October 07, 2023 can be considered as a major turning point in the world of terrorism, when Hamas [Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya] aka the ‘Islamic Resistance Movement’ attacked Israel. For the first few hours Hamas terrorists rampaged through the border territory that separates the Gaza strip from Israel and carried out atrocities against humanity through their targeting of civilians, killing over 1200 and kidnapping 248 in this initial attack. Hamas adheres to an extreme ideology of Islamic terrorism blended with Palestinian nationalism that gives a veneer of legitimacy in the Arab world while being dedicated to the destruction of Israel; and its preferred methods to achieve dominance include rocket attacks, random shootings, kidnappings and suicide bombings. However, since Hamas has not been designated as a terrorist organization by the United Nations, it receives constant funding from Qatar and Iran that allows it to build grassroot support among the Palestinians in Gaza, while constantly upgrading its military capacity.
Qatar has been regularly accused of allowing financers of terrorism and the leaders of terrorist organizations to live and operate freely within their country. According to U.S. Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence recent statement, “There are U.S and internationally designated terrorist financers in Qatar that have not been acted against by Qatari authorities”. Qatar’s response to these allegations are that, ‘Qatar does not consider those organizations to be terrorists’. The reality is that Qatar is the prominent terrorist financer and safe sanctuary provider to Hamas; and today while a devastating war is raging in the Gaza strip, Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh (Political Bureau Chief), Salih al-Aruri (Deputy Chief), and Yahya al-Sinwar (Gaza Political Bureau Chief) are directing the war from the safety and luxury of their Qatar based homes. “Qatari finance” is synonymous with the funding of global terrorism and one of its effects is the current Hamas–Israel war.
Besides Iran; which provides funding, weapons, training, coordination, direction, and more to support Hamas terror activities, Qatar is Hamas’s largest political and financial patron. Qatar’s publicly reported annual support to Hamas ranges from $120 million to $480 million depending on the year and information source. These funds benefit Hamas leaders directly through payroll and kickback schemes and indirectly through social services and government operations that help Hamas maintain political control over Gaza. All the while, Qatar’s state-sponsored media channel, Al-Jazeera, spreads antisemitism, hatred towards the western countries, and incitement to violence throughout the Arab world.
Going backwards in time, it was on 15 August 2021, that the Taliban marched into Kabul and took over Afghanistan as the U.S. military and its allies hastily evacuated that country. This victory of the Taliban over the great Western powers was a major morale boost to every terrorist organization across the globe. Regardless of the Doha accord that was brokered by Qatar between the Taliban and USA; the consensus between all terrorist organizations is that the Taliban won a protracted 20-years war against the Western military might and most importantly that the modern military of the western powers could be defeated. In the West, there is a growing consensus that Afghanistan has become a center of terrorist activities that is already affecting the neighboring regions, with terrorists’ groups having greater freedom of activities without any hindrance from the de-facto administrators of that country. The influence of the Taliban is today an integral part of the global Islamist terrorist narrative, while it is Qatar that leads the efforts to become the global mediator between the Taliban and the West, having allowed the Taliban to open a political office in Doha in 2013. With a UN visa ban and the UN General Assembly’s rejection of the Taliban regime’s request to take over Afghanistan’s seat at the UN, the Taliban is heavily reliant on the Qatari government’s political assistance to conduct global diplomatic activities outside Afghanistan. Beyond this, the Qatar authorities, with the tactic approval of the USA, paid members of the Taliban leadership with monthly stipends worth thousands of dollars, to “help facilitate” peace talks with the West. Taliban officials are also provided luxury vehicles, free health care, free food and freedom to decide Taliban policy in Afghanistan from the comfort of their Qatar based homes.
Since retaking control of Afghanistan, the Taliban has transformed the schools into religious madrassas (Islamic schools), where boys are indoctrinated by mullahs in extremist ideology that includes hatred for USA, Israel, and Europe. Women are banned from any opportunities of education and employment. Former terrorists from Arab states are tasked with drilling recruits in military training and ideological instructions. Their efforts are focused on producing a new generation of well-trained and radically educated extremists. In this context, Hamas had been the first to congratulate the Taliban on their victory in 2021 and the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, in a telephone conversation with Abdul Ghani Baradar, the deputy Prime Minister of Afghanistan and a senior Taliban leader had stated that “the end of the U.S. occupation was a prelude to the demise of all occupation forces, foremost of which is the Israeli occupation of Palestine”.
