Connect with us


Reform, Reconstruction and Radicalization: A new Western stratcom for the Global South



Most countries around the world are now going through a reconstruction process, as the pandemic left marks everywhere. However, in some places, especially in the Global South, states were already trying to become more stable, to rebuild themselves and emerge more resilient. This article discusses the importance of strategic communication in these endeavours, and its effects upon the 3Rs: reform, reconstruction and radicalization. It tackles the question of whether countries from the Global South could incorporate in their efforts some elements of the Western stratcom toolbox. 

Finding the common ground

Since its birth, the European Union has gone through plenty and diverse challenges. These can be grouped in at least two categories. The first category includes the challenges which stem from the EU’s essence, or are imbedded in the very nature of the European project, such as creating a European identity while bringing together different cultures, traditions and languages, integrating new members and the withdrawal of old ones (i.e., Brexit), dealing with different living standards, national interests, histories and mentalities, geographic characteristics and security concerns. Ensuring that, at the end of the day, everyone is (or at least feels) better off has never been easy in the expanding European family.

The second category refers to external challenges through which the EU has had to navigate and find its way through, such as the financial crisis of 2008, the refugee crisis, and the Covid-19 pandemic. Besides these, other sweeping trends such as climate change, aging population, digital revolution, and internal and external disinformation campaigns, come with dangers and need adaptation and resilience.

The problems which the EU faced in the previous years, both intrinsic and extrinsic, could be compared, to some extent and keeping the sense of proportions, to the ones faced by the Global South countries in their efforts of reconstruction, reform and nation building. The West should not give lessons to the countries in the Global South. However, it can share from its own experience and the lessons it learnt along the way, from its successes and its mistakes, in a manner which is not patronising or paternalistic, but informative. Given that a common mantra of past years has been a Europe in crisis and, despite this narrative, Europe has still been able to move forward, why not make use of this experience in dealing with crisis and communicating solutions?

The architects of the African Union designed it on the template of the EU institutions. The two are spatially different, and probably also decades apart, and therefore a comparison between the two has obvious limits. However, tools and lessons which come from the challenges the EU faced along the way may prove useful. Not only may they be useful for a regional club of countries struggling to unite and find common interests, such as the African Union, but many countries from the Global South are comprised by a great variety of cultures, languages and religions and are in the pursuit of constructing a national identity and bringing about regional peace and stability.  

Stratcom and the 3 Rs: Reform, Reconstruction and Radicalization

Strategic communication is an essential part in ensuring that countries’ efforts to reform and rebuild themselves bear results. After a crisis, be it provoked by civil war, conflict with other countries, natural disasters, or political changes, countries have to go through a rebuilding and stabilisation process. Each case is unique, as each state has different characteristics, and therefore each recipe for recovery may need periodic refinements, but the ingredients are more or less the same: establishing the right institutions, restoring effective governance, protecting human rights, stabilizing the economy, and improving social cohesion and reconciliation.

No matter what mix of ingredients and what path towards reconstruction a state chooses, strategic communication must be implemented for several reasons. First of all, it can be used to ensure that the state-society relations are rebuilt, so citizens trust that the government is working in their favour and is responsive to their opinions. Governments that put together a successful strategy cannot pursue it without having citizens’ support, and therefore we need to see an alignment of that strategy with communication. Second, in the process of nation-building, the relations between citizens need to be restored, and officials can increase social cohesion and resilience by promoting an authentic national narrative, as well as fostering a safe space for citizens to interact and create a sense of community. Third, a state can use strategic communication tools in order to reconnect and engage with the international community, attract partners and investors, and therefore aid the economic recovery process. Another point is that, if radicalization is taking place, many reforms and efforts might just not stick, as another narrative pushed by marginal/terrorist groups might prevail. States can use stratcom not only in their counter-terrorism policies, but also in the prevention phases of radicalization, by engaging in a dialogue with vulnerable communities, providing support and an alternative set of values, always in consultation with local stakeholders and making full use of local knowledge and sensitivities.   

