What Trump has brought onto the world #IranUSIsrael

What #TrumpEra has brought onto the world #Iran #US #Israel  

 

Sharing Prof Jeffrey Sachs' analysis

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRt9xR1df3I #Economic_Collapse #anarchy

 

Watch this space for updates!

 

Sachs' #doomsday prediction? Can the world live through this one? #IranIsraelUS #realitycheck

Sachs' #doomsday prediction? Can the world live through this one? #IranIsraelUS #realitycheck

 

 Professor Sachs' prediction - we are at the brink of World War III.

Sharing the video link to the interview:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeRETBWnNWA&t=3s 

An inflection point, to say the least.

Keep watching this space for updates!

Some Pertinent Questions on #EpicFury & #RoaringLion

 Another day of the war in West Asia, showing no signs of either a quick resolution or any slackening in the ongoing military operations from both sides. More death and destruction raining from the skies. More pain inflicted on millions of people in the region, as well as millions of people around the world, indirectly affected by a war they have nothing to do with. Another day of huge financial losses, stock market tumbles, and increased volatility in multiple sectors of economies worldwide. 

Some pertinent questions on the military-political aspects stemming from #EpicFury & #RoaringLion:

1. Is the campaign proceeding according to a plan?

Multiple and contradictory statements by administration officials in the US and Israel put a big question mark on whether the operations were actually undertaken with some concrete plans? Arguments on #StrategicDeterrence #EnergyLeverage #GrandStrategy #StrategicDepth are only as good as the reasoning and logic behind them. They begin to sound specious when leadership contradictions emerge, time planning is revised to suit the moment of facing a questioning audience, and no firm answers are available to aims and objectives of operations, especially military in nature.

(And to answer an unspoken one - yes the world does need answers. Because it is the global population which is facing the brunt of actions in West Asia).

2.  Are drones the new go-to option for equalising the asymmetry of warfare between unequal adversaries?

Evident from the manner in which drones are being utilised by Iran, they have emerged as relatively inexpensive to manufacture, they can be amassed for use in swarms and waves relentlessly causing attrition, are effective against expensive hi-tech deployed by the superior enemy, and have a much lower material and human cost attached to their use. Their retaliatory usage lends less escalation pressure to operational matrices, simultaneous to their effective use in high numbers, and fewer cost-effective counter mechanisms. While so far not used in fully autonomous modes, their usage is likely to pervade all domains of warfare in the near future as dynamic utilisations are arrived at. 

3. The attack on the IRIS Dena in international waters in the IOR.

What is the sanctity of multilateralism, and hence multilateral exercises such as the International Fleet Review? Is attack on a vessel returning to home port, in a non-combat mode, justified? If any vessel conducting itself in a "peace protocol" as such exercises demand, then its destruction, that too by a nuclear submarine, not only sounds beyond justification, it begets allegations of deliberate targeting of a virtual non-combatant. Finally, what manner of intelligence was responsible for the attack, and where did it originate? 

4. What was the causus belli for the US-Israel offensive? 

Did the ostensible vulnerability of the regime in Iran, following massive protests, responsible for the timing of the war?  If Iran's nuclear strength was responsible, then what was the previous year's offensive meant for - especially so, since its stated aims were achieved, according to, no less than the US President. If the US intends to undertake regime change, air strikes are not going to achieve it; hence, if boots on the ground will ultimately be required, then the whole US posture of withdrawing from external and "forever" wars, seems to be a farce.  Finally, if none of these, then what is the world expected to accept it as - military adventurism? 

5.  Is this war making any difference to China?

In the geopolitical struggle between the US and China, the war in Iran is seen as another pain point (after Venezuela's example) for China, especially its energy security, being dependent on the oil and gas from the Gulf for 50-60% of its requirements. To that extent, how long before China engages means to secure the supply of oil from the region? Will naval escorts for tankers suffice? Or will this mean China's entry in to the conflict?
On the other hand, contemporary conflicts are being used by China as test-beds for emerging technologies from Chinese incubators, with their real test under combat conditions, at little cost to China itself, or without it having to enter the fray.
War materiel expenditures are reducing stockpiles of the US, possibly at rates that it may not be able to replenish so speedily. Will the war therefore, indirectly work in favour of China?

