Featured

Zionist chess board: Why does world oppose rogue Trump’s dangerous move on Jerusalem?

Zionist chess board: Why does world oppose rogue Trump’s dangerous move on Jerusalem?

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

______

 

US Presidents have been cheating the Palestinians and Arab world.  They have been told give and take principle would eventually lead to a situation where there would two nations- Israel and Palestine- living together as good neighbors-sheppards   Now Trump has destroyed that feeble hope as well. Since Israel occupies with its monstrous terror arsenals and WMS of USA, Palestinians are expected to do exactly what the USA and Israel tell them.

Since USA and Israel cannot prove that God had given in writing about ownership of Israel, they have now resorted to fakely taking over Jerusalem. Once occupied, Jerusalem could be theirs. No other veto member/s would ever care to retake it and handover to the Palestinians.

Big business fraud Trump  has now officially  joined the hawkish criminal Netanyahu to support the cause of expansionism and genocides of or holocaust of Palestinians. .

Extremely confused US president Trump seeking to present himself as shroud politician without nay prior epicene in politics, very quickly has – deliberately or otherwise – exposed himself to be a top core Zionist with criminal intent targeting Palestinians and Islam. In declaring Jerusalem which officially is not a part of USA as the new capital of illegal Israel which is also not a part of USA either, Trump has done exactly what rouges alone can perform.  He has effectively put an end to Mideast the peace move.

Trump has played the usual US mischief with the Arab world but in the worst manner. He has betrayed not only the unfortunate Palestinians and Arab nations, but entire world that looked forward to an early settlement of the issue and establishment of Palestine state.

Has Trump the businessman got some fantastic profit from Tel Aviv for the Jerusalem deal? America s doesn’t do any favor to any nation without getting in return like cricket teams do in offering individual scores like 100s and 50s. .

A few lunatic and insane elements also get elected along with normal people to rule or misrule the nations.  Democracy provides for that. While most of the elected Israeli leaders are essentially rogues, for the first time a rogue and insane president in the name of Donald Trump now becomes the custodian of White House.  .

World cannot expect anything better from an erratic and  rogue Trump who has decided to recognize Jerusalem and indirectly regularize all occupied territories inside Palestine. Trump has also indirectly now made all Zionist criminals reputable Jews.

Amid erratic Donald Trump’s move to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, opinions have begun pouring in from Islamic world as well as other nations. Iranian leaders have stated that Tehran will not tolerate any aggression against holy Islamic sites.

India, Israel and USA work jointly as secret nuke allies.  On Dec. 6 when India observes Black Day as it completes 25th year since the ghastly destruction of historic Babri Mosque in Uttar Pradesh by the state backed Hindu criminals, US President Trump has also hit the headlines with announcement of Jerusalem as a part of Zionist empire even as Saudi Arabia and Israel continue to have secret talks on Palestine, other issues.

The entire world shocked by the ultra fanatic move of Trump. Muslim nations could not believe that US president could stoop so low to promote the Zionist interests by handing over Jerusalem to the Zionist criminals without even consulting the stake holders.

The war of words is likely to escalate should Trump, as some government officials have suggested, announce tomorrow that the USA is relocating its embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which the Palestinians claim for their own.

Obviously, Trump has approached Jerusalem issue as one of his many real estate deals but worse he has done what Netanyahu should have done it as the ruling hawkish Jewish leader. In taking a unilateral decision, Trump ahs in deed trumped even Netanyahu’s role in future Israel.

Trump’s declaration of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is a powerfully symbolic statement about a city that houses many of the world’s holiest sites of Islam, Christianity and Judaism. .Trump cited several: the Western Wall that surrounded the Jews’ ancient Temple, the Stations of the Cross that depict Jesus along his crucifixion path, and the Al-Aqsa Mosque where Muslims say their Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven.

Israelis and Palestinians reacted in starkly different terms. PM B Netanyahu hailed Trump’s announcement as an “important step toward peace,” and Israeli opposition leaders echoed his praise. But Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Trump’s shift serves extremist groups that want religious war and signals US withdrawal from being a peace mediator. Protesters in Gaza burned American and Israeli flags.

Pope Francis said that maintaining Jerusalem’s status quo was important “in order to avoid adding new elements of tension to an already volatile world that is wracked by so many cruel conflicts.” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres implicitly criticized Trump’s decision, warning that the city’s status must be resolved through direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. “From day one as secretary-general of the UN, I have consistently spoken out against any unilateral measures that would jeopardize the prospect of peace for Israelis and Palestinians,” Guterres said. “Jerusalem is a final status issue that must be resolved through direct negotiations between the two parties on the basis of the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, taking into account the legitimate concerns of both the Palestinian and the Israeli sides,” Guterres said.

 

US terror embassy to Jerusalem and fate of Palestinians

Trump the modern rouge has shattered decades of unwavering US neutrality on Jerusalem Wednesday, declaring the sorely divided holy city as Israel’s capital and sparking frustrated Palestinians to cry out that he had destroyed already-fragile Mideast hopes for peace. Israeli forces got another chance to attack Palestinians, they dispersed tear gas at a checkpoint entrance to Ramallah, while the Palestinian Red Crescent reported 22 wounded from live fire or rubber bullets in the West Bank

Leaders across the Middle East and the rest of the world warned of disastrous consequences as US President Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital — a decision that overturns decades of US policy.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the USA can no longer play the role of peace broker. “These deplorable and unacceptable measures deliberately undermine all peace efforts,” Abbas said after Trump’s announcement. He said Trump’s move amounted to “an announcement of US withdrawal from playing the role it has been playing in the past decade in sponsoring the peace process.”

Palestinian officials declared the Mideast peace process “finished.” Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah met with European diplomats and told them that the US move “will fuel conflict and increase violence in the entire region.”

As such was only expected of fascist Zionism, Trump’s announcement was met by an almost universal diplomatic backlash as fascist Israeli PM B Netanyahu lavished praise on the president, saying his name would be associated with Jerusalem’s long history and urging other countries to follow suit.

Furious Palestinians have called for a “day of rage” on Friday as protests spread against US President Donald Trump’s widely criticised recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Sporadic clashes broke out between Palestinians and Israeli forces on Thursday, as Israel deployed hundreds more troops to the occupied West Bank amid uncertainty over the fallout.

Hamas called for fresh protests after the main weekly Muslim prayers on Friday. A senior Palestinian official said US Vice President Mike Pence was “not welcome in Palestine” following the policy shift, which ended decades of US ambiguity on the status of the disputed city. Hamas leader Ismail Haniya has called for a new intifada or uprising in Gaza City. Demonstrations were held in West Bank cities as well as in Gaza, where five Palestinians were wounded from Israeli fire, Gazan authorities said.

Trump said his defiant move — making good on a 2016 presidential campaign pledge — marks the start of a “new approach” to solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.. “We cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past,” Trump said, brushing aside the appeals for caution from around the world. Defying dire, worldwide warnings, Trump insisted that after repeated peace failures it was past time for a new approach, starting with what he said was his decision merely based on reality to recognize Jerusalem as the seat of Israel’s government. He also said the USA would move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, though he set no timetable.

US Vice President Pence is due to meet the Palestinian president in the second half of December on a regional tour, but a senior member of Abbas’s Fatah faction said the leader would not meet him. “The American vice president is not welcome in Palestine. And President Abbas will not welcome him,” said Jibril Rajoub. “Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital,” the US leader declared from the White House. “Acknowledging this as a fact is a necessary condition for achieving peace. It is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel,” Trump said, urging calm and “the voices of tolerance to prevail over the purveyors of hate.”

The White House, however, is likely to only consider the meeting cancelled if they hear that from Abbas, whose office could not be reached for comment.  It said it would be “counterproductive” to cancel a scheduled meeting between Pence and Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas during his visit from Dec 17-19.

Palestinian resistance group Hamas which controls Gaza said Trump’s move was a “flagrant aggression against the Palestinian people.” Hamas urged Arabs and Muslims to “undermine the US interests in the region” and to “shun Israel.”

Down with anti-Islamic Trump

Funnily, Trump insists the move did not prejudge final talks, saying it simply reflected the reality that west Jerusalem is and will continue to be part of Israel under any settlement. “The United States would support a two-state solution if agreed to by both sides,” he said.

But USA is insincere fascist.

Defying dire, worldwide warnings, Trump insisted that after repeated peace failures it was past time for a new approach, starting with what he said was his decision merely based on reality to recognize Jerusalem as the seat of Israel’s government.

Meanwhile, Trump also said the USA would move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, though he set no timetable. “We cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past,” Trump said, brushing aside the appeals for caution from around the world.

Erratic Trump gave many pseudo promised to the US voters to gain their sympathy in the form of their votes and he wanted Jewish votes that were with Democrats under Obama.  Most Jews voted for Hillary and ignored and degraded trump’s gimmicks.  Trump used Jerusalem as a mere gimmick in the campaign but since his election Jews have worked to force trump and his Jewish son in law to fulfill that promise, leaving all other promises to their own fate.

Israel has Tel Aviv as its capital ever since it was imposed in Mideast by US-UK rogue twins and it is developed city now. Why should they need one more capital in Jerusalem to thwart Palestine desire to make it its own capital?

Erratic Trump as businessman and showman wanted a name very badly especially after his failed threat to North Korea. Why he or Israel wants a sound capital in Jerusalem which the Palestinians want as their own capital?

Erratic Trump repeatedly said he would make Israel see reasons and forge alliance and friendship with Palestine which would be sn independent nation to pursue its own legitimate interests.  Worse, USA and Israel opposed the UN decision to make it a defacto member of UN and USA had even stopped the funding of the UN as a punishment for ignoring its status on UN with a huge veto.

So, Trump, like any other Zionist is hater of Islam and Palestine.

 

Global reactions

However, UK in recent times has made a positive departure from its position on Palestine and refused ot vote with USA an Israel.

Though continuously failing in his attempts to showcase  the US power, and trying hard to show to the world that he can so many things simultaneously , Trump may have thought Saudi Arabia and Gulf States, also promoting  the Zionist interests,  would solute the Trump’s new Zionist ideas but none to support Trump’s Zionist fanaticism.

And there are major ramifications over who should control the territory. The United States has never endorsed the Jewish state’s claim of sovereignty over any part of Jerusalem and has seen the city’s future as indelibly linked to the “deal of the century” between Israel and the Palestinians that Trump believes he can reach. Beyond Kushner, Trump has dispatched other top emissaries to the region in recent months in hopes of advancing new negotiations.

Trump said he wasn’t delivering any verdict about where an Israeli-Palestinian border should lie. Instead, he described his Jerusalem declaration as recognizing the reality that most of Israel’s government already operates from the city, and he suggested the US ally should be rewarded for creating a successful democracy where “people of all faiths are free to live and worship.” “Today we finally acknowledge the obvious,” he said, emphasizing that he wouldn’t follow past presidents who tiptoed around Jerusalem out of diplomatic caution.

US embassies and consulates around the world were put on high alert. Across the Middle East and Europe, they issued warnings to Americans to watch out for violent protests. In Jordan, home to a large Palestinian population, the US said it would close its embassy to the public on Thursday and urged children of diplomats there to stay home from school.

There was little in Trump’s statement to encourage the Palestinians. Although he recited the longstanding US position that Jerusalem’s borders must still be worked out through negotiation, he made no recognition of the Palestinian claims to east Jerusalem.

For the first time, Trump did appear to endorse the concept of an independent Palestine existing alongside Israel. Yet even that idea appeared conditional, as he said he’d promote the “two-state solution” if both sides agreed. Netanyahu’s g

Government is dominated by hard-liners who oppose Palestinian independence.

Trump made no reference to signing a waiver that officially delays any move of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, but multiple officials confirmed he signed the waiver Wednesday. It means there will be no embassy move for at least another six months. Establishing a Jerusalem embassy was a major campaign promise of Trump’s and one that officials said he focused on in discussions with top advisers in recent weeks. He focused on his directive to the State Department to begin a process of moving the embassy as required by US law, however many years that might take. After his speech, he signed a proclamation to that effect. In Germany, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said work will begin immediately to identify a site.

A non-governmental expert on the Middle East who consults regularly with the White House said the Trump administration had opted against an earlier plan of converting the existing US Consulate in Jerusalem to an embassy. Instead, it’s looking to construct an entirely new facility, said the individual, who wasn’t authorized to disclose private conversations with US officials and requested anonymity.

In making his decision, Trump overruled more cautious counsel from Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis, who voiced concern about endangering US diplomats and troops in Muslim countries, according to officials briefed on internal administration deliberations. Those officials were not authorized to publicly discuss the matter and spoke on condition of anonymity. “There will of course be disagreement and dissent regarding this announcement — but we are confident that ultimately, as we work through these disagreements, we will arrive at a place of greater understanding and cooperation,” Trump said. He said he intends “to do everything in my power to help forge” a peace agreement.

French President Emmanuel Macron branded as “regrettable” Trump’s decision, calling for efforts to “avoid violence at all costs.” “This decision is a regrettable decision that France does not approve of and goes against international law and all the resolutions of the UN Security Council,” Macron told reporters at a news conference in Algiers.

France and the European Union have joined Muslim leaders in urging Trump to reconsider amid worries that the move could re-ignite a fresh orgy of violence in the Middle East and beyond. Bekir Bozdag, Turkey’s deputy prime minister, apparently shares those concerns, saying Trump’s actions would result in “a major catastrophe.” Presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin used more measured language on Twitter, saying that moving the American embassy to Jerusalem would be “a fatal mistake and go against international agreements, UN resolutions and historical facts. We hope the US administration will avoid this mistake.”

Turkey

Harsh objections came from a wide array of presidents and prime ministers. From the Middle East to Europe and beyond, leaders cautioned Trump that any sudden change on an issue as sensitive as Jerusalem not only risks blowing up the new Arab-Israeli peace initiative led by Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, but could lead to new violence in the region. No government beyond Israel spoke up in praise of Trump or suggested it would follow his lead.

Erdogan is expected to speak with leaders of Western countries, including Britain, Germany, Spain and France, as well as Russia about Trump’s decision.

Turkey’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement: “We condemn the irresponsible statement of the US administration that we learned with great concern, declaring that it recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and it will be moving the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.” The ministry added: “This decision is against international law and relevant UN Resolutions, as the annexation of Jerusalem by Israel has been rejected by (the) international community and the UN.”

Under Turkey’s chairmanship, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) will convene an extraordinary meeting in Istanbul on Dec. 13 to present a coordinated response.   While Turkey’s EU Minister Omer Celik called the decision a “provocation,” presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin said it is “null and void” for Ankara, adding that it is ridiculous to define it “as a contribution to peace.” This is an attempt to legalize the current situation that would eliminate all peace initiatives, and it aims at opening deep wounds in the Middle East.

 

Saudi and Iran

Not only Israel wants a rift between USA and Turkey but even USA and Turkey themselves consider that option seriously.  Turkey believes that even the USA an ally of Israel is harming its EU interests. Trump’s action was widely denounced, with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan saying it was not only “irresponsible and illegal” also plays into the hands of terrorists. Jordan decried the announcement as a violation of international law and the UN charter.

Saudi Arabia expressed “great disappointment” over the misbehavior of “friend in need, Trump’s announcement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and relocating the US embassy to Jerusalem. Saudi King Salman warned Trump that moving the US embassy for Israel to Jerusalem was a “dangerous step” that could rile Muslims worldwide. Kingdom had previously warned of the serious consequences of such an “irresponsible and unwarranted step.  Trump action represents a great bias against the historic and permanent rights of the Palestinian people in Jerusalem, which have been affirmed by the relevant international resolutions and have been recognized and supported by the international community.

The move is a shift away from the US historically impartial position with regard to the issue of Jerusalem, which will further complicate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,” the royal court said. A statement said that although Trump’s move does not diminish the “inalienable and preserved rights of the Palestinian people in Jerusalem and other occupied territories,” it does “exemplify a drastic regression in the efforts to move the peace process forward.”

The Kingdom reaffirms the importance of finding a just and lasting solution to the Palestinian cause in accordance with the relevant international resolutions, and the Arab Peace Initiative, so that the Palestinian people can regain their legitimate rights, which will strengthen security and stability in the region

If Trump moves forward with his pledges, the optics could get really ugly. There will be lots of burnings of American and Israeli flags inside Turkey but also by thousands of members of the Turkish Diaspora in Europe who support Erdogan. It will be another step in Turkey’s drift away from the West.

Riyadh does not have a strategy to win the war,“ Riedel continues. “The front lines have barely moved in months. The Houthis show no sign of giving up. More airstrikes are not likely to bring a decision. So the Saudi strategy by default is to rely on famine and disease to wear down the Yemeni people. All sides in this war are guilty of perpetuating a catastrophe, but the blockade and airstrikes are the principal cause of the famine and cholera. The Saudi government and leadership should be held accountable for their actions. A strategy of starvation is unacceptable.”

Giorgio Cafiero adds that conflict in Yemen offers the Islamic State “new opportunities and grievances to exploit as the internationally recognized central government remains entirely ineffectual. Should IS-Yemen lure more highly trained and battle-hardened fighters from the Levant, the local offshoot of IS could become an increasingly ascendant force to be reckoned with in southern Yemen, adding new dimensions of complexity and instability to the country’s civil war and growing famine threat.”

The kingdom’s isolation of Qatar has undermined Gulf Cooperation Council unity, another windfall for Iran. Cafiero explains the limitations of the “Anti-Terror Quartet” of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain in building a new regional alignment, given differing perspectives on how best to deal with Turkey and Iran. Meanwhile, Iran — allied with both the Syrian and Iraqi governments — comes out a winner in both countries, while Saudi Arabia scrambles for a foothold.

Mohammed’s record of frustration may have implications for any perceived gains from the now open secret of an emerging Saudi-Israeli entente to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement and counter Iran. Ben Caspit writes, “Peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia is not about to break out anytime soon. On the other hand, Israel is an unofficial member of the Sunni alliance led by young Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. For the past two years, he has been setting the Middle East on fire with a series of audacious moves.” Given the regional climate, it is fair to ask whether Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will succumb to Saudi pressure to agree to a peace settlement or resign, as Adnan Abu Amer reports. Whether Saudi Arabia can “deliver” the Palestinians is an open question.

If the Trump administration is looking to back a winner in the Middle East, then it might think again about the seeming unconditional love offered Riyadh. Saudi Arabia should of course be a pillar of US strategy and posture, but given the scorecard to date, Washington may be overdue in counseling some restraint. As we wrote two weeks ago, “The Trump administration should send a clear signal to the crown prince that the United States does not necessarily have his back in any and all confrontations with Iran, while urging a try at diplomacy between Tehran and Riyadh, which is essential and long overdue.”

The courage and example of the Lebanese people to stand for sovereignty and against interference cannot be undersold. The country cannot escape its geography, at the crossroads of the Saudi-Iranian and Israeli-Iranian regional fault lines, and with over 1.5 million Syrian refugees within its borders. The trend, and pulse, of Lebanon, cannot be denied or ignored. We suggested back in 2014 that an exciting new post-sectarian social contract in Lebanon may be emerging, writing that “the failures and dashed expectations of the uprisings in Egypt and Syria, which quickly fell prey to regional and ideological agendas and violence, and Lebanon’s own tragic past, could make it an incubator for a new approach to governance that would allow Lebanon to realize its potential, rather than fall victim to the rhetoric and false promise of what was once known as the Arab Spring.”

Netanyahu has had more than one opportunity to conduct negotiations with the Palestinians his way, i.e., according to the “if they give” principle. Over the eight-year term of President Barack Obama and almost a year of the Trump presidency, we have heard over and over what the Palestinians must give and what they will not get in return: They have to recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, to allow Israelis to settle on Palestinian lands and to fight Hamas. In return, they will not get an independent state, they will not get an inch of the Israeli-annexed city of Jerusalem, they will not control the borders of their nonexistent state and, of course, discussion of returning a single Palestinian refugee to Israel is a nonstarter.

When late PLO chief Yasser Arafat conducted negotiations with Israel over a permanent peace agreement, the Israeli right said he was “not a partner” for peace because he was unwilling to pay the price for a deal with Israel. His successor, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, is also dubbed a non partner because he lacks the ability to pay this price. The pervasive view in Israel is that Arafat failed because he was too strong, and Abbas failed because he was too weak. Since Netanyahu has to divide his time between Cabinet meetings and meetings with police anti-corruption investigators, not only does he not want to pay the price of an agreement with the Palestinians, he is unable to do so.

When Netanyahu was at the peak of his power, he could have promoted a regional peace agreement under the auspices of the Obama administration, but he didn’t want to. With Netanyahu at the nadir of his power, he does not want to

The State of Israel is plummeting to the lowest ebb of corruption. We are the second most corrupt state in the West. The World Bank never wrote this about anyone (else) — not about my government, not Yitzhak Rabin’s, not Menachem] Begin’s … and if we continue this way, we will be No. 1.” All rights to this remark are reserved to Netanyahu in the above-mentioned 2005 press conference. They were said in reaction to the plan advanced by the late Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to pull Israeli troops and settlements out of the Gaza Strip, claiming it was designed to distract public opinion and shield the prime minister from police investigations of suspected corruption.

Netanyahu rightfully accused Sharon at the time of making concessions to the Palestinians without getting anything in return. Sharon pushed through a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza without seeking an agreement with neither the Palestinians nor the support of Arab states. An opportunity has now arisen to right that wrong. The diatribe Netanyahu directed at Sharon in 2005 is all the more apt now: “The Likud and the state need a leader who will stop the corruption and work to heal the rift among the people.”

On Dec. 6, in a meeting with government officials, ambassadors of Islamic countries and participants at the 31st International Conference on Islamic Unity, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei reacted to Trump’s move on Israel by saying, “Their announcement of Quds Jerusalem as the capital of Occupied Palestine Israel proves their incompetence and failure. In regards to Palestine, they are helpless and unable to achieve their goals. Victory is for the Islamic nation. Palestine will be free, and the Palestinian people will be victorious.”

Describing the USA and Israel as oppressors, Khamenei said, “The modern-day pharaoh is represented by the US, the Zionist regime and their accomplices in the region, who seek to create wars in our region, and this is plotted by the US.”

Khamenei continued, “Today, some enemies and individuals line up against the Islamic nation and the path of the Prophet Muhammad (SAS).” The Iranian leader, however, added that Tehran doesn’t seek war. “We have no conflict with Islamic nations. We seek unity. But in response to this willingness to forge unity, there are some who seek a war and their policies are based on war. In response, we admonish [them]; we use a language of advice; we rely on admonition. The destiny of the approach that some governments in the region take, as noted in the Quran, will be self-destructive,” the supreme leader said.

At the same meeting, President Hassan Rouhani joined Khamenei in condemning any attempt by the United States to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. “Today, the enemies have launched a new conspiracy against the Muslims and have targeted the great goal of the liberation of the Holy Quds,” said Rouhani. “The Holy Quds belongs to Muslims and Palestinians, and it is not a place in which anyone can stand against the thoughts and feelings of the people. This is a new adventure of the ‘global arrogance’ in the region.”

The Iranian president also said, “Although the Islamic Republic of Iran has responded to the call by the nations [seeking its aid] by supporting them, and wants to resolve problems through negotiation and has never agreed to changes in the borders in the region, it will not tolerate aggression against Islamic sanctities.”

Moreover, in a phone conversation with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Dec. 6, Rouhani urged Islamic countries to be united in the face of Trump’s “illegal, provocative and very dangerous decision.”

The Iranian president said, “Islamic countries and all the free countries of the world must act quickly against Washington’s move … to stop them.” Rouhani also said Tehran will participate in the extraordinary summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation

 

Trumps has thrown region into a circle of fire!

US President Donald Trump’s decision on Wednesday to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital has sparked strong Turkish condemnation.  President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday said the decision ignored UN resolutions and amounted to “throwing the region into a circle of fire.” He added: “Hey Trump, what are you trying to do? If Trump is saying, ‘I am powerful and right,’ he is wrong.”

Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran, among other nations condemned Trump’s dirty tricks.

Turkey slammed the announcement as irresponsible and illegal. “We condemn the irresponsible statement of the US administration… the decision is against international law and relevant UN resolutions,” Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu wrote on Twitter. Earlier, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had warned after a meeting with Jordan’s King Abdallah that the move would “play into the hands” of terror groups.

