Asia

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares109 Views

      in World Politics

      Biden’s Golden Opportunity to Reverse Course on China

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in UK Politics

      Indian slums ‘covered up with white cloth’ during Boris Johnson’s visit

      by

      Large white sheets appear to have been used to cover up the view of slum housing along the route taken by Boris Johnson during his visit to Gujarat, India on Thursday.A number of videos and images posted on social media by local journalists appear to show white sheets lining the roadside near the former home of Mahatma Gandhi in Ahmedabad, which was visited by the UK prime minister on the first day of his India tour.Later that day and other images showed the sheets being taken down from their large metal frames, once again revealing the view of informal settlements behind. There is no official confirmation that the Gujarat government, led by prime minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), made these arrangements for Mr Johnson’s visit, and both state and city officials The Independent spoke to said they were not aware of any plan to cover up the view of slums.One video, shared online by filmmaker Vinod Kapri and purportedly recorded on Thursday in Ahmedabad, shows white cloth blocking the view on the side of the road as normal traffic continues in the busy city.Addressing Mr Modi, who hails from Gujarat and has increasingly offered the state as a stop-over for visiting foreign dignitaries in recent years, Kapri wrote: “You were the Chief Minister of Gujarat for 12 years. For 8 years you are the Prime Minister of the country @narendramodi.. Still, what is it that you are ashamed to show @BorisJohnson ?” One later video, posted on Thursday evening by a journalist named Umashankar Singh who works with news channel NDTV, shows the white sheets being taken down from their scaffolding, revealing shacks and parked scooters behind.“Curtains come off as Johnson leaves,” he wrote on Twitter on Thursday after the British prime minister had left for Delhi for his talks with Mr Modi on Friday. Mr Johnson had landed in India’s western province of Gujarat at 10.30am local time on Thursday and was received by chief minister Bhupendra Patel. His itinerary in Ahmedabad included the visit to the famous Sabarmati Ashram, the old home of Mahatma Gandhi, where he posed sitting with Gandhi’s famous charkha (spinning wheel). In his opening remarks to Mr Modi during his ceremonial reception in Delhi on Friday morning, Mr Johnson commented on how much he had enjoyed the “fantastic welcome” in Gujarat and said he “wouldn’t necessarily get that… everywhere in the world”. Mr Johnson’s visit to India came amid calls for his resignation back home, after he was fined by the police for breaching his own Covid lockdown rules against social gatherings. This isn’t the first time steps have been taken to hide parts of the view during a visit by a foreign dignitary to Ahmedabad. When then-US president Donald Trump visited Gujarat in early 2020 for a stadium event alongside Mr Modi dubbed the “Namaste Trump” rally, Ahmedabad’s municipal corporation built a four-foot-high wall to hide a stretch of slums on the American leader’s route through the city. Mr Johnson’s own India visit had already been mired in controversy after he visited a JCB factory, one day after the same company’s equipment was used to demolish houses of mostly poor Muslims in the North Delhi locality of Jahangirpur, an area hit with back to back incidents of religious violence over the last weekend. More

    • 188 Shares149 Views

      in UK Politics

      ‘Tone-deaf’ Boris Johnson visits JCB factory amid outcry in India over demolitions using company’s bulldozers

