Israeli intelligence failure – or a deep rooted conspiracy?

On Saturday 07^th October 2023, the terrorist group Hamas based out of the Gaza strip caught the State of Israel by complete surprise, breaking through an electronically powered physical fence that is supposed to have cost over a billion US dollars in its creation, to safe-guard the security of Israel. The fence was breached at multiple sites and the entire concept of its existence crashed, along-with the credibility of the Israeli intelligence services.

Three issues are glaring prominent in this attack. The 1^st is the speed, training and focus of the Hamas terrorists when they broke through the fence, invaded Israeli territories, captured and transported hostages back to Gaza while indiscriminately killing civilians. The 2^nd issue is the lack of an immediate response by the Israeli Defense Forces. It took the IDF over six hours to enter this battle-field, stripping away the much-publicized fantasy of the IDF being a professionally trained and highly skilled, mobile fighting force. The 3^rd issue was the global reputation of the Israeli intelligence services. “Mossad”, the civilian–military intelligence and anti-terrorist strike force; the “Military Intelligence Directorate” which is to supposed to inform the Israeli government and IDF with intelligence warnings and alerts on a daily basis; the "Shin bet", the organization charged with maintaining internal security, including in the Israeli-occupied territories; the “Combat Intelligence Collection Corps” which is the newest of the IDF GOC Army Headquarters' five corps, created in April 2000 and tasked with collecting combat intelligence; and “Lekem” (Lishka le-Kishrei Mada) which is tasked to collect scientific and technical intelligence abroad from both open and covert sources, and was supposed to have been disbanded in 1986, but never confirmed to have been so.  

All five of these intelligence services seem to have failed their primary purpose of keeping their government informed of the activities of their immediate enemy, the State of Palestine and its armed factions Hamas (specifically it’s Qassam brigades), Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Palestinian Liberation Front, as-Sa’iqa, Fatah al-Intifada, Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine; etc.

Hamas, which started the current attack on Israel, was created in 1987 as an off-shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood’s political movement. The Muslim Brotherhood identifies itself as a Sunni Islamist organization that was founded in Egypt in 1928, by Hassan al-Banna, and Islamic scholar and school teacher. Hamas has been financed regularly by Iran and Qatar, two counties which are seemingly at odds with each other the former being Shi’a and the latter being Sunni. Yet, both have funded Hamas and other terrorist organizations due to their common hatred against Israel.

Iran has had a complex relationship with Israel. This relationship has changed from military and economic close cooperation before the Iranian revolution of 1979, to complete hostility, with Iran supporting Hamas and the Islamic Jihad for Palestine in Gaza, and the Hezbollah in Lebanon. Before the 1979 revolution, when most Arab countries in Middle-East were in opposition to the existence of Israel, the then Shah of Iran supported Israeli settlers in what was considered as Palestine territories.  The Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi recognized Israel as a sovereign state in 1950. Economic, political and military cooperation between these two countries expanded rapidly while tensions between Israel and the Arab countries escalated in the 1960s and 1970s.

Before the Shah of Iran was deposed in 1979, Israel had undertaken a multi-billion-dollar project to sell advanced, surface-to-surface missiles to Iran. This project, code named ‘Flower’, was one of the six oil-for-arms contract signed in Tehran in April 1977 by Shah Reza Pahlavi and Shimon Peres, the then Defense Minister of Israel. The Flower project, involved the production of missiles with warheads weighing 750 Kgs and a tactical range of 480 kms. This joint missile program envisaged shipping the missiles from Israel to Iran, in the form of components for assembly and testing. Operation Flower was just one of the many joint military projects between the two countries. According to de-classified documents available in the USA’s Library of Congress, other projects included advanced radar systems, converting aircraft for maritime surveillance purposes, and enhancing the missiles program to enable their launch from submarines.

Even after 1979, when the Shah of Iran was deposed by the Islamic Revolution, the Iran-Israel military cooperation continued discreetly with Israel supplying arms, ammunition and military aid to Iran during its 10-year war against Saddam Hussain’s Iraq, in the 1980s. Various sources has estimated that, with the tactic approval of the USA, Iran was provided military aid of approximately US$ 2 billion in that period. The clandestine cooperation did not stop there. During the Iran-Contra affair, Israel played a crucial role as a facilitator of arms shipments from USA to Iran in 1985 and 1986.

All this came to an end when Yasser Arafat, the then PLO Chairman signed the Oslo Accords on 13 September 1993, with Israel Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, in the presence of the then President of USA, Bill Clinton. This prompted the Ayatollahs of Iran to begin their campaign to create new armed Islamist groups in Palestine and Lebanon, while increasing their support to existing ones. While Iran is estimated to be funding US$ 100 million annually to Hamas, it has also publicly acknowledged that it is also supplying the rockets used by Hamas to target Israel. In 2012, Iran’s military commanders disclosed that they had provided over 50 thousand rockets and over half a million anti-tank missiles to militants in Gaza; alongwith the technology to manufacture the Fajr-5 missiles in Gaza itself.