Erdogan has already called a summit meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Istanbul on Dec. 13 to discuss the issue.

Egypt’s Foreign Ministry said that Trump’s announcement did not change the city’s legal status. “The decision of the American president … constitutes a violation of decisions of international law and the United Nations charter,” said government spokesman Mohammed Momani. Mohammed ElBaradei, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Egypt’s former vice president who now lives in self-imposed exile, suggested Arabs do have options, including radically reducing the billions of Arab money flowing to America and a radical downsizing of diplomatic, military and intelligence relations with the US.

Sheikh Ahmed Al-Tayeb, Imam of Egypt’s Al-Azhar Mosque, said: “It incites feelings of anger among all Muslims and threatens world peace.” “The gates of hell will be opened in the West before the East,” he added.

 

Trump- Netanyahu Jerusalem mischief

Trump’s willingness to part with international consensus on such a sensitive issue drew increasingly urgent warnings from around the world. EU diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini said the decision could take the region “backwards to even darker times”.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said it would put the region in a “ring of fire”. Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was “deeply concerned”, calling for the Palestinians and Israel to renew negotiations.

Fascist Israel now is eager to decide the fate of former Ottoman Empire. Erdogan stated in a televised address that Turkey would consider breaking off ties with Israel altogether. President Erdogan has also invited leaders of OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) 57 member states, spread over four continents, to convene for an extraordinary summit in Istanbul on Dec. 13 over the Jerusalem issue.

Every US ruler has been a hard core Zionist and therefore never punished Israel for its crimes against humanity but only added more terror good to Israeli terror depots. The real test was the presidency of Barrack Obama -, a non white ruler with left background, but he did exactly what the Neocons and republican roguish elements suggested. Though he did not give free lunches to Netanyahu at White House as lavishly as his predecessors and now Trump have done, Obama also failed to contain Zionist fascism and allowed Israeli military pound upon the besieged Palestinians, including children.

Obama never sought to punish the Jewish criminals both in Israel and in USA.  Jewish community is among the riches guys in USA and it finances the political parties and reaps benefits when the regime comes into force. .

Turkey’s president Erdogan, who survived a terror coup attempt by anti-Islamic forces guided by USA-Israel-Germany, has threatened to sever ties with Israel if the USA recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state. Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned President Donald Trump against following through with electoral pledges to move the American embassy to the contested city. “Mr. Trump, Jerusalem is the red line of Muslims.”

Whatever the outcome, Erdogan seems eager to seize on the affair to shore up his credentials as a global defender of Islam even at the risk of further tension with the USA and putting relations with Israel back on ice. In a rare instance of solidarity with Erdogan, Turkey’s main anti-Islamic opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) has also aired its misgivings. Ozturk Yilmaz, a CHP lawmaker who briefed reporters after meetings with White House officials, said that he had conveyed his party’s concerns about a “new intifada” of Trump.

Before Erdogan and his Islam-based Justice and Development Party shot to single-party rule in 2002, Turkey and Israel were close military allies rooted through Washington. They held joint military drills; Israeli fighter pilots would train over the Konya plain in central Anatolia and Israeli tourists would flock to Turkey.

Erdogan began to steadily chip away at the once thriving alliance and relations collapsed altogether in 2010, when Israeli commandos stormed the Mavi Marmara, part of a flotilla of ships carrying aid to the Gaza strip in defiance of an Israeli fascist blockade. Nine Turkish activists, including Americans were killed in the ensuing violence. Relations were downgraded and ambassadors withdrawn. If a Jew or Israeli military kills an American that is not treated as a murder in White House!

It took six years for the rift Mavi Marmara to end, with plenty of nudging from the Barack Obama government.

Since Jews and US Zionists literally control US Congress, another row with Israel will only further diminish Turkey’s rapidly shrinking standing in Congress, where the imprisonment since October 2016 of American pastor Andrew Brunson on outlandish charges of seeking to overthrow the Turkish government has provoked an outcry.

The comments prompted swift reactions from Israeli leaders.  Minister Naftali Bennett, a senior partner in Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government, said, “Erdogan does not miss an opportunity to attack Israel. Israel will advance its goals, including the recognition of united Jerusalem as the capital of the state of Israel. It’s better to have a united Jerusalem than Erdogan’s sympathy.”

.

European reaction

Both Israelis and Palestinians claim Jerusalem as their capital and previous peace plans have stumbled over debates on whether and how to divide sovereignty or oversee holy sites.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said she will be calling US President Donald Trump about his plan to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital after her foreign secretary expressed concern. May told this to parliament, referring to Trump’s stance on Jerusalem, which has sparked international cries of alarm. “Our position has not changed. The status of Jerusalem should be determined as a negotiated settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians and Jerusalem should be a shared capital,” she said.

The British alarm follows stern criticism of Trump’s proposal from EU diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini. In recent months, Trump’s Jewish son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has been working with a small team to develop a new US proposal to revive peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.But Trump’s decision to pre-empt the process by backing Israel’s claim on Jerusalem has triggered a chorus of international concern, amid fears that it could sink any hope of new peace talks.

Not sure of what exactly Trumps wants and speaking later on the sidelines of the meeting alongside US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Johnson also said Trump’s imminent decision underlined the urgency of a new US-led Middle East peace plan. “But clearly this is a decision that makes it more important than ever that the long-awaited American proposals on the Middle East peace process are now brought forward and I would say that that should happen as a matter of priority.

The EU’s top diplomat pledged on Thursday to reinvigorate diplomacy with Russia, the US, Jordan and others to ensure Palestinians have a capital in Jerusalem after US President Donald Trump recognized the city as Israel’s capital.

The EU, a member of the Middle East Quartet along with the USA, the UN and Russia, believes it has a duty to make its voice heard as the Palestinians’ biggest aid donor and Israel’s top trade partner. “The European Union has a clear and united position. We believe the only realistic solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine is based on two states and with Jerusalem as the capital of both,” EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini told a news conference.  She said she would meet Jordan’s foreign minister on Friday, while she and EU foreign ministers would discuss Jerusalem with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Brussels on Monday. “The European Union will engage even more with the parties and with our regional and international partners. We will keep working with the Middle East Quartet, possibly in an enlarged format,” said Mogherini, citing Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, as well as Norway. “We remain convinced that the role of the United States … is crucial,” she said.

Mogherini, who also spoke to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, threw her weight behind Jordan’s King Abdallah, saying he was “a very wise man” that everyone should listen to as the custodian of the Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem. Trump’s decision stirred outrage across the Arab and Muslim world and alarm among US allies and Russia because of Jerusalem’s internationally disputed status, and the Palestinian group Hamas urged Palestinians to abandon peace efforts and launch a new uprising against Israel.

Mogherini stressed all 28 EU governments were united on the issue of Jerusalem and seeking a solution envisaging a Palestinian state on land Israel took in a 1967 war, but policy divisions within the bloc have weakened its influence. “This is the consolidated European Union position,” she said, saying EU foreign ministers made that clear to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Tuesday in Brussels.

Hurdles for the EU include its range of positions, ranging from Germany’s strong support for Israel to Sweden’s 2014 decision to officially recognize the state of Palestine. The EU is also perceived by some in Israel as being too pro-Palestinian, partly because of the EU’s long-held opposition to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, diplomats say.

In a joint statement with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, Abbas said “any measure tampering with the legal and historical status of Jerusalem is invalid” and warned Trump’s decision would “have dangerous repercussions”. In Lebanon, Hassan Nasrallah, the head of the powerful Shiite movement Hezbollah, called for a mass demonstration on Monday “to protest and denounce this American aggression”. Protests are also planned in Turkey and Malaysia.

Palestinian shops in east Jerusalem and the West Bank were largely shuttered and schools closed in answer to a general strike call.

Observation

The Palestinians want the eastern Jerusalem as the capital of their future state. Israel seized Arab east Jerusalem in the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it in a move never recognised by the international community. Maybe, Israel wants to take over Jerusalem, since God had never gifted that land to Jews who are now worst criminals world know, and later bargain for major portion of Jerusalem- that the  colonist and imperialist policy USA knows well.

The international community does not recognize the ancient city Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, insisting the issue can only be resolved in negotiations. Several peace plans have unraveled in the past decades over the issue of how to divide sovereignty or oversee holy sites in Jerusalem. This point was reiterated by UN chief Antonio Guterres, who stressed his opposition to “any unilateral measures that would jeopardize the prospect of peace”.

Trump also kicked off the process of moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem — another campaign promise dear to US evangelical Christian and right-wing Jewish voters. By this decision, America became a very small nation, a small minded country, like Israel, like Bhutan, any small country in the world. His predecessors had made the same pledge, but quickly reneged upon taking office.

Trump’s move left many angry US allies struggling to find a diplomatic response, with an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council set for Friday.

Trump’s decision may have various consequences. It could throw the Middle East policy of the US into a profound crisis, derail the personal relationship between Erdogan and Trump, and create an opportunity for spoilers.

The surprise action of Trump anticipates a major change in Erdogan’s perception of Trump, only time will tell whether the latter’s decision will galvanize regional cooperation against it. The day before Trump announced his decision, Ankara warned that recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital could prompt Turkey to cut diplomatic ties with Israel.

Thousands across Turkey took to the streets and demonstrated in front of the US consular and embassy buildings.

Trump’s decision has further strained US-Turkish and Turkish-Israeli relations.  In particular, Turkish-Israeli relations are likely to deteriorate if violence breaks out in Palestine, and if Israel responds in a heavy-handed manner. If the Turkish government had any intention of further improving relations with Israel prior to this decision, now it will face public sensitivity and pressure.

Turkey should manage this process via a multilateral framework. Given the wide international rejection of this issue, Turkey should build on this and not reduce it to a Muslim matter.

 

Advertisements
Featured

Russia-Africa Ties: Kremlin for a Mideast Meet – -By Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Russia-Africa Ties: Kremlin for a Mideast Meet -By Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

 

1.

 

 

A continent not known for any extra energy resources, Africa has been ignored by neo-imperialist USA and European states who other wise speak about lack of “democracy” and seek “regime changes” for advancing their resources goal don’t bother about democracy and regime issues in Africa. But China and Russia are making diplomatic efforts invest in Africa for profits taking into account the cheap labour and raw materials in the region.

 

 

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev embarked on a four-day African tour on 23 June, covering Egypt, Nigeria, Angola and Namibia. Beginning with a visit to pro-West Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for talks on economics and politics particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the disputed Iranian elections, Medvedev is scheduled to have a hectic time. Medvedev’s trip appears focused on helping Russian companies gain additional access to the continent’s natural resources wealth. The president arrived in Egypt on 23 June, and then goes on to. The main focus is on key Russian export strengths, especially energy resources and nuclear power. His visit comes at a time when Russia is trying to strengthen its global, strategic role.

 

President Medvedev, in his first official visit to Africa, and the first by a Russian head of state for more than three years has met his Egyptian counterpart, Mubarak, in Cairo at the start of a four-day trip to Africa. Russia’s economic and trade ties, as well as the Middle East peace process, were expected to be high on the agenda in talks between Medvedev and Mubarak. Medvedev is due to sign a nuclear energy deal in Egypt, which is Russia’s top trading partner in the continent. He will later visit Nigeria, Namibia and Angola, where he will seek to promote Russian business interests, particularly in the energy sector.

Medvedev also seeks to rekindle the Soviet Union’s once-close ties with Egypt, which have been complicated recently by a dispute over the quality of Russian grain exports. Last month, Egypt declined to accept Russian grain after it said a 137,000-ton shipment contained an excess of insects and seeds. The Federal Phytosanitary Inspection Service, Russia’s agriculture watchdog, consequently rejected 168 tons of Egyptian oranges in the port of Novorossiysk after finding a large number of Mediterranean fruit flies in a shipment, but Russian Foreign Ministry officials said the grain dispute would not hurt relations.

 

 

Egypt is the world’s eighth-largest LNG exporter, but it wants to meet rising local demand before committing to any new export deals. The presidents have plenty to discuss, particularly economic ties that comprised just 0.3 percent of Russia’s overall foreign trade in the first four months of 2009. Energy tops the agenda, as both Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko and Rosatom chief Sergei Kiriyenko are accompanying Medvedev. Rosatom, the state nuclear corporation, is planning to sign a deal in Egypt that would allow it to bid for the right to build the country’s first nuclear power station and to explore for uranium. Gazprom has expressed interest in investing in Egypt and Nigeria, both members of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum. The group, which also includes Russia and Iran, is scheduled to hold its next meeting on June 30 in Doha, Qatar. Talks were held with Mahmud Latif, chairman of the Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company, in December to discuss opportunities for Gazprom to join exploration and production projects there, including buying into Egypt’s two liquefied natural gas plants.

 

 

The visit comes on the heels of U.S. President Barack Obama’s well-received visit to Cairo earlier this month. But the situation in the region has already shifted, rocked by the mass protests, engineered by the US/UK-inspired opposition, over the Iranian presidential election, making Medvedev’s visit to the regional power broker “extremely timely”. At the same time, there is uneasiness in the relationship now; thousands of Russian students travel to Egypt to pursue Islamic studies and often “come back as radical Islamists”. Russians feel it is necessary for the countries to coordinate actions in preventing their radicalization. Thirty Russian citizens were detained in Egypt earlier this month during a police document check at a Cairo university. Four Chechens were deported to Russia last week despite concerns for their safety, and one of them, the son of a rebel leader, has not been seen since arriving at a Moscow airport.

 

 2.

 

Just last week, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev chaired three international summits, including SCO and the first meeting of the leaders of the so-called Bric developing countries involving Brazil, Russia, India and China.  At Bric meet in Russia, Dmitry Medvedev said that reserve currencies, including the dollar, “have not managed to perform their functions. Both Russia and China have questioned the role of the dollar in the world’s economy, leading to speculation that Bric might be considering the creation of a new global reserve currency. As the global recession bites, the four Bric nations are showing a growing willingness to work together and called for a bigger say in the global financial system.

 

 

Despite the relatively modest $600 million in trade from January to April, Russian grain exports and Egypt-bound tourists make it Moscow’s biggest economic partner on the trip. Medvedev and Mubarak signed five bilateral agreements in the spheres of security, justice, environment, culture and information. Russia and Egypt have already signed an accord in March 2008 on nuclear co-operation, possibly opening the way for Russia to construct nuclear power stations in the country. The first reactor, on the Mediterranean coast, will be constructed at a cost of more than $1.5bn (£750m). The Kremlin said: “The signing of an agreement on a strategic partnership between Russia and Egypt will become the central event of the Cairo summit.” Following talks, Mubarak said he supported Russia’s proposal for an international conference in Moscow on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. The Kremlin declined to provide additional information on the trip. Spokespeople at the Egyptian, Nigerian and Angolan embassies in Moscow said they could not comment on the meetings. So, Russia is taken very seriously.
In Nigeria, Medvedev is expected to focus more on energy. After his two-day visit to Egypt, Medvedev heads to Nigeria, where Russia’s powerful gas giant, Gazprom, wants to secure contracts to build pipelines. In particular, the company is interested in the proposed Trans-Saharan pipeline, which would deliver Nigerian gas to Europe.  Gazprom was picked by Nigeria as one of 15 companies in April to be core investors in the exploration and production of its gas reserves, the world’s seventh-largest. In September, Gazprom and the state-owned Nigerian National Petroleum Company signed an agreement to look for joint projects to develop gas fields and transport the fuel. Gazprom also signed a memorandum of understanding with NNPC in April to analyze three oil blocks there for possible exploration. An agreement in Nigeria, which would allow the countries to cooperate in nuclear energy, will be signed.

After Nigeria, Medvedev will head southwest to Namibia, where he is scheduled to arrive Wednesday evening. In 2007, VTB, Viktor Vekselberg’s Renova Group and Tekhsnabexport, or TENEX, a unit of Rosatom’s Atomenergoprom holding for civilian nuclear assets, created a joint venture to produce uranium there. Representatives of uranium miner Atomredmetzoloto, another Rosatom unit, will be going to Namibia. The company established a joint venture with VTB and Russian private equity firm Arlan last year to explore uranium deposits in western Namibia. The Russian president has meetings arranged with well-known African figures, including Namibia’s founding father, Sam Nujoma, as well as a safari trip. The Namibia-Russia Intergovernmental Commission on Trade and Economic Cooperation is overseeing the new business partnership.

 

Medvedev’s last stop was Angola, Namibia’s northern neighbor, where Alrosa has a diamond branch in the capital, Luanda. The state diamond monopoly said in April that it was pulling out of its joint venture in Angola following the collapse of the world diamond market. Alrosa has also cut production in Russia, where state depository Gokhran has been buying all of the company’s output until prices recover.

 3.

 

Medvedev’s visit is only the second time a Russian president has traveled to sub-Saharan Africa. Former president and Russia’s strong man Vladimir Putin visited South Africa and Morocco in 2006, and he also met with Mubarak in Cairo in 2005. The long-serving Egyptian president elicited a frown from then-President Putin on his most recent visit to Moscow, in March 2008, when he joked that he saw “few differences” between him and President-elect Medvedev.
President Dmitry Medvedev while in Egypt on his Mideast tour said a Middle East peace conference before the end of 2009 would be convened a move backed by Egypt. Russia, which had proposed such conferences in the past but vould noy hold any so far, is a member of the Quartet of Middle East negotiators, along with the EU, the USA and the UN. Medvedev said after talks with Egyptian President Mubarak: “We paid special attention to Middle East issues. We highly appreciate efforts by the Egyptian president to create an atmosphere of trust and cooperation in the region,” He said at a joint news conference in Cairo that the Moscow Middle East conference, which they plan to hold before the end of the year, will also contribute to achieving this goal.
Outside the Islamic world, Russia is one among a few nations that support Hamas or, at least don’t oppose their genuine claims. Moscow is the only quartet member talking to Hamas, the group that controls Gaza but which is snubbed by Israel and the West. Yasser Abed Rabbo, aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, said, “We welcome the holding of an international conference in Moscow. But before it can go ahead, there must be real improvements.” This included stopping Israeli settlement activity on Palestinian land and an Israeli commitment to a two-state solution.

 

The Palestinians, like Egypt and other Arab states, have dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conditional proposal for a demilitarized Palestinian state. Medvedev’s trip to Egypt comes less than three weeks after U.S. President Barack Obama visited Cairo. Fascist Israel says it “would, in principle, agree to attend, provided, of course, that “anti-peace elements” such as Hamas and Hezbollah are not invited.” Israel seeks no peace in the region and hence the fascist leadership promotes state terrorism in Palestine, each time they invade, killing innocent Palestinians whose lands they occupy.  

  

Post-script

 

 

Obviously, the Medvedev’s African visit is part of a bid to bolster Russia’s global role. The countries he was visiting are rich in natural resources. Rosneft, the largest Russian oil company, whose chief is joining the delegation accompanying Medvedev, has announced its intention to expand its African operations. The final two countries on Medvedev’s itinerary, Namibia and Angola , present new opportunities for Russian corporations in the spheres of diamonds, metals, hydrocarbons and uranium. Alrosa , Russia ‘s state diamond corporation has worked in Angola for almost two decades. It has stakes in two existing joint ventures, and wants to explore for diamonds and diversify its holdings in energy. Russian companies have technical licences to prospect for uranium in Namibia, where energy, uranium reserves and tourism present potentially rich pickings.

 

Egypt has become the center of diplomatic exercises by big and medium powers on account of its proactive role in the strangled Palestine issue. Egypt mediates between Palestine and Israel, on the one hand, and Hamas and Fatah, on the other. Leaders of USA, Palestine, Israel keep flocking to Cairo for diplomatic adventures to resolve the crisis in Mideast by establishing – and already much delayed- Palestine state. Perhaps no other international issue has brought together so many times to discus the same issue without any real outcomes Palestine issue has been and the cause is the stubborn Zionist regime to black any peace move to force the Israelis to surrender the ands and sovereignty to the Palestinians. Russia is also making its “legitimate’ bid to convene a peace meet on Mideast. Last year a proposal was mad by the Kremlin only to be shelved by Russia for unknown reasons.

 

 

The political dimension of Medvedev’s trip has not been stressed by Moscow. Instead, Russian businessmen have accentuated the potential for making money. They acknowledge just how far Russia has fallen behind the major investors in Africa, particularly China. The volume of trade between Russia and the African countries remains paltry. For example, the Russian Academy of Sciences estimates that trade with Nigeria is worth $300m annually – as opposed to China’s $11bn. Today, in terms of influence, Russia lags far behind China and the US – not just in Egypt but right across the African continent, where it once had considerable influence. As the battle for the world’s energy and mineral resources gathers pace, that weakness is one that Medvedev will be keen to address. Medvedev headed for Africa aware that Russia is far behind Western and Chinese companies when it comes to securing a share of the continent’s natural wealth.

 

It is all part of what the Kremlin believes should be a truly global role for Russia, in keeping with what Moscow calls a multi-polar world, with several strong regional spheres of influence. The Africa trip is in continuation of Russia’s efforts possibly to forge an international coalition to face the unipolarity move of US-led west. The Soviet Union’s ties with Africa were political and ideological. The continent was a key battleground in the stand-off between East and West, the battles fought most often by proxy. Russia’s relations with Africa declined so quickly when the Soviet Union collapsed. Now a newly-assertive Russia is trying to bolster a global role, often in regions far from its own borders. Most Russians believe both Putin and Medvedev would lead Russia back to the era of Soviet glory making the nation a real super power to promote real equality at home and to effectively challenge the unilateralism of neo-imperialism. 

  ———————–

Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Independent Researcher in International Affairs, The only Indian to have gone through entire India, a fraud and terror nation,
South Asia.

Indian Hindutva objections to Muslim divorce practice: Is Modi- government really sincere about the “fate” of Indian Muslim women?

 

Indian Hindutva objections to Muslim divorce practice: Is Modi- government really sincere about the “fate” of Indian Muslim women?

– Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

_____

 

[“In order to prove that Indian regime indeed cares for Indian women Muslims, a minimum of 20% seats in academic institutions and jobs must be reserved for Muslim women. Also a minimum of 10% seats in the parliament and state assemblies should be reserved for Muslim women and there should at least be one women judge in every court of India”. That is the real empowerment of Muslim women in India which would make difference in community andantino at large”].

 

For Hindu politicians in Indian political outfits, Hinduism perhaps is a source and cause for instant and perpetual entertainment. As the majority community they can play as much as they like. Muslims cannot have any serious objections. But when the Hindutva leaders using Hindutva as a cheap political resource use Islam also like that for entertainment purposes, we have serious objection to that nonsense. The Congress-BJP duo that fights for power should not trespass the Islamic territories by misusing some senseless Muslim individuals.

Indian national political outfits, particularly the Congress and BJP- the former and incumbent misrulers that promoted rampant corruption and crimes, continue to play dirty religiously communal politics for garnering their Hindu votes.

Indian government run by the BJP led Hindutva parties, on the strength of Shi’a sect of Islam that foolishly fights Sunni sect, is on its way to make Islam irrelevant possibly by ban it altogether after creating problems for the latter.

The BJP is keen to get the anti-Islam issue Triple Talaq passed in the parliament to show to the Hindu voters that Triple Talaq has been imposed on Muslims in order to keep the Hindu voters in good humors.

Triple Talaq

Qur’an terms nikah or marriage ‘mithaqan ghaliza’, a strong agreement. Divorce is not  a good thing.

Women in Islam are the most protected female population on earth but the anti-Islamic forces try to disrupt the tranquility and make the women vulnerable external pressures. The venomous RSS-BJP duo and their secret Hindutva ally Congress, among others have recently “discovered” that Islam in India is against not only Islamic women but even their own religious women.

Hindutva forces have been at work for quite some time to tarnish the image of Islam and target Indian Muslims and with power in hands thanks to the Muslim community in India,  they now go all out to do maximum harms to them.  They have several cases in Indian courts seeking to support Hindutva ideology and punish the Muslims who do not support the RSS-BJP.

This is misinformation spread deliberately by the Hindutva media lords to insult Islam as a terrorist religion without any humanness and threaten Indian Muslims – both male and female.

