The Reality of the Afghan and Iraq War – Myth Behind the Troop Surge

December 4, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

I urge every reader of this article to view the contents of the preceding article published under the title ‘Global Terrorism – 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden Revelations,’ International Politics, on this website www.padminiarhant.com,

The adapted articles and segments substantiates the fact that 9/11 attack could have been prevented at all costs and the terror leader Osama Bin Laden apprehended during many opportunities presented time and again.

Further, the recent statement from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirming that the former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Tommy Franks failure to execute the order to capture Osama Bin Laden within the armed forces grasp is conveniently evaded by the authorities.

Even though many credible sources have come forward and testified before Congress to this effect, neither 9/11 commission nor the members of Congress pursued any investigation against those responsible for the neglect up until now.

Subsequent to 9/11, the Afghan war was waged with the unanimous support from all around. It’s been nine years since the incursion and the conservative death toll in this war alone as per:
————————————————————————————————–
1. SOURCE: WIKIPEDIA.ORG

List of civilian casualties of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)

The War in Afghanistan (2001–present) has caused the deaths of thousands of Afghan civilians directly from insurgent and foreign military action, as well as the deaths of possibly tens of thousands of Afghan civilians indirectly as a consequence of displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment, crime and lawlessness resulting from the war.

The war, launched by the United States as “Operation Enduring Freedom” in 2001, began with an initial air campaign that almost immediately prompted concerns over the number of Afghan civilians being killed[1] as well as international protests.

————————————————————————————–

2. Source: http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

About 251 times as many people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than in the ghastly attacks of September 11, 2001. More than 108 times as many people have been killed in these wars and occupations than in all terrorist attacks in the world from 1993-2004. The 2004 report showed terrorism at an all-time high, and after numerous experts suggested that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were fueling the increase, subsequent reports have remained classified.
——————————————————————————————
3. Source: http://cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm

Professor Marc W. Herold, Ph.D., M.B.A., B.Sc. Departments of Economics and Women’s Studies, McConnell Hall, Whittemore School of Business & Economics, University of New Hampshire.

A Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States’ Aerial Bombing of Afghanistan:

“What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties — 3,000 – 3,400 [October 7, 2001 thru March 2002] civilian deaths — in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan.

But, the critical element remains the very low value put upon Afghan civilian lives by U.S. military planners and the political elite, as clearly revealed by U.S. willingness to bomb heavily populated regions. Current Afghan civilian lives must and will be sacrificed in order to [possibly] protect future American lives.”
————————————————————————————————–
Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics, National and Global Security, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

World Peace – Part One

November 29, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Since it’s my 200th post on this website, www.padminiarhant.com, I would like to dedicate the article to my favorite topic, Peace.

The world is riddled with violence in the worst form of terrorism and warfare not barring the dangerous nuclear threats. Then there are local crimes like the drug war in Mexico or the politically incited Philippines massacre exacerbating the miseries of the population. It would be appropriate to attribute the present situation to the political, economic and social injustice prevalent in the society.

Throughout history, the dominance of one nation over another through invasion, illegal occupation and provocative actions have led to the retaliation through terrorism and war including the use of nuclear arsenal witnessed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Often, when the rich nations demonstrate the political power in combination with the military might against the economically weaker countries, the aggression contributes to the perennial chaos and catastrophe.

Further, the most powerful, in their quest for eternal supremacy engage in activities, which provide a fertile ground to the less superior elements seeking similar status, thereby creating a permanent hostile environment to prolong their agenda. It’s increasingly prominent in the impoverished regions of the world. Subsequently the supreme forces’ commandeering the nation is depicted as the marquis in the modern concept of global war on terror.

Interestingly, with reference to warfare vs. terrorism the pronounced bias is noteworthy. The disproportionate civilian casualties during war is accepted as a collateral damage while the equally reprehensible results from a terrorist bombing is condemned reeking racial and anti-religious overtones in the moral evaluation fomenting anger, frustration and anticipated violent reaction. In a way, the setting is well orchestrated to justify the Machiavellian pursuit.

Synonymously, democratic nations conducting war is characterized as purposeful act for national security regardless of the implementation producing mass fatalities on all accounts. The operation is easily facilitated in a democratic system than any other form of government. Democracy is convenient because of its representation by the people. Therefore, the populace choice is ideal for the ultimate authority to authenticate undemocratic policies. It’s currently conspicuous in the contentious debates on health care reform and troops increase in Afghanistan.

The elected representatives succumb to the pressure from the establishments controlling every legislative matter. Congress is supposed to be the central governing body. Yet, it is decentralized with the existing partisanship between the two major political parties and the selective allegiance to the various special interests and lobbyists by the members constitutionally obligatory to the republic.

In terms of military commitments, the economic and political factors determine the cavalier approach to an indefinite presence on foreign soil. Economically, the defense budget is by far the favored legislation carried out through bipartisanship with supplements approved by Congress in the absence of legitimate evidence supportive of the claim. Contrary to the belief among certain lawmakers positioned themselves as fiscal conservatives and prioritizing political correctness over rationality, war is profitable to the operatives whereas it is remaining to be a phenomenal liability to the national deficit.

It’s poignant to raise the Afghan war costs in this context.
————————————————————————————————–
According to the New York Times article on November 15, 2009 by Christopher Drew,

“Titled – High costs playing role in Afghan war debate: At $1 million per soldier per year, troops drain budget.

The latest internal government estimates place the cost of adding 40,000 U.S. troops and sharply expanding the Afghan security forces, as favored by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and allied commander in Afghanistan, at $40 billion to $54 billion a year, the officials said.

Even if fewer troops are sent, or their mission is modified, the rough formula used by the White House, of about $1 million per soldier a year, appears almost constant. In 2006, congressional researchers had estimated the per-soldier cost to be $390,000.

So even if Obama opts for a lower troop commitment, Afghanistan’s new costs could wash out the projected $26 billion expected to be saved in 2010 from withdrawing troops from Iraq.
And the overall military budget could rise to as much as $734 billion, or 10 percent more than the peak of $667 billion under the George W. Bush administration.”

———————————————————————————————-

Cost Factor Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

Evidently, the military spending rises exponentially with the new administration in power, suggesting the real authority is not necessarily the ‘democratically’ elected entity. Above all, the status quo is bolstered by the fiscal conservatives’ unequivocal acceptance of the pentagon demands despite the track record confirming it a national burden on deficits and death tolls. In contrast, the same legislators vote against the investment in health care and economic stimulus guaranteed to benefit the constituents granting them the power.

The dilemma of democracy and military intervention does not end at the economic level. In fact, it permeates to the political dynamics, through hawkish prevalence in key cabinet positions like the defense and the State department relentlessly promoting extravagant military operations. It’s important to shed light on the recent setbacks in the foreign policy due to the State department’s indulgence or the lack thereof in many international crises, since the arrival of the new administration.