      by

      Boris Johnson’s visit to inaugurate a JCB factory during his two-day tour of India has been dubbed “tone deaf” amid the outcry over the destruction of mostly Muslim homes in the country using the company’s bulldozers.The British prime minister landed in India on Thursday, a day after municipal authorities in Delhi moved in with JCB bulldozers to raze homes and properties of mainly Muslim residents in an area of the capital where religious riots broke out over the weekend. The local authorities have denied that the demolitions were linked to the communal violence and said there was no discrimination involved in the drive, but the incident has led to an uproar and many observers noted the unfortunate timing of Mr Johnson’s JCB factory visit. Mr Johnson’s first stop in India was at the city of Ahmedabad in the western state of Gujarat, where he was taken to the Sabarmati Ashram, the former home of Mahatma Gandhi. He was photographed using Gandhi’s traditional charkha (spinning wheel). But it was the second stop on the trip — the inauguration of a new plant for the UK-based Joseph Cyril Bamford Excavators Limited (JCB) company — that drew attention to Mr Johnson’s visit from a number of agitated Indian commentators.Mr Johnson had boarded an Indian Air Force Chinook helicopter to visit JCB’s new factory in Vadodara, owned by major Tory donor Lord Bamford.Political commentators in India pointed out that bulldozers and diggers manufactured by the company, which also produces agricultural and construction equipment, were used to demolish houses during a high-profile incident in Jahangirpuri, in north Delhi, the day before. JCB logos featured prominently in photographs from Thursday of tearful residents scrambling to retrieve personal items among the debris of their homes. “What a bulldozer of an irony! British PM @BorisJohnson will inaugurate the JCB plant in Halol that will manufacture bulldozers on a day when Supreme Court is taking cognisance of the constitutional limits of the administration’s use of the machine. #jahagirpuri,” Sanjay Kapoor, editor of India’s Hardnews magazine wrote. “JCB’s website proudly notes that it is used for construction, agriculture, recycling and power generation. In India, it is being used to disposess the poor and inflict collective humiliation upon Muslims. Hope that friends in the UK will make hold their PM to account,” Alishan Jafri, a Muslim journalist in India who writes for The Wire, tweeted. “Seems like @BorisJohnson’s visit is now turning increasingly tone-deaf. Visiting a plant of the JCB company while its bulldozers are being used to illegally terrorise Muslims? Someone at @UKinIndia failed to do their job. Only way Johnson can salvage this trip is by speaking up,” Mohamed Zeeshan, a leading Muslim columnist in India, wrote. “As many such images emerged from Delhi, it is ironical that the UK PM ⁦⁦@BorisJohnson⁩ will inaugurate a JCB factory in Gujarat today,” wrote Danish Khan, another Indian journalist, sharing the image of the JCB bulldozer used in the demolitions in north Delhi.Amnesty India called his visit “not only ignorant but his silence on the incident is deafening”.The demolition drive by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation, which is under the control of the Hindu right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led by Narendra Modi, carried on for some time on Wednesday morning despite a stay order issued by the country’s top court. Residents and rights activists alleged that the demolition drive was biased against Muslim residents, after officials stopped short of damaging a temple that was in the same lane as other structures which were said to be encroaching. During his visit to the JCB factory, Mr Johnson dismissed questions about authoritarianism in his host country and insisted that India “is democratic”. Nonetheless, Mr Johnson suggested he would raise with Mr Modi issues including restrictions on the press, the protection of minorities and the use of bulldozers to destroy mainly Muslim homes when asked by broadcasters during the visit to the JCB factory.He said: “We always raise the difficult issues, of course we do, but the fact is that India is a country of 1.35 billion people and it is democratic, it’s the world’s largest democracy.”Asked if it was an embarrassment for the prime minister that JCB should find itself involved in a court case on the day he visited its factory in Gujarat, Mr Johnson’s official spokesperson said: “It is a matter for the Indian authorities how any equipment is used.”The spokesperson denied that Mr Johnson had visited the JCB plant because the firm’s boss Lord Bamford is a major Tory donor.“No,” he said. “He chose to go to the JCB factory because it is a very good illustration of a UK business working with India and the Indian government to benefit both the UK and India.“The factory visited today is the sixth one they have opened here. They are one of the biggest producers in India of this sort of equipment.”The Jahangirpuri area witnessed violence on 16 and 18 April during Hindu festivals, when slogan-chanting saffron-clad men carried out a procession in the area where mostly Muslims reside and a scuffle ensued between groups of people.It follows a similar incident in the central Indian state of Madhya Pradesh, where the state government — also led by the BJP — openly said it was demolishing Muslim properties as punishment for the violence that marred a Hindu festival in the city of Khargone. According to news reports, the authorities there vowed to demolish at least 50 “illegal” structures of Muslims accused of pelting stones at the Ram Navami procession and said that the damage caused to public and private properties during the violence will be recovered from rioters.Mr Modi’s government has been repeatedly accused of emboldening hardline Hindu religious groups and in recent months several incidents of hate speech against Muslims have been reported at religious events. There have been clashes between the two communities during recent Hindu festivals in at least five Indian states.During his visit to Ahmedabad, Mr Johnson is also expected to meet billionaire Gautam Adani, a firm supporter of Mr Modi and fellow Gujarati, and to see the Gujarat International Finance Tec-City or GIFT City before flying to Delhi where he will meet the Indian prime minister. Downing Street says Mr Johnson’s focus will be on strengthening trade and defence ties between India and the UK, and that the prime minister will not “lecture” his host on any points of difference, including India’s ongoing neutral stance towards the conflict in Ukraine. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in World Politics

      Industrialization and Innovation Could Make the Indian Economy Takeoff

      by

      Labor-intensive manufacturing has historically been the best-known recipe for driving economy-wide productivity enhancement. Over time, several countries, notably those in East Asia, managed to move unskilled workers from farms in rural areas to factories in urban settings. This transition increased both individual incomes and national GDPs, ultimately boosting productivity.