It seems hard to believe that none of this was noted seriously by the five intelligence agencies of Israel.

Now, let us look at the role played by Qatar in their support for Hamas. Throughout the last 60 odd years, Qatar has facilitated and funded radical Islamist ideologies and provided a safe haven to their leaders inside Qatar. The entire leadership of Hamas are permanent residents of Qatar, lavishly hosted and richly funded by Qatar’s ruling al-Thani family. Beyond this, Qatar is funding an assertive Islamist social environment in the West through its investment in Islamic education and academic fields in the UK, funding of British schools, universities, community centers and Islamic centers; essentially funding Islamic extremism. Qatar is an unspoken enemy of Bharat [India] through its acts of liberally funding the Pakistani Army, which in turn funds terrorism in Kashmir. Other terrorists that Qatar has openly supported are the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood, certain al-Qaeda affiliates and the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

With only 350,000 nationals; but with constant access to enormous wealth through its natural gas reserves, Qatar seeks to exercise an international influence that is disproportionate to its geographical size, not only in the Middle-East, but across the world. Qatar’s protection from any global action is insured by its “investments” in the political parties and politicians in the UK, the USA and the EU. Governments of these countries, regardless of which political party is in power, seek to maintain good relationships with Qatar in order to benefit from its huge energy reserves, to sell defense equipment to it, and to attract Qatari investment into key infrastructure and energy projects. Bharat [India] and its ruling politicians are no exception. They allowed an investment of one billion US dollars by the Qatar Investment Authority into Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Retail Ventures. Beyond this, Qatar has made investments into media houses, real estate, infrastructure, financial institutions and investment funds. So, when thousands of Indian origin construction workers are killed in Qatar under inhuman working conditions or very soon, eight retired officers of our navy are hanged at the whim of Qatar’s ruling family, do not be shocked. According to our Government and our bureaucracy, sacrificing a few Indian lives and our honor and price for the billions in investments; is just the price of doing business with Qatar.  

Qatar’s ruling family, the al-Thani’s have perfected the art of being on all sides of a conflict and supporting everyone against each other. While funding the Hamas and allowing its leaders to enjoy residency in Qatar, it has positioned itself to be a key negotiator for the release of Israeli hostages, and at the same time preserved its close security and economic ties with the USA. Qatar hosts the forward HQs of the U.S. military’s Central Command at the al-Udeid Air base in Doha. This gives Qatar the safety shield that it needs from any military attacks from its neighbors while being publicly praised by USA as its major non-NATO ally, critically important to U.S. foreign policy in the region. This support from USA comes at a cost of tens of millions of dollars that Qatar spends though its lobbyists in Washington DC, and influences the U.S. lawmakers through investments in law-makers constituencies, contributing to their election fund-raising, sponsored visits to Qatar (Minnesota Congress woman Ilhan Omar’s visit to the soccer World cup was fully funded by Qatar) and has been accused of bribing this same Congress woman in exchange for sensitive intelligence information and to influence U.S. policy in its favor.

When caught in illegal acts, Qatar falls back on their policy of threatening to restrict energy supplies to countries that accuse it of corrupt and unethical practices.

The attack on Israel by Hamas has to be considered as a geo-political strategy by Iran and Qatar, working to destabilize the Middle-East peace process for their own gains. The current conflict has successfully stalled and maybe destroyed the Israel–Saudi Arabi Normalization Agreement, allowed Iran to gain prominence in the region’s politics, while putting those Arab states that have signed peace agreements with Israel into a difficult position whereby while trying to honor these agreements they have to deal with the unrest on the ground by their Muslim citizens who are majorly anti-Israel. This works in the favor of Qatar who is opposed to the global influence of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, who have accused Qatar of various crimes in the past. The Hamas offensive has encouraged smaller terrorist groups to attack U.S forces in the region, with rocket attacks on American military installations in Iraq and Syria.

If the current Hamas–Israel expands to become a U.S–Iran conflict, even through the use of proxies, it will affect global economy. Europe which is already under economic recessions due to the Ukraine–Russia war, will be adversely impacted as energy supplies from the Gulf would become scarce. The U.S. economy might also tip into severe recession and higher inflation, leading to a domino effect on other economies of the world that are tied to the U.S. economy. Scarcity of energy resources will mean higher logistics costs, increased production costs and reduced consumer spending.

The first question to be asked is this. At what point will USA, UK and the EU decide to abandon their support to Qatar to stop its funding of terrorists across the world, and try to normalize ties with Iran? Unless the influence of Qatar is removed from the geo-political equation, peace or even a restless peace will not materialize.

