#no documented terror threat human and drug trafficking will not be affected by a border wall

[armeniaitn]

Armenia Adopts New National Security Strategy

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/politics/armenia-adopts-new-national-security-strategy-39783-27-07-2020/

Armenia Adopts New National Security Strategy

On July 10, Armenia’s Security Council approved a new National Security Strategy. It is considerably longer than the previous version of this document, adopted in 2007 (Armenia’s first strategy planning document since the country regained its independence in 1991), and the updated strategy appears more ambitious. It is also structured in a different way and is subject to review no later than in five years; the old strategy did not stipulate a future deadline for review.

Some aspects that were covered in the preamble of the 2007 document have, this time, been included in an address delivered by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and published in parallel with the new strategy—akin to a preface. However, while the former preamble laid out five “fundamental values” of national security—independence, safety of the state and its people, peace and international cooperation, the protection of identity, and national well-being (2017 National Security Strategy at Mfa.am, January 26, 2007)—Pashinyan’s address includes extended references to the historical and cultural heritage that he asserts make up Armenia’s national values. Specifically, he refers to the ancient Armenian kingdoms as well as the first Republic of Armenia (1918–1920) as the antecedents of the modern republic, while acknowledging Soviet Armenia’s “exceptional contribution” to education, science, culture and industry. The appended address also formulates “rules for [intra-]Armenian coexistence”: a rejection of violence and voter fraud as political tools as well as the elimination of corruption and repairing the damage it previously caused (2020 National Security Strategy at Sns.am, July 10, 2020). Additionally, the 2020 document’s newly drafted preamble states three basic national security principles: self-reliance, the perpetuation of statehood (closely related to an avoidance of involvement in various geopolitical disputes), and resilience—a relatively new concept in Armenian politics. Another novel component is the mention of the deterioration of the international order as well as the decay of familiar alliances and mutual trust between states.

The 2007 strategy included a list of both external and internal threats to Armenia’s national security. The former included the possible use of military force by Azerbaijan, which, under some circumstances, might be supported by Turkey; internal conflicts in neighboring countries; the sabotage of transit routes in neighboring countries; terrorism and trans-border crime, including the illicit drug trade, money laundering and human trafficking; energy dependence; regional isolation, including impediments to Armenia’s participation in the Transport Corridor Europe–Caucasus–Asia (TRACECA—an international transport program involving the European Union, Iran, and 11 former Soviet republics) and INOGATE, a former international energy cooperation program between the EU and countries of the Black and Caspian sea region, operational before 2016; the weakening of national and cultural identity in the Armenian diaspora; as well as epidemics and natural or technological disasters. The list of internal threats included the deterioration of governance efficiency and lack of public trust toward the judiciary; a deficient political system; lack of democracy; social polarization; urbanization, specifically the abandonment of rural settlements (particularly in border areas) and high concentration of population in seismic areas; insufficient fiscal management; infrastructure deficiencies; inefficiencies in the education system; low morals and lack of “patriotic education”; negative demographic trends, including a low birth rate, high mortality, and brain drain; as well as environmental problems and the inefficient management of natural resources. The 2007 document indicated the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) as the main guarantor of security, with Russia being Armenia’s main partner in bilateral relations. A secondary level of international security cooperation involved the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). At the bilateral level, the most significant regional partners (aside from Russia) were Georgia and Iran.

In turn, the 2020 strategy does not distinguish between external and internal threats but rather assesses a general “security environment.” Some of the new document’s explicitly identified threats include the emergence of new regional powers; arms races; impediments to access to regional infrastructure; hybrid threats, including cyber threats and disinformation; declines in democracy and human rights, both regionally and globally; Azerbaijan’s threats of force to resolve the Karabakh conflict; Turkey’s military and political support to Azerbaijan; the growth of religious fundamentalism in the Middle East; terrorism and trans-border crime; demographic decline; corruption; and poverty. The document additionally includes a rather long clause referring to the possibility of a growing rivalry between military-political blocs influencing the South Caucasus region and between the members of such blocs. Most significantly, concerning the latter, the passage mentions the “blocs’ members’ actions against other members’ interests, particularly the sales of arms to Azerbaijan”—a clear swipe at fellow CSTO members Russia and Belarus (see EDM, March 28, 2018, June 14, 2018, December 13, 2019).

