India won’t intervene militarily in Maldives!

 

India won’t intervene militarily in Maldives!

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

—————

The Maldives is a low-lying country that is expected to be among the first in the world to go under water as a result of climate change. While it may take a few more decades for rising sea levels to wreak havoc on the archipelago, there are more immediate and pressing problems tearing the country apart.

An Indian Ocean archipelago of 1,192 islands, the Maldives is a tourist paradise. Tourism is the backbone of the country’s economy, and tour operators have reported hundreds of daily cancellations since the state of emergency was imposed on February 5. Following the state of emergency, Maldives has been in a tensed state of existence in as the archipelago is facing a sort of turmoil, ransacking its tourism based economy.

Crisis

 

The current crisis was the result of a Supreme Court ruling on February 1, overturning the convictions of Yameen’s rivals. In addition to ordering the government to release the nine convicted opposition leaders, the apex court called for reinstating 12 parliamentarians who were stripped of their seats last year when they left Yameen’s Progressive Party of Maldives to join the opposition.

Two weeks after the government of the Maldives declared a state of emergency amid rising political tension, on February 20th Parliament approved a 30-day extension that, among other grave consequences, may result in serious damages to the economy, scaring away international visitors. On February 20, President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom requested to extend the Maldives state of emergency for a total of 45 days. The Maldives government and the Ministry of Tourism have emphasized their commitment to safety for civilians and tourists alike.

The emergency “shall only apply to those alleged to have carried out illegal activities — it shall not apply to otherwise law-abiding residents of, or visitors to, the Maldives,” Yameen’s office said in a statement.

The opposition Jumhooree Party says the approval of the extension is illegal, and urged Yameen to lift the state of emergency in order to restore normalcy. “Despite the State of Emergency, the country is functioning as normal as possible,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of Tourism told TPG Tuesday before the extension was approved. “Schools and government offices are in operation and we do not foresee any threats to the public or tourists. We too are continuing with the promotional activities of the destination.”

Since Yameen became president in a controversial election in 2013, he has systematically crushed dissidence within his party and removed rivals from the political arena.

For instance, MDP leader and former Maldivian president Mohamed Nasheed, the archipelago’s first democratically elected leader, was convicted on terrorism charges in 2015 and sentenced to 13 years in jail. While Nasheed has been living in self-exile in Britain since 2016, several other opposition leaders, including a former defense minister in the Nasheed government, Mohamed Nazim; Yameen’s once “trusted” vice-president, Ahmed Adheeb; and leader of the opposition Adhaalath Party, Sheikh Imran Abdulla, are in jail on long prison terms.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) calls on neighboring India to militarily intervene to end the crisis, and let Nasheed become the president.

According to reports in the Indian media, the government has ruled out the military option for now, although it has activated its standing operating procedure for the Maldives by keeping troops ready for deployment there at short notice, should the need arise.

But India is said to be working with a group of countries, including the USA and Saudi Arabia, to pressure the government through imposition of sanctions. However, India has traditionally opposed the sanctions option to influence regime behavior, as sanctions affects ordinary people rather than the ruling elite.

Relations between India and the Maldives have been strong for decades; India played a major role in building the Maldives’ economy and military. It was India’s support that kept the authoritarian Gayoom in power for three decades.

However, bilateral ties have been fraying since Nasheed’s exit from power in 2012. That year, the Maldivian government abruptly terminated a $500 million contract awarded to India’s GMR Infrastructure for developing an airport in Male. Bilateral ties have deteriorated since then. Yameen’s “authoritarian governance” has irked India, but it is his tight embrace of China that has raised hackles in Delhi.

No invitation for invasion

 

A country could decide to send military forces to neighboring or any other country only on the request from the nation concerned. Otherwise the intervention becomes totally illegal and amounts to invasion. USA led NATO have been occupying many countries in Middle East and Afghanistan after invading them on false justifications.

Anyone who closely follows Indian state behavior abroad would quickly endorse the argument that India would not intervene in Maldives citing any reason.

In order to decide to sent troops to nearby Maldives, India must have got a request from the government of Maldives but that government has not sought it. In 1988 when India intervened in Maldives it was on the request received from the then President Gayoom.

When an external government is engaged in dealing with an emergency situation, naturally that power should be given huge service charges. Without any request from Maldivian government of Yameen, India won’t get any service charges. Though the exiled opposition leader Nasheed might be willing to pay the money to India as he has made the request to New Delhi, but India cannot respond to non-government actors.

This step alone can easily do away with any suggestion to India for intervention in Maldives.

The government of Maldives has not asked for Indian military to help bring peace and normalcy back to the island nation. India cannot attack Maldives on the suggestion by the opposition leader who now lives in Srilanka.

Claiming to be a ‘terror victim’, India would not like to be seen as an aggressor as no amount of justification can  make New Delhi “innocent” although it has got that look. .

China factor

 

But there are some more important reasons that deny India any chance to send troops to Maldives which, in the absence of a request from the government,   would mean to remove the President and government from power.

Today, archipelago Maldives is not alone, though insignificant for non-tourists. China is fast becoming an economic ally of Maldives and might soon have its own military bases in the island nations as well.

Chinese nexus is the prime strength Maldives would operate on.

Unlike China, USA can only bully small nations but cannot spend money on them, does not invest there to help their economies flourish. Already, Beijing, knowing the Indian strategic community’s desire for a military showcase byIndia in Maldives, has expressed its opposition to outside intervention from India.

Unlike USA, India cannot attack Maldives on the suggestion of USA or Israel or Opposition leader Nasheed and if that at all happens India would possibly be in a long term trouble.

In 2014, when Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Maldives, Yameen handed over the airport project to a state-run Chinese company. The two sides signed a string of deals during that visit that saw Beijing participate in a big way in infrastructure building in Maldives. Maldives also became an enthusiastic participant in the Maritime Belt of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Then in December last year, the Maldives and China signed a Free Trade Agreement, much to India’s concern. Delhi is worried about Beijing’s mounting influence over Maldives and the strategic implications for India.

China’s growing presence in the Maldives is a serious concern to India given the latter’s geographic proximity to the Indian coastline. The Maldives also sit near international sea lanes through which India’s oil imports traverse. India’s security would be threatened should the Chinese set up a naval base in the Maldives. These concerns are not without substance; in August 2017, three Chinese naval vessels docked at the Maldives’ capital, Male, setting off alarm bells in Delhi.

India’s vulnerability

 

India is watching the unfolding crisis in the Maldives with concern. It is mulling different options. Not doing anything is not an option given India’s stakes in a stable Maldives.

A seemingly busy India, whose PM is on a perpetual foreign tours as India’s foreign policy with very little time for the people and keeps mum on all major anti-people events, promotes rampant corruption and the powerful lords  loot the nation and its resources for private use, steel cash from nationalized banks, illegal mining and land grabbing.

IPL Modi, PNB looter Nirav Modi- both have escaped from India and are now abroad thanks to timely help and aid from agencies of Indian regime, Kothari, et al are just the tip of iceberg in Indian saga of misappropriation of state resources while the intelligence and media lords are terribly busy blasting fake news about Pakistan and Muslims in order rot keep the fanatic sections of India.

The Indian government has said it is “disturbed” by the declaration of emergency in the Maldives and “the suspension of the Maldivian people’s constitutional rights.” It is “carefully monitoring the situation,” it said. Earlier, its Ministry of External Affairs issued a travel advisory to its citizens traveling to Maldives.

Sections in India are in favor of an Indian military intervention in the Maldives. Some argue that it does not behoove a rising power with big ambitions like India to shrink away from acting robustly to defend its interests in the region.

A section of the BJP leadership has described the current crisis in the Maldives as an “opportunity” for India “to stake its claim to being a global player.” It is “imperative” for India to intervene in the Maldives, they argue,  “since any global role is always dependent on a country’s performance in the neighborhood first. Those who want to see India a superpower as soon as possible with a magic touch, say that “time is ripe for a decisive Indian intervention in the Maldives.”  Such intervention by India would have the support of countries like the USA, Israel and UK, which, they reason, would be keen to see the pro-China Yameen removed from power. “This could be used to silence the Kashmiris who fancy for sovereignty”.

If India does decide in favor of military intervention, this will not be the first time it has done so in the Maldives. In 1988, India sent in a small contingent of troops to avert a coup attempt against Gayoom. But the circumstances of that intervention were different from what exists today. In 1988, President Gayoom invited India to intervene. Yameen is unlikely to do so now.

Importantly as well, 30 years ago the coup plotters were just a small group of mercenaries. A military intervention today could leave Indian troops stuck in a Maldivian quagmire.

Yameen wins power struggle

 

Yameen, like most rulers today, is determined to cling to power. Not only has Yameen ignored the court order, but he went on to declare an emergency and had the judges who handed out the ruling arrested. Reinstating the 12 parliamentarians would reduce his government to a minority. That would enable parliament to oust him in a no-confidence vote.

Besides, Yameen seems apprehensive that allowing Nasheed to return to the Maldives and freeing the other opposition leaders would galvanize the opposition and boost mass protests against his iron-fisted rule. Presidential elections are due later this year and Yameen fears that he will be defeated by a strong opposition campaign.

With the proclamation of a state of emergency, Yameen has prevented parliament from meeting. The emergency will be in place for 15 days, during which he can be expected to pack the judiciary with loyal judges. He is likely to engineer defections from the opposition. He could extend the state of emergency as well.

Yameen has already appointed new judges, who have since annulled the court order releasing the opposition politicians. Former president and opposition leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who is Yameen’s half-brother, has been detained and Yameen has fired two police chiefs over three days.

With Yameen tightening his grip, Nasheed has called on India “to send an envoy, backed by its military to free the judges and the political detainees.” He has asked for India’s “physical presence” in the Maldives.

China has warned India against any military intervention in Maldives.

Observation

 

China is closely watching events in the Maldives. The archipelago is a popular destination for Chinese tourists; in light of the current uncertainty, Beijing has advised its citizens to postpone travel to the Maldives. Having invested heavily in the Maldives, China is concerned about the safety of its investments, projects, and personnel. It has asked the Maldivian government to take necessary measures to earnestly protect the security of the Chinese enterprises, situations and personnel.

Unlike India, China has leverage with the Maldivian government. Yameen is likely to listen to China. Beijing would not want to see Yameen go. China is opposed to India meddling in Maldives and has made this more than clear. An editorial in China’s state-run Global Times chided India for openly intervening in its neighbors’ domestic affairs. It observed that there is no justification for India to intervene in Male’s affairs.

