<p>China today said President Xi Jinping and his US counterpart Donald Trump have reached a consensus on fighting terrorism and upholding peace and stability in South Asia, amid America ramping up pressure on Pakistan to dismantle terror safe havens.</p>

<p>During their talks, Xi and Trump discussed Afghanistan and committed to working toward a peaceful future for the terrorist haven.</p>

<p>&quot;This morning, the two presidents talked and held joint press meeting. I am not aware of the details of the talks. What I know is that the two sides also discussed anti- terrorism issues and upholding peace and stability in South Asia,&quot; Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told a media briefing.</p>

<p>&quot;They reached consensus in this respect,&quot; she said without elaborating or mentioning whether India&#39;s concerns over terrorism emanating from Pakistan figured in the talks.</p>

<p>To counter terrorism, China and the US as well as other countries share the common interests and the two countries stand ready to work with other parties for stronger anti- terrorism cooperation, she said.</p>

<p>South Asia and Afghanistan figured prominently in today&#39;s talks as both the leaders mentioned it in their briefings.</p>

<p>After the talks, Trump said terrorists are a threat to humanity and that he and Xi will &quot;stop radical Islamic terrorism.&quot;</p>

<p>&quot;In order to create more secure future for all and protect our citizens from extremism and terrorism, President Xi and I also committed to working together for a peaceful future for Afghanistan,&quot; Trump said.</p>

<p>&quot;Terrorists are a threat to all of humanity and we will stop radical Islamic terrorism,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>Trump&#39;s remarks assume significance after he unveiled his new South Asia policy under which the US has warned Pakistan against providing safe harbour to terrorist organisations.</p>

<p>Trump&#39;s South Asia policy giving importance to India and inviting New Delhi to play a bigger role in reconstruction of Afghanistan has also raised eyebrows in Beijing and Islamabad.</p>

<p>Elaborating on the Trump-Xi talks on Afghanistan, Hua said the two sides believe that maintaining the stable and constructive relations between Afghanistan and its neighbouring countries is of great significance to the peace and reconstruction process in Afghanistan.</p>

<p>&quot;They support an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace and reconstruction process, call on relevant parties in Afghanistan to achieve extensive and inclusive national reconciliation through political negotiation at an early date and stand ready to play a positive role through such mechanisms as the Quadrilateral Coordination Group of Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the US,&quot; Hua said in a written response to news agency PTI.</p>

<p>Ahead of Trump&#39;s visit, China conducted an anti-terrorism trilateral meeting with Pakistan and Afghanistan.</p>

<p>Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Li Hulai conducted the trilateral meeting on November 7 which was attended by top officials of Pakistan and Afghanistan.</p>

<p>China has been trying to bring about peace between Islamabad and Kabul amid scathing criticism from Afghanistan leaders over Pakistan&#39;s support to Taliban by sheltering them.</p>

<p>Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has made separate visits to the two countries recently and met Pakistan and Afghanistan?s officials after the talks.</p>

<p>Pakistan?s Special Secretary Tasnim Aslam and Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister Hekmat Karzai who took part in the talks called on Wang.</p>

<p>In the meeting, Wang thanked Pakistan and Afghanistan for their support for China in fighting the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) and their contribution to the fight against international counter terrorism especially in South Asian region, Hua said.</p>

<p>ETIM is active in the Muslim Uygur majority province of Xinjiang which shared borders with Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and Afghanistan.</p>

<p>Xinjiang had been restive for several years over increasing settlements of majority Hans from other provinces of China.</p>

<p>&quot;China stands ready to work with two parties to strengthen our counter-terrorism cooperation to uphold the regional peace and stability,&quot; she said, adding that Pakistan and Afghanistan stated that they stand ready to strengthen cooperation with China in this regard.</p>


During their talks, Xi and Trump discussed Afghanistan and committed to working toward a peaceful future for the terrorist haven.

China today said President Xi Jinping and his US counterpart Donald Trump have reached a consensus on fighting terrorism and upholding peace and stability in South Asia, amid America ramping up pressure on Pakistan to dismantle terror safe havens. During their talks, Xi and Trump discussed Afghanistan and committed to working toward a peaceful future for the terrorist haven. "This morning, the two presidents talked and held joint press meeting. I am not aware of the details of the talks. What I know is that the two sides also discussed anti- terrorism issues and upholding peace and stability in South Asia," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told a media briefing. "They reached consensus in this respect," she said without elaborating or mentioning whether India's concerns over terrorism emanating from Pakistan figured in the talks. To counter terrorism, China and the US as well as other countries share the common interests and the two countries stand ready to work with other parties for stronger anti- terrorism cooperation, she said. South Asia and Afghanistan figured prominently in today's talks as both the leaders mentioned it in their briefings. After the talks, Trump said terrorists are a threat to humanity and that he and Xi will "stop radical Islamic terrorism." "In order to create more secure future for all and protect our citizens from extremism and terrorism, President Xi and I also committed to working together for a peaceful future for Afghanistan," Trump said. "Terrorists are a threat to all of humanity and we will stop radical Islamic terrorism," he said. Trump's remarks assume significance after he unveiled his new South Asia policy under which the US has warned Pakistan against providing safe harbour to terrorist organisations. Trump's South Asia policy giving importance to India and inviting New Delhi to play a bigger role in reconstruction of Afghanistan has also raised eyebrows in Beijing and Islamabad. Elaborating on the Trump-Xi talks on Afghanistan, Hua said the two sides believe that maintaining the stable and constructive relations between Afghanistan and its neighbouring countries is of great significance to the peace and reconstruction process in Afghanistan. "They support an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace and reconstruction process, call on relevant parties in Afghanistan to achieve extensive and inclusive national reconciliation through political negotiation at an early date and stand ready to play a positive role through such mechanisms as the Quadrilateral Coordination Group of Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the US," Hua said in a written response to news agency PTI. Ahead of Trump's visit, China conducted an anti-terrorism trilateral meeting with Pakistan and Afghanistan. Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Li Hulai conducted the trilateral meeting on November 7 which was attended by top officials of Pakistan and Afghanistan. China has been trying to bring about peace between Islamabad and Kabul amid scathing criticism from Afghanistan leaders over Pakistan's support to Taliban by sheltering them. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has made separate visits to the two countries recently and met Pakistan and Afghanistan?s officials after the talks. Pakistan?s Special Secretary Tasnim Aslam and Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister Hekmat Karzai who took part in the talks called on Wang. In the meeting, Wang thanked Pakistan and Afghanistan for their support for China in fighting the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) and their contribution to the fight against international counter terrorism especially in South Asian region, Hua said. ETIM is active in the Muslim Uygur majority province of Xinjiang which shared borders with Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and Afghanistan. Xinjiang had been restive for several years over increasing settlements of majority Hans from other provinces of China. "China stands ready to work with two parties to strengthen our counter-terrorism cooperation to uphold the regional peace and stability," she said, adding that Pakistan and Afghanistan stated that they stand ready to strengthen cooperation with China in this regard.

Trump, Xi reach consensus to curb terrorism in South Asia: China

<p>The Halloween terrorist attack in New York by Sayfullo Saipov has ignited a debate in social media between scholars of Central Asia on why there is an apparently increasing number of such attacks by Uzbeks. The New York atrocity follows similar events in Istanbul, St Petersburg and Stockholm. Four very prominent attacks within ten months give an impression and suggest a trend.</p>

<p>Certain questions naturally arise. Why so many Uzbeks? Does this simply reflect the high number of emigrants, or is it a matter of specific recruitment networks within their migrant communities? Does the combination of a more repressive environment at home with a more open environment in countries of destination matter? Maybe it&rsquo;s specific histories of conflict between certain groups and the government in Tashkent? Or, perhaps, it&rsquo;s a backlash against the foreign allies of Uzbekistan? For most of these questions, only partial answers are available &ndash; but certain things can be said.</p>

<p>The error repeatedly made across the media is to look for explanations in Uzbekistan itself, but this isn&rsquo;t about radicalisation in Uzbekistan. There are very few terrorist attacks in Uzbekistan itself, only ten out of 85,000 global incidents recorded from 2001-2016. The much-cited Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan left the country almost two decades ago, hasn&rsquo;t committed an attack there since 2004, and now fights in remnants in Afghanistan and Pakistan.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, the attackers perpetrating the incidents above left Uzbekistan many years before the attacks and were &ldquo;radicalised&rdquo; after leaving. Clearly, the real explanations lie elsewhere.</p>

<p><strong>Getting out</strong></p>

<p>This is why migration matters, as it does on almost every question with regard to contemporary Central Asia. Uzbekistan has easily the largest population in Central Asia, with more than 30m citizens. Over the last 20 years, several million Uzbeks have left their home country in search of a better life abroad. In this sense, the millions of Uzbeks are part of a wider trend of predominantly young men migrating overseas. For many of them, this is a tremendous opportunity; most are assets to their new home countries. But a tiny minority fall prey to radicalisation and violence.</p>

<p>In a social media debate with other Central Asia specialists, Sarah Kendzior, a journalist and anthropologist of Uzbekistan, argued:&nbsp;</p>

<blockquote>
<p>I think the big error that people are making is that this is an &lsquo;Uzbek problem&rsquo; instead of a &lsquo;alienated man abroad susceptible to the influence of terrorist propaganda and recruitment efforts&rsquo; problem. It makes far more sense to examine the three Uzbek cases within this broader category of men.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Then there&rsquo;s the question of recruitment mechanisms among migrants. Sergei Abashin, the Russian anthropologist, has drawn attention to how the sheer extent of Uzbek migrant networks makes them an attractive target for militant groups who offer them meaning in militant religion. Uzbek author and journalist Hamid Ismailov concur; in a Facebook response to the Saipov attack, he recalled a passage from his 2014 novel where he linked the emergence of international Uzbek jihadist networks to the battle between two very violent political institutions: the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and the government of Uzbekistan.</p>

<p>Also relevant are specific security governance measures and patterns. Kendzior is correct that the things that attract Central Asians to conduct terrorist attacks and mass shootings are the same as those which attract other young men, including Europeans and Americans. This is a global phenomenon &ndash; but it&rsquo;s also true that more perpetrators come from certain places than from others. The question is why.</p>

<p><strong>Hunted abroad</strong></p>

<p>Some countries, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Uzbekistan in particular, have been very good at &ldquo;exporting&rdquo; young men who are susceptible to jihadism due to their experience of repression at home. And this repression can even follow them overseas.</p>

<p>At the University of Exeter, we record Central Asian governments&rsquo; transnational security measures against exiled citizens and opposition groups. Of these states, Uzbekistan is consistently the most likely to pursue its exiles overseas, and particularly its religious exiles. As Alexander Cooley and I discuss in our book Dictators Without Borders, the Uzbek security services informally but extensively collaborate with security services in Russia, where the vast majority of Uzbek migrants are found, and other former Soviet states.</p>

<p>The Uzbek government would say that attacks such as the ones seen this year justify its strategy, but the reverse may be true. Their transnational crackdown on peaceful groups feeds into the jihadist narrative that secularism and Islam are entirely incompatible, as well as subjecting many young men who were not previously attracted to such narratives to harsh, violent repression.</p>

<p>Moreover, despite Uzbekistan&rsquo;s appalling human rights record, some Western democracies continue to provide limited security co-operation, particularly the US. These measures too can help fuel jihadist thinking. Had the US government made an explicit policy decision many years ago not to work with the Karimov government on counter-terrorism because that government was making the situation worse, it would have undercut some of the violent, radical narratives that may draw in a figure such as Saipov.</p>

<p>The Trump administration&rsquo;s knee-jerk anti-immigration response to the Saipov attack risks exacerbating this problem, and once again affirms jihadist images of the West. Migration should be recognised as a given and a good, and not least as part of the foundation of the US itself; simply shutting it down cannot be sound policy, and it won&rsquo;t help to reduce risks elsewhere. Instead, Western governments need to push back against repressive counter-terrorism policies among the states who have &ldquo;exported&rdquo; the perpetrators of violent acts &ndash; and they must be prepared to withdraw their support from those dangerous governments who&rsquo;ve come to depend on it.</p>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/has-uzbekistans-repressive-government-helped-radicalise-its-emigrants-and-exiles-86887" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.</p>

<p>Image Credit: EPA</p>


The repressive counter-terrorism policies of states, such as Uzbekistan are pushing many of its emigrants to paths of extremism.

The Halloween terrorist attack in New York by Sayfullo Saipov has ignited a debate in social media between scholars of Central Asia on why there is an apparently increasing number of such attacks by Uzbeks. The New York atrocity follows similar events in Istanbul, St Petersburg and Stockholm. Four very prominent attacks within ten months give an impression and suggest a trend. Certain questions naturally arise. Why so many Uzbeks? Does this simply reflect the high number of emigrants, or is it a matter of specific recruitment networks within their migrant communities? Does the combination of a more repressive environment at home with a more open environment in countries of destination matter? Maybe it’s specific histories of conflict between certain groups and the government in Tashkent? Or, perhaps, it’s a backlash against the foreign allies of Uzbekistan? For most of these questions, only partial answers are available – but certain things can be said. The error repeatedly made across the media is to look for explanations in Uzbekistan itself, but this isn’t about radicalisation in Uzbekistan. There are very few terrorist attacks in Uzbekistan itself, only ten out of 85,000 global incidents recorded from 2001-2016. The much-cited Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan left the country almost two decades ago, hasn’t committed an attack there since 2004, and now fights in remnants in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Meanwhile, the attackers perpetrating the incidents above left Uzbekistan many years before the attacks and were “radicalised” after leaving. Clearly, the real explanations lie elsewhere. Getting out This is why migration matters, as it does on almost every question with regard to contemporary Central Asia. Uzbekistan has easily the largest population in Central Asia, with more than 30m citizens. Over the last 20 years, several million Uzbeks have left their home country in search of a better life abroad. In this sense, the millions of Uzbeks are part of a wider trend of predominantly young men migrating overseas. For many of them, this is a tremendous opportunity; most are assets to their new home countries. But a tiny minority fall prey to radicalisation and violence. In a social media debate with other Central Asia specialists, Sarah Kendzior, a journalist and anthropologist of Uzbekistan, argued: I think the big error that people are making is that this is an ‘Uzbek problem’ instead of a ‘alienated man abroad susceptible to the influence of terrorist propaganda and recruitment efforts’ problem. It makes far more sense to examine the three Uzbek cases within this broader category of men. Then there’s the question of recruitment mechanisms among migrants. Sergei Abashin, the Russian anthropologist, has drawn attention to how the sheer extent of Uzbek migrant networks makes them an attractive target for militant groups who offer them meaning in militant religion. Uzbek author and journalist Hamid Ismailov concur; in a Facebook response to the Saipov attack, he recalled a passage from his 2014 novel where he linked the emergence of international Uzbek jihadist networks to the battle between two very violent political institutions: the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and the government of Uzbekistan. Also relevant are specific security governance measures and patterns. Kendzior is correct that the things that attract Central Asians to conduct terrorist attacks and mass shootings are the same as those which attract other young men, including Europeans and Americans. This is a global phenomenon – but it’s also true that more perpetrators come from certain places than from others. The question is why. Hunted abroad Some countries, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Uzbekistan in particular, have been very good at “exporting” young men who are susceptible to jihadism due to their experience of repression at home. And this repression can even follow them overseas. At the University of Exeter, we record Central Asian governments’ transnational security measures against exiled citizens and opposition groups. Of these states, Uzbekistan is consistently the most likely to pursue its exiles overseas, and particularly its religious exiles. As Alexander Cooley and I discuss in our book Dictators Without Borders, the Uzbek security services informally but extensively collaborate with security services in Russia, where the vast majority of Uzbek migrants are found, and other former Soviet states. The Uzbek government would say that attacks such as the ones seen this year justify its strategy, but the reverse may be true. Their transnational crackdown on peaceful groups feeds into the jihadist narrative that secularism and Islam are entirely incompatible, as well as subjecting many young men who were not previously attracted to such narratives to harsh, violent repression. Moreover, despite Uzbekistan’s appalling human rights record, some Western democracies continue to provide limited security co-operation, particularly the US. These measures too can help fuel jihadist thinking. Had the US government made an explicit policy decision many years ago not to work with the Karimov government on counter-terrorism because that government was making the situation worse, it would have undercut some of the violent, radical narratives that may draw in a figure such as Saipov. The Trump administration’s knee-jerk anti-immigration response to the Saipov attack risks exacerbating this problem, and once again affirms jihadist images of the West. Migration should be recognised as a given and a good, and not least as part of the foundation of the US itself; simply shutting it down cannot be sound policy, and it won’t help to reduce risks elsewhere. Instead, Western governments need to push back against repressive counter-terrorism policies among the states who have “exported” the perpetrators of violent acts – and they must be prepared to withdraw their support from those dangerous governments who’ve come to depend on it. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. Image Credit: EPA

Why Uzbeks are turning into jihadis

<p>The shooting in Virginia that wounded House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, as well as the shooting in a San Francisco UPS facility that left four dead on the very same day, have generated &ndash; yet again &ndash; the standard set of responses in the wake of a mass shooting in the United States.</p>

<p>The details of any such tragedy often emerge slowly, but a few points can be made. While deaths from mass shootings are a relatively small part of the overall homicidal violence in America, they are particularly wrenching. The problem is worse in the U.S. than in most other industrialised nations. And it is getting worse.</p>

<p>The political overlay of the Virginia shooting also carries a particular social harm. Any thought that guns can play a helpful role in reducing tyranny in a democratic country like the United States should quickly be dispelled. Hopefully, that message will penetrate everyone from the NRA leadership and Sen. Rand Paul to anyone on the opposite end of the political spectrum who doesn&rsquo;t like the current developments of Republican rule.</p>

<p>I&rsquo;ve been researching gun violence &ndash; and what can be done to prevent it &ndash; in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if the NRA claim that guns helped reduce crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialised nations instead of the highest one &ndash; and by a wide margin.</p>

<p>The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other &ldquo;advanced countries&rdquo; have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents &ndash; even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.</p>

<p><strong>The state of gun control in the US</strong></p>

<p>Eighteen states in the U.S. and a number of cities including Chicago, New York and San Francisco have tried to reduce the unlawful use of guns as well as gun accidents by adopting laws to keep guns safely stored when they are not in use. Safe storage is a common form of gun regulation in nations with stricter gun regulations.</p>

<p>The NRA has been battling such laws for years. But that effort was dealt a blow in June 2015 when the U.S. Supreme Court &ndash; over a strident dissent by Justices Thomas and Scalia &ndash; refused to consider the San Francisco law that required guns not in use be stored safely. This was a positive step because hundreds of thousands of guns are stolen every year, and good public policy must try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children.</p>

<p>The dissenters were alarmed by the thought that a gun stored in a safe would not be immediately available for use, but they seemed unaware of how unusual it is that a gun is helpful when someone is under attack.</p>

<p>Statistics show only the tiniest fraction of victims of violent crime are able to use a gun in their defense. Over the period from 2007 to 2011, roughly six million nonfatal violent crimes occurred each year. Yet data from the National Crime Victimisation Survey show that 99.2 percent of victims in these incidents did not protect themselves with a gun &ndash; this in a country with roughly 300 million guns in civilian hands.</p>

<p>In fact, a classic study of 198 cases of unwanted entry into occupied single-family dwellings in Atlanta found that the invader was twice as likely to obtain the victim&rsquo;s gun than to have the victim use a firearm in self-defense.</p>

<p>The author of the study, Arthur Kellerman, concluded in words that those opposing safe storage of guns should heed:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>On average, the gun that represents the greatest threat is the one that is kept loaded and readily available in a bedside drawer.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>A loaded, unsecured gun in the home is like an insurance policy that fails to deliver at least 95 percent of the time, but has the constant potential &ndash; particularly in the case of handguns which are more easily manipulated by children and more attractive for use in crime &ndash; to harm someone in the home or be stolen and harm someone else.</p>

<p><strong>More guns won&rsquo;t stop gun violence</strong></p>

<p>For years, the NRA mantra has been that allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns would reduce crime as they fought off or scared of the criminals.</p>

<p>Some early studies even purported to show that so-called right-to-carry (RTC) laws did just that, but a 2004 report from the National Research Council refuted that claim, saying it was not supported by &ldquo;the scientific evidence,&rdquo; while remaining uncertain about what the true impact of RTC laws was.</p>

<p>Ten years of additional data have allowed researchers to get a better fix on this question, which is important since the NRA is pushing for a Supreme Court decision that would allow RTC as a matter of constitutional law.</p>

<p>The new research on this issue from my team at Stanford University has given the most compelling evidence to date that RTC laws are associated with significant increases in violent crime. Looking at Uniform Crime Reports data from 1979 to 2014, we find that, on average, the 33 states that adopted RTC laws over this period experienced violent crime rates that are roughly 14 percent higher after 10 years than if they had not adopted these laws.</p>

<p>In the meantime, can anything make American politicians listen to the preferences of the 90 percent on the wisdom of adopting universal background checks for gun purchases?</p>

<p><strong>Gun control around the world</strong></p>

<p>As an academic exercise, one might speculate whether the law could play a constructive role in reducing the number or deadliness of mass shootings.</p>

<p>Most other advanced nations apparently think so, since they make it far harder for someone like your typical American mass killer to get his hands on particularly lethal weapons. Universal background checks are common features of gun regulation in other developed countries, including:</p>

<p><strong>Germany</strong>: To buy a gun, anyone under the age of 25 has to pass a psychiatric evaluation. Presumably, 21-year-old Charleston shooter Dylann Roof would have failed.<br />
<strong>Finland</strong>: Handgun license applicants are allowed to purchase firearms only if they can prove they are active members of regulated shooting clubs. Before they can get a gun, applicants must pass an aptitude test, submit to a police interview and show they have a proper gun storage unit.<br />
<strong>Italy</strong>: To secure a gun permit, one must establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm and pass a background check considering both criminal and mental health records.<br />
<strong>France</strong>: Firearms applicants must have no criminal record and pass a background check that considers the reason for the gun purchase and evaluates the criminal, mental and health records of the applicant.<br />
<strong>The United Kingdom and Japan</strong>: Handguns are illegal for private citizens.<br />
While mass shootings, as well as gun homicides and suicides, are not unknown in these countries, the overall rates are substantially higher in the United States than in these nations.</p>

<p>While NRA supporters frequently challenge me on these statistics, saying that this is only because American blacks are so violent, pointing to the type of wildly incorrect claims about the percentages of whites killed by blacks that Dylann Roof spouted and Donald Trump tweeted, it is important to note that white murder rates in the U.S. are well over twice as high as the murder rates in any of these other countries.</p>

<p><strong>Australia hasn&rsquo;t had a mass shooting since 1996</strong></p>

<p>The story of Australia, which had 13 mass shootings in the 18-year period from 1979 to 1996 but none in the succeeding 21 years, is worth examining.</p>

<p>The turning point was the 1996 Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, in which a gunman killed 35 individuals using semiautomatic weapons.</p>

<p>In the wake of the massacre, the conservative federal government succeeded in implementing tough new gun control laws throughout the country. A large array of weapons were banned &ndash; including the Glock semiautomatic handgun used in the Charleston shootings. The government also imposed a mandatory gun buy-back that substantially reduced gun possession in Australia.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/australia-20171106053635.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>A pile of about 4,500 prohibited firearms in Sydney that have been handed in under the Australian government&rsquo;s buy-back scheme July 28, 1997. (Reuters)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>The effect was that both gun suicides and homicides fell. In addition, the 1996 legislation disallowed self-defense as a legitimate reason to purchase a firearm.</p>

<p>When I mention this to disbelieving NRA supporters, they insist that crime must now be rampant in Australia. In fact, the Australian murder rate has fallen to one per 100,000 while the U.S. rate, thankfully lower than in the early 1990s, is still roughly 5 per 100,000 &ndash; nearly five times as high. Moreover, robberies in Australia occur at only about half the rate of the U.S.: 58 in Australia versus 113.1 per 100,000 in the U.S. in 2012.</p>

<p>How did Australia do it? Politically, it took a brave prime minister to face the rage of Australian gun interests.</p>

<p>Prime Minister John Howard wore a bullet-proof vest when he announced the proposed gun restrictions in June 1996. The deputy prime minister was hung in effigy. But Australia did not have a domestic gun industry to oppose the new measures so the will of the people was allowed to emerge. And today, support for the safer, gun-restricted Australia is so strong that going back would not be tolerated by the public.</p>

<p>That Australia hasn&rsquo;t had a mass shooting since 1996 is likely more than merely the result of the considerable reduction in guns &ndash; it&rsquo;s certainly not the case that guns have disappeared altogether.</p>

<p>I suspect that the country has also experienced a cultural shift between the shock of the Port Arthur massacre and the removal of guns from everyday life, as they are no longer available for self-defense and they are simply less present throughout the country. Troubled individuals, in other words, are not constantly being reminded that guns are a means to address their alleged grievances to the extent that they were in the past, or continue to be in the U.S.</p>

<p><strong>Lax gun control in one nation can create problems in another</strong></p>

<p>Of course, strict gun regulations cannot ensure that the danger of mass shootings or killings has been eliminated.</p>

<p>Norway has strong gun control and committed humane values. But that didn&rsquo;t prevent Anders Breivik from opening fire on a youth camp on the island of Utoya in 2011. His clean criminal record and hunting license had allowed him to secure semiautomatic rifles, but Norway restricted his ability to get high-capacity clips for them. In his manifesto, Breivik wrote about his attempts to legally buy weapons, stating, &ldquo;I envy our European American brothers as the gun laws in Europe sucks ass in comparison.&rdquo;</p>

<p>In fact, in the same manifesto, Breivik wrote that it was from a U.S. supplier that he purchased &ndash; and had mailed &ndash; 10 30-round ammunition magazines for the rifle he used in his attack.</p>

<p>In other words, even if a particular nation or state chooses to make it harder for some would-be killers to get their weapons, these efforts can be undercut by the jurisdictions that hold out. In the U.S., of course, state gun control measures are often thwarted by the lax attitude to gun acquisition in other states.</p>

<p><em>Editor&rsquo;s note: This is an updated version of <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-us-gun-control-compares-to-the-rest-of-the-world-43590" rel="nofollow" target="blank">an article</a> first published on June 24, 2015.</em></p>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-us-gun-control-compares-to-the-rest-of-the-world-79490" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.</p>


