Colombo Security Conclave: Is it a new Minilateral hostile to China in the Indian Ocean?

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

By Anirudh Ramakrishna Phadke

The Colombo Security Conclave (CSC) was hosted virtually by Sri Lanka from its headquarters in Colombo in early August. A meeting of top-ranking officials such as deputy national security advisors (DNSAs) from Sri Lanka, India, and the Maldives along with high-ranking government officials from observer nations of the CSC. This unique conclave deliberated security cooperation across “four pillars” namely maritime security, human trafficking, counterterrorism, and disaster management. The observer nations, namely Bangladesh, Maturities, and Seychelles are set to become permanent members of the Colombo Security Conclave at the next national security level meeting scheduled to take place in the Maldives later this year.

The CSC’s ambition is very clear. The emergence of the Indian Ocean Region as the new strategic battle arena comes along with its demerits too. Widening security concerns of sea piracy, goods (including drugs and arms) smuggling, controlling illegal entry into strategic sea lanes, combating maritime pollution and cyber security are some of the intersecting worries for the CSC nations.

Another outstanding cause for reviving this security conclave back to life was the aggressive maritime policy implemented by China in the Indian Ocean. Maritime policy behaviour of China towards the Indian Ocean is seen as a constant emerging threat by both permanent as well as current observer CSC nations. In late October 2020, Beijing held its fifth plenary session which deliberated upon the 11th five-year plan and the 2035 grand vision of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

The plenary session emphasised expanding the domestic market based on consumption & innovation. China’s ambition as stated in the grand vision makes it strengthen its foothold in the Indian Ocean Region stretching from Djibouti in Africa to far East Asia beyond the South China Sea. Since 2020, the dragon’s aggressive advancements in the sea, especially in the Indian Ocean resulted in an eye-opener for India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. Thus, the trilateral level National Security Advisors (NSAs) came back into action as Colombo Security Conclave which, was held in November 2020, the latter being in limbo since 2014.

In the aftermath of the meeting, there was an uproar among South Asian scholars that CSC must stay clear of the current QUAD-China face-offs. Although the revival of the trilateral meeting was an Indian effort, Scholars say that India should not bring long-rooted rivalry with China into the platform. Though Scholars debate the CSC should transcend beyond QUAD-China clashes and must serve as a personal subregional forum for combating non-traditional security concerns among its members. Upon deeper probing into the latter statement, the following facts would put why the Colombo Security Conclave must give equal priority to considering the China debate.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

China’s ambitious One Belt One Road (OBOR) project created a fulcrum to leverage trillions of dollars of government loans and state-owned industries’ investments across Italy till the South China Sea and resulted in returns falling back into China. The OBOR is regarded as a serious threat by India as it breaks land sovereignty (of India) across the Indo-China Himalayan border, which in turn, has resulted in numerous border incursions, standoffs, and clashes since 2000. A part of OBOR project execution in peninsular India, which gave rise to the infamous maritime strategy (of China) known as the String of Pearls resulted in serious damages in the past to the current CSC member nations.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

The String of Pearls strategy paved way a clear route for China to encircle India in its peninsular region. Today the communist giant has or is building deep-water ports in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, an oil-gas pipeline in Myanmar and in Aksai Chin (China Occupied Kashmir), and a military logistic base in Djibouti. Unable to pay Chinese loans, these nations later fall into the debt trap. The classic example of the latter case is when Sri Lanka was forced to China’s 99-year lease of its Hambantota Port Region. It shows, China was using OBOR imitative to implement debt-trap diplomacy. After loading struggling economies with debt, they cannot repay, China leverages its role as a creditor to coerce them into ceding control over strategically important ports, resources, and commercial routes. Apart from Gwadar port (Baluchistan, Pakistan) and the Hambantota port which already fell victim to the dragon’s realpolitik, littoral islands like Maldives and nations in the IOR region are most exposed to the Chinese debt trap with an exception being India. Thus, looking at past India failed in the race in winning the hands of Sri Lanka and the Maldives against China due to its poor strategic forecast.

Read the full article in our recent publication.

Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback

All the views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. For image credit click here. This article was originally published in Khabarhub and republished by the author in his book titled ‘Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Vol. 1’.

About the Author

Anirudh Phadke is the founding-editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘Colombo Security Conclave: Is it a new Minilateral Hostile to China in the Indian Ocean?’

Follow us on Social

Related Posts

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisement

India-China Rivalry Best Explained by the Concept of “Security Dilemma”

By Anirudh Ramakrishna Phadke

India and China, the two biggest populated countries in Asia with different ideologies, culture, and government bodies has constantly engaged in wars, tensions, and conflicts with each other at either Himalayan border or at the Indian Ocean. Many scholars have citied the India-China rivalry as a classic example justified by the concept of security dilemma. First, root cause of rivalry are the characteristics of these two Asian giants. India is predominantly filled with diversified culture and religion while China officially practices state atheism. Secondly, India is ideologically democratic nation while China adopted communism characterised by totalitarian dictatorship. Most importantly these two distinct nations are immediate neighbours to one another.

Now what causes the rise, escalation, of a relation to rivalry? Scholars argue that territorial disputes are major reasons between states to cultivate rivalry. India and China rising in their governance leadership in Asia and rest of the world see each other as antagonists. The rivalry can also happen due to nations commitment to third parties such as signing off a security treaty or alliance thus getting dragged into security dilemma automatically with opposite parties. The above-mentioned factors have played a vital role in shaping the Indo-China rivalry over past decades. Although the territorial disputes started since the independence of these two countries, rivalry started back in 1960s.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Scholars have found out three evident items in India-China relationship over the past seven decades: hard balancing, soft balancing, and limited hard balancing. These strategies are used both by India and Chinese elites constrain and curb the power of an adversary to maintain their relationship within the status quo. Scholars argue that balancing acts within rivalry nations is conditioned on threat basis and not exclusively to increase in material capabilities. Thus, when practically applied India and China suffer from security dilemma problems, especially on areas of military capabilities and territorial disputes.