Therefore, the unspoken question has to be asked. Did Israel and its allies have complete knowledge of the impending Hamas attack on Israel, but decided to let it happen anyway for a greater geo-political strategy? The other line of thought is that, prior to this Hamas terrorist attack of 7^th October, the politics of Israel was deeply divided. Their current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was on trial for corruption, and was being tried in their Court of Law for fraud, breach of trust, and accepting bribes. Three of his former close confidants have turned State’s evidence and are testifying against him. The current war is a welcome diversion from political problems, even if it has caused the killings of thousands on both sides. So, the moot question arises. Did some interested parties in Israel manipulate intelligence information for party political gains, not realizing that what they might have expected to be nothing more than ‘containable violence’, actually turned out to be a full-scale invasion?

While many will assume these questions to be in the area of an ‘unbelievable conspiracy’, the relationships of the past between the various players in the middle-east, the current relationships between Islamic nations and their fundamentalists, the issues faced by Israeli politicians in their own country, and their singular relationships with the USA; all of these will determine the outcome of the present Hamas–Israel conflict.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Canada: Bogged in a swamp of its own making

Much is being said across the world about the massive controversy between India and Canada that was triggered by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s statement in his parliament, accusing India and its law-enforcement agencies of the targeted killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar; a wanted criminal with a Interpol arrest warrant in his name, who was given safe haven by Canada in-spite of his association to terrorists activities.

 The news agency Associated Press calls him ‘a plumber who was an activist for the formation of a Sikh homeland’. That would be the same as calling the al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden a civil construction engineer. The fact is that Nijjar was a terrorist, a drug distribution gangster and was involved in extortion and murder. Credible evidence to these facts had been provided by the Indian Govt to the Canadians repeatedly; and these reports were absolutely ignored. But, we the readers, know all of this from the media.

 What we are not fully aware of is the role played by the Canadian law-enforcement and Intelligence organizations, specifically the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) which is the equivalent of the Indian CBI, and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) which is the equivalent of India’s Intelligence Bureau (IB) and R&AW, rolled into one.

 Prior to 1984, security intelligence in Canada was the purview of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). However, during the 1970s, there were allegations that the RCMP’s Security Service Division, the predecessor to CSIS, had been involved in numerous illegal activities. These illegal activities included and were not restricted to assault with a weapon, manslaughter, rape, theft, breaking and entering without a warrant, sexual harassment of convicts, sexual and mental harassment of female RCMP employees, a pattern of lying to the Canadian Govt officials and other assorted offenses. For details, click this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_excessive_police_force_incidents_in_Canada/

 The Canadian Press in its report of 19 September 2023 has stated that the slain terrorist Nijjar was meeting the Canadian Security Intelligence Service officers “once or twice a week” including one or two days before his June 18 killing, with another meeting scheduled for two days after his death. The question is why? Why were the Canadian spy agency officials in regular meetings with a known fugitive from justice?

 Spy agencies recruit criminals (accused or convicted) based on three parameters; greed, revenge and ideology. Njjar would have been ideal for all three categories; the need for money for his activities, revenge against India and propagating the ideology of Khalistan. But what was the advantage that CSIS was hoping to attain? Being a professional agency, it can be assumed that they were building cases against Khalistani terrorists and the Punjabi-Canadian narco-gangs operating within Canada; while in reality their political masters are shielding Khalistani operatives from prosecution within Canada and offering them safe haven and an unrestricted license to operate their divisive agenda. The requirements of the political vote-bank support from the radical Sikh community clearly surpasses the safety and security of the Canadian nation and its people.

 Therefore, the role of CSIS can be construed to be two-fold. One, would be to have an insider man in the Khalistani movement, who could give advance information about threats to the Canadian society within country, and the second could be a puppet to use in foreign policy strategy of the Canadian Govt. The former could be considered as standard operating procedure of any intelligence agency and would not be considered abnormal. However, it is the second reason that raises warning flags for India.

 Historically, Canada has been known to be weak in matters of law-enforcement, military operations and counter insurgency. Being isolated from most of the world by two oceans and protected militarily by their immediate neighbor to the South, the USA; Canada is looked up as a non-dependable and passive member of the global power structure of the Western countries. In August 2005, the deputy Director of Operations of the CSIS, Jack Hooper had testified before the Canadian Senate Committee on National Security and Defense, and had explained to the politicians of that committee, that Canada has a problem with terrorists in general and with home-grown terrorists in particular. His statements were met with disbelief by the Members of Parliament, and it was openly speculated in the media that Hooper was vastly exaggerating. This reaction reflected Canada’s attitude towards terrorism; as somebody else’s problem, and not their concern.

 But the reality is ugly. Whether Canadians realize it or refuse to accept it, Canada has from a long time back, become a source of international terrorism and an operational base for global terror; a country where the world’s deadliest extremists’ movements are active and thriving. According to the 2016 report of CSIS, there are a number of terrorist’s groups operating in Canada; engaging in fund-raising, procuring arms and ammunition, spreading propaganda, recruiting followers and planning cross-border terrorism.

 Armenian terrorists were the first to recognize Canada’s potential as a safe haven, followed by the Khalistanis from India, the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, the Palestine factions and the Hezbollah. By 1998, every major terrorist group in the world was operating in Canada. The Canadian Senate Sub-committee on security and intelligence reported way back in 1999, that Canada had become a ‘venue of opportunity’ for terrorists. So, what are these terrorist organizations doing in Canada? The answer is, everything.

