We hope we may have some suspects today or tomorrow,” Police Gen. Pongsapat Pongcharoen, a deputy national police chief, told reporters on Saturday.There was no claim of responsibility for the attacks on Thursday and Friday, which followed a successful referendum last weekend on a new constitution that critics say will bolster the military’s power for years to come.

The violence appeared aimed at dealing a blow to the country’s tourism industry, which brings in crucial income to the government. One small bomb exploded on a beach in Patong on the island of Phuket and four others rattled the seaside resort city of Hua Hin, prompting businesses to shut their doors, streets to empty and anxious tourists to huddle inside their hotels.

Eleven foreigners were wounded in the blasts, including nationals of Austria, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands.“We hope we may have some suspects today or tomorrow,” Police Gen. Pongsapat Pongcharoen, a deputy national police chief, told reporters on Saturday. He did not elaborate, but said police were gathering evidence and that international militant groups were not believed to be behind the attacks.

Speaking late Friday, Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha said the attacks “struck at the hearts of all Thai people.”

Royal Thai Police Col. Krisana Patanacharoen also said on Friday that it was “too early to conclude” who was behind the attacks. But he said the bombings followed “a similar pattern used in the southern parts of the country” a reference to a low-level insurgency in the country’s largely Islamic south that has ground on for more than a decade and killed more than 5,000 people.

Southern militants fighting for greater autonomy have carried out sophisticated, coordinated attacks before, but most have hit three provinces in the far south that were not among those targeted this week.The violence occurred just ahead of the first anniversary of the Aug. 17 bombing of Bangkok’s popular Erawan Shrine, which left 20 dead and injured more than 120 others. Thai authorities said that bombing was revenge by a people-smuggling gang whose activities were disrupted by a crackdown, but analysts suspect it might have been the work of Uighur separatists angry that Thailand forcibly repatriated more than 100 Uighurs to China.

Foreign governments, including the United States, issued warnings urging travellers to use caution and avoid affected areas. Many of the tourists interviewed on Saturday were resuming their vacations while keeping an eye for any sign of trouble.“We feel pretty safe. At first we had a lot of mixed feelings, because we didn’t know the area well enough,” said Lexus Chlorad (21), from New York, after arriving in Hua Hin on Friday afternoon.

Carl Suensson (68), from Sweden, said on Saturday that “today it’s pretty OK, but yesterday was scary.”

“We follow the news 24 hours. Wherever there’s a lot of people, like the market, bars behind Hilton, the train station, we try to avoid it,” he added.The first bomb exploded in the southern province of Trang an area full of beautiful beaches and tourist islands killing one person and injuring six, according to police. Then on Thursday night, attackers in Hua Hin hid bombs on a busy street filled with bars and restaurants, planting them inside two potted plants and were detonated by remote control about half an hour apart.

One Thai woman was killed and about 20 people were wounded, 11 of them foreigners.

Last Sunday, Thai voters approved a referendum on a new constitution that is supposed to lead to an election next year. Critics say it is undemocratic and is fashioned to keep the military in control for at least five more years even if a free election is held.Friday’s blast took place on a public holiday marking the birthday of Thailand’s Queen Sirikit. The junta has repeatedly said that defending the monarchy is a top priority, and the army and its allies are eager to ensure a smooth succession for King Bhumibol Adulyadej, the world’s longest-reigning monarch.Many foreigners living in Thailand have gotten used to bouts of violence.“I’ve seen it go up and down going through all the coups and everything,” said Gabrielle Boccer, a Swiss—Australian who has lived in Thailand for 25 years. “I’m just a little wary, but life goes on.”

As Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi began his three-day visit India visit from Goa, a commentary in the state-run Xinhua news agency that appeared on Friday was not far from linking New Delhi’s entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) with the South China Sea (SCS) issue.The juxtaposition of the two themes, which have recently become a cause for friction between the two countries, appeared under the title, “India should join China in rising above differences, forging closer partnership.”

Slight softening of NSG stand

The write-up underscored that India should not consider that its entry into the NSG is “tightly closed”. It pointed out that “so far, there is no precedent for a non-Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) signatory to become a NSG member”. But it added: “However, New Delhi should not be downhearted as the door to the NSG is not tightly closed. But any future discussions need to be based on safeguarding an international nuclear non-proliferation mechanism, in which India itself has a huge stake.”

