Monday, April 04, 2022

China, Solomon Islands in South Pacific sea change deal

Pending security pact would give China naval and police access to Pacific nation in Au
stralia and New Zealand’s backyard

By NATE FISCHLER
MARCH 30, 2022

Children look out to sea from the Red Beach landing site near Honiara in the Solomon Islands in a file photo. Photo: AFP / Torsten Blackwood

A draft security agreement between the Solomon Islands and China was leaked on social media last Thursday and has been confirmed as authentic by South Pacific island nation.

The key points of the leaked draft agreement include permitting Chinese PLA Navy ships to dock and stopover in the country and carry out logistical operations. It also allows unfettered access to Chinese military police.

While sparking protest from Australia and New Zealand, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare has defiantly stood by his government’s initiative, saying Tuesday in a speech to the country’s parliament in the nation’s capital of Honiara that the deal is almost ready to sign.

Sogavore also accused the West of sowing discord and instability in the region amid the backlash and has insisted that diversification of security partners is both a sovereign right as well as a positive development for the country traditionally considered in Australia’s sphere of influence. In addition to security considerations, Beijing has also offered substantial infrastructure investment in the country.

Nearby Australia and New Zealand, meanwhile, have expressed grave concern about the soon-to-be-finalized security arrangement. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has pressured the Solomon Islands not to sign the deal and has lobbied neighboring Papua New Guinea and Fiji to do the same.

At the same time, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has warned of militarization of the region as a consequence of China moving in while also adding that she sees “very little reason in terms of the Pacific security for such a need and such a presence.”

For their part, China has said that “Relevant countries should earnestly respect the Solomon Islands’ sovereignty and independent decisions instead of deciding what others should and should not do self-importantly and condescendingly from a privileged position,” through Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin, who added that any attempt to undermine the bilateral agreement by third parties and outside forces would be “doomed to fail.”

If fully implemented, the draft deal would allow for Chinese warships to be stationed around 1,600 kilometers off the coast of Australia. As Australian vessels also resupply in the Solomon Islands, the possibility of the two navies encountering each other in the country looms large.


Analysts note China already has the military capability to strike northern Australia with long-range ballistic missiles from their militarized artificial islands in the South China Sea, some 3,500 kilometers away.

The draft agreement in practice would allow for the deployment of Chinese military assets to the Solomon Islands to “protect the safety of Chinese personnel and major projects in [the] Solomon Islands.” It further allows for the Solomon Islands to request that China “send police, armed police, military personnel and other law enforcement and armed forces” to the country.

Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare, left, and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, right, watch Foreign Minister Jeremiah Manele sign an agreement with China State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing in 2019. 
Photo: AFP / Thomas Peter

Moreover, it remains vague as to both what type of military personnel may be sent to the Solomon Islands as well as what kind of operations the PLA and Chinese police may undertake there, leaving the door open for speculation and worry in neighboring Australia and New Zealand who regard the Solomon Islands as being in their “backyard.”

Meanwhile, Solomon Islands government Chief of Staff Robson Djokovic emphasized that the agreement is still in draft form and is not yet signed while also urging caution when publishing information about the draft agreement as it is considered a sensitive national and regional security issue. Sogavare made similar remarks to parliament is his speech on Tuesday.

The draft agreement has also sparked widespread speculation that the Solomon Islands could easily turn into a Chinese military base. Sogavare countered this speculation by blasting criticism of his government’s policies.

“We are not pressured in any way by our new friends, and there is no intention whatsoever to ask China to build a military base in the Solomon Islands,” he said. In his first comments since the revelation that a security agreement is in the works, Sogavare added that the backlash from Australia, New Zealand and the United States is “very insulting” and “nonsense.”

Australian Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews has stated categorically that any expansion of Chinese military activity in the Pacific is concerning and vowed continued support for the Solomon Islands. “That is our backyard. This is our neighborhood, and we are very concerned of any activity that is taking place in the Pacific Islands,” she is quoted as saying. “Our Pacific Island friends know that we are there to support them,” she added.

Andrews could be referring to the Pacific Islands Forum 2018 Boe Declaration which states that regional security must be undertaken collectively among the forum’s 18 member states. Some argue that Honiara’s bilateral initiative with Beijing undermines the declaration. Similarly, former New Zealand defense minister Wayne Mapp has said that the Solomon Islands have “gone rogue” and brought great power conflict to the South Pacific.

Solomon Islands’ opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr has also voiced concern about the deal. The island chain country switched recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 2019. “The writing has been on the wall since the switch [from Taiwan] in 2019,” he said. This issue is highly contentious domestically with Sogavare being seen as the main proponent of establishing close ties with Beijing after decades of collaboration with Taipei.

The opposition party has expressed concerns that entanglements with China may lead to an autocratic domestic government, criticism Sogavare downplayed when speaking to parliament on Monday. The opposition has been active in criticizing Sogavare’s government with the party’s leader Mathew Wale saying in an interview that he is disappointed Australia has not acted to stop the implementation of the security deal.

Some also openly worry that Sogavare will use Chinese police to prop up his government and stay in power in a manner that is far beyond the authority granted to him under the country’s constitution.

The change in recognition has had major consequences at home. While promising that ties with Beijing would bring economic development in the form of aid and infrastructure to the struggling island country, tensions came to a boil when it was alleged that MPs were offered and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars to switch recognition.

Allegations of corruption coupled with local and cultural complexities in the highly religious island chain nation where economic anxieties and provincial rivalries run deep sparked widespread fury leading to anti-Chinese and anti-Sogavare protests.

Flames rise from buildings in Honiara’s Chinatown on November 26, 2021 as days of rioting have seen thousands ignore a government lockdown order. 
Photo: AFP via Getty Images / Charley Piringi

The unrest plays into a longstanding secessionist movement in the province of Malaita where the provincial leader and Sogavare’s political rival, Daniel Suidani, is vocally pro-Taipei and has vowed to forbid any Chinese investment in the province he governs.

Washington has since bypassed the central government and delivered a US$25 million aid package directly to Malaita in a move that experts have called destabilizing by fanning the secessionist anti-Sogavare movement. Protests turned riotous and deadly last November and devasted the domestic economy; many buildings, businesses and a police station were burned to the ground.

Riots were particularly intense in the nation’s capital of Honiara’s Chinatown district, where ethnic Chinese were targeted and their businesses burned down. Most of those targeted had no affiliation or loyalty to Beijing. At the time it was reported that the charred remains of at least three individuals were uncovered there.

