Large turnout expected in crucial vote for local government in Indian-administered Kashmir

Large turnout expected in crucial vote for local government in Indian-administered Kashmir
Supporters listen as India's opposition Congress party leader Rahul Gandhi, unseen, speaks during an election rally at Dooru some 78 kilometers south of Srinagar, Indian controlled Kashmir, on September 4, 2024. (AP/File)
Short Url
Updated 17 September 2024
Follow

Large turnout expected in crucial vote for local government in Indian-administered Kashmir

Large turnout expected in crucial vote for local government in Indian-administered Kashmir
  • Polls are first in a decade and first since Modi’s government in 2019 scrapped the Muslim-majority region’s special status
  • Many locals see the vote as opportunity to elect their own representatives and register their protest against the 2019 changes

SRINAGAR: In Indian-administered Kashmir, many people boycotted elections for decades in protest against Indian rule. But in the run-up to the local election beginning Wednesday, many are willing to buck that trend and use their vote to deny Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s party the power to form a local government in the disputed region.
The vote is the first in a decade, and the first since Modi’s Hindu nationalist government in 2019 scrapped the Muslim-majority region’s special status and downgraded the former state to a federally governed territory. The move — which largely resonated in India and among Modi supporters — was mostly opposed in the region as an assault on its identity and autonomy.
“Boycotts will not work in this election,” said Abdul Rashid, a resident in southern Kashmir’s Shangus village. “There is a desperate need to end the onslaught of changes coming from there (India).”
The election will allow residents to have their own truncated government and a local parliament called an assembly, instead of remaining under New Delhi’s direct rule. The region’s last assembly election was held in 2014, after which Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party for the first time ruled the region in a coalition with the local Peoples Democratic Party.
But the government collapsed in 2018 after BJP withdrew from the coalition. Polls in the past have been marked with violence, boycotts and vote-rigging, even though India called them a victory over separatism.
This time, New Delhi says the polls are ushering in democracy after more than three decades of strife. 
However, many locals see the vote as an opportunity not only to elect their own representatives but also to register their protest against the 2019 changes.
Polling will be held in three phases. The second and third phases are scheduled for Sept. 25 and Oct. 1. Votes will be counted on Oct. 8, with results expected that day.
Kashmir is divided between nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan. Since 1947, the neighbors have fought two wars over its control, after British rule of the subcontinent ended with the creation of the two countries. Both claim the Himalayan territory in its entirety.
In 2019, the Indian-controlled part of the region was divided into two territories, Ladakh and Jammu-Kashmir, ruled directly by New Delhi. The region has been on edge since it lost its flag, criminal code, constitution and inherited protections on land and jobs.
Multiple pro-India Kashmiri parties, many of whose leaders were among thousands jailed in 2019, are contesting the election, promising to reverse those changes. Some lower-rung separatist leaders, who in the past dismissed polls as illegitimate exercises under military occupation, are also running for office as independent candidates.
India’s main opposition Congress party, which favors restoration of the region’s statehood, has formed an alliance with the National Conference, the region’s largest party. Modi’s BJP has a strong political base in Hindu-dominated areas of Jammu that largely favor the 2019 changes but is weak in the Kashmir Valley, the heartland of anti-India rebellion.
“Our main concern is governance through local representatives. It will be good for us if the BJP forms the government here as it’s already in power at the center,” said Chuni Lal, a shopkeeper in Jammu city.
The vote will see a limited transition of power from New Delhi to the local assembly, with a chief minister at the top heading a council of ministers. But Kashmir will continue to be a “Union Territory” — a region directly controlled by the federal government — with India’s Parliament remaining its main legislator.
The elected government will have partial control over areas like education, culture and taxation but not over the police. Kashmir’s statehood must be restored for the new government to have powers similar to other states in India. However, it will not have the special powers it enjoyed before the 2019 changes.
Last year, India’s Supreme Court endorsed the government’s 2019 changes but ordered New Delhi to conduct local polls by the end of September and restore Kashmir’s statehood. Modi’s government has promised to restore statehood after the polls but has not specified a timeline.
Elections in Indian-held Kashmir have remained a sensitive issue. Many believe they have been rigged multiple times in favor of local politicians who subsequently became India’s regional enforcers, used to incrementally dilute laws that offered Kashmir a special status and legitimize New Delhi’s militaristic policies.
In the mid-1980s, the region’s dissident political groups emerged as a formidable force against Kashmir’s pro-India political elite but lost the 1987 election widely believed to have been rigged. A public backlash followed, with some young activists taking up arms and demanding a united Kashmir, either under Pakistani rule or independent of both.
India insists the insurgency is Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, a charge Islamabad denies. Tens of thousands of people have been killed in the fighting, which most Kashmiri Muslims consider a legitimate freedom struggle.
Noor Ahmed Baba, a political scientist, said the outcome of the polls “is not going to change the dynamics of the Kashmir dispute” since it will end with a largely powerless legislature, but will be crucial for optics.
“If local parties win, it is going to put some pressure on the central government and perhaps delegitimize from a democratic perspective what has been done to Kashmir. But a BJP win can allow the party to consolidate and validate 2019 changes in the local legislature,” Baba said.
India’s ruling BJP is not officially aligned with any local party, but many politicians believe it is tacitly supporting some parties and independent candidates who privately agree with its stances.
The National Conference party says Modi’s BJP is trying to manipulate the election through independent candidates. “Their (BJP’s) concerted effort is to divide the vote in Kashmir,” said Tanvir Sadiq, a candidate from the National Conference.
The BJP’s national secretary, meanwhile, says his party’s former ally, the Peoples Democratic Party, and the National Conference are being supported by former militants. Ram Madhav said at a recent rally that they want to return the region to its “trouble-filled days.”
For residents whose civil liberties have been curbed, the election is also a chance to choose representatives they hope will address their main issues.
Many say that while the election won’t solve the dispute over Kashmir, it will give them a rare window to express their frustration with Indian control.
“We need some relief and end of bureaucratic rule here,” said Rafiq Ahmed, a taxi driver in the region’s main city of Srinagar.