Potential lessons from the Western stratcom experience 

A first example or lesson from the EU would be the challenge of finding a common project and common goals following major events, such as the financial crisis, Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic. In each case, the EU Member States were affected differently from an economic, political and social angle. They also had different needs and expectations. Therefore, it has been a difficult task to negotiate and find solutions for all parties involved, to frame the issues so as to arrive at the best possible outcome. For example, after the financial crisis, richer states had to “bail out” the ones that were in a worse position. More recently, the Covid-19 pandemic has proven to be one of the most complex challenges until now, triggering a medical and economic crisis, combined with social changes and tensions. However, the response from the EU has also been a historical one: the largest stimulus package ever financed has been approved, standing as an instrument designed to boost the post-pandemic recovery and pave the way towards a greener, more digital and more resilient Europe.

The diversity of interests and cultures is, at least from one perspective, problematic, and risks leading to sub-optimal results and inhibiting efficient decision-making. From a geopolitical point of view, security concerns have always been perceived differently in the EU, with Eastern Europe being more concerned with the dangers coming from Russia and the protracted conflicts in Europe’s Eastern and Southern Neighbourhoods. Further integration in aspects such as defence and energy has always been particularly tricky, as oftentimes national interests prevail and no common decision can be reached.  

However, the key to managing different points of view stands in successful negotiation. In 2017, the European Commission under Jean-Claude Junker’s presidency presented a White Paper on the Future of Europe, setting on the table five scenarios for all Member States to choose, from “nothing but the single market” to “doing much more together“.This has been considered an intelligent move, as it did not include only one specific reform proposal with strong integration, and did not leave room for populists to hide behind duplicity, for example arguing for more benefits brought by common action but rejecting more integration. The debate regarding the future of Europe is now back on EU’s agenda, with the Conference on the Future of Europe, taking place under Ursula von der Leyen’s presidency, including conferences, consultation and debates with EU’s civil society.

As the international system has been increasingly characterised by great power competition, the EU started taking a more geopolitical stance and communicating a greater strategy for itself. But, at least up until a few years ago, there have been major difficulties in communicating strategically and formulating clear intentions regarding big ideas. The bureaucratic Europe silenced the political Europe, and therefore the EU’s objectives were quite limited from a strategic and communication point of view, leaving the impression of lacking ambition. The “strategic autonomy” has now become a buzzword in Brussels, who started communicating more clearly its ambitions, refusing to be a pawn caught between the powerplay of great powers, and deciding it wants to shape its own future, based on its own needs and values. We can therefore see a refinement and essentialisation of the EU’s positioning, but also an alignment of its strategy with communication. For sure, there are some aspects to be considered by those who do not want to be the grass for political and economic elephants such as the US and China.

The EU’s recovery and resilience plan is as much about mitigating the economic and social impact of the Covid-19 pandemic as it is about building back better – supporting reforms and investments which will make Member States’ economies and societies more resilient and sustainable in the face of challenges posed by climate change and digital transition. The focus of EU’s attention and resource allocation is drawn now to the big issues and trends that will set the tone for the next decade.

Moreover, the Conference on the Future of Europe represents, together with the recent Porto Social Summit– where EU leaders, European institutions, social partners and civil society representatives met to discuss how to set the European social policy agenda for the next decade – a chance to update the existing social contract and make necessary social reforms, to make concrete common steps towards the implementation of the principle that no individuals are left behind. The political turmoil seen in recent years has been topped with the problems brought by the pandemic, which aggravated inequalities and spurred people’s unhappiness with the current system. The steps the EU is taking in order to have an open dialogue with citizens will ensure that changes and reforms will not be taken only at a high level, but will be actually underpinned by the necessities and opinions of the civil society.   

Where to start?

Countries that are in a process of reconstruction and nation-building should adapt these lessons to their own situation, and use strategic communication so that reforms gain popular traction and bear fruits. A strategy is needed to steer a country in the right direction, but it cannot succeed alone. It has to be complemented by strategic communication.