Afghanistan being the immediate focus, the events thus far signify the continuation of the detrimental U.S. foreign policy notwithstanding the complexity in forging renewed alliance with the beleaguered leader by the administration’s top diplomats and the generals.

Moreover, the U.S. Secretary of State has been instrumental in the controversial nomination surpassing the ego trip of the Bush administration. The Afghan government headed by the U.S. and NATO appointed official, President Hamid Karzai is no stranger to the worldwide criticisms.

The Karzai government’s credibility is eclipsed by the substantial corruption besides the internationally rejected fraudulent election. Never mind the repercussions on the Afghan people, the Western power always knows the best in the handling of the cultures that are inherently alien in every aspect.

Moving towards Pakistan, Prime Minister Gilani has expressed deep concerns over the U.S. decision to increase troops in Afghanistan stating that it would facilitate the influx of militants escaping the U.S. and NATO attacks, inevitably straining Pakistan’s mission against the terror networks. Pakistan’s predicament is valid along the foreign troops’ enormity in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has been urged by the victim nations of the terror attacks to earnestly dismantle and eradicate terror organizations responsible for global terrorism. In this respect, it’s incumbent on Pakistan to display integrity by bringing the Mumbai 26/11 attackers to justice. Amid immense grief, Mumbai remembered the victims on November 26, 2009, the anniversary of the brutal terror act that besieged the commercial center with the perpetrators hiding behind the judicial impunity.

The victims’ family endures life-long pain and agony, which is compounded with the delay in the swift deliverance of justice as seen in the Mumbai terrorism. Pakistan’s deliberation in the open shut case is rather political than judicial when it is conclusive that the terror plot was masterminded in Pakistan.

There is urgency for India’s neighbor to act fervently considering the spate of suicide bombings in Pakistani cities overwhelming the law and order rendering the government incapable of dealing with security matter.

In the Western hemisphere – The Honduran military coup convincingly launched by the promoters in Washington D.C. in coherence with the national and the Latin American business networks ousted the democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya and appointed the military coup leader Roberto Michelleti.

International news media reported that following the scandal exposure, Roberto Michelleti decided to step down and agreed to allow the deposed President Zelaya resume office until the end of the constitutional term.

However, in a sudden twist to the political showdown, the mysterious interference by the powerful disrupted the democratic process that has not only weakened the United States status in Latin America but also expected to split the Honduran population in the national elections scheduled today under heavy army vigilance to assist the conservative candidate succeed in the undemocratic poll.

Honduras has seven out of ten people living in abject poverty and surely, the political sabotage might serve the powerhouse interest at the expense of the Hondurans plight, the maneuver still fail to achieve the recognition they desire.

This is one of the many events where the power politics raised its ugly head to rein in progress under democracy. The conspirators behind the political instability in Honduras are no different from the elements constantly engaged in toppling governments for radical reasons. History is testimony that democracy is resilient and will ultimately prevail irrespective of external intrusion whether it is Honduras, Afghanistan, Palestine or Tibet.

The topic World Peace is intended to cover other regions on a wide range of issues. Hence, the sequel with comprehensive details will follow in the due course of time.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment 

Honduran Election Jeopardy

November 17, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The political situation in Honduras has evolved into a constitutional crisis with the upcoming national elections scheduled on November 29, 2009. President Manuel Zelaya, a democratically elected head of the state was ousted through a military coup approved by the Honduran Congress on the premise that the deposed leader allegedly attempted to subvert the constitution to remain in power.

Meanwhile, the self-appointed interim President Roberto Micheletti has not wasted any time in demonstrating the monstrosity of a typical military coup since seizing power in June, 2009. In a bizarre twist to the political fiasco, the Congress and the military regime are in breach of the constitution they were proposing to defend against the Zelaya government. Hondurans plight has worsened with the political unrest and contrarily solidified the support for the legitimate Zelaya leadership.

To add insult to injury, the U.S. State Department intervened in a manner to broker the open-end ‘Tegucigalpa San Jose Accord’ on October 29, 2009 without any stipulations or deadline.

————————————————————————————————–
According to the Associated Press release on date – Martha Mendoza in Mexico City

“The accord calls for the formation of a national unity government, but does not require Zelaya’s restoration to office, leaving that decision up to Congress. It set no deadline for lawmakers to vote.
Honduran lawmakers will not decide whether to restore ousted President Manuel Zelaya until after upcoming presidential elections, the congressional leader said Tuesday, a decision that could undermine international support for the vote.

The administration of President Barack Obama has repeatedly said that recognition of the election is not linked to any one action, said State Department spokesman Charles Luoma-Overstreet.

Several Latin American countries have warned they will not recognize the outcome of the election unless Zelaya is restored beforehand.

But the United States has not ruled out restoring diplomatic ties with a newly elected Honduran government even if Zelaya remains out of power through the vote.

Zelaya declared the pact a failure two weeks ago when Micheletti announced the formation of a unity government before Congress had voted, accusing the interim leader of maneuvering to stay in power.”
————————————————————————————————–
Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

It’s apparent to any reasonable mind that the U.S. State department’s haphazard mediation has exacerbated the turmoil in the absence of specificity and clarity not to mention the weakening of the United States status to resolve international issues.

In perspective, the precise solutions to the Honduran political climax is for the interim coup leader Roberto Micheletti to acknowledge the reality and gracefully step aside by allowing the democratically preferred President Manuel Zelaya to resume office until the end of his elected term – January 2010.

As for the Honduran Congress, the actions or the lack thereof strongly suggest their undermining of the constitution they were elected to protect and honor in a democracy. Therefore, it’s incumbent on the Congress as elected representatives to comply with the popular demand and reinstate the Zelaya Presidency that would ensure the political stability right now. Furthermore, within the constitutional framework President Manuel Zelaya should be able to seek re-election provided there is a populace support for the process.

Nevertheless, the military coup under Roberto Micheletti and the Honduran Congress has violated the constitution more than the purported effort by President Manuel Zelaya.

Restoring democracy in Honduras is paramount for political security in the Western hemisphere, considering the precarious economic conditions affecting the majority in the region. The Latin American nations’ decision to denounce the Congress vote and the electoral result is appropriate due to the prevalent undemocratic events thus far.

President Manuel Zelaya is the democratically elected leader and constitutionally justified to govern the nation effective immediately and the forces in defiant of the democratic values are worthy of condemnation notwithstanding their removal from office.

The people of Honduras have displayed tremendous fortitude in rejecting the military takeover and the regional solidarity has been instrumental in containing the unaffordable calamity.

I convey my best wishes to the people of Honduras and encourage them to remain unified in preserving freedom and democracy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Israel Palestine Peace Treaty

November 14, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The fate of the two states solution is hanging in balance and the peace process has once again come to a screeching halt. Initially, there appeared to be momentum on both sides until the controversial yet credible issues surfaced and ignored by the parties in default.

The contentious issues are –

Freezing Jewish settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem in its entirety.

Honoring the Gaza report compiled by the Head of the UN Fact Finding Mission, Justice Richard Goldstone, overwhelmingly approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council and the U.N. General Assembly recently.