Coming to present times, the most surprising part of Hamas’ devastating cross-border attack was its complexity. Rarely in history has a terrorist organization been able to fight from the air, sea, and land; leaving no doubt that members of the Hamas were trained in battle tactics by various experienced terrorists and that a large number of Taliban and other Arab-origin fighters might have been part of the attackers in this operation.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stated on 12 October that “Hamas is ISIS and Hamas should be treated exactly the way ISIS was treated”. There is no doubt that the 07 October attack was comparable with those of ISIS in the past, in terms of planning and its brutality against unarmed civilians. However, any comparisons between these two terrorists’ organization does miss an important point. Hamas is not affiliated with ISIS, nor is there any history of collaboration between these two. Rather, ISIS is an opponent of Hamas and both consider each other as rivals in the global jihadi movement. It is important to study the positioning of ISIS and al-Qaeda in relation to the Hamas campaign since 07 October and its ongoing military operations. It is also necessary to evaluate the risk of ISIS and al-Qaeda potentially getting involved in this ongoing violence, a desire already expressed by both terrorists’ groups.
The common shared view of all three organizations is that Israel is illegally occupying Muslim lands on its whole state territory and it should be erased as an independent state. Thus, violence against Israeli citizens is considered as commendable and framed as ‘heroic resistance’ against occupation. In this regard, the total rejection of Israel as an independent state corresponds with their severe opposition towards the process of normalization of relationships between Israel and various Arab states in recent years. However, despite the similar views on these issues there is a fundamental disagreement between the two globally oriented terrorist organizations and Hamas, which propagates an Islamic nationalist agenda focused on the Palestinian issue rather than the larger vision of creating a global Islamic caliphate. For al-Qaeda and the ISIS, the desired liberation of Palestine represents a strategic first-step opportunity to unite the world’s Muslims in a global struggle; while for Hamas, the Palestinian struggle is the sole goal. Furthermore, both ISIS and al-Qaeda condemn democracy as an un-Islamic concept, while Hamas has participated in the 2006 legislative elections in the Palestinian territories and has shared elected power with its rival, the Fatah party which is secular, social and democratic in its political beliefs. These decisions at that time were opposed by al-Qaeda, which considered these actions of Hamas as an acceptance of the existing nation-state political process and thereby indirectly accepting and legitimizing the existence of Israel.
Beyond these issues, both al-Qaeda and ISIS have criticized Hamas for its failure to implement Sharia based legislation in Gaza, and for Hamas’s repression of the al-Qaeda-leaning Jaysh al-Ummah and the pro-IS Jama’at Ansar al-Dawla al-Islamiyya fi Bayt al-Maqdis, the Salafi-jihadi factions in Gaza. The dilemma for al-Qaeda and ISIS is that Hamas has been acting as a precursor of Islamic violence in a conflict that bears a huge symbolism for Muslims including the formers very own target audiences. Thus, these two global terrorist organizations are praising the Hamas attack on Israel as an attack on a shared enemy, while also trying to frame this event in-line with their global agenda rather than just a Hamas nationalist vision. While al-Qaeda is attempting to present this latest Hamas attack on Israel as part of the former’s global campaign against the “crusader, Zionist” forces and has called upon Muslims across the world to support the people of Palestine by whatever means possible, including attacks on US targets; ISIS has been cautiously arguing that only by striking all of Israel’s external allies simultaneously, can Israel be fully defeated.
In its ‘al-Naba’ propaganda magazine, in the article “The Road to Jerusalem” it condemns Hamas (never mentioned by name) as a proxy of Shiite Iran and as part of its axis of “resistance.” Hamas’s warfare was not to be considered jihad as it served the interests of the Iranians and their plot for regional domination. “The difference between jihad and resistance is as the difference between truth and falsehood,” the editorial
“Whoso allies with those who curse the Prophet’s wives [i.e., the Shia] will never liberate Jerusalem … and whoso differentiates between the Rejectionists [i.e., the Shia] and the Jews will never liberate Jerusalem … Indeed, we consider the mujahid who lies in wait for the Rejectionists in Iraq to be closer to Jerusalem than those who show loyalty to the Rejectionists and burnish their image.” The editorial went on to claim that all of the Islamic State’s battles “east and west are in fact steps in the direction of Jerusalem, Mecca, al-Andalus, Baghdad, Damascus, and all other captured Muslim lands.” In other words, it is the Islamic State, and not Hamas, that holds the promise of liberating Jerusalem.