Any military showcase by India could also prove counterproductive to India’s long-term interests. It would push Yameen closer to the Chinese, for instance. Besides, it would boost perception of India as a “big brother” and a “bully” in the region. Undemocratic forces in India’s neighboring countries have usually stoked anti-India sentiment among the masses by stressing such perceptions. This can be expected to happen in the Maldives too.

Importantly, an Indian military intervention is unlikely to benefit democratic forces in the Maldives in the long run as a democratic government, should one come to power in the archipelago following an intervention, would be seen as “made in India” with the USA acting as a “midwife.” Such a government would lack legitimacy in the eyes of many Maldivian people.

It does seem that the Sino-Indian contest for influence in the archipelago is as fierce as the ongoing tussle between Yameen and the Maldivian opposition.

Thus any suggestion for Indian military intervention in Maldives is ruled out.

India could perhaps act as a mediator in a possible dialogue between Yameen’s Maldivian government and the opposition. But Yameen would not welcome an Indian role against the Chinese wish. India thus cannot have privileged the leverage to influence the decisions of Maldivian President. Moreover, he has reportedly defied Indian requests relating to the current crisis.

Advertisements

Why India won’t intervene militarily in Maldives?

Why India won’t intervene militarily in Maldives?

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

—————

An Indian Ocean archipelago of 1,192 islands, the Maldives is a tourist paradise. The Maldives is a low-lying country that is expected to be among the first in the world to go under water as a result of climate change. While it may take a few more decades for rising sea levels to wreak havoc on the archipelago, there are more immediate and pressing problems tearing the country apart.

Tourism is the backbone of the country’s economy, and tour operators have reported hundreds of daily cancellations since the state of emergency was imposed on February 5. Following the state of emergency, Maldives has been in a tensed state of existence in as the archipelago is facing a sort of turmoil, ransacking its tourism based economy.

Crisis

The current crisis was the result of a Supreme Court ruling on February 1, overturning the convictions of Yameen’s rivals. In addition to ordering the government to release the nine convicted opposition leaders, the apex court called for reinstating 12 parliamentarians who were stripped of their seats last year when they left Yameen’s Progressive Party of Maldives to join the opposition.

Two weeks after the government of the Maldives declared a state of emergency amid rising political tension, on February 20th Parliament approved a 30-day extension that, among other grave consequences, may result in serious damages to the economy, scaring away international visitors. On February 20, President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom requested to extend the Maldives state of emergency for a total of 45 days. The Maldives government and the Ministry of Tourism have emphasized their commitment to safety for civilians and tourists alike.

The emergency “shall only apply to those alleged to have carried out illegal activities — it shall not apply to otherwise law-abiding residents of, or visitors to, the Maldives,” Yameen’s office said in a statement.

The opposition Jumhooree Party says the approval of the extension is illegal, and urged Yameen to lift the state of emergency in order to restore normalcy. “Despite the State of Emergency, the country is functioning as normal as possible,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of Tourism told TPG Tuesday before the extension was approved. “Schools and government offices are in operation and we do not foresee any threats to the public or tourists. We too are continuing with the promotional activities of the destination.”

Since Yameen became president in a controversial election in 2013, he has systematically crushed dissidence within his party and removed rivals from the political arena.

For instance, MDP leader and former Maldivian president Mohamed Nasheed, the archipelago’s first democratically elected leader, was convicted on terrorism charges in 2015 and sentenced to 13 years in jail. While Nasheed has been living in self-exile in Britain since 2016, several other opposition leaders, including a former defense minister in the Nasheed government, Mohamed Nazim; Yameen’s once “trusted” vice-president, Ahmed Adheeb; and leader of the opposition Adhaalath Party, Sheikh Imran Abdulla, are in jail on long prison terms.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) calls on neighboring India to militarily intervene to end the crisis, and let Nasheed become the president.

According to reports in the Indian media, the government has ruled out the military option for now, although it has activated its standing operating procedure for the Maldives by keeping troops ready for deployment there at short notice, should the need arise.

But India is said to be working with a group of countries, including the United States and Saudi Arabia, to pressure the government through imposition of sanctions. However, India has traditionally opposed the sanctions option to influence regime behavior, as sanctions affects ordinary people rather than the ruling elite.

Relations between India and the Maldives have been strong for decades; India played a major role in building the Maldives’ economy and military. It was India’s support that kept the authoritarian Gayoom in power for three decades.

However, bilateral ties have been fraying since Nasheed’s exit from power in 2012. That year, the Maldivian government abruptly terminated a $500 million contract awarded to India’s GMR Infrastructure for developing an airport in Male. Bilateral ties have deteriorated since then. Yameen’s “authoritarian governance” has irked India, but it is his tight embrace of China that has raised hackles in Delhi.

No invitation for invasion

A country could decide to send military forces to neighboring or any other country only on the request form that nation concerned. Otherwise the intervention becomes totally illegal and amounts to invasion. USA led NATO have been occupying many countries in Middle East and Afghanistan after invading them on false justifications.

Anyone who closely follows Indian state behavior abroad would quickly endorse the argument that India would not intervene in Maldives citing any reason.

In order to decide to sent troops to nearby Maldives, India must have got a request from the government of Maldives but that government has not sought it. In 1988 when India intervened in Maldives it was on the request received from the then President Gayoom.

When an external government is engaged in dealing with an emergency situation, naturally that power should be given huge service charges. Without any request from Maldivian government of Yameen, India won’t get any service charges. Though the exiled opposition leader Nasheed might be willing to pay the money to India as he has made the request to New Delhi, but India cannot respond to non-government actors.

This step alone can easily do away with any suggestion to India for intervention in Maldives.

The government of Maldives has not asked for Indian military to help bring peace and normalcy back to the island nation. India cannot attack Maldives on the suggestion by the opposition leader who now lives in Srilanka.

Claiming to be a ‘terror victim’, India would not like to be seen as an aggressor as no amount of justification can  make New Delhi “innocent” although it has got that look. .

 

China factor

But there are some more important reasons that deny India any chance to send troops to Maldives which, in the absence of a request from the government,   would mean to remove the President and government from power.

Today, archipelago Maldives is not alone, though insignificant for non-tourists. China is fast becoming an economic ally of Maldives and might soon have its own military bases in the island nations as well.

Chinese nexus is the prime strength Maldives would operate on.

Unlike China, USA can only bully small nations but cannot spend money on them, does not invest there to help their economies flourish. Already, Beijing, knowing the Indian strategic community’s desire for a military showcase byIndia in Maldives, has expressed its opposition to outside intervention from India.

Unlike USA, India cannot attack Maldives on the suggestion of USA or Israel or Opposition leader Nasheed and if that at all happens India would possibly be in a long term trouble.

In 2014, when Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Maldives, Yameen handed over the airport project to a state-run Chinese company. The two sides signed a string of deals during that visit that saw Beijing participate in a big way in infrastructure building in Maldives. Maldives also became an enthusiastic participant in the Maritime Belt of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Then in December last year, the Maldives and China signed a Free Trade Agreement, much to India’s concern. Delhi is worried about Beijing’s mounting influence over Maldives and the strategic implications for India.

China’s growing presence in the Maldives is a serious concern to India given the latter’s geographic proximity to the Indian coastline. The Maldives also sit near international sea lanes through which India’s oil imports traverse. India’s security would be threatened should the Chinese set up a naval base in the Maldives. These concerns are not without substance; in August 2017, three Chinese naval vessels docked at the Maldives’ capital, Male, setting off alarm bells in Delhi.

India’s vulnerability

India is watching the unfolding crisis in the Maldives with concern. It is mulling different options. Not doing anything is not an option given India’s stakes in a stable Maldives.

A seemingly busy India, whose PM is on a perpetual foreign tours as India’s foreign policy with very little time for the people and keeps mum on all major anti-people events, promotes rampant corruption and the powerful lords  loot the nation and its resources for private use, steel cash from nationalized banks, illegal mining and land grabbing.

IPL Modi, PNB looter Nirav Modi- both have escaped from India and are now abroad thanks to timely help and aid from agencies of Indian regime, Kothari, et al are just the tip of iceberg in Indian sage of misappropriation of state resources while the intelligence and media lords are terribly busy blasting fake news about Pakistan and Muslims in order rot keep the fanatic sections of India.

The Indian government has said it is “disturbed” by the declaration of emergency in the Maldives and “the suspension of the Maldivian people’s constitutional rights.” It is “carefully monitoring the situation,” it said. Earlier, its Ministry of External Affairs issued a travel advisory to its citizens traveling to Maldives.

Sections in India are in favor of an Indian military intervention in the Maldives. Some argue that it does not behoove a rising power with big ambitions like India to shrink away from acting robustly to defend its interests in the region.

A section of the BJP leadership has described the current crisis in the Maldives as an “opportunity” for India “to stake its claim to being a global player.” It is “imperative” for India to intervene in the Maldives, they argue,  “since any global role is always dependent on a country’s performance in the neighborhood first. Those who want to see India a superpower as soon as possible with a magic touch, say that “time is ripe for a decisive Indian intervention in the Maldives.”  Such intervention by India would have the support of countries like the USA, Israel and UK, which, they reason, would be keen to see the pro-China Yameen removed from power. “This could be used to silence the Kashmiris who fancy for sovereignty”.

If India does decide in favor of military intervention, this will not be the first time it has done so in the Maldives. In 1988, India sent in a small contingent of troops to avert a coup attempt against Gayoom. But the circumstances of that intervention were different from what exists today. In 1988, President Gayoom invited India to intervene. Yameen is unlikely to do so now. Importantly as well, 30 years ago the coup plotters were just a small group of mercenaries. A military intervention today could leave Indian troops stuck in a Maldivian quagmire.

Yameen wins power struggle

Yameen, like most rulers today, is determined to cling to power. Not only has Yameen ignored the court order, but he went on to declare an emergency and had the judges who handed out the ruling arrested. Reinstating the 12 parliamentarians would reduce his government to a minority. That would enable parliament to oust him in a no-confidence vote.

Besides, Yameen seems apprehensive that allowing Nasheed to return to the Maldives and freeing the other opposition leaders would galvanize the opposition and boost mass protests against his iron-fisted rule. Presidential elections are due later this year and Yameen fears that he will be defeated by a strong opposition campaign.

With the proclamation of a state of emergency, Yameen has prevented parliament from meeting. The emergency will be in place for 15 days, during which he can be expected to pack the judiciary with loyal judges. He is likely to engineer defections from the opposition. He could extend the state of emergency as well.

Yameen has already appointed new judges, who have since annulled the court order releasing the opposition politicians. Former president and opposition leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who is Yameen’s half-brother, has been detained and Yameen has fired two police chiefs over three days.