In the US, gun control measures are often thwarted by the lax attitude to gun acquisition in pro-gun states

The shooting in Virginia that wounded House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, as well as the shooting in a San Francisco UPS facility that left four dead on the very same day, have generated – yet again – the standard set of responses in the wake of a mass shooting in the United States. The details of any such tragedy often emerge slowly, but a few points can be made. While deaths from mass shootings are a relatively small part of the overall homicidal violence in America, they are particularly wrenching. The problem is worse in the U.S. than in most other industrialised nations. And it is getting worse. The political overlay of the Virginia shooting also carries a particular social harm. Any thought that guns can play a helpful role in reducing tyranny in a democratic country like the United States should quickly be dispelled. Hopefully, that message will penetrate everyone from the NRA leadership and Sen. Rand Paul to anyone on the opposite end of the political spectrum who doesn’t like the current developments of Republican rule. I’ve been researching gun violence – and what can be done to prevent it – in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if the NRA claim that guns helped reduce crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialised nations instead of the highest one – and by a wide margin. The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents – even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens. The state of gun control in the US Eighteen states in the U.S. and a number of cities including Chicago, New York and San Francisco have tried to reduce the unlawful use of guns as well as gun accidents by adopting laws to keep guns safely stored when they are not in use. Safe storage is a common form of gun regulation in nations with stricter gun regulations. The NRA has been battling such laws for years. But that effort was dealt a blow in June 2015 when the U.S. Supreme Court – over a strident dissent by Justices Thomas and Scalia – refused to consider the San Francisco law that required guns not in use be stored safely. This was a positive step because hundreds of thousands of guns are stolen every year, and good public policy must try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. The dissenters were alarmed by the thought that a gun stored in a safe would not be immediately available for use, but they seemed unaware of how unusual it is that a gun is helpful when someone is under attack. Statistics show only the tiniest fraction of victims of violent crime are able to use a gun in their defense. Over the period from 2007 to 2011, roughly six million nonfatal violent crimes occurred each year. Yet data from the National Crime Victimisation Survey show that 99.2 percent of victims in these incidents did not protect themselves with a gun – this in a country with roughly 300 million guns in civilian hands. In fact, a classic study of 198 cases of unwanted entry into occupied single-family dwellings in Atlanta found that the invader was twice as likely to obtain the victim’s gun than to have the victim use a firearm in self-defense. The author of the study, Arthur Kellerman, concluded in words that those opposing safe storage of guns should heed: On average, the gun that represents the greatest threat is the one that is kept loaded and readily available in a bedside drawer. A loaded, unsecured gun in the home is like an insurance policy that fails to deliver at least 95 percent of the time, but has the constant potential – particularly in the case of handguns which are more easily manipulated by children and more attractive for use in crime – to harm someone in the home or be stolen and harm someone else. More guns won’t stop gun violence For years, the NRA mantra has been that allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns would reduce crime as they fought off or scared of the criminals. Some early studies even purported to show that so-called right-to-carry (RTC) laws did just that, but a 2004 report from the National Research Council refuted that claim, saying it was not supported by “the scientific evidence,” while remaining uncertain about what the true impact of RTC laws was. Ten years of additional data have allowed researchers to get a better fix on this question, which is important since the NRA is pushing for a Supreme Court decision that would allow RTC as a matter of constitutional law. The new research on this issue from my team at Stanford University has given the most compelling evidence to date that RTC laws are associated with significant increases in violent crime. Looking at Uniform Crime Reports data from 1979 to 2014, we find that, on average, the 33 states that adopted RTC laws over this period experienced violent crime rates that are roughly 14 percent higher after 10 years than if they had not adopted these laws. In the meantime, can anything make American politicians listen to the preferences of the 90 percent on the wisdom of adopting universal background checks for gun purchases? Gun control around the world As an academic exercise, one might speculate whether the law could play a constructive role in reducing the number or deadliness of mass shootings. Most other advanced nations apparently think so, since they make it far harder for someone like your typical American mass killer to get his hands on particularly lethal weapons. Universal background checks are common features of gun regulation in other developed countries, including: Germany: To buy a gun, anyone under the age of 25 has to pass a psychiatric evaluation. Presumably, 21-year-old Charleston shooter Dylann Roof would have failed. Finland: Handgun license applicants are allowed to purchase firearms only if they can prove they are active members of regulated shooting clubs. Before they can get a gun, applicants must pass an aptitude test, submit to a police interview and show they have a proper gun storage unit. Italy: To secure a gun permit, one must establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm and pass a background check considering both criminal and mental health records. France: Firearms applicants must have no criminal record and pass a background check that considers the reason for the gun purchase and evaluates the criminal, mental and health records of the applicant. The United Kingdom and Japan: Handguns are illegal for private citizens. While mass shootings, as well as gun homicides and suicides, are not unknown in these countries, the overall rates are substantially higher in the United States than in these nations. While NRA supporters frequently challenge me on these statistics, saying that this is only because American blacks are so violent, pointing to the type of wildly incorrect claims about the percentages of whites killed by blacks that Dylann Roof spouted and Donald Trump tweeted, it is important to note that white murder rates in the U.S. are well over twice as high as the murder rates in any of these other countries. Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996 The story of Australia, which had 13 mass shootings in the 18-year period from 1979 to 1996 but none in the succeeding 21 years, is worth examining. The turning point was the 1996 Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, in which a gunman killed 35 individuals using semiautomatic weapons. In the wake of the massacre, the conservative federal government succeeded in implementing tough new gun control laws throughout the country. A large array of weapons were banned – including the Glock semiautomatic handgun used in the Charleston shootings. The government also imposed a mandatory gun buy-back that substantially reduced gun possession in Australia. A pile of about 4,500 prohibited firearms in Sydney that have been handed in under the Australian government’s buy-back scheme July 28, 1997. (Reuters) × The effect was that both gun suicides and homicides fell. In addition, the 1996 legislation disallowed self-defense as a legitimate reason to purchase a firearm. When I mention this to disbelieving NRA supporters, they insist that crime must now be rampant in Australia. In fact, the Australian murder rate has fallen to one per 100,000 while the U.S. rate, thankfully lower than in the early 1990s, is still roughly 5 per 100,000 – nearly five times as high. Moreover, robberies in Australia occur at only about half the rate of the U.S.: 58 in Australia versus 113.1 per 100,000 in the U.S. in 2012. How did Australia do it? Politically, it took a brave prime minister to face the rage of Australian gun interests. Prime Minister John Howard wore a bullet-proof vest when he announced the proposed gun restrictions in June 1996. The deputy prime minister was hung in effigy. But Australia did not have a domestic gun industry to oppose the new measures so the will of the people was allowed to emerge. And today, support for the safer, gun-restricted Australia is so strong that going back would not be tolerated by the public. That Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996 is likely more than merely the result of the considerable reduction in guns – it’s certainly not the case that guns have disappeared altogether. I suspect that the country has also experienced a cultural shift between the shock of the Port Arthur massacre and the removal of guns from everyday life, as they are no longer available for self-defense and they are simply less present throughout the country. Troubled individuals, in other words, are not constantly being reminded that guns are a means to address their alleged grievances to the extent that they were in the past, or continue to be in the U.S. Lax gun control in one nation can create problems in another Of course, strict gun regulations cannot ensure that the danger of mass shootings or killings has been eliminated. Norway has strong gun control and committed humane values. But that didn’t prevent Anders Breivik from opening fire on a youth camp on the island of Utoya in 2011. His clean criminal record and hunting license had allowed him to secure semiautomatic rifles, but Norway restricted his ability to get high-capacity clips for them. In his manifesto, Breivik wrote about his attempts to legally buy weapons, stating, “I envy our European American brothers as the gun laws in Europe sucks ass in comparison.” In fact, in the same manifesto, Breivik wrote that it was from a U.S. supplier that he purchased – and had mailed – 10 30-round ammunition magazines for the rifle he used in his attack. In other words, even if a particular nation or state chooses to make it harder for some would-be killers to get their weapons, these efforts can be undercut by the jurisdictions that hold out. In the U.S., of course, state gun control measures are often thwarted by the lax attitude to gun acquisition in other states. Editor’s note: This is an updated version of an article first published on June 24, 2015. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

How US gun control compares to the rest of the world

<p>Today&rsquo;s mass shooting at a small Baptist church in the small Texas town of Sutherland Springs highlights the role of pro-gun advocates in blocking the progress of effective gun control.</p>

<p>Such advocacy often reflects the persuasive power of &ldquo;issue management&rdquo; &ndash; a communication process that enables organisations to isolate public issues and steer them in a direction that suits their interests. In the case of the terrible mass-shooting in Las Vegas, the NRA turned a potential PR disaster into a near-triumph.</p>

<p>This approach has been used since the early 1980s when issues management was developed as a strategy to help US businesses compete on an equal footing in setting the social agenda. It was soon adopted around the world by governments, non-profits, community groups and activist organisations.</p>

<p><strong>Controlling the headlines</strong></p>

<p>Usually, it&rsquo;s pretty transparent who is managing the issue and trying to persuade the public, the government or some other decision maker.</p>

<p>For example, we know broadly who is trying to convince us to vote for or against same-sex marriage, or to support or oppose the Adani coal mine, or to join the campaign to ban duck-shooting in Victoria.</p>

<p>But sometimes it is much less clear. A case in point is the television campaign purportedly launched by Australian convenience-store owners to oppose plain packaging of cigarettes, which turned out to be funded by Big Tobacco.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/file-20171024-20375-o2umwy-20171106050733.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>A section of the advertisement that appeared in the Australian media that was actually partly funded by the tobacco industry. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>In fact, some of the most effective issue management is only partly visible to the public, and in some cases is never seen at all in the mainstream media.<br />
Conversely, there are rare occasions when a major controversy is fought out almost entirely in the headlines and the issue management is laid bare for all to see.</p>

<p><strong>NRA agenda setting</strong></p>

<p>Whatever you think of the National Rifle Association you have to give them credit for some highly effective issue management. In the wake of the shooting rampage in Las Vegas, they could have dusted off their usual response after every previous mass shooting.</p>

<p>But instead, the plotters at NRA came up with an audacious new approach &ndash; they called for a review of the so-called bump stocks, which are devices retrofitted to turn a legal semi-automatic weapon into an illegal automatic killing machine.</p>

<p>Bump stocks allow the gun to fire faster than you can manually pull the trigger, which is how the Las Vegas shooter could fire so many shots in such a short time.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/file-20171024-20346-d0li1k-20171106050843.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>A bump fire stock that attaches to a semi-automatic rifle to increase the firing rate. (Reuters)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>In issue management terms, the NRA&rsquo;s strategy was a classic case of &ldquo;look over here&rdquo; while maintaining its devotion to its core objectives.</p>

<p>By seeming to give away something that is peripheral to the gun rights issue, the NRA implemented a perfect example of the tried and true &ldquo;issue diversion tactic&rdquo;. In doing so, it positioned itself as part of the solution, rather than as a key part of the problem.</p>

<p><strong>The long and short of it</strong></p>

<p>While some issue management campaigns are very long-term - like the decades-long tussle over cigarette sales - there are also occasions when the issue management strategy seems to be a short-term initiative explicitly designed to influence the media headlines (such as the NRA campaign).</p>

<p>Commentators and reporters in the US and elsewhere rushed to express amazement that the NRA was actually &ldquo;supporting gun control&rdquo;. Headlines around the world hyped a minor concession on bump stocks into an apparently substantive change of direction.<br />
For example, ABC America headlined it: &ldquo;Las Vegas shooting leads to first signs of movement in gun control stalemate&rdquo; and The Orange County Register trumpeted: &ldquo;Gun control war dramatically changes with GOP, NRA agreeing to regulations.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Meanwhile, in Australia, the ABC reported: &ldquo;NRA supports crackdown on rapid-fire device used in Las Vegas&rdquo; and Sputnik News carried the headline &ldquo;NRA calls for additional gun control following Las Vegas massacre.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Overall the NRA&rsquo;s strategy produced a real media win, placing itself at the centre of claimed reform. At the same time, the group also achieved political success.</p>

<p>Republican politicians were predictably quick to embrace a call for &ldquo;sensible regulation&rdquo; which they could endorse without alienating their gun-rights-endorsing voters.</p>

<p>Even anti-gun Democrats had little choice but to support the proposal, thus delivering a faux image of bipartisanship, with the NRA appearing as an honest broker.</p>

<p>The NRA&rsquo;s plan was an ingenious win-win for them &ndash; though not for actual gun control.</p>

<p><strong>The art of issue management</strong></p>

<p>Issue management is a serious discipline taught in universities and practised in boardrooms around the world.</p>

<p>It can be used by a corporation to persuade the government and the public to accept the construction of a new toll road, or by the government to encourage childhood vaccination. Or it might be used by a non-profit to increase funding to combat aboriginal inequality or to drive domestic violence onto the national agenda.</p>

<p>Yet issue management has always had its critics, who claim it is often just a mask for manipulation and everything that is bad about public relations.</p>

<p>There is a large body of literature and evidence to refute this assertion, but some controversial cases undoubtedly give strength to the critics who claim it is all about &ldquo;dirty tricks,&rdquo; like the example of Big Tobacco&rsquo;s &ldquo;hidden&rdquo; campaign against plain packaging of cigarettes.</p>

<p>Whatever you think of the NRA, their response to the Las Vegas tragedy was a lesson in well-executed issue management - and we can expect them to use a similar strategy in response to today&rsquo;s tragedy. It&rsquo;s just a shame that such strategic audacity wasn&rsquo;t applied in support of a more worthy cause.</p>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-nra-can-teach-us-about-the-art-of-public-persuasion-85610" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.</p>


The Texas attack makes it clear again that the National Rifle Association of the US can't evade the issue of actual gun control

Today’s mass shooting at a small Baptist church in the small Texas town of Sutherland Springs highlights the role of pro-gun advocates in blocking the progress of effective gun control. Such advocacy often reflects the persuasive power of “issue management” – a communication process that enables organisations to isolate public issues and steer them in a direction that suits their interests. In the case of the terrible mass-shooting in Las Vegas, the NRA turned a potential PR disaster into a near-triumph. This approach has been used since the early 1980s when issues management was developed as a strategy to help US businesses compete on an equal footing in setting the social agenda. It was soon adopted around the world by governments, non-profits, community groups and activist organisations. Controlling the headlines Usually, it’s pretty transparent who is managing the issue and trying to persuade the public, the government or some other decision maker. For example, we know broadly who is trying to convince us to vote for or against same-sex marriage, or to support or oppose the Adani coal mine, or to join the campaign to ban duck-shooting in Victoria. But sometimes it is much less clear. A case in point is the television campaign purportedly launched by Australian convenience-store owners to oppose plain packaging of cigarettes, which turned out to be funded by Big Tobacco. A section of the advertisement that appeared in the Australian media that was actually partly funded by the tobacco industry. (Others) × In fact, some of the most effective issue management is only partly visible to the public, and in some cases is never seen at all in the mainstream media. Conversely, there are rare occasions when a major controversy is fought out almost entirely in the headlines and the issue management is laid bare for all to see. NRA agenda setting Whatever you think of the National Rifle Association you have to give them credit for some highly effective issue management. In the wake of the shooting rampage in Las Vegas, they could have dusted off their usual response after every previous mass shooting. But instead, the plotters at NRA came up with an audacious new approach – they called for a review of the so-called bump stocks, which are devices retrofitted to turn a legal semi-automatic weapon into an illegal automatic killing machine. Bump stocks allow the gun to fire faster than you can manually pull the trigger, which is how the Las Vegas shooter could fire so many shots in such a short time. A bump fire stock that attaches to a semi-automatic rifle to increase the firing rate. (Reuters) × In issue management terms, the NRA’s strategy was a classic case of “look over here” while maintaining its devotion to its core objectives. By seeming to give away something that is peripheral to the gun rights issue, the NRA implemented a perfect example of the tried and true “issue diversion tactic”. In doing so, it positioned itself as part of the solution, rather than as a key part of the problem. The long and short of it While some issue management campaigns are very long-term - like the decades-long tussle over cigarette sales - there are also occasions when the issue management strategy seems to be a short-term initiative explicitly designed to influence the media headlines (such as the NRA campaign). Commentators and reporters in the US and elsewhere rushed to express amazement that the NRA was actually “supporting gun control”. Headlines around the world hyped a minor concession on bump stocks into an apparently substantive change of direction. For example, ABC America headlined it: “Las Vegas shooting leads to first signs of movement in gun control stalemate” and The Orange County Register trumpeted: “Gun control war dramatically changes with GOP, NRA agreeing to regulations.” Meanwhile, in Australia, the ABC reported: “NRA supports crackdown on rapid-fire device used in Las Vegas” and Sputnik News carried the headline “NRA calls for additional gun control following Las Vegas massacre.” Overall the NRA’s strategy produced a real media win, placing itself at the centre of claimed reform. At the same time, the group also achieved political success. Republican politicians were predictably quick to embrace a call for “sensible regulation” which they could endorse without alienating their gun-rights-endorsing voters. Even anti-gun Democrats had little choice but to support the proposal, thus delivering a faux image of bipartisanship, with the NRA appearing as an honest broker. The NRA’s plan was an ingenious win-win for them – though not for actual gun control. The art of issue management Issue management is a serious discipline taught in universities and practised in boardrooms around the world. It can be used by a corporation to persuade the government and the public to accept the construction of a new toll road, or by the government to encourage childhood vaccination. Or it might be used by a non-profit to increase funding to combat aboriginal inequality or to drive domestic violence onto the national agenda. Yet issue management has always had its critics, who claim it is often just a mask for manipulation and everything that is bad about public relations. There is a large body of literature and evidence to refute this assertion, but some controversial cases undoubtedly give strength to the critics who claim it is all about “dirty tricks,” like the example of Big Tobacco’s “hidden” campaign against plain packaging of cigarettes. Whatever you think of the NRA, their response to the Las Vegas tragedy was a lesson in well-executed issue management - and we can expect them to use a similar strategy in response to today’s tragedy. It’s just a shame that such strategic audacity wasn’t applied in support of a more worthy cause. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Texas attack: How many more lives before the US says no to gun

<p>Another day, another extremist attack, so what else is new? Recently it was in New York, a couple of weeks ago it was in Las Vegas, before that in London, and before that in Paris and so the list goes on and on. We could just as easily be referring to the seasonal Fashion Week held in these international hubs of design instead of the far grimmer subject of &lsquo;lone wolf&rsquo; attacks and terrorism.</p>

<p>Israel for example, despite its outstanding intelligence and security services, apart from a pro-active and robust approach to counter-terror policy and actions, reportedly faces at least one lone wolf attack a month.</p>

<p>The attackers themselves too span the globe. The New York attacker is of Uzbek origin, while we have had Afghans, Pakistanis, Libyans, Algerians, Palestinians and a host of other nationalities involved as well. If there is one thing in common amongst them, it is that they are homegrown, that is citizens of the country attacked, and in most cases followers of radical Islam.</p>

<p>Also, does the present attack by an Uzbek imply that Uzbekistan and probably Central Asia is the new focus of radical Islam? &nbsp;While one attack is hardly evidence of such a trend, it is worth recalling that Central Asia has been the focus of radical Islam for years. It is now a forgotten footnote of history that the erstwhile Soviet Union used the Red Army to suppress the Basmachi Movement, the Islamic Rebel Groups in Central Asia, in the 1920&rsquo;s.</p>

<p>Interestingly, documentation now available in the public domain suggests that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 was in response to attempts to radicalise the population in Central Asia, though ironically the Americans got this completely wrong and gave it a massive boost instead, something they have been forced to confront over the past two decades.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The very individualistic nature of such attacks ensures that their planning and preparation remain very low-key, and therefore, extremely difficult for the intelligence and security apparatus to pick up or prevent.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The very individualistic nature of such attacks ensures that their planning and preparation remain very low-key, and therefore, extremely difficult for the intelligence and security apparatus to pick up or prevent." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>The primary difference between lone wolf attackers and those belonging to terrorist groups, as we have all learnt over time, is that while they may be adherents of radical ideologies, they operate either alone or at best with an accomplice or two and are devoid of any support, logistic, intelligence or operational from any terrorist organisation.</p>

<p>This obviously limits the damage they can actually cause though, as we recently witnessed at Las Vegas, easy availability of high calibre weapons can tragically result in utter devastation. However, the very individualistic nature of such attacks ensures that their planning and preparation remain very low-key, and therefore, extremely difficult for the intelligence and security apparatus to pick up or prevent. The evolving nature of this threat makes existing counter - terror architecture and processes incapable of combating such threats effectively.</p>

<p>It is nobody&rsquo;s case that counter-terror intervention groups, such as the Special Action Groups of the NSG, have become redundant because it is impossible to foresee what tactics terrorists may employ in the future. Thus, hostage rescue and building/aircraft/train/ship intervention continue to be essential tasks for which specialised units must be kept trained and ready.</p>

<p>What however is emerging as absolutely essential to deal with lone wolf attacks is the necessity to reinforce beat cops and armed policemen with highly trained officers, both in and out of uniform, suitably equipped to respond instantaneously to ongoing situations. In this respect, the United Kingdom has been pro-active in establishing a high-level Counter-Terrorism Committee that is responsible for formulating the national Counter Terrorism and Domestic Extremism strategy.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>It is a shameful, but unquestionable fact that India&#39;s counter-terrorism architecture is not much better than it was at the time of the Mumbai attacks, where it failed miserably.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=It is a shameful, but unquestionable fact that India's counter-terrorism architecture is not much better than it was at the time of the Mumbai attacks, where it failed miserably." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Also, through its National Counter Terrorism Policing Headquarters it coordinates and controls specialised investigative and immediate intervention units, the CTC and CTU&rsquo;s. All of this backed by an effective database. It is no wonder then that the three attackers involved in the London Bridge terror incident in June this year were neutralised within eight minutes.</p>

<p>Though we in this country have not been subjected to lone wolf attacks, the reason for which needs to be analysed in depth, there is little doubt that we need to put in place systems to be able to deal with such a threat. It is, in fact, utter criminal negligence on the part of our political class that has led to the stalling of the establishment of the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) and the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) projects.</p>

<p>It is a shameful, but unquestionable fact that our counter-terrorism architecture is not much better than it was at the time of the Mumbai attacks, where it failed miserably. It is high time that our political and security establishment get a move on and do what they are paid for, resignations and bluster after the event means little.</p>


Security establishment of India needs to work on and develop a better counter-terrorism architecture to track and avoid terrorist attacks

Another day, another extremist attack, so what else is new? Recently it was in New York, a couple of weeks ago it was in Las Vegas, before that in London, and before that in Paris and so the list goes on and on. We could just as easily be referring to the seasonal Fashion Week held in these international hubs of design instead of the far grimmer subject of ‘lone wolf’ attacks and terrorism. Israel for example, despite its outstanding intelligence and security services, apart from a pro-active and robust approach to counter-terror policy and actions, reportedly faces at least one lone wolf attack a month. The attackers themselves too span the globe. The New York attacker is of Uzbek origin, while we have had Afghans, Pakistanis, Libyans, Algerians, Palestinians and a host of other nationalities involved as well. If there is one thing in common amongst them, it is that they are homegrown, that is citizens of the country attacked, and in most cases followers of radical Islam. Also, does the present attack by an Uzbek imply that Uzbekistan and probably Central Asia is the new focus of radical Islam? While one attack is hardly evidence of such a trend, it is worth recalling that Central Asia has been the focus of radical Islam for years. It is now a forgotten footnote of history that the erstwhile Soviet Union used the Red Army to suppress the Basmachi Movement, the Islamic Rebel Groups in Central Asia, in the 1920’s. Interestingly, documentation now available in the public domain suggests that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 was in response to attempts to radicalise the population in Central Asia, though ironically the Americans got this completely wrong and gave it a massive boost instead, something they have been forced to confront over the past two decades. The very individualistic nature of such attacks ensures that their planning and preparation remain very low-key, and therefore, extremely difficult for the intelligence and security apparatus to pick up or prevent. × The primary difference between lone wolf attackers and those belonging to terrorist groups, as we have all learnt over time, is that while they may be adherents of radical ideologies, they operate either alone or at best with an accomplice or two and are devoid of any support, logistic, intelligence or operational from any terrorist organisation. This obviously limits the damage they can actually cause though, as we recently witnessed at Las Vegas, easy availability of high calibre weapons can tragically result in utter devastation. However, the very individualistic nature of such attacks ensures that their planning and preparation remain very low-key, and therefore, extremely difficult for the intelligence and security apparatus to pick up or prevent. The evolving nature of this threat makes existing counter - terror architecture and processes incapable of combating such threats effectively. It is nobody’s case that counter-terror intervention groups, such as the Special Action Groups of the NSG, have become redundant because it is impossible to foresee what tactics terrorists may employ in the future. Thus, hostage rescue and building/aircraft/train/ship intervention continue to be essential tasks for which specialised units must be kept trained and ready. What however is emerging as absolutely essential to deal with lone wolf attacks is the necessity to reinforce beat cops and armed policemen with highly trained officers, both in and out of uniform, suitably equipped to respond instantaneously to ongoing situations. In this respect, the United Kingdom has been pro-active in establishing a high-level Counter-Terrorism Committee that is responsible for formulating the national Counter Terrorism and Domestic Extremism strategy. It is a shameful, but unquestionable fact that India's counter-terrorism architecture is not much better than it was at the time of the Mumbai attacks, where it failed miserably. × Also, through its National Counter Terrorism Policing Headquarters it coordinates and controls specialised investigative and immediate intervention units, the CTC and CTU’s. All of this backed by an effective database. It is no wonder then that the three attackers involved in the London Bridge terror incident in June this year were neutralised within eight minutes. Though we in this country have not been subjected to lone wolf attacks, the reason for which needs to be analysed in depth, there is little doubt that we need to put in place systems to be able to deal with such a threat. It is, in fact, utter criminal negligence on the part of our political class that has led to the stalling of the establishment of the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) and the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) projects. It is a shameful, but unquestionable fact that our counter-terrorism architecture is not much better than it was at the time of the Mumbai attacks, where it failed miserably. It is high time that our political and security establishment get a move on and do what they are paid for, resignations and bluster after the event means little.

