Cluster Munitions in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict: A Controversial Dance of Destruction.

M A Hossain, 

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has reached a critical juncture, as the Biden administration announced its inclusion of cluster bombs in the United States next $800 million weapons package for Ukraine. The Pentagon is contemplating the use of cluster munitions as a strategic maneuver. Particularly after the destruction of Kakhovka dam, Ukraine has been slow to achieve it goal of a counteroffensive against Russian forces or their mercenaries. Kyiv has been increasingly desperate for more weaponry, including controversial cluster bombs from its allies.  According to the Human Rights Watch, both Russia and Ukraine have been accused of using cluster bombs in several times, resulting civilian casualties.  The international communities have expressed their deep concerns regarding the deployment of unconventional cluster munitions in Ukraine.

Cluster bombs are infamous weapons that release multiple smaller submunitions over a wide area. These submunitions, known as bomblets, are dispersed from the main munition and scatter across the target zone. The weapons, which can be delivered via artillery, Rockets, bombs, and missiles. Upon detonation in the air above the target area, they disperse lethal fragments, causing extensive damage and casualties. These submunitions or bomblets are designed to explode either upon impact or with a delayed detonation mechanism. Cluster munitions are widely considered as among the most harmful weapons to civilians or other unintended targets, especially children, as they disperse bomblets indiscriminately across the wide area and often fail to explode upon initial impact. This leaves behind duds that act like land mines, posing a long-lasting threat to civilians even after a conflict ends. These weapons are typically used against enemy concentrations, armored vehicles and infrastructure targets. 

Cluster bombs can have a significant impact on the battlefield by saturating a large area with explosive submunitions, leading to widespread destruction and demoralizing enemy forces. The high density of bomblets creates a battle shock among the enemy forces and can destroy armored vehicles and fortified trenches. It also disrupts enemy logistics by damaging infrastructures, supply line, and communication networks. Cluster bombs are very effective against entrenched defensive positions, artillery position, and air defense systems. The unexploded submunitions act as scattering random booby traps across the battlefield. While cluster munitions may provide additional military value in certain limited situations, they are not a magical winning weapon for overall warfare.

Despite their immediate military advantages, cluster munitions pose long-term risk.  Unexploded bomblets can remain dormant and hazards for civilians long after the conflict ends. These unexploded submunitions can be triggered easily by unsuspecting individuals, including children, resulting in severe injuries or fatalities. The substantial environmental impact such as contamination of agricultural land and water sources poses a severe threat to the ecosystem. The humanitarian impact of cluster bombs extends far beyond the duration of the conflict itself.  According to a 2019 report by Royal United Services Institute(RUSI) has revealed that 97% of casualties from cluster bombs worldwide were accounted for by civilians and among them the children accounting for 66% of the casualties.  

The utilization of cluster mutations carries a contentious historical background. They were extensively used during World War ll. The United States has used these weapons in various prior conflicts, including Southeast Asia in the 1960s and 1970s and Iraq in 2003, and engagements in the Persian Gulf War, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Syria. Saudi Arabia employed US-supplied cluster munitions in Yemen in 2009. In the ongoing Russia -Ukraine conflict, both Russian and the Ukrainian armed forces have not denied credible evidence of their use of cluster munitions. In 2008, more than 100 nations signed the convention on cluster munitions, an international treaty that came into effect in 2010, prohibiting the use, production, transfer, and stockpiling of the deadly weapons.  Only 16 countries, including the US, Ukraine, Russia, have so far refused to sign the convention. 

The decision to employ cluster munitions in the Russia -Ukraine conflict carries a significant consequence.  While these munitions may provide tactical advantages, the potential long-term damage to noncombatants and the undermining of the international humanitarian law cannot be ignored. Mr. Biden is facing obstacles from members of his own and opposition parties in the Caucasus  to deliver this lethal weapon to Ukraine, but will ultimately be able to bypass those obstacles under his presidential power. It would escalate tensions, hinder future negotiations, and perpetuate extreme destruction. From the tactical perspective, the use of cluster munitions by Ukraine may gain time to replenish arms and ammunition, to break through multi-layered Russian defense or bring halt the advance of Russian troops or their mercenaries. It would also engage extra forces to rebuild or clear occupied territories by Russia. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that this may potentially trigger a limited scale of nuclear attacks. 

The historical usage of cluster bombs in previous conflicts has demonstrated the devastating and enduring impact on affected communities.  Ukraine's decision to use this unconventional weapon is deeply troubling and raises serious ethical, legal, and humanitarian concerns. It is imperative for the international communities, Human Rights organizations, and other influential nations to come together to condemn this saber-rattling and exert diplomatic pressure on the sponsoring nation to oppose any transfer or use of cluster munitions. 