With Yameen tightening his grip, Nasheed has called on India “to send an envoy, backed by its military to free the judges and the political detainees.” He has asked for India’s “physical presence” in the Maldives.

China has warned India against any military intervention in Maldives.

Observation

China is closely watching events in the Maldives. The archipelago is a popular destination for Chinese tourists; in light of the current uncertainty, Beijing has advised its citizens to postpone travel to the Maldives. Having invested heavily in the Maldives, China is concerned about the safety of its investments, projects, and personnel. It has asked the Maldivian government to “to take necessary measures to earnestly protect the security of the Chinese enterprises, situations and personnel.”

Unlike India, China has leverage with the Maldivian government. Yameen is likely to listen to China. But Beijing would not want to see him go.

China is opposed to India meddling in Maldives and has made this more than clear. An editorial in China’s state-run Global Times chided India for openly intervening in its neighbors’ domestic affairs. There is “no justification” for India “to intervene in Male’s affairs,” it observed.

Any military showcase by India could also prove counterproductive to India’s long-term interests. It would push Yameen closer to the Chinese, for instance. Besides, it would boost perception of India as a “big brother” and a “bully” in the region. Undemocratic forces in India’s neighboring countries have usually stoked anti-India sentiment among the masses by stressing such perceptions. This can be expected to happen in the Maldives too.

Importantly, an Indian military intervention is unlikely to benefit democratic forces in the Maldives in the long run as a democratic government, should one come to power in the archipelago following an intervention, would be seen as “made in India” with the USA acting as a “midwife.” Such a government would lack legitimacy in the eyes of many Maldivian people.

It does seem that the Sino-Indian contest for influence in the archipelago is as fierce as the ongoing tussle between Yameen and the Maldivian opposition.

Thus any suggestion for Indian military intervention in Maldives is ruled out.

India could perhaps act as a facilitator or even a mediator in a possible dialogue between Yameen’s Maldivian government and the opposition. But will Yameen welcome an Indian role against the Chinese wish? Moreover, he has reportedly defied Indian requests relating to the current crisis. India cannot have privileged the leverage to influence the decisions of Maldivian President.

————

Zionist Israel: Fascist Netanyahu likely to be punished for serious fraudulence!

Zionist Israel: Fascist Netanyahu likely to be punished for serious fraudulence!

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

_____

 

Zionism says Israel promotes and does not –and should not- punish Jews.

Ever since Israel was imposed on Palestine by USA and allies that had won the WW II, the Zionist system took every care of Jews being imported primarily from Europe and Russia. Possibly, the Isreali courts refused to punish the criminal Jews and punished only Arabs and others, while Israeli regime refused to accept the International Law as the basis for all international disputes. Israel considers only its own Zionist laws as genuine and rejects all other laws simply as “anti-Semitist”.

For years, while Israel takes away the taxes of Palestine, Israeli political outfits loot the resources of Israel and take huge bribes from abroad in return for favors even form USA. Israeli leaders and rulers have exploited the tensed situation around in their own financial favors by misusing economic deals from within and across the globe where corporate lords like Ratan Tata of India give plenty of money to rulers- now Netanyahu.

The Israeli leader is mired in two separate corruption investigations. The first, known as Case 1000, revolves around him allegedly accepting luxury gifts worth tens of thousands of dollars from an Israeli-American billionaire. The second, which is referred to as Case 2000, is focused on his rumored deal with the influential Yedioth newspaper for better coverage in return for a crackdown on its rival outlet. Netanyahu, who denies all the allegations, is likely to face charges in the first probe, Israeli media reported last week.

Whether or not Israel would punish its top criminal leaders and frauds remains a trillion dollar question and similarly the Israeli courts run by illegal settler judges might not put Zionist fascist Netanyahu whose palms are stained with Palestinians blood, for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The Israeli police recommended that PM B Netanyahu be charged with bribery, fraud and breach of trust, casting a pall over the future of a tenacious leader who has become almost synonymous with his country. The announcement instantly raised doubts about his ability to stay in office.

 

The gifts and allegations

Netanyahu, who has been prime minister for nine straight years, and his family have become embroiled in a series of scandals in recent months.

Recordings recently emerged of his wife, Sara, screaming at an aide, while separate recordings emerged of his eldest son, Yair, on a drunken night out at a series of Tel Aviv strip clubs while traveling around in a taxpayer-funded government car with a government-funded bodyguard.

It follows reports that the bribe investigations have entered their final stages. It also comes immediately after the meeting on the recommendations, chaired by the police chief, recommend indicting Netanyahu in at least one of the corruption probes.

Netanyahu is involved in two separate criminal investigations, known as Case 1000 and Case 2000. In Case 1000, Netanyahu is suspected of having received gifts from businessmen overseas totaling 1 million shekels (approximately $280,000), including cigars, champagne, jewelry and more, from 2007 through 2016. The case has focused primarily on Netanyahu’s relationship with Israeli billionaire and Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan.

The case 2000 centres on an allegation that Netanyahu asked the publisher of an Israeli newspaper, Yediot Aharonot, for positive coverage in exchange for help in reining in a rival publication. The second allegation centres on a claim that Netanyahu, Israeli prime minister since 2009, received gifts worth at least a million shekels ($283,000; £204,000) from Hollywood mogul Arnon Milchan and other supporters.

In a statement, police said there was sufficient evidence to indict Netanyahu in the first case, known as File 1000, for accepting bribes, fraud and breach of trust. It said Netanyahu had accepted gifts valued at 750,000 shekels ($214,000) from Milchan, and 250,000 shekels (or $71,000) from Packer. The gifts from Milchan reportedly included expensive cigars and champagne. Netanyahu reportedly was recorded asking Arnon Mozes, the publisher of the Yediot Ahronot daily, for positive coverage in exchange for reining in a free pro-Netanyahu daily that had cut into Yediot’s business.

In exchange for the “gifts”, Netanyahu tried to advance a tax break that would have benefited Milchan. The Israeli PM worked to advance the extension of the tax waiver for returning citizens over 10 years, a benefit that has a considerable economic value for Milchan, the police statement said.

In exchange for more favorable media coverage, Netanyahu promised to hamper the circulation of a rival newspaper, in recordings obtained by police. “In his framework, what was discussed was the assistance of Mozes to Netanyahu in establishing his stature as PM through positive coverage in Yedioth Ahronoth that, in return for the PM assisting Mozes in advancing economic interests of Yedioth Ahronoth by an initiative to block the strengthening of Israel Hayom,” the police statement said.

Police said that in return, Netanyahu had operated on Milchan’s behalf on US visa matters, legislating a tax break and connecting him with an Indian businessman. It said he also helped Milchan, an Israeli producer whose credits include “Pretty Woman,” ″12 Years a Slave” and “JFK,” in the Israeli media market.

The Jerusalem Post says the gifts included champagne and cigars, and were given in exchange for help getting Milchan a US visa. Milchan, the producer of films including Fight Club, Gone Girl and The Revenant, should face bribery charges, police said.

The recommendations marked a dramatic ending to a months-long investigation into allegations that Netanyahu accepted gifts from Hollywood mogul Arnon Milchan and Australian billionaire James Packer, and suspicions that Netanyahu offered to give preferential treatment to a newspaper publisher in exchange for favorable coverage.

Among those caught up in the shipping investigation are David Shimron,  Netanyahu’s personal lawyer and second cousin, and Yitzhak Molcho,  Netanyahu’s lifelong friend and close adviser, whom he has sent on his most delicate diplomatic missions since the 1990s.  Molcho and Shimron are partners in a law firm as well as brothers-in-law.

Another possible case may be brewing over suspicions of the exchange of benefits in return for favorable media coverage between Netanyahu and a close friend who owns Bezeq, Israel’s telecommunications giant. According to the police, expensive cigars, jewelry and pink champagne flowed into the prime minister’s official Jerusalem residence in quantities sufficient to stock a small cocktail lounge. The generous patrons included Arnon Milchan, the Israeli movie producer, and James Packer, an Australian billionaire.

Israeli police recommended that Benjamin Netanyahu be indicted on bribery and breach of trust charges in a pair of corruption cases, dealing an embarrassing blow to the embattled prime minister that is likely to fuel calls for him to step down. Police said there was sufficient evidence to charge both Milchan and Mozes with bribery. There was no immediate comment from either man.

Graft investigation

The Israeli police accused Netanyahu of accepting nearly $300,000 in gifts over 10 years. Israeli police recommended that the state indict Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on charges of bribery and corruption. Unlike his military crimes in Palestine and Arab world, his economic corruption may not have anything to do with violating international law and the human rights but fate of Palestinians affected badly because of his corrupt career as the powerful PM.

 

Concluding a yearlong graft investigation, the police recommended that  Netanyahu face prosecution in two corruption cases: a gifts-for-favors affair known as Case 1000, and a second scandal, called Case 2000, in which  Netanyahu is suspected of back-room dealings with Arnon Mozes, publisher of the popular newspaper Yediot Aharonot, to ensure more favorable coverage.

Police also recommended that the state indict Mozes as well as billionaire Arnon Milchan, a Hollywood producer and former Israeli intelligence operative who allegedly gave Netanyahu gifts with the intention of bribing him. Haaretz published a graphic outlining the investigations. Case 1000 refers to claims that the prime minister accepted “lavish gifts,” and Case 2000 refers to the purported deal with the newspaper publisher.

The recommendation comes as part of ongoing probes into allegations that Netanyahu “improperly accepted expensive gifts from different businessmen” including from Indian corporate lord Ratan Tata who is among the top Indians seeking Bharatrna award- Indian nation’s top civilian honor – for  his ‘work’ and “negotiated with publisher Arnon ‘Noni’ Mozes for favorable coverage of himself in Yediot Aharonot in exchange for support of a bill to weaken Israel Hayom, the largest circulation Hebrew-language paper and Yediot’s biggest competitor

Criminal cum fraud Netanyahu deserves merciless punishment for his crimes against humanity by killing the besieged Palestinians, including their little children and with his corruption records he should be hanged without any mercy shown to him.  But can that a happen when his associate Trump is still alive.

Governments can do anything illegal, immoral and improper in promoting their favorites.

 

Zionist denial

As the police investigation gained steam in recent months, Netanyahu has claimed to be a “victim” of an overaggressive police force and a media witchhunt. This reminds us of his claims of being a “terror victim”.  USA and India also have similar fake claims.

Netanyahu has not been anxious to resign run away to avoid further embarrassment or punishment because he is sure of US support through the President Trump and he is damn sure of staying in power.