Moreover, there needs to be an increased emphasis on message segmentation and targeting. Although there is only one master narrative, different groups and stakeholders have to be dealt with in a different manner, depending on their needs. The recent focus of EU’s communication efforts on social aspects, although long overdue, is to ensure that no groups are left without a voice and the populist/extremist surge is contained. Countries need to adapt their message depending on their audience, and make sure that they extend communication practices towards new audiences as well.

Strategic communication must also be better integrated with mass communication, meaning that officials should employ and coordinate various communication methods and channels in order to provide clear and consistent messages that reach a vast majority of people. In many places, the pandemic gave a boost to these communication practices, as vital information regarding new regulation and measures had to reach everyone. Leaders should take note and be more visible and communicative not only during a crisis, but in general. 

Continue Reading


UN: Revealing Taliban’s Strategic Ties with Al Qaeda and Central Asian Jihadists



Afghan peace mediators

As the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and the deadline for the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan draws near, the region has been witnessing sudden adjustments. The Taliban have not only intensified assaults against the Afghan government forces and captured new territories but also began to demonstrate their regional ambitions to reduce Washington’s influence in Central and South Asia. As the US military has completed more than half of its withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Taliban believe that they defeated America after 20 years of grueling war. The Taliban leaders, who were driven by the latest military successes, began further setting their own conditions for the neighbors and stepping on the toes of Washington in order to prevent the establishment of a new US military base in Central Asia.

On May 26, the Taliban issued a statement warning Afghanistan’s neighbors not to allow the US to utilize their territory and airspace for any future military operations against them. The Sunni Islamist jihadi group cautioned that facilitating US military operations by neighboring countries in the future will be a “great historical mistake and a disgrace that shall forever be inscribed as a dark stain in history.” They further emphasized that the presence of foreign forces is “the root cause of insecurity and war in the region.” The insurgent group strictly warned without elaborating that “the people of Afghanistan will not remain idle in the face of such heinous and provocative acts”. At the end of the statement, they exerted political pressure on the Central Asian states, threatening that “if such a step is taken, then the responsibility for all the misfortunes and difficulties lies upon those who commit such mistakes.”

Given the past experience of US military presence in the region, the Taliban’s threatening appeal is most likely addressed to the governments of Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.  After the 9/11 attacks the Kyrgyz, Tajik, and Uzbek governments hosted the American military to wage a campaign against the Taliban, Al Qaeda and their Salafi-Jihadi subsidiaries. But virtually every US military base in Central Asia was suddenly expelled when the personal interests of the regional authoritarian leaders have been infringed upon. Uzbekistan expelled the US base from Karshi-Khanabad amid strong political disagreements over a bloody 2005 crackdown on protesters in Andijan. The Dushanbe and Kulob airports in Tajikistan were used very briefly by the NATO forces. The US base at the Bishkek airport in Kyrgyzstan also was closed in 2014 under heavy Russian hands. It is no secret that following the expel of US military bases, some political leaders of Central Asia became skeptical of Washington, thus further perceiving it as an unreliable partner.

The Taliban’s warning to the Central Asian states is fully consistent with the strategic expectations of Al Qaeda, its loyal and faithful ideological partner in the global jihad, both of which jointly seek to push the US out not only from Afghanistan, but also from Central and Southeast Asia. Based on propaganda releases and the rhetoric on Telegram channels, the Central Asian Salafi-Jihadi groups which are linked to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, strongly supported the withdrawal of US forces from the region. Consequently, Uighur and Uzbek jihadists potentially see the Taliban and Al Qaeda as powerful parent organizations, whose resurgence in Afghanistan offers major advantages for their military and political strengthening. Unsurprisingly, Al Qaeda and Taliban aims to oust the US forces from the region, hence playing into the hands of Moscow and Beijing, considering that both unlikely to welcome an increased US military presence in their backyard.

