Considering the weapons and skills of the Central Asian armies that have weapons and skills of the former Soviet Union, the forces of these countries are likely to face more severe insurgent resistance. It should be kept in mind that they cannot provoke all people. At no point in the past twelve years, Central Asian countries have not been willing to join a multi-national force and have not shown interest in it. Also, the strong combination of Central Asian armies in Afghanistan would be unpleasant. For example, speculation is that the Tajik army will be deployed to Tajikistan in Afghanistan. The same will be the case with the Uzbek and Turkmen forces. In this case, they will receive a brutal response from the Taliban. In fact, the Taliban will provoke Pashtun nationalism against forces from Central Asian countries to break up Afghanistan (from the Taliban’s perspective). Pashtuns do not turn their attention to this and will target Tajiks, Uzbeks and Turkmens of Afghanistan. In such a scenario, Afghanistan easily falls into a full-blown civil war.
Other countries in the region that are likely to send troops to Afghanistan include Saudi Arabia, UAE and Egypt from the Middle East. Since people in these countries are involved with the Afghan insurgency, it is very unlikely that these countries will join the security force of several regional nationalities in Afghanistan. Middle East countries do not want to bet on deploying troops in Afghanistan. It can be very unpleasant to fight with insurgents that are being used by them in these countries, especially when these countries have not yet gone through the Arab Spring.
It is clear from the information that terrorist groups and their supporters have made a determination to horrify in Afghanistan in the coming year. The Taliban’s neglect of the Afghan government’s peace plan clearly shows that the Taliban have focused their attention on the war with the government in Afghanistan. The process of electing the National Assembly and the district councils is as important as the legitimacy of the government of Afghanistan, the failure of this process is also important for the Taliban and terrorist groups in Afghanistan. In addition, developments in the region and international affairs, such as the withdrawal from the United States of America of the program of action with Iran and the defeat of ISIL in the Middle East, have had a significant impact on increasing insecurity in Afghanistan.
The ISIL group has carried out the most deadly attacks in Afghanistan this year, and has been able to focus more attention on analysts and news outlets. But what is most worrying is that this group has turned to the massacre of a particular social group in Afghanistan to flame up the fire of sectarian strife in Afghanistan, which, if not blocked by the government, has further concerns will create. The ISIS group launched this year in Afghanistan with a deadly explosion in the Shiite section of western Kabul, killing about 69 dead and 120 wounded. The incident took place at a polling station for the upcoming parliamentary elections in the Shiite neighborhood of Kabul, which was held by ISIL.
The ISIL suicide attacks against the religious and cultural sites of the Shiites of Afghanistan are now one of the major problems and challenges of the national unity government in the security sector of this people, which has so far failed to succeed and failed. Since its inception in Afghanistan, ISIL has been the most deadly attack on its Shiite population. Following the bloodiest suicide attacks in the demonstration on the Dehmzang square, Baqer al-olum and Al-Zahra Mosque, the most bloody suicide attack took place in the mosque during the winter of last year, resulting in the martyrdom of 40 worshipers and the wounding of 90 people. Following the bitter incident, another suicide bomber struck Imam Khomeini Mosque in Dasht-e-Baruchi, Kabul, killing more than 40 people and wounding 50. Following was a suicide bombing at the Tibian Social Cultural Center, where 52 cultural activists, journalists and Shiite students, martyrs and 90 others were wounded. At the beginning of spring this year, a bloody suicide attack was carried out on the pilgrimage of the Shah Shah, and a month later, a suicide attack took place at the Tazkara Distribution Center to register for the electoral campaign, which took all of these attacks to the ISIL group. In addition to the bloody attacks that took place in Kabul, ISIL was also carrying out deadly attacks on Shiite religious sites in other provinces of Afghanistan, an example of which was ISIL’s attack on the Javadiyah mosque in Herat city, which resulted in 30 martyrs and more than 60 others were wounded.