While Netanyahu has vehemently denied the allegations and publicly attacked the credibility of Israeli Police Commissioner Inspector General Roni Alsheich, observers have praised the indictment recommendations while also noting that these alleged crimes are not the worst of which he’s been accused—pointing to Israel’s ongoing occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well as its treatment of Palestinians, which have elicited demands that the prime minister be tried for war crimes at the International Criminal Court.

Police say they have enough evidence to indict Milchan on charges of bribery. MK Yair Lapid, a Netanyahu’s chief rival who served as finance minister during this period and was called to testify during the investigation, called on Netanyahu to step down. “Even if the law does not require the Prime Minister to resign, someone who has committed crimes and has such serious accusations against them, many of which he does not deny, cannot continue to serve as PM with responsibility for the security and well-being of Israel’s citizens,” Lapid said.

Milchan fired back at police, insisting he and Netanyahu have been friends since long before the period under investigation. “The recommendation disregards indisputable basic facts including — the ties between Milchan and Netanyahu started in the early years of 2000, when a military boss Netanyahu had no government role. This connection was characterized by friendship between the two and their families. In this framework, “gifts” were given from time to time by Mr. Milchan to the Netanyahu family with no business interest,” said Milchan’s lawyer.

Most Jews call bribes the Jewish leaders and rulers receive as gifts.

Both Netanyahu and Mozes have said these were not serious discussions; rather, they each claim they were trying to expose the other’s lack of trustworthiness. In a statement to Israeli media, the lawyer for Mozes said, “The cases against him will be closed.” As expected, Netanyahu has repeatedly proclaimed his innocence, insisting that investigators will find he did nothing wrong. Police say there is enough evidence to indict Mozes on charges of offering bribes.

The Israeli leader has long been fighting with the country’s law enforcement over Police Commissioner Roni Alsheikh’s decision to proceed with the publication. Last week, after Alsheikh alleged that certain “powerful” elements are trying to compromise the investigation into Netanyahu by collecting information on the officers involved, the Israeli PM called the claims “delusional and false insinuations

 

Jewish stubbornness

Netanyahu is stubborn, bold and damn sure nothing would happen to him. “Over the years, I have been the subject of at least 15 enquiries and investigations,” he said in his TV address. “Some have ended with thunderous police recommendations like those of tonight. All of those attempts resulted in nothing, and this time again they will come to nothing.”

In his TV address, Netanyahu said that his entire three-decade political career, which included serving as Israel’s ambassador to the U.N., a stint at prime minister in the 1990s and a series of Cabinet posts, were meant only to serve the Israeli public. He acknowledged aiding Milchan with his visa issues, but said Milchan had done much for Israel and noted that the late Shimon Peres had also been close with Milchan. He also said that over the years he had taken decisions that hurt Milchan’s business interests in Israel. He said all the allegations over the years against him had one goal: “to topple me from government.” He said past scandals had all “ended with nothing” and “this time as well they will end with nothing.”

At the same time, the PM attempted to downplay the impact of the looming police report on the attorney general’s final decision, adding “we don’t attach any importance to the recommendations, the value of which everyone now understands.”

Netanyahu said the allegations were baseless and that he would continue as prime minister. The allegations, he said, “will end with nothing”. Netanyahu has said the scandals are all the work of media out to get him. His coalition partners, so far, have backed him, saying they will not take down the government over a police conclusion. According to a police statement published, authorities found evidence of “accepting bribes, fraud, and breach of trust.”

Israeli media say Netanyahu has been questioned by investigators at least seven times. Israel’s Channel 10 reported in December that Packer told investigators he gave the prime minister and his wife Sara gifts. Police say Netanyahu is also suspected of fraud and breach of trust in a case involving Australian billionaire James Packer.

But while the petition was still being processed, Netanyahu appeared to distance himself from the move. Speaking on Israeli television, Netanyahu said he would continue to rule Israel in his assigned role.

Yossi Fuchs, right wing attorney who filed the appeal, did not hide the fact that the petition’s imminent aim was to shield the embattled Israeli leader from a public backlash that may result from the publication of the report. He argued that the attorney general will not be able to stay impartial amid such outcry and will be forced to take the side of the police.

Gradually some ministers have stopped endorsing his crimes.

Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, a bitter rival of Netanyahu, called on him to suspend himself and for the coalition to appoint a replacement on Wednesday morning. “The depth of corruption is horrifying,” Barak said. “This does not look like nothing. This looks like bribery.”

Shrewd Zionist criminal

Basically criminal minded, Netanyahu has murdered several Palestinians in order to stay in power. .

The 68-year-old is in his second stint as prime minister, and has served in the role for a total of 12 years. He has faced a number of allegations in his time in office. After his first term as prime minister two decades ago, police recommended that he and Sara face criminal charges for keeping official gifts that should have been handed over to the state. The charges were later dropped. In July 2015, the couple was accused of charging the government for the services of a contractor who did private work for them. The charges were later dropped.

Now Netanyahu angrily rejected the accusations, which included accepting nearly $300,000 in gifts from a pair of billionaires. He accused police of being on a witch hunt, vowed to remain in office and even seek re-election. In an effort to deflect blame, Netanyahu has lashed out, attacking the police, the media, the opposition and the left in rallies and on social media. He has often called the investigations against him “fake news,” echoing the language of President Donald Trump.

And he has presided over an increasingly bitter relationship with the Palestinians in the territories Israel has occupied for more than a half-century, whose hopes of soon gaining a state of their own have dwindled as Israeli settlements expand.

Netanyahu, who has emerged as one of President Trump’s most ardent allies, is serving his third consecutive term since his election in 2009 and his fourth overall since the 1990s. If he were to remain in the post through July 2019, it would set a record for total time in office, surpassing that of the state’s founder, David Ben-Gurion.

Netanyahu’s relationship with Trump—who, last year, provoked international outrage by recognizing Jerusalem and the capital of Israel—and drew comparisons the US probe, led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, into allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian operatives to influence the 2016 election and obstructed justice.

Yet, Netanyahu has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has vowed to fight on, saying that no police recommendation would prompt his resignation. His longevity attests to his political agility and to his perfection of a campaigning and governing style in which he casts his political foes and critics as enemies of the broader body politic.

Though he has formed previous governing coalitions with those to his left, his current government is often described as the most right-wing and religious in Israel’s history.

Netanyahu has prepared the public for this moment for months, and made strenuous efforts to discredit those investigating him, but he has not prepared Israel or his government for the possibility that he may be unable to continue to lead. He has designated no successor, and no single member of his own coalition has emerged as ready to step into his shoes. Meanwhile, a centrist opposition, led by Yair Lapid of the Yesh Atid party, has been gaining strength.

The Israeli law enforcement authorities have handled the cases with great caution, wary of the possibility of bringing down a prime minister who might then be proved not guilty in court, not least with Israel facing increasing security threats on its northern and southern frontiers.

Israel’s constant state of alert has led some critics to argue all the more that a prime minister so focused on fighting his own legal battles cannot be entrusted with fateful decisions of peace and war. Netanyahu promoted the extension of a 10-year tax exemption to expatriate Israelis returning to the country, “a benefit that has great economic value for Milchan,” who has long worked in Hollywood. But the Finance Ministry blocked this legislation, saying it was against the national interest and fiscally unsound.

The police recommendations must now be examined by state prosecutors and the attorney general, Avichai Mandelblit, a former military prosecutor and onetime Netanyahu aide. Last week, Israeli Police Chief Roni Alsheich, in an interview with Israel’s Keshet news channel, said “powerful elements” were “sniffing” around investigators working on the Netanyahu cases.

Israel’s Supreme Court has ruled in the past that government ministers or deputy ministers, once indicted, may not remain in their posts. Whether that principle should also apply to the elected prime minister is an open question.

 

Olmert has some dignity, Netanyahu has nothing!

Netanyahu would be something of a test case as Israel’s first sitting prime minister to be formally charged. His predecessor, Ehud Olmert, announced his resignation in September 2008, a week after the police recommended that he be charged with bribery, breach of trust, money laundering and fraudulent receipt of goods. That case involved an American businessman and a travel-expense scandal from Mr. Olmert’s days as mayor of Jerusalem and minister of industry and trade.

Olmert was eventually convicted in various cases and served 19 months of a 27-month prison sentence. He was released last year.

Pre-empting the police recommendations, Netanyahu told the public to expect them and did his best to minimize their importance. “Any fair-minded person will ask themselves how people who say such delusional things about the prime minister can investigate him objectively and make recommendations in his case without bias” he wrote accusing the police commissioner, Roni Alsheich, of having an agenda. In December, Netanyahu told a gathering of his right-wing Likud Party supporters: “The vast majority of police recommendations end in nothing. Over 60 percent of the police recommendations are thrown in the trash. Over 60 percent of the police recommendations don’t get to an indictment.”

Experts have disputed those figures, however, and the prime minister’s opponents have begun quoting from an interview he gave in 2008, at the height of Olmert’s legal troubles, to turn the tables on Netanyahu.  Describing Olmert as “up to his neck in investigations,” Netanyahu said of his political rival at the time: “He does not have a public or moral mandate to determine such fateful matters for the state of Israel when there is the fear, and I have to say it is real and not without basis, that he will make decisions based on his personal interest in political survival and not based on the national interest.”

In some ways, though, Netanyahu has been here before. During his first term in office, in the late 1990s, the police recommended that he be charged with fraud and breach of trust in a complicated case in which Netanyahu was suspected of acting to appoint an attorney general who would be sympathetic to a minister under investigation for corruption, in return for that minister’s political support. Ultimately, the attorney general closed that case, citing a lack of evidence.

Again, in March 2000, once Netanyahu was out of office, the police recommended that he be charged with bribery, fraud and breach of trust in a case involving his holding on to $100,000 in gifts that were state property and having the state pay for private work on his home. Months later, the attorney general also ordered that case closed.

This time around, the police recruited a state’s witness, Ari Harow, Netanyahu’s former chief of staff and once one of his closest confidants.

 

Netanyahu fixed

Opposition politicians pounced, demanding that Netanyahu step down, be ousted by his coalition or at least declare himself “incapacitated,” as former Prime Minister Ehud Barak urged on Twitter, calling the police findings “hair-raising.”  The left-leaning Zionist Union party should quit the government.  “If you have a drop of concern for the future, fulfill your obligation. Free Israel from this madness.”

And Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon, whose center-right Kulanu party holds 10 seats in Parliament, giving it the power to sink Netanyahu’s government, signaled just before midnight that he was not prepared to leave the coalition, saying that he would wait for the attorney general’s decision on whether to indict Netanyahu.