Pakistan ends lockdown of its capital after Imran Khan supporters are dispersed by police

Pakistan ends lockdown of its capital after Imran Khan supporters are dispersed by police
Updated 33 sec ago
Follow

Pakistan ends lockdown of its capital after Imran Khan supporters are dispersed by police

Pakistan ends lockdown of its capital after Imran Khan supporters are dispersed by police
ISLAMABAD: Authorities reopened roads linking Pakistan’s capital with the rest of the country, ending a four-day lockdown, on Wednesday after using tear gas and firing into the air to disperse supporters of imprisoned former Prime Minister Imran Khan who marched to Islamabad to demand his release from prison.
“All roads are being reopened, and the demonstrators have been dispersed,” Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi said.
Khan’s wife, Bushra Bibi, who was leading the protest, and other demonstrators fled in vehicles when police pushed back against the rallygoers following clashes in which at least seven people were killed.
The police operation came hours after thousands of Khan supporters, defying government warnings, broke through a barrier of shipping containers blocking off Islamabad and entered a high-security zone, where they clashed with security forces.
Tension has been high in Islamabad since Sunday when supporters of the former prime minister began a “long march” from the restive northwest to demand his release. Khan has been in a prison for over a year and faces more than 150 criminal cases that his party says are politically motivated.
Hundreds of demonstrators have been arrested since Sunday.
Bibi and leaders of her husband’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party fled to Mansehra in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, where the party still rules.
Khan, who remains a popular opposition figure, was ousted in 2022 through a no-confidence vote in Parliament.

Anti-mine treaty signatories slam US decision to send land mines to Ukraine

Anti-mine treaty signatories slam US decision to send land mines to Ukraine
Updated 9 min 45 sec ago
Follow

Anti-mine treaty signatories slam US decision to send land mines to Ukraine

Anti-mine treaty signatories slam US decision to send land mines to Ukraine
  • Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky has called the mines “very important” to halting Russian attacks
  • Ukraine receiving US mine shipments would be in “direct violation” of the anti-mine treaty

Siem Reap, Cambodia: Washington’s decision to give anti-personnel mines to Ukraine is the biggest blow yet to a landmark anti-mine treaty, its signatories said during a meeting.
Ukraine is a signatory to the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention which prohibits the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of land mines.
The United States, which has not signed up to the treaty, said last week it would transfer land mines to Ukraine to aid its efforts fighting Russia’s invasion.
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky has called the mines “very important” to halting Russian attacks.
Ukraine receiving US mine shipments would be in “direct violation” of the treaty, the convention of its signatories said in a statement released late Tuesday.
“In the 25 years since the Convention entered into force, this landmark humanitarian disarmament treaty had never faced such a challenge to its integrity,” it said.
“The Convention community must remain united in its resolve to uphold the Convention’s norms and principles.”
Ukraine’s delegation to a conference on progress under the anti-landmine treaty in Cambodia on Tuesday did not mention the US offer in its remarks.
In its presentation, Ukrainian defense official Oleksandr Riabtsev said Russia was carrying out “genocidal activities” by laying land mines on its territory.
Riabtsev refused to comment when asked by AFP journalists about the US land mines offer on Wednesday.
Ukraine’s commitment to destroy its land mine stockpiles left over from the Soviet Union was also “currently not possible” due to Russia’s invasion, defense ministry official Yevhenii Kivshyk told the conference.
Moscow and Kyiv have been ratcheting up their drone and missile attacks, with Ukraine recently firing US long-range missiles at Russia and the Kremlin retaliating with an experimental hypersonic missile.
The Siem Reap conference is a five-yearly meeting held by signatories to the anti-landmine treaty to assess progress in its objective toward a world without antipersonnel mines.
On Tuesday, land mine victims from across the world gathered at the meeting to protest Washington’s decision.
More than 100 demonstrators lined the walkway taken by delegates to the conference venue in Cambodia’s Siem Reap.


Turkiye scales down $23 bln F-16 jet deal with US, minister says

Turkiye scales down $23 bln F-16 jet deal with US, minister says
Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Turkiye scales down $23 bln F-16 jet deal with US, minister says

Turkiye scales down $23 bln F-16 jet deal with US, minister says

ANKARA: Turkiye has reduced its planned $23 billion acquisition of an F-16 fighter jet package from the United States, scrapping the purchase of 79 modernization kits for its existing fleet, Defense Minister Yasar Guler said late on Tuesday.
NATO member Turkiye earlier this year secured a deal to procure 40 F-16 fighter jets and 79 modernization kits for its existing F-16s from the United States, after a long-delayed process.
“An initial payment has been made for the procurement of F-16 Block-70. A payment of $1.4 billion has been made. With this, we will buy 40 F-16 Block-70 Viper and we were going to buy 79 modernization kits,” Guler told a parliamentary hearing.
“We gave up on this 79. This is why we gave up: Our Turkish Aerospace Industries (TUSAS) facilities are capable of carrying out this modernization on their own, so we deferred to them,” he said.
The sale of the 40 new Lockheed Martin F-16 jets and ammunition for them will cost Turkiye some $7 billion, Guler added.
Turkiye placed its order in October 2021, two years after the United States kicked the country out of the fifth-generation F-35 fighter jet program over its procurement of a Russian missile defense system.
Turkiye wants to re-join the F-35 program and buy 40 new F-35 jets, Guler also said.
Turkiye is one of the largest operators of F-16s, with its fleet made up of more than 200 older Block 30, 40 and 50 models.
Ankara is also interested in buying Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jets, built by a consortium of Germany, Britain, Italy and Spain.
It is also developing its own combat aircraft, KAAN.