The initial analysis is that the ISIS group is seeking revenge against the Shiites of Afghanistan because of the large presence of Afghan Shiite youth through Iran’s recruiting of the Syrian war. This reprisal has caused the religious, cultural and religious communities of Afghanistan to always be threatened by ISIS. In addition, the ISIS group ideologically views all Shiites around the world with a hostile and reprehensible relationship that the countries supporting the radical and Takfiri ideology of the ISIS group also do not ignore any inhuman attitude towards the Shiites, As a result of this Takfiri view, the Shiites of Afghanistan are more threatened and vulnerable. It should be noted that in the recruitment process by the Iranian government of Afghan refugee children in Iran for deployment to Syria and in the area of providing security for Shiite citizens in Afghanistan, the central government of Afghanistan has a major responsibility that has been very weak in this area. Is. Meanwhile, Shiites and the Hazaras have shown a glorious civilization in democratic processes like the previous election, and have not, as the most civilized social group, conducted any illegal behavior for government institutions in the center and provinces. But again, they have been deprived of their most basic citizenship rights, whose neighborhoods in Kabul are an irrefutable certificate in this regard.
But another analysis in this regard is very different from that which was raised. Based on this view, ISIS is likely to be a fake intelligence and intelligence phenomenon Pakistan and other terrorist countries use to launch specific operations and sectarian wars in Afghanistan, Ideological, is trying to hit the central government of Afghanistan. According to this analysis, the relationship between the Taliban and ISIL is very close to each other. Because the Taliban group is also using it to use any means and behavior that undermined the Afghan government. The reality is the killing of innocent people by terrorists with the intent of punishing the central government for their demands. Concerns in these cases are doubling where the central government has been weak in securing the security of Afghan citizens, especially in the area of security of the religious and cultural centers of the Shiites, which has been very weak and unobtrusive. As a result, as mentioned above, only in the capital, the statistics of the dead and wounded Shiites are much more terrible than some of the statistics and information is available.
The steps that the Afghan government has taken to protect the Shi’i centers has been to ensure the security of Shiite mosques by the Shiite people themselves. Although they suffered from lack of equipment and facilities and did not receive any training from the beginning to the last month, they were still relatively effective. Since the recent Daesh’s bloody attack on the IDS center for voting registration in the Shiite neighborhood of western Kabul was faced with intense civilian reactions. This has led the Afghan president to consider an independent security domain for the security of Western Kabul’s citizens that the news of the opening of this area has been published in the media, but the residents of western Kabul have so far not been aware of the existence of this area and I personally could not really I get the point where the area actually opened in what part of West Kabul is open and where it is.
The second major security challenge of the Afghan government is the Taliban’s terrorist and terrifying activities. Last year, in addition to the center of Afghanistan, distant provinces of the country also witnessed widespread unrest that the recent Taliban attack on downtown Farah was at the top of its domestic news.
Taliban successive attacks in Farah city and the capture of the city at the beginning of last months by the Taliban showed that the Taliban group was more integrated and more enthusiastic from its donor countries than was expected. Find out Farah’s incident is beyond the existing analysis of what is important at the national level for Afghanistan, the Taliban’s message to the people and government of Afghanistan. By the end of 1396, the Afghan government, with the consent of all political parties in Afghanistan, declared unilateral and unconditional peace for the Taliban, and considered the great concessions for Taliban readiness for the peace process. But so far, there has been no indication from the Taliban that they are prepared to accept peace. In addition, the Taliban group, with the onset of its spring strike called Khandagh, virtually showed that the Taliban are still determined by their hostility to the Afghan people and started suicide bombing wars from remote areas of Afghanistan, where the Farah incident It’s an example.
ISIL and the Taliban now cover all terrorist groups as their subdivision and become more coherent, but the Afghan government has not responded to Afghan public opinion so far. It was expected that the government of Afghanistan would be more determined to mobilize public opinion after rejecting a peace plan without the preconditions of the Afghan government from the Taliban. But on the contrary, it was a Taliban group that proved its determination in Farah.