Australia has taken a leading role in helping to subsequently stabilize the country along with Fiji, Papua New Guinea and New Zealand. This arrangement, the result of a 2017 agreement allowing for the Solomon Islands to call on Australia for aid in the event of civil unrest and intended to foster regional cooperation, is set to continue until May and then come under review.

Canberra has been the primary security provider to the Solomon Islands for decades, a status quo Australian policymakers are keen to maintain.

Canberra sent police and Australian Defense forces to the country upon Sogavare’s request last November to assist in restoring and preserving calm amid the deadly civil unrest. Now, however, their role in the country could be on the verge of being replaced by Beijing. A small number of Australian soldiers – as well as Papuan New Guinea soldiers – remain in the country.

Complicating the picture, however, a small number of Chinese police have been in the country since Honiara accepted Beijing’s offer to help restore order in late February. The police unit, dubbed the People’s Republic of China Public Security Bureau’s Solomon Islands Policing Advisory Group, is officially in the country to train local authorities in anti-riot capabilities.

With bitter party politics, longstanding interprovincial anxieties and multiple foreign security forces present in the Solomon Islands, a climate of insecurity is palpable.

In response to the deal’s seemingly imminent implementation, some Australians have taken a hawkish approach, with one commentator receiving attention on social media for calling for an Australian invasion of the Solomon Islands to prevent the deal from being implemented. The notion has not been echoed by any member of the Australian government.

Australia considers the Solomon Islands as being in its backyard. Image: Wikimedia

Yet a parallel can be drawn to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, which was justified in Moscow by “legitimate security concerns” with respect to Ukraine, traditionally within the Russian sphere of influence, exercising its sovereignty to seek closer relations with the West.

Having sanctioned Russia and publicly sided with Ukraine, Australia and New Zealand risk appearing hypocritical if they attempt to undermine the Solomon Islands’ initiative with Beijing, legitimate security concerns notwithstanding.

If the security deal with China is indeed implemented, the Solomon Islands will become the PRC’s top partner in the South Pacific a mere three years since it switched recognition from Taipei to Beijing. This represents a sea change in the South Pacific and a significant shift in the regional balance of power, though Sogavare is insistent that neighbors have no reason to worry as Honiara will not “pick sides.”

The Solomon Islands, of course, was the sight of a major Allied counteroffensive against Imperial Japan in World War II, which left the country in ruin. Strategically important but economically impoverished, the Solomon Islands once against finds itself in the middle of dangerous great power politics at the outbreak of what some see as a new Cold War.

Nate Fischler, a graduate of the Johns Hopkins-Nanjing Center, is an independent Asia-based reporter focusing primarily on China and Vietnam. Follow him on Twitter at @NateFischler
Russia accused of executing Ukrainian civilians in Bucha
Local resident stand next to a destroyed Russian tank, as Russia's attack on Ukraine continues, in Bucha, near Kyiv region, Ukraine on Sunday. 
Photo by Vladyslav Musienko/UPI | License Photo


April 3 (UPI) -- U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Sunday that images of Ukrainian civilians alleged to have been executed in the city of Bucha are a "punch to the gut."

"Since the aggression, we've come out and said that we believe that Russian forces have committed war crimes," Blinken told CNN.

"We've been working to document that, to provide the information we have to the relevant instructions and organizations that will put all of this together. And there needs to be accountability for it."

Blinken will travel to Brussels, Belgium, on Monday for a meeting of foreign ministers of NATO member nations, the State Department said in a press release. He will also meet with foreign ministers of the Group of Seven nations.


Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, called for an investigation into Russia war crimes on Sunday after the revelations.

"Appalled by reports of unspeakable horrors in areas from which Russia is withdrawing. An independent investigation is urgently needed," von der Leyen said in a statement. "Perpetrators of war crimes will be held accountable."

Her comments came hours after Ukraine's Defense Ministry posted a video to social media accusing Russian forces of executing civilians in the Ukrainian city of Bucha. The video purports to show the bodies of at least three people in civilian clothing lining a street.

"The Ukrainian city of Bucha was in the hands of animals for several weeks," the Defense Ministry said. "Local civilians were being executed arbitrarily, some with hands tied behind their backs, their bodies scattered in the streets of the city."

In the post, the Defense Ministry also called the scenes from Bucha as a "New Srebrenica" in a reference to a massacre during the Bosnian War in which more than 8,000 people were killed in 1995.

A STREET IN BUCHA FULL OF RUSSIAN TANKS 

Mykhailo Podolyak, a senior adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, shared graphic images to Twitter purporting to show the bodies of men and women shot dead with their hands tied behind their backs.

"These people were not in the military. They had no weapons. They posed no threat," Podolyak said. "How many more such cases are happening right now in the occupied territories?"

The Russian Defense Ministry denied killing civilians in a statement to Telegram on Sunday and called the video "fake."

"Given that the troops left the city on March 30, where were these footage for four days?" the Russian Defense Ministry said. "The bodies in the video seem to have been deliberately laid out in order to create a more dramatic picture."

The alleged executions of Ukrainians in Bucha came as Russian forces withdrew from the city, which sits on the west bank of the Dnipro River near Kyiv.

British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said in a statement that she was "appalled by atrocities in Bucha and other towns in Ukraine."

"Reports of Russian forces targeting innocent civilians are abhorrent," she said. "The UK is working with others to collect evidence and support @IntlCrimCourt war crimes investigation. Those responsible will be held to account."

French President Emmanuel Macron called the images of the alleged executions "unbearable" in a statement posted to Twitter. Macron has been a major figure in attempting to negotiate peace between Russia and Ukraine.

"In the streets, hundreds of cowardly murdered civilians. My compassion for the victims, my solidarity with the Ukrainians," Macron said. "The Russian authorities will have to answer for these crimes."

In Ukrainian street, a corpse with hands bound and a bullet wound to the head



By Simon Gardner
Reuters
April 04, 2022

BUCHA, Ukraine (Reuters) - A man lay sprawled by the roadside in the Ukrainian city of Bucha on Sunday, his hands tied behind his back and a bullet wound to his head, one of hundreds of local residents that officials say have been found dead in the wake of five weeks of Russian occupation.

Bucha's deputy mayor, Taras Shapravskyi, said 50 of the dead residents, found after Russian forces withdrew from the city late last week, were the victims of extra-judicial killings carried out by Russian troops, and the officials have accused Moscow of war crimes.

Russian's defence ministry said in a statement issued on Sunday that all photographs and videos published by the Ukrainian authorities alleging 'crimes' by Russian troops in Bucha were a "provocation," and no resident of Bucha suffered violence at the hands of Russian troops.

