Hillary Clinton’s India Visit: New Delhi Reminds Washington of Country's Interests in Region

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrapped up her three-day visit to India on May 8. Her trip came at a time when India and the United States are perceived to have taken somewhat different positions from each other on various issues. After two decades of increasing proximity, disagreements between the two countries over several key matters now seem to be slowing down the momentum of bilateral relations. Those who had hoped that Clinton’s visit would put the spark back in the ties will have been a bit disappointed as both parties have not done much, in addition to reiterating already-known positions.

During her stay, Clinton met key Indian leaders, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress President Sonia Gandhi. and discussed a range of issues, including China, regional security and civil nuclear cooperation.

Pakistan’s Role in Eliminating Terror

The US secretary of state has pressed Pakistan to do more to ensure its territory is not used as "launching pad" by terror groups for attacks and also said that Hafiz Saeed was "one of the "principal architects" of the November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks. Hillary's comments came at a joint news conference after her talks with External Affairs Minister SM Krishna who spoke of the need for elimination of "terrorist sanctuaries" in the neighborhood.The two leaders nudged Pakistan to bring to justice the perpetrators of the 26/11 attacks and pledged to continue to work together in combating the menace.

In his remarks, Krishna said the recent terrorist attacks in Afghan capital – Kabul -- highlighted the need for elimination of terrorist sanctuaries in the neighborhood and for Pakistan to take steps against terrorism, including bringing to justice the perpetrators of 26/11 attacks. He also stressed the need for stronger action from Pakistan on terrorism, including on bringing to justice the perpetrators of the Mumbai terrorist attack.

In April 2012, the United States offered a $10 million reward for information leading to the conviction of Saeed, the founder of the Pakistan-based terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).

Afghan Problem

The vision for Afghanistan was also discussed at the meeting. India stressed the need for sustained international commitment to build Afghan capacity for governance, security and economic development, and to support Afghanistan with assistance, investment and regional linkages.

To ask India to “do more” on the Iranian issue, therefore, is not fair on the part of the United States. The US secretary of state should understand that if the US has to do all it can to safeguard its geo-political interests in the Afghanistan-Pakistan area, India, too, has its interests in Kabul which cannot be properly taken care of if New Delhi loses the Iranian link.

US Investment in West Bengal

Clinton’s offer to Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee to invest in West Bengal is, however, a welcome development. The state will also gain immensely once the issues between India and Bangladesh are settled conclusively. An agreement between the two neighbors on the Teesta River water issue could have been signed by now had Banerjee not taken a stand different from New Delhi’s line of thinking. But, as External Affairs Minister SM Krishna told his Bangladesh counterpart Dipu Moni, in New Delhi, efforts are on to bring the West Bengal Chief Minister to the view that the country’s overall interests must be given precedence over the state’s interest.

Earlier, the West Bengal chief minister had scuttled the United Progressive Alliance’s plans to allow Foreign Direct Investment in multi-brand retail, arguing that the move would destroy small businesses. The US secretary of state seems to have failed to force a change of heart in the feisty Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.

Issue of Oil Imports From Iran

The Damocles sword is still hanging on India. The United States gave no firm assurance to India that the proposed American sanctions will not apply to it for oil purchases from Iran even as New Delhi stated that the Iranian issue was not a source of discord between the two countries.

Continuing to resist American pressure over the matter, India also made it clear that it would abide only by UN Security Council sanctions against Iran and not those imposed by individual countries.

The US pressure on India regarding oil imports from Iran leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Does it not tantamount to interference in our internal affairs? As long as Manmohan Singh is the prime minister any directions of the United States in India's internal affairs and treaties like nuclear deal are cake walks.

In March 2012, the United States announced sanctions which threaten to shut out importers of Iranian oil from the US financial system unless they make significant and continuing cuts to their purchases by the end of June. Japan and 10 European Union nations have been granted exemption while India and China remain at risk.

In addition to its need for oil, there are two reasons why India must not take the US pressure lying down. India's only reliable land-route into Afghanistan and Central Asia runs through Iran. Moreover, the current US approach is likely to make the Iranian — and regional — security situation worse, not better. Saudi Arabia and Israel, which is already nuclear-armed, worry that a nuclear-capable Iran would tilt the regional balance and want the squeeze put on Iran. But too much financial or military pressure could backfire, goading the regime to commit to acquiring a strategic weapon — something it has not done until today.

India has demonstrated that it has come of age and stood its ground. Iran, despite its saber rattling, is a responsible power and we have a very useful conduit to their Leaders, which could be invaluable, when the World needs stability and growth. India must neither shut off Iran's oil imports nor Iran's access routes to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Pakistan can make overtures to a new relationship, but India cannot afford to alienate the country that can provide a counter balance to the Taliban-Pakistan nexus.

India has been firm in its foreign policy right since independence, and rightly so; we are a country with one of the fastest growing economy. We have recently done an arm deal which is considered world's biggest. We have to manage our allies ourselves. The Indian external affairs minister’s decision to disagree with Clinton and reminding her of India's interests in the region.

