News Archives – Page 16 of 24

December 7, 2021 — No Comments

Agricultural Supply Chain Crisis: How shortages impacted Economic Security in Italy (English and Italiano)

By: Maria Chiara Aquilino and Sarah Toubman

*Image Source:* https://www.world-grain.com/articles/15228-pandemic-boosts-durum-pasta-consumption

Global supply chain issues have recently manifested as a consequence of lockdowns implemented by world governments to curb the impact of Covid-19. Due to restrictions on movement, many producers are unable to adequately deliver goods across international borders in a timely manner, posing severe implications to both economic and food security across the globe. In Italy, these global supply chain issues have directly impacted consumers by raising the average costs of food, and limiting the earnings of the country’s large agricultural sector, which is a leading exporter of many goods, including pasta, wine, and olive oil. In the past three years, global demands on pasta surpassed production due to an increase in consumption as well as an inadequate response to the spike in demand by supply chain leaders. This has resulted in the loss of 3 million tons of wheat, causing an increase in pasta prices. Overall, supply chain problems in Italy compound pre-existing international economic and food insecurity caused by Covid-19 by decreasing the variety and quantity of key exports.

While Italy’s agricultural supply chain has no doubt been harmed by the impacts of Covid-19, it is this new complication in conjunction with other variables which has had such a severe impact on agricultural exports. For example, prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, Italy lacked a robust labour force of truck drivers compared to other European countries. Additionally, Italy sources a large percentage of the wheat it uses to make pasta from Canada and Russia. Supply chain issues alone could have hampered the import of Canadian and Russian grain into Italy, but both countries also experienced ecological disasters in 2021 which led to poor wheat harvests. Canadian wildfires in the summer of 2021 and an exceptionally cold winter 2021 in Russia damaged both countries' harvests.

Difficulties concerning imports from Canada have particularly impacted the Italian supply chain. As Italy’s primary foreign provider of wheat, the poor harvest in Canada halved imports of the grain into Italy from 6.5 to 3.5 million tons. Already, this scarcity has caused the costs of wheat to increase by 60%, and prices are forecasted to rise by a further 15% by the end of December 2021.

At present, supply chain resilience is the main solution being promoted to tackle the ongoing issues undermining agricultural output. There has been an outstanding trend in the encouragement of reshoring strategies, which are aimed at redirecting the supply chain production within national borders, and by integrating artificial intelligence into supply chain processes to optimize and improve the time management of production. While Italy imports around 40% of wheat necessary for the supply chain to meet the demand, according to Coldiretti (National Confederation of Growers), the spike in pasta prices can be dealt with by encouraging the Italian production of wheat. For this reason, growers have been advocating for agreements between agricultural and industrial businesses in order to establish prices that will not go below production costs. Fostering the Italian production of wheat to cope with the current supply chain crisis would also ensure better regulated goods, as Italy forbids the use of chemical herbicide for agricultural purposes, in contrast to Canada.

The Italian pasta and wheat industries have not been the only ones affected by Covid-19 induced supply chain issues. Italian exports of milk and dairy products, beef cattle, eggs, flowers, and wine all fell between March-May 2019 and March-May 2020, with the latter plummeting by a shocking 37%. However, this dramatic decrease likely resulted from the global closures of the bar and restaurant sectors in addition to supply chain issues. A few industries even saw modest improvements in production despite the lockdowns, with Italian exports of fruits, vegetables, oil, cereal, pigs, and sheep and goats increasing between March-May 2019 and March-May 2020. Most major Italian trade partners imported fewer goods in 2020, with only Switzerland and China importing more agricultural products, food, and drinks from the country than they had in 2019. Germany, typically the top importer of Italian products, decreased its agricultural imports by 21% and food and drinks by 28% in 2020.

Particularly in the first few months of the lockdown of 2020, Italian industry suffered from labour shortages, slowed operations, and supply chain bottlenecks. Many farm and factory workers were ill with Covid-19 or in a mandatory quarantine, and consequently unable to work. Borders closures also meant that the fruit and vegetable agricultural sectors were unable to rely on seasonal workers from elsewhere in the European Union as usual. Thus, in the early months of the pandemic, the Italian supply chain was suffering more in the production stage than in transport and distribution. Challenges with the transport and distribution side of the supply chain in Italy have instead emerged more recently.

While the Italian agricultural sector remained functional during periods of lockdown, it suffered from secondary effects related to the pandemic. Other areas of production in the Italian economy were directly closed or restricted as part of measures taken by the government to slow the spread of the virus. It has been estimated that government restrictions “locked” up to 52% of the Italian state GDP due to the closure of sectors deemed nonessential. For example, 40% of Italy's twenty most economically crucial sectors were locked, including the retail trade and food services by an April 2020 decree of the Italian Prime Minister. Agricultural production in Italy is deeply interconnected with some of these other sectors, specifically hospitality. As a result, the closure of these sectors poses a risk to the economic security of Italian agri-business.

Difficulties and shortages jeopardised Italian agricultural and economic security even prior to the global pandemic crisis generated by the outbreak of Covid-19. Labour shortages, supply chain bottlenecks, closures and an extended lockdown inevitably impacted demands from the international market. At the same time, further economic insecurity due to the pandemic stemmed from Italy’s difficulty in importing essential goods such as wheat. Continued issues with rising food prices, struggles in meeting the demand and limited earnings can be tackled through resilience strategies to lift the sector up using national production and innovative approaches.

Italiano

Problemi nella supply chain globale si sono recentemente manifestati come conseguenze di lockdowns implementati dai governi per frenare l’impatto del Covid-19. A causa delle restrizioni implementate, molti produttori sono impossibilitati a fornire adeguatamente beni destinati al mercato internazionale rispettando tempistiche adeguate, compromettendo la sicurezza economica ed alimentare a livello globale. In Italia queste problematiche hanno diretto impatto sui consumatori a causa dell’incremento nella media dei prezzi degli alimenti e del limitato guadagno del paese nell’esteso settore agricolo, esportatore leader di numerosi beni,tra cui pasta, vino e olio d’oliva. Negli ultimi tre anni, la domanda di pasta a livello economico globale ha superato la produzione a causa di un incremento nella consumazione e di un’adeguata risposta a questo picco. Il risultato è stata la perdita di tre milioni di tonnellate di grano duro e l’aumento dei prezzi della pasta. Problemi relativi alla supply chain italiana risalivano all’epoca pre-Covid-19 e alla preesistente insicurezza economica ed alimentare, che è poi stata ulteriormente peggiorata dalla pandemia e dalla diminuzione di varietà e quantità di esportazioni cruciali.

La filiera agricola italiana ha senza dubbio subito l’impatto del Covid-19, una crisi che si è sommata ad altre variabili che già da tempo avevano avuto un severo impatto su esportazioni agricole. Ad esempio, prima della pandemia l’Italia soffriva di una forte mancanza di manodopera di autotrasportatori rispetto ad altri paesi europei. Inoltre, l’Italia acquista una grande percentuale del grano duro utilizzato nella sua produzione di pasta da Canada e Russia. Le questioni relative alla catena di approvvigionamento da sole avrebbero potuto ostacolare l'importazione di grano canadese e russo in Italia, ma entrambi i paesi hanno inoltre subito disastri ecologici nel 2021 che hanno portato a raccolti di grano poveri. Gli incendi in Canada nell'estate del 2021 e un inverno 2021 eccezionalmente freddo in Russia hanno infatti danneggiato i raccolti di entrambi i paesi.

Le difficoltà relative alle importazioni dal Canada hanno avuto un impatto particolare sulla filiera italiana. Come primo fornitore straniero di grano all'Italia, il cattivo raccolto in Canada ha dimezzato le importazioni di grano in Italia da 6,5 a 3,5 milioni di tonnellate. Questa carenza ha già causato un aumento del 60% dei costi del grano, e i prezzi potrebbero aumentare di un ulteriore 15% entro la fine di dicembre 2021.

