Video Report - #war #Ukraine #Russia War in Ukraine: Could this war go nuclear?

Video Report - #China on #Ukraine Crisis: the Security Council should help defuse the crisis, rather than fueling it

#China - About the Uygurs’ situation in Xinjiang: a legal point of view

 By Norbert Rouland

Following the defeat of the United States in Afghanistan, it is appropriate for China to ensure a certain degree of stability in the region of Central Asia. China wishes to ascertain a return to political stability and the promotion of economic development in the region. This requires fighting against terrorism, separatism, and extremism.

As President Xi Jinping has stressed in several of his speeches, no civilization is superior to another. But terrorism is contrary to human civilization and human rights. China is being subject to the dangers and tensions that exist in Central Asia. The "three demons" of terrorism, separatism and religious extremism are considered to be the three greatest threats to China.

So then, how is the Chinese government's policy in Xinjiang to be judged from a legal point of view? What opinion can a European jurist like me give? Can we legally speak of “genocide” with regard to the Uygurs?

Two official documents define “genocide,” namely the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on Dec. 9, 1948; and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted in 1998. Article 2 of the Convention and Article 6 of the Rome Statute define the crime of genocide as follows:

Namely, “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

a) Killing members of the group;

b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcible transfer of children from the group to another group.

It is obvious that China does not intend to destroy all or part of the Uygur population. Attacks committed by the terrorists can't be tolerated. China just wants to put the Uygur people out of harm's way. This action cannot be called genocide. Every State resorts to public force to ensure social order and to protect its population against the perpetrators of criminal offences.

It should be noted that in the Muslim world, there is very little criticism of the policy conducted by the Chinese government regarding the Uygurs. There are no associated demonstrations or protests among the populations in the 57 Muslim countries of the world. This has never existed. For example, Saudi Arabia does not criticize the Chinese government.

Let us recall what the United States, which criticizes China, did after the 9/11 attacks. They invaded Afghanistan and led coalitions to invade several countries in the Middle East. They sent those they presumed to be terrorists without undergoing any form of trial to the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, where they underwent various tortures.

The author is a law professor at the University of Aix-Marseille, France.

http://en.people.cn/n3/2022/0223/c90000-9961740.html

#UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - Chinese, Russian presidents hold phone conversation on Friday

 BEIJING, Feb. 25 (Xinhua) -- Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on Friday held a phone conversation.

During the phone conversation, Xi thanked Putin again for coming to China to attend the opening ceremony of the Beijing Winter Olympics, and congratulated the Russian athletes on finishing second in the Winter Olympics medal table.

Putin extended warm congratulations to all the Chinese people for the complete success of the Beijing Winter Olympics and for the outstanding performance of the Chinese delegation.

The two sides mainly exchanged views on the current Ukrainian situation.

Putin introduced the historical context of the Ukraine issue as well as Russia's special military operation in eastern Ukraine and its position.

He said that the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have long ignored Russia's legitimate security concerns, repeatedly broken their commitments and continuously pushed their military deployment eastwards, which challenged Russia's strategic bottom line.

Russia is ready to hold high-level negotiation with Ukraine, said Putin.

Xi pointed out that recent dramatic changes in the situation in eastern Ukraine have drawn great attention from the international community, adding that China decides on its position based on the merits of the Ukrainian issue itself.

He called on dropping the Cold War mentality, attaching importance and respecting the legitimate security concerns of various countries and forming a balanced, effective and sustainable European security mechanism through negotiation.

The Chinese side supports the Russian side in solving the issue through negotiation with the Ukrainian side, Xi said, adding that China has been consistent in its basic position on respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries and abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

China is ready to work with members of the international community to embrace the concept of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security, and firmly uphold the international system with the United Nations at its core and the international order based on international law, Xi said. 

http://en.people.cn/n3/2022/0227/c90000-9963247.html

#UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - US Determination to Expand NATO Creates Unpredictable Situation, Cuban Foreign Ministry Says

 The US persistence in pushing forward with NATO’s expansion eastward is leading to unpredictable consequences that could have been avoided, Cuba’s Foreign Ministry says.

“The American determination to continue the progressive expansion of NATO towards the borders of the Russian Federation has led to a scenario with implications of unpredictable scope that could have been avoided,” the ministry said on Saturday.

The ministry added that the recent US and NATO deployments close to the Russian borders and the delivery of weapons to Kiev amount to a “progressive military encirclement.”

The Cuban National Assembly earlier called on the United States to take Russia’s security proposals “seriously and realistically,” saying that Russia has the right to defend itself.

Russia submitted its security guarantee requests in December, asking for legal guarantees against further NATO expansion to the east, against Ukraine's membership in the alliance, and the deployment of NATO military bases in post-Soviet space. These guarantees were intended to serve as the basis for European security.

According to President Vladimir Putin, the proposals on European security were rejected offhand by Western partners, as NATO has been boosting defenses around Russia's borders despite a pledge given in the 1990s that the alliance would not “move an inch” eastward.

On Thursday, Russia announced a special military operation in Ukraine following the request of the Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics to defend them from Kiev's aggression. Donbas, a primarily Russian-speaking region, has been under pressure and regular attacks since 2014, when a right-wing nationalist government seized power in Kiev in a US-backed coup.

By shelling DPR and LPR and using prohibited weapons, Kiev has knowingly ignored the Minsk accords, which envisaged a ceasefire and granting special status to the DPR and LPR after holding elections there. In the same manner, Kiev's violations of the Minsk agreements have been ignored by Western leaders, while the shelling of Donbas received no coverage in the Western media for 8 years.

The unprecedented proximity of NATO forces, basically the encirclement of Russia, was cited as the main reason for the special operation, along with what Moscow called the "genocide" of the Russian-speaking population in Donbas.

• https://sputniknews.com/20220227/us-determination-to-expand-nato-creates-unpredictable-situation-cuban-mfa-says-1093406965.html

Video Report - #UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - Putin: Redrawing borders, rewriting history

Video Report - #UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - Russia blocks US resolution on #Ukraine

Video Report - #UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - Sky glows after massive explosions near Kyiv

Video Report - #UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - Fuel tanks burn after explosions near #Vasylkiv, #Ukraine

Video Report - #UkraineUnderAttack #UkraineRussia - The sights, sounds and stories from #Ukraine

Pashto Music Video - Aliya khan ❤️| Tappay |

#Pakistan - #Balochistan: the foreign hand?

By Pervez Hoodbhoy

WITH the present uptick of attacks on security forces, we are back to a familiar routine. Between when a terrorist incident occurs and blame is assigned, the separation is no more than a few minutes. The investigation-free and evidence-free conclusion never changes; whatever happened is the work of foreign forces. Domestic political opponents — even if perfectly peaceful and totally unconnected with the incident — can conveniently be labeled as foreign agents and stomped upon hard. It is hoped that fear will leave them paralysed and speechless.

This may explain why Hafeez Baloch was forcibly disappeared three weeks ago by armed men who alighted from a black pickup. This bright young man is an M.Phil candidate in particle physics in my department at Quaid-e-Azam University. The incident happened in front of his terrified students and fellow teachers while he was teaching at a small private school in Khuzdar, his hometown. Hafeez had used the winter vacations to take a short trip home and earn some desperately needed cash. Just days away from returning to Islamabad for submitting his final thesis, his teachers and fellow students tell me he was a bookworm not known to have the slightest connection with any violent group.

Fearful of how the security forces might react, the local police balked at registering an FIR. While in their captivity, Hafeez will doubtless have been accused of being a foreign agent. Like countless other young Baloch men arbitrarily picked up in the past, he too will be deeply scarred emotionally — and perhaps physically — during this ordeal. One does not even know if he will ever be seen alive again. The mounting sense of Baloch grievance will go up yet another notch.

Pakistan’s external enemies are claimed to be behind its problems of national integration. But those who play secret games under the guise of national security bear far greater responsibility. It is they who made our country suffer so grievously from terrorism between 2001 and 2014. Although inimical foreign powers have undoubtedly sought to inflict hurt, Pakistan’s wounds during that terrible period were largely self-inflicted. Forcibly disappearing Baloch students won’t eliminate terrorism but will weaken the federation of Pakistan. In the years following 9/11, terrorist attacks became a daily occurrence once Gen Pervez Musharraf sided with America and joined its so-called war on terror. Earlier, Pakistan had been the Taliban’s principal supporter and, as is well known, that support continued secretly. However, publicly Pakistan had declared itself on the side of the Taliban’s enemy. In retaliating against this perceived betrayal, religiously inspired young boys from madressahs blew themselves up in bazars, hospitals and schools. The establishment, however, claimed all terrorists were either foreigners or foreign supported. The common refrain was: how could killers of Muslims be Muslim?

The loudest advocate of the foreign hand theory was the late Gen Hamid Gul. My first encounter with this famous general was after he addressed an audience sometime around 1998 in the physics auditorium at Quaid-e-Azam University. There he urged Pakistan to lead jihad around the world. During the Q&A session he was flattered at my calling him Adolf Hitler’s brother. We then sparred frequently on various TV channels. My last televised encounter with him was in early 2014, just after a horrendous back-to-back suicide attack some hours earlier. The general declared that the bombers were non-Muslim because they had not been circumcised. He angrily refused to provide proof. The truth, however, had started leaking out soon after the bloody capture in 2008 of the Swat valley by Mullah Fazlullah’s forces. The powers that be of those times approvingly watched him — and the infamous Mangal Bagh — from a distance. Their U-turn came much later. After the 2014 massacre of 149 children and their teachers at the Army Public School in Peshawar, the denial mode was switched off. Thereafter the Pakistan Army launched Operation Rad-ul-Fasaad. The word ‘fasaad’ is a term strictly used for internal conflict only, not war against an external enemy.

Suddenly Pakistanis began to see TV propaganda video clips of PAF jets pounding targets in North Waziristan, artillery firing into the mountains, or, perhaps, some other celebration of these military operations. You rubbed your eyes in disbelief — how could aircraft of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan bomb Taliban fighters whose stated goal was to establish Pakistan as an Islamic state? How could they ever have been portrayed as non-Muslims?

It took a very long time to admit that Fazlullah’s TTP was actually a Muslim force. Now that the Afghan Taliban government in Kabul continues to harbour and protect the TTP, that delusionary bubble has finally burst. But has it? I don’t know. One day TTP is denounced as India-funded and, on the next, embraced as brothers. The confusion continues.

For now, let’s leave that as it is. What about Balochistan. Where lies the truth? How deep is India’s involvement? India has certainly not been unaware of Pakistan’s difficulties in Balochistan. As a general rule, whenever a population is angry and alienated, for external enemies to find domestic allies is easy. India believes that Pakistan recruited Kashmiris on India’s side of the LOC to attack Indian security forces. Back in 1971, India could successfully exploit Bengali alienation to cut Pakistan in two. Today, Baloch alienation leads many Indians to talk about Balochistan as an arrow in India’s quiver against Pakistan.

Indian spymasters Vikram Sood and Ajit Doval, as well as PM Modi, have often spoken about doing a tit-for-tat for perceived Pakistani involvement in Kashmir. Meanwhile strategists like Pramit Pal Chaudhuri suggest the retribution could come through fanning Pakistan’s exaggerated fears of Baloch secession. India should hope, he says, that the Pakistan Army’s angry overreaction to dissent will keep Balochistan aflame.

The abductors of Hafeez Baloch — and of other young missing Baloch men who number in the hundreds — have taken the bait dangled by Pramit Chaudhri and others. Throughout the Baloch community of students in Islamabad, anger and fear run deep. The flagrant violation of Baloch constitutional rights is weakening the national spirit and harming the federation. Before the self-appointed guardians of Pakistan’s security cause further damage to our country through their illegal actions, they must be brought to task.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1677136/balochistan-the-foreign-hand

Russia to Riyadh — Imran Khan now has a history of being in the wrong place at the wrong time

 

NAILA INAYAT

If you want to blame anyone for all this, blame US President Joe Biden. Had he called Khan like Putin did, it would’ve been a different story altogether.

All was going well before it wasn’t. There was excitement and elation before there weren’t. That’s the thing about fantasy and reality. In your own la la land, you can be a mediator of superpowers or imagine yourself stopping a war or even drawing your own borders from Germany to Japan. But in reality, you might be welcomed by your host with a hostile invasion of his neighbor. What are the odds?

Some were still in the process of celebrating the mammoth moment when Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan set foot in Russia, that too in a black shalwar kameez. At that moment, nothing mattered beyond the handsomeness and breaking and setting of records— “first in two decades”, “game-changer”, “never before”. Never again. Everything became historic indeed when Russia began its war on Ukraine simultaneously on the same day.

Exciting times

On his arrival at the Moscow airport, PM Imran Khan was delighted at his timing. “So much excitement,” he said. That “excitement” increased manifold when the PM and his entourage were found in a war capital. When Russia’s invasion of Ukraine started, many wondered if Khan would cut his visit short. Then came a one-on-one meeting with President Vladimir Putin, and this time a rather sombre-looking PM Khan posed for the cameras on a day when the entire world was condemning Russian for its actions. Exciting times to share the space with Putin?So much for Pakistan going bloc-free. The criticism is not that Pakistan shouldn’t pursue its relationship with Russia but given the escalating Ukrainian situation for months, Imran Khan was sleepwalking into a diplomatic embarrassment. The sarkari spin-masters argue: the prime minister was unaware that Putin would invade Ukraine on his arrival.

Sure, let’s add this to a long list of things the ever-so-aware PM, who knows more about everything under the sky, didn’t know. If Ukraine was part of India, then probably he’d know. By the way, what are intelligence agencies for?

The prime minister and his team went with a lot of fanfare but returned rather quietly. Unlike the historic 2019 return from the United States when Khan felt he had won the 1992 World Cup all over again.

Wrong time, wrong place

Constantly, for one year now, we have been preached how Naya Pakistan doesn’t believe in blocs and camps anymore. No more fighting others’ wars, no more being used as a hired gun, and no more being asked to do more. But no one was buying this new-found national conscience. When the dollars dried from one side, it was time to pick another. This is, however, not the first time that PM Khan found himself in the wrong place at the wrong time. Back in 2018, after the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Khan travelled to be part of the Saudi investment conference in Riyadh at a time when major world leaders and organisations had boycotted the event. His viewpoint was that Pakistan cannot afford to snub Saudi Arabia over the murder of Khashoggi, talking about the dire need for loans at the time.

In case of Russia, given the unfolding of events and economic sanctions, Pakistan scored no bilateral deal, let alone the much-talked-about gas pipeline project with Khan’s visit. The gas project is much like Khan’s gas dreams at home, where he hoped against hope that gas might be found while drilling off Pakistan’s shores and our 50 years of gas problems will be solved. But, of course, no reserves were discovered off Karachi coast.

From Ukraine, Pakistan covered 60 per cent of its wheat imports last year, but there is fear of food inflation in the aftermath of the conflict. Brace yourself for the next 100 days of speeches— you’ll probably be told that Russia and Ukraine are responsible for food inflation.

Cheerleaders on steroids

Prime Minister Imran Khan’s Russia visit has led to a ‘with us or against us’ debate between supporters and critics. Emotions are running high on what is the best way to deal with Russia at this time. The cons of the visit have been highlighted — Putin used Khan and made most of this opportunity to embarrass Pakistan; “In foreign affairs, hum [Pakistan] mamoo ban gaye” (We were made a fool); “Russia settled decades-old score with Pakistan by invading Ukraine on the day it invited Imran Khan. Putin showed a finger to Khan.” Then there have been those who left no stone unturned to praise Putin, going as far as invoking Quranic interpretations to describe the future acts of the Russian president. Then in excitement of another level, it was declared “Ukraine mein dhamaka, Putin attacks Russia.” Wait, what? On steroids have been the YouTubers who declared that Putin meeting Khan with a small table between them was a signal to the world that Putin loves Khan and did not sit the Pakistan PM across a big table like Western visitors. No one told the sarkari cheerleaders that the four-metre table between others and Putin were placed when the Russian Covid test was refused by visiting leaders due to fears of DNA theft. But let’s hail small-table diplomacy for now.

If you want to blame anyone for all of this, blame US President Joe Biden. Had he called Khan like Putin did thrice in as many months, it would have been a different story altogether. But lovers will tell haters that Biden is jealous and the purpose of the visit has been served. That’s the thing about living in fantasies.

https://theprint.in/opinion/letter-from-pakistan/russia-to-riyadh-imran-khan-now-has-a-history-of-being-in-the-wrong-place-at-the-wrong-time/847515/

Ukraine crisis: Why Imran Khan's Russia trip will further isolate Pakistan

Pakistani Premier Imran Khan chose to meet with President Putin in Moscow, just as Russian forces were invading Ukraine. DW analyzes why the visit is likely to strain Islamabad's ties with Washington and Brussels.

"What a time I have come, so much excitement," Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan was heard saying at the airport as he arrived in Moscow on Wednesday ahead of a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Khan's statement would prove to be ill-timed, as hours after his arrival, Russia carried out a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The West has condemned President Putin with one voice and imposed strict sanctions on Moscow. Russian forces are bombing Ukrainian cities and are closing in on the capital Kyiv. There is definitely more anger than "excitement" about the situation in the West.However, with Khan's visit, Pakistan's leadership seems to be demonstrating its naivete vis-a-vis the gravity of global politics in the aftermath of Russia's unilateral invasion of Ukraine.

Pakistani officials have insisted that Khan's Moscow trip had nothing to do with the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The visit was scheduled much earlier, and Khan and Putin said they discussed bilateral and South Asian affairs during their Thursday meeting.

But experts point out that the timing of Khan's Russia trip was a "diplomatic disaster." Although Khan is not a huge player in global politics, his meeting with Putin during the Ukraine invasion has carried some immense symbolic value — mostly in favor of Russia.

Pakistan moving toward US rivals

Regardless of what Khan's ministers have said about Pakistan's "neutrality," geopolitical analysts are watching as the world becomes more clearly divided between the Western and China-Russia camps. Islamabad's close ties with Beijing are no secret, but Pakistani authorities maintain that they want good relations with both China and the US.

However, the time for "neutrality" from South Asian countries like Pakistan and India is almost over after Russia's Ukraine attack, according to security observers."The trip, while overshadowed by the Ukraine crisis, represented a key milestone for a relationship that has quietly grown in recent years," said Micheal Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, to DW."It also amplifies the direction that Pakistan’s foreign policy is taking; one that is increasingly aligning with US rivals and hence suggests the limits of expanding US-Pakistan relations in the years ahead," he added.

US State Department spokesman Ned Price was quite clear on this issue.

"We believe it's a responsibility of every responsible country around the world to voice concern, to voice objection, to what Putin appears to have in mind for Ukraine," Price said on Wednesday, responding to a question about Khan's meeting with Putin.

Pakistan receives substantial military aid from Washington, and its economy is heavily dependent on the International Monetary Fund's loans.

Whether or not Khan has calculated potential repercussions of his Moscow visit, it could have serious consequences for his country's economy.

A 'wrong signal' to the West

Khalid Hameed Farooqi, a Brussels-based Pakistani journalist and an expert on South Asian diplomatic affairs, told DW that Khan's Russia visit will "isolate Pakistan more among the international community.""Regardless of what he says, by going to Moscow, Khan has conveyed a message to Europe and the US that he has decided to side with Russia in the Ukraine conflict," Farooqi said.

"He could have easily rescheduled his trip, but possibly, he wanted to put pressure on Washington," he said, adding that even India, which has historically been close to Russia, has so far abstained from taking sides in the conflict.

"EU diplomatic circles have not taken Khan's Russia trip well," according to Farooqi.

Maleeha Lodhi, Pakistan's former ambassador to the US, however, believes Khan did the "right thing to press ahead" with his trip. "The prime minister's visit was scheduled much before the [start of] the Ukraine crisis. The visit was bilateral in nature and not intended to send any signal to the West. The visit helped consolidate the positive trajectory in relations between Pakistan and Russia and explored more areas of cooperation," she told DW.

A 'business trip'

A Russian government statement described Khan's tour as a "working visit."

"The leaders of the two countries discussed the main aspects of bilateral cooperation and exchanged views on current regional topics, including developments in South Asia," said the statement.Pakistani is facing an acute energy crisis, and one of the reasons behind Khan's Moscow trip was to finalize a gas pipeline deal with Putin.Trade between Pakistan and Russia, however, is relatively small, with Pakistan exporting $277 million (€247 million) of products in 2019, and Russia exporting $178 million to Pakistan."The visit was not substantial in terms of business agreements; instead certain MOUs were signed which were possible without the visit," Talat Masood, a retired army general and security expert, told DW.

Analyst Farooqi said that after the West has imposed heavy sanctions on Russia, Pakistan is no position to do business with Moscow.

Pakistani military wants 'distance' from Russia

It is important to note that while Khan was preparing to visit Moscow, Pakistan's powerful military chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, was meeting with EU officials in Brussels.

Although, his visit was "low-key," analyst Farooqi believes it was significant.

"Pakistan's military leadership wants to keep distance from Russia, unlike Imran Khan," said Farooqi.

"It doesn't want to provoke the West, as Pakistan's security infrastructure relies on the West's support. The generals are pro-West," he said.

Farooqi says that Khan wants to be recognized as being in charge of Pakistan, but in reality, the military generals call the shots in the Muslim-majority country.

Security analyst Masood believes Khan catered to his "anti-West" local constituency by visiting Russia.

"Pakistan is walking a tightrope, although the visit could help Khan domestically," he said.

But Khan's popularity is plummeting in Pakistan, with masses reeling under high inflation and rising unemployment. Meanwhile, opposition parties are hoping to oust him through a no-confidence vote in parliament.

https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-crisis-why-imran-khans-russia-trip-will-further-isolate-pakistan/a-60916130

کل بھی بھٹو زندہ تھا،آج بھی بھٹو زندہ ھے