Reuters was not able to independently verify who was responsible for killing the dead residents.

But three bodies seen by Reuters reporters on Sunday -- the corpse with the hands bound and two others which did not have bound hands -- bore bullet shots to the head consistent with what Bucha mayor Anatoliy Fedoruk and his deputy described as executions.

In all three cases, there were no signs of any other significant injuries elsewhere in the body. All three people shot in the head were male, and all three were dressed in civilian clothing.

On the body of the person whose hands were bound, there were powder burn marks on his lips and face. Such marks can mean a person was shot at close range.

The cloth used to bind the man's hands appeared to be a white armband. Russian troops, while they were in Bucha, required that local residents wear the armbands to identify themselves, according to one woman who was still wearing hers.

Reuters sent questions to the Kremlin and the Russian defence ministry about the corpses that its reporters had witnessed, but received no immediate reply.

Russia's defence ministry, in its statement on Sunday said: "During the time that Russian armed forces were in control of this settlement, not a single local resident suffered from any violent actions." It added that before Russian troops withdrew on March 30 they delivered 452 tons of humanitarian aid to civilians around the Kyiv region.

Shapravskyi, the deputy mayor, said some 300 people were found dead after the Russian withdrawal. Of these, he said officials so far have logged 50 as executions carried out by Russian forces. Reuters could not independently verify those figures.

The others were either killed in crossfire, or their deaths are so far unexplained.

"Any war has some rules of engagement for civilians. The Russians have demonstrated that they were consciously killing civilians," Fedoruk, the mayor, said as he showed Reuters reporters one of the bodies.

SHALLOW GRAVE


Reuters also spoke to one local resident who described a person being found dead after Russian troops detained them, and another resident who described two people found dead with single gunshot wounds to the head.

Reuters was not able to independently verify the descriptions provided by the residents.

Sobbing as she gestured at her husband's shallow grave, a shot of vodka topped with a cracker resting on freshly dug earth, Tetyana Volodymyrivna recounted an ordeal at the hands of Russian troops in this city 37 km (23 miles) northwest of Kyiv.

She and her husband, a former Ukrainian marine, were dragged from their apartment when Russian troops set up their command centre in their building. The soldiers held them prisoner in the apartment building where they lived.

She said the Russians, when they arrived in the city, asked people who they were, and demanded to see documents.

She said a fighter with the Russian forces who she believed was from Russia's semi-autonomous Chechnya region warned he would "cut us up." She did not say how she knew he was Chechen.

Reuters sent a request for comment to the office of the leader of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, a Kremlin loyalist, but received no reply.

Tetyana, who identified herself by her first name and patronymic but did not give her family name, was released after being held for four days. Her husband was nowhere to be seen for several days, until she was told about some bodies in a basement stairwell of the building where she and her husband lived.

"I recognised him by his sneakers, his trousers. He looked mutilated, his body was cold," she said. "My neighbor still has a picture of his face. He had been shot in the head, mutilated, tortured."

Reuters reviewed the photograph, which showed that the face and body were badly mutilated. The news agency could not determine if there was a bullet wound.

After recovering her husband's body, she and some neighbours buried it in a garden plot near their building, just deep enough "so dogs wouldn't eat him," she said.

Another corpse still lay in the stairwell where her husband was found, a Reuters reporter saw. Local residents covered the body with a bedsheet as a mark of dignity.

"SHOT IN LEFT EYE"


Around the corner, another grave contained the remains of two men, a woman resident told Reuters. She said the men had been taken away by Russian troops. She did not witness them being killed. When the bodies were found, both had been shot through the left eye, she said. Six other residents gathered near the grave said her account was correct.

One of the residents said she recognised one of the dead men as a tenant in the apartment complex, who she said was a retired member of the Ukrainian military.

Bucha was captured in the days immediately after the Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces who swept south, capturing the defunct nuclear reactor at Chernobyl and moving southwards toward the capital.

Bucha and the northern outskirts of nearby Irpin were the point at which the Russian advance from the northwest was halted after they met with unexpectedly fierce resistance from Ukrainian forces.

The area witnessed some of the bloodiest fighting of the battle for the capital, until Russian forces pulled back from north of Kyiv. Moscow said in late March it was regrouping to focus on battles in eastern Ukraine.

On Saturday, Ukraine said its forces had retaken all areas around Kyiv and that it now had complete control of the capital region for the first time since the invasion.

On Sunday, roads in Bucha were littered with unexploded ordnance. Rockets poked out of the tarmac near burned-out wrecks of tanks. Some residents scrawled "Beware, mines" on their walls in chalk after finding booby traps or missiles on their premises.

Resident Volodomir Kopachov said Russians troops had set up a rocket system in a vacant lot next to his garden. When a Reuters reporter visited, boxes of ammunition and spent shell casings littered the ground.

Kopachov, a Ukrainian dog breeder, was in mourning.

He said his 33-year-old daughter, her boyfriend and a friend were shot dead by Russian troops after firing a party streamer towards them just days before the pullback. Kopachov's wife said they fired the streamer as a gesture of defiance, not with the intent of harming the soldiers.

"It is so hard to go through it all," said the 69-year-old," as 10 Alabai, a breed of prized Central Asian Shepherd dog, barked in his backyard.

Kopachov said he had not ventured beyond the gates of his house for a month. "They were killing [people] on the spot. No one asked: 'who you are, why you are out?'. The men were simply shot."

The Kremlin denies that it has invaded Ukraine, saying it is carrying out a "special military operation" to degrade the Ukrainian armed forces and is targeting military installations rather than carrying out strikes on civilian areas.

Speaking in Hostomel, near Bucha, on Sunday, Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov said: "This is not a special operation, these are not police actions... These are inhumans who simply committed crimes against civilians."

(Additional reporting by Zohra Bensemra and Sergiy Karazy; Editing by Christian Lowe)



Lithuanian documentary maker Kvedaravicius killed in Ukraine's Mariupol

2022/4/3 


VILNIUS (Reuters) -Lithuanian film director Mantas Kvedaravicius was killed on Saturday in Mariupol, the Ukrainian city whose fate he had documented for many years, according to the Ukrainian Defence Ministry and a colleague.

"While (he was) trying to leave Mariupol, Russian occupiers killed Lithuanian director Mantas Kvedaravicius," the ministry's information agency tweeted https://twitter.com/armyinformcomua/status/1510400551019859972 on Sunday.

Reuters could not immediately verify the report.

"We lost a creator well known in Lithuania and in the whole world who, until the very last moment, in spite of danger, worked in Russia-occupied Ukraine," Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda said.