M A Hossain is a political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email : writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at :

1. The New Nation, BD:12 July 23

2. The Daily Asian Age, BD:12 July 23

Private Army: A Complex Challenge to Global Security.

 Del H Khan & M A Hossain, 

This is not merely a hypothetical scenario, but an undeniable reality wherein conflicts and wars are fought not by conventional armies but by private armies and military contractors. Private armies, also known as Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs), are becoming a controversial topic that remains at the forefront of global security discussions. The utilization of PMSCs in conflict situations presents a multifaceted and contentious issue.  While their involvement can at times yield positive result, the potential for human rights abuses and abuses of power, coupled with lack of accountability, necessitates careful regulation and oversight. 

The Sacred Band of Thebes is believed to be the oldest private army in the history, having been formed in Ancient Greece around the 4th century BC.  Private armies have been associated with various religion throughout history. In Hinduism, the private army of Maratha was one of the most prominent military forces in India.  The Maratha army played a crucial role in expanding the Maratha Empire and was renowned for their mobility and flexibility in battle.  During the Ottoman Empire, the Janissaries were a private army composed of elite soldiers who were recruited from Christian boys. They were fiercely loyal to the Sultan and played a crucial role in Ottoman military campaigns.  In Christianity, the Knight Templar were a private military order established in the 12th century during the Crusades.  For centuries, the Swiss Guards, establishment in 1506 by Pope Julius ll, have stood as a renowned private army for protecting the Pope and Vatican City. Another formidable private army was the French Foreign Legion, which was established in 1831.  This mercenary force was composed of soldiers from various countries and was often deployed to conflicts around the world. However, the history of private armies dates back to ancient time, when wealthy individuals frequently hired mercenaries to augment their armies or even lead them into battle. 

Private armies have become a global phenomenon, often resulting in devastating consequences for regional stability, human rights, and international law. In South Africa, a PMC known as Executive Outcomes (EO) was hired by the government of Angola and Sierra Leone in the 1990s to fight against rebel groups, while EO was credited with restoring peace and stability, but also faced criticism for human rights abuse, economic interests, and lack of accountability. Sandline International (SI), a British PMC, was contracted by ousted President Kabbalah of Sierra Leone in 1997 to overthrow the military Junta.  But, SI's involvement sparked diplomatic scandals.  In the Middle East, American PMC Black Water (later named Academi) was contracted by the US government to provide security services in the Iraq after the 2003 invasion. Nevertheless, Black Water became infamous for its involvement in various unethical gross misconducts, specially Nisour Square massacre in 2007. After Black Water's contract was terminated, the American government hired Triple Canopy (TC). But, they too faced allegations of fraud, corruption, and misconduct. TC also operated in other countries such as Honduras, Haiti and Peru, where it faced accusations of human rights abuse, environmental damage and interference with local affairs.

In Latin America, the right-wing paramilitary group United Self defense Force of Colombia (AUC) was formed by landlords, drug lords and former military officers to combat leftist guerrillas such as FARC. The Russian PMC Wagner Group (WG) has been accused of participating in several conflicts on behalf of Russia in Syria, Libya, Sudan, Central African Republic, and Venezuela. It has also been implicated in human rights violations, war crimes and covert operations. In European Union, Wagner Group and RSB Group have gained notoriety for their involvement in conflicts in Syria and Ukraine respectively. In Australia and Oceania, the private military industry is relatively small, with firms like Aegis Defense Services and G4S.  Asia is dominated by firms like Academi and Aegis Defense Services.

While, private armies are criticized for their lack of accountability, especially in areas where there is limited government control. Their activities often violate International and local laws. The most significant concern is that they undermine the monopoly of legitimate violence held by States.  This can erode a state's sovereignty and authority and can sometimes even act against the interest of the host government or local populations, ultimately leading to instability and conflicts.  Moreover, they typically operate under complex contractual arrangements, which obscure their identities, responsibilities, and liabilities. Currently, there is no effective International enforcement mechanism that can monitor, investigate, or sanction private armies for violations or abuses.

The private armies differ from other armed actors such as militia, rebels, and terrorists in several key aspects. These PMCs are motivated by profit rather than political or ideological objectives. They operate independently and are controlled by the objectives set by their clients. The PMCs have a distinct operational scope, size, and capabilities that differentiate them from a local or International security services providers.  Private armies mainly operate in conflict zone or high-risk areas, and also provide protection to Infrastructures, convoy, or governments and private clients. In contrast, security service providers offer services, like security consulting, risk assessment and training.