In the war of intelligence and guerrilla warfare, without the mobilization of public opinion and forcing the enemy to go through peace through a war, the Afghan government has never been able to succeed. But due to the coherence of the Taliban group, the failure of talks between the Taliban and the Meriya without the presence of the Government of Afghanistan, the high profile of the Mola-barader in these talks, the withdrawal of US troops from the Taliban group and the role of Pakistan in the Afghan peace process, the prolongation of partisan wars could finally cost Impose a lot on the government of Afghanistan.
Twentieth century was a century of great events and developments in every part of human life. The century is marked by the deadliest wars, deadliest weapons and unprecedented interconnectedness. The destructive power of A-bombs and the interconnectedness that transformed world into a global village infused traditional wisdom of conflict resolution with great confusions. New conflicts demanded new solutions. Globalization transformed the traditional theatre of conflict; war.
War in twenty first century has acquired a whole new character. State which was once the almighty Leviathan has lost its monopoly over violence, its erosion of monopoly over violence from globalization transformed the character of war. Wars of today are not fought between states rather there is network of state and non-state actors which includes mercenaries, private security companies, hired thugs etc. Globalization has unleashed a plethora of problems by undermining state sovereignty. Globalization which was supposed to encourage cosmopolitan politics and cooperation ended up creating more divisions.
Mary Kaldore, professor at London School of Economics, is among the scholars who have acknowledged the impact of globalization on the character of war. In her book, New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era, she highlights this change in character of war. Highlighting the difference she wrote that new wars are different from old wars because of who fight these wars, for what reason these wars are fought, how these wars are financed and the way these wars are fought. Old wars were fought by states, financed by states, were waged for ideological purposes and battles were the defining character. However, in new wars; actors are networks of state and non-state actors, which are to a greater extent privately financed and direct confrontation between opposite forces is rare. Kaldor is of the view that this change in character of war is caused by globalization. Kaldor is of the view that this transformation is a consequence of globalization and disintegration of state.
Along with globalization, clash of symmetrical opponents can destroy the world. Advent of nuclear weapons has changed the traditional military logic. In fact, any war according to old military logic is simply not beneficial anymore. War between nuclear powers will leave neither party at benefit. Since the costs of such victory cancel the benefits it holds. Avoiding direct war serves the political interest better than waging one. This change in military logic is evident from the change in tactics of wars of today. Today’s wars are fought through Guerilla and counter insurgency tactics are the tactics. Majority of the conflicts involves one state and one or more than one non-state actor. These are battles between wolves and shepherds where wolves attack the flock while shepherds try to save the sheep.
However, it is not the change in military logic and innovation of new types of weapons that have transformed the character of war. Rather transformation in politics is the defining element of this change. Politics of ‘new wars’ is Identity politics which is very different from politics of old wars. Old wars were largely driven by ideological politics whereas new wars are driven entirely by identity politics. In words of Professor Kaldor, “identity politics is about right to power in the name of a specific group whereas ideological politics is about winning power in order to carry out a particular ideological programme”. Globalization prompted groups to securitize their identity. War for these actors is either a mean for keeping their identity or claiming in lands in the name of that identity.
Another dimension of problems caused by globalization for the concept of war is proliferation of capitalism. The ideas of capitalism and free market motivated such actors who saw potential for profit in war. These actors established private security firms and were up for grab for the highest bidder. Companies like Titan and Blackwater are profit-maximizing companies whose only motivation is the accumulation of wealth. These institutions induced the concept of war with further complexities and legitimacy of violence further degenerated. These developments underline the need for a new conceptualization of war. To address these complexities and set the basis for future exploration, Kaldor defines war as a “mutual enterprise” rather than a “contest of wills”. The reason illustrated by Kaldor is that the latter makes the elimination of enemy the ultimate objective of war whereas former suggests that both sides are interested “in the enterprise of war rather than winning and losing for both political and economic ends”. Although it is very difficult to discern what means one employs for what ends, the protracted conflicts all around the world and the industry which these wars fuel paints a different picture a picture very close to the concept of war as mutual enterprise rather than a contest of wills.