Some instructive textual changes between the two strategy documents regard Karabakh. The 2007 version stated that Armenia would be the security guarantor for the population of Karabakh, whereas the new strategy mentions security guarantees for the un-recognized “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.” Moreover, the new document reminds that the 1994 ceasefire agreement was signed by representatives of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the de facto government of Karabakh, thus implying that any conflict-resolution negotiations will also need to be conducted trilaterally.

Considering international cooperation, the 2020 strategy again prioritizes Russia, both bilaterally and within the CSTO framework, as well as regional cooperation with Georgia and Iran, underlining the imperative of keeping such cooperation free from geopolitical influences. The clauses on cooperation with the United States and NATO are rather general and unambitious, similar to the 2007 strategy. The importance of cooperation with the EU is more strongly stressed, including a readiness to implement the Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement, as well as prioritizing bilateral relations with France and Germany. Compared to 2007, trilateral cooperation with Greece and Cyprus is a newly articulated priority. Finally, while the 2007 document generally referred to cooperation with countries of the Asia-Pacific region, the new strategy specifically mentions cooperation with China and India, albeit briefly.

One of the most important features of the new strategy, and where it diverges from the old one, is the addition of a chapter on civilian security, citizens’ well-being and economic development—in fact, the longest chapter of the just-released planning document. The chapter specifically mentions the need to reform the police and security service, and to improve the level of parliamentary and civil society oversight; to develop the IT sector and information society while countering cyber threats; and so forth. While the economic development plans are rather ambitious, it remains to be seen how the lack of investment, currently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, may affect those goals.

Read original article here.

[youngcontroversy-blog]

Fifty-eight former U.S. national security officials told the Trump administration in a letter Monday that they are aware of "no emergency that remotely justifies" diverting funds to build a border wall. The officials, who served in both Democratic and Republican administrations, include former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who served in the Clinton administration, and former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, a Republican who served in the Senate and the Obama administration.  The letter, according to its authors, is a declaration intended to be used in lawsuits challenging President Donald Trump's Feb. 15 decision to redirect $8 billion in federal funds in order to begin construction of a barrier along the southern border. Trump had promised during his campaign to build the border wall but Congress has offered less than $2 billion in federal funds after months of negotiations.  The officials fact check Trump's basis for declaring the national emergency, pointing out that illegal border crossings are near 40-year lows, there isn't any documented terror threat, human and drug trafficking will not be affected by a border wall, and there is no violent crime threat posed by immigrants. Personally, I see the allocation of military funds ( an already inflated budget) to secure our boarders seems fantastic. It will obviously have a major effect on drug trafficking in the south west United States, and Trump has used the National Emergency to do more than just build his wall.... He also has signed off on the immediate creation of the space force, to be a branch of the airforce like the marines are a branch of the Navy. Big moves by the Trump Administration with the most recent display of Federal power. (at Washington, District of Columbia) https://www.instagram.com/p/BuWsN6VB7jp/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=1p8g2ibyy9wht

[chrissterry]

More than 50 ex-national security officials tell Trump his national emergency is not justified : NBC News

More than 50 ex-national security officials tell Trump his national emergency is not justified : NBC News

WASHINGTON — Fifty-eight former U.S. national security officials told the Trump administration in a letter on Monday that they are aware of “no emergency that remotely justifies” diverting funds to build a border wall.

The officials, who served in both Democratic and Republican administrations, include former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who served in the Clinton administration, and…

[whittlebaggett8]

Thailand Takes up the ASEAN Challenge

ASEAN leaders will meet up with for their 34th summit on June 23, preceded by various ministerial preparatory meetings that will consider location starting off from June 20. As Thailand is the ASEAN Chair for 2019, the ASEAN Summit will be chaired by Prayut Chan-o-cha, in his to start with important regional celebration due to the fact he was chosen to go on as key minister subsequent the elections in Thailand in May perhaps 2019. There are significant pressing challenges for ASEAN to tackle and divergent views can be anticipated from ASEAN member states on how ASEAN need to position itself to deal with the worries it faces. Thailand’s leadership will be vital in guiding and shaping ASEAN’s reaction and presenting a united front in dealing with the disruptions the region faces.