 They have established their own international support network to raise funding for terrorism and spread their ideology through every media channel. With offices throughout their regions of influence; socially acceptable activities that support their organizations with money, false passports and IDs, information, media outreach; and most importantly, their craving for credibility. Canada is the land of opportunity for terrorists seeking funding to finance their campaigns.

 The Khalistan movement in particular, depends on the Punjabi and Sikh diaspora for funding and support, in part due to its tightly knit community structure. Added to this, job opportunities are plenty in Canada and the welfare system is generous. Immigrants are entitled to all the rights of Canadian citizens. As an added advantage to terrorist organizations, until December 2001 it was absolutely legal to collect money in Canada for terrorists’ groups. Canada’s anti-terrorism law now prohibits this, but its enforcement is proving to be a difficult task since the law is not retroactive, which means that it cannot be used to prosecute terrorists for crimes committed before it was enacted.

The other type of fund-raising is through criminal activities. Terrorists groups in Canada are involved in bank fraud, migrant smuggling, human sex slave trafficking, loan frauds, extortion, theft, money laundering and drug distribution. This has resulted in Canadian terrorists killing people across the world.

 The 1993 World Trade Center bombings in New York, the suicide bombings in Israel, political killings in India, the 1985 bombing of Air India’s flight that killed 329 people, the 1996 Colombo truck bomb that killed over 100 civilians, and the Bali bombing of 2002 are some of the known terrorists attacks linked back to Canada. The singular reason why terrorists have unrestricted advantages in Canada is the Canadian government’s long-standing reluctance to confront the challenges of terrorism. As important as this is, its equally important to understand the complacency of the Canadian society towards terrorism. The Canadian society worries more about their government infringing heavily on their human rights and civil liberties. This complacency affects its politicians too. In its handling of terrorist groups operating in Canada, the government has missed opportunities to shut down their activities and has constantly display an astounding level of indifference to countries affected by terrorism. The Canadian branch of Babbar Khalsa (which is internationally designated as a terrorist organization) was allowed to be registered as a charity organization and to issue tax exemption receipts to financial donors.

 The Liberal political party of Justin Trudeau as well as the other political parties of Canada have avoided any public discussion on the role of terrorists in their country. In their logic of sound political strategy, to take a stand against terrorism was to risk losing the support of those groups who buy influence on the promise of delivering the support of ethnic vote-banks. One such influencer group is the New Democratic Party (NDP) which currently gives crucial support and stability to Justin Trudeau’s government. Incidentally, the NDP was formed in 1961 and had supported the minority government formed by Pierre Trudeau’s (Justin Trudeau’s father’s) Liberal Party from 1972 to 1974. The Khalistani influence started on October 1, 2017, when Jagmeet Singh, won the leadership vote to head the NDP. He is the first person of a minority group to lead a major Canadian federal political party on a permanent basis. He is also a self-declared hardline supporter of the Khalistani movement.

 The biggest danger to Canada today is the single-minded focus of its activists, politicians and a large section of the academia, on the rights of those accused of terrorism, without any regard to the right of Canadian citizens to defend themselves from the threat of terrorism. A foreign security official once stated publicly that, “Canada is a land of trusting fools”. Canadian intelligence authorities have been disrupting terrorists’ groups frequently. But, after being caught the worst that happens to these accused terrorists is deportation. And even then, most of those ordered out of the country never leave. Under the Canadian legal system, they are allowed to appeal multiple times against deportation.

 CSIS has been investigating Sikh extremism since August 1984, after the Sikh youth group ISYF, aka the Dashmesh Regiment, had allegedly complied a hit-list of moderate Sikhs in Canada. However, the surveillance tactics of the CSIS left a lot to be desired; and due to their lack of adequate resources, low interest to investigate every scrap of information received and inter-agency bickering with the RCMP, resulted with their on and off surveillance of Talwinder Singh Parmar, whose extradition was sought by India since May 1982. Even with actionable information received in advance of the possibility of an attack against Air India, the CSIS was unable to stop it. After this tragedy, they could never convict Parmar for the planning and carrying out the bombing of Air India’s “Kanishka” airplane, and it was left to the Indian authorities to terminate Parmar permanently in an encounter in Jalandhar, Punjab on 15 October 1992.

 The very same policies that made Canada the safe haven for international terrorists also assisted in the formation of the Punjabi–Canadian organized crime gangs. These Punjabi origin gangs of Canada are today among the top 5 organized crime hierarchy across that nation. The Dosanjh gang of brothers Ranjit and Jimsher Dosanjh, Rajinder Singh Sandhu and Suminder Singh Grewal of the Hell’s Angels, and Gurmit Singh Dhak were some of the early gangsters who developed deep ties with the Khalistani terrorists in those early days of the terrorist–gangster unity. In recent times, a major drug bust conducted in April 2021 broke up an Indo-Canadian trafficking network primarily based in Brampton, Ontario. Of the 28 arrested, the majority were India-born Punjabi men. Police seized $2.3 million worth of drugs.