Injustice is committed to women in India is not by Muslim men but by the ruling regime that targets Islam and Muslims. As such the RSS=BJP seeking to destroy all mosques in the country cannot be “well-wishers” of either men or women of Islam.

The Islamic law Triple talaq requires a long procedure of divorce   if the partners have developed strong hatred toward each other and onetime simple Talaq is not enough but three times of talaq needed to obtain a divorce so that the partners have enough time and opportunities to reverse their rigid stance and come back to live together, avoiding unnecessarily separated lives against the wishes of Islam.

There is clear misunderstanding among non-Muslims about the message of Triple Talaq and some of the anti-Islamic people argue in TV channels that Muslims just say instantly the Triple Talaq once or twice or thrice and end the marriage abruptly.

That is not the case. If there is a problem with a married couple, the concerned families and community intervenes and find a amicable solution. They meet regularly, discuss the issue and finally decides whether divorce is good enough for them.   The husband does not pronounce Triple talaq instantly and end the problem.  That doesn’t happen in Islam, may such “instant” thing happen in other communities.

Islam honors and cares for the sanctum of marriages and ties to save the marriage even if the couple has serious misunderstandings and crises. Like in any other religion, some Muslim men could be dangerous guys and even criminals and could harm wives but that is a criminal case the court should solve it.

Preferably Triple talaq process could have some days between them to be able to pronounce the final talaq by the relatives and their common well wishers.

There could be instances of deviations and such cases should be dealt sternly with but using one of two such wrong instances, if at all,  to negate the triple talaq philosophy is totally foolish and to fanatic.

Duplicates do not become originals. Those who try to disturb the religious laws cannot pretend to be the well wishers of Muslim women. Only Islam and Muslim men alone can provide real security to Muslim women.

Triple talaq is already declared by Supreme Court as null and void. It has become the law of the land. Then what is the need for any further legislation on that?

 

Why are they against Islam and Muslims?

It is a sheer habit. By nature and in essence the Hindutva people fear and hate Islam- unnecessarily. They should fear God and not Islam. If they are god fearing, they won’t hate Islam or any other religion. That is a fact.

Islam is the most humane religion on earth guided by the Holy Quran but the foes of Islam across the globe try find faults with Islam and concerning Islamic faith.

The anti-Islamic forces and media lords y always work to prove that Islam is a terrorist religion where women do not have any right to live in male dominated society and as if every Muslim woman commits suicide due to restrictions imposed by men on their “carefree movements”.  And so much so they behave as if more and more Hindu women and ladies from other religions come to Islam to fill the gap.

Is that so?

Mere sympathy does not bring adherents to Islam but true faith in Islam does that.

The Hindutva forces not only plan secret communal agendas to garner Hindu votes for the Hindutva parties, but worse, also now try to divide the Muslims community along nonsensical lines by declaring that Women in Indian Islam do not have freedoms to enjoy life as they wish. .

Today, the BJP can pass any resolution in both houses of the parliament. BJP has as per its plan has passed the triple talaq bill in the Lok Sabha.

Are these foes of Islam really worried about Muslim women? If so why are they not doing anything about the plight of their own women?

RSS dictates Indian Parliament

As a “historic” Indian anti-Muslim step, the lower house of Indian parliament (Lok Sabha) has passed the contentious bill making instant triple illegal with up to three years in jail for the husband, a development hailed by the government as “historic”.

Congress ad its close allies rejoice at the BJP‘s bold step. The bill was passed after the House rejected a string of amendments moved by Asaduddin Owaisi from the AIMIM and Bhartruhari Mahtab from the BJD. MPs from the RJD, AIMIM, BJD, AIADMK and All India Muslim League opposed the bill, calling it arbitrary in nature. One of Owaisi’s amendments saw 241 voting against it, and only two voting in its favour.

With BJP MPs behaving like owners of the parliament, huge numerical superiority in the lower house of the Parliament, it was a foregone conclusion that the BJP will be able to get the bill passed without a hitch. It should also pass the Rajya Sabha hurdle as well, given the fact that the numbers in the upper house of Parliament also favor the saffron camp. PM Modi is engaged consensus to target Muslims in getting the Bill passed by Upper House while Congress is ready for that. . .

The BJP government argues that the tradition is already illegal in three out of the four Islamic schools of thought. The talaq-e-bidat is sanctified only in the Hanafi jurisprudence. The Hanafi scholars in the North India made it a prestige issue without deliberating it with ulema of other schools of thoughts and take a reasonable stand on the issue that has finally resulted in a bill that makes the Muslim men in the country a very vulnerable target.

Criminalizing something that didn’t take place?  The BJP that has used the issue of instant triple talaq deftly for making political gains, has simply gone too far in its zest to make the entire Muslim community look obscurantist and backward. Many among Muslims are looking at the latest bill as a tool to divide the Muslim community. Others claim that the bill was unnecessary as it criminalizes an act that cannot be committed due to it being illegal. Faizan Mustafa, a renowned legal expert says, “The purpose of criminal law is to forbid and prevent conduct that unjustifiably and inexcusably inflicts or threatens substantial harm to individual or public interests. Since the Supreme Court has set aside triple talaq, it no longer dissolves the marriage, and thus, causes no harm at all. It no more threatens the security and well-being of society…

The BJP and its media lords clam with the Bill the life and status of Indian Muslim women have been upgraded and they gain full justice.

How?

Will Indian Muslim women get something extra from Indian regime so as to ensure their safety and security?

Every aspect of Islam is much better than in other religions. Some problems crop up in rich Muslim families where women seek more freedoms that men have. In fact some women want to be totally free and their husbands are scared of telling them something unpleasant for the sake of unity of families. .

The Bill

The BJP government is determined to intrude into the personal lives of individuals with anew Bill on Muslim women. It aims at making every citizen to behave as the RSS wants and dictates.

Parliament has to decide whether the victims of triple talaq have fundamental rights or not, government said, after some Opposition members claimed it violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

With the Supreme Court making triple talaq illegal, there was actually no need to bring the bill, criminalize something that cannot be done and try to take credit for passing the Bill if not improving the lot of the Indian Muslim women.

The BJP claims it wants to ensure justice for the Muslim women in the country. Nonetheless, the whole idea of criminalizing triple talaq, despite the fact that the country’s apex court had struck down the tradition, seems rather very strange.

Union Law Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, while speaking during the discussion in the Parliament said, “My appeal is that this bill should not be seen through the eyes of political parties, religion or as a vote bank. This is for the “honor” of our sisters and our daughters. This is for their ”dignity and justice”. I want to follow the legacy of this house by seeing that India stands up for its Muslim “sisters and daughters” whose brothers and sons  the RSS criminals  kill by lynching for eating beef or not fowling ‘ghar Wapsi’ law. .

Fulfilling its electoral promise, the BJP-led government moved swiftly to draft the legislation following a Supreme Court order in August, striking down the practice as unconstitutional. The apex court asked the government to come up with legislation within six months. “It is a historic day. We are making history today,” Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad told the House after tabling the Bill. A major bill restricting the Islamic practices to suit the common code was passed in Lower House within a day and it would go for the approval of the Upper house.

The Bill must provide justice, security and honour to women. The bill, its framing was faulty and flawed. if the proposed law makes the practice of instant triple talaq illegal and void, how a person can be jailed for pronouncing ‘talaq-e-biddat?’

Members from Congress and the Left were not allowed to speak on the Bill as they had not given notice. SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav was also seen opposing the Bill. RSP leader Ramachandran said: “The main apprehension is the over enthusiasm of the NDA government led by the BJP. There is a cloud of suspicion.

AIMIM supremo Asaduddin Owaisi said Parliament lacks the legislative competence to pass the law as it violated fundamental rights. Taking a dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Owaisi said that while the Bill talks only about Muslim women being abandoned, the government should also worry about nearly 20 lakh women of various religions who are abandoned by their husbands, “including our bhabhi from Gujarat.”

BJP government is least bothered about what the Muslim MPs say or do not say. Owaisi MP slammed Law minister Prasad who as Union law minister has failed to discriminate between civil law and criminal law. Not a single Muslim country has a penal provision. Triple talaq is a form of verbal and emotional abuse,” he said.

Owaisi alleged that the Centre was giving an advantage to the offenders and was not helping the situation. “Your dream of having more Muslims in jail will be achieved. Please send the Bill to the Standing Committee. You are forcing a Muslim woman to file an FIR against her husband. You are giving a handle to the Muslim man, who will have 90 days. If you are true to your intentions, create a corpus of 1,000 crore,” he said.

Though Congress supported the Bill, senior leader Salman Khurshid, a former law minister, said the proposed law is an intrusion into the personal lives of individuals, and would bring the civil issue of divorce into the realm of criminal law.

Islam wants Triple Talaq not in one go or instantly but in a process of several meetings while the BJP/RSS supporters might want just one Talaq in one go instantly!

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill would only be applicable on instant triple talaq or ‘talaq-e-biddat’. It gives power to the victim to approach a magistrate seeking “subsistence allowance” for herself and minor children. A victim can also seek the custody of her minor children from the magistrate.

Religious leadership to be blamed there is no denying that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 is a watershed moment for the Muslims in the Independent India. The instant triple talaq, also called talaq-e-biddat is something that does not go against the very spirit of marriage. But the process should be followed.

The RSS and BJP are in a hurry as if they won’t survive next general poll. . The fundamental principle of good legislation is the art of conducting men to the maximum of happiness, and to the minimum of misery. A principal source of errors and injustice in legislation are false ideas of its utility. The Lok Sabha debates clearly demonstrated that government has unrealistic hopes from this bill.

The triple talaq shouldn’t be criminalized as there was no need to do so. “Inconsequential triple talaq, thus, should not be criminalized. The primary purpose of criminal law is ‘prevention’ of an act; if non-criminal means can succeed in preventing this act, criminal law need not be used.

The BJP law minister says if the Muslim women don’t have justice, this house will give them justice. The “instant” triple destroys the very sanctity of this agreement by unilaterally allowing the man to end the marriage at the spur of the moment. But who does triple Talaq instantly? – Not Muslims as they discuss in the community before taking a decision.

While many were not happy, especially regional and Muslim parties, the Congress said it supports the Bill but with strengthened safeguards for divorced Muslim women. It asked for the Bill to be sent to a Standing Committee, instead of being decided on Thursday itself. Lalu Prasad would have protested vehemently but he is in jail.

Soon after the introduction of the Bill was approved, Prasad wondered whether Parliament could remain silent if the fundamental rights of women were being trampled. He said the legislation was not aimed against any religion but was framed to provide a sense of justice, security and honor to women. He said the law was required as even after the Supreme Court had struck down the practice of ‘talaq-e-biddat’ in August. He claimed that as recently as today, a woman in Rampur reported that she was given “instant” triple talaq by her husband for getting up late. That is absolute nonsense.

 

Why is much ado about nothing?

What exactly the Indian government and judiciary talk about “Triple talaq”?

Since the Supreme Court’s judgment declaring valid a recent marriage of Hindu girl and Muslim boy that took place in Kerala, the Hindutva forces have been on their dirty toes to take revenge on Muslims.

A marriage should be saved at all cost and separation could be recommended only when the partners cannot live together any long.

Does the BJP really the savior of Muslim women? Please don’t laugh! The saffron party has been gloating over the fact that it has been able to bring the law criminalizing triple talaq and pass it from Lok Sabha. The Union Law Minister has said that the government wants to improve the lot of the Muslim women in the country. Does the party really want to improve the condition of the Muslim woman by sending the husband, usually the lone bread winner in a household to the jail for three years?

The instant triple talaq may have destroyed the lives of a few Muslim women who actually suffered from it, but this was taken care of by the Supreme Court verdict making the practice null and void. If the sole bread winner of the family goes to jail for committing a crime that cannot really take place, who will look after the wife and children.

The woman, following the apex court verdict will remain his wife despite him pronouncing triple talaq. If the BJP was really eager to see the Indian Muslim women develop, as the Union Law Minister so grandly claimed, his government should have passed legislation providing special provision of reservation for the Muslim women in job and education. By ensuring that the sole bread winner of the family goes to jail, the BJP government at the center has hurt the Muslim woman the most, whose interests it claims it wanted to safeguard

BJP-Congress duo must debate the divorce in vogue in other religions.

Triple Talaq in Islam is the best opportunity for the partners to decide on the issue without hurry. Triple talaq need not be done  in one go and can be done on different days one after another and only third  talaq  could  enable for a divorce to come into force only if both agree.

What is the objection from enemies of Islam? Why do the RSS-BJPP target the Triple talaq to get more Hindu votes?

Islam insists on a careful Triple Talaq allowing enough time fro the married couple to decide their separation if the married partners cannot live any more together. Once divorced, the partners cannot rejoin just like if they  feel for their mistake of divorce  that but for that to happen  the women must get  married again to another man before the first husband takes her back.

So, the Triple talaq is a safe method of taking correct decision.

But the RSS/BJP and their Hindu boys and girls seek just one Talaq and be free to enjoy life “in full”. They want a “single talaq’ pronouncement in secrecy on the bed itself to end the marriage bond. Secretly

Muslims want triple talaq only when the men and women decide they cannot live together.

Three times would give them an opportunity to think thrice before deciding on the break up. He or she can say no after Talaq twice.

But Hindus want just one talaq and break the marriage.

Foolish people argue foolishly because they are majority and the media are theirs.

How can the government improve the lot of the Muslim women in the country?

In order to prove that Indian regime indeed cares for Indian women Muslims, a minimum of 20% seats in academic institutions and jobs must be reserved for Muslim women. Also a minimum of 10% seats in the parliament and state assemblies should be reserved for Muslim women and there should at least be one women judge in every court of India. ”. That is the real empowerment of Muslim women in India which would make difference in community andantino at large.

Will the patriotic people who claim to be interested in India’s over all development do it now? Or let them shut their wide communal mouth. They need to kill or insult Muslims to get the Hindu votes.

One of the worst embodiments of Hindutva is the criminalized dowry system that has harmed not only most Hindu women but also Muslim women, epically poor sections of lower strata of population.

Some of the insane practices in Hinduism/Hindutva have negatively influence Muslim community. One of them is the dowry system considered to be the basis of their economy. Men ask and get huge sum along with cars, etc, as dowry to marry a girl.  Marriages have been halted and women committed suicide when some marriages stopped due to the non-payment of dowry money promised.

Most of Muslims are with poor background. Without enough sound economic backups, Muslim women dins difficulties in getting married. .

Maybe the PM Modi is not aware of such cruel practices but the Law minister should know it.

Indian parliament must end dowry menace that makes men parasitic worms. Will PM Modi take pity on Indian women who are the victims of deadly dowry system and the resultant crimes?

What is problem in passing law on the issue and save every woman from injustice in the country? These women certainly include Muslim women too.

But India is in a hurry to fix Muslim community and probably force them to become Hindus by changing their names. .

Why is Modi- Hindutva government worried only about Indian women?

It is a known fact that Indian regime and media lords hate Muslims and they want to fix Muslims and insult Islam.

Indian government is now busy fixing Indian Muslims by mischievously trying to hurriedly pass a law to cancel the Islamic Triple Talaq policy meant for save even a troubled marriage.

Now the BJP government wants to free Indian women from the clutches of men and society.

Some wild wolves are worried about the cows getting trenched in rains. Why?

Is that because of concerns for Islam or women?

Why?

With the backing from USA, Israel and other anti-Islamic forces, India actively pursues policies to target Muslim community, mosques, and its faith.

BJP is using Indian women to target men next Muslim men would used against  women afterworlds, police and military would be used to kill Muslims- both men and women , and children as well as Israelis doing in  occupied Palestine.

 

Observation

Will the regime guarantee jobs and economic status for Muslim women in India? Will India pass the Women Reservation Bill? Will India abolish dowry system as it badly affects poor Muslim women? Dowry system is bad for Islam and it is not practiced in Arab nations or other Muslim nations but only in India Muslim community suffers due to the dreadful dowry system. .

Since its independence from UK, India has actively pursued anti-Islamic path in a systematic manner and most political parties, especially Congress as a part of its own hidden anti-Islam policy supports the Hindutva designs secretly. After Ghar wapsi, Beef, lunching, etc now the RSS-BJP has touched a crucial issue of Islamic divorce practices. India claims Saudi Arabia has cleared the matter in favor of Indian Hindutva so that India could buy more oil format.

Like what the Hindutva minded Congress party did before, the  Modi led  BJP government is  also playing to the gallery of Hindutva lords by making politics  a mere entertainment in  the  country and  the parliament a forum to keep the Hindutva lords in good humors.  The process started as soon as BJP came to power in 2014 by defeating the communal Congress led NDA coalition.

Now that the Hindutva criminals are sure that Muslims would get back their legitimate Babri Mosque, they accelerate their ill designed agenda against Muslim community because they are in brute majority and many parties  support their misrule, Indian Parliament and state assemblies have their own  communalized Hindus, etc

The Triple talaq is one of the weapons of foes of Islam to target both Muslims and judiciary.  Clearly, the Congress BJP duo is secretly working to  defame Islam and ban even the Holy Quran by taking  the issue to  Hindutva led Parliament that would clear anything anti-Islam quickly even without  any debate.

Indian BJP government says they are worried about the “fate” Indian women but not in the true spirits and ease the plight of all Muslims under Hindutva rule and their status. In fact, they are least bothered about the plight of Hindu women but are keen only to insult Islam. Yes, some wild wolves are so much worried about the cows getting trenched in rains.

They say Indian Muslim women want freedom from husbands but, they argue, Muslim husbands do not let them leave them to do whatever they want to do on streets.

They want to make the West happy by saying that Islam is not a good religion but Hindutva and others are super religions offering too many freedoms to women to enjoy life freely…

Interestingly, the BJP India gives priority to Muslim women’s status rather the women reservation Bill hanging in the parliament for decades, affecting the Indian women in all respects. Indian polices on liquor-gambling laws concerning liquor and lottery sales etc have been harming women, including Muslim women. But neither the Congress nor its secret Hindutva ally BJP bothered to help the women who toil and suffer because of male dominations and their liquor behavior.

Strangely enough, of all formations, it is RSS-BJP, rather than the Congress party, that has come forward to protect the status and strength of Muslim women in India, making them lawfully independent of “dominant” Muslim men who impose their will on the weaker women.

RSS/BJP now has majority in the parliament and so they are pushing hard for targeting Islam and Indian Muslims Even in protecting the Muslim men and women of India has proven to be fanaticism.

Babri Mosque issue is still pending but Indian regime and judiciary are playing dirty politics with Muslims while Intelligence-media rods target Muslims and Islam so vulgarly so that the judiciary would be cowed down in favor of Hindutva criminalism. Now the Hindu parties and judiciary are quick to point fingers at the Muslim women in order to target Islam and Indian Muslims and Islam. .

Hindus and others would certainly rejoice at the Triple developments but those Muslims who also rejoice the BJP’s “care” for women in Islam should know that  these elements who pulled down  Bharatmata’s  historic Babri Mosque built by emperor Babur as part of Indian Islamic cultural assets , have  no reasons to do anything good for Muslims – male or female.

The proposed law was violative of personal laws and was a politically motivated move. Given the population of Muslims in the country, triple talaq cases were negligible. The BJP-RSS duo is unnecessarily taking gun to kill a mosquito. They have jeopardized the sanctity of the House.

Under the proposed law, instant triple talaq in any form — spoken, in writing or by electronic means such as email, SMS and WhatsApp — would be illegal and void. It will make instant talaq punishable by a jail term of up to three years and a fine, and would be a cognizable, non-bailable offence.

The Bill will now be sent to the Rajya Sabha for passage before it is forwarded to the President for signing it into law. The Bill’s prospects in the Rajya Sabha are uncertain as the government lacks majority and the Congress’ support for the Bill is conditional.

Tomorrow the BJP-Congress led Hindu forces would enact laws against Islam, Muslims, mosques etc.

The Congress-BJP governments that force Muslim employees to quit their hard earned jobs in order to possibly appoint Hindus in those  vacant  places and also refuses to give pension and other retirement benefits  as agreed by the  administrations, cannot be expected to be good to Muslim women.

At the national level, Indian regime pledged to rebuild the Babri Mosque  at the very site  where it stood for centuries as an important example of world cultural monuments and  Hindu-Muslim unity in the country has not been kept  either by the Congress  or BJP.  How can Muslims expect this hypocrite regime to upgrade in status and take care of women of Islam?

One has no ideas as what all left in the secret bags of RSS to be used against Indian Muslim and Islam. Devil moves in mysterious ways. One must wait for their next move.

India knows well as to how to divert the attention of the nation and world at large it can do that by enacting another bigger drama than demonetization. By passing a new “Muslim law”, the BJP government has possibly has vetoed any possibility of Muslims taking the case to the special benches of Apex Court.

Indian Parliament today with Hindutva majority with Hindutva minded Congress backup can pass any law. If the BJP decides to destroy every mosque parliament will pass it. If RSS wants to deny work for Muslims, that would be done and if they want to kill every Muslim or destroy the houses and shop of Muslims, Indian parliament would give its consent. So, the BJP-Congress duo can achieve anything they want in the parliament.

Triple Talaq gimmick is only the tip of the iceberg.

That is today’s Indian Hindu mindset that follows the USA-Israeli fanaticism as a part of Indian hate model.

——

Pakistan reacts sharply to Trump’s cheap comments!

Pakistan reacts sharply to Trump’s cheap comments!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

_____

 

 

Three issues should be explained right here about the deceptive US aid policy. First, it is a fact that USA gave some military aid to Pakistani aid as service charges for what Pakistani government and military did to boost the image of NATO in killing Muslims as terrorists.  Pakistani core media lords also painted the falsehood to promote US-Pakistani illicit relations targeting Islam.  For all services Islamabad did for Washington bosses have got the Islamic nation a so-called terrorist nation.  USA has made it so. Since USA has already got what it sought from Islamabad by coercion, now it criticizes and even insults its major non-NATO ally. So cool!

Second, USA does not give any free money to Pakistan or any other country, except its criminal child Israel in fascist suit. Generally, USA tells Pakistan that it would release so much money in kind for services rendered by Islamabad to NATO terrorist gang, but in order to claim it Pakistan must purchase US-Israeli terror goods worth double of the promised aid money. That is to say Pakistan is forced to buy their terror goods.

Third, Whatever USA has given to Pakistan is received from India for supporting its Kashmir and anti-Pakistan causes. So, USA just transfers the Indian money to Pakistan.

Issuing a tough warning to Pakistan as a New Year gift, US President Donald Trump in the midnight alleged that this South Asian nation has given America nothing but lies and deceit and has given safe haven to terrorists. “The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools,” Trump said in a strongly worded tweet.

 

Pakistan feels awfully insulted by USA after misusing Pakistan for its goals in order mainly to keep its funding agencies in India in good humours. “They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!” Trump said in his first tweet of the year.

These days, Trump’s rhetoric targets those that stopped serving the US interests.  Pakistan tops the list as it stopped killing Muslims to make Indo-US happy. India and Israel are the favourites of this global rogue who says things as his Jewish son in law suggests. .

However, this latest US nonsense is the strongest warning that has come from the US president. In his new South Asia Policy unveiled in August, Trump had called for tougher measure against Pakistan if it did not cooperates the US in its fight against terrorism.

The Trump government insists on Pakistani military to keep killing Muslims as Pakistan has killed much less than Afghanistan has achieved. Last week Trump announced the USA will deny Pakistan military aid amounting to $255 million as it expects Islamabad to take decisive action “against terrorists and militants on its soil”. “The United States does not plan to spend the $255 million in FY 2016 in Foreign Military Financing for Pakistan at this time”

A White House statement said: The President has made clear that the United States expects Pakistan to take decisive action against terrorists and militants on its soil, and that Pakistan’s actions in support of the South Asia Strategy will ultimately determine the trajectory of our relationship, including future security assistance, continues to review Pakistan’s level of “cooperation”.

US monsters are barking like wild wolves.

USA continues to bully Pakistan by using its terror aid.

Known for its open bluffing, USA tells one thing but does the opposite, premises huge sum but provides only a part of it in “kind” only if Pakistan spends equal amount on US-Israeli terror goods. The amount, $255 million, is left over from $1.1 billion aid earmarked for Pakistan in 2016, and which included non-military aid as well. It was cleared for handing over in August, just days before it would lapsed as unspent money.