6.  Will this war and the actions of US-Israel prove to be precedents to other conflict flashpoints?

Scant regard for rules-based international order is evident from the disdain exhibited by the US in not consulting even its allies, leave alone the UN sanctifying its actions. This hubris unfortunately comes at a cost, and may be cited as precedent for future attacks on other countries, or killing of heads of states. Instantaneously the examples of Ukraine and Taiwan come to mind; a belligerent Russia and China, should they choose to adopt the same route, would have benefit of precedent.  

7. How will the Gulf states react?

Iran's attacks on first, the US bases in host countries, followed by attacks on oil infrastructure and pipelines in the larger middle East, is indicative of it spreading an enlarging choke around strategic reserves, ensuring depletion, followed by a continuous and sustained collapse of supply. Even if the GCC states ignore the attacks on US bases, will they be able to indefinitely ignore the noose around their supply lines? Apart from the havoc wreaked on the rest of the world's oil and energy security, the GCC states' own economies will buckle under the absence of petrodollar inflows. In the eventuality, how long before they exit the alliance with the US? 

8. How long will the world continue to suffer for America's actions? (alongside, how long will Israel's flagrant and blatant violations of the rules-based order be ignored by the rest of the world?)

If the war continues for "3-4 weeks", as casually mentioned by the US President, it has cascading effects on Oil and gas prices, food production and supplies, manufacturing, airlines, shipping, tourism and hospitality industry. Currency fluctuations will ruin the financial bases of many small economies, and make huge, possibly irreparable dents in larger economies. Governments will be stretched to maintain basic services for their people. As things stand, the world is staring at a severe recession.

The countless dead and injured in the war itself, are not even being mentioned here.

Food for thought for readers.

Keep watching this space for updates.

America's Latest War in West Asia - Iran Redux

 As the world woke up to the last day of February, it was greeted by news of the US-Israel attack on Iran. To many, it was a surprise because the last they had heard was an impending deal between the two sides, as the mediating Oman representative had surmised from discussions' end, the previous evening. It was doubly surprising because the sequence of events was well within the ultimatum given by President Trump, viz., 6th March. So, then to wake up to news of an attack initiated by US-Israel made no sense to most.

As is wont, the start of the war in West Asia, termed as Operation Epic Fury by the US, and Operation Roaring Lion by Israel,  finds itself shrouded in speculations, controversies, theories, and conjectures, as to what prompted the partners to undertake an attack, especially with a reasonably peaceful solution almost within reach. Depending on which side of the narrative one is reading, the theories range from the "plausible" to outright "bizarre". However, and notwithstanding, this note does not assume or speculate. It is a summation of  what this conflict throws up in military-political terms, and an initial brief of where the conflict stands, and what it indicates, in the first few days of hostilities. Updates will follow, as the situation develops.

In military terms, Iran's (purported) depleted abilities post the 12 Day War, in the previous year, along with some devastation of its missile and nuclear capacities, were expected to give an edge to the adversary. Its drone manufacturing capabilities were also expected to be running below par, owing its steady supply to Russia in the Russo-Ukraine War to the north. Over the last couple of years of Israel's offensive in Gaza, accompanied by relentless onslaught against Iran's proxy militias (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis) across the region, were suggestive of them having been fairly de-fanged, at least to the extent of being unable to provide a viable multi-pronged reflex. 

On the other hand, the tremendous technological and numerical edge professed by the US-Israel combine, was likely to overwhelm any resistance from Iran. Even though there were some murmurs of US production of important munitions falling short, indeed, not even having made up for the expenditures incurred in the previous year, Trump's inimitable bombast papered it over. 

Shortly before the opening salvos, detailed satellite imagery of US assets in the region including bases, aircraft, and naval vessels pre-positioned, were released on open source intelligence sites, apparently by China. It was an indication of the level of technology possessed by China, apart from the fact that it also signaled its willingness to share such data, to the benefit of Iran. China is also known to have been supplying electronic technology for Iran's missile, radar, and drone development requirements.