Whether India-China rivalry to be justified by the aspect of security dilemma can be answered through where these nations can find prospect of stability vs these nations’ unstable environment. Initial days of diplomatic relations between India and China were established through cooperation and shared identities between the two countries. The shared themes revolved under the notion that both nations were once victim of British colonialism later achieving liberation through years of resistance. The newly formed independent China’s government was first recognised by India outside of the Communist Bloc. Nehru, the then Prime Minister of independent India sent out his appreciation regarding the agenda of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates!

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public & foreign policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered directly into your inbox.

The slogan ‘Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai’ (Indians and Chinese are brothers) reached its peak during 1955 Bandung Conference. Both the leaders of the newly formed independent developing nations received much respect as emerging countries of the third world. The territorial disputes started to appear when China annexed Tibet in 1950. The same year Nehru was advised by Indian policy makers that China’s ambition will not stop with Tibet but could also arrive to India’s North-eastern region too. Later Nehru denied his security advisors allegations on China’s wicked plans in one of his 1950 parliament speech. Although China was not happy with India’s decision to grant asylum to Dalai Lama, effort was taken from Chinese side to not escalate the tensions into military conflicts.

The Panchsheel agreement signed between India and China to peacefully solve the outstanding irritants shows that territorial disputes are important, but not enough, factors to explain the rise of persisting rivalries. Shared identities can allow countries to mitigate territorial disputes without much escalation. However, post 1962 Sino-Indian war proved that when nations go for deploying balancing strategies for solving immediate crisis such as territorial disputes, it can lead to widening attributes such as hostility and enemy identity rather than shared identities.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

India’s refugee status to Dalai Lama and forcing China to follow McMahon line was the turning point in India-China security dilemma. China denied following it by stating that no Beijing officials accepted the 1914 Shimla accord. Furthermore, China opposed the view of McMahon line as part British colonialism while India defended it. China felt offended and betrayed by India due to its support of British sentiment whereas in reality India tried to secure her own borders. Nehru started growing doubts about China’s real ambitions as the Communist nation under Mao Zedong began to send its revolution worldwide. The communist supporters of India took Chinese revolution as an inspiration thereby resulting in growing insurgency in parts of Ladakh and Northeast. Tensions began to escalate at borders where it turned into a military conflict. Still both the countries had a chance to defend escalating the tensions to war, but since balancing strategies were deployed, it resulted in deepening their enmity towards each other.

Read the full article in our recent publication.

Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback

All the opinions and views expressed are those of the author. Image credit goes to Google Images. This article was originally published by the author in his book titled ‘Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Vol. 1’.

About the Author

Anirudh Phadke is the founding-editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘India-China Rivalry Best Explained by the Concept of Security Dilemma.’

Follow us on Social

Related Posts

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Did India Successfully Managed Tensions of its Strategic Partnerships between the US, Iran and Russia?

By Anirudh Ramakrishna Phadke

*The following article was originally published by the author in “Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Vol. 1”

How successfully has India tried to manage the tensions between its strategic partnership with the United States on one hand and its strategic partnerships with Iran and Russia on the other?

As the two biggest democracies of the world, India and the United States strategic partnership began to flourish in the post-cold war era. India and Soviet Union (now Russia) began their diplomatic engagements during in 1954 to counter US-Pakistan strategic partnership which was made through Central Treaty Organisation. During 1961, India saw a strain in its strategic partnership with Soviet Union as India became a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement to avoid playing victim card due to cold war or in other words the aggressive powerplay between the US and Soviet Union. Few years ahead, the then 37th US President Nixon’s decision to support Pakistan during 1971 Indo-Pak war shut off communication between India and the US.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

The dissolution of Soviet Union in 1991 and India’s foreign policy adaptation of the Unipolar World led to develop close ties with United States. On the other hand, upon dissolution of Soviet Union, now Russia retained its special strategic partnership with India. It has been termed as special and privileged strategic partnership by many scholars. India and Russia have a strong economic, military, and diplomatic relations till now. India and Russia have a strong economic, military, and diplomatic engagements. India and Iran established their first diplomatic relations in 1950. India’s relations with Iran suffered same fate as the US and Soviet Union. The relationship saw a serious downfall when India became the fundamental pillar of non-Alignment cooperation while Iran openly conveyed its support for Western Bloc and enjoyed close relations with the US.

The post-cold war period once again changed the ways these four countries acted among themselves. Although India did not recognise 1979 Islamic Revolution, the relations between the two countries began to prosper when wind turned against US with context of Iran. In post- Cold War era it can be aptly said that India had ties with US and Iran for technology, commerce, and oil trade, respectively. There are many instances where tensions began to grow between these nations due to their close diplomatic ties with other partners.

As the cold war memories have been fading away so did the India’s non-Alignment movement. When Narendra Modi, former chief minister of Gujarat state, elected as Prime Minister of India in 2014, the latter statement began to make even more sense. Under the new regime India has succeeded in a new foreign policy notion called strategic autonomy. So, what are the diplomatic tensions India is facing with the US, Iran, and Russia by adopting a strategic autonomy policy.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

The United States and Iran are engaged in constant odds right from mid 1950s. During that time US was caught in the race with UK to conquer oil reserves of Iraq and Iran. Later US overthrew Iran’s democratic government to gain upper hand in oil reserves. Meanwhile the then imperial regime too failed shortly leading to Iran Revolution.US cut out formal diplomatic ties it had with Iran when signing nuclear development program under its imperial regime. In recent years US assassination of Iran’s top commander Qasem Soleimani made even more anti- American sentiment stronger. Meanwhile India having its largest oil demand satisfied by Iran, has been caught in this dilemma between US-Iran conflict.