      Not all countries have taken to manufacturing, though. Some of them have experienced premature deindustrialization, which economist Dani Rodrik has analyzed extensively. India’s manufacturing sector never reached full potential because of this phenomenon.

      Are You Ready for Collapse?

      READ MORE

      Instead, India ended up with the “premature servicization” of its economy. This diminished its capacity to create enough well-paying jobs for its large population and did not allow for increased productivity.

      India’s Drive to Industrialization and Innovation

      Services now comprise more than half of India’s GDP. As alluded to above, services do not deliver productivity growth in the same way as industry. Those who argue for free trade believe this does not matter. India can import industrial goods like cars and cellphones while exporting software writing and call center services.

      Such arguments for a trade-based economy fail to recognize, or in many cases deliberately omit, increasing trade deficits when a country has poor manufacturing. In a volatile and uncertain world, these deficits can become a geopolitical liability for any nation because manufacturers can shut off access to the most basic of goods. Manufacturing does not only increase productivity and enhance security, but it also creates jobs and lowers inequality. For these reasons, India has recently embarked on a reindustrialization program. 

      Embed from Getty Images

      The new Production Linked Incentives (PLIs) seek to attract the more reputed global manufacturers, the best brains in industry and high-quality, long-term investments to India. Under PLIs, participants can manufacture for the domestic and/or export markets. The government applied these incentives to 14 sectors, of which telecoms, cellphones, electronic equipment and automobiles are benefiting already.

      Many manufacturers station their Global Capability Centers (GCCs) in India, which has become a global base for services operations. A June 2021 report by Deloitte and NASSCOM states that 1,300 GCCs employed more than 1.3 million professionals and generated $33.8 billion in annual revenues in the financial year starting April 1, 2020, and ending March 31, 2021. Another report estimates that GCCs are likely to grow by 6-7% per year and rise to over 1,900 by 2025. It also says that these GCCs are evolving from back-office destinations to global hubs of innovation.

      Digitization is aiding this transformation of GCCs. Now, industrial design is no longer a monopoly of a headquarters in Michigan or Munich. Thanks to fast-speed internet and powerful computers, research, design and development of new machines, goods and consumption articles can take place anywhere in the world. Software is playing an increasingly bigger role in creating new hardware, driving additive manufacturing and automating factories. A process of disintermediation of manufacturing is under full swing, leading to what can be called a “servicization of manufacturing.”

      This trend gives India a unique opportunity. Global businesses need rapid, at-scale and cost-effective innovation. With its cost advantages and services ecosystem, India can provide that innovation to the world. Conventionally, innovation is associated with creating something new such as an iPhone or a Tesla. However, innovation occurs in less flamboyant ways as well. Any change in design or development that creates new value for the firm or provides an operational competitive advantage is an innovation too.

      A Unique Opportunity to Takeoff

      Global companies aiming to operate faster, cheaper and better are increasingly operating in India. The country has become more innovative over the years. India granted 28,391 patents in the financial year 2020-21, up from 9,847 in 2016-17 and 7,509 in 2010-11. Last year, the press reported that India registered as many trademarks in the past four years as in the previous 75. India’s rank on the global innovation index has moved up from 81 in 2015 to 46 in 2021. The World Intellectual Property Organization also recognized India as the second most innovative low and middle-income economy after Vietnam.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      India missed out on the first and second industrial revolutions. The first one took place in Europe between the mid-18th and mid-19th centuries when India was fragmented and undergoing colonization by the British East India Company. The Second Industrial Revolution occurred in the 20th century, but India was ruled by the British government directly, which had no interest in industrialization. London’s incentive was to use India as a provider of raw materials and as a captive market for finished British industrial goods.

      After independence in 1947, India failed to industrialize unlike its East Asian counterparts. It chose a Soviet-style planned economy that was closed and protectionist. Only in 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed did India embrace market reforms and liberalized its economy.

      Today, India is growing at 9% and its GDP is about to touch the $3-trillion mark. With strong global tailwinds, India can embrace industrialization and innovation, and finally enter what American economist Walt Rostow has termed the takeoff stage of economic growth.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 88 Shares109 Views

      in World Politics

      What the Taliban’s Constitution Means for Afghanistan

      by

      In a recent webinar titled, “Recognition of the Taliban as a Legitimate Government of Afghanistan,” a participant asked me which constitution is currently in place and the status of the Afghan Constitution from 2004? I couldn’t answer because the status of the constitution was still unclear.

      In August 2021, the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan through unconstitutional means. They initially did not establish a new government or issue a decree suspending or repealing the constitution. However, when prompted by the Chinese ambassador to Afghanistan, the minister of justice noted that the Taliban plan to temporarily enact the 1964 constitution, excluding parts that contradict the principles of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the formal name of the country under the new government. Thus far, the Taliban have not released a formal document or policy statement that would indicate how they plan to govern.