The main trade of the Indo-Canadian crime groups are murder-for-hire operations, along with arms trafficking, racketeering, extortion, assassinations, and the trafficking of cocaine, heroin, MDMA, methamphetamine and cannabis. 

 Indo-Canadian crime syndicates, are funding secessionist groups, including Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), in a bid to rekindle the Khalistan movement in India. Crime syndicates like Dhaliwal and Grewal gangs, involved in drug trafficking and operating out of the Canadian state of British Columbia, are linked to SFJ leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannu. The US based pro-Khalistan SFJ group was banned by the Indian government in July 2019 for its anti-Indian activities. The SFJ, which also has links with Pakistani establishments, has been pushing for a referendum for self-determination by the Sikh community in support of Khalistan. Several key activists of SFJ have been identified in India and as of now over a dozen cases have been registered against each of them.

Pakistan’s spy agency the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) has turned several chiefs of Sikh terror groups into drug smugglers. It is an established fact that the ISI is using Khalistani terrorists to smuggle narcotics and provide funds to terror various groups for anti-India activities. Recently, the Peel Regional Police in Canada arrested more than a dozen people on different charges including mail theft. Most of the arrested individuals are of Punjabi origin. The investigators claimed that the accused parties were stealing mail by breaking into Canada post mailboxes or simply grabbing it from roadside residential mailboxes. They would target cheques, credit cards, and identification documents and often altered and deposited the stolen cheques into various banks before withdrawing the funds.

The Sunday Guardian reported in August 2022, that an attempt for a large-scale revival of the Khalistani movement was being coordinated from Pakistan with the involvement of narco-terrorists in India and Canada. 

It is speculated in foreign intelligence agencies that the Indo-Canadian criminal network has entered and is deeply entrenched within the Canadian law enforcement agencies including the RCMP and CSIS. Pro–Khalistan elements are now exercising significant influence inside Canada’s government offices because of the electoral power that some in their community wields in that country.  

Apart from the radical elements, descendants of Pakistani Army officials, who migrated to Canada in the latter part of 1900 and are now naturalised Canadian citizens, are occupying crucial posts in different offices in Canada and are contributing in nurturing, protecting and expanding the narco-terrorism ring that operates from Canada, and which has now become the biggest hub for sending drugs to European countries and the United Kingdom. 

The deaths of three Khalistani leaders in rapid succession in countries other than India; with two manifest killings and a third that has been brought into dispute, have created a storm of speculation regarding the possibilities of covert operations by India’s external intelligence agency, R&AW. Most of this commentary is devoid of context, and its tone and content are based entirely on the sentiments and affiliations of the media ‘analysts’.

While the death of three Khalistani extremists in widely dispersed locations abroad over a relatively brief period of 45 days is certainly surprising and may call for close police scrutiny, it does fit into a broader context of narco-criminal alliances, and their activities have seen numerous incidents of violence, including killing of each other’s members, in the past. While the possibility of covert operations by state agencies cannot automatically be ruled out, the sudden acquisition of capability and intent, and its abrupt operational usage in multiple cases, does not fit into the profile of a non-violent, slow acting intelligence agency of long-standing.

A careful study of the past deaths of Khalistani terrorists and Indo-Punjabi gang members show a different picture. On November 19, 2022; a prominent Pakistan-based operational commander of the Babbar Khalsa International (BKI), Harvinder Singh aka Rinda, died at a military hospital in Lahore, allegedly due to a drug overdose. Rinda was among the foreign based ‘masterminds’ of the Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) attack on the Punjab Police Intelligence Headquarters at Mohali in Punjab on May 9, 2022. The incident has also been linked to several gangsters abroad, crucially including Lakhbir Singh aka Landa in Canada, Satbir Singh aka Satnam Singh in Greece, and Yadwinder Singh in the Philippines.

On January 27, 2020, another arms and drug dealer, as well as the then ‘chief’ of the KLF, Harmeet Singh alias ‘Happy PhD’, was killed at the Dera Chahal Gurdwara near Lahore, apparently because of a financial dispute over drug deals with a local Pakistani gang. It is within these murky environments of the Khalistani-narcotics-gangs network, patronized and substantially controlled by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI); that the killing of Paramjit Singh Panjwar needs to be assessed.

Panjwar was deeply involved in the smuggling of heroin, weapons and Fake Indian Currency Notes (FICN) from Pakistan, even as he sought to keep the KCF alive with the revenues generated from these activities. There is as yet no clarity on who killed Panjwar, and the case is unlikely to be solved in Pakistan, where Panjwar’s existence is not even acknowledged, and where his death was reported as the killing of ‘Malik Sardar Singh’, the identity he had been given by the ISI. Furthermore, Panjwar would not be a very high priority target for Indian agencies, were they to begin drawing up any ‘hit-lists’.