It is crucial to develop a legally binding of international convention on PMCs that defines their status, rules, responsibilities, and objectives under international law. To regulate or control private armies, states must review and revise existing law to establish clear criteria and procedure for licensing or registering PMCs operating within their territory or abroad. Oversight of PMCs should be established through a clear legal framework, licensing system, vetting procedure, contracting standards, monitoring mechanism, and complaint procedures.

The diversification of clients and missions poses a challenging for private armies to balance their profit motives with their professional ethics while maintaining their reputation and credibility in a competitive market. It is imperative for policy-makers, International organizations, and civil society groups to collaborate in developing best practices and effective regulations that strike a balance between the need for security and respect for human rights and accountability.  This approach would ensure that private armies operate within ethical and legal frameworks, making a positive contribution to International security.

This article published at :

1. The New Thinking, NY, USA :11Jul23

BRICS membership : Boon or bane for Bangladesh.

M A Hossain, 

Bangladesh has recently submitted its application to join BRICS, a consortium comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. BRICS serves as a forum for emerging economics to address their concerns and facilitate cooperation within a structured framework. The BRICS countries currently have a population of 3.42 billion, accounting for 42% of the world's population. In 2021, this bloc contributed 31.5% of the global GDP, amounting to $26.03 trillion, and also accounted for 18% of global trade. Consequently, it represents an influential bloc of emerging economics that focus on economic cooperation and development. While there may not be immediate benefits due to it not being a trade bloc, BRICS membership promises substantial long-term advantages for Bangladesh but there are challenges to navigate.

Over the past few decades, the developing world has made remarkable strides and the figure of developing nations increased significantly.  Subsequently, the BRICS initiative aims to unite all developing nations under a framework to attain socio-economic progress. The dominance of the dollar-based monetary system has prompted to explore alternative options, resulting in countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Argentina, United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Indonesia, and Venezuela have expressed their desire to join the bloc.

Disappointments, undue conditions even ambitious, and the dollar-based monetary system of the advanced developing countries has driven other nations to establish alternative multilateral banks to meet their financial needs. Seizing this opportunity, BRICS established two such multilateral lending agencies, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) initiated by China and operational since January 2016 in Beijing and the New Development Bank (NDB) established by BRICS in 2015 and headquartered in Shanghai. These two banks serve as alternative multilateral banks to the Bretton Woods Institution, the World Bank (WB) and International Monetary Fund (IMF). Bangladesh became a member of both the banks.

The total capital of both the banks is $100 billion.  AIIB has now 103 members across the world. Last 5 years, AIIB and NDB have approved $22.02 billion and $30 billion respectively for physical infrastructure development, improve connectivity, and integration among the member states. Bangladesh certainly would be considered as an important member of BRICS because of its test book example of spectacular economic development. AIIB has already approved $2.40 billion for 13 projects and has proposed of $1.73 billion for four more projects in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh's decision to join BRICS comes at a very crucial time as the international economy is crippling mostly because of COVID-19 and western sanctions centering Russia-Ukraine conflict.  The sanctions are exacerbating the sufferings of every country in the world. The Western restrictions are impeding countries from purchasing industrial raw materials, fuel, fertilizer even food grains. The Western powers use the dollar-based monetary system as a punitive tool against their rivals. Recently, the US Federal Reserve, the country’s Central Bank, has aggressively increased interest rate. This has exerted tremendous pressure on the currencies of many Global South nations. Such action has led to a global cost-of- living crisis that has driven millions of people into destitution and economic hardship.

BRICS member countries have long discussed introducing a common currency and the establishment of their own reserves. If it becomes effective, this would reduce dependence on the dollar. Dilma Rousseff, the NDB's new chief, recently announced that the bank is gradually distancing itself from the US dollar. She pledged that at least 30% of loans would be provided in the local currencies of member states. It would help to avoid the negative impact of exchange rate fluctuations of dollar.

Membership in BRICS would grant access to additional external sources to get funds on easier terms and conditions, and strengthen their negotiation position. It would also help Bangladesh to diversify its foreign relations.  Bangladesh will be able to take advantage of this if an alternative currency or an alternative trade system is introduced in the future among the BRICS countries.  Moreover, BRICS investment in infrastructure, technology, and education would drive improvements in productivity, competitiveness, and job creation.  Bangladesh would have the opportunity to be more proactive in global issues and contribute to setting agendas. It would enhance bilateral trade and foreign investment in Bangladesh.

The US and EU are two major trade partners for Bangladesh.  So, after joining the alliance, Bangladesh may come under pressure from the west. A significant challenge for Bangladesh would be to avoid financing any disputed, less-viable, and environmentally detrimental projects. The relationships among member states are very complicated. Bangladesh, as a neighboring country, has to face the challenges on diplomatic relations with India and China.