Taliban leaders are well aware that the possible deployment of US military assets in Central Asia will impede their strategic goal in rebuilding the so-called Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Today Washington is actively working with nations surrounding Afghanistan on the deployment of its troops to support Afghan forces “over the horizon” after withdrawal from the country on September 11. The US air support for the Afghan military could thwart Taliban plans to quickly seize Kabul and force them to sit at the negotiating table with the Ashraf Ghani administration. The Taliban have consistently and clearly emphasized in their numerous public statements opposing the negotiation and power share with the Kabul regime. They consider themselves the only and undeniable military-political force that has the right to rule the country in accordance with Sharia law. The Taliban jihadists are determined to continue waging jihad until establishing the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and their emir, Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada, becomes the country’s “lawful ruler”.

On June 6, 2021, the Taliban once again appealed to Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan “to resolve their border issues through a dialogue” and “seeking a logical solution that would benefit both sides.” Recall, during the two-day border conflict between the armed forces of the two post-Soviet countries at the end of April, more than 50 people were killed, hundreds were injured and thousands were forced to leave their homes. In its statement, the Taliban, called on Tajik and Kyrgyz leaders to value “the peace and security of their respective nations.” According to the local analysts, Taliban’s “peace-aiming appeal” looks like a mockery of the Afghan people suffering from their bloody jihad.

Taliban’s “Soft Power” Under Construction

The question to be posed is what kind of leverage does the Taliban has with the Central Asian states to put pressure on them in preventing the possible deployment of new US military bases in the region?

The Taliban, an insurgent Islamist group that has yet to come to power, does not have any economic or political leverage over the former Soviet republics of Central Asia. But it is imperative to mention that the Taliban holds “soft power” tools, such as Central Asian Salafi-Jihadi terrorist groups affiliated with the Taliban and Al Qaeda. These groups challenged the region’s secular regimes, hence aiming to establish an Islamic Caliphate in the densely populated Fergana Valley, sandwiched between Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

It is no secret that the Central Asian post-Soviet countries consider the Al Qaeda-linked Uzbek and Uighur Sunni Salafi-Jihadi groups hiding in Taliban-controlled Afghan soil as a threat to the security of the entire region. Recall, the first group of radical Islamists from Central Asia who found refuge in Afghanistan in the mid-90s was the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), which had close and trusting ties with both Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Currently, Uighur fighters of Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) from China’s Xinjiang, Uzbek militant groups such as Katibat Imam al-Bukhari (KIB), Katibat Tawhid wal Jihad (KTJ), the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU) and Tajik militants of Jamaat Ansarullah (JA) wage jihad in Afghanistan under the Taliban’s umbrella.

The Taliban still strongly support Uzbek and Uighur jihadists despite the 2020 US-Taliban peace agreement that requires the Taliban to sever ties with Al Qaeda and all Central Asian terrorist groups.

In response to documentary evidence of the UN Security Council and the US Defense Intelligence Agency on the Taliban’s close-knit relationship with Al Qaeda and their failure to fulfill the obligation, the Taliban have adopted new tactics to publicly deny the presence of transnational terrorist groups in the country and their ties to them. The Taliban still insist that there are no foreign fighters in the country. But regular UN reports reveal the true face of the Taliban, who are trying to hide their deep network links with Al Qaeda and Central Asian Islamists — a decades-old relationship forged through common ideology and a history of joint jihad.

Thus, a recently released report by the UN Security Council’s Taliban Sanctions Monitoring Team confirms that there are “approximately between 8,000 and 10,000 foreign terrorist fighters from Central Asia, the North Caucasus and China’s Xinjiang in Afghanistan. Although the majority are affiliated foremost with the Taliban, many also support Al Qaeda.” The UN report stated that Uzbek and Uighur jihadists’ ties with the Taliban and Al Qaeda remain “strong and deep as a consequence of personal bonds of marriage and shared partnership in struggle, now cemented through second generational ties.” Further the UN monitoring team revealed Al Qaeda’s core strategy of “strategic patience,” according to which the group would wait for “a long period of time before it would seek to plan attacks against international targets again.”