Hardeep Singh Nijjar, on whose behalf the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has taken on a political risk with his blatantly false statements in his own parliament; has however, been high among India’s concerns about Khalistani elements in Canada. Nijjar had been accused of two killings in Punjab and for organizing terrorist training camps in Canada itself. Indian intelligence has reported that Nijjar had links with gangster Arshdeep Singh aka Arsh Dalla, to provide the logistics and manpower for several of his operations in Punjab. Nijjar has long been associated with an often-violent Gurudwara politics in Canada, and for his well-known clashes with the principal architect of the Air India flight 182 Kanishka Bombing of 1985, Ripudaman Singh Malik.

On January 23, 2022, at the Guru Nanak Sikh Temple in Surrey, Nijjar ranted against Malik for over an hour, describing him as a “Qaum da gaddaar” (traitor to the nation) and an “agent”, adding that he should be “taught a lesson.” Malik was killed in a gang-style hit, very similar to Nijjar’s own subsequent killing, by two men on 22 June, 2022. Investigations into Nijjar’s killing are likely to be a dead-end, as were investigations into the Ripudaman Singh Malik’s killing.

When Justin Trudeau publicly accused India for being involved in Nijjar’s death, his credibility dropped even further than usual; since it is from Canada that a continuous separatist campaign is being fueled and funded by Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Indian origin, and where extremists openly flaunt their affiliations with terrorists, and their close connections with Justin Trudeau’s ruling Liberal Party.

In Canada, the Punjabi gangster culture is rampant. Twenty-one per cent of gangsters killed in gang wars or police operations since 2006 are of Punjabi origin, while only two per cent of Canada’s population is Punjabi. Of the eleven individuals identified by the Canadian law-enforcement in August 2022 as those who “pose a significant threat to public safety due to their ongoing involvement in gang conflicts and connection to extreme levels of violence”, nine of these listed gangsters were of Punjabi origin. These gangs have come to dominate organized criminal activity in Canada, with fratricidal conflicts within the Punjabi gangs accounting for much of the present gang violence.

Therefore, the more credible explanation of Nijjar’s killing seems to be differences within their own vicious political and criminal connections, rather than the policy of the Indian government.

 

References:

1.    The Sikh Diaspora www.journals.openedition.org

2.    Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies www.ipcs.org

3.    Canadian Press www.thecanadianpress.com

4.    Wikipedia

5.    Public Safety Canada www.publicsafety.gc.ca

6.    Cold Terror by Stuart Bell

7.    The Wilson Centre www.wilsoncenter.org

8.    JSTOR www.jstor.org

9.    www.justice.gc.ca

 

 

 

 

 

Geopolitical Shifts: The Balance of Power Amidst the Global Tensions.

In our current times, the global geopolitical landscape is a dynamic arena where the balance of power is constantly evolving. In the past year alone, the Russia-Ukraine war and mounting tensions between China and the USA have led to a reconfiguration of power dynamics. Today, we will explore the current state of affairs between Western countries, Middle-Eastern countries, and Asia, with a focus on China and India, as these regions navigate the complexities of international relations.

The Russia-Ukraine Conflict:

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has had far-reaching implications on the balance of power. It has strained relations between Russia and the Western countries, leading to economic sanctions, diplomatic tensions, and heightened security concerns. The West, comprising primarily the United States and European Union, has supported Ukraine, imposing sanctions on Russia and providing military aid to the Ukrainian government. The conflict has shifted the balance of power in favor of the West, as it strengthens alliances and galvanizes support against Russia's expansionist ambitions. A year after Russia's invasion of Ukraine sparked the largest conflict in Europe since World War II, the repercussions continue to reverberate around the world. Not only has the war in Ukraine set off a geopolitical realignment, but it has caused economic hardship far from the epicenter of the fighting.

The Feb 2022, invasion has touched off a refugee crisis, as Ukrainians flee the conflict in their homeland and many Russian men seek to avoid conscription. More than eight million refugees have fled Ukraine in what the World Health Organization [WHO] describes as "the largest movement of people in the European Region since the Second World War." Many have been involuntarily relocated by Russia. Others have put a strain on resources, as well as schools and hospitals, in Poland and Germany. However, one of the positive effects has been that Ukrainian refugees are filling factory jobs left vacant by Europe's labor shortage. The political effect has been the faster process toward expanding NATO, with Finland and Sweden pursuing membership after decades of official neutrality.

A 21st century war in Europe, led by a nuclear power, is pushing the world toward realignment. It has rattled NATO, the European Union and the U.N., forcing countries to take sides in ways that have led to escalating tensions and diplomatic shifts. For example, Turkey, despite being a NATO member, has increased trade with Russia since the start of the war and has strenuously objected against Sweden and Finland joining the NATO alliance.

