat. Remember, the ASEAN today is much bigger than originally the countries of South East Asia. Similarly, the SCO too has vastly enlarged its membership beyond Russia, Central Asian Republics and China. Arab League too could take a cue from these precedents. This summit could also help initiate a regional process towards healing and economic revival of nations which have been devastated due to prolonged conflict like Yemen, Syria and Libya as well as Iraq. The summit also offers an opportunity to resolve the ongoing deadly conflict in Sudan, one of the members of the league. Solidarity with Palestine, a cause that the Palestinians fear is losing traction in the past few years due to reconciliation attempts with Israel too could be an important aspect to be debated. India is already an Observer in the Arab League since December 2010 when the Indian Ambassador in Cairo was designated as India’s Permanent Representative to the Arab League with Observer Status. India and Arab League could use this re-vitalized forum to further cement ties with the region, where India already has deep and strategic ties with many major countries. Conclusion Arab League and the WANA region are at a point of inflection. Right initiatives and futuristic policies seeking regional integration rather than merely ‘Pan-Arabism’ could herald a new era in the region. With Saudi Arabia, the land of the two holy mosques taking over the presidency of the Arab League, there could be no better time for the Arab League to evolve anew. Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer. You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

Arab League: Time to evolve amidst changing discourse in the region

On 10th March 2023, China took the world by surprise when it announced that Saudi Arabia and Iran have agreed to resume diplomatic relations, in a peace deal brokered by it. The peace deal offers hope for peace and end to conflicts in the region. Among such conflicts is the eight-year-long ongoing war in Yemen where Saudi-led coalition is pitched against Iran-backed Houthi rebels since March 2015. As per the peace deal, both sides have agreed to end their support to the war in Yemen. It may be recalled that Saudi Arabia, along with regional Arab Allies and the US, launched airstrikes in Yemen on 26th March, 2015 in the air assault codenamed "Operation Decisive Storm", in response to the Houthi’s armed conflict against the government of Yemen.&nbsp;

Watch | The West Asia Post: Yemenis bear the cost of war

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/the-west-asia-post-yemenis-bear-the-cost-of-war-584934/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Already, there are signs of the peace deal taking shape in Yemen. On 09th April, Saudi and Omani delegations held talks in Sanaa with Houthi officials as well as the head of Houthi Supreme Political Council, Mahdi al-Mashat. The talks focused on an early reopening of Houthi-controlled ports and the Sanaa airport, nation rebuilding efforts and a clear timeline for foreign forces to exit the country. In the past few weeks, both sides have exchanged number of prisoners too, as a goodwill gesture. There were concerns that the armed conflict could resume after Ramzan as the ceasefire in Yemen had expired in October 2022, but there is hope that the relative calm over past one year may finally translate into cessation of hostilities.&nbsp;

The conflict in Yemen however, goes well beyond the war since March 2015. The seeds of the unrest and conflict have a long history, mostly internal to Yemen and a long-lasting peace can only prevail only once both external and internal conflicts are resolved.&nbsp;

Internal Conflict

The roots to the internal conflict in Yemen go back to 22nd May 1990 when the erstwhile two Yemeni nations were united and brought under a single flag. People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen (South Yemen) merged with Arab Republic of Yemen (North Yemen) to form a new country, ‘Republic of Yemen’. It was a forced union as, Yemen, since the 19th century, had been divided in two separate entities along a north-south divide.

North Yemen was part of the former Ottoman Empire, while South Yemen fell under British influence in 1839 when the British captured the port of Aden. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, North Yemen became an independent republic while South Yemen continued under the British until Britain withdrew in 1967, after which it was largely under control of communist forces, till unification in 1990.

The unification which came about more as a result of collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, was a compromise and a power-sharing formula attempting to balance political power. President Saleh, who was the President of Arab Republic of Yemen (North Yemen) since July 1978, continued as the president while the southern leader al-Beidh was made the Vice president.

However, the simmering conflict continued. Outnumbered one-is-to-four in terms of population and facing discrimination in jobs and sharing of revenue, Southern Yemenis felt left out and exploited. The first national elections, held on 27th April 1993, which promised a solution to the political unrest, resulted in a stalemate as neither of the parties could muster up a majority.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/middle-east/saudi-led-coalition-releases-over-100-additional-yemen-war-prisoners-583456">Saudi-led coalition releases over 100 additional Yemen war prisoners</a>

The impasse continued till King Hussein of Jordan helped negotiate Yemen’s Document of Pledge and Accord (DPA), signed in Amman in February 1994, promising a balanced and equitable distribution of power and decentralized system of governance. The hope for peace was shattered when Saleh’s forces attacked a camp of southern forces in Sanaa in April 1994. &nbsp;

Suffering heavy losses, southern leader Ali Salem al-Beidh formally declared secession on 20th May.Armed clashes continued until 07th July 1994, when Saleh’s troops marched into Aden and declared victory. The military defeat and the continuing discrimination left the people in Southern Yemen feeling betrayed which slowly paved the way for the emergence of ‘Southern Movement’ in 2007, which has been fighting since for the rights of Southern Yemen.&nbsp;

In July 2017, the Southern Movement, which was supporting President Hadi government and the Saudi coalition against the Houthis till then, formed a ‘Southern Transitional Council’ (STC), a secessionist movement focused on re-gaining independence for South Yemen. It was formed owing to a discord with President Hadi when Hadi fired governor of Aden in April 2017.&nbsp;

Since then, the STC has attempted coup against the Hadi government twice, once in January 2018 and again in August 2019, when its forces overthrew the Hadi government and forced them to vacate Aden. After a sustained regional effort, the STC and the Hadi government signed the Riyadh Agreement in November 2019 which promised de-escalation and reconciliation. However, the STC soon scrapped the peace deal on 26th April 2020 and declared self-rule in key port city of Aden and other southern provinces. It later rescinded its declaration of self-rule on 29th July 2020, through Saudi mediation efforts. &nbsp; 
Current Crisis&nbsp;