In recent times as India seeks to balance its US and Iran ties by hunting out other sources to meet its oil demand. This move has been fuelled by strict imposition of economic sanctions against Iran. India is carefully crafting this move as Tehran is important for New Delhi as both nations have key strategic interests in Indo-Pacific region and condemning Taliban and Pakistan’s action against fostering terrorism in Indian soil. India has managed to create two- way portal in such a way that US’ FDI (Foreign Direct Investments) in India and India’s FDIs in Iran’s Chabahar port does not create hindrances. The port is vital for India in accessing major parts of Central Asia and Eastern Russia.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

India has managed to send a message to Washington stating that Iran is key element in Indo- Pacific construct to connect Eurasia as New Delhi has plans to make it a functioning alternative to China’s BRI project. Since US has growing concerns with China regarding BRI, Washington started to show positive signs towards India’s latter plan. Further India included Russia in its development project thus making these rival big powers to join hands and at same time not straining its own relationship. The International North South Transport Corridor (INSTC), currently in its beta stage aims to connect Mumbai in India to St. Petersburg in Russia via Iran. Think tank experts have said that despite India’s growing activities with Iran it will have not but noticeable impact on US-India strategic partnership.

Another potential way that India tried to delicate the act of balancing by engaging as mediator in solving the US-Iran tensions. For New-Delhi energy security including alternate sources to oil, will be the ultimate concern for next few years. Non-oil trade between Iran and India stood at US$ 2.69 billion in recent years. This implies that apart from decreasing oil trade between the two countries due to US’ economic sanctions, New-Delhi and Tehran firmly holds their strategic partnership. Scholars suggest that India maintaining relations with Iran and US in fact can be useful bridge between Iran and the US. India with the help of international groupings such as the International Energy Agency, is encouraging bilateral dialogue between US and Iran while making India to source out alternate energy developing infrastructure to meet its energy demands. India has been trying to indulge Washington to find value in considering new economic partnerships with Iran, rather than pushing to curb these ties.

The next irritant which is openly visible is the strategic partnership maintained between both the US and Russia by India. During the Cold War era both the countries had aggressive powerplay to heighten their sphere of Influence. Although India founded non-Aligned movement it had close military ties with Soviet Union (now Russia). Upon dissolution after Cold War India’s foreign policy adopted Unipolar world thus retaining diplomatic ties with Russia while blooming new ties with the US. This caused much turmoil to India as it progressed towards establishing itself as a regional power in Asia.

Read the full article from our recent publication.

Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback
Available in E-book, Paperback & Hardback

Opinions and views expressed in this article are those of the author. Image credit goes to Google Images.

About the Author

Anirudh Phadke is the founding-editor of The Viyug. He holds a Master of Science (Strategic Studies) and a certificate in Terrorism Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He currently works for an International Law Enforcement Organisation based in Singapore. He can be reached out via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘Did India Successfully Managed Tensions of its Strategic Partnerships between the US, Iran and Russia?’

Follow us on Social

Related Posts

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Vol. 1- Strategy, India-China Affairs, & Cross-Strait Relations

About the book

Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Volume 1 & 2 is the finest collection of research papers, Op-Eds, critical analysis report, and other essay formats written and compiled by the author. This volume includes a guest contribution by Binita Verma.

This volume contains the following chapters;

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Chapter: 1- The Evolution of Strategic Thought

The essays under this chapter are;

  • Are any of Mahan’s Principles of Sea Power Still Relevant in the 21st Century?
  • Finding Modern Day Relevance in ‘The Art of War’.

Chapter: 2- The Analysis of Defence & Security Policy

The essays under this chapter are;

  • The Viability of Deterrence Strategies in the 21st Century.

Chapter: 3- Indian Ocean Security

The essays under this chapter are;

  • Special Article by Binita Verma: Convergences and Divergences in India-China Relations.
  • Colombo Security Conclave: Is it a new Minilateral hostile to China in the Indian Ocean?
  • Finding Deterrence Strategies Deployed in the Indian Ocean Region.

Chapter: 4- India’s Foreign and Security Policy

The essays under this chapter are;

  • Examining India’s Stance on Rohingya Crisis
  • How successfully has India tried to manage the tensions between its strategic partnership with the United States on one hand and its strategic partnerships with Iran and Russia on the other?
  • Would you agree that the India-China rivalry is best explained by the concept of “security dilemma”?

Chapter: 5- Cross-Strait Relations

The essays under this chapter are;

  • Taiwan’s Strategy to Reduce Economic Dependence on China
  • Paper/Article Review- “Ambiguity, Economic Interdependence, and the US Strategic Dilemma in the Taiwan Strait” written by Scott L. Kastner, published in Journal of Contemporary China (2006), 15(49), November, 651-699.

The publication is available on (Amazon) Kindle to read for free with Kindle Unlimited Membership. You can also purchase the book in various formats such as e-book, paperback, & hardback.

Advertisements

buy printed copies🚚

Buy the printed version of this book directly from The Viyug. The book is available in paperback and hardback formats. Shipment will be usually dispatched to your doorstep within 1 to 2 weeks. All the details will be coordinated directly to you via email once the order has been placed.

As of now we ship within anywhere in India. For other regions and countries the printed versions can be purchased on Amazon.

Currently Out of Stock with us. For printed copies, purchase on NotionPress or Amazon.

Digital, Paperback & Hardback on Amazon.

Digital & Paperback on NotionPress.

