|
|
|
|
13 June 2006
Pallavi Aiyar
|
|
A regional grouping spreads its wings
Whether one sees it as a forum for regional cooperation and stability or as a new military alliance along the lines of NATO, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation today is an international body of considerable weight.
IN THE five years since it's founding in 2001, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) has metamorphosed from a somewhat obscure regional grouping into a major vehicle for the promotion of Chinese and Russian geopolitical interests. The SCO, which will hold its summit meeting on June 15 in Shanghai, has benefited from an increasing confluence of interests among the major regional power centres of Central Asia, China, and Russia. Its emergence as a counterweight to American influence in the area, combined with the possibility that it may admit Iran as a permanent member, has cast it into the global geo-strategic spotlight.
Regardless of whether one sees it as a forum for regional cooperation and stability, as the SCO itself holds, or as a new military alliance along the lines of NATO, as claimed by some U.S. analysts, the SCO today is an international organisation of considerable weight. It covers an area of over 30 million square kilometres or about three-fifths of Eurasia and a population of some 1.4 billion. It also controls a large part of the world's oil and gas reserves and includes two of the world's five declared nuclear powers.
The SCO evolved out of a grouping known as the "Shanghai Five," which was set up in 1996 by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, and Tajikistan. It was expanded to include Uzbekistan in 2001 and rechristened the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. In 2004 and 2005, it admitted Mongolia, Pakistan, India, and Iran as observers.
The organisation has a mandate to combat terrorism, extremism, and separatism throughout the region in addition to promoting deeper economic integration between member states. The SCO maintains that it is not aimed against any other country or grouping and remains an "open organisation."
The group is currently looking into the possibility of accepting new permanent members from among the observer countries. At the June 15 summit meeting, observers will not have any voting rights but may make speeches in accordance with the guidelines for observer countries.
The Presidents of Mongolia, Pakistan, and Iran will be attending the summit, whereas India will be represented by Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Murli Deora. Significantly, Afghan President Hamid Karzai will also attend. Afghanistan is not an observer of the SCO and instead sought and received membership of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation last year.
The heads of SCO member states are expected to sign a series of agreements at the summit. The drafts of the deals and the agenda for the summit meeting were agreed upon by the Foreign Ministers who met in Shanghai in late May. Efforts to integrate the economies of the organisation's members will also be on the agenda. According to Zhang Deguang, the SCO's secretary general, the group hopes to "realise the free flow of commodities, capital, technologies, and services in the region within 20 years."
SCO countries have already agreed on more than 125 joint projects related to trade and investment and have set up seven specialist panels to coordinate cooperation in fields such as customs, transportation, investment promotion, energy, and telecommunications.
In keeping with its strategy of aggressive economic diplomacy, Beijing recently announced $900 million worth of loans for other SCO countries. The loans are in the form of preferential buyer's credit for SCO member states that buy Chinese exports.
Chinese President Hu Jintao will be holding bilateral meetings with the heads of state attending the summit on the sidelines of the meeting, including one with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. However, Mr. Zhang Deguang has said the Iranian nuclear issue will not be a major topic up for discussion during the summit.
Iran has been lobbying for permanent membership of the SCO, claiming that its inclusion would "make the world more fair." Media reports in China and Russia have indicated that the request is being considered seriously.
SCO membership could be a lifeline to Iran. This would end efforts to isolate it internationally and would enable it to partake in various SCO projects giving it access to technology and investment. Moreover its inclusion would also have major implications for global energy security.
U.S. unease
At a regional security conference in Singapore in early June, the U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld criticised the SCO for considering membership for Iran. "It strikes me as strange that one would want to bring into an organisation the leading terrorist nation of the world, Iran," he said.
The United States is increasingly coming to see the SCO as a military confederacy that is being used by Beijing and Moscow to squeeze it out of the region. At last year's summit meeting, the SCO issued a declaration calling for the U.S. to set a deadline for withdrawing air bases in Uzbekistan and Kyrgystan, established earlier to support the American war on terrorism in Afghanistan. Uzbekistan subsequently evicted the U.S. and Kyrgystan demanded a 100-fold increase in the rent on its base when the lease expired on May 31. Negotiations are ongoing.
The U.S. has also been denied observer status at the SCO.