The police have also been making headway in other criminal investigations in which Netanyahu has not been named as a subject, but that involve associates from his most inner circle. His wife already faces criminal charges of sneaking $100,000 in catered meals into the prime minister’s residence.

But a potentially far more explosive scandal, called Case 3000, involves a $2 billion deal for the purchase of submarines and missile ships from a German supplier. Critics have described that episode as perhaps the biggest corruption case in Israeli history, touching on deep conflicts of interest and national security.

Netanyahu, addressing the nation live on television shortly before the police released their findings made clear that he would not step down. “I feel a deep obligation to continue to lead Israel in a way that will ensure our future,” he said, before embarking on a 12-minute defense of his conduct. “You know I do everything with only one thing in mind — the good of the country,” he said. “Not for cigars from a friend, not for media coverage, not for anything. Nothing has made me deviate, or will make me deviate, from this sacred mission.”

With a cloud hanging over his head, he could soon find himself facing calls to step aside. During similar circumstances a decade ago, Netanyahu, as opposition leader, urged then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to resign during a police investigation, saying a leader “sunk up to his neck in interrogations” could not govern properly.

A final decision on whether Netanyahu should face charges will come down to the attorney general’s office. A decision could take months to reach. Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked said any prime minister who has been charged should not be obliged to resign.

The police statement said that Netanyahu, after receiving gifts, even from Jews coming to settle down  in Israel, pushed for the Milchan Law, which would have ensured that Israelis who return to live in Israel from abroad were exempt from paying taxes for 10 years. The proposal was eventually blocked by the finance ministry.

 

Observation: Netanyahu seeks escape route

Israel’s highest court has given police the go-ahead to publicize indictment recommendations in two long-running corruption investigations into the prime minister. Outrage over the probes led to months of large-scale protests.

The decision gives police the green light to submit their recommendations on the PM’s possible indictment to the attorney general. The highly anticipated release was halted on Sunday due to the petition pending a hearing in court.

Israeli police said there is “sufficient evidence” to indict Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on criminal charges in two corruption cases.

The final decision about whether to file formal charges lies with Mandelblit and is subject to a hearing beforehand with Netanyahu’s lawyers. Reaching that threshold alone could easily take months.

Police will now pass the evidence to the attorney general, who will make a decision on whether or not to indict the Prime Minister. That decision is not expected imminently.

By Israeli law, he is only required to step down if he is convicted and that conviction is upheld through the appeals process to the High Court, a process that could take years.

However, he could face public and political pressure to step down much earlier.

Opinion says if Netanyahu needs to be indicted, the attorney general must make a decision to bring charges against him, but he needs to be able to make that decision without public pressure based on police recommendations

Since the probes were launched in December 2016, they have grown into a source of recurrent public outrage, with thousands of Israelis taking to streets to protest the “Crime Minister” every Saturday.

Late last year, the protest movement was given a boost by Israeli lawmakers, who passed a law aimed at scrapping the procedure of police recommendations to the attorney general. The bill, however, was watered down so that it would not apply to current investigations, including Netanyahu’s.

Netanyahu long ago earned the nickname “the Magician” for his uncanny knack for political endurance, and even his most ardent opponents have been hesitant to write him off.

At what point he might be legally required to step down, short of a final conviction, is likely to be a matter of increasingly heated debate, though public opinion and political pressure could in the end play a decisive role.

When asked whether the USA had any reaction to the police statement, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said, “The only thing I have to say about that is that the United States has a very strong relationship, not only with PM Netanyahu but also the Israeli government. We’re certainly aware of it, but we consider it to be an internal Israeli matter.”

The next legislative elections are scheduled for November 2019.  Netanyahu heads a fragile coalition, but on television, he appeared confident the allegations would not spur new elections.

it is the favors Netanyahu may have given his wealthy friends in return that could herald his downfall. A formal bribery charge would be by far the most serious outcome, and the most ominous for his political survival.

Hopefully, Israeli system would not provide an escape route for fascist Netanyahu from legal complications to remain unpunished.

Netanyahu deserves worst possible punishment for all his crimes.

Iran plane crash along with 66 persons on board!

Iran plane crash along with 66 persons on board!

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

_________

 

In one of theorist air crash in recent times in Iran,

Relatives of 66 people who were on board a plane that crashed in Iran are desperately waiting for any news. State media says the Aseman Airlines passenger plane that came down in the Zagros Mountains on Sunday has been found. Sixty passengers, two security guards, two flight attendants and the pilot and co-pilot were on board.

All those on board were feared to have been killed. Heavy wind and snow forced rescuers to stop the search late on Sunday. The plane that crashed was a French-Italian made ATR 72-500. The ATR 72-500 twin-engine turboprop was travelling from Tehran to the south-western city of Yasuj. Flight EP3704 left Tehran at 04:30 GMT on Sunday, and crashed about an hour later on Dena Mountain, near the city of Semirom in Isfahan province. The crash site is about 22km (14 miles) from Yasuj, Iranian media reported.  The crashed plane was 25 years old, Iran’s civil aviation organisation said.

Search and rescue teams were dispatched to look for the site where the plane came down, but were later forced to stop the operation. “With the wind intensifying, and with snow, rain and darkness, it is not possible for rescue and relief teams to reach high altitudes and the search operation has been postponed until tomorrow,” broadcaster IRIB announced. “Five helicopters are on alert to resume the search at dawn if the weather conditions are better.”

Aseman Airline initially said everyone had been killed, but said later: “Given the special circumstances of the region, we still have no access to the spot of the crash and therefore we cannot accurately and definitely confirm the death of all passengers of this plane.”

Passengers’ relatives earlier gathered at a mosque near Tehran’s Mehrabad airport, according to AFP news agency. “I can’t bring myself to believe it,” said one woman whose husband was on the plane. One man told Tabnak news website that he had missed the flight. Showing an unused ticket as proof, he said: “God has been really kind to me but I am so sad from the bottom of my heart for all those dear ones who lost their lives.”

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani expressed sympathy for all involved, saying in a statement that the incident brought “great grief and sorrow”. Iran has suffered several aviation accidents in recent years and has an ageing aircraft fleet. The country has struggled to obtain spare parts to maintain its planes in the face of international sanctions imposed to curb its nuclear program. Those sanctions have been mostly lifted under a 2015 deal between Iran and the US alongside several other powers. Aseman, Iran’s third largest airline, signed a contract with Boeing last year to buy 30 of its latest medium-range 737s.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has also expressed “deep sympathy” for relatives of those on board, saying the accident “saddened the hearts”.

Recent major air crashes in Iran  

August 2014: Sepahan airways Antonov carrying 40 crashes shortly after take-off from Tehran, killing 39 – engine failure blamed; January 2011: IranAir Boeing 727 breaks up on landing in snowstorm in north-west, killing 78; July 2009: Caspian Airlines Tupolev bound for Armenia from Tehran catches fire shortly after take-off killing all 168 on board

Aviation deaths have been steadily falling for the last two decades. In 2005, there were more than 1,000 deaths on-board commercial passenger flights worldwide, the Aviation Safety Network said.

2017 was the safest year in history for commercial airlines, according to industry research. There were no passenger jets crashes anywhere in the world, separate reports by Dutch consultancy To70 and The Aviation Safety Network found. This was despite more flights being made than ever before. But To70 warned that despite high safety levels on passenger planes, the “extraordinarily” low accident rate must be seen as “good fortune”.

A report by the Airline Safety Network said there were a total of ten fatal accidents, resulting in 79 deaths last year. That compared with 16 accidents and 303 lives lost in 2016. The organisation based its figures on incidents involving civil aircraft certified to carry at least 14 people.

The most serious accident of 2017 came in January when a Turkish cargo plane crashed into a village in Kyrgyzstan killing all four crew and 35 people on the ground. And the incident with the most on-board fatalities happened on New Year’s Eve, when a Nature Air single-propeller Cessna 208 Caravan plane crashed in western Costa Rica, killing 12 passengers and crew.

Neither report counted military or helicopter accidents, meaning the year’s worst air disaster, the crash of a Burmese Y-8 military transporter plane, which crashed in June killing all 122 people on board did not appear in the statistics.

The last fatal passenger jet airliner accident took place in November 2016 in Colombia, and the last commercial passenger aircraft crash to kill more than 100 people occurred in Egypt a year earlier. ASN said the accident rate was one fatal passenger flight accident per 7,360,000 flights. “Since 1997 the average number of airliner accidents has shown a steady and persistent decline, for a great deal thanks to the continuing safety-driven efforts by international aviation organisations such as ICAO, IATA, Flight Safety Foundation and the aviation industry,” ASN president Harro Ranter said.

Incidents involving smaller planes also did not figure in the data.

Safety improving

Dutch consultancy To70, estimated there was one fatal accident for every 16 million flights, though its report was compiled before the Costa Rica crash. “2017 was the safest year for aviation ever,” the firm’s Adrian Young said, but added civil aviation still carried “very large risks”. He pointed to new technology including fears of lithium-ion batteries catching fire on-board, as well as “mental health issues and fatigue,” among the main risk factors for the industry. And he highlighted that there were “several quite serious non-fatal accidents” including the “spectacular” failure of an engine on an Air France A380.

Heavy wind and snow forced rescuers to stop the search late on Sunday.The ATR 72-500 twin-engine turboprop was travelling from Tehran to the south-western city of Yasuj. ‘God has been kind to me’

Sixty passengers, two security guards, two flight attendants and the pilot and co-pilot were on board. Aseman Airline initially said everyone had been killed, but said later: “Given the special circumstances of the region, we still have no access to the spot of the crash and therefore we cannot accurately and definitely confirm the death of all passengers of this plane.”

Passengers’ relatives earlier gathered at a mosque near Tehran’s Mehrabad airport, according to AFP news agency.

State media says the Aseman Airlines passenger plane that came down in the Zagros Mountains on Sunday has been found. “I can’t bring myself to believe it,” said one woman whose husband was on the plane. One man told Tabnak news website that he had missed the flight.

Showing an unused ticket as proof, he said: “God has been really kind to me but I am so sad from the bottom of my heart for all those dear ones who lost their lives.”

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani expressed sympathy for all involved, saying in a statement that the incident brought “great grief and sorrow”.

Iran has suffered several aviation accidents in recent years and has an ageing aircraft fleet.

The country has struggled to obtain spare parts to maintain its planes in the face of international sanctions imposed to curb its nuclear program.

Those sanctions have been mostly lifted under a 2015 deal between Iran and the US alongside several other powers.