Kvedaravicius, 45, was best known for his conflict-zone documentary "Mariupolis", which premiered at the 2016 Berlin International Film Festival.

The film paints a portrait of Mariupol, a strategic port in a largely Russian-speaking part of eastern Ukraine where Russian-backed separatists have been fighting Ukrainian forces since 2014.

The city was a main target of Russia's invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. Now bombed into ruins, it has been besieged for weeks, with tens of thousands trapped with little access to food and water.

"Mantas Kvedaravicius, was murdered today in Mariupol, with a camera in his hands, in this shitty war of evil, against the whole world," Russian film director Vitaly Mansky, founder of the Artdocfest arts festival in which Kvedaravicius was a participant, said on Facebook.

Amnesty International had awarded Kvedaravicius's 2011 film "Barzakh", shot in the Russian region of Chechnya, where Russian forces fought two wars to put down rebellions between 1994 and 2009, a prize at the Berlin International Film Festival.

"The audience was taken into the villages, into the lives and souls of the people," said Julia Duchrow, deputy secretary general of Amnesty International in Germany.

"Mantas Kvedaravicius has shown great courage for this: The film was shot without permission and at great personal risk.

"This courage, this unconditional will to show human rights violations and make them accessible to the public, distinguished Mantas Kvedaravicius."

(Reporting by Lidia Kelly in Melbourne and Andrius Sytas in Vilnius; Editing by William Mallard, Raissa Kasolowsky and Kevin Liffey)
Beware: The human vulnerability to 'patriotic propaganda'
RAW STORY
April 04, 2022

Photo by leah hetteberg on Unsplash

At least a dozen times in the past week I’ve heard American TV commentators wonder out loud how it is that average Russians don’t believe the horrors their government has inflicted on Ukraine and its people.

The most common story is of Ukrainian refugees or people under bombardment who’ve tried to tell friends or relatives back in Russia what’s going on and gotten a disbelieving response.

“How could average Russians be so stupid?” seems to be the main line of inquiry.

Another line of questioning wonders out loud if Putin’s lock on Russian TV and radio is so complete that, like the old Soviet Union, no truth can get through.

The reality is “none of the above.” While Putin does control the media in Russia now, the horrors of the war in Ukraine are not all that difficult to find online.

But Russians are looking at the war from their own point of view, just as Americans viewed our unprovoked and lethal bombing attack on Baghdad in April of 2003. It’s “our side versus their side,” and that perspective is being used to sell the war within Russia.

Russians aren’t any smarter or stupider than Americans, and vice-versa. Ditto for Ukrainians and everybody else on Earth. We’re all just human beings with the same vulnerability to “patriotic propaganda.”


Hundreds of thousands of years of living in families, bands and tribes — when the success of the group meant survival for its individual members — have conditioned us humans to reflexively trust people we’ve given authority to, at least until they’re totally, utterly discredited.

This is the foundation of our loyalty to sports teams and towns or regions as much as it is our loyalty to our nations. We gain comfort and a sense of safety believing that we’re part of something larger than ourselves.  

 a new poll shows Putin's approval rating in Russia rising sharply to 83% since the war began. From 69% in January. This is from Levada, independent pollster. levada.ru/2022/03/30/odo…


March 30th 202243 Retweets71 Likes


When we’re members of (or at least cheerleaders for) a “team” — be it sports, family, community, or government — our instinctive baseline assumption is that the team’s leaders are working honestly for the benefit of everybody.

It’s why when President Johnson told us we’d sustained an attack in the Gulf of Tonkin and had to go to war with North Vietnam, it took about a decade for the majority of Americans to realize we’d been lied to. Richard Nixon even doubled down on it, riding to re-election in 1972 on his promise to “win” the Vietnam war “with honor.”

It’s why when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that Saddam Hussein intended to use against us, it took most Americans several years to realize that we’d been lied into a second war we didn’t want or need.

If it took us years to figure out that American leadership was lying to us about issues of war and peace, why should any of us think Russians will only take a few days or weeks to figure out that the same thing is happening to them right now?

We made the same mistake average Russians are making right now. Repeatedly. It’s all about human nature being exploited by ruthless politicians.

This is the great danger for all nations, and democracies are only slightly less vulnerable to it than autocracies like Russia.

Which is why the Framers of the Constitution put into it a provision they believed would stop or at least slow any hasty or dishonest attempts to drag America into unnecessary war.


Speaking directly to this issue, on April 20, 1795, James Madison, who shepherded through the Constitution and Bill of Rights and would become President of the United States in the following decade, published an essay he titled Political Observations 20.

In it, he offered an “observation” that’s critical for us to hear today:

“Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other.”

Reflecting on war’s impact on the Executive branch of government, Madison continued his essay about the dangerous and intoxicating power of war for a commander-in-chief president.

“In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive [president] is extended,” he wrote. “Its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force of the people.”

It’s that human tendency to rally around the flag during a time of crisis, to believe “patriotic propaganda” that leads us to war, that Madison was worried about.

We can now look back over the past 50 years and so how badly it has torn apart our country (and continues to haunt us in Iraq and Afghanistan).

War, after all, is legalized murder. And, as we see today in Ukraine, it often involves large amount of property destruction and even widespread rape.

War, Madison proposed, and the impulse to use war to gain political power or get rich, is cancer, a malignancy that infects “republican” governments as well as kingdoms and theocracies.

“The same malignant aspect in republicanism,” he wrote, “may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both.”

Nobody, he knew, is immune to war’s seduction, and no free nation can survive if those who would make unnecessary war aren’t held to account.

“No nation,” he concluded, “could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

He and his colleagues did everything they could think of to prevent the new country they were birthing from engaging in unnecessary war, and finally believed they had it figured out:
“The reader shall judge on this subject for himself,” Madison wrote. “The constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the legislature the power of declaring a state of war…”

The key to it, he said, is found in that part of the Constitution where the power to declare a war is held exclusively by Congress, while running the military and making the war itself is entirely in the hands of the Executive Branch.

“The separation of the power of declaring war, from that of conducting it, is wisely contrived, to exclude the danger of its being declared for the sake of its being conducted.
“The separation of the power of raising armies, from the power of commanding them, is intended to prevent the raising of armies for the sake of commanding them.”


But we’ve repeatedly failed to keep the power to make war constrained to the body that is, at least in theory, closest to the people: Congress.

Instead, for 70 years we’ve given presidents the power to make war with slick weasel words like “police action” and “Authorization to Use Military Force.”