The current conflict owes its origin to the ‘Arab Spring’ protests in 2011. Thousands of protesters, angered by continuing poverty, unemployment and corruption, gathered in the capital city Sanaa in January 2011, calling for President Saleh to step down as president. Saleh initially was dismissive about the protests but later offered concessions including assurance to step down after the current term ends in 2013. However, on 18th March, when protesters in Sanaa were fired upon by Saleh loyalists, killing at least 50 people, many officials, diplomats, ministers, and members of parliament resigned in protest. These included Maj. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, commander of the army’s 1st Armoured Division and one of the most powerful military officers in Saleh government.&nbsp;

Crisis intensified and on 03rd June, President Saleh was injured in a bomb blast in the presidential palace. &nbsp;He was rushed to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment. Meanwhile, the GCC countries along with the UN attempted a peaceful resolution to the crisis and formulated a plan called ‘GCC Initiative’ in May 2011 to support an agreement on the peaceful transfer of power.

On 21st October, 2011, the UNSC voted unanimously to pass the resolution UNSC Resolution 2014 which called for immediate implementation of GCC initiative and transfer of power in Yemen. On 23rd November 2011 finally, President Ali Abdullah Saleh signed a power–transfer agreement and relinquished post of the President to hand over power to Vice President Abdu Rabbo Mansour Hadi. A National Dialogue Conference (NDC) too was launched in March 2013 to reach consensus on major issues facing the country's political future but conflict continued and the Houthis kept extending their reach across the country.&nbsp;

In September 2014, armed Houthi tribesmen overran Sanaa, seizing key government buildings. On 21st January 2015, Houthi fighters overran the presidential palace. President Hadi and PM Khaled Bahah (along with the cabinet) were placed under house arrest and thereafter resigned on 22nd January 2015. Hadi escaped to Aden on 21st February describing the Houthi takeover of Sana’a as a “coup”. &nbsp;The Houthis took control of Taiz Airport and entered Aden unopposed on 25th March 2015, completing control of the three major cities in the country, Sana’a, Taiz and Aden. President Hadi fled to Riyadh on 25th March and the Saudi-led coalition launched airstrikes on 26th March 2015. The war have continued ever since.

Conclusion

The conflict in Yemen is therefore, equally about the external as well as the internal fault lines. While the Saudi-Iran peace deal many lead to formal end to the war between the Coalition and the Houthis, the more acute internal conflict may take longer. The mistrust between the South and the North would take time and trust to heal. However, it would be best left for the people to internally and mutually come with their own peace formula. A federal government with decentralized power structures in the North and South with a balanced and fare revenue-sharing structure could be one option.

The other could be an option taking Yemen back to the pre-1990 era of two nations sharing borders, but in peace and mutual respect. There may be other options too. The ‘Arab Spring’ protests of the previous decade have however taught the world a clear lesson. Political changes are best reconciled within the representatives groups of people themselves and external interference only brings about chaos.&nbsp;

Finally, Yemen has suffered for far too long. It is an important country of the Arabian Peninsula and holds the key to a very critical choke point across the Red Sea at Bab-al-Mandab for the global trade. The UN has called Yemen one of the world’s largest humanitarian crises. In 2023, a staggering 21.6 million people require some form of humanitarian assistance as 80 percent of the country struggles to put food on the table and access basic services. It is time now for Yemen to heal and for peace to have a chance.

Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

On 10th March 2023, China took the world by surprise when it announced that Saudi Arabia and Iran have agreed to resume diplomatic relations, in a peace deal brokered by it.

