A resplendent display of diplomatic affability, similar to what has been shown in some eras past, Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was welcomed by a guard of honor at the Prime Minister’s House in Pakistan. It was far more than a ceremonial formality, a meticulously choreographed reception that showed a reinvigorated alliance between these two nations that were going to chart their course in a world full of turmoil.
The meticulously choreographed reception showcased a reinvigorated alliance between Turkey and Pakistan.
The symbolic event is an event that highlights the long historical bonds that link Turkey and Pakistan as well as the strategic one that both countries are forging by working together, but at the same time when both are realigning their roles serving complex geopolitical challenges.
Turkish president Erdogan, who has been in office since 2003 and whose rein has seen the Turkish foreign policy cautiously realigned in line with a conception of Turkey as a dynamic regional player, has long projected Turkey as a country that can act together with its neighbors.
How he’s been received recently in Pakistan, with military protocol down to its last detail, and even displays of national pride, translates that it doesn’t have to look the way it did in the old days. Instead, nations are now searching inwards and tending toward like-minded partners to create bonds that are financially strong and tactically resilient. This ceremony is a statement of that inconceivable reality to come.
It also enhances these concrete economic figures. As per the World Bank’s 2022 estimates, Turkey’s economy is worth around $800 billion, making a strong case as a powerful piece of counterweight in regional affairs. At the same time, bilateral trade between Turkey and Pakistan has shot up to a thousand dollars and is close to reaching the $2 billion level, which proves this relationship has nothing to do with symbolic gestures but has some economic interests behind it.
These figures demonstrate the benefit of maximizing economic reliance for the purpose of greater strategic cooperation, firmly analogous to cooperative arrangements that stretch beyond superficial proclamations of euphoria.
Bilateral