Highlights of September 2024

0

Developments in Russia-Ukraine War

Russia-Ukraine war has continued without any significant change in the status-quo. With the US and UK – Ukraine’s key western partners – expressing reluctance to allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons to strike deep inside Russian territory, the stalemate has continued. Ukraine’s Kursk invasion appears to have been ignored and normalized by Russia, reflecting that the latter accords it little priority, even as Russia continues to aggressively advance further in the eastern Donbas region and occupy more and more strategic villages.

Contest in Africa

Beyond the European theatre, the consequences of the war took an ugly turn in Mali in Africa, where an attack by al-Qaeda affiliated Tuareg rebels killing scores of Mali armed forces personnel along with Russian Wagner Group mercenaries was linked to Ukraine, as subsequent investigations showed that Ukraine had trained and funded those rebels. This has led to a widespread international condemnation, as Ukraine’s actions had targeted the national army of a sovereign country which was not engaged in any past or present hostilities with Ukraine. In recent months, Africa has become an important front in the Russia-Ukraine war, as Kyiv has been working to counter Russian influence in Africa and expand its own by doubling its embassies on the continent and increasing aid. Russia has also been seeking to expand its influence in Africa through its network of Private Military Companies (PMCs) like the Wagner Group and, lately, through the Russian Orthodox Church.

Ukraine’s Supremacy in Decentralized Drone Warfare

Russia-Ukraine war has become the world’s first integrated drone, digital, and cyber war, and Ukraine’s military-industrial complex has significantly grown – while Russia’s has declined – during the war, in terms of weapons development. In Russia’s war against Ukraine, both sides are using domestic and foreign drones, but Ukraine has a ten-to-one advantage in the number of drones on the front. Horizontal ties between civil society, volunteer groups, a decentralized government, and the military combine to make Ukraine fundamentally different from Russia’s vertically organized, authoritarian state and society. Surveillance cameras in shops, offices, and roads are used as intelligence sources on Russian troop movements. Other Ukrainians work alongside foreign volunteers in Ukraine’s information technology army, hacking and launching cyber-attacks against Russia, contributing to the “civilianization of the digital battlefield.”

Further, Ukraine’s military-industrial complex has grown during the war, with every second piece (41 percent) of ammunition on the front line being Ukrainian-made, up from 18 percent in 2023. Ukraine’s production of one million drones a year is higher than any NATO member, including the United States. This shows that Ukraine’s reliance on West will progressively reduce if this pace of indigenous technology development is kept up, regardless of the outcome of the long-drawn war.

Changes in Russian Nuclear Doctrine

As Russia becomes increasingly desperate – with its economy going under and with the country attempting to emulate Iran’s sanctions economy model – it has introduced changes in its previous 2020 nuclear doctrine towards the end of September. The new doctrine encompasses the following key changes, although a formal policy document is yet to be released (Jayaprakash, 2024):

First, it will expand the list of states and alliances against which deterrence can be carried out.

Second, a non-nuclear state conducting aggression against Russia with the support of a nuclear state – even using conventional weapons – will be interpreted as a joint attack against Russia. The evolved language clearly sends a message to the United States to not allow Ukraine to use long range weapons deep inside Russia.

Third, the doctrine has reduced the threshold for military attacks inside Russia. The launch of conventional weapons towards the Russian border and crossing into the territory of the Russian Federation is justification for the use of nuclear missiles.

Fourth, while the previous doctrines mentioned Russia calling for nuclear deterrence in defence of an ally, the proposed doctrine explicitly calls for a nuclear response in the event of an attack against Belarus, citing the latter as a party to the treaty establishing the Union State of Russia and Belarus.

Finally, with the release of the doctrine, Putin emphasised the importance of the nuclear triad for the guarantee of Russia’s survival and for maintaining the balance of power. A nuclear triad consists of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs)[1], Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs)[2] and Strategic bombers.[3] Presently, US, Russia, China and India are known to possess a nuclear triad, while Israel is suspected to possess one but has not formally disclosed it. A nuclear triad deters an enemy from destroying the nuclear forces in first strike, ensuring that the country can launch a second strike.