Until recently, the SCO's effectiveness as a strategic alliance was limited by the Central Asian states' attempt to have a multi-directional foreign policy that would play off the U.S. against a developing Sino-Russian détente. However, successful regime changes in 2004 and 2005 in Kyrgystan as well as other former Soviet republics like Ukraine and Georgia have alerted these States to their vulnerability and the fact that Western powers would prefer market-oriented pro-Western regimes rather than the authoritarian, crony systems currently in place.
Russia and China, on the other hand, both believe in the "non-interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country" approach, which suits the Central Asian nations well. Moreover, in addition to support against opposition movements, the SCO provides Central Asian states with economic development aid and increased opportunities for trade and investment.
For Beijing and Moscow, the SCO enables the creation of a significant sphere of influence and provides a vehicle for the pursuance of their geo-political objectives. That the SCO became the first regional grouping to oppose the bid by India, Japan, Brazil, and Germany to seek permanent membership of the United Nation's Security Council is an example of the manner in which the SCO is furthering China's interests.
The SCO's growing influence has been made possible by the dramatic improvement of Sino-Russian ties. For decades, bilateral ties between the neighbours were characterised by hostility as they competed for supremacy of the communist world. Relations began warming up in the late 1980s. In October 2004, the two countries made a final and comprehensive settlement of their border dispute. Bilateral trade is soaring, having reached almost $30 billion last year, a 37 per cent increase from 2004. Russia is also China's chief arms suppliers. Recently China's President said Sino-Russian relations had reached an "unprecedented high" and were embedded with an "obvious strategic ingredient."
Last August, the countries engaged in their first-ever bilateral war games, consisting of land, air and sea manoeuvres. SCO member state countries were invited as observers.
Despite claims that it is not a military alliance, the SCO has conducted joint military exercises as well. The first of these were in 2003, when joint military drills were held in Kazakhstan and China's northwestern Xinjiang province. The six nations are also planning another series of military exercises for next year.
There have been reports that the U.S. is trying to create its own "Greater Central Asia" initiative a grouping of countries friendly to American policy that will serve as a counterweight to the SCO. At a meeting of SCO parliamentary leaders in Moscow last Month, Russian President Vladimir Putin made an allusion to this when he said, "We see in the international arena there are attempts to create competition to our organisation, I think it would be right if we did not engage in this."
So far, however, the Central Asian states have not shown much interest in the U.S. attempt to wean them away from China and Russia and reorientate towards South Asia. Moreover, South Asian countries like India and Pakistan are themselves keen to associate with the SCO. Pakistan is known to actively be lobbying for permanent membership. India too, given its large appetite for oil, will only benefit from further integration with the group.
The upcoming summit meeting is a commemorative one and the main business of the day will be a review of the past achievements of the organisation. For member states there is much to celebrate.
Source : The Hindu
|
|
*********************
|
|
February
2004
Satish Kumar and
Namrata Goswami
|
|
Bush Announces Steps to Combat Proliferation
On
February 11, US President George Bush in a speech at the
National Defence University in Washington urged new
international efforts to combat the spread of weapons of mass
destruction (WMD), saying that the most dangerous threat before
the world was the potential for terrorists or rogue nations to
use chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons in a
surprise first attack. He also announced seven proposals that
would modernize nonproliferation laws, restrict the sale and
transport of nuclear technologies and equipment, and stop the
sale of nuclear technology to countries that do not agree to
vigorous international inspections to ensure that their nuclear
programmes are for peaceful purposes. Bush also urged the United
Nations Security Council to quickly approve a U.S.-proposed
resolution that would require all states to criminalize
proliferation, enact strict export controls, and secure all
sensitive materials within their borders. He also added that
only nations that have signed the additional protocol of the NPT
be allowed to import equipment for their civilian nuclear
programme and nations that have violated NPT obligations be
debarred from serving on the IAEA Board of Governors.
Greater
Middle East Initiative of the US
Al
Hayat, a London based Arabic newspaper; published a copy of
a draft American proposal “Greater Middle East Initiative”
in the first week of February that plans to usher in economic,
political and cultural changes in the Middle East. The draft
that has not been made official yet aims at getting the Middle
Eastern leaders to launch wide ranging political and economic
reforms. However, the draft does not increase financial aid to
the region. The US hopes at getting it adopted at a summit
meeting of the eight leading industrial nations in June at Sea
Island, though some European officials have suggested that they
would block it if there was no progress in solving the
Israel-Palestine issue. Meanwhile, Arab leaders reacted
negatively to the Initiative. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt
and Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia criticized it as an
attempt to dictate the Middle East. Mr. Mubarak said on February
25, “Whoever imagines that it is possible to impose solutions
or reform from abroad on any society or region is delusional”.