However, the U.S. House of Representatives proactively rejected the international consensus with a majority vote and condemned the report as biased against Israel. In addition, the House of Congress seemingly solidified their support on this issue by urging the White House to follow suit.

The Congress initiative in this respect is extremely disappointing and unconstitutional as it does not represent the popular view. Furthermore, the humanitarians in Israel confirm that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s personal approach with the House members on this issue led to the sweeping vote suggesting the U.S. democracy is a puppet to Israeli Knesset.

Preceding these events, the White House reportedly pressured the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to abandon any action at the U.N.General Assembly pertaining to the Gaza war crimes. The Palestinian President’s compliance with the White House requirement had jeopardized his leadership as the head of the democratically elected government. Fearing backlash in the upcoming elections in January 2010, the PLO leader decided not to run for re-election creating confusion and opportunity for all in the fragmented Palestinian politics.

It’s important to shed light on the Goldstone report dismissal by the relevant authorities viz. Israel, the United States, Russia, China and others sharing the burden of disproportionate military engagement and activities in direct violation of the Geneva Convention. Essentially, the deliberate invalidation of the well-balanced and meticulous findings by the honorable justice, Richard Goldstone possessing the background semblance with Israel than Palestine merit hearing and appropriate action in the international court of law.

In the war crime investigations, the authorities in power particularly the permanent U.N. Security Council members are united in the vilification or exoneration of their adversaries and allies for self-absolution. In fact, the protocol renders the process redundant besides displaying the international court of justice as a judicial committee exclusively set up for the U.N. P5 Plus targeted nations against a universal mandate.

The status quo justify the urgency to expand the U.N. Security Council permanent membership enforceable only through the U.N. member nations’ concerted action. Alternatively, defiance by dishonoring the present U.N. Security Council proposals would produce the desired membership extension.

Since, both Israel and Hamas are implicated for the crimes against civilian population, the trial in the international court of law is mandatory and appropriate to begin a new chapter in the twenty first century. War related atrocities, genocides, ethnic cleansing is dominant in the contemporary era setting a dangerous precedence now and in the future. It further exemplifies that the privileged nations with powerful allies are above the law and exempt from heinous crimes against humanity under the guise of national security, a contrived political fallacy.

Other pertinent issue stalling the peace negotiations is the unacceptable acceleration of Jewish settlements in the West Bank claimed by the Israeli authorities as a ‘natural growth,’ neglecting the explicit assault on the intelligence of the international community. Jewish settlements in the clearly demarcated Palestinian territories i.e. the West Bank and East Jerusalem is by far the most explosive and a provocative political maneuver by Israel to prolong the illegal occupation of Palestinian land.

No matter, how the Jewish settlements representing the nuclear component in the peace strategy is circumvented, the civilian and armed forces’ indefinite establishment is an infringement on human rights and unequivocally qualifies as an invasion of a foreign land in the eyes of the universal law, if not the U.S. law.

Unless and until the Israeli government recognizes the abominable settlement activity with a unilateral commitment to cease occupation through complete withdrawal of settlers and the military base, the regional conflict will continue to fuel global terrorism predominantly affecting the nations complicit to the colonization.

Although, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the cabinet ministers visit to Washington seeking peace talks resumption is a refreshing change in the half a century old crisis, peace mediation premised on Israel’s terms and conditions is analogous to the test drive conducted on a one way street with a dead end.

Earlier this week, Europe commemorated the fall of Berlin Wall marking the twentieth anniversary, a historic moment for the people liberated from the iron fist rule under ‘Communism,’ that caused political oppression and economic depression. Accordingly, the occasion attracted the prominent political figures reminiscent of the post demolition.

Ironically, the world rejoiced the fall of the Berlin wall while being complacent to a similar wall constructed by Israel along the Jerusalem neighborhoods and the West Bank resurrecting the repressive environment.

Indeed, the modern democracies’ pride and prejudice shines through these celebrations.

Interestingly, Israel’s offer to contain the new settlement expansion with the on-going construction permits issued behind the scenes earned a compliment from the U.S. Secretary of State as ‘unprecedented’ gesture that also echoed the Israeli Prime Minister demanding the Palestinian side to refrain from pre-conditions in the peace discussion.

The bone of contention in the embattled Israeli-Palestinian dispute is the irrefutable Jewish settlements, the concrete wall and the systemic abuse of human rights denying freedom, dignity and respect to the Palestinian population correlative to the twentieth century holocaust, a dark age in human civilization.

Tolerating imperialism in the new millennium is nullifying democracy to human beings born to be free like other species in the animal kingdom.

On the Palestinian front, Hamas is benefiting from the political vacuum in Fatah governing the West Bank. The situation is likely to become the worst nightmare for Israel and the United States without Israel’s co-operation in the peace pact.

Given the limited resources and territories, the best hope for the Palestinian people is to unify and present a consolidated political, economic and social agenda through young leadership embracing democratic values, peace over terrorism strengthened by a strong vision and dynamic qualities to build the newly independent Palestine.

As for the core issues in the Israeli-Palestine Peace Treaty:

1. Complete withdrawal of Israeli settlers and the military base from all Palestinian territories including the occupied peripheral lands since 1967.

2. Palestine is to be internationally recognized as a sovereign nation with East Jerusalem as the Capital City for the independent state.

3. The policy depriving Palestinians the right to return to Israel would conversely apply to the Jewish settlers and Israeli citizens on the Palestinian land. Similar reciprocal apply to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s insistence to identify Israel as the ‘Jewish’ state.

4. Palestinian and Arab nation’s reaffirmation of Israel as a sovereign nation in the Middle East along with a solemn oath to disavow violence in the form of suicide bombings, rocket firing and last but not the least any nuclear threats against Israel.

5. Economic aid to Palestine for reconstruction purpose.

6. United States and other economic powers pledge equal assistance to both Israel and Palestine to reflect fairness in the deal.

Finally, it’s imperative and incumbent on the United States to be an honest broker in implementing the Peace Treaty as stated above to restore credibility in resolving international problems.

Palestinian and Israeli children are entitled to a long lasting peace and a bright future. It’s time to set the differences aside and reconcile terms with reality that,

War has no winners whereas everyone is a winner in Peace.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | 1 Comment 

Afghan Election Malady – The Resumption of the Puppet Government

November 2, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

“More of the same,” – the campaign slogan used in the 2008 U.S. Presidential election against the Republican candidate John McCain is adapted by the current U.S. administration in the endorsement of the corrupt Karzai government.

The incumbent President Hamid Karzai subsequent to being found guilty of massive voter fraud amid intense violence against the Afghani population during the first round of election on August 20, 2009, now hailed the victor following the challenger DR. Abdullah Abdullah’s withdrawal from the highly skeptical runoff election scheduled for November 7, 2009.

Afghan election chairman Azizullah Lodin, a staunch supporter of President Hamid Karzai, arrived at a decision against the will of the Afghan people enduring medieval era economic and social injustice under the Karzai governance since 2001.