Ukraine’s new ‘victory plan’:

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented a “victory plan” to the Joe Biden administration and two US presidential candidates. The plan envisages arming Ukraine adequately for negotiating “peace through strength” with Moscow as well as strengthening economic sanctions on Russia. Kyiv has apparently dropped its earlier conditions, namely the eviction of Russian forces from Ukrainian territories, Russian reparations for war damages, and prosecution of war crimes.

Some of the key elements of the plan include:

  • Arming Ukraine with advanced weaponry prioritizing long-range missiles, electronic warfare equipment, air defence systems, and artillery shells.
  • Allowing Ukraine to strike military targets deep inside Russia with Western-supplied weapons at their maximum range.
  • Using Russian frozen assets in the West to support Ukraine’s defence against Russia’s aggression. Finalizing a political decision in that regard and agreeing on an implementation mechanism.
  • A clear promise, ahead of any negotiations, to invite Ukraine to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) “after the end of the war.”
  • Some form of Western security guarantees as an interim solution, stronger than the bilateral security agreements recently signed by NATO member states with Ukraine and pending Ukraine’s eventual accession to NATO.
  • Calling a second “world peace summit,” this time with Russia’s participation, in November 2024, following up on the first such summit that Switzerland hosted in June 2024 without Russia’s participation

Zelenskyy’s plan aspires to levels of US and European military support that would turn the tide of the war in Ukraine’s favour, even if not regaining the Russian-occupied territories in their entirety. The plan has been motivated by the West’s fatigue and reluctance to ensure Ukraine’s decisive victory in the war, rising pressure in western capitals to negotiate and end to the war and attempts to ensure that Russia joins the peace summit due to be held in December. Relentless Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure with the onset of winter is once again further posing domestic challenges for the country. It is also interesting to note that the Biden administration and the German government are the leading opponents of inviting Ukraine to join NATO.

Zelenskyy’s Victory Plan is designed, in part, to pre-empt outright defeatist proposals from being tabled by western parties and by countries like Brazil and China, with Ukraine accusing the latter two parties of taking Russia’s side and enabling its war. Out of all the existing proposals, Ukraine has found India’s peace proposal – discussed between Modi and Zelenskyy in New York in September – the most palatable. According to disclosures by Ukrainian officials, Modi was clear in his discussions with Kyiv that — while Ukraine would inevitably need to compromise on some things to end Moscow’s onslaught — any proposals to end the war should not include giving up territory to Russia (Starcevic, 2024). This shows how far Modi has come along in such a short time. Ever since Modi’s Ukraine’s visit, Kyiv has come to view India as its ideal intermediary in dealings with Russia.

Developments in Israel-Hamas War

The continuing Israeli offensive in West Asia is fast acquiring the form of a direct confrontation between Israel and Iran, as Israel undertakes momentous attacks to dismantle Iran’s historic and famed ‘forward network’ or ‘Axis of Resistance’ – consisting of Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis and other associated Iran-backed terrorist militias – across the region. This forward network was established in the aftermath of the Iran-Iraq war of 1980 – which took place after Sunni nations felt threatened by the 1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution – to enable Iran to counter its US-backed Sunni adversaries in the region and establish its influence. Further, a key aim of the forward network was to wage jihad for the elimination of Israel. While some militias in the network were created by Iran, others were co-opted by it.