New Geopolitical Equation in Asia

After the dramatic announcement of killing of Osama Bin Laden, a big change in the geopolitics of Asia has become evident centering the dilemma in the relations between Pakistan and the United States. Through this incident, signals are being received regarding a visible role of China and a shrink in the influence of the United States in this region as a split has been created in the relationship between Pakistan and the United States. The plummeting in the Washington-Islamabad relations first came to the limelight through the arrest of a US contractor Raymond Davis, who is known as a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) spy, for his involvement in the killings of two Pakistani citizens. After languishing for three months in prison, Raymond Davis was freed in March with the payment of blood money.
Since then, it was being thought that the US pressure on Pakistan would be mounted. Exactly this happened. Subsequently, the United States claimed that their commandoes have killed Bin Laden in a raid. Pakistan has described the raid as a blow to its sovereignty. However, the United States has brought an allegation against Pakistani intelligence agency for providing shelter to Bin Laden. Though a number of questions have surfaced centering this raid -- whether Bin Laden was really killed in the attack or he was killed much earlier or anybody else was killed in the name of Bin Laden.
War on Terror
Centering this incident whatever it might be -- the actual Bib Laden killed or no -- Pakistan is trying to come out of the influence of the United States, a long time friend of that country. Within 15 days of the killing of Bin Laden, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani visited China. The Chinese leaders categorically announced that Pakistan has significant contribution to the war on terror. This country is also a victim of terrorism.
The Western countries must show their respect to the sovereignty of Pakistan. The Chinese leaders further announced that Beijing will consider any attack on Islamabad an attack against it and China will always stand beside Pakistan. This announcement from Beijing in the face of an intense pressure from the west was not only a matter of ease for Islamabad, but a clear indication that China support Pakistan at the time of difficulty.
Building Gwadar Port
Massive steps were taken to enhance military relations between China and Pakistan during this visit of Gilani. The area of cooperation also includes transfer of military technology side by side with military assistance. China has assured Pakistan of supplying more than 50 JF Thunder Aircraft within a shortest possible time. In addition, the two countries have reached an agreement on purchasing frigates for the navy and training on operating submarines. Seventy-five percent arms of Pakistani Armed Forces comes from China. Very soon 260 Chinese fighter planes will be added to the Pakistan Air Force. It is being though that Pakistan is going to be a member of Shanghai Cooperation from an observer at the behest of China. And this might add a new dimension to China-India relations in the coming days. During Gilani's visit to China this time, the most important military on the agenda was the proposal of setting up a naval base at Gwadar Seaport, built on assistance from Beijing.
China and India have long been involved in a race for expanding influence in the India Ocean. Comparatively India navy is now stronger in the India Ocean. It can be said India has its hegemony on the sea. An intensive relationship of cooperation of India navy with the US Navy has been added to this. China has to import its fuel oil from the Middle East through the narrow strata of Malacca under the India-US naval surveillance. During any adverse situation the India-US naval power may close down this supply route for China. Alternative sea routes are very essential for China. Beijing is going to be achieved this opportunity this time completely. Gwadar seaport has multifaceted military significance. Virtually this port will be the main center for China to maintain its influence in the southern seacoast of Asia. From there China will be able to maintain its surveillance on the Indian and US Naval Forces.
Gwadar Seaport is very close to the seacoast of Oman. The distance of the Persian Gulf from here is not so far. Before 1958, Gwadar was under Oman. Later, the area was handed over to Pakistan. In 1973, US President Richard Nixon visited Pakistan. During the visit, the then Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto requested Richard Nixon to help building a seaport at Gwadar. Bhutto proposed that Pakistan would ensure benefit of the US Navy from Gwadar if the port was built with assistance from his country. But Nixan did not make any response to that proposal.
Failing to get any support from the US for building the seaport at Gwadar, Pakistan did not abandon its plan in this regard. Later, they sought helps from China in this regard. The work on building the seaport began in 2002 with assistance from China. China invested $200million for construction of the seaport. The first phase of the construction of the port ended in 2006. Singapore Port Management Authority was given the responsibility of running the port. Now China will be given the responsibility of running the port from Singapore Port Authority. A decision has been taken to review soon the port management by Singapore Port Authority.
The work on establishing direct road and railway communications with China from Gwadar seaport has begun so that oil tankers could be transported to Chinese territory from the port. China began the expansion of road network on Karakoram Highway from Gilgit in Pakistan to Xinjinag province of China. In 2006, Islamabad and Beijing signed agreement to build a road from Kashgar in China to Abbottabad in Pakistan. The two countries took the decision of constructing an alternative land route in consideration that Karakoram Highway might be risky for bigger containers. Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari visited China in July 2010. During his talks with Chinese President Hu Jintao, a decision was taken to set up 3,000 km railway line from Kashgar to Gwadar.
Security experts believe China will use this port equally both for civil and military purposes. Chinese ships will not anchor at the port only, but its submarines use the same as a base. In a recent report by New Delhi-based Institute of Defense Studies and Analysis said this port is a threat to India. Gwadar Port is very close to Hormuz strata. During any adverse situation, Pakistan might impose restriction on this route. However, Beijing will be able to conduct a complete surveillance on Indo-US naval maneuverings in the Arab Sea and Persian Gulf.
Pressure From Western Countries
Both the United States and India are worried over this strategic and military cooperation between Pakistan and China. Many people think the conflict between the CIA and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) is rooted in the relations between China and Pakistan. It seems that the US has toned down to Pakistan as Islamabad successfully played the China card in face of relentless pressure from the Western countries.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a surprised visit to Pakistan along with Admiral Mike Mullen, then chairman of the Joint US Chief of Staff. Hillary announced that the United States will continue its cooperation and the war on terror with Pakistan. So long the United States has been alleging that Bin Laden had been hiding inside Pakistan with helps from Pakistani intelligence officials. But during her visit to Islamabad, Hillary said she did not believe top Pakistani official knew about the hiding of Bin Laden in that country.
The US security adviser has already announced that Washington's assistance to Pakistan will not be stopped. The US concern has started unfolding at a time when Pakistan is set to go under the total influence of China.
Despite conducting drone attacks inside Pakistan to eliminate the Taliban militants, the United States has been holding talks with the Taliban at the mediation of Turkey. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) officials have already held meeting with mid ranking Taliban leaders. Recently, former NATO official and former foreign minister of Turkey Hiqmat Setin said that Turkey was going to hold high level talks with the Taliban soon.
It is being observed that the United States contact with the Taliban still exists. However, Pakistan has been made the target of the Taliban. Questions have now been raised from inside Pakistan about the motive behind the recent attack on Pakistani naval base in Karachi and destruction of two naval surveillance aircraft. Whether any special message is being given by this type of attack. It has become clear from the nature of the attack that the target of the raid was to hit the military strength of Pakistan. A section of the mass media in Pakistan has alleged that those who have been conducting this type of attack in Pakistan in the name of the Taliban have special links with the US and Indian intelligence agency.
Pakistan's Military Cooperation with China
However, India has already expressed concern over Pakistan's military cooperation with China. Following the claim of killing Bin Laden at Abbottabad by the US force, a hint was given from New Delhi that India might conduct similar attack on Pakistan. The reaction shown by Pakistan in response to that desire of New Delhi is another cause of concern for India. Pakistan made it clear that if India dared to conduct such raids Islamabad will limited scale nuclear weapon or tactical nuclear arms. It was not so long known that Pakistan has such sophisticate nuclear arsenals.
At the same time, India plunged into another diplomatic difficulty. India handed over a list of 50 terrorists residing in Pakistan to Islamabad authorities and demanded their extradition for trials. The following day reports were published in the Indian newspapers that two of the listed terrorists detained in Indian prisons. Indian wanted to mount pressure on Pakistan in line with the United States, but they himself got entangled in trouble. And as a result, the image of India was tarnished.
After the killing of Bin Laden, the competition launch between the United States and China for expanding influence centering Pakistan gives a signal of a new strategic equation of the Asian superpowers. Iran has also joined the race. Iran has already expressed its solidarity with the integrity of Pakistan. It is being thought that Pakistani military officials have been maintaining contacts with Iran.
Importance of Islamabad
Except China, Pakistan has taken initiative of enhancing cooperation with Russia. President Asif Ali Zardari had already visited Russia. He was given a rousing reception in Moscow. The new relations of China and Russia with Iran and Pakistan could turnout to be a big concern for the United States in future. This will make the position of US-led NATO force in Afghanistan weak, and also deal a blow to the US initiatives of establishing control over the energy resources in Central Asia. In addition, Russia, China is also enhancing its influence in the Central Asia. A cooperative relation between China and Pakistan will help Beijing to make another step forward in expanding its influence in this region. Because of road communication with Central Asia and port facilities, the importance of Pakistan has increased. Despite multifaceted pressure from United States and acts of sabotage inside the country, Pakistan is playing the cards of its good relations with China and Russia because of its geostrategic position. And this is the main weapon of Pakistan. Because of this it is very easy to criticize Pakistan, but difficult to avoid.