Aseman, Iran’s third largest airline, signed a contract with Boeing last year to buy 30 of its latest medium-range 737s.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has also expressed “deep sympathy” for relatives of those on board, saying the accident “saddened the hearts”.

Passengers’ relatives have gathered at a mosque near Tehran’s Mehrabad airport. “I can’t bring myself to believe it,” said one woman whose husband was on board. One man told Tabnak news website that he had missed the flight. Showing an unused ticket as proof, he said: “God has been really kind to me but I am so sad from the bottom of my heart for all those dear ones who lost their lives.”

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani expressed sympathy for all involved, saying, in a statement, that the incident brought “great grief and sorrow”.

Iran has suffered several aviation accidents in recent years and has an ageing aircraft fleet.

The country has struggled to obtain spare parts to maintain its planes in the face of international sanctions imposed to curb its nuclear program.

Those sanctions have been mostly lifted under a 2015 deal between Iran and the US alongside several other powers.

Aseman, Iran’s third largest airline, signed a contract with Boeing last year to buy 30 of its latest medium-range 737s.

The crashed plane, a French-Italian-made ATR 72-500, was 25 years old, Iran’s civil aviation organisation said.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has also expressed “deep sympathy” for relatives of those on board, saying the accident “saddened the hearts”.

Sixty-six people are feared to have been killed in a passenger plane crash in the Zagros mountains in Iran.

The Aseman Airlines plane, en route from Tehran to the south-western city of Yasuj, came down near the city of Semirom in Isfahan province.

The Red Crescent deployed search and rescue teams to the site. The airline has retracted a statement saying definitively that all aboard were dead.

Flight EP3704 left Tehran at 04:30 GMT, and crashed about an hour later.

The aircraft, a twin-engine turboprop, came down on Dena Mountain, 22km (14 miles) from Yasuj, news channel Irinn reported.

Sixty passengers, two security guards, two flight attendants and the pilot and co-pilot were on board.

The airline initially said everyone had been killed, but said later: “Given the special circumstances of the region, we still have no access to the spot of the crash and therefore we cannot accurately and definitely confirm the death of all passengers of this plane.”

Bad weather, including fog and heavy snow, has hampered rescue efforts. Emergency teams have had to travel to the crash site by land rather than using a helicopter.

Passengers’ relatives have gathered at a mosque near Tehran’s Mehrabad airport, according to Reuters news agency. “I can’t bring myself to believe it,” said one woman whose husband was on board. One man told Tabnak news website that he had missed the flight.

Showing an unused ticket as proof, he said: “God has been really kind to me but I am so sad from the bottom of my heart for all those dear ones who lost their lives.”

The country has struggled to obtain spare parts to maintain its planes in the face of international sanctions imposed to curb its nuclear program.

Those sanctions have been mostly lifted under a 2015 deal between Iran and the US alongside several other powers.

Aseman, Iran’s third largest airline, signed a contract with Boeing last year to buy 30 of its latest medium-range 737s. Iran’s civil aviation organisation said that the crashed plane, a French-Italian-made ATR 72-500, was 25 years old.

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani expressed sympathy for all involved, saying, in a statement, that the incident brought “great grief and sorrow”.

Iran has suffered several aviation accidents in recent years and has an ageing aircraft fleet.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has also expressed “deep sympathy” for relatives of those on board, saying the accident “saddened the hearts”.

Investigate- Indo South African cricket match fixing to remove Prez Jacob Zuma?

 

Investigate- Indo South African cricket match fixing to remove Prez Jacob Zuma?

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

_____

 

Cricket is fake sport where right from the toss literally everything is fixed with the agenda of obtaining desired outcomes.  Big money change hands even as fanatic spectators watch the cricketism matches.

Can cricketers also play politics? Why not? Can they be used to bring down a government by making them underplay deliberately? Have Indian and South African teams played for the down fall of president Zuma?

Apparently the removal of South African Prez Jacob Zuma was the target of Indo-South African cricket teams, though there are no authenticated reports in this regard.  Cricket mafias and core media keep the secret deals very close and dear to them.

Outcomes of cricket matches are linked to the same other issues. South African President has been forced to resign because S by visiting India

So PM Modi is safe for now.

South African President was removed because they lost cricket series to India.

Cricket match fixing, South Africa debacle and President Zuma removal

Cricket match fixing in South Africa had been fixed to remove President Zuma with a deliberate debacle.

South Africa has to offer one 100 to one of Indian players!

That is the Indian cricketism, IPL rule.

Indo-South African ed several times But Indian circlet board BCCI and its SA version seem to have fixed the ODI in favor of India. So, SA bowlers are weak and carefree to offer at east one full 100 to a top batboy, if the top ones fail

then next persons in order would get it – even Dhoni could hope for it if others fail.

Once agreements are made South African IPL fellows must oblige India team whether India plays in India or abroad.

Not just that. SA bowlers should not attack poor Indian batboys and let them all shine, Indian wickets cannot be taken by A as per rule and Indian batboys would throw away their wicket on their own volition when they want.

Only error can make an Indian wicket fall. SA wont target Indian wickets, stumps, etc.

As per the agreements, SA bowlers should not trouble Indian batboys so that they make as many fake records as possible.

Are not Indians in South Africa smart enough?

In fact, Indian cricket team has forced SA President Zuma to resign from presidency after he was removed from power. That is because their cricket team deliberately lost to visiting Indian team of Guptas. ..

Indian PM Modi should feel relieved that they are playing in SA to oust him from power and let Zuma go to hell as he has ruled many years.  But IPL and ISL etc must be on course to get him also out. .

 

Interestingly, both teams are now busy playing another format T20 India playing with same players. PM and finance minister deliberately deny other young players chances to serve their country Mother India by being in at least one format.

Will PM Modi be kind to consider their inner voice?

After all what would India do with all such fake records and false rankings in cricket in all formats? If Indian regime provides the youngsters to come to play for the nation by replacing old/senior guys who have played for 5 years that would be good for the nation and people.

Mafias cannot be allowed control cricket team composition. Corruption and huge cash flow in BCCI is a reason for all wrong decisions being taken there.

Interestingly, cricket board I kept outside the purview of sports ministry because India wants to promote corruption in cricket independent of corruption in government and elsewhere. Now we know how some big guys have looted the India bank money with the government supporting their causes as being a part of global capitalism to fund imperialism and terror wars.

Already India has asked SA to bowl first and offer at least 200 runs in 2o overs without targeting the stumps. And South African fraud shave obliged Indian regime and BCCI.

Like Sri Lanka, South Africans are very reliable and trust worthy team with kind bowlers who would go all out to promote India batboys with big scores and they themselves deliberately lose and add insult to their nation.

So What?

It is between two nations and they relate cricketism with regime change.  After tremendous success of India in South Africa, now Australia is happily going to there to make merry with 100s and 200s and 50s, etc and make new bogus records.

Meanwhile, there should be a investigation on the question if Indo South African cricket match fixing has taken place to remove Prez Jacob Zuma. If yes, that is a very serious matter because fake cricketers have taken into hands the issue of regime change. Government brokers and cricket mafias jointly decide the matter of removal of a ruler.

fake sports, cricket match fixing etc are linked to financial fraudulences that Indian regime promotes as its policy to help the corporate lords expand  their wealth, while the poor and common people are left to their own fate.

India’s anti-Muslim policy!

India’s anti-Muslim policy!

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

______

 

India’s anti-Muslim policy is well known and welcomed by nay anti-Islamic nations around the globe. In fact, this Indian anti-Islamic policy has gathered a few allies not only in the West and Israel but even in third world countries.

India’s anti-Muslim policy is directly linked to its anti-Pakistan policy.  In fact, Indian anti-Islam policy is also connected to its hatred for Pakistan. When the criminal Hindus pulled down ghastly the historic Babri mosque India may have thought it has attacked and destroyed Pakistan.

Sick minds need treatment proper treatment but who will do that when Americans and Arabs rejoice at Hindutva happiness?

Indo-Pak

Relations between India and Pakistan have been complex and largely hostile due to a number of historical and political events starting with the violent partition of British India in 1947, the Kashmir conflict leading to numerous military conflicts fought between the two nations. Consequently, their relationship has been plagued by hostility and suspicion. India views its own Muslims with suspicion, denies them legitimate rights, now lynching and denial of Muslim marriage- divorce rights. . Like it sees Pakistan, India hates Muslims and ignores I their presence. Even the Muslim ministers in BJP government obviously are under surveillance.

Officially, India emerged as a “secular nation” with a Hindu majority population and a large Muslim minority and Muslims have been under duress and surveillance, they are continuously insulted and injured. Pakistan emerged also as a secular nation with an overwhelming Muslim majority population; later becoming an Islamic republic although its constitution guarantees freedom of religion to people of all faiths. India remained a threat to Pakistan and snubbed it, always wished bad for it and its people.

Soon after their independence, India and Pakistan established diplomatic relations but mutual suspicion and hatred kept them divided perpetually.

Since their Independence, the two countries have fought three major wars, one undeclared war and have been involved in numerous armed skirmishes and military standoffs. The Kashmir conflict is the main centre-point of all of these conflicts with the exception of the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971 and Bangladesh Liberation War, which resulted in the secession of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The attempts to improve the relationship have failed mainly because of Kashmir issue and Indian hatred for Muslims in both nations and the Shimla summit, the Agra summit and the Lahore summit etc only served the leaders to come together to enjoy  life for a couple of days. Since the early 1980s, relations between the two nations soured particularly after the Siachen conflict, the intensification of Kashmir insurgency in 1989, Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests in 1998 and the 1999 Kargil war. The 2003 ceasefire agreement and the Delhi–Lahore Bus service – were only particularly successful in de-escalating tensions.

After a brief thaw following the election of new governments in both nations, bilateral discussions again stalled after the 2016 Pathankot attack.[5] In September 2016, a terrorist attack on an Indian military base in Indian-administered Kashmir, the deadliest such attack in years, killed 19 Indian Army soldiers. India’s claim that the attack had been orchestrated by a Pakistan-supported jihadist group was denied by Pakistan. India links struggle for Kashmiris for sovereignty to Pakistan. But Pakistan, like its nuclear neighbor India, also has not decided to give up Kashmiri lands it occupies.

Whose land is Kashmir?  

Kashmir was a Muslim-majority princely state, ruled by a Hindu king, Maharaja Hari Singh. At the time of the partition of India, Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of the state, preferred to remain independent and did not want to join either the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan. He wanted both India and Pakistan to recognize his princely state as an independent neutral country. But India managed to get the Hindu king to accept Indian accession soon after the Indian independence but Pakistan also sent troops to P Kashmir. Now both occupy Jammu Kashmir. While Pakistan does not kill Kashmiris, India does it voluntarily as Indian policy as most of them seek sovereignty form Indian occupation and its crimes.