On 10th March 2023, China took the world by surprise when it announced that Saudi Arabia and Iran have agreed to resume diplomatic relations, in a peace deal brokered by it. The peace deal offers hope for peace and end to conflicts in the region. Among such conflicts is the eight-year-long ongoing war in Yemen where Saudi-led coalition is pitched against Iran-backed Houthi rebels since March 2015. As per the peace deal, both sides have agreed to end their support to the war in Yemen. It may be recalled that Saudi Arabia, along with regional Arab Allies and the US, launched airstrikes in Yemen on 26th March, 2015 in the air assault codenamed "Operation Decisive Storm", in response to the Houthi’s armed conflict against the government of Yemen. Watch | The West Asia Post: Yemenis bear the cost of war × Already, there are signs of the peace deal taking shape in Yemen. On 09th April, Saudi and Omani delegations held talks in Sanaa with Houthi officials as well as the head of Houthi Supreme Political Council, Mahdi al-Mashat. The talks focused on an early reopening of Houthi-controlled ports and the Sanaa airport, nation rebuilding efforts and a clear timeline for foreign forces to exit the country. In the past few weeks, both sides have exchanged number of prisoners too, as a goodwill gesture. There were concerns that the armed conflict could resume after Ramzan as the ceasefire in Yemen had expired in October 2022, but there is hope that the relative calm over past one year may finally translate into cessation of hostilities. The conflict in Yemen however, goes well beyond the war since March 2015. The seeds of the unrest and conflict have a long history, mostly internal to Yemen and a long-lasting peace can only prevail only once both external and internal conflicts are resolved. Internal Conflict The roots to the internal conflict in Yemen go back to 22nd May 1990 when the erstwhile two Yemeni nations were united and brought under a single flag. People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen (South Yemen) merged with Arab Republic of Yemen (North Yemen) to form a new country, ‘Republic of Yemen’. It was a forced union as, Yemen, since the 19th century, had been divided in two separate entities along a north-south divide. North Yemen was part of the former Ottoman Empire, while South Yemen fell under British influence in 1839 when the British captured the port of Aden. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, North Yemen became an independent republic while South Yemen continued under the British until Britain withdrew in 1967, after which it was largely under control of communist forces, till unification in 1990. The unification which came about more as a result of collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, was a compromise and a power-sharing formula attempting to balance political power. President Saleh, who was the President of Arab Republic of Yemen (North Yemen) since July 1978, continued as the president while the southern leader al-Beidh was made the Vice president. However, the simmering conflict continued. Outnumbered one-is-to-four in terms of population and facing discrimination in jobs and sharing of revenue, Southern Yemenis felt left out and exploited. The first national elections, held on 27th April 1993, which promised a solution to the political unrest, resulted in a stalemate as neither of the parties could muster up a majority. Also Read | Saudi-led coalition releases over 100 additional Yemen war prisoners The impasse continued till King Hussein of Jordan helped negotiate Yemen’s Document of Pledge and Accord (DPA), signed in Amman in February 1994, promising a balanced and equitable distribution of power and decentralized system of governance. The hope for peace was shattered when Saleh’s forces attacked a camp of southern forces in Sanaa in April 1994. Suffering heavy losses, southern leader Ali Salem al-Beidh formally declared secession on 20th May.Armed clashes continued until 07th July 1994, when Saleh’s troops marched into Aden and declared victory. The military defeat and the continuing discrimination left the people in Southern Yemen feeling betrayed which slowly paved the way for the emergence of ‘Southern Movement’ in 2007, which has been fighting since for the rights of Southern Yemen. In July 2017, the Southern Movement, which was supporting President Hadi government and the Saudi coalition against the Houthis till then, formed a ‘Southern Transitional Council’ (STC), a secessionist movement focused on re-gaining independence for South Yemen. It was formed owing to a discord with President Hadi when Hadi fired governor of Aden in April 2017. Since then, the STC has attempted coup against the Hadi government twice, once in January 2018 and again in August 2019, when its forces overthrew the Hadi government and forced them to vacate Aden. After a sustained regional effort, the STC and the Hadi government signed the Riyadh Agreement in November 2019 which promised de-escalation and reconciliation. However, the STC soon scrapped the peace deal on 26th April 2020 and declared self-rule in key port city of Aden and other southern provinces. It later rescinded its declaration of self-rule on 29th July 2020, through Saudi mediation efforts. Current Crisis The current conflict owes its origin to the ‘Arab Spring’ protests in 2011. Thousands of protesters, angered by continuing poverty, unemployment and corruption, gathered in the capital city Sanaa in January 2011, calling for President Saleh to step down as president. Saleh initially was dismissive about the protests but later offered concessions including assurance to step down after the current term ends in 2013. However, on 18th March, when protesters in Sanaa were fired upon by Saleh loyalists, killing at least 50 people, many officials, diplomats, ministers, and members of parliament resigned in protest. These included Maj. Gen. Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, commander of the army’s 1st Armoured Division and one of the most powerful military officers in Saleh government. Crisis intensified and on 03rd June, President Saleh was injured in a bomb blast in the presidential palace. He was rushed to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment. Meanwhile, the GCC countries along with the UN attempted a peaceful resolution to the crisis and formulated a plan called ‘GCC Initiative’ in May 2011 to support an agreement on the peaceful transfer of power. On 21st October, 2011, the UNSC voted unanimously to pass the resolution UNSC Resolution 2014 which called for immediate implementation of GCC initiative and transfer of power in Yemen. On 23rd November 2011 finally, President Ali Abdullah Saleh signed a power–transfer agreement and relinquished post of the President to hand over power to Vice President Abdu Rabbo Mansour Hadi. A National Dialogue Conference (NDC) too was launched in March 2013 to reach consensus on major issues facing the country's political future but conflict continued and the Houthis kept extending their reach across the country. In September 2014, armed Houthi tribesmen overran Sanaa, seizing key government buildings. On 21st January 2015, Houthi fighters overran the presidential palace. President Hadi and PM Khaled Bahah (along with the cabinet) were placed under house arrest and thereafter resigned on 22nd January 2015. Hadi escaped to Aden on 21st February describing the Houthi takeover of Sana’a as a “coup”. The Houthis took control of Taiz Airport and entered Aden unopposed on 25th March 2015, completing control of the three major cities in the country, Sana’a, Taiz and Aden. President Hadi fled to Riyadh on 25th March and the Saudi-led coalition launched airstrikes on 26th March 2015. The war have continued ever since. Conclusion The conflict in Yemen is therefore, equally about the external as well as the internal fault lines. While the Saudi-Iran peace deal many lead to formal end to the war between the Coalition and the Houthis, the more acute internal conflict may take longer. The mistrust between the South and the North would take time and trust to heal. However, it would be best left for the people to internally and mutually come with their own peace formula. A federal government with decentralized power structures in the North and South with a balanced and fare revenue-sharing structure could be one option. The other could be an option taking Yemen back to the pre-1990 era of two nations sharing borders, but in peace and mutual respect. There may be other options too. The ‘Arab Spring’ protests of the previous decade have however taught the world a clear lesson. Political changes are best reconciled within the representatives groups of people themselves and external interference only brings about chaos. Finally, Yemen has suffered for far too long. It is an important country of the Arabian Peninsula and holds the key to a very critical choke point across the Red Sea at Bab-al-Mandab for the global trade. The UN has called Yemen one of the world’s largest humanitarian crises. In 2023, a staggering 21.6 million people require some form of humanitarian assistance as 80 percent of the country struggles to put food on the table and access basic services. It is time now for Yemen to heal and for peace to have a chance. Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer. You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