On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made a famous statement: 
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." 
The line was not, as is widely believed, about patriotism in general but rather what Johnson saw as the false use of the term "patriotism" by William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham (the patriot minister) 

Political views of Samuel Johnson - Wikipedia

 



Which makes it so hard to prevent war.


War is, on the one hand, the ultimate poison to a democracy unless its waged defensively like we last saw in WWII. The very human impulse to rally around one’s family, team, and nation is nearly irresistible, as we’ve seen here in America even when UN Weapons Inspectors are calling out the lies.

Russia’s reckless war against Ukraine should punctuate this lesson for all Americans. And it emphasizes how a country can’t restrain its power to make war when it’s in the middle of one.

Now, therefore, is the time for us to strengthen America’s defenses against a future war-wanting president.

Our Constitution, as Madison pointed out, vests the power to declare war exclusively with Congress, but we’ve watered it down. And we need to fix that.

Slick warmongers have succeeded in finding ways around that constitutional requirement, as mentioned earlier.

This generation must reverse those war-making grants of executive privilege and prevent any future president from leading America into another disastrous war like Russia is facing in Ukraine and we’re still reeling from as Afghanistan slips into famine.

This doesn’t mean that America can’t participate in helping countries like Ukraine defend themselves, as long as Congress authorizes it.

But if we don’t take this opportunity to fix our war-making laws now, we risk our democratic republic sliding farther away from the separation of powers principle that prevents wars. As Madison noted, that makes us more vulnerable to “fraud” and the “degeneracy of manners and of morals” that is so common in oligarchies.

Congress must make clear that America will only engage in wars that are debated and declared by Congress as the Constitution requires. No more Vietnams or Iraqs.

With our precedents and laws as they are today, our next president — especially if it’s another rightwing narcissist — can still follow Bush’s war-path to re-election.

History shows that all it takes to get high approval ratings for war is showering a country with patriotic propaganda, telling the story exclusively from that country’s perspective.

Putin is doing that now in Russia, and Americans have fallen for a similar sales pitch from cynical presidents using war for their own purposes thrice in my lifetime. None of those American wars were declared by Congress, as the Constitution requires.

We must reassert the wisdom of clearly defining war and not allowing a single person, grasping for the added power and popularity war initially brings, to declare war on behalf of Americans. Otherwise, the only thing at the end of that road, beyond more piles of dead bodies, is the end of democracy.
TANKS FOR THE MEMORIES
Ukraine has become a graveyard for Russians — and for modern weapons systems
 Salon
April 02, 2022

Ukraine Defense Ministry handout

The word "miscalculation" has been thrown around a lot to describe Vladimir Putin's attempt to annex Ukraine, but perhaps his biggest miscalculation lay in thinking he could do it using tanks as his primary weapon. It's clear as the sixth week of the war begins that his apparent plan was to send a column of tanks rumbling into Kyiv, blow up a few things, send Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his government scampering away in fear, declare victory, install a puppet president and go home. Evidence that his plan was a strategic, tactical and political failure is showing on your television screens around the clock. If there is one image that will symbolize forever this war, it will be a blown-up Russian tank, its treads sagging and its turret tilted, rusting by the side of the road in Ukraine.

Thirty years ago, this country used two armored cavalry regiments, a mechanized infantry division and a 400 helicopter-strong air assault to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi forces. Huge formations of tanks crossed the border from Saudi Arabia following massive airstrikes on Iraqi positions. During the assault, three epic tank battles were fought in the desert of Kuwait, one of which is thought to have been the largest tank battle in American history. In less than 100 hours of fighting, U.S. forces destroyed 1,350 Iraqi tanks and 1,224 armored personnel carriers (APCs). In all, some 5,000 Iraqi armored combat vehicles were destroyed, damaged or captured. The U.S. military lost a single Bradley fighting vehicle. What is now known as the first Gulf War was the most celebrated and successful use of armored weaponry in modern history. It seemed as Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles rolled to victory in Kuwait City that powerful armored vehicles had proved their worth as weapons of modern war.


Putin's attempt to take that lesson and apply it to Ukraine has failed abjectly, and it's not just because the deserts of a Kuwait winter are more amenable to tank battles than the muddy flatlands of an Eastern European spring. Yes, 30 years have passed, and Russia has not kept up with modern technology and tactics, but it's more than that. The fierce determination of Ukraine's fighters has played an outsized role throwing Russian forces into disarray, but size and money and ease of use have played large roles, too.

Russian tanks have met their match because of two Western-made rockets, the U.S. Javelin and the British Next generation Light Anti-tank Weapon (NLAW). Both are lightweight, easily portable, deadly accurate, relatively inexpensive and designed to get around every attempt of modern armor design to defeat them. Lightly armored Russian personnel carriers, constructed mostly of aluminum, can be destroyed using Russia's own RPG-7 rocket launcher, which was designed and deployed more than 60 years ago.

Ukrainian forces have expertly used the Javelin and the NLAW to destroy Russian tanks as they have moved in convoys and deployed in combat to assault Ukrainian cities and towns. The weapons are carried by infantry soldiers on foot and can be fired from positions of cover and concealment. Both are "fire and forget" weapons, meaning that once they have been aimed at a target and tracked for a short period, they can be fired by the user, who is then able to drop the weapon and move away to safety. The NLAW is disposable. The weapon is meant to fire a single missile and then be discarded. The American Javelin can be reloaded and used to fire multiple missiles, but in an emergency can be discarded if the soldier using it has come under fire and must retreat from his or her position. Both weapons are designed to use high-tech location systems to hit the tops of tank turrets where they are lightly armored and highly vulnerable.

But here is the real deal: The NLAW disposable missile costs around $25,000, and the Javelin rocket launcher system costs about $180,000 and fires a missile that costs around $75,000. Both rocket launchers are being used in Ukraine to destroy tanks that cost upwards of $2 million each. The cost differential is obvious. It's even better when you consider the RPG-7, which costs around $1,000 and fires missiles that can cost as little as $100 each. (Costs can go up to as much as $500 for RPG warheads when they use armor piercing or air-burst technology.) Their cost-effectiveness is amazing when you consider that they're being used to knock out Russian APCs costing more than $1 million each. In Iraq, the same RPGs were used by insurgents to bring down American Apache and Blackhawk helicopters that cost between $6 million and $13 million each, depending on the model and year of manufacture.

Ukraine has also made use of armed drones against Russia's heavy armor, such as the T-72 tank. The drones were acquired from Turkey and fire "smart" bombs that are much more expensive than Javelin rounds but have been extremely effective, especially when used to destroy tanks in convoys, where even one disabled tank becomes an obstacle to every vehicle behind it. The infamous 40-mile Russian convoy that moved slowly from the Belarus border to positions around Kyiv was stalled repeatedly by Ukrainian drones and anti-tank weapons fired by infantry. RPGs were also used to take out Russian ammunition and fuel trucks, making the units they were meant to serve less combat-effective.