It is the norm for all ASEAN Chairs to use a topic to outline their chairmanship. Thailand has selected the topic “Advancing Partnership for Sustainability.” In a nutshell, Thailand hopes to progress ASEAN’s development to continue to keep rate with the adjustments using put which includes preparing for the new overall economy. Bangkok also recognizes that ASEAN requirements to strengthen partnerships with dialogue partners and other establishments in meeting the increasing challenges and would like to assure that ASEAN’s procedures and community creating efforts are sustainable. Whilst Thailand performs to notice the deliverables beneath its concept, it also has to shepherd ASEAN by means of the existing geopolitical and financial uncertainties that the area faces. Its management of ASEAN through these attempting situations will be intently watched.

ASEAN is in for a time period of regional uncertainty as a end result of the heightened strategic opposition in between China and the United States. The rivalry concerning these big powers shows no sign of abating, with the U.S. labelling China a revisionist energy although Beijing has indicated that it will not succumb to strain and is organized to confront Washington in excess of the lengthy time period. It is not crystal clear how long this uncertainty will final nor what the final final result will be. Even as it attempts to handle and alter to this most up-to-date flux in the region, ASEAN has to concurrently deal with other urgent troubles and disruptions such as the negotiations with China on a Code of Carry out to govern habits in the South China Sea, the unravelling of the cost-free trade system, uncertainties more than the foreseeable future of the multilateral trading process and globalization, expanding protectionist tendencies, the emergence of identity politics, and the urgent require to regulate to the new realities of the electronic financial state.

Making the most of this article? Click on listed here to subscribe for full accessibility. Just $5 a thirty day period.

These profound issues will need to be dealt with even as ASEAN member states carry on to cope with existing transnational nontraditional worries that pose actual and existing potential risks, these types of as terrorism and violent extremism, prescription drugs, human trafficking, maritime security, and cyber troubles. On top of all that, there’s the current Rohingya problem in Myanmar, which has set a dent on ASEAN’s trustworthiness in excess of its lack of ability to tackle a really serious human legal rights problem in its have yard. Every ASEAN member will also have its very own domestic and exterior priorities and other countrywide problems that might undermine its potential or willingness to lend its entire pounds to a regional and coordinated response to these expanding issues.

The essential issue is no matter whether ASEAN, in spite of its 52 years of existence and its difficult-earned reputation as a profitable regional corporation nonetheless has the agency, wit, and tenacity to navigate and endure the rising and seemingly intractable worries that it will have to deal with likely ahead. Insistently, inquiries go on to be elevated about the robustness of ASEAN unity, if assurances of ASEAN centrality seem hollow, and the impression of big powers in influencing insurance policies and the positions of unique ASEAN associates international locations.

Having Inventory of the ASEAN Community

As a system, ASEAN hopes to comprehend an built-in, properly-connected Local community by 2025 as envisioned in its Eyesight Document 2025. A crucial aspiration that would do much for the regional grouping if realized is the institution of a prevalent industry and creation foundation. That’s an bold, but undoubtedly doable aspiration — offered each individual member point out is ready to make the domestic adjustments, adjustments, and sacrifices essential to notice this target while at the exact time coping with the external shocks and disruptions they now facial area.

Presented the structural uniqueness of ASEAN, in certain final decision-building by consensus, it has been no indicate feat for ASEAN to have progressed this far over the past 52 years of its existence. This development is not only in spots thought of low-hanging fruit, which much more usually than not are technical and stand to advantage all member states, but in substantive spots throughout all 3 pillars that outline how ASEAN is structured, namely political-security, economics, and socio-cultural. ASEAN has designed genuine development in forging regional ways to combat prevalent threats and issues this sort of as terrorism, violent extremism, cybersecurity, transnational crime, nontraditional protection difficulties these types of as human trafficking, and humanitarian guidance and catastrophe reduction preparedness to identify a few, some of which are cross pillar undertakings.