NATO’s
Role in Afghanistan
On
February 6, at Brussels, NATO defence ministers agreed to
increase NATO troop presence in Afghanistan. Britain, Norway,
Italy, Turkey agreed to commit five new teams of soldiers and
civilians that would move beyond Kabul, and assist local
authorities throughout Afghanistan. The new NATO Secretary
General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, also stated on the same day that
the credibility of NATO was at stake in Afghanistan, the first
ever out of area mission of NATO outside the European Atlantic
theatre, if security was not enhanced there. On February 17 at
Washington, Lt. General David W. Barno, commander of American
led forces in Afghanistan said that the military had adopted
certain new tactics to combat Al Qaeda and Taliban militants.
American units down to the level of 40 soldiers had been
dispatched to live in villages across Afghanistan where they
could forge ties with tribal elders and gather information about
guerilla and terrorist activities. He also expressed confidence
in roping Osama Bin Laden by the year-end. On February 18,
Taliban resurgents tried to dissuade people in the countryside
from accepting the election registration card for the upcoming
Afghan elections in June. UN Special Representative to
Afghanistan, Jean Arnault, said on February 18 that the Taliban
could create obstacles if security was not tightened.
North
Korean Nuclear Talks
The
second round of six party talks held at Beijing from February
25-28, 2004 exposed stark disagreements between participants
with regard to North Korea’s nuclear programme. Pyongyang’s
chief delegate, Kim Kye-Kwan, pointed out that the offer of a
North Korean nuclear freeze on January 6, 2004 applied only to
the military component of its nuclear programme and maintained
that North Korea would retain its peaceful nuclear programme for
the purpose of generating electricity. The US demanded complete
dismantling of North Korea’s nuclear weapons as it did not
produce electricity from nuclear plants and a civilian programme
might easily be turned into a full fledged arms programme. It
also ruled out the possibility of rewarding North Korea for its
cooperation. Meanwhile, Mr. Choe Jin Su, the North Korean
ambassador to Beijing said that Russia, China and South Korea
had offered energy assistance to North Korea in exchange of a
comprehensive freeze of its weapons programme but admonished the
US for adopting a hard-line. However, this second round of talks
expressed commitment to a nuclear weapons free Korean peninsula.
All the participating states endorsed a peaceful resolution to
the North Korean nuclear crisis and agreed to hold the third
round of talks at Beijing before June, 2004.
Iran’s
Nuclear Weapons
On
February 22, Iran acknowledged publicly that it had secretly
purchased components for a nuclear programme from a network of
international suppliers but insisted that it was mainly for
electricity production. The statement came after Hassan Rohani,
head of Supreme National Security Council of Iran met Director
General El Baredi of the IAEA at Vienna on February 21 and was
briefed on the report released by the IAEA on February 24 that
pointed to evidence of indigenous production of concentrated
fuel and highly enriched uranium by Iran. The agency also found
concealed plans to make sophisticated centrifuges, including a
model called the P-2, a second generation Pakistan design.
Iraq Elections
On
February 23, Secretary General Kofi Annan said that national
elections in Iraq could be held by the end of this year or early
2005. In a report to the Security Council, Mr. Annan pointed out
that his special envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi and a team of UN experts
that visited Iraq in January maintained that the logistics
existing in Iraq were not favourable for early elections and it
might take until May to set up an election framework and eight
months from then to organize elections. The report also stated
that it was urgent that the Iraqis establish an independent
election commission that could decide the structure of the
national vote. Mr. Annan also said that it was important to
stick to the June 30 deadline of handing power to the Iraqis
though he refrained from suggesting the contours of a care-taker
government. The report, however, did not call for a new Security
Council resolution on Iraq, a step that the US would also like
to avoid in order to keep out France and Germany from the
political process in Iraq. Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq’s
most powerful religious leader demanded on February 26 that
nation wide elections must be held by the end of the year, but
dropped his earlier insistence that elections had to be held
before June 30. In a statement released from his Najaf office,
he also demanded a UN Security Council resolution that would
guarantee elections this year.
