US experts question Pakistan's decision to execute Kulbhushan Jadhav

April 12, 2017

Washington, Apr 12: Top US experts have expressed concern over Pakistan's decision to give death penalty to Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav as they warned that Islamabad wants to send a "strong message" to India against isolating it on the world stage.

jadhav

Jadhav, 46, was awarded the death sentence by military Field General Court Martial under the army act for his alleged involvement in terrorism and espionage. The death sentence was confirmed by army chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa.

"Apart from the gross irregularities in the Kulbhushan Jadhav situation, such as the lack of consular access and the secrecy surrounding the surprise court-martial, what struck me the most is the contrast between the speed of Mr Jadhav's trial set against the endless postponements for that of the Mumbai attackers," Alyssa Ayres, a former senior state department official in its South and Central Asia Bureau said.

"The latter case, by contrast, has been in a continual state of prolongation for nearly nine years," Ayres said.

She is currently senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, a top American think-tank.

Bharat Gopalaswamy, director of South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-DC based top US think-tank, believes that the evidence warranting Jadhav's conviction "is rather flimsy" and the story by the Pakistani authorities "do not add up".

Without furnishing further evidence, this conviction as it stands, "seems to be politically motivated" in order to counter India's aggressive diplomacy against Pakistan in combating terrorism, he said.

"This whole story is shrouded in mystery and uncertainty, but it seems clear that Pakistan wants to send a very strong message to India, whether to warn New Delhi against meddling in Pakistan or to push back in a big way against India's efforts to isolate Pakistan on the world stage," said Michael Kugelman, deputy director and senior associate for South Asia at the prestigious Woodrow Wilson Center.

"At the same time, given how much India will want to ensure that Yadav isn't executed, Pakistan now has a very large bargaining chip at its disposal. Pakistan may want to use Yadav as a trump card to get some type of major concession from India," Kugelman said.

"The bottom line is that India-Pakistan relations are on life support. We can kiss goodbye any immediate prospects for resuming dialogue, though that wasn't a very strong possibility even before the announcement about Yadav's death sentence. Ultimately, India and Pakistan face some very dark and dangerous days ahead," he said.

According to Sameer Lalwani, senior associate and deputy director for Stimson's South Asia program, said the decision and timing of Jadhav's execution sentence "appears puzzling" because in many ways it does not seem to work in Pakistan's self-interest.

"If Jadhav posed a threat and Pakistan wanted to send a deterrent signal to potential saboteurs of CPEC and Gwadar, they could have executed him months ago after his intelligence value had been exhausted," Lalwani said.

"If Pakistan wanted to exploit Jadhav's capture for diplomatic purposes by showcasing evidence of Indian sub conventional aggression, Pakistan still has yet to convince the international community and an execution raises suspicions," Lalwani said.

"Finally, if the Indians care that much about Jadhav, Pakistan could have used him as a bargaining chip. Perhaps the sentence is an opening bargaining gambit but actually executing Jadhav may not be reaping much of a deterrent signal for Pakistan while foreclosing on diplomatic or trade value," he said.

Both the state department and the White House refused to comment on the sentencing of Jadhav.

"We have seen these reports. We refer you to the governments of India and Pakistan for further information," a state department spokesperson said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 9,2020

London, May 9: Air India's first evacuation flight from London will be taking off for Mumbai today.

The screening of passengers is underway.

"Air India's first evacuation flight from London taking off for Mumbai today at 1200. Flight is 100% booked! Shubh Yatra. Please stay in touch. GoI working to send more evacuation flights!" High Commission of India, London said in a tweet.

On Monday, India announced had that it will begin phased repatriation of its citizens stranded abroad from May 7.

The government said that Air India will operate 64 flights in the first week from May 7 to May 13 to bring back around 15,000 Indian nationals.

On day three of the 'Vande Bharat Mission', flights carrying Indians from the Gulf countries, the United Kingdom, Bangladesh and Malaysia will arrive in India.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 13,2020

Mexico City, Jun 13: The number of people, who have died of COVID-19 in Mexico, has risen by 544 to 16,448 within the past 24 hours, Jose Luis Alomia, the director of epidemiology at the Health Ministry, said.

He also said on late Friday that the number of confirmed coronavirus cases had increased by 5,222 to 139,196 within the same period of time.

A day earlier, the Latin American nation has recorded 4,790 new confirmed cases of the coronavirus, with 587 fatalities.

The World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic on March 11. To date, more than 7.6 million people have been infected with the coronavirus worldwide, with over 425,000 fatalities, according to Johns Hopkins University.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

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.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.