Although, al-Qaeda and ISIS are seeking opportunities to gain an operational foot-hold in the Palestinian areas, to what extent they will be able to do so is unclear. Not only is Hamas opposed to their presence there, but also all states that border Israel and Palestinian territories (Egypt, Lebanon including Hezbollah, Jordan and Syria) are hostile towards them. They also have to contend with the presence of Iran’s various Shi’ite proxy groups in the region, who do not look favorably upon the Wahhabi–Sunni ideology of al-Qaeda and ISIS.
Terrorism has the power to destroy peace processes, dangerously escalate volatile situations and push countries onto the path of long and destructive wars. It is said that “Those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it.” It was an assassin’s bullet in Sarajevo that resulted in World War I and produced 40 million casualties, and it was the 3,000 persons killed in New York on Sept 11, 2001 that launched the U.S. led global war on terror in which an estimated 3.6 to 3.8 million have since perished. This current Hamas-Israel conflict already has ramifications far beyond the Middle-East. This terrorist attack should be ringing alarm bells across the world. Every country has its own enemies who seek an opportunity to exploit that country’s social and political divisiveness, civil distractions and security challenges. Fomenting domestic political violence would be one of the foremost strategies, alongwith cross-border terrorism.
Hamas’s terrorist attack on Israel has significant repercussions on the Ukraine-Russia war. While both Russia and Ukraine are seeking political and diplomatic support from international communities, the Hamas–Israel war is taking global attention and resources away from Ukraine’s war efforts. This change of focus by the global community could lead to a diminished economic and military assistance for that country, even though the USA has reconfirmed that it will maintain military and economic support for Ukraine as its strategic priority. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy was quick to condemn Hamas’s actions in an effort to clearly align his policy with that of the USA’s position of supporting Israel, but at the same time he wants to avoid alienating the Arab world, especially Saudi Arabia.
Russia, as a part if it’s multi-polar sphere of influence policy has not condemned Hamas directly, and has blamed the policies of the USA for this current Middle-East crisis. Russia has a longstanding relationship with Hamas. By offering to serve as a mediator between Israel and the Palestinians, Russia shows that it is aligning explicitly with the global south, seeking to erode the USA led liberal world order and pushing forth the concept of a growing multipolar world of global politics, calling for a ‘just solution’ to the Palestinian problem, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry. In early December, Russia’s President Putin hosted the President of Iran Ebrahim Raisi in Moscow, where the war in Gaza was discussed alongwith efforts to boost oil prices. Apart from Qatar, Iran provides rockets, arms, ammunition and training to Hamas; and is ready to provide military hardware to Russia for its war in Ukraine, where Russia has is already using Iranian drones extensively.
The two wars of the world; Russia fighting Ukraine, and the Hamas-Israel conflict has pushed up the cost of living across the world and severely diminished the heath and well-being of people, specially those mired in poverty. With growing food insecurity, over 258 million people in 58 plus countries are in a food crisis or in a moderate to severe food insecurity. European countries are facing soaring energy prices, leading to a decline in economic growth. There is also the impact on global financial markets. European countries have suffered large losses, with East Europe affected through disrupted trade links and West Europe affected through their ownership investments. There is an opinion that Europe will feel the long-term financial impact of the war more severely than other countries. However, such opinions overlook the fact that the many policies of the West are actually enabling Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Russian imports of high-priority battlefield items, which include micro-electronics, satellite navigation systems and other critical parts which are subject to the Western sanctions imposed on Russia have reached pre-war levels; with the leading suppliers being Intel and Analogue Devices (semiconductor manufacturers), AMD, Texas Instruments and IBM; all of which are American companies. The EU is equally complicit in ignoring sanctions that it has itself imposed on Russia, importing commodities worth US$ 195.56 Billion from Russia in 2022. These include oil products, mineral fuels, Iron and Steel, Fertilizers, Precious metals, Inorganic and organic chemicals, Nuclear reactors and boilers, Slag and ash ore, food items, fruits, vegetable products, and a host of other items. Essentially, the EU stands accused of the same activities that it is accusing countries of the global South; supporting the Russian war effort. EU countries are estimated to have spent nearly €5.3bn buying over half of all Russia’s LNG during the first seven months of 2023, with Spain and Belgium the second and third largest buyers worldwide. It can be safely assumed that a substantial part of this income by Russia is delivered to Iran for military supplies and Iran in-turn uses part of this income to fund the terrorist organizations Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis’ of Yemen.