Attualmente, la resilienza della catena di approvvigionamento è vista come soluzione principale ed è promossa per affrontare le questioni in corso che minano la produzione agricola. C'è stata una tendenza eccezionale nell'incoraggiare strategie di reshoring, che mirano a riorientare la produzione della catena di approvvigionamento all'interno dei confini nazionali, e integrare l'intelligenza artificiale nei processi della catena di approvvigionamento per ottimizzare e migliorare la gestione dei tempi di produzione. Mentre l'Italia importa circa il 40% del grano necessario alla filiera per soddisfare la domanda, secondo la Coldiretti (Confederazione Nazionale dei Coltivatori), l'impennata dei prezzi della pasta può essere affrontata incoraggiando la produzione italiana di grano. Per questo motivo, i coltivatori hanno chiesto accordi tra aziende agricole e industriali al fine di stabilire prezzi che non scendano al di sotto dei costi di produzione. Promuovere la produzione italiana di frumento per far fronte all'attuale crisi della filiera garantirebbe anche una migliore regolamentazione delle merci, in quanto l'Italia vieta l'uso di diserbanti chimici per scopi agricoli, a differenza del Canada.

L'industria italiana della pasta e del grano non è stata l'unica ad essere colpita da problemi di supply chain indotti da Covid-19. Le esportazioni italiane di latte e prodotti lattiero-caseari, bovini da carne, uova, fiori e vino sono diminuite tra marzo-maggio 2019 e marzo-maggio 2020, con quest'ultimo che precipita di un impressionante 37%. Tuttavia, questa drastica diminuzione è probabilmente dovuta alla chiusura globale dei settori bar e ristoranti, oltre che a problemi di supply chain. Alcune industrie hanno visto anche modesti miglioramenti nella produzione nonostante i blocchi, con l'aumento delle esportazioni italiane di frutta, verdura, olio, cereali, suini e ovini e caprini tra marzo-maggio 2019 e marzo-maggio 2020. La maggior parte dei principali partner commerciali italiani ha importato meno merci nel 2020, con solo la Svizzera e la Cina che importano più prodotti agricoli, cibo e bevande dal paese rispetto al 2019. La Germania, tipicamente il primo importatore di prodotti italiani, ha ridotto le sue importazioni agricole del 21% e il cibo e le bevande del 28% nel 2020.

In particolare nei primi mesi del blocco del 2020, l'industria italiana ha sofferto di carenze di manodopera, rallentamento delle operazioni e strozzature della catena di approvvigionamento.

Molti lavoratori agricoli e di fabbrica sono stati affetti da Covid-19 o in una quarantena obbligatoria, e di conseguenza incapaci di lavorare. La chiusura delle frontiere ha inoltre impedito ai settori dell'agricoltura di contare, come di consueto, su lavoratori stagionali provenienti da altri paesi dell'Unione europea. Così, nei primi mesi della pandemia, la filiera italiana soffriva più in fase di produzione che di trasporto e distribuzione. Le sfide legate al trasporto e alla distribuzione della supply chain in Italia sono invece emerse più di recente.

Altre aree di produzione nell'economia italiana sono state direttamente chiuse o limitate nell'ambito delle misure adottate dal governo per rallentare la diffusione del virus. È stato stimato che le restrizioni governative "hanno bloccato" fino al 52% del PILdello Stato italiano a causa della chiusura di settori ritenuti non essenziali. Ad esempio, il 40% dei venti settori economicamentepiù cruciali dell'Italia sono stati bloccati, tra cui il commercio al dettaglio e i servizi alimentari da un decreto del primo ministro italiano dell'aprile 2020. La produzione agricola in Italia è profondamente interconnessa con alcuni di questi altri settori, in particolare l'ospitalità. Di conseguenza, la chiusura di questi settori rappresenta un rischio per la sicurezza economica dell'agroindustria italiana.

Nel complesso, l'indebolimento delle difficoltà e delle carenze aveva messo a repentaglio la sicurezza agricola ed economica italiana anche prima della crisi pandemica globale generata dal Covid-19. La carenza di manodopera, le strozzature della catena di approvvigionamento, le chiusure e un blocco prolungato hanno inevitabilmente inciso sulla domanda del mercato internazionale. Allo stesso tempo, l'ulteriore insicurezza economica dovuta alla pandemia deriva dalla difficoltà dell'Italia di importare beni essenziali come il grano. Indubbiamente, l'aumento dei prezzi dei prodotti alimentari, le lotte per soddisfare la domanda e i limitati guadagni devono ora essere affrontati attraverso strategie resilienti che possono aiutare a risollevare il settore, basandosi soprattutto sulla produzione nazionale e su approcci innovativi.

December 7, 2021 — 1 Comment

European Union Taxonomy: What is at Stake?

By: Elena Bascone & Riccardo Bosticco

2020 was a historical year in many aspects, most of them not positives. However, 2020 was a turning point in Europe when it comes to environmental policies: last year, the EU Commission introduced, for the first time, a classification of economically sustainable activities. Also known as EU taxonomy, this tool is essential in providing clarity in a still heterogeneous legal framework concerning sustainability. Indeed, the taxonomy establishes four conditions that an activity needs to meet to be classified as sustainable:

Contributing substantially to one of the environmental objectives established by the Commission - examples include climate change mitigation and adaptation, transition to circular economy, prevention of pollution, and so on;
Complying with the environmental law principle of “do no significant harm”;
Complying with minimum social safeguards;
Complying with the technical screening criteria.

However, the establishment of the framework has sparked a debate in the business sector and concerning nuclear energy, whose inclusion remains disputed.

The impact on businesses

The taxonomy will foster sustainable corporate governance in three ways: first, reducing “greenwashing” by setting strict standards; second, providing preferences when marketing the products; third, driving sustainable investors to compete to finance like-minded businesses in terms of sustainability. The second aspect, however, deserves particular attention. Indeed, we need to make distinctions between different industries.

According to data, the positive impact of the classification will vary according to the businesses concerned: in 2019, the Joint Research Center (JRC) published a technical report on the financial impact of the taxonomy, which highlights how the green transition is more prominent in two specific industries - energy-intensive sector and transports. Moreover, the JRC’s report indicates that the adoption of this scheme will lead to a significant increase in the issuance of green bonds and loans. Nonetheless, this increase can be estimated around 4.9% in the energy intensive sector and around 6% in the transport sector.

In addition to this, some industrial sectors can hardly be framed as “green” or not green with mathematical confidence; in fact, substantial criticalities concerning de-carbonizing policies deal with measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV). These activities, paramount to a sustainable economy, do not apply equally in all sectors.

Still, by the inclusion or exclusion of particular products rather than others, the EU taxonomy fosters investments in some sectors rather than others, thus enlightening debates moved by concerns of losing competitiveness and seeing interests hampered. Such arguments apply to the case of the inclusion of nuclear energy into EU taxonomy.

Hot knots: Nuclear Energy

In the EU there are 106 nuclear power reactors, which operate on the soil of 13 out of 27 Member States and are responsible for one-quarter of the electricity generated in the Union. The production of more than half of the total consumption locates in France, which, consequently, has a keen interest in fostering nuclear energy as a driver for renewable energy production.

On October 22, European Commission President Von der Layen announced the intention to include the nuclear into EU taxonomy, giving new impetus to a debate that can hardly find its synthesis. Already in 2019, a coalition formed by France, Britain and some Eastern European Countries threatened to play the veto card on the advancement of the taxonomy regulation in case it excluded nuclear energy. Although the Joint Research Centre (JRC) argued that there was no evidence showing atomic energy was a significant cause of harm to human and environmental health compared to other technologies, the issue sparked a debate that needed a political solution rather than experts’ consultation. Hence, a compromise was required.