The prospect of Bangladesh joining BRICS holds immense promises. Bangladesh would be significantly benefited by infrastructure development, market expansion, Technological advancements and diplomatic influence. So, Bangladesh needs to be more cautious on political and diplomatic relations among the BRICS members. Upholding the non-aligned  principle of our foreign policy "friendship to all, malice to none" should be the only guiding force to move forward with BRICS nations.

M A Hossain, political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email : writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at ;

1. The Daily Observer, BD:27 June 23

2. Modern Diplomacy :27 June 23

3. The Asian Age, BD: 17 July 23

The Bay of Bengal: Geostrategic Significance and Contest for Influence

Del H Khan & M A Hossain, 

The Bay of Bengal possesses significant geostrategic importance, given its function as a crucial maritime gateway, abundant energy resources, and vital shipping lanes. Its strategic location and diverse ecosystems necessitate the preservation of natural habitats and the promotion of sustainable development. Understanding these factors, it becomes imperative to explore the strategic interests of global actors in the Bay of Bengal and analyze the potential consequences for regional stability and cooperation.

The United States seeks to expand its presence in the Indo-Pacific. They believe that having a naval base in the Bay of Bengal will enhance its power projection capabilities and maintain deterrence. China, on the other hand, wants to establish a naval base to solidify its military presence in the region and gains a strategic foothold in the Indian Ocean. India, begin another most influential regional power in the area, desires to protect its interests and deter potential threats.  Japan also has vested interests in the Bay of Bengal to establish a naval base as a way to project power and safeguard its interests.

India, as the largest country bordering the Bay of Bengal, holds crucial strategic interests. Safeguarding the shipping lanes in the region is vital for India's trade and economic prosperity. Additionally, protecting the oil and gas reserves in the bay ensures energy security, a critical aspect of India's development. Furthermore, countering the spread of terrorism is a shared concern among global actors, as stability in the Bay of Bengal is essential for regional security.

India's efforts to secure its interests in the Bay of Bengal are driven by factors such as the growing importance of the Bay of Bengal, the rise of China, and the need for regional cooperation. Strengthening its naval presence, developing maritime infrastructure, engaging with other littoral states, and promoting regional economic integration are among the initiatives that India is emphasizing to secure its interests in the Bay of Bengal.

China, a rising power, has expanded its economic and military presence in the Bay of Bengal for several reasons. Acquiring access to the region's resources, particularly its oil and gas reserves, is of great significance to China's growing energy demands. Moreover, extending its influence into the Indian Ocean aligns with China's broader geopolitical aspirations.

The United States is securing its interests in the Bay of Bengal and the littoral countries through means such as military cooperation, economic engagement, and diplomacy. The U.S. is formulating her steps to counter China's growing influence in the region by building stronger ties with regional allies, enhancing its own military presence, and working with other countries to promote a free and open Indo-Pacific.

Japan, a major economic power, shares similar interests in the Bay of Bengal. Safeguarding the shipping lanes, protecting energy interests, and preventing terrorism align with Japan's objectives in ensuring economic stability and national security. Japan is actively engaging Herself for its interests in the Bay of Bengal through initiatives such as building up its naval presence, providing security assistance, promoting economic cooperation, and engaging in diplomacy.

Russia, as a major regional power, also recognizes the strategic importance of the Bay of Bengal. Securing the shipping lanes and protecting energy interests are of significant interest to Russia, as they contribute to maintaining its economic ties and regional influence. Russia is securing its interests in the Bay of Bengal through means such as military cooperation, economic cooperation, and diplomacy. Russia is also working to counter the influence of other major powers in the region.

Global actors take various strategic initiatives against Bangladesh through which they can exert influence. Trade and investment play a crucial role in strengthening economic ties and promoting growth. By engaging in trade and investing in Bangladesh's economy, these actors can enhance their economic interests while contributing to Bangladesh's development. Development assistance is another avenue through which global actors can exert influence. By providing support for infrastructure development, education, and healthcare, they can bolster Bangladesh's capabilities and enhance its socio-economic well-being.

Furthermore, security cooperation is an essential aspect of engaging with Bangladesh. Collaborating with Bangladesh on security issues, particularly in countering terrorism and maintaining regional stability, is in the mutual interest of global actors. They can mitigate security threats and promote peace in the region through concerted efforts. 

Military assistance has also played a role, with the United States, China, and India offering support to enhance Bangladesh's military capabilities. While this assistance aims to strengthen Bangladesh's resistance against external threats, it can also exert pressure on the country to subdue the interests of its assisting nations.