ASEAN financial cooperation has moved in advance considering that the signing of the ASEAN No cost Trade Location Settlement in 1992. Person member states have created development in domestic economic progress partially because of to membership in ASEAN, benefitting from the peace and steadiness that the grouping has introduced to the location, as perfectly as the ASEAN agreements both equally intra-ASEAN and with external associates forged over the many years.

Significantly perform has been specified to the collective profile of ASEAN, such as its market place dimensions of 640 million, expanding trade with the earth (at $2.57 trillion in 2017) aided to a big extent by the grouping’s community of no cost trade agreements, its every year growing GDP figures ($2.8 trillion in 2017), and increasing foreign direct investment (FDI), $137 billion for 2017. These cumulative figures have been employed to recommend that ASEAN is poised to come to be the fourth most significant economy in the entire world by 2030, and makes for great profiling of ASEAN’s good results.

What these figures in actuality point out are that if ASEAN were a single state, it would certainly be a formidable world-wide economic participant. Having said that, breaking down these figures to the general performance of each and every member point out reveals the extensive disparity that exists inside of the grouping. The ASEAN Statistical Yearbook 2018, revealed by the ASEAN Secretariat, reveals this disparity primarily based on the studies of just about every member condition. For instance, the GDP per capita for Singapore and Brunei are in the 5 figures whereas the relaxation of ASEAN’s member states are nonetheless in the 4 digit mark. The influx of FDI into the location is also not evenly distribute.  Some member states entice large inflows of FDI yearly whereas other individuals do not. Of the $137 billion in FDI ASEAN recorded in 2017, Singapore acquired somewhat in excess of $62 billion, followed by Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines at $23 billion, $14 billion, and $10 billion, respectively.

ASEAN’s very first section of economic integration finished in 2015, and it is now in the up coming period guided by the ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2015-2025. Closer economic integration will need the following problems to be resolved.

Reduced intra-ASEAN trade: With intra-ASEAN trade at about 23 per cent of ASEAN’s general trade figures, any flux in the exterior trade setting would affect the well being of ASEAN’s exterior trade. ASEAN has established alone the concentrate on of doubling intra-ASEAN trade by 2025 as a buffer towards around-reliance on world wide trade. This would need adjustments and commitment by just about every MEMBER Condition, together with enhancements in infrastructure connectivity inside ASEAN to facilitate cross-border imports and exports as very well as complementary output functions

Controlling non-tariff boundaries: When member states have mainly implemented the tariff removing/reduction targets agreed underneath the AFTA and the exclusion lists have been shortened, there has been a concomitant improve in non-tariff actions (NTMs) inside of ASEAN from 1,634 to 5,975 involving 2000 and 2015. NTMs undermine the tariff free of charge atmosphere that AFTA seeks to boost.

Bridging the growth gap: There is a extensive gap in the economic and progress levels of each member state. The Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI) was set up for the certain reason of narrowing the enhancement gap inside ASEAN. Having said that, the gap continues to be extensive. Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and to a lesser extent Vietnam continue on to lag at the rear of the other ASEAN associates. When IAI endeavours enable, a lot more desires to be completed to go these nations up the improvement ladder, together with national attempts by the lesser created member states to catch the attention of a lot more FDIs into their economies.

Conquering domestic hurdles: ASEAN strategies and agreements to recognize a popular market and creation base have to be applied at the nationwide level, which is the duty of every member point out. Every single has differing domestic constraints, challenges, and pressures that would make national amount implementation of ASEAN agreements much less of a priority. Even if the member condition would like to pursue implementation, there could be capacity shortcomings, national legal hurdles, source constraints, and domestic political complications that some member states could possibly confront.