Politically, dispensations in US and Israel are at their ebb in popularity rankings, albeit for different reasons. An Israeli offensive is probably the only issue that can propel Israelis to overlook Prime Minister Netanyahu's indiscretions primarily due to its history of viewing Iran as an existential threat. In the US, the President was elected on an America First plank, along with promises to extract the US military from protracted deployments abroad. Therefore, to lead the country in to another, possibly long-term engagement, does not ostensibly make sense. However, given a spate of recent events, showcasing Iran as inimical to US interests and even an immediate threat, provides the dispensation a smokescreen, if not more. 

On the Iranian side, recent and widespread domestic protests against the theological state's tyranny, made the government relatively vulnerable. An assumption that a limited offensive would result in change of regime, at the hands of a dissatisfied population (of course, with the right external impetus) may have prompted US-Israel to move at this time. Also, recent success in Venezuela would have encouraged the US, at least in being overly optimistic in its plans against Iran. Finally, Trump's domestic compulsions versus his foreign policy criticalities, may simply have been disregarded by his thirst for military adventurism, with his track record of scant regard for rules-based international system or disdain for global bodies such as the United Nations, or what they stand for. 

As things stand, the war shows no signs of abating or any compromise between the adversaries. Instead, the scope of the conflict has actually been enlarged by Iran's direct attacks on US facilities across the region, and civilian infrastructure in host nations. These include Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Cyprus, and Oman (its erstwhile mediator). Iran's attacks also encompass the oil infrastructure in the region, along with the threat of closing the Strait of Hormuz, responsible for the transit of 15% of global oil and 20% of global LNG supply. A recalcitrant Iran has promised attacks on any ships attempting the Strait of Hormuz stretch, bringing all merchant shipping to a grinding halt.

Military-political inferences on date can be summarised as follows:

In their military campaign comprising air strikes, though US-Israel maintain the destruction of nuclear and missile sites in Iran, its counter-attack suggests reliance on short-range missiles and drones, which it seems to have huge stockpiles of. Iran is effectively running up the costs for US-Israel, while keeping its own costs in control. For instance, $4Million worth Patriot missiles are facing $20000 drones, according to estimates. Interception too is proving costly, with 5-10 times costs incurred per interception of aerial vehicles/ steep trajectory weapons. 

The use of Anthropic based AI model as a battlefield tool, including identification of targets, analysing intelligence inputs, strike simulations, and decision-making, indicates the prescient amalgamation of AI in the modern war room and its utilisation in the increasingly digitalised war zones. Its effectiveness and efficacy will be evident in the days to come, as also its limitations.However, its use in Epic Fury is certainly a clarion call if not more, to all aspiring powers. 

Israel has attacked Lebanon for its hosting of the Hezbollah. Southern parts of Lebanon have been ordered to evacuate to provide strategic depth to bordering areas of Israel and its settlements.  

Iran's proxies have opened up alternate fronts against US-Israel, albeit commensurate to their depleted strengths. While these may not make substantial difference to the counter-attack, they will certainly serve as irritants to be countered.

In its defence, Iran has consciously adopted a Mosaic Defence, enabling its forces to break into small, independent, self-contained units, which are empowered to take tactical decisions without reference to the military chain of command, and even those decisions which may have strategic implications. Mosaics are also capable of coming together seamlessly, or breaking away, as the case may demand. 

Iran has so far targeted US bases in the region, bypassing all Air Defence systems deployed, proving its resilience in matching strike for strike. These include the Jebel Ali port and Al Dhafra air base (UAE), Prince Sultan air base  (Saudi Arabia),  Al Udeid air base (Qatar), Erbil and Ain al-Asad air bases (Iraq), Akrotini (Cyprus), Muwaffaq al-Salti air base (Jordan), Ali al-Salem air base and Camp Buehring (Kuwait), and Nsa Bahrain (Bahrain). It has also claimed a strike on the USS Abraham Lincoln with missiles, but this is not confirmed/ denied by the US.

Iran has brought down a number of the US' MQ-9 drones, numbers unconfirmed. It has also targeted (and claimed destroyed, unconfirmed by US) radars for THAAD and the AN/FPS-132 phased array radar. These are billion dollar technologies, and if their destruction is confirmed, it puts a big question mark on the US' ability to protect its own and its allies' assets in the region and beyond. 