      Can the Taliban Govern Responsibly?

      READ MORE

      When the caretaker administration was introduced last September, the government was modeled on a different system than the one intended in the 2004 constitution, but it shared similarities with the 1964 version. The 2004 model provides for presidential rule, and a direct vote elects a president as the head of state to serve a five-year term.

      So far, it is clear that the 2004 constitution is no longer in force in Afghanistan and that the Taliban have, more or less, restored their constitution that was drafted in 1998. Under that version, the Taliban’s caretaker administration is a theocratic monarchial system with a supreme leader, known as the amir al-Mu’minin (leader of the faithful), as its king.

      The Taliban’s Constitution

      Under its rule between 1996 and 2001, the Taliban never introduced a written constitution for Afghanistan nor validated any previous version. But they made some efforts to draft a constitution. This process began in 1998 when the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Omar — formally known as amir al-Mu’minin — issued a legislative decree under which a so-called constituent assembly — or ulema committee (a religious body of scholars) — was established, led by Maulvi Noor Mohammad Saqib, the former chief justice of Afghanistan.

      Embed from Getty Images

      The decree placed the power to review laws with the committee, under the supervision of the supreme court of Afghanistan. The committee’s task was to look at existing laws, including under past constitutions, and to remove articles that did not conform to sharia. The committee began working on the constitution in July 1998 and decided that the review of the previous constitution should be in accordance with the Hanafi madhab (school of jurisprudence) of Sunni Islam. Articles inconsistent with sharia would be amended or repealed and, if necessary, a new article would be added.

      The constitution was drafted after a round of sessions, but it was not approved before the Taliban were toppled by US-led forces in 2001. The preamble of the constitution notes that it was adopted in 2005 by the supreme council of the Taliban, with 10 chapters and 110 articles. The constitution’s travaux préparatoires (preparatory works) are not publicly available to show which constitution of Afghanistan was chosen as the basis for the Taliban’s version. Yet based on preliminary examination of both versions, it appears that the 1964 constitution, which was adopted under King Mohammad Zahir Shah, has been chosen as a foundation for the Taliban’s model. The Taliban’s constituent assembly has reviewed the 1964 constitution and removed, amended or added articles to the constitution that it believes contradict Islamic law.

      Despite the considerable differences between the two constitutions, many articles of the Taliban’s version are verbatim to those of the 1964 model. While not explicitly mentioned, the Taliban’s constitution provides for a theocratic ruler under the title of amir al-Mu’minin, who would be similar to a king under the 1964 constitution in terms of political power.

      The Taliban’s constitution is focused on the religious dynamics of the country, without considering the social and economic implications, and it forms the basis of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. The constitution recognizes Islam as the national religion and adheres to the Hanafi madhab of Sunni Islam. Due to its similarity with the 1964 model, in principle, the constitution commits to the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the charter of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the Non-Aligned Movement, and other relevant laws and regulations within the limits of Islamic law and national interests. Power is divided between the amir al-Mu’minin, the prime minister or executive, the Islamic shura (parliament) and the supreme court. Ultimately, however, the amir al-Mu’minin has unlimited power to execute his will in all aspects of the government.

      To make sense of the Taliban’s constitution, it is important to examine the responsibilities of the head of state, the shura, the executive and the judiciary and the role of foreign policy.

      The De Facto King

      Under the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the amir al-Mu’minin is the head of state. He executes his authority in the executive, legislative, and judiciary fields according to the provisions of the constitution and other laws. Under the Taliban, the amir would be an Afghan national, born to Afghan Muslim parents and a follower of the Hanafi madhab. The amir al-Mu’minin has similar immensurable powers as the king had under the 1964 constitution. For example, under that version, the king was able, inter alia, to appoint and remove prime ministers and other government ministers, issue a state of emergency, approve the national budget, ratify laws, select and dismiss judges, promote and retire high-ranking officials and declare war. The Taliban’s constitution gives the same powers to the amir.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      Unlike the 1964 and 2004 constitutions, the procedure for appointing the head of the state is not clearly laid out in the Taliban’s constitution. Yet one of the tasks of the shura, together with the supreme court and the prime minister, is to decide on what happens in the event of the amir al-Mu’minin stepping down. The amir would inform the speaker of the shura, chief justice of the supreme court and the prime minister about his resignation. After this, a meeting between the shura, the chief justice and the prime minister takes place. However, if the amir al-Mu’minin dies and does not choose a successor, then the chief justice takes over as acting leader. 