Iran Continues Nuke Program: Threat to World Peace

Iran appears to have worked on designing an atomic bomb and may still be conducting secret research, the UN nuclear watchdog said in a report likely to raise tensions in the Middle East.
Citing what it called "credible" information from member states and elsewhere, the agency listed a series of activities applicable to developing nuclear weapons, such as high explosives testing and development of an atomic bomb trigger.
The report immediately exposed splits among the big powers about how best to handle the row over Iran's nuclear aims: the United States signaled tougher sanctions on Teheran but Russia said the report could hurt chances for diplomacy.
It was preceded by Israeli media speculation that the Jewish state may strike against its arch foe's nuclear sites. But Defence Minister Ehud Barak has recently said that no decision had been made on embarking on a military operation.
Iran, which denies it wants nuclear weapons, condemned the findings of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as "unbalanced" and "politically motivated."
IAEA Chief Yukiya Amano is "playing a very dangerous game," Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador, said.
Teheran's history of hiding sensitive nuclear activity from the IAEA, continued restrictions on IAEA access and its refusal to suspend enrichment, which can yield fuel for atom bombs, have drawn four rounds of U.N. sanctions and separate punitive steps by the United States and European Union.
The report detailed evidence apparently showing concerted, covert efforts to acquire the capability to make atomic bombs. Some of the cited research and development work by Iran have both civilian and military applications, but "others are specific to nuclear weapons," said the report.
Western powers have pressured the major oil producer, which says its nuclear program is aimed at increasing electricity generation, over its record of hiding sensitive nuclear activity and lack of full cooperation with UN inspectors.
The United States will look to put more pressure on Iran if it fails to answer questions raised by the IAEA report, a senior US official said in Washington. "That could include additional sanctions by the United States. It could also include steps that we take together with other nations," the official told reporters.
Russia criticized the report, saying it would dim hopes for dialogue with Teheran on its nuclear ambitions and suggesting it was meant to scuttle chances for a diplomatic solution.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said: "We have serious doubts about the justification for steps to reveal contents of the report to a broad public, primarily because it is precisely now that certain chances for the renewal of dialogue between the 'sextet' of international mediators and Teheran have begun to appear."
Russia and the United States are among the six big powers, also including China, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, which have been involved in stalled attempts to find a diplomatic solution to the nuclear dispute with Iran.
Sanction on Iran’s Energy Sector
The US Government has announced that it will slap sanctions directly on Iran's energy sector and warned the financial firms in the world against dealing with the Islamist state.
"Recent days have brought new evidence that Iran's leaders continue to defy their international obligations and violate international norms," US State Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at the State Department, referring to the recent alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in the United States, and report by the UN nuclear watchdog on Iran's nuclear program.
Iran and its powerful ally Russia have slammed new Western sanctions imposed on Teheran over its suspect nuclear program, saying they were illegal and futile.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry stated that the unilateral measures against Iran's financial, petrochemical and energy sectors announced Monday by the United States, Britain and Canada amounted merely to propaganda and psychological They were "reprehensible" and would prove ineffective, it said.
Russia -- which with China had blocked any possibility of the Western steps going before the UN Security Council for approval -- took a sterner view, saying in a Foreign Ministry statement the sanctions were "unacceptable and against international law."
The declarations set the stage for a hardening of diplomacy over Iran and its nuclear program. The issue has already generated speculation that Israel is mulling air strikes against Iranian nuclear sites.
The country is already subject to four sets of UN sanctions designed to force it to give up uranium enrichment, along with additional, unilateral sanctions by the United States and the European Union (EU).
The latest sanctions put more pressure on Iran's financial sector, with the United States and Britain invoking anti-terrorist laws to target Iran's central bank and other financial institutions.
Rejection of UN Report
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has dismissed a report from the United Nations' nuclear agency that highlighted concerns Teheran had worked on designing an atomic bomb, saying it was based on "invalid" information from Washington.
"You should know that this nation will not pull back even a needle's width from the path it is on," he said in a speech carried live on state television.
However, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said Iran remains ready to engage in negotiations with world powers concerned about its nuclear program, but only if the other parties show it due respect.
The EU may approve fresh sanctions against Iran within weeks, after a UN agency said Teheran had worked to design nuclear bombs, EU diplomats said.
Iran denies trying to build atom bombs and its Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said any US or Israeli attack on its nuclear sites would be met with 'iron fists'.
The United States and Israel have refused to rule out any option to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear arsenal.
Diplomats in Brussels said preliminary discussions among EU capitals on new measures had begun and plans may be ready for EU foreign ministers in Brussels to approve on December 1.
Iran already faces a wide range of the UN sanctions, as well as some imposed unilaterally by the United States and the EU.
New EU sanctions would be a significant part of Western efforts to ratchet up pressure on Teheran after the UN nuclear watchdog's report this week that laid bare a trove of intelligence suggesting Iran is seeking nuclear weapons.
Teheran’s Confidence
Iran’s confidence emanates from the fact that its nuclear facilities are supported by Russia and China. Or is it that Ahmadinejad is sitting on a nuclear weapon facility already? Well, this is unlikely because nuclear weapons and the delivery system cannot be made overnight and in such secrecy.
The point is that Ahmadinejad’s brave anti-US postures must, in the natural course, make those who dream of an end to the US hegemony and those who detest George Bush, the war-monger, look up to him. And in that context express disgust over the Manmohan Singh regime’s decision to kow-tow the United States and its allies.
A generation that grew up detesting the United States and participated in umpteen demonstrations and other kinds of agitation against the successive regimes in the US — the Vietnam War some 40 years ago and against the Invasion of Iraq now — must feel happy that they are not alone.
Other View
Economic sanctions would hurt the West more than Iran. The premise of this argument is that any sanctions imposed on Teheran would result in a dramatic rise in oil prices, hurting the economies of Western countries and undermining public support for the sanctions.
WhileIran holds the world’s second-largest reserves of oil and gas and is the fourth-largest oil producer, it is in fact a net importer of refined oil products, including gasoline. And internal consumption of oil products in Iran is growing by 5.2 percent a year, far faster than its ability to increase refining capacity. This means that the levels of imports necessary to make the Iranian economy function will only increase over time.
Russia and China would never go along with sanctions. While persuading Russia and China to support sanctions might take some time and effort, these countries are unlikely to prove reliable allies for the Iranian regime.
Russia has little strategic interest in supporting the Iranian cause. While it may see Iran as a useful tool for balancing U.S. power in the Middle East, it has far more to fear from Iran’s nuclear program in the long term than does the United States or Europe. Iran’s support of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism across the Middle East and Central Asia is a direct challenge to Russian interests in territories that were part of the old Soviet empire and are still considered by Moscow to be within its sphere of influence.
Iran might respond to sanctions by irrationally lashing out at Israel and other U.S. allies. One of the most dangerous assumptions about Iran is that it is acting irrationally or is led by people who do not calculate the potential costs and benefits of their actions.