Pakistan delivered its rejoinder to US President Donald Trump’s “lies and deceit” tweet, telling the USA to stop blaming Pakistan for its failures in Afghanistan. The response was also delivered on Twitter, where President Trump’s started the New Year, by slamming Pakistan for playing US leaders for “fools’ and providing safe havens to terrorists.”No more,” he tweeted. The US had given Pakistan 33 billion dollars in aid in the last 15 years and yet, he said, Pakistan had “given us nothing but lies and deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools

President Trump did not specify the aid that his administration would stop but the assertion comes in the backdrop of reports that his administration was considering withholding $255 million in already delayed aid to Pakistan.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif promptly said that his government was preparing a response that “will let the world know the truth”. Later, according to Pakistan’s Dawn newspaper, Pakistan’s Foreign Office summoned the US Ambassador but there was no word from the foreign office on the agenda of this sudden meeting. On Twitter, Pakistan’s Defence and Information ministers hit back at Donald Trump.

Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khurram Dastgir-Khan said the US had received for “free” “land and air communication, military bases and intelligence cooperation that decimated Al-Qaeda “for 16 years “but they have given us nothing but invective and mistrust. They overlook cross-border safe havens of terrorists who murder Pakistanis,” he added.

Marriyum Aurangzeb, Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, chipped in. Firing back at the Trump administration, she said there had been no ambiguity about Pakistan’s “unmatched sacrifices” and the United States should not shift the blame for its failure in Afghanistan on Pakistan.

Later, media reports cited Pakistan Foreign Minister’s interview to Geo television in an Urdu-language interview that made the same point. He asked the USA to hold “its own people accountable for its failures in Afghanistan”, claiming that all funds from the USA had been “properly audited” and that “services were rendered.”

US-Pakistani ties have chilled steadily under Trump, who seeking to showcase the US military prowess to the world and threaten weak nations in August declared that “Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence, and terror”.

Of course, one country which is enjoying the tussle between the USA and Pakistan, former secret allies without any real ideological base, cooperating on killing the Muslims in Afghanistan and Pakistan proper, is its nuclear neighbour India that wants to kill the Kashmiris and take away entire Jammu Kashmir from Kashmir.

Already, destabilized, injured and insulted, Pakistan now needs regain full and complete sovereignty from USA and NATO and should purse a policy that keep both USA and India in check.

There could be many pro-US nuts among Pakistani parasites indoors and in USA that would ask the government to accept the insult and warnings as an Islamic fate and just do exact what the US monoesters seek from Islamabad..

Islamabad should take the Trumped warning seriously and end all military deals with it – let India fill the terror gap- and begin pursuing a bold Islamic foreign policy.

Islam doesn’t wish to see Muslim nations that behave slaves to anti-Islamic nations.

Once Islamabad becomes strong willed and self reliant, Americans would come again waging its long nasty tail.

Time is running out!

Persian Spring in Iran!

Persian Spring in Iran!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

_____

 

The crisis long expected in Iran has just struck, presumably as the enemies of Islam and Iran sought.

Upon their tremendous success in destabilizing Arab nations, the USA-Israel fascist twins try to make Arab Spring a Persian Spring as well by activating and accelerating unrest in Iran while Iranians think they are the same people who first destabilized Arab nations.

USA and Israel have succeeded in extending “Arab Spring” to Iran, making it a Persian Spring, killing many.

Israel has recently declared that “Israel and the United States have secretly signed a far-reaching joint memorandum of understanding providing for full cooperation to deal with Iran’s nuclear drive.” As part of the secret deal, both countries seek to put “steps on the ground” in order to attack Iran covertly. The secret deal was made on December 12 at the White House. Just a few days later, Trump tweeted that “Many reports of peaceful protests by Iranian citizens fed up with regime’s corruption and its squandering of the nation’s wealth to fund terrorism abroad. Iranian govt should respect their people’s rights, including right to express themselves.

In fact, Trump a heavy fellow perhaps thinks Netanyahu – and not himself – should receive a Nobel Peace Prize for brutally controlling the besieged Palestinians, killing even children in Palestine and he believes that Obama should not have got it.

Protests across Iran saw their most violent night as “armed protesters” tried to overrun military bases and police stations before security forces repelled them, killing 10 people, Iranian state television said. The demonstrations, the largest to strike Iran since its disputed 2009 presidential election, have seen five days of unrest across the country and a death toll of at least 13 with the slaying of a police officer announced late Monday.

The protests began in Mashhad over economic issues and have expanded to several cities, with some protesters chanting against the government and the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Hundreds of people have been arrested. Iranian state television aired footage of a ransacked private bank, broken windows, overturned cars and a firetruck that appeared to have been set ablaze. It said 10 people were killed by security forces during clashes Sunday night. “Some armed protesters tried to take over some police stations and military bases but faced serious resistance from security forces,” state TV said. In a later report, state TV said killed six people were killed in the western town of Tuyserkan, 295 kilometers (185 miles) southwest of Tehran, and three in the town of Shahinshahr, 315 kilometers (195 miles) south of Tehran.

Dictator Trump, who has been happily tweeting against Iranian government and in support of the protesters, continued into the New Year, describing Iran as “failing at every level despite the terrible deal made with them by the Obama Administration.” “The great Iranian people have been repressed for many years,” he wrote. “They are hungry for food & for freedom. Along with human rights, the wealth of Iran is being looted. “TIME FOR CHANGE”, but not in Israel and USA!

Many in Iran distrust and hate Trump because he has refused to re-certify the nuclear deal and his travel bans have blocked Iranians from getting US visas. Israeli Netanyahu, calling the protesters “brave” and “heroic,” said in a video posted to YouTube that the protesters sought freedom, justice and “the basic liberties that have been denied to them for decades.” He criticized the Iranian regime’s response to the protests and also chided European governments for watching “in silence” as the protests turn violent.

Late Monday, Iran’s semi-official Mehr news agency said an assailant using a hunting rifle killed a policeman and wounded three other officers during a demonstration in the central city of Najafabad, about 320 kilometers (200 miles) south of Tehran.  On Sunday, Iran blocked access to Instagram and the popular messaging app Telegram used by activists to organize.

President Hassan Rouhani acknowledged the public’s anger over the Islamic Republic’s flagging economy, though he and others warned that the government wouldn’t hesitate to crack down on those it considers lawbreakers. That was echoed by judiciary chief Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani, who urged authorities to confront rioters, state TV reported.”I demand all prosecutors across the country to get involved and the approach should be strong,” he said. Rouhani also stressed that Iran “has seen many similar events and passed them easily.”

The unrest now being witnessed in Iran reminds one of the history of British imperialism in Iran, inextricably linked to the D’Arcy concession, the creation of the Anglo-Persian (Iranian) Oil Company, and the infamous 1919 Anglo-Persian Agreement which effectively reduced Iran to the status of a British protectorate. .

In the anti-colonialist political milieu of the post-World War II scene in the developing world, the burgeoning conflict between Iranian nationalism and British oil interests takes concrete form.  the historical developments leading up to May of 1948, the tactics of the American and Israeli national security establishments up to the present moment in sustaining the notion of Eretz Yisrael, the genocidal deprivation of the legitimate political aspirations of the Palestinians, and the subterranean activities of the Israeli lobby worldwide, would unmask the same political and moral deficiencies inherent in what happened in Iran

USA and Israel are trying to revive the old system, which is regime change through subterfuge. But that will certainly prove difficult for both the United States and Israel because Russia is not going to stand on the sideline and watch Iran goes up in flame. In doing so, Israel and the United States are paying “Iranian” dissidents to shake the masses.

People across Iran took to the streets again on Sunday evening in defiance of a heavy presence of riot police and state warnings to stay away. Iranian authorities have threatened a crackdown against protesters and scrambled to block social media apps allegedly used to incite unrest as the biggest demonstrations in nearly a decade continued for a fourth day.

The demonstrations began over economic grievances on Thursday but have since taken on a political dimension, with unprecedented calls for the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to step down. Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, in his first comments about the protests, aired on national television on Sunday night, said “people have the right to criticize”, but said the authorities would not tolerate antisocial behavior. He said criticism was “different from violence and destroying public properties”.

The protests are the biggest in Iran since 2009, when demonstrators called for the removal of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president after what they regarded as his fraudulent re-election. Officials said they arrested at least 200 people during demonstrations in central Tehran on Saturday. It was not clear how many were arrested in the provinces, which saw protests on a bigger scale than the capital. Two protesters were killed in western Iran on Saturday.

On Sunday Trump said that “people are finally getting ‘wise’ as to how their money and wealth is being stolen and squandered on terrorism”, adding that the US was “watching very closely for human rights violations”.

Rouhani, urging the nation to be vigilant, acknowledged that people were unhappy about the state of economy, corruption and a lack of transparency. “People are allowed under the constitution to criticize or even protest but in a way that at the end they lead to a better situation in the country for the people,” he said. Condemning the US president, Donald Trump, who has voiced support for the protests, Rouhani said: “This gentleman who today sympathizes with our people has forgotten that a few months ago he called us a terrorist nation. The one who has opposed the Iranian nation from his head to his toe has no right to express sympathy for people of Iran.”

Earlier in the day, Iran’s interior minister, Abdolreza Rahmani-Fazil, said authorities would not tolerate the “spreading of violence, fear and terror”, which he said would “definitely be confronted”.  “Those who damage public property, disrupt order, people’s security and break the law must be responsible for their behaviour and should answer and pay the price,” he said, according to the website of the state broadcaster Irib.

The broadcaster said authorities had blocked Instagram and the messaging app Telegram, which is the most popular social networking platform in Iran, citing an anonymous source who said the move was “in line with maintaining peace and security of the citizens”. Authorities said the filtering was temporary. A source in Iran told the Guardian the state had started blocking access to Telegram, but it was not covering all provinces yet.

Authorities said two protesters were killed in the western province of Lorestan on Saturday, but denied it was the result of clashes between demonstrators and riot police.

Many senior figures within the reformist camp and the opposition Green movement remain perplexed as to how to respond to the current wave of unrest. The sharp nature of some of the slogans, which have challenged the foundations of the Islamic republic, has left them mute.

There have been anti-Khamenei chants such as “Death to the dictator” and slogans opposing Iran’s regional policy, including “Let go of Syria, think about us” and “I give my life for Iran, not Gaza, not Lebanon”. There were also nostalgic slogans in support of the monarchy and the late shah, as well as some with a nationalistic nature, including

Iranian conservatives, while acknowledging ordinary people were protesting for what they said were mainly economic reasons, accused foreign powers of inciting violence and exploiting the situation.

Some videos showed protesters apparently setting bins on fire and trying to break into government buildings. The semi-official Tasnim news, which is close to the elite Revolutionary Guards, published a photo that it said showed a protester setting fire to the Iranian flag. There were chants of “Death to the Revolutionary Guards” in at least one city.

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson issued a statement saying “there should be meaningful debate about the legitimate and important issues the protesters are raising and we look to the Iranian authorities to permit this….We regret the loss of life that has occurred in the protests in Iran, and call on all concerned to refrain from violence and for international obligations on human rights to be observed,” he said. German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel also said in a statement that “after the confrontation of the past days it is all the more important for all sides to refrain from violent action.” Both countries were part of the 2015 nuclear deal.

USA-Israel twins target Iran and by weakening it they hope to use the population against the Islamic government. Iran’s economy has improved since the nuclear deal, which saw Iran agree to limit its enrichment of uranium in exchange for the end of some international sanctions. Tehran now sells its oil on the global market and has signed deals to purchase tens of billions of dollars’ worth of Western aircraft.

Israel says the improvement has not reached the average Iranian. Unemployment remains high, and official inflation has crept up to 10 percent again. A recent increase in egg and poultry prices by as much as 40 percent, which the government has blamed on a cull over avian flu fears, appears to have been the spark for the economic protests.

While the protests have sparked clashes, Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard and its affiliates have not intervened as they have in other unauthorized demonstrations since the 2009 election. It wasn’t immediately clear if the Guard would change its posture given the reported attacks on police stations and military bases. In Tehran on Monday, streets were calm, though a heavy police presence was noticeable. Brig. Gen. Massoud Jazayeri , the Guard commander and deputy chief of staff for Iran’s military, said Monday that Trump’s support of the protesters “indicates planning by the USA for launching a new sedition in Iran.”

Amid not-so-subtle calls from USA for regime change in Iran, critics blasted Trump and his neoconservative allies on the right for misrepresenting and exploiting recent protests in the nation.

All anti-Islamic and anti-Iran rogues began attacking Iran and supporting the unrest and want the trouble to continue indefinitely. US dictator Trump wrote: “Iran is failing at every level despite the terrible deal made with them by the Obama Administration. The great Iranian people have been repressed for many years. They are hungry for food & for freedom. Along with human rights, the wealth of Iran is being looted.

Sen. John McCain, a notorious war hawk who infamously joked about bombing Iran a decade ago, tweeted: “The USA stands with the brave protesters who yearn for freedom, peace, and an end to corruption in Iran.”  Nuclear deal foe and US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley praised the “Iranian people who are now finding their voice.” Sen. Lindsey Graham who once called Iranians “cheaters and liars,” said the protests show the Iran nuclear deal isn’t working and that he would lay out what a “better deal would look like and … would stand with the Iranian people the entire time.”

As if USA really cares for human rights while torturing the falsely detained Muslims cruelly in secret places, State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert tweeted that “Secretary Tillerson reiterates the United States’ deep respect for the Iranian people. We call on all nations to stand with us in demanding the regime respect their basic human rights.” The tweet came less than two weeks after it was revealed that Tillerson told State Dept. employees that allies and adversaries should get different treatment for human rights abuses.

Former US Ambassador to the United Nations and serial advocate for bombing innocent people and overthrowing foreign governments he dislikes John Bolton said clearly that regime change should be the goal of the protests, and praised dictator Trump for “taking the side of the demonstrators.” Israeli Netanyahu, meanwhile, even wished “the Iranian people success in their noble quest for freedom.” Commentators on social media were quick to point out the shallowness of such calls

The USA has been disrespecting, insulting, isolating, bullying, and punishing the Iranian people for 65 years because they wanted democracy. Dictator Trump pretended to pro poor- what is drama and nonsense.

Why the US never stands behind oppressed people in Saudi Arabia, or those being literally bombed and starved to death in Yemen-or Palestinians living under military law and apartheid.

Double talks are the passion for Americans. When the ISIS attacked Tehran, massacring civilians, Trump and many US politicians basically cheered on the attack as a good thing in Islamic world. Now they suddenly pretend to care about Iranians against the government

The size of the protests is much smaller than those of 2009, according to reports, but Iranian lawyer and Nobel Peace laureate Shirin Ebadi told Italian newspaper La Repubblica Sunday she believes “the protests are not going to end soon” and could very well swell.  At the moment though, writes Reza Marashi, research director for NIAC, “These protests more closely resemble a continuation of Iran’s long-standing civil rights movement rather than an attempt to overthrow the government.” But Marashi says one thing is clear: “Washington would be wise to acknowledge the limits of its power inside Iran where almost every Iranian is an anti-American. Policymakers cannot change this simple truth:

Israel and the USA have secretly signed a far-reaching joint memorandum of understanding providing for full cooperation to deal with Iran’s nuclear drive.” As part of the secret deal, both countries seek to put “steps on the ground” in order to attack Iran covertly. The deal was made on December 12 at the White House. Just a few days later, Trump tweeted that “Many reports of peaceful protests by Iranian citizens fed up with regime’s corruption and it’s squandering of the nation’s wealth to fund terrorism abroad. Iranian govt should respect their people’s rights, including right to express themselves.

Many Iranians are sceptical about how the protests have spread so quickly. One prominent senior reformist commentator, Hamidreza Jalaipour, said reformists were opposed to protests instigated by “advocates of regime change”, implying that the new wave of protests was not spontaneous. A protester from Tehran University told the Guardian by phone that although students were puzzled about how the protests were organised and spreading so quickly, they were not “getting leads from anyone”.

President Rouhani may have options: it can follow the example of its predecessors (Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani after the protests of the early 1990s and Mohammad Khatami after the 1999 student uprising and opt for a more cautious path, or capitalize on public discontent to push the system towards more genuine reforms. He may have other options too. That choice however, may not ultimately determine the Islamic Republic’s fate.

In fact, both Trump and Netanyahu are trying to revive the old system, which is regime change through subterfuge. But that will certainly prove difficult for both the United States and Israel because Russia is not going to stand on the sideline and watch Iran goes up in flame. USA would try all gimmicks to bring Moscow to its side.

The problems are USA and Israel: the protestors are Iranian, and the solution will also be Iranian.  USA and Israel have no role in it.

Emerging US-China relations!

Emerging US-China relations!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

______

 

  1. National interest

 

Every nation purses its own national interest by conducting foreign relations. China is dong the same as much as USA or Russia or any other country. USA and China – the focus of this study- would not do anything for other nations without any profit in terms of their own national interest.

USA and its arch foes like Russia and China can never be true friends, let alone allies in any true sense but they maintain business relations and as powerful veto members they cooperate and coordinate their secret operations globally.

USA under Donald Trump who has already proved to be its new rouge president without any sense of discipline by unilaterally declaring Jerusalem to be the second capital of fascist Israel that regularly drink Palestinian blood as part of US-Israeli agenda, cannot be expected to be a “friend” of China or Russia, notwithstanding his rhetoric in that direction: he only advances US national interest by pretending to be a great admirer of Putin and Xi and interestingly these former communist regimes also just pretend to take him to be a serious ‘peace maker’.

China sells its goods to USA but buys very little of US goods and takes its help for business deals in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. China remains the major customer of Russian terror goods and technology.

A contrast between the two presidents was set at the start of the year.

 

US policy

One of the major foreign policy goals of USA has been to disrupt and spoil the strong Russo-China relations. Americans go about the job very systematically. have achieved their Cold War target of dismantling the powerful Soviet Union and Socialist system of East Europe- considered to be the chief foe of capitalism and imperialism but in the post Cold war era the ever growing Sino-Russian military ties have caused worries even for the US Neocons that focus on sustaining the US militarism as the chief tool of foreign policy and destabilizing any power that challenges US supremacy.

For decades and under many presidencies USA found it futile to waste resources and energy to make Russia and China fight each other in wars, it first pretended to be supporter of new Russian capitalist economics but when it was amply clear that Russia cannot be bent so long as former KGB officer Vladimir Putin is in control, it cleverly forged strong economic ties with Beijing only to criticize later Beijing for “dumping” the Chinese ‘wastes’ in USA.

Today, China on the move to bring entire world to promote its economy through One Belt program but since China does it by peaceful and persuasive ways, USA cannot protest.  In fact USA has made enormous success in making entire world work for its capitalist agenda even much before the One Belt project was launched to being entire world and economies closer to China. But Washington feels uneasy about the Chinese plan to counter it.

In fact, China’s ever-rising economy worries Americans so badly that they have to pretend to be friends with Beijing and try to cause a possible drift in Sino-Russian relations.

Notwithstanding state crimes against its own citizens on terrorism plank, USA keeps talking about human right violation in Russia and China as if everything is normal in other countries, but these days in order to gain maximum from China, Americans do not talk about “deficit” of human rights in China although colossal violations do take place in China especially in the Islamic Xinjiang region.

Even Chinese mixed system does not tolerate Islam in Xinjiang and does not allow freedom of Islamic religious practices, evincing regular prayers and fasting during the Holy Ramadan.

Decoding the visit

US President Trump’s official visit as part his Asian shuttle tour has brought to focus on Sino-American relations. The second time this year, Trump met with his Chinese counterpart President Xi woefully unprepared. As was true when Trump prematurely hosted Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida resort, in March, US policy toward China remains unformulated and uncoordinated. Departments and Cabinet officials are still running their own plays often at times in direct tension with one another.

All the while, US policy is subject to the whims of an unpredictable and unscripted president whose rhetoric on China swings back and forth like an old-fashioned metronome.

Without a coherent China policy, much less a strategy for implementing it, Trump regime officials have been hard-pressed to explain why the president was going to Beijing at all. Not so for China as to why it wanted to receive him.  Xi was coming off his coronation at the Communist Party’s twice-a-decade Congress, a lavish celebration of his consolidation of power. And Trump’s visit can only help him boos this global image. .

In Beijing, the two leaders representing West and East respectively might have been able to paper over the cracks by unveiling a few energy deals, but that would only be a “calm before the storm” and the “escalation of tensions” next year. The Trump government has high expectations from China, a fundamental reordering of the trade relationship, while China expects a relatively painless negotiation process.

Obviously Trump went to China to get President XI on US board to target North Korea and coerce him to support US cause against a close Chin ally. Trump could not achieve the objective mainly because China is not Pakistan destabilized by US led NATO forces that still occupy that Islamic nation.

 

US coercive diplomacy  

US coercive diplomacy always gets what the Americans want. Consider the US-Japan relations. USA uses its first atomic bombs to attack Japan, destroying a lot of places and killing thousands of innocent Japanese citizens. But soon after the WW-II, USA made plan to bring Japan under US control by launching the Cold war and NATO against Soviet Union and Communism-Socialism. Japan was made to play important role to protect it from any future Soviet attack. Te Cold war arrangement made by USA has remained intact thus far even after the end of Cold war and Communist-Socialist system. .

Unlike China- North Korean close ties, even the US-South Korea relations have not been a very stable and Trump’s previous comments disparaging the US-Korea free trade agreement and accusing Seoul of appeasing North Korea and not pulling its weight in the alliance.

 

  1. History of relations and fragile rapprochement

 

The partnership between China and the USA, in which each nation regards the other as a potential adversary as well as an economic partner, has been described by world leaders and academics as the world’s most important bilateral relationship of the century- outweighing even US-Russia relations.

For most of the 22 years between 1949 and 1971, Sino-US relations were uniformly hostile, with Mao Zedong frequently referring to the USA as “the most dangerous imperialist power”, and the USA frequently attacked by Chinese propaganda in the worst manner.

Later, President Kennedy believed that US policy towards China was “nonsensical”, and he considered reestablishing diplomatic ties in his second term. However, Kennedy’s assassination in late 1963, followed by the Vietnam War and China’s Cultural Revolution, ended any possibility of normalized relations with Beijing for years.  Despite this official non-recognition, the USA and China held 136 meetings at the ambassadorial level.

 

The end of the 1960s brought a period of transformation. For China, when American president Johnson decided to wind down the Vietnam war in 1968, it gave China an impression that the US had no interest of expanding in Asia anymore while the USSR became a more serious threat as it intervened in Czechoslovakia to displace a communist government and might well interfere in China.

This became an especially important concern for the People’s Republic of China after the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969. The PRC was diplomatically isolated and the leadership came to believe that improved relations with the USA would be a useful counterbalance to the Soviet threat. Zhou Enlai, the Premier of China, was at the forefront of this effort with the committed backing of Chairman Mao Zedong. In 1969, the United States initiated measures to relax trade restrictions and other impediments to bilateral contact, to which China responded. However, this rapprochement process was stalled by the Vietnam War where China was supporting the enemies of the USA Communication between Chinese and American leaders, however, was conducted with Pakistan and Poland as intermediaries.

Kennedy’s assassination in late 1963, followed by the Vietnam War and Cultural Revolution, ended any possibility of normalized relations with Beijing for years.

The Cultural Revolution brought about near-complete isolation of China from the outside world and vocal denunciations of both US imperialism and Soviet revisionism.

Beginning in 1967, the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission established the China Claims Program, in which American citizens could denominate the sum total of their lost assets and property following the Communist seizure of foreign property in 1950. American companies were reluctant to invest in China despite (future Chairman) Deng Xiaoping’s reassurances of a stable business environment.

Many saw the specter of Communist China behind communist movements in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, but a growing number concluded that if the PRC would align with the US it would mean a major redistribution of global power against the Soviets. Mainland China’s market of nearly one billion consumers appealed to American business

In April 1971, the athletes became the first Americans to officially visit China since the communist takeover. The smooth acceptance of this so-called “ping-pong diplomacy” gave confidence to both sides. In July 1971, Henry Kissinger feigned illness while on a trip to Pakistan and did not appear in public for a day. He was actually on a top-secret mission to Beijing to negotiate with Zhou Enlai.

