 Saudi Arabia said to host a peace conference on the Ukraine war. Strangely enough, Russia is not a part of it. What does this mean? It has been three years since the horrific explosion in Beirut's port, which led to over 200 deaths. To this day, no one in the position of authority has been held accountable. Why is this so? And finally, the past few days saw yet another instance of mob violence in the state of Haryana in India. What led to this horrific violence? We will be looking at all this in this episode of daily debrief. But before we get on with this show, don't forget to hit that subscribe button. A summit to discuss peace in Ukraine is scheduled to be held in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia this weekend. Both western countries and some from the global south are invited, but there is one notable exception. One country which is not invited to the talks and that is Russia. Now if you're wondering how peace talks for the Russia-Ukraine war can take place without Russia, you're not alone. So let's go to Abdul for the details. Abdul, thank you so much for joining us. A very curious peace conference, so to speak. I mean, the two countries that are fighting, Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine, of course, is part of it. Many other countries are part of it, but Russia is not part of this peace conference. So could you tell us about the genesis, so to speak, of this idea of a peace conference in the first place? This, the genesis is very simple. When Zelensky went to US in 2021, 22nd December, he basically proposed a so-called peace deal in which basically he demanded that Russia should not be part of any negotiations because Russia is responsible for the war. And that basically is the basis. So it has three basic points. That Russia should first withdraw from all the territories, which basically it has captured since 2014. It means the Crimean Peninsula is also part of it. Then it says that Russia should be ready to pay war compensation for whatever losses Ukraine has incurred and should be ready to face a trial in international court for the quote-unquote war crimes it has done in Ukraine. Until it does all those three, it should not be included. It agrees to do all those threes. It should not be part of any peace negotiation. And this was the, basically, of course, this proposal was rejected by Russians and most of the countries which have proposed negotiation, negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine find this idea absurd. Still, Western countries, particularly the US and European Union, have pushed this particular proposal and have tried to mobilize support for behind Zelensky's so-called peace proposal. And they had a first round of negotiation in Europe. This is the second round, which is going to happen in Saudi Arabia, maybe on Saturday. This will start. And for two days, as you rightly pointed out, Russia has, again, has not been invited. And there is no attempt to basically bring in Russian perspective into it. This is basically a larger attempt to mobilize opinion among the countries which so far have remained neutral or considered not taking position on the Ukrainian war. The way West is proposing asking them to take position to basically rally behind Ukraine and rally behind the Western stand, again Russia, and to follow the sanctions which are imposed on Russia by the US and European Union. Right, Abdul, of course, interesting to also remember that there were actually talks which took place at the beginning of the war, which were then sabotaged according to reports because of Boris Johnson's intervention. But there have also been other proposals, if I'm not mistaken, the African Union leaders at some point had raised something, there have been others. So is there, what is the fate of some of those proposals? See, China had given a proposal, a very serious proposal. Then African Union and some African countries individually also gave certain proposals. There are numerous other proposals according to Russia. There are around 300 of different kinds of proposals which Russia has received, some from individuals, some from countries, some from the group of countries. And all of them basically talk about negotiation between the parties, means Ukraine and Russia together. As you rightly pointed out, there were negotiations on the similar lines in the beginning of the war, which was in March and April in 2022. Those talks were sabotaged by the Western intervention. There were, now it has been confirmed. In fact, Vladimir Putin during his meeting with the African leaders last month had basically claimed that, in fact, the Ukrainians also had agreed on broader idea of peace. All the proposals were by and large negotiated. But at the last moment, when the final proposal was sent to Ukrainians, they did not respond to it. And that basically happened primarily because of the Western attempts to scuttle the negotiation. So, all these peace proposals, which of course, which were scuttled in April 2022, Istanbul peace process and the other parties like African peace proposal or the Chinese and other individuals who have proposed basically talk about bringing both the parties together. That is the basic thing. Nobody is, of course, dictating what should be the outcome of the negotiation. But if you see this particular proposal, which is going to be discussed in Saudi capital, not Saudi capital, sorry, in Jeddah, basically talks about already dictating the terms to one of the parties of the war and saying until it agrees to these proposals, there cannot be any settlement. This peculiar idea of peace is strange and which basically, of course, also seals the fate of this kind of exercise. And I think other peace proposals were rejected primarily because the US and the European Union, the Western powers which are vacuuming Ukraine did not want to end the war at this moment. They want, it seems, that the war should continue. And that is why they are continuously rejecting and pushing a particular peculiar idea, which is not acceptable to Russia. And so one should understand the larger political intentions behind the fate of the other peace proposals, which are there on the table. Well, Abdul, thank you so much for that analysis. We'll come back to you probably on Monday to get your evaluation of what really transpired in Jeddah. But as of now, it seems