Colonel Gaddafi Assassinated: End of An Era in Libya

Sixty-nine-year-old deposed dictator Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, a maverick who had ruled Libya with an iron hand for 42 years, was on 20 October shot and killed by the rebels in his hometown of Sirte after the revolutionary forces overran his last bastion.
The longest-serving leader in the African and Arab world, Gaddafi died of his wounds after being captured from a hole where he had been hiding in Sirte, a rebel commander said, adding there was a lot of firing and he was also hit in his head.
"Muammar Gaddafi has been killed," Libyan Prime Minister Mahmoud Jibril said in a news conference in the capital Tripoli.
Gaddafi's son Mutassim and Defence Minister Abu-Bakr Yunis Jabr were also found dead in Sirte, the last major bastion of resistance two months after the regime fell in August.
Known for his flamboyant dressing style and gun-toting female bodyguards as much as for his iron clasp over the country, Gaddafi had been holed up with the last of his fighters in the furious battle with revolutionary fighters assaulting the last few buildings they held in his Mediterranean coastal hometown of Sirte. At one point, a convoy tried to flee the area and was blasted by NATO airstrikes, though it was not clear if Gaddafi was in the vehicle.
Sirte’s fall caps weeks of heavy, street—by—street fighting as revolutionary fighters besieged the Mediterranean coastal city. Despite the fall of Tripoli on 21 August, Gaddafi loyalists mounted fierce resistance in several areas, including Sirte, preventing Libya’s new leaders from declaring full victory in the eight-month civil war. Earlier this week, revolutionary fighters gained control of one stronghold.
Life of Gaddafi
Born in the desert in 1942, Gaddafi, at the age of only 29, became the leader of a small group of junior army officers who in September 1969 staged a bloodless coup, overthrowing King Idris while he was abroad for medical treatment. Fiercely anti-Western and inspired by Egypt's President Nasser, he governed according to his unique political philosophy — set out in his Green Book — based on a combination of socialism and Arab nationalism.
Gaddafi quickly showed he would brook no dissent to his idiosyncratic rule, reportedly having students who marched against his regime publicly hanged. In one of his most infamous atrocities, 1,200 prisoners were massacred in a Tripoli jail in 1996.
As far as his relations with other nations are concerned, his outspoken public support for a range of terrorist organizations, including the IRA and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), attracted growing international criticism and concern.
The increasingly erratic nature of his regime was underlined in 1984 when diplomats at the Libyan embassy in London opened fire on a demonstration outside, killing Yvonne Fletcher.
In 1986, the bombing by Libyan agents of a Berlin nightclub, in which two off-duty American servicemen died, prompted President Reagan to launch air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi. Gaddafi's adopted daughter was among 35 Libyans killed.
In December 1988, came the most notorious incident of all — the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over the Scottish village of Lockerbie, killing 270. The attack prompted global outrage. For years Gaddafi denied any involvement, leading to UN sanctions and international pariah status for his regime.
He finally began to emerge from the cold when South African president Nelson Mandela helped to broker a deal which saw two Libyan intelligence officers handed over in 1999 to stand trial before a Scottish court. In 2003, after one of the men had been convicted, the Libyan government wrote to the UNSC formally accepting responsibility for the actions of its officials in the attacks.
Gaddafi's rehabilitation seemed complete when the same year, following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein by US and British forces, he admitted that Libya had an active weapons of mass destruction program which he offered to dismantle. In 2004, Tony Blair traveled to Tripoli to welcome the West's new ally in the so-called "War on Terror".
Chronology of Recent Events
15/16 February 2011: The arrest of human rights activist Fethi Tarbel starts a riot in Benghazi.
24 February: Antigovernment militias take control of central coastal city of Misrata after evicting forces loyal to Gaddafi.
26 February: The U.N. Security Council imposes sanctions on Gaddafi and his family, and refers the crackdown on rebels to the International Criminal Court.
28 February: EU governments approve sanctions against Gaddafi and his closest advisers.
5 March: The rebel National Transitional Council (NTC) in Benghazi declares itself Libya's sole representative.
17 March: The UN Security Council votes to authorise a no-fly zone over Libya and military action -- to protect civilians against Gaddafi's army.
19 March: The first air strikes halt the advance of Gaddafi's forces on Benghazi and target Libya's air defences.
30 April: A NATO missile attack on a house in Tripoli kills Gaddafi's youngest son and three grandchildren, his government says.
27 June: The ICC issues arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam and intelligence chief Abdullah al-Senussi on charges of crimes against humanity.
21 August: Rebels enter Tripoli with little resistance. Gaddafi makes audio addresses over state television calling on Libyans to fight off the rebel "rats".
23 August: The rebels overrun Gaddafi's fortified Bab al-Aziziya compound in Tripoli, trashing the symbols of his rule.
29 August: Gaddafi's wife, his daughter Aisha and two of his sons enter Algeria. Aisha Gaddafi gives birth in a clinic in a border town hours after crossing the frontier.
1 September: Libya's interim rulers meet world leaders at a conference in Paris to discuss reshaping Libya. Gaddafi, on the 42nd anniversary of his coming to power, urges his supporters to fight on.
8 September: Interim prime minister Mahmoud Jibril arrives in Tripoli on his first visit since it was taken by his forces.
11 September: Libya starts producing oil again. Niger says Gaddafi's son Saadi has arrived there.
13 September: Interim government chief Mustafa Abdel Jalil makes his first speech in Tripoli to a crowd of about 10,000.
15 September: France's Nicolas Sarkozy and Britain's David Cameron land in Libya to a heroes' welcome.
16 September: The UN Security Council eases sanctions on Libya, including on its national oil company and central bank. The UN General Assembly approves a request to accredit interim government envoys as Libya's sole representatives at the United Nations, effectively recognizing the NTC.
20 September: US President Barack Obama calls for the last of Gaddafi's loyalist forces to surrender as he announces the return of the U.S. ambassador to Tripoli. Gaddafi taunts NATO in a speech broadcast by Syrian-based Arrai television station.
21 September: The interim rulers say they have captured most of Sabha, one of three main towns where Gaddafi loyalists have been holding out since the fall of Tripoli. Gaddafi's birthplace Sirte and the town of Bani Walid continue to resist.
25 September: The first Libyan crude oil to be shipped in months sails from the eastern port of Marsa el Hariga for Italy.
27 September: NATO says Libya's interim rulers have taken full control of the country's stockpile of chemical weapons and nuclear material.
12 October: Government fighters capture Gaddafi's son Mo'tassim after he tried to escape Sirte.
13 October: NTC forces say they have control of the whole of Sirte except neighborhood 'Number Two' where Gaddafi forces are surrounded.
14 October: Gunfights break out in Tripoli between Gaddafi supporters and NTC forces, the first sign of armed resistance to the new government.
17 October: NTC forces celebrate the capture of Bani Walid, one of the final bastions of Gaddafi loyalists.
-- A Syrian television station confirms Gaddafi's son Khamis died in fighting southeast of Tripoli on 29 August.
18 October: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives in Libya on an unannounced visit, urges militias to unite.
20 October: NTC fighters capture Sirte, Gaddafi's hometown, ending a two-month siege and extinguishing the last significant hold out of troops loyal to the deposed leader.
Assessment
With the fall of the Gaddafi, who came to power in a bloodless coup against King Idris in 1969 when he was a 27-year-old army captain, Libya has become another case of regime change since the start of the popular unrest that broke out in the Arab world this past January and February. Libya’s regime had been led by the Gaddafi family. Despite the fact that Gaddafi took power via a military coup, he did not allow a robust and autonomous military institution that could pose a threat to his authority to develop. This practice, however, seems to have resulted in sizeable defections from the Libyan army, sparking a civil war.
The crisis in Libya may play itself out over a long period of time. The country’s geopolitical reality is one where the crisis within the country can continue to evolve without seriously impacting the region or beyond. Meanwhile, the de facto government of new Libya, the NTC, has been feted in Paris by more than 60 nations and international organizations. The NTC presented its plans for nation-building to the international community and the rest of the world pledged to help the new government in meeting urgent needs and begin the formation of a functioning governing authority.

Civil Unrest, Rekindled Nationalism in Libya

The Libyan revolutionaries captured the country's capital Tripoli with a crushing force. Three sons of the Libyan tyrant Colonel Muammar Gaddafi who made up a last-ditch fight were seized one after another. Now the revolutionaries are stepping up their hunt for Gaddafi while taking over the control of Libya's economic lifelines. This indeed marks the death of "the era of Gaddafi". Although Gaddafi still tries hard to turn the tide, he has lost his control over the country. The name of Gaddafi may become obsolete soon.
Under the coordination of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Transitional National Council formed by the anti-Gaddafi alliance is now gradually taking over the ruling power. This has not only realigned the political forces in Libya, but has also added an uncertain variable to the new order of Middle East, which is yet to be established. This variable may be in the form of what predicted by the US State Secretary Hillary Clinton -- an Iraq-style civil unrest in Libya. But it could be in the form of the resurrection of nationalism in Middle Eastern tribes as well. The fanatic nationalism may replace the tyrant politics and start to expand its external influence again. Whichever scenario it is going to turn out, the situation in Libya worries the outsiders a lot.
What worries us the most now is the rekindled nationalism among the public in Middle East. The emergence of nationalism almost coincides with the collapse of the tyrant rule. Nationalism has timely filled in the blank in the people's hearts after the downfall of the tyrant politics. In countries used to be ruled by tyrants like Iraq, Tunisia, and Egypt, nationalism has helped the people found their new starting point. However, the over emphasis on nationalism may cause new commotion. Another concern is the anti-Gaddafi alliance because we could see the shadow of Gaddafi cast upon the alliance. Under this shadow, we do not see any candidate who can replace him at the moment yet. This is why many Western people have predicted that after the downfall of Gaddafi, Libya will plunge into an internal strife, which will be more sinister and destructive than that in Iraq. The hatred and violent confrontation between tribes may lead the country to a crisis of separation.
It is beyond doubt how the weapons of mass destruction and bio-chemical weapons possessed by Libya could influence the balance of powers in Middle East. Therefore, a pressing mission for the gulf countries now is to rebuild the "natural equilibrium" of Middle East. Countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and France have called on Gaddafi to hand over his power the soonest possible, so that the Transitional National Council led by Mahmoud Jibril can take over the administration temporarily. This is not only related to how fast Libya can be consolidated, this is also related to the establishment of the equilibrium in Middle East. If a political and economic alliance can be established and the different tribes in the country can agree and come out with a consistent diplomatic policy in the post-Gaddafi Libya, then it is possible that we will see a power balance between the Libyan alliance and other Arabic countries. If Libya is unable to establish such a political and economic alliance at the moment, then the country should develop some form of negotiation mechanism among the many tribes in the country to ensure the security in Libya itself, as well as in Middle East. This kind of arrangement of the power structure is rather similar to the equilibrium in Europe in the 19th century, but at the same time, this is indeed the direction of the development of our history today.
Disintegration in Arab World
In addition to diplomatic arrangement, the West should also find way to mitigate the shocks caused during the disintegration process in Iraq, Tunisia, and Egypt by tackling from the perspective of internal affairs. The West has hoped to see Middle East transit from tyrant politics. However, the changes have been too speedy for the West to handle. We have even observed the panic and confusion of the West as they are unable to be on top of these changes. Initially Russia opposed to the call of the United States and Europe that demanded Gaddafi to step down. But the country changed its mind in late July and called on Gaddafi to step down the soonest possible. This is an example of how some have failed to have a good command of the situation. This is why the West should get in touch with the revolutionaries as soon as possible to learn about their thoughts, to provide them the necessary aids, to appease the grudge among the tribes, and to prevent another civil war from breaking out.
Deterioration of Country’s Economy
The deterioration of the Libyan economy triggered the movement that eventually toppled the Gaddafi regime. However, the deteriorated economy would not get improved as an immediate result of the collapse of the tyrant politics or the rise of nationalism. What would the Libyan people do when they realize nationalism is not going to bring them warm winter?
Perhaps some would get frustrated; but it is more likely that some would advocate Fascist and nationalist dictatorship and attack the West for bringing the Libyan economy into trouble. They may impute the economic problems to the West and a series of civil wars may break out between tribes in support of Gaddafi and anti-Gaddafi tribes.
Role of International Community
Thus, what the whole international community should do today is to think of how to address the issue based on the fact of the power vacuum in Libya. For the West, the United States especially, the current pressing task is to understand and handle the changing state of affairs in Libya by employing a new framework. The new framework has to cover both the internal affairs and diplomatic fronts. In relation to internal affairs, they should establish communication channels with all tribes in Libya to be on top of the situation. At the same time, they should offer economic aids as soon as possible to help the Libyan people get through the coming severe winter and prevent Fascism or civil wars from breaking out.
Diplomatically, they should try to reestablish the equilibrium to prevent the expansion of the Arabic nationalism. For the entire international community, handling the changing state of affairs in Libya is like managing an international crisis. It is the greatest challenge to the political wisdom and resolution of the Western world as to whether or not they can handle this crisis in an appropriate manner and whether or not they can prevent the predicted disaster.

ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting

The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Foreign Ministerial Meeting is going on in Bali, Indonesia. This Meeting plans to come out with a new Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. The intention of it is to resolve the territorial dispute over the islands in the South China Sea. As the territorial dispute over the islands in the South China Sea island is widespread and complex; adding to the fact that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and China's Foreign Affairs Minister Yang Jiechi will also be attending the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) to be held in Bali on 23 July, one can expect the issue of territorial dispute between China and ASEAN countries to be raised and debated. In this regard, this round of ASEAN Ministerial Meeting which has already drawn widespread attention has indeed carried with it a significant meaning for all concerned countries.
Interference of External Forces
Originally, the plan and hope for this round of ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting was for ASEAN to search a right direction and path as well as to look for the role that ASEAN should play in the international arena as a regional grouping. But unexpectedly, in recent months, the territorial dispute over the islands in the South China Sea suddenly emerged with the interference of external forces. There were even incidents whereby the confronting countries involved in the conflict had the tendency to resolve the territorial dispute between them by military force. Yet such a development has in turn led ASEAN member countries to, without any intent, produce a certain degree of consensus. In the first place, due to the special geographical location of the South China Sea, countries surrounding this patch of regional water which includes China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan have put forward different interpretation of claims pertaining to the sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea.
The interpretations by different countries over the islands ownership have in turn led to overlapping of claims among them. According to the principles of the Law of the Sea, the overlapping maritime claimants can in fact be resolved through negotiation and demarcation of maritime zone. However, in the case of the South China Sea, it is not easy for the demarcation of territorial waters to come out with any kind of good arrangement. This is because the numbers of main claimant bodies involved in the maritime territorial dispute in the South China Sea are quite a lot. Moreover, the level of overlapping claim of islands and maritime waters by these countries are also varied in different degrees or levels.
Maritime Demarcation Issue
Second, if countries intend to use some kind of demarcation agreement to resolve maritime conflict it will usually mean that the involved countries are willing to more or less make certain degree of mutual concessions or compromise on how the maritime demarcation should be settled. However, between China and Vietnam and between China and the Philippines and even between China and Malaysia, each and every country involved in the South China Sea island dispute does not show any obvious signs of compromise. Some involved countries have even deployed military vessels to protect their claimed territorial islands. As such, at this round of ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting, the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea that ASEAN member countries intend to come out is but a framework to vigorously promote the idea of using negotiation as means to resolve the territorial dispute and conflict. Such a proposal is bound to heighten the territorial dispute between China and ASEAN countries.
Territorial and Jurisdictional Dispute
If ASEAN member countries come out with the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea unilaterally among themselves, what can happen during the following ASEAN Regional Forum is the possibility for China to engage in aggressive debating war with the Philippines and also with Vietnam. In the past, at the meeting held between China and ASEAN member countries to discuss "how to handle the potential conflict in the South China Sea", China and ASEAN did issue a joint statement that said: "In the territorial claim regions, relevant countries should consider the possibility to adopt a mutually beneficial cooperation framework to resolve the territorial dispute in the South China Sea."
The statement also said that "military force should not be used to resolve the territorial and jurisdictional dispute in the South China Sea." When such a proposal was jointly announced by both China and ASEAN during that period, the use of words in the announcement was filled with peaceful compromised terms. It was considered then that China and ASEAN countries have finally attained positive and fruitful result deemed useful to defuse the potential conflicts in the South China Sea. But in fact, such a joint declaration does not carry with it any legal binding. Moreover, the conclusion of that meeting between China and ASEAN also did not really touch on the actions and behaviors already taken by some involved countries which have gone ahead to take unilateral action to develop the islands which they claimed ownership. Such a joint declaration by China ASEAN then has now become a time bomb affecting the peace and security in the South China Sea.
Concept of Joint Development
So far, the concept of joint development of the resources in the South China Sea is still worthy of this region's effort to promote further. Participants of the ASEAN Foreign Minister Meeting held in Bali should offer a variety of concrete and feasible solutions on this joint development of resources concept and to encourage all the relevant countries building more consensus on this idea. Furthermore, even all relevant countries have the desire to implement the concept of joint development of resources in the South China Sea; they should still approach the planning and consideration of it from different angles and perspectives. This is because the sea area of the South China Sea is quite vast and the claims as expressed by involved countries are all different. As such, at this very moment, it can still be a bit more difficult to streamline the whole South China Sea region as one unified common development zone which can allow the involved countries to proceed and carry out full-fledge cooperation to jointly develop the resources there. However, if through some kind of international cooperation, China and all the involved ASEAN countries can come out with different demarcation zones, then it is more feasible for involved countries to engage in joint development of resource projects in the South China Sea region. The scope of cooperation can begin with small point and later on expand to larger surface. Depending on the different maritime zones in the South China Sea, the main cooperation bodies can carry out joint resource development projects either using bilateral or multilateral approach as warranted. In addition, countries in the South China Sea can also specify the type of marine resources such as oil and gas for the involved countries to carry out specific joint cooperation development projects.
Of note is that after the United States made a deliberated attempt to intervene in the South China Sea dispute, ASEAN countries are shrouded in the shadow of its powerful neighbor. The main reason for the United States to forcefully making its presence in wanting to get involved in the South China Sea oil exploration activities is that the United States wants to use such an approach to threaten the Beijing authority. Its intention is to force China and Vietnam as well as China and the United States to move to the negotiating table. This is also because when the US and Canadian companies, which have traditional cooperation ties with these ASEAN countries overheard that the United States might not rule out the possibility to use force in the South China Sea, these companies might be encouraged to take bold step to engage in joint resource development projects with Vietnam and the in the South China Sea knowing that they have the subtle backing coming from the United States. In this regard, when the United States deploys its military supremacy chips in the South China Sea, such chips can at least be used for the US companies to get involved in the joint resource development projects with countries in the South China Sea region. By so doing, the United States will not end up with not getting any concrete benefits from it.
Of late, the defensive actions taken by the Philippines and Vietnam over their respective territorial rights for islands in the South China Sea have become more and more aggressive. This especially so when the Manila Government has now included the Karajan Islands in the South China Sea as its administration district and considered the Islands as an integral part of the Philippine territory . Under such delicate circumstances when countries involved in the territorial dispute in the South China Sea islands have continued to insist on their respective claims for their islands in the South China Sea, even the situation between China and the Philippines will not immediately develop into a sword crossing confrontation, we trust Vietnam will not keep its silence for long.
Resolving Controversial Issues
The theme of the ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting held on 21 July should go more specific into the controversial issues pertaining to the South China Sea. And China's "just in time" action will definitely trigger the old issues pertaining to the unilateral development of islands by some countries surrounding the South China Sea. There is no way for these old problems to avoid being discussed. To resolve the conflict of interest in the South China Sea once and for all, there is a possibility that some ASEAN countries must give the suggestion for ASEAN to sign an Convention with Beijing on the joint development of resources in the South China Sea, or to work on the areas in the South China Sea that can carry out joint development projects. Yet once the countries involved begin to touch on the real issues, quarrels and fights over the real issues can even be more serious than before. In the end, there is no end to the fights and quarrels over the territorial dispute in the South China Sea.