There is a push-back to the US efforts to widen this war into a global conflict. When NATO’s secretary-general called on South Korea to supply military assistance to Ukraine, stressing Kyiv’s “urgent need” for more ammunition, Seoul refused. Despite being a NATO member, Turkey has refused to join Western sanctions against Russia or to supply Ukraine with weapons, instead pushing the two to begin peace talks. South Africa went ahead with joint military exercises with both Russia and China despite Western criticism; and Iran has acknowledged that it is providing Russia with attack drones.

India has refused to take sides in what it views as essentially a power struggle between the East and West. India has instead opted to walk the middle path: preserving its time-tested relations with Russia, seeking to improve relations with China, and strengthening relations with USA and Japan. India’s middle-path approach has gained greater relevance and urgency with its leadership of the G-20 this year. Prime Minister Modi has reinforced India's long-standing policy of nonalignment, and creatively rephrased it as “multi-alignment”. Multi-alignment, according to India's Foreign Minister Dr. Jaishankar, is “more energetic and participative.” India currently balances its memberships in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, alongside Russia and China (the SCO), and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (known as the Quad) with Australia, Japan, and the United States. India has placed a significant emphasis on debt relief for developing economies, and Prime Minister Modi recently expressed his concern for the unsustainable debt that threatens the “financial viability” of many countries. 

The Middle-East set-back to USA. 

The Middle-East, long characterized by geopolitical complexities, finds itself in a unforeseen position amidst the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Historically, the region has been influenced by both Western powers and Russia, primarily due to its strategic importance in terms of energy resources and geopolitical significance. The old US Middle-East policy strategies of the US which asked Arab partners for their undivided loyalty, and which assumed collective enmity toward Iran, does not work anymore. There was a time when USA was able to impose, or at least rudely communicate its preferences to its Arab partners. But that time is now gone. The USA does not have the leverage it once had in the region. It is also less trusted by its Arab partners, who have interpreted the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and tolerance of Iranian aggression in the region to mean that it is headed for the exit from the region.

There is no doubt that USA has stepped back from diplomatic leadership on the Middle-East peace process and conflict management across the region. Only on issues related to Iran, the USA has a sustained but not consistent, focus. Other actors have been inserting themselves into regional decision-making. As these two dynamics converge, a new geopolitical structure is evolving. It has seven primary countries; Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Israel, the United States, India and Russia. Others, like Egypt, maintain some of their past influence, although at significantly diminished levels. The Iran - Saudi Arabia peace pact, brokered by China has the potential of bringing about a higher level of peaceful co-existence, that the USA has not been able to achieve over decades.

US officials understand very well  that asking regional partners to downgrade their economic relations with China is a nonstarter (since, China is Saudi Arabia’s largest trading partner). They also recognize that encouraging these partners to limit their political relations with China is not an option either. These partners are likely to increase their cooperation under the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states. The one major area where the USA still has enough influence to shape the policy agenda with its Arab partners, is defense and security. The big challenge for USA will be to offer substantial incentives to its Arab partners to refrain from military cooperation with China, while ensuring they (the USA) do not promise anything it cannot deliver, including, most notably, a formal defense pact or official security guarantees. Economic interests have compelled several regional powers to increase their trade and do more business with China, and Gulf Arab partners’ new diplomatic approach to security has sought to pacify and normalize ties with Iran.

In the Middle-East, India is not supporting another country’s empire but advancing its own interests. When the United States, India, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates set up a new joint working group to coordinate strategy earlier this month, the four-country combination inevitably drew comparisons with the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, the Indo-Pacific Quad that joins the United States and India with Australia and Japan. 

Two factors have played an important role in India’s relations with Middle Eastern countries: economics and India’s internal politics. The economic factor is centered on the oil trade and remittances from the sizable Indian diaspora in the Middle East. The second factor is India’s internal politics with regard to its own large Muslim population. Over a period of time, however, India has diversified its relations beyond these factors. Especially in the case of Saudi Arabia, where India has been developing an extended strategic partnership over the past few years, leading to an agreement to set up a Indo-Saudi Strategic Partnership Council, and to increase cooperation on counter-terrorism. 

China's Rising Influence:

China's rapid rise as a global power has been a defining feature of the 21st century. With a robust economy, expansive military capabilities, and an assertive foreign policy, China seeks to challenge the dominant global position of Western countries and reshape the geopolitical landscape in Asia and beyond. The ongoing trade tensions and ideological differences between China and the United States have strained relations and increased the likelihood of armed confrontation. As the world's two largest economies, any conflict between China and the United States would have profound consequences for global stability and the balance of power.  

On his recent visit to China, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva pledged to work with Beijing to “re-balance” global politics and expressed a desire to settle more trade in a currency other than the U.S. dollar, another interest that is shared by China. In addition to Lula, heads of state or government from the European Union, France, Malaysia, Singapore and Spain have visited China since late March 2023, and senior Chinese officials have met with their counterparts in multiple countries. French President Emmanuel Macron in particular raised eyebrows after voicing support for Chinese narratives and releasing a joint statement pledging cooperation in areas of nuclear energy and food security.  China is waging what could be termed a new “great game” for geopolitical dominance. While China frequently deploys military coercion tactics to back up its extensive territorial claims, it seeks to secure global dominance not by a risky campaign of military conquest, but by a more subtle and gradual approach of amassing political and economic influence.