According to the report, “several hundred Uighur jihadists of Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) located primarily in Badakhshan and neighboring Afghan provinces, whose strategic goal is to establish an Islamic Uighur state in Xinjiang, China.” To achieve its goal, TIP facilitates the movement of fighters from Afghanistan and Syria to China. Abdul Haq al-Turkistani, who is a member of Al Qaeda’s Shura Majlis, leads the Syrian and Afghan branches of TIP for more than two decades. According to the UN monitoring group, “Uighur militant Hajji Furqan, the TIP’s deputy emir, is also a deputy leader of Al Qaeda and responsible for the recruitment of foreign fighters.” Such mixed appointments of group leaders highlight the close and deep ties between the troika: Taliban-Al Qaeda-TIP.

The UN report found more evidence of close cooperation between Uzbek IMU jihadists and the Taliban. The report stated that the “IMU fighters are currently based in Faryab, Sar-e Pol and Jowzjan provinces, where they dependent on the Taliban for money and weapons”. The UN monitoring team also highlighted the activities of Central Asian Salafi-Jihadi groups such as KIB, IJU and Jundullah, which are waging jihad in the northern Afghan provinces of Faryab and Kunduz under Taliban shelter and control. “The Taliban has forbidden these groups from launching independent operations, resulting in a reduction of their income.” In conclusion, UN analysts noted that pressure on the Taliban to cut their ties with Al Qaeda and Central Asian Salafi groups has not succeeded. Thus, the UN report once again refuted the Taliban’s assertion that Al Qaeda and Central Asian jihadists are not present in Afghanistan.


Thus, it can be assumed that while US military pressure persists, the Taliban’s tactics will continue to publicly deny their trust relationships and close ties with Al Qaeda, Central Asian jihadists, and other transnational terrorist groups in the country. But as long as the Taliban’s perception of its own level of influence and control in Afghanistan remains high, insurgents will continue to insist that they are abiding by the accord with the US.

The Taliban’s strategy is to build the foundation of their “soft power” through the patronage and protection of Al Qaeda and Central Asian Salafi-Jihadi groups in Afghanistan. Thus, in this complex process, not only material interests, but also common religious roots originating in the Hanafi school of Sunni Islamic theology and mutual sympathy for jihadist ideological visions might play a significant role.

Continue Reading


Cyber-attacks-Frequency a sign of Red Alert for India



The biggest target is in terms of transportations, nuclear power plants, Power system Operation Corporation Limited, V.O. Chidambaram Port Trust, Telangana State Load Dispatch Centre, logistic industries and research organisations which eventually can lead to destruction of the whole ecosystem. The confidentiality breach in the case of medical data leak as reported by a German cyber security firm –Greenbone Sustainable Resilience wherein Picture Archiving and Communication Servers were linked to public internet without any requisite protection is a point of concern. Then, there are certain individualistic attacks such as hacking email and financial crimes (banking), etc. In the last two years the attacks radar of focus has been defence, government accounts and the vaccine manufacturing companies.

Cyber Security – Individualistic awareness need of the hour

The target of the individual in a peculiar case which led to heinous crimes casted was due to opening of a document which was a bait to install Netwire- a malware. The bait was eventually delivered through a file and what prompted a person to open that link was a Drop box sent to him on his email was actually opening a Pandora Box of malicious command and control server. An emphasis to understand the technicality that Netwire stands for a malware which gives control of the infected system to an attacker. This in turn paves way for data stealing, logging keystrokes and compromise passwords. In the similar vein the Pegasus used the tactic to infiltrate the user’s phones in 2019.

Cyber Security – Attacking Power Distribution Systems

The intrusions by Chinese hacker groups in October, 2020 as brought out by Recorded Future was done through Shadow Pad which opens a secret path from target system to command and control servers. And, the main target is sectors such as transportation, telecommunication and energy .And , there are different tags that are being used by the Chinese Espionage Industry such as APT41, Wicked Spider and Wicked Panda , etc.

The institutions backing legitimisation

The Institutions which are at working under the cyber security surveillance are the National Security Council and National Information Board headed by National Security Adviser helping in framing India’s cyber security policy .Then, in 2014 there is the National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre under the National Technical Research Organisation mandating the protection of critical information infrastructure. And, in 2015 the National Cyber Security Coordinator advises the Prime Minister on strategic cyber security issues. In the case of nodal entity , India’s Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-in) is playing a crucial role under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology(MEITY).But, there is a requirement of clarity in National Cyber Security Policy of 2013 and the needed updates desired in it respectively.