The Gaza-Israel conflict has already led to a tragic loss of lives and is a severe risk to the fragile peace in the middle-east. The economic repercussions of this crisis will depend on the extent and duration of the fighting, the associated geo-political effect and the strong possibility of increased terrorist attacks. From the global economic perspective, energy security is the most important issue. The developing situation might lead to severe supply disruption, particularly if the crisis brings Iran into the war directly, or if the general unrest and terrorist attacks in Iraq reduces the oil production there. Apart from the fact that the Middle-east is a crucial supplier of energy, it is also a key shipping passageway. Whether the hostilities remain confined to Gaza and Israel, or escalates to a direct military confrontation between Israel and Iran; the result will be the same; increased cost of energy supplies, slower economic growth and higher inflation. There is no doubt that West bank and Gaza are affected the most, but the neighboring countries of Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon are already feeling the economic impact. Tourism, which accounts for between 35 ~ 50% of the goods and services exports of this countries’ economies is already hard-hit with visitors cancelling travel to this region amid concerns of threat escalation.
The conflict has had a modest impact on energy prices with the oil prices remaining relatively stable and the natural gas prices at slightly elevated levels. The impact on Government Bond yields has been minimal to date and have mostly returned to pre-conflict levels. Despite this, there is a growing uncertainty that is eroding consumer confidence, which could result in a reduced spending and investment. As the war continues, the regional growth could deteriorate as hesitancy starts to affect investment decisions. This crisis would expose the underlying vulnerabilities of fragile economies of countries like Somalia, Sudan and Yemen as borrowing costs rise. There would be a decline in the flow of critical aid as donors refrain from their usual level of contributions and if the aid efforts do not expand to the growing needs. Against this background, any escalation in the Hamas-Israel conflict would have far-reaching ramifications. The economic impact would start affecting the neighboring countries of Iraq, Syria and Jordan with the most impact on trade, tourism and investments. The flow of refugees would increase significantly, adding to the social and fiscal pressures on the countries that receive them and potentially cause a long-term financial distress. Regardless of how this conflict continues, any hope for a stable Middle-East has suffered a set-back, maybe for a long time. Without a doubt, this crisis will reshape the region’s future. With an expected acute economic impact and highly elevated risks, pragmatic crisis management and carefully crafted policies will be critical in the short term, to prevent this crisis from causing high levels of uncertainty in the region.
While at war with Ukraine, Russia has to deal with its own internal strife caused by the mercenary group Wagner and the Russian Imperial Movement [RIM]. While the Wagner group is a private military organization that had become the main force of the Russian government’s invasion and has been recently designated as a terrorist organization by the EU and USA; RIM is a loose confederation of Russian far-right groups that fight alongside Wagner. Called the ‘ultra–patriots’, these extreme nationalist imperialist groups insist on conducting a more aggressive military campaign in Ukraine, including the possible use of nuclear weapons. Created in 2002, RIM believes in the revival of the Russian Empire and also that Ukraine is a part of greater Russia. In 2014, the group created a military wing called the Imperial Legion to fight in the conflict zone. It is reported that RIM is actively involved in the fighting in Ukraine alongside the Wagner group. However, while the majority of Wagner’s fighters are former prisoners, the RIM forces have military experience and a strong nationalist motivation to participate in the war.
While participating actively in the Ukraine war as part of the Russian government forces, RIM presents itself to be in opposition to the same Russian government, blaming the ruling party and Vladimir Putin personally for ruining the country. Putin’s government treats RIM as a potential political threat, due to its strong connections with far-right movements in Europe and especially in Spain; and yet there are close collaborative links between the two for Russia’s foreign policy strategies. The Putin government lets RIM exist without a harsh crackdown on Russian territory in exchange for using them as proxies abroad. The purpose of using RIM in the EU is clear, to intimidate Europe and to broadcast the message that support of Ukraine will have consequences.