quite, I don't know the word, maybe curious, strange, intriguing, whatever, where there's a peace process without one of the parties involved. But thank you so much for talking to us. But do stay back because we are coming back to you for another story from West Asia. On August 4, 2020, a huge explosion rocked Beirut port. The damage was catastrophic. Over 230 people died, 6,500 people were injured, and the economic impact continues to haunt the country to this day. However, how many people, especially those in positions of power were held accountable? The answer is zero. To understand this failure, let's go back to Abdul. So welcome back, Abdul. Of course, a horrific incident that took place in 2020. The visuals at that time were stunning. And it's, I guess, one of those accidents, if you can call it an accident, which has had such a catastrophic impact, not just then, in terms of the lives lost, in terms of the injuries, but is actually, you know, had dealt a huge blow to the entire economy of the country, lasting even now, and very few incidents of that sort in recent memory. So three years down the line, why is there such lack of accountability for what happened considering its impact? This has primarily to do with the peculiar political culture, you can say, about Lebanon. Of course, the Lebanon is completely divided. The current Lebanon politics is completely divided between the parties, which are basically pro-external interventions, and there are parties which are completely against all kinds of intervention in the Lebanese politics. So, following the blast on August 4, 2020, there have been two inquiry commissions constituted. Both of them, if you see a section of the Lebanese political group, have basically released that both the inquiry commissions have been biased, politically biased in particular. And they have used the blast, the tragedy which happened and the aftermaths of it, basically to settle certain political scores, and to basically promote a particular narrative of politics. And that has been at the root of the disagreement which basically has led to the resignation of the first, basically dismissal of the first inquiry commission, and the second inquiry kind of, you can say, a complete stagnation in the process of the inquiry in the second inquiry commission. And one should, it is difficult to basically take a position at this moment, who is correct and who is not, but the primary reason behind the lag in which there has been no finality of setting in accountability, who has been responsible for the blast, and to kind of bring justice to the victims and their families is primarily because of this peculiar political situation, and this disagreement between all the political parties in Lebanon. And that is the only thing which can be said at this moment regarding the inquiry commission, and its inability to bring closer to the events of August 4, 2020. Ranabil, you make a very interesting point which is that the inquiry into a port blast is actually very closely connected to the extent of the political crisis in Lebanon itself. And it is very difficult to sort of separate the two. But ex-elaborating on that point a bit further, could you maybe take us through what is right now politically happening in the country. We do know that elections were held, but then no government was formed. The president's term expired. So there was at some point, I mean even now I believe there is neither a president nor a proper parliament, nor a prime minister or a properly elected prime minister. So what has been happening in recent times in the country politically? Well, the Lebanese parliament is meeting for maybe 16th time to elect president, which is the post of the president is vacant since October 2021. When Michael on the president, his term got over and he resigned. And so there is no president in Lebanon for a very long time now. And parliament has, despite the fact that there was elections, there were elections a year back. Those elections have created a hung parliament. And all the parties have failed to come to a consensus to form a government. And that government cannot be formed as per the Lebanese constitution until there is an election of the president. So the parties completely disagree on who should be the president. And every time there is a candidate decided the election either do not happen because the quorum is not fulfilled or when it happens the votes are so divided that nobody is elected. So that has been happening for almost a year and a half now in Lebanese politics. And that basically also hints towards the state of the Lebanese politics, which we were referring to when we were talking about the blast inquiry. That there is a group which basically thinks that it is necessary to form a government in Lebanon which basically carries forward quote unquote to its closer links with France or to US and basically pursue the policies they want to pursue in Lebanon. And there is a group, of course, there are a set of other political groups, Hezbollah and others, which basically are opposed to this particular idea. And that basically is reflected in both the inability of the parliament to decide on a formal government in Lebanon and also many other matters including the inquiry of the blast because that also has links with the final outcome of the inquiry. So all these things basically, that's what this basically complicates the understanding of the politics in Lebanon because of the external, continued external interventions and the attempts to resist it and the complete division among the political groups in Lebanese politics. Thank you so much, Abdul. We'll hopefully come back to you when there are more developments in Lebanon as well. Thanks so much for speaking to us. And finally over the past few days, religious violence broke out in the northern Indian state of Haryana. The violence began with the religious procession taken out by the Hindu right-wing organization the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and this led to clashes. These clashes spread and at least five people died in related events. This incident is once again raised the key question of whether governments are doing enough to stop the activities of vigilante groups and mobs. Now these groups are often responsible for such incidents. We go to Pragya for more. Pragya, very shocking reports coming from