A cohesive approach – Data Protection and Privacy Importance

The Data privacy i.e. the personal data protection bill is an important imperative in which services of private actors can be bridged through a concerned law which is missing link in that sense. The point of Data localisation falls squarely within this dimension of Section 40 and 41 of the draft bill where in the Indian stakeholders have the capacity to build their own data centres .In this contextualisation there also a need to understand certain technicalities involved in terms of edge computing which in a way is enabling the data to be analysed, processed, and transferred at the edge of a network. An elaboration to this is the data is analysed locally, closer to where it is stored, in real-time without delay. The Edge computing distributes processing, storage, and applications across a wide range of devices and data centres which make it difficult for any single disruption to take down the network. Since more data is being processed on local devices rather than transmitting it back to a central data centre, edge computing also reduces the amount of data actually at risk at any one time. Whereas on the other hand, there is insistence on data localisation has paved the way for companies such as Google Pay to adhere to the policy and synchronise their working with the United Payments Interface (UPI).

What do you understand by Data Share?

In the recent case of WhatsApp privacy issue and drawing in parallel other organisation a similar platform such as Facebook and Google shared the data to the third party with a lopsided agreement and with continuance of the data trade business industry. In 1996 the internet was free so was perceived as carte blanche , a safe harbour falling under the Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act in the United States but with the evolution of the circumstances the laws in that specifications are also required to change in that respect. In relations to the Indian law under the Information Technology Act, 2000 under the Section 69 the Indian government has the powers to monitor and decrypt any information that’s store in any computer resource but on certain conditions such as in regards to the sovereignty, defence and security of the country.

Cyber-attacks understanding on the International Forums

In terms of Lieber Code of Conduct of 1863 or be it Hague Convention of 1899 there is a need of updating the definitions and where in the cyber army falling under the categorisation  of civilians , not possessing any of the warfare weapons cause the main weapon that they possess is a malware which is invisible but can have deep repercussions leading to destruction of that particular economy altogether .So, in recent evolving circumstances there is an undue importance to for the target country to respond with equal force and having a right to self-defence in this manner regardless of the attack being from a non-state actor from a third country and masquerading under the civilian garb .Henceforth , there a thorough understanding of the complex environment that one is dealing with , there is undue emphasis to change and respectively update with the current world.

Continue Reading


Incidents of Uranium Theft in India: Depleting Nuclear Safety and International Silence




In yet another incident of the capture of nuclear-related materials from unauthorized persons in India has made headlines in the Indian media but largely ignored in the international media. On 4th June 2021, as reported in the Indian media, the authorities arrested seven people possessing approximately 6.4 kilograms of Uranium in the Eastern State of Jharkhand. This is the second time in less than a month where Indian authorities have captured such a gang in an attempt to sell uranium illegally. An incident of the same nature was reported just a few days ago in May 2021 where authorities apprehended unauthorized persons, who were trying to sell nearly 7 kilograms of natural uranium on the black market. Notably, Indian authorities themselves believe that these events might be linked to a “national gang involved in illegal uranium trade”. This is a very serious issue because it means two things; first, that Indian local uranium reserves, radioactive nuclear materials, and facilities are not protected and are prone to black marketing. Secondly, this scenario has emerged because India is not adhering to international bindings of nuclear safety and security such as UN resolution 1540 and (Convention on Physical Protection on Nuclear Material) CPPNM under IAEA to secure its materials, reserves, and facilities. But, the most damaging aspect in this scenario is the discriminatory behavior of the international community, which is criminally silent on the violations of norms, practices, and regulations necessary for nuclear safety and security.