Ukraine is not without its own mercenary fighters. Their “Azov regiment” is a far-right all volunteer infantry military unit whose 900 odd members are ultra-nationalists and are suspected to be neo–Nazis’ who believe in the ideology of white supremacy. The unit was initially formed as a volunteer group in May 2014 out of the ultra-nationalist Patriot of Ukraine gang, and the neo-Nazi Social National Assembly (SNA) groups. Both groups engage in xenophobic and neo-Nazi ideals and have physically assaulted migrants, the Roma community and people opposing their views. The organization was founded by Andriy Biletsky, who has publicly announced that the group’s purpose was to ‘lead the white races of the world in a final crusade against Semite–led Untermenschen (inferior races led by the Jews). He was elected to Ukraine’s parliament in 2014 and was a MP until 2019. The OCHA (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) have accused the Azov regiment of violating international humanitarian law. The OCHA report details incidents where Azov had entered civilian buildings with force, displaced residents and looted properties. In Donbas region, the Azov are accused of rape and torture of detainees. In 2019, members of the United States Congress had called upon the US State Department to designate Azov as a ‘foreign terrorist organization”. Their submissions have been ignored by the Biden administration. There is a wide trans-national support for Azov and Ukraine has emerged as a new hub for battle-field training for far-right groups across the world. Outside Ukraine, Azov is the central magnet for a network of extremists’ groups stretching from USA, Europe and all the way to New Zealand, attracting young men who are eager for combat experience. It is estimated that over the last six years, more than 17 thousand foreign fighters from over 50 countries have come to Ukraine for join Azov.
Interestingly, Azov has been recruiting, radicalizing and training American citizens for a long time, which has been confirmed by Christopher Wray, the Director of the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation), in his testimony to the U.S. Senate, where he further stated that American white supremacists are traveling abroad to be battle trained. The question that law-enforcement are not asking in the Western countries is that; how does Azov, which was an obscure militia in 2014 become so influential in the global web of far-right extremism? Investigators like Ali Soufan, a former FBI agent and a security consultant in the USA, found that the key to its international growth was its extensive use of the social media, especially Facebook. Apart from offering a place for foreign radicals to study the strategies of war; the Azov movement through its online propaganda, has fueled a global ideology of hate that now inspires more terrorist attacks in the USA than Islamic extremism and is a growing threat throughout the Western world.
The Republic of Bharat (India) has charted its own course during these turbulent times. Bharat has stood firm in its policy of public neutrality towards every country involved in these conflicts, either directly or through the support structure on behalf of the participants. Bharat has consistently called for the “respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states” and for “an immediate cessation of violence and hostilities”. It is constantly advising that “dialogue is the only answer to settling differences and disputes”. Bharat has ascended to the international stage as a great power without committing to any economic or military alliances that might entangle its progress. This ascent is best guaranteed through the path of peace and goodwill when surrounded by competing power centers that can be leveraged to derive benefits amid their mutual rivalries, while keeping its own interests in mind and without forming any alliances to realize its geopolitical objectives. Essentially, Bharat prefers a multipolar global order that allows it to maneuver between several diverse blocs, exploiting their differences depending on the issues-at-hand, to secure gains for itself while avoiding permanent alignments with anyone.
Bharat is on the front-line in the fight against terrorism. In 2022 – 23, terrorism affected the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), the northeastern states, and parts of central India. Terrorist groups active in India include Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Hizbul Mujahideen, ISIS, al-Qa'ida, Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen, and Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh. Pakistan, especially its army, is the sponsor of cross-border terrorism into India. With the sole exception of ISIS which is funded out of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, all other Wahhabi–Islamic terrorist groups based in Pakistan are constantly funded and sponsored by the Pakistan Army in their constant effort to destabilize the state of Jammu & Kashmir and spread anarchy in other parts of Bharat. The Pakistani sponsored cross-border terrorism takes a high toll on the lives of our Army, Border Patrol and Kashmir police personnel, alongwith loss of lives of civilians. Apart from sponsoring Islamic terrorists against Bharat, Pakistan has restarted its funding and support to the Sikh separatists who are demanding an independent country of Khalistan within the borders of Bharat. Two more countries have joined in to support the Khalistan terrorists who reside within their territories, Canada and the USA.
Canada officially and falsely accused the Bharat government of killing a known Khalistan terrorist who was also an drugs distributor against whom an international arrest warrant was existing for acts of terrorism. The Prime Minister of Canada, instead decided to call this terrorist a Canadian citizen and stated that he was ‘just a plumber’. This accusation by the Canadian PM was made in the Canadian parliament, even though there has been no evidence offered by the Canadian government to-date on this issue. Canada has a long history of allowing full freedom of all kinds of activities to terrorists’ organizations across the world; to having a presence in that country, raise funding for terrorism and direct terrorist attacks across the world, without any restrictions being imposed by successive Canadian governments. The killing of this specific terrorism-accused took place in Canada, by persons unknown and unidentified till now. What is effectively a murder in Canada has been converted by Canada into a major international embarrassment for itself. The government of Bharat as categorically denied any association with this killing, which the Canadian government refuses to accept. Further, Canada has ignored all public announcements by Khalistan leaders in their own country, calling for the assassination of Bharat’s diplomats in Canada, and termed this open threat as ‘freedom of expression’. Bharat has responded to Canada’s political and diplomatic threats by imposing certain sanctions that are affecting the economies of both countries, but more so of Canada.
An American citizen of Indian origin, who has openly threatened to blow-up Indian owned passenger aircraft and has publicly instructed his fellow Khalistan supporters to kill Bharat’s diplomats based in USA, has not been detained or investigated by the US authorities. Conversely, they have accused the Govt of Bharat of conspiring to kill this very terrorist and are investigating this death threat.
The most infamous activity of U.S. was during the mid-1980s when Ronald Reagan was President and US$34 million were routed by the U.S. National Security Council, with the full support of the Reagan administration to destabilize the government of Nicaragua. The ‘Iran – Contra’ affair, as it was called in subsequent investigations facilitated the illegal sales of arms to Iran. Using secret, non-appropriated funds, the U.S. Govt started to deliver arms to Iran in the hope of releasing American hostages held by Hezbollah. The profits from these sales were then diverted to the Contras, a group of rebels fighting against their own government. To increase the level of funding to the Contras, the U.S. authorities led by the CIA (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency) helped the Contras to set-up a cocaine trafficking operation that allowed for the clandestine import of drug shipments into California and its distribution on the west coast of USA. The CIA operatives were also accused of the kidnapping and murder of a DEA (U.S. Drug Enforcement Authority) agent Enrique Camarena, because he became a threat to this covert operation by the CIA. (Please refer the book: Dark Alliance – the CIA, the Contras and the Crack Cocaine Explosion by journalist Gary Webb).
In February 1998, the then U.S. President Bill Clinton’s envoy to the Balkans described the Kosovo Liberation Army [KLA] as a “terrorist group”; quite forgetting the recorded fact that the U.S. CIA had funded, trained and supplied arms to the same KLA in the prior years. The KLA has been accused of crimes against humanity, trafficking of human organs, and wanton killing of Serbs and fellow ethnic Albanians.
After the terrorist attack on 09 September 2001 on New York and the Pentagon (popularly known as the 9/11 attacks), the USA launched the ‘War on Terror’, a vague definition for violent revenge against weak countries. This violence was justified by a presidential memorandum of 07 February 2002, that authorized U.S. interrogators of prisoners captured during the War in Afghanistan to deny these prisoners the basic human rights protections required by the Geneva Conventions, basically authorizing war crimes against civilian populations. The terrorist activities and human rights violations by the United States of America can be defined by the singular existence of the Guantanamo Bay detention center, a symbol of human torture and indefinite detention without trial of people who are “assumed” to have been terrorists or associated with terrorism. 21 years after the opening of an offshore detention facility specifically designed to evade the rule of law, the US government continues to detain 35 men inside the Guantánamo Bay detention camp. The United Nations Human Rights office has defined this a an “Ugly chapter of unrelenting human rights violations”; and yet, not one country, nor the United Nations is willing to sanction the USA for its cruelty towards civilians and innocent people.
Since March 2011, the USA has provided extensive lethal arms aid to Syrian groups; notably the Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham and the Southern Front. The U.S. government has provided military aid to the radical Islamist group ‘Nour al-Din al-Zenki’ accused of many crimes against humanity.
The world is today mired in regional conflicts that have negative global effects. The two ongoing wars, the US-China trade war, and the rising potential for a conflict over Taiwan, shows that the world is today in a state of constant disruptions, and that multipolar geopolitics will drive the economic outcomes across regions. We can expect the financially rich countries of the world to impose global policies that will assist their economic growth, perhaps at the cost of poorer nations, which will increase the divide between the countries of the global south and the affluent global north. As the world moves towards a period of higher instability and more complexity, there could be monetary volatility and higher inflation, perhaps leading to a reduction in globalization and lesser boost in productivity.
References:
