പിന്നീട് ഏജൻസി ‘ഹിന്ദുസ്ഥാനി’ലേയ്ക്ക് മാറിയപ്പോൾ ‘തി’ തിരിച്ചുകിട്ടി. വടക്കേഇന്ത്യയിൽ പോകുമ്പോൾ ഞാൻ ‘സേഥി’യാകും. പലർക്കും അതിനപ്പുറം ഒരു പേര് സങ്കല്പിക്കാനാകില്ല. കോട്ടയത്ത് വന്നകാലത്തു എത്രപറഞ്ഞാലും ഞാൻ ‘സിബി’യാണെന്ന് അവർ ഉറപ്പിക്കും. ഒരു പേരിൽ എന്തിരിക്കുന്നു എന്ന് ചോദിക്കാം.

എന്നാൽ കാലം മാറി. സിംഹത്തിനു ഇപ്പോൾ ‘സീത’യെന്നു വിളിച്ചതിനു കോടതി മറുപടി പറയേണ്ടി വന്നിരിക്കുന്നു. അതും ‘അക്ബർ’ എന്ന മറ്റൊരു ചങ്ങാതിയുടെ കൂടെ വസിക്കുന്നതിനു. ഞാൻ ഓർക്കുകയായിരുന്നു. പത്തുമുപ്പതു വർഷം മുമ്പ് മൂന്നാർ മാട്ടുപ്പെട്ടിയിൽ പശുഫാം കാണാൻ പോയി. നല്ല കൊഴുത്ത പശുക്കൾ. ഇൻഡോ-സ്വിസ് പ്രൊജക്റ്റ് പ്രകാരം ആണെന്ന് തോന്നുന്നു ഇതിനെ പരിപാലിച്ചിരുന്നത്. ഞങ്ങൾ കൗതുകത്തോടെ നോക്കി. പശുക്കൾക്ക് പേരുണ്ട്. അബ്ദുല്ല, രാജു, രാമൻ, ജോസഫ്….അങ്ങനെ. പശുഫാമിൽ ഇത്രനല്ല നിലയിൽ മതേതരത്വം കാത്തുസൂക്ഷിച്ച ഒരു കാലം ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. ഇന്നാണെങ്കിൽ വടക്കേ ഇന്ത്യയിലോ മറ്റോ ഇത് സങ്കൽപ്പിക്കാൻ പറ്റുമോ?

മൃഗങ്ങൾക്കു മനുഷ്യരുടെയും ദൈവങ്ങളുടെയും പേരിടുന്നതിൽ സ്നേഹത്തിന്റെ ഒരംശമുണ്ട്. അവിടെ വർഗീയതയ്ക്ക് ഒരു സ്ഥാനവുമില്ല. കോടതി ഇന്ന് ഹർജിക്കാരോട് ചോദിച്ചതും ഇതുതന്നെ. ആ അർത്ഥത്തിൽ ‘മനുഷ്യ-മൃഗ’ സന്ദേഹങ്ങൾക്കു ഇന്ന് പുതിയ മാനങ്ങൾ കൈവന്നിരിക്കുന്നു. സിനിമയിലെ കഥാപാത്രങ്ങൾക്ക് പോലും ഇന്ന് ധൈര്യത്തോടെ പേരിടാൻ പലരും മടിക്കുകയാണ്. സാഹിത്യത്തിൽ ഇന്ന് ഇതുമായി ബന്ധപെട്ടും ചോദ്യങ്ങൾ ഉയരുന്നുണ്ട്. ‘പാല്‌പിരിയുന്ന കാലം’ ചെറുകഥയിൽ എന്തുകൊണ്ട് എൻ. എസ്‌.മാധവൻ ‘സാബു’ എന്ന് കഥാപാത്രത്തിനു പേരിട്ടു? ഉത്തരേന്ത്യയിൽ മാട്ടിറച്ചിയുമായി യാത്ര ചെയ്തു ആക്രമിക്കപ്പെടുന്നത് ആഖ്‌ലാഖും മറ്റുമല്ലേ, സാബുവല്ലല്ലോ…തുടങ്ങിയ ആശങ്കപ്പെടുത്തുന്ന ചോദ്യങ്ങൾ. ബഷീറും തകഴിയും കേശവദേവും പൊൻകുന്നം വർക്കിയുമെല്ലാം ഇന്ന് ജീവിച്ചിരുന്നെകിൽ അവരുടെ കഥാപാത്രങ്ങൾ എന്തുതരം വിചാരണയ്ക്കു ഇന്ന് കീഴ്പ്പെടേണ്ടി വരുമായിരുന്നു !

The post പേരിനൊപ്പം first appeared on KM Seethi.

In the discourses of human development, the late M. Kunhaman, an esteemed economist and subaltern thinker, argued that human development is not just desirable but an indispensable prerequisite for safeguarding human rights. He emphatically argued that the deprivation of opportunities for human development inherently corresponds to the denial of fundamental human rights. This reality is starkly exemplified in the systematic deprivation faced by marginalized groups in India, including Dalits, Adivasis, and women—a thoughtful observation made by Professor Kunhaman.

On this significant International Human Rights Day, we pay tribute to Professor Kunhaman for an expressive reason. His demise, just a day before his 74th birthday in the capital city of Kerala, left a deep impact that resonates with distress and sadness. Kunhaman’s life stands as a testament to his remarkable dedication to championing the dignity and rights of subaltern communities in the country.

Human Rights Workshop at MGU – M Kunhaman speaks. BRP Bhaskar, Rajan Gurukkal, N Madhavan Kutty, CR Bijoy and KM Seethi on the panel

Kunhaman’s intellectual life spanned over four decades in the realms of both academia and the public sphere. With his last teaching career at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai, and earlier at the Department of Economics, University of Kerala, he established his standing as a distinguished public intellectual in the country. Significant for his critique of mainstream development discourses, including contemporary left politics, Kunhaman consistently advocated for the rights of deprived and marginalised sections of society, surpassing the fervour of many of his contemporaries. His life’s work grappled with questions of marginality and subalternity from a compelling vantage point.

A profound chapter of Kunhaman’s life unfolds in his autobiography Ethiru (Defiance) published in 2020. This autobiographical work serves as a rich compendium, offering penetrating insights into the multitude of experiences – of caste discrimination and oppression that he confronted throughout his life.

When the Kerala Sahitya Academy decided to honour him with an award for his autobiography in 2021, Kunhaman gracefully declined, emphasizing that he did not write for the sake of “the allure of awards.” Instead, he urged the subaltern communities to transcend such temptations. In his autobiography, he asked Dalits to carve out moments for contemplation and reading. Expressing his aspiration for a life distinct from his father’s laborious toil, he sought the luxury of time for thoughtful reflection and reading. He eloquently articulated, “Without the luxury of time for contemplation, how can we nurture individuals with elevated thoughts?”

Hailing from the Palakkad district of Kerala, Kunhaman was born in 1949 and established himself through academic excellence. He secured the first rank in his Master’s degree in economics, becoming only the second student from the Dalit community in Kerala to achieve this feat, after former Indian President K.R. Narayanan. Building on this success, he pursued his MPhil at the Centre for Development Studies (CDS) and earned a PhD from Cochin University of Science and Technology. His career unfolded with a long tenure at the University of Kerala, where he taught from 1979 to 2006. Subsequently, he joined the Tata Institute of Social Sciences Tuljapur campus, dedicating nearly nine years to furthering his contributions to academia as a professor.

Kunhaman’s intellectual legacy is marked by significant contributions, including notable works such as Development of Tribal Economy, State Level Planning in India, and Globalisation: A Subaltern Perspective. Beyond these impactful publications, he further enriched scholarly discussions through insightful essays, featuring the depth and breadth of his influence on intellectual discourse.

While ardently fighting for the subalterns, it may be recalled, Kunhaman maintained a critical stance toward Dalit studies. He expressed scepticism about the field, pointing out its susceptibility to epistemological stagnation. He criticized the tendency within Dalit studies to approach dynamic questions within a static framework, divorcing analytical focus from empirical processes and neglecting the imperative for praxis. According to Kunhaman, these limitations contributed to restricted perceptions among writers and activists, ultimately leading to distorted perspectives among policymakers. Kunhaman noted a decline in the revolutionary zeal of Dalit activism from the 1980s, characterizing it as more reactive than proactive. Moreover, he highlighted a paradoxical situation where the caste system seemed to be weakening, yet the influence of caste continued to strengthen. This nuanced perspective underlined his commitment to a deeper understanding of the complexities within the discourse on Dalit issues.

In elucidating the significance of subaltern economics, which acknowledges the distinctive economic behaviours of marginalized or discriminated social groups, Kunhaman contended that a considerable segment of human society operates outside the confines of the perfectly competitive market economy. This is particularly evident in Adivasi and peasant societies, where the economizing and maximizing behaviour characteristic of capitalist societies is either absent or of minimal importance.

While acknowledging the commendable contributions of writers in the new tradition who have formulated a theory of underdevelopment, Kunhaman critiqued the dependency theory. He brought attention to a significant drawback involving circular reasoning, where underdevelopment is ascribed to dependence, and dependence is perceived as the outcome of underdevelopment. Moreover, he pointed out that the dependency theory oversimplifies by portraying advanced countries as exploiters and underdeveloped ones as exploited, disregarding the internal class structures within both categories. Kunhaman emphasized the existence of exploitative dynamics within advanced countries and a privileged class within underdeveloped ones. Expressing concern over economists neglecting the study of subaltern groups, he attributed this oversight to their conventional economic training. Kunhaman underscored the crucial importance of recognizing and addressing the challenges faced by subaltern groups to foster a more comprehensive understanding of economic dynamics.

Kunhaman’s lectures, delivered across both academic and public arenas, consistently captivated diverse audiences with their insightful discourse. When discussing the complex subject of globalization, he boldly asserted that, while it might offer extensive opportunities for a privileged minority armed with abundant resources—both material and intellectual—it simultaneously heralded a gradual process of impoverishment for the majority in India and the Global South, ultimately culminating in their obliteration.

In analysing the impact of neoliberal economic policies, Kunhaman contended that these approaches had transformed into formidable obstacles for the impoverished. He brought in the discussion of poverty, advocating against its narrow definition as a mere shortage of food grains per capita. Instead, he championed a more comprehensive perspective, positioning poverty as a pivotal issue around which various challenges, including illiteracy, poor health, inadequate housing, and lack of access to safe drinking water, converged. In doing so, Kunhaman aimed to stress the complex and interconnected nature of poverty, shedding light on its multifaceted dimensions and far-reaching consequences for marginalized communities.

Kunhaman emphasised the critical role of economic changes as a catalyst for substantive social transformation. He argued that a socially stratified society mirrors a stratified economic order, emphasizing that authentic social progress depends on eradicating economic disparities. While policy interventions may instigate certain social changes, he contended that genuine equality remains elusive until the underlying conflicts within the economic system are comprehensively addressed. Drawing attention to Kerala’s development experience critically, he presented it as a significant case study, illustrating the complex relationship between economic and social change.

Kunhaman also critically examined the implementation of land reforms, arguing that post-independence reforms predominantly concentrated on granting ownership rights to tenants. He observed that this shift led to the conversion of many tenants into capitalist farmers, aligning themselves with regional political parties and attaining significant political influence in various states. The impact on landowners, he noted, was relatively minimal, with only a few experiencing proletarianization due to land loss, and opportunities for Dalits to become landowners remained scarce.

Even in the case of Kerala, celebrated for its ‘radical’ land reforms, Kunhaman contended that there has been no substantial change in the class position of Dalits resulting from these reforms. His analysis focussed on the intricate and often uneven outcomes of land reform initiatives in the Indian landscape, emphasizing the need for a more inclusive approach to address the complexities of agrarian transformation.

During Kunhaman’s research at the Centre for Development Studies, he actively participated in intense intellectual exchanges with eminent scholars, including K.N. Raj, I.S. Gulati, Vaidyanathan, and others. His intellectual encounters also extended to figures such as E.M.S. Namboodiripad and P.G. Govinda Pillai. Reflecting on his experiences, Kunhaman wrote about the distinctive mindset of E.M.S. Namboodiripad. Remarkably, despite his Brahminic heritage, Namboodiripad embraced the idea of viewing Dalits as equals. Kunhaman emphasized Namboodiripad’s openness, exemplified by the leader’s genuine interest in visiting Dalit huts. There, Namboodiripad would comfortably sit on the cow-dung paste-covered floor, symbolizing a departure from traditional norms. Despite Kunhaman’s active participation in meetings led by Namboodiripad, which often included critiques of Marxist political theory, Namboodiripad consistently displayed a remarkable absence of intolerance, creating an environment conducive to constructive discourse.

Kunhaman consistently voiced his concerns regarding the evolving landscape of higher education, particularly the shift from resource-based to knowledge-driven development. He critically observed the transformation of education into a commodity, expressing worry about the commercialization of knowledge. This trend, he argued, fostered a market-oriented perspective where the provision of education was increasingly influenced by profit-driven entrepreneurs and investors rather than educators.

In emphasizing the crucial role of knowledge in development, Kunhaman stressed the need to pay equal attention to the social structures involved in its generation, collation, value addition, diffusion, and application. He argued against a depoliticized discourse on knowledge, drawing attention to its potential social harm and strategic deficiencies. He often reiterated, “We need to create not the best talents, but different talents,” urging a shift in focus from conventional norms to a more diverse and inclusive approach to nurturing talents within the educational realm.

Despite his open and consistent criticism of mainstream left parties, Kunhaman, at times, maintained a positive attitude by readily acknowledging progressive initiatives undertaken by left governments. He particularly recognized the substantial potential in the People’s Planning and decentralization introduced by the left government in 1996. Simultaneously, he did not hesitate to articulate his critiques of certain development projects initiated by the government that fell short of addressing the broader social ecosystem of the state. Kunhaman’s critical approach reflected both his astute evaluation of governmental actions and his commitment to constructive critique even within political frameworks he was critical of.

In the final years of his life, Kunhaman extended his intellectual reach by delivering lectures in wider circles. His most recent appointment was as the Nelson Mandela Chair Professor at Mahatma Gandhi University in 2021-22. Despite his notable lack of inhibition, pretension, or grand ambitions, distinguishing him from conventional positions and institutions, those nearby sensed a lingering melancholy. This subtle undercurrent of sadness in Kunhaman’s character was likely a result of his internalization of various forms of marginality in real life, shaping them into excruciating agonies that remained undisclosed to many until he shared his experiences in his autobiography.

Then, many asked this question, why did he decide to end his life amid all commitments?

Addressing a spate of Dalit suicides in prestigious institutions like IITs in India, Suraj Yengde, a scholar at Harvard Kennedy School, asserted in Caste Matters that these suicides represent a form of social lynching. He underscored how these tragic incidents underscore the heightened vulnerabilities faced by Dalits, revealing a systemic failure to address their concerns adequately. Yengde contextualized these suicides within the historical pattern of Dalits experiencing violence sanctioned by the social hierarchy of dominant-caste society.

In an interview with Francis Wade, Gayatri Chakravarty Spivak delved into the pervasive violence, exploitation, and oppression endured by marginalized communities over the years. Spivak noted that individuals subjected to such conditions often reach a point where they lose the fear of death, creating a unique and unsettling circumstance. Frantz Fanon also noted that the denial of fundamental equality, a defining aspect of our humanity, can lead to extreme violence. This denial results in a state where individuals are no longer afraid of death, providing the subaltern with a means to convey their struggles through the act of dying.

Kunhaman’s unexpected demise left a distressing question hanging in the air, without a definitive answer: Did his choice to end his own life convey a message to a society contending with the enduring complexities of caste-based and other oppressive systems?

Unfortunately, the pervasive oppression and marginalization that marked Kunhaman’s life largely went unaddressed by many, showing the silent struggles he faced throughout his lifetime.

The post M Kunhaman: A Subaltern Intellectual and His Politics of Defiance first appeared on KM Seethi.

Photo: Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger speaks at the Gala Dinner of the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations in New York City on October 24, 2023 (Credit: XINHUA)

Amidst the tributes honouring the late American diplomat Henry Kissinger, who breathed his last at the age of 100, a narrative simultaneously got underway across online conduits as well as in sections of international media. In certain circles, Kissinger found himself branded with different labels, symbolizing actions perceived to reverberate with far-reaching global consequences. This perceptible variance in opinions and assessments shows the obfuscated political legacy left by a diplomat who was ‘indispensable’ in shaping American foreign policy in the 1960s and 1970s.

Kissinger—a hardcore realist whose influence pervaded the corridors of American foreign policy under the tenures of Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford—negotiated and helped make decisions in momentous geopolitical settings, including the disengagement of the United States from Vietnam and the initiation of diplomatic overtures with China. Nevertheless, his legacy, particularly in the region of South America, as well as in South and Southeast Asia, is dented by accusations of promoting aerial attacks and support for repressive military autocracies. Kissinger was criticised for his alignment with authoritarian regimes, which professedly conceived as a strategy to counteract the ideology of communism.

Official records substantiate the complicity of Nixon and Kissinger in endorsing the 1973 coup that deposed Allende, the incumbent president of Chile. The aftermath of this stage-managed upheaval by General Augusto Pinochet manifested in widespread violation of human rights, including political executions, electoral annulments, and media encumbrances. Similarly, his involvement in the bombardment of Cambodia and endorsement of the Pakistan military’s coercive actions against the people of East Pakistan was well established. Numerous scholars and observers had previously identified a spectrum of issues contributing to his unfavourable portrayal. For example, in The Price of Power (1983), Seymour Hersh depicted Kissinger as an “unhinged paranoiac,” while Christopher Hitchens, in The Trial of Henry Kissinger (2001), framed his critique as a comprehensive charge sheet, advocating for Kissinger to be prosecuted as a war criminal. Thus, his ‘inevitable presence’ in the West’s containment project remained a topic of discussion among scholars of International Relations. What adds intrigue to Kissinger’s legacy is its enduring impact on China, a communist country with a distinct geopolitical trajectory.

China in Kissinger’s Diplomacy  

China responded to Kissinger’s demise with an overwhelming outpouring of tributes from current officials, former officials, academics, and ordinary citizens. This is in stark contrast to the mixed views prevailing in the West regarding Kissinger’s role in U.S. foreign policy. However, his standing in China is characterized by universal reverence and respect. The Chinese official sources, including the influential media like Global Times referred to Chinese people as having “mourned the loss of a wise mind who witnessed the world’s turbulence and prosperity in the past century, while others expressed their appreciation for his contribution to China-US relations, which is considered the most important relationship in the current world.” Global Times wrote that Kissinger, who visited China over 100 times throughout his life, made his last trip to Beijing in July 2023 during a period of heightened tensions in China-US relations. During this visit, Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Kissinger, acknowledging and praising his significant role in fostering bilateral relations. President Xi emphasized the enduring value the Chinese people placed on friendship, expressing gratitude for Kissinger’s historic contributions to promoting the growth of China-US relations. Xi reflected on the significant decision made 52 years ago, when Chairman Mao Zedong, Premier Zhou Enlai, President Richard Nixon, and Kissinger demonstrated extraordinary strategic vision in normalizing China-US relations. This decision, according to Xi, not only brought benefits to both countries but also had a transformative impact on the world, as reported by the Global Times.

Admittedly, China has attracted global attention since the collapse of the Soviet Union, emerging as one of the top economies. Questions had emerged about the impact of its economic rise on global politics, military power, and the management of the global economic system. Many said that China’s adherence to Western institutions facilitated its growth. Policy analysts like Kissinger agreed that China’s dynamic growth made it a major force with significant implications for international relations.

In 2005, Kissinger, a key architect of U.S.-China policy in the 1970s, predicted in the Washington Post that the rise of China and Asia would reshape the international system, shifting the global political centre to the Pacific. He cautioned against assuming a strategic confrontation akin to imperial Germany, emphasizing China’s preference for patient and balanced approaches. In his book, On China, Kissinger discouraged substituting China for the Soviet Union in policy thinking, highlighting the historical differences in imperial traditions between the two nations. He stressed that the Chinese state, existing for 2,000 years, relied more on cultural conformity than force, cautioning against Cold War style military containment.

Kissinger’s On China garnered widespread global attention and extensive reviews. With a rich history in diplomacy and foreign policy, Kissinger engaged in diplomatic initiatives, notably contributing to the opening of American relations with China in the early 1970s. Drawing on decades of personal acquaintance with Chinese leaders and access to historical source material, Kissinger explored China’s diplomatic, strategic, and negotiating approaches throughout its extensive history.

In his writing, Kissinger addressed key questions about China’s role in global power dynamics in the twenty-first century. He went into major milestones in Chinese foreign policy, covering traditional China’s sensitivities and strategies. He also skillfully reexamined the well-known Chinese grievance of the “century of humiliation” and underscored China’s historical fear of encirclement, considering earlier challenges such as those posed by the Mongols.

Kissinger’s work on China extensively examined critical events since Mao’s emergence, encompassing internal-external dynamics of Chinese diplomacy, Sino-European interactions, the evolution and schism of Sino-Soviet ties, the Korean War, the thaw in Sino-American relations during the Nixon era, the Taiwan Straits crisis, the Great Leap Forward, the Sino-Indian war, Cultural Revolution, post-Mao reforms, Deng’s foreign policy, Tiananmen, the Jiang Zemin era, and China’s ‘Peaceful Rise,’ among other significant topics.  Kissinger commenced his narrative in the book with Mao’s meeting with top political and military commanders during the 1962 India-China border standoff. The context was a negotiation impasse, prompting Mao to decide to break the stalemate. Referring to historical conflicts, Mao recounted that China and India had fought “one and a half” wars, drawing operational lessons from each. The first, during the Tang Dynasty, involved suppressing an Indian kingdom, leading to centuries of flourishing exchanges. Mao emphasized that perpetual enmity was not inevitable, but to secure peace, China needed to use force to bring India to the negotiating table, Kissinger wrote.

He appreciated the uniqueness of Mao invoking millennium-old events to guide contemporary strategic imperatives. Shortly after Mao’s discourse, China executed a sudden, devastating offensive against the Indian position. Kissinger noted the unprecedented nature of a modern leader initiating a major national undertaking by referencing ancient events and expecting colleagues to grasp the significance of these allusions, highlighting the distinct nature of Mao’s strategic approach.

Kissinger’s stance on China was widely recognized due to his decisive role in diplomatic relations between the West and China in the 1970s. Dismissing the notion of China dominating the world, he suggested that the country’s political leadership would focus on aligning political institutions with its economic transformations. In a discussion, Kissinger expressed, “I do not believe that a country that will be so preoccupied with this fundamental change will also have the time to dominate the world.”

While neither the more optimistic Chinese analyses nor the American perspective, asserting that a successful Chinese ‘rise’ is incompatible with America’s position in the Pacific and the world, have received official endorsement from either government, these viewpoints underlie much current thought. If these assumptions were adopted by either side, it could potentially lead to escalating tensions between China and the U.S., emphasizing the delicate nature of their relationship.

The relationship between the U.S. and China involved strategic considerations where each nation seeks to shape the other’s influence. China aims to push American power away from its borders, limit U.S. naval strength, and diminish its weight in global diplomacy. On the other hand, the U.S. endeavoured to rally China’s neighbours into a counterweight against Chinese dominance, emphasizing ideological differences. The tricky interaction is further complicated by asymmetrical notions of deterrence and preemption—where the U.S. focused on overwhelming military power, while China prioritized decisive psychological impact, increasing the risk of miscalculations.

The key question revolved around realistic expectations. Explicit American attempts to organize Asia for containment or an ideological bloc faced challenges due to China’s vital trade partnerships. Similarly, Chinese efforts to exclude the U.S. from Asian affairs met resistance from other regional states fearing the repercussions of a single-power dominance. The nature of the Sino-American relationship was more accurately characterized by Kissinger as ‘coevolution’ than a partnership. Both nations pursued domestic imperatives, cooperating where possible, and adjusting their relations to minimize conflict. While not fully endorsing each other’s aims, they strived to identify and cultivate complementary interests.

In seeking to demonstrate his profound understanding of Chinese strategic thought, particularly those enduring over centuries among successive generations of Chinese policymakers and statesmen, Kissinger emphasized the Chinese as adept practitioners of realpolitik. He contended that their strategic doctrine differed markedly from Western preferences in strategy and diplomacy. According to Kissinger, China’s turbulent history instilled in its leaders a recognition that not every problem has a straightforward solution, cautioning against an excessive focus on total mastery over specific events, which could disrupt the harmony of the universe. Chinese statesmen, he observed, rarely gambled the outcome of conflicts on singular all-or-nothing clashes, favouring instead elaborate, multiyear manoeuvres aligned with their strategic style.

Contrasting Western traditions that value decisive clashes and heroic feats, the Chinese ideal, as described by Kissinger, emphasized subtlety, indirection, and the patient accumulation of relative advantage. This distinction highlighted the strategic approach entrenched in Chinese geopolitical thinking throughout history.

Kissinger perceived the Washington-Beijing relationship as plagued by ambiguity, with some U.S. academics and policymakers strongly critical of China, labelling post-Cold War policies as ‘appeasement.’ Whether anti-Communists or human rights activists, many advocated regime change in Beijing. However, the feasibility of inducing ‘peaceful evolution’ in China remained elusive, acknowledging Washington’s limited influence since the 1950s.

He believed that the concept of a ‘China threat’ revolved around its growing capacity to disrupt the existing international order. Militarily, China is seen as acquiring capabilities to project power beyond East Asia and challenge the U.S. Navy, particularly near Taiwan. Economically, its increasing demand for raw materials has driven commodity price hikes, expanding extraction operations globally. The intentions behind China’s newfound power remained unclear, with official assertions denying aggressive motives, emphasizing its developing status and projecting decades before military parity with the U.S. Yet, scepticism persisted among American scholars and policymakers regarding the sustainability of China’s rise. Some anticipated a regime fall, foreseen economic slowdown, and highlighted growing domestic unrest manifested in tens of thousands of anti-government demonstrations annually. Despite these concerns, China’s economic growth contrasts starkly with current struggles in Europe and the United States.

According to Kissinger, the strategic dynamics in Asia differed significantly. He advised against fixating on China’s military buildup, noting that while China increased its military capabilities, its defence budget was less than 20% of America’s. The key test for Beijing’s intentions, he argued, lies in whether its rising capabilities aim to exclude America from Asia or contribute to cooperative endeavours. Kissinger advocated a strategy of maintaining close relations with all major Asian countries, including China, as the best approach for achieving anti-hegemonic objectives. He viewed Asia’s rise as a critical test for American competitiveness in the evolving global landscape, particularly in Asian countries.

Kissinger observed that many Chinese, both within and outside the government, perceived Washington as seeking to contain and restrict China’s rise. He warned against self-fulfilling prophecies, emphasizing the interconnectedness of the United States and China in a globalized world. A Cold War scenario, he contended, would lead to international alignment and exacerbate disputes globally when comprehensive global solutions are required for issues like nuclear proliferation, the environment, energy, and climate.

Highlighting that conflict is not inherent in a nation’s rise, Kissinger pointed to the U.S. in the twentieth century as an example of achieving eminence without conflict with dominant countries. He argued that Sino-U.S. relations did not need to follow a confrontational path and could find adequate cooperation on contemporary issues. However, he noted the absence of an overarching concept for their interaction, unlike the Cold War period where a common adversary facilitated cooperation. Despite the potential for collaboration, both countries lack a shared framework amidst the challenges of a globalized world undergoing political, economic, and technological upheaval. According to Kissinger, most Chinese view their country’s rise not as a challenge to the U.S. but as a return to a historically preeminent position, considering the past two centuries of relative weakness as an abnormality.

Kissinger did not advocate abandoning Taiwan, but he emphasised that the relationship with China was too crucial to risk continuing robust support for democratic Taiwan. Throughout his career, Kissinger championed realpolitik, admiring figures like Bismarck who prioritised national interest over ideals. He saw leaders like Zhou and Mao as effective strategists in his pragmatic image.

In the context of China’s rise, Kissinger argued for an end to American criticism of China’s one-party system and human rights abuses. Embracing the Westphalian notion that states should refrain from interfering in each other’s internal affairs, he considered the Chinese as contemporary model Westphalians. To avoid conflict with China, Kissinger suggested yielding on these points and focusing on shared interests.

While acknowledging human rights violations as grounds for reconsidering relationships, he contended that applying this criterion to countries crucial for American security, especially China, would pose challenges. He warned against making democratic governance a condition for progress in other areas, asserting that such insistence would lead to inevitable deadlock. Kissinger proposed a pragmatic approach, urging idealists to recognize the need for occasional adjustments based on circumstances and realists to acknowledge the reality of values in operational policies.

In an interview in 2021, he said:

In dealing with China, different schools of thought have to be sorted out. There’s a group who thinks the Chinese capacity for foreign policy must be confronted at all levels from economics to Chinese internal politics. It ascribes current Chinese policies to the current Chinese leadership and strives for bringing about a more accommodating group. I, on the other hand, believe that such an attitude generates a maximum of resistance. Of course, free societies must continue to conduct world affairs compatible with their principles and free of the threat of hegemony. But coexistence in the current world of technology is a necessity, because it is impossible to visualize a war between major countries who have significant AI technology that will not destroy cultural life as we know it. So that will be the debate in America and maybe in the world.

 According to Kissinger, Europe should refrain from exploiting tensions between the United States and China, as doing so may intensify confrontations and worsen crises. Rather than endorsing an aggressive stance against China, he supported the idea of fostering a shared strategic understanding among nations. It is crucial to avoid escalating the situation through constant maneuvering for advantages, emphasizing a more measured and cooperative approach to international relations.

In his surprise visit in July this year, Kissinger expressed his friendship towards China and urged both nations to enhance their cooperation. He emphasized the importance of eliminating misunderstandings, promoting peaceful coexistence, and steering clear of confrontations between the United States and China. Kissinger asserted that past experiences have consistently demonstrated that treating either country as an adversary is not a viable or affordable approach for either the United States or China.

 In sum, Kissinger persistently grappled with a critical inquiry as he highlighted in his work on China and the West: Does China’s ascent inevitably culminate in conflict with the United States? Drawing parallels with Germany’s rise a century ago, he cleverly admitted the potential for heightened tensions while maintaining an optimistic outlook. He emphasised that history, despite its patterns, unfolds without mechanical repetition. Exploring further, Kissinger offered thoughtful insights into Chinese history and foreign policy, atypical of the perspective of a former U.S. policymaker. This perspective renders the topic relevant for debates among International Relations scholars.

References

Kissinger, Henry A. (1979): White House Years, New York: Simon and Schuster.

Kissinger, Henry A. (1982): Years of Upheaval, New York: Simon and Schuster.

Kissinger, Henry A. (2005): “China: Containment Won’t Work,” The Washington Post, 13 June.

Kissinger, Henry A. (2011): “Avoiding a US-China Cold War,” The Washington Post, 14 January.

Kissinger, Henry A. (2011): On China, New York: Penguin Press.

Seethi, K.M. (2011): “China’s ‘Peaceful Rise’ in the New Millennium,” Indian Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol.4. Nos. 1&2. January- December.

Seethi K.M. (2021): Enduring Dilemma: Flashpoints in Kashmir and India-Pakistan Relations, New Delhi: KW Publishers.

The post Power Dynamics: Henry Kissinger’s Realpolitik in China Policy first appeared on KM Seethi.

The post മുറിവുണക്കാനായി… first appeared on KM Seethi.

More than two million people in Gaza have suffered the consequences of the ruthless attack by Hamas, including the killing of several foreign nationals on 7 October. Numerous analyses have already come elucidating the immediate reasons behind the Hamas attack. These factors include historical injustices against the Palestinian people, Israel’s ongoing occupation policy, the perceived indifference of West Asian/Gulf regimes that engaged with Israel through the ‘Abraham Accords,’ increased external support from militant groups like Hezbollah and from countries such as Iran, besides the weakened position of the Benjamin Netanyahu administration in Israel due to nationwide protests covering various issues, including allegations of corruption and attempts to subordinate the judiciary.

While Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, Israel, Canada, the European Union, and several other countries—based on its history of employing violence and terrorism in pursuit of its goals—it gained control of the Gaza Strip through a combination of elections and other means since 2006, creating a political divide between the two territories. Evidently, Hamas would have received support from different countries and forces, over the years, for the kind of attack it launched against Israel. But the price is too heavy for the people of Gaza who were already suffering amid multiple crises.

Reports say that over the past ten days, the ongoing conflict has resulted in the loss of 4,200 lives, with over a million people compelled to evacuate their homes under Israeli authorities’ orders. Large sections of the Gaza Strip now lie in ruins, as reported by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). OHCHR expressed serious concerns about the wellbeing of civilians in the upcoming days. Military operations continue unabated, and Gaza remains under siege, affecting the availability of water, food, medicine, and other essential necessities. Daily breaches of international humanitarian law and human rights law persist.

In southern Gaza, where a humanitarian crisis is already unfolding, UN relief agencies reiterated their plea for a secure and reliable humanitarian corridor to deliver stockpiled aid into the Occupied Territory. Both Egypt and Israel have faced numerous calls from the UN and the international community to safeguard non-combatants affected by the conflict. UN World Food Programme (WFP) Regional Communications Lead for the Middle East and North Africa emphasized the urgent need for unhindered access and safe passage to deliver essential humanitarian supplies to Gaza. Approximately 300 tonnes of food are either stationed at or en route to the Egyptian border in Rafah, sufficient to sustain approximately a quarter of a million people for a week. The UN Human Rights Office reported that a significant number of casualties in Gaza include women and children, Palestinian journalists, medical personnel, and UN personnel.

In response to urgent warnings from the UN Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA), regarding the dire situation in Gaza amidst intense Israeli airstrikes from land, sea, and air, humanitarian workers have expressed deep concern over the targeting of healthcare facilities. This has raised alarm about the medical care available to the injured, including pregnant women and those with chronic health issues. Furthermore, OHCHR reported that civilians attempting to relocate to southern Gaza have been tragically killed by explosive weapons, underscoring the need for an urgent and independent investigation.

The international community has called for an immediate humanitarian pause to facilitate the delivery of aid and mitigate further suffering. Adherence to the laws of war and the protection of civilians is of utmost importance in preventing further loss of life in this dire crisis, as emphasized by UN Agencies. Emergency Relief Coordinator Martin Griffiths stressed, “History is watching,” as he highlighted the dire situation facing approximately one million Gazans who have been displaced in the past week.  “Aid access is our top priority, and we are actively engaged in ongoing discussions with Israeli authorities, the Egyptian government, and the people of Gaza to facilitate this,” Mr. Griffiths emphasized. He expressed optimism about the potential for positive developments in resolving the political obstacles that have hindered aid convoys from crossing into southern Gaza from Egypt’s Rafah. The UN Secretary-General had recently characterized the situation as highly precarious.

Griffiths stressed that it is the responsibility of all Member States, not just those in the region, to help defuse what is one of the most significant Israeli-Palestinian conflicts in decades. He highlighted the obligations of the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and the Arab world to ensure the protection of civilian lives and adherence to the rules of war. He further emphasized the importance of refraining from attacking civilian infrastructure, safeguarding civilians during their movement, ensuring the delivery of much-needed aid, and establishing corridors to provide respite from the ongoing relentless attacks.

Meanwhile, diplomats were working to address critical issues, including the release of approximately 199 Israeli hostages taken during the Hamas raid. Griffiths underscored that this war began with the abduction of these hostages, although acknowledging the historical tensions between the Palestinian and Israeli peoples.  Amid the ongoing airstrikes in Gaza and concerns about a potential regional escalation, particularly on the northern border with Lebanon, Griffiths reiterated the imperative for humanity to prevail. He emphasized that history is closely observing whether the consequences of this conflict will have lasting negative effects or if there will be swift efforts to rebuild and foster a sense of coexistence and neighbourly relations between these two troubled communities.

Meanwhile, the UN Security Council convened an emergency session in New York to discuss various resolutions related to the rapidly evolving crisis in and around Gaza. However, Security Council failed to adopt a resolution proposed by Russia, which called for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza. The draft received five votes in favour (China, Gabon, Mozambique, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates) and four against (France, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States), with six abstentions. The main point of contention was the lack of specific condemnation of the extremist group Hamas, which initiated the recent violence. The resolution aimed to establish a humanitarian ceasefire, secure the release of hostages, ensure aid access, and facilitate the safe evacuation of civilians. As usual, the role of the UN has been limited to ‘debates’ and post-conflict post-war ‘disaster management.’

Many wonder why the UN, which played a role in the partition of Palestine, did not establish a Peacekeeping force in the region over the years. Such a presence could have potentially prevented the loss of thousands of lives in the conflict zone. However, deploying a UN Peacekeeping force in Palestine within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is fraught with complexity and contention, according to some observers. Major obstacles include the need for the UN Security Council approval, the requirement for consent from involved parties (Israel and Palestinian authorities), intricate conflict dynamics involving political and historical issues, concerns about maintaining neutrality, the potential impact on peace negotiations, and significant resource and operational challenges. Despite occasional discussions, the idea has not been realized due to these complexities. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains deeply rooted and sensitive, necessitating solutions that address these challenges and garner support from key stakeholders, with diplomatic negotiations remaining the primary approach for resolution.

However, the decades-long diplomatic efforts have not yielded any result, resulting in an uncertain situation with the major stakeholders moving in for their own affairs. Nonetheless, despite decades of diplomatic endeavours, no tangible outcomes have been achieved, leaving the situation uncertain as key players pursue their own interests.

The post The Besieged Gaza Amid Humanitarian Crisis first appeared on KM Seethi.

ഏറ്റവും ഒടുവിൽ മധുവിനെ കാണുന്നത്, ഒരു വേദി പങ്കിടുന്നത് 2016-ൽ. സർവകലാശാലയുടെ സ്കൂൾ ഓഫ് ലെറ്റേഴ്സ് സ്ഥാപക ഡയറക്ടർ ആയിരുന്ന ജി. ശങ്കരപിള്ളയുടെ അനുസ്മരണത്തിനു കോട്ടയത്ത് വന്നപ്പോൾ. ശങ്കരപിള്ള ഞങ്ങളുടെ സഹപ്രവർത്തകനും കുടുംബസുഹൃത്തുമായിരുന്നു. മധുവിന്റെ ആദ്യകാല നാടക/അഭിനയ ജീവിതത്തിൽ ശങ്കരപിള്ളയ്ക്ക് വലിയ പങ്കുണ്ടായിരുന്നതായി മധു ഓർത്തെടുത്തു. ചിറയിൻകീഴിൽ ഞങ്ങളുടെ കുടുംബപരിസരത്തും കുടുംബക്കാരുമായി അടുത്തബന്ധമുള്ള സിനിമ/നാടകക്കാരായിരുന്നു പ്രേംനസീർ, ജി.ശങ്കരപ്പിള്ള, ഗോപി, തുടങ്ങിയവർ. മധുവിന്റെ നാടക/ സിനിമാ ജീവിതത്തിൽ ഇവരെല്ലാം വലിയ പങ്കുവഹിച്ചവരായിരുന്നു.

ശങ്കരപിള്ള അനുസ്മരണചടങ്ങിനിടയിൽ മിനി ഓടിനടന്നു പടമെടുക്കുന്നതു കണ്ടപ്പോൾ മധു അടുത്ത് വിളിച്ചു ചോദിച്ചു, ഒന്നിച്ചു പടമെടുക്കണ്ടേ എന്ന്. ഭർത്താവാണ് തൻറെ കൂടെയിരിക്കുന്നതെന്നു പറഞ്ഞപ്പോൾ, മധുവിന് കൂടുതൽ ആവേശമായി. പോകുമ്പോൾ തിരുവനന്തപുരത്തു വീട്ടിൽ വരണമെന്നും പറഞ്ഞു. എന്നാൽ നിരവധി തവണ കണ്ണൻമൂലയിലൂടെ പോകുമ്പോഴെല്ലാം കയറാൻ സാധിക്കാത്തതിൽ ദുഃഖമുണ്ടായിട്ടുണ്ട്.

എഴുപതുകളിലും എൺപതുകളിലും ഞങ്ങളുടെ കൗമാരവും യൗവ്വനവും എല്ലാം ഭാവസാന്ദ്രമാക്കിയത് മലയാള നോവലുകളിലെ ചില കഥാപാത്രങ്ങളാണ് എന്ന് പറയുന്നതിൽ തെറ്റില്ല. അതിനു ഭാവുകത്വം നൽകിയ നടന്മാരാണ് സത്യനും മധുവുമെല്ലാം. പേരെടുത്തു പറയാൻ വേറെയും നിരവധി പേരുണ്ട്. മധുവിന്റെയും സത്യൻെയും അനശ്വര കഥാപാത്രങ്ങൾ നിറഞ്ഞാടിയ മിക്ക സിനിമകളും അക്കാലത്തു തന്നെ കണ്ടിട്ടുണ്ട്. കാണാതെപോയതു പിൽക്കാലത്തു തേടിപ്പിടിച്ചു കാണാനും സാധിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട്.

പല അനശ്വര കഥാപാത്രങ്ങളും പല അനശ്വര ഗാനങ്ങളും ഇന്നും മനസ്സിൽ തങ്ങി നിൽക്കുന്നു. മധു “പാടിയ” പാട്ടുകൾ എന്നാൽ അത് ഹൃദയത്തിൽ തട്ടിയതായിരിക്കും.

“എന്‍റെ സൂര്യൻ എരിഞ്ഞടങ്ങി
ഈ സന്ധ്യതൻ സ്വർണ്ണമേടയിൽ
എന്‍റെ കുങ്കുമപ്പാടമാകവേ
ഇന്നു കത്തിയെരിഞ്ഞു പോയ്
മേഘമായ് മേഘരാഗമായ് വരൂ
വേഗമീ..തീ കെടുത്തുവാൻ..”

1977-ൽ എം.ജി.കോളേജിൽ പ്രീഡിഗ്രിക്കു പഠിക്കുന്ന കാലത്താണ് ‘യുദ്ധകാണ്ഡം’ ഇറങ്ങുന്നത്. മനസ്സിൽ നിന്നും മായാത്ത ഒത്തിരി പാട്ടുകളിൽ ഒന്നായിരുന്നു, ഓ.എൻ.വി/കെ.രാഘവൻ, പി. ഭാസ്കരൻ/കെ.രാഘവൻ ടീമിൻറെതായി വന്നു കൊണ്ടിരുന്നത്. മിക്കതും മധുവിന്റെ ചുണ്ടുകളിൽ കൂടി. മധുവും എം.ജി.കോളേജിൽ പ്രീഡിഗ്രിക്കു പഠിച്ച ഒരാളായിരുന്നു. മോഹൻലാൽ എന്റെ ഒരു വർഷം സീനിയർ ആയി അന്ന് എം.ജി.കോളേജിൽ ഉണ്ട്. സിനിമയൊന്നും അന്ന് തുടങ്ങിയിട്ടില്ല. യൂണിവേഴ്സിറ്റി കോളേജിൽ എത്തുമ്പോൾ കേൾക്കുന്നത് അവിടെയും മധു ഒരു പൂർവ്വവിദ്യർത്ഥിയായിരുന്നു എന്നാണ്.

ഞാൻ മധുവിനെ നേരിട്ട് കാണുന്നത് 1980-ൽ ആണെന്നാണ് ഓർമ. മുഹമ്മദ് എളാപ്പയുടെ മകൻറെ വിവാഹ ദിവസം. മധുവിന്റെ അടുത്ത സുഹൃത്തായ ബഹദൂർ എളാപ്പയും അവിടെ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. വാപ്പിയുടെ മരണശേഷം ഞങ്ങളുടെ പിതാവിന്റെ സ്ഥാനത്തു നിന്നു ഞങ്ങളെ വാത്സല്യപൂർവ്വം നോക്കിയ മുഹമ്മദ് എളാപ്പ തലസ്ഥാനത്തെ അന്നത്തെ പ്രമുഖരുമായെല്ലാം വലിയ അടുപ്പമുള്ള ആളായിരുന്നു. ഞങ്ങളുടെ അടുത്ത ബന്ധുകൂടിയായ ബഹദൂർ എളാപ്പ തിരുവനന്തപുരത്തുള്ളപ്പോഴെല്ലാം ജവാഹർ നഗറിലെ മുഹമ്മദ് എളാപ്പയുടെ വീട്ടിൽ ആയിരിക്കും. മധു ഉമാസ്റ്റുഡിയോ ആരംഭിക്കുന്ന കാലത്തു ഇവരുടെയെല്ലാം സഹായവും സേവനവും തേടിയിരുന്നു എന്ന് കേട്ടിട്ടുണ്ട്. അക്കാലത്തു ഉമാസ്റ്റുഡിയോയിൽ നിർമിച്ച പല സിനിമകളും കാണാൻ സാധിച്ചിട്ടുമുണ്ട്. ഒരിക്കൽ സ്റ്റുഡിയോ കാണാൻ വട്ടിയൂർക്കാവിനടുത്തു പോയത് ഓർക്കുന്നു.

മധുവിന്റെ സിനിമാഭൂപടം അതിവിശാലമാണ്. നടനും, നിർമാതാവും, സംവിധായകനും എല്ലാം കൂടിച്ചേർന്ന അതിവിശാലമായ മണ്ഡലം. മലയാള സിനിമയിൽ അങ്ങനെ കൈവെച്ചു പോയവർ വിരളം. എത്രയോ മികച്ച സിനിമകൾ. സ്വന്തം നിർമിതിയിലും സംവിധാനത്തിലും കൂടി വന്ന നിരവധി ചിതങ്ങൾ. മറ്റനേകം സിനിമകളിൽ എന്നും ഓർത്തുവെക്കാൻ പറ്റുന്ന ഒട്ടേറെ കഥാപാത്രങ്ങൾ. പഴയ പല ഗാനങ്ങളും ഇന്നും കേൾക്കുമ്പോൾ മധുവിന്റെ കഥാപാത്രങ്ങൾ പുനർജനിക്കുന്നമാതിരി.

നവതിയിലും മലയാള സിനിമയുടെ യൗവനം കാത്തുസൂക്ഷിക്കുന്ന, ഹൃദയത്തിൻ തന്ത്രികൾ എന്നും തട്ടിയുണർത്തുന്ന മധുവിനു ഒരായിരം ആശംസകൾ..

താരക കണ്ണെഴുതി വിണ്ണിലെ തൂവെള്ള
താമരപ്പൂവൊന്നു ചൂടി

വെണ്മുകിൽ തൂവാല തുന്നിയിരിക്കുന്നു
കണ്ണിൽ കവിതയുമായീ-

മണിവീണക്കമ്പിയെ ചുംബിച്ചുണർത്തുന്ന
മലരണിക്കൈ വിരൽ പോലെ
ഹൃദയത്തിൻ തന്ത്രികൾ തട്ടിയുണർത്തുന്നു
അനുരാഗസുന്ദരസ്വപ്നം…..

The post ഹൃദയത്തിൻ തന്ത്രികൾ എന്നും തട്ടിയുണർത്തുന്ന… first appeared on KM Seethi.

പിന്നീട് അത് എന്റെ ബുക്ക് ഷെൽഫിലെ സജീവ സാന്നിധ്യമായി. അപ്പുവും കുഞ്ഞുണ്ണിയും ചെറുപ്പത്തിൽ ഈ മൂന്ന് വാല്യങ്ങളും എടുത്തു വെച്ച് “ഏങ്കൽച്ചും മാർച്ചും” കളിക്കുമായിരുന്നു (ഇക്കാലത്തു മാർക്സിനേയും ഏഗൽസിനേയും കളിപ്പിക്കുന്നതാരാണെന്നു പറയേണ്ടതില്ലല്ലോ).

മാസങ്ങൾ കഴിയുന്നതിനു മുമ്പ് മറ്റൊരു ചടങ്ങിൽ വെച്ച് കിട്ടിയ സമ്മാനം ഫത്ഹുൽ മുഈൻ. 16 ആം നൂറ്റാണ്ടിൽ കേരളത്തിൽ ജീവിച്ചിരുന്ന മുസ്‌ലിം പണ്ഡിതനായ സൈനുദ്ദീൻ മഖ്ദൂം രണ്ടാമൻ രചിച്ച വിഖ്യാതമായ ഒരു ഇസ്‌ലാമിക കർമശാസ്ത്ര ഗ്രന്ഥമാണ് അത്. എന്നിൽ നിന്നും ഒരാൾ അത് കൊണ്ടുപോയി. പിന്നെ കിട്ടിയിട്ടില്ല. തമാശ ഒരു കൂട്ടർ ഭൗതികവാദ ചിന്ത അടങ്ങിയ കൃതികൾ തന്നപ്പോൾ മറ്റൊരു കൂട്ടർ ആത്മീയ കാര്യകൃതിയാണ് തന്നത്. ഈ ചെക്കന് വേണ്ടത് എടുത്തോട്ടെ എന്ന് ഇരുകൂട്ടരും വിചാരിച്ചു കാണും.

മൂന്നാമത്തെ സമ്മാനം തിരുവനന്തപുരത്തെ വക്കം മൗലവി ഫൌണ്ടേഷൻ (ട്രസ്റ്റ് ആകുന്നതിനു മുമ്പ്) തന്ന 500 രൂപ. അതുകൊണ്ടൊരു സെക്കന്റ് ഹാൻഡ് സൈക്കിൾ വാങ്ങി (പുതിയത് വാങ്ങാനുള്ള ശേഷി അന്ന് എനിക്കില്ലായിരുന്നു). സൈക്കിൾ ആണ് എത്രയോകാലം എന്നെ കോട്ടയവുമായി ബന്ധിപ്പിച്ചിരുന്നത്. രാവിലെ വേണാട്   എക്സ് പ്രെസ്സിൽ കയറണമെങ്കിൽ ഇത് ചവിട്ടി തമ്പാനൂരിൽ എത്തണം. രാത്രി തിരിച്ചും അവൻ എന്നെ വീട്ടിൽ എത്തിക്കും. കുറേക്കാലം കഴിഞ്ഞപ്പോൾ അത് മോഷണം പോയി. വലിയ സങ്കടമായിരുന്നു. സമ്മാനം തന്ന ബഷീർ സാറിനോട് സൈക്കിളിന്റെ കാര്യമൊന്നും പറഞ്ഞിട്ടില്ലായിരുന്നു. പറഞ്ഞെങ്കിൽ അദ്ദേഹം ഒരു പുതിയത് തന്നെ വാങ്ങിച്ചു തരുമായിരുന്നു.

എല്ലാ ശ്രീനാരായണ സമാധിക്കും അന്ന് കിട്ടിയ ആ വലിയ സമ്മാനം ഓർക്കും. “വിദ്യയാണ് ഇരുകാലി മാടുകളെ യഥാര്‍ത്ഥ മനുഷ്യരാക്കിത്തീര്‍ക്കുന്നത് “എന്ന ഗുരുവചനം എത്രയോ കാലങ്ങൾ കഴിഞ്ഞാലും നമ്മോടു കൂടിയുണ്ടാവും. യഥാർത്ഥ മനുഷ്യൻ ആരാണെന്നോ എങ്ങനെയുള്ളതാണെന്നോ ഗുരു പറഞ്ഞില്ല. അത് നമ്മൾ സ്വയം ചോദിക്കേണ്ടതാണെന്നും സ്വയം കണ്ടെത്തേണ്ടതാണെന്നും ഗുരു പറയാതെ പറഞ്ഞു.

The post “ഏങ്കൽച്ചും മാർച്ചും” first appeared on KM Seethi.

സർജറി ടേബിളിൽ ജീവൻ നിലനിർത്താൻ കിടക്കുന്ന മനുഷ്യന്റെ ‘ഇനവും തരവും’ കൂടി ഈ ‘വിശ്വാസി’കൾ അന്വേഷിച്ചു പോകാൻ സാധ്യതയുണ്ട്. ഓരോ അവയവും കയ്യിലെടുത്തു കീറി തുന്നിക്കെട്ടുമ്പോൾ “പടച്ചോനെ ഈ മനുഷ്യനെ രക്ഷിക്കണേ” എന്ന് പ്രാർത്ഥിച്ചാൽ പോരെ സഹൃദയരെ ?

ശാസ്ത്രം പഠിച്ചവർ ശസ്ത്രക്രിയ ചെയ്യുമ്പോൾ രക്തത്തിനും ശരീരാവയവങ്ങൾക്കും എന്ത് മതം? എന്ത് ജാതി? ഇക്കാലമത്രയും അന്താരാഷ്ട്ര മാനദണ്ഡങ്ങൾ അനുസരിച്ചു ശസ്ത്രക്രിയാ മുറികളിലെ യൂണിഫോം ധരിച്ച്‌ പണി ചെയ്തവർ എല്ലാം നരകത്തിലേയ്ക്കാനോ പോയത്? ഇവരെല്ലാം കൈകൊണ്ടു തൊട്ട രോഗികളുടെ ശരീരങ്ങൾ മതങ്ങളാൽ തീർക്കപ്പെട്ട എടുപ്പുകളായിരുന്നോ? 

ഹാ കഷ്ടം.

നി‍ർമ്മിത ബുദ്ധി ലോകത്തെ കീഴടക്കികൊണ്ടിരിക്കുന്ന കാലത്താണ് മത ബുദ്ധികേന്ദ്രങ്ങൾ ഇത്തരം മൗലികവാദ ശാഠ്യങ്ങൾക്കു പുതിയ മേച്ചിൽപ്പുറങ്ങൾ തുറന്നിടുന്നത്. ഇത് കേവലം ഏഴ് വിദ്യാർത്ഥിനികളുടെ ആവശ്യമായി മാത്രം കാണാനുള്ള ‘ബുദ്ധി ‘ മാത്രമേ മലയാളികൾക്ക് ഉള്ളോ ?

മനസ്സാണ് ആത്യന്തികമായും മനുഷ്യന്റെ ചോദനകളെ പ്രചോദിപ്പിക്കുന്നതും പ്രലോഭിപ്പിക്കുന്നതും. വസ്ത്രം കേവലം ‘അടയ്ക്കൽ -തുറക്കൽ ‘ പ്രക്രിയകൾക്കപ്പുറം പ്രചോദനത്തിന്റെയും പ്രലോഭനത്തിന്റെയും മാറാല തീർക്കുന്ന ഒരു ഇടം കൂടിയാണ്. ഒരു ഭാഗത്തു കമ്പോളം അത് കൊയ്തെടുക്കുമ്പോൾ, മറുഭാഗത്തു മതമൗലിക വാദം കൊണ്ടാടുന്നു.

ഖുർആൻ നന്നായി വായിച്ചാൽ മനസ്സിലാകുന്നത് വസ്ത്രം മനുഷ്യനെ നിയന്ത്രിക്കുന്നില്ല എന്നാണ്. മനുഷ്യനാണ് വസ്ത്രങ്ങളെ നിയന്ത്രിക്കേണ്ടത് എന്ന് ചുരുക്കം. ഈ നിയന്ത്രണം ആത്യന്തികമായി മനുഷ്യന്റെ സാമൂഹിക നന്മയിലും, വിചാരത്തിലും, വിവേകത്തിലും കൂടി ആവിഷ്‌കൃതമായിരിക്കണം. ഓരോരോ മതങ്ങളും ജാതികളും അവരവരുടെ “നിയന്ത്രണ സംവിധാനങ്ങൾ” ഒരുക്കിയാൽ, നിർബന്ധിച്ചാൽ, പൊതുസമൂഹം പൊതുനന്മ പൊതുബോധം തുടങ്ങിയവ നമുക്കില്ലാതെ വരും. എത്ര തന്നെ നന്മയുള്ളവരായിരുന്നാലും അതിൽ പെട്ടുപോകുന്നവർ സമൂഹത്തിനു മുമ്പിൽ അപഹാസ്യരായിത്തീരും.

അല്ലെങ്കിൽ തന്നെ ഇത്തരം വിഷയങ്ങൾ നന്നായി ചിലവാകുന്ന ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ കാലാവസ്ഥയിൽ ഇതുകൂടി ഒരു ‘സാധ്യത’യുള്ള വില്പനച്ചരക്കാകും.

നന്മബോധമുള്ള മെഡിക്കൽ വിദ്യാർത്ഥിനികൾ ഇത്തരം ബാലിശമായ വാദങ്ങൾ വലിച്ചെറിഞ്ഞു ലോകം കടന്നു പോകുന്ന വെല്ലുവിളികളെ നേരിടുക. വസ്ത്രങ്ങളിൽ കൂടി ഒളിപ്പിച്ചു കടത്താൻ ശ്രമിക്കുന്ന മതമൗലികവാദത്തെ തിരിച്ചറിയുക, പ്രതിരോധിക്കുക.

The post ഓപ്പറേഷൻ തിയേറ്ററിലെ ‘മത’പ്പാട് first appeared on KM Seethi.

Photo Credit: PMO India

India’s engagements with Egypt have attained a new significance with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Cairo on 24-25 June. During the visit, Prime Minister Modi and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi signed a ‘Strategic Partnership’ agreement that would serve as evidence of the growing ties between the two nations, holding promises for both geopolitical and economic realms. In a Twitter post, Modi noted that his visit was of great historical significance. He emphasized that it would “add renewed vigour to the relationship between India and Egypt,” ultimately benefiting the people of both nations. The MEA statement noted that “the newly established ‘India Unit’ in Egyptian Cabinet was a useful tool in steering bilateral collaborations.” The two leaders also discussed “further cooperation in G-20, highlighting the issues of food and energy insecurity, climate change, and the need for the Global South to have a concerted voice.” Egyptian President El-Sisi is also expected to attend the G20 Leaders’ Summit to be held in New Delhi in September 2023.

Significantly, for the first time since 1997, an Indian head of government embarked on a state visit to Egypt, marking a noteworthy sign. The visit was filled with notable events, including the prestigious presentation of Egypt’s highest civilian honour, the Order of the Nile, to Prime Minister Modi and his meeting with the Indian diaspora and the visit to Al-Hakim Mosque in Cairo. This exceptional gesture carries even greater significance given the relatively brief period since President El-Sisi’s visit to India earlier this year. Government of India sources elaborated on the fruitful discussions held between the leaders, emphasizing their mutual dedication to enhancing the connections between their respective nations. These efforts encompassed a wide range of areas, including trade, investment, defense, security, renewable energy, cultural exchanges, and promoting people-to-people interactions. MEA spokesman Arindam Bagchi expressed his contentment with the productive nature of the meeting, highlighting that India and Egypt solidified their collaboration by signing three additional memoranda of understanding. These memoranda encompassed agriculture, archaeology, and antiquities, as well as competition law, showcasing the comprehensive scope of their cooperation.

In a previous meeting held in January, Modi and El-Sisi set forth their commitment to bolster bilateral trade to the level of $12 billion within the next five years. This ambitious target significantly surpassed the already remarkable figure of $7.23 billion recorded for the fiscal year 2021-22. It is worth noting that the two countries also appended their signatures to several agreements in New Delhi, encompassing areas such as cybersecurity, information technology, culture, and broadcasting, thus fostering a multifaceted and comprehensive approach to their collaboration.

In the realm of diplomatic interactions, India and Egypt also experienced a notable expansion in political exchanges at the ministerial level during the past years. Particularly noteworthy was the reciprocal visits of ministers from both countries, which demonstrated the emphasis placed on fortifying various dimensions of the bilateral relationship. The visits undertaken by Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh in September 2022 and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar in October of the preceding year yielded remarkable outcomes in the sphere of defense collaboration between India and Egypt. These visits paved the way for the momentous inception of “Desert Warrior,” a joint tactical exercise conducted by the air forces of the two nations. Furthermore, another significant milestone in the bilateral defense cooperation was marked by Cyclone 2023, a two-week-long joint military exercise carried out by the armies of India and Egypt.

Historical Trajectory

The bilateral relations between India and Egypt, two populous countries in the Asian and African continents, are embedded in their distinctive cultural and civilizational heritages. Their links have a history that goes back to the pre-Christian era, as shown by the excavations in Pattanam under the Muziris Heritage Project of Kerala, the south Indian State. The Malabar Coast of Kerala had trade links with Egypt and the traders from there used to come to Muziris, the port which later came to be called Kodungaloor. This is being rediscovered today in the context of understanding Kerala’s historical connectivity with the Arab world and Europe, through the Indian Ocean trade. Even as history played a significant role in forging multi-level ties, the politics and international relations of the twentieth century further strengthened their relations.

In the post-colonial conditions, India and Egypt rediscovered themselves, in a larger collectivity called the Global South with a shared understanding of international relations and foreign policy. Both sought to tread on an autonomous, non-aligned foreign policy path, drawing inspiration from the Bandung spirit of the Afro-Asian solidarity. This collaborative spirit continued in their opposition to the Cold War, in their struggle for an equitable international economic order and in their shared outlook on a variety of issues from the Palestine question to the issues of terrorism and religious extremism.

The relationship did not, however, undergo any major change in the post-Cold War period. However, there has been a substantial change in the very structure of bilateral relations, shaped increasingly by the process of economic liberalisation and globalisation. Inevitably, the bilateral relations saw a major jump in trade and investment. There was an increase of 60 to 75 per cent in bilateral trade between the two countries in the last few years, though the global slowdown affected some sectors. Investments from both sides also increased considerably. More than 50 Indian companies are now working in Egypt, providing employment to nearly 35,000 Egyptians. A study says that five Indian companies alone, who top the list, provide jobs to 13,000 Egyptians. A good number of them are in the construction, energy and textiles sectors. The combined investment of these major companies is estimated to cross $3 billion.

Egypt also sets a wider platform for foreign countries to come and invest in the country. The Suez Canal expansion project was one of the major developmental projects with an estimated cost of $8 billion (with expected revenue of $12.5 billion). President El-Sisi had invited India to be a partner in the Suez Canal Economic Zone during his visit in 2016, particularly in sectors such as petrochemicals, energy, agriculture, healthcare, education, IT etc. This is obviously a major challenge that Indian companies can certainly take up. When the Suez Canal becomes a full-fledged free trade zone, it would add to the opportunities for India to boost its exports to Africa and Europe. This was reiterated by the Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry, who in an interview said that Egypt was strategically placed to help India in its desire to project itself further into Africa.

While bilateral trade continued to rise (since the agreement signed between the two countries in 1978), the global slowdown occasionally affected the momentum. This was clear from the trend during 2013-14, but trade picked up momentum soon, and by 2018 India’s total trade with Egypt was restored to $4.5 billion. The target set by many for the coming years was $12 billion which is not too ambitious, given the vast opportunities available, particularly in the context of the US sanctions on Iran. Egypt could be one of the balancing sources of crude, besides its potential as a source of stable supply of liquefied natural gas. Egypt being a mineral rich country, India can tap benefits from its trade with it, given the growth trajectory of the Indian industry. India must also explore the feasibility of a free trade agreement (FTA) with the African countries. For example, the proposal for a Common market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA) which included Egypt needs to be taken up seriously, and the work of the Joint Study Group set up for the purpose should be activated.

It is important for India to consider Egypt as a major hub for trade connectivity with Europe, Africa and Asia. Currently the share of Egypt in India’s total exports to the African region is less than 10% and this can be enhanced with a favourable policy regime in both India and Egypt. The two countries should also be very cautious about the impending slowdown in the world economy and every option should be region-specific realistic strategies while expanding avenues of trade and investment. As the leading countries of the Global South, both India and Egypt should sustain the historical equation in meeting the challenges of the global financial institutions controlled by the Global North countries. This equation must get reflected in their joint efforts in all multilateral fora for a favourable bargain. This is obviously a task that India is expected to take up as Chairperson of the G-20 this year.

As Egypt is strategically placed as a hub of maritime connectivity, India can develop effective partnerships and collaboration in a number of areas such as trade, commerce and services. While maritime security and counter-terrorism will remain high priority areas, it is equally important that the two countries learn from each other in areas of social policies and local governance (such as national rural employment guarantee scheme and Panchayat Raj system in India).

Another area of mutual engagement is maritime connectivity as envisaged in India’s Project Mausam (PM) launched in 2014. It is the Government of India, Ministry of Culture project with two agencies having directly involved in its implementation – the Archaeological Survey of India and the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts. The PM aims to bring in a new cross-national and cross-regional communication system among the countries of the Indian Ocean region which will strengthen understanding of cultural values and concerns. It intends to provide new avenues for understanding national cultures in their regional milieu. India identified 39 countries, including Egypt, to be partners for the ‘new wind’ project which included countries from the Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula. Though there was a slow pace in the PM activities, it has great potential to further India’s maritime connectivity with a large segment of the Asian and African continents.

Trade is, of course, one of the main concerns of PM given the fact that the Gulf, West Asia and North Africa are India’s biggest regional trade partners. Historically, the commodities traded through the Indian Ocean connectivity included spices, medicines, gems, stones, ornaments, metals, wood, etc. The Indian Ocean connectivity facilitated trade, and migration, and through them the spread of cultures and religions. Historically, Kerala maintained a unique position in the global exchanges relations, both economic and cultural and the ‘spice route’ connectivity goes back to two millennia. The spices constituted one of the major components of India’s trade basket and Kerala was the hub of major exotic spices (like black pepper). Nearly 33 countries, including Egypt and Oman, had spice trade with ancient Kerala. A survey of the mummy of Ramesses II, one of the ancient Egypt’s rulers found that there were fragments of pepper in his nostrils. Spices from Kerala were also used in Egyptian perfume oil.

The Muziris project and the Pattanam excavation in Kerala showed that the Southern coast of India and the Arab world had vibrant ocean connectivity. India’s Project Mausam, if it is extended to other levels, can be a good beginning and it would be instrumental in forging new ties with the African continent, in general, and the Arab world, in particular. The Government of India can co-opt partners like Egypt in the project and thereby strengthen both maritime and geo-historical connectivity.

Egypt’s desire to work with BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) grouping is an indication that Cairo seeks to play a pro-active role in the Global South. Within the context of Global South engagements, India and Egypt serve as exemplars of South-South solidarity and cooperation, and their collaboration demonstrates the potential for developing nations to forge partnerships, exchange best practices, and jointly address pressing global issues.

(The author was a member of the Indian delegation to Cairo as part of the Fourth Dialogue between the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs (ECFA) and the Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA), during 10-11 September 2019. Some observations in the article are based on the author’s presentation at Cairo Dialogue).

The post Engaging Egypt in a strategic vibe: India seeks to enhance partnership with Cairo first appeared on KM Seethi.

Sweden, an Arctic State with significant stakes in the geopolitics of the region, is set to revamp its defence strategy in the wake of the Ukraine war and the changing landscape of the High North. The recent report submitted by the Swedish Defence Commission on the country’s security policy emphasized that the world stands at a critical juncture, with the established rules-based international order facing challenges from “autocratic nations like Russia and China.” It acknowledges the grim reality of a potential large-scale war in Europe, as Russia demonstrates a sustained intention for conflict with Western nations. Given the aggressive stance of Russia, the report stated, it is imperative for Sweden to prioritize the long-term development of its comprehensive defense capabilities. This includes the ability to safeguard its territory against armed aggression, in alignment with NATO’s collective defense framework. The committee warned that the conflict in Ukraine could escalate and potentially involve attacks on other countries or the use of nuclear or other mass-destruction weapons.

Changing Security Perceptions

Last year, the Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said that the country found itself “in the most serious security policy situation since WWII with a European great power waging war against a neighbouring country. The government’s focus is to stand up for democratic values and to protect Swedish interests.” In the task description, the new government set up a four-part policy: 1) Sweden will join NATO and realize the agreement with Turkey and Finland, 2) the foreign policy must protect Swedish interests and promote democratic values, 3) the armed forces are to be strengthened with at least 2% of the gross national product (GNP) by 2026, and 4) the support for Ukraine is to be increased.
Tobias Billström, the new foreign minister of Sweden, announced the end of Sweden’s feminist foreign policy, stating that the country’s foreign policy should prioritize Swedish interests and values, and it indicated a shift in the government’s approach. With the discontinuation of the feminist foreign policy, the new government is to emphasize a broader approach that encompasses a range of priorities aligned with Swedish interests and values. The specific foreign policy priorities of the new government would depend on the policies and agendas outlined by Tobias Billström and the government itself.

Sweden, like many Western nations, had reduced its defense after the end of the Cold War but has since increased military spending. The country aims to meet NATO’s requirement of allocating 2% of GDP to defense by 2026. Deliberations commenced to formulate long-term defense plans, including budget allocation, with a final report expected in April of next year. Joining NATO would mark a departure from Sweden’s longstanding formal neutrality, although the country has been engaged in training exercises with NATO forces. Finland, Sweden’s neighbouring country to the east with a significant Russian border, was admitted to NATO in April after applying alongside Sweden in response to the conflict in Ukraine. In March Sweden’s lawmakers endorsed the country’s membership in NATO, approving the necessary legislation and officially paving the way for Sweden to join the Nordic security grouping. This parliamentary authorization marked the final crucial step in Sweden’s path towards becoming a member of the Western military alliance, comprising 30 nations. A major hurdle is Turkey which is expected to take a positive stand with pressures being put on President Erdogan. Latest instance is the statement of U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken who persuaded Ankara to support Sweden in its bid to join NATO.

Sweden’s defense policy situation is indeed unique, similar to Finland. Unlike NATO members, both Sweden and Finland have traditionally pursued a policy of neutrality in their security and foreign affairs. However, both countries have been gradually deepening their cooperation with Western defense policies. Recognizing the evolving security landscape, Sweden, Finland, and Norway signed an agreement indicating a closer military collaboration among them. This agreement reflects their shared interests and the need for enhanced cooperation in the face of evolving regional security challenges.

Sweden’s Arctic Strategy

Sweden’s Arctic strategy, initially introduced in 2011, downplayed the military aspects of defense and security politics in the region. However, the latest strategy says “the dramatic climate change in the past decade and the new geostrategic realities in the region mean greater challenges and changed circumstances for Swedish Arctic policy.” While emphasizing the importance of peace and stability in the Arctic, the Swedish government acknowledges the potential for military conflicts in the High North, aligning with the perspectives of other Arctic states. Sweden intends to address this through diplomatic efforts while also strengthening its military capabilities in northern Sweden. The rationale behind this approach includes heightened international tensions, increased military activities in the region, the possibility of an arms race, global unrest, and the risk of incidents escalating into military conflicts. This aligns with the perspectives of other countries that recognize their self-interest in the Arctic. Sweden’s decision to prioritize these concerns underscores the seriousness of the situation.

The updated security policy direction of Sweden’s Arctic strategy is influenced by the recommendations put forth by the Swedish Defense Committee. This committee serves as a platform for representatives from all parliamentary parties, the government, and experts from various fields. In the previous year, this collaborative forum emphasized that Sweden’s security policy extends beyond the southern part of the country, encompassing areas in the High North, including the Barents Sea and the Norwegian Sea. This recognition underscores the importance of addressing security concerns in the Arctic region as part of Sweden’s overall security strategy.

Sweden’s Arctic territory is primarily composed of the two northernmost counties, Västerbotten and Norrbotten. Although this region accounts for approximately one-third of Sweden’s total land area, it is home to just over half a million residents, making it significantly less densely populated than the southern regions of the country. The sparser population in the Arctic territory highlights the unique demographic and geographical characteristics of this northern region of Sweden.

The Swedish Armed Forces’ recent study on Sweden’s changing strategic role reflects the increasing emphasis on geopolitical considerations among the country’s elites and decision-makers. General Micael Bydén, Sweden’s Supreme Commander, has proposed the establishment of a new military unit in the Arctic city of Kiruna, driven by several factors.

One rationale behind General Bydén’s proposal is the altered geopolitical reality in the region, particularly due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Sweden’s decision to pursue NATO membership. Sweden’s limited combat readiness and the potential challenges in implementing its total defense strategy raise concerns about its ability to assist other NATO allies in the event of Russian aggression.

Additionally, Sweden aims to highlight its value to the alliance in light of Turkey’s opposition to its NATO membership. Demonstrating Sweden’s Arctic resources and status as an Arctic nation could enhance NATO’s role in the region, which could be leveraged by Swedish diplomats and officials during membership negotiations with other alliance members.

While these reasons are valid, they present an incomplete picture of Sweden’s strategic thinking regarding the Arctic and its growing importance in transatlantic security. General Bydén’s request for a military presence in the Arctic is driven not only by impending NATO membership and Russia’s actions but also by the emerging significance of Northern Sweden as a supplier of critical minerals, a space hub, and data centers.

The Arctic region has been vital to Europe’s industrial development and resource security, thanks to its substantial reserves of iron ore. The state-owned mining company, LKAB, is a major European producer, and its ReeMAP project aims to make it a significant supplier of rare earth elements and phosphorus in the EU. This project is strategically important as it could reduce the EU’s reliance on external sources of critical raw materials, enhance the defense industry, support the green transition, and improve the continent’s resilience to external supply disruptions.

In the context of Sweden’s potential NATO membership, the military strategic analysis highlights that Russia would likely have a higher threshold for launching a military attack on Sweden as a NATO member. However, Sweden would still face a different level of threat and an increased risk of non-armed attacks. The future is also uncertain due to the evolving dynamics of the great power competition between the United States and China. The assessment underscores that this competition will be a major factor in future geopolitics, and the priorities and direction of the United States will continue to be crucial for European security.

The post Sweden’s Changing Military Strategy In The High North And Its Implications For the Arctic Geopolitics first appeared on KM Seethi.