The New York terror attack calls for a changed counter-terror response

<p>The recent attack on a bike path in lower Manhattan once again compels us to ask: Why do people pledge allegiance to the Islamic State?</p>

<p>Sayfullo Saipov, the suspect in the attack, isn&rsquo;t a devout Muslim. He cursed and came late to prayers, according to acquaintances who talked to The New York Times. So why would he want to be a martyr?</p>

<p>As a professor of modern Middle Eastern history, I have spent the majority of my professional life studying the region, its culture, society and politics. In recent years, I have researched and written about IS and its terrorist activities. While other experts and I have long looked at how radicalisation occurs, some new ideas are emerging.</p>

<p><strong>Of lone wolves, flaming bananas and machismo</strong></p>

<p>Like this recent attack in New York, many IS attacks around the globe are carried out by individuals the media have dubbed &ldquo;lone wolves&rdquo; &ndash; that is, freelancers who act without the direct knowledge of the IS leadership. To avoid glamorising them, the RAND Corporation prefers the term &ldquo;flaming bananas.&rdquo;</p>

<p>There are two theories as to why these individuals pledge allegiance to the group. The first is that they get &quot;radicalised&quot;.</p>

<p>Radicalisation refers to a step-by-step process whereby individuals become increasingly susceptible to jihadi ideas. First, they cut themselves off from social networks such as family, which provide them with support and a conventional value system. They then immerse themselves in a radical religious counterculture. They might do this on their own, or a jihadi recruiter might bring them into the fold. Either way, the result is the same.</p>

<p>Some observers claim IS propaganda plays a key role in recruitment. Rather than presenting a religious rationale for the group&rsquo;s actions, IS propaganda tends to focus on the violence the group perpetrates. IS has even released a video game based on Grand Theft Auto 5 in which, rather than stealing cars and battling the police, the player destroys advancing personnel carriers and shoots enemy soldiers.</p>

<p>Perhaps, then, the radicalisation model is wrong or not universally applicable. Perhaps there&rsquo;s something other than religious zealotry at play.</p>

<p>Consider the widely reported story of two would-be jihadists who, before they left Birmingham, U.K., for Syria, ordered &ldquo;Islam for Dummies&rdquo; and &ldquo;The Koran for Dummies&rdquo; to fill the gaps in their knowledge.</p>

<p>Newspaper stories time and again puzzle over the problem of how it happens that individuals who go on to join IS were found in bars, even gay bars, or had western girlfriends and smoked and drank almost up to the time they committed some act of violence for the group. The most common explanation is that their dissolute lifestyle was a cover.</p>

<p>After the driver of a truck ran down and killed 84 people in Nice, France, for example, the French interior minister was at a loss to explain how someone who drank during Ramadan &ndash; which had ended a week and a half before &ndash; could have radicalised so quickly.</p>

<p>A number of experts have argued that the radicalisation model should be replaced by, or supplemented with, a different model.</p>

<p>Rather than joining a radically different religious counterculture, individuals are attracted to IS, these experts argue because its actions reaffirm the cultural values of those who are marginalised, or those who exhibit what psychiatrists call &ldquo;anti-social personality disorders.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Could it be that IS volunteers are drawn to a value system that asserts an aggressive machismo, disparages steady work and sustains the impulse for immediate gratification? Could it be that they are attracted to a culture that promotes redemption through violence, loyalty, patriarchal values, thrill-seeking to the point of martyrdom and the diminution of women to objects of pleasure?</p>

<p>In this reading, IS more closely resembles the sort of street gang with which many of its Western and Westernised enlistees are familiar than its more austere competitor, al-Qaida.</p>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-draws-lone-wolves-to-the-islamic-state-86746" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.</p>


Terrorists are drawn IS value system that asserts an aggressive machismo

The recent attack on a bike path in lower Manhattan once again compels us to ask: Why do people pledge allegiance to the Islamic State? Sayfullo Saipov, the suspect in the attack, isn’t a devout Muslim. He cursed and came late to prayers, according to acquaintances who talked to The New York Times. So why would he want to be a martyr? As a professor of modern Middle Eastern history, I have spent the majority of my professional life studying the region, its culture, society and politics. In recent years, I have researched and written about IS and its terrorist activities. While other experts and I have long looked at how radicalisation occurs, some new ideas are emerging. Of lone wolves, flaming bananas and machismo Like this recent attack in New York, many IS attacks around the globe are carried out by individuals the media have dubbed “lone wolves” – that is, freelancers who act without the direct knowledge of the IS leadership. To avoid glamorising them, the RAND Corporation prefers the term “flaming bananas.” There are two theories as to why these individuals pledge allegiance to the group. The first is that they get "radicalised". Radicalisation refers to a step-by-step process whereby individuals become increasingly susceptible to jihadi ideas. First, they cut themselves off from social networks such as family, which provide them with support and a conventional value system. They then immerse themselves in a radical religious counterculture. They might do this on their own, or a jihadi recruiter might bring them into the fold. Either way, the result is the same. Some observers claim IS propaganda plays a key role in recruitment. Rather than presenting a religious rationale for the group’s actions, IS propaganda tends to focus on the violence the group perpetrates. IS has even released a video game based on Grand Theft Auto 5 in which, rather than stealing cars and battling the police, the player destroys advancing personnel carriers and shoots enemy soldiers. Perhaps, then, the radicalisation model is wrong or not universally applicable. Perhaps there’s something other than religious zealotry at play. Consider the widely reported story of two would-be jihadists who, before they left Birmingham, U.K., for Syria, ordered “Islam for Dummies” and “The Koran for Dummies” to fill the gaps in their knowledge. Newspaper stories time and again puzzle over the problem of how it happens that individuals who go on to join IS were found in bars, even gay bars, or had western girlfriends and smoked and drank almost up to the time they committed some act of violence for the group. The most common explanation is that their dissolute lifestyle was a cover. After the driver of a truck ran down and killed 84 people in Nice, France, for example, the French interior minister was at a loss to explain how someone who drank during Ramadan – which had ended a week and a half before – could have radicalised so quickly. A number of experts have argued that the radicalisation model should be replaced by, or supplemented with, a different model. Rather than joining a radically different religious counterculture, individuals are attracted to IS, these experts argue because its actions reaffirm the cultural values of those who are marginalised, or those who exhibit what psychiatrists call “anti-social personality disorders.” Could it be that IS volunteers are drawn to a value system that asserts an aggressive machismo, disparages steady work and sustains the impulse for immediate gratification? Could it be that they are attracted to a culture that promotes redemption through violence, loyalty, patriarchal values, thrill-seeking to the point of martyrdom and the diminution of women to objects of pleasure? In this reading, IS more closely resembles the sort of street gang with which many of its Western and Westernised enlistees are familiar than its more austere competitor, al-Qaida. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

What draws 'lone wolves' to the Islamic State

<p>New York is an intrepid city. One can&#39;t but fall in love with it. I for that matter was in complete awe. Having lived and worked there for years, I would marvel at the city&#39;s capacity to absorb the most myriad group of ethnic communities across the world. The heinous 9/11 attack did leave its scar on the city but failed to daunt its spirit. While rest of the US has become suspicious of foreigners in different degrees, NYC continues to live up to the unmatched standard of its own cosmopolitanism. An unusual mix of people, culture and religion.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">New York is an international symbol of freedom and democracy, and we will not be deterred. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NYCstrong?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NYCstrong</a> <a href="https://t.co/2antds3185">pic.twitter.com/2antds3185</a></p>
&mdash; Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) <a href="https://twitter.com/NYGovCuomo/status/925520087670493184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">New York&#39;s resilience is stronger than a cowardly act of terror. Thinking of the victims, their families, &amp; the responders who saved lives.</p>
&mdash; Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) <a href="https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/925515496576962562?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>No person, no group, no community own NYC. The city belongs to all New Yorkers. And who is a New Yorker? Anyone who lives there, works in the city, share the city&#39;s spirit. You don&#39;t have to be particularly white, a Jew or an American citizen to be a New Yorker. The city will embrace you. Slowly, with time, as you gain your foothold in that behemoth metropolis, if you start feeling comfortable with its peculiar ebb and flow of life, the city will suck you in. The people make New York City what it is. Not the buildings, shops, the cars or the affluence.</p>

<p>&quot;New York is very much like the movies&quot;, the Algerian-French couple pointed out to me as the sun set over the white desert, close to Jordan&#39;s border with Saudi Arabia. I agreed in politeness. But the city, in reality, is stranger than celluloid fiction.</p>

<p>In the real world, Italy may have very little to do with China; there could possibly be no overlaps between the languages, cultures, food types of the two countries but just across Mulberry Street, Little Italy and China Town co-exist. How do the residents of two blocs communicate? I have no idea. Do they fight each other? No.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Life in the City is a rich tapestry of diverse colours, designs and motifs. And that is what makes it unique. You cannot essentialise it, reduce it, box it, or simplify it.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Life in the City is a rich tapestry of diverse colours, designs and motifs. And that is what makes it unique. You cannot essentialise it, reduce it, box it, or simplify it." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>This coexistence evident all over the city is not a doing of NYPD alone. Over years, the city has learned to live an eclectic life, slowing growing out of its more violent past. It respects stability but is not hankering for homogeneity. While one can decide to stick to one&#39;s culture and language, religion and dress, there is always the possibility of getting enriched by others who are very different. Different but no less.</p>

<p>Life in the City is a rich tapestry of diverse colours, designs and motifs. And that is what makes it unique. You cannot essentialise it, reduce it, box it, or simplify it. The City is a bundle of contradictions.</p>

<p>Yesterday&#39;s terrorist attack was a brutal blow to this richness of life, mauling to the ground the values the City stands for. Not only have we lost eight precious lives; we have jeopardised a spirit which is hard to find nowadays because there is so much hate, jingoism, and intolerance.</p>

<p>Let us for a moment not get into the number game by saying, oh, only eight died. I agree many more die in the war zones of West Asia every day. But we cannot for sake of humanity compare lives with lives. Every life lost is a loss. Let us condemn it.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>How is killing these people, most of whom are tourists and immigrants, help to maul the military might of the US?</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=How is killing these people, most of whom are tourists and immigrants, help to maul the military might of the US?" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p><strong>Also watch:</strong>&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/school-bus-with-children-inside-hit-in-new-york-attack-6467"><strong>School bus with children inside hit in New York attack</strong></a></p>

<p>The mindless terror that motivated the assassin appals me. No for god&#39;s sake don&#39;t try to convince me of the ideological underpinning of the act. It had none. It was not even prompted by an empathy for a cause. The terrorist decided to strike at the hub of New York&#39;s tourist destination. It is very much a civilian space too. It is a stone throw away from Wall Trade Center, Wall Street, Anne Frank Museum. Millions of commuter included me, travelled through that locality every day. How is killing these people, most of whom are tourists and immigrants, help to maul the military might of the US?</p>

<p>In his mindless rage, what the assassin might have missed is that such actions make the US an even more paranoid country. The current president is already hellbent to stop immigration with his exclusionary ideology that has little regard for the New York spirit. This attack will give Donald Trump one more and a very big excuse to close the doors and come down hard on other countries whose citizens he is keen on relegating to lives of eternal damnation. It is already evident from Twitter posts how hate is flowing fast and thick</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Stop letting these animals in the country!</p>
&mdash; Jose Guitian Cicero (@omgitzjose) <a href="https://twitter.com/omgitzjose/status/925589998312751104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Start deportations, entire families. Investigate all their neighbors.<br />
Ppl start paying attention who TFK lives next door! +Fk protesters!!!</p>
&mdash; ?NdRE (@cruztomahawk) <a href="https://twitter.com/cruztomahawk/status/925597499502616577?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">There will be no freedom when those terrorists will kill us all??</p>
&mdash; Bina Arington (@Baring5225) <a href="https://twitter.com/Baring5225/status/925592483777593344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>My only plea today is if you wish to fight hegemony, violence, hatred, then think carefully and resist strategically. Killing innocent lives does not help whatever cause you are fighting for, it does not defeat your mighty opponent and, the worst is, you only help to bolster jingoistic responses. More importantly, you end up killing a spirit which you may actually want to champion, at least for the sake of a more tolerant world.</p>


This attack will give Donald Trump one more and a very big excuse to close the doors and come down hard on other countries whose citizens he is keen on relegating to lives of eternal damnation.

New York is an intrepid city. One can't but fall in love with it. I for that matter was in complete awe. Having lived and worked there for years, I would marvel at the city's capacity to absorb the most myriad group of ethnic communities across the world. The heinous 9/11 attack did leave its scar on the city but failed to daunt its spirit. While rest of the US has become suspicious of foreigners in different degrees, NYC continues to live up to the unmatched standard of its own cosmopolitanism. An unusual mix of people, culture and religion. New York is an international symbol of freedom and democracy, and we will not be deterred. #NYCstrong pic.twitter.com/2antds3185 — Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) November 1, 2017 × New York's resilience is stronger than a cowardly act of terror. Thinking of the victims, their families, & the responders who saved lives. — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 1, 2017 × No person, no group, no community own NYC. The city belongs to all New Yorkers. And who is a New Yorker? Anyone who lives there, works in the city, share the city's spirit. You don't have to be particularly white, a Jew or an American citizen to be a New Yorker. The city will embrace you. Slowly, with time, as you gain your foothold in that behemoth metropolis, if you start feeling comfortable with its peculiar ebb and flow of life, the city will suck you in. The people make New York City what it is. Not the buildings, shops, the cars or the affluence. "New York is very much like the movies", the Algerian-French couple pointed out to me as the sun set over the white desert, close to Jordan's border with Saudi Arabia. I agreed in politeness. But the city, in reality, is stranger than celluloid fiction. In the real world, Italy may have very little to do with China; there could possibly be no overlaps between the languages, cultures, food types of the two countries but just across Mulberry Street, Little Italy and China Town co-exist. How do the residents of two blocs communicate? I have no idea. Do they fight each other? No. Life in the City is a rich tapestry of diverse colours, designs and motifs. And that is what makes it unique. You cannot essentialise it, reduce it, box it, or simplify it. × This coexistence evident all over the city is not a doing of NYPD alone. Over years, the city has learned to live an eclectic life, slowing growing out of its more violent past. It respects stability but is not hankering for homogeneity. While one can decide to stick to one's culture and language, religion and dress, there is always the possibility of getting enriched by others who are very different. Different but no less. Life in the City is a rich tapestry of diverse colours, designs and motifs. And that is what makes it unique. You cannot essentialise it, reduce it, box it, or simplify it. The City is a bundle of contradictions. Yesterday's terrorist attack was a brutal blow to this richness of life, mauling to the ground the values the City stands for. Not only have we lost eight precious lives; we have jeopardised a spirit which is hard to find nowadays because there is so much hate, jingoism, and intolerance. Let us for a moment not get into the number game by saying, oh, only eight died. I agree many more die in the war zones of West Asia every day. But we cannot for sake of humanity compare lives with lives. Every life lost is a loss. Let us condemn it. How is killing these people, most of whom are tourists and immigrants, help to maul the military might of the US? × Also watch: School bus with children inside hit in New York attack The mindless terror that motivated the assassin appals me. No for god's sake don't try to convince me of the ideological underpinning of the act. It had none. It was not even prompted by an empathy for a cause. The terrorist decided to strike at the hub of New York's tourist destination. It is very much a civilian space too. It is a stone throw away from Wall Trade Center, Wall Street, Anne Frank Museum. Millions of commuter included me, travelled through that locality every day. How is killing these people, most of whom are tourists and immigrants, help to maul the military might of the US? In his mindless rage, what the assassin might have missed is that such actions make the US an even more paranoid country. The current president is already hellbent to stop immigration with his exclusionary ideology that has little regard for the New York spirit. This attack will give Donald Trump one more and a very big excuse to close the doors and come down hard on other countries whose citizens he is keen on relegating to lives of eternal damnation. It is already evident from Twitter posts how hate is flowing fast and thick Stop letting these animals in the country! — Jose Guitian Cicero (@omgitzjose) November 1, 2017 × Start deportations, entire families. Investigate all their neighbors. Ppl start paying attention who TFK lives next door! +Fk protesters!!! — ?NdRE (@cruztomahawk) November 1, 2017 × There will be no freedom when those terrorists will kill us all?? — Bina Arington (@Baring5225) November 1, 2017 × My only plea today is if you wish to fight hegemony, violence, hatred, then think carefully and resist strategically. Killing innocent lives does not help whatever cause you are fighting for, it does not defeat your mighty opponent and, the worst is, you only help to bolster jingoistic responses. More importantly, you end up killing a spirit which you may actually want to champion, at least for the sake of a more tolerant world.

Terror attacks on NYC will bolster jingoism in the US

<p>Pakistan has returned the five remaining helicopters to the United States that were given to them to monitor its border with Afghanistan.</p>

<p>According to the Geo News, the US&nbsp;gave a total of nine helicopters to Pakistan in 2002, out of which four were returned on October 15.</p>

<p>The Ministry of Interior&#39;s air wing had been using the choppers for anti-narcotics operations and combating terrorism, according to sources.</p>

<p>Now, it would be difficult to monitor the Pakistan-Afghanistan border as the Ministry of Interior is left with only three Cessna aircraft in the air wing, the insiders added</p>


Pakistan has returned the five remaining helicopters to the United States that were given to them to monitor its border with Afghanistan.

Pakistan has returned the five remaining helicopters to the United States that were given to them to monitor its border with Afghanistan. According to the Geo News, the US gave a total of nine helicopters to Pakistan in 2002, out of which four were returned on October 15. The Ministry of Interior's air wing had been using the choppers for anti-narcotics operations and combating terrorism, according to sources. Now, it would be difficult to monitor the Pakistan-Afghanistan border as the Ministry of Interior is left with only three Cessna aircraft in the air wing, the insiders added

Pakistan returns helicopters given by US

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Pro-<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ISIS?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ISIS</a> media unit Wafa&#39; Foundation continues to threaten 2018 FIFA <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WorldCup?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WorldCup</a>, this time using an image of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LionelMessi?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LionelMessi</a> in a prison outfit <a href="https://t.co/isB8RDKYAK">pic.twitter.com/isB8RDKYAK</a></p>
&mdash; SITE Intel Group (@siteintelgroup) <a href="https://twitter.com/siteintelgroup/status/922863797928329216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 24, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Ahead of the FIFA World Cup to be held in 2018, the Wafa Media Foundation,&nbsp; a pro-ISIS group on Twitter, releases a shocking image to threaten fans and followers of football.</p>

<p>The Islamic State&#39;s mouthpiece used the face of the Argentinian football legend Lionel Messi to convey their ideology. The released poster says &#39;Just Terrorism&#39; and &#39;You are fighting a state that does not have failure in its dictionary&#39;. Also in the poster, Lionel Messi is standing behind the bar with one eye crying blood.</p>

<p>The poster is intended to spread terror among football fans, indicating also that the terror group may carry a terror attack during FIFA World Cup. The other posters released by them contain pictures of rifles and explosives. Last week, Wafa Media Foundation published one photo of a fighter carrying a rifle and a time-bomb with the ISIS black flag in front of a football stadium. The official symbol of the 2018 World Cup finals was also included in the image.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/%5B%20br(eakfast)%20+%20(l)unch%20%5Dwww.brunch.com%20(1)-20171025090746.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The poster says, &quot;Oh, enemies of Allah in Russia, I swear that the fire of the mujahideen will burn them, just wait,&quot;. (Twitter)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Politics has always been part of all sporting events in the recorded history of humankind. When Indian football clubs played with their British counterpart, it was very much a display of nationalist sentiment. In more recent times, every cricket match between India and Pakistan was an extension of the political tension that exists between the two nation. Winning a match has become more than a sporting event, it has come to signify, unfortunately, the superiority of one nation over the other. Political permeation of sports is not limited to the subcontinent; every football match played between and English and Wales football club show the domineering influence of politics, often sidelining the sporting spirit.</p>

<p>For repressive minority groups, sports events have often served as a tool to convey their sufferings to the rest of the world. For instance, recently, American football player Colin Kaepernick initiated a protest against New York police brutality. The NFL players either took a knee during the national anthem before a game or stand with arms locked in silent protest. This bold move started as a result of repeated videos showing police shooting and killing unarmed black men.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/sports%20story-20170926011311.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>NFL protest (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Racism has time again inspired players to protest. In the 1968 Olympics, 200m gold and bronze medalist Tommie Smith and John Carlos respectively took up a public stance against racism. They stood with their heads bowed and raising a black-gloved hand as the American National Anthem played during the victory ceremony.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/tommie%20smith2-20170927050712.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Tommie Smith and John Carlos (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>But, terrorism in sports is something that has caused global concern and condemnation. The threat of terrorism has become a major threat to all major sporting events as causing a debacle there, the terrorists understand well enough, would have global repercussions. Sporting events, such as the Olympics, football tournaments and cricket matches have been targeted, some of them had a larger impact such as the 1972 Olympics in Munich.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/munich-20171026053223.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The Palestine Liberation Organization terrorist at 1972 Munich Olympics. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>At the Munich Olympics, eleven Israeli Olympic team members were taken as the hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian terrorist group Black September. The attack was motivated by the desire to release members of the Palestine Liberation Organization held in captivity in Israeli prisons. German neo-Nazis gave logistical help to the commander of the terrorist group, Luttif Afif in carrying out the brutal attack.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Boston Marathon of 2013 witnessed another bloody chapter in global sports history; two bombs were detonated near the finishing line, leaving three people dead and more than 260 injured. These attacks will always be considered as dark chapters in the history of sports, and the recent one targeting FIFA World Cup is another chapter added to the books on &#39;sports and terrorism&#39;.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/boston-20171026053004.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Double bombings near the finish line of the Boston Marathon killed three people and injured at least 264. (Others)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Terror threat to FIFA World Cup will definitely influence the football festival. Having millions of followers, the Argentinian star is a legend and is also one of the favourites in the football fraternity. The terrorist, thus, very judiciously picked up the poster boy of the game.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The 2018 FIFA World Cup will be played across 11 cities in Russia from&nbsp;June 14 to July 15, and the final will be played at the Luzhniki Stadium in Moscow.</p>

<p>Hence, these continuous terrorist threats raise a serious question as to how the Russian government is going to deal with the security issues during the World Cup. Meanwhile, these threats will remain the main concern for football fans and followers, who are eager to visit Russia to support their favourite teams.</p>


Vulnerable targets, media exposure, and international impact are some of the reasons why terrorists have increasingly started targeting sporting venues.

Pro-#ISIS media unit Wafa' Foundation continues to threaten 2018 FIFA #WorldCup, this time using an image of #LionelMessi in a prison outfit pic.twitter.com/isB8RDKYAK — SITE Intel Group (@siteintelgroup) October 24, 2017 × Ahead of the FIFA World Cup to be held in 2018, the Wafa Media Foundation, a pro-ISIS group on Twitter, releases a shocking image to threaten fans and followers of football. The Islamic State's mouthpiece used the face of the Argentinian football legend Lionel Messi to convey their ideology. The released poster says 'Just Terrorism' and 'You are fighting a state that does not have failure in its dictionary'. Also in the poster, Lionel Messi is standing behind the bar with one eye crying blood. The poster is intended to spread terror among football fans, indicating also that the terror group may carry a terror attack during FIFA World Cup. The other posters released by them contain pictures of rifles and explosives. Last week, Wafa Media Foundation published one photo of a fighter carrying a rifle and a time-bomb with the ISIS black flag in front of a football stadium. The official symbol of the 2018 World Cup finals was also included in the image. The poster says, "Oh, enemies of Allah in Russia, I swear that the fire of the mujahideen will burn them, just wait,". (Twitter) × Politics has always been part of all sporting events in the recorded history of humankind. When Indian football clubs played with their British counterpart, it was very much a display of nationalist sentiment. In more recent times, every cricket match between India and Pakistan was an extension of the political tension that exists between the two nation. Winning a match has become more than a sporting event, it has come to signify, unfortunately, the superiority of one nation over the other. Political permeation of sports is not limited to the subcontinent; every football match played between and English and Wales football club show the domineering influence of politics, often sidelining the sporting spirit. For repressive minority groups, sports events have often served as a tool to convey their sufferings to the rest of the world. For instance, recently, American football player Colin Kaepernick initiated a protest against New York police brutality. The NFL players either took a knee during the national anthem before a game or stand with arms locked in silent protest. This bold move started as a result of repeated videos showing police shooting and killing unarmed black men. NFL protest (Others) × Racism has time again inspired players to protest. In the 1968 Olympics, 200m gold and bronze medalist Tommie Smith and John Carlos respectively took up a public stance against racism. They stood with their heads bowed and raising a black-gloved hand as the American National Anthem played during the victory ceremony. Tommie Smith and John Carlos (Others) × But, terrorism in sports is something that has caused global concern and condemnation. The threat of terrorism has become a major threat to all major sporting events as causing a debacle there, the terrorists understand well enough, would have global repercussions. Sporting events, such as the Olympics, football tournaments and cricket matches have been targeted, some of them had a larger impact such as the 1972 Olympics in Munich. The Palestine Liberation Organization terrorist at 1972 Munich Olympics. (Others) × At the Munich Olympics, eleven Israeli Olympic team members were taken as the hostage and eventually killed, along with a German police officer, by the Palestinian terrorist group Black September. The attack was motivated by the desire to release members of the Palestine Liberation Organization held in captivity in Israeli prisons. German neo-Nazis gave logistical help to the commander of the terrorist group, Luttif Afif in carrying out the brutal attack. The Boston Marathon of 2013 witnessed another bloody chapter in global sports history; two bombs were detonated near the finishing line, leaving three people dead and more than 260 injured. These attacks will always be considered as dark chapters in the history of sports, and the recent one targeting FIFA World Cup is another chapter added to the books on 'sports and terrorism'. Double bombings near the finish line of the Boston Marathon killed three people and injured at least 264. (Others) × Terror threat to FIFA World Cup will definitely influence the football festival. Having millions of followers, the Argentinian star is a legend and is also one of the favourites in the football fraternity. The terrorist, thus, very judiciously picked up the poster boy of the game. The 2018 FIFA World Cup will be played across 11 cities in Russia from June 14 to July 15, and the final will be played at the Luzhniki Stadium in Moscow. Hence, these continuous terrorist threats raise a serious question as to how the Russian government is going to deal with the security issues during the World Cup. Meanwhile, these threats will remain the main concern for football fans and followers, who are eager to visit Russia to support their favourite teams.