Kissinger and his aides did not receive a warm welcome in Beijing, and the hotel they stayed in was equipped with pamphlets excoriating US imperialism. However, the meeting with Zhou Enlai was productive, and the Chinese premier expressed his hope for improved Sino-US relations. He commented that the US had intentionally isolated China, not vice-versa, and any initiative to restore diplomatic ties had to come from the American side. Zhou spoke of the late President Kennedy’s plans to restore relations with China and told Kissinger

From February 21 to February 28, 1972, President Nixon traveled to Beijing, Hangzhou, and Shanghai. At the conclusion of his trip, the US and the PRC issued the Shanghai Communiqué, a statement of their respective foreign policy views. In the Communiqué, both nations pledged to work toward the full normalization of diplomatic relations. This did not lead to immediate recognition of the People’s Republic of China but ‘liaison offices’ were established in Beijing and Washington.

The USA acknowledged the PRC position that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The statement enabled the US and PRC to temporarily set aside the issue of Taiwan and open trade and communication. Also, the USA and China both agreed to take action against ‘any country’ that is to establish ‘hegemony’ in the Asia-Pacific.

Most major anti-US propaganda disappeared in China after the Nixon visit; although there was still occasional criticism of US imperialism, the Soviet Union had definitively become China’s arch-foe in the 1970s.

The rapprochement with the USA benefited the PRC immensely and greatly increased its security for the rest of the Cold War. It has been argued that the USA. Eventually, however, the PRC’s suspicion of Vietnam’s motives led to a break in Sino-Vietnamese cooperation and, upon the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia in 1979, the Sino-Vietnamese War. Both China and the United States backed combatants in Africa against Soviet and Cuban-supported movements. The economic benefits of normalization were slow as it would take decades for American products to penetrate the vast Chinese market. While Nixon’s China policy is regarded by many as the highlight of his presidency.

In the Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations, dated January 1, 1979, the United States transferred diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. The US reiterated the Shanghai Communiqué’s acknowledgment of the Chinese position that there is only ‘one China’ and that Taiwan is a part of China; Beijing acknowledged that the American people would continue to carry on commercial, cultural, and other unofficial contacts with the people of Taiwan

Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping’s January 1979 visit to Washington initiated a series of important, high-level exchanges which continued until the spring of 1989. This resulted in many bilateral agreements, especially in the fields of scientific, technological, and cultural interchange, as well as trade relations. Since early 1979, the USA and the PRC have initiated hundreds of joint research projects and cooperative programs under the Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology, the largest bilateral program. On March 1, 1979, the two countries formally established embassies in each other’s capitals, outstanding private claims were resolved and a bilateral trade agreement was completed

Sino-US military cooperation also began in 1979; American arms sales to China were initiated, and in 1981 it was revealed that a joint Sino-US listening post had been operated in Xinjiang, near the Soviet border. Chinese demands for advanced technology from the US were not always met,

As a consequence of high-level and working-level contacts initiated in 1980, New York City and Beijing become sister cities, US dialogue with the PRC broadened to cover a wide range of issues, including global and regional strategic problems, political-military questions, including arms control, UN, and other multilateral organization affairs, and international narcotics matters.

High-level exchanges continued to be a significant means for developing US-PRC relations in the 1980s. President Ronald Reagan and Premier Zhao Ziyang made reciprocal visits in 1984. Reagan’s first two years in office saw some deterioration in Sino-US relations due to the president’s vociferous anti-communism, as well as the inability of the two nations to come to a common understanding over the Korean standoff, the Israel-Palestine conflict, or the Falkland War. In 1982, Deng Xiaoping, in a reiteration of Mao Zedong’s “Three Worlds” theory, criticized both the US and Soviet Union for imperialism.

In the period before the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, a growing number of cultural exchange activities gave the American and Chinese people’s broad exposure to each other’s cultural, artistic, and educational achievements. Numerous mainland Chinese professional and official delegations visited the USA each month. Many of these exchanges continued even after the suppression of the Tiananmen protests. The expanding relationship that followed normalization was threatened in 1981 by PRC objections to the level of US arms sales to the Republic of China on Taiwan. Following China’s violent suppression of political protests in June 1989, the US and other governments enacted a number of measures against China’s violation of human rights. Tiananmen event disrupted the US-China trade relationship, and US investors’ interest in mainland China dropped dramatically. Tourist traffic fell off sharply. The Bush administration denounced the repression and suspended certain trade and investment programs on June 5 and 20, 1989.

Relations with China began under George Washington, leading to the 1845 Treaty of Wangxia. The USA was allied to the Republic of China (now Taiwan) during the Pacific war, but broke off relations with China for 25 years when the communist government took over, until Richard Nixon’s 1972 visit to China. Since Nixon, every successive US president has toured China.

In the first public sign of warming relations between Washington and Beijing, China’s ping-pong team invites members of the US team to China on April 6, 1971. Journalists accompanying the U.S. players are among the first Americans allowed to enter China since 1949. In July of 1971, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger makes a secret trip to China. Shortly thereafter, the United Nations recognizes the People’s Republic of China, endowing it with the permanent Security Council seat that had been held by Chiang Kai-shek’s Republic of China on Taiwan since 1945.

Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong establishes the People’s Republic of China in Beijing on October 1 1845 after peasant-backed Communists defeat the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang and thousands of his troops flee to Taiwan. The United States—which backed the Nationalists against invading Japanese forces during World War II—supports Chiang’s exiled Republic of China government in Taipei, setting the stage for several decades of limited US relations with mainland China.

The Soviet-backed North Korean People’s Army invaded South Korea on June 25. 1945 The United Nations and the United States rush to South Korea’s defense. China, in support of the communist North, retaliates when USA, UN, and South Korean troops approach the Chinese border. As many as four million people die in the three-year conflict until the United Nations, China, and North Korea sign an armistice agreement in 1953

In 1959, nine years after the People’s Republic of China asserted control over Tibet, a widespread uprising occurs in Lhasa. Thousands die in the ensuing crackdown by PRC forces, and the Dalai Lama flees to India. The United States joins the United Nations in condemning Beijing for human rights abuses in Tibet, while the Central Intelligence Agency helps arm the Tibetan resistance beginning in the late 1950s.

President Richard Nixon spends eight days in China in February 1972, during which he meets Chairman Mao Zedong and signs the Shanghai Communiqué with Premier Zhou Enlai. The communiqué sets the stage for improved US-Sino relations by allowing China and the United States to discuss difficult issues, particularly Taiwan. However, normalization of relations between the two countries makes slow progress for much of the decade.

China joined the nuclear club in October 1964 when it conducts its first test of an atomic bomb. The test comes amid US-Sino tensions over the escalating conflict in Vietnam. By the time of the test, China has amassed troops along its border with Vietnam.

US President Jimmy Carter grants China full diplomatic recognition, while acknowledging mainland China’s One China principle and severing normal ties with Taiwan. Chinese Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping, who leads China through major economic reforms, visits the United States shortly thereafter. However, in April, Congress approves the Taiwan Relations Act, allowing continued commercial and cultural relations between the United States and Taiwan. The act requires Washington to provide Taipei with defensive arms, but does not officially violate the USA’s One China policy.

The Reagan regime signed in August 1982 a third joint communiqué with the People’s Republic of China to normalize relations. It reaffirms the U.S. commitment to its One China policy. Though Ronald Reagan voices support for stronger ties with Taiwan during his presidential campaign, his administration works to improve Beijing-Washington relations at the height of U.S. concerns over Soviet expansionism. President Reagan visits China in April 1984 and in June; the US government permits Beijing to make purchases of US military equipment

In the spring of 1989, thousands of students hold demonstrations in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, demanding democratic reforms and an end to corruption. On June 3, the government sends in military troops to clear the square, leaving hundreds of protesters dead. In response, the U.S. government suspends military sales to Beijing and freezes relations.

In September 1993, China releases Wei Jingsheng, a political prisoner since 1979. That year, President Bill Clinton launches a policy of “constructive engagement” with China. However, after Beijing loses its bid to host the 2000 Olympic Games, the Chinese government imprisons Wei again. Four years later, Clinton secures the release of Wei and Tiananmen Square protester Wang Dan. Beijing deports both dissidents to the USA.

NATO accidentally bombs the Chinese embassy in Belgrade during its campaign against Serbian forces occupying Kosovo in May 1999, shaking US-Sino relations. The USA and NATO offer apologies for the series of US intelligence mistakes that led to the deadly bombing, but thousands of Chinese demonstrators protest throughout the country, attacking official US property.

US President Bill Clinton signed the US-China Relations Act of 2000 in October, granting Beijing permanent normal trade relations with the United States and paving the way for China to join the World Trade Organization in 2001. Between 1980 and 2004, US-China trade rises from $5 billion to $231 billion. In 2006, China surpasses Mexico as the United States’ second-biggest trade partner, after Canada.

In April 2001, a US reconnaissance plane collides with a Chinese fighter and makes an emergency landing on Chinese territory. President George W. Bush expresses regret over the death of a Chinese pilot and the landing of the US plane.

After North Korea conducts its first nuclear test in October 2006, China serves as a mediator to bring Pyongyang back to the negotiating table.

US President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlined a US “pivot” to Asia. Clinton’s called for “increased investment—diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise—in the Asia-Pacific region” is seen as a move to counter China’s growing clout. That month, at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, President Obama announces the United States and eight other nations have reached an agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership—a multinational free trade agreement. Obama later announces plans to deploy 2,500 marines in Australia, prompting criticism from Beijing.

The 18th National Party Congress 2012 concludes with the most significant leadership turnover in decades as about 70 percent of the members of the country’s major leadership bodies—the Politburo Standing Committee, the Central Military Commission, and the State Council—are replaced. Li Keqiang assumes the role of premier, while Xi Jinping replaces Hu Jintao as president, Communist Party general secretary, and chairman of the Central Military Commission. Xi delivers a series of speeches on the “rejuvenation” of China.

In 2013 the US President Barack Obama hosted Chinese President Xi Jinping for a “shirt-sleeves summit” at the Sunnylands Estate in California in a bid to build a personal rapport with his counterpart and ease tense US-China relations. The presidents pledge to cooperate more effectively on pressing bilateral, regional, and global issues, including climate change and North Korea. Obama and Xi also vow to establish a “new model” of relations, a nod to Xi’s concept of establishing a “new type of great power relations” for the United States and China.

On the sidelines of the 2014 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping issue a joint statement on climate change, pledging to reduce carbon emissions. Obama sets a more ambitious target for US emissions cutbacks, and Xi makes China’s first promise to curb carbon emissions’ growth by 2030. These commitments by the world’s top polluters stirred hopes among some experts that they would boost momentum for global negotiations ahead of the 2015 UN-led Climate Change Conference in Paris.

 

South China Sea

Relations between the two countries have generally been stable with some periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Currently, China and the USA have mutual political, economic, and security interests, including but not limited to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, although there are unresolved concerns relating to the role of democracy in government in China and human rights in both respective countries. China is the largest foreign creditor of the USA. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea.

As the US government charts next steps with China, it should widen the aperture of its focus. In the past, the USA has convinced China to assume greater responsibility on issues ranging from climate change to peacekeeping and public health. China’s contributions have reduced the need for the USA to do more. Under US pressure, China also moderated its behavior on issues such as cyber-enabled espionage for commercial gain. Additionally, there are other issues that previous administrations have put near the top of the agenda, notably the South China Sea and human rights, which have gotten short shrift from the Trump team. There are reasonable arguments why neither should be at the top of the agenda.

US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter called on China to halt its controversial land reclamation efforts in the South China Sea, saying that the USA opposes “any further militarization” of the disputed territory. Ahead of the conference, US officials say that images from US naval surveillance provide evidence that China is placing military equipment on a chain of artificial islands, despite Beijing’s claims that construction is mainly for civilian purposes.

US options in the South China Sea mostly involve military deployments, exercises, and freedom of navigation operations, which the administration has tried to regularize, as diplomatic options have become less attractive with the defection of the Philippines under President Duterte from solidarity on political and legal issues. But US prestige and influence in Southeast Asia depend upon our visible involvement and leadership on South China Sea issues, so there will have to be a diplomatic component supplementing the work of Pacific Command. As for human rights, Trump has a valid point in contending that the United States needs to balance its concerns with other issues not only in China but throughout the world. But if Washington is seen as indifferent to human rights after decades of championing the cause, the damage to the perception of our country, not least among ordinary people in China, will be substantial.

As of April 2017, ongoing maritime disputes in the South China Sea have strained relations between the two. America has conducted freedom of navigation patrols in the region to underscore the US’ position that the artificial islands constructed by China are located in international waters.

 

 

  1. Issues and strains

At the outset one important thing must be cleared right here so that there is no confusion about growing economic ties of USA and China in areas of market economy and investments and cooperation in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

As veto powers, USA and China coordinate on many regional and global issues.  They have tacit understanding against Islam and in making Muslims appear to be the terrorists- a major agenda of USA-Israel-Germany trio. Though both share tensions and issues, there is one common factor that binds them: veto status on UNSC. Unlike USA that uses its veto mainly to defend the Zionist crimes against humanity, China rarely uses the veto that too only to defend its own interests if threatened.

At people’s level, Americans and Chinese do not appreciate each other and do not favor better ties. As of 2015, China’s public opinion of the USA is at 44%, while the US public opinion of China is somewhat lower at 38%. The highest recorded favorable opinion of the USA was at 58% (2010) and the lowest at 38% (2007). Conversely, the highest recorded favorable opinion of China was at 52% (2006) and the lowest at 35% (2014).

When normal US presidents before Trump could not achieve nay tamable breakthrough in US-China relations, a proven roguish president Trump cannot make any real difference to the world order and fundamental change in US-China or US Russia relations.

Pretensions should not be taken for real.

Sino-Soviet border conflict: Differences over security, ideology, and development models strain Sino-Soviet relations. China’s radical industrialization policies, known as the Great Leap Forward, lead the Soviet Union to withdraw advisors in 1960. Disagreements culminate in border skirmishes in March 1969. Moscow replaces Washington as China’s biggest threat, and the Sino-Soviet split contributes to Beijing’s eventual rapprochement with the USA.

Relations between the two countries have generally been stable with some periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War in which China opposed US aggression and interventionist strategies.

Currently, China and the USA have mutual political, economic, and security interests, including but not limited to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, although there are unresolved concerns relating to the role of democracy in government in China and human rights in both respective countries. China is the largest foreign creditor of the USA.

While the violation of human rights always been criticized by Washington, the issue South China Sea is a recent conflictual concern- both have been top issues between USA and China. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea. US options in the South China Sea mostly involve military deployments, exercises, and freedom of navigation operations, which the White House has tried to regularize, as diplomatic options have become less attractive with the defection of the Philippines under President Duterte from solidarity on political and legal issues.

Interestingly, American rulers criticize little about human right problem as they view the economic and   regional as well as North Korean issue more important than HR. That is exactly America is doing with regard to HR problems in Russia.  If Washington is seen as indifferent to human rights after decades of championing the cause, the damage to the perception of USA, not least among ordinary people in China, will be substantial.

US prestige and influence in East and Southeast Asia depend upon its visible involvement and leadership on South China Sea issues, so there will have to be a diplomatic component supplementing the work of Pacific Command.

As of April 2017, ongoing maritime disputes in the South China Sea have strained relations between the two. America has conducted freedom of navigation patrols in the region to underscore the US’ position that the artificial islands constructed by China are located in international waters.

With North Korea on the brink of being able, according to US strategists, to strike the USA with a nuclear missile, President Trump must increase pressure on Pyongyang and its enablers, especially Beijing.

US strategists say these will be important moments for Trump not to fall prey to China’s efforts to visually demean the US president. They argued that the Chinese would do everything humanly possible to prevent Trump from saying or doing anything extemporaneously. The symbols and messages of the visit will instead be conveyed through official photographs and tightly scripted press sprays. Recall the favorite photo of China’s state-run media from Florida that captured an erudite Xi tutoring a diminished Trump slumped on a couch.

After the failed attempt by Obama with his Asia pivot to contain China in Asia with the help of India, others, now Trump seems to be approaching the issue differently as top US businessman.  However, he has not yet reveled his mind to   the public or experts

However, President Trump is using “stick and carrot” card as a mere gimmick as he is the first American president to sanction a Chinese bank for helping North Korea evade US and UN economic sanctions. Obviously China is annoyed and worried about its economic growth and decided to pretend to be on US side.

Irrational and erratic Trump cannot make any positive contribution to the bilateral relations with any nation globally; relations with China have strained under Barack Obama’s Asia pivot strategy.  Just because Obama failed to achieve anything with China and only could spoil even the routine ties, Trump cannot be expected to get the relations on steady foot.  The US support for Japan in the Senkaku Islands dispute, as well as Donald Trump’s threat to declare China a “currency manipulation” as part of a potential trade war would not suggest Trump really seeks a better relationship with China.

The Trump team has no theory of success in Beijing; his stop in China was the least important of the five-country tour. Whether Trump got China right would depend more on his ability during the other parts of his Asia swing to evince both an enduring commitment to America’s allies and a modicum of US regional leadership.

Officially a communist nation pursuing Socialist policies indoors and a mixed agenda abroad, China has developed trade relations with US superpower along with it also shares the veto power on UNSC. USA has been employing many countries in Asia including those he is visiting now and India to contain the Chinese influence on the continent and beyond.

Unlike Russia which as equal super power maintains tensions with USA for several reasons, including dismantling of NATO, China, focused on attaining economic superpower status, always avoids tensions with USA and Europe. This shrewd diplomacy has helped Beijing to be focused on its own problems indoors and outside.

 

China’s niceties of diplomacy

When they met at US President Donald Trump‘s Mar-a-Lago estate in April, China‘s President Xi Jinping found a way to charm the mercurial former real estate mogul. Trump hailed the “good chemistry” of the sunny summit in Florida and predicted, “lots of very potentially bad problems will be going away.”

The “bromance” is set to continue when Xi returns the favour by laying on a lavish welcome for Trump‘s visit starting on Wednesday. Xi has grown more powerful since their last meeting, while Trump is under a political cloud after his former campaign manager was indicted in an intensifying investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Chinese experts say Beijing has learned to manage Trump, a real-estate mogul who had never held elective office before becoming president, and whose administration in its first 10 months has been turbulent. “China has an objective view of him. We’re going to make him feel comfortable,” said Wang Yiwei, a professor of international relations at Renmin University. “He may end up being re-elected. We need to look at this from a long-term perspective, and not view him as an ‘other’ or a joke.”

 

  1. Trump’s business mentality and world peace

An advanced capitalist promoting US imperialism, Trump applies his business skills to improve relations with red China. As such he has no knowledge or experience in foreign policy matters.

The Trump government therefore has not presented a coherent public explanation of how it views China, what kind of relationship it seeks to cultivate, or how it plans to do so.

Some senior officials have however said they wish to see the US-China relationship constructive and results-oriented, including by expanding cooperation, accepting healthy competition, and seeking to avoid confrontation. Secretary Tillerson, in particular, has spoken of the necessity to think forward 50 years about the type of relationship the USA should have with China, indicating that he understands the lessons of the trajectory of the last 50 years.

Trump has been searching for leaders to be used as leverage who can pursue the North Korean nuclear ambitions and thought of option like Russia, Taiwan, China, from bashing China for stealing American jobs to exaggerating China’s modest concessions on market access, he said would consult with President Xi before engaging Taiwan’s leaders and he began hailing his personal chemistry with President Xi.

The impact of the president’s lurches has been compounded by the well-documented divergence among his senior advisors on China. Mattis, Tillerson, McMaster, Kelly, and Dunford have taken a relatively pragmatic approach, seeming to place value in stable relations and dialogue to solve problems. An influential group of the president’s advisors, including Ross, Lighthizer, Navarro, and Bannon, advocate a harder-edged response to Chinese challenges to US primacy.

In the absence of an overarching strategy, Beijing is left to parse statements from senior US officials for clues about Washington’s intentions toward China. The president has been moving from bashing China for stealing American jobs to exaggerating China’s modest concessions on market access to praise him a good man.

As a consequence of both the president’s frequently changing views and the variance in perspectives among his senior advisors, Washington does not appear to possess clarity on what type of relationship it seeks to build with China. This cognitive dissonance inhibits Washington’s ability to elicit Chinese support for steps to strengthen the relationship over the long run.

More recently, he has aroused alarm in Beijing over his intentions toward North Korea by raising the specter of military “fire and fury” along China’s border.

However, despite these shortcomings, Trump has had one important asset that has served as an anchor, namely his personal relationship with Xi Jinping. The Mar-a-Lago meeting in March, concentrating on building personal bonds rather than resolving issues, was well-conceived and well-executed. Trump came out with a genuine high regard and respect for Xi, and Xi clearly values his personal relationship with Trump as well.

Their relationship is, ironically, unburdened by the values disputes that have poisoned Trump’s relationships with European allies.

Many in his government sometimes argue for harshly punitive measures against China, they are restrained by the Trump-Xi relationship and by the risk of a sharp reaction from the president if they misread his intentions.

The Trump-Xi relationship has similarly restrained Chinese official responses to Trump government’s statements and actions that normally would have elicited a strong response.

Trump’s planned trip to China offered an opportunity for the two sides to make substantial progress on North Korea or trade issues.

In terms of output from these dialogues the Trump record has been disappointing. Experience has shown that progress depends on clear identification of US priorities and an agreed game plan for addressing Chinese priorities. Likewise, negotiators need to be empowered to set up the dialogues and follow-up persistently after talks conclude. On this count, the administration has been handicapped by its failure to nominate and confirm undersecretaries and assistant secretaries within key departments that normally would carry out such functions. The key working level officials at the State Department and National Security Council are capable and knowledgeable, but they need much more help.

Trump’s concentrated focus on North Korea and trade is a departure from the approach of the past governments, which deliberately grounded US-China relations in a broad range of areas of cooperation, which served as guardrails to keep the relationship from veering off track.

With the affirmative agenda now narrowed to North Korea and trade, there is a greater demand to deliver results on these two preeminent issues. On North Korea, the Trump administration has been right to push China to do more. Through both intensive engagement and the credible threat of sanctions on Chinese companies, the administration secured some gains with China—implementation of a coal ban, support for stiffer sanctions at the United Nations, and increased scrutiny of Chinese commerce crossing the border with North Korea. The administration should continue to try to work with Beijing on North Korea, because there can be no serious progress in peacefully reining in North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs without China’s cooperation.

While pushing the Chinese to do more, the administration needs to understand that Beijing’s leverage over Pyongyang is limited, and that attempting to farm out the North Korean problem to Beijing won’t deliver progress toward peaceful denuclearization, but it will generate needless friction in the US-China relationship. Beijing’s willingness to work with America will depend on China’s trust that the administration knows what it is doing, that it is cognizant of China’s interests on the Korean Peninsula, that it is not aggravating the situation with incendiary rhetoric, and that it does not risk blundering into a planned or unplanned war. Some of the president’s recent comments give little confidence in this regard.

On trade, the administration’s attitude has shifted course several times. After heated rhetoric during the campaign (including pledges to name China a currency manipulator on day one, impose a 45 percent tariff on imports), initial interactions with the Chinese were positive. President Trump and President Xi held a summit at Mar-a-Lago and set up the Comprehensive Economic Dialogue (CED), styled after the approach of the last two American presidents. This process yielded an early harvest that administration officials hailed as major breakthroughs with China.

But the July CED meeting was a failure. Trump rejected the deal negotiated between his secretaries and the Chinese. This week, Trump directed the U.S. Trade Representative to study whether it should launch a Section 301 investigation into Chinese violations of intellectual property rights, especially as it relates to forced technology transfers. At the same time, an investigation is ongoing into whether steel imports pose a threat to national security.

All of this leaves the Chinese side understandably confused: Are we continuing to negotiate small openings, which is all that China will accept at the moment (before this fall’s 19th Party Congress)? Or are we moving towards significant unilateral protectionist measures against Chinese imports and investment outside the framework of the World Trade Organization that invite China and other countries to do the same? The risk of a hardline approach is that China will not change anytime soon, but likely will feel compelled to retaliate, and tit-for-tat protectionist measureswill hurt the U.S. and global economies.