Paperback available on Flipkart (India)

About the Author

Anirudh Phadke holds a Master of Science in Strategic Studies from S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He completed his Bachelor of Arts in Defence and Strategic Studies from Guru Nanak College (Autonomous), Chennai. He also holds a certificate in Terrorism Studies from RSIS, NTU. He is the founder and editor of The Viyug. He can be contacted via email at anirudh.r.phadke@viyug.com

Binita Verma is a Ph.D. Scholar of American Studies program in Jawaharlal Nehru
University (JNU). She is currently working on “American and Russian Policies towards the Geopolitics of the Arctic Region” as her Ph.D. topic. She did her M.Phil from the same department on “US Policy and Perspectives towards Arctic”. She has completed her Masters in Politics (with specialisation in International Relations) from JNU. She has published articles on topics related to Arctic Region, US-China, Geopolitics of Arctic and Indo Pacific related events. Her primary interests pertain to US foreign policy, international geopolitical developments, India in Arctic and Russia-China-US relations.

Liked our content, Share it as a tweet to your friends and colleagues.

Check this publication from The Viyug titled.. Research Papers on Defence and Strategic Studies Vol. 1- Strategy, Indo-China Affairs, & Cross-Strait Relations. A must recommended read.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

A New Opportunity

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

By Sauro Dasgupta

As the government withdrew the three farm bills, it signified a greater shift in the Modi government’s public policy shift. It shows that the government can balance the interests of the country with the interests of the party.

The Modi government got the farm bills passed in Parliament without a concrete discussion. The protests against the bills were deemed anti-national, mollycoddled by the deep state of Pakistan and Khalistani groups, a conspiracy theory that gained much traction. The government and the ruling party and their allies tried to defend the farm bills through thick and thin. The sheer arrogance and inhumane face of the party could be seen when a convoy of the son of a minister in the government rammed into a group of protestors at Lakhimpur Kheri. Despite the intervention of the Supreme Court, the ruling party refused to prosecute the perpetrators.

Almost sixty-five protestors died of cold, injuries or targetted violence of the State. When the Opposition and various charitable foundations tried to provide the protestors with some relief, they were brutally persecuted. The raw violence of the State could be seen with full vigour.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

The farm bills were entirely designed to fully corporatize Indian agriculture. Though it seemed an attractive proposition, close interaction with farmers reflects their main worry behind the same. Many companies enter agriculture, buy products from farmers at a high price and sell it in the market under their brand name. Gradually, they started growing products like meat (lab-grown meat), Genetically Modified products, etc. They eventually stopped purchasing products from the farmers. Since they had already eased out the middlemen who would stand by farmers in all their difficulties, farmers were now helpless, with many of them being forced to commit suicide. Since the farmers were too poor to afford quality education, the future of the farmers and their children was devastated as well.

The farmers’ protest evolved from a protest to a movement in no time. Huge rallies were organized by NRIs abroad to rally support for the cause of the farmers. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was the first leader to support the farmers. He voiced his dismay against the heavy-handedness of the Indian State against the farmers.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

The government, on its part, tried to assuage the concerns of the protestors against the farm bills. The death of people like Navdeep Singh and the young protestors at Lakhimpur Kheri was a turning point in the protests. The mob lynching of the young Dalit farm labourer from Taran Taran, Lakhbir Singh by Nihangs at Singhu border, demonstrated that a few protestors had gone the other way, unlike their fellow protestors who protested peacefully.

Despite a huge majority in the Parliament, it was quite reasonable and well-timed of the ruling party to withdraw the bills. This happened previously only in case of the Land Ordinance (2015) and the SC/ST Act (2018). The ruling party feared upsetting its poll equations and alliances in states like Punjab, where an alliance with Punjab Lok Dal of ex Punjab Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh and the Shiromani Akali Dal of the Badals is in the offing. This alliance has become brighter after a meeting of Captain Singh with Prime Minister Modi. This alliance may continue in the Uttar Pradesh polls as well along with its regional allies like Apna Dal and the Republican Party of India (Athawale) led by Union Ministers Anupriya Patel and Ramdas Athawale, respectively.

The middlemen referred previously have always been strong supporters of the ruling party. Farmers have also voted enthusiastically for the party in the past. Therefore, they constituted a solid vote bank for the ruling party in the Northern provinces of India. The Bharatiya Kisan Sangh, which is the farmers’ wing of the RSS also protested against the bills, just as the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh had also protested against the privatization of public sector undertakings in 2020. It made no sense to alienate these influential wings of the RSS, at a time when bigwigs of the RSS were chiding the government to introspect on these laws.

In the end, the protests touched a chord in the heart of the Prime Minister. A very sensitive man, he has always lent himself to criticism and has always acted like a true statesman during such moments of crisis in the Parliament. It should consult the Opposition and all stakeholders before bringing forth any law. That alone will be a new opportunity to preserve democracy and can reaffirm its commitment to the vibrant democratic traditions of India.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Views and opinions expressed in this article are those of author

Author’s Profile

Sauro Dasgupta is currently pursuing post-graduate studies in International Relations at Jadavpur University, Kolkata. He can be reached out via dasgupta_sauro@yahoo.co.in.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘A New Opportunity’

Follow us on Social

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

American Occupation: What worked, what didn’t

By Aswathy Kooanmpilly

Twenty years later, the US leaves its latest battlefield. Like its other post Second World War ventures, American involvement in Afghanistan has come to nought. Thus, it becomes important to put the event in context by looking into a brief history of American occupation to understand where the US went wrong.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

American occupation of other lands is generally considered to have begun in the age of imperialism. But American imperialism is a relative term. Some would consider the entire existence of the nation itself based on imperialism. In academic circles, the Spanish cessation of Cuba and the Philippines around the turn of the 20th century is considered the beginning of American imperialism. Even then, the US claimed to be liberating these areas.