In fact, Russia's use of armored weapons like tanks and APCs has been a bust. The only thing the Russian military has been effective at doing is standing back from Ukrainian cities and shelling civilian areas with artillery and rocket launchers, which is to say the one thing they've been really good at is committing war crimes. Russia has also been very reluctant to employ its helicopters for both air-mobile infantry and gunship use because the Ukrainian military has been supplied with Stinger and other anti-aircraft missiles, which have been used to take down Russian helicopters as well as fighter-bomber jet aircraft. The cost differential between the ground-based Stingers and expensive Russian air force jets is enormous, which is why Russia has failed to achieve air superiority despite its far better equipped air force and army helicopter units. They have been reluctant to put them in the air, knowing Ukrainians with Stingers are waiting for them on the ground.

The Pentagon has for several decades had a team of military officers from the three major services, along with civilian defense experts and scientists, whose task is to look 25 years ahead, constantly trying to predict what the warfare of the future will look like and prepare for it. Thirty years ago, when the U.S. drove Saddam's army out of Kuwait, we didn't face anti-tank weapons like the Javelin and NLAW. The technology of that time was the plain and simple LAW, a disposable anti-tank weapon that fired an inaccurate unguided warhead that wasn't capable of penetrating American armor, much less the enemy armor of that time.

The Pentagon doesn't talk much about what its seers into warfare's future are up to, but they must be studying what has happened to Russian armor faced with the much smaller and less well-equipped Ukrainian army. Russia has had major problems moving its armored units from their positions across the border before the war into Ukraine, even more problems supplying their tanks and APCs with fuel once they were underway, and problems after that resupplying and refueling tanks once they reached positions where they could be used in combat to invade Ukrainian cities and take territory. Tanks have historically been one of an army's weapons of terror. Their fearsome appearance and firepower has had an understandably intimidating effect on both infantry soldiers and defenses in place.

But tanks sitting still on a road, packed closely together, like those we saw in the infamous 40-mile convoy at the beginning of the war aren't intimidating at all. They are targets, and now many of them are scrap heaps of twisted steel and limp tracks and crooked turrets, all because a foot soldier carrying a 25-pound missile launcher was able to sneak up close enough to fire a warhead that cost less than one percent of the cost of the tank. Those kinds of figures, as they say, are not sustainable. Nor is the tank as a weapon of modern war.



Pluto: ‘recent’ volcanism raises puzzle – how can such a cold body power eruptions?

Simulated image of Pluto’s Wright Mons volcano. Nature Communications


Published: March 29, 2022
THE CONVERSATION

Pluto, the Solar System’s largest dwarf planet, just became even more interesting with a report that icy lava flows have recently covered substantial tracts of its surface. In this context, “recently” means probably no more than a billion years ago. That’s old, of course – and there is no suggestion that volcanoes are still active – but it’s only a quarter the age of the Solar System and no one knows how Pluto brewed up the heat needed to power these eruptions.

The news, coming nearly seven years after NASA’s New Horizons probe made its spectacular flyby of Pluto on July 14, 2015, is thanks to analysis of images and other data by a team led by Kelsi Singer of the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado.

Singer’s team draw particular attention to a mountainous feature named Wright Mons, which rises 4-5km above its surroundings. It is about 150km across its base and has a central depression (a hole) 40-50km wide, with a floor at least as low as the surrounding terrain.

The team claims that Wright Mons is a volcano, and cite the lack of impact craters as evidence that it is not likely to be older than 1-2 billion years. Many other areas of Pluto have been around long enough to accumulate large numbers of impact craters – no recent icy lava flows have covered them.

As volcanoes go, Wright Mons is a big one. Its volume exceeds 20 thousand cubic kilometres. Although considerably less than the volume of Mars’s biggest volcanoes, this is similar to the total volume of Hawaii’s Mauna Loa, and much greater than the volume of its above sea-level portion. This is particularly impressive given Pluto’s small size, with a diameter about a third that of Mars and a sixth that of Earth.
Height profile of Wright Mons (blue line), compared with the above sea-level part of Hawaii’s Mauna Loa (blue line) and the biggest volcanoes on Mars (red lines). Singer et al. (2022)


The Wright stuff

In detail, the slopes of Wright Mons and much of its surroundings are seen to be crowded with hummocks up to 1km high and mostly 6-12km across. The team conclude that these hummocks are made primarily of water-ice, rather than nitrogen- or methane-ice that covers some other young regions on Pluto. They argue that this is consistent with the material strength necessary to form and preserve these domes, but they do recognise small patches of much weaker nitrogen-ice, mainly in the central depression.

The hummocks were likely created by some sort of ice volcanism, known by the technical term “cryovolcanism” – erupting icy water rather than molten rock. Pluto’s bulk density shows that it must have rock in its interior, but its outer regions are a mixture of ices (water, methane, nitrogen and probably ammonia and carbon monoxide, too, all of which are less than a third as dense as rock) in the same way that the crust of the Earth and other rocky planets is a mixture of several silicate minerals.


250km wide image centred on Wright Mons. NASA/JHUAPL/SwRI

At Pluto’s surface temperature of well below -200°C, ice made of frozen water is immensely strong. It can (and on Pluto, does) form steep mountains that will last for eternity without sagging downhill like a glacier on the much less frigid Earth, where water-ice is weaker.
What melts the ice?

Ice, of course, melts at much lower temperatures than rock. And when there is a mixture of two ices, melting can begin at a lower temperature than for either of the pure ices (the same principle applies in silicate rock made of different minerals). This makes melting even easier. Despite this, it is a surprise to find evidence of relatively young water-rich cryovolcanic eruptions on Pluto, because there is no known heat source to power them.

There is only very limited scope for Pluto’s interior to be heated by tidal forces – a gravitational effect between orbiting bodies, such as a moon and a planet – which warm the interiors of some of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. And the amount of rock inside Pluto is not enough to produce much heat from radioactivity.

Singer and her coworkers speculate that Pluto somehow held on to heat from its birth, which was unable to leak out until late in the body’s history. This would be consistent with Pluto having a deep internal liquid water ocean, suggested based on other evidence.

If the hummocks from which Wright Mons is built do represent water-ice eruptions, this stuff clearly was not flowing freely like liquid water, but must have been some kind of gooey crystal-rich “mush”, maybe within a completely frozen, but still pliable, outer skin that confined each effusion of fluid into a dome-like hummock.
A hole in the argument?