War in Yemen may be over, peace still needs to be won

The latest round of talks on the revival of the Iran nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) ended in Vienna on August 8, with all parties returning back to their respective capitals for ‘political consultations’. The talks were convened as a part of one last-ditch effort by Josep Borrell, EU’s high representative along with the lead Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri Kani in yet another bid to revive the deal. Earlier too, eight rounds of talks in Vienna since April 2021 did not yield any positive results. It may be recalled that the Iran Nuclear Deal was revoked unilaterally by the US under President Trump in May 2018, calling it the “most horrible deal ever”. Talks to revive the deal and restore the JCPOA began in right earnest only in April 2021, soon after Joe Biden took over as the US president. At the end of the eighth round of talks in January 2022, the talks were paused for participants ‘go back to capitals for consultations’. In addition to the Vienna talks, there was also a round of indirect talks hosted at Doha on 28-29 June, which too failed to deliver despite initial positive messaging from both sides.

Politically, neither Iran nor the US look to budge from their stand on critical issues. There are basically two key sticking points to the nuclear deal; first is a sovereign assurance sought from the US by Iran that America will not unilaterally revoke the deal in future, and secondly, all economic sanctions imposed under “false excuses” must be lifted. It is also seeking that IRGC should be delisted from the list of foreign terrorist organizations. On all these issues, the US is not ready to concede yet. Any hopes of an early resolution were dashed by the IAEA's June 6 resolution formally criticising Iran for a lack of cooperation and failure to explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites in Iran. On the same day, the Terrorist Financing Targeting Center (TFTC), a group of countries led by the US and Gulf nations, sanctioned three individuals associated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) on terror financing. In an almost immediate response, Iran started removing surveillance cameras from nuclear sites in the country, rendering the IAEA blind to nuclear activities in the Iranian plants.

Why is JCPOA important?

JCPOA, signed on July 14, 2015, and effective from January 2016, was a landmark deal, negotiated over five years between Iran and P5 plus1. It was an ‘instrument of faith’ between the two parties with strict checks and balances which was aimed to ensure that a strict vigil was kept on Iran’s nuclear program, lest Iran develops a nuclear weapon and at the same time, tough and crippling economic sanctions against Iran were to be revoked giving Iran the much needed economic relief. It was a win-win situation for both parties. Scaling down of the nuclear program by Iran coupled with strict monitoring by IAEA ensured that the delicate security and geopolitical balance in the region was not altered. Similarly, Iran was able to again commence its crude oil and natural gas trade and also invite global investments to prop its economy. With the US scaling down its active involvement in military conflicts in the West Asian region and Afghanistan under President Obama, it was necessary to ensure that the potential nuclear threat from Iran was contained and thus JCPOA was clearly a very critical and important deal towards that goal.

What happened to JCPOA?

Iran was sincere towards the implementation of the JCPOA and did everything that was required of it. Under the deal, Iran could not operate more than 5,000 first-generation IR-1 centrifuges to enrich uranium, that too, only up-to to 3.67 per cent. All uranium enriched to 20 per cent was to be scrapped or shipped out, the core of its Heavy Water Plant at Arak was to be demobilised and most importantly, Iran agreed to ‘anywhere, anytime’ inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA and UN inspectors. Iran stuck to the deal and on 16th January 2016, designated as the Implementation Day, the IAEA verified that Iran had met its all nuclear related commitments, triggering the lifting of sanctions on Iran.

Despite former US president Trump unilaterally pulling out of the deal in May 2018, Iran continued compliance till March 6, 2019, the last time that IAEA reported that Iran was implementing all its nuclear-related commitments. The US designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Iran as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on April 8, 2019, was a trigger which was followed immediately by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani announcing on April 9 that Iran will install a cascade of 20 IR-6 centrifuges at Natanz. There has been no stopping thereafter in Iran scaling up its nuclear program.

How is Iran making the nuclear deal irrelevant?

As far as Iran is concerned, three things are vitally important to it; firstly is the removal of economic sanctions which are hurting it badly, secondly is its right towards a peaceful nuclear program meant for ‘medical research and other peaceful uses’, and thirdly is safeguarding its own role and standing in the region as a major regional power.

Of all these, the economy is perhaps the most important and Iran has been steadily working on working around the sanctions over the years. Its 25-year strategic partnership with China offers a large assured market of oil as well as non-oil trade. The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, too, has provided an opportunity for Iran. Both Russia and China have joined forces and have challenged the western-oriented Dollar trade system based on SWIFT clearance system and have proposed their own trade system. India too announced a sovereign international trade clearing system based on Rupee payment in July 2022. With Iran enjoying close ties with each of these nations, such alternate systems open up great trade opportunities for Iran. This, when seen in the context of the ongoing US-China standoff, India exercising its sovereign choices to buy oil from Russia (and possibly from Iran) and Turkey recently announcing that it will pay Russia in Rubles for natural gas, provide a perfect opportunity for Iran to leverage it and join alternate payment systems and mutual arrangements with these countries to bypass sanctions. Also, with Syria under President Assad stabilizing politically and Iraq heavily under Iran's influence, oil exports through these countries provide additional revenue to Iran. It is perhaps due to this and more loopholes being exploited by Iran that the US Treasury, on 02nd August announced sanctions against UAE and HK-based companies accused of facilitating the sale and transfer of Iranian petrochemical products. On the same day, a media report quoted United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI), a watchdog group that tracks Iran's network of illegal oil tankers, stating that Iran’s export revenues between March 2021 and March 2022 from oil, gas, and related products totalled $39 billion, compared to $22 billion for the previous year, a rise of 77 per cent and an extra $17 billion, with exports primarily to China and Syria. Iran is therefore slowly and steadily working around economic sanctions imposed by the US.