Taiwan’s
Referendum
China
sent a delegation to Washington in the first week of February to
urge the US to put pressure on Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian
to give up his proposed referendum on China-Taiwan relations on
March 20, along with the presidential elections. Beijing also
requested the visiting US Deputy Secretary of State, Richard
Armitage, in the first week of February to intervene with
Taiwan. However, President Bush’s pressure on Taiwan not to
hold a referendum put him at loggerheads with neo conservatives
at home that support Taiwan’s cause against China. Further, on
February 12, Under Secretary of Defence for Policy, Douglas J.
Feith, in a bilateral dialogue with China in Beijing urged China
to withdraw its missiles aimed at Taiwan and reduce tensions at
the Taiwan Straits pouring cold water on Chinese efforts to
pressurize the US, Taiwan’s biggest ally and arms provider, to
intervene in its internal affairs and stop the referendum.
Parliamentary
Elections in Iran
In
what was seen as a pre-determined result, Islamist hardliners
swept the February 20 parliamentary elections in Iran .The
hardliners’ victory had been facilitated by the Guardian
Council, a non democratic body comprised of twelve clerics that
were nominated by Iran’s supreme religious leader, Ayatollah
Ali Khomeini. On February 1, it disqualified more than 3, 600
pro-reformist candidates amongst 8,200 election candidates
including 80 serving members of parliament from contesting in
the elections. President Mohammad Khatami’s brother Muhammad
Reza Khatami, who led the largest pro-reform party, the
Participation Front, was also disqualified. On February 12,
President Khatami warned that the Guardian Council was adopting
an extremist, anti-democratic stand. However, the resistance
from the reformist candidates to the Guardian Council’s ruling
thinned out when Ayatollah Khomeini ruled that elections would
go ahead as planned. The elections witnessed a low voter turn
out of 50 percent and revealed that parliamentary democracy in
Iran was overshadowed by strong theocratic tendencies. Reacting
to the dodgy parliamentary elections British Foreign Secretary
Jack Straw hinted on February 23 that it might hamper efforts
between the EU and Iran to sign a trade agreement.
Pakistan’s
Nuclear Proliferation
On
February 5, Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf granted
state pardon to Dr. Abdul Qadir Khan, founder of Pakistan’s
Nuclear programme despite his confession on Pakistan National
Television on February 4 that he was guilty of proliferating
nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya. Dr. Khan also
contradicted his earlier statements made to foreign media in
January that he had acted on the indirect instructions of
Generals Aslam Beg and Jehangir Karamat when he absolved the
Pakistan government of any role in the proliferation network.
Further, at a press conference at Army Headquarters in
Rawalpindi on February 6, Gen. Musharraf pointed out that he had
decided to grant pardon to Dr. Khan keeping in mind his
tremendous contribution to the development of Pakistan’s
nuclear arsenal. The General, however, pointed out on February 9
at Rawalpindi that he had made Dr. Khan resign as head of Khan
Laboratories in March, 2001 after suspicions grew on his
clandestine activities. The General denied allegations that the
Pakistan army had a role in the proliferation network. However,
many Pakistani local newspapers and analysts were of the opinion
that fear of further revelations on the role of the Pakistan
army in the proliferation network had prompted Gen.
Musharraf’s pardon. Such closely guarded nuclear secrets and
hardware could not have been transported out of Pakistan without
the knowledge of the top army officials, they maintained. On
February 9, IAEA investigations of Libya’s nuclear programme
revealed a similarity of centrifuge designs with Pakistan. Libya
had said in the first week of February that they had been
procured from certain middlemen in the nuclear black market.
However, evidence now pointed to an active role of Dr. Khan.
Moreover, on February 4 at Kuala Lumpur, Western investigations
revealed the connection between the Malaysian company Scomi
Precision Engineering of Selangor and Dr. Khan’s network. The
company had supplied high quality nuclear components to Dr. Khan
that were later sent to Libya.
Haitian
Crisis
Faced
with pressure from the US and France, the President of Haiti,
Jean Bertrand Aristide, left the country on February 29, 2004.
in accordance with the constitution, Haitian Chief Justice,
Boniface Alexander, was made temporary head of state. On March
1, 2004, the UN Security Council approved unanimously a US led
multilateral force that included France, Canada and Brazil to
restore order in Haiti. Meanwhile, Rebel Leader, Guy Phillipe
also agreed to disarm his men in return for security guarantees
from the international force. The Haitian crisis erupted on
February 5, 2004, when major cities were convulsed by armed
uprisings led by Guy Philippe, a former Haitian police chief
against President Aristide. Civilian opposition groups in
Port-Au-Prince joined demonstrations on February 6 that demanded
Mr. Aristide’s resignation and squarely blamed him for
gross human rights violations. However, the US had been
sceptical in committing troops to defuse the Haitian crisis.