Also unhelpful is the continuing focus on the trade balance as a metric of who wins and who loses from trade. The trade balance is equal to the difference between saving and investment and is influenced by many factors. If the Federal Reserve normalizes interest rates and Congress enacts deficit-increasing tax cuts, then it is very likely that the US trade deficit will rise, regardless of what China does. Making the trade balance, rather than market access, the key issue is bad economics and sets the administration up for failure.

 

  1. Does Trump respect Xi?

 

A ‘great friend’ China has great economic agenda and it plans to  make entire world to contribute to its striving  for the status superpower to eventually replace USA. However, unlike USA which does everything only for its exclusive advantages, Beijing permits the “belt” countries also to get benefits.

As part of its economic boost, Chinese military spending has been increasing year by year. In March 2007, China announced an 18 percent budget increase in defense spending for 2007, totaling more than $45 billion. Increases in military expenditures average 15 percent a year from 1990 to 2005.

In September 2008, China surpasses Japan to become the largest holder of US debt—or treasuries—at around $600 billion. The growing interdependence between the US and Chinese economies becomes evident as a financial crisis threatens the global economy, fueling concerns over US-China economic imbalances.

Trump’s stop in Beijing is billed as a “state visit plus” to mark the importance of the dynamic between himself and President Xi, as well as relations between the US superpower and China’s fast-growing economy and armed forces. Trump already calls Xi a great friend. Earlier, Trump called Russian strong man Putn as also a great friend.

Days ahead of Trump taking office, Xi was the keynote speaker at the World Economic Forum in Davos, offering a vigorous defence of globalization. Trump formally withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership his first week in office, distancing America from its Asian allies.  “Xi is strong and confident with a vision for where he wants his country to go,” said one Beijing-based Western diplomat. “Trump just seems to spend his time arguing with everyone.” Trump in office put aside his grievances about China‘s trade and currency practices, aired vociferously during the campaign, to get China behind his strategy of punishing sanctions on North Korea for its escalating missile and nuclear tests.

And Beijing accommodated him when he grew frustrated.

Washington’s policy for four decades has recognized that there is but one China. Under this policy, the USA has maintained formal ties with the People’s Republic of China but also maintains unofficial ties with Taiwan, including the provision of defense aid. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, visiting Beijing in March, describes the U.S.-China relationship as one “built on non-confrontation, no conflict, mutual respect, and always searching for win-win solutions.”

 

Relations between the two countries have generally been stable with some periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Currently, China and the United States have mutual political, economic, and security interests, including but not limited to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, although there are unresolved concerns relating to the role of democracy in government in China and human rights in both respective countries. China is the largest foreign creditor of the USA. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea.

The two leaders are in different positions. Xi has just emerged from a glowing five-yearly Communist Party congress; Trump has low approval ratings of 34 percent and is battling a probe about election collusion with Russia. He faces condemnations form both Democratic and Republican pastries.

The election and ascension of current US President Donald Trump has considerably strained US-China relations with multiple news outlets anticipating potential trade or military conflict between the USA and China. This is largely due to comments made during his presidential campaign citing Chinese currency manipulation and outsourcing of American trade to China.

Public opinion of the other country tends to fluctuate around 40 to 50 percent favorability. As of 2015, China’s public opinion of the U.S. is at 44%, while the US public opinion of China is somewhat lower at 38%.The highest recorded favorable opinion of the United States was at 58% (2010) and the lowest at 38% (2007). Conversely, the highest recorded favorable opinion of China was at 52% (2006) and the lowest at 35% (2014).

Trump says he will honor the One China policy in a call with Chinese President Xi Jinping. After winning the presidential election, Trump breaks with established practice by speaking on the telephone with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and questioning the U.S. commitment to its One China policy.

While railing against the US trade deficit with China, he has put the blame for that squarely on his predecessors and expressed admiration for China‘s leader.

In a congratulatory phone call, Trump hailed the “extraordinary elevation” of Xi, whose political thoughts were enshrined in the Communist Party’s constitution last month during a congress marking the start of his second term. In an interview with Fox Business Network’s Lou Dobbs, Trump gushed that “some people might call him the king of China” and “people say we have the best relationship of any president-president”.

China‘s ambassador to the United States, Cui Tiankai, said Trump will receive a “state visit-plus” experience in Beijing.

While it is unclear what the “plus” means – Trump is expected to go to the Forbidden City, but China has released few details – a protocol that lets Trump “rejoice in grandiosity” will be important to keeping relations stable, said Teng Jianqun, head of American Studies at Foreign Ministry think-tank China Institute for International Studies. “We must seize upon his special characteristics, such as liking instant gratification, and set up some things that bring immediate results,” he said.

On the commercial front, that means a slew of deals – and worries among some in the US business community that the transactional Trump will be placated by a handful of contract wins instead of resolving long-standing complaints about discriminatory Chinese policies and market access restrictions.

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zheng Zeguang told reporters on Friday that China would “create a good atmosphere” with informal activities for the two presidents, so they have ample time to talk about important issues. Zheng said that at the April summit, Trump and his wife Melania had extended an “extremely warm, friendly and thoughtful” reception to Xi and his wife Peng Liyuan. “The Chinese people demand that courtesy be repaid in kind,” he said.

The divisive figure Trump is in the United States and its allies in Europe and elsewhere Trump, cannot be a popular figure for the people of China  many neo-capitalists in China might admire his business acumen.

The ruling Communist Party’s official People’s Daily marked China‘s announcement of his visit with a picture of a beaming Trump and the headline “Trump‘s coming!”

Days after Trump‘s September 4 rhetoric that the United States was considering “stopping all trade with any country doing business with North Korea,” Beijing ordered North Korean companies operating within its borders to shut down, banned its exports of textiles and reduced China’s oil exports to the North.

But with North Korea occupying most of the Trump administration’s attention in Asia, China‘s construction of military facilities on artificial islands in disputed waters of the South China Sea has seemingly fallen off the radar. Beijing does still get irritated about US navy “freedom of navigation” patrols there, which have continued under Trump. “Trump is very popular with the (Chinese) military,” said a Chinese official with ties to the military, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It’s great for China that the United States is in chaos. It means we don’t have to worry about them challenging us.”

Tillerson has already signaled the limits of Washington’s patience with China. Ahead of a trip to India recently, Tillerson said that “China, while rising alongside India, has done so less responsibly, at times undermining the international, rules-based order,” and he criticized China for its “predatory economics” and its “provocative actions in the South China Sea”.

At last month’s party congress, Xi laid out a vision for a prosperous and assertive China taking a bigger place on the global stage.

The US Congress left China with greater confidence and lung power, more unhurried in its dealings with the USA.

 

  1. Is entire world Trump’s enemy?   

 

It looks like that.

Rationalists join hands to propagate their ideals to the public. True nationalists try to keep the nation united. Lefts have their own agenda for the societies and world. Fascists operate together to attack other nations and take away their valuables. Racists also have got their agendas to divide people according to the color and nationalities.

Birds of the same feather flock together, an old proverb goes like that.

Anti-Islamic racism has become the favorite idea of Trump and Netanyahu, among others. Trump is working towards making Islam and Islamism as being threat to Western imperialism. His announcement of denying entry for Muslims into USA is one of his first steps in that direction.  He ensured the support of Netanyahu by declaring Jerusalem as the new capital of fascist Israel is another step.

Generating hatred against a particular nation or people or race has been a success story of Trump in months. Maybe, Trump feels vulnerable to all sorts of personal and private influences that under no circumstance serve US interests.

Trump’s 12-day trip to Asia – the longest by a US president in a quarter-century – will give him a chance to reassure ‘friends and allies’ in the region, who have expressed uncertainty about his “America First” policies. One-on-one leader meetings are traditionally an opportunity for US presidents to deliver direct, sensitive messages to their counterparts.

Chinese President Xi Jinping no doubt flatters his American guest as a diplomatic necessity, hoping that President Trump prefers the image of a successful summit to a confrontation over sanctions.

Using the economic and political ties to divide Russo-China relations thereby isolate Russia has been one of the major thrusts of US policy for China. Though the media continue to harp on the “friendly” relations between Trump and Put, there cannot be any real chance for credible improvement in the bilateral ties. Trump is a businessman who knows how to create news.

Trump should be a gracious guest, but he should also be cognizant that his comments will air for weeks and months on Chinese propaganda in the service of strengthening Xi internally and diminishing the standing of the United States throughout Asia. Trump’s aides should explain the damaging effects of his public fealty to Xi.

While the two leaders projected a cordial relationship in public, President Trump would have warned Xi in private that Washington would move forward with robust sanctions targeting Chinese companies and banks that facilitate North Korea’s evasion of sanctions.

Chinese entities that strengthen North Korea’s economy by getting around sanctions undermine the American policy of financially isolating North Korea. That isolation, for USA, is key to gaining leverage as a means to prevent a military conflict.

The principal failing of Trump’s approach to China has been his singular focus on North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs at the expense of other vital US interests. Trump is far more likely to elicit Chinese cooperation on North Korea if America is seen as strong and principled, rather than wavering and willing to bargain away its interests for the right price. If the president wants to prove he’s tough on North Korea, he’ll need to be similarly so on the South China Sea, Taiwan and human rights. Failing to press Xi on these issues—both publicly and privately—would be read in China and throughout the region as US weakness.

Trump himself has said repeatedly that he’s not going to give Xi a hard time on Taiwan or trade as long as China is helping to pressure Pyongyang. This is a tragic misunderstanding of what constitutes US leverage and power in its relationship with China. The single worst thing the Trump government could do in Beijing would be to sign a joint declaration that hangs like an albatross on US-Asia policy.

China would try to pin Trump down on all sorts of symbolic platitudes, which—while seemingly harmless—would invariably be read throughout Asia as US retreat and acquiescence. Experts said the Trump team wasn’t going to outsmart the Chinese.

President Donald J. Trump’s message must be consistent: denuclearization is America’s vision for entire world, including USA, and not the Korean Peninsula or Iran alone.  Egregious history of nuclear, chemical and missile proliferation by many nuclear powers including USA and Israel requires urgent denuclearization globally.. Coordinated sanctions actions targeting the economies of select countries is not in the best interests of prosperity of the globe

Trump’s Beijing trip would service Xi’s domestic political interests, bolstering his image among the Chinese people as a co-equal of the American president. It will also afford Xi the opportunity to flatter Trump and convince him that the USA should both accommodate China’s core interests and back away from any punitive or destabilizing measures on trade, North Korea, the South China Sea and Taiwan that would disrupt an otherwise healthy and positive US-China relationship. Prospects for significant policy breakthroughs are slim to none.

Neocons had suggested to President Trump to seize the opportunity on this trip to build a multilateral coalition outside the UN of likeminded countries (South Korea, Japan, Australia, Britain, France and Germany) that commits to increasing pressure on North Korea. Trump and this group of nations must discourage South Korea from drawing closer to Beijing and should target North Korean shipping by declaring that all vessels linked to North Korea can be inspected under UN and international law.

Trump has already sanctioned Chinese and Russian facilitators of North Korea’s sanctions evasion and in September sanctioned 26 overseas representatives of North Korean banks. These actions are a clear warning shot to Beijing that Washington is widely expected to target additional Chinese nationals and banks that play a key role in these illegal schemes.

There is a constant advice that Trump government should take a page from the Iran sanctions playbook and issue fines against Chinese banks for failing to identify North Korean transactions – similar to the $12 billion in fines issued from 2012 to 2015 against European banks for Iran sanctions violations.

It was said while the USA has already lowered expectations to nearly zero for what it hopes to achieve, success would be measured by what Trump doesn’t do in Beijing. The best the USA can hope for is that Trump departs China without doing significant damage to US interests in the region.

China has responded well to US pressure so far. It issued a banking directive prohibiting financial transactions with North Koreans and another directive prohibiting North Korean businesses in China and joint ventures.

All said and done, President Trump, a big American showman and dramatician, may not be willing to strain the Sino-US relations beyond certain acceptable limits.

It seems Trump hates not just Islam or Muslim nations alone but entire world and humanity. He just pretends to love China and Russia and even calls Putin and Xi a great people. But an anti-humanist and imperialist Trump cannot love any nation that has something to do with communism and socialism now or in the past.

Hatred for Islam and anti-Islamism of these countries cannot be a basis for reliable ties with war mongering capitalist America.

Emerging US-China relations!

Emerging US-China relations!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

______

 

  1. National interest

 

Every nation purses its own national interest by conducting foreign relations. China is dong the same as much as USA or Russia or any other country. USA and China – the focus of this study- would not do anything for other nations without any profit in terms of their own national interest.

USA and its arch foes like Russia and China can never be true friends, let alone allies in any true sense but they maintain business relations and as powerful veto members they cooperate and coordinate their secret operations globally.

USA under Donald Trump who has already proved to be its new rouge president without any sense of discipline by unilaterally declaring Jerusalem to be the second capital of fascist Israel that regularly drink Palestinian blood as part of US-Israeli agenda, cannot be expected to be a “friend” of China or Russia, notwithstanding his rhetoric in that direction: he only advances US national interest by pretending to be a great admirer of Putin and Xi and interestingly these former communist regimes also just pretend to take him to be a serious ‘peace maker’.

China sells its goods to USA but buys very little of US goods and takes its help for business deals in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. China remains the major customer of Russian terror goods and technology.

A contrast between the two presidents was set at the start of the year.

 

US policy

One of the major foreign policy goals of USA has been to disrupt and spoil the strong Russo-China relations. Americans go about the job very systematically. have achieved their Cold War target of dismantling the powerful Soviet Union and Socialist system of East Europe- considered to be the chief foe of capitalism and imperialism but in the post Cold war era the ever growing Sino-Russian military ties have caused worries even for the US Neocons that focus on sustaining the US militarism as the chief tool of foreign policy and destabilizing any power that challenges US supremacy.

For decades and under many presidencies USA found it futile to waste resources and energy to make Russia and China fight each other in wars, it first pretended to be supporter of new Russian capitalist economics but when it was amply clear that Russia cannot be bent so long as former KGB officer Vladimir Putin is in control, it cleverly forged strong economic ties with Beijing only to criticize later Beijing for “dumping” the Chinese ‘wastes’ in USA.

Today, China on the move to bring entire world to promote its economy through One Belt program but since China does it by peaceful and persuasive ways, USA cannot protest.  In fact USA has made enormous success in making entire world work for its capitalist agenda even much before the One Belt project was launched to being entire world and economies closer to China. But Washington feels uneasy about the Chinese plan to counter it.

In fact, China’s ever-rising economy worries Americans so badly that they have to pretend to be friends with Beijing and try to cause a possible drift in Sino-Russian relations.

Notwithstanding state crimes against its own citizens on terrorism plank, USA keeps talking about human right violation in Russia and China as if everything is normal in other countries, but these days in order to gain maximum from China, Americans do not talk about “deficit” of human rights in China although colossal violations do take place in China especially in the Islamic Xinjiang region.

Even Chinese mixed system does not tolerate Islam in Xinjiang and does not allow freedom of Islamic religious practices, evincing regular prayers and fasting during the Holy Ramadan.

Decoding the visit

US President Trump’s official visit as part his Asian shuttle tour has brought to focus on Sino-American relations. The second time this year, Trump met with his Chinese counterpart President Xi woefully unprepared. As was true when Trump prematurely hosted Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida resort, in March, US policy toward China remains unformulated and uncoordinated. Departments and Cabinet officials are still running their own plays often at times in direct tension with one another.

All the while, US policy is subject to the whims of an unpredictable and unscripted president whose rhetoric on China swings back and forth like an old-fashioned metronome.

Without a coherent China policy, much less a strategy for implementing it, Trump regime officials have been hard-pressed to explain why the president was going to Beijing at all. Not so for China as to why it wanted to receive him.  Xi was coming off his coronation at the Communist Party’s twice-a-decade Congress, a lavish celebration of his consolidation of power. And Trump’s visit can only help him boos this global image. .

In Beijing, the two leaders representing West and East respectively might have been able to paper over the cracks by unveiling a few energy deals, but that would only be a “calm before the storm” and the “escalation of tensions” next year. The Trump government has high expectations from China, a fundamental reordering of the trade relationship, while China expects a relatively painless negotiation process.

Obviously Trump went to China to get President XI on US board to target North Korea and coerce him to support US cause against a close Chin ally. Trump could not achieve the objective mainly because China is not Pakistan destabilized by US led NATO forces that still occupy that Islamic nation.

 

US coercive diplomacy  

US coercive diplomacy always gets what the Americans want. Consider the US-Japan relations. USA uses its first atomic bombs to attack Japan, destroying a lot of places and killing thousands of innocent Japanese citizens. But soon after the WW-II, USA made plan to bring Japan under US control by launching the Cold war and NATO against Soviet Union and Communism-Socialism. Japan was made to play important role to protect it from any future Soviet attack. Te Cold war arrangement made by USA has remained intact thus far even after the end of Cold war and Communist-Socialist system. .

Unlike China- North Korean close ties, even the US-South Korea relations have not been a very stable and Trump’s previous comments disparaging the US-Korea free trade agreement and accusing Seoul of appeasing North Korea and not pulling its weight in the alliance.

 

  1. History of relations and fragile rapprochement

 

The partnership between China and the USA, in which each nation regards the other as a potential adversary as well as an economic partner, has been described by world leaders and academics as the world’s most important bilateral relationship of the century- outweighing even US-Russia relations.

For most of the 22 years between 1949 and 1971, Sino-US relations were uniformly hostile, with Mao Zedong frequently referring to the USA as “the most dangerous imperialist power”, and the USA frequently attacked by Chinese propaganda in the worst manner.

Later, President Kennedy believed that US policy towards China was “nonsensical”, and he considered reestablishing diplomatic ties in his second term. However, Kennedy’s assassination in late 1963, followed by the Vietnam War and China’s Cultural Revolution, ended any possibility of normalized relations with Beijing for years.  Despite this official non-recognition, the USA and China held 136 meetings at the ambassadorial level.

 

The end of the 1960s brought a period of transformation. For China, when American president Johnson decided to wind down the Vietnam war in 1968, it gave China an impression that the US had no interest of expanding in Asia anymore while the USSR became a more serious threat as it intervened in Czechoslovakia to displace a communist government and might well interfere in China.

This became an especially important concern for the People’s Republic of China after the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969. The PRC was diplomatically isolated and the leadership came to believe that improved relations with the USA would be a useful counterbalance to the Soviet threat. Zhou Enlai, the Premier of China, was at the forefront of this effort with the committed backing of Chairman Mao Zedong. In 1969, the United States initiated measures to relax trade restrictions and other impediments to bilateral contact, to which China responded. However, this rapprochement process was stalled by the Vietnam War where China was supporting the enemies of the USA Communication between Chinese and American leaders, however, was conducted with Pakistan and Poland as intermediaries.

Kennedy’s assassination in late 1963, followed by the Vietnam War and Cultural Revolution, ended any possibility of normalized relations with Beijing for years.

The Cultural Revolution brought about near-complete isolation of China from the outside world and vocal denunciations of both US imperialism and Soviet revisionism.

Beginning in 1967, the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission established the China Claims Program, in which American citizens could denominate the sum total of their lost assets and property following the Communist seizure of foreign property in 1950. American companies were reluctant to invest in China despite (future Chairman) Deng Xiaoping’s reassurances of a stable business environment.

Many saw the specter of Communist China behind communist movements in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, but a growing number concluded that if the PRC would align with the US it would mean a major redistribution of global power against the Soviets. Mainland China’s market of nearly one billion consumers appealed to American business

In April 1971, the athletes became the first Americans to officially visit China since the communist takeover. The smooth acceptance of this so-called “ping-pong diplomacy” gave confidence to both sides. In July 1971, Henry Kissinger feigned illness while on a trip to Pakistan and did not appear in public for a day. He was actually on a top-secret mission to Beijing to negotiate with Zhou Enlai.

Kissinger and his aides did not receive a warm welcome in Beijing, and the hotel they stayed in was equipped with pamphlets excoriating US imperialism. However, the meeting with Zhou Enlai was productive, and the Chinese premier expressed his hope for improved Sino-US relations. He commented that the US had intentionally isolated China, not vice-versa, and any initiative to restore diplomatic ties had to come from the American side. Zhou spoke of the late President Kennedy’s plans to restore relations with China and told Kissinger

From February 21 to February 28, 1972, President Nixon traveled to Beijing, Hangzhou, and Shanghai. At the conclusion of his trip, the US and the PRC issued the Shanghai Communiqué, a statement of their respective foreign policy views. In the Communiqué, both nations pledged to work toward the full normalization of diplomatic relations. This did not lead to immediate recognition of the People’s Republic of China but ‘liaison offices’ were established in Beijing and Washington.

The USA acknowledged the PRC position that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The statement enabled the US and PRC to temporarily set aside the issue of Taiwan and open trade and communication. Also, the USA and China both agreed to take action against ‘any country’ that is to establish ‘hegemony’ in the Asia-Pacific.

Most major anti-US propaganda disappeared in China after the Nixon visit; although there was still occasional criticism of US imperialism, the Soviet Union had definitively become China’s arch-foe in the 1970s.

The rapprochement with the USA benefited the PRC immensely and greatly increased its security for the rest of the Cold War. It has been argued that the USA. Eventually, however, the PRC’s suspicion of Vietnam’s motives led to a break in Sino-Vietnamese cooperation and, upon the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia in 1979, the Sino-Vietnamese War. Both China and the United States backed combatants in Africa against Soviet and Cuban-supported movements. The economic benefits of normalization were slow as it would take decades for American products to penetrate the vast Chinese market. While Nixon’s China policy is regarded by many as the highlight of his presidency.

In the Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations, dated January 1, 1979, the United States transferred diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. The US reiterated the Shanghai Communiqué’s acknowledgment of the Chinese position that there is only ‘one China’ and that Taiwan is a part of China; Beijing acknowledged that the American people would continue to carry on commercial, cultural, and other unofficial contacts with the people of Taiwan

Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping’s January 1979 visit to Washington initiated a series of important, high-level exchanges which continued until the spring of 1989. This resulted in many bilateral agreements, especially in the fields of scientific, technological, and cultural interchange, as well as trade relations. Since early 1979, the USA and the PRC have initiated hundreds of joint research projects and cooperative programs under the Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology, the largest bilateral program. On March 1, 1979, the two countries formally established embassies in each other’s capitals, outstanding private claims were resolved and a bilateral trade agreement was completed

Sino-US military cooperation also began in 1979; American arms sales to China were initiated, and in 1981 it was revealed that a joint Sino-US listening post had been operated in Xinjiang, near the Soviet border. Chinese demands for advanced technology from the US were not always met,

As a consequence of high-level and working-level contacts initiated in 1980, New York City and Beijing become sister cities, US dialogue with the PRC broadened to cover a wide range of issues, including global and regional strategic problems, political-military questions, including arms control, UN, and other multilateral organization affairs, and international narcotics matters.

High-level exchanges continued to be a significant means for developing US-PRC relations in the 1980s. President Ronald Reagan and Premier Zhao Ziyang made reciprocal visits in 1984. Reagan’s first two years in office saw some deterioration in Sino-US relations due to the president’s vociferous anti-communism, as well as the inability of the two nations to come to a common understanding over the Korean standoff, the Israel-Palestine conflict, or the Falkland War. In 1982, Deng Xiaoping, in a reiteration of Mao Zedong’s “Three Worlds” theory, criticized both the US and Soviet Union for imperialism.

In the period before the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, a growing number of cultural exchange activities gave the American and Chinese people’s broad exposure to each other’s cultural, artistic, and educational achievements. Numerous mainland Chinese professional and official delegations visited the USA each month. Many of these exchanges continued even after the suppression of the Tiananmen protests. The expanding relationship that followed normalization was threatened in 1981 by PRC objections to the level of US arms sales to the Republic of China on Taiwan. Following China’s violent suppression of political protests in June 1989, the US and other governments enacted a number of measures against China’s violation of human rights. Tiananmen event disrupted the US-China trade relationship, and US investors’ interest in mainland China dropped dramatically. Tourist traffic fell off sharply. The Bush administration denounced the repression and suspended certain trade and investment programs on June 5 and 20, 1989.