Though in both incidents, Uranium was in natural condition, which cannot be used for making bombs; however; it should be of great concern, as even in its natural state the Uranium can spread considerable radioactivity if used with conventional explosives. Moreover, Indian authorities themselves are considering that these activities could be linked with national gangs involved in the illegal supply of uranium. This raises the point that actually how much natural uranium is illegally sold in the black market by India. Since these are only incidents that are being reported in the Indian media, there might be many incidents that have never been reported. Also, this gang was captured from near the area where Indian Uranium mines of Jharkhand are allocated, the likelihood of access of non-state actors to these mines cannot be denied. These incidents are critical for international security and stability because such radioactive material when sold in black markets could be brought by the non-state and states aspiring for nuclearization. Unfortunately, in such a scenario all the efforts currently going on to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons would be hampered. The recurring of these incidents reflect that India, despite being a member of CPPNM is not ensuring the protection of its nuclear materials from theft and sabotage by proper regulations, stringent mechanisms, and control. Other than CPPNM, India has also signed UN resolution 1540, which makes it mandatory for the states to ensure security regulations, mechanisms, equipment required for the security of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) from the non-state actors. But, surprisingly, so far the UN or any other international organization has not taken notice of these recurring events. Rather, these mishaps by Indian authorities are shoved under the carpet. These incidents have been reportedly re-occurring in India, media reported these events in 2003, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2016, 2019, and now again in 2021. 

Nuclear safety and security is a national matter of any state; however, against the backdrop of the potential damage, which these weapons can bring, they have become an international concern. Specifically, to an extent, where states are sometimes criticized, lauded, and sometimes rewarded for their behavior in this realm. In this regard, India appears as an exceptional case, where the formation of Nuclear Suppliers Group NSG to stop such events in the future has its roots in the Indian so-called peace nuclear explosion (PNE) in 1974. Ironically, a few years down the road, the same NSG gave a waiver to India for conducting nuclear export. Moreover, India was made part of many other regimes such as the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), Australia Group, and Wassenaar Arrangement. Although, these decisions were carried out in lieu of geo-political realities, where the West regards India as a balancer against China but it gave a free hand to India. Even the US-based NTI Report on Nuclear Security Index gives India less score in nuclear safety and security regulations. At a time when many nuclear theft-related incidents have occurred in India in recent years, disgracefully, India still desires to become a member of NSG based on its so-called nuclear record.

To sum up the situation, the occurrence of back-to-back nuclear theft-related incidents has further exposed India’s nuclear credentials and its non-adherence to international practices of nuclear safety and security. If legal bindings such as CPPNM and 1540 would not be implemented in the future by India, the South Asian stability, as well as the international security, would be undermined. Moreover, if the international non-proliferation continues to remain lenient towards states like India, the rest would likely regard the international non-proliferation mechanism not just as discriminatory but even as hoaxing. Many states might prefer to proliferate for their own interests, which would not serve the non-proliferation mechanism and regime. A very candid example is that today even after two years of the last NPT review conference, the next has not been conducted and chances are that it might not be conducted this year.

Continue Reading



Tech News3 hours ago

100 Start-ups Join WEF’s Technology Pioneers Community in 2021 Cohort

The World Economic Forum announced today its 2021 Technology Pioneers, young and growing tech companies taking on top global concerns...

Science & Technology3 hours ago

Internet of Behavior (IoB) and its Influence on Human Behavioral Psychology

Internet of behavior is a connection between technology and human psychology which gives it the power to generate patterns and...

Intelligence4 hours ago

UN: Revealing Taliban’s Strategic Ties with Al Qaeda and Central Asian Jihadists

As the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and the deadline for the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan draws...

Terrorism Terrorism
Defense6 hours ago

Nuclear Black Market and India’s Expanding Weapons Program

The threat around nuclear and radiological material has become acute in India with its expanding nuclear weapons program. There exist...

Energy News12 hours ago

Korea shares experience of electric vehicles and renewable energy with Thailand

The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) is supporting South-East Asian countries in combatting climate change through policy consultation and...

Style14 hours ago

Rolex Oyster Perpetual Explorer

Rolex is presenting its new-generation Oyster Perpetual Explorer. At 36 mm, it returns to the size of the original model launched...

Diplomacy14 hours ago

Biden-Putting meeting: Live from Geneva

19:00 The places of the flags on the Mont Blanc bridge on which President Biden and President Putin will pass...