Iran has so far not fired any hypersonic missiles, which travel at speeds exceeding 10000 mph and may not be possible to intercept. The missiles it has used are short range, and deployed on mobile carrier units (usually trucks), making it easy to hide, speedily deployed and fired, and difficult to track in real time. It also suits the concept of Mosaics employed by the Iranians.

The US has torpedoed IRIS Dena, an Iranian frigate which was returning from participating in the International Fleet Review 2026 in India's eastern port of Vishakhapatnam. Submarine launched Mark-48 torpedo was used to target the vessel, off the coast of Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean. 

The war in West Asia has ruptured geopolitical equations, as they were, prior to it. 

Huge upheavals in oil and energy security, shipping, aviation, and hospitality sectors has been witnessed since the start of the war. Apart from these, associated sectors of manufacturing, food security, safety of expatriates and diaspora populations, is bringing huge downsides to financial markets across the globe, the scale of which was last seen during Covid times. 

Access to oil and energy from the region has come to a grinding halt. Major powers to be affected are China and India. With crude headed for the $100 mark per barrel, the war has opened up a fresh spate of panic, affecting as it is, not  just oil and gas, but associated industries such as fertilizers, refined products (including textiles), and shipping insurance. Insurers have raised the rates sharply in response to the threat envisaged in the Strait of Hormuz, effectively stopping shipping in its tracks. The cumulative effect is to raise the costs of energy sourcing, food production, imports/ exports, not least being the effect on buffer stocks for domestic consumption. Prolonged volatility is bound to put governments under strain.

US-Israel's disregard for the concerns of the rest of the world is likely to increase focus on alliances such as BRICS, in the near future. The extent to which major powers will get involved, is to be seen in times to come. What remains certain is the US' hegemony will stand challenged. If it does not succeed in its stated aim of regime change in Iran, it may well be a body blow to its continued acceptance in leadership position.

The assassination of Ayatollah Khameini is being compared to the death of Imam Husayn at Karbala, lending an extreme shade of martyrdom to the Ayatollah's death. It has also served to bridge the Sunni-Shia divide in Islam, as evident from violent protests across the region and beyond. The US seems to have self-created possibly an indestructible ideological nemesis for itself. This is likely to fuel prolonged backlash, further acts of terrorism, and if the US decides to go in for a ground offensive, it will almost certainly find itself in a quagmire of insurgencies. 

Keep watching this space for fresh developments and the next part to these updates.

Ukraine War and other Tremors

 

Ukraine War and other Tremors

 

The Russo-Ukraine War drags on into the seventh week of fighting, as claims and counter-claims continue to be exchanged over which side has the upper hand. While the west has relied on sanctions and provision of military aid to Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to have stumped any more stringent measures being implemented, and largely nullified the ability of the west to intervene more meaningfully by publicising his nuclear option. To that end, the vily ex-KGB agent also seems to have highlighted the weakness of nuclear armed opponents engaging in a confrontation; once the nuclear option is exercised, there is really NO other option.

 

The war has thrown up an unexpected hero in the form of President Zelenskyy, who has not only managed to give the Russians a bloody nose, but has indeed gone into overdrive whipping up a media campaign to garner support, not just inside Ukraine but across the globe. The Ukrainian army supported by volunteers comprising its own nationals and those arriving from other countries, has given a spirited fight to the Russians. It has also used guerrilla tactics to destroy a large part of Russia’s advance and a sizeable number of officers and troops have been killed. According to Ukrainian estimates, more than 800 tanks and about 18000 odd troops have already been decimated. Even if only part of these numbers are true, it still puts paid the opinion that overrunning Ukraine would be a cakewalk for the Russian army. In the long run, the reputation of the Russian army to be a potent fighting force will certainly be tarnished, not to mention the inherent and collateral loss of morale in the troops, question marks on the leadership, and the domestic popularity of Putin himself. Already viewed by a sizeable part of Russians as an autocratic leader who is stifling dissent and debate at home, Putin will find it very hard to shove the losses under the carpet.