Munich to Messi: Why terror haunts sports

<p><br />
French parents sent to the prosecutor for naming their child Jihad.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The authorities in Toulouse in South of France were immediately triggered by the application of Muslim couple tried to register their baby&#39;s name at the town hall.</p>

<p>The name has created a controversial row as in recent years has France has suffered from several terrorist attacks.</p>

<p>As the couple tried to register their baby&#39;s name at the town hall the authorities were immediately triggered and now a public prosecutor is challenging the parents&#39; decision in the family court over the name&#39;s link to terrorism.</p>

<p>Parents have clarified that Jihad does not mean Holy war but signifies effort, struggle, and self-denial.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The final judgment is yet to come from the family court judges but parents have to choose a new name if judges rule in favor of local authorities.</p>

<p>The French Civil Code allows parents to name their newborn anything they please unless it is against the interests of the child.</p>

<p>In 2013 Similar controversy happened when a Muslim woman also named her son Jihad in France. The child went to school wearing a t-shirt with words &#39;I am a bomb&#39; on the front and &#39;Born on September 11&#39; at the back<br />
She was later given a suspended jail sentence. &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


The authorities in Toulouse in South of France were immediately triggered by the application of Muslim couple tried to register their baby's name at the town hall.

French parents sent to the prosecutor for naming their child Jihad. The authorities in Toulouse in South of France were immediately triggered by the application of Muslim couple tried to register their baby's name at the town hall. The name has created a controversial row as in recent years has France has suffered from several terrorist attacks. As the couple tried to register their baby's name at the town hall the authorities were immediately triggered and now a public prosecutor is challenging the parents' decision in the family court over the name's link to terrorism. Parents have clarified that Jihad does not mean Holy war but signifies effort, struggle, and self-denial. The final judgment is yet to come from the family court judges but parents have to choose a new name if judges rule in favor of local authorities. The French Civil Code allows parents to name their newborn anything they please unless it is against the interests of the child. In 2013 Similar controversy happened when a Muslim woman also named her son Jihad in France. The child went to school wearing a t-shirt with words 'I am a bomb' on the front and 'Born on September 11' at the back She was later given a suspended jail sentence.

Muslim couple names infant son Jihad, dragged to court

<p>In an important step forward to initiate dialogue with the Kashmiris, the Modi government has appointed former Director of Intelligence Bureau, Dineshwar Sharma, to facilitate talks on behalf of the government with various representatives of Kashmir. Sharma comes armed with experience and insight having served previously as an interlocutor for peace talks with Assam&rsquo;s insurgent group, the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA).</p>

<p>While the appointment is promising, it is unclear if it merely represents a symbolic gesture or if New Delhi is seriously intent on engaging with the Kashmiris. While it is premature to assess Sharma&rsquo;s ability to bring contesting parties to the negotiating table, there are several reasons why the job will be a highly challenging one and is unlikely to improve relations between the central government and Kashmiris.&nbsp;</p>

<p>A question most Indian administrations are reticent to discuss (including this one) is whether New Delhi is ultimately interested in seeking a political settlement to the Kashmir conflict. This means for a negotiated settlement to work, the facilitator of peace talks will need to address the political aspirations of those who seek an independent Kashmir.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Kashmir is deeply embedded in its idea of territorial integrity and sovereignty which has not been up for debate until now and is unlikely to change even with the appointment of an interlocutor.&nbsp;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Kashmir is deeply embedded in its idea of territorial integrity and sovereignty which has not been up for debate until now and is unlikely to change even with the appointment of an interlocutor.?" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>This includes a variety of pro-secessionist groups, including the Hurriyat and the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). If Sharma comes to the negotiating table representing the primary political interests of the BJP and the Indian state, then a long-term settlement is unlikely to succeed. If, however, Sharma intends to exercise his agency independent of New Delhi and be willing to address the grievances of a variety of Kashmiri groups, he could be in a stronger position to influence change.</p>

<p>Note, this is not the first attempt to manage the conflict diplomatically. Even if efforts to influence Kashmiris yield a positive outcome internally, talks with Pakistan still remain on the agenda as the next necessary step. Several bilateral and diplomatic channels already exist between the two countries and yet the conflict remains unresolved with both states unwilling to compromise their respective territorial positions on Kashmir. For India, Kashmir is deeply embedded in its idea of territorial integrity and sovereignty which has not been up for debate until now and is unlikely to change even with the appointment of an interlocutor.</p>

<p><strong>Also Read: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/reality-bites-centre-appoints-an-interlocutor-for-kashmir-talks-22768">Reality bites: Centre appoints an interlocutor for Kashmir talks</a></strong></p>

<p>Second, the highly communal and polarised nature of the conflict will make it harder for the interlocutor to maintain a fair balance between opposing religious groups. Kashmiri Muslims are increasingly aware of the Modi government&rsquo;s Hindu nationalist and majoritarian anti-Muslim, anti-minority rhetoric and will view any attempt at negotiations suspiciously. Kashmiri Hindus, on the other hand, will seek to aggressively push their interests having been purged from the Kashmir valley at the height of the Islamist insurgency in the 1990s. How successfully will Sharma be able to navigate these two opposing movements?&nbsp;</p>

<p>Third, the appointment raises the issue of whether it signals a gradual shift in India&rsquo;s Kashmir strategy from that which has predominantly relied on military solutions to one that actively pursues diplomacy over the use of force. The current government in New Delhi has mostly been interested in maintaining the status quo and no one has articulated a clear political strategy. Sharma&rsquo;s appointment also comes at a time when al-Qaeda and IS groups have made deep inroads into Kashmir, further damaging and undermining Indian security.</p>

<p>In July 2017, Zakir Musa, local commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen militant group, was appointed the head of al-Qaeda&rsquo;s unit in Kashmir, leaving a major al-Qaeda footprint in Kashmir. As of today, in an alarming new development, IS has released a video announcing that Kashmiri fighters are ready to pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The Indian government needs a strategy to prevent local Kashmiris from becoming further radicalised by militant groups.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The Indian government needs a strategy to prevent local Kashmiris from becoming further radicalised by militant groups." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>At a time when the forces of Islamist extremism are deeply entrenched in Kashmir, the Indian government needs a strategy to prevent local Kashmiris from becoming further radicalised by militant groups. As a facilitator of dialogue, will Sharma seek to address de-radicalisation efforts and develop a series of counter-terrorism measures? Doing this, though, could introduce a contradiction in means and ends.</p>

<p>Faced with mounting threats and infiltration, it will be next to impossible for the Indian government to relinquish its military option. The next terrorist attack, the next border crisis with Pakistan, and the slightest provocation will stall or completely derail chances for dialogue. Again, external circumstances place severe limits on Sharma&rsquo;s ability to facilitate peace.</p>

<p>Much of the success of the interlocutor will depend then on how the Kashmir issue is framed. A clear strategy with well-articulated goals and objectives will be a start and we need more information on what these strategies will be. Until then, creating such appointments will serve little purpose.</p>


The success of the interlocutor depends on clear strategy with well-articulated goals and objectives on Kashmir issues

In an important step forward to initiate dialogue with the Kashmiris, the Modi government has appointed former Director of Intelligence Bureau, Dineshwar Sharma, to facilitate talks on behalf of the government with various representatives of Kashmir. Sharma comes armed with experience and insight having served previously as an interlocutor for peace talks with Assam’s insurgent group, the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA). While the appointment is promising, it is unclear if it merely represents a symbolic gesture or if New Delhi is seriously intent on engaging with the Kashmiris. While it is premature to assess Sharma’s ability to bring contesting parties to the negotiating table, there are several reasons why the job will be a highly challenging one and is unlikely to improve relations between the central government and Kashmiris. A question most Indian administrations are reticent to discuss (including this one) is whether New Delhi is ultimately interested in seeking a political settlement to the Kashmir conflict. This means for a negotiated settlement to work, the facilitator of peace talks will need to address the political aspirations of those who seek an independent Kashmir. Kashmir is deeply embedded in its idea of territorial integrity and sovereignty which has not been up for debate until now and is unlikely to change even with the appointment of an interlocutor. × This includes a variety of pro-secessionist groups, including the Hurriyat and the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). If Sharma comes to the negotiating table representing the primary political interests of the BJP and the Indian state, then a long-term settlement is unlikely to succeed. If, however, Sharma intends to exercise his agency independent of New Delhi and be willing to address the grievances of a variety of Kashmiri groups, he could be in a stronger position to influence change. Note, this is not the first attempt to manage the conflict diplomatically. Even if efforts to influence Kashmiris yield a positive outcome internally, talks with Pakistan still remain on the agenda as the next necessary step. Several bilateral and diplomatic channels already exist between the two countries and yet the conflict remains unresolved with both states unwilling to compromise their respective territorial positions on Kashmir. For India, Kashmir is deeply embedded in its idea of territorial integrity and sovereignty which has not been up for debate until now and is unlikely to change even with the appointment of an interlocutor. Also Read: Reality bites: Centre appoints an interlocutor for Kashmir talks Second, the highly communal and polarised nature of the conflict will make it harder for the interlocutor to maintain a fair balance between opposing religious groups. Kashmiri Muslims are increasingly aware of the Modi government’s Hindu nationalist and majoritarian anti-Muslim, anti-minority rhetoric and will view any attempt at negotiations suspiciously. Kashmiri Hindus, on the other hand, will seek to aggressively push their interests having been purged from the Kashmir valley at the height of the Islamist insurgency in the 1990s. How successfully will Sharma be able to navigate these two opposing movements? Third, the appointment raises the issue of whether it signals a gradual shift in India’s Kashmir strategy from that which has predominantly relied on military solutions to one that actively pursues diplomacy over the use of force. The current government in New Delhi has mostly been interested in maintaining the status quo and no one has articulated a clear political strategy. Sharma’s appointment also comes at a time when al-Qaeda and IS groups have made deep inroads into Kashmir, further damaging and undermining Indian security. In July 2017, Zakir Musa, local commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen militant group, was appointed the head of al-Qaeda’s unit in Kashmir, leaving a major al-Qaeda footprint in Kashmir. As of today, in an alarming new development, IS has released a video announcing that Kashmiri fighters are ready to pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State. The Indian government needs a strategy to prevent local Kashmiris from becoming further radicalised by militant groups. × At a time when the forces of Islamist extremism are deeply entrenched in Kashmir, the Indian government needs a strategy to prevent local Kashmiris from becoming further radicalised by militant groups. As a facilitator of dialogue, will Sharma seek to address de-radicalisation efforts and develop a series of counter-terrorism measures? Doing this, though, could introduce a contradiction in means and ends. Faced with mounting threats and infiltration, it will be next to impossible for the Indian government to relinquish its military option. The next terrorist attack, the next border crisis with Pakistan, and the slightest provocation will stall or completely derail chances for dialogue. Again, external circumstances place severe limits on Sharma’s ability to facilitate peace. Much of the success of the interlocutor will depend then on how the Kashmir issue is framed. A clear strategy with well-articulated goals and objectives will be a start and we need more information on what these strategies will be. Until then, creating such appointments will serve little purpose.

Kashmir: Will the appointment of interlocutor change anything?

<p>The head of the Islamic State group in Southeast Asia, who figures on the US &quot;most wanted terrorists&quot; list, has been killed in the battle to reclaim a militant-held Philippines city, the country&#39;s defence minister said Monday.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Isnilon Hapilon&#39;s death came during a push to end the four-month siege of Marawi, a battle that has claimed more than 1,000 lives and raised fears that IS was seeking to set up a regional base in the southern Philippines.</p>

<p>President Rodrigo Duterte and security analysts say Hapilon has been a key figure in the jihadist outfit&#39;s drive to establish a Southeast Asian caliphate as they suffer battlefield defeats in Iraq and Syria.</p>

<p>&quot;(Our troops) were able to get Isnilon Hapilon and Omar Maute. They were both killed,&quot; Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana told reporters, referring to another fighter who led the attack with Hapilon on Marawi in May.</p>

<p>The US government had offered a $5 million bounty for information leading to Hapilon&#39;s arrest, describing the 51-year-old as a senior leader of the southern Philippines-based Abu Sayyaf group, which the US considers a &quot;foreign terrorist organisation&quot;.</p>

<p>Lorenzana said Philippine ground forces mounting a final assault on the militants in Marawi killed Hapilon and Omar Khayyam Maute, one of two brothers who led a militant group allied to Hapilon, early Monday.</p>

<p>DNA tests will be carried out on the two bodies because of the reward offer from the US and Philippine governments, he added.</p>

<p>&quot;The implication of this development is that the Marawi incident is almost over and we may announce the termination of hostilities in a couple of days,&quot; Lorenzana said.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Philippine authorities have made several previous announcements on the imminent end of the conflict, but observers believe this time the forecast is likely to be accurate.</p>

<p>Pro-IS gunmen occupied parts of Marawi, the Islamic capital of the mainly Catholic Philippines, on May 23 following a failed attempt by security forces to arrest Hapilon, authorities said.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Philippine military says Hapilon joined forces with the Maute group to plan the rampage.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Since then more than 1,000 people have been killed and 400,000 residents displaced.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Duterte has imposed martial law across the southern third of the Philippines to quell the militant threat.&nbsp;<br />
<br />
<strong>&#39;Centre of gravity&#39;</strong></p>

<p>The insurgents have withstood a relentless US-backed bombing campaign and intense ground battles with troops that have left large parts of Marawi in ruins.</p>

<p>Defence chiefs last month said other Philippine militant leaders had been killed in the battle for Marawi.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Troops were still pursuing Malaysian Mahmud Ahmad in the Marawi battle zone, Lorenzana said on Monday, describing him as the &quot;conduit&quot; between IS and local militant groups.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The restive south of the mainly Catholic Philippines is home to a decades-old Muslim separatist insurgency and to extremist gangs that have declared allegiance to IS including the Abu Sayyaf and Maute groups.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Hapilon is believed to have been involved in 2001 kidnappings of three Americans, two of whom were later killed.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Hapilon was based in Basilan island in the strife-torn south but authorities said in January that he had moved to the Mautes&#39; base in Lanao del Sur province, 300 kilometres (180 miles) east, to create an alliance and to establish an IS presence there.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Marawi is Lanao del Sur&#39;s capital and largest city.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The deaths of Hapilon and Maute signal the end of the militant groups, the armed forces chief said on Monday.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;This means their centre of gravity has crumbled,&quot; General Eduardo Ano said. &nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;We just needed to get these two (leaders) to make sure the leadership, the centre of gravity falls, and elsewhere even the Maute-ISIS (fighters) in other areas would also crumble.&quot;&nbsp;</p>

<p>However, an analyst said the deaths of the leaders would likely prompt retaliatory attacks from their followers and allies, with young leaders seeking to take their place.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;Terrorism will take a new form in the post-Marawi period because these terrorist groups linked to ISIS continue to innovate and their actions are evolving,&quot; Rommel Banlaoi, chairman of the Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research, told AFP.</p>

<p>&quot;It&#39;s going to be a new battle.&quot;</p>


The head of the Islamic State group in Southeast Asia, who figures on the US "most wanted terrorists" list, has been killed in the battle to reclaim a militant-held Philippines city

The head of the Islamic State group in Southeast Asia, who figures on the US "most wanted terrorists" list, has been killed in the battle to reclaim a militant-held Philippines city, the country's defence minister said Monday. Isnilon Hapilon's death came during a push to end the four-month siege of Marawi, a battle that has claimed more than 1,000 lives and raised fears that IS was seeking to set up a regional base in the southern Philippines. President Rodrigo Duterte and security analysts say Hapilon has been a key figure in the jihadist outfit's drive to establish a Southeast Asian caliphate as they suffer battlefield defeats in Iraq and Syria. "(Our troops) were able to get Isnilon Hapilon and Omar Maute. They were both killed," Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana told reporters, referring to another fighter who led the attack with Hapilon on Marawi in May. The US government had offered a $5 million bounty for information leading to Hapilon's arrest, describing the 51-year-old as a senior leader of the southern Philippines-based Abu Sayyaf group, which the US considers a "foreign terrorist organisation". Lorenzana said Philippine ground forces mounting a final assault on the militants in Marawi killed Hapilon and Omar Khayyam Maute, one of two brothers who led a militant group allied to Hapilon, early Monday. DNA tests will be carried out on the two bodies because of the reward offer from the US and Philippine governments, he added. "The implication of this development is that the Marawi incident is almost over and we may announce the termination of hostilities in a couple of days," Lorenzana said. Philippine authorities have made several previous announcements on the imminent end of the conflict, but observers believe this time the forecast is likely to be accurate. Pro-IS gunmen occupied parts of Marawi, the Islamic capital of the mainly Catholic Philippines, on May 23 following a failed attempt by security forces to arrest Hapilon, authorities said. The Philippine military says Hapilon joined forces with the Maute group to plan the rampage. Since then more than 1,000 people have been killed and 400,000 residents displaced. Duterte has imposed martial law across the southern third of the Philippines to quell the militant threat. 'Centre of gravity' The insurgents have withstood a relentless US-backed bombing campaign and intense ground battles with troops that have left large parts of Marawi in ruins. Defence chiefs last month said other Philippine militant leaders had been killed in the battle for Marawi. Troops were still pursuing Malaysian Mahmud Ahmad in the Marawi battle zone, Lorenzana said on Monday, describing him as the "conduit" between IS and local militant groups. The restive south of the mainly Catholic Philippines is home to a decades-old Muslim separatist insurgency and to extremist gangs that have declared allegiance to IS including the Abu Sayyaf and Maute groups. Hapilon is believed to have been involved in 2001 kidnappings of three Americans, two of whom were later killed. Hapilon was based in Basilan island in the strife-torn south but authorities said in January that he had moved to the Mautes' base in Lanao del Sur province, 300 kilometres (180 miles) east, to create an alliance and to establish an IS presence there. Marawi is Lanao del Sur's capital and largest city. The deaths of Hapilon and Maute signal the end of the militant groups, the armed forces chief said on Monday. "This means their centre of gravity has crumbled," General Eduardo Ano said. "We just needed to get these two (leaders) to make sure the leadership, the centre of gravity falls, and elsewhere even the Maute-ISIS (fighters) in other areas would also crumble." However, an analyst said the deaths of the leaders would likely prompt retaliatory attacks from their followers and allies, with young leaders seeking to take their place. "Terrorism will take a new form in the post-Marawi period because these terrorist groups linked to ISIS continue to innovate and their actions are evolving," Rommel Banlaoi, chairman of the Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research, told AFP. "It's going to be a new battle."

IS Southeast Asia chief killed in the Philippines: Govt

<p>The&nbsp;recent mass shooting in Las Vegas that left dozens of people dead and hundreds injured raises two important questions: How do dangerous people get their guns? And what should the police and courts be doing to make those transactions more difficult?</p>

<p>The fact is that even leaving aside the assault in Las Vegas and terrorist attacks like the one in San Bernardino, California, in 2015, gun violence is becoming almost routine in many American neighbourhoods. The U.S. homicide rate increased more than 20 percent from 2014 to 2016, while last year&rsquo;s 3.4 percent rise in the violent crime rate was the largest single-year gain in 25 years.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The guns carried and misused by youths, gang members and active criminals are more likely than not obtained by transactions that violate federal or state law. And, as I&rsquo;ve learned from my decades of researching the topic, it is rare for the people who provide these guns to the eventual shooters to face any legal consequences.</p>

<p>How can this illicit market be policed more effectively?</p>

<p><strong>Undocumented and unregulated transactions</strong></p>

<p>The vast majority of gun owners say they obtained their weapons in transactions that are documented and for the most part legal.</p>

<p>When asked where and how they acquired their most recent firearm, about 64 percent of a cross-section of American gun owners reported&nbsp;buying it from a gun store, where the clerk would have conducted a background check and documented the transfer in a permanent record required by federal law. Another 14 percent were transferred in some other way but still involved a background check. The remaining 22 percent said they got their guns without a background check.</p>

<p>The same is not true for criminals, however, most of whom obtain their guns illegally.</p>

<p>A transaction can be illegal for several reasons, but of particular interest are transactions that involve disqualified individuals &ndash; those banned from purchase or possession due to the criminal record, age, adjudicated mental illness, illegal alien status or some other reason. Convicted felons, teenagers and other people who are legally barred from possession would ordinarily be blocked from purchasing a gun from a gun store because they would fail the background check or lack the permit or license required by some states.</p>

<p>Anyone providing the gun in such transactions would be culpable if he or she had reason to know that the buyer was disqualified, was acting as a straw purchaser or if had violated state regulations pertaining to such private transactions.</p>

<p>The importance of the informal (undocumented) market in supplying criminals is suggested by the results of inmate surveys and data gleaned from guns confiscated by the police. A national survey of inmates of state prisons found that just 10 percent of youthful (age 18-40) male respondents who admitted to having a gun at the time of their arrest had obtained it from a gun store. The other 90 percent obtained them through a variety of off-the-book means: for example, as gifts or sharing arrangements with fellow gang members.</p>

<p>Similarly, an ongoing study of how Chicago gang members get their guns has found that only a trivial percentage obtained them by direct purchase from a store. To the extent that gun dealers are implicated in supplying dangerous people, it is more so by accommodating straw purchasers and traffickers than in selling directly to customers they know to be disqualified.</p>

<p><strong>The supply chain of guns to crime</strong></p>

<p>While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of those in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer &ndash; including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.</p>

<p>That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.</p>

<p>If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.</p>

<p>The gun at that point has been diverted from legal commerce. In this respect, the supply chain for guns is similar to that for other products that have a large legal market but are subject to diversion.</p>

<p>In the case of guns, the diversion from licit possession and exchange can occur in a variety of ways: theft, purchase at a gun show by an interstate trafficker, private sales where no questions are asked, straw purchases by girlfriends and so forth.</p>

<p>What appears to be true is that there are few big operators in this domain. The typical trafficker or underground broker is not making a living that way but rather just making a few dollars on the side. The supply chain for guns used in crime bears little relationship to the supply chain for heroin or cocaine and is much more akin to that for cigarettes and beer that are diverted to underage teenagers.</p>

<p>There have been few attempts to estimate the scope or scale of the underground market, in part because it is not at all clear what types of transactions should be included. But for the sake of having some order-of-magnitude estimate, suppose we just focus on the number of transactions each year that supply the guns actually used in robbery or assault.</p>

<p>There are about 500,000 violent crimes committed with a gun each year. If the average number of times that an offender commits a robbery or assault with a particular gun is twice, then (assuming patterns of criminal gun use remain constant) the total number of transactions of concern is 250,000 per year.</p>

<p>Actually, no one knows the average number of times a specific gun is used by an offender who uses it at least once. If it is more than twice, then there are even fewer relevant transactions.</p>

<p>That compares with total sales volume by licensed dealers, which is upwards of 20 million per year.</p>

<p><strong>All in the family</strong></p>

<p>So how do gang members, violent criminals, underage youths and other dangerous people get their guns?</p>

<p>A consistent answer emerges from the inmate surveys and from ethnographic studies. Whether guns that end up being used in crime are purchased, swapped, borrowed, shared or stolen, the most likely source is someone known to the offender, an acquaintance or family member.</p>

<p>For example, Syed Rizwan Farook &ndash; one of the shooters in San Bernardino &ndash; relied on a friend to get several of the rifles and pistols he used because Farook doubted that he could pass a background check. That a friend and neighbour was the source is quite typical, despite the unique circumstances otherwise.</p>

<p>Also important are &ldquo;street&rdquo; sources, such as gang members and drug dealers, which may also entail a prior relationship. Thus, social networks play an important role in facilitating transactions, and an individual (such as a gang member) who tends to hang out with people who have guns will find it relatively easy to obtain one.</p>

<p>Effective policing of the underground gun market could help to separate guns from everyday violent crime. Currently, it is rare for those who provide guns to offenders to face any legal consequences, and changing that situation will require additional resources to penetrate the social networks of gun offenders.</p>

<p>Needless to say, that effort is not cheap or easy and requires that both the police and the courts have the necessary authority and give this sort of gun enforcement high priority.</p>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" nofollow="" rel="">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-dangerous-people-get-their-weapons-in-america-85056" nofollow="" rel="">original article</a>.</p>