In relation to its contemporaries, the US was seen as a benevolent power. America’s democratic concessions to the Filipinos were considered progressive during that time, but its hasty retreat was motivated by changing priorities, as it was to be repeated in subsequent endeavours. The US realised that having the Philippines as an integrated colony was hurting its economy so it willingly granted the region independence. 

There are very few places where American occupation can be considered fruitful. It worked in war-torn West Germany and Japan which were firmly in the jaws of defeat and South Korea which was/is in an existential battle with its northern brother. The existence of a Soviet threat also acted as a rationale for the intervention for both the occupied and the occupier. These two nations understood that working with the US would help in its development and they adopted a developmental model to sustain themselves rather than revel fully in corruption. There were local acts of resistance against the allied forces but nothing substantial or country-wide to hurt the American presence.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

After the period of decolonisation, the world moved into a neocolonial phase where economic coercions outweighed military takeovers. The coercive power of economic initiatives was more effective and subtle than any direct invasion. Yet America’s ideological hostility with the USSR and the failure of its puppet regime led to the Vietnam War. After its defeat in that war, the US should have realised its shortcomings. 

But the end of the Cold War gave the American ego a boost. Believing liberalism to have won, it used the principle as the legitimised basis to interfere in other nations. Its folly has been to revert back to a physical takeover of governments colonial style while using the excuse of democracy and modernisation. This is the 21st century, no one believes in the excuse of “white man’s burden” anymore. As a nation that gained independence after defeating the global superpower of its time, the US should have recognized the power of nationalism.

The US was successful in conquering these areas but abysmal at policing them. Its corrupt puppet governments were a farce of democracy and very unpopular with the population they governed. One reason the Taliban was able to make such swift gains was due to Ghani administration’s failure in resolving common issues of the people. America’s fault was the belief that it could export liberalism through military occupation while professing to abide by it. Europe did not thrive through colonialism by applying the ideas of liberty, equality, and fraternity in its colonies. In this connected world, such hypocrisy won’t fly. Stretched wars in far-flung areas also test the American citizens’ attention and patience.

In the present age, military occupation cannot counter threats that come through non-traditional means. Ideology motivated the resistance efforts against the American forces in both Vietnam and Afghanistan. American bombings just fueled them more. Presently, the US faces hostility from non-state actors and attacking a sovereign nation won’t solve the problem as evident in the case of the Iraqi invasion.

Hopefully, the failure of the NATO mission in the Middle East marks the end of the political/militaristic form of imperialism. This event might also end the American belief in its global hegemony. The US has increasingly shifted attention towards a rising China, insinuating that it doesn’t consider itself unchallenged in the international arena. 

But pundits had spelt out such forecasts when the US left Saigon. American military intervention responded to the “red menace” during the era of the USSR, the same way it is responding to the threat of Islamic terrorism during the present age of globalisation. Who knows what might again trigger the US into another occupation. But we all can guess what will end any such future endeavours.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

Author’s Profile

Aswathy Kooanmpilly is a postgraduate in International Studies from Christ University. She is interested in the Indo-Pacific region, International Relations Theories, and how culture and similar intangible forces shape global affairs.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘American Occupation: What Worked, What Didn’t.’

Follow us on Social

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

China’s 2035 Vision and It’s Implications in East Asia and India

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

By Anirudh Ramakrishna Phadke

While still many parts of the world are accusing China for the COVID-19 pandemic, the dragon has started formulating its next conquest. In late October 2020, Beijing held its fifth plenary session which discussed the draft proposal for the 11th five-year plan & the 2035 grand vision. The planning committee took broad strokes, covering many areas and issues without laying the implementation mechanisms. Nevertheless, the plans will profoundly impact neighbouring economies and the Chinese itself.

The Vision & Mission of the Documents

The official documents are comprehensive but quite vague, containing 15 broad areas & 60 issue points. Based on the analysis of experts, it can be deduced that China 2035 vision, will have three focal areas.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

  1. Achieving a steady GDP growth target.
  2. Expanding the domestic market based on consumption & innovation.
  3. Enhancing security & sustainability in China.

China no longer sets numerical GDP growth. However, according to the statements at the Fifth Plenum, it has planned great leaps in its economic and technological capabilities, and doubling its GDP per capita. China will also focus on boosting domestic and international dual circulations. The goal is to decrease its dependence on global market while opening new destinations for foreign investments, imports and innovation.

Further the plan reveal that China underscored the commitment to construct an ‘ecological civilization’ through land protection, green economy and waste management. It has deployed stipulated measures on public health systems and mechanisms to address against major natural disasters.

The 2035 Vision’s Impact on East Asia

China’s development objectives are synergistic with economies in East Asia. China’s investments and trade have grown exponentially within this region. Under its BRI investments have flown consistently to Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. In Post-Covid Era, China is likely to seek a stronger security presence in its overseas projects, which may deepen the deployment of military forces in these regions.

Apart from completing the massive infrastructures in East Asia, it deepens the debt trap diplomacy. China will become more proactive in supporting multilateral mechanisms and promoting cooperation on critical issues to enhance regional stability. The documents have stated that independent and robust science and technology sectors are the ‘strategic anchor’ of national development in China, and the country needs to strengthen innovation and placement in core technology fields. The dragon will seek to restructure supply chains that leverage on production advantages inside China & increases its resilience when cooperating with foreign nations.

In terms of health sector and crisis management, the pandemic has demonstrated that China & East Asia, share strong capacities. They can jointly grow fast, involving dense networks across government companies & think tanks in East Asian countries.

How will India Respond?