Secretary of State, Colin Powell, had acknowledged on February
17 in Washington that the Bush Administration already stretched
thin in the Middle East had no appetite for sending troops to
Haiti. In fact, the administration had reposed faith in Mr.
Aristide to gear Haiti towards a political settlement and disarm
his supporters. Pressure from human rights groups as well as
episodes of hundreds of Haitians taking to the sea in order to
reach safety in Florida, forced the US to change its stand.
Secretary of State, Colin Powell, said on February 26, 2004 that
Mr. Aristide’s resignation was in the best interest of Haiti.
|
|
*********************
|
|
January
2004
Satish Kumar and
Namrata Goswami
|
|
Russia
and the US
In
a sudden departure from a thaw in US-Russian relationship in
recent years, the US Secretary of State Colin Powell in an essay
in the Russian newspaper, Izvestia,
on January 26, 2003 criticized the human rights abuses in
Chechnya and the unfair access to state owned media by United
Russia, a party favourable to Mr.Putin in the December 2003
parliamentary elections. He expressed concern on the arrest of
Mikhail Khodorkovsky, owner of the largest Russian oil company,
Yukos. He also pointed out that Russia is yet to maintain
balance between the executive and other branches of government.
This was in stark contrast to President George Bush’s
September, 2003 meeting with Mr. Putin at Camp David where he
had applauded the Russian president for his vision of democracy
and freedom. There could be three reasons that triggered off the
Powell essay. First, the US was unhappy at Mr. Putin’s move to
reassert government control over natural resources in Russia.
Second, the arrest of Mr. Khodorkovsky thwarted US economic
designs of turning Russia into the largest non-OPEC source of
crude oil. Mr. Khodorkovskky had planned to sell 40 percent
stake in his company to either Exxon Mobil or Chevron Texaco.
Third, Russia in a new defence policy paper in October, 2003
declared the 12 Commonwealth of Independent States (former
Soviet Republics) as constituting a vital security zone. It
asserted the right to preempt the use of force if this region
was threatened by outside forces. This might have irritated the
US since it had set sights at increasing its sphere of influence
in Central Asia. However, the US is keeping its disagreements
with Russia subtle as Russia’s support is vital for the recent
US standoff with North Korea, as well as for the war against
terrorism and post war reconstruction in Iraq.
Pakistan
and Nuclear Proliferation
Pakistan President Pervez
Musharraf acknowledged on January 26, 2004 that scientists from
his country might have sold and transferred nuclear technology
to other nations for their personal financial gains. He was
reacting to CIA reports of December, 2004 that pointed to the
involvement of Pakistan’s top scientist Dr.Abdul Qadir Khan
and father of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb in a weapons
proliferation network that transferred nuclear technology to
North Korea, Libya, and Iran. President Musharaf denied the
involvement of the Pakistan army in weapons technology
transfers. The CIA however pointed out that it was not possible
for such top secrets to be transferred out of Pakistan without
the involvement of certain top army officials. Retired General
Mirza Aslam Beg during his tenure as army chief between 1988-91
was believed to have had a clear knowledge of the transfer of
nuclear secrets. Senior Pakistan army officials including
retired Lt.Gen. Hamid Gul have stated that CIA reports on the
army’s involvement in the proliferation nexus are baseless.
The US is of the view that it is only assisting Pakistan in
dealing with the investigation of nuclear proliferation. The
Pakistan President Musharraf has the authority to decide the
fate of Dr.Abdul Qadir Khan who had also been accused of
stealing centrifuge designs from a European company in the
1970s. President Musharraf seems to be caught in a crossfire as
he not only has to facilitate further investigations into the
proliferation crisis in Pakistan but also maintain his support
base within the Pakistan army.
North
Korea’s Nuclear Crisis
On January 6, 2004, North Korea’s Central
News Agency published a statement that North Korea was willing
to freeze its nuclear activities provided the US removes North
Korea from its list of sponsors of terrorism as well as lift
economic and military sanctions imposed on it. The statement
indicated a shift from the stand adopted by North Korea in the
first round of six party talks held at Beijing in August 2003.
Then, the US had demanded that North Korea must dismantle its
nuclear arsenal, while North Korea insisted on signing a non
aggression treaty with the US. The change in North Korea’s
stand was ushered in due to the willingness of the Bush
administration around October 2003 to give a multilateral
guarantee that it would not attack North Korea.
Meanwhile, the January 6,
2004 statement by North Korea was received positively at
Washington. Secretary of State Colin Powell observed that the
statement endorsed North Korea’s willingness to resolve the
nuclear crisis through peaceful means. It would also provide a
congenial atmosphere for multilateral negotiations in the
upcoming six party talks at Beijing to be held in February, 2004
that includes not only the US and North Korea but also China,
South Korea, Japan and Russia. Against this backdrop, on January
10-11, 2004, on North Korea’s invitation, a private American
delegation visited North Korea to view its bomb usable plutonium
extracted from 8,000 spent fuel rods that were kept in a cooling
pool near North Korea’s nuclear reactor at Yongbyon. The
members of the delegation pointed out that North Korea might
develop a nuclear bomb if the crisis was not resolved soon.
Iraq
Elections
The American plans for a
caucus-style election to choose representatives to the Iraqi
interim assembly suffered a setback on January 11, 2004 when the
most influential Shiite cleric Ayatollah al-Sistani said that
representatives must be chosen by direct elections. He further
added that the interim constitution drafted by the Iraqi
Governing Council must be approved only by directly elected
representatives. The Shiite Muslims make up 60 to 70 percent of
Iraq’s population but never held power in Iraq. A direct
election would benefit them but might antagonise the Sunni
Muslims and Kurds. The cleric also pointed out that an agreement
for the American led Forces’ stay in Iraq must be approved by
directly elected representatives to the interim assembly. The
American administrators in Iraq led by L. Paul Bremer had agreed
along with the Iraqi Governing Council led by Adnan Pachachi on
November 15, 2003 that sovereignty would be handed over to the
Iraqi interim assembly by June 30, 2004 after caucus elections
to be held in Iraq’s 18 states to choose delegations to the
national assembly. However, the Ayatollah said that he might
change his stand if a UN led team pointed out that direct
election were not feasible in Iraq.
Iraq
and the United Nations
The Bush Administration
along with the Iraqi leaders is pressing the UN to play a role
in Iraq’s road to sovereignty. L. Paul Bremer, the chief
American Administrator in Iraq and Adnan Pachachi, Head of the
Iraqi Governing Council, met the UN Secretary General, Kofi Anan
on January 23, 2003 to persuade him to send a team to Iraq in
order to assess the viability of holding direct elections to the
interim assembly in Iraq. The UN’s involvement would
legitimize the election process in the eyes of the Iraqi people.
The Secretary General is expected to give a decision soon on
whether the UN would take part in the transitional phase
preceding Iraq’s path to democracy. Meanwhile, European
nations indicated that they would provide help in Iraq’s post
war reconstruction. The US administration is now reconsidering
its decision to give contracts to only those countries that took
part in the US led war in Iraq.
Iraq
and Al Qaeda
Secretary of State Colin
Powell admitted on January 8, 2004 that no concrete evidence was
available that could establish a link between Iraq and the Al
Qaeda. This contradicted his February 5, 2003 presentation
before the UN Security Council in which he had stated that there
was a “sinister nexus” between Iraq and the Al Qaeda. He
however, defended his earlier stand in the UN Security Council
by pointing out that the possibility of such a connection was
strong at that time and hence demanded immediate action. He also
said that Iraq today harboured a terrorist network led by Abu
Musaab al- Zarqawi, an associate of Osama Bin Laden and his Al
Qaeda network. He defended President Bush’s decision to go to
war in Iraq as Saddam Hussein was dangerous to world peace and
had the potential of developing WMDs.
