Turkey govt turns iconic museum Hagia Sophia into Mosque

Washington DC, Feb 7: United States on Thursday asked all countries to speak out against mistreatment of Muslims living in China especially in Xinjiang region by Chinese authorities.

Alice G. Wells, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs, while talking to reporters appreciated the steps taken by Central Asian states to ensure that no ethnic Kazakh, Uighur, Kyrgyz is refouled to China and that the human rights of individuals who reach Central Asia are observed.

"As a matter of principle we urge all countries, not just Central Asian countries, to speak out against human rights abuses that are evident against Muslims in all of China but certainly in Xinjiang. And the countries of Central Asia, several of the countries of Central Asia have deep first-hand knowledge of those abuses given the direct impact it has on their own populations who have loved ones, family members, that are swept up in these detention centers," Wells said.

"We appreciate steps by Central Asian states to ensure that no ethnic Kazakh, Uighur, Kyrgyz is refouled to China, that the human rights of individuals who reach Central Asia are observed. And we also appreciate I think what countries like Kazakhstan can do to promote the free and safe travel of compatriots, ethnic compatriots across the border," she added.

China has been accused of oppressing the Uighurs by sending them to mass detention camps, interfering in their religious activities and sending the community to undergo some form of forceful re-education or indoctrination. However, Pakistan has stayed mum over this issue.

As many as 1 million people, or about 7 per cent of Xinjiang's Muslim population, have been incarcerated in a sprawling network of "political re-education" camps, according to US and UN studies.

In 2018, the New York-based Human Rights Watch released a report accusing Beijing of a "systematic campaign of human rights violations" against Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang.

Beijing says its camps in Xinjiang are "vocational training centres."

Last year, several documents leaked revealed details about Beijing's fears about religious extremism and its wholesale crackdown on Uighurs.

The US had called on the Chinese government to "immediately release all of those who are arbitrarily detained and to end its draconian policies that have terrorised its own citizens in Xinjiang."

Srinagar, May 12: Two paramilitary Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) officers committed suicide after shooting themselves with their service rifles in Kashmir on Tuesday.

In the first incident, a CRPF sub-inspector on Tuesday committed suicide after shooting himself with his service rifle at Mattan area of south Kashmir’s Anantnag district. The deceased, identified as Fatah Singh of Jaisalmer in Rajasthan, had reportedly left behind a suicide note that read: “I am afraid, I may have Corona.”

Station House Officer (SHO) Akura, Mattan police station Jazib Ahmed said that they have followed the COVID-19 protocol while dealing with the body of the CRPF sub-inspector. “His samples have been taken and post-mortem conducted. Only results would confirm whether he was a COVID-19 positive,” he said.

CRPF spokesman in Srinagar Pankaj Singh said the officer had returned to his unit after performing a day-long duty. “As such, there is no evidence that he had caught COVID-19. Let’s wait for the final report. Details will be shared with the media,” Singh said.

Hours after the first incident, an assistant-sub-inspector of the CRPF posted in Srinagar also committed suicide by shooting himself dead with his service rifle.

Special Director General of CRPF, Zulfikar Hassan said they were trying to find out the reason for the two boys taking this extreme step.

Suicides and fratricide incidents are not uncommon among the CRPF and the Army personnel deployed in Kashmir. In 2006, recognising the rising fratricide and suicide cases among the armed forces, the then Defence Minister had constituted an expert group of psychiatrists under the Defence Institute of Psychological Research in order to suggest remedial measures to prevent suicide and fratricide incidents.

Over the last decade, incidents of fratricide have reportedly reduced in the Army as the force has taken measures to address the issue.

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.