Hezbollah’s Impending Demise

Hezbollah – the most powerful non-state actor in the world – has formed a key part of Iran’s proxy network. It was directly created by Iran in 1982 in the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, forcing Israel and US-backed forces to withdraw from Lebanon, although a portion of southern Lebanon continued to be under Israeli control. It was finally freed by Israel in 2000, prompting Hezbollah to declare it as the ‘first Arab victory against the Zionist entity.’ The strength of Hezbollah was built, to a significant extent, under Hasan Nasrallah who had commanded the organization since the 1990s and transformed it to occupy a key place in Lebanese political system. Often, Hezbollah – due to its deep infiltration in society and political system and its functions – was often referred to as a ‘state within state.’ With more than 40,000 trained fighters and access to advanced technology for warfare, this outfit has been regarded as the crown jewel of Iran’s forward network.

It is for this reason that Israeli offensive over the past month resulting in elimination of the key rank and file of Hezbollah has been a significant breakthrough. The element of surprise was also on Israel’s side, as it shifted its major operations from Gaza towards southern Lebanon, adding a new war objective – rehabilitation of Israelis in the northern parts of the country, bordering southern Lebanon which had been facing constant barrage of attacks from Hezbollah for last few months. The operation that Israel undertook to start its new war front was no less significant and has been even hailed by the Indian Army chief publicly. Israel – known for masterminding unique spy operations – had infiltrated the supply chain for producing electronic pagers to be supplied to Hezbollah as far back as nine years ago, implanting those communicative devices with bombs which would explode at a time of Mossad’s choosing.

Nearly a decade later, Israel decided to explode those pagers and walkie talkies, resulting in serious injuries to thousands of Hezbollah members. At a time when Hezbollah and Iran were still reeling from surprise, more explosions of devices occurred across Lebanon, including mobile phones, solar systems, laptops etc., reflecting the depth of Israeli infiltration in enemy territories. This surprise incapacitation of Hezbollah was immediately followed by Israeli attacks on individual Hezbollah leaders – including the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah in his hide-out – and a comprehensive ground invasion of southern Lebanon. This was Israel’s historic fourth invasion of Lebanon, at a time when Hezbollah was still in shock. Nasrallah’s death was accompanied by the elimination of the ranks of all top Hezbollah commanders.

The recent events are even more momentous than Israel’s daring summer assassination of Hamas’s chief on Iranian territory and the elimination of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders who were attending meetings with Hezbollah in Lebanon when Israel attacked.

Possibilities of an all-out war

The elimination of Hezbollah’s key leaders, especially Nasrallah has, both, infuriated and threatened Iran. The recent Israeli actions have been widely interpreted as an invitation to open warfare, with Israel making its desire for regime change in Iran known publicly. Netanyahu’s statement indicating Israeli support for the people of Iran against the regime has propelled Ayatollah Khamenei to go into hiding, fearing Israeli attempt to assassinate him. Iran has also – out of its threat perception and to send a domestic public message – launched a barrage of missiles at Israel, even as Hezbollah resumes its bombardment in Israel’s north. While Israel has not yet responded to Iran’s missile offensive – which did not have any Israeli casualties – it continues to advance its ground offensive in both southern Lebanon and Gaza.

A key reason for Israeli escalation in the past month, resulting in a near-elimination of Hezbollah is because Israel sensed weakness of its enemy. Israel sensed that both Iran and Hezbollah were wary of an all-out war. This perception was bolstered after Isreal tested waters in June-July by attacking Iran’s embassy in Syria and killing key Hezbollah and Hamas chiefs and commanders, one on Iranian soil. Despite such daring escalations, all Hezbollah did was fire some 300 short-range missiles, which were easily intercepted by Israel. Iran also did not want an escalation and so held back. It wanted Hezbollah to fight. Hezbollah made its desire for a limited war known to Iran. This made Israel sense a weakness on both sides, enabling it to quickly go for an all-out kill. After all, Israel had been preparing since 2006 for the next opportunity to strike Hezbollah for good. Even as Hezbollah – over the years – was transforming into a conventional military force, Isreal was preparing like a militia to take on Hezbollah, thereby putting it at a distinct advantage. Its explosion of Hezbollah’s devices are typically tactics used by militias and terrorists themselves, but Israel innovatively adopted these very means to eliminate Hezbollah terrorists.

The Continuing Genocide of Hindus in Bangladesh

The widespread genocide of Hindus in Bangladesh which had begun immediately in the aftermath of deposition of Sheikh Hasina in a mass uprising is continuing unabated. Despite the clear documentation of this genocide which has, in the recent past, spread even to Buddhist minorities in Chittagong and other hill districts close to India, there continues to be a penchant on the part of self-righteous international organizations like the United Nations and its agencies as well as the media to turn a blind eye.

One big reason for this is the continuing attempt to whitewash the uprising against Hasina as a students’ movement in response to the repressive measures adopted by her to quell the anti-government quota protests. The Western countries and the international organizations and media bankrolled by them have actively spread this propaganda, conveniently masking the fact that the so-called movement had long been hijacked by hardline Islamist elements, such as the opposition Bangladesh National Party (BNP), the Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) and Hefazat-e-Islam.

Jamaat-e-Islami’s Terrorism

The JeI – whose Bangladeshi branch is an offshoot of the original JeI established in Pakistan in 1941 – had been completely weakened by Hasina when its leader, Motiur Rehman Nizami – who had been one of the most powerful figures in the country – had been hanged to death by the Hasina government in 2016. The JeI had become so weak that it could barely mobilize to protest its leader’s execution. Nizami was known to belong to the Al Badr militia which had helped the Pakistani Army carry out a gruesome massacre of civilians in Demra during the 1971 liberation movement. During the anti-Hasina protests when the so-called students’ movement was being led by prominent organizations like Chhatra Shibir, it should be remembered that Chhatra Shibir is nothing but the youth wing of JeI established in 1954 in the then East Pakistan. It is interesting to note that after facing oblivion with the establishment of Bangladesh under Sheikh Mujib Ur Rehman, the JeI finally successfully reinvented itself as the prime voice of Muslim majoritarianism and radicalism in Bangladesh during the December 6, 1992, demolition of Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, at a time when Khaleda Zia’s BNP had gained power in Bangladesh in 1991. It is also interesting to note that a hardline Islamist faction like JeI could garner such unprecedented support as, under its present leader Shafiqur Rehman, it has, through sophisticated tactics and rhetoric, widely infiltrated coaching centers and liberal universities and used them as fertile breeding grounds for the propagation of its Islamic ideology. Hasina, in failing to anticipate this and ban the JeI on time – she banned it as late as August 2024, barely days before her overthrow – paid a heavy price.

Hefazat-e-Islam’s Terrorism

The same goes for the other major radical Islamic outfit in Bangladesh, Hefazat-e-Islam, which was formed in 2010 to advance the cause of protection of Islam and to protest against Hasina’s repeal of the Fifth Amendment (passed during the military rule) which had altered the country’s secular, socialist character. In 2013, it revealed its true nature during its protests demanding capital punishment for an atheist blogger, among other regressive demands. It was also responsible for hacking a blogger to death in broad public space. Notably, this group came to limelight in 2021 when its members – launching the organization’s biggest protest till date – were arrested for widespread disruption and violence in Bangladesh during Narendra Modi’s visit, including attacks on Hindu temples.