The White House declared the election ‘historic’ and extended congratulatory message to their nominee, President Hamid Karzai, along with the ally Britain and the U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon. The irony is, the glorified election had no ‘democratic’ element whatsoever in the previous round or in the repeat election planned on November 7, 2009.

Moreover, the bizarre outcome proclaiming the extremely controversial and the most unpopular President Hamid Karzai – the winner, has the U.S. administration blessings to further destabilize Afghanistan for another four years.

DR. Abdullah’s action by dropping out of the runoff charade is appropriate. The contender’s concerns were legitimate and justified due to the Afghan election commission chairman’s overt bias to President Karzai and the lack of evidence or enthusiasm from the U.S. and allies to ensure free and fair elections.

The United States and the allies’ pre-disposition on this issue signifies their sworn allegiance to the military industrial complex agenda –

Continuation of Afghanistan’s carnage and destruction through Karzai government and the prolonged war on terror.

It is worth shedding light on the U.S and Western backed puppet government, President Hamid Karzai’s policies condemned by the humanitarians across the globe.

1. First, the fraudulent election on August 20, 2009 and refusal to comply with the request for the implicated election commission chairman, Azizullah Lodin’s replacement in the scheduled runoff event.

2. Legislation of the ‘non-consensual’ consummation against Afghan women – Appear to be “normal” for the U.S. administration, Britain and the United Nations’Authority in the overwhelming acknowledgment and legitimizing of the Karzai government to rule Afghanistan for an extended term.

3. Appointment of the cabinet members and judiciary committee vehemently opposed to women’s rights and other socio-economic progress.

4. Economic policy focused on narcotic trade to boost national GDP concocted with nepotism through the appointment of the family member (President Hamid Karzai’s Brother Ahmad Wali Karzai – New York Times Article titled “employee on CIA payroll”), for opium mass production.

5. Facilitating Taliban resurgence and conciliatory to the atrocities against the local population particularly the female children deprived of education through acid pouring and burning down girls schools – Again, the endorsers seemingly have no objection in this context as well.

6. Last but not the least and the poignant matter being –President Hamid Karzai’s absolute coherence and approval to the permanent military occupation in Afghanistan. For comprehensive details please refer to the blogpost titled “Afghan War, The Additional Troops request and the Election Analysis,” published on this website on September 29, 2009.

As per the recent development, the White House decision to pronounce the Afghan election debacle ‘historic’ and ‘lawful’ is reminiscent of the Bush-Cheney policy stating the Iraq war as “Mission Accomplished.”

The Global village was promised a newly enlightened U.S. foreign policy dedicated to immediate troops withdrawal, peace and diplomacy, honest brokering and recognition of human rights. Otherwise, a departure from the Bush-Cheney doctrine or Senator John McCain’s pledge to wage war for over hundred years.

Honoring the dishonorable characteristics of an Afghan government dismissed as the miserable failure by the people is the renewal of the U.S. foreign policy held responsible for the contemporary global terrorism threatening international peace and security.

United States pursuing the course of action for the purpose other than the humanitarian cause in Afghanistan and other Islamic regions is authenticating the political hypocrisy reflected in the U.S. foreign policy regardless of the administrations in the White House.

The Red States and the Blue States came together as the United States to vote for the believable and the realistic “Hope and Change” at home and around the world.

Hope cannot be a reality unless promises are delivered and Change is not possible without sincere commitment.

Democracy is meaningful when the government is credible and Afghanistan deserves better than the status quo forced upon them by the domineering political forces demonstrating humongous hubris with an inevitable downfall.

I urge the people of Afghanistan to validate the leadership that can guarantee political stability, economic opportunities, national security, social progress beginning with basic human rights and above all, freedom from the foreign occupation of Afghanistan.

Unfortunately, President Hamid Karzai’s government has been unsuccessful in every aspect and lost the vote of confidence among the Afghan people during the first term and now after the first round of elections. Similar sentiments are shared by the genuinely caring ‘A-political’ groups of the international community.

The people of Afghanistan can achieve their dreams provided they are discerning in the political fate written on their behalf by the foreign powers.

I wish the people of Afghanistan courage and wisdom to do what is best for them and their long occupied nation.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Mutiny in Pakistan

October 31, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The terror networks scattered around Pakistan have joined forces with Al-Qaida and Pakistani Talibans to challenge the fragile central power in Islamabad. October has been the bloodiest month with a spate of suicide bombings and explosions in different cities including the audacious attacks against the military headquarters heightened by a hostage crisis.

Major cities like Lahore, Rawalpindi, Peshawar and Islamabad have been the fair game for the militants seeking vengeance towards the Pakistani military operation against the domiciled Talibans in the South Waziristan, the lawless region controlled by the terror groups.

When the country’s military and the intelligence that is constitutionally limited to national defense expand their role in civilian affairs through military coups, aiding and abetting in the assassinations of Political candidates, orchestrating terrorist activities in foreign nations, the backlash is accordingly serious and consequential. Naturally, the monsters raised by the Pakistani ISI and the ‘esteemed’ military are now giving them the run for the money.

In a newly awakened moment, the Pakistani military is grappling to contain the pre-meditated and the impromptu domestic terrorisms originally nurtured by the institutions with the central government turning a blind eye to the flames that has evolved into an inferno at the present time.

The conspiracy base for a significant terror attacks suffered and averted around the world by most democracies are unequivocally linked to the Pakistani networks. In fact, the recent hostage situation at the Pakistani military compound reportedly (Source- Pakistani media) had three defense personnel full-fledged involvement in the hostile takeover.

Unfortunately, the innocent civilians endure the human and economic losses from the senseless violence regardless of the sources being either home-grown or external. The widespread terror activities across the nuclear nation are symbolic of the notorious organizations’ objective to undermine the government that is historically replaced by the military coups in Pakistan.

It’s rather intriguing that the Pakistani intelligence, noted as the reliable agency within the country’s political hierarchy, has sharply declined in the entrusted intelligence services to protect the nation and prevent any harm to the neighbors in Iran, Afghanistan, India or the farther away United States.

On the other hand, although the latest Pakistani aggressive military action in the Swat Valley against the local tribal forces representing the Pakistani Talibans claimed to be effective, the mass population has been displaced with a unique ‘refugee’ status in their homeland. The populace frustrations are justified with comments such as “when the American dollar trickles in, the Pakistani military stunt is displayed to charm the foreign donor.”

Any drastic measures viz. the drone attacks and continuous shelling pursued by the local and the foreign governments against the terror networks producing immense civilian casualties…alternatively, the chaos from the lack of humanitarian provisions is likely to facilitate a fertile ground for terror recruitments of the desolate victims.

Likewise, the Saudi Arabia financed ‘Madrassas,’ the schools attended by the children of the poorer segment have been highly controversial especially in Pakistan due to the dominance in the form of Deobandi, Wahhabi and Salafi Islamic elements.