Viewing as a result of present agreements: Some agreements might be hard for some member states to apply even nevertheless they have agreed to these in basic principle. Just one case in point would be the movement of labor in just ASEAN. International locations such as Singapore and Malaysia would be careful in agreeing to enable unfettered motion of labor as this could consequence in a flood of unskilled labor motion from the considerably less formulated member states to the extra developed states.

ASEAN economic cohesion is still function in progress, but now requires larger perseverance and resolve to realize its goal of nearer economic integration. There are new troubles to be resolved these kinds of as the existing traits from multilateral trading arrangements, rising sentiments versus globalization, and expanding protectionist tendencies. These will be even more difficult by the uncertainties produced by the heightening U.S.-China trade dispute. Though each member condition would have to make its very own changes and coverage changes to navigate and mitigate the results of these world traits, ASEAN as a grouping need to proceed to converse out against these developments and argue strongly for the preservation of a free of charge, multilateral trade method ruled by worldwide rules and norms.

ASEAN’s US-China Predicament

The the latest U.S.-China tensions, which is rising in intensity, location ASEAN in a tough situation. The two international locations are lengthy-standing and important partners for ASEAN. In November 2018 Singapore Key Minister Lee Hsien Loong remarked that ASEAN would not want to be put in a posture in which it had to opt for sides. The dynamics will be complex if each ASEAN member leans towards a person or the other ability, which would then make it unachievable for ASEAN to arrive to a widespread placement on this rivalry. Realistically, there is absolutely nothing that ASEAN can do to enable each sides take care of their dissimilarities. This is a confrontation of the huge boys and ASEAN does not have the fat to influence the final result.

Bilaterally some member states might previously be in the invidious posture of obtaining taken sides, primarily individuals member states that count considerably on financial largesse from China. Most ASEAN customers depend on China as their most critical buying and selling associate. The United States also is an critical companion for ASEAN member states for trade, investments and, for some users, obtain to protection technological know-how and armed forces devices. Each member would have its individual inner position relating to relations with China and the United States.

It is anticipated that this important energy tussle could be a examination of ASEAN unity. It would do the grouping no great if member states had been split and unable to appear to a popular place simply because of their affiliation, closeness, and dependency on a single power or a different. ASEAN’s credibility would be undermined. As this year’s chair, Thailand need to forge a prevalent ASEAN situation on the U.S.-China strategic level of competition, even if it only success in expressions of issue over the effect and implications for the area and urging the two sides to resolve their discrepancies peacefully as a result of negotiations.

Even though ASEAN could put up with adverse penalties as a outcome of this most recent China-U.S. strategic competitiveness, it like the rest of the earth is a spectator. A major stress for ASEAN member states is the potential of a confrontation concerning China and the United States in the South China Sea major to a conflict. This is ASEAN’s yard and any pressure or conflict in this place would have important repercussions for the balance of the region. The U.S. has built it clear that it does not understand China’s claims in the location and is established to guarantee that China’s actions in the space do not go unchallenged, as manifested by the new enhancement of Independence of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) in the South China Sea by U.S. naval vessels.

The shows by the Chinese defense minister and the acting U.S. secretary of defense at the recently concluded 18th Shangri-La Dialogue laid bare the positions of both of those sides. The two designed challenging statements about their respective solve and perseverance to protect their nationwide passions if press came to shove. This was significant-level posturing by the major protection officers of equally countries. Normally the presentations ended up not an indication that war was imminent, but extra a illustration of the stakes concerned in worst-case situations.

For ASEAN these types of converse is worrying as the diminishing atmospherics would have unfavorable implications for the regional stability and financial environments. Plainly if the U.S.-China situation deteriorates further more, ASEAN would have to make changes to cope with new realities and worries, and assure that its reaction to the modified circumstance does not place ASEAN squarely on 1 side or a further. It is a hard scenario for ASEAN wherever two of its most essential partners are obtaining critical complications with just about every other, and the conclusion-activity is continue to not apparent.