War in nuclear age, where symmetry in capabilities will, eventually, lead to MAD, cannot have the same character it once had. Mankind frightened by the destructiveness of these weapons and compelled by their natural instinct to clash is trying to fight the new wars with new weapons according to old principles. This is commendable but not practical as this undermines the capabilities of new weapons by considering them just another weapon of war. Concepts of limited war show the appreciation of this reality. There political, technological and economical developments highlight the need for evaluation of old ideas and encourage the need for new ideas. As the aphorism goes “modern problems require modern solutions”, wars of today are modern and they require modern solutions as the traditional ones are not adequate enough.
SCO: Potential and Challenges to Regional Integration
The modern system of the world is facing the state of imbalance as it passes through the phase of change and evolutionary development. Globalization has emerged as a main trend in international relations and deepens the interdependency between countries of the world. The rapid increasing interdependency contributes for countries to get close one another and to protect their interests. The desire of extending economic and trade activities, access to capital market and the contracts for investment are encouraging countries to work together and to cooperate. The cooperation for economic activities, trade, transportation, information, communication and transmission are making the countries and regions unite.
Regionalization has emerged as a new form and process of interaction among the countries of the world. Many countries are striving to establish a system of cooperation with their neighbors to enhance their potential and also to facilitate each other for solution regional issues. Thereby, the regionalization has taken diverse form of regional integration including the establishment of multinational regulatory system and flexible model of cooperation and partnership in different areas and at different levels. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)is an outstanding example of regionalization and hybrid and new mixed model of interstate multifaceted cooperation.
SCO established in 2001 to meet the objectives of regional security and stability. Since the establishment the organization continued evolutionary path of multifaceted and multilateral cooperation. It does not desire to achieve a specific target level of collaboration, but it move systematically along the path of finding the common attribute in resolving the regional issues. The SCO also has potential of unique perimeters, new opportunities and directions of further development in the areas of security, economics and other mutual interests. The organization comprises of 43 percent of world population and 25 percent of global GDP. Similarly, it covers 80 percent area of Eurasia. Although the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is a young organization than the other international associations but it has the ability to achieve mutually beneficial solution of political, economic and security issues and it also leads to accumulation of unresolved issues of the region. However, the size never conflates with influence and effectiveness. In fact, the SCO is also facing hamstring by major regional economies and powers with their own interests in the region and mistrust between member states.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization is often stated as a club of autocrat powers. The members follow the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of other states. However, China and Russia adhere this principle rhetorical basis but not in reality. Both the countries have history of interference and violence of neighboring countries. The member states rely on the principle to push back at Western and local civil society effort to promote responsible governance, human rights and democratic norms in the region. Since the formation, the organization holds a broad goal of fighting against terrorism, extremism and separation. Furthermore, the convention of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization invokes the principle of United Nation charter to help clock the organization’s founding document with international legitimacy identifying all three equal threats to state security, public order and the safety of citizen. The member states also have commitment to share information about terrorist activities and threats and to make request to act against individuals or organization. Subsequent declaration of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and agreements of the member states have simply added to the list of principles and their responsibilities. Since the surveillance of new technology the member states moved beyond the simple method of information exchange to best practice of monitoring and tackling.
On the other hand, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization has had very little achievements to strength domestic security despite the convergence of member states. The RATS (Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure) based in Tashkent Uzbekistan has been coordinating to combat these three evils Terrorism, Extremism, Separation). The RATS provides a platform and services to member states particularly Central Asian States of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan for sharing intelligence but it made very little progress. Furthermore the RATS shares intelligence with member states but the terrorist threats are increasing.
Since the SCO framed, the high hopes of diplomatic relations, effective economic and security cooperation were made by the founding members. It was also expected that the organization may bring regional cohesion to Central Asia and it would create great opportunities for the regional states of mutual trade and economic activities, and it will lead towards security promotion of the region. The founding partners of the SCO had ambitious plan for the transforming the organization in to a cohesive bloc with political and economic integration. There was also a hope that the organization may counter influence of EAEU and CSTO and will maintain its own influence in the region. But Russia wanted to dilute Chinese influence within the organization by advocating its expansion in to south Asia and other neighboring states.The SCO has organized many joint military exercises and efforts but could get any significant level of achievements because they were symbolic and political moves. To encounter any kind of security crisis and military operation in the region, there is a need of political logistical and operational system. For example during the unrest in Kyrgyzstan in 2010, the organization delivered an anodyne statement for peace; security and stability, additionally, China and Russia were hesitating to get involved. While, the other states and powers tried to play their role to tackle the crisis.