In theoretical terms India can benefit from China’s 2035 vision. However, the geopolitical tensions between these two countries make them sworn enemies and develop their own counter-strategies to outrun one another. India will likely to work out every diplomatic move to bring down China in international scenario by discouraging technologies operating from mainland China. In the upcoming decade India will closely work with Japan, South Korea, and other advanced democracies to develop parallel technology, infrastructure, & supply networks. India will leverage its technology and resources to offer competing projects among its fellow democracies in Asia and Europe to outrun China in this long term 2035 vision.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

Author’s Profile

Anirudh Ramakrishna Phadke is the founder & chief-editor of The Viyug. He is currently doing MSc Strategic Studies at S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Singapore.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘China’s 2035 Vision and It’s Implications in East Asia and India.’

Follow us on Social

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

How Important is the Indo-Pacific Region to a Strategic India?

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

By Jay Maniyar

The Indo-Pacific region is a constructed geography that stretches from the western Indian Ocean Region (IOR), inclusive of the Arabian Gulf in the north and East Africa in the south, all the way up to the western Americas. It has recently gained prominence as a result of its rising geostrategic profile in the international domain, both terrestrial and maritime. Indian naval officer Capt. (Dr.) Gurpreet S. Khurana mentioned the term in an academic paper in 2007. Then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe referred glowingly to the construct in a speech to the Parliament of India a few months later and laid a cooperative ground for its future that continues to be worked on even today. The Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, defined the region as extending from the shores of Africa to the coasts of America.

The term has been historically applied by German scholar Karl Haushaufer during the warring years of the 20th century (1920s). Even prior, it has gained recognition in erstwhile European states as being identified as a region of strategic significance owing to the boundless possibilities and potential of people-to-people connect, maritime trade and profitable business. Thus, its resuscitation as a key geostrategic entity today is a welcome opportunity (and challenge) that must not be discarded for the long-term interests of the Asia-Pacific (its high-level predecessor) and the world as a whole.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

INDIA’S COGNIZANCE OF THE INDO-PACIFIC

With a stress on ‘Indo’ in the ‘Indo-Pacific’ as a wider reference to India itself (a likelihood not publicly highlighted), the Indian subcontinent, the Indian Ocean, and the entire IOR, one half of this region immediately interested India. The situation of India within these strategic confines further enabled India’s deepening interest in almost all affairs of the region. These range from geopolitical, to geo-economic, to geostrategic and influence a wide array of factors such as trade and commerce via the high seas, the holistic security of critical sea lines of communication that carry this trade, sound resource harnessment from beneath the oceans, and necessary disaster management. These are just a few attributes of India’s Indo-Pacific policy and the maritime interest of the country in the region continue to expand in length, breadth, depth, and width. Moreover, India aims to realise a series of partnerships and friendships in the Indo-Pacific and further its well-renowned image as a benign power willing to become responsible on the world’s stage. This will also help India bury colonial demons and usher in an era wherein it will be going places for the purpose of the fundamental material wellness of those places. As the Indo-Pacific’s pivotal power alongside Japan, the United States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Australia, and other influential powers, India has a role to play like no other given its unique and historic profile and posture.

With the above in mind, Narendra Modi announced a series of working initiations aimed at fostering regional inclusion, involvement, rise, and growth in the nascent strategic arena of the Indo-Pacific. These include ‘Security And Growth for All in the Region’ (India’s SAGAR vision), a participation in the Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy with its partners such as Japan and the United States of America (USA), and the seven-point Indo-Pacific Oceans’ Initiative (IPOI) of late 2019. While SAGAR emphasises an Indian desire to forge a collective security mechanism led by Indian military proponents such as the Indian Navy and Coast Guard, the FOIP looks at the broader region by not limiting itself to the strategically-emergent Indian Ocean area. The IPOI, meanwhile, seeks to further Indian maritime interests in domains such as ecology and maritime security. Together with the 2015 Act East Policy, a derivative of the Look East Policy of the 1990s, the intention remains to achieve strategic parity with an assertive and forthcoming Peoples’ Republic of China, the land area of which occupies a majority of the Indo-Pacific in its own right and magnitude. This parity will cover the domains of infrastructure, energy security, bilateral and multilateral trade, and foreign investment obtained to facilitate connectivity and power a nascent rise.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

The above factors, accompanied by carefully-constructed national and international policy paradigms, are indicative of the comprehensive importance of the Indo-Pacific region to Indian national strategy up and above all other geopolitical constructs. There is no region, presently, that offers India such a comfortable combination of partaking in multidimensional activity in its own neighbourhood and aspiring to do the same abroad, albeit that that is attuned to local circumstances. Even India’s partners are acceding rather quickly to the invitation of the Indo-Pacific region as it presents them to forge a cooperative demeanour in a world plagued by resource shortages and unending conflicts. This runs synonymous to India’s new diplomatic stance of focused and engaged multilateralism combined with a shift from non-alignment as a long-running instrument of state policy to strategic autonomy as an everlasting advance.

CONCLUSION – ALL ABOARD THE INDO-PACIFIC EXPRESS

India’s ambitions in the Indo-Pacific region are akin to the hunt for influence and resources by Russia and Great Britain during the ‘Great Game’ of the nineteenth century. The difference, this time around, is that a new ‘Great Game’ is premised on peace, affability, and laws of the maritime domain as opposed to war and conflict. However, a Chinese presence across the continent in the form of the macro ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ coupled with a gazillion micro initiatives, poses an incredible geostrategic challenge. In this regard, the attention and importance India accords to the Indo-Pacific region as a whole, not restricted to just the Indian Ocean region, scales new heights. Even the prioritisation of a rules-based order hinged on the principles of freedom, transparency, openness, and a common prosperity and progress effectually reason why India is of vitality to the Indo-Pacific and vice versa.