Madrassas, – A generic Arabic/Urdu term for ‘schools’ in the Islamic nations around the world have maintained the reputation of a ‘regular’ school, teaching educational and vocational skills to the disadvantaged as well as the secular minorities in the society.

Nevertheless, the madrassas run by the extreme religious authorities mainly in Pakistan has become the bone of contention after September 11, 2001.

The reports indicate that since independence in 1947, the madrassas in Pakistan have risen from 200 to over an estimated 40,000, with the unofficial madrassas in the country anywhere between 10,000 and 13,000 comprising approximately 2.0 million students.

Further, in the 1980’s – the Pakistani government deployed militants in Kashmir and Afghanistan believed to have attended the madrassas inculcating fundamentalism in the curriculum. A sizeable proportion of students in these institutions were the neglected local and refugee population from the Soviet era Afghanistan and neighboring Baluchistan.

On a broader aspect, the madrassas appear to be serving the deserving population with the required basic education and religious/cultural appreciation. Appropriately, the Zardari-Gilani administration could establish uniformity in the madrassas resembling the national public/private educational system.

What is the reason behind Pakistan’s mutiny?

Two sources are predominantly responsible for the political instability in Pakistan. They are the Western intervention in Pakistan’s political system and the joint opposition to the Western intrusion by the Pakistani military and the intelligence alike. As a result, the real stakeholders, the people in the society are subject to systemic abuse of power in the inherently fractured political gamut.

The Western powers admire and search for the political candidates in awe with western ideology. Hence, they cherry pick those individuals as the preferred heads of the government in these regions, in spite of their nominees’ past failures, political scandals and most relevantly the paradoxical personal background revealing them as the Western proxies in the nation with an overwhelming majority in abject poverty, inadequate literacy and illiteracy.

Moreover, the Western selection criteria based on their candidates’ foreign affiliations viz. a U.S. or Western educated, failing that a longtime resident with Western work experience etc. for political successions in the diametrically different cultures is perceived by the locals as the dismissal or invalidation of their society.

On the flipside – the Pakistani military, the ISI and the local political factions in abhorrence to the Western choices constantly attempt to sabotage the ‘so-called’ democratic elections. If the Western appointed political candidates survive the electoral processes, then the listed oppositions ensure the limited life span of such governments not barring the restricted authority on foreign policy and nuclear site management.

The people in Pakistan clearly understand that the elections in their country are a mere charade with an inevitable political casualty resulting from the western backed candidates’ insincere declaration to reform the fundamentally corrupt political structure.

It’s important to highlight that the moral and ethical degradation are not necessarily exclusive to Kabul, Islamabad, Middle East, Africa…the contemporary world politics is plagued by corruption, cronyism and power clenching with an utter disregard for the people’s plight that is conspicuous in the policy decisions at the state, national and international level.

Politics is a game where the key players i.e. the people are used and abused for political gains. When it’s not convenient, they are considered to be a threat to the political status and financial security by some elected officials in their unconstitutional and unconscionable commitment to derail progress.

The United States health care fiasco serves as a good example in this context.

Pakistan’s current mayhem is self-inflicted precisely from the military and the intelligence reigning control over the U.S and other Western democracy backed puppet governments. When the national intelligence in cohort with the various terror networks are implicated for terror activities in foreign soil and the authorities ‘supposedly’ in power grant immunity to every imaginable terror group, criminal elements, terror masterminds, then the outcome is bound to backfire.

The matter worsened when the supreme court justices were fired by the former President Parvez Musharraf clarifying the above point that, the political figures do not hesitate to violate the constitution in order to remain in power. Under the same presidency, the world’s most wanted Osama Bin Laden was provided the medical treatment while the nuclear arsenal dealer A.Q.Khan, revered as the ‘Father of the Nuclear Pakistan,’ sheltered in a ‘Royal comfort’ to satisfy the minimal legality for a monumental criminal activity.

United States in return rewarded the Musharraf government with billions of dollars in aid and greeted the President as the strongest ‘ally’ in the newly invented ‘war on terror.’ When the ally, for most part chose to remain oblivious in the grand mission to capture the 9/11 terror chief or eradicate the terror movements around the country as they were not obligatory to account for the ten billion dollars and more in financial compensation by the American tax payers.

That raises the question against the U.S. intelligence and their ingenuity in the contentious issue of global terrorism when the American public was repeatedly alerted with the various terrifying color codes during the Bush-Cheney administration that stood by and let the dwarf develop into a giant. Meanwhile, the pleasantries and medal of honor bestowed upon each other in Washington for masquerading the facts as fiction.

Recently, the Congress approved 1.5 billion dollars each year over the next five years in financial aid to curb terrorism in Pakistan created a pandemonium in the Pakistani political circuit expressing the stipulations in the bill as an insult to Pakistani sovereignty.

Interestingly, the political forces’ objection was anchored on the meaningful requirement to alienate the military operation from the ‘democratically’ elected government role essentially strengthening the sovereignty and empowering the people in the nation governance.

The heated debates and the subsequent Pakistani dignitaries’ visit to Washington to discuss against the legitimate legislative conditions confirm the reality on the Pakistan military dominance in the government. Furthermore, the recipients’ demand to make the substantial donations with no strings attached has been a dangerous precedence in the terror related policy between the U.S and Pakistan.

Pakistan’s relations with the neighbors all around have been extremely volatile, tensions have escalated along the borders with Iran, and Afghanistan compared to the relatively calmer Kashmir front. Not surprisingly, the critics were swift in their finger pointing at the arch nemesis India and the benefactor United States, held responsible for Pakistan’s status quo when the people of both nations have been the victims of brutal terror attacks and continuous plotting against the respective national interests.

Is there hope for Pakistan to emerge from the present quagmire?

Absolutely. It’s only achievable through the active participation of the ‘moderates’ in the society that is prevalent in the economic activities…however, not visible in the political or social reform. Pakistan has tremendous intellectual talent and leadership skills at its disposal. The reason for its obscurity is the deprivation of equal opportunities to people across the diverse socio-economic spectrum, due to the western influence and military interference in the frail democratic system.

Pakistan’s salvage rests in the hands of the far sighted and reasonable minds seeking harmony and not acrimony with its neighbors and the international community. The peaceful convergence of the moderate thinkers and the youth population brimming with ideas can be an indomitable force in dealing with the humongous problems facing the nation and lead the country towards a credible democracy.

The leadership in Pakistan can ease the burden on the society by softening the rhetoric towards nations eternally viewed as ‘political rivals,’ particularly India, a strategy created by the vengeful ‘British Raj’ (British rule) as a token gift to the Indian sub-continent upon being ousted from the region.

Pakistan and India would not be independent if not for the iron will of the single entity, Mahatma Gandhi to free the region from the burgeoning colonial occupation and relentless effort to unite the sparring Hindu and Muslim factions that ultimately ended in the leader sacrificing his life for the cause.