Diplomacy has been another avenue employed by these global actors. Engaging in diplomatic efforts allows them to cultivate relationships with the Bangladeshi government, promote shared interests, and resolve disputes. Nevertheless, diplomatic engagement may also lead to attempts to influence Bangladesh's decision-making in a manner that may not necessarily align with its own best interests.

Furthermore, other global players, including the European Union and Gulf states, are also taking an interest in Bangladesh seriously. The EU, as Bangladesh's largest trading partner, has significantly contributed to the country's development through extensive trade and assistance. Gulf states, on the other hand, have emerged as prominent investors in Bangladesh and have previously provided military aid.

In the realm of the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh stands to reap numerous benefits. This body of water serves as a significant shipping route and houses substantial reserves of oil and gas. Bangladesh can capitalize on these resources by bolstering its ports, enhancing its shipping industry, and further developing its oil and gas sector. Moreover, the Bay of Bengal boasts stunning beaches and islands that hold great potential for tourism. Bangladesh can foster tourism growth by promoting this natural beauty and investing in the necessary infrastructure. Furthermore, the Bay of Bengal offers abundant fishing grounds, which Bangladesh can tap into by strengthening its fisheries sector. Additionally, this relatively unexplored body of water holds tremendous possibilities for marine research. 

Bangladesh must implement strategic measures to protect its interests in the Bay of Bengal. Firstly, it should focus on promoting economic development to strengthen its economy and increase its bargaining power. This involves attracting foreign investment, improving infrastructure, and cultivating a skilled workforce. Secondly, building a strong military is necessary to deter aggression and safeguard its interests.  Bangladesh should also engage in multilateral diplomacy, actively participating in regional organizations like the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) and Indian Ocean Rim Association for Regional Cooperation (IOR-ARC) to advance its diplomatic objectives. Furthermore, maintaining balance relations with major global actors while avoiding taking sides in conflicts is crucial to prevent entanglement and foster cooperation.

By effectively harnessing the opportunities presented by the Bay of Bengal and proactively addressing the contest for influence in the region, Bangladesh can secure a prosperous and secure future. These measures will enable Bangladesh to assume a leading role in shaping the trajectory of the Bay of Bengal while safeguarding its own interests.

Del H Khan, is a global affairs analyst and author of several award-winning and bestselling books. 

M A Hossain, is a political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

This article published at :

1. The Daily Observer, BD: 25 June 23

2. The Daily Asian Age, BD: 27 June 23

3. South Asia Journal, NJ,USA :25 June 23

Russia-Ukraine war : The Nova Kakhovka Dam Destruction.

M A Hossain,

Ever since the initiation of Russia's conflict against Ukraine, the Nova Kakhovka Dam has been identified as a high-value target due to its strategic importance. It was seized by Russian forces during Moscow's invasion in February 2022 and has remained under their control since then. In the early morning of June 6, 2023, the Nova Kakhovka Dam, located on the Dnipro River, collapsed, resulting in one of the most significant human and environmental disasters since the war began in Ukraine. The dam, situated 30 km east of the city of Kherson, holds substantial implications for the broader war effort. Both Moscow and Kyiv have started accusing each other of what could arguably be considered a war crime. The destruction of the dam occurred just as Ukraine was preparing for a long-awaited counter-offensive in this strategic region.

Civil engineering experts, intelligence analysts, and officials have proposed three main theories regarding the cause of the collapse. Firstly, it is suggested that Russia might have blown up the dam. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, his government, and the country's military swiftly blamed Moscow for the dam's destruction. They pointed out that the dam had been under Russian control for the past year. So, it was an easy task for the Russian army to plant explosives accurately. People in the area reported hearing explosions at the time when the dam was presumed to be damaged. Moscow may have sought to impede Ukraine's anticipated counter-offensive. Moreover, the reservoir supplies cooling water to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Europe's largest nuclear power station, making its safety crucial.

Secondly, it is possible that artillery attacks by Ukraine caused sufficient damage to the dam. The Kremlin accused the Kyiv regime to deprive Crimea of water, which Russia annexed in 2014. It also brought the worst disaster to the Russian-controlled area, which had served as a launching pad for Russian military operations in the past. There were reports that Russian forces were caught off guard during the collapse. Thirdly, the destruction could be attributed to structural failure. The dam had already sustained some prior damage, as satellite images showed partial damage from June 1 and 2. Additionally, the water level had risen to a record 17.5 meters in April, which had poised a risk to the dam intact.

Now let us analyze the military tactical implications for both parties concerning the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka Dam. Firstly, Russia has historical precedents for such actions. In 1941, Stalin ordered to destroy of a dam across the Dnipro River to make the approach inaccessible for advancing German forces. Furthermore, during Napoleon's invasion in 1812, Russia implemented a "scorched earth policy," leaving the French Army with little sustenance and only the smoldering ruins of Moscow to capture.