Taiwan’s Anti-China Stance
The President of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian, toned
down his anti China rhetoric after criticism from Washington
that he was being too confrontationist with Beijing. The
questions put forth in an upcoming referendum in Taiwan have
also been rephrased. Instead of bluntly demanding that the
Chinese must renounce the use of force in Taiwan and withdraw
its ballistic missiles aimed at the island, the revised
questions deal with whether Taiwan should develop antimissile
weapons if China refuses to remove its missiles that are aimed
at Taiwan. The question whether Taiwan should negotiate with
mainland China to establish peace in the region would also be
put to vote. Beijing is against any referendum because that
might result in the Taiwanese voting for independence from
China. The severe criticism of China by Chen could have been
motivated by the future presidential elections in Taiwan.
|
|
December
2003
Satish Kumar
|
|
In a highly significant move, the European Union approved a
common security strategy on December 12, in order to enable
Europe to “share in the responsibility for global security,
and building a better world.” At a two-day summit in Brussels
to discuss a draft constitution for the Union, the leaders also
approved a plan for a joint military planning staff separate
from NATO. The plan aroused fears in Washington that it would
duplicate NATO institutions and damage trans-Atlantic
cooperation in defence matters.
The
military side of the plan was less satisfactory to nations like
France and Germany who would have preferred the European Force
to have its own headquarters in Brussels, apart from NATO. Under
pressure from the British Prime Minister Tony Blair, France and
Germany revised their original plan to accommodate American
objections, and agreed for a planning staff of about 100
civilian and military officials and for NATO and European Union
to station teams of officers at each other’s headquarters.
This
is the first time that Europe has formally framed its strategy
for common defence and taken steps to back it up militarily. The
EU strategy paper emphasized that Europe did not want to rupture
the alliance with North America. However, the paper departed
from the security thinking of the Bush administration and stated
that none of the current threats to peace, terrorism, weapons of
mass destruction, the collapse of government institutions and
organized crime – was purely military, “nor can they be
tackled by purely military means.”
Japan
Decides to Send Troops to Iraq
Japan
decided on December 9 to send troops to join the American-led
forces in Iraq. The cabinet of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi,
approved a plan to send up to 600 ground troops to southeastern
Iraq in a non-combatant mission to last from six months to one
year. Explaining the decision, Mr. Koizumi emphasized the
importance of Japan’s alliance with the United States who has
of late been urging it to play a more active role
internationally. “The US is Japan’s only ally, and it is
striving very hard to build a stable and democratic government
in Iraq,” Mr. Koizumi said. “Japan must also be a
trustworthy ally to the US”, he pointed out.
The decision to deploy troops abroad is a turning point in
post-war Japan whose US-imposed constitution does not permit it
to possess a military force but only a Self-Defence Force. In
the last decade, however, the constitution has been interpreted
to allow the Self-Defence Force to take part in several small
peace keeping missions, from East Timor to Mozambique. The
Japanese parliament passed a law a few months ago allowing the
Self-Defence Force to take part in the reconstruction of Iraq.
The addition of the Japanese military forces, even if small,
amounts to a big diplomatic victory for the United States. The
US now has the imprimatur of war-renouncing Japan in a military
operation which is opposed by most of the world, including some
of America’s traditional allies.
Libya
Admits Nuclear Weapons and Renounces Them
On December 19, 2003, Libya’s President Col. Quaddafi admitted
that Libya had been secretly developing nuclear weapons. He
stated that he would dismantle the same and open his country for
inspections. IAEA Director, Mohammed El Baradei visited Libya on
December 29 and said that his inspectors had been allowed to
visit four previously unseen nuclear facilities around the
capital, Tripoli.
In
the week before Christmas, President George Bush and Prime
Minister Tony Blair announced that following nine months of
secret talks, Col. Quaddafi had agreed to scrap his WMD
programme. On December 27, Libya confirmed that it would sign an
additional protocol to the NPT, granting the IAEA inspectors the
power to make more intrusive checks on the country’s nuclear
facilities.
Libya’s
leader Col. Muammar Quaddafi has been seeking to improve
relations with the major powers for some years. Five years ago
Libya agreed to let two of its agents to stand trial before
Scottish judges for the bombing of an Pan Am airliner over
Lockerbie in 1988. In August 2003, Libya accepted responsibility
for the bombing and agreed to pay $2.7 billion to the victims’
families as compensation. This prompted the UN to lift its
sanctions against the country, though America still continues to
impose sanctions of its own.
Domestic
considerations may also have influenced Mr. Quaddafi’s
decision to abandon his WMD programme. There is widespread
discontent among Libyans that they have seen little benefit from
their country’s oil riches. Libya’s reserves are the largest
in Africa and about the same as America’s, but they mostly lie
untapped and the country’s oil output has fallen by almost
half since the 1970s.
