India, China, Russia refrain from seeking East Jerusalem as Palestine capital

Agencies
December 12, 2017

New Delhi, Dec 12: India, Russia and China on Monday refrained from seeking East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine after a meeting of foreign ministers from the three countries met in New Delhi.

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj hosted her Russian and Chinese counterparts Sergey Lavrov and Wang Yi for the 15th annual meeting of the Russia-India-China (RIC) in New Delhi.

The joint statement issued after the meeting called for "negotiations aimed at creating an independent, viable, territorially contiguous Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel within mutually agreed and internationally recognised borders". It, however, did not have any reference to East Jerusalem.

The last RIC joint statement issued after the 14th meeting of the foreign ministers of the three nations in Moscow in April 2016 had categorically called for East Jerusalem to be the capital of the future state of Palestine.

The move by Russia, India and China to drop the reference to East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine came just days after US President Donald Trump formally recognised the ancient holy city as the capital of Israel.

The US move evoked sharp criticism not only from Arab world, but also from Europe and many other nations. Trump also set in motion a plan to shift the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Moscow has expressed concern over the US move. Russia's ambassador to Israel, Alexander Shein, however, was quoted saying that Moscow had recognised West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in April this year. He, however, also said that Russia could consider shifting its embassy from Tel Aviv to West Jerusalem after the "Palestinians and the Israelis agree on all issues of the final status" of the territories of Palestine.

China, however, reiterated its support to establishment of an independent sovereign Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital as recently as last week. "The status of Jerusalem must be determined through dialogue and negotiation on the basis of UN resolutions, and the two-state solution remains a viable, fundamental solution to the Palestinian issue," Wang said in Beijing after the US recognised the ancient city as the capital of Israel.

New Delhi declined to toe the US line on recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and stated that its position on Palestine was "independent and consistent" and shaped by its "views and interests, and not determined by any third country". India, however, refrained from reiterating its long-held view that eastern part of the holy city should be the capital of Palestine.

India in fact stopped calling for East Jerusalem to be the capital of Palestine this year. Hosting Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in New Delhi in May, Prime Minister Narendra Modi did call for "a sovereign, independent, united and viable Palestine, co-existing peacefully with Israel", but avoided supporting the demand for East Jerusalem to be the capital of Palestine. He carefully avoided referring to it during his visit to Israel in July – the first by a Prime Minister of India, although the two countries had established formal diplomatic relations in 1992. His message on the occasion of International Day of Solidarity with Palestinian People on November 25 last or India's statement to UN General Assembly on November 29 last too did not refer to the call for East Jerusalem to be the capital of Palestine.

The leaders of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) too refrained from calling for East Jerusalem the capital of Palestine when they issued a joint statement after the summit of the five-nation bloc at Xiamen in China in September. The statement issued after the BRICS summit in Goa in October 2016 had reiterated the call for East Jerusalem to be the capital of Palestine.

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 5,2020

New Delhi, Mar 5: A Delhi court Thursday issued fresh death warrants for execution of the four convicts in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case for March 20 at 5.30 am.

Additional Sessions Judge Dharmendra Rana fixed March 20 as the new date of execution after it was told by the Delhi government that the convicts have exhausted all their legal remedies.

The lawyer for the four death row convicts also told the court that there was no legal impediment for the court to proceed in fixing the date of execution.

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.
Agencies
August 9,2020

New Delhi, Aug 9: Indian on Sunday achieved a grim milestone after recording the highest single-day spike of 64,399 coronavirus cases, according to the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

As many as 861 deaths were reported in the country in the last 24 hours, taking the cumulative toll to 43,379.

With the new cases, the country's coronavirus count has reached 21,53,011 including 6,28,747 active cases and 14,80,885 cured/discharged/migrated.

Maharashtra has 1,47,355 active coronavirus cases, the highest in the country.

According to the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), 7,19,364 samples were tested on August 8 while over 2.41 crores samples so far have been tested in the country.

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.