 

Reverberations of the war are being felt across economies globally. The rise in petroleum prices in the aftermath of sanctions against Russian gas and oil saw a desperate United States releasing a huge quantity from its strategic cache to stabilise prices. Spiralling food grain prices resulted from the abrupt stoppage of Russian and Ukrainian grains reaching other markets; losses to the aviation and tourism industries as a result of sanctions and airspace restrictions have only compounded the problems for these sectors still trying to limp back from the debilitating Covid restrictions; trans-continental banking operations were stymied due to the overnight sanctions against Russian banking entities; rise of alternate currencies such as crypto has seen an upsurge with the collapse of the Ruble’s value. All these are just the tip of the iceberg in a globalised world where the interconnections have rippling effects across sectors, and will probably continue to do so for quite some time to come.

 

South Asia is witnessing its own set of tremors in these turbulent times. China is trying to stem the resurgence of Covid in some of its important financial centres such as Shanghai. Post-Ukraine, there are apprehensions that China may consider a similar misadventure in Taiwan. The Chinese have already been flexing their military muscle over the last several months, especially in the areas of marine, aerospace, missile, and cyber capabilities. Pakistan has just seen the overthrow of its Prime Minister after weeks of high drama including constitutional and political crises which required intervention by its highest court. Needless to say, the Pakistani army remains very much in control, preferring to control things from behind a screen rather than its historically blatant way of doing so. In his last few days, the outgoing Prime Minister Imran Khan has repeatedly praised Indian foreign policy, which by association makes it very difficult for the next government to initiate any dialogue with India. Sri Lanka has just seen the collapse of its economy under a huge debt burden, a substantial portion owed to China. The island has been forced to approach the IMF for help, but before any such outside help arrives, it is seeing its biggest domestic crisis since the days of its civil war. Bhutan has lost its place in the Happiness rankings, possibly as a fallout of opening up the Himalayan kingdom over the last few years. In the middle of it all, India seems to be insulated so far, but faces criticism for its neutral stance on the Ukraine war. To be fair, it has exercised realpolitik to ensure its own requirements do not get affected by the turmoil. However, some amount of re-alignment or a wary approach to Indian strategic concerns is likely to occur in the future.

 

In all, very interesting, albeit turbulent times; the world is yet to see the end game of these events.

Brexit Travails - Sharpening Divisions in the Isles?

Brexit Travails – Sharpening Divisions in the Isles?

 

As the world grappled with the resurgence of Covid-19, and focus remained on the war against the seemingly indomitable coronavirus, a couple of facts have received less than deserved attention, possibly escaping the attention of political scientists. The first was couched in the aftermath of the demise of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh – namely, the apology extended by Sinn Fein leadership for the assassination of Lord Louis Mountbatten by the IRA. The second is the growing din for Scottish independence from the union that is the United Kingdom. The two may seem unconnected, but the future of the isles is being fashioned by these events, and their likely ramifications on the politics of the region.  

 

As I write this, it happens to be the 104^th anniversary of the Easter Rising of Ireland in 1916. The rebellion marked the huge nationalist feeling that swept Ireland and became the precursor to the massive support garnered by Sinn Fein. Subsequently, it led to the War of Independence and culminated in the Anglo-Irish Treaty partitioning the island into the Irish Free State, a Dominion of the British Commonwealth (which later became the Republic of Ireland) and the territory known as Northern Ireland, which continued to be a part of the United Kingdom. No doubt, it left the simmering discontent of the island having been partitioned. Decades later, in a period spanning almost thirty years, the emerald isle witnessed some of the ghastliest violence in the turmoil called ‘The Troubles’ in Ireland, including the assassination of Lord Mountbatten in 1979 by the ‘Provos’ or the Provisional Irish Republican Army, as it was called. The Provisional IRA’s political front, viz. Sinn Fein was gradually assimilated into the political process, and post the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, has gained heft in its own right in both parts of Ireland; in the 2017 Northern Ireland Assembly elections, it had only one seat less than the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), shares power with four ministerial berths in the executive, and holds seven of the 18 seats of Northern Ireland in the UK House of Commons. Simultaneously, it is the second largest party in the Republic of Ireland and its main opposition party. Sinn Fein opposed Northern Ireland leaving the European Union with the rest of the UK in the 2016 Brexit referendum, and immediately in its wake suggested another referendum on the reunification of Ireland. Mary Lou McDonald, the President of Sinn Fein since 2018, echoed this stance of the party in relation to the issues of a hard border coming up post-Brexit; effectively demanding a unified Ireland and as part of the EU. In the violence in Northern Ireland in the aftermath of Brexit, blame has been apportioned to the attendance of over 2000 mourners at the funeral of a former IRA cadre amidst Covid-19 restrictions, and failure to prosecute anyone. Under the terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol which came into existence in January 2021, the Irish Sea now forms a border as the UK has left the EU, but Northern Ireland continues to remain in the Single Market for goods, necessitating checks of goods at ports of entry, arriving from Great Britain. This has further exacerbated tensions and unleashed violence.