Tripartite
Agreement on North Korea
In what could be counted as an interesting twist to the North
Korean nuclear crisis, the US along with Japan and South Korea
agreed on December 7 on a set of principles that would provide a
security guarantee to North Korea provided it began a verifiable
dissembling of its nuclear arsenal. Interestingly, the joint
position of these three countries does not include the clause
that North Korea should return to the NPT. Asian diplomats
however point out that the joint statement may not be accepted
by North Korea as it did not carry a unilateral declaration by
the US that it would not attack North Korea. Mr.Bush has said
many times that the US had “no intention” of attacking North
Korea but when pressed, he said, “all options are on the
table” if diplomacy failed to lead to disarmament. North Korea
might also be postponing the scheduled talks in the hope that
George Bush would not be elected for a second term by the
American public.
Taiwan
Demands Removal of Missiles
Taiwan’s
national legislature passed two resolutions on December 17,
calling on China to remove 500 missiles that point to the island
as it amounts to “state sponsored terrorism”. President Bush
stated during the Chinese Prime Minister’s visit to Washington
the previous week that Taiwan should stop raising tensions in
the Taiwan Straits. But, President Chen of Taiwan reiterated
that China has to remove the missiles and renounce the use of
force against the island.
US
Bars France, Germany and Russia
French,
German and Russian companies were barred by the Pentagon from
competing for $18 billion in contracts for reconstruction of
Iraq. Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defence, issued
the directive on December 9, 2003. The motive behind this was to
debar countries that had not taken part in the American led
coalition against Iraq as well as a show of US muscle and
unilateral posture in international decision-making. The move
registered displeasure against France, Germany and Russia, which
argued against the use of force in Iraq.
In
what was seen as a contradiction, George Bush called upon
France, Germany and Russia to forgive Iraq’s debts, a day
after the Pentagon debarred them from getting involved in
re-construction. White House officials maintained that Mr. Bush
was taken by surprise by the bluntness of the Pentagon’s
declaration. Many in the White House feared that the Pentagon
statement would undermine US moves to repair ties with allies
that had opposed the invasion of Iraq. Despite requesting debt
forgiveness from the US allies, the President defended his
policy of debarring the above-mentioned nations by pointing out
that only those nations that had contributed militarily in Iraq
would be given a stake in the $18 billion reconstruction
efforts.
US
Captures Saddam Hussein
The
US received a boost on December 14, 2003 with the announcement
of the capture of Saddam Hussein, ten miles from his hometown of
Tikrit. The DNA tests confirmed Saddam’s identity. The capture
of Saddam Hussein, it was hoped, would provide some clue to
Iraq’s elusive weapons of mass destruction. It was indeed a
surprise for US troops in Iraq that Saddam surrendered without
putting up any resistance. The trial of Saddam Hussein is likely
to be conducted by the Iraqi local courts
given the US’s distaste for international tribunals.
Wen
Jiabao Visits Washington
George
Bush declared on December 9, 2003, that the US and China are now
“partners in diplomacy”. He was speaking on the occasion of
China’s Prime Minister, Wen Jiabao’s three-day visit to the
US. Many in the US establishment pointed out that Bush’s
statement was made keeping in mind the necessity to preserve
peace in the Taiwan Straits. Mr. Bush also lauded the critical
role of a mediator that China was playing in the North Korean
crisis. On the economic front, China had amassed a trade surplus
of $120 billion with the US in 2003.
Russian
Elections
On the December 7, 2003, Russians voted convincingly for United
Russia Party in the parliamentary elections. The Communist Party
that had captured the highest number of seats in the two
previous elections fared badly. The international media as well
as observers of the Council of Europe and Organisation for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) had been critical of
the present elections as it witnessed the avid control of the
independent media by the state as well as the active role of the
security forces.
Kyoto
Protocol
In
the meantime, the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change suffered a
setback when Andrei Illarionov, Senior Adviser to the Russian
President, declared on December 2, 2003,that his country would
not ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The Treaty requires major
industrial countries to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions by
5.2 percent by the year 2012. Though 120 countries have ratified
the treaty, without Russian and the US cooperation, the
threshold for reigning in carbon emissions cannot be met. The US
had already refused ratification in 2001.
This does not imply that the treaty is doomed. Russia is trying
to draw out a bargaining chip from the European Union, desperate
to enforce the treaty, into promising Russia favourable prices
for export of Russian natural gas. The bargaining package must
also include support towards Russia’s candidature as member of
the World Trade Organization.
|
|
*********************
|
|
|