Ukrainian delegation visiting Seoul to ask for weapons aid, media reports say

Ukrainian delegation visiting Seoul to ask for weapons aid, media reports say
Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Ukrainian delegation visiting Seoul to ask for weapons aid, media reports say

Ukrainian delegation visiting Seoul to ask for weapons aid, media reports say
  • The group was expected to meet their South Korean counterparts as early as Wednesday, according to the report

SEOUL: A Ukrainian delegation led by Defense Minister Rustem Umerov is visiting South Korea this week to ask for weapons aid to be used by Kyiv in its war with Russia, according to media reports.
The delegation had met with South Korea’s National Security Adviser Shin Won-sik to exchange views on the conflict in Ukraine, the DongA Ilbo newspaper reported on Wednesday, without giving a source.
In an interview with South Korean broadcaster KBS in October, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky said Kyiv would send a detailed request to Seoul for arms support including artillery and an air defense systems.
The South China Morning Post also reported this week that a Ukrainian delegation was due to visit South Korea to request weapons aid, citing an informed source.
The group was expected to meet their South Korean counterparts as early as Wednesday, according to the report.
A spokesperson for South Korea’s defense ministry declined to confirm when asked whether a Ukrainian delegation had arrived in Seoul during a regular media briefing on Tuesday.
Seoul, which has emerged as a leading arms producer, has been under pressure from some Western countries and Kyiv to provide Ukraine with lethal weapons but has so far focused on non-lethal aid including demining equipment.
South Korea’s Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul, asked earlier this month whether Seoul would send weapons to Ukraine in response to North Korea aiding Russia, said all possible scenarios were under consideration and Seoul would be watching the level of participation by North Korean troops in Russia and what Pyongyang received from Moscow in return.


Trump’s threat to impose tariffs could raise prices for consumers, colliding with promise for relief

Trump’s threat to impose tariffs could raise prices for consumers, colliding with promise for relief
Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Trump’s threat to impose tariffs could raise prices for consumers, colliding with promise for relief

Trump’s threat to impose tariffs could raise prices for consumers, colliding with promise for relief
  • The US is the largest importer of goods in the world, with Mexico, China and Canada its top three suppliers, according to the most recent US Census data