 

In its 2014 referendum for independence from the union, 55% of Scotland voted to remain in the UK. It was touted as being a settled issue by David Cameron, then Prime Minister. However, in the 2016 referendum for the exit of the UK from the EU, 62% of Scotland voted to remain but in the overall tally, 52% of the UK voted to leave. Despite the Scots’ will to remain as part of the EU, the UK pursued Brexit. The Scottish National Party (SNP) pushed for a second referendum on independence due to the change in circumstances, not least being Brexit. Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister of Scotland, secured the parliamentary approval required to pursue invoking a Section 30 order under the Scotland Act 1998, for a second referendum; the Prime Ministers in Downing Street have not shown an inclination to do that, the latest being Boris Johnson refusing its sanction. Ahead of the Scottish elections in May 2021, the SNP has promised to bring up the issue once again, even in the absence of a Section 30 order, allowing a second referendum for independence. In latest polls, the SNP has a huge 20% lead over its Conservative and Labour opponents; a victory for the SNP will inevitably throw up the issue of the second referendum, and consequently a debate on Scotland’s exit from the UK. The majority of people in favour of such a move seem to have based their choice on being part of the EU again.

 

So, as things stand, the UK has its hands full with trouble brewing in both Northern Ireland and Scotland. Sinn Fein has long tried to project its accommodative stance, a conciliatory façade – also in its bid to dissociate, or at least whitewash the memories of its violent origins with the IRA. To that end, and given its growing heft in both parts of Ireland, it is politically astute to apologise for the assassination of Lord Mountbatten at the height of ‘The Troubles’, focussing instead on an inclusive agenda. It may also well garner the support of fence-sitters including among the unionists who may feel compelled by the positives of being part of the EU (as it is 56% of Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU), the prospects of growth in development and trade, and mollified by the non-violent avatar of Sinn Fein.

 

Sturgeon’s demand for a referendum even in the absence of a Section 30 order, if the SNP were to maintain its decisive lead at the polls in May 2021, could trigger the larger debate of holding territories in the union against popular will. As recent years have suggested, divisions exist in opinion as to which direction should be taken, and at the very least, Brexit amplified these bringing them in full public view. The pandemic and its accompanying devastating effects on trade, tourism, peoples’ freedom of movement, and economies as a whole, have further sharpened these divides.

 

If indeed, such is the trajectory adopted by politics in Northern Ireland and Scotland, the region could see a lot of changes. Most of the scenarios seem to only spell trouble for Great Britain. Apart from the demand for independence based on economic choice and realities, the rise of the Celts on both sides of the Irish Sea could lead to significant decline in Britain’s strategic importance and dominance of political decision-making. Who can say, the world may see an independent Scotland and a unified Ireland, both part of the EU, in the near future? It will also strain an already beleaguered British economy, and the need for even more aggressively seeking bilateral trade agreements with other countries to tide over these voids. Long known as the proponent of divide-and-rule, Britain seems to be getting the proverbial taste of its own medicine.

 

 

Power versus Politics in Kashmir

It is evident ... that a conflict is always concerned with a distribution of power. Indeed, an exertion of power is prerequisite to the retention of a share in the determination of future relations--as well as for the acquiring or retaining of other benefits perceived as the "reasons" for conflict.
                                                                             ---- North, Koch, and Zinnes, 1960

The recent events of stone pelting on defence forces in Kashmir and emerging violence backed by separatists and the ISI demand a stringent action from those in power. The political cauldron in Kashmir is boiling and any chances of peace being restored in the valley seem like a distant dream. The alienation of the people and lack of socio political and economic opportunities makes things more difficult for the forces.