      The constitution does not explicitly state who appoints the amir al-Mu’minin. But it does imply that the authority to appoint him rests with the shura, the chief justice and the prime minister. The one significant difference between the amir and the king under the 1998 and 1964 constitutions, respectively, is that leader of the faithful is accountable and equal before the law like any other citizen. Under the 1964 constitution, the king was not accountable and was to be respected by all.  

      Islamic Shura

      Chapter three of the Taliban’s constitution deals with the nature of the shura, the appointment of its members and its powers. Under the constitution, Afghanistan would have a unicameral shura that has, inter alia, legislative power and the interpretation of the constitution. Members of the shura are appointed by the amir al-Mu’minin for an indefinite duration. The amir would appoint three members from the first grade I provinces, a maximum of two from the grade II provinces and one from grade III provinces. (Based on criteria determined by the Afghan government, all provinces are given different grades and, according to these grades, they receive particular privileges and allocation of the national budget.)

      The members of the shura would also have met the conditions set by the ahl al-hall wa’l ‘aqd, which refers to those qualified to elect or depose a caliph on behalf of the Muslim community under Sunni Islam. The constitution does not specify a method for the appointment of this group of people. Hence, this process remains open to arbitrariness and biased selection of pro-establishment individuals of dubious credibility and competence.

      The amir al-Mu’minin also appoints the speaker of the shura from amongst existing members, but the constitution does not address the appointment of the deputy and secretary of the shura. The shura has the power to ratify, modify or abrogate laws. However, the procedure of enacting laws and abrogation of laws and how the shura will engage with stakeholders is not specified. The shura also has the power, inter alia, to oversee the actions of the government, make decisions on contentious issues, approve the state budget, ratify international treaties and agreements (together with the supreme court and the council of ministers), approve loans and grants, adopt government policies, and elucidate and question the government.

      Embed from Getty Images

      The Taliban’s constitution does not give immunity to members of the shura in case they commit a crime. Article 51 states that if a member of the shura is accused of an offense, the official responsible shall communicate the matter to the speaker. The legal proceedings against the accused would be initiated only when the speaker allows it. In the case of a witnessed crime, the official responsible can start legal proceedings and arrest a member without seeking permission from the speaker.

      Executive

      The prime minister and other ministers who lead the government are the highest executive and administrative authority under the Taliban’s constitution. Appointees to the position of prime minister must meet specific criteria. This includes being a Muslim, a follower of the Hanafi madhab and born to Muslim parents. The prime minister represents the government (executive) and he chairs the council of ministers. The prime minister can delegate his powers to other ministers, sign contracts and agreements at the government level, organize and oversee the affairs of ministries, and appoint, promote, retire and dismiss government officials.

      The government under the Taliban’s model is in charge of the country’s domestic and foreign policies, regulates the performance of ministries and independent authorities, takes necessary measures in executive and administrative matters, drafts government-related laws and regulations, drafts and amends the annual budget, supervises banking affairs, ensures public security in the country and approves external expertise recruitment. The prime minister can also propose removing ministers to the amir al-Mu’minin, but they can only be removed if the head of state gives his approval.  

      Judiciary

      Articles 70 to 82 of the Taliban’s constitution contain detailed provisions on the courts and the status and independence of the judiciary. The constitution establishes the judiciary as an independent organ of the state. The only court established under the constitution is the supreme court, while the number of other courts and their jurisdiction is determined by law. The jurisdiction of the courts to hear cases brought before them is exclusive and, as per the constitution, “under no circumstances shall a law exclude from the jurisdiction of the judiciary, as defined in this title, a case or sphere, and assign it other authorities.”

      The amir al-Mu’minin appoints judges on the recommendation of the chief justice. The number and qualifications of the supreme court judges are not determined. But for the appointment of the chief justice, an ambiguous criterion of “full competence,” or Ahliat-e-Kamil, has been laid down. The deputies and justices of the Supreme Court are also appointed by the amir al-Mu’minin on the recommendation of the chief justice of the supreme court, taking into account the criteria of religion, piety, sufficient knowledge of jurisprudence, the judicial and legal system of the country.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Under the 1964 constitution, the king could appoint judges and review their position after 10 years, but he was not permitted to remove officials from their office through other means. The Taliban’s constitution, on the other hand, does not state the terms of tenure of supreme court judges, and the amir al-Mu’minin can remove judges from their offices.

      The power of the amir to remove judges and the appointment of judges for an undetermined period brings the judiciary’s independence into question. The supreme court under the Taliban’s constitution no longer has the power to interpret the constitution under judicial review. That power has been assigned to shura. Thus, the constitution does not recognize the separation of power and enforce checks and balances.