If the matter followed parallel lines in the first stage, focusing on the alternative options of ‘inclusion – non-inclusion’, today it has assumed a narrower shape. What is at stake is how to introduce nuclear energy into the taxonomy in a way that would advance green transition. Among the proposed solutions, Mairead McGuinness suggested to add to the actual outline of the taxonomy one category that would identify not completely green activities that are nonetheless helpful for the transition. Specifically, the section named “Amber” would complement the existing framework composed by the labels “Green”, “Enabling”, and “Transition”.

Despite similar attempts, however, frictions remain. On top of the UN Cop26 held in Glasgow, Germany, Denmark, Luxembourg, Austria, and Portugal jointly expressed concerns relative to the inclusion of nuclear energy in the taxonomy, since its “too risky, too expensive” character would undermine the policy’s “integrity, credibility and therefore its usefulness”. According to those countries, the controversial nature of nuclear energy would thus hamper the objective of the taxonomy. Evidently, however, positions about the inclusion of nuclear energy in the taxonomy reflect the different strategic importance that countries assign to it.

Conclusion

One should not dismiss that often one single policy synthesizes an ampler network of interests and concerns. In general, the estimated positive impact of the taxonomy on businesses, whether it will include nuclear energy or not, is sizable. Therefore, statements in favour and against atomic energy need a critical assessment to provide a sounder understanding of what is at stake; indeed, where is the boundary between sustainable policies and (energy) security concerns?

December 3, 2021 — No Comments

The legacy of Canadian Residential Schools: the Indigenous Rights Movement and its current Challenges

By: Esther Brito Ruiz, Ludovica Brambilla, Arslan Sheikh and Reka Szabo.

*Image Source*: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ashamed-my-faith-catholics-battling-religion-discovery-1.6081426

Recently, unmarked graves of hundreds of Indigenous children were discovered in various locations in Western Canada, in the territory of residential schools. These schools operated between the end of the 19th century until 1996, and were mostly run by the Catholic Church. The official number of Indigenous children who died in these schools because of mistreatment is 4120, but it is claimed that the actual number could be much larger.

Evidence from various studies prove that approximately 150,000 indigenous children were subject to forceful assimilation in these institutions, after having been separated from their families. Physical, psychological, and sexual abuse were among the practicesused in these schools. The high death rate of Indigenous students can be connected to the extremely bad conditions of the schools— such as poor nutrition, the lack of nurses or the inadequate construction or use of the buildings — and to the lack of proper medical treatment provided to indigenous children, among other inhuman practices. The leading cause of death was tuberculosis, easily caught by malnourished children.

The practices of the residential schools have been described as a genocide by several scholars. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, after having examined testimonies from thousands of survivors, also announced that these acts are to be classified as cultural genocide against Indigenous people.

After the discovery of the graves, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau guaranteed financial aid and support to the Indigenous communities in Canada. Furthermore, an initiative of the Survivors of the Mohawk Institute at Six Nations of the Grand River — a large reserve in Canada — aimed at uncovering more details about the dark legacy of the schools’ past with a death and criminal investigation. Questions still remain about the responsibility, the accountability, and the compensation, regarding the Canadian state and the Catholic Church.

However, the discrimination of indigenous communties in Canadais not solely a past phenomenon - according to some studies ongendered violence and on the unequal treatment of indigenous people in Canada, Indigenous minorities still face a very different set of circumstances compared to the majority society. We must also consider that the controversy surrounding the Canadian case is not a localized issue, but the latest in a global movement of recognition and redress led by indigenous communities.

The Global Context for Indigenous Rights

Currently, there are 370 million Indigenous people around the world, spanning over 90 countries, 5,000 communities, and 4,000 languages. As such, the struggle of the indigenous movement is not an ancient issue, but a current and contemporary human security challenge. While there has been progress – most notably marked by the 2007 United Nations’ Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (ratified by 143 countries) – indigenous abuses are still erased and forgotten, as we have mentioned in the case of Canadian residential schools.

The legacy of indigenous communities has been marked by a rich history and vital contributions to our culture and environment (for example, in safeguarding 80% of global biodiversity) – however, it has also been defined by horrific atrocities. Well-known is the case of Native American communities, numbering over 10 million before European colonization, and decimated to under 300.000 by the 1900s. Indigenous peoples continue to face continuous and pervasive human rights abuses – ranging from assimilation policies, to land dispossession, the criminalization of protest, or abuses by armed forces. These abuses extend globally – having worsened in recent years and in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic – and most severely affect communities defending their rights and lands. This has led to intergenerational trauma in many indigenous communities. Today, the most prominent topic in discussions and advocacy within indigenous communities remains the issue of land rights and the resources they harbor.

*Image Source*: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mobili/32358569142

Indigenous Peoples and Natural Resources

Indigenous Peoples have a special relationship with natural resources. But from the times of colonisation to the present day, theirrights over these resources have been continuously violated. Even though they make up five-percent of the world’s population, they account for about fifteen-percent of the extreme poor. The major cause of this discrepancy owes to the history of colonisation, subjugation, and oppression. They regularly lack formal recognition over their lands and other natural resources, and are often last to get public investments, access to justice, political participation, and face various obstacles to partake in the formal economy.

Around a quarter of all land outside Antarctica belongs to Indigenous Peoples. But much of this land occupied by them is undercustomary ownership, and most of the governments all over the world acknowledge only a small percentage of this land as lawfully belonging to Indigenous Peoples. The unstable land tenancy is a cause of conflict, environmental degradation, and inadequate economic and social development. This endangers Indigenous Peoples’ culture and knowledge systems both of which have an extremely valuable contribution in maintaining ecological integrity and conserving nature and biodiversity.

As per World Bank, ‘’Improving security of land tenure, strengthening governance, promoting public investments in quality and culturally appropriate service provision, and supporting indigenous systems for resilience livelihoods are critical to reducing the multidimensional aspects of poverty while contributing to the SDGs.’’

The crucial role of social movements

It appears that legal frameworks for the protection of Indigenous People’s rights have been established, but land rights are not yet addressed by state actors and international organizations. Often, aboriginal communities lament a pattern of broken promises and a series of failures within development projects that have been promoted by such actors. This is due in part to the difficulty in questioning the power relations within the structure in which they operate. What is also elided by the mainstream narrative, are the continuities between the colonial past and the present. A postcolonial perspective on the matter has been proposed by many indigenous scholars that investigate colonial legacies to explain the nowadays imbalances between indigenous people and the broader society. Inequities are evident in regard to the land and resources issues but encompass almost every aspect of society, most notably healthcare. A postcolonial approach has been put into practice by many social movements, activists, and advocates for Indigenous People’s rights. Protests and movements, like Idle No More in Canada, emerge from the aboriginal communities and amplify their voices in the many arenas in which decisions are made. They represent the opportunity to contrast the structural violence they face, through ‘grassroots’ discourses around their conditions and demands and cooperations with governments and international actors. In response to the recent discovery of yet another atrocity committed in the residential ‘schools’, Idle No More has asked to cancel Canada Day to ultimately acknowledge the legacy of settler colonialism and violence in Canada’s history; Fifty municipalities have accepted the proposal out of respect and justice.

The Canadian case serves to illustrate what remains an evolving redress and human rights struggle for indigenous communities around the world. Indigenous human security continues to be precarious in most states, and despite the increasing recognition of these transnational advocacy movements, much remains to be done. As states seek to fulfil their obligations to ensure the wellbeing of their communities, a renewed focus must be placed on the recognition of indigenous peoples and their voices as rightful custodians of their land, resources, and culture. If the promises of a post-colonial global order are to be realized, it is indigenous communities that will define and lead the way to achieving it.

November 30, 2021 — No Comments

Drought in Iran: What to expect?

By: Shahin Modarres, Yasmina Dionisi and Filippo Cimento.

*Image Source*: https://www.resetdoc.org/story/drought-worse-sanctions/

May God protect this land from foe, drought, and falsehood. This famous prayer engraved in the heart of Apadana Palace in Persepolis by the Persian Shahanshah Darius the Great has a particular meaning to Iranians, but why? Where do we stand 2570 years after these words were said?

A nation without water is a nation without the most crucial flow of life. Water is undeniably recognized as a priority for human sustainable development and linked to all other environmental and societal concerns.

It should come as no surprise then that the importance of water, and its role as a vital commodity, considerably increase in arid and desert areas. These, specifically, are regions where the natural phenomenon of drought does not only frequently occur but bears rather alarming economic, social and environmental costs.

Iran is no stranger to an arid climate. Located 20 to 45 degrees north, more than 90 percent of the country’s area is dry. The question of water drought is relevant in such a country whose society and economy can be said to be water-dependent: water has played a key role in its society since the establishment of the first known human empire in the southwestern part of Iran. Drought should be addressed as an urgent concern. Three major consequences of water drought in Iran are delved into in this article: respectively on the agricultural sector, on energy production in regards to hydroelectricity, and ultimately on internal migration.

Agriculture

Drought primarily affects the agriculture sector. Studies on the Iranian agricultural sector are limited but its major role in Iran’s political economy and food security can still be denoted. The country aims towards becoming fully self-sufficient in food production and food security remains a priority in Iran.

Arid areas like the Middle East rely on irrigation. Reportedly, in what is the water used for agriculture, irrigation accounts for about 20% of the global agricultural evapotranspiration. What has been evident is that Iran's agriculture is heavily impacted by water availability. Dating back to July 1968 when the Nationalization of Water Resources act was enacted, and all water in the country was considered a natural wealth and belonging to the nation; the relation between Iran’s agricultural sector and water use hardly goes unnoticed: Iran’s agricultural sector is, as a matter of fact, responsible for about 90% of water consumption at a national scale. From 2005, 98 percent of all agricultural raw materials in Iran were produced from irrigated lands.

Scholars find the main theme in this sense is the one of responsibility. This responsibility is principally visible in the action of the government in what concerns the resources management. For example, George Joffe claims that “Waste needs to be eliminated”, and “The real solutions, therefore, are to find ways of using water more efficiently and rationally, rather than fighting to retain control”. This could be done by reducing the amount of water lost through leaks which stays at a level of 50% of all water piped. Moreover “cost-effective methods of desalination through solar power will ultimately be the key to survival”. It is self-evident that Iran is not going in this direction, on the contrary, there is an increasing process of irresponsible exploitation, that in most cases reveals being without any vision. About this Iraj Emadonin says that “Farmlands under irrigation are estimated to comprise around 8 million hectares.” And since “Groundwater plays a very important role in Iran’s agricultural operations”, Roohollah Noori affirms that a portion of nearly “77% of Iran’s land (2021) is under extreme groundwater overdraft, where the rate of human uptake is more than three times higher than the rate of natural recharge.”

Hydro-electricity

Drought is halting the country’s desire to transition to hydroelectric reliance for energy. Iran uses water power to generate electricity. Still, if hydroelectric power stations have operated in the country for over half a century, the percentage of electricity that actually originates from these has considerably decreased over the course of the last decade. 40 years ago, 37% of the total electricity in Iran was produced with hydroelectric power stations. As of 2007, that percentage amounted to only 8%. Nevertheless, environmental concerns and increased awareness of the limited supplies of fossil fuels have been pushing the country to seek clean and renewable hydroelectric power. Such overreliance posed limits within the government as it was pushed to subsidize fuels, for individual energy consumption.

What is sought out as a renewable alternative is a hydroelectric power, but it is clear how that a drought crisis makes it far from favorable. This comes at a dangerous price, considering Iran suffers from frequent shortages of power.

The level of energy production is influenced by different factors. The manifestation of drought is one of the most influential ones. In particular, the negative impact of this phenomenon is confirmed by Kaveh Madani, who states that “reservoirs, which are vital for farms, communities, and hydropower have fallen to dangerous lows”.

Different studies have been conducted on the topic, describing the relation between dry climate conditions and hydroelectric production. Saeed Jamali believes that “The expected climate warming could intensify droughts and dry spells, bringing to hydropower generation reduction, which is expected at the Saymareh, Saz Bon, Garsha, and Koran Bozan basins.”More in detail “because of insignificant streamflow reductions since 2020, hydropower production may not change considerably during this period. However, serious hydropower generation deficit is expected by the 2050s and 2080s”. But those are not the only regions that will be affected, in fact in Sadat Mousavi’s opinion is that climate change has the potential to significantly alter the hydropower generation in the Dez Dam basin. The results of the study showed a reduction in the flow of water and electricity generation for the Bakhtiari reservoir.” So, the scientific community is concordant in the necessity of seeking solutions. For instance, Pouya Ilfaei proposed the ideation of a management strategy of energy that works in a more efficient way, thanks to big data analysis.

Internal migration

The ultimate consequence of drought will be internal migration.

In 1985, the United Nations Environmental Programme coined the term “environmental refugee”. It is known worldwide that human migration is largely affected by changes in climate and drought strikes are a considerable factor that causes the displacement of people, notably from rural centers to the cities. Climate change has been the most compelling cause for environmentally-induced migrations: the drought phenomenon has been classified as a slow-onset change, and scholars have highlighted how slow-acting processes lead to more long-term migrations. Worse, part of the country may become inhabitable.

Drought-prone areas in Iran, around Lake Urmia, the Southern part of the country, and Khuzestan, for instance, host rural populations. These are largely dependent on resources such as water, soil, and crops.

Not alarmingly Iran is experiencing a rapid migration from rural areas to urban centers and today over 75 percent of the population live in urban areas, the capital hosting 18 of them.Even worse, the abovementioned drought-prone areas are at risk of becoming inhabitable.

As mentioned above, scholars' voice agrees in considering the dangerous consequences of internal migration. First, Ali Mirchi underlines that “mass migration will increase more than we have ever seen” if “villages and rural areas run out of water, and livelihood will not be sustainable anymore”. Shahrzad Khatibi adds that “unplanned and irregular expansion of the main cities has contributed to overpopulation.” From the latter different problems derive, such as “urbanization and increasing water demand, while there is no match between demand and water availability”. The government should “reverse process of migration from the large cities of the country to smaller towns. Like in Tehran, where 20% of the population lives, the government should consider different short-term and long-term policies in order to decrease economic attractiveness”. The adoption of this kind of strategy is fundamental in order to avoid discontent related complications. In this regard, Rasoul Sadeghi warned that “Low levels of migration effectiveness underpin limited population redistribution. Spatial patterns reflect socioeconomic inequalities” which are relevant and develop in a gap between rich cities and underdeveloped countryside. Along with this situation, there has been “no policy concerns about housing costs, traffic congestion in destination areas.” But there is an even more complex process, internal to Tehran where overpopulation has made spatial inequality the distinguishing feature of urban unsustainable development.

Conclusion

As this conclusion is being written Iranians in different regions of the country are protesting against the mismanagement of the country's water resources whilst facing violent suppression by security forces. People in Isfahan have been peacefully standing where once Zayande Roud river lived, for more than a week now. Other cities particularly from the Southern and Central regions of the country are joining them to show their concern regarding a concerning lack of water resources. Agriculture and all related products face an unstable state where in many cases there are exist no sufficient water resources. Iran's source of hydroelectricity has also been seriously threatened by the same growing drought. The combination of both elements mentioned is generating a South to North pathway of internal migration, which foresees overpopulation in regions already facing the same problem on a more minor scale. Internal migration derived by drought is introducing many catastrophic factors, growing inhabitant zones is the least.

November 30, 2021 — No Comments

How Different Political Powers Approach the Issue of Ethics in the Development of Artificial Intelligence

By: Zrinka Borić

*Image Source*: https://www.pexels.com/photo/person-reaching-out-to-a-robot-8386434/

Advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technology is expected to drive progress and change in the areas of military, economy, and information. This so-called “fourth industrial revolution” opens various possibilities, among which the most probable one is further development and prosperity of those who will be able to reap the benefits, resulting in further strengthening existing inequalities in the global state system.

The main concern an average person has regarding the AI is the idea of the post-apocalyptical world in which the robots and AI have completely overtaken the Earth, as depicted in many famous science-fiction publications. To approach this topic it is necessary to have two things in mind. First, the developement of the strong AI (also called Artificial General Intelligence – AGI) systems that will focus on the simulation of human reasoning and creation of machine intelligence equal to the human currently does not exist, and the experts cannot agree on the expected occurrence of this type of AI. Second, artificial intelligence systems rely heavily on data. Therefore, the quantity, quality and availability of data are crucial. In the longterm, the ethical and responsible approach to data collection for AI development and implementation aims to guarantee a balanced and responsible innovation.

For example, the United States and the European Union countries have expressed dedication in developing trustworthy and ethical AI. At the other hand, countries like China and Russia have not shown such dedication in the development and employment of their autonomous weapons systems. Cyber policy and security expert Herbert Lin expresses the concern how due to lower level of regard towards the ethical and safety issues there is a likely opportunity that their weapons are going to be more militarily effective and developed sooner.

Different forms of government have different approaches towards AI development and implementation. China is characterized as authoritarian and hierarchical state, the United States is a federal republic with a democratically run government, while the European Union is described as a political and economic union with that operates through combination of supranational and intergovernmental decision-making approach.

PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

China defines artificial intelligence research and development as key to boosting national economic and manufacturing competitiveness as well as providing national security. China’s vigorous approach towards the AI development is caused by the potential economic benefit in the future. The experts assume that China will benefit from the highest relative economic gain from AI technologies, since the AI technology is envisioned to improve its productivity and manufacturing possibility and therefore to meet future GDP targets. Therefore, China faces the risk of AI development and application without giving enough attention to a responsible use of AI and preparing its citizen to adapt to possible changes affected by widespread AI adoption. China has already once fallen in the trap of recklessly rushing into uncontrolled progress, and it led to an unsustainable level of growth accompanied by a set of negative effects on China’s economy growth. China’s clear competitive advantage lies in its abundance of data which will most likely become one of the crucial elements in the future development of AI technology, relatively loose privacy laws, vibrant start-ups, and a stable rise in the number of AI engineers.

THE EUROPEAN UNION

The state structure shapes the design of the AI policy and its implementation. When discussing the EU it is important to keep in mind that the EU is not a country, but an economic and political supranational and intergovernmental organization. Considering the fact that economic prosperity and national security of the European Union are still firmly in the hands of the national governments it can easily be understood why the organizational structure of the Union hinders the process of making concrete and quick decisions which are always favorable in the conditions of the international competition. The EU has succeeded to publish joint plans and policies regarding AI, such as Civil Law Rules on Robotics, Declaration for Cooperation on Artificial Intelligence, Ethic Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, and Policy and Investment Recommendations for Trustworthy AI.

The European Union pays special attention to the study of the potential impact of artificial intelligence technology on the society. The researches usually involve social aspect such as data protection (e.g. GDPR law), network security and AI ethics. There are more substantial ethical or normative discussions when it comes to developing human-centered and trustworthy AI technologies. [...] Developing the culture of trustworthy AI and not only when it comes to security and defense, but more broadly about AI enabled technologies. This is at the forefront of the policy and political thinking in Brussels.“ claims Raluca Csernatoni, an expert on European security and defense with a specific focus on distruptive techologies.

In 2018 member states signed the Declaration on Cooperation on Artificial Intelligence where the participating member states agreed to cooperate in various fields regarding AI development and implementation, including ensuring an adequate legal and ethical framework, building on EU fundamental rights and values.

THE UNITED STATES

During the Obama administration National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) Committee on Technology drafted the report Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence in 2016. Concerns about safeguarding “justice, fairness, and accountability” if AI was to be tasked with consequential decisions about people had previously been mentioned in Administration’s Big Data: Seizing Opportunities, Preserving Values report and Big Data and Privacy: A Technological Perspective report. Regarding the governance and safety, the report advises that use of AI technology must be controlled by “technical and ethical supervision”.

Later, during the Trump Administration the 2019 AI R&D Strategic Plan expressed seven main fields of interest, one of which is understanding ethical, legal, and societal applications of AI. According to the recent EU-US Trade and Technology Council TTC it is clear that the current administration continues supporting the efforts for the development of responsible and trustworthy AI.

THE U.S. – EU COOPERATION

The most recent U.S.- EU cooperation on the AI advancement, the TTC, was launched on September 29, 2021 in Pittsburgh. TTC working groups are cooperating on discussing the issues of technology standards, data governance and technology platforms, misuse of technology threatening security and human rights, and many others. The United States and European Union affirmed their commitment to a human-centered approach and developing mutual understanding on principles of trustworthy and responsible AI. However, both have expressed significants concerns that authoritarian governments are piloting social scoring systems with an aim to implement social control at scale. They agree that these systems „pose threats to fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, including through silencing speech, punishing peaceful assembly and other expressive activities, and reinforcing arbitrary or unlawful surveillance systems“.

CONCLUSION

Different forms of governments differ immensly in their approach towards the development and implementation of AI, as well as when it comes to the necessary principles of ethics and responsibility. However, governments need to take further actions with great cautions. When implemented carelessly, without taking ethics and safety in consideration, AI could end up being ineffective, or even worse, dangerous. Governments need to implement AI in a way that builds trust and legitimacy, which ideally requires legal and ethical frameworks to be in place for handling and protecting citizens’ data and algorithm use.

November 26, 2021 — No Comments

Middle East: Toward a Sustainable Regional Security System?

By: Martina Gambacorta.

*Image*: This amazing tangled knot of a diagram, made by U.K. data journalist David McCandless, displays the key players and notable relationships in the Middle East. What it communicates is something no one doubts: **the Middle East is a confusing place.** *Image Source*: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/ng-interactive/2014/sep/24/friends-and-enemies-in-the-middle-east-who-is-connected-to-who-interactive

Without doubt, security is the first and fundamental objective of governments involved in the building of a sustainable regional security in the Middle East but it is not the only one. On one hand, different actors are cooperating to counter the Iranian threat and the affiliated militias. On the other hand, multilateral cooperation is taking a way forward from the mere security interests, while economic and thus political aims are now being prioritized. One of the things that emerged especially in the last 20 years, is that the US role in the region is vitally important but it works much better when it is done through multilateral efforts of allies. In an ideal World one would see the inclusion of Russia and China in this multilateral work, but if not, it is up to the countries of the region, the US, the EU and other willing actors to try to take action to address the regional challenges. Up to now military action has played an important role—through aviation, maritime and border security; but we are moving toward an increased non-military cooperation.

In Middle Eastern minds, a unified front would play a decisive role in dealing with major fundamental challenges that are undermining the regional stability, such as Iran. Nonetheless, such unified front would not only look at allies, but would strive to include enemies too. Saudi Arabia and Iran informal talks are a clear proof of how the two want to avoid a collision that would destabilize their respective systems of power.