China and Russia are the primary drivers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization but have different visions for this organization. Although they share common interest of regional stability within the organization but at the same time their geopolitical interests pull them in different directions. These differences are a big question mark, how the organization would achieve their objective and would evolve? Russia thinks of SCO as a security to prevent encroachment by outside powers NATO, UE and United States, and also a tool to maintain its geopolitical domination on the region and less than a partnership in Central Asia.
Since the post-cold war, the economic imbalance has increased between China and Russia. China is increasing its economic influence in Central Asia while Russia is worrying about its security issues. Moscow hopes that the Pakistan and Indian including in Shanghai Cooperation Organization may bind Beijing to more work for the security and stability of the region than to enhance its own economic influence in the region. As the issues of uncertainty in Afghanistan, Pakistan-India confrontation and instability on China-India border are a clear threat to the interests of all member states. China is also suspected about the Russian ability to act as the security manager in an area where china has invested and is investing billions of dollars. On the other hand, Beijing may not be able rely on extra regional powers to secure and prevent Central Asia from the security deteriorated environment. However, SCO has not made any mechanism or approach to play a decisive security role in Afghanistan post withdrawal United States and NATO force.
China thinks that economic activities and investment can mitigate instability. Shanghai Cooperation Organization also a tool to promote Chinese soft power and economic influence in Central Asia. Therefore, Beijing has been continued its investment in the region and through OBOR and SCO. Although the Central Asian States are receptive to these Chinese overture but they are also keen to prevent SCO to become an anti-western bloc because the states feel the need of Western powers to counterbalance their powerful neighbors. Moscow already has upended its relationship with West over the Ukraine issue, thus, in these circumstances; Russia has no other choice to acquiesce Chinese increasing economic influence in the region. Moscow may pull itself from the Chinese efforts to multiply its security role in the region. The current clash on border between China-India put Russia in to awkward position. Russia does not like tension between China and India but it suggests dialogues and appears to have little interest mediating. Russia never wanted that China convert SCO in to an economic and trade bloc while China never wanted that Russia transform the organization into a military alliance. It is hard to imagine that Shanghai Cooperation Organization may be able to deliver its original goals eradicate extremism, terrorism and separation through mutual cooperation because it appears with the major focus on economic integration across the Eurasian region.
Now the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is coexisting with other regional initiatives like OBOR, AIIB, CSTO and EAEU. Both China and Russia have expressed their intentions to work within these institutions. Since the formation, the SCO is facing many structural and organizational challenges. All members have their own interests and values of independence and sovereignty, which are difficult to reconcile with collective security particular Pakistan and India, China and India have mutual mistrust and all Central States also have territorial issues with one another.
Possibility of an alliance in Sino-Russian Relations
The defense ministers’ meeting of NATO member states was held in video format a few days ago (17/2/2021). During the period, the discussion focused on the topic of “China-Russia threat” and believed that a “global approach” should be adopted to curb China-Russia expansion.” At the same time, this meeting also attracted widespread attention from outsiders.
Senior Russian researcher, Vasily Kashin published an article in which he emphasized that when there is a risk of military conflict with the United States, China and Russia should immediately form a military alliance. And share the missile early warning data collected by themselves.
According to the article, Sino-Russian military technology cooperation has always been quite secretive, and because Russian companies have participated in the development of China’s ballistic missile early warning system, China and Russia are fully able to establish data sharing on this basis and establish their own global Missile defense network. Russian media subsequently reported on it and said that Russia has repeatedly proposed the formation of a Sino-Russian military alliance, and even President Putin himself has conveyed the idea of an alliance with China.