Since independence in 1947, the two nuclear-armed neighbours have fought two of their three wars over Kashmir, which both countries claim in full. The LoC has remained volatile in the last year. According to official figures, 860 incidents of ceasefire violations by Pakistani troops were reported in 2017, compared with 221 the year before.

As Indian media blast anti-Kashmir  feelings, anti-India sentiment runs deep among Kashmir’s mostly Muslim population, and most support the rebels’ cause against Indian rule, despite a decades-long military crackdown to fight dissent. Rebel groups have been fighting especially since 1989 for the Indian-administered portion to become independent or merge with Pakistan. Nearly 100,000 Kashmiris have been killed in the uprising and the ensuing Indian military crackdown. India maintains roughly 500,000 soldiers in the territory.

The history of India-Pakistan relations show that, every time an attempt is made to build relations, Pakistan’s army sabotages the peace talks by either escalating tensions at the Line of Control (LoC) or sending trained militants to India to launch attacks. On January 2, 2016, for example, a heavily armed group from Pakistan attacked the Indian Air Force base in Pathankot. This attack came immediately after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s impromptu visit to Lahore to meet his counterpart, Nawaz Sharif. This was followed by another attack carried out on September 18, 2016, where four heavily armed militants, belonging to Jaish-e-Mohammed, managed to cross the porous border and launch a surprise attack on an army camp in Uri in Jammu and Kashmir, resulting in the deaths of 17 soldiers. India cannot digest when Saeed who was released by the Lahore High Court, supports the Kashmir freedom cause.

However, in spite of the continued hostility, both India and Pakistan did keep the composite dialogue going through their national security advisers. Sadly, both countries are now experiencing a low point in their relations, with a virtual breakdown of the mechanism set afloat in Lahore to settle disputes through dialogue.

India’s ‘terrorism” plank against destabilized Pakistan

India is mainly responsible for Pakistan’s destabilization now as it caused Pakistan joining the anti-Islamic war behind USA-NATO fascist forces following the Sept-11 hoax. The USA  “democratically” exploited Pakistani problems with India.

The plank of ‘terrorism” has so far stood Indian in good stead. India has used terrorism as a basis for suspension of official talks with Pakistan due to alleged terrorist attacks launched by groups from across the border. The strain in relations has spread out to other sectors such as research and scientific development as well – something, which adversely affects the entire region.

India wants Pakistan to review its strategy of waging a proxy war with the help of militants to create disorder and mayhem in Kashmir. This strategy has proved counterproductive, besides inviting international condemnation. Recently, the Indian army has managed to kill or neutralize the Kashmiri freedom fighters or “militants” sent across the border; more than 190 militants have been killed by Indian forces this year alone.

The attack sparked a military confrontation across the Line of Control, with an escalation in ceasefire violations and further militant attacks on Indian security forces. As of December 2016, the ongoing confrontation and an increase in nationalist rhetoric on both sides have resulted in the collapse of bilateral relations, with little expectation they will recover. Both accuse each other for violence and cross fires and killings.  Though some steps have been taken to improve relations, they have not succeeded mainly because of Kashmir issue.

It is obvious that it is not Pakistan that is creating hurdles in the way of successful implementation of SAARC’s agenda, but in fact it is India which is trying to isolate Pakistan by using underhand tactics. India does not want SAARC to serve for greater regional cooperation and economic integration that includes Pakistan.

While new Delhi accuse so Pakistan of terror promotion shames and recognizes US pushing Pakistani military for  every actions it undertakes against India, Pakistanis say India has been funding the strategic destabilization of Pakistan, radicalization of South Asia – especially in Pakistan. The Indian spy and terrorist Kulbhushan Jadhav is a fine example for this. India media says Yadav is now a Pakistani agent.

India would not realize that it is not the only country in the region or continent or SAARC that can dominate all the time. But if the region is thrown into negativity, India will also suffer along with the others as well.

Earlier USA was behind Pakistan without in fact really helping it in any way  USA only used Pakistan and exploited the military officers, but now China has over taken USA and help Pakistan economically. India has thus one major worry now- China funded CPEC to which all of the South Asian nations would gravitate for profits in due course.

Indo Pakistan Tensions target Kashmiris

Despite a 2003 ceasefire, India and Pakistan regularly trade fire across the so-called Line of Control (LoC), the military demarcation between the Indian and Pakistani controlled parts of Jammu and Kashmir. Cross fires keep happening at LOC, generally killing each other but Kashmiris are threatened.

The latest exchange of fire started after Pakistan accused Indian forces of killing four of their soldiers near the de facto border. Despite a 2003 ceasefire, India and Pakistan regularly trade fire across the so-called Line of Control (LoC), the military demarcation between the Indian and Pakistani controlled parts of Jammu Kashmir.

The hostilities increased between India and Pakistan since December last year after both accused each other of killing soldiers on either side. In September 2016, India claimed to have launched “surgical strikes” on bases used by armed groups in Pakistan-administered Kashmir to fight Indian security forces. Pakistan denied any Indian soldiers were ever on Pakistan-administered soil.

India regularly accuses Pakistan of aiding fighters in crossing the LoC to attack Indian targets. Pakistani has been denying the charges.  The soldiers of two countries traded heavy gunfire in RS Pura and Ramgarh sectors along the border, amid the growing tensions between the two neighbours. An official said that Pakistani troopers violated ceasefire by resorting to indiscriminate firing at Indian positions in several sectors of the border. The fresh tension on the border has caused further turbulence in the relations between India and Pakistan.

 

Why does India hate Muslims?

Any friendship with Pakistan would make Muslims in India feel mentally tension free and relatively secured and for that reason India never wants that to happen. The prime objective of Indian regime is to keep majority Hindus in good humors and somewhat happy even by targeting, insulting, lynching and killing Muslims. India media -both core and non detailed – promote Islamophobia as part of anti-Islamic tirade by USA-Israeli twins.

Unfortunately, historically committed to promote interests of Muslims, Pakistan has failed in its prime objective and now promotes only anti-Islamic goals of Americans, Europeans, Israelis and Indians.  Pakistan as a major ally of NATO is also a part of anti-Islamic coalition led by NATO as well. Americans throw some terror goods to Pakistan military depots as service charges for killing Muslims and helping global state terror (GST) operations to make Islam appear to be a terrorist religion.

In order to target Muslims in the country and promote exclusive Hindu interests, India also targets Pakistan, calling its terror manufacturer- a job that USA and Israel do much better than even India – and isolates Pakistan for supporting the cause of besieged Kashmiris.

India always snubs Pakistan and Bangladesh whenever an occasion comes. While Pakistan leaders come running to New Delhi on the invitation of Indian new PM Modi, India just snubbed Pakistan by ignoring the 19th SAARC summit at Islamabad in November 2016 which had to be cancelled –as per its rule every member country must attend it to enable to begin meetings – due to India refusing to attend it. Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Bhutan also follow the Hindutva footsteps in boycotting the summit.

Interestingly, the South Asia regional interests are squandered by India’s anti-Pakistan action in getting the SAARC meeting cancelled which also denied Pakistan to have its nominee Amjad Hussian B Sial as the New Secretary General by rotations. By this anti- SAARC mischief, India has reiterated its power as the super power of the region.

Americans and Jews appreciated India as “Well done” because Pakistan has refused to target Muslims just for terror coins from USA. India went ahead with its new anti-Pakistan venture called the ‘Bay of Bengal Initiative’ for promoting Multi Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation targeting Pakistan and China. India hosted a meeting on March 21, 2017 by inviting Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. Obviously, Pakistan is worried not just because it left out of this meeting but mainly they target indirectly Pakistan.

India seems to be eager to replace SAARC with the new ‘Bay of Bengal’ alliance so that Bangladesh continues to be under Indian control and targt its foe Pakistan with Indian support. Another meeting was held in October 2017 where Indian foreign secretary Jaishankar referred to SAARC as a “jammed vehicle.” In an implicit reference to Pakistan, he also said that “as one country” is not, and since the other seven-nation regional grouping ‘Bay of Bengal’ has members that are “broadly aligned” and “articulate similar aspirations”, and are connected to the other members of the South Asian regional bloc on the key issue of ‘terrorism’, it is unlikely that the SAARC could be revived.

India has also denied Pakistan in sharing scientific databases and remote access to advanced research facilities through NKN. NKN will outspread global research and education networks to six SAARC member states — Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka. The connection from Afghanistan, Maldives and Sri Lanka to India would be through a submarine cable for international connectivity.

Pakistan is the only SAARC nation that has been left out of this venture.

Pakistan is helpless as USA also targets it.

By isolating Pakistan India has clearly permanently lost its claim to become a veto guy on the UNSC to control the world. India’s disinterest in the summit was manifest. This added to the relegation of the strong regional organization.

The key causes of perpetual Indo-Pakistani tensions and cross border firings include maintaining illegal occupation of and crimes in Kashmir, keeping Muslims in India under strains and tensions- and murders, force Muslims in India to renounce their legitimate claims of over their Babri Mosque, create coerced circumstances for Arab rulers to let Indian have Hindu gods and structures fixed in Arab nations one by one in Mideast for Arabs also to worship them for favors.

Arabs should know if they refuse to worship Hindu gods upon building Hindu structures over there they could be liable for lynching and murder.  Saudi king would also be summoned to worship Hindu gods in Abu Dhabi

Any way that is the problem of those hypocrites in Arab robs!

 

Observation

The major issue in Indo-Pakistan conflict remains Kashmir and it must be resolved soon so that the nations could focus on economic and technological issues jointly to benefit the people. Wars and tensions do not promote genuine prosperity for the common people.

Both India and Pakistan, fighting for military superiority to control alien Jammu Kashmir, have primary tasks of being independent nations left unfulfilled. While both regimes promote the rich and corporate lords, poor people continue to suffer. And the poor has no voice to be raised against oppressive and exploitative nature of the systems.

In India, hapless Muslims suffer the most as they have no voice and genuine leaders to take up their plight with the regime and UN. Rich Muslims are friends with rich Hindus and exploit fellow Muslims. .

As India keeps attacking Kashmiri Muslims in all possible ways, including in fake encounters there seems to be no end to the sufferings of Kashmiris. As Pakistan still insists on entire Kashmir, India can kill every Muslim in Kashmir with the new strategic alliance with world powers, mainly the roguish super dictator USA.