In this frame, the Middle Eastern geopolitical scene has been shaken in recent years by a completely unexpected, almost paradoxical, convergence such as that between Saudi Arabia and Israel. In this case, the most significant episodes were perhaps the apparently repeated meetings, between 2016 and 2018, between the influential Saudi prince Turkī al-Fayṣal, former head of the secret services, and Tzipi Livni, co-secretary of the largest Israeli opposition party, together with General Amos Yadlin and his colleague Ya'akov Amidror, formerly head of military intelligence and National Security Advisor. Since those years, an intelligence-sharing program has begun between Saudi Arabia and Israel to monitor both the pro-Iranian non-state actors in the region, from Ḥizbullah to the ḥūṯī, and the advancement of the Iranian missile program.

In Riyadh, the hope is that Israel—through its influence on groups in Washington—will be able to coordinate robust pressure on the US political establishment to activate containment of Iran, by introducing or re-imposing sanctions, and possibly helping to reactivate Washington's commitment to defending the interests of all its traditional Middle Eastern allies. The Saudis therefore offered new demonstrations of loyalty to the United States, including a willingness to open a new chapter to secure Israel's future in the region.

Such normalization reflects nothing but the footsteps traced by Obama, Trump and Biden’s presidencies to leave responsibilities to local actors whenever US interests are not at stake. Also, it reflects a profound need for a sustainable regional security system that could develop simultaneously to the creation of ties of political and economic-financial nature and access to resources. An example is the announcement of the giant Dubai Port (Dp) World that it intends to settle in the Israeli port of Haifa or the maritime expansion strategy of the United Arab Emirates. This demonstrates a need for new funding and space to stay afloat in a crisis environment.

In this sense, the "Abraham Agreements" go toward this direction but do not come out of nowhere, in that they represent a tactical convergence between the interests of the actors involved. The Arab Gulf countries, including Qatar and Oman, have been cultivating economic-financial, intelligence and security relations with Israel for years, behind the scenes or in a semi-formal manner.

In 2015, the Emirates granted the Jewish state to establish diplomatic representation at the International Renewable Energy Agency based in Abu Dhabi. Together with Egypt, Qatar has been the main mediator between Hamas and Israel for years. In 2018, Oman formally received Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In the same year, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said in an interview that Israelis "have a right to have their own land" and that Saudi Arabia "has no problems with Jews". Also in 2018, Bahraini Foreign Minister Khaled ben Ahmad Al Khalifa even went so far as to take Israel's side against Iran. Commenting on the umpteenth air raid in Syria attributed to the Jewish State Air Force against alleged Iranian military bases, he stated that "Israel has the right to defend itself and eliminate sources of danger".

If the Turkish threat is added to the Iranian one, the Jewish state could be—together with Russia—a new factor of protection. Behind the curtain of the agreements also hides Saudi Arabia. If Bahrain has signed an agreement with Israel, it is because Riyadh has given the green light. Saudi Arabia then granted the opening of its airspace to air links between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv. To do more, Mohammed bin Salman must wait to formally take power, so that his father - the over eighty and sick King Salman - passes away. Mohammed bin Salman’s ambition is to become the protector of all the holy places of Islam. Science fiction, at least for now.

Is this frame a solid basis for a sustainable regional security system? It is too early to answer and in the following 20 years changes will shape a new frame. As presented in this article, advances have been made and different actors are building a new unified front. Nonetheless, unanswered questions still remain. One of this concerns Iran and the future of the JCPOA. Should a comprise be found, and sanctions reduced, the unified front will undoubtedly accommodate the US. Nonetheless, the JCPOA works have proofed to be a failure in the past, and unexpected outcomes cannot be excluded. Moreover, the JCPOA will not be enough to tackle other issue but the nuclear one. While allies are talking to each other, and enemies are being included in such dialogue, religious and ethnic differences won’t be easily overcome through politics and economics.

November 26, 2021 — No Comments

Russian-U.S. Rivalry

By: Igor Shchebetun and Alessio Calzetti.

From the battlespace of Europe to the borders of the Middle East to East Asia the Soviet Union and the United States did battle for the supremacy of the world. Millions of pairs, who inhabited the 20th century, considered it a fight for the end of history. Both powers used every means at their disposal including nuclear bombs, military espionage, finances, propaganda, cultural ties and many more asymmetric tools. Nearly everything the Americans and the Soviets designed, had an art of dying, but was an excuse for living. For this was the geopolitics of the Cold War.

Bernard Baruch, a financial adviser to presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, to find the Cold War in 1948 as a rivalry between two superpowers, which at the time was the United States and the Soviet Union, who each proceeded to fill the power vacuums left by the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. The Cold War was a competition between two systems - the US versus the USSR, capitalism versus communism, pluralism versus totalitarianism. The american-soviet struggle was present in the daily lives of people and shaped their identities and beliefs, from technology and espionage to business sports and movies. Nearly everything we hold dear today was formed by the Cold War. So in a way by studying the past we gained a better understanding of the present.

Most historians agree that the Cold War took place between 1947 and 1991. It’s origins however are much more profound and can be traced to the geographical pivot theory by historian Alfred Thayer Mahan, who wrote extensively on global politics. Mahan believed that whoever controlled the world's oceans would come to dominate global politics, since most people live adjacent to the sea. The notion was that a powerful navy allows one to project power by the way of the sea onto the commercial maritime routes that connect the globe. For instance, Mahan’s work encouraged the American government to purchase Alaska, annex Hawaii, construct a strong navy and confront Spain in a war. In global terms, Mahan’s book “The influence of sea power upon history” became mandatory reading in the German and French navies and even inspired the Japanese to fight the Russians in 1904. Considering his monumental impact, Mahan is often considered one of the most critical strategists in world history.

Holding the opposite view was geographer Halford Mackinder, who argued that global power belonged to whoever controlled the heartland. Although, he came a bit later than Mahan, Mackinder’s work would also mold the minds of policymakers to come and he is often considered the father of geopolitics as a field of study. In 1904 Mackinder wrote his most important thesis «The heartland theory», which divided the world in three bodies. The first was the world island, which consisted of Europe, Asia and Africa. The second categorization refers to the offshore islands like the British Isles and the Japanese archipelago, while the final group points out to the Americas and Australia as outlying islands. Within these parameters, Mackinder placed a special emphasis on the world island. This was the most populous and resource rich land combination. Whoever controlled the world island would gain the means to dominate the globe. Within the world island however was the heartland region, which stretched from the Volga to the Yangtze and from the Arctic to the Himalayas. This was the core domain of the world island power. A summary of this theory comes down to the following passage: “Who rules East Europe commands the heartland, who rules the Heartland commands the world island, who rules the world island commands the world”. Going by this theory, Mackinder explained international relations by observing how pivot islands were trying to conquer or at least prevent a singular power from dominating the heartland. This concept explains why Britain always fought against whoever tried to conquer continental Europe like Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

Alexander Dugin, for instance, who is a modern political analyst with close ties to the Kremlin, has repeatedly written about the need for a Russian based Eurasian power. In the late 19th and early 20th century, making this theory, especially the part concerning East Europe, became a source of inspiration for policymakers from Nazi Germany. Karl Haushofer, a politician and strategist from the Munich University, argued that Germany's national interest was to expand to the east.

Haushofer believed that to command authority over East Europe and thereby pivot into the heartland one had to control the eastern half of Europe as a collective unit, since the landmass was geographically defenseless and like the barriers like mountains and rivers. As Haushofer thought to promote a German Soviet alliance, because their collective output would have overwhelmed the coastal powers, such as France, the United Kingdom and the United States. Most analysts today would argue that there is merit to this claim. However, Haushofer ideas took a turn to the dark side, when Adolf Hitler took the queue and added it to his to-do list. Although Haushofer himself was not a member of the Nazi Party, his work influenced the Nazi leadership and laid the bedrock for what will become known as the leobens round. This infamous expansionist policy sought to permanently remove the indigenous populations of Eastern Europe and repopulate the land with German settlers with the ultimate goal, being to dominate the Heartland region and from there the world island.

From a geopolitical angle the Cold War was a testing ground for these theories, putting the global naval power, the United States against the Soviet Union, which controlled more land than any country. This clash would turn out to be the most epic international power struggle in history. It was essentially a game of chess on a global scale. The Americans sought to contain their Soviet counterparts wherever and whenever. Meanwhile, the Soviet leadership fought desperately to break out the containment by exporting its communist ideology. In the ensuing tug of war, alliances were made. Governments were overthrown and the international community was practically split in two. Underneath the disguise of ideology the age-old geopolitical rules guided the contest. So when Putin says that the breakup of the Soviet Union was a disaster, he isn't referring to the collapse of communism, but the disintegration of the heartland concept. In this regard, one can argue that the grand chessboard of the Cold War still presents the template of modern long-term global politics.

November 23, 2021 — No Comments

The arrest of Dairo Usaga “Otoniel” and the future of the Urabeños cartel in Colombia

By: Giovanni Giacalone

*Image Source*: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dario-Antonio-Usuga-David-1.webp

On October 23rd, the Colombian special forces arrested Dairo Antonio Usuga David, alias “Otoniel”, leader of the Urabeños drug cartel and paramilitary group, who had been on the run since 2011. The operation, carried out by a special team codenamed “El Blanco”, was initiated in early October, when the Colombian intelligence identified Usaga in the Uraba sub-region of Antioquia, north-western Colombia, not far from the Panamanian border. The fugitive was identified through the surveillance of cartel members who were carrying medical material for the treatment of a kidney disease that Usaga was known to suffer from. The special forces surrounded him in a remote mountainous area, while helicopters and drones flew over, and Navy ships were stationed off the coast to prevent a potential escape by sea.

In mid-April, Usaga had been spotted and photographed while onboard a longboat traveling between the Verde and Esmeralda rivers in the Paramillo area. The fugitive was accompanied by two armed men and a dog. That was the last time the cartel leader was photographed before his recent capture. In 2017 the US Department of State offered a $5 million reward for information leading to his arrest and, in 2017, Colombian police dropped flyers from helicopters offering a $5 million reward for information leading to his capture, but without any positive outcome. Between the end of 2020 and early 202, Colombian authorities intensified their efforts to capture Usuga, following an increase in levels of cocaine production.

Los Urabeños

The Urabeños, also known as the Gulf Clan (Clan del Golfo), take their name from Uraba, the already cited north-western region of Colombia, which is extremely important for drug cartels as it offers direct access to the Caribbean and Pacific coasts from the departments of Antioquia and Chocó. The group’s origins can be traced back to the far-right paramilitary force Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia-AUC (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) and to Daniel Rendon “Don Mario” who, after the 2006 demobilization of the AUC, took thousands of former fighters with him and expanded his drug trafficking operations and networks in the Uraba area, quickly expanding in over 15 departments including Cordoba, La Valle del Cauca, Santander, La Guajira and even the area of Medellin.

Don Mario was arrested by the Colombian police in April of 2009 and the cartel was taken over by the Usaga brothers, Dairo Antonio “Otoniel” and Juan de Dios “Giovany”, both former paramilitary members who had known Rendon since the 1990s.

“Otoniel” has an interesting background as he had initially joined the Ejercito Popular de Liberacion (Popular Liberation Army), a Colombian communist guerrilla group mainly active between 1967 and 1991, when it began to break apart. However, he soon switched sides and joined the far-right paramilitary and narco-group Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia, active between 1997 and 2006 against the FARC and ELN. It is interesting to notice how the Usaga brothers only had approximately 250 men at their orders when Rendon was arrested in April 2009. However, thanks to the two cartel leaders, the organization quickly grew in numbers, expanding operations and territory control. “Otoniel” took over the cartel in January 2012, when his brother “Giovany” was killed by the police during a raid in the Choco department. On that occasion, the new leader offered a $1,000 reward for each police officer killed in revenge for his brother’s murder. Usaga “Otoniel” had managed to escape capture for ten years, constantly on the move, hiding in grueling parts of Cordoba and Antioquia, protected by a small group of men. However, his being on the run ended on October 23^rd.

The aftermath

The Urabeños have a particular organizational structure that enables them to quickly spread their presence throughout the Colombian territory and to continue operations when one of its leaders is arrested or killed, and when some of their cells are neutralized. As explained by InsightCrime, such a structure relies on blocs that receive direct orders from the cartel’s leadership, they retain specific territories and have internal lines of command. Some of them are also in charge of smaller substructures.

Additionally, Urabeños also rely on franchises, mostly local gangs that have no formal links to the cartel nor its chain of command, as they are simply sub-contracted to operate for them, in their name. It is not very different from what Isis does with terror cells throughout the world that perpetrate attacks in their name, but that are not structurally integrated into the organization. As indicated by InsightCrime, this is a win-win situation for both sides. “For Urabeños this strategy opens doors to criminal income, hitmen and a greater territorial presence, even if indirectly. For smaller gangs, the Urabeños represent an important ally to help them establish local dominance and to overcome rivals”.

It is very unlikely that the arrest of “Otoniel” will have a strong impact on the cartel’s narco-trafficking activity, not only due to the organization’s already cited flexible structure but also because there are several deputy leaders ready to take Usaga’s place. Among them, the two with more chances seem to be Wilmer Giraldo “Siopas”, indicated as second in command of the Urabeños and in charge of the southwestern part of Antioquia; Jobanis de Jesús Ávila “Chiquito Malo”, in charge of cocaine production and exportation. However, José Gonzalo Sánchez, alias “Gonzalito”, and Orozman Osten Blanco “Flechas” are two other possible candidates.

There is also a possibility that the cartel will break down into different factions looking for control of narcotrafficking, but that would more likely be a short-term option since it would negatively impact the cartel’s trafficking activity in the medium-long term, something that the Urabeños want to avoid at all costs, considering that narco-business is thriving.

November 19, 2021 — No Comments

The role of Unmanned Underwater Vehicles in Modern Naval Warfare

By: Marco Verrocchio and Danilo delle Fave.

*Image Source*: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MK_18_MOD_2_Swordfish_UUV.JPG

The two types of Unmanned Underwater Vehicles

In order to intercept and strike isolated enemy forces, to organise ambushes to naval convoys, and, in general, to obtain naval supremacy, Navies around the world had to rely on air surveillance: until now maritime surveillance has always been dependent on the use of submarines. Not anymore.

In the recent decades a significant contribution to maritime surveillance has come from the use of UUVs (Unmanned Underwater Vehicles). Although they are less familiar in comparison to their Aerial counterparts and they operate in a different environment, the technology underlying both systems is similar. Underwater drones can be divided in two main categories: the remotely operated underwater vehicles (ROUVs) and the Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). While the former have a long history of widespread use in deep-sea exploration and underwater wrecks investigations, the second ones have been developed for research purposes.

Despite that, AUVs military development and employment outbroke only in the last years in newspapers columns and news, creating an aura of mystery surrounding AUVs. This happened due to two factors. First, many AUVs are still in a semi-prototype phase of development. Secondly, they are used also in ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) operations. Not surprisingly, their use becomes public only when fishermen boats accidentally discover one of them.

Current use of UUVs

The major and well-known theatre of use of AUVs is the contested South China Sea. Not coincidentally, their employment in the region escalated since 2016, when the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague refused China’s claim over the SCS. Although AUVs are unmarked, Indonesia, Philippines, Australia and Taiwan have warned the US about the use of Chinese AUVs, discovered close to their coasts by fishermen or coast guards.