Sadly, the terror attacks launched against civilians around the globe yielded fatalities among people of Islamic faith as well. India being the second largest Muslim nation in the world, the impact is even greater when one Muslim vows to destroy the life of another across the border.

After gaining independence on August 14, 1947, Is Pakistan really a free nation today?

A country mired with incessant violence and political turmoil needs to pause and reflect on the course of actions that has led to the regrettable carnage and devastation with no end in sight thus far.

Therefore, it’s poignant for the Pakistani society at the crossroads to disavow divisiveness and embrace solidarity within and around itself.

The only beneficiaries from Pakistan’s disintegration threatening the national and global security are the despots of the terror organizations and the profit oriented military industry complex.

Pakistan can rise and shine again with the solemn oath to pursue peace and resurrect the due progress it is entitled to in the twenty first century.

I convey my best wishes to the people of Pakistan and pray for their peaceful existence.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

New Afghan Strategy

October 26, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

In the past weeks, the additional troops request from the U.S. Commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal in the 10,000 to 80,000 range and then reportedly cut back to the median 40,000 troop level is attention worthy due to the flurry of comments, rhetoric and insinuations from the quarters responsible for the status quo.

The U.S. troops presence including the recently approved contingency expected to arrive in December 2009 stands at 68,000 along with the participation of 28 nations in the form of NATO alliance further boosting the military representation in one nation – Afghanistan, to deal with the combined insurgency from the Afghan Talibans and the Al-Qaida in the northern regions.

Interestingly, the argument is steered towards the strategy to win the war in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the relevant questions raised by the concerned citizens and the representatives in the Congress regarding the military role, operational term and the costs are evaded through partisan politics and the suppression of facts.

The U.S. led war against Afghanistan began in October 2001 under the Bush-Cheney administration. It has been more than eight years for the U.S. and NATO occupancy in that region with substantial troops surge up until now. Although, the initial military attack on the ground enhanced with the deployment of sophisticated artilleries and technological devices presumably yielded the desired outcome i.e. the temporary expulsion of Talibans from the regional shelters, it also produced massive casualties on all sides with the Afghan civilians enduring the sizeable proportion.

As a result, the opposition to the foreign troops occupation is widespread in Afghanistan and around the world particularly with the U.S./NATO aggressive pursuit of the militants in the absence of specificity such as the occupancy duration, clear objectives and success formulas inflicting considerable damages to the civilian existence rather than containing the pervasive crisis.

In fact, the high command’s inefficiency in the implementation of the traditional military policy to win at all costs subsequently contributed to the Taliban re-emergence facilitating easy recruitment of local and foreign militants as the formidable insurgents in the prolonged military intervention.

Like stated earlier in the blogpost titled “Afghan War, the Additional Troops Request and the Election Analysis,” dated September 29, 2009 published under International Politics on this website www.padminiarhant.com ,

The cost-benefit ratio in the invasion and occupation of both Afghanistan and Iraq neither accurately evaluated nor presented to the American public financing the two wars since 2001. Amidst intense propaganda and misinformation, the proponents of the indefinite military aggression continue to demand for the increase in troops supply against the will of the local population in Afghanistan and the United States, despite the strategic failures of the overwhelming military engagement.

Again, the scenario is similar to the various economic stimulus packages and the controversial bailouts in trillions of dollars passed since 2008 with a significant portion held in reserve, instead of the entire investments in the allocated areas to derive the comprehensive economic impact. It’s been followed by a strong recommendation for additional stimulus funds prior to achieving the targeted goals.

The interests payable on the bailout borrowings is greater than the interest or dividends earned from the bailout beneficiaries, the financial institutions. Further, the bailout recipients are yet to comply with the legislative stipulations in terms of stimulating the economy through liquidity flow, affordable financial charges specifically the credit card interest rates worsened to an abominable APR 29.99% in defiance of the stimulus requirement.

However, there is still a distinction between the vast troops deployment and an isolated stimulus investment of $787 billion approved earlier this year with the latter providing the gradual economic revival and salvation of the global economic collapse, in spite of the meager investment of the legislated amount.

The Pentagon has not considered the importance of checks and balances in the ethical and economic aspects in their haphazard missions in Iraq and Afghanistan not to mention the numerous U.S. military bases in various parts of the world.

Ironically, the myopic view of the ‘Nay’ Sayers in the contentious health care reform against the disproportionate defense budget attributing to the enlarged national deficit is fanning the fire to the cauldron.

The ‘so-called’ fiscal conservatives from both sides of the political aisles, appear to be comfortable with the unaccounted military spending yielding economic losses and human fatalities while remaining vehemently opposed to the costs and life saving health care legislation.

With respect to the commotion on the military expansion in Afghanistan, the U.S. defense should justify the urgency on the troops dispense of the great magnitude (current 68,000 + possible 40,000 to 80,000), considering the enormous U.S./NATO consolidated military existence and the negative ramifications overriding the opportunities to prevail in the ‘apparent’ war on terror.

The factions favoring the military industrial complex demand are uninhibited in their criticisms of the deliberations sought in the life and death matter and the self-proclamation as the savior of the young men and women in harm’s way when their proposal could precisely escalate the death toll.

In the backdrop of severe local oppositions, economic liabilities, irreplaceable loss of human lives, political instability awaiting reconciliation on Afghan governance, the unrealistic troop requisition from the highest military command confirms the protracted war on terror waged for militaristic purpose than the humanitarian cause.

Those who argue on the national security basis must realize that terrorism cannot be eliminated unless and until the fundamental issues such as freedom, basic human rights, economic and social development are addressed through viable and credible political establishments in the regions infiltrated by the terror networks and organizations.

Whenever there is a conspicuous political fragmentation, the society is vulnerable to the military coups like in Pakistan and Latin America or a chosen destination for the anti-progress radical elements viz. the Al-Qaida and the Taliban forces.

Therefore, it is imperative for the political contenders in Afghanistan to prioritize the national interest and security over their personal aspirations by forming a coalition government to enforce the desperately needed law and order in the state.

It’s extremely disappointing to witness the incumbent President Hamid Karzai’s unrepentant conduct in light of the recent fraudulent election mired with violence, fictitious ballots…ignored for the sake of retaining power that has essentially weakened Afghanistan and emboldened the Taliban insurgency threatening to disrupt the democratic electoral process once again.

The Afghan and the worldwide opinion of the Karzai administration in the past five years is conclusively one that has miserably failed to restore normalcy leave alone democracy that is perceived to be a tall order in the overtly corrupt bureaucracy.

Hence, it is appropriate for the President Hamid Karzai to step down gracefully and acknowledge the reality at home by allowing his opponent DR. Abdullah Abdullah to assume office as the 13th President of Afghanistan in the immediate future as the runoff election is unlikely to deliver any positive solutions.

If the religious belief among the two political contenders are intact then it is for them to know that “Man proposes and God disposes,” otherwise “Wahi Hoga Jo Manzoorén Khudah Hoga.”