DETROIT: If Donald Trump makes good on his threat to slap 25 percent tariffs on everything imported from Mexico and Canada, the price increases that could follow will collide with his campaign promise to give American families a break from inflation.
Economists say companies would have little choice but to pass along the added costs, dramatically raising prices for food, clothing, automobiles, booze and other goods.
The president-elect floated the tariff idea, including additional 10 percent taxes on goods from China, as a way to force the countries to halt the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs into the US But his posts Monday on Truth Social threatening the tariffs on his first day in office could just be a negotiating ploy to get the countries to change behavior.
High food prices were a major issue in voters picking Trump over Vice President Kamala Harris, but tariffs almost certainly would push those costs up even further.
For instance, the Produce Distributors Association, a Washington trade group, said Tuesday that tariffs will raise prices for fresh fruit and vegetables and hurt US farmers when other countries retaliate.
“Tariffs distort the marketplace and will raise prices along the supply chain, resulting in the consumer paying more at the checkout line,” said Alan Siger, association president.
Mexico and Canada are two of the biggest exporters of fresh fruit and vegetables to the US In 2022, Mexico supplied 51 percent of fresh fruit and 69 percent of fresh vegetables imported by value into the US, while Canada supplied 2 percent of fresh fruit and 20 percent of fresh vegetables.
Before the election, about 7 in 10 voters said they were very concerned about the cost of food, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of more than 120,000 voters.
“We’ll get them down,” Trump told shoppers during a September visit to a Pennsylvania grocery store.
The US is the largest importer of goods in the world, with Mexico, China and Canada its top three suppliers, according to the most recent US Census data.
People looking to buy a new vehicle likely would see big price increases as well, at a time when costs have gone up so much they are out of reach for many. The average price of a new vehicle now runs around $48,000.
About 15 percent of the 15.6 million new vehicles sold in the US last year came from Mexico, while 8 percent crossed the border from Canada, according to Global Data.
Much of the tariffs would get passed along to consumers, unless automakers can somehow quickly find productivity improvements to offset them, said C.J. Finn, US automotive sector leader for PwC. That means even more consumers “would potentially get priced out,” Finn said.
Hardest hit would be Volkswagen, Stellantis, General Motors and Ford, Bernstein analyst Daniel Roeska wrote Tuesday in a note to investors. “A 25 percent tariff on Mexico and Canada would severely cripple the US auto industry,” he said.
The tariffs would hurt US industrial production so much that “we expect this is unlikely to happen in practice,” Roeska said.
The tariff threat hit auto stocks on Tuesday, particularly shares of GM, which imports about 30 percent of the vehicles it sells in the US from Canada and Mexico, and Stellantis, which imports about 40 percent from the two countries. For both, about 55 percent of their lucrative pickup trucks come from Mexico and Canada. GM stock lost almost 9 percent of its value, while Stellantis dropped nearly 6 percent.
It’s not clear how long the tariffs would last if implemented, but they could force auto executives to move production to the US, which could create more jobs in the long run. However, Morningstar analyst David Whiston said automakers probably won’t make any immediate moves because they can’t quickly change where they build vehicles.
Millions of dollars worth of auto parts flow across the borders with Mexico and Canada, and that could raise prices for already costly automobile repairs, Finn said.
The Distilled Spirits Council of the US said tariffs on tequila or Canadian whisky won’t boost American jobs because they are distinctive products that can only be made in their country of origin. In 2023, the US imported $4.6 billion worth of tequila and $108 million worth of mezcal from Mexico and $537 million worth of spirits from Canada, it said.
“Tariffs on spirits products from our neighbors to the north and south are going to hurt US consumers and lead to job losses across the US hospitality industry,” it added.
Electronics retailer Best Buy said on its third-quarter earnings conference call that it runs on thin profit margins, so while vendors and the company will shoulder some increases, Best Buy will have to pass tariffs to customers. “These are goods that people need, and higher prices are not helpful,” CEO Corie Barry said.
Walmart also warned last week that tariffs could force it to raise prices.
Tariffs could trigger supply chain disruptions as people buy goods before they are imposed and companies seek alternate sources of parts, said Rob Handfield, a professor of supply chain management at North Carolina State University. Some businesses might not be able to pass on the costs.
“It could actually shut down a lot of industries in the United States. It could actually put a lot of US businesses out of business,” he said.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who talked with Trump after his call for tariffs, said they had a good conversation about working together. “This is a relationship that we know takes a certain amount of working on and that’s what we’ll do,” Trudeau said.
Trump’s threats come as arrests for illegally crossing the border from Mexico have been falling. But arrests for illegally crossing the border from Canada have been rising over the past two years. Much of America’s fentanyl is smuggled from Mexico, and seizures have increased.
Trump has sound legal justification to impose tariffs, even though they conflict with a 2020 trade deal brokered in large part by Trump with Canada and Mexico, said William Reinsch, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a former Clinton administration trade official. The treaty, known as the USMCA, is up for review in 2026.
In China’s case, he could simply declare Beijing hasn’t met obligations under an agreement he negotiated in his first term. For Canada and Mexico, he could say the influx of migrants and drugs are a national security threat, and turn to a section of trade law he used in his first term to slap tariffs on steel and aluminum.
The law he would most likely use for Canada and Mexico has a legal process that often takes up to nine months, giving Trump time to seek a deal.
If talks failed and the duties were imposed, all three countries would likely retaliate with tariffs on US exports, said Reinsch, who believes Trump’s tariffs threat is a negotiating ploy.
US companies would lobby intensively against tariffs, and would seek to have products exempted. Some of the biggest exporters from Mexico are US firms that make parts there, Reinsch said.
Longer term, Mary Lovely, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said the threat of tariffs could make the US an “unstable partner” in international trade. “It is an incentive to move activity outside the United States to avoid all this uncertainty,” she said.
Trump transition team officials did not immediately respond to questions about what he would need to see to prevent the tariffs from being implemented and how they would impact prices in the US
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum suggested Tuesday that Mexico could retaliate with tariffs of its own. Sheinbaum said she was willing to talk about the issues, but said drugs were a US problem.