The second issue is the nuclear enrichment program. Iran commenced nuclear enrichment beyond the stipulated limits of JCPOA in April 2019. Later, on 02nd December 2021, Iran's Guardian Council approved the legislation mandating the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran to increase enrichment levels to 20 per cent and to suspend implementation of the Additional Protocol in 60 days if sanctions are not addressed. On 13th April this year, soon after a cyber-attack on the Natanz nuclear plant, Iran announced its intention to enrich uranium to 60 per cent. A resolution adopted by the IAEA on 06th June formally criticizing Iran for a lack of cooperation with it prompted Iran to switch off surveillance cameras resulting in the IAEA having no information on the progress of nuclear enrichment in Iranian plants. Most recently, on 02nd August, Iran announced its plans for further enrichment and stockpiling after the US announced sanctions on companies of UAE and Hong Kong for petrochemical trade with Iran. IR6 centrifuges are enriching uranium at a fast pace and with 27 surveillance cameras switched off, IAEA and the world is virtually blind to Iran’s nuclear activities. With each passing day, Iran is close to stockpiling enough ‘Highly Enriched Uranium’ to produce a nuclear weapon, if it so wants.

Last is the issue of geopolitical alignments in the region. Here too, Iran has been carefully forging new ties. The GCC-Qatar standoff in June 2017 brought Qatar closer to Iran. Turkey too is realigning ties with Iran with President Raisi calling the Turkish president’s visit to Tehran in July this year an "important turning point" in improving the relations between the two neighbouring countries. With Saudi Arabia, there have been five rounds of talks, mediated by Iraq, and there were recent reports of both foreign ministers likely to meet soon. The Yemen ceasefire is holding off since Ramadan, an important factor in ties with Saudi Arabia. With UAE, too, there has been a marked progress. UAE recently announced the return of its ambassador to Tehran, and in December 2021, UAE National Security Advisor Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan visited Tehran, signalling an approach to the normalisation of ties. Although it is too premature to say that Iran would be accepted as a trustworthy partner in the largely Sunni Arab world, but new emerging dynamics maybe be beneficial to Iran in the long run.

Conclusion

For P5 plus 1, the Iran nuclear deal is very important. It gives them and the world an effective control who can watch over suspected Iran’s nuclear weapons program. For Iran, on the other hand, the nuclear deal has now become more of a bargaining chip for issues which transcend the limited context of the nuclear program. Each passing day is making it more and more difficult for the deal to be revived. The world will perhaps one day rue the manner in which former US president Trump blew up the deal and virtually let Iran off the hook. Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief, at the conclusion of the Vienna talks on August 8 said, “What can be negotiated has been negotiated, and it’s now in a final text.” The deal is clearly now more than mere technicalities and requires political decision making at the highest level&nbsp;at both ends. Meanwhile, Iran is merrily chugging along, making sure that deal or no deal&nbsp;it is doing enough to safeguard its interests.

The latest round of talks on the revival of the Iran nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) ended in Vienna on August 8, with all parties returning back to their respective capitals for ‘political consultations’.

The latest round of talks on the revival of the Iran nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) ended in Vienna on August 8, with all parties returning back to their respective capitals for ‘political consultations’. The talks were convened as a part of one last-ditch effort by Josep Borrell, EU’s high representative along with the lead Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri Kani in yet another bid to revive the deal. Earlier too, eight rounds of talks in Vienna since April 2021 did not yield any positive results. It may be recalled that the Iran Nuclear Deal was revoked unilaterally by the US under President Trump in May 2018, calling it the “most horrible deal ever”. Talks to revive the deal and restore the JCPOA began in right earnest only in April 2021, soon after Joe Biden took over as the US president. At the end of the eighth round of talks in January 2022, the talks were paused for participants ‘go back to capitals for consultations’. In addition to the Vienna talks, there was also a round of indirect talks hosted at Doha on 28-29 June, which too failed to deliver despite initial positive messaging from both sides. Politically, neither Iran nor the US look to budge from their stand on critical issues. There are basically two key sticking points to the nuclear deal; first is a sovereign assurance sought from the US by Iran that America will not unilaterally revoke the deal in future, and secondly, all economic sanctions imposed under “false excuses” must be lifted. It is also seeking that IRGC should be delisted from the list of foreign terrorist organizations. On all these issues, the US is not ready to concede yet. Any hopes of an early resolution were dashed by the IAEA's June 6 resolution formally criticising Iran for a lack of cooperation and failure to explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites in Iran. On the same day, the Terrorist Financing Targeting Center (TFTC), a group of countries led by the US and Gulf nations, sanctioned three individuals associated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) on terror financing. In an almost immediate response, Iran started removing surveillance cameras from nuclear sites in the country, rendering the IAEA blind to nuclear activities in the Iranian plants. Why is JCPOA important? JCPOA, signed on July 14, 2015, and effective from January 2016, was a landmark deal, negotiated over five years between Iran and P5 plus1. It was an ‘instrument of faith’ between the two parties with strict checks and balances which was aimed to ensure that a strict vigil was kept on Iran’s nuclear program, lest Iran develops a nuclear weapon and at the same time, tough and crippling economic sanctions against Iran were to be revoked giving Iran the much needed economic relief. It was a win-win situation for both parties. Scaling down of the nuclear program by Iran coupled with strict monitoring by IAEA ensured that the delicate security and geopolitical balance in the region was not altered. Similarly, Iran was able to again commence its crude oil and natural gas trade and also invite global investments to prop its economy. With the US scaling down its active involvement in military conflicts in the West Asian region and Afghanistan under President Obama, it was necessary to ensure that the potential nuclear threat from Iran was contained and thus JCPOA was clearly a very critical and important deal towards that goal. What happened to JCPOA? Iran was sincere towards the implementation of the JCPOA and did everything that was required of it. Under the deal, Iran could not operate more than 5,000 first-generation IR-1 centrifuges to enrich uranium, that too, only up-to to 3.67 per cent. All uranium enriched to 20 per cent was to be scrapped or shipped out, the core of its Heavy Water Plant at Arak was to be demobilised and most importantly, Iran agreed to ‘anywhere, anytime’ inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA and UN inspectors. Iran stuck to the deal and on 16th January 2016, designated as the Implementation Day, the IAEA verified that Iran had met its all nuclear related commitments, triggering the lifting of sanctions on Iran. Despite former US president Trump unilaterally pulling out of the deal in May 2018, Iran continued compliance till March 6, 2019, the last time that IAEA reported that Iran was implementing all its nuclear-related commitments. The US designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Iran as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on April 8, 2019, was a trigger which was followed immediately by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani announcing on April 9 that Iran will install a cascade of 20 IR-6 centrifuges at Natanz. There has been no stopping thereafter in Iran scaling up its nuclear program. How is Iran making the nuclear deal irrelevant? As far as Iran is concerned, three things are vitally important to it; firstly is the removal of economic sanctions which are hurting it badly, secondly is its right towards a peaceful nuclear program meant for ‘medical research and other peaceful uses’, and thirdly is safeguarding its own role and standing in the region as a major regional power. Of all these, the economy is perhaps the most important and Iran has been steadily working on working around the sanctions over the years. Its 25-year strategic partnership with China offers a large assured market of oil as well as non-oil trade. The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, too, has provided an opportunity for Iran. Both Russia and China have joined forces and have challenged the western-oriented Dollar trade system based on SWIFT clearance system and have proposed their own trade system. India too announced a sovereign international trade clearing system based on Rupee payment in July 2022. With Iran enjoying close ties with each of these nations, such alternate systems open up great trade opportunities for Iran. This, when seen in the context of the ongoing US-China standoff, India exercising its sovereign choices to buy oil from Russia (and possibly from Iran) and Turkey recently announcing that it will pay Russia in Rubles for natural gas, provide a perfect opportunity for Iran to leverage it and join alternate payment systems and mutual arrangements with these countries to bypass sanctions. Also, with Syria under President Assad stabilizing politically and Iraq heavily under Iran's influence, oil exports through these countries provide additional revenue to Iran. It is perhaps due to this and more loopholes being exploited by Iran that the US Treasury, on 02nd August announced sanctions against UAE and HK-based companies accused of facilitating the sale and transfer of Iranian petrochemical products. On the same day, a media report quoted United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI), a watchdog group that tracks Iran's network of illegal oil tankers, stating that Iran’s export revenues between March 2021 and March 2022 from oil, gas, and related products totalled $39 billion, compared to $22 billion for the previous year, a rise of 77 per cent and an extra $17 billion, with exports primarily to China and Syria. Iran is therefore slowly and steadily working around economic sanctions imposed by the US. The second issue is the nuclear enrichment program. Iran commenced nuclear enrichment beyond the stipulated limits of JCPOA in April 2019. Later, on 02nd December 2021, Iran's Guardian Council approved the legislation mandating the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran to increase enrichment levels to 20 per cent and to suspend implementation of the Additional Protocol in 60 days if sanctions are not addressed. On 13th April this year, soon after a cyber-attack on the Natanz nuclear plant, Iran announced its intention to enrich uranium to 60 per cent. A resolution adopted by the IAEA on 06th June formally criticizing Iran for a lack of cooperation with it prompted Iran to switch off surveillance cameras resulting in the IAEA having no information on the progress of nuclear enrichment in Iranian plants. Most recently, on 02nd August, Iran announced its plans for further enrichment and stockpiling after the US announced sanctions on companies of UAE and Hong Kong for petrochemical trade with Iran. IR6 centrifuges are enriching uranium at a fast pace and with 27 surveillance cameras switched off, IAEA and the world is virtually blind to Iran’s nuclear activities. With each passing day, Iran is close to stockpiling enough ‘Highly Enriched Uranium’ to produce a nuclear weapon, if it so wants. Last is the issue of geopolitical alignments in the region. Here too, Iran has been carefully forging new ties. The GCC-Qatar standoff in June 2017 brought Qatar closer to Iran. Turkey too is realigning ties with Iran with President Raisi calling the Turkish president’s visit to Tehran in July this year an "important turning point" in improving the relations between the two neighbouring countries. With Saudi Arabia, there have been five rounds of talks, mediated by Iraq, and there were recent reports of both foreign ministers likely to meet soon. The Yemen ceasefire is holding off since Ramadan, an important factor in ties with Saudi Arabia. With UAE, too, there has been a marked progress. UAE recently announced the return of its ambassador to Tehran, and in December 2021, UAE National Security Advisor Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan visited Tehran, signalling an approach to the normalisation of ties. Although it is too premature to say that Iran would be accepted as a trustworthy partner in the largely Sunni Arab world, but new emerging dynamics maybe be beneficial to Iran in the long run. Conclusion For P5 plus 1, the Iran nuclear deal is very important. It gives them and the world an effective control who can watch over suspected Iran’s nuclear weapons program. For Iran, on the other hand, the nuclear deal has now become more of a bargaining chip for issues which transcend the limited context of the nuclear program. Each passing day is making it more and more difficult for the deal to be revived. The world will perhaps one day rue the manner in which former US president Trump blew up the deal and virtually let Iran off the hook. Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief, at the conclusion of the Vienna talks on August 8 said, “What can be negotiated has been negotiated, and it’s now in a final text.” The deal is clearly now more than mere technicalities and requires political decision making at the highest level at both ends. Meanwhile, Iran is merrily chugging along, making sure that deal or no deal it is doing enough to safeguard its interests.

With JCPOA revival uncertain, Iran is slowly and surely making the nuclear deal irrelevant

The ongoing war in Ukraine has brought to the fore many fault lines in a largely western-oriented international order, most of which although known for many years, were kept safely tucked away in the background, lest it threatens its very foundation. Some of such major issues highlighted in this conflict are; viability of international trade system which is largely based on dollar exchange rates, energy trade and energy security, how to counter a major nuclear weapons power like Russia when it ‘invades’ a sovereign nation and perhaps the most important, legitimacy and effectiveness of the UN. There could be many more issues that may follow once the war is over and the dust settles down.

Western Sanctions on Russia and India’s Position

The western nations are still grappling with the war which is now in its third month and the current western strategy largely focusses on three major strands; isolating Russia, severe economic sanctions against Russia and military support to Ukraine. From day one, the US and EU have tried to rally the world against Russia, calling for unity and support in a manner reminiscent of President Bush’s call to the world after the 9/11 stating, “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”. While the US, UK, EU, Japan, Canada, Australia etc have joined ranks against Russia, there are many others who have either refused to join or are watching from the side-lines. Where does India stand among all this?

Right from the start of war, the West has constantly pressured India to join it in condemnation of Russia and to stop trade, especially oil trade with Russia. The fact that Indian oil companies bought around 3 million barrels of oil from Russia at discounted rates after the start of ‘special military operations’ has been highlighted more than once to the Indian establishment by almost all western powers. Dr S Jaishankar, the Minister for External Affairs has repeatedly defended the oil purchases by Indian oil companies as also the oil trade with Russia which is a mere 2 percent of India’s overall oil imports.

Hitting out at constant criticism and perhaps showing a mirror to the West, while addressing a joint news conference after the conclusion of the 2+2 Dialogue with the US on 12th April, he stated “We do buy some energy, which is necessary for our energy security. But I suspect looking at the figures, probably our total purchases for the month would be less than what Europe does in an afternoon”.&nbsp;

Earlier, the US Deputy NSA, Daleep Singh courted severe criticism and backlash from India when, during his recent visit to India, he stated that the US won’t like to see a “rapid acceleration of India’s imports from Russia as it relates to energy or any other exports. He warned that there will be “consequences” for countries, including India. Stepping in perhaps for damage control, the US Secretary of State &nbsp;Blinken had to acknowledge that India "has to make its own decisions about how it approaches this challenge" and that "India's relationship with Russia has developed over decades at a time when the United States was not able to be a partner to India". Other nations have been more cautious in their approach towards India.&nbsp;

Australia’s High Commissioner to India Barry O’Farrel stated that ‘Australia understands India’s position’ whereas UK Foreign Secretary Truss during her India visit stated that ‘UK respected India’s decision, India is a sovereign nation and UK is not going to tell India what to do’.&nbsp;

The Western Hypocrisy

The recently held Raisina Dialogue at New Delhi provided an opportunity as well as deep insight into the current thought process of India’s foreign policy. At a session, Dr Jaishankar retorted the West when asked about India’s ties with Russia and the war in Ukraine, stating, “when rules-based order was under challenge in Asia, the advice we got from Europe was- do more trade. At least we are not giving you that advice. We should find a way of returning to diplomacy and dialogue”, calling out the hypocrisy of the West and India’s sovereign right to do what considers is right in its national interests.

On the issue of oil trade with Russia, a report published in the Times of India on 29th April, based on research done by a think-tank ‘Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air’, highlighted a remarkable fact. It highlighted how, despite the sanctions imposed by the West since February, Germany was still the top importer from Russia and the US too imported oil more than India, which was at the bottom, at 12th position! Add to that is a recent admission by the EU itself that it cannot cut oil imports by Russia totally and will do it in a phased manner.

In fact, after protests by Hungary and Slovakia, media reports suggest that the EU could grant exemption to these two countries from the ban on oil import from Russia. Germany, which is one of the largest importers of natural gas from Russia, too initially expressed its inability to cut off imports from Russia. There are also reports of some oil companies in EU nations (Italy?) which have already opened Rouble accounts in Russian banks to keep importing gas and oil from Russia. Hungary and Belarus seem to have broken ranks with the EU and have reportedly stated that they may continue trade with Russia.&nbsp;

Amongst all this, an interesting question can come up for debate too. What if the war had started at the peak of winters and not on 24th February? Could Europe have been bold enough then to turn off its heating in order to ban Russian gas immediately?&nbsp;

As pointed out earlier, this war has exposed many hypocrisies, especially of the West. When questions are asked about Russia’s war in Ukraine, one may also go back into history and seek accountability on how the Western coalition could launch war in Iraq in 2003 on a threat of WMD, which never existed! How and under what grounds could the Western coalition have suddenly abandoned Afghanistan in August 2021 leading to complete mayhem, a humanitarian disaster and the return of Taliban? What about the only instance of nuclear bombing of a nation, Japan in 1945?

India and its Energy Security

If there is one thing that has emerged for India from the war in Ukraine, it is India’s assertiveness and confidence while dealing with tough foreign policy issues. India is no longer in the game of ‘appeasement’ or ‘toeing the line’ and nations of the world are watching this with interest, some with concern too. Energy security is critical to India’s security as it imports 80 percent of its energy needs. It is therefore India’s sovereign right to source from friendly countries of its choice and in quantity of its choice. India may import three or thirty million barrels from Russia or elsewhere, without any need of approval from others, who themselves cannot stand scrutiny to their own words. India therefore has clearly no need to defend its sourcing of energy security. In fact, if anything, India could consider restarting energy imports from Iran, with the Iran nuclear deal headed nowhere in the current deadlock, but that could be a debate for another day.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

The ongoing war in Ukraine has brought to the fore many fault lines in a largely western-oriented international order, most of which although known for many years, were kept safely tucked away in the background, lest it threatens its very foundation.