Japan, US Agree To Drop Deadline To Relocate Futenma Base

Japan and the United States agreed at security talks between their defense and foreign ministers in Washington on Tuesday to drop their earlier deadline for the relocation of a key US base within Okinawa Prefecture by 2014, a move that will likely further stall the already protracted negotiations over the base.
Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa and Foreign Minister Takeaki Matsumoto also agreed with US Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on a new set of ''common strategic objectives'' in a joint statement, which called for China to play a constructive role in regional stability.
In the statement issued after the ''two-plus-two'' defense and security meeting, the four ministers reaffirmed a bilateral accord reached in May last year on the relocation of the US Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station, which is a key point in implementing the overall realignment of US forces in Japan, and finalized the configuration of Futenma's replacement facility.
'This is a very important progress toward the relocation,' Kitazawa said in a joint news conference afterward, referring to building the facility in the form of two runways in a V-shaped formation.
Futenma Relocation Plan
The ministers committed to completing the relocation ''at the earliest possible date after 2014,'' but provided no specific timeline or steps to address the concerns in Okinawa and the US Congress regarding the feasibility of the current Futenma relocation plan.
Okinawa, which has long hosted the bulk of US forces in Japan, strongly opposes the relocation of the Futenma base from Ginowan to the less populated coastal area of Nago's Henoko district, citing noise concerns and danger of possible accidents because of the base's presence.
Gates said: ''It is critical that we move forward with the relocation of Futenma,'' stressing the importance of making ''concrete progress over the course of the next year.'' While the Futenma relocation remains a pending issue that needs to be worked out, the Japanese and US defense and foreign chiefs agreed on the key role of the US forces' participation in disaster drills held by local authorities to enhance ties between the forces and base-hosting communities.
Improving Contingency Access
They also agreed to improve contingency access by the US forces and Japan's Self-Defense Forces to facilities in Japan.
Based on the ''common strategic objectives,'' which were originally drawn up in February 2005 and updated in May 2007, the two nations said they will boost the bilateral security alliance amid regional security challenges such as the threat posed by North Korea's nuclear and missile programs.
Japan and the United States agreed to deter provocative actions by North Korea, apparently in light of incidents in 2010, including the North's fatal artillery attack on a South Korean island, and to seek the denuclearization of North Korea, including its uranium enrichment program, in a verifiable manner. The ministers also called for the maintenance of maritime safety and security by defending the principle of freedom of navigation.
Although the statement did not name a specific country, Japanese officials have expressed concern in past documents about China's growing military power and increased naval activities around Japan's southwestern islands.
Regional Stability and Prosperity
Japan and the United States urged China to take a ''responsible and constructive role in regional stability and prosperity'' and called for ''its cooperation on global issues, and its adherence to international norms of behavior.'' They also called on China to be more open and transparent in its military modernization.
The ministers also discussed the issue of territorial rows between China and some Southeast Asian nations in South China Sea and the role of Japan and the United States in the issue, a Japanese official said.
In view of the uncertain security environment in the region, Gates said the United States will maintain a strong presence with forward deployment in East Asia, noting that the latest Futenma accord marks ''steady progress'' in modernizing US forces in the region.
Realigning US Forces
Beyond the issue of realigning US forces, the ministers reaffirmed cooperation between the US military and the SDF, which worked closely together on disaster relief operations in the wake of the March 11 earthquake and tsunami in northeastern Japan.
The ministers agreed on the importance of setting up a regional logistics hub in Japan for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief missions, and also looked to a stronger trilateral security and defense cooperation with Australia and South Korea. Meeting face-to-face under the two-plus-two framework for the first time in four years, the ministers also agreed that the United States can export a jointly developed ballistic missile interceptor to third countries.

Vietnam, Philippines for Seeking US Intervention

The South China Sea, where China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei all have their sovereignty claims, is recently clouded by conflicts. Vietnam and the Philippines, in particular, have made a lot of efforts and attempts to make the United States intervene into the sovereign right disputes in the South China Sea. The conflicts have drawn the attention of the international community. Considering that four out of these five countries are member states of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the issue is related to safety in the Asia Pacific region, Indonesia, as the chair of ASEAN this year, naturally cannot turn a blind eye. Indonesia has the responsibility to stop the attempts of the two ASEAN member-states to internationalize the South China Sea row.
Exclusive Economic Zone
Vietnam conducted live-fire exercises in the waters near Hon Ong Island in its self-claimed 'exclusive economic zone' on 13 June. The nine-hour long exercises were kept limited to naval gunfire and no missile was launched. The Vietnamese authorities also mobilized its citizens to stage anti-China demonstrations outside the Chinese Embassy in Hanoi twice. These actions aimed at flexing its muscles to China. Lately, the Aquino III administration in the Philippines has repeatedly alleged that Chinese vessels had made incursions into the Spratly Islands.
The Philippines announced on 13 June that the country will rename the South China Sea as the West Philippine Sea and some Philippine Congressmen proposed to boycott Chinese products. Both Vietnam and the Philippines welcome the international community, the United States in particular, to help ease the tension in the South China Sea. In the face of all these provocations, the official media of China has warned Vietnam and the Philippines to restrain, rather than escalate the sovereign right disputes in the South China Sea.
Freedom of Navigation
The Obama and Democratic government of the United States proclaimed their plan to return to Asia in 2008 after assuming the ruling power. US State Secretary Hillary Clinton claimed that the United States will intervene into the South China Sea issue because the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea is also a core interest of the country. The US Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently announced that the country will boost its military strength in the Asia Pacific region and will even deploy its most advanced near-shore warship to Singapore. All these actions have given Vietnam and the Philippines an impression that the United States will give them its support if they come into military conflicts with China in the South China Sea.
Yet, the United States made it clear on 10 June that it does not wish to see the tension in the South China Sea and would not take the side of any party involved in the conflicts. Freedom and safety of the navigation in the South China Sea are the concerns of the United States. One-third of the US freight is shipped via the South China Sea every year. The South China Sea offers a fast passage from the western Pacific Ocean to Middle East. If a war erupts in the South China Sea, it will hit the US economy badly. At this time, the popularity of Obama has declined due to his inability to fulfill the promises he made in the presidential election in 2008 and to restore the US economy, as well as the country's massive debt and financial deficit and the high unemployment rate. Obama is now bothered by the chances of his reelection. It is impossible that the United States will go to war with China for Vietnam and the Philippines.
Why do China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei claim they have the maritime sovereignty in the South China Sea? This is because the South China Sea, which is dubbed the second Persian Gulf, is said to have the reserves of 213 billion tons of oil and enormous gas potential. The sovereign right disputes in the South China Sea is a long-standing issue that is impossible to be resolved overnight. In the 1990s, China put forth the proposition of 'set aside disputes, pursue joint development.' But it ends up 'China sets aside disputes, other countries pursue development.' General Zhang Li, former deputy chief of the general staff of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) said in June 2009 that while other countries already had more than 1,000 oil wells in the South China Sea, China had zero oil well there. In early 2010, China proclaimed its core interests in the South China Sea and demarcated the entire South China Sea as the country's territorial waters. This became an issue of widespread concern.
State of Economy
Indonesia is the chair of ASEAN this year. The sovereignty disputes between China and Vietnam, and between China and the Philippines show a tendency to escalate and this has affected the stability in this region. Indonesia has the responsibility to contact all quarters involved and play the role of a mediator to ease the tension. Both Vietnam and the Philippines are plagued with scores of domestic problems including the weak economy, high unemployment rate, and rampant public resentment.
It appears that the Vietnamese and Philippine governments attempt to exploit this issue and incite narrow nationalist sentiment to divert the people's attention and their grudge against the governments. Meanwhile, some Chinese people have started the debate on whether the country should continue to 'keep a low profile' in its diplomatic policy.
Small Hegemonic Power
War is a continuation of politics. China has reiterated a few times that it would not resolve the South China Sea sovereignty disputes by military means and called on the relevant parties to seek peaceful resolution with sincerity and patience. China opposes to the interference of the United States because this will only make the issue more complicated. Vietnam had shown its bellicist inclination and its ambition to become 'a small hegemonic power in Indochina' before. The country had invaded its neighbor Cambodia and had gone to war with China.
Will Vietnam be overwhelmed by greed and once again provoke China -- its 'comrade and brother,' which had helped Vietnam defeat the US imperialists and regain its freedom by sacrificing the lives of its own people and its own money. How do the rulers of China, the Philippines, and Vietnam do their calculation? We really have no idea. It is quite unlikely that a war will erupt in the South China Sea, although small-scale conflicts are inevitable.