By destroying the dam, Russia gains tactical advantages in this strategic region. The resulting flood has created obstacles that may slow down the long-awaited Ukrainian offensive, impeding the movement of troops, armored vehicles, and heavy machinery for the next few weeks. This has compelled the Ukrainian army to allocate resources to address the humanitarian emergency and reassess their counter-offensive plan. Undoubtedly, it is a morale victory for the Russian army and represents a significant strategic achievement. Maintaining the status quo on the occupied territories will place Ukraine under pressure, as it has been preparing for a counter-offensive with Western-trained troops and advanced weaponry. Ukraine is facing a 1,000 km line of Russian defense. If Russia could repulse the offensive maneuver of the Ukrainian army, then it will increase the political pressure on Ukraine and the West. This will be potentially leading to the consolidation of Russia's gains and Ukraine has to accept the ceasefire proposal of China. 

However, if Ukraine is indeed behind the destruction of the dam, it is crucial to consider the tactical advantages achieved by the Ukrainian forces. This act could potentially facilitate the relocation of the Ukrainian army to the north bank of the Dnipro River, enabling them to sustain a long-awaited counter-offensive. Ukrainian forces intent to recapture significant portions of territory in the south of the country. Kyiv's objective is to breach Russia's defense lines to the south of Zaporizhzhia, effectively splitting the territory and isolating Crimea, thereby achieving a major strategic victory. The resulting flood could also aid the Ukrainian side in dispersing Russian troops and retaking areas that connect Crimea to the eastern Donbas region.

While the details and background of the dam's destruction remain unclear, but the wider multifaceted short-term and long-term consequences are catastrophic. The destruction of the dam has disrupted the livelihoods of residents in Kherson, Dnepropetrovsk, and Zaporizhzhia. It has devastated the ecosystem, basic infrastructure, irrigation systems, and clean water facilities. Furthermore, it has impacted significantly on the country's energy security. The breach of the dam will have long-term effects on agricultural production and food security. A massive volume of freshwater will flow into the Black Sea, affecting the salinity of the Dnipro Delta. It is more likely that hundreds of thousands of people will become ecological refugees in southeastern Ukraine in the coming years. Additionally, it is worth noting that the Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibit attacks on dams, dikes, and nuclear power plants where this incident would comply with an act of war crime.

As the extent of the destruction becomes evident, the International Committee of the Red Cross has warned of a 'significant' threat to civilians. This act appears to be an attempt to inflict long-term damage on the viability of Ukraine as a functioning society and economy. The destruction of the Nova Kakhovka Dam has taken the conflict to new heights since the war's inception.

M A Hossain, political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email: writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at :

1. The Geopolitics : 11June23

2. The Daily Observer: BD:12June23

3. The Asian Age, BD:13June23

4. The New Nation, BD: 14June23

5. The Jakarta Post, Indonesia: 15June23

Pakistan's Political Turmoil and Global Security Concern.

M A Hossain,

Pakistan is currently in a critical juncture of political turmoil which is posing a threat to its sovereignty as well as growing concerns about global security.  Not only that, if Pakistan fails to address the crisis, then definitely it will be the beginning of the extinction of democratic values regionally and globally. Pakistan has also been spiralling towards a severe economic catastrophe and struggling to meet the basic needs of its population. Now Pakistan is in a state of critical emergency after 1971, where the elite class should not repeat their apocalyptic mistake of ignoring the voices of the people. 

The power struggle of the current stalemate began when Imran Khan was ousted in April 2022 following a parliamentary vote of no-confidence.  However, this imbroglio is hardly a scenario that has arisen overnight. This is a result of bankrupt political regimes. Needless to say, Pakistan's ruling power has generally been characterized by its preference for one side of the Pakistan Army. Each of the five prime ministers has been indicted or imprisoned after leaving office. The military-dominated Pakistan has a long record of engineering the electoral playing field to achieve the Army's preferred result.

Corruption has long been a pressing issue in Pakistan's political landscape, with high-profile corruption cases involving influential politicians and bureaucrats. These scandals have eroded public trust in the government and raised concerns about the misuse of public funds. The economic condition in Pakistan was facing a severe crisis. Now the devastating flood of 2022, 50-years high inflation, food and energy shortage, collapsed investment, critically low exports, and foreign exchange reserve, mounting foreign debt, and the failure of international lenders have further exacerbated the situation.  Furthermore, Covid-19 and the invasion of Ukraine by Russia put tremendous pressure on world food and energy prices, which has had a negative impact on Pakistan's economy.

Pakistan is experiencing violent social unrest. Economic challenges, rising inflation, polarized politics, and unemployment have contributed to the frustration and discontent among the populace, especially the youth where over 60% of the population is under the age of 30.  A weaponized society with nothing to lose has grown a new ability to touch the untouchable elite Institutions.  Furthermore, ethnic and sectarian tensions, mass reform movements recently by religio- political parties, and engagement between Tehreek-e- Taliban Pakistan(TTP) and security forces clearly spelled out the public frustration with elite Institutions or ruling systems.

Pakistani, especially the young generation, are frustrated and possess discontent with the country's political discourse of weakening opponents and appeasing puppet masters.  Poor dynastic leadership has also paved the way for military intervention in state power. Imran Khan has taken advantage of the situation to make himself the savior of the nation. However, he is also seen as a trump card for Islamic jihadist organizations. His party’s strongholds, including Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Gilgit-Baltistan, Lahore, and Punjab, are all strongly under the control of Islamic jihadist groups.  Imran Khan as a prime minister praised the mujahideen and hailed Osama bin Laden as Shahid (martyr) in the parliament. One more significant thing, the Pakistani Constitution has ensured the right to choose the Sharia rule provincially or in special administrative areas.

Now, in recent years, TTP or other similar religio- political fundamentalists have exhibited mass reform movements and continue armed struggle across the country. Their issue-based movement has become popular among the countrymen and their armed struggle has made the elite establishment bound to sit for a peace deal with TTP. We will be in a fool's paradise if we ignore the smartness and political acumen of present Islamic jihadist organizations. Now the situation in Pakistan is more favorable for TTP as well as International Islamic militant organizations. The Pakistani Judiciary, PTI, Islamic militant organizations, and military, Pakistan Democratic Movement(PDM) coalition are near to head-on collision. The worst possible fact is civil war, and the next phase will be the triumph of the Islamic jihadist movement.

The pressing question that demands attention from global leaders is why Pakistan should be a cause for concern. We must not forget that Pakistan is a nuclear-armed nation. Drawing upon my extensive two-decade study of Islamic militant organizations, it is evident that the Islamic jihadist movement will emerge at full throttle in Pakistan. In my opinion, Pakistan will be Afghanistan 2.0 today or tomorrow unless the crisis is not dealt with appropriately. This ideological warfare is just like cancer in the human body. If we fail to recognize it at an early stage, it would leave us no choice but to surrender.  Now, if we compare the situation of Pakistan with earlier Afghanistan, Iraq, Burkina Faso, and Mali, then it becomes evident that Pakistan is at the last stage of ideological cancer.  I assume that the next Islamic jihadist movement is likely to extend its reach to Kashmir and Yemen. If this movement gains traction in Pakistan, then it will be a matter of time to establish a strong jihadist bastion in South Asia and the Middle East.

The West, unfortunately, has deprioritized its engagement against Islamic militant organizations, which will compromise the value of democracy and bring a new dimension to democratic countries globally. To be sure, we will not be able to see democracy piping over the Great Wall in the East and the African-Russian imaginary barrier in the West. Meanwhile, Somalia and Yemen will serve as strategic game-changer, providing an economic lifeline for international Islamic jihadist organizations. 

So, where does the savior of democracy lie? Or, are democracy and human rights merely tools used to suppress third-world nations? These crucial questions demand answers. 

In conclusion, my perception will only begin to take shape once Islamabad falls. Pakistan must respond quickly because time is not on its side. Now the most straightforward way to restore peace in Pakistan would be through timely, free and fair elections, unfettered by the establishment's intervention. An elected government has the potential to restore confidence in Pakistan's Institutions, and that confidence is as desirable for Beijing and Riyadh as it is for Washington and New Delhi. Otherwise, the simplest explanation for other means may align with my perceptions(!), ultimately, becoming a stark reality.

M A Hossain, political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email: writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at :

1. Modern Diplomacy, EU:20May23

2. The North Lines, India :21May23

3. IPA, India: 21May23

4. The New Nation, BD:22May23

5. The Daily Excelsior, India: 22May23

6. The Hitavada, Nagpur,India:21May23

7. The Arabian Post, UAE:22May23

8. The Hills Times, india: 24May23

9. The Asian Age, BD:30May23

The Pinyin And Future Asian Union.

M A Hossain,

The 19th century has been commonly referred to as the era of 'Pax Britannia' owing to the unparalleled dominance of the British Empire across the world. Subsequently, the 20th century was dubbed as the 'American Century' in recognition of the United States' meteoric rise as a superpower and its immense influence over global politics, economy, and culture. As we progress further into the 21st century, there is a growing consensus among analysts and experts that the century belongs to China, which has been hailed as the frontrunner of the 'Pinyin', or 'Chinese Century.