It should be noted that the containment and suppression of China and Russia by Western countries do not stop there. To provoke the territorial sovereignty of China and Russia, US aircraft and warships have already on the doorstep of China and Russia, carrying out under the banner of freedom of navigation (FON).
Intensive reconnaissance activities, this behavior has seriously threatened the national security of China and Russia but also undermined global peace and stability. To build a global encirclement of China, the United States is also actively wooing other countries to join its anti-China front in an attempt to reorganize the eight-nation coalition forces to contain China.
It can be said that Western countries are pressing on with China and Russia step by step. As the US continues to escalate its suppression, the security situation around China and Russia will deteriorate again in the future, and the two sides may even break out head-on conflict.
Faced with the complex situation in the Indo-Pacific, China and Russia also need to strengthen cooperation in the field of national defense. After all, the two countries are originally a comprehensive strategic partnership of cooperation in the new era. In recent years, the strategic mutual trust between the two sides has been deepening and several rounds of military exercises have been jointly conducted.
Therefore, the opinions of Russian experts are in line with the future development trend of Sino-Russian relations. As a friendly country, Sino-Russian relations will only continue to develop for the better, and the possibility of China and Russia forming a military alliance in the future is not ruled out. The Chinese people also have extremely high expectations for the future direction of Sino-Russian relations. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi once stated that Sino-Russian cooperation “has no end, no restricted zone, and no upper limit” (2/1/2020).
Foreign media believe that this means China’s non-aligned position or non-alignment Applying the Sino-Russian relationship again means that Wang Yi recognized the possibility of China and Russia forming a military alliance. Both China and Russia are peace-loving world powers and have always been committed to maintaining the peace and stability of the regional situation.
Therefore, even if a military alliance is concluded in the future, they will never follow a hegemonic line. In the final analysis, how China and Russia cooperate depends on changes in the international situation. Instead of worrying about the “threat” brought by the rise of China and Russia, Western countries should stop deteriorating the regional situation and work with China and Russia to maintain world peace and stability. Otherwise, this “heart disease” will never be eliminated.
It is worth noting that the Western countries, led by the United States, have a very playful attitude towards Sino-Russian cooperation. They have been using various means to sow discord between China and Russia in an attempt to prevent the establishment of a Sino-Russian military alliance.
However, the continuous deepening of cooperation between China and Russia is a historical development. The inevitable result of this is that no matter how obstructed by Western countries, Sino-Russian relations will continue to develop for the better, without any interference from external forces.
Biden administration’s policy towards Vietnam, and the South China Sea
The one big question loomed large about Biden administration and it was whether there be a change in Biden administration...
Beyond the friendship diplomacy between Morocco and Mauritania
Over the past decade or so, many politicians and diplomats have held that the most significant bilateral relationship has been...
The Present Battle over Greece’s Past is Seeding New Battles in its Future
The streets of Greece have been raging with marches, violent clashes between police and protesters, and clandestine violence since the...
The phenomenon of land grabbing by multinationals
Since 2012 the United Nations has adopted voluntary guidelines for land and forest management to combat land grabbing. But only...
The Only Wealth, There’s in Man
The famous quote of Jean Bodinprovide us with an important visualization about the human capital in developing countries, in order...
Hybrid Warfare Against Pakistan: Challenges and Response
The term ‘hybrid warfare’ entered the strategic lexicon in the early 21st century despite having been practiced in various forms...
Twentieth century was a century of great events and developments in every part of human life. The century is marked...
South Asia3 days ago
Ancestral Lineage of Hazaras: from Afghanistan to Pakistan
Eastern Europe3 days ago
Caspian: Status, Challenges, Prospects
Americas2 days ago
Rejoining the UNHRC will be the State Department’s first diplomatic mistake
Green Planet3 days ago
Climate politics and the future of carbon emissions
Middle East2 days ago
Back to Strategic Hedging and Mediation in Qatar Foreign Policy after the Gulf Reconciliation
Middle East3 days ago
A little acknowledged clause may be main obstacle to revival of Iran nuclear accord
Europe2 days ago
Dara of Jasenovac
Americas2 days ago
Transition 2021: How Biden is likely to approach the Middle East