ASEAN will also have to tackle the no cost and open up Indo-Pacific idea now that the U.S. Office of Protection has manufactured crystal clear its Indo-Pacific tactic via a report launched in the course of the Shangri-La Dialogue. This is by much the most detailed U.S. iteration of the Indo-Pacific thought from the strategic and protection perspectives. The report served to verify that the expression “Asia-Pacific” will no longer be employed in the U.S. lexicon and that the Indo-Pacific defines the U.S. strategic theater.

The United States sees its cost-free and open Indo-Pacific method as even further empowering the idea of ASEAN centrality in the regional safety architecture. It is not distinct what empowering ASEAN centrality means while it indicates an expectation that ASEAN will variable the U.S. Indo-Pacific method into its idea of ASEAN centrality. The report also pointed out that the United States respects ASEAN’s consensus dependent decision-creating model but incorporating “we imagine that the a lot more ASEAN speaks with a single voice, the more it is able to retain a area free of charge from coercion,” reflecting a problem about ASEAN unity. ASEAN will have to make a decision what this Indo-Pacific system would indicate for the idea of ASEAN centrality and its effect on the hitherto ASEAN-led regional architecture. China has designed distinct in ASEAN-led boards its desire for the standing quo, this means a focus on the Asia-Pacific with East Asia as the core as opposed to a wider Indo-Pacific concentrate.

ASEAN has so much has not formulated a clear situation on the Indo-Pacific concept. Now is as very good a time as any, below Thailand’s chairmanship, for ASEAN to make your mind up on how it can posture itself so that the ASEAN-led regional architecture stays the finest choice for regional balance and protection and is not diluted by an expanded regional framework encompassing a wider location.  It can be anticipated that China’s “friends” in ASEAN would work to make certain that China’s considerations would be factored into any dialogue that ASEAN would have on the topic.

ASEAN’s major focus ought to be to ensure that its advancement and integration plans carry on unabated, maintain its determination to guidelines and norms centered on international regulation, and keep on to discuss out to protect absolutely free trade, multilateralism, and open markets. Singapore’s minister for trade a short while ago spoke of the will need for ASEAN to stay an open system and forge partnerships with as several international locations and financial blocs as probable.

ASEAN leaders will have a lot on their plates to examine to occur to a frequent knowing on the financial and protection problems dealing with the location and the actions that ASEAN has to take to meet these challenges. ASEAN unity is important in this regard.

Hirubalan V. P. is a previous Singaporean diplomat who served in Jakarta, Brunei, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines. He very last served as Deputy Secretary Normal in the ASEAN Secretariat, in charge of the Political and Stability Section prior to retiring from community company. The views expressed here are his individual.

The post Thailand Takes up the ASEAN Challenge appeared first on Defence Online.

from WordPress https://defenceonline.com/2019/06/21/thailand-takes-up-the-asean-challenge/

[sarkarimirror]

Unbridled Surrogacy: A Pathway to Next Generation Crime (Article By IPS G.K.GOSWAMI)

Unbridled Surrogacy: A Pathway to Next Generation Crime G.K. GOSWAMI and SIDDHARTHA GOSWAMI

Abstract Surrogacy may potentially result into genetic bewilderment because of diffused parentage if the gamete donors are not known. In the absence of known parental pedigree, forensic tools like DNA may not be able to establish an individual’s identity, causing difficulty in the execution of national and international laws. This forensic void may attract transnational criminal syndicates to exploit surrogacy and produce tradable ‘designer criminals’ to commit a battery of crimes like terrorism, various kinds of trafficking, smuggling and organ trade without leaving any forensic footprints for their personal identification. Indeed unbridled surrogacy may become a fertile ground to produce stateless ‘criminal robots’ without known genetic antecedents posing a great threat to global safety and security.   Introduction THE impact of medical assisted reproduction on socio-cultural values and social norms is well known. (Lindheim et al., 2014) Assisted reproductive Technology (ARTs) may result in diffused parentage, posing a threat to the forensic identification of an individual. (Blauwhoff, 2008; Gajendra K. Goswami, 2015; Gajendra K. Goswami, 2016; Ravitsky, 2017) Likewise, unbridled surrogacy may potentially become a tool to orchestrate the next generation crimes. The rising trend of global terrorism and other transnational organised crimes necessitates thorough discussion on the potential misuse of surrogate children. There can hardly be two views that various interventions under reproductive technology has given hope to infertile 34 December 8-14, 2017 MAINSTREAM people to have their own children but unregulated surrogacy is likely to be misused to create ‘designer fedayeen’ causing havoc and destruction without leaving behind any forensic clues to ascertain their antecedents. Even DNA may fail to establish the genetic identity of a ‘planned surrogate baby’, if sperm, ovum and womb are used from discrete sources. Instead of recruiting a criminal, surrogacy may alternatively be used for creating a baby, which can be trained for operating terror modules, committing contract killing or carrying out several types of trafficking and smuggling including drugs, weapons, wildlife and so on. Surrogate children may further be exploited for organ trading, sex rackets, forced labour, pornography, begging, spying or even to become surrogate mothers. Child laundering may yet be another method of exploiting children. (Smolin, 2007) Thus ‘designer surrogate robots’ may be the future criminals posing a challenge to the forensic scientists to establish their genetic antecedents. Interestingly, available literature reflects only on the ethical conside-rations of surrogacy, highlighting exploitation of surrogate mothers but any deliberation on designer surrogacy for creating criminals does not find any mention in academic discussions. Since ages, human identification for various purposes, including criminal proceedings, was considered important by the society. International law also demands proof of nationality to prosecute a fugitive. In such a scenario, DNA profiling emerged as a panacea to establish the individual identity by matching it with parental or sibling profiles. In the absence of known parental pedigree, the DNA test may fail to disclose an individual’s identity. Similarly detection of the gestational surrogate mother continues to be a challenge for forensic experts.1 In the absence of genetic contribution for conceiving a child, merely a womb-donated mother may not be detected by DNA, says Dr Lalji Singh, the globally renownced Indian expert on DNA Profiling. Criminal syndicates may exploit such forensic void in identifying a predesigned perpetrator to deceive the enforcement agencies. Dimensions THE corpse of Osama bin Laden was identified by establishing DNA linkages to his family members. (Ackerman, 2011; Check, 2011; Obama and McRaven) Had he been a surrogate child, born out of anonymous gametes and womb, establishing his genetic identity then would have been a forensic challenge. In all probability, genetic impersonation and manipulations in the world of crime will become a challenge for the next generation of both, forensic scientists and law enforcement agencies. (Hamilton, 2009) Further trading of these children may bring back a new variant of modern age slavery. A genetically conceived criminal may look like a work of fiction but needs attention of the lawmakers, jurists and medical practitioners to design a foolproof system to prevent its occurrence so that the wonder science of medical assisted reproduction may not become a fertile ground to produce predesigned criminals. In the absence of a robust scientific and legal framework, the transnational terrorism and other crimes may widely be sponsored by crossborder remote control without any footprints of their involvement. Diverse surrogacy-legal regimes in various countries promote transnational reproductive tourism. (Inhorn and Patrizio, 2012) In general, the developed nations have strict laws for assisted reproduction but many developing jurisdictions have either scanty or no law in place. India, the global capital of surrogacy, is facing challenges in making surrogacy laws. Medical facilities and surrogate mothers’ availability at low cost in developing countries impose negligible legal responsibility on commissioning parents, which further facilitates cross-border baby-making. The record-keeping at fertility clinics is poor without having a national level registry of surrogate children. Thus surrogate children are being produced like chattel violating the cardinal principle of the inviolability of the human body susceptible to exploitation and abuse. Surrogacy is a booming global industry worth nearly $ 6 billion annually. (Morris, 1993) A series of middlemen involved in the process further enhances the susceptibility quotient for the misuse of reproductive technology. Newspapers are flooded with reports of the susceptibility of surrogate children ranging from abandonment to their misuse. (Express, 2012) Multiple births in surrogacy are common but no record of unwanted ‘extra-children’ is available whereas these ‘abandoned children’ may become an easy target of the criminal racketeers. Every child has the inherent right to know her/ his genetic ancestry which is essential for her/his personal development and for medical reasons. (Besson, 2007) The right to know one’s genetic origin must be available to every child including the right to know the identity of the surrogate mother. Indeed the ARTs and surrogacy need legal regulations both at the national and global level. A global Protocol on Surrogacy Laws is the need of the hour with special emphasis on maintaining records of surrogate children so that they may be tracked forensically, if need be. The challenges before forensic experts to unravel the mystery of diffused parentage and gestational surrogate womb need global attention for further intensive research in this field. Conclusion IN the era of rising transnational crimes, identification of criminals, dead or alive, continues to pose a challenge for law-enforcers. Sponsored trans-border crimes have a history of affecting diplomatic relationship between nations in the past. Stateless criminals created through surrogacy may challenge the regional and global efforts for combating cross-border organised crimes. Transnational criminals are in the habit of exploiting and improvising advanced technologies and ARTs may not be an exception. Unregulated assisted reproductive procedures may become a boon to the underworld, if not checked in time. Global attention and efforts are required to regulate assisted reproduction to check possible abuse of surrogate children. REFERENCES Ackerman, S. (2011), ‘Osama bin Laden: Commandos Use Thumb, Eye Scans to Track Terrorists’, http://www. wired. com/dangerroom/2011/05/csi-bin-laden-Commandos-usethumb-eye-scans-to-track-terrorists/(Accessed June 6, 2017). Besson, S. (2007), ‘Enforcing the child’s right to know her origins: Contrasting approaches under the convention on the rights of the child and the European convention on human rights’. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 21(2), 137-159. Blauwhoff, R.J. (2008), ‘Tracing Down the Historical Development of the Legal Concept of the Right to Know One’s Origins-Has to know or Not to Know Ever Been the Legal Question.’ Utrecht L. Rev., 4, 99. Check, R.R. (2011), ‘Fallout from Using DNA to Identify Osama bin Laden’. Express, T.I. (2012), ‘From abandonment to abuse, 18 cases that helped draft surrogacy bill’, September 8, 2016. The Indian Express. Goswami, G.K. (2015), ‘The genetic truth of surrogate parentage’, Medico-Legal Journal, 0025817215576877. Goswami, G.K. (2016), Assisted Reproduction and Conflicts in Rights: Satyam Law International: New Delhi. Hamilton, S.N. (2009), Impersonations: Troubling the person in law and culture: University of Toronto Press. Inhorn, M.C., and Patrizio, P. (2012), ‘The global landscape of cross-border reproductive care: twenty key findings for the new millennium’, Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 24(3), 158-163. Lindheim, S.R., Coyne, K., Ayensu-Coker, L., O’Leary, K., Sinn, S., and Jaeger, A.S. (2014), ‘The Impact of Assisted Reproduction on Socio-Cultural Values and Social Norms’, Advances in Anthropology, 4 (04), 227. Morris, P. (1993), Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, (ed.), ‘Practical Handbook on the Operation of the Hague Convention of November 15, 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters’, 2nd edn.(loose-leaf), Maklu, Antwerp/Apeldoorn 1993. Netherlands International Law Review, 40(01), 147-147. Obama, B., and McRaven, W. H., ‘The Death of Osama bin Laden: Presidential Speech’, White House (May 1, 2011) (www. youtube. com/watch. Ravitsky, V. (2017), ‘The right to know one’s genetic origins and cross-border medically assisted reproduction’, Israel journal of health policy research, 6(1), 3. Smolin, D. M. (2007), ‘Child laundering as exploitation: applying anti-trafficking norms to intercountry adoption under the coming Hague regime.’ Vt. L. Rev., 32, 1. ENDNOTES 1. Based on genetic contribution, the surrogate mother may be either gestational (only carries pregnancy, no genetic contribution), or traditional (contributes ovum by the process called intrauterine insemination and carries pregnancy to the term). DNA enables linking mother with child if she contributes ovum irrespective of carrying the pregnancy. Disclaimer: The Views expressed by the author in this  article are entirely his own and not necessarily reflect the views of sarkarimirror.com Read the full article