Quid pro quo hinted at

Without stating that a quid pro quo could be in the offing, the article, nevertheless followed its observations on India’s stalled bid for the NSG with an elaboration of the SCS issue — especially, highlighting New Delhi’s support for a dialogue “between the parties concerned” during the Foreign Ministerial meeting of the Russia-India-China (RIC) trilateral earlier this year.“In a joint communiqué issued by the Foreign Ministers of China, India and Russia after they met in Moscow earlier this year, India agreed that the SCS issue should be addressed through talks between the parties concerned,” the commentary observed.

After U.S., Japan stepped into SCS issue

China’s insistence on a direct dialogue among the disputants follows its angst against the involvement of outside powers, especially the United States and Japan, in the SCS arena. China’s sensitivities have been further heightened after an international tribunal at The Hague, in its ruling rejected Beijing’s claims in the SCS.

“Given that the SCS correlates with China’ s vital national interests, it is hoped that India would fully comprehend Beijing’ s concerns, and continue to play a constructive role in maintaining peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific,” said the commentary.India has faulted China for blocking its entry in the 48-nation NSG, which controls the global flow of nuclear material and technology. The Xinhua write-up, however, stressed that “India has wrongly blamed China for blocking its entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).”

‘Emerging countries will feel cheated’

Earlier in an interview with The Hindu, Han Hua, director for Arms Control and Disarmament at Peking University, had observed that making an exception for India to join the NSG as a nuclear weapon State was also likely to trigger resistance from some emerging countries such as Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, as well as Kazakhstan. These nations, which had given up nuclear weapons capability or atomic weapons at one stage, were bound to “feel cheated” if India was “rewarded” because, unlike them, it persisted in pursuing atomic weapons.

The article noted that the two countries need to work together to keep their disagreements in check, as they entered “a season of intensive top-level diplomatic encounters that could well define the future of their partnership”

Russia is conducting a series of military and rhetorical escalations toward Ukraine that have analysts once again looking for clues as to President Vladimir Putin’s next move.On Wednesday, Russia’s state security agency, the FSB, claimed that it had blocked an attack on Crimea by “sabotage-terrorist groups” sponsored by the Ukrainian government, though two Russian soldiers were killed. Putin accused the Ukrainian government of using terrorism to incite conflict over Crimea, which Russia annexed from Ukraine in 2014.

Infiltration attempt

There are two sets of overlapping events: the supposed recent attack on Crimea, and Russia’s build-up there.The official Russian account lays out the first as follows: It began late Saturday, when FSB officers discovered a group of saboteurs just on the Crimean side of the land border with Ukraine. A fire-fight ended with one FSB officer killed and several of the saboteurs captured. Then on Monday, Ukrainian special forces attempted to cross into Crimea, killing one Russian soldier in firing over the border.

Moscow insists that Ukraine sponsored the plot. It’s difficult to judge the truth of these claims. Ukraine denies them.Whatever happened, images found by open-source analysts suggest that Russia has been escalating its military presence in Crimea since at least Saturday — before the supposed attack occurred.Mr. Putin has also escalated his language toward Ukraine, choosing to use this episode for some larger aim.

Analysts have pointed out disturbing parallels with how Russia behaved just before previous military actions against Ukraine.In February 2014, similar speeches and military manoeuvres provided cover for Crimean volunteer militias to seize the peninsula, then still controlled by Ukraine, only to reveal they were in fact Russian special forces launching a military occupation.Some have wondered whether Moscow might be plotting another intervention. Fighting has increased in eastern Ukraine, as it did before the August 2014 incursion.

But that seeming parallel may be the point, meant to create fear of military action — rather than actual action — that will give Mr. Putin leverage with Ukraine and with Western countries.

Classic Russian strategy

Mark Galeotti, a New York University professor who studies Russia, pointed out that Crimea would make little sense as a staging ground for military action against eastern Ukraine, which borders mainland Russia but not Crimea, and that the rest of the country is better defended. “It’s highly unlikely that the Russians are truly planning some major offensive,” Mr. Galeotti said. Rather, “We’re looking at a classic Russian strategy of building up tension.”

International peace talks over Ukraine, once the mechanism by which Mr. Putin forced contact with Western leaders who had shunned him over annexing Crimea, have become increasingly regarded as fruitless and irrelevant.By dangling the threat of renewed conflict, Mr. Putin gives the talks a new purpose: to coax him back from the brink.“It’s a standard Putin tactic — he wants to try to go there from a position of strength,” Mr. Galeotti said of the next peace talks, planned for early September. — The New York Times News Service