Relations with China began under George Washington, leading to the 1845 Treaty of Wangxia. The USA was allied to the Republic of China (now Taiwan) during the Pacific war, but broke off relations with China for 25 years when the communist government took over, until Richard Nixon’s 1972 visit to China. Since Nixon, every successive US president has toured China.

In the first public sign of warming relations between Washington and Beijing, China’s ping-pong team invites members of the US team to China on April 6, 1971. Journalists accompanying the U.S. players are among the first Americans allowed to enter China since 1949. In July of 1971, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger makes a secret trip to China. Shortly thereafter, the United Nations recognizes the People’s Republic of China, endowing it with the permanent Security Council seat that had been held by Chiang Kai-shek’s Republic of China on Taiwan since 1945.

Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong establishes the People’s Republic of China in Beijing on October 1 1845 after peasant-backed Communists defeat the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang and thousands of his troops flee to Taiwan. The United States—which backed the Nationalists against invading Japanese forces during World War II—supports Chiang’s exiled Republic of China government in Taipei, setting the stage for several decades of limited US relations with mainland China.

The Soviet-backed North Korean People’s Army invaded South Korea on June 25. 1945 The United Nations and the United States rush to South Korea’s defense. China, in support of the communist North, retaliates when USA, UN, and South Korean troops approach the Chinese border. As many as four million people die in the three-year conflict until the United Nations, China, and North Korea sign an armistice agreement in 1953

In 1959, nine years after the People’s Republic of China asserted control over Tibet, a widespread uprising occurs in Lhasa. Thousands die in the ensuing crackdown by PRC forces, and the Dalai Lama flees to India. The United States joins the United Nations in condemning Beijing for human rights abuses in Tibet, while the Central Intelligence Agency helps arm the Tibetan resistance beginning in the late 1950s.

President Richard Nixon spends eight days in China in February 1972, during which he meets Chairman Mao Zedong and signs the Shanghai Communiqué with Premier Zhou Enlai. The communiqué sets the stage for improved US-Sino relations by allowing China and the United States to discuss difficult issues, particularly Taiwan. However, normalization of relations between the two countries makes slow progress for much of the decade.

China joined the nuclear club in October 1964 when it conducts its first test of an atomic bomb. The test comes amid US-Sino tensions over the escalating conflict in Vietnam. By the time of the test, China has amassed troops along its border with Vietnam.

US President Jimmy Carter grants China full diplomatic recognition, while acknowledging mainland China’s One China principle and severing normal ties with Taiwan. Chinese Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping, who leads China through major economic reforms, visits the United States shortly thereafter. However, in April, Congress approves the Taiwan Relations Act, allowing continued commercial and cultural relations between the United States and Taiwan. The act requires Washington to provide Taipei with defensive arms, but does not officially violate the USA’s One China policy.

The Reagan regime signed in August 1982 a third joint communiqué with the People’s Republic of China to normalize relations. It reaffirms the U.S. commitment to its One China policy. Though Ronald Reagan voices support for stronger ties with Taiwan during his presidential campaign, his administration works to improve Beijing-Washington relations at the height of U.S. concerns over Soviet expansionism. President Reagan visits China in April 1984 and in June; the US government permits Beijing to make purchases of US military equipment

In the spring of 1989, thousands of students hold demonstrations in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, demanding democratic reforms and an end to corruption. On June 3, the government sends in military troops to clear the square, leaving hundreds of protesters dead. In response, the U.S. government suspends military sales to Beijing and freezes relations.

In September 1993, China releases Wei Jingsheng, a political prisoner since 1979. That year, President Bill Clinton launches a policy of “constructive engagement” with China. However, after Beijing loses its bid to host the 2000 Olympic Games, the Chinese government imprisons Wei again. Four years later, Clinton secures the release of Wei and Tiananmen Square protester Wang Dan. Beijing deports both dissidents to the USA.

NATO accidentally bombs the Chinese embassy in Belgrade during its campaign against Serbian forces occupying Kosovo in May 1999, shaking US-Sino relations. The USA and NATO offer apologies for the series of US intelligence mistakes that led to the deadly bombing, but thousands of Chinese demonstrators protest throughout the country, attacking official US property.

US President Bill Clinton signed the US-China Relations Act of 2000 in October, granting Beijing permanent normal trade relations with the United States and paving the way for China to join the World Trade Organization in 2001. Between 1980 and 2004, US-China trade rises from $5 billion to $231 billion. In 2006, China surpasses Mexico as the United States’ second-biggest trade partner, after Canada.

In April 2001, a US reconnaissance plane collides with a Chinese fighter and makes an emergency landing on Chinese territory. President George W. Bush expresses regret over the death of a Chinese pilot and the landing of the US plane.

After North Korea conducts its first nuclear test in October 2006, China serves as a mediator to bring Pyongyang back to the negotiating table.

US President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlined a US “pivot” to Asia. Clinton’s called for “increased investment—diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise—in the Asia-Pacific region” is seen as a move to counter China’s growing clout. That month, at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, President Obama announces the United States and eight other nations have reached an agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership—a multinational free trade agreement. Obama later announces plans to deploy 2,500 marines in Australia, prompting criticism from Beijing.

The 18th National Party Congress 2012 concludes with the most significant leadership turnover in decades as about 70 percent of the members of the country’s major leadership bodies—the Politburo Standing Committee, the Central Military Commission, and the State Council—are replaced. Li Keqiang assumes the role of premier, while Xi Jinping replaces Hu Jintao as president, Communist Party general secretary, and chairman of the Central Military Commission. Xi delivers a series of speeches on the “rejuvenation” of China.

In 2013 the US President Barack Obama hosted Chinese President Xi Jinping for a “shirt-sleeves summit” at the Sunnylands Estate in California in a bid to build a personal rapport with his counterpart and ease tense US-China relations. The presidents pledge to cooperate more effectively on pressing bilateral, regional, and global issues, including climate change and North Korea. Obama and Xi also vow to establish a “new model” of relations, a nod to Xi’s concept of establishing a “new type of great power relations” for the United States and China.

On the sidelines of the 2014 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping issue a joint statement on climate change, pledging to reduce carbon emissions. Obama sets a more ambitious target for US emissions cutbacks, and Xi makes China’s first promise to curb carbon emissions’ growth by 2030. These commitments by the world’s top polluters stirred hopes among some experts that they would boost momentum for global negotiations ahead of the 2015 UN-led Climate Change Conference in Paris.

 

South China Sea

Relations between the two countries have generally been stable with some periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Currently, China and the USA have mutual political, economic, and security interests, including but not limited to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, although there are unresolved concerns relating to the role of democracy in government in China and human rights in both respective countries. China is the largest foreign creditor of the USA. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea.

As the US government charts next steps with China, it should widen the aperture of its focus. In the past, the USA has convinced China to assume greater responsibility on issues ranging from climate change to peacekeeping and public health. China’s contributions have reduced the need for the USA to do more. Under US pressure, China also moderated its behavior on issues such as cyber-enabled espionage for commercial gain. Additionally, there are other issues that previous administrations have put near the top of the agenda, notably the South China Sea and human rights, which have gotten short shrift from the Trump team. There are reasonable arguments why neither should be at the top of the agenda.

US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter called on China to halt its controversial land reclamation efforts in the South China Sea, saying that the USA opposes “any further militarization” of the disputed territory. Ahead of the conference, US officials say that images from US naval surveillance provide evidence that China is placing military equipment on a chain of artificial islands, despite Beijing’s claims that construction is mainly for civilian purposes.

US options in the South China Sea mostly involve military deployments, exercises, and freedom of navigation operations, which the administration has tried to regularize, as diplomatic options have become less attractive with the defection of the Philippines under President Duterte from solidarity on political and legal issues. But US prestige and influence in Southeast Asia depend upon our visible involvement and leadership on South China Sea issues, so there will have to be a diplomatic component supplementing the work of Pacific Command. As for human rights, Trump has a valid point in contending that the United States needs to balance its concerns with other issues not only in China but throughout the world. But if Washington is seen as indifferent to human rights after decades of championing the cause, the damage to the perception of our country, not least among ordinary people in China, will be substantial.

As of April 2017, ongoing maritime disputes in the South China Sea have strained relations between the two. America has conducted freedom of navigation patrols in the region to underscore the US’ position that the artificial islands constructed by China are located in international waters.

 

 

  1. Issues and strains

At the outset one important thing must be cleared right here so that there is no confusion about growing economic ties of USA and China in areas of market economy and investments and cooperation in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

As veto powers, USA and China coordinate on many regional and global issues.  They have tacit understanding against Islam and in making Muslims appear to be the terrorists- a major agenda of USA-Israel-Germany trio. Though both share tensions and issues, there is one common factor that binds them: veto status on UNSC. Unlike USA that uses its veto mainly to defend the Zionist crimes against humanity, China rarely uses the veto that too only to defend its own interests if threatened.

At people’s level, Americans and Chinese do not appreciate each other and do not favor better ties. As of 2015, China’s public opinion of the USA is at 44%, while the US public opinion of China is somewhat lower at 38%. The highest recorded favorable opinion of the USA was at 58% (2010) and the lowest at 38% (2007). Conversely, the highest recorded favorable opinion of China was at 52% (2006) and the lowest at 35% (2014).

When normal US presidents before Trump could not achieve nay tamable breakthrough in US-China relations, a proven roguish president Trump cannot make any real difference to the world order and fundamental change in US-China or US Russia relations.

Pretensions should not be taken for real.

Sino-Soviet border conflict: Differences over security, ideology, and development models strain Sino-Soviet relations. China’s radical industrialization policies, known as the Great Leap Forward, lead the Soviet Union to withdraw advisors in 1960. Disagreements culminate in border skirmishes in March 1969. Moscow replaces Washington as China’s biggest threat, and the Sino-Soviet split contributes to Beijing’s eventual rapprochement with the USA.

Relations between the two countries have generally been stable with some periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War in which China opposed US aggression and interventionist strategies.

Currently, China and the USA have mutual political, economic, and security interests, including but not limited to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, although there are unresolved concerns relating to the role of democracy in government in China and human rights in both respective countries. China is the largest foreign creditor of the USA.

While the violation of human rights always been criticized by Washington, the issue South China Sea is a recent conflictual concern- both have been top issues between USA and China. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea. US options in the South China Sea mostly involve military deployments, exercises, and freedom of navigation operations, which the White House has tried to regularize, as diplomatic options have become less attractive with the defection of the Philippines under President Duterte from solidarity on political and legal issues.

Interestingly, American rulers criticize little about human right problem as they view the economic and   regional as well as North Korean issue more important than HR. That is exactly America is doing with regard to HR problems in Russia.  If Washington is seen as indifferent to human rights after decades of championing the cause, the damage to the perception of USA, not least among ordinary people in China, will be substantial.

US prestige and influence in East and Southeast Asia depend upon its visible involvement and leadership on South China Sea issues, so there will have to be a diplomatic component supplementing the work of Pacific Command.

As of April 2017, ongoing maritime disputes in the South China Sea have strained relations between the two. America has conducted freedom of navigation patrols in the region to underscore the US’ position that the artificial islands constructed by China are located in international waters.

With North Korea on the brink of being able, according to US strategists, to strike the USA with a nuclear missile, President Trump must increase pressure on Pyongyang and its enablers, especially Beijing.

US strategists say these will be important moments for Trump not to fall prey to China’s efforts to visually demean the US president. They argued that the Chinese would do everything humanly possible to prevent Trump from saying or doing anything extemporaneously. The symbols and messages of the visit will instead be conveyed through official photographs and tightly scripted press sprays. Recall the favorite photo of China’s state-run media from Florida that captured an erudite Xi tutoring a diminished Trump slumped on a couch.

After the failed attempt by Obama with his Asia pivot to contain China in Asia with the help of India, others, now Trump seems to be approaching the issue differently as top US businessman.  However, he has not yet reveled his mind to   the public or experts

However, President Trump is using “stick and carrot” card as a mere gimmick as he is the first American president to sanction a Chinese bank for helping North Korea evade US and UN economic sanctions. Obviously China is annoyed and worried about its economic growth and decided to pretend to be on US side.

Irrational and erratic Trump cannot make any positive contribution to the bilateral relations with any nation globally; relations with China have strained under Barack Obama’s Asia pivot strategy.  Just because Obama failed to achieve anything with China and only could spoil even the routine ties, Trump cannot be expected to get the relations on steady foot.  The US support for Japan in the Senkaku Islands dispute, as well as Donald Trump’s threat to declare China a “currency manipulation” as part of a potential trade war would not suggest Trump really seeks a better relationship with China.

The Trump team has no theory of success in Beijing; his stop in China was the least important of the five-country tour. Whether Trump got China right would depend more on his ability during the other parts of his Asia swing to evince both an enduring commitment to America’s allies and a modicum of US regional leadership.

Officially a communist nation pursuing Socialist policies indoors and a mixed agenda abroad, China has developed trade relations with US superpower along with it also shares the veto power on UNSC. USA has been employing many countries in Asia including those he is visiting now and India to contain the Chinese influence on the continent and beyond.

Unlike Russia which as equal super power maintains tensions with USA for several reasons, including dismantling of NATO, China, focused on attaining economic superpower status, always avoids tensions with USA and Europe. This shrewd diplomacy has helped Beijing to be focused on its own problems indoors and outside.

 

China’s niceties of diplomacy

When they met at US President Donald Trump‘s Mar-a-Lago estate in April, China‘s President Xi Jinping found a way to charm the mercurial former real estate mogul. Trump hailed the “good chemistry” of the sunny summit in Florida and predicted, “lots of very potentially bad problems will be going away.”

The “bromance” is set to continue when Xi returns the favour by laying on a lavish welcome for Trump‘s visit starting on Wednesday. Xi has grown more powerful since their last meeting, while Trump is under a political cloud after his former campaign manager was indicted in an intensifying investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Chinese experts say Beijing has learned to manage Trump, a real-estate mogul who had never held elective office before becoming president, and whose administration in its first 10 months has been turbulent. “China has an objective view of him. We’re going to make him feel comfortable,” said Wang Yiwei, a professor of international relations at Renmin University. “He may end up being re-elected. We need to look at this from a long-term perspective, and not view him as an ‘other’ or a joke.”

 

  1. Trump’s business mentality and world peace

An advanced capitalist promoting US imperialism, Trump applies his business skills to improve relations with red China. As such he has no knowledge or experience in foreign policy matters.

The Trump government therefore has not presented a coherent public explanation of how it views China, what kind of relationship it seeks to cultivate, or how it plans to do so.

Some senior officials have however said they wish to see the US-China relationship constructive and results-oriented, including by expanding cooperation, accepting healthy competition, and seeking to avoid confrontation. Secretary Tillerson, in particular, has spoken of the necessity to think forward 50 years about the type of relationship the USA should have with China, indicating that he understands the lessons of the trajectory of the last 50 years.

Trump has been searching for leaders to be used as leverage who can pursue the North Korean nuclear ambitions and thought of option like Russia, Taiwan, China, from bashing China for stealing American jobs to exaggerating China’s modest concessions on market access, he said would consult with President Xi before engaging Taiwan’s leaders and he began hailing his personal chemistry with President Xi.

The impact of the president’s lurches has been compounded by the well-documented divergence among his senior advisors on China. Mattis, Tillerson, McMaster, Kelly, and Dunford have taken a relatively pragmatic approach, seeming to place value in stable relations and dialogue to solve problems. An influential group of the president’s advisors, including Ross, Lighthizer, Navarro, and Bannon, advocate a harder-edged response to Chinese challenges to US primacy.

In the absence of an overarching strategy, Beijing is left to parse statements from senior US officials for clues about Washington’s intentions toward China. The president has been moving from bashing China for stealing American jobs to exaggerating China’s modest concessions on market access to praise him a good man.

As a consequence of both the president’s frequently changing views and the variance in perspectives among his senior advisors, Washington does not appear to possess clarity on what type of relationship it seeks to build with China. This cognitive dissonance inhibits Washington’s ability to elicit Chinese support for steps to strengthen the relationship over the long run.

More recently, he has aroused alarm in Beijing over his intentions toward North Korea by raising the specter of military “fire and fury” along China’s border.

However, despite these shortcomings, Trump has had one important asset that has served as an anchor, namely his personal relationship with Xi Jinping. The Mar-a-Lago meeting in March, concentrating on building personal bonds rather than resolving issues, was well-conceived and well-executed. Trump came out with a genuine high regard and respect for Xi, and Xi clearly values his personal relationship with Trump as well.

Their relationship is, ironically, unburdened by the values disputes that have poisoned Trump’s relationships with European allies.

Many in his government sometimes argue for harshly punitive measures against China, they are restrained by the Trump-Xi relationship and by the risk of a sharp reaction from the president if they misread his intentions.

The Trump-Xi relationship has similarly restrained Chinese official responses to Trump government’s statements and actions that normally would have elicited a strong response.

Trump’s planned trip to China offered an opportunity for the two sides to make substantial progress on North Korea or trade issues.

In terms of output from these dialogues the Trump record has been disappointing. Experience has shown that progress depends on clear identification of US priorities and an agreed game plan for addressing Chinese priorities. Likewise, negotiators need to be empowered to set up the dialogues and follow-up persistently after talks conclude. On this count, the administration has been handicapped by its failure to nominate and confirm undersecretaries and assistant secretaries within key departments that normally would carry out such functions. The key working level officials at the State Department and National Security Council are capable and knowledgeable, but they need much more help.

Trump’s concentrated focus on North Korea and trade is a departure from the approach of the past governments, which deliberately grounded US-China relations in a broad range of areas of cooperation, which served as guardrails to keep the relationship from veering off track.

With the affirmative agenda now narrowed to North Korea and trade, there is a greater demand to deliver results on these two preeminent issues. On North Korea, the Trump administration has been right to push China to do more. Through both intensive engagement and the credible threat of sanctions on Chinese companies, the administration secured some gains with China—implementation of a coal ban, support for stiffer sanctions at the United Nations, and increased scrutiny of Chinese commerce crossing the border with North Korea. The administration should continue to try to work with Beijing on North Korea, because there can be no serious progress in peacefully reining in North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs without China’s cooperation.

While pushing the Chinese to do more, the administration needs to understand that Beijing’s leverage over Pyongyang is limited, and that attempting to farm out the North Korean problem to Beijing won’t deliver progress toward peaceful denuclearization, but it will generate needless friction in the US-China relationship. Beijing’s willingness to work with America will depend on China’s trust that the administration knows what it is doing, that it is cognizant of China’s interests on the Korean Peninsula, that it is not aggravating the situation with incendiary rhetoric, and that it does not risk blundering into a planned or unplanned war. Some of the president’s recent comments give little confidence in this regard.

On trade, the administration’s attitude has shifted course several times. After heated rhetoric during the campaign (including pledges to name China a currency manipulator on day one, impose a 45 percent tariff on imports), initial interactions with the Chinese were positive. President Trump and President Xi held a summit at Mar-a-Lago and set up the Comprehensive Economic Dialogue (CED), styled after the approach of the last two American presidents. This process yielded an early harvest that administration officials hailed as major breakthroughs with China.

But the July CED meeting was a failure. Trump rejected the deal negotiated between his secretaries and the Chinese. This week, Trump directed the U.S. Trade Representative to study whether it should launch a Section 301 investigation into Chinese violations of intellectual property rights, especially as it relates to forced technology transfers. At the same time, an investigation is ongoing into whether steel imports pose a threat to national security.

All of this leaves the Chinese side understandably confused: Are we continuing to negotiate small openings, which is all that China will accept at the moment (before this fall’s 19th Party Congress)? Or are we moving towards significant unilateral protectionist measures against Chinese imports and investment outside the framework of the World Trade Organization that invite China and other countries to do the same? The risk of a hardline approach is that China will not change anytime soon, but likely will feel compelled to retaliate, and tit-for-tat protectionist measureswill hurt the U.S. and global economies.

Also unhelpful is the continuing focus on the trade balance as a metric of who wins and who loses from trade. The trade balance is equal to the difference between saving and investment and is influenced by many factors. If the Federal Reserve normalizes interest rates and Congress enacts deficit-increasing tax cuts, then it is very likely that the US trade deficit will rise, regardless of what China does. Making the trade balance, rather than market access, the key issue is bad economics and sets the administration up for failure.

 

  1. Does Trump respect Xi?

 

A ‘great friend’ China has great economic agenda and it plans to  make entire world to contribute to its striving  for the status superpower to eventually replace USA. However, unlike USA which does everything only for its exclusive advantages, Beijing permits the “belt” countries also to get benefits.

As part of its economic boost, Chinese military spending has been increasing year by year. In March 2007, China announced an 18 percent budget increase in defense spending for 2007, totaling more than $45 billion. Increases in military expenditures average 15 percent a year from 1990 to 2005.

In September 2008, China surpasses Japan to become the largest holder of US debt—or treasuries—at around $600 billion. The growing interdependence between the US and Chinese economies becomes evident as a financial crisis threatens the global economy, fueling concerns over US-China economic imbalances.

Trump’s stop in Beijing is billed as a “state visit plus” to mark the importance of the dynamic between himself and President Xi, as well as relations between the US superpower and China’s fast-growing economy and armed forces. Trump already calls Xi a great friend. Earlier, Trump called Russian strong man Putn as also a great friend.

Days ahead of Trump taking office, Xi was the keynote speaker at the World Economic Forum in Davos, offering a vigorous defence of globalization. Trump formally withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership his first week in office, distancing America from its Asian allies.  “Xi is strong and confident with a vision for where he wants his country to go,” said one Beijing-based Western diplomat. “Trump just seems to spend his time arguing with everyone.” Trump in office put aside his grievances about China‘s trade and currency practices, aired vociferously during the campaign, to get China behind his strategy of punishing sanctions on North Korea for its escalating missile and nuclear tests.

And Beijing accommodated him when he grew frustrated.

Washington’s policy for four decades has recognized that there is but one China. Under this policy, the USA has maintained formal ties with the People’s Republic of China but also maintains unofficial ties with Taiwan, including the provision of defense aid. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, visiting Beijing in March, describes the U.S.-China relationship as one “built on non-confrontation, no conflict, mutual respect, and always searching for win-win solutions.”

 

Relations between the two countries have generally been stable with some periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Currently, China and the United States have mutual political, economic, and security interests, including but not limited to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, although there are unresolved concerns relating to the role of democracy in government in China and human rights in both respective countries. China is the largest foreign creditor of the USA. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea.

The two leaders are in different positions. Xi has just emerged from a glowing five-yearly Communist Party congress; Trump has low approval ratings of 34 percent and is battling a probe about election collusion with Russia. He faces condemnations form both Democratic and Republican pastries.

The election and ascension of current US President Donald Trump has considerably strained US-China relations with multiple news outlets anticipating potential trade or military conflict between the USA and China. This is largely due to comments made during his presidential campaign citing Chinese currency manipulation and outsourcing of American trade to China.

Public opinion of the other country tends to fluctuate around 40 to 50 percent favorability. As of 2015, China’s public opinion of the U.S. is at 44%, while the US public opinion of China is somewhat lower at 38%.The highest recorded favorable opinion of the United States was at 58% (2010) and the lowest at 38% (2007). Conversely, the highest recorded favorable opinion of China was at 52% (2006) and the lowest at 35% (2014).

Trump says he will honor the One China policy in a call with Chinese President Xi Jinping. After winning the presidential election, Trump breaks with established practice by speaking on the telephone with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and questioning the U.S. commitment to its One China policy.

While railing against the US trade deficit with China, he has put the blame for that squarely on his predecessors and expressed admiration for China‘s leader.

In a congratulatory phone call, Trump hailed the “extraordinary elevation” of Xi, whose political thoughts were enshrined in the Communist Party’s constitution last month during a congress marking the start of his second term. In an interview with Fox Business Network’s Lou Dobbs, Trump gushed that “some people might call him the king of China” and “people say we have the best relationship of any president-president”.

China‘s ambassador to the United States, Cui Tiankai, said Trump will receive a “state visit-plus” experience in Beijing.