      Foreign Policy

      According to the Taliban’s constitution, the foreign policy of the Islamic Emirate is based on the teaching of Islam, human values, securing the public interest and political independence, territorial integrity, playing an effective and constructive role in international peace, and cooperating with the international community.

      In principle, the constitution supports the UN Charter, the charter of the OIC, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other internationally accepted principles and regulations, as long as they do not conflict with Islamic principles and national interests. The constitution condemns the use of force against any country and calls for dispute settlement through peaceful means. It also supports the program of disarmament and the elimination of the weapon of mass destruction.

      The Rights of Afghans

      So, with all this in mind, what does the constitution mean for the people of Afghanistan?

      First, it is clear that under the Taliban’s constitution, the public has no say in the decision-making process — neither in the form of voting, nor with holding government bodies to account. The constitution denies the people their right to elect members to the shura, choose a prime minister, pick members of provincial assemblies or select governors, mayors and members of district assemblies since, according to the Taliban, elections are considered un-Islamic.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      Second, the selection of members of the shura by the amir al-Mu’minin opens the door for picking individuals who are close to the inner circle of the Taliban, particularly Taliban members themselves. By introducing the strict and ambiguous conditions of Ahl al-hall wa’l ‘aqd for shura appointees and a constitutional clause for the amir and prime minister to be followers of the Hanafi madhab of Sunni Islam, women and religious minorities such as Shia Muslims are excluded from positions of power and the decision-making process. Such provisions also contradict other clauses of the Taliban’s constitution, including the one that provides for equality before the law and prohibits all forms of discrimination.

      Third, the Taliban’s constitution guarantees certain fundamental rights with limitations. This, in principle, includes freedom of speech, the right to a free and fair trial, liberty, human dignity, right to property, right to assemble unarmed and inviolability of person’s residence. It also provides for certain social rights, including the chance to receive free education. Most importantly, however, it leaves the regulation of women’s education to a specific law, which limits their right to education.

      Prime Minister Mulla Hasan Akhund also confirmed such limitations in his first speech, where he indicated that only sharia education is compulsory and that women could seek knowledge in other fields if necessary. Thus, it can be inferred from his speech and the constitutional clause that the government will determine and specify faculties where women can take enroll and which the Taliban think are necessary for women. This provision itself contradicts other clauses of the constitution.

      Finally, regarding the rights of children, women and minorities, the Taliban’s constitution does not specifically guarantee their protection. However, all Afghan citizens are provided with general protection, which includes children, women and minorities.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in UK Politics

      Christine Lee: UK warning over ‘Chinese agent’ draws scorn from China

      by

      The Chinese government and lawmakers in Hong Kong have lashed out at the UK after its intelligence agency MI5 warned that an alleged spy had infiltrated parliament to improperly influence British politicians on behalf of China.Christine Lee, a 58-year Anglo-Chinese lawyer, was accused of attempting to sway UK lawmakers while facilitating donations from figures in Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland, according to a security briefing circulated to MPs and peers on Thursday.Former Labour minister Barry Gardiner received more than £500,000 from Ms Lee’s law firm to cover staffing costs, while much smaller sums were given to Labour HQ and Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey.The alleged agent, a London-based solicitor, was given an award by Theresa May when she was prime minister in 2019, and former leader David Cameron was photographed speaking in at a 2016 event for a Chinese “engagement” group that Ms Lee founded.Foreign Office officials have raised concerns with China’s ambassador to the UK over the issue, but the Chinese embassy in London denied the allegations late on Thursday night, saying it had “no need” to “buy influence” in any foreign parliament.“We firmly oppose the trick of smearing and intimidation against the Chinese community in the UK,” the embassy’s spokesperson said in the statement.Former Hong Kong Chief Executive Chun-ying Leung also criticised the UK government and accused London of double standards.“If political donations from China and Hong Kong are viewed as acts of espionage, there are too many British spies in Hong Kong who are making direct or indirect donations and promoting the ‘western agenda’ to legislators in the capacity of barristers, professors, NGOs,” he wrote on his Facebook page. “These people would all be spies then.” Regina Ip, a top adviser to Hong Kong’s leader Carrie Lam, made a similar argument on Twitter. She said that the the Chinese-controlled territory could by the same measure level accusations against foreign rights activists – referring to Benedict Rogers by name – who have constantly voiced concerns about the deteriorating state of civil liberties there. On Chinese social media platform Weibo, The Independent identified several posts expressing sarcastic “disbelief” about the reach of China’s supposed infiltration campaign. “We have already infiltrated the British parliament? That’s amazing,” one netizen wrote.“Are we now powerful enough to interfere with the British parliament?” wrote another netizen. “Are they going to accuse us of interfering with the Queen’s domestic matters?” Other netizens in both China and Hong Kong accused the UK of hypocrisy, and questioned whether all donations made by the US and UK in Hong Kong would be considered as infiltration attempts. Some Weibo users said MI5’s warning could be part of a coordinated smear campaign by the West before the Beijing Winter Olympics start next month.“Western countries have united once again to create rumors,” the netizen wrote. “Whenever China is about to host major events, they will always do something like this. The tactic is getting really old and tiring.” The allegation against Ms Lee is one of interference in order to gain covert influence in the UK and not intelligence gathering, according to Whitehall sources. The UK’s home secretary Priti Patel said stronger laws were needed since Ms Lee’s activity was “under the criminal threshold” – warning that it is likely there will be more security alerts like the one issued on Thursday.The Independent has contacted Ms Lee’s law firm for comment.       More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in World Politics