The polit bureau of the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) has amended the country's constitutional provision thus paving the way for President Xi Jinping to remain in the office until it is required both by China and the Asian nations. We have to, first of all, understand certain points. No one can undermine the magnanimous contributions of Comrade Mao Zedong, who actually is the founder of a politically and diplomatically strong China. Mr Xi Jinping actually is the real successor of Comrade Mao, and he is the founder of a new China, which not only is very strong both politically and diplomatically but also is the fastest-growing economy in the world.

While comrade Mao's dreams were fundamentally for the betterment of China- politically, diplomatically and economically; President Xi's visions are for China in particular and the rest of the Asian nations in general. The 'Made in China' vision has already been largely implemented. President Xi's brilliant idea of establishing connectivity amongst the Asian nations and Europe and beyond is ultimately going to bring fruits of prosperity in Asia. Possibly, One Belt One Road (OBOR) will place China into the lead role of promoting. 'Made in Asia' products to Europe, America, Australia and the African continent.

Implementation of OBOR means the creation of millions of new job opportunities in all the Asian nations. President Xi is dreaming of transforming Asia into an Economic superpower in this unipolar world. And once Asia reaches that status, global politics and diplomacy will ultimately come under the total control of us – the Asians.

As we know, Europe, Australia, and the United States of America had already reached the optimum level of progress. Still, there is a huge unemployment crisis. But, Asian nations by and large today are either underdeveloped or developing, the implementation of OBOR certainly would not have any unemployment problem for the residents of the continent. Instead, we are going to offer job opportunities to people from other continents as the next Asia is certainly going to become the hub of economic activities.  We have many advantages in comparison to our neighbours on other continents. Labour is cheaper here, people are hardworking, and we are blessed with natural and mineral resources worth trillions of dollars, ninety-five per cent of which are still unexplored.

In the future, under the leadership of President Xi Jinping would also have our common currency which easily can turn into the strongest currency in the world-much stronger than Euro, Pound or the US dollar.

Yes, I am talking about a future Asian Union, which will turn into a reality within the next two decades or even earlier, under the leadership of China. Just think about the military strength of the Asian Union! Military manpower size of a combined Chinese, Russian, Indian, North Korean, Pakistani, and the rest of the Asian nations would be unchallengeable. Similarly, the military technology and logistics of an Asian Union combining China, India, North Korea, Israel, and Pakistan would be gigantic in a real sense. None of the neighbours from the other continent would take the risk of indulging into military tussle with the Asian Union. Military supremacy will come to our grips.

The concept involves the creation of a political and economic union between all Asian nations. If this becomes a reality, then it would represent a significant shift in the global power dynamics. Asia has some of the world's largest and strongest economies, like China, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and South Korea. It would also create the largest single market of over 4 billion people, surpassing both the European Union and the United States. The creation of the Asian Union will eliminate the barriers, like a complex web of tariffs, regulations and cultural differences for businesses to operate across the region. This would become a key player in shaping the direction of the world economy.

In addition to its economic and military power, the Asian Union would also have a significant political influence on the world stage. The member nations would be able to speak with a single voice on key global and regional issues. The Asian Union would have the ability to balance the influence of the United States and the European Union for building a more multipolar world order.

However, there would also be challenges associated with the creation of the Asian Union. One of the key challenges would be navigating the complex geopolitical relationships in the region. Then strain relations with the neighbours including India, China, Korea, Israel, and Japan. The Asian Union would need to facilitate an equal voice in decision-making among the union. In my opinion, these challenges could be overcome through dialogue and positive gestures of powerful members like China, India, Israel, North Korea, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.

Some people are wrongly interpreting the constitutional amendment by the CPC as a move of turning Mr Xi as the President for life. Some others are even saying, almost all the powers are now been placed into the hands of the President and the ruling party has turned insignificant.

These assessments are grossly misleading and wrong. Power always remains with the ruling party-the CPC, and the polit bureau members only decided to let President Xi remain in office until it is required by China and Asia. In China, the ruling party always holds a key role. Ask anyone in the world, the name of the Chinese ruling party and the President. Everyone will give the correct answer. But if you ask, for example, the name of the Russian President and the ruling party, you'll get a half-answer. Most people have even never heard the name of the Russian ruling party.

In every country in the world, except China and North Korea, the ruling party actually gets eclipsed under the shadow of the head of the government. This makes China's political system more accountable and more pro-people. So, It's the time to unite all Asian nations under the leadership of pro-people rule.

M A Hossain, political and defence analyst based in Bangladesh.

Email: writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at :

1. Policy Watcher: 05May23

2. The Pakistan Daily : Pakistan :09May23