While it is unclear what the “plus” means – Trump is expected to go to the Forbidden City, but China has released few details – a protocol that lets Trump “rejoice in grandiosity” will be important to keeping relations stable, said Teng Jianqun, head of American Studies at Foreign Ministry think-tank China Institute for International Studies. “We must seize upon his special characteristics, such as liking instant gratification, and set up some things that bring immediate results,” he said.

On the commercial front, that means a slew of deals – and worries among some in the US business community that the transactional Trump will be placated by a handful of contract wins instead of resolving long-standing complaints about discriminatory Chinese policies and market access restrictions.

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zheng Zeguang told reporters on Friday that China would “create a good atmosphere” with informal activities for the two presidents, so they have ample time to talk about important issues. Zheng said that at the April summit, Trump and his wife Melania had extended an “extremely warm, friendly and thoughtful” reception to Xi and his wife Peng Liyuan. “The Chinese people demand that courtesy be repaid in kind,” he said.

The divisive figure Trump is in the United States and its allies in Europe and elsewhere Trump, cannot be a popular figure for the people of China  many neo-capitalists in China might admire his business acumen.

The ruling Communist Party’s official People’s Daily marked China‘s announcement of his visit with a picture of a beaming Trump and the headline “Trump‘s coming!”

Days after Trump‘s September 4 rhetoric that the United States was considering “stopping all trade with any country doing business with North Korea,” Beijing ordered North Korean companies operating within its borders to shut down, banned its exports of textiles and reduced China’s oil exports to the North.

But with North Korea occupying most of the Trump administration’s attention in Asia, China‘s construction of military facilities on artificial islands in disputed waters of the South China Sea has seemingly fallen off the radar. Beijing does still get irritated about US navy “freedom of navigation” patrols there, which have continued under Trump. “Trump is very popular with the (Chinese) military,” said a Chinese official with ties to the military, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It’s great for China that the United States is in chaos. It means we don’t have to worry about them challenging us.”

Tillerson has already signaled the limits of Washington’s patience with China. Ahead of a trip to India recently, Tillerson said that “China, while rising alongside India, has done so less responsibly, at times undermining the international, rules-based order,” and he criticized China for its “predatory economics” and its “provocative actions in the South China Sea”.

At last month’s party congress, Xi laid out a vision for a prosperous and assertive China taking a bigger place on the global stage.

The US Congress left China with greater confidence and lung power, more unhurried in its dealings with the USA.

 

  1. Is entire world Trump’s enemy?   

 

It looks like that.

Rationalists join hands to propagate their ideals to the public. True nationalists try to keep the nation united. Lefts have their own agenda for the societies and world. Fascists operate together to attack other nations and take away their valuables. Racists also have got their agendas to divide people according to the color and nationalities.

Birds of the same feather flock together, an old proverb goes like that.

Anti-Islamic racism has become the favorite idea of Trump and Netanyahu, among others. Trump is working towards making Islam and Islamism as being threat to Western imperialism. His announcement of denying entry for Muslims into USA is one of his first steps in that direction.  He ensured the support of Netanyahu by declaring Jerusalem as the new capital of fascist Israel is another step.

Generating hatred against a particular nation or people or race has been a success story of Trump in months. Maybe, Trump feels vulnerable to all sorts of personal and private influences that under no circumstance serve US interests.

Trump’s 12-day trip to Asia – the longest by a US president in a quarter-century – will give him a chance to reassure ‘friends and allies’ in the region, who have expressed uncertainty about his “America First” policies. One-on-one leader meetings are traditionally an opportunity for US presidents to deliver direct, sensitive messages to their counterparts.

Chinese President Xi Jinping no doubt flatters his American guest as a diplomatic necessity, hoping that President Trump prefers the image of a successful summit to a confrontation over sanctions.

Using the economic and political ties to divide Russo-China relations thereby isolate Russia has been one of the major thrusts of US policy for China. Though the media continue to harp on the “friendly” relations between Trump and Put, there cannot be any real chance for credible improvement in the bilateral ties. Trump is a businessman who knows how to create news.

Trump should be a gracious guest, but he should also be cognizant that his comments will air for weeks and months on Chinese propaganda in the service of strengthening Xi internally and diminishing the standing of the United States throughout Asia. Trump’s aides should explain the damaging effects of his public fealty to Xi.

While the two leaders projected a cordial relationship in public, President Trump would have warned Xi in private that Washington would move forward with robust sanctions targeting Chinese companies and banks that facilitate North Korea’s evasion of sanctions.

Chinese entities that strengthen North Korea’s economy by getting around sanctions undermine the American policy of financially isolating North Korea. That isolation, for USA, is key to gaining leverage as a means to prevent a military conflict.

The principal failing of Trump’s approach to China has been his singular focus on North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs at the expense of other vital US interests. Trump is far more likely to elicit Chinese cooperation on North Korea if America is seen as strong and principled, rather than wavering and willing to bargain away its interests for the right price. If the president wants to prove he’s tough on North Korea, he’ll need to be similarly so on the South China Sea, Taiwan and human rights. Failing to press Xi on these issues—both publicly and privately—would be read in China and throughout the region as US weakness.

Trump himself has said repeatedly that he’s not going to give Xi a hard time on Taiwan or trade as long as China is helping to pressure Pyongyang. This is a tragic misunderstanding of what constitutes US leverage and power in its relationship with China. The single worst thing the Trump government could do in Beijing would be to sign a joint declaration that hangs like an albatross on US-Asia policy.

China would try to pin Trump down on all sorts of symbolic platitudes, which—while seemingly harmless—would invariably be read throughout Asia as US retreat and acquiescence. Experts said the Trump team wasn’t going to outsmart the Chinese.

President Donald J. Trump’s message must be consistent: denuclearization is America’s vision for entire world, including USA, and not the Korean Peninsula or Iran alone.  Egregious history of nuclear, chemical and missile proliferation by many nuclear powers including USA and Israel requires urgent denuclearization globally.. Coordinated sanctions actions targeting the economies of select countries is not in the best interests of prosperity of the globe

Trump’s Beijing trip would service Xi’s domestic political interests, bolstering his image among the Chinese people as a co-equal of the American president. It will also afford Xi the opportunity to flatter Trump and convince him that the USA should both accommodate China’s core interests and back away from any punitive or destabilizing measures on trade, North Korea, the South China Sea and Taiwan that would disrupt an otherwise healthy and positive US-China relationship. Prospects for significant policy breakthroughs are slim to none.

Neocons had suggested to President Trump to seize the opportunity on this trip to build a multilateral coalition outside the UN of likeminded countries (South Korea, Japan, Australia, Britain, France and Germany) that commits to increasing pressure on North Korea. Trump and this group of nations must discourage South Korea from drawing closer to Beijing and should target North Korean shipping by declaring that all vessels linked to North Korea can be inspected under UN and international law.

Trump has already sanctioned Chinese and Russian facilitators of North Korea’s sanctions evasion and in September sanctioned 26 overseas representatives of North Korean banks. These actions are a clear warning shot to Beijing that Washington is widely expected to target additional Chinese nationals and banks that play a key role in these illegal schemes.

There is a constant advice that Trump government should take a page from the Iran sanctions playbook and issue fines against Chinese banks for failing to identify North Korean transactions – similar to the $12 billion in fines issued from 2012 to 2015 against European banks for Iran sanctions violations.

It was said while the USA has already lowered expectations to nearly zero for what it hopes to achieve, success would be measured by what Trump doesn’t do in Beijing. The best the USA can hope for is that Trump departs China without doing significant damage to US interests in the region.

China has responded well to US pressure so far. It issued a banking directive prohibiting financial transactions with North Koreans and another directive prohibiting North Korean businesses in China and joint ventures.

All said and done, President Trump, a big American showman and dramatician, may not be willing to strain the Sino-US relations beyond certain acceptable limits.

It seems Trump hates not just Islam or Muslim nations alone but entire world and humanity. He just pretends to love China and Russia and even calls Putin and Xi a great people. But an anti-humanist and imperialist Trump cannot love any nation that has something to do with communism and socialism now or in the past.

Hatred for Islam and anti-Islamism of these countries cannot be a basis for reliable ties with war mongering capitalist America.

Burma: State genocides as part of ethnic cleansing

Burma: State genocides as part of ethnic cleansing

At least 6,700 Rohingya were killed in August alone after violence broke out!

Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

________

Torturing and murdering of Muslims and insulting Islam and making it appear to be a terrorist religion is not new but has been the phenomenon of last century but continuing this century as well. That Islam alone remains a living religion with a strong message for the humanity has unnerved many who hate Islam.

Anti-Islamism and Islamophobia are now the global phenomena, terrorizing global Muslims. Enemies of Islam pounce upon Muslims everywhere at times just for fun. The trends have made life difficult for Muslims as governments refuse Muslims jobs, deny them salary, force Muslims to quit the hard earned jobs and deny them pension, thereby  denying  the Muslims the right to exit, work and live with honor. .  .

Since Muslims, unlike peoples of other religions, do not have their world leader, let along national leaders, to guide them according to the Islamic life patterns.

The Rohingya is one category of Muslim community in Burma in South East Asia that has no leader to guide and secure their lives and habitat and hence they are being targeted and killed by the regime and military.

The Rohingya, who numbered around one million in Myanmar at the start of the year, are one of the many ethnic minorities in the country. Rohingya Muslims represent the largest percentage of Muslims in Myanmar, with the majority living in Rakhine state.

They have their own language and culture and say they are descendants of Arab traders and other groups who have been in the region for generations. But the government of Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist country, denies the Rohingya citizenship and even excluded them from the 2014 census, refusing to recognize them as a people.

State terror techniques targeted the Muslim minority possibly because they don’t worship Burmese god Buddha. Since the 1970s, Rohingya have migrated across the region in significant numbers. In the last few years, before the latest crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces. Estimates of their numbers are often much higher than official figures.

The plight of Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar came to global light when more than 647,000 Rohingya fled into Bangladesh since August this year.

Based on surveys of refugees in Bangladesh conducted by Medecins Sans Frontieres, at least 6,700 Rohingya were killed in August after violence broke out in Myanmar in August. The Medecins Sans Frontieres said it was “the clearest indication yet of the widespread violence” by Myanmar authorities. However, Myanmar’s official figure of genocides is less than.400. Previously, the armed forces stated that around 400 people had been killed; most of them described as ‘Muslim terrorists’.

Myanmar, like the Pentagon in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan etc, or Israel in Palestine or India in Kashmir, claims to be “innocent” and has denied any wrongdoing with Muslim population and they leave Myanmar on their own though the regime and military assure of all necessary help to minorities.  Further the Myanmar military blames the violence on “terrorists” without specifying who they are

The plight of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people is said to be the world’s fastest growing refugee crisis. Risking death by sea or on foot, more than half a million have fled the destruction of their homes and persecution in the northern Rakhine province of Myanmar (Burma) for neighbouring Bangladesh since August 2017.

The Rohingya, who numbered around one million in Myanmar at the start of the year, are one of the many ethnic minorities in the country. Rohingya Muslims represent the largest percentage of Muslims in Myanmar, with the majority living in Rakhine state.

They have their own language and culture and say they are descendants of Arab traders and other groups who have been in the region for generations.

But the government of Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist country, denies the Rohingya citizenship and even excluded them from the 2014 census, refusing to recognize them as a people.

Refugee crisis

The plight of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people is said to be the world’s fastest growing refugee crisis. Risking death by sea or on foot, more than half a million have fled the destruction of their homes and persecution in the northern Rakhine province of Myanmar (Burma) for neighbouring Bangladesh since August 2017.

Most Rohingya refugees reaching Bangladesh – men, women and children with barely any belongings – have sought shelter in these areas, setting up camp wherever possible in the difficult terrain and with little access to aid, safe drinking water, food, shelter or healthcare.

Of the 537,000 refugees who have arrived since August 58% are are children, while 60% of the adults are women.

The largest refugee camp is Kutupalong but limited space means spontaneous settlements have sprung up in the surrounding countryside and nearby Balukhali as refugees keep arriving. While the Kutupalong refugee camp has grown from 13,901 to 20,000 since August, the number living in makeshift or spontaneous settlements outside the camp has climbed from 99,495 to 311,225.

The aid group’s survey found that at least 9,000 Rohingya died in Myanmar, also known as Burma, between 25 August and 24 September. “In the most conservative estimations” at least 6,700 of those deaths have been caused by violence, including at least 730 children under the age of five, according to MSF.

The United Nations described the military offensive in Rakhine, which provoked the exodus, as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. Myanmar’s military says it is fighting Rohingya militants and denies targeting civilians. The UN says the Rohingya’s situation is the “world’s fastest growing refugee crisis”. Before August, there were already around 307,500 Rohingya refugees living in camps, makeshift settlements and with host communities, according to the UNHCR.

Ethnic cleansing by state

Myanmar treats the Muslim community as if they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Since the 1970s, Rohingya Muslims, in order to escape persecution by the state, have migrated across the region in significant numbers. Estimates of their numbers are often much higher than official figures. In the last few years, before the latest crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces.

Since the 1970s, Rohingya have migrated across the region in significant numbers. Estimates of their numbers are often much higher than official figures. n the last few years, before the latest crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces.

The latest exodus began on 25 August after Rohingya Arsa militants attacked more than 30 police posts. Rohingyas arriving in an area known as Cox’s Bazaar – a district in Bangladesh – say they fled after troops, backed by local Buddhist mobs, responded by burning their villages and attacking and killing civilians.

The latest exodus began on 25 August after Rohingya Arsa militants attacked more than 30 police posts. Rohingyas arriving in an area known as Cox’s Bazaar – a district in Bangladesh – say they fled after troops, backed by local Buddhist mobs, responded by burning their villages and attacking and killing civilians.

At least 288 villages were partially or totally destroyed by fire in northern Rakhine state after August 2017, according to analysis of satellite imagery by Human Rights Watch. The imagery shows many areas where Rohingya villages were reduced to smoldering rubble, while nearby ethnic Rakhine villages were left intact.

Amnesty International says the Myanmar military has killed hundreds of Rohingya and raped and abused Rohingya women and girls. The government claims that “clearance operations” against the militants ended on 5 September, but they indeed continued after that date.

Human Rights watch says most damage occurred in Maungdaw Township, between 25 August and 25 September – with many villages destroyed after 5 September, when Myanmar’s de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, said security force operations had ended.

The UN says the Rohingya’s situation is the “world’s fastest growing refugee crisis”. Before August, there were already around 307,500 Rohingya refugees living in camps, makeshift settlements and with host communities. according to the UNHCR. Most Rohingya refugees reaching Bangladesh – men, women and children with barely any belongings – have sought shelter in these areas, setting up camp wherever possible in the difficult terrain and with little access to aid, safe drinking water, food, shelter or healthcare. Of the 537,000 refugees who have arrived since August 58% are are children, while 60% of the adults are women.

The UN described the military offensive in Rakhine, which provoked the exodus, as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. Myanmar’s military says it is fighting Rohingya militants and denies targeting civilians.

Need for aid

There has been widespread condemnation of the Myanmar government’s actions but talk of sanctions has been more muted: The UN Security Council appealed to Myanmar to stop the violence but no sanctions have been imposed The USA urged Myanmar’s troops to respect the rule of law, stop the violence and end the displacement of civilians from all communities” China says the international community “should support the efforts of Myanmar in safeguarding the stability of its national development” Bangladesh plans to build more shelters in the Cox’s Bazar area but also wants to limit their travel to allocated areas

The need for aid is overwhelming.720,000 children in need of humanitarian assistance, according to Unicef $434m in funding needed for UN humanitarian response plans over the next six months 900,000 doses of cholera vaccine mobilized for immunization campaign. Reports say 10,000 latrines to be built by Bangladesh military to provide sanitation for 250,000 people. 500 tonnes of aid has been delivered in five airlifts

Myanmar urged displaced people to find refuge in temporary camps set up in Rakhine state but added that Myanmar would not be able to allow all those who fled to Bangladesh to return.

The UK Disasters Emergency Committee launched an appeal for funds to help the refugees and their overstretched host communities. UK Prime Minister Theresa May also said the military action in Rakhine had to stop. The UK has suspended training courses for the Myanmar military.

Burma: State genocides as part of ethnic cleansing

Burma: State genocides as part of ethnic cleansing

At least 6,700 Rohingya were killed in August alone after violence broke out!

Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

________

Torturing and murdering of Muslims and insulting Islam and making it appear to be a terrorist religion is not new but has been the phenomenon of last century but continuing this century as well. That Islam alone remains a living religion with a strong message for the humanity has unnerved many who hate Islam.

Anti-Islamism and Islamophobia are now the global phenomena, terrorizing global Muslims. Enemies of Islam pounce upon Muslims everywhere at times just for fun. The trends have made life difficult for Muslims as governments refuse Muslims jobs, deny them salary, force Muslims to quit the hard earned jobs and deny them pension, thereby  denying  the Muslims the right to exit, work and live with honor. .  .

Since Muslims, unlike peoples of other religions, do not have their world leader, let along national leaders, to guide them according to the Islamic life patterns.

The Rohingya is one category of Muslim community in Burma in South East Asia that has no leader to guide and secure their lives and habitat and hence they are being targeted and killed by the regime and military.

The Rohingya, who numbered around one million in Myanmar at the start of the year, are one of the many ethnic minorities in the country. Rohingya Muslims represent the largest percentage of Muslims in Myanmar, with the majority living in Rakhine state.

They have their own language and culture and say they are descendants of Arab traders and other groups who have been in the region for generations. But the government of Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist country, denies the Rohingya citizenship and even excluded them from the 2014 census, refusing to recognize them as a people.

State terror techniques targeted the Muslim minority possibly because they don’t worship Burmese god Buddha. Since the 1970s, Rohingya have migrated across the region in significant numbers. In the last few years, before the latest crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces. Estimates of their numbers are often much higher than official figures.

The plight of Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar came to global light when more than 647,000 Rohingya fled into Bangladesh since August this year.

Based on surveys of refugees in Bangladesh conducted by Medecins Sans Frontieres, at least 6,700 Rohingya were killed in August after violence broke out in Myanmar in August. The Medecins Sans Frontieres said it was “the clearest indication yet of the widespread violence” by Myanmar authorities. However, Myanmar’s official figure of genocides is less than.400. Previously, the armed forces stated that around 400 people had been killed; most of them described as ‘Muslim terrorists’.

Myanmar, like the Pentagon in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan etc, or Israel in Palestine or India in Kashmir, claims to be “innocent” and has denied any wrongdoing with Muslim population and they leave Myanmar on their own though the regime and military assure of all necessary help to minorities.  Further the Myanmar military blames the violence on “terrorists” without specifying who they are

The plight of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people is said to be the world’s fastest growing refugee crisis. Risking death by sea or on foot, more than half a million have fled the destruction of their homes and persecution in the northern Rakhine province of Myanmar (Burma) for neighbouring Bangladesh since August 2017.

The Rohingya, who numbered around one million in Myanmar at the start of the year, are one of the many ethnic minorities in the country. Rohingya Muslims represent the largest percentage of Muslims in Myanmar, with the majority living in Rakhine state.

They have their own language and culture and say they are descendants of Arab traders and other groups who have been in the region for generations.

But the government of Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist country, denies the Rohingya citizenship and even excluded them from the 2014 census, refusing to recognize them as a people.

Refugee crisis

The plight of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people is said to be the world’s fastest growing refugee crisis. Risking death by sea or on foot, more than half a million have fled the destruction of their homes and persecution in the northern Rakhine province of Myanmar (Burma) for neighbouring Bangladesh since August 2017.

Most Rohingya refugees reaching Bangladesh – men, women and children with barely any belongings – have sought shelter in these areas, setting up camp wherever possible in the difficult terrain and with little access to aid, safe drinking water, food, shelter or healthcare.

Of the 537,000 refugees who have arrived since August 58% are are children, while 60% of the adults are women.

The largest refugee camp is Kutupalong but limited space means spontaneous settlements have sprung up in the surrounding countryside and nearby Balukhali as refugees keep arriving. While the Kutupalong refugee camp has grown from 13,901 to 20,000 since August, the number living in makeshift or spontaneous settlements outside the camp has climbed from 99,495 to 311,225.

The aid group’s survey found that at least 9,000 Rohingya died in Myanmar, also known as Burma, between 25 August and 24 September. “In the most conservative estimations” at least 6,700 of those deaths have been caused by violence, including at least 730 children under the age of five, according to MSF.

The United Nations described the military offensive in Rakhine, which provoked the exodus, as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. Myanmar’s military says it is fighting Rohingya militants and denies targeting civilians. The UN says the Rohingya’s situation is the “world’s fastest growing refugee crisis”. Before August, there were already around 307,500 Rohingya refugees living in camps, makeshift settlements and with host communities, according to the UNHCR.

Ethnic cleansing by state

Myanmar treats the Muslim community as if they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Since the 1970s, Rohingya Muslims, in order to escape persecution by the state, have migrated across the region in significant numbers. Estimates of their numbers are often much higher than official figures. In the last few years, before the latest crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces.

Since the 1970s, Rohingya have migrated across the region in significant numbers. Estimates of their numbers are often much higher than official figures. n the last few years, before the latest crisis, thousands of Rohingya were making perilous journeys out of Myanmar to escape communal violence or alleged abuses by the security forces.

The latest exodus began on 25 August after Rohingya Arsa militants attacked more than 30 police posts. Rohingyas arriving in an area known as Cox’s Bazaar – a district in Bangladesh – say they fled after troops, backed by local Buddhist mobs, responded by burning their villages and attacking and killing civilians.

The latest exodus began on 25 August after Rohingya Arsa militants attacked more than 30 police posts. Rohingyas arriving in an area known as Cox’s Bazaar – a district in Bangladesh – say they fled after troops, backed by local Buddhist mobs, responded by burning their villages and attacking and killing civilians.

At least 288 villages were partially or totally destroyed by fire in northern Rakhine state after August 2017, according to analysis of satellite imagery by Human Rights Watch. The imagery shows many areas where Rohingya villages were reduced to smoldering rubble, while nearby ethnic Rakhine villages were left intact.

Amnesty International says the Myanmar military has killed hundreds of Rohingya and raped and abused Rohingya women and girls. The government claims that “clearance operations” against the militants ended on 5 September, but they indeed continued after that date.

Human Rights watch says most damage occurred in Maungdaw Township, between 25 August and 25 September – with many villages destroyed after 5 September, when Myanmar’s de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, said security force operations had ended.

The UN says the Rohingya’s situation is the “world’s fastest growing refugee crisis”. Before August, there were already around 307,500 Rohingya refugees living in camps, makeshift settlements and with host communities. according to the UNHCR. Most Rohingya refugees reaching Bangladesh – men, women and children with barely any belongings – have sought shelter in these areas, setting up camp wherever possible in the difficult terrain and with little access to aid, safe drinking water, food, shelter or healthcare. Of the 537,000 refugees who have arrived since August 58% are are children, while 60% of the adults are women.

The UN described the military offensive in Rakhine, which provoked the exodus, as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. Myanmar’s military says it is fighting Rohingya militants and denies targeting civilians.

Need for aid

There has been widespread condemnation of the Myanmar government’s actions but talk of sanctions has been more muted: The UN Security Council appealed to Myanmar to stop the violence but no sanctions have been imposed The USA urged Myanmar’s troops to respect the rule of law, stop the violence and end the displacement of civilians from all communities” China says the international community “should support the efforts of Myanmar in safeguarding the stability of its national development” Bangladesh plans to build more shelters in the Cox’s Bazar area but also wants to limit their travel to allocated areas

The need for aid is overwhelming.720,000 children in need of humanitarian assistance, according to Unicef $434m in funding needed for UN humanitarian response plans over the next six months 900,000 doses of cholera vaccine mobilized for immunization campaign. Reports say 10,000 latrines to be built by Bangladesh military to provide sanitation for 250,000 people. 500 tonnes of aid has been delivered in five airlifts

Myanmar urged displaced people to find refuge in temporary camps set up in Rakhine state but added that Myanmar would not be able to allow all those who fled to Bangladesh to return.

The UK Disasters Emergency Committee launched an appeal for funds to help the refugees and their overstretched host communities. UK Prime Minister Theresa May also said the military action in Rakhine had to stop. The UK has suspended training courses for the Myanmar military.