The balance of power in the 21st century is characterized by a complex interplay between Western countries, Middle Eastern countries, India and China. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has led to the consolidation of Western alliances, bolstering their position vis-à-vis Russia. However, the rise of China, which is being countered by the rise of India, introduces a new dynamic, as it challenges the Western-led order and seeks to assert its influence regionally and globally. 2023 looks set to be a transition year for geopolitics. An end to the war in Ukraine does not appear in sight. Putin looks unlikely to win decisively and Ukraine will not give up. The West still lacks a common strategy on how to end the war. The war will continue to modify the post-Cold War world order but no clear alternative structure is emerging. While Western unity has been strengthened, particularly through NATO and the G7, the partnership between China and Russia remains strong. Amongst this fragmentation and uncertainty, one thing is clear: the China-US relationship will remain the single most important fault line in geopolitics. 

To counter China's 'Belt and Road Initiative', national security advisors from India, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the United States met with Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman in Riyadh to discuss an ambitious connectivity project to link the Middle East to India through roads, rails, and seaports. The connectivity project aims to leverage India’s capacity as an infrastructure provider. Its track record includes the construction of the world’s largest rail system in Asia and contributions to cross-border electricity-sharing arrangements. Through the new initiative Indian officials hope to develop a deeper infrastructure footprint in the Middle East to counter China’s BRI. This Middle East-India connectivity initiative is still purely aspirational, but its potential is vast, linking India with a region critical to its interests and in cooperation with some of its top partners. It is planned that India could eventually benefit from land and sea trade routes stretching from Israel and the UAE all the way to Greece’s Piraeus port and onward into Europe.

Despite remaining strong in 2022, Western unity will be tested. The EU and the US do not share the same approach towards China. The EU itself is divided, with Germany advocating for a more balanced approach. Tensions between the EU and the US are also growing on trade and subsidies following the US Inflation Reduction Act which provides massive subsidies for US green industries, threatening European industry at a time when it is already facing high energy prices. The EU has announced that it will develop its own subsidy package in response. 

Many countries in the ‘Global South’ will seek to insulate their interests from big power competition. This new form of non-alignment is motivated by practical concerns, including leveraging market access to and support from the West and China for investment, technology and debt. They may still align with either side on different issues on a case-by-case basis. Three major developing countries will chair the G20 in 2023, 2024 and 2025: India, Brazil and South Africa allowing them to influence the geopolitical agenda. 

The possibility of an armed confrontation between China and the United States poses significant risks. It could potentially destabilize the global economy, disrupt international trade, and escalate tensions in the Asia-Pacific region. The USA, recognizing China's growing influence, has adopted a more assertive stance, strengthening alliances in the region and engaging in economic and military partnerships with countries like Japan, South Korea, and Australia. These alliances serve as a counterweight to China's ambitions and contribute to maintaining a balance of power.

Against this backdrop, the global economic situation will remain uncertain and challenging throughout the year. Geopolitical instability will continue in 2023 and has become a key driver of policy developments. Geopolitical developments are directly leading to rapid policy changes in energy, digital, tech, trade, and defense areas as well as to investment screening rules. Corporate and investors need to anticipate and analyze these trends and understand how they will impact governments’ priorities. Businesses are facing governments that are becoming economically less rational. The political dimension is now taking a leading role in business policy decisions. Understanding the political context of these decisions is key to understanding and anticipating future policy changes and engaging with governments effectively. 

Today, Geopolitical instability remains prominent, 30 years after the Cold War and the alleged “end of history.” State-sponsored cyber risk, pandemics, adaptation to climate change, economic retrenchment, accelerating technological change, and demand internalization are all combining to create a risk environment that is unprecedented in terms of the challenges it poses. Financial disruptions, national and global security issues, supply chain vulnerabilities, existing and emerging cybersecurity threats, disruptions in food security, sudden and unexpected changes in the environment, and concerns about public health are interrelated like never before and therefore risk management must become an increasingly collaborative enterprise, and there is a clear and urgent need for uncommon collaborations in risk management. 

Essentially, there are many new policies and actions that are needed. Failures to accurately assess risk are, at their foundation; failures of imagination. Therefore, all stake-holders must embark on a focused “campaign of learning” to build a wider and stronger foundation of relationships and knowledge that allows them to see connections that they may not otherwise notice. 

We can win the race to reduce our vulnerability to risk and take advantage of the opportunities that arise. That is, if we acknowledge the extent to which things have changed, allow ourselves to be less comfortable in what we think we know, take ownership of the challenge, and act; early and often.

 

References & Citations:

https://en.majalla.com
https://www.npr.org
https://www.csis.org
https://www.discoursemagazine.com/
https://flint-global.com/
https://www.dw.com/en/
https://foreignpolicy.com/