Conflict as the quintessential intermittent dissociative social process is often defined as a conscious action, as the deliberate attempt to oppose, resist or coerce the will of another or others. (Green, 1956). Gillin and Gillin (1948) opined that “Conflict is the social process in which individuals or groups seek their ends by directly challenging the antagonist by violence or threat of violence.”In order to understand conflict, social, economic, political and class related, one needs to develop deeper insights into the various dynamics of conflict, its causes, transformation and current manifestations. To put it in Marxist theoretical framework, Conflict simply is the Anti-Thesis of cooperation. It is struggle and opposition involving emotional altitude of hostility and violent interference with one’s autonomous choice.

Conflict is omnipresent. Its degree may vary from society to society. The element of consciousness is very crucial in conflicting scenarios. Those involved are fully aware of the harm they are causing to others and in particular the social fabric of the country where it erupts. There are not one but several triggers such as biological, social, economic, political, religious, ethnic etc.

The fulcrum of conflict in Kashmir is shifting inexorably in favour of the separatists. Statistics reveal a very disturbing picture of the number of Kashmiri men who have disappeared leaving their wives alone to live in perpetual fear. These “Half Widows” as they are called face the flak of both the forces and the government concerned.

The solution to the Kashmir issue is a political one and occasional use of hard force, counter insurgency operations are needed to keep the volatile situation in check. There have been numerous success stories where hard uses of power and force have wiped out all forms of terrorism from the society. There is the Chechnya example, the Sri Lankan example but following a similar tactics in Kashmir won’t work.

The expanding landscape of communication technology and the wide use of social media have made matters worse. After the killing of Hizbul operative Burhan Wani, the valley witnessed violence that takes us back to 1989-90. Several experts on Kashmir have written that a human shield is not the humanitarian form of dealing with stone pelters but what can the army do if the Kashmiris take to the street and attack defence personnel and vehicles.

The victimisation of the people, the alienation of the people and the increasing influence of Pakistan army and agencies on young minds need to be addressed. Opportunities for constructive work need to be created. The valley needs development and only then the conflict will transform itself into something more positive. Autonomy , freedom are all adjectives used to justify violence. It is historically established that Kashmir acceded to India so the question of giving it away to our notorious neighbour doesn’t arise.

Essentially there are four ways to address the issue. One, bring about large scale development, create jobs so that there is no brain drain. Two, involve the Kashmiris in decision making processes and keep them informed. Three, continue with counter insurgency operations to establish some form of peace in the valley and four recognise the rights of the people assuring them of proper action. Disillusionment needs to be done away with. It is a very dangerous term.

The controversial “Armed Forces Special Powers Act” needs to be looked at from a more humane perspective. The Armed Forces need to work in cooperation with the coalition government to seek possible solutions to the issue. Success stories of IIT’s and other academic institutions set a very good example but the Kashmiri youth largely is focussing more on the Radical forces hell bent on tearing the valley apart. The police and the defence forces need some form of reforms to tackle the situation. Kashmir has been the bone of contention between India and Pakistan for far too long. The bloodshed needs to stop and it can be stopped only politically.

The separatists and terrorists are taking undue advantage of the vulnerable sections of the Kashmiri population to further their agenda of “Aazaadi”. The confidence with which Pakistan supplies funds and weapons for the fight in Kashmir is known to the world , yet every time the Indian forces take action, they become the culprits in the eyes of the Media. The Media plays a very powerful role in changing mindsets , mostly against the Indian state. Though the Media in India is largely self regulated some form of control needs to be exercised especially in Kashmir. This is to stop the ongoing psychological warfare.

It is not hidden from the world that Pakistan’s agenda is to destabilize India through disguised aggression and continuous proxy war in Kashmir. A joint action needs to be taken and above all issues of socio economic development needs to be addressed with immediate attention. It is only development that can bring about change.

 “An eye for an Eye makes the whole world blind”-M. K Gandhi

Image Courtesy- Al Jazeera