      Is Afghanistan Going to Break Apart?

      by

      After the shambolic US withdrawal, Afghanistan faces an existential problem: Its very existence as a state is now in question. Most people forget that Afghanistan is a patchwork of disparate ethnic groups and remote villages. Unlike Germany or Japan, it is not and has never been a nation-state. Since the 1880s, Afghanistan has been a state based on a loose coalition of poorly governed provinces, forgotten villages and marginalized ethnic groups. 

      A Chequered Past

      For more than a century, different power centers in Afghanistan have had some sort of representation in the central government, even if they often got leftovers from the dominant Pashtun ruling class. This class was repressive and often bloody. Abdur Rahman Khan, the Iron Amir, conducted genocide against the Hazaras in the 1890s, erased a substantial part of the cultural heritage of Nuristanis by forcing them to convert to Islam, and confiscated fertile lands of Tajiks and Uzbeks in the north only to redistribute them to Pashtun tribes. Even a modernist king like Amanulla pursued the Iron Amir’s policies. Yet, at the helm of power, there was generally a servant’s seat at the table for other ethnic groups such as the Tajiks, the Uzbeks and even the Hazaras. This seat at the table along with the backing of superpowers, first the British and then the Soviets, kept the state and the political order intact.

      Afghanistan Is On the Verge of Disaster

      READ MORE

      When the Soviets invaded in 1979, the Pashtun-dominated order of Afghanistan gradually crumbled. Ideology trumped ethnicity, and groups like the Tajiks, the Uzbeks and the Hazaras rose in prominence. Much credit for this goes to Babrak Karmal, the president of Afghanistan from December 1979 to November 1986. When the Soviets withdrew in February 1989, this order collapsed. The battle-hardened mujahideen groups fought a brutal civil war in which Tajik leaders Burhanuddin Rabbani, leader of the Jamiat Party, and Ahmad Shah Massoud, known as the “Lion of Panjshir,” held the upper hand.

      Embed from Getty Images

      The Pashtuns struck back through the Taliban and took over Kabul in 1996. They exercised power over most of the country while Massoud was leading the resistance to the Taliban government from the Panjshir Valley. He was killed in Afghanistan two days before the 9/11 attacks in 2001 by an al-Qaeda suicide squad masquerading as journalists on the pretext of filming an interview. Even after his death, the resistance to the Taliban continued and Massoud’s fighters contributed heavily to the ground fighting that drove out the Taliban from much of the country, including Kabul.

      In the five years of Taliban rule from 1996 to 2001, the Pashtuns returned as the dominant military and political group. They ran an autocratic regime, marginalizing other ethnic groups and suppressing opponents. Hence, resistance to the Taliban was persistent and ferocious in many parts of the country.

      The Post 9/11 Experience

      The 9/11 attacks led to the American intervention and the creation of a new democratic state. Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, Turkmens and other marginalized communities became active participants in the political process. Despite its fragility and flaws, the post-2001 political order and its democratic components offered a unique opportunity for Afghanistan to transform into a functioning polity and society.

      The governing Pashtun ethnonationalist elites, their non-Pashtun partners, including conservative warlords, and the reemergence of a Pashtun-led insurgency squandered the resources and opportunities that otherwise might have consolidated a civil and democratic political order.  

      The Taliban’s forceful return to Kabul last August ended the post-2001 American-backed constitutional order. Today, chaos prevails and a fanatical Pashtun clergy has a vice-like grip on every aspect of Afghanistan’s social, political and economic life. Furthermore, the Taliban are fanatical Muslims with ethnofascist tendencies and a profound apathy for Afghanistan’s ethnic, cultural and political diversity.