Finally, the Afghan war without an exit strategy is a replica of the Iraq war experiencing the relentless insurgency through explosions and suicide bombings irrespective of the definitive U.S. timeline for troop withdrawal. The military should be preparing for the troop contraction and not a permanent occupation in Afghanistan as detailed in the cited reports on the blogpost mentioned above. If the intention is to occupy under the pretext of the war on terror, then the United States agenda is no different from the former Soviet rule forced out with the 120,000 troops on land.

Violence only begets violence and war is the classic example that the end does not justify the means.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Afghan Election Quagmire

October 22, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

As detailed in the blogpost titled

‘U.S. Dilemma on Afghanistan’ published on the website

www.padminiarhant.com, September 1, 2009 – in the ‘International Politics’ category,

The flawed Afghan election results in favor of the current President Hamid Karzai appropriately rejected by the U.N. backed investigators with the runoff election scheduled for November 7, 2009.

Afghanistan heading for yet another election within two weeks is a tall order given the recent turmoil in the electoral process that led to the annulment of the results. Modern democracy is not devoid of voter fraud, corruption and unscrupulous tactics by the respective campaigns representing the political candidates.

However, the Afghan election is complex due to the extremism ranging from physical threats, ballots stuffing, violence that mars the democratic protocol and worsened now with the August election declared ‘flawed,’ by the United Nations panel and the other international authorities.

Again as suggested earlier in the cited blogposts –

Source: www.padminiarhant.com – International Politics

U.S. Dilemma on Afghanistan under the heading – ‘Political stalemate in the national election’ – September 1, 2009

Afghanistan War and Election – August 21, 2009

“In light of the above perspective, Afghanistan would be better off with a coalition government of the two contenders – President Hamid Karzai and DR. Abdullah Abdullah exchanging ideas, sharing the intellect and experience in a concerted effort to move the war torn nation forward to the twenty first century. In addition, the fractured society would benefit from the collective talent and experience of the consolidated government, besides maintaining checks and balances on the activities hindering the democratic functions.”

The prudent option for the incumbent President Hamid Karzai and the opponent DR. Abdullah Abdullah is to prioritize the national crisis demanding political stability, economic and social development, law and order…that would eventually steer the war ravaged Afghanistan towards a plausible democracy.

Considering the contentious political battle during the August election, both leaders share the burden of responsibility to alleviate the Afghan population suffering until now through a strong coalition. Moreover, the combined effort in addressing the great many challenges would expedite the birth of progressive and peaceful Afghanistan.

It’s absolutely important for both leaders with international stature to acknowledge the enormous anomalies in every aspect contributing to the status quo, not to mention the Afghanistan’s future dependent upon a solemn and a unified political structure dedicated to nation governance.

Needless to state that after a bitter political scuffle, it might be hard to swallow the pride and forge an alliance for a coalition government. Nevertheless, any leadership’s shining moment ascends when the common cause is recognized and the national interest upheld in sheer solidarity.

Afghanistan’s resources are scare at present and the runoff election is an additional economic and a political liability without a definite positive outcome. Further, the voter turnout is highly arbitrary and expected to be exacerbated by the approaching winter, Taliban interference and the prevalent U.S./NATO operations against the Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces along the borders. In addition, it’s also a huge drain on the international resources that could be made available in the reconstruction of Afghanistan.

Although, power sharing is never an easy option, the two leaders and their able representatives should abandon the political sentiments while embracing the deep sense of patriotism to rebuild the nation yearning for a breath of fresh air in the form of harmony, hard work and honest government.

DR. Abdullah Abdullah, having held the cabinet position as the Foreign Minister under President Karzai’s administration, is not a stranger to this recommended union. Whatever issues there are or might be, it’s best to resolve through direct dialogue and forthright communication without compromising diplomacy.

Both leaders possess the relevant experience and knowledge to execute the power sharing vital for enforcing the desperate national security.

President Hamid Karzai has held the office since December 7, 2004.

Therefore, in a democratic setting it would be appropriate for –

DR. Abdullah Abdullah to assume the title as the 13th President of Afghanistan,

With the incumbent President Karzai overseeing the administrative affairs as a Senior Aide and a Political Liaison in the new administration.

Worldwide, there are many opportunities available to serve the nation and humanity. One can make a difference in any capacity provided there is an earnest desire to promote goodness, peace and unity.

Often, selfless leaders without an official post in politics such as Mahatma Gandhi, DR. Martin Luther King Jr., in recent memory have left an indelible mark in their incredible service to mankind.

The people of Afghanistan deserve a break from the perpetual unrest, chaos and catastrophe. It entirely rests in the hands of the two leaders President Hamid Karzai and DR. Abdullah Abdullah to reconcile their differences, identify the commonalities essential to relieve the exhausted population and let democracy prevail from now onwards.

On that note, Best Wishes to the leaderships of DR. Abdullah Abdullah as the new President of Afghanistan alongside the leader Hamid Karzai for a successful democratic government and a peaceful, prosperous Afghanistan.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Peace and Freedom to Tibet

October 15, 2009

From: PADMINI ARHANT
WWW.padminiarhant.com

Attention: Mr. Richard Gere
Chairman of the Board of Directors
International Campaign for Tibet

Dear Mr. Richard Gere,

I acknowledge your kind invitation to join you and millions of voices around the world in the Freedom Campaign for Tibet. I admire the passion, determination and zeal exhibited by the supporters towards the noble cause.

I share your concerns and views regarding the human rights abuse, violation and suppression of democracy in Tibet. Having been a resident of New Delhi, India, I’m all too familiar with the plight of the Tibetan population fleeing their homeland from persecution and unspeakable crime against humanity.

In fact, my website www.padminiarhant.com dedicated exclusively to bring about the real “Change” comprising peace, liberty and civil rights… long overdue not just in Tibet but the entire world.

Perhaps, a tall order!, I’m genuinely optimistic and committed in Dharma, Truth and Justice prevailing over the contrary. Even though, his holiness Dalai Lama in honor of the peaceful Buddhist religion is conciliatory to autonomy as a concession to liberate his people from the burgeoning tyranny worsening by the hour, my mission is to join forces with campaign such as yours and deliver complete freedom and independence for Tibet.

It doesn’t fall short of ensuring the safe return of his holiness Dalai Lama to his free and liberated homeland in the immediate future, that I believe to be his holiness’ silent prayer.

Rest assured, Peace and Freedom to Tibet is no longer a dream but an inevitable reality.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Humanitarian, International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Misplaced Diplomacy – His Holiness Dalai Lama’s Visit to Washington

October 8, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

His Holiness Dalai Lama is one of the favorite guests for the people around the world. The spiritual leader is a personification of peace, joy and immense hope for the people of Tibet and an overwhelming majority in the international community.

His Holiness’ visit has been anything except controversial in any part of the world, despite the authority in China politicizing the spiritual leader’s visit to deflect the horrendous humanitarian crime against the peaceful Tibetan population not barring the suppression of democracy in the Mainland and ethnic provinces of China.