The team cite the depth and volume of the central depression of Wright Mons to dismiss earlier suggestions that this is a volcanic crater (a caldera) or that it has been excavated by explosive eruptions. Instead, they regard it as a gap that somehow avoided being covered by erupted hummocks.

I have my doubts about that, because there is an even bigger probable volcano, Piccard Mons, to the south of Wright Mons that also has a large central depression. It strikes me as too much of a coincidence for there to be two adjacent volcanoes both with fortuitous holes in their middles. I think it is more likely that these central depressions are somehow integral to how these volcanoes grew or erupted.
Height map showing the ring-like Wright Mons in the northern half and the even larger Piccard Mons in the southern half. 
NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Southwest Research Institute

Piccard Mons is less well characterised than Wright Mons because, by the time New Horizons made its closest approach, Pluto’s rotation had carried Piccard Mons into darkness. The flyby was so fast that only the side of Pluto facing the Sun at the right time could be seen in detail. However, New Horizons was able to image Piccard Mons thanks to sunlight weakly reflected onto the ground by haze in Pluto’s atmosphere.


That was a remarkable achievement, but it leaves us wanting to know more. What extra details are lurking in the poorly imaged half of Pluto? It will probably be decades before we find out, or learn much more about how these icy volcanoes formed.

Author
David Rothery

Professor of Planetary Geosciences, The Open University
Disclosure statement

David Rothery is Professor of Planetary Geosciences at the Open University. He is co-leader of the European Space Agency's Mercury Surface and Composition Working Group, and a Co-Investigator on MIXS (Mercury Imaging X-ray Spectrometer) that is now on its way to Mercury on board the European Space Agency's Mercury orbiter BepiColombo. He has received funding from the UK Space Agency and the Science & Technology Facilities Council for work related to Mercury and BepiColombo, and from the European Commission under its Horizon 2020 programme for work on planetary geological mapping (776276 Planmap). He is author of Planet Mercury - from Pale Pink Dot to Dynamic World (Springer, 2015), Moons: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2015) and Planets: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2010). He is Educator on the Open University's free learning Badged Open Course (BOC) on Moons and its equivalent FutureLearn Moons MOOC, and chair of the Open University's level 2 course on Planetary Science and the Search for Life.



HIRE A FUCKING PALEONTOLOGIST
112 million-year-old dinosaur tracks in Utah damaged by construction equipment

The damage at the Mill Canyon Dinosaur Tracksite is minor but some footprints had fractures around the rims, U.S. officials said.

April 2, 2022
By The Associated Press



MOAB, Utah — Dinosaur tracks from 112 million years ago have been damaged in southeastern Utah by heavy machinery used to rebuild a boardwalk at the popular tourist area, U.S. officials say.

The damage at the Mill Canyon Dinosaur Tracksite is minor but some footprints had fractures around the rims, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management recently said in a report.

The agency also said an area where a prehistoric crocodile crossed a mud flat appeared to have been driven over multiple times by a backhoe, causing fracturing, the Salt Lake Tribune reported.

The site is considered among the most important dinosaur track areas in the nation, containing tracks from at least 10 different species.


The agency in the report said the project should be reevaluated, the area clearly marked and work crews briefed on where they can and can’t go.

The report also noted that the agency should fill a vacancy for a regional paleontologist that has been vacant since 2018.

“To ensure this does not happen again, we will follow the recommendations in the assessment, seek public input, and work with the paleontology community as we collectively move forward on constructing boardwalks at the interpretive site,” the agency said.

That revised report should be done this summer.

“It’s good that we stopped more damage from happening,” said Jeremy Roberts, among those who sought to have the Bureau of Land Management pause the project. “But this will continue to plague the state until we get a paleontologist.”


 

100 million-year-old dinosaur tracks damaged to build boardwalk in Utah
2022/4/2 
© New York Daily News
                                  Marek Uliasz/Dreamstime/TNS

They didn’t have backhoes in the Cretaceous period.

Dinosaur tracks from 112 million years ago in Utah were damaged in January by construction equipment building a boardwalk at a tourist attraction.

The dino footprints at Mill Canyon Dinosaur Tracksite have been drawing visitors since they were discovered in 2009. But people noticed in January that some of the tracks had been damaged, and there was heavy construction equipment at the site.

The Bureau of Land Management, which operates the site, claimed at the time that no equipment was in the protected area near the dinosaur tracks. However, they had to backtrack on that claim and launch an investigation.


On Wednesday, the BLM shared the report from that investigation, which confirmed that construction equipment had caused irreversible damage to some of the tracks.

The new, metal boardwalk was commissioned because the current, wooden boardwalk is in rough shape, having been warped by the eastern Utah desert sun.

For several years, the local BLM office had a paleontologist on staff. But in 2018, that paleontologist left for a different job and was not replaced. No paleontologists were consulted prior to the construction project, according to the report.

Despite the problems, construction of the new boardwalk is expected to resume later this year. However, the BLM said it would create a new plan and actually talk to a paleontologist or two this time.

In addition to being a popular tourist location, Mill Canyon Dinosaur Tracksite is a significant prehistoric location. It’s one of the 10 most important dinosaur tracksites in the U.S.


Traces of giant prehistoric crocodiles discovered in northern British Columbia


Today’s crocodiles are quite similar to their prehistoric ancestors, if a bit on the smaller side. (Shutterstock)

Published: March 31, 2022 
THE CONVERSATION

Giant crocodiles once roamed northeastern British Columbia. A recently published article in Historical Biology features the first detailed trace fossil evidence ever reported of giant crocodylians. The sites are from the Peace Region of northeastern British Columbia, north of Tumbler Ridge.

The trace fossils include swim traces, made when the crocodiles were scraping the muddy bottoms of lakes and river channels with their claws. Some of these swim traces showed remarkable detail, including parallel striations that represent scale patterns on the crocodiles’ feet.

While the Tumbler Ridge area has become well known for its dinosaur tracks, there is something special about crocodiles. Unlike dinosaurs, they survived, and still have not changed substantially since the Mesozoic.


In 2020, a crane company donated time and personnel to recover four large blocks containing some of the finest examples of these tracks and traces. They were transported to the Tumbler Ridge Museum, where they are securely stored and will be incorporated into future exhibits.

An example of giant crocodile swim traces made by a crocodile’s claws scraping the bottom of a river channel, showing scale striations. (C. Helm), Author provided

Ancient giants

The tracks and traces we examined are in the age range of 95–97 million years from the Cretaceous Period. The tracks included ankylosaurs, ornithopods and turtles.