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, a four-party (chiefly) security forum comprising India, Japan, the United States, and Australia, is all but an Indo-Pacific initiative by the very means of it being aimed at deterring Chinese aggression. It was brought back to the international table in 2017 after a gap of ten years owing to pervasive strategic reluctance at the time of its founding. This interesting combine of the QUAD, as it is popularly known, with an expanded regional focus which is centered on Indo-Pacific issues is endorsed enthusiastically by India. This leads to the subsequent amplification of the importance of the Indo-Pacific in New Delhi’s strategic circles. PM Modi’s multifaceted initiatives supplement the growing significance of the Indo-Pacific region to India. In summary, no region has caught the eye of Indian policymakers in recent times as the Indo-Pacific. What is to be positively hoped for is that the desired end-results must follow this articulate adaptation, conceptualisation, enunciation, and formalisation of India as a central Indo-Pacific country.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions shared in the above Commentary belong to its Author only. They do not, in any capacity, express the views and opinions of his employer in the National Maritime Foundation or The Viyug.

About the Author

Jay Maniyar is a Research Associate at the National Maritime Foundation in New Delhi, India. His research focuses upon the maritime domains of Japan, South Korea (the Republic of Korea), and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). He is presently authoring two books, one each on Japan and South Korea’s interests in the Indian Ocean. Mr. Maniyar can be reached via email at jaymaniyar@gmail.com.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘How Important is the Indo-Pacific Region to a Strategic India?’

Follow us on Social

Climate Change and Energy

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

By Mr. Babu LaL Meena

Abstract

“Climate change has happened because of human behaviour, therefore it’s only natural it should be us ,human beings ,to address this issue. It may not be too late if we take decisive actions today .” – Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary – General ,United Nations.

India is both a major greenhouse gas emitter and one of the most vulnerable countries in the word to climate change and energy . Energy is the main driver of climate change as it contributes most of greenhouse gases. India’s has been famous for arguing that it should incur no expense in controlling emissions that cause climate change . The country is already experiencing change in climate & the impacts of climate change , including water stress , heat waves and drought storms and flooding and associated negate consequences on health and live hoods. Climate change is one of the most important global environmental with implication for food production water supply, health, energy .This articles addresses these climate change and energy .India’s own public is also demanding more. India probably will be severely impacted by continuing climate change and energy . India energy policy faces enormous liked to addressing its energy poverty, managing India’s high energy import dependence and finding ways to address the electricity gap. The article suggests that a very large number of options to control warming gases in India ‘s own self – interest and leverage on emissions could amount to several thousand million tones of CO2 annually over the next decade and an even larger quantity by 2025. Keywords : India , Climate Change, Energy , Migration.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

Introduction to Background

India is one of the most significant countries in world, In both its green house gas emissions and its vulnerability to climate change with a large and growing population, India’s emissions of green house gases are increasing .India’s broad spectrum of highly articulated national policies inclusive growth goals in the areas of economic development, human development and environment protection. India energy policy faces enormous liked to addressing , its energy poverty ,managing India’s high energy import dependence and finding ways to address the electricity gap . It is imperative that India realizes this and engages more constructively in global mitigation efforts .The NAPCC is a positive first step in India’s efforts to combat global climate change.

Climate Change

“we are the first generation to feel the effect of climate change and the last generation who can do something about it.” – Barack Obama , Former US President .

Nowadays, people around the world have been focusing on facing climate change. Climate change has become a major concern for the international community. Climate change is the major global challenge today, and the world is becoming more vulnerable to this change. Climate change is more than global warming. Climate change takes place due to natural and human influences. Climate Change is one the main environmental challenges facing the world today. India is facing several problems. Climate change is associated with various adverse impacts on agriculture, water resources, forest and biodiversity, health coastal management and increase in temperature. All domestic and international strategies involving India must realize these core interests as boundary constraints on what India is willing to offer as part of its contribution to climate change.

Energy

“Energy is the essence of life. Every day you decide how you are going to use it by knowing what you want and what it takes to reach that goal, and by maintaining focus.” – Stephen Hawking .

Energy plays an important role in many aspects of our lives. we use electricity for lighting and cooling. Energy is a requirement in our everyday life as a way of improving human development leading to economic growth and productivity. India sources of energy to meet rising demand, climate change mitigation efforts may constrain its use of indigenous and imported coal, oil, and gas while development likely to encounter opposition other non-emitting technologies will require technology transfer and capacity-building . The need for energy and its related services to satisfy human social and economic development welfare and health is increasing.

Migration

“The negative portrayal of migration can foster policies that seek to reduce and control its incidence and do little to address the needs of those who migrate, when migration may be the only option for those affected by climate hazards. Indeed, policies designed to restrict migration rarely succeed, are often self –defeating, and increase the costs to migrants and to communities of origin and destination.” (World Bank ,2010, p.25).

Its impact on migration is object of increasing attention from policy- makers and researchers. The first regards the weight of environmental and climate factors in migration and relationship to push or pull factors, whether of a social, political, or economic nature. India receives immigrants from a number of countries such migration may exacerbate tension as well as putting a strain on Indian central and state government. India has been in lockdown since march 25, 2020. During this time, activities not contributing to the production and supply of essential goods and services were completely or partially suspended.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Conclusion

Based on arguments of equity and per capita emissions. India has shied away so far from direct engagement in global efforts to mitigate emission of GHGS. While essentially valid such arguments are becoming increasingly unsustainable in the international politics of climate change. A serious climate change policy backed with necessary action will increasingly become a part of India relations with industrialized countries, especially the US as the world gears up for serious mitigation action, some kind of engagement on India’s may be unavoidable. The article has discussed the growing concerns faced by India with regard to climate change and energy. India’s success or meeting its future energy needs is not only of concern to India but to the entire world since if India fails, Paris fails.

References

www.researchgate.net2560

www. Indianexpress.com/article/opinion/booking.edu

www. Republication.com/aeee.htm

World Bank ( 2010) , World Development Report2010, Development and Climate Change/  The World Bank, Washington DC. 