According to the news reports, Washington has differed the meeting with his holiness as a precautionary measure due to the impending visit by the President of the United States to China and the possible ramifications on the Chinese leadership cooperation or the lack thereof in the economic and environment policy, notwithstanding the contentious Iranian nuclear negotiations.

All the more reason for the urgent expansion of the United Nations Security Council that holds the globally persecuted population hostage to camouflage the atrocities against humanity.

The White House elected option in this context is extremely disappointing considering the democratic status and the tradition followed with respect to receiving guests from diverse backgrounds to promote diplomacy unless the entity is a threat to national or international security…

There appears to be a mistaken identity. The regime in China should realize that the guest denied honorable reception to appease them is not Osama, but instead the diametrically opposite being, the Dalai Lama and Beijing’s implied deliberations on the important global matter suggests the implicit spread of the world’s most fearsome ‘Communist’ rule by proxy against even the firmly democratic United States and other nations.

Interestingly, China’s neighbor and the obvious thorn on their side, Taiwan was threatened by the Communist regime stating the protocol as provocative during the holiness recent visit to the island nation. However, the Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou let diplomacy override the political shenanigan from Beijing.

As detailed earlier in the blogpost on this website –” People’s Republic of China – The Deadly Dragon” published on 08/13/2009, letting the Communist regime dictate terms and conditions to the nations regardless of stature is a dangerous precedence and inflates the hubris of the authority responsible for the most genocides worldwide.

The irony is, the repressive regime reining in on the economic power through tactical investment in U.S. Treasury notes while dumping goods on the U.S. consumers thereby enslaving the ‘Superpower’ to the point of no return. Meanwhile, the Communist nation engaged in worst humanitarian crimes in history remains a mere spectacle dissipating into a fading memory.

The International Court of Justice as the UN judiciary has diligently held trials against the perpetrators of human atrocities until date. Similarly, the International criminal court, a permanent tribunal potentially has global jurisdiction on war crimes to genocides and other massacres. Yet, the two most internationally dependent judicial systems are oblivious to the regime’s historical brutality towards humans across the globe.

The heinous crimes among them are – the systemic abuse of the Tibetan population and desecration of the holy shrines including the enriched Tibetan culture.

Subsequently, the Tiananmen massacre in worldview, Darfur genocide, Sri Lankan Government ethnic cleansing and now the mass killings of the people of Guinea, West Africa by the military dictator has Beijing’s footprints i.e. trademarks as the chief supplier of the conventional deadly arsenals to these impoverished regions.

North Korea, Pakistan and Iran are in the MFN (Most Favored Nation) category for the Communist nation in the prolific arms race.

Notably in Darfur, the authoritarian rule violating the self sanctioned UN arms embargo as the permanent member of the UN Security council is the absolute defiance for the international rule of law by the regime, essentially delivering the present P5 UN Security Council irrelevant, if not a laughing stock to say the least.

In light of the continuous denouncement by Beijing towards his holiness’ visit to any nations for a spiritual and educational purpose or otherwise, it’s imperative for the UN General assembly to condemn the dictatorial regime and act vigorously by demanding the dissolution of the UN Security Council with members violating their resolutions for political and economic gains.

The present UN Security Council has emboldened the rogue nations with the leadership of China as the Chieftain successfully enabling the holocausts around the world particularly the oppressed Tibet in the Himalayan foothills.

China had no business to invade Tibet before and has no reason to occupy the region now. Therefore, it’s in the best interest of the Chinese regime to heed to the prophetic warning and prepare for Tibet’s inevitable independence and not the autonomy as pleaded by the spiritual leader, Dalai Lama.

The Tibetan population deserves freedom and democracy through self-governance and not be subject to a diabolical rule in the twenty first century. This is not the Genghis Khan or Kublai Khan era for annexations and the international authorities cannot ignore the extreme human suffering under the past and the present Communist dictatorship.

Lack of action to bring the Chinese leadership to justice is complicity to the human annihilation in the worst order leaving a violent legacy for the future world.

As for China, holding the U.S. trillion dollar debt and defying the climate issue will be self-detrimental. Any willful harm to the world’s largest consumer base, the U.S. economy is an economic disaster for the global warehouse, China interdependent on the U.S. performance to sustain the presumptuous ‘emerging economic’ position in the global market. Even if China threatens to discard the U.S. currency, it would be fatal for the Chinese economic prospects given the volatility in the other international currency such as Euro resisting the precipitous rise, taking toll on the export nations like Germany.

Non-compliance to the environmental requirement is an invitation to the calamities continually experienced in several parts of China ranging from the earthquake, floods and typhoons that no longer constitutes a natural act.

With respect to the Iranian nuclear negotiations, it should be clear from the horrific evidence in Sudan (Darfur), North Korea and Burma that Beijing’s commitment to world peace and order is to be taken with a grain of salt because of the back alley trading and cohesion to the belligerent leaderships in these regions, conforming with the belief,

Birds of a feather flock together.

Besides, the present UN Security Council will be unable to deter Beijing from trading with Iran. China’s huge investments in the oil refineries, the hindering factor for Iran from becoming the leading crude oil exporter is in the elimination process through Beijing’s extensive involvement with Iran to satisfy the oil quest from the economic growth.

The only alternative to contain the recalcitrant Beijing is to expand the UN Security Council from P5 to P11 and introduce credibility to the UN authority governing the global crisis.

Throughout history, the communist leadership in China has demonstrated a disturbing and an untrustworthy relationship with its neighbors and other economies to achieve the long desired ‘Superpower’ goal. The mounting betrayal to humanity is a tip of the iceberg.

The U.S. subservience to China is a regrettable trend reflected in Beijing’s unethical demands to the American investors e.g. Google barred from competing in China on bizarre accounts and the mandatory regulation for technology sector to market PCs with built-in filters to curb free speech… are a few of the unscrupulous practices in the Far-Eastern ethos. Free and fairness is oxymoron to the regime.

The White House obliging to Beijing’s unnecessary intervention in diplomatic course with individuals and nations warrants a serious threat to the U.S sovereignty previously undermined by the espionage charges against Beijing’s agents and the recent alleged spying via telecommunication cables.

It’s time for the world population to come together and reject the totalitarian regime in China wreaking havoc not only in its own soil but also for the entire humanity. Since the democratically elected governments are reluctant to challenge the regime, pursuing peaceful and non-violent dissent against injustice is symbolic and a guaranteed success for liberation proven in the twentieth century.

Another effective strategy for the world population is to invest in other economies deserving equal opportunity to economic freedom.

The White House misplaced diplomacy against the spiritual leader might be an interim false victory for Beijing. Nevertheless, the ancient wisdom confirms that the end is near when the mind is unclear revealed through Beijing’s double-crossing in the domestic and international affairs.

Tibet was once a free spiritual sanctuary and destined to be so in the immediate future. Only time will prove the certain outcome for the pious and peace-loving Tibetan population.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics, Politics | Leave a Comment 

« Previous Page — Next Page »

PadminiArhant.com