US Stirs More Storms To South China Sea Conflicts

Since March 2011, both Vietnam and the Philippines have engaged in several rounds of arguments with China over the sovereignty disputes of islands in the South China Sea. These conflicts have led to a sudden increase of tension in the South China Sea. More recently, Vietnam has even come out with official protest against China, making claim that China has dispatched its warships to interfere with a Vietnamese ship's oil exploration work in the South China Sea, cutting and damaging the ship's undersea oil probing cable.
However, the Philippines also accused China for invading the Philippines' territorial waters as many as seven times within this year. Moreover, the Manila Government also claimed that since its protest against China's invasion of its territorial waters could not be resolved, it has now decided to appeal the case to the United Nations. Yet China's response to the Philippines was that China's vessels were sailing along its own territorial waters. China claimed it did not violate any other country's territorial rights at all.
Dispute Over Sovereignty Rights
By virtue, any dispute over the sovereignty rights of islands in the South China Sea is but the dispute between 'two families' namely ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) and China. In the past, when there were disputes over issues pertaining to conflicts in some of the islands in the South China Sea, the members of these two families would sit down and negotiate a way out to settle the dispute.

However, ever since US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton came out with remarks saying that 'the United States has the obligation to ensure free and secure maritime shipping route along the South China Sea' and presented a high profile of US intention in wanting to involve in the South China Sea affairs when she attended the ASEAN Regional Forum held in Vietnam in July 2010, the United States has indeed stirred more storms to the South China Sea. The sky above the South China Sea has suddenly changed color, and the atmosphere in the South China Sea has also become increasingly tense among countries surrounding the Sea.
Expansion of China's Military Power
On 4 June, when US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was in Singapore attending the Tenth Asian Security Conference, Gates reiterated the US position in the South China Sea. He said the United States will maintain 'strong' military power in this region to guard its allies and to protect the Southeast Asian region's waterways and the region's maritime security. Indirectly, Gates also hinted that the expansion of China's military power has threatened Asian countries. Yet of note is that China's Defense Minister General Liang Guanglie was also among the representative attending the same Asian Security Conference held in Singapore.
From these recent incidents, it is not difficult for us to see that the US involvement in the South China Sea affairs has already disrupted the 'warm relationship' that ASEAN has all along maintained with China. It is also not difficult for us understand that of late, China's high-profiled execution of power in the protection of its maritime interest in the South China Sea is but a design for China to resist the power competition coming from the United States. Of course, the Chinese authority also knows that the reason why Vietnam and the Philippines will loudly accuse China for violating their respective maritime territorial rights is because they have received encouragement from the United States indirectly. As such, at this stage of time, the sovereignty dispute in the South China Sea is no long an issue between the 'two families' namely ASEAN and China. The South China Sea issue has been internationalized. We trust that if some major happening or conflicts ever happens in the South China Sea in the coming days, the United States will definitely want to get involved in it.
Issues and Problems
Issues and problems pertaining to the South China Sea are indeed very complex because these complex issues have involved many countries. Besides China, many other countries have also claimed their rights over certain portion of the group of islands in the South China Sea. These countries have included Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan. If the conflict in the South China Sea cannot be resolved in an amiable manner, it can lead to military conflicts in any minute.
In this regard, what our Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak recently said at the 10th Asian Security Conference held in Singapore should be viewed as a hint for the direction that ASEAN countries should go in order to resolve the conflicts in the South China Sea. Najib said: 'As long as we treat China positively and constructively, China will also make the same response to us. China is a country well known for returning kindness to other countries when it has received kindness from others.'

Pakistan-China Friendship: Gilani Visits Beijing

Reiterating friendship with Pakistan during the recent visit of Pakistan Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani, China warned in clear terms that the international community should respect integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan and should not forget its contribution to the war on terror. China has announced to supply 50 JF-Thunder warplanes to meet Pakistan's defense requirements. It has also announced 700 million yuan as aid for reconstruction of the flood-affected area and 100 million yuan loan on soft terms. It has signed nine memorandums of understanding in banking, trade, industry, agriculture, information technology sectors, and implementation on Saindak projects.
Strained Pakistan-US Relations
The announcement and the agreement that China made during the visit of Prime Minister Gilani, where he met his Chinese counterpart Wen Jiabao regarding Pakistan's defense and economic assistance are the outcome of the everlasting Pakistan-China friendship that has become a strong bond over the past 60 years and it is not in the power of anyone to break or weaken this chain now. The Pakistani prime minister paid visit to China at a critical time when relations between Pakistan and the United States were at their lowest ebb because of the Abbottabad operation and drone attacks. As a result of the US intervention and its strategy to keep Pakistan under constant pressure, and its desire to use the country according to its own will in the so-called war on terror, the Pakistan-US relations have become strained.
Since it was impossible for India to remain silent in this situation, it also started hurling threats to Pakistan. The Indian Air Force chief first issued a statement that his country can launch surgical strikes in Pakistan in self-defense. At the same time, India unleashed a propaganda campaign against Pakistan. In their separate statements, Indian Defense Minister A.K. Anthony and Home Minister P. Chidambaram strongly criticized growing relations between Pakistan and China, China's unilateral announcement about Pakistan's defense, and defense agreements. They announced to counter it by enhancing their (India's) defense preparedness. India's criticism of Pakistan-China relations and announcement to enhance its defense capabilities under the pretext of growing relations between China and Pakistan makes it clear once again that India wants to become mini-super power of the region. It has full support and patronage of the United States in its ambition and the defense and strategic agreements concluded between the United States and India during the visit of the US President Barack Obama to India last year are a clear proof in this regard.
This is a scintillating reality that China is a time-tested friend of Pakistan and Pakistan's integrity and stability is the cornerstone of China's regional strategy. However, as General (retried) Hamid Gul, former chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence, has said, that in spite of being deep and close friend, China will not fight for us because it is against the foreign policy and strategy of China.
Difference between China and the United States is that the Untied States neither follows any principle or international regulation for its interests, nor does it refrain from landing its troops in any region or any country. Similarly, clandestine acts in all the concerned and important countries, through CIA under preplanned objectives and targets, are also an important part of the US policy. On the other hand, China has neither committed flagrant aggression in any part of the world despite all sorts of international pressure and expectations, nor any report about China's clandestine activities came to light. In the backdrop of this clear situation, expectation on the part of the Pakistani rulers that China will physically come to the assistance in case of any possible the US or Indian aggression will be tantamount to committing suicide.
Similarly, China's economic policy is also crystal clear. China does gladly extend technical assistance and manpower to friendly countries but making a country beggar in the name of aid is not part of its economic policy. Since China's economic and political system has its foundations in communism, and since making weak segments and countries economically and financially strong is its prime objective, China always supported Pakistan in such projects that may help it stand on its own feet. According to reports, when Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani requested for immediate financial aid in view of financial deficit and fiscal hardship in the next budget, the Chinese leadership turned down this request with great love and politeness saying giving cash contribution (alms) to friendly countries is not part of China's financial policy. Since the Pakistani rulers have developed the bad habit of getting direct financial aid from the United States, the United Kingdom, World Bank, and the IMF on stringent conditions, and now that these institutions have hinted at stopping aid to Pakistan after the Usama Bin Ladin episode, and some severe conditions are being attached, for further aid, the Pakistani rulers, as usual, tried to steer the drowning boat of country's economy to safety by visiting China. However, like a good and genuine friend, China gave it the recipe of getting rid of the aid once and for all and expressed the desire to assist through investment instead of giving cash aid.
China's Support to Pakistan's Sovereignty and Integrity
It is the impact of the way, in which the Chinese leadership expressed it friendship with Pakistan in clear terms in the current testing time, like the past, that India did not take much time to change its harsh tune against Pakistan. The same change can be seen in the statements of the US leadership. The United States had persistently been talking to Pakistan in threatening tone until clear and emphatic announcement by China but once the Chinese stance came to light, many US officials, including Hillary Clinton, have stated that Pakistan had no knowledge, at official level, about the presence of Usama Bin Ladin in Abbottabad.
Similarly, the visit of Senator John Kerry and Marc Grossman, US special envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan, to Pakistan immediately after Prime Minister Gilani's visit to China, and formal announcement about launching joint operation in future indicates that the Chinese announcement to declare Pakistan's sovereignty and integrity as cornerstone of its foreign policy played an important role in pacifying the US outrage and anger.
Lesson for Pakistan From China's Progress
Doubtless, China is our time-tested and all-weather friend but it is unfortunate that neither we learnt any lesson from China's progress and everlasting friendship nor did we make any meaningful planning to achieve self reliance. Despite excellent relations with China at official and government-level, attention was never focused to promote people-to-people contacts in t between the two countries.
Since all personal interests of our aristocracy are linked with the West and the United States, we are tied in bonds of friendship with China under strategic compulsion but unfortunately, despite all out friendship and sympathies of China, the hearts of our aristocracy throb in unison with the west and the United States in spite of their threats and deceptions. This is the very basic reason that in spite of all sympathy and sincerity on the part of China, everlasting relation of friendship could not be established between the people of Pakistan and China that should have been established.
Demand of Situation
Time has come for Pakistan to stand on its own feet and break the begging bowl of the West and the United States and make model of China's progress our ideal. By doing so, Pakistan can start journey on the great highway of progress and prosperity.
For this new journey, Pakistan will have to promote our political, defense, economic, and commercial relations with its neighbors and genuine friendly countries like China, India, Iran, and Turkey on priority basis instead of its distant relatives such as the United States and the United Kingdom.

Agreement Between HAMAS, Fateh Historic Achievement

The people who had become disheartened by the events of the past few months in the Middle East got a sense of relief and joy at the joining together of the two large groups of Palestinians -- HAMAS and Fateh. Otherwise, the everyday tensions of the Islamic world had drowned them in despair. Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Jordan--the political storms at last gave some relief. For the past four years, tensions between the two groups were good news for the enemies of Islam, especially Israel. But today, when this news was announced that in spite of the many attempts of their enemies the two groups have reached to work together, it was enough to make Israel and its guardian writhe with jealousy.
Israel bared its fangs and immediately announced its decision to withhold tax revenue from the Fateh group. This was announced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He even said that the Fateh will have to choose between Israel and the Islamic group, while its chief protector the United States without making any comment, announced that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has spoken to Netanyahu and Fateh leader Mahmoud Abbas.
Differences and Act
Attempts at reconciliation between the HAMAS and the Fateh started two months ago and now, at last, these attempts had reached fruition. Both parties have shown their appreciation. The world history has is witness that whenever Muslims put their differences on the back burner and put up a united front, they have always got success, while the Koran has told them to set aside their differences and act as one. And whenever, on the orders of the Almighty, they have said "Labbayk " [Arabic for 'I have come O Lord' they have tasted success]. Now that Palestinians have chosen the path of unity, definitely success will be their fate and their enemies will be wiped out.
Enemies of Islam will know the strength of Islam. They know that Muslims do not rest until they have wiped out their enemies from existence. That is why they know that whenever their community gets united, it spells trouble for them. They know that unity among Muslims means trouble for them and that is why they keep putting obstacles in their path. They keep threatening the Fateh that if they sort out their differences with the HAMAS, then its cooperation with Israel will be put in grave danger. This means that behind the scenes, the Fateh was threatened that if it makes up with the HAMAS, then its cooperation with Israel and the United States will be in jeopardy and can also end in war. But all their attempts came to naught and both the groups have signed this historic document.
Important Step Taken
From the news pouring in, the signatures are of Abu Zauq of the HAMAS and Azam Ahmad of the Fateh. HAMAS leader Khalid Mashal and Fateh leader Mahmoud Abbas did not affix their signatures on this agreement, but in the joint statement that was issued in Egypt both leaders showed agreement and called it an historic achievement. Observers of the events in Palestine and Israel agree that this has been a very important step. This will be very beneficial for the Palestinian public, and the most important aspect of the Palestinian state coming up.
Muslims and all right-thinking people of the world wishes that war in Palestinians will end and both sides will jointly be able to struggle for an independent Palestinian State. Because of this fratricidal struggle, both sides were suffering heavy losses, as they had to concentrate on two fronts which were frittering away their strength. Now they will be able to land a heavy blow on their enemy. Now that both the groups have sorted out their differences, they will concentrate on a single point--the establishment of an independent Palestinian State, and land a body blow to their enemy.
Joy for Islamic World
With this agreement not only the Palestinian factions are happy, but the entire Islamic world rejoices, because the land of Palestine is for Muslims. Regardless of which part of the world he may be living in, Palestine has a spiritual connection. This is where He turns to when Muslim recites His prayers. That is why there is a wave of joy to welcome this agreement.
All those who preach peace in the world are in darkness regarding this agreement and are trying to secretly sabotage it. This process has started. That is why the Fateh and the HAMAS and the Palestinian public should guard this agreement and protect it from their enemies, who are shamefully trying to prevent the building of an independent Palestinian State. The whole world, Muslims and all right-thinking people and good wishes are with them.

US Veto on Jewish Settlement Resolution

The United States has vetoed the resolution in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), in which the construction of Jewish settlements in occupied areas by Israel were termed unauthorized. It is pertinent to note that Israel continues to build unauthorized Jewish settlements ever since 1967 in occupied areas. It has also been constantly rejecting all appeals and international pressure in this regard.

It is also noteworthy that soon after Barack Obama took over as US President, the United States continued to pretend that it was striving to get the Middle East issue resolved but it turned out to be a mere ploy. It was under this ploy that the peace dialogue between the Palestine Authority and Israel was resumed. The entire world is aware of what progress this dialogue made, of what extent Israel was made to accept the establishment of an independent sovereign Palestinian state, and what change Israel has made in its stance on the construction of Jewish settlements in occupied areas.

Wrath and Indignation
As far as unauthorized Jewish settlement is concerned, Israel had held up the work for some time just prior to resumption of peace talks. But just before the commencement of talks, it announced that it would go ahead with construction work. At this, the United States has expressed great wrath and indignation. It had given the impression that the construction of these unauthorized colonies may also adversely affect US-Israel relations. During the same time, the US vice president, who was on a visit to the Middle East, adopted a hard attitude against Israel and astonished it. Later, however, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, by way of appeasing Israel as usual, said that relations between the United States and Israel would in no way be affected. Both the United States and Europe chide Israel just for the sake of it.

The United States had also adopted the stance on justification of these colonies that their construction is wrong and also illegal. Yet, one can easily comprehend the duality in the US stand that while the US leadership talks about Palestinians' rights, endorses and supports peace talks, pretends to prevent Israel from construction of illegal colonies, and enacts the drama of exerting pressure in this regard, when the resolution to declare Jewish colonies as illegal was moved in the UNSC, the very same United States vetoed it.

Suspension of Peace Talks
The resolution declares that Jewish settlements constructed after 1967 are illegal. Of the 15 members on the UNSC, 14 voted in its favor and demanded that Israel should forthwith stop construction of these colonies, but vetoing the proposal, the United States came out with a ridiculous argument that it would be adversely affect the peace talks.

The US argument is untenable and has no justification, as it is the issue of these unauthorized colonies that is actually hampering the peace talks the most. The Palestine Authority has suspended peace talks on the plea that Israel continues to construct new colonies in occupied areas. The Palestine Authority is considered to be pro-United States, and both the United States and Israel have intentionally kept the representative organization of Palestine, HAMAS, out of the peace process. Despite it, not only has Palestine suspended the peace talks with Israel, but has also expressed great frustration that the United States has vetoed the resolution in the UNSC. It has categorically asserted that this would damage the cause of peace.

Pro-Israel US Stance
It is clear from the attitude that Palestine has adopted on the argument put up by the United States that the US stand indirectly favors Israel's stand in respect of these colonies, and that it goes to prove the pro-Israel US stance. It is a different issue that to hoodwink the world, the United States even now maintains that it is strongly against construction of Jewish settlements in occupied areas.

Undoubtedly, the fresh US initiative has proved yet again that the United Nations has turned into an institution kept hostage by the United States, and the United Nations has failed to fulfill its responsibilities.