Author’s Profile

Mr. Babu Lal Meena is a PhD researcher in School of Education.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read the article titled ‘Climate Change & Energy’.

Follow us on Social

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Uprising Local Militia and Intensity of Bloodshed in Afghanistan

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

By Nadir Shah Katawazai

Recently, several districts fell under Taliban control, and the intensity of war from both sides is increasing day by day. The government has changed their plan regarding war and has asked people to shoulder the Afghan forces. The Minister of Defence has urged people to stand with Afghan forces to crush the Taliban and will soon be given weapons to the uprising. The uprising has come out and takes weapons against antigovernmental groups.
The war becomes intense after the Doha agreement in late 29 February 2020 between the United States and the Taliban. The Afghanistan government was excluded from the deal, but the main agenda was based on four points, in which two very vital clauses. Firstly, the release of five thousands prisoner of the Taliban from the custodian of the Afghan government and secondly, intra-afghan talks between the Afghan government and Taliban. Despite the release of the prisoner but the intra-afghan talks still not commenced yet, which extensively increasing the bloodshed.

The U.S special Representative for Reconciliation Zalimay Khalilzad, was assigned and tasked to deal with the Taliban to finish the U.S longest war. The Khalilzad went to several countries like Pakistan, China, India, Russia, Afghanistan and central Asian countries to speed up the peace process and to reach a deal to stop the bloodshed. After passing more than one and half years of the agreement have not reached any suitable discussion. One of the significant improvements that we have seen after one and half years in the U.S administration under the Trump and Biden government that we should withdraw all our forces in September 2021 as per the deal.

However, now they have withdrawn around fifty per cent of their forces, and most operations are conducted unilaterally by the Afghan forces. As the withdrawal of U.S. forces commences the war, more damage to all sides like Afghan forces, Taliban, and significantly more casualties to innocent people were the targets.

Subscribe to The Viyug Updates

Get exclusive contents and fresh perspectives on defence, geopolitics, international affairs, public policy, intelligence, strategic studies, and many more delivered to your inbox.

After the withdrawal of forces, the U.S.A has committed that we will continue to support the economic aid to the Afghan forces and government. The Afghan government have welcomed the U.S Aids and responded that we eulogize such an act of the U.S government with the Afghan government and say that the U.S is the strategic partner with the Afghan government in difficult times and longest supporting for more than two decades with the Afghan people and government.

President Ghani have several times requested to their neighbours especially to Pakistan to play its constructive role as Islamabad is fully endorsing the Taliban. Their sanctuaries are in the main city of Pakistan, like in Quetta and Peshawar city. Islamabad has robust control and grip, and Rawalpindi intelligence is playing its double game supporting the Taliban to avail its interest in Kashmir and Afghanistan. The Pakistani military has conducted several military operations in the Tribal areas in north and South Waziristan, but the Taliban activities are still at their peak.

Recently, the Exterior Minister of Pakistan, Shah Muhammad Qureshi, talks to the media that Pakistan has no control over the Taliban but can play an optimistic role for a stable Afghanistan. A Member of Parliament from North Waziristan agency Mohsin Dawar talked in Parliament a few days ago and retaliated to Qureshi remarks about the Taliban that He looks like the Foreign Minister of the Taliban, not Pakistan Foreign Minister he was defending Taliban in such away.

After the controversial election and parallel ceremony among Afghan leaders, Abdullah Abdullah becomes the Chairman of Afghan Reconciliation for Peace. However, there is still conflict on forming an inclusive team between Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah. The late formation of an inclusive peace team has slowed down the peace process, and the persistence of Taliban leaders to talks with the Afghan peace team has maintained the deadlock in the peace talks.

After withdrawal, the Taliban have seized several districts in various provinces. However, the government claimed that of the tactical reason we are living the districts. The fall of districts have created scepticism among the common afghan and worrisome situation that many have fear about the coming of days and thinking that what will happen next couple of months.

The withdrawal has neither only frightened the afghan citizens but has limited their activities of the foreigner. The foreigners have neither limited their travelling but advice their citizens to limit their activities without necessity in Afghanistan. The control of Hamid Karzai International Airport is handing over to the Afghan government, but it is too difficult for Afghanistan to handle easily.

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

The U.S and NATO have decided to hand over the Airport to Turkey. However, the Taliban have threatened the Turkey government and said that no one could take responsibility that it is contradicted with the early agreement with the U.S. the issue of Airport have even compel the foreigner to think to close their embassy.

In a nutshell, the local Militia should be biometric. The government has to strict surveillance on that as the Militia of Warlord Dostum and other groups toppled the late President of Afghanistan Dr Najibullah government. There is a question in people’s minds, and they fear how the government will control these militias after some months. There will be a direct fight between the People and the Taliban, which will deteriorate the situation, which will be very difficult for the government to control. It will further increase the war. The Taliban have threatened the leaders of Militias that those who involved in uprising people will be faced with much difficulty.

The uprisings have weakened the government positions and especially lesson the moral of afghan armies. The militia has stood with the Afghan army in more provinces. There is an urgent need for Pakistan to endorse the Afghan government and persuade the Taliban to agree on a Ceasefire with the Afghan government. However, the uprising will intensify the war not only within Afghanistan but will also damage the situation across Durnadline in Pakistan.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

Author’s Profile

Nadir Shah is from Afghanistan and has a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science and worked in the National Museum of Afghanistan for more than three years. He is currently doing an M.A in South Asian Studies (UMISARC department) at Pondicherry University, India. Nadir has written four articles which were published in the Afghanistan times newspaper and delivered more than 20 interviews to various TV channels during his job. He has attended many international conferences and national seminars abroad and inside the country.

Share this article with your friends and colleagues on Twitter

Read this article titled ‘Uprising Local Militia and Intensity of Bloodshed in Afghanistan.’

Follow us on Social

Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: