Latest news with #SchoolofInternationalStudies
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
8 hours ago
- Politics
- First Post
As US joins Israel's war against Iran, is Ayatollah's time coming to end?
As the United States has joined Israel's war against Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is facing an existential crisis to his regime. In a far cry from the goal of destroying Israel and exporting the Islamic Revolution globally, he now has no good options to even keep his regime afloat. read more 'We shall export our revolution to the whole world. Until the cry 'there is no God but Allah' resounds over the whole world, there will be struggle,' Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, swore in 1970s. In 1979, Khomeini put Iran on the path to destroy Israel and export the Islamic Revolution to the world. In 2025, his successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has his back to the wall and is staring at the potential collapse of his regime. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While Israel had already degraded the Iranian power to the extent that nearly all air defences had been taken out, the military brass had been wiped out, and many missile launchers and weapon storage sites had been destroyed, US airstrikes on Saturday struck a blow to Khamenei's ultimate leverage of the nuclear programme. The Islamic Republic is currently at its weakest point and Supreme Leader Khamenei does not have many options as the war is now not just with Israel but with the United States and the fear of the collapse of regime change is very real, says Alvite Ningthoujam, a scholar of West Asia at the School of International Studies (SIS), Symbiosis International University (SIU), Pune. For decades, Iran did not draw power just from its military and intelligence apparatus, which was second in the region only to that of Israel, but also from the 'Axis of Resistance' it sponsored — the bloc comprised groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis. The bloc stands battered and is in no position to help Iran. For Israel, 'Operation Rising Lion' that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched last week was not a new war but merely the latest episode in the war that the Islamic Republic began in 1979, so the current state of the regime, whether it's the degradation of proxies or strikes on its nuclear sites, is the result of its policies going back to the foundation of the regime, says Daphne Richemond Barak, a professor of international relations at the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy at Israel's Reichman University. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Khamenei faces regime change fears as Trump & Netanyahu join hands In a far cry from 1989 when Khamenei took over as the Supreme Leader of Iran and assumed the responsibility of destroying Israel, exporting the Islamic Revolution globally, and weakening the West, his sole responsibility has now been reduced to ensuring the survival of the regime. Netanyahu, on the other hand, is hell-bent on toppling Ayatollah Khamenei's regime and it remains to be seen if President Trump will support that objective as well, says Ningthoujam, the Deputy Director at SIS, Pune. Regime change is, however, easier said than done. Unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, there is no indication that Israel or the United States are about to launch a ground offensive. Unlike Syria, there are no opposition forces whom they may support militarily and financially against the regime. 'Even as Supreme Leader Khamenei appears to be secure from immediate regime change, the threat is there and he is under unprecedented pressure, and it is under such pressure that he takes major actions. The future of the regime may rest on whether he now decides to fight to the end, develop a nuclear weapon, or make a deal to live to fight another day,' says Ningthoujam. ALSO READ: As Netanyahu dares Khamenei, here's timeline of Israel-Iran conflict STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The fate of Khamenei's regime may rest on how the external pressure affects internal faultlines in Iran. It is no secret that Iranians despise the conservative, dictatorial regime — as was seen in 2022-23 when millions took to the streets in the monthslong uprising after the regime's morality police murdered a young woman for purportedly not following the hijab law. However, the external pressure can work both ways. While many accounts suggest that Iranians in and out of the country are quietly cheering at the weakening of the regime, some suggest that there is a brewing rallying around the flag effect as many Iranians interpret the Israeli offensive as not one directed at the regime but at the country. The regime change in Iran may not be the same as Iraq or Afghanistan where an invading force overthrew the ruler or like Syria where armed groups opposed to the regime overthrew it, but could be much more subtle, suggests Ningthoujam. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'If the Supreme Leader is assassinated along with the remaining leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), there would be a leadership vacuum. The rise of a new crop of leaders would amount to a regime change. Even if the Supreme Leader remains but the regime is weakened and public anger against extremists swells, the moderates may come to power and give the country a new direction. That would be as good as regime change,' says Ningthoujam. Khamenei has no good options With his back to the wall, Khamenei has no good options. Whether Khamenei makes a deal and surrenders the nuclear programme to ensure the regime's survival or puts up a fight, the chances are that he would emerge as a loser both internally and externally. If Khamenei gives up nuclear enrichment as the international community has demanded, he would give up his final leverage and risk meeting the same fate as Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who gave up the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programme in 2003 in a deal with the United States and United Kingdom and was still ousted in Western military intervention in 2011. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD If Khamenei keeps his nuclear programme, he would risk plunging his country deeper into the conflict. Neither Netanyahu nor Trump would have any issue from bombarding Iran until it becomes a wasteland like the Gaza Strip. ALSO READ: Inside Netanyahu's campaign to destroy Iran's bunker nuclear sites Either way, Supreme Leader Khamenei would be at the risk of losing his legitimacy and that of the Islamic Republic and the Islamic Revolution, says Ningthoujam. For Israel, however, Khamenei's choice may not matter — at least for now. Even though Prime Minister Netanyahu set the destruction of Iranian nuclear capabilities and the collapse of the Iranian regime as principal objectives, the main idea behind the offensive was the degradation of the Iranian regime and that has been achieved, says Prof. Barak, the international relations scholar at Israel's Reichman University. Critics of the US and Israeli actions have said that strikes on the Iranian nuclear programme would leave Khamenei with no choice but to make a nuclear weapon to restore deterrence as conventional deterrence stands eroded. Barak does not agree. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Barak says, 'The attacks have degraded the Iranian ability to make nuclear weapons. Even if the knowledge continues to exist, the means no longer exist whether it is a strong regime at home or proxies abroad. There were four broad outcomes with Operation Rising Lion and at least three of them are about to be realised.' Barak lists the four outcomes expected from the Operation Rising Lion at the onset: the United States entering the war on Israel's sides and attacking Iran's underground nuclear sites as that capability did not exist with Israel; Israeli strikes in the absence of direct US involvement setting back the Iranian nuclear programme by many years, making its revival next to impossible; Israeli strikes and possible US participation pushing Iran into making a deal favourable to Israel; and the chaos inside Iran from the war leading to an uprising against the regime. While the first two potential outcomes have been achieved and the third may still be achieved as Trump has pitched the strikes as a way to bring Iran to the negotiating table. The fourth potential outcome depends on how the situation evolves. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Until now, it was a proxy war. Now, Israel has gone for the head of the octopus — Iran is an octopus and not a snake. If you cut a tentacle, like Hezbollah or Hamas, it would regrow. Therefore, Israel has now struck the head of the octopus in Iran. The international community may be concerned about chaos at the fall of the regime in Iran, but Israel is not. Israel has been in an existential war with Iran since 1979,' says Barak.
New Straits Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Expert: Malaysia must balance law and humanity in Rohingya refugee crisis
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia must urgently strike a balance between its domestic immigration policies and international humanitarian obligations in addressing the plight of Myanmar refugees, analysts say. Universiti Utara Malaysia's School of International Studies (Academic and International) deputy dean Dr Shazwanis Shukri said that while deporting the Rohingya — who make up the majority of Myanmar refugees in Malaysia — was not a viable option, the existing policy vacuum remained deeply concerning. She said that refugees continued to be treated as undocumented migrants, leaving thousands in legal limbo and vulnerable to exploitation, detention, and abuse. "The reality is that Malaysia has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention, and therefore does not formally recognise refugees within its legal framework. "However, under customary international law, we are bound by the principle of non-refoulement — meaning we cannot return them to a country where they face persecution," she told the New Straits Times. Shazwanis said one practical approach would be to strengthen cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to register Rohingya asylum seekers and issue identification cards that provide limited protection from arrest or deportation. However, she said that this informal arrangement had clear limitations, leaving many in prolonged uncertainty without access to legal employment, public education, or government healthcare services. To address these gaps, she proposed the introduction of a temporary protection framework tailored for the Rohingya community, recognising their unique status as stateless individuals and victims of systematic ethnic persecution. "This could include temporary residency rights, legal access to employment in specific sectors, and minimal access to essential services such as healthcare and education — ideally in partnership with NGOs and UN agencies," she said. Without such measures, Shazwanis said, Malaysia risked a cascade of humanitarian, legal, diplomatic, and security challenges. Legally, the government's current stance also contradicts its commitments under international conventions it has ratified, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). "There is also a growing security dimension to consider. Leaving a large population in limbo, with no legal status or livelihood options, creates opportunities for human trafficking, forced labour, and even recruitment into extremist networks," she added. She also urged a more active regional response through Asean, highlighting the absence of a formal refugee framework within the bloc. Meanwhile, Nusantara Academy for Strategic Research senior fellow Dr Azmi Hassan said Malaysia should refrain from deporting Myanmar refugees, regardless of whether they are officially recognised by the UNHCR. "This is not about interfering in Myanmar's domestic affairs — it is a humanitarian matter. Deporting them now, under the current regime, risks exposing them to political persecution," he said. Azmi added that Malaysia had long accommodated not only Myanmar refugees but also undocumented migrants from other parts of the region, including Indonesia, despite lacking a formal refugee policy. As Asean chair this year, he said Malaysia had a chance to demonstrate leadership through compassion. "We must lead by example and show that we are capable of hosting the Rohingya, even if the Myanmar junta disapproves. "Until Myanmar returns to civilian rule and upholds the Asean Five-Point Consensus, we must prioritise humanitarian values." On June 16, Myanmar refugees in Malaysia
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
7 days ago
- Politics
- First Post
As Israel strikes Iran, Netanyahu gambles future of West Asia
With Israel's strikes on the Iranian nuclear sites, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu might have played the gamble of his life. Without US involvement, it appears highly improbable for Israel to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities — the main objective of the war. But Trump prefers to keep a distance, at least for now. read more Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives for a speech at his Jerusalem office, regarding the new measures that will be taken to fight the coronavirus, March 14, 2020. (Photo: Gali Tibbon/Reuters) As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has finally put into motion a plan that he has held close to his heart for more than a decade, he has played the gamble of his life as even though he has started the war, he needs active US involvement to win it. Even though Israel has wiped out the Iranian military's chain of command, established air superiority, and battered scores of missile launchers and production sites, the damage to most important nuclear sites at Natanz and Fordow has been limited. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The outcome of this conflict depends heavily on the extent of US involvement and Prime Minister Netanyahu will do everything possible to draw the United States into the war with Iran, says Alvite Ningthoujam, a scholar of West Asia at the School of International Studies (SIS) at Symbiosis International University (SIU), Pune. Anything short of the complete destruction of Iranian nuclear capabilities, which would require US help, if not involvement, would mean the failure of Netanyahu's gamble and severe consequences for Israel and the region. Netanyahu's ambition rests on Trump's action Israel has set Tehran ablaze, assassinated the Iranian military brass, struck missile bases, hit missile production sites, and essentially destroyed all Iranian air defences, but has not been able to breach through mountains and hundreds of metres of earth to reach underground nuclear facilities at Natanz and Fordow. Herein lies Netanyahu's gamble. He wants the United States to join the war on Iran because the success of 'Operation Rising Lion' rests on it. He needs the United States to join the war either directly by participating in bombardment or indirectly by supplying 'bunker buster' munitions that can reach Iran's underground nuclear plants — the Fordow nuclear site is located half a mile underground and has been built inside a mountain. As long as Natanz and Fordow remain standing, Netanyahu's main objective of the war of preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon remains unfulfilled. Whether US President Donald Trump takes the bait and joins the war remains to be seen. Despite Trump's disdain for Iran, one of the core commitments of his 'Make America Great Again' platform is distancing the United States from wars in faraway lands. As recently as a day before the Israeli offensive, Trump had asked Israel to not go ahead with an attack as talks were going on with Iran regarding the regime's nuclear programme. However, once Israel began the offensive, he claimed that he was aware of it but ruled out any active involvement. Iran has not bought the denial. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Iran has blamed the United States for the Israeli assault. Whether Iran strikes US interests in the region would shape the scope of US involvement in the war. Ningthoujam says that one of Netanyahu's objectives from the war appears to have been to kill US-Iran talks. 'Prime Minister Netanyahu has never favoured talks or a nuclear deal with Iran. He has always preferred military action. Attacking Iran's nuclear sites even as talks were going on suggests he wanted to scuttle the US-Iran negotiations and leave President Trump with no choice other than to join the war if he would want to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon,' says Ningthoujam, the Deputy Director of SIS, Pune. Netanyahu needs US & Arab partners for defence too For defensive purposes as well, the US involvement is key — as it was last year. In two exchanges of missiles and drones last year, the defensive coalition propped by the previous Joe Biden administration of the United States was critical in the defence of Israel. It will be very difficult to put together the coalition — also comprising the United Kingdom, France, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates — again over the outrage over the war in Gaza that has killed hundreds in recent weeks and caused famine-like conditions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Netanyahu has put these Western and Arab partners in a bind: realpolitik dictates that they stand with Israel, but domestic compulsions dictate otherwise. 'Even moderate Arab rulers, such as Jordanian King Abdullah, will find it difficult to join such a coalition openly because of the public anger against Israel. Even if ruling elites have compulsions, no Arab ruler, not even someone as powerful as Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, can alienate their people. They have to walk a tightrope between realpolitik and Arab steet's sensibilities,' says Ningthoujam. Even as the ongoing conflict's scale is unprecedented in West Asia, the support so far is muted. Unlike the last time when Western and Arab partners went all-in to help Israel, only US ground-based air defence systems have been pressed into action this time in addition to Jordan shooting down missiles and drones that entered its airspace. This is a telltale of how isolated Israel stands as a result of Netanyahu's policies. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What if Netanyahu's gamble fails? Trump and Netanyahu have opposite approaches to contentious issues. While Trump prefers to make a deal even though he has a poor record, Netanyahu prefers military action. If Trump does not join Netanyahu in his war, the main aim of the war —the destruction of Iran's ability to make a nuclear weapon— remains unfulfilled. That would be catastrophic for Israel. Even before the Israeli decapitation of the Iranian military in the ongoing offensive, the US intelligence agencies had assessed that Iran could finally decide to develop a nuclear weapon as its conventional deterrence through regional proxies had been battered as Israel degraded Hamas and Hezbollah after the October 7 attack and opposition groups ousted the Assad dynasty in Syria. The agencies had also assessed that Iran had reduced the timeline to develop a 'crude' nuclear weapon from 12-18 months to just a few months. Now that Iran has its back completely to the wall, the failure of the destruction of Iranian nuclear capabilities would leave Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei with just two choices: either go full-throttle to develop a nuclear weapon to restore deterrence or reach a deal with Trump such that he pressures Netanyahu to stand down. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In either case, Netanyahu would have lost and served Khamenei either a nuclear weapon or a face-saving deal on a platter. The Jerusalem Post has reported that Iran has reached out to Trump via Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Oman with the offer of a deal — the contents of the proposal are not known. Whether Trump accepts that and asks Netanyahu to stand down or joins him in attacking Iranian nuclear sites remains to be seen. At the stakes is the future of West Asia.
South China Morning Post
07-05-2025
- Politics
- South China Morning Post
Modi under pressure as India's Pakistan strikes ignite nationalist fervour, global concern
India launched missile strikes on targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir early Wednesday, marking the most serious military escalation in years between the nuclear-armed rivals and raising fears of a broader conflict – one that analysts say may serve New Delhi's domestic political aims but risks triggering unpredictable retaliation from Islamabad. Advertisement The strikes – which Indian authorities dubbed 'Operation Sindoor' – came in retaliation for an April 22 attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that left 26 Indian tourists dead. New Delhi has blamed Pakistan-based militants for the assault, a claim Islamabad has denied. The Indian Defence Ministry said 'precision strikes at terrorist camps' at nine locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir were conducted, following which the nation's military posted on social media: 'Justice is served. Jai Hind [Victory for India].' Pushpesh Pant, former dean of the School of International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University, said the strikes were 'more optics than kinetics', adding that Prime Minister Narendra Modi needed to show a strong response after the Kashmir killings triggered national outrage. 'In India, you have very interesting reports which say Modi has taken a leaf out of Israel's war on Hamas in Gaza. It is not true as then the attacks would have been massive,' said Pant. Rescuers remove a body from a damaged building after it was hit by an Indian strike in Muridke near Lahore, Pakistan, on Wednesday. Photo: Reuters The attack posed a direct challenge to the narrative of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) regarding Kashmir. Modi's government revoked the region's semi-autonomous status in 2019 and has since touted improvements in security and development as a key national achievement.
India.com
27-04-2025
- Politics
- India.com
JNU Students Union Polls: ABVP Maintains Lead In Central Panel Election, Wins 23 Councillor Seats
NEW DELHI: RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) maintained its lead across all four central panel posts as counting continued on Sunday for the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students' Union (JNUSU) elections 2024-25. As of 1 PM today, around 2,475 votes had been counted, with ABVP candidates ahead for the posts of President, Vice-President, General Secretary, and Joint Secretary. Polling for the JNUSU elections had concluded on Friday, with a voter turnout of approximately 70 per cent. Out of 7,906 eligible students, around 5,500 cast their votes, according to the JNU Election Committee. In the race for President, ABVP's Shikha Swaraj was leading with 756 votes, followed by Nitish Kumar of the AISA-DSF alliance with 579 votes. For the post of Vice-President, ABVP's Nittu Gautam was ahead with 710 votes. Kunal Rai was leading for General Secretary with 832 votes, while Vaibhav Meena was in front for Joint Secretary with 823 votes. In the councillor elections, ABVP has secured 23 out of 42 seats across various schools and special centres. These include two out of five seats each in the School of International Studies and the School of Social Sciences, one seat each in the School of Biotechnology, the Special Centre for Molecular Medicine, and the Special Centre for Nano Science, and two out of three seats in the School of Computer and System Sciences. ABVP also made a clean sweep by winning all four seats in the School of Engineering and three seats in the School of Sanskrit and Indic Studies. Victories were also recorded in the Amalgamated Centre, the School of Environmental Sciences, the School of Physical Sciences, and the Atal Bihari Vajpayee School of Management and Entrepreneurship. Voting was conducted in two sessions across all schools and centres, including the School of International Studies and the School of Language, Literature and Culture Studies. This year's election has seen a four-way contest, with AISA aligning with the Democratic Students' Front (DSF) after splitting from its traditional ally SFI. ABVP and an NSUI-Fraternity alliance also fielded full panels, making the race highly competitive. The elections, initially scheduled for April 18, were postponed following an incident of violence and vandalism on campus. After legal proceedings and administrative intervention, polling was rescheduled to April 25. The counting of votes began on April 27 and is expected to conclude later in the evening. Final results for the central panel are awaited.