Mass killing in Las Vegas raised questions on unregulated gun possession

The recent mass shooting in Las Vegas that left dozens of people dead and hundreds injured raises two important questions: How do dangerous people get their guns? And what should the police and courts be doing to make those transactions more difficult? The fact is that even leaving aside the assault in Las Vegas and terrorist attacks like the one in San Bernardino, California, in 2015, gun violence is becoming almost routine in many American neighbourhoods. The U.S. homicide rate increased more than 20 percent from 2014 to 2016, while last year’s 3.4 percent rise in the violent crime rate was the largest single-year gain in 25 years. The guns carried and misused by youths, gang members and active criminals are more likely than not obtained by transactions that violate federal or state law. And, as I’ve learned from my decades of researching the topic, it is rare for the people who provide these guns to the eventual shooters to face any legal consequences. How can this illicit market be policed more effectively? Undocumented and unregulated transactions The vast majority of gun owners say they obtained their weapons in transactions that are documented and for the most part legal. When asked where and how they acquired their most recent firearm, about 64 percent of a cross-section of American gun owners reported buying it from a gun store, where the clerk would have conducted a background check and documented the transfer in a permanent record required by federal law. Another 14 percent were transferred in some other way but still involved a background check. The remaining 22 percent said they got their guns without a background check. The same is not true for criminals, however, most of whom obtain their guns illegally. A transaction can be illegal for several reasons, but of particular interest are transactions that involve disqualified individuals – those banned from purchase or possession due to the criminal record, age, adjudicated mental illness, illegal alien status or some other reason. Convicted felons, teenagers and other people who are legally barred from possession would ordinarily be blocked from purchasing a gun from a gun store because they would fail the background check or lack the permit or license required by some states. Anyone providing the gun in such transactions would be culpable if he or she had reason to know that the buyer was disqualified, was acting as a straw purchaser or if had violated state regulations pertaining to such private transactions. The importance of the informal (undocumented) market in supplying criminals is suggested by the results of inmate surveys and data gleaned from guns confiscated by the police. A national survey of inmates of state prisons found that just 10 percent of youthful (age 18-40) male respondents who admitted to having a gun at the time of their arrest had obtained it from a gun store. The other 90 percent obtained them through a variety of off-the-book means: for example, as gifts or sharing arrangements with fellow gang members. Similarly, an ongoing study of how Chicago gang members get their guns has found that only a trivial percentage obtained them by direct purchase from a store. To the extent that gun dealers are implicated in supplying dangerous people, it is more so by accommodating straw purchasers and traffickers than in selling directly to customers they know to be disqualified. The supply chain of guns to crime While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of those in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer – including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals. That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm. If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years. The gun at that point has been diverted from legal commerce. In this respect, the supply chain for guns is similar to that for other products that have a large legal market but are subject to diversion. In the case of guns, the diversion from licit possession and exchange can occur in a variety of ways: theft, purchase at a gun show by an interstate trafficker, private sales where no questions are asked, straw purchases by girlfriends and so forth. What appears to be true is that there are few big operators in this domain. The typical trafficker or underground broker is not making a living that way but rather just making a few dollars on the side. The supply chain for guns used in crime bears little relationship to the supply chain for heroin or cocaine and is much more akin to that for cigarettes and beer that are diverted to underage teenagers. There have been few attempts to estimate the scope or scale of the underground market, in part because it is not at all clear what types of transactions should be included. But for the sake of having some order-of-magnitude estimate, suppose we just focus on the number of transactions each year that supply the guns actually used in robbery or assault. There are about 500,000 violent crimes committed with a gun each year. If the average number of times that an offender commits a robbery or assault with a particular gun is twice, then (assuming patterns of criminal gun use remain constant) the total number of transactions of concern is 250,000 per year. Actually, no one knows the average number of times a specific gun is used by an offender who uses it at least once. If it is more than twice, then there are even fewer relevant transactions. That compares with total sales volume by licensed dealers, which is upwards of 20 million per year. All in the family So how do gang members, violent criminals, underage youths and other dangerous people get their guns? A consistent answer emerges from the inmate surveys and from ethnographic studies. Whether guns that end up being used in crime are purchased, swapped, borrowed, shared or stolen, the most likely source is someone known to the offender, an acquaintance or family member. For example, Syed Rizwan Farook – one of the shooters in San Bernardino – relied on a friend to get several of the rifles and pistols he used because Farook doubted that he could pass a background check. That a friend and neighbour was the source is quite typical, despite the unique circumstances otherwise. Also important are “street” sources, such as gang members and drug dealers, which may also entail a prior relationship. Thus, social networks play an important role in facilitating transactions, and an individual (such as a gang member) who tends to hang out with people who have guns will find it relatively easy to obtain one. Effective policing of the underground gun market could help to separate guns from everyday violent crime. Currently, it is rare for those who provide guns to offenders to face any legal consequences, and changing that situation will require additional resources to penetrate the social networks of gun offenders. Needless to say, that effort is not cheap or easy and requires that both the police and the courts have the necessary authority and give this sort of gun enforcement high priority. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

How dangerous people get their weapons in America

<p>For members of Europe&#39;s biggest Rohingya community in Bradford, Northern England, the news from Myanmar brings a mix of anger, fear and haunting memories of dramatic escapes from their homeland.</p>

<p>Some 300 members of the Muslim minority have settled in Bradford in recent years under a refugee programme and they are desperate to draw international attention to the plight of their brethren.</p>

<p>&quot;If I grew up in Myanmar&nbsp;I would be dead today,&quot; said Omme Kulsum Harun, a 17-year-old wrapped in a traditional long white and yellow robe with a thick grey veil covering most of her head of black hair.</p>

<p>Kulsum said she would like to study nursing in order to help fellow Rohingya, hundreds of thousands of whom have fled into Bangladesh in recent weeks following a crackdown by Myanmar&#39;s military.</p>

<p>Harun&#39;s mother Samuda saw her own aunt raped by a soldier when she was a little girl and was told by villagers that her sister suffered the same fate while the family were trying to flee Myanmar.</p>

<p>&quot;Today, I don&#39;t even know if my sister is alive,&quot; the mother of seven told AFP, holding back tears.</p>

<p>&quot;It makes me so sad and angry when I watch the news and see the situation in Myanmar,&quot; she said.</p>

<p>The contrast could not be bigger with her new life.</p>

<p>Harun shows off a picture of her son Ismail Mohamed, a student at Bradford University.</p>

<p>A former wool-making hub, Bradford is one of Britain&#39;s most diverse cities and around a quarter of the population is Muslim, according to the latest census figures.</p>

<p><strong>We won&#39;t give up</strong></p>

<p>In a city where Victorian-era terraced houses stand side by side with mosques and abandoned industrial plants, Nijam Uddin Mohammed said he has found freedom.</p>

<p>The 36-year-old arrived in 2008 after spending more than 18 years in a refugee camp in Bangladesh.</p>

<p>&quot;My life started in Bradford. In the refugee camps back in Bangladesh we couldn&#39;t do what we wanted.&quot;</p>

<p>&quot;If we wanted to go for a walk or see some friends in another camp we had to seek permission. It was like a mini-prison. It was not a life.&quot; he said.</p>

<p>During the day, the father of two young children works as an interpreter for the state-run National Health Service and at night he drives a minicab.</p>

<p>He also heads up the Rohingya association of Bradford, which holds meetings at the homes of local Rohingya families every Monday.</p>

<p>At these meetings, the Rohingyas share news about their loved ones and discuss how to put pressure on the British government to become more active.</p>

<p>They have started petitions, held public meetings and sent letters to politicians including Prime Minister Theresa May.</p>

<p>&quot;The (Myanmar) army wants to shut us down but here in Bradford we are free and we are not afraid,&quot; Mohammed said.</p>

<p>&quot;Even if they have never known their homeland, our kids will always raise their voices. We won&#39;t give up.&quot;</p>

<p><strong>Suu Kyi &#39;betrayed us&#39;</strong></p>

<p>Their anger has been stoked further by speeches from the head of Myanmar&#39;s civilian administration, Aung San Suu Kyi, who has refused to condemn the military.</p>

<p>&quot;She betrayed us. We had great expectations but instead of helping us she remained silent.&quot;</p>

<p>&quot;She&#39;s doing politics with our lives,&quot; Mohammed said.</p>

<p>Referring to Suu Kyi&#39;s comments about reports of Rohingya suffering as &quot;fake news&quot;, Harun said: &quot;Is it fake news that my sister was raped by the military?&quot;</p>

<p>Mohammed said he welcomed Britain&#39;s decision to suspend military assistance to Myanmar&#39;s army.</p>

<p>But the deputy head of the association, Nur Huda, said it was up to Muslim countries to take the lead and follow the example of Turkey, where President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has condemned &quot;Buddhist terrorism&quot;.</p>

<p>But Mohammed said: &quot;It is not a Muslim issue. We are all human beings who share the same blood and want to live.&quot;</p>


Some 300 members of the Muslim minority have settled in Bradford in recent years under a refugee programme and they are desperate to draw international attention to the plight of their brethren

For members of Europe's biggest Rohingya community in Bradford, Northern England, the news from Myanmar brings a mix of anger, fear and haunting memories of dramatic escapes from their homeland. Some 300 members of the Muslim minority have settled in Bradford in recent years under a refugee programme and they are desperate to draw international attention to the plight of their brethren. "If I grew up in Myanmar I would be dead today," said Omme Kulsum Harun, a 17-year-old wrapped in a traditional long white and yellow robe with a thick grey veil covering most of her head of black hair. Kulsum said she would like to study nursing in order to help fellow Rohingya, hundreds of thousands of whom have fled into Bangladesh in recent weeks following a crackdown by Myanmar's military. Harun's mother Samuda saw her own aunt raped by a soldier when she was a little girl and was told by villagers that her sister suffered the same fate while the family were trying to flee Myanmar. "Today, I don't even know if my sister is alive," the mother of seven told AFP, holding back tears. "It makes me so sad and angry when I watch the news and see the situation in Myanmar," she said. The contrast could not be bigger with her new life. Harun shows off a picture of her son Ismail Mohamed, a student at Bradford University. A former wool-making hub, Bradford is one of Britain's most diverse cities and around a quarter of the population is Muslim, according to the latest census figures. We won't give up In a city where Victorian-era terraced houses stand side by side with mosques and abandoned industrial plants, Nijam Uddin Mohammed said he has found freedom. The 36-year-old arrived in 2008 after spending more than 18 years in a refugee camp in Bangladesh. "My life started in Bradford. In the refugee camps back in Bangladesh we couldn't do what we wanted." "If we wanted to go for a walk or see some friends in another camp we had to seek permission. It was like a mini-prison. It was not a life." he said. During the day, the father of two young children works as an interpreter for the state-run National Health Service and at night he drives a minicab. He also heads up the Rohingya association of Bradford, which holds meetings at the homes of local Rohingya families every Monday. At these meetings, the Rohingyas share news about their loved ones and discuss how to put pressure on the British government to become more active. They have started petitions, held public meetings and sent letters to politicians including Prime Minister Theresa May. "The (Myanmar) army wants to shut us down but here in Bradford we are free and we are not afraid," Mohammed said. "Even if they have never known their homeland, our kids will always raise their voices. We won't give up." Suu Kyi 'betrayed us' Their anger has been stoked further by speeches from the head of Myanmar's civilian administration, Aung San Suu Kyi, who has refused to condemn the military. "She betrayed us. We had great expectations but instead of helping us she remained silent." "She's doing politics with our lives," Mohammed said. Referring to Suu Kyi's comments about reports of Rohingya suffering as "fake news", Harun said: "Is it fake news that my sister was raped by the military?" Mohammed said he welcomed Britain's decision to suspend military assistance to Myanmar's army. But the deputy head of the association, Nur Huda, said it was up to Muslim countries to take the lead and follow the example of Turkey, where President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has condemned "Buddhist terrorism". But Mohammed said: "It is not a Muslim issue. We are all human beings who share the same blood and want to live."

'I would be dead': Britain's Rohingyas speak out

<p>Venezuela accused the United States on Monday of &quot;psychological terrorism&quot; designed to bring down the government after it was included in a list of eight countries targeted by a travel ban.</p>

<p>&quot;As if it mattered to us to have a visa for the United States. I only go to the United States if I have to go to the UN, to the OAS,&quot; President Nicolas Maduro said, referring to the Organization of American States.</p>

<p>Speaking at a meeting with governors broadcast by state television VTV, Maduro said US President Donald Trump has &quot;isolated the United States&quot; with his speech at the United Nations General Assembly last week, in which he called the Venezuelan leader a &quot;dictator.&quot;</p>

<p>He was speaking a day after Venezuela was added to a new list of countries targeted by the US ban, due to what it called poor security and a lack of cooperation with American authorities.</p>

<p>The restrictions on Venezuela were limited to officials from a list of government agencies and their families, while full travel bans were placed on nationals from the other seven countries, including Chad and North Korea.</p>

<p>Earlier, Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza described Trump as acting like &quot;the world&#39;s emperor.&quot;</p>

<p>Amid an escalating war of words, Arreaza told the UN General Assembly that Venezuela would seek dialogue with Washington to &quot;stop the madness and irrationality.&quot;</p>

<p>Last week, he accused Trump of being &quot;racist and supremacist&quot; after the US leader told the annual UN gathering that the US was ready to act to restore Venezuela&#39;s democracy.</p>

<p>&quot;As a free people, we are ready to defend our sovereignty, our independence and our democracy in any scenario and in any way,&quot; Arreaza said.</p>

<p>In a short statement to reporters following his speech, he added: &quot;I insist, if they attack us on the ground, we will respond forcefully in the defense of our country and of our people.&quot;</p>

<p>His foreign ministry said that &quot;these types of lists... are incompatible with international law and constitute in themselves a form of psychological and political terrorism.&quot;</p>

<p>Most of the nations affected by the US ban were part of a measure targeting Muslim countries that Trump authorized shortly after taking office.</p>

<p>Maduro&#39;s socialist government said Washington was using the fight against terrorism for its own political ends.</p>

<p>The foreign ministry statement said the ban was seeking to &quot;stigmatize&quot; Venezuela &quot;under the pretext of combating terrorism, by including it in a unilaterally drawn-up list and accusing other states of being alleged promoters of this terrible scourge.&quot;</p>

<p>It rejected &quot;the irrational decision of the United States government to once again catalog the noble Venezuelan people as a threat to their national security.&quot;</p>

<p>Venezuela has been rocked by months of economic chaos and deadly protests as Maduro tries to consolidate control, including through a new Constituent Assembly that has wrested power from the opposition-dominated legislature.</p>

<p>OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro called for additional sanctions against the Maduro government, denouncing what he called the &quot;consolidation of the dictatorial regime in Venezuela.&quot;</p>

<p>His organization&#39;s fourth report on the Venezuelan political crisis says that democracy was &quot;completely eliminated&quot; when the &quot;illegitimate&quot; Constituent Assembly was established on July 30.</p>


Most of the nations affected by the US ban were part of a measure targeting Muslim countries that Trump authorized shortly after taking office

Venezuela accused the United States on Monday of "psychological terrorism" designed to bring down the government after it was included in a list of eight countries targeted by a travel ban. "As if it mattered to us to have a visa for the United States. I only go to the United States if I have to go to the UN, to the OAS," President Nicolas Maduro said, referring to the Organization of American States. Speaking at a meeting with governors broadcast by state television VTV, Maduro said US President Donald Trump has "isolated the United States" with his speech at the United Nations General Assembly last week, in which he called the Venezuelan leader a "dictator." He was speaking a day after Venezuela was added to a new list of countries targeted by the US ban, due to what it called poor security and a lack of cooperation with American authorities. The restrictions on Venezuela were limited to officials from a list of government agencies and their families, while full travel bans were placed on nationals from the other seven countries, including Chad and North Korea. Earlier, Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza described Trump as acting like "the world's emperor." Amid an escalating war of words, Arreaza told the UN General Assembly that Venezuela would seek dialogue with Washington to "stop the madness and irrationality." Last week, he accused Trump of being "racist and supremacist" after the US leader told the annual UN gathering that the US was ready to act to restore Venezuela's democracy. "As a free people, we are ready to defend our sovereignty, our independence and our democracy in any scenario and in any way," Arreaza said. In a short statement to reporters following his speech, he added: "I insist, if they attack us on the ground, we will respond forcefully in the defense of our country and of our people." His foreign ministry said that "these types of lists... are incompatible with international law and constitute in themselves a form of psychological and political terrorism." Most of the nations affected by the US ban were part of a measure targeting Muslim countries that Trump authorized shortly after taking office. Maduro's socialist government said Washington was using the fight against terrorism for its own political ends. The foreign ministry statement said the ban was seeking to "stigmatize" Venezuela "under the pretext of combating terrorism, by including it in a unilaterally drawn-up list and accusing other states of being alleged promoters of this terrible scourge." It rejected "the irrational decision of the United States government to once again catalog the noble Venezuelan people as a threat to their national security." Venezuela has been rocked by months of economic chaos and deadly protests as Maduro tries to consolidate control, including through a new Constituent Assembly that has wrested power from the opposition-dominated legislature. OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro called for additional sanctions against the Maduro government, denouncing what he called the "consolidation of the dictatorial regime in Venezuela." His organization's fourth report on the Venezuelan political crisis says that democracy was "completely eliminated" when the "illegitimate" Constituent Assembly was established on July 30.

New US travel ban 'psychological terrorism': Venezuela

<p>Syed Akbaruddin, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/india-afghanistan-raise-terrorist-safe-havens-at-un-security-council-meet-20653">India&#39;s Permanent Representative to the UN, has raised the issue of terrorism in the UN Security Council in Afghanistan</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He appealed to the UN Security Council to ensure that the forces of terrorism and extremism do not proliferate.</p>

<p>Stating that the first and the foremost duty of the international community is to make sure that terrorism does not expand, he said the world should not differentiate between good or bad terrorism.</p>

<p>Citing Taliban, Haqqani Network, Al-Qaeda, Daesh, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, he said that these terror organisations are also prohibited by law.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said &quot;The international community cannot remain silent. It is the international community&#39;s first and foremost duty to ensure that the forces of terrorism and extremism do not find sanctuaries and safe havens anywhere and at any level,&quot; he said in an apparent dig at Pakistan.&quot;</p>

<p>The council majorly took into account the worsening situation in Afghanistan and called the continuous attack on Afghanistan as a matter of serious concern.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;The multiple crises that have been inflicted on Afghanistan have made Afghan territory attractive for criminal and terrorist groups, who are well connected to international terror and crime networks.&quot;These groups are stealing the resources of Afghanistan which ought to belong to the people of the country,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>Afghan Foreign Minister Salahuddin Rabbani also joined Akbaruddin in highlighting upon the terrorist safe havens across the border.</p>

<p>He said that the present situation in Afghanistan is the result of the long-standing policy of the neighbouring state which aims to keep the country unstable.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Scourge of terrorism affecting Afghanistan is product of long-standing policy by a neighboring State to keep Afghanistan unstable:S Rabbani</p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/912502153746432000">September 26, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>He also added that the terrorism perpetrated by the neighbouring countries have devastated Afghanistan for years now&nbsp;hoping that the new strategy of the United States for South Asia has generated new hope among people in the country.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Joanne Adamson, who was representing the European Union, stressed the importance of strong commitment by the international community in accompanying Afganistan&#39;s fight for long-term peace, security, and stability.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


Afghan Foreign Minister Salahuddin Rabbani also joined Akbaruddin in United Nations Security Council for highlighting the terrorist safe havens across the border

Syed Akbaruddin, India's Permanent Representative to the UN, has raised the issue of terrorism in the UN Security Council in Afghanistan. He appealed to the UN Security Council to ensure that the forces of terrorism and extremism do not proliferate. Stating that the first and the foremost duty of the international community is to make sure that terrorism does not expand, he said the world should not differentiate between good or bad terrorism. Citing Taliban, Haqqani Network, Al-Qaeda, Daesh, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, he said that these terror organisations are also prohibited by law. He said "The international community cannot remain silent. It is the international community's first and foremost duty to ensure that the forces of terrorism and extremism do not find sanctuaries and safe havens anywhere and at any level," he said in an apparent dig at Pakistan." The council majorly took into account the worsening situation in Afghanistan and called the continuous attack on Afghanistan as a matter of serious concern. "The multiple crises that have been inflicted on Afghanistan have made Afghan territory attractive for criminal and terrorist groups, who are well connected to international terror and crime networks."These groups are stealing the resources of Afghanistan which ought to belong to the people of the country," he said. Afghan Foreign Minister Salahuddin Rabbani also joined Akbaruddin in highlighting upon the terrorist safe havens across the border. He said that the present situation in Afghanistan is the result of the long-standing policy of the neighbouring state which aims to keep the country unstable. Scourge of terrorism affecting Afghanistan is product of long-standing policy by a neighboring State to keep Afghanistan unstable:S Rabbani — ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2017 × He also added that the terrorism perpetrated by the neighbouring countries have devastated Afghanistan for years now hoping that the new strategy of the United States for South Asia has generated new hope among people in the country. Joanne Adamson, who was representing the European Union, stressed the importance of strong commitment by the international community in accompanying Afganistan's fight for long-term peace, security, and stability.

Afghanistan hopes for countering terrorism through the new US strategy for South Asia

<p>Political activists and human rights defenders have blamed Pakistan for crushing voices of dissent and harbouring terrorists.</p>

<p>At a side-event titled &quot;Freedom of Expression&quot; at the 36th session of Human Rights Council in Geneva, the activists from Pakistan occupied Kashmir, Sindh, Pakhtunistan criticised Islamabad for its anti-people policies.Sardar Shaukat Ali Kashmir, Chairman of United Kashmir People`s National Party (UKPNP), said that Pakistan has suppressed every voice, which is concerning to the human rights.</p>

<p>&quot;Terror infrastructure is still intact and they are recruiting people and communities like Shia, who are being marginalised. In Pakistan, the terrorists enjoy every freedom of abusing and intimidating anyone. They are free and protected, whereas the civil society is suppressed,&quot; he said.The persecution of religious minorities, including Christians and Hindus in Pakistan, was also highlighted during the conference.</p>

<p>&quot;The basic issue that we are facing is the blasphemy law. It seems that every time some kind of conflict arises, even on the personal basis it is always ending up with blasphemy. As the whole world knows about Asia Bibi, recently a 17-year-old boy was dragged and beaten to death by his Muslim classmates,&quot; said Nighat John Urpani, Sec. General of Pakistan Minorities Alliance (PMA).</p>

<p>She added that this is the result of fundamentalist and terror outfits in Pakistan.&quot;As I said the militant groups are very free their, they are operating on social media, they are recruiting people and it seems there is no one who can stop them,&quot; she said.&nbsp;</p>


Political activists and human rights defenders have blamed Pakistan for crushing voices of dissent and harbouring terrorists

Political activists and human rights defenders have blamed Pakistan for crushing voices of dissent and harbouring terrorists. At a side-event titled "Freedom of Expression" at the 36th session of Human Rights Council in Geneva, the activists from Pakistan occupied Kashmir, Sindh, Pakhtunistan criticised Islamabad for its anti-people policies.Sardar Shaukat Ali Kashmir, Chairman of United Kashmir People`s National Party (UKPNP), said that Pakistan has suppressed every voice, which is concerning to the human rights. "Terror infrastructure is still intact and they are recruiting people and communities like Shia, who are being marginalised. In Pakistan, the terrorists enjoy every freedom of abusing and intimidating anyone. They are free and protected, whereas the civil society is suppressed," he said.The persecution of religious minorities, including Christians and Hindus in Pakistan, was also highlighted during the conference. "The basic issue that we are facing is the blasphemy law. It seems that every time some kind of conflict arises, even on the personal basis it is always ending up with blasphemy. As the whole world knows about Asia Bibi, recently a 17-year-old boy was dragged and beaten to death by his Muslim classmates," said Nighat John Urpani, Sec. General of Pakistan Minorities Alliance (PMA). She added that this is the result of fundamentalist and terror outfits in Pakistan."As I said the militant groups are very free their, they are operating on social media, they are recruiting people and it seems there is no one who can stop them," she said.

Activists from PoK, Sindh blame Pakistan for harbouring terrorists, targeting minorities

<p>Apparently, it&rsquo;s quite unnatural for Bangladesh and India not to be close allies, especially with India&#39;s involvement in Bangladesh&#39;s War of Independence of 1971. And then, of course, there are the unique cultural similarities and geographical realities with regards to common Ganges-Bramhaputra plain that runs through both the countries. Despite the overt Hasina-Modi bonhomie, the political reality is, however, very different. Bangladesh&#39;s relations with India can best be described as a loose friendship with hidden mutual mistrust and suspicion.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The lack of trust between the two countries&nbsp;comes forth more in the context of Bangladesh-Myanmar tussle on persecution and expulsion of &nbsp;Rohingyas from Arakan.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The tensed Bangladesh &ndash;India relationship stems from a variety of issues, such as &lsquo;equitable sharing of all common river water, terrorist camps and migration.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The tensed Bangladesh ?India relationship stems from a variety of issues, such as ?equitable sharing of all common river water, terrorist camps and migration." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>The prime deficiency of India&rsquo;s South Asia policy has been its obsession with Pakistan. Only recently a separate desk has been introduced for Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal in the Ministry of External Affairs at the South Block of Raisina Hills in New Delhi. Pakistan became important for its nuisance value while India failed to see the constructive value of the rest, especially Bangladesh which is already the 31st largest economy in the world with more than 6 per cent average economic growth in the last couple of decades. Courtesy the economic growth, the western world has come to view Bangladesh as one of the &lsquo;Next Eleven&rsquo;. Bangladesh has come to develop relations with the west, Japan, Middle-East and China and derived great economic benefits out of those relations.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The tensed Bangladesh &ndash;India relationship stems from a variety of issues, such as &lsquo;equitable sharing of all common river water, terrorist camps and migration. Since 1996 gradual progress has been achieved by Bangladesh and India to address some of these issues. Bangladesh has destroyed the dens the Indian rebels made along Bangladesh -<br />
India borders and proactively searched and sealed all channels of logistics and arms supply to these rebels. Bangladeshi intelligence agencies are also blocking ISI or its proxies&rsquo; probable operations against India from Bangladeshi soil. &nbsp;</p>

<p>Geo-politically, in South Asia and beyond, there are several areas where an alliance between the India and Bangladesh could have brought good mutual dividend and uphold some great IR principles. One such area is Pakistan&rsquo;s export of terrorism and Islamic radicalism. Both India and Bangladesh are affected by that. &nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>Myanmar on the other hand hardly has any principled position. It is buying good numbers of multi-role fighter aircraft&nbsp;from Pakistan, the regional hub of Islamic terrorism, giving a boost to Pakistani military industry and technology. These are made through the collaboration between Pakistan and China, Myanmar&rsquo;s closest ally and India&rsquo;s geo-strategic nemesis. In this context, it&rsquo;s difficult to make sense as to why&nbsp;India is siding with Myanmar in its dissension with Bangladesh on an acute humanitarian crisis like Rohingya.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>It&rsquo;s difficult to make sense as to why&nbsp;India is siding with Myanmar in its dissension with Bangladesh on an acute humanitarian crisis like Rohingya.&nbsp;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=It?s difficult to make sense as to why?India is siding with Myanmar in its dissension with Bangladesh on an acute humanitarian crisis like Rohingya.?" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Apart from the principle and propriety angle, India hardly gains anything from Myanmar. India can&rsquo;t match the kind of investment China made in Myanmar.&nbsp;</p>

<p>A further irony is, lacs of &nbsp;Indians were expelled from Myanmar like the Rohingyas in the fifties and sixties. The remaining ones and later migrant Indian in Myanmar are still abused in that country with racial slur &#39;Kala&rsquo;. The Myanmar Indians falls in the same absurd 1982 citizenship law as Rohingyas. Myanmar is always likely to be on China&#39;s side despite India&rsquo;s disgraceful pampering.&nbsp;</p>

<p>On the other hand, India has much to lose not by standing by Bangladesh&rsquo;s side at the time of its need both in comparative and absolute terms. &nbsp;Bangladesh might again lean more towards the Islamic bondage rather than the subcontinental one. If Islamic solidarity is revived on this issue, India&rsquo;s massive stake in the Middle East might even be harmed for its direct or indirect support in Rohingya genocide and expulsion.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It seems&nbsp;some of PM Modi&rsquo;s strategic advisors have gone bonkers with anti-Muslim preoccupation and very weak Rohingya terrorism stories. Because of them, soon India might find herself on the wrong side of geopolitics and history. Bangladesh did a balancing act between concerns of India and interest of China by postponing China&rsquo;s proposal for a Sri Lanka and Pakistan like the development of a deep sea port in Sonadia of Chittagong. Now, it&rsquo;s a payback time for India and an opportunity for it to befriend Bangladesh for the long term by strongly being by the latter&rsquo;s side in this crisis.&nbsp;</p>

<p>If India is strongly by the side of Bangladesh now, much of the remaining &nbsp;Indo-Bangla mistrust in the relationship will be gone, and Bangladeshi people, as well as the political forces, will appreciate the value of India&rsquo;s friendship immensely. It will bring a defining shift in Bangladesh-India relation for a very long term. &nbsp;The question is whether PM Modi is ready for an in-depth strategic re-assessment and would his policy strategists allow him to do that?</p>


India?s massive stake in the Middle East and South Asia might be harmed for its direct or indirect support in Rohingya genocide and expulsion.

Apparently, it’s quite unnatural for Bangladesh and India not to be close allies, especially with India's involvement in Bangladesh's War of Independence of 1971. And then, of course, there are the unique cultural similarities and geographical realities with regards to common Ganges-Bramhaputra plain that runs through both the countries. Despite the overt Hasina-Modi bonhomie, the political reality is, however, very different. Bangladesh's relations with India can best be described as a loose friendship with hidden mutual mistrust and suspicion. The lack of trust between the two countries comes forth more in the context of Bangladesh-Myanmar tussle on persecution and expulsion of Rohingyas from Arakan. The tensed Bangladesh –India relationship stems from a variety of issues, such as ‘equitable sharing of all common river water, terrorist camps and migration. × The prime deficiency of India’s South Asia policy has been its obsession with Pakistan. Only recently a separate desk has been introduced for Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal in the Ministry of External Affairs at the South Block of Raisina Hills in New Delhi. Pakistan became important for its nuisance value while India failed to see the constructive value of the rest, especially Bangladesh which is already the 31st largest economy in the world with more than 6 per cent average economic growth in the last couple of decades. Courtesy the economic growth, the western world has come to view Bangladesh as one of the ‘Next Eleven’. Bangladesh has come to develop relations with the west, Japan, Middle-East and China and derived great economic benefits out of those relations. The tensed Bangladesh –India relationship stems from a variety of issues, such as ‘equitable sharing of all common river water, terrorist camps and migration. Since 1996 gradual progress has been achieved by Bangladesh and India to address some of these issues. Bangladesh has destroyed the dens the Indian rebels made along Bangladesh - India borders and proactively searched and sealed all channels of logistics and arms supply to these rebels. Bangladeshi intelligence agencies are also blocking ISI or its proxies’ probable operations against India from Bangladeshi soil. Geo-politically, in South Asia and beyond, there are several areas where an alliance between the India and Bangladesh could have brought good mutual dividend and uphold some great IR principles. One such area is Pakistan’s export of terrorism and Islamic radicalism. Both India and Bangladesh are affected by that. Myanmar on the other hand hardly has any principled position. It is buying good numbers of multi-role fighter aircraft from Pakistan, the regional hub of Islamic terrorism, giving a boost to Pakistani military industry and technology. These are made through the collaboration between Pakistan and China, Myanmar’s closest ally and India’s geo-strategic nemesis. In this context, it’s difficult to make sense as to why India is siding with Myanmar in its dissension with Bangladesh on an acute humanitarian crisis like Rohingya. It’s difficult to make sense as to why India is siding with Myanmar in its dissension with Bangladesh on an acute humanitarian crisis like Rohingya. × Apart from the principle and propriety angle, India hardly gains anything from Myanmar. India can’t match the kind of investment China made in Myanmar. A further irony is, lacs of Indians were expelled from Myanmar like the Rohingyas in the fifties and sixties. The remaining ones and later migrant Indian in Myanmar are still abused in that country with racial slur 'Kala’. The Myanmar Indians falls in the same absurd 1982 citizenship law as Rohingyas. Myanmar is always likely to be on China's side despite India’s disgraceful pampering. On the other hand, India has much to lose not by standing by Bangladesh’s side at the time of its need both in comparative and absolute terms. Bangladesh might again lean more towards the Islamic bondage rather than the subcontinental one. If Islamic solidarity is revived on this issue, India’s massive stake in the Middle East might even be harmed for its direct or indirect support in Rohingya genocide and expulsion. It seems some of PM Modi’s strategic advisors have gone bonkers with anti-Muslim preoccupation and very weak Rohingya terrorism stories. Because of them, soon India might find herself on the wrong side of geopolitics and history. Bangladesh did a balancing act between concerns of India and interest of China by postponing China’s proposal for a Sri Lanka and Pakistan like the development of a deep sea port in Sonadia of Chittagong. Now, it’s a payback time for India and an opportunity for it to befriend Bangladesh for the long term by strongly being by the latter’s side in this crisis. If India is strongly by the side of Bangladesh now, much of the remaining Indo-Bangla mistrust in the relationship will be gone, and Bangladeshi people, as well as the political forces, will appreciate the value of India’s friendship immensely. It will bring a defining shift in Bangladesh-India relation for a very long term. The question is whether PM Modi is ready for an in-depth strategic re-assessment and would his policy strategists allow him to do that?

Rohingya: Why India should side with Bangladesh and not Myanmar

<p>The Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi&#39;s visit to Israel is historic in many ways. The fact that PM Modi is the first Indian &nbsp;prime minister to visit Israel in the last 70 years, foreign policy experts interpret this as a signal that both the national governments are willing to write a new chapter by overriding any &lsquo;historical baggage&rsquo;. Evidently, the dynamics of the bilateral relationship will be premised on&nbsp;further deepening the existing ties in matters related to defence, agriculture, trade, diplomacy and water management. At outset, it was made clear&nbsp;by Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel that Indian talents and Israel technologies should write the future of growth. India not only needs Israel technologies for its&nbsp;&quot;Make in India&quot; campaign but also to promote&nbsp;Digital India and reinventing Agri(culture-digital) India.</p>

<p>Israel&#39;s&nbsp;technological prowess is&nbsp;so crucial to India because both countries have geopolitical and domestic imperatives, a <a href="https://thewire.in/88698/emergence-reluctant-digital-power/">reluctant digital power</a> (India) needs a strong support from a <a href="http://www.barlaw.co.il/blog/from-a-start-up-nation-to-a-cyber-security-nation-the-evolution-of-israel-as-a-security-leader/">cyber power</a> (Israel) to edge out any cyber geopolitics in South Asia. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>India not only needs Israel technologies in Make in India but also in Digital India and reinventing Agri(culture-digital) India.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=India not only needs Israel technologies in Make in India but also in Digital India and reinventing Agri(culture-digital) India." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p><strong>Cyber Camaraderie</strong>&nbsp;</p>

<p>While addressing the Cyber Week 2017, the seventh edition of an annual cybersecurity conference held at Tel Aviv University in Israel on&nbsp;June, PM Benjamin Netanyahu said that cyber security is one of the key areas of cooperation to be discussed with PM Narendra Modi.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Indo-Israel cyber camaraderie is need of the hour, particularly because Israel has world&rsquo;s largest cyber security industry after the US.&nbsp;Many Israeli companies having a growing&nbsp;role in cyber defence technology, research and development, encryption and data protection. After China, India has the world&rsquo;s largest number of Internet users, but the digital ecosystem available to Indian users is prone to attack, and that makes Digital India initiative vulnerable.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Israel has world&rsquo;s largest cyber security industry and many Israeli companies having a protuberant role in cyber defence technology, research and development, encryption and data protection.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Israel has world?s largest cyber security industry and many Israeli companies having a protuberant role in cyber defence technology, research and development, encryption and data protection." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p><strong>Bishop to Bishop 1</strong>- India has ranked <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/india-ranks-4th-in-online-security-breaches/articleshow/58408905.cms">4th</a> in cyber security breaches and <a href="http://www.dnaindia.com/money/interview-india-ranked-fifth-in-ransomware-attacks-in-2016-pankit-desai-2438345">5th</a> in ransomware attacks. Statistically speaking,&nbsp;the costs of cyber threats are spurring up very quickly. For instance, the insane cyber attack on <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/05/insane-81m-bangladesh-bank-heist-heres-know/">Bangladesh Bank</a> costs $ 81 million and&nbsp;in 2014, the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sony-cybersecurity-costs-idUSKBN0JN2L020141209">cyber attack on Sony</a> studio was $100 million.&nbsp;More recently, the outbreak of WannaCry ransomware attack cost the world&nbsp;$4 billion. Cyber frauds carried out&nbsp;in India was worth <a href="http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/cyber-frauds-cost-india-4-billion/article5261594.ece">$4 billion in 2013</a>&nbsp;alone, and there is nothing to root it out yet.</p>

<p>An estimation shows that cybercrime <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/07/cybercrime-costs-the-global-economy-450-billion-ceo.html">costs</a> the global economy $450 billion in 2016. Another estimation by the Microsoft underlines that economic loss of cyber crime would reach $3 trillion by 2020, which is just a tip of the larger iceberg. In foreseeable future, it might hold a significant risk to businesses, governments and societies. How should India and Israel address this issue?&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>As per a report, the Israel Defense Forces has 8200, elite cyber offensive and defensive army to address potential cyber threats.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=As per a report, the Israel Defense Forces has 8200, elite cyber offensive and defensive army to address potential cyber threats." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p><strong>Bishop to Bishop 2</strong> -So far, Israel has been able to subdue&nbsp;its external threats by expanding it&rsquo;s both territorial and cyber capabilities. As per a report, the Israel Defense Forces has 8200 members strong elite cyber offensive and defensive army to address potential cyber threats. On the contrary, due to thin interests in building cyber offensive and defensive mechanisms, India has become a target of cyber attacks mostly generated from <a href="http://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/news/cyber-attacks-on-india-mostly-from-china-pakistan-prasad-725195">China and Pakistan</a>. How Israel could help India in making so?</p>

<p><strong>Bishop to Bishop 3</strong> &ndash; India needs to move out from the present reluctant position to become a truly digital power. Both India and Israel need to expand their cyber diplomacy and digital economy with likeminded countries to address cyber issues in global level.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Lack of cyber attack attribution is a key factor to the hasty rise of cyber threats and both nations need&nbsp;to consider this while addressing the cyber security issues in a bigger picture.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Indo-Israel cyber agreements would promulgate upon win-win theory and it can always be substantiated by the existing sheer trust and strong commitments.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Indo-Israel cyber agreements would promulgate upon win-win theory and it can always be substantiated by the existing sheer trust and strong commitments." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>To counter China and Pakistan both online and offline, PM Modi and his Israeli counterpart should underline strong commitment during this trip. Major areas to look into are: border surveillance preferably by UAVs to avoid human fatalities and cooperation in developing India&#39;s cyber army to protect India&rsquo;s internet ecosystem from external penetrations. There is also a need for bilateral commitments to counter cyber terrorism globally.&nbsp;</p>

<p>In the post demonetisation period, India has eased towards building a&nbsp;digital economy but to become a sustainable cyber player, it needs to bring in an infrastructure ecosystem, capacity building, digital funding, and technology transfer to substantiate domestic projects. Indo-Israel cyber agreements will be&nbsp;promulgated upon a win-win theory, and it can always be substantiated by the existing &nbsp;trust and strong commitments.</p>


To counter China and Pakistan both online and offline, Prime Ministers Modi and Netanyahu should underline strong commitment during this trip

The Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Israel is historic in many ways. The fact that PM Modi is the first Indian prime minister to visit Israel in the last 70 years, foreign policy experts interpret this as a signal that both the national governments are willing to write a new chapter by overriding any ‘historical baggage’. Evidently, the dynamics of the bilateral relationship will be premised on further deepening the existing ties in matters related to defence, agriculture, trade, diplomacy and water management. At outset, it was made clear by Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel that Indian talents and Israel technologies should write the future of growth. India not only needs Israel technologies for its "Make in India" campaign but also to promote Digital India and reinventing Agri(culture-digital) India. Israel's technological prowess is so crucial to India because both countries have geopolitical and domestic imperatives, a reluctant digital power (India) needs a strong support from a cyber power (Israel) to edge out any cyber geopolitics in South Asia. India not only needs Israel technologies in Make in India but also in Digital India and reinventing Agri(culture-digital) India. × Cyber Camaraderie While addressing the Cyber Week 2017, the seventh edition of an annual cybersecurity conference held at Tel Aviv University in Israel on June, PM Benjamin Netanyahu said that cyber security is one of the key areas of cooperation to be discussed with PM Narendra Modi. Indo-Israel cyber camaraderie is need of the hour, particularly because Israel has world’s largest cyber security industry after the US. Many Israeli companies having a growing role in cyber defence technology, research and development, encryption and data protection. After China, India has the world’s largest number of Internet users, but the digital ecosystem available to Indian users is prone to attack, and that makes Digital India initiative vulnerable. Israel has world’s largest cyber security industry and many Israeli companies having a protuberant role in cyber defence technology, research and development, encryption and data protection. × Bishop to Bishop 1- India has ranked 4th in cyber security breaches and 5th in ransomware attacks. Statistically speaking, the costs of cyber threats are spurring up very quickly. For instance, the insane cyber attack on Bangladesh Bank costs $ 81 million and in 2014, the cyber attack on Sony studio was $100 million. More recently, the outbreak of WannaCry ransomware attack cost the world $4 billion. Cyber frauds carried out in India was worth $4 billion in 2013 alone, and there is nothing to root it out yet. An estimation shows that cybercrime costs the global economy $450 billion in 2016. Another estimation by the Microsoft underlines that economic loss of cyber crime would reach $3 trillion by 2020, which is just a tip of the larger iceberg. In foreseeable future, it might hold a significant risk to businesses, governments and societies. How should India and Israel address this issue? As per a report, the Israel Defense Forces has 8200, elite cyber offensive and defensive army to address potential cyber threats. × Bishop to Bishop 2 -So far, Israel has been able to subdue its external threats by expanding it’s both territorial and cyber capabilities. As per a report, the Israel Defense Forces has 8200 members strong elite cyber offensive and defensive army to address potential cyber threats. On the contrary, due to thin interests in building cyber offensive and defensive mechanisms, India has become a target of cyber attacks mostly generated from China and Pakistan. How Israel could help India in making so? Bishop to Bishop 3 – India needs to move out from the present reluctant position to become a truly digital power. Both India and Israel need to expand their cyber diplomacy and digital economy with likeminded countries to address cyber issues in global level. Lack of cyber attack attribution is a key factor to the hasty rise of cyber threats and both nations need to consider this while addressing the cyber security issues in a bigger picture. Indo-Israel cyber agreements would promulgate upon win-win theory and it can always be substantiated by the existing sheer trust and strong commitments. × To counter China and Pakistan both online and offline, PM Modi and his Israeli counterpart should underline strong commitment during this trip. Major areas to look into are: border surveillance preferably by UAVs to avoid human fatalities and cooperation in developing India's cyber army to protect India’s internet ecosystem from external penetrations. There is also a need for bilateral commitments to counter cyber terrorism globally. In the post demonetisation period, India has eased towards building a digital economy but to become a sustainable cyber player, it needs to bring in an infrastructure ecosystem, capacity building, digital funding, and technology transfer to substantiate domestic projects. Indo-Israel cyber agreements will be promulgated upon a win-win theory, and it can always be substantiated by the existing trust and strong commitments.

Why Israel needs to help India build a cyber army

<p>&nbsp;Alphabet Inc&#39;s Google will implement more measures to identify and remove terrorist or violent extremist content on its video-sharing platform YouTube, the company said in a blog post on Sunday.</p>

<p>Google said it would take a tougher position on videos containing supremacist or inflammatory religious content by issuing a warning and not monetizing or recommending them for user endorsements, even if they do not clearly violate its policies.</p>

<p>The company will also employ more engineering resources and increase its use of technology to help identify extremist videos. &nbsp;It will also train new content classifiers to quickly identify and remove such content.</p>

<p>&quot;While we and others have worked for years to identify and remove content that violates our policies, the uncomfortable truth is that we, as an industry, must acknowledge that more needs to be done,&quot; said Google&#39;s general counsel Kent Walker.</p>

<p>Google will expand its collaboration with counter-extremist groups to identify content that may be used to radicalize and recruit extremists.</p>

<p>The company will also reach potential Islamic State recruits through targeted online advertising and redirect them towards anti-terrorist videos in a bid to change their minds about joining.</p>

<p>Germany, France and Britain, countries where civilians have been killed and wounded in bombings and shootings by Islamist militants in recent years, have pressed Facebook and other providers of social media such as Google and Twitter to do more to remove militant content and hate speech.</p>

<p>Facebook on Thursday offered additional insight on its efforts to remove terrorism content, a response to political pressure in Europe to militant groups using the social network for propaganda and recruiting.</p>

<p>Facebook has ramped up the use of artificial intelligence such as image matching and language understanding to identify and remove content quickly, the company said in a blog post.</p>


Germany, France and Britain, countries where civilians have been killed and wounded in bombings and shootings by Islamist militants in recent years, have pressed Facebook and other providers of social media such as Google and Twitter to do more to remove militant content and hate speech

Alphabet Inc's Google will implement more measures to identify and remove terrorist or violent extremist content on its video-sharing platform YouTube, the company said in a blog post on Sunday. Google said it would take a tougher position on videos containing supremacist or inflammatory religious content by issuing a warning and not monetizing or recommending them for user endorsements, even if they do not clearly violate its policies. The company will also employ more engineering resources and increase its use of technology to help identify extremist videos. It will also train new content classifiers to quickly identify and remove such content. "While we and others have worked for years to identify and remove content that violates our policies, the uncomfortable truth is that we, as an industry, must acknowledge that more needs to be done," said Google's general counsel Kent Walker. Google will expand its collaboration with counter-extremist groups to identify content that may be used to radicalize and recruit extremists. The company will also reach potential Islamic State recruits through targeted online advertising and redirect them towards anti-terrorist videos in a bid to change their minds about joining. Germany, France and Britain, countries where civilians have been killed and wounded in bombings and shootings by Islamist militants in recent years, have pressed Facebook and other providers of social media such as Google and Twitter to do more to remove militant content and hate speech. Facebook on Thursday offered additional insight on its efforts to remove terrorism content, a response to political pressure in Europe to militant groups using the social network for propaganda and recruiting. Facebook has ramped up the use of artificial intelligence such as image matching and language understanding to identify and remove content quickly, the company said in a blog post.

Google to take measures to prevent terrorist content on youtube

<p>The leaders of France and Britain on Tuesday announced an anti-terror action plan to crack down on radicalisation through social media.</p>

<p>After talks with British Prime Minister Theresa May in Paris, French President Emmanuel Macron said both countries agreed that social networks were not doing enough to stamp out terror propaganda.</p>

<p>Speaking after terror attacks in Manchester and London, Macron said the two countries had worked on a &quot;very concrete&quot; action plan.</p>

<p>He said one of the key measures would aim at preventing the incitement of &quot;hate and terrorism&quot; on the internet.</p>

<p>May said she and Macron agreed that &quot;more should be done to tackle the terrorist threat online&quot;.</p>

<p>She said the British and French campaign was aimed to &quot;ensure the internet cannot... be used to host the radicalising material that leads to so much harm.&quot;</p>

<p>May said the British government was already working with social media companies &quot;to halt the spread of extremist material and poisonous propaganda that warps young minds&quot;, adding: &quot;But we know they need to do more.</p>

<p>&quot;Today we can announce that the UK and France will work together to encourage organisations to do more and abide by their social responsibility to step up their efforts to remove harmful content from their networks.&quot;</p>

<p>The campaign includes exploring the possibility of legal penalties against tech companies if they fail to take the necessary action to remove unacceptable content, May said.</p>

<p>Britain was rocked by a suicide bombing at a pop concert in Manchester on May 22 which killed 22 people, including children, followed two weeks later by a knife and van attack in central London, which left eight dead.</p>

<p>France has been a constant target for jihadist attacks since 2015, with more than 230 people killed.</p>

<p>After their press conference the two leaders headed to the Stade de France to watch a friendly match between the French and English football teams.</p>


May and Macron agreed that 'more should be done to tackle the terrorist threat online'

The leaders of France and Britain on Tuesday announced an anti-terror action plan to crack down on radicalisation through social media. After talks with British Prime Minister Theresa May in Paris, French President Emmanuel Macron said both countries agreed that social networks were not doing enough to stamp out terror propaganda. Speaking after terror attacks in Manchester and London, Macron said the two countries had worked on a "very concrete" action plan. He said one of the key measures would aim at preventing the incitement of "hate and terrorism" on the internet. May said she and Macron agreed that "more should be done to tackle the terrorist threat online". She said the British and French campaign was aimed to "ensure the internet cannot... be used to host the radicalising material that leads to so much harm." May said the British government was already working with social media companies "to halt the spread of extremist material and poisonous propaganda that warps young minds", adding: "But we know they need to do more. "Today we can announce that the UK and France will work together to encourage organisations to do more and abide by their social responsibility to step up their efforts to remove harmful content from their networks." The campaign includes exploring the possibility of legal penalties against tech companies if they fail to take the necessary action to remove unacceptable content, May said. Britain was rocked by a suicide bombing at a pop concert in Manchester on May 22 which killed 22 people, including children, followed two weeks later by a knife and van attack in central London, which left eight dead. France has been a constant target for jihadist attacks since 2015, with more than 230 people killed. After their press conference the two leaders headed to the Stade de France to watch a friendly match between the French and English football teams.

France and UK announce anti-terror action plan

<p>The government of Qatar has hired John Ashcroft, the US&nbsp;attorney general during the September&nbsp;11 attacks, as it seeks to rebut accusations from US&nbsp;President Donald Trump and its Arab neighbors that it supports terrorism.</p>

<p>Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period as the country seeks to confirm its efforts to fight global terrorism and comply with financial regulations including US&nbsp;Treasury rules, according to a Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, filing on Friday with the Justice Department.</p>

<p>&quot;The firm&#39;s work will include crisis response and management, program and system analysis, media outreach, education and advocacy regarding the client&#39;s historical, current and future efforts to combat global terror and its compliance goals and accomplishments,&quot; according to a letter by Ashcroft firm partner Michael Sullivan included in the filing.</p>

<p>Qatar faces isolation by fellow Arab countries after Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Egypt severed ties with Doha on Monday, accusing it of supporting Islamist militants and their adversary Iran. Qatar denies the allegations.</p>

<p>The crisis is a major diplomatic test for the United States, which is a close ally of countries on both sides but has given mixed signals on whether to isolate Qatar or bring it into talks with other Gulf countries.</p>

<p>Trump on Friday accused Qatar of being a &quot;high level&quot; sponsor of terrorism in remarks made shortly after his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, pushed Qatar&#39;s Arab neighbors to &quot;immediately take steps to de-escalate the situation.&quot;</p>

<p>The Ashcroft firm was hired to do a compliance and regulatory view of Qatar&#39;s anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing framework, Sullivan said in an email.</p>

<p>&quot;Qatar is confident that the review and analysis will confirm that Qatar has significant measures in place to prevent and detect efforts to launder funds and/or to use its financial systems to finance terrorist organizations,&quot; he said.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>Ashcroft was US&nbsp;attorney general under President George W. Bush from February 2001 to February 2005, turbulent years in which US&nbsp;policies and laws were reshaped by the so-called war on terrorism that followed the 2001 al Qaeda attacks.</p>

<p>Ashcroft&#39;s firm includes an array of former senior government officials including Sullivan, a former US&nbsp;attorney in Massachusetts appointed by Bush to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period

The government of Qatar has hired John Ashcroft, the US attorney general during the September 11 attacks, as it seeks to rebut accusations from US President Donald Trump and its Arab neighbors that it supports terrorism. Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period as the country seeks to confirm its efforts to fight global terrorism and comply with financial regulations including US Treasury rules, according to a Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, filing on Friday with the Justice Department. "The firm's work will include crisis response and management, program and system analysis, media outreach, education and advocacy regarding the client's historical, current and future efforts to combat global terror and its compliance goals and accomplishments," according to a letter by Ashcroft firm partner Michael Sullivan included in the filing. Qatar faces isolation by fellow Arab countries after Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Egypt severed ties with Doha on Monday, accusing it of supporting Islamist militants and their adversary Iran. Qatar denies the allegations. The crisis is a major diplomatic test for the United States, which is a close ally of countries on both sides but has given mixed signals on whether to isolate Qatar or bring it into talks with other Gulf countries. Trump on Friday accused Qatar of being a "high level" sponsor of terrorism in remarks made shortly after his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, pushed Qatar's Arab neighbors to "immediately take steps to de-escalate the situation." The Ashcroft firm was hired to do a compliance and regulatory view of Qatar's anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing framework, Sullivan said in an email. "Qatar is confident that the review and analysis will confirm that Qatar has significant measures in place to prevent and detect efforts to launder funds and/or to use its financial systems to finance terrorist organizations," he said. Ashcroft was US attorney general under President George W. Bush from February 2001 to February 2005, turbulent years in which US policies and laws were reshaped by the so-called war on terrorism that followed the 2001 al Qaeda attacks. Ashcroft's firm includes an array of former senior government officials including Sullivan, a former US attorney in Massachusetts appointed by Bush to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

Qatar hires ex-US attorney general John Ashcroft to rebut accusations of sponsoring terror

<p>Britain went to the polls on Thursday for a snap election called by Prime Minister Theresa May ahead of Brexit after a campaign shadowed by terrorism.</p>

<p>May called the vote in April, when opinion poll ratings for her and her centre-right Conservative party were sky high, presenting herself as the strong leader to take Britain into Brexit talks.</p>

<p>But Islamist attacks in London and Manchester have put her under pressure over her six years as interior minister, while campaign missteps have dented her reputation as a safe pair of hands.</p>

<p>Meanwhile opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, an anti-war campaigner deemed unelectable by a majority of his own lawmakers, has run an energetic campaign, promising change and an end to austerity.</p>

<p>While May has been touring target seats around the country, delivering slogan-heavy speeches to small groups of hand-picked activists, Corbyn has drawn large crowds to open-air rallies.</p>

<p>Speaking to reporters on her plane during a final burst of campaigning on Wednesday, May insisted she had no regrets about calling the vote three years early.</p>

<p>&quot;I&#39;ve enjoyed the campaign,&quot; she said. &quot;There is a very clear choice for people when they come to vote.&quot;</p>

<p>Asked what would constitute success, the 60-year-old vicar&#39;s daughter said: &quot;I never predict election results.&quot;</p>

<p>Corbyn, a 68-year-old leftwinger who has never held ministerial office and defied the odds to win the Labour leadership two years ago, urged supporters in Glasgow to think big.</p>

<p>&quot;Wouldn&#39;t it be great if on Friday we woke up to... a Labour government that will be a government for all of our communities across the whole of the country,&quot; he said.</p>

<p><strong>&#39;Little confidence&#39;&nbsp;</strong></p>

<p>It is the third time Britain has gone to the polls in two years, twice for a general election and once for the EU referendum, and voter fatigue appeared to be an issue among the early voters.</p>

<p>&quot;I don&#39;t think it has really been a campaign, we don&#39;t know anything about what they are going to do about Brexit, it&#39;s been pointless really,&quot; said Joe Kerney, 53, at a polling station in Hackney, east London.</p>

<p>&quot;I have little confidence in anybody,&quot; added voter Simon Bolton, 41. &quot;I think we lack quality in terms of who we can choose, it is very limited.&quot;</p>

<p>The election is May&#39;s first since taking office after Britons voted by 52 percent to leave the European Union.</p>

<p>May has accused Corbyn of being unprepared for negotiations set to begin on June 19, and unwilling to curb mass migration -- a key driver of the Brexit vote.</p>

<p>But her government&#39;s record on cutting funding for health and education have also featured strongly in the campaign, to the benefit of Labour.</p>

<p>The Conservatives were also damaged by a manifesto plan for elderly care that would see some pay more.</p>

<p>Then came the suicide bombing at a Manchester concert on May 22, which killed 22 people including seven children, followed by Saturday&#39;s knife and van attack in London, which left eight dead.</p>

<p>Campaigning was twice suspended in the aftermath of the attacks, which May blamed on &quot;evil&quot; Islamist ideology.</p>

<p>The Conservatives have always been strong on defence and security, and they have sought to exploit Corbyn&#39;s anti-nuclear stance and his alleged past support for Irish paramilitaries.</p>

<p>But May also faced uncomfortable questions over cuts to police numbers during her time as interior minister, amid accusations that the attackers in Manchester and London Bridge had slipped through the intelligence net.</p>

<p><strong>Security tightened&nbsp;</strong></p>

<p>Security on voting day was reviewed following the London attack, with the city&#39;s Metropolitan Police force implementing a &quot;specialist and highly flexible operation&quot; which it said could be deployed as needed.</p>

<p>Polling stations, many located in schools and community centres, opened at 7:00am (0600 GMT) and will close at 10:00pm, with 49.6 million registered voters electing a total of 650 MPs to parliament.</p>

<p>Overall turnout in the 2015 general election was 66.4 percent.</p>

<p>An exit poll will give an indication of the outcome, although final results will not emerge until early Friday.</p>

<p>As the Conservatives and Labour trade blows, the smaller pro-European Liberal Democrats and the pro-Brexit UK Independence Party (UKIP) have failed to gain much traction.</p>


Britain went to the polls on Thursday for a snap election called by Prime Minister Theresa May ahead of Brexit after a campaign shadowed by terrorism.

Britain went to the polls on Thursday for a snap election called by Prime Minister Theresa May ahead of Brexit after a campaign shadowed by terrorism. May called the vote in April, when opinion poll ratings for her and her centre-right Conservative party were sky high, presenting herself as the strong leader to take Britain into Brexit talks. But Islamist attacks in London and Manchester have put her under pressure over her six years as interior minister, while campaign missteps have dented her reputation as a safe pair of hands. Meanwhile opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, an anti-war campaigner deemed unelectable by a majority of his own lawmakers, has run an energetic campaign, promising change and an end to austerity. While May has been touring target seats around the country, delivering slogan-heavy speeches to small groups of hand-picked activists, Corbyn has drawn large crowds to open-air rallies. Speaking to reporters on her plane during a final burst of campaigning on Wednesday, May insisted she had no regrets about calling the vote three years early. "I've enjoyed the campaign," she said. "There is a very clear choice for people when they come to vote." Asked what would constitute success, the 60-year-old vicar's daughter said: "I never predict election results." Corbyn, a 68-year-old leftwinger who has never held ministerial office and defied the odds to win the Labour leadership two years ago, urged supporters in Glasgow to think big. "Wouldn't it be great if on Friday we woke up to... a Labour government that will be a government for all of our communities across the whole of the country," he said. 'Little confidence' It is the third time Britain has gone to the polls in two years, twice for a general election and once for the EU referendum, and voter fatigue appeared to be an issue among the early voters. "I don't think it has really been a campaign, we don't know anything about what they are going to do about Brexit, it's been pointless really," said Joe Kerney, 53, at a polling station in Hackney, east London. "I have little confidence in anybody," added voter Simon Bolton, 41. "I think we lack quality in terms of who we can choose, it is very limited." The election is May's first since taking office after Britons voted by 52 percent to leave the European Union. May has accused Corbyn of being unprepared for negotiations set to begin on June 19, and unwilling to curb mass migration -- a key driver of the Brexit vote. But her government's record on cutting funding for health and education have also featured strongly in the campaign, to the benefit of Labour. The Conservatives were also damaged by a manifesto plan for elderly care that would see some pay more. Then came the suicide bombing at a Manchester concert on May 22, which killed 22 people including seven children, followed by Saturday's knife and van attack in London, which left eight dead. Campaigning was twice suspended in the aftermath of the attacks, which May blamed on "evil" Islamist ideology. The Conservatives have always been strong on defence and security, and they have sought to exploit Corbyn's anti-nuclear stance and his alleged past support for Irish paramilitaries. But May also faced uncomfortable questions over cuts to police numbers during her time as interior minister, amid accusations that the attackers in Manchester and London Bridge had slipped through the intelligence net. Security tightened Security on voting day was reviewed following the London attack, with the city's Metropolitan Police force implementing a "specialist and highly flexible operation" which it said could be deployed as needed. Polling stations, many located in schools and community centres, opened at 7:00am (0600 GMT) and will close at 10:00pm, with 49.6 million registered voters electing a total of 650 MPs to parliament. Overall turnout in the 2015 general election was 66.4 percent. An exit poll will give an indication of the outcome, although final results will not emerge until early Friday. As the Conservatives and Labour trade blows, the smaller pro-European Liberal Democrats and the pro-Brexit UK Independence Party (UKIP) have failed to gain much traction.

In shadow of terror, Britons vote in key election

<p>The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/timeline-london-terror-attack-unfolded-in-just-a-few-minutes-16413">London Bridge terror attack</a>, that left seven people dead, including the three attackers, has shifted focus to Pakistan as one of the attackers was of Pakistani origin, The Sun reported.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Sun reported&nbsp;the name of one of the attackers as Abz, a person of Pakistani origin.</p>

<p>According to the report, Abz (27), was an ex-London Tube worker and a &#39;family man&#39;, who appeared in a Channel 4 TV documentary titled &quot;The Jihadis Next Door&quot; not too long ago and unfurled a jihadist flag in a park in an attempt to radicalise young kids.</p>

<p>The man is now being identified as the ringleader of the attack.</p>

<p>Abz was reportedly wearing an Arsenal strip.</p>

<p>A former friend revealed his identity. The friend claimed, Abz, a father of two, had been brainwashed after watching clips of American hate preacher Ahmad Musa Jibril on YouTube, The Sun reported.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Another friend reportedly described Abz as a person who was a bit shady and found him to be on drugs.</p>

<p>The police made 12 arrests so far, most of them in Barking, East London.</p>

<p>(WION)</p>


The Sun reported?the name of one of the attackers as Abz, a person of Pakistani origin.

The London Bridge terror attack, that left seven people dead, including the three attackers, has shifted focus to Pakistan as one of the attackers was of Pakistani origin, The Sun reported. The Sun reported the name of one of the attackers as Abz, a person of Pakistani origin. According to the report, Abz (27), was an ex-London Tube worker and a 'family man', who appeared in a Channel 4 TV documentary titled "The Jihadis Next Door" not too long ago and unfurled a jihadist flag in a park in an attempt to radicalise young kids. The man is now being identified as the ringleader of the attack. Abz was reportedly wearing an Arsenal strip. A former friend revealed his identity. The friend claimed, Abz, a father of two, had been brainwashed after watching clips of American hate preacher Ahmad Musa Jibril on YouTube, The Sun reported. Another friend reportedly described Abz as a person who was a bit shady and found him to be on drugs. The police made 12 arrests so far, most of them in Barking, East London. (WION)

One London attacker of Pakistani origin: Report

<p>The United States might ban laptops from aircraft cabins on all flights in and out of the country as part of a ramped-up effort to protect against potential security threats, US&nbsp;Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Sunday.</p>

<p>In an interview on &quot;Fox News Sunday,&quot; Kelly said the United States planned to &quot;raise the bar&quot; on airline security, including tightening screening of carry-on items.</p>

<p>&quot;That&#39;s the thing that they are obsessed with, the terrorists, the idea of knocking down an airplane in flight, particularly if it&#39;s a US&nbsp;carrier, particularly if it&#39;s full of US&nbsp;people.&quot;</p>

<p>In March, the government imposed restrictions on large electronic devices in aircraft cabins on flights from 10 airports, including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Turkey.</p>

<p>Kelly said the move would be part of a broader airline security effort to combat what he called &quot;a real sophisticated threat.&quot; He said no decision had been made as to the timing of any ban.</p>

<p>&quot;We are still following the intelligence,&quot; he said, &quot;and are in the process of defining this, but we&#39;re going to raise the bar generally speaking for aviation much higher than it is now.&quot;</p>

<p>Airlines are concerned that a broad ban on laptops may erode customer demand. But none wants an incident aboard one of its airplanes.</p>

<p>&quot;Whatever comes out, we&#39;ll have to comply with,&quot; Oscar Munoz, chief executive officer of United Airlines, told the company&#39;s annual meeting last week.</p>

<p>Airlines were blindsided in January when President Donald Trump issued an executive order banning entry for 90 days to citizens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, sending airlines scrambling to determine who could board and who could not. The order was later blocked in the courts.</p>

<p>In the case of laptops, the administration is keeping the industry in the loop. Delta Air Lines said in a statement it &quot;continues to be in close contact with the US&nbsp;Department of Homeland Security,&quot; while Munoz applauded the administration for giving the company a &quot;heads up.&quot;</p>

<p>&quot;We&#39;ve had constant updates on the subject,&quot; he said. &quot;We know more than most. And again, if there&#39;s a credible threat out there, we need to make sure we take the appropriate measures.&quot;</p>

<p><strong>More scrutiny of carry-ons</strong></p>

<p>Among the enhanced security measures will likely be tighter screening of carry-on items to allow Transport Security Administration (TSA) agents to discern problematic items in tightly stuffed bags.</p>

<p>Kelly said that in order to avoid paying fees for checking bags, people were stuffing them to the point where it was difficult to see through the clutter.</p>

<p>&quot;The more stuff is in there, the less the TSA professionals that are looking at what&#39;s in those bags through the monitors can tell what&#39;s in them.&quot;</p>

<p>The TSA has begun testing certain new procedures at a limited number of airports, requiring people to remove additional items from carry-on bags for separate screenings.</p>

<p>Asked whether the government would expand such measures nationwide, Kelly said: &quot;We might, and likely will.&quot;</p>

<p>(Reuters)</p>


The government had previously imposed restrictions on large electronic devices in aircraft cabins on flights from 10 airports

The United States might ban laptops from aircraft cabins on all flights in and out of the country as part of a ramped-up effort to protect against potential security threats, US Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Sunday. In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Kelly said the United States planned to "raise the bar" on airline security, including tightening screening of carry-on items. "That's the thing that they are obsessed with, the terrorists, the idea of knocking down an airplane in flight, particularly if it's a US carrier, particularly if it's full of US people." In March, the government imposed restrictions on large electronic devices in aircraft cabins on flights from 10 airports, including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Turkey. Kelly said the move would be part of a broader airline security effort to combat what he called "a real sophisticated threat." He said no decision had been made as to the timing of any ban. "We are still following the intelligence," he said, "and are in the process of defining this, but we're going to raise the bar generally speaking for aviation much higher than it is now." Airlines are concerned that a broad ban on laptops may erode customer demand. But none wants an incident aboard one of its airplanes. "Whatever comes out, we'll have to comply with," Oscar Munoz, chief executive officer of United Airlines, told the company's annual meeting last week. Airlines were blindsided in January when President Donald Trump issued an executive order banning entry for 90 days to citizens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, sending airlines scrambling to determine who could board and who could not. The order was later blocked in the courts. In the case of laptops, the administration is keeping the industry in the loop. Delta Air Lines said in a statement it "continues to be in close contact with the US Department of Homeland Security," while Munoz applauded the administration for giving the company a "heads up." "We've had constant updates on the subject," he said. "We know more than most. And again, if there's a credible threat out there, we need to make sure we take the appropriate measures." More scrutiny of carry-ons Among the enhanced security measures will likely be tighter screening of carry-on items to allow Transport Security Administration (TSA) agents to discern problematic items in tightly stuffed bags. Kelly said that in order to avoid paying fees for checking bags, people were stuffing them to the point where it was difficult to see through the clutter. "The more stuff is in there, the less the TSA professionals that are looking at what's in those bags through the monitors can tell what's in them." The TSA has begun testing certain new procedures at a limited number of airports, requiring people to remove additional items from carry-on bags for separate screenings. Asked whether the government would expand such measures nationwide, Kelly said: "We might, and likely will." (Reuters)

US might ban laptops on all flights into and out of the country

<p>US President Donald Trump on Thursday intensified his accusations that NATO allies were not spending enough on defence and said more attacks such as this week&#39;s bombing in Manchester would take place unless the alliance did more to stop militants.</p>

<p>In unexpectedly abrupt remarks as NATO leaders stood alongside him, Trump said certain member countries owed &quot;massive amounts of money&quot; to the United States and NATO, even though allied contributions are voluntary, with multiple budgets.</p>

<p>His scripted comments contrasted with NATO&#39;s choreographed efforts to play up the West&#39;s unity by inviting Trump to unveil a memorial to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States at the new NATO headquarters.</p>

<p>&quot;We will never waiver in our determination to defeat terrorism and achieve lasting security, prosperity and peace,&quot; Trump said in the speech before a dinner with leaders.</p>

<p>&quot;Terrorism must be stopped or ... the horror you saw in Manchester and so many other places will continue forever,&quot; Trump said, referring to Monday&#39;s suicide bombing in the northern English city that killed 22 people, including children.</p>

<p>Trump called on NATO, an organisation founded on collective defence against the Soviet threat, to include limiting immigration in its tasks as well as fighting terrorism and deterring Russia.</p>

<p>NATO leaders wanted Trump to publicly support the military alliance that he had called &quot;obsolete&quot; during his campaign.</p>

<p>But he instead returned to a grievance about Europe&#39;s drop in defence spending since the end of the Cold War and failed to publicly commit to NATO&#39;s founding Article V rule which stipulates that an attack on one ally is an attack against all.</p>

<p>&quot;Twenty-three of the 28 member nations are still not paying what they should be paying for their defence,&quot; Trump said, standing by a piece of the wreckage of the Twin Towers.</p>

<p>&quot;This is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States, and many of these nations owe massive amounts of money from past years,&quot; Trump said as the other leaders watched.</p>

<p>Nicholas Burns, a former long-time diplomat and ambassador to NATO from 2001-2005, now a professor at Harvard&#39;s Kennedy School of Government, said every U.S. president since Harry Truman had pledged support for Article V and that the United States would defend Europe.</p>

<p>&quot;Not so Trump today at NATO. Major mistake,&quot; he said on Twitter.</p>

<p>White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump was &quot;100 percent&quot; committed to collective defence. &quot;We are not playing cutesie with this. He is fully committed,&quot; Spicer said.</p>

<p><strong>Bare Minimum</strong></p>

<p>Praise was always going to be in short supply after Trump&#39;s sharp election campaign criticism of the alliance, which he blamed for not doing more to combat terrorism.</p>

<p>Last year, Trump threatened to abandon US allies in Europe if they did not spend enough on defence, comments that were particularly unnerving for the ex-Soviet Baltic states on Russia&#39;s border which fear Moscow might try a repeat of its 2014 annexation of Ukraine&#39;s Crimea.</p>

<p>Although he has since softened his tone in phone calls and meetings with Western leaders, Trump&#39;s sharp words on Thursday recalled his awkward meeting with Angela Merkel in March, when he pressed the German chancellor for Germany to meet NATO&#39;s military spending target.</p>

<p>NATO diplomats planned to placate Trump with a pledge on Thursday to agree to national plans by the end of this year showing how NATO allies will meet a promise to spend 2 percent of economic output every year on defence by 2024.</p>

<p>But Trump increased the pressure, calling that agreement made at a summit in Wales in 2014 &quot;the bare minimum&quot;.</p>

<p>&quot;Even 2 per cent of GDP is insufficient ... 2 percent is the bare minimum for confronting today&#39;s very real and very viscous threats,&quot; Trump said.</p>

<p>He also made his presence felt at his first NATO summit, literally, pushing his way past Montenego&#39;s prime minister, Dusko Markovic, whose country joins the organisation next month, in footage that went viral.</p>

<p>Spicer said he had not seen the video but assumed the US president was moving to his designated spot.</p>

<p>NATO nonetheless strived to impress Trump with allied jets flying overhead and a walk through the new glass headquarters, which replaces a 1960s prefab structure.</p>

<p>Trump, a real estate magnate, called the building &quot;beautiful&quot; and joked that he did not dare ask how much it cost.</p>

<p>It was left to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to try to hammer home the message of unity.</p>

<p>&quot;NATO is more than a club, more than an organisation. NATO embodies the unique bond between Europe and North America,&quot; Stoltenberg said. &quot;As we raise our flags today, our alliance stands strong united and resolute,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>In one nod to Trump, NATO leaders are due to agree later on Thursday for the Western military bloc to join the US-led, 68-nation coalition against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.</p>

<p>(Reuters)<br />
&nbsp;</p>


In unexpectedly abrupt remarks as NATO leaders stood alongside him, Trump said certain member countries owed 'massive amounts of money' to the United States and NATO

US President Donald Trump on Thursday intensified his accusations that NATO allies were not spending enough on defence and said more attacks such as this week's bombing in Manchester would take place unless the alliance did more to stop militants. In unexpectedly abrupt remarks as NATO leaders stood alongside him, Trump said certain member countries owed "massive amounts of money" to the United States and NATO, even though allied contributions are voluntary, with multiple budgets. His scripted comments contrasted with NATO's choreographed efforts to play up the West's unity by inviting Trump to unveil a memorial to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States at the new NATO headquarters. "We will never waiver in our determination to defeat terrorism and achieve lasting security, prosperity and peace," Trump said in the speech before a dinner with leaders. "Terrorism must be stopped or ... the horror you saw in Manchester and so many other places will continue forever," Trump said, referring to Monday's suicide bombing in the northern English city that killed 22 people, including children. Trump called on NATO, an organisation founded on collective defence against the Soviet threat, to include limiting immigration in its tasks as well as fighting terrorism and deterring Russia. NATO leaders wanted Trump to publicly support the military alliance that he had called "obsolete" during his campaign. But he instead returned to a grievance about Europe's drop in defence spending since the end of the Cold War and failed to publicly commit to NATO's founding Article V rule which stipulates that an attack on one ally is an attack against all. "Twenty-three of the 28 member nations are still not paying what they should be paying for their defence," Trump said, standing by a piece of the wreckage of the Twin Towers. "This is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States, and many of these nations owe massive amounts of money from past years," Trump said as the other leaders watched. Nicholas Burns, a former long-time diplomat and ambassador to NATO from 2001-2005, now a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, said every U.S. president since Harry Truman had pledged support for Article V and that the United States would defend Europe. "Not so Trump today at NATO. Major mistake," he said on Twitter. White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump was "100 percent" committed to collective defence. "We are not playing cutesie with this. He is fully committed," Spicer said. Bare Minimum Praise was always going to be in short supply after Trump's sharp election campaign criticism of the alliance, which he blamed for not doing more to combat terrorism. Last year, Trump threatened to abandon US allies in Europe if they did not spend enough on defence, comments that were particularly unnerving for the ex-Soviet Baltic states on Russia's border which fear Moscow might try a repeat of its 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimea. Although he has since softened his tone in phone calls and meetings with Western leaders, Trump's sharp words on Thursday recalled his awkward meeting with Angela Merkel in March, when he pressed the German chancellor for Germany to meet NATO's military spending target. NATO diplomats planned to placate Trump with a pledge on Thursday to agree to national plans by the end of this year showing how NATO allies will meet a promise to spend 2 percent of economic output every year on defence by 2024. But Trump increased the pressure, calling that agreement made at a summit in Wales in 2014 "the bare minimum". "Even 2 per cent of GDP is insufficient ... 2 percent is the bare minimum for confronting today's very real and very viscous threats," Trump said. He also made his presence felt at his first NATO summit, literally, pushing his way past Montenego's prime minister, Dusko Markovic, whose country joins the organisation next month, in footage that went viral. Spicer said he had not seen the video but assumed the US president was moving to his designated spot. NATO nonetheless strived to impress Trump with allied jets flying overhead and a walk through the new glass headquarters, which replaces a 1960s prefab structure. Trump, a real estate magnate, called the building "beautiful" and joked that he did not dare ask how much it cost. It was left to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to try to hammer home the message of unity. "NATO is more than a club, more than an organisation. NATO embodies the unique bond between Europe and North America," Stoltenberg said. "As we raise our flags today, our alliance stands strong united and resolute," he said. In one nod to Trump, NATO leaders are due to agree later on Thursday for the Western military bloc to join the US-led, 68-nation coalition against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. (Reuters)

NATO allies not spending enough to shore up defences: Trump

<p>I have been following anti-terrorist operations of the security forces closely, particularly since the Dhaka cafe attack in July 2016, which killed at least 20 civilians. The attack was claimed by the Islamic State overnight, before the Bangladesh government and its security agencies could confirm the identities of the terrorists inside the Holey Artisan Bakery, at the diplomatic area of Dhaka.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The police since then have intensified their counter terrorist drive across the country. In six months between December 2016 and May 2017, at least <a href="http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2017/04/01/four-children-among-seven-killed-in-moulvibazar-militant-hideout">32 suspected terrorists</a> have been killed. Five of them were children and four women.&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Four of those killed are below the age of 10 including an infant.</p>

<p>Following the July cafe attack, modus operandi of the security forces have changed. Specialised units of the security forces, mostly the Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crimes Unit carry out &quot;block raids&quot;, where they cordon off an area for several hours that would span a few days and subsequently result in suspected terrorists blowing only themselves up in &quot;suicide blasts&quot;.&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />
As someone following the global terrorist activities, I have observed that most suicide blasts by extremists target individuals they consider infidels.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Under current circumstances, the police crackdown on militancy in the country has two-pronged sentiments, 1. Fear in people&#39;s&nbsp;minds allow such police actions in the hope that this will curb militancy, and 2. Nature of these operations prompts curiosities.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Media, including myself, can report only the narrative presented by the security forces. The operational areas are off-limits to civilians and journalists because of risk they pose to lives.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Once they are killed, no knowledge about their whereabouts or family is available. In some <a href="http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/crime/2017/04/30/jhenaidah-militant-abdullah-among-deceased-operation-eagle-hunt">cases</a> even the police have not been able to identify the persons they suspected as terrorists.&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Human rights organisation say that the style of the operations indicate that the security forces are pursuing a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/bangladesh-5-members-of-a-family-suspected-of-links-with-neo-jmb-killed-in-police-raid-15459">complete elimination of the suspects</a>, which prevents media from getting any more&nbsp;information beyond what is officially provided.&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />
In &ldquo;Operation Hit Back&rdquo; at Moulvibazar, Sylhet on March 29, the police cordoned off the &ldquo;militant den&rdquo; for three days. They said there has been exchange of fire but eventually eight suspects, including four children below the age of ten killed themselves in suicide explosions.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
One of the children was an infant.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Platoons of policemen were deployed. What efforts were made to save the lives of the children in the three days? Are we then resorting to the narrative of compromising a few lives, in other words, human rights for the &quot;greater good&quot; of the society?<br />
&nbsp;<br />
In an earlier operation in Sylhet codenamed &ldquo;Operation Twilight&rdquo; as well as in &ldquo;Operation Hit Back&rdquo;, &ldquo;militant dens&rdquo; were planted with improvised explosive devices. Security personnel said the operations were sensitive because the buildings were planted with IED. Yet, the security forces were able to <a href="http://www.thedailystar.net/country/sporadic-gunshots-mark-day-3-sylhet-militant-den-raid-1381606">fire rocket launchers</a>&nbsp;at one of the buildings and continue exchanging fires disregarding the possibility that the terrorist could blow up the building.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The nature of the anti-terrorist operations in Bangladesh since last July have been deadly and confrontational. The question is whether the confrontation could have been avoided.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Bangladesh is known for being a tolerant Muslim-majority nation, where the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina thrives on the secular principle of the state.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Although radicalisation has shown its ferocity through terror plots in the form of countrywide explosions and attacks waged at cultural programmes and political rallies in early 2000, the suicide explosions and confrontation between extremists and security forces in recent months have been unprecedented for the people of Bangladesh. It is indeed a grave concern how this group of radicals evolved in a country that has not seen such frequency of violence in the past.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances alarmed human rights organisations and civil society in Bangladesh. This has ensued for nearly a decade since the government of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia introduced paramilitary force Rapid Action Battalion.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Human right groups report that such actions have not stopped entirely but the focus has largely shifted to the area of militancy and anti-terror raids. Some even question if this is the new face of extrajudicial killing.</p>