Politically, the AUVs have become a tool to raise the tension in the Area. For instance, the seizure of an American AUV by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) in 2016 has been announced in response to Trump's call with the Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen. The same happened in April 2021, with the allegation that a Boeing manufactured AUV was spying on Chinese coasts. Moreover, the use of UUVs raised a legal debate, due to the lack of a political framework on the use of unmanned systems underwater: they defy the laws and customs of the Law of the Sea, and will continue to do so without proper international regulation.

All these factors plus the technological advance will contribute to the massive use of UUVs in the future not only in South-East Asia, but also in other parts of the world, for instance in the Mediterranean: Turkey has developed a Stingray-shaped drone that can be used for surveillance or it can carry explosives to blow up a ship. Nevertheless, a major threat that concerns US NATO partners is the development of the Russian AUV “Poseidon”, a nuclear propelled torpedo able to carry a nuclear warhead that can be launched by submarines.

Aside from the development of UUV, countering underwater drones has been used to contrast enemy operations: in 2016 UK has hosted one of the biggest exercises together with US, using squads of UUVs which successfully detected other UUVs and submarines. Therefore, the UUVs will play a crucial role in naval supremacy: we will see the use of swarm drone attacks against enemy aircrafts, the massive implementation of UUVs in naval surveillance, the development of anti-drone ships and UUVs, the introduction of unmanned surface ships in Navies all over the world.

With the development of the UUVs, we are heading towards a new era, as happened before with the development of the UAVs, the ever greater potential of these devices will completely change our perception of the war. In addition, given their low cost, they will create more competition and difficulties among the countries, allowing countries less technologically advanced as the West to obtain the means to counter Western naval supremacy.

November 16, 2021 — No Comments

Insights from Joanna Chiu’s book, “China Unbound, A New World Disorder”

By: Sandra Watson Parcels

Joanna Chiu’s book, China Unbound: A New World Disorder, describes China as a global bully who uses various tactics in its attempts to create a new world order. The new world disorder Chiu describes in her book exposes troubling implications for global stability and human rights.

China is the world’s second-largest economy with far reaching political and economic influence. Jan Wong, Globe and Mail Bureau Chief in Beijing from 1989 to 1994 recalls when China’s markets began to open and there was a strong desire for global friendship. However, since President Xi Jinping’s rise to power in 2012, China has gone from underdog to bully.

Xi is an admirer of ancient legalist scholars and quoted Han Fei, a legalist scholar from 200-233 BCE, to justify why his citizens should submit to a strong leader; ‘When those who uphold the law are strong, the state is strong.’ In one speech to party members, he discussed the lessons to learn from the collapse of the Soviet Union and how its wavering ideology, political rot, and military disloyalty caused its downfall.

Experts search to understand why Xi and his cohorts have increased attacks on civil society to such unprecedented levels. Noble Peace Prize winner and human rights activist, Liu Xiaobo, died in 2017 in Chinese custody. This was the first Noble Peace Prize winner to die in police custody since Nazi Germany. An account of a Kazakhstan Uyghur woman imprisoned in a Chinese internment camp in Xinjiang province provides a rare glimpse into the horrid human right violations intensifying under Xi’s reign. After 15 months of arbitrary captivity, she was released. A nurse attempted to take the shackles off her ankles, but the metal had dug so deep for so long that the metal had stuck to her skin. Depriving her of sunlight for over a year, her captors fed her watery soup and steamed buns which reduced her weight to 35kg. After her release, she moved to Turkey and was interviewed there about her experience.

In 2014, the Umbrella movement was born in Hong Kong as protesters fought to retain their democratic characteristics enshrined in “two systems, one country” doctrine. But, by June 2020, China’s National Security Law came into effect and abolished the 50-year agreement with Britain in Hong Kong. The law aspires to regulate and punish actions against/by any individual of any nationality anywhere in the world. In response, many countries quickly moved to cancel extradition treaties with Hong Kong. Legal experts sounded the alarm that any individual who has said anything critical of China should avoid travelling to China.

There is an old fable in China that all Chinese descend from the yellow emperor so no matter where Chinese people reside, they are part of the motherland. Recently minority groups in China have also been added to the myth by China’s Communist Party (CCP). China has created an overseas organization, called United Front, that spies on and harasses Chinese diaspora. This exemplifies a key element of Beijing’s strategy for harassment to target common individuals and groups and is often overlooked by governments and media.

For decades, most countries in the world have followed along with aspects of China’s One China policy that declares Taiwan as Chinese territory. As a result, Taiwan has been diplomatically isolated, despite being independent since 1949 and a vibrant democracy for the past five decades. China now threatens Taiwan’s sovereignty on almost a daily basis. Beijing also claims approximately 90 percent of the South China Seas, including the territorial waters and economic zones of various other countries in the region.

Canada and Australia are middle powers that recently came face-to-face with China’s bullying and aggression. Canada has significant influence on the world stage due to its rich natural resources, membership in the G7 group of advanced economies, and membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). In December 2018, Meng Wanzhou, Chief Financial officer of Huawei, was arrested by Canadian authorities on behalf of the United States for allegations of fraud. Chinese media reported that Xi flew into a rage directed at Canada. Days later, two Canadians – Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig – were arrested in a blatant act of hostage diplomacy. Canadian Robert Schellenberg, already sentenced to 15 years in a Chinese prison, was resentenced to death in an act of death-threat diplomacy. Even though the tone in Ottawa has recently changed and there are calls for a tougher stance on China, there is still no real effort to reduce Canada’s vulnerability to Beijing and shift trade to other markets. Australia, as another middle power, caught the world’s attention when it passed the Foreign Interference law that stood up to Beijing’s aggression, showing that even though they are economically reliant on China, it would not be used for political manipulation.

Italy and Greece look at China as more of a solution to their economic woes. Italy joined China’s New Silk Road project in 2019. The European Commission scolded Italy and created a strategy paper on ways to deal with Beijing. The European Union (EU) also moved to restrict Beijing’s investment in European infrastructure. Greece joined China’s New Silk Road in 2018. The Port of Piraeus is now controlled by China and is hailed as an economic success as it becomes the main Mediterranean gateway for the New Silk Road between Asia and Europe. Chinese officials made many visits to Greece during its economic crisis. It was a smart strategy by Beijing to pander to the black sheep of Europe. In 2017, Greece vetoed an EU statement of human rights abuses in China, and it has become clear that China is using chequebook-diplomacy for political leverage in Greece.

There are fears that China’s aggressive behavior and the world’s subsequent reaction is leading to a new Cold War. Russia has often been brazenly anti-American. Russia’s economic reliance on China continues to grow, while Russian goods only makeup one percent of China’s world trade. There is increased concern in Russia that the Chinese may encroach on their influence in Central Asia. However, external pressures by the West for a united front against China and Russia is pushing them closer. The United States, under the Biden administration has moved closer to its allies then the previous administration, such as the joint action by the US, Canada, the UK, and the EU to impose parallel sanctions on Chinese officials involved in the mass interment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. President Biden has also brought back the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (The QUAD) which includes the US, India, Japan, and Australia. The United States must be a global defender but can only do that successfully by also addressing its own actions. Its recent domestic trends of fake news and oversimplified soundbites has created anger and confusion that often discredits fact-based criticisms of China. As tensions increase on legitimate concerns, disinformation could push the world to outright conflict.

For years, the world has ignored, overlooked, and mishandled China’s actions out of economic self-interest.

As China’s toxic aggression grows into oppression, expansion and human rights violations, the world can no longer be complicit in its behaviour. If China is not stopped, its aggressive actions against both states and individuals will change the international world order into a new world disorder.

‹ Newer Posts Older Posts ›