The best way forward, therefore, is to look for “out of box solutions” to solve this complex problem. One way would be to grant autonomy to the people of Kashmir (on both sides of the border), so that there is free movement of people and trade on both sides of the valley. This will help in reducing the mistrust between the two countries.

Indo-Pak must promote positivism in their routine rhetoric. It is in this context that Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Bajwa’s first briefing to the Senate Committee assumes significance as he indirectly accepted the supremacy of the parliament. In a major shift in the army’s ostrich approach on Pakistan’s India policy, he told the Senate to improve ties with India. Both India and Pakistan should welcome this positive development, as the general’s briefing could mark a historic departure in the Pakistan Army’s attitude toward India.

Prime Minister Modi made a brief, unscheduled visit to Pakistan from abroad while en route to India, becoming the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Pakistan since 2004 and that gave the impression that India is eager to forget the past and begin new relationships with Pakistan. But that was a misplaced expectation. Despite Pakistani PM Sharif’s visit to India and Modi’s visit to Islamabad, relations between the countries have remained frigid, following repeated acts of cross-border terrorism.

Until India and Pakistan decide to settle the Kashmir issue in favor of Kashmiris, there is no chance for better bilateral relations between India and Pakistan and without their improved ties Indian government would not views Muslims in India as its own population with a different religious belief.

Indian Muslims have a role now. They must come out openly to raise their voice against Indo-Pakistani tensions, oppressive system in Kashmir so that their own lives would improve considerably as the tensions become subsided and considerably reduced. India media target Muslims and Islam as a part of their anti-Islamic campaign to promote Hindutva moorings.

Due to the complexity of the disputes, especially over Kashmir, no immediate settlement is possible, but talks can go a long way in easing the tensions between the two countries and generate goodwill and background for positive talks. It is here Pakistan can learn from China and India, which, while continuing to explore ways to settle their border disputes, have attempted to improve trade and commerce. In the last five decades, since the 1962 war, not many bullets have been fired by both sides, despite several tense encounters. Contrast this with India and Pakistan, where cross-border shelling has become the order of the day.

In the past the attempts to boost ties — such as the composite dialogue, Lahore-Delhi bus service, and opening of cross-LoC trade in both India- and Pakistan-administered Kashmir — did contribute in the easing of tensions between the two countries, though for a very short period.

It now depends on the matured leadership of both countries to take the relationship forward in a meaningful and constructive way. It may be a worthwhile to include, along with Kashmiri freedom leaders, the army representatives from Pakistan in all future peace talks to get their unbridled support. Both countries should forget the bitter past and work toward ending the hostility.

At a time when there is tension in many parts of the world, there is now an urgent need to make sincere and genuine attempts to improve bilateral ties, as this will bring peace and prosperity to the people of both countries.

Indo-Pakistan rivalry and conflicts harem the regional interests, threatens the life of Kashmirs, peace and prosperity a distance cry.  Indian military godowns are now full terror good from literally every region, now more of American and Israeli. .

India’s anti-Muslim policy is rooted in its anti-Pakistan attitude.

India goes all out to embrace bloodstained figure of Zionist criminal leader Netanyahu both in Israel and New Delhi.   .

India’s anti-Muslim policy is very strong now under the Hindutva regime which is being supported by every Hindu dominated party in the nation.

India views Muslims in the country, in neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh as being one nation that needs to be targeted and hence Indian media lords strategically promotes Hindutva parties and their anti-Islamic attacks and lynchings.

How could Americans explain Indian logic of victimization of minority community by forcing Muslim employees/teachers to quit jobs and denying  pension, promotions and other retirements benefits to Muslims?

And they do all this in the name of Hinduism. Can a religion if they have got the sanction of the Almighty flourish or survive long if leaders in its name continue to target Muslims and their belongings?

India must give up its rigidity and stubbornness and try to accommodate the interests of Kashmir and Pakistan. The three nations could make the region strong. In fact, India Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir (The Four) would prove to be a formidable regional alliance in due course.  But India, which thus far promotes hate politics targeting its Muslim neighbors, should like this. Indian media should be encouraged to promote this genuine regional alliance.

Let us hope and wish 2018 mark a new constructive chapter in India-Pakistan relations so that not only both nations live in peace as a result of the realignment of relationship, but the  unlucky Muslims in India also begin  to be treated like humans even if not exactly the equals.

India’s anti-Muslim policy!

India’s anti-Muslim policy!

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

______

 

India’s anti-Muslim policy is well known and welcomed by nay anti-Islamic nations around the globe. In fact, this Indian anti-Islamic policy has gathered a few allies not only in the West and Israel but even in third world countries.

The key causes of perpetual Indo-Pakistani tensions and cross border firings include maintaining illegal occupation of and crimes in Kashmir, keeping Muslims in India under strains and tensions- and murders, force Muslims in India to renounce their legitimate claims of over their Babri Mosque, create coerced circumstances for Arab rulers to let Indian have Hindu gods and structures fixed in Arab nations one by one in Mideast for Arabs also to worship them for favors.

Arab should know if they refuse to worship Hindu gods upon building Hindu structures over there they could be liable for lynching and murder.  Saudi king would also be summoned to worship Hindu gods in Abu Dhabi

Any way that is the problem of those hypocrites in Arab robs!

Any friendship with Pakistan would make Muslims in India feel mentally tension free and relatively secured and for that reason India never wants that to happen. The prime objective of Indian regime is to keep majority Hindus in good humors and somewhat happy even by targeting, insulting, lynching and killing Muslims. India media -both core and non detailed – promote Islamophobia as part of anti-Islamic tirade by USA-Israeli twins.

Unfortunately, historically committed to promote interests of Muslims, Pakistan has failed in its prime objective and now promotes only anti-Islamic goals of Americans, Europeans, Israelis and Indians.  Pakistan as a major ally of NATO is also a part of anti-Islamic coalition led by NATO as well. Americans throw some terror goods to Pakistan military depots as service charges for killing Muslims and helping global state terror (GST) operations to make Islam appear to be a terrorist religion.

In order to  target Muslims in the country and promote  exclusive Hindu interests, India also targets Pakistan, calling its  terror manufacturer- a job that USA and Israel do much better than even India – and isolates Pakistan for  supporting the cause of besieged Kashmiris.

India always snubs Pakistan and Bangladesh whenever an occasion comes. While Pakistan leaders come running to New Delhi on the invitation of Indian new PM Modi, India just snubbed Pakistan by ignoring the 19th SAARC summit at Islamabad in November 2016 which had to be cancelled –as per its rule every member country must attend it to enable to begin meetings – due to India refusing to attend it. Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Bhutan also follow the Hindutva footsteps in boycotting the summit.

Interestingly, the South Asia regional interests are squandered by India’s anti-Pakistan action in getting the SAARC meeting cancelled which also denied Pakistan to have its nominee Amjad Hussian B Sial as the New Secretary General by rotations. By this anti- SAARC mischief, India has reiterated its power as the super power of the region.

Americans and Jews appreciated India as “Well done” because Pakistan has refused to target Muslims just for terror coins from USA. India went ahead with its new anti-Pakistan venture called the ‘Bay of Bengal Initiative’ for promoting Multi Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation targeting Pakistan and China. India hosted a meeting on March 21, 2017 by inviting Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. Obviously, Pakistan is worried not just because it left out of this meeting but mainly they target indirectly Pakistan.

India seems to be eager to replace SAARC with the new ‘Bay of Bengal’ alliance so that Bangladesh continues to be under Indian control and targt its foe Pakistan with Indian support. Another meeting was held in October 2017 where Indian foreign secretary Jaishankar referred to SAARC as a “jammed vehicle.” In an implicit reference to Pakistan, he also said that “as one country” is not, and since the other seven-nation regional grouping ‘Bay of Bengal’ or BIMSTEC has members that are “broadly aligned” and “articulate similar aspirations”, and are connected to the other members of the South Asian regional bloc on the key issue of ‘terrorism’, it is unlikely that the SAARC could be revived. Indi has also denied Pakistan in sharing scientific databases and remote access to advanced research facilities through NKN. NKN will outspread global research and education networks to six SAARC member states — Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka. The connection from Afghanistan, Maldives and Sri Lanka to India would be through a submarine cable for international connectivity.

Pakistan is the only SAARC nation that has been left out of this venture.

Pakistan is helpless as USA also targets it.

By isolating Pakistan India has clearly permanently lost its claim to become a veto guy on the UNSC to control the world. India’s disinterest in the summit was manifest. This added to the relegation of the strong regional organization.

The plank of ‘terrorism” has so far stood Indian in good stead. India has used terrorism as a basis for suspension of official talks with Pakistan due to alleged terrorist attacks launched by groups from across the border. The strain in relations has spread out to other sectors such as research and scientific development as well – something, which adversely affects the entire region.

It is obvious that it is not Pakistan that is creating hurdles in the way of successful implementation of SAARC’s agenda, but in fact it is India which is trying to isolate Pakistan by using underhand tactics. India does not want SAARC to serve for greater regional cooperation and economic integration that includes Pakistan.

While new Delhi accuse so Pakistan of terror promotion shames and recognizes US pushing Pakistani military for  every actions it undertakes against India, Pakistanis say India has been funding the strategic destabilization of Pakistan, radicalization of South Asia – especially in Pakistan. The Indian spy and terrorist Kulbhushan Jadhav is a fine example for this. India media says Yadav is now a Pakistani agent.

India would not realize that it is not the only country in the region or continent or SAARC that can dominate all the time. But if the region is thrown into negativity, India will also suffer along with the others as well. This is something Delhi needs to keep in mind. India has one worry now- China funded CPEC to which all of the South Asian nations would gravitate for profits in due course.

Indo-Pakistan rivalry and conflicts harem the regional interests, threatens the life of Kashmirs, peace and prosperity a distance cry.  Indian military godowns are now full terror good from literally every region, now more of American and Israeli. .

India’s anti-Muslim policy is rooted in its anti-Pakistan attitude.

India goes all out to embrace bloodstained figure of Zionist criminal leader Netanyahu both in Israel and New Delhi.   .

India’s anti-Muslim policy is very strong now under the Hindutva regime which is being supported by every Hindu dominated party in the nation.

India views Muslims in the country, in neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh as being one nation that needs to be targeted and hence Indian media lords strategically promotes Hindutva parties and their anti-Islamic attacks and lynchings.

How could Americans explain Indian logic of victimization of minority community by  forcing Muslim employees/teachers to quit jobs and denying  pension, promotions and other retirements benefits to Muslims?

And they do all this in the name of Hinduism. Can a religion if they have got the sanction of the Almighty flourish or survive long if leaders in its name continue to target Muslims and their belongings?