      In recent months, many analysts have been very charitable to the Taliban. In an interview with Fair Observer, political analyst Anas Altikriti said, “The reality is the Taliban have won and in today’s world, they have the right, the absolute right to govern.” If the right to govern comes from conquest, then Altikriti is right. Lest we forget, the Taliban have yet to win an election or demonstrate that they are actually capable of governing. Moreover, they are rigid, dictatorial and revanchist. An inclusive political formula that represents Afghanistan’s mosaic-like diversity is impossible so long as the Taliban remain exclusively in charge.

      The legitimate aspirations of non-Pashtun ethnic groups such as the Tajiks, the Uzbeks, the Hazaras, the Turkmens and others are now dissolving in the acid of Sunni fundamentalism. The Taliban have marginalized them completely. These groups have no seat at the table, no representation in the decision-making process and have to live under the barrel of the Taliban gun.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      In 2022, this situation is untenable. Non-Pashtun ethnic groups are fed up and want control over their destiny. Many Pashtun technocrats, including the former president, Hamid Karzai, have switched sides and are part of the ruling dispensation. They claim the Taliban are the source of stability and have formed the only organization capable of ruling the country. However, they forget an important point. Marginalized groups in Afghanistan are chafing under Pashtun hegemony. If the Taliban-led Pashtuns cling to their unilateral rule and convert Afghanistan into a centralized state, the country will indubitably and inevitably break apart.

      Federalism Is the Way Forward

      To avoid a bloody partition along ethnic lines or a 1990s style civil war, Afghanistan needs a federal political system. Afghanistan is not France or the United Kingdom. It cannot be run out of a grand capital no matter how powerful the ruling class is. Like Switzerland and the United States, Afghanistan is an extremely diverse country with a history of local autonomy and a glorious tradition of bloody rebellion as the British, the Soviets and the Americans discovered at their cost.

      Therefore, the balance of power in any political system that can work must lie with local, not national government. Such a system could turn Afghanistan’s disparate ethnic groups into building blocks of a new federal state and avoid the looming bloodbath due to the Taliban’s autocratic rule.

      With China and Russia taking center stage, Afghanistan is increasingly forgotten. That is as risky as it is unfortunate. Conflict in Afghanistan could spill over into South and Central Asia, threatening global peace and security. Afghanistan needs dialogue between different groups ready to hammer out a territorial, judicial, and administrative settlement that leads to a functional union. Only then can we expect the fragile state of Afghanistan to survive.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in UK Politics

      India threatens ‘reciprocal measures’ if UK does not reform vaccine policy

      by

      The British government was accused of “discrimination” for forcing mandatory quarantine, even for completely vaccinated people arriving from India, UAE and other countries under their newly changed Covid-19 related travel guidelines.India’s foreign ministry on Tuesday described Britain’s decision to not recognise ‘Covishield’ — the Covid-19 vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and manufacture by Serum Institute of India (SII) in Pune as “discriminatory”. Harsh Varshan Shringla, India foreign secretary warned that the country is within its rights to “take reciprocal measures” if the matter was not resolved.”The non-recognition of Covishield is a discriminating policy and impacts our citizens travelling to the UK. The external affairs minister has raised the issue strongly with the new UK foreign secretary. I am told that certain assurances have been given that this issue will be resolved,” Mr Shringla said in New Delhi.Indian foreign minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar raised the issue with his British counterpart Liz Truss in New York and reportedly urged her to remove the quarantine requirement for vaccinated Indians. “Urged early resolution of quarantine issue in mutual interest,” Mr Jaishankar said in a tweet.“We have offered our partner countries of mutual recognition of vaccines. But these are reciprocal actions. If we don’t get satisfaction we will be well within our rights to impose reciprocal measures,” the ministry said in a statement.According to the rules in the UK, travellers who have received both doses of the Covishield vaccine will have to quarantine for 10 days. The new rules will take effect from 4 October and is an attempt to streamline the present “red, amber, green traffic light system” to a single red list of countries.However, according to New Delhi, India provided 4 million doses of Covishield vaccine to the UK at their request. “The basic issue is that the vaccine called Covishield, of which the original manufacturer is in the UK. This has been used by their health system,” the statement added.Besides India, several other countries in the Middle East, South America, Africa and Russia are upset over the change in Britain’s travel policy. Meanwhile, author and opposition MP, Shashi Tharoor, pulled out of a planned book tour of UK in protest against the quarantine rules. In a tweet on Monday, he wrote: “It is offensive to ask fully vaccinated Indians to quarantine. The Brits are reviewing”.Another lawmaker from India Jairam Ramesh said “This smacks of racism”. “Absolutely bizarre considering Covishield was originally developed in the UK and The Serum Institute, Pune has supplied to that country too,” he added.Covishield and Covaxin are the two India-made coronavirus vaccines that have been administered to millions of Indians so far. More