Yunus’s Active Legitimation of Minority Persecution

In the view of the terrorist background of these so-called students’ outfits, it is surprising that the international community, led by western narrative, is supporting such Islamic revival in Bangladesh – a patent security threat to India, as it will strengthen the jihadist network across Bangladesh and Pakistan, and lead to complete decimation of religious minorities in Bangladesh. It is noteworthy that these Islamic terrorist elements in Bangladesh – masquerading as students – have received public legitimacy and recognition like never before under the interim government of ‘Noble Laureate’ Mohammad Yunus – who also happens to be a close ally of American Democrats and of families like Clintons. Instead of controlling the law-and-order situation in Bangladesh and protecting the minorities and other civilians, one of the first things that the Yunus government did was to lift the ban on JeI. The government was also prompt in granting bail to Jashimuddin Rahmani, the chief of the al-Qaeda-inspired terror outfit, Ansarullah Bangla. Yunus himself also met Haque, the leader of Hefazat who had spearheaded the 2021 anti-Modi protests. His government also freed more than 32 Islamic terrorists lodged in jails. When he travelled to the United Nations summit in America recently, he carried with him and lauded Mahfuz Alam, the leader of banned Islamic terrorist outfit Hizbul Tahrir (banned in many countries, including US and UK), as the ‘brain behind the revolution’, even as Bill Clinton clapped. This was the clearest admission that the so-called revolution was not a spontaneous student movement as portrayed by western media, but a deliberately masterminded and funded colour revolution to trigger Islamic revival and regime change. Not only this, but Yunus made statements downplaying the attacks on Hindu minorities saying that these attacks were not communal but a fallout of political upheaval due to the Hindu community’s traditional support for Hasina’s Awami League.

That Yunus was blatantly supported by the West, – led by America which has lost no time in sending its top diplomats to Bangladesh to engage with Yunus and promised him billions of dollars to facilitate Bangladesh’s ‘development’ – has legitimized the Islamist massacre of Hindus in the country. That Islamism has always found the most fertile growing ground in democracy has been well-known, but Bangladesh is the clearest example of this trend, where Islamic forces have historically masked themselves and allied with democratic movements and later taken over the system. Yunus, himself a product of Western democracy and laurels, is a standing example of this trend. The developments in Bangladesh since Yunus took over were infamously lauded by American philanthrope, Alexander Soros, son of George Soros, in a social media post on October 2nd (Mukherjee, 2024). Further, the Talibanization of the country was openly backed by Obama and Clintons, the backbone behind the Democrat-led Biden-Harris administration in the US. Yunus is one of the major donors to the Clinton Foundation. According to Wikileaks, even in 2007, Hillary Clinton had exerted pressure on Bangladesh Army to appoint Yunus as the head of interim government.

Not only this, under Yunus, the jihadist outfits and student wings have established an alternative government in the country akin to Iran’s private militia, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which have established a regime of mob justice where perpetrators enjoy legal immunity. Further, the regime – akin to apartheid – also issued orders in September (from the President’s Office directly) soliciting details of Hindu civil servants working at the level of secretaries and joint secretaries in various government ministries and departments. Despite the hasty rescinding of the order, it led to panic among Hindus and allegations of blatant religious profiling and official persecution (Mishra, 2024). Further, many Hindus allege receiving threatening calls from Islamists to either offer them protection money or else face death (Arya, 2024). In more recent times, there has been disruption and vandalization of Durga Puja ceremonies in Bangladesh including throwing of firebombs, and precipitating in the theft of the crown of Jeshoreshwari Devi – one of the revered Hindu Shakti Peeths – offered by Modi to the temple during his visit in 2021. Despite the CCTV cameras capturing the identity of the thief and the process of theft and despite India officially raising objections and deploring the ‘systematic desecration of temples’ in the aftermath of attacks on Durga puja pandals, Bangladesh authorities have failed to act.

The worsening situation in Bangladesh is now leading to some hardening of attitude in India. While Modi had raised concerns regarding persecution of minorities in Bangladesh with the US, India is now raising this issue more actively in Indian public sphere too. Tripura and West Bengal have witnessed protests on this issue. In recent times, notably, RSS’s Mohan Bhagwat made a speech saying that Bangladeshi Hindus need help and that it is the duty of Indian government to help them, and further referring to weakness as a crime and calling for the mobilization of Hindus. UP Chief Minister, Yogi Adityanath, likewise stressed the need for Hindus to unite or else face elimination.

  1. Long-range missiles launched from land.
  2. Long-range missiles launched from submarines.
  3. Long-range bombers with nuclear missiles.
Share.

Leave A Reply