The size of the crocodiles can be estimated from the distance between their claw impressions. We used this distance to estimate a total body length of about nine metres, and possibly as much as 12 metres. This was corroborated by our identification of a partial track, 75 centimetres long, which allowed for a similar length estimate of close to nine metres.

A crocodile of such prodigious size would have weighed around five tonnes, and would probably have been a top predator. By comparison, the record length of crocodiles living today is about six metres.
MOM AND KIDS

Today’s crocodiles are significantly smaller than their prehistoric ancestors. (Shutterstock)

Gigantism in crocodiles has been reported several times in the fossil record. In North America, the oldest body fossil evidence of giant crocodiles is of Deinosuchus at about 82 million years, estimated to have been between eight to 12 metres long. Deinosuchus has been recorded from the United States and Mexico, but never from Canada.

The large swim traces from north of Tumbler Ridge may represent a precursor to Deinosuchus, that lived at least 13 million years before the previously reported first appearance of giant crocodiles in North America.

Tracking enviromental changes


3D photogrammetry image showing a trackway made by a juvenile ankylosaur on the left, and on the right a hybrid between a crocodile track and swim trace; horizontal and vertical scales are in metres.
(C.Helm), Author provided

The environment consisted of a low-lying delta-plain with shallow lakes, river channels and vegetated wetlands, situated about 100 kilometres inland from the shoreline of the Western Interior Seaway that linked the Gulf of Mexico with the Arctic Ocean.

It was possible to document multiple episodes of flooding and emergence, which determined whether and when animals walked or swam. This helped explain the variety of tracks and traces that were identified.

These findings follow our discovery of 112 million-year-old swim traces, made by much smaller crocodylians (between one and two metres long) within the Tumbler Ridge UNESCO Global Geopark. Our familiarity with the nature of the exceptionally well-preserved traces from near Tumbler Ridge led directly to the first identification of crocodile swim traces in Africa.



The co-existence of traces made by walking ankylosaurs and swimming crocodiles on a single surface was intriguing and unprecedented in the fossil record. One of the ankylosaur trackways is the smallest thus far described from the region. It comprised tracks only 10 centimetres wide, presumably made by a juvenile.

Authors
Guy Plint
Professor, Earth Sciences, Western University
Disclosure statement
Guy Plint receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Discovery Grant Program.
Charles Helm
Research Associate, African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience, Nelson Mandela University
Explainer-What political upheaval in Pakistan means for rest of the world



By Jonathan Landay and Gibran Naiyyar 
2022/4/4 

WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan blocked a no-confidence vote he looked sure to lose on Sunday and advised the president to order fresh elections, fueling anger among the opposition and deepening the country's political crisis.

His actions have created huge uncertainty in Islamabad, with constitutional experts debating their legality and pondering whether Khan and his rivals can find a way forward.

The nuclear-armed nation of more than 220 million people lies between Afghanistan to the west, China to the northeast and nuclear rival India to the east, making it of vital strategic importance.

Since coming to power in 2018, Khan's rhetoric has become more anti-American and he has expressed a desire to move closer to China and, recently, Russia - including talks with President Vladimir Putin on the day the invasion of Ukraine began.

At the same time, U.S. and Asian foreign policy experts said that Pakistan's powerful military has traditionally controlled foreign and defence policy, thereby limiting the impact of political instability.

Here is what the upheaval, which many expect to lead to Khan's exit, means for countries closely involved in Pakistan:

AFGHANISTAN

Ties between Pakistan's military intelligence agency and the Islamist militant Taliban have loosened in recent years.

Now the Taliban are back in power, and facing an economic and humanitarian crisis due to a lack of money and international isolation, Qatar is arguably their most important foreign partner.

"We (the United States) don't need Pakistan as a conduit to the Taliban. Qatar is definitely playing that role now," said Lisa Curtis, director of the Indo-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security think-tank.

Tensions have risen between the Taliban and Pakistan's military, which has lost several soldiers in attacks close to their mutual border. Pakistan wants the Taliban to do more to crack down on extremist groups and worries they will spread violence into Pakistan. That has begun to happen already.

Khan has been less critical of the Taliban over human rights than most foreign leaders.

CHINA

Khan has consistently emphasised China's positive role in Pakistan and in the world at large.

At the same time, the $60-billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) which binds the neighbours together was actually conceptualised and launched under Pakistan's two established political parties, both of which want Khan out of power.

Opposition leader and potential successor Shehbaz Sharif struck deals with China directly as leader of the eastern province of Punjab, and his reputation for getting major infrastructure projects off the ground while avoiding political grandstanding could in fact be music to Beijing's ears.

INDIA

The neighbours have fought three wars since independence in 1947, two of them over the disputed Muslim-majority territory of Kashmir.

As with Afghanistan, it is Pakistan's military that controls policy in the sensitive area, and tensions along the de facto border there are at their lowest level since 2021.

But there have been no formal diplomatic talks between the rivals for years because of deep distrust over a range of issues including Khan's extreme criticism of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his handling of attacks on minority Muslims in India.

Karan Thapar, an Indian political commentator who has closely followed India-Pakistan ties, said the Pakistani military could put pressure on a new civilian government in Islamabad to build on the successful ceasefire in Kashmir.

On Saturday, Pakistan's powerful army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa said his country was ready to move forward on Kashmir if India agrees.

The Sharif political dynasty has been at the forefront of several dovish overtures towards India over the years.

UNITED STATES

U.S.-based South Asia experts said that Pakistan's political crisis is unlikely to be a priority for President Joe Biden, who is grappling with the war in Ukraine, unless it led to mass unrest or rising tensions with India.

"We have so many other fish to fry," said Robin Raphel, a former assistant secretary of State for South Asia who is a senior associate with the Center for Strategic and International Studies think-tank.



With the Pakistani military maintaining its behind-the-scenes control of foreign and security policies, Khan's political fate was not a major concern, according to some analysts.

"Since it's the military that calls the shots on the policies that the U.S. really cares about, i.e. Afghanistan, India and nuclear weapons, internal Pakistani political developments are largely irrelevant for the U.S.," said Curtis, who served as former U.S. President Donald Trump's National Security Council senior director for South Asia.

She added that Khan's visit to Moscow had been a "disaster" in terms of U.S. relations, and that a new government in Islamabad could at least help mend ties "to some degree".

Khan has blamed the United States for the current political crisis, saying that Washington wanted him removed because of the recent Moscow trip.

(Additional reporting and writing by Sanjeev Miglani; Editing by Mike Collett-White)