Skip to main content

Dangerous escalation: On Russia’s expulsion U.S. staff (.hindu)

Russia’s expulsion of U.S. mission staff could lock the two countries into a retaliatory spiral.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to cut the U.S. diplomatic presence in the country by 755 signals a serious escalation in tensions between the two superpowers. His move came three days after the U.S. Senate passed a sanctions Bill targeting Moscow and allies. The scale of the cut is unprecedented and is comparable to the shutdown of the American diplomatic mission in Russia after the 1917 Bolshevik revolution. The decision also signals that Mr. Putin, who had pinned hopes on the Donald Trump administration to improve ties, is losing heart about such a reset. When Barack Obama expelled Russian diplomats in the last leg of his presidency over Moscow’s alleged interference in the presidential election, Mr. Putin did not retaliate, apparently hoping to strike a new beginning with the incoming administration. During his campaign, Mr. Trump himself had expressed interest in building stronger ties with Moscow. But despite Mr. Trump’s overtures, the U.S. establishment has continued to take a hard-line position towards Moscow. While the investigation into the allegations of Russia’s election-time interference is still under way, Congress went ahead preparing the sanctions Bill. Passed by both Houses of Congress with a near-total majority, the Bill also seeks to limit Mr. Trump’s ability to suspend or lift sanctions on Russia. After the White House said the President would sign the Bill, Moscow retaliated.

The new sanctions will add to Russia’s economic troubles at a time it is already battling sanctions imposed by Europe and the U.S., and dealing with a commodities meltdown. Mr. Putin could impose counter-sanctions, but the chances of winning a trade war with the world’s largest economy are slim. Hence, Russia’s formal declaration of a diplomatic war to show that it can hurt America’s geopolitical interests elsewhere. Whenever Russia and the U.S. joined hands to address the world’s pressing problems in recent years, there were results. The Iran nuclear deal is one example. The Trump administration’s willingness to work with the Russians in Syria has also helped calm parts of the war-ravaged country. The ceasefire brokered by Moscow and Washington between the Syrian regime and rebels in July is still holding, raising hopes for a sustainable political solution to the crisis. Besides, if the U.S. wants to address the North Korean nuclear crisis diplomatically, which is perhaps the biggest foreign policy challenge before the Trump administration today, it could do with Russia’s help. Russia is also crucial to stabilising Afghanistan, where it is reportedly arming the Taliban. But instead of expanding their cooperation and addressing these challenges as responsible global leaders, the nuclear-armed powers seem to have fallen into the old Cold War-era spiral of irrational mutual hostility.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i