<p>(WION)</p>


Bangladesh?s growing anti-terror raids raise concerns

I have been following anti-terrorist operations of the security forces closely, particularly since the Dhaka cafe attack in July 2016, which killed at least 20 civilians. The attack was claimed by the Islamic State overnight, before the Bangladesh government and its security agencies could confirm the identities of the terrorists inside the Holey Artisan Bakery, at the diplomatic area of Dhaka. The police since then have intensified their counter terrorist drive across the country. In six months between December 2016 and May 2017, at least 32 suspected terrorists have been killed. Five of them were children and four women. Four of those killed are below the age of 10 including an infant. Following the July cafe attack, modus operandi of the security forces have changed. Specialised units of the security forces, mostly the Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crimes Unit carry out "block raids", where they cordon off an area for several hours that would span a few days and subsequently result in suspected terrorists blowing only themselves up in "suicide blasts". As someone following the global terrorist activities, I have observed that most suicide blasts by extremists target individuals they consider infidels. Under current circumstances, the police crackdown on militancy in the country has two-pronged sentiments, 1. Fear in people's minds allow such police actions in the hope that this will curb militancy, and 2. Nature of these operations prompts curiosities. Media, including myself, can report only the narrative presented by the security forces. The operational areas are off-limits to civilians and journalists because of risk they pose to lives. Once they are killed, no knowledge about their whereabouts or family is available. In some cases even the police have not been able to identify the persons they suspected as terrorists. Human rights organisation say that the style of the operations indicate that the security forces are pursuing a complete elimination of the suspects, which prevents media from getting any more information beyond what is officially provided. In “Operation Hit Back” at Moulvibazar, Sylhet on March 29, the police cordoned off the “militant den” for three days. They said there has been exchange of fire but eventually eight suspects, including four children below the age of ten killed themselves in suicide explosions. One of the children was an infant. Platoons of policemen were deployed. What efforts were made to save the lives of the children in the three days? Are we then resorting to the narrative of compromising a few lives, in other words, human rights for the "greater good" of the society? In an earlier operation in Sylhet codenamed “Operation Twilight” as well as in “Operation Hit Back”, “militant dens” were planted with improvised explosive devices. Security personnel said the operations were sensitive because the buildings were planted with IED. Yet, the security forces were able to fire rocket launchers at one of the buildings and continue exchanging fires disregarding the possibility that the terrorist could blow up the building. The nature of the anti-terrorist operations in Bangladesh since last July have been deadly and confrontational. The question is whether the confrontation could have been avoided. Bangladesh is known for being a tolerant Muslim-majority nation, where the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina thrives on the secular principle of the state. Although radicalisation has shown its ferocity through terror plots in the form of countrywide explosions and attacks waged at cultural programmes and political rallies in early 2000, the suicide explosions and confrontation between extremists and security forces in recent months have been unprecedented for the people of Bangladesh. It is indeed a grave concern how this group of radicals evolved in a country that has not seen such frequency of violence in the past. Extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances alarmed human rights organisations and civil society in Bangladesh. This has ensued for nearly a decade since the government of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia introduced paramilitary force Rapid Action Battalion. Human right groups report that such actions have not stopped entirely but the focus has largely shifted to the area of militancy and anti-terror raids. Some even question if this is the new face of extrajudicial killing. (WION)

Growing anti-terror raids in Bangladesh raise human right concerns

<p dir="ltr">The Trump administration on Thursday blamed Pakistan for deteriorating Indo-Pak relations and warned that the ties might worsen further if another &quot;high- profile&quot; terrorist attack emanates from across the border this year.</p>

<p dir="ltr">&quot;Islamabad&#39;s failure to curb support to anti-India militants and New Delhi&#39;s growing intolerance of this policy, coupled with a perceived lack of progress in Pakistan&#39;s investigations into the January 2016 Pathankot cross-border attack, set the stage for a deterioration of bilateral relations in 2016,&quot; Daniel Coats, director of National Intelligence, told lawmakers during a Congressional hearing.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence along with top intelligence officials, Coats said the relations between India and Pakistan became more tense following two major terrorist attacks in 2016 by militants crossing into India from Pakistan.</p>

<p dir="ltr">&quot;They might deteriorate further in 2017, especially in the event of another high-profile terrorist attack in India that New Delhi attributes to originating in or receiving assistance from Pakistan,&quot; Coats said in his testimony before the Senate committee on worldwide threats.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Supporting India&#39;s pre-condition for bilateral talks on Islamabad stopping support to cross border terrorism, Coats said increasing numbers of cross-firing along the Line of Control, including the use of artillery and mortars, might aggravate the risk of unintended escalation between the two countries.</p>

<p dir="ltr">&quot;Easing of heightened Indo-Pak tension, including negotiations to renew official dialogue, will probably hinge in 2017 on a sharp and sustained reduction of cross-border attacks by terrorist groups based in Pakistan and progress in the Pathankot investigation&quot;, Coats said.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Last year, heavily-armed terrorists sneaked in from across the border and attacked the Pathankot Air Force Station in Punjab. The attack had claimed the lives of seven security personnel while four terrorists were killed.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Coats said Pakistan is concerned about its international isolation due to its dwindling position against India&#39;s rising international status, expanded foreign outreach and deepening ties with the US. Pakistan will likely turn to China to offset its isolation, empowering a relationship that will help Beijing to project influence into the Indian Ocean, said the top US intelligence official.</p>

<p dir="ltr">In his remarks ahead of the possible release of the Afghanistan policy of the Trump Administration, he said &quot;Pakistan-based terrorist groups will present a sustained threat to the US interests in the region and continue to plan and conduct attacks in India and Afghanistan.&quot;</p>

<p dir="ltr">&quot;The threat to the US and the West from Pakistani-based terrorist groups will be persistent but diffuse. Plotting against the US homeland will be conducted on a more opportunistic basis or driven by individual members within these groups,&quot;&nbsp;he told members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Noting that Pakistan will probably be able to manage its internal security, he said anti-Pakistan groups are likely to focus more on soft targets.</p>

<p dir="ltr">&quot;The groups we judge will pose the greatest threat to Pakistan&#39;s internal security include Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan, Jamaat ui-Ahrar, al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, ISIS-K, Laskhare Jhangvi, and Lashkar-e Jhangvi ai-Aiami, he said, adding that the emerging China Pakistan Economic Corridor will probably offer militants and terrorists additional targets.&quot;</p>

<p dir="ltr">Pakistan&#39;s pursuit of tactical nuclear weapons potentially lowers the threshold for their use, Coats warned.</p>

<p dir="ltr">&quot;Early deployment during a crisis of smaller, more mobile nuclear weapons would increase the amount of time that systems would be outside the relative security of a storage site, increasing the risk that a coordinated attack by non-state actors might succeed in capturing a complete nuclear weapon&quot;,he said.</p>

<p dir="ltr">(PTI)</p>


Testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence along with top intelligence officials, director of National Intelligence?Coats said the relations between India and Pakistan became more tense following two major terrorist attacks in 2016 by militants crossing into India from Pakistan.

The Trump administration on Thursday blamed Pakistan for deteriorating Indo-Pak relations and warned that the ties might worsen further if another "high- profile" terrorist attack emanates from across the border this year. "Islamabad's failure to curb support to anti-India militants and New Delhi's growing intolerance of this policy, coupled with a perceived lack of progress in Pakistan's investigations into the January 2016 Pathankot cross-border attack, set the stage for a deterioration of bilateral relations in 2016," Daniel Coats, director of National Intelligence, told lawmakers during a Congressional hearing. Testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence along with top intelligence officials, Coats said the relations between India and Pakistan became more tense following two major terrorist attacks in 2016 by militants crossing into India from Pakistan. "They might deteriorate further in 2017, especially in the event of another high-profile terrorist attack in India that New Delhi attributes to originating in or receiving assistance from Pakistan," Coats said in his testimony before the Senate committee on worldwide threats. Supporting India's pre-condition for bilateral talks on Islamabad stopping support to cross border terrorism, Coats said increasing numbers of cross-firing along the Line of Control, including the use of artillery and mortars, might aggravate the risk of unintended escalation between the two countries. "Easing of heightened Indo-Pak tension, including negotiations to renew official dialogue, will probably hinge in 2017 on a sharp and sustained reduction of cross-border attacks by terrorist groups based in Pakistan and progress in the Pathankot investigation", Coats said. Last year, heavily-armed terrorists sneaked in from across the border and attacked the Pathankot Air Force Station in Punjab. The attack had claimed the lives of seven security personnel while four terrorists were killed. Coats said Pakistan is concerned about its international isolation due to its dwindling position against India's rising international status, expanded foreign outreach and deepening ties with the US. Pakistan will likely turn to China to offset its isolation, empowering a relationship that will help Beijing to project influence into the Indian Ocean, said the top US intelligence official. In his remarks ahead of the possible release of the Afghanistan policy of the Trump Administration, he said "Pakistan-based terrorist groups will present a sustained threat to the US interests in the region and continue to plan and conduct attacks in India and Afghanistan." "The threat to the US and the West from Pakistani-based terrorist groups will be persistent but diffuse. Plotting against the US homeland will be conducted on a more opportunistic basis or driven by individual members within these groups," he told members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Noting that Pakistan will probably be able to manage its internal security, he said anti-Pakistan groups are likely to focus more on soft targets. "The groups we judge will pose the greatest threat to Pakistan's internal security include Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan, Jamaat ui-Ahrar, al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, ISIS-K, Laskhare Jhangvi, and Lashkar-e Jhangvi ai-Aiami, he said, adding that the emerging China Pakistan Economic Corridor will probably offer militants and terrorists additional targets." Pakistan's pursuit of tactical nuclear weapons potentially lowers the threshold for their use, Coats warned. "Early deployment during a crisis of smaller, more mobile nuclear weapons would increase the amount of time that systems would be outside the relative security of a storage site, increasing the risk that a coordinated attack by non-state actors might succeed in capturing a complete nuclear weapon",he said. (PTI)

US blames Pakistan for deteriorating Indo-Pak ties

<p>The sane people in Bangladesh do not think that Bangladesh and India are enemies although since 1975, right wing political forces have tried to paint such a picture. Even today, some fringe elements in the Bangladeshi intelligentsia keep peddling such a narrative to an audience that thrives on this.</p>

<p>However, over the past several years, the sensible quarters of the civil society and media have been able to reassert, by and large, the objective narrative of mutual trust and the benefits of Bangladesh-India cooperation and the need for strengthening it. India didn&rsquo;t do anything in the last 46 years that shows New Delhi&#39;s intent to gobble up Bangladesh. Nor it is possible. False fear mongering and small neighbour mentality are out.</p>

<p>There are big economic and political changes taking place in the region and beyond. It is an ongoing geopolitical game and all the interested parties are trying to get the most out of it through conventional non-violent means i.e. strategic posturing, economic cooperation, diplomacy, etc.</p>

<p>Unlike in the past, today, bigger domestic constituencies of leading developing countries are getting increasingly interested in their nations&#39; regional and global standings. Therefore, alongside international politics and security, other factors such as economic benefits, regional or international stature and even domestic politics have become important determinants of bilateral and multilateral relationship between countries.</p>

<p>Since the Narendra Modi-led Hindu nationalist BJP government came to power in India in 2014, riding on the development plank, India-Bangladesh relationship needed a reboot. The secular Awami League under Sheikh Hasina, with a history of good relations with the secular Indian National Congress, continued to be in power in Dhaka for a second term.</p>

<p>Both the governments realised that inter-state relations come ahead of inter-party relations across the border and thus developed a good working relationship. Moreover, Bangladesh and India have a shared history and commonalities of culture, not to mention the huge volume of bilateral trade and other interactions.</p>

<p>However, Bangladesh is an aspirational country and it is already the world&rsquo;s 31st largest economy in terms of purchasing power parity. It has a big population with a large number of young people who want jobs and a good life. Therefore, when it comes to economy, Bangladesh, like other Least Developed Countries (LDCs), needs more FDI in infrastructure, manufacturing, processing industries and other fields. As the western, Japanese and West Asian finances are drying out, China is fast stepping into that vacuum. It has overtaken India as the largest trading partner of Bangladesh. Bangladesh&#39;s military is also dependent on Chinese supply of military hardware as those are of reasonable standards and are affordable.</p>

<p>Bangladesh&rsquo;s cosiness with China seems to have puzzled India, Beijing&#39;s geopolitical competitor. It is a different matter that India is currently utilising China&rsquo;s economic rise and has replaced Pakistan as China&#39;s largest trade partner in South Asia.</p>

<p>To nullify the Bangladesh-China intimacy, India has proposed a long-term defence cooperation pact with Bangladesh which&nbsp;&nbsp;involves purchasing Indian military armaments, various military-to-military cooperation measures like training, capacity building, joint exercises, etc.</p>

<p>Much has not been disclosed but there is a sense that India would also seek a deeper military strategic alliance. This would serve the Modi government very well as the overall security and geopolitical rise of India are key promises made by Modi. If successful, this defence agreement with Bangladesh would help Modi in his 2019 re-election bid. He can then claim that he has been successful in &lsquo;isolating Pakistan in South Asia&rsquo; and &lsquo;resisting China in this part of South Asia&rsquo;.</p>

<p>What does this mean for Bangladesh and the Awami League government?</p>

<p>Bangladesh doesn&rsquo;t need Indian armaments which are not known for their quality although Dhaka may wish to reduce its dependence on Chinese armaments, owing to China&rsquo;s proximity to Myanmar. But for that, Dhaka would do better to look at Russia or Eastern Europe.</p>

<p>The Awami League government of Bangladesh, unlike the BJP in India, will be significantly embarrassed in the domestic political sphere if this agreement goes through. Its detractors have long accused it as a pro-India party.&nbsp;&nbsp;Moreover, Bangladesh still has important unresolved issues with India like water sharing of the Teesta and other rivers.</p>

<p>India also did not support Bangladesh on the humanitarian Rohingya issue, considering its own geostrategic interest in Myanmar. Most importantly, a comprehensive India-Bangladesh defence pact would inevitably raise the obvious question as to who the pact is against. It will send China, Bangladesh&rsquo;s strategic economic partner, a wrong signal. Beijing has just committed to invest a whopping $27 billion in Bangladesh while indicating that it could invest another $13 billion in the private sector. Bangladesh, therefore, will do well to keep out of the India-China geopolitical competition and engage in economic ties with both.</p>

<p>The Modi government made the lingering Land Boundary Agreement a reality and allowed more Bangladeshi products to reach the Indian markets without tariff. Bangladesh actively and consistently went after hideouts of northeast Indian insurgents along its border. Bangladesh will probably reciprocate by allowing India&rsquo;s landlocked northeast region to use its seaports for a reasonable fee.</p>

<p>Bangladesh doesn&rsquo;t consider India as an enemy but it is surrounded by the country on three sides. The adjacent northeastern region of India is a highly militarised zone and keeps Bangladesh wary at all times. It is also difficult for Bangladesh to gauge the direction of India&#39;s domestic politics in the light of anti-Bangladesh rhetoric, specially on immigrants, used in previous general elections. India&rsquo;s record of politico-military involvement in Sri Lanka also doesn&#39;t help.</p>

<p>Many Bangladeshis are worried about the state of Muslims in India as news of discrimination and persecution by Hindutva activists keep making news. On the other hand, Bangladesh&rsquo;s current relationship with Pakistan is moving from bad to worse. Currently, Bangladesh&rsquo;s relationship with the rest of the Islamic world is less cosy than in the past for obvious reasons. Even though India and Bangladesh share a warm relationship at present, Bangladesh doesn&rsquo;t want to put all its eggs in the same basket by aligning too closely with the saffron dispensation in New Delhi.</p>

<p>Therefore, neither Bangladesh wants acrimony with India nor does it need any defence cooperation. It&rsquo;s better that Bangladesh&rsquo;s defence remains independent of India. Rather, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on friendly coexistence and cooperation in countering terrorism and extremism would be a fair shot for both the countries. Hopefully, the Indian government would understand Bangladesh&rsquo;s conundrum and would settle for something sustainable for both the sides.</p>


Dhaka and New Delhi should instead agree on friendly coexistence and cooperation in countering terrorism

The sane people in Bangladesh do not think that Bangladesh and India are enemies although since 1975, right wing political forces have tried to paint such a picture. Even today, some fringe elements in the Bangladeshi intelligentsia keep peddling such a narrative to an audience that thrives on this. However, over the past several years, the sensible quarters of the civil society and media have been able to reassert, by and large, the objective narrative of mutual trust and the benefits of Bangladesh-India cooperation and the need for strengthening it. India didn’t do anything in the last 46 years that shows New Delhi's intent to gobble up Bangladesh. Nor it is possible. False fear mongering and small neighbour mentality are out. There are big economic and political changes taking place in the region and beyond. It is an ongoing geopolitical game and all the interested parties are trying to get the most out of it through conventional non-violent means i.e. strategic posturing, economic cooperation, diplomacy, etc. Unlike in the past, today, bigger domestic constituencies of leading developing countries are getting increasingly interested in their nations' regional and global standings. Therefore, alongside international politics and security, other factors such as economic benefits, regional or international stature and even domestic politics have become important determinants of bilateral and multilateral relationship between countries. Since the Narendra Modi-led Hindu nationalist BJP government came to power in India in 2014, riding on the development plank, India-Bangladesh relationship needed a reboot. The secular Awami League under Sheikh Hasina, with a history of good relations with the secular Indian National Congress, continued to be in power in Dhaka for a second term. Both the governments realised that inter-state relations come ahead of inter-party relations across the border and thus developed a good working relationship. Moreover, Bangladesh and India have a shared history and commonalities of culture, not to mention the huge volume of bilateral trade and other interactions. However, Bangladesh is an aspirational country and it is already the world’s 31st largest economy in terms of purchasing power parity. It has a big population with a large number of young people who want jobs and a good life. Therefore, when it comes to economy, Bangladesh, like other Least Developed Countries (LDCs), needs more FDI in infrastructure, manufacturing, processing industries and other fields. As the western, Japanese and West Asian finances are drying out, China is fast stepping into that vacuum. It has overtaken India as the largest trading partner of Bangladesh. Bangladesh's military is also dependent on Chinese supply of military hardware as those are of reasonable standards and are affordable. Bangladesh’s cosiness with China seems to have puzzled India, Beijing's geopolitical competitor. It is a different matter that India is currently utilising China’s economic rise and has replaced Pakistan as China's largest trade partner in South Asia. To nullify the Bangladesh-China intimacy, India has proposed a long-term defence cooperation pact with Bangladesh which involves purchasing Indian military armaments, various military-to-military cooperation measures like training, capacity building, joint exercises, etc. Much has not been disclosed but there is a sense that India would also seek a deeper military strategic alliance. This would serve the Modi government very well as the overall security and geopolitical rise of India are key promises made by Modi. If successful, this defence agreement with Bangladesh would help Modi in his 2019 re-election bid. He can then claim that he has been successful in ‘isolating Pakistan in South Asia’ and ‘resisting China in this part of South Asia’. What does this mean for Bangladesh and the Awami League government? Bangladesh doesn’t need Indian armaments which are not known for their quality although Dhaka may wish to reduce its dependence on Chinese armaments, owing to China’s proximity to Myanmar. But for that, Dhaka would do better to look at Russia or Eastern Europe. The Awami League government of Bangladesh, unlike the BJP in India, will be significantly embarrassed in the domestic political sphere if this agreement goes through. Its detractors have long accused it as a pro-India party. Moreover, Bangladesh still has important unresolved issues with India like water sharing of the Teesta and other rivers. India also did not support Bangladesh on the humanitarian Rohingya issue, considering its own geostrategic interest in Myanmar. Most importantly, a comprehensive India-Bangladesh defence pact would inevitably raise the obvious question as to who the pact is against. It will send China, Bangladesh’s strategic economic partner, a wrong signal. Beijing has just committed to invest a whopping $27 billion in Bangladesh while indicating that it could invest another $13 billion in the private sector. Bangladesh, therefore, will do well to keep out of the India-China geopolitical competition and engage in economic ties with both. The Modi government made the lingering Land Boundary Agreement a reality and allowed more Bangladeshi products to reach the Indian markets without tariff. Bangladesh actively and consistently went after hideouts of northeast Indian insurgents along its border. Bangladesh will probably reciprocate by allowing India’s landlocked northeast region to use its seaports for a reasonable fee. Bangladesh doesn’t consider India as an enemy but it is surrounded by the country on three sides. The adjacent northeastern region of India is a highly militarised zone and keeps Bangladesh wary at all times. It is also difficult for Bangladesh to gauge the direction of India's domestic politics in the light of anti-Bangladesh rhetoric, specially on immigrants, used in previous general elections. India’s record of politico-military involvement in Sri Lanka also doesn't help. Many Bangladeshis are worried about the state of Muslims in India as news of discrimination and persecution by Hindutva activists keep making news. On the other hand, Bangladesh’s current relationship with Pakistan is moving from bad to worse. Currently, Bangladesh’s relationship with the rest of the Islamic world is less cosy than in the past for obvious reasons. Even though India and Bangladesh share a warm relationship at present, Bangladesh doesn’t want to put all its eggs in the same basket by aligning too closely with the saffron dispensation in New Delhi. Therefore, neither Bangladesh wants acrimony with India nor does it need any defence cooperation. It’s better that Bangladesh’s defence remains independent of India. Rather, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on friendly coexistence and cooperation in countering terrorism and extremism would be a fair shot for both the countries. Hopefully, the Indian government would understand Bangladesh’s conundrum and would settle for something sustainable for both the sides.

Why a long-term defence pact with India is not in Bangladesh?s interest

<p>The External Affairs minister, Sushma Swaraj, has said that the government of India was in touch with Pakistan through diplomatic channels.</p>

<p>In a written reply to Lok Sabha, the minister said that &quot;the governments of India and Pakistan remained in touch through bilateral diplomatic channels, including for addressing all urgent humanitarian and other matters concerning people-to- people ties&quot;.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The minister said that the talks between the foreign secretaries of the two countries to decide the modalities of the Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue, agreed during her visit to Islamabad in December 2015, could not take place due to the terrorist attack on Pathankot airbase in January last year.</p>

<p>&quot;The government was also able to effectively neutralise Pakistan&#39;s efforts to internationalise Kashmir issue, and conveyed to India&#39;s interlocutors that normalisation of India-Pakistan relations through a peaceful bilateral dialogue can take place only in a conducive environment free from violence and terrorism,&quot; Swaraj said.</p>

<p>The Indian foreign secretary, S. Jaishankar, in exchange of letters with his Pakistani counterpart Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry last year, made it clear that the talks could go ahead only if Pakistan is willing to take action on terrorists responsible for the Pathankot airbase attack and the 2008 Mumbai attack. He also said that Pakistan will have to vacate from the illegally occupied parts of Jammu and Kashmir. &nbsp;</p>

<p>(WION with inputs from PTI)</p>


Swaraj said that the two governments were in touch through bilateral diplomatic channels addressing humanitarian, people-to-people concerns

The External Affairs minister, Sushma Swaraj, has said that the government of India was in touch with Pakistan through diplomatic channels. In a written reply to Lok Sabha, the minister said that "the governments of India and Pakistan remained in touch through bilateral diplomatic channels, including for addressing all urgent humanitarian and other matters concerning people-to- people ties". The minister said that the talks between the foreign secretaries of the two countries to decide the modalities of the Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue, agreed during her visit to Islamabad in December 2015, could not take place due to the terrorist attack on Pathankot airbase in January last year. "The government was also able to effectively neutralise Pakistan's efforts to internationalise Kashmir issue, and conveyed to India's interlocutors that normalisation of India-Pakistan relations through a peaceful bilateral dialogue can take place only in a conducive environment free from violence and terrorism," Swaraj said. The Indian foreign secretary, S. Jaishankar, in exchange of letters with his Pakistani counterpart Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry last year, made it clear that the talks could go ahead only if Pakistan is willing to take action on terrorists responsible for the Pathankot airbase attack and the 2008 Mumbai attack. He also said that Pakistan will have to vacate from the illegally occupied parts of Jammu and Kashmir. (WION with inputs from PTI)

India, Pakistan remained in touch through diplomatic channel: India's foreign minister

<p>US Defense secretary James Mattis said Iran was the world&#39;s biggest state sponsor of terrorism, as fresh sanctions were imposed by President Donald Trump.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;As far as Iran goes, this is the single biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world,&quot; Mattis told reporters at a press conference in Tokyo.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;It does no good to ignore it. It does no good to dismiss it and at the same time I don&#39;t see any need to increase the number of forces we have in the Middle East at this time,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>&quot;We always have the capability to do so but right now I don&#39;t think it&#39;s necessary,&quot; he added.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;Trump imposed new sanctions against Iran&#39;s weapons procurement network on Friday after Iran conducted a ballistic missile test this week.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Officials, however, maintain that the US will not break the deal signed with Iran under Obama administration to lift measures aimed at Iran&#39;s nuclear programme.&nbsp;</p>

<p>(WION with inputs from AFP)</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


US defense secretary James Mattis said there is no need to increase US troops in the middle east at this moment

US Defense secretary James Mattis said Iran was the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism, as fresh sanctions were imposed by President Donald Trump. "As far as Iran goes, this is the single biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world," Mattis told reporters at a press conference in Tokyo. "It does no good to ignore it. It does no good to dismiss it and at the same time I don't see any need to increase the number of forces we have in the Middle East at this time," he said. "We always have the capability to do so but right now I don't think it's necessary," he added. Trump imposed new sanctions against Iran's weapons procurement network on Friday after Iran conducted a ballistic missile test this week. Officials, however, maintain that the US will not break the deal signed with Iran under Obama administration to lift measures aimed at Iran's nuclear programme. (WION with inputs from AFP)

'Iran biggest state sponsor of terrorism' says Mattis

terrorism

Terrorism, News on Terrorism, stories on Terrorism, articles on Terrorism, Terrorism stories at Wion, Terrorism news, Terrorism latest news