The ongoing war in Ukraine has brought to the fore many fault lines in a largely western-oriented international order, most of which although known for many years, were kept safely tucked away in the background, lest it threatens its very foundation. Some of such major issues highlighted in this conflict are; viability of international trade system which is largely based on dollar exchange rates, energy trade and energy security, how to counter a major nuclear weapons power like Russia when it ‘invades’ a sovereign nation and perhaps the most important, legitimacy and effectiveness of the UN. There could be many more issues that may follow once the war is over and the dust settles down. Western Sanctions on Russia and India’s Position The western nations are still grappling with the war which is now in its third month and the current western strategy largely focusses on three major strands; isolating Russia, severe economic sanctions against Russia and military support to Ukraine. From day one, the US and EU have tried to rally the world against Russia, calling for unity and support in a manner reminiscent of President Bush’s call to the world after the 9/11 stating, “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”. While the US, UK, EU, Japan, Canada, Australia etc have joined ranks against Russia, there are many others who have either refused to join or are watching from the side-lines. Where does India stand among all this? Right from the start of war, the West has constantly pressured India to join it in condemnation of Russia and to stop trade, especially oil trade with Russia. The fact that Indian oil companies bought around 3 million barrels of oil from Russia at discounted rates after the start of ‘special military operations’ has been highlighted more than once to the Indian establishment by almost all western powers. Dr S Jaishankar, the Minister for External Affairs has repeatedly defended the oil purchases by Indian oil companies as also the oil trade with Russia which is a mere 2 percent of India’s overall oil imports. Hitting out at constant criticism and perhaps showing a mirror to the West, while addressing a joint news conference after the conclusion of the 2+2 Dialogue with the US on 12th April, he stated “We do buy some energy, which is necessary for our energy security. But I suspect looking at the figures, probably our total purchases for the month would be less than what Europe does in an afternoon”. Earlier, the US Deputy NSA, Daleep Singh courted severe criticism and backlash from India when, during his recent visit to India, he stated that the US won’t like to see a “rapid acceleration of India’s imports from Russia as it relates to energy or any other exports. He warned that there will be “consequences” for countries, including India. Stepping in perhaps for damage control, the US Secretary of State Blinken had to acknowledge that India "has to make its own decisions about how it approaches this challenge" and that "India's relationship with Russia has developed over decades at a time when the United States was not able to be a partner to India". Other nations have been more cautious in their approach towards India. Australia’s High Commissioner to India Barry O’Farrel stated that ‘Australia understands India’s position’ whereas UK Foreign Secretary Truss during her India visit stated that ‘UK respected India’s decision, India is a sovereign nation and UK is not going to tell India what to do’. The Western Hypocrisy The recently held Raisina Dialogue at New Delhi provided an opportunity as well as deep insight into the current thought process of India’s foreign policy. At a session, Dr Jaishankar retorted the West when asked about India’s ties with Russia and the war in Ukraine, stating, “when rules-based order was under challenge in Asia, the advice we got from Europe was- do more trade. At least we are not giving you that advice. We should find a way of returning to diplomacy and dialogue”, calling out the hypocrisy of the West and India’s sovereign right to do what considers is right in its national interests. On the issue of oil trade with Russia, a report published in the Times of India on 29th April, based on research done by a think-tank ‘Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air’, highlighted a remarkable fact. It highlighted how, despite the sanctions imposed by the West since February, Germany was still the top importer from Russia and the US too imported oil more than India, which was at the bottom, at 12th position! Add to that is a recent admission by the EU itself that it cannot cut oil imports by Russia totally and will do it in a phased manner. In fact, after protests by Hungary and Slovakia, media reports suggest that the EU could grant exemption to these two countries from the ban on oil import from Russia. Germany, which is one of the largest importers of natural gas from Russia, too initially expressed its inability to cut off imports from Russia. There are also reports of some oil companies in EU nations (Italy?) which have already opened Rouble accounts in Russian banks to keep importing gas and oil from Russia. Hungary and Belarus seem to have broken ranks with the EU and have reportedly stated that they may continue trade with Russia. Amongst all this, an interesting question can come up for debate too. What if the war had started at the peak of winters and not on 24th February? Could Europe have been bold enough then to turn off its heating in order to ban Russian gas immediately? As pointed out earlier, this war has exposed many hypocrisies, especially of the West. When questions are asked about Russia’s war in Ukraine, one may also go back into history and seek accountability on how the Western coalition could launch war in Iraq in 2003 on a threat of WMD, which never existed! How and under what grounds could the Western coalition have suddenly abandoned Afghanistan in August 2021 leading to complete mayhem, a humanitarian disaster and the return of Taliban? What about the only instance of nuclear bombing of a nation, Japan in 1945? India and its Energy Security If there is one thing that has emerged for India from the war in Ukraine, it is India’s assertiveness and confidence while dealing with tough foreign policy issues. India is no longer in the game of ‘appeasement’ or ‘toeing the line’ and nations of the world are watching this with interest, some with concern too. Energy security is critical to India’s security as it imports 80 percent of its energy needs. It is therefore India’s sovereign right to source from friendly countries of its choice and in quantity of its choice. India may import three or thirty million barrels from Russia or elsewhere, without any need of approval from others, who themselves cannot stand scrutiny to their own words. India therefore has clearly no need to defend its sourcing of energy security. In fact, if anything, India could consider restarting energy imports from Iran, with the Iran nuclear deal headed nowhere in the current deadlock, but that could be a debate for another day. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer) WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

India need not be defensive about sourcing its energy security

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Rajeev Agarwal

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.