the northern part of India. Of course the incidents in the new district being the focus but also reports of some of these incidents spreading to other parts as well, generally a rise in tension between religious groups. And as far as I understand this tradition of processions leading to violence has actually become quite common in the recent past. It is always there but it has actually become a bit common as well. So maybe could you explain first the dynamics of this specific region where this violence took place? Yeah Prashanshu, so in one large part of Haryana relatively prosperous state, you have one of the poorest districts of India and that is where the right-wing Hindu nationalist groups decided to take out a procession on a rather large scale and before the procession they released these video messages which were insulting and can be seen as also threatening by two figures in particular who are known, considered culprits of killings and lootings in that region known as Mivad. So the moment those videos were released, there was a count a series of counter messages on social media released by the locals of Mivad and this is something that the police, the administration, the state government actually should have picked up, even the center could have picked it up and it was being noticed on a wide scale but it wasn't. And so this procession was carried out whether those two figures arrived at the scene of the procession, the religious processions that they wanted to bring out it's not clear but if you don't know yet but the point is that the very fact that they would be there led to this kind of anger because they are part of these organized groups which are known to have state backing and they are armed and the people of Mivad are the most impoverished Muslim population of India, it's a predominantly Muslim district, there's a roughly a 60-40 breakup of Muslims and Hindus but where the Muslims live there are also Hindu religious sites, there's this temple there. People have been visiting that temple, it's a rather grand temple, this is the first time that there has been violence there, the result of that violence what the reports are telling us is not only that six people have died, there's been large-scale burning of vehicles over there and the tension spread over to nearby districts Gurgaon which is known as a millennium city which is where the India's information technology services exports take place from where cars are manufactured and so on so it's a deeply ironic thing that primordial identities are being stoked and you know people are being made to fight over things which are essentially within the ambit of law and order. Absolutely Praki that's a very interesting point you make the fact that and I think there are a number of people who over the years have commented that any instance of religious violence could be quickly controlled if the state takes a decisive measure and often it does not and that's what many critics are saying about this at this point but also I just wanted to talk about we discussed the violence in Manipur also some days ago when the Manipur state in northeastern India we discussed that as well and generally there is a sense that there has been an you know a larger increase in right-wing fundamentalism of the vigilante variety you know it's been going on for many years groups taking like you said taking law and order into their own hands and creating situations which are you know which are in various ways provocative then there's often a response from the other side at which point things just escalate and then you know all this violence happens. So how do you sort of analyze the fact that this trend seems to be is it escalating is it you know what is what is the agenda here so to speak. Yeah Prashant it certainly seems to be escalating and you know you mentioned Manipur that's a state in the northeast where people have been two ethnic groups have been literally at war and saying that they are at war with each other over again an administrative issue an issue of whether of how one group should be represented in the constitution or not whether they should be entitled to certain benefits or not again this is something for the government governments in India have sorted out these problems for better or worse since the country gained independence so if people are warring if this is a trigger for you know armed battles and complete separation of people then yes I would say especially with Manipur with Mewat in Haryana which we just discussed happening at the same time and people dying definitely it anybody would be right to conclude that this is escalating and it is escalating it it's happening at a rate now for example just on the same day as Mewat erupted in violence there was a individual who shot at people a soldier who shot at people in a train and people are connecting that with the overall atmosphere in the country you know that this this man a railway protection force official might or might not have had a mental condition which you know made him do what he did which is essentially but he identified people for their religion and then he killed them later he shot a video which essentially included the political slogan of the ruling Hindu the right wing Hindu nationalist party so what are what are we supposed to conclude as journalists what are we supposed analysts supposed to conclude that yes it's escalating and it's escalating also because as the critics say what are the efforts being made to ensure this doesn't happen again and that you know there is no there is no solution which you're going to find only in policing we all know that in India India has to be socially managed there are conflicts which exist there are rifts which exist which you have to ensure don't keep widening and that's that's exactly what the government doesn't seem to be doing right thank you Pragya so much for I think giving us a larger picture analysis of what is happening this is just one incident but there have been many incidents similar incidents in recent times as well so important to take note thank you so much and that's all we have in today's episode we'll be back tomorrow with another episode bringing you news from across the world so do tune in for that as well go to our website peoplesdispatch.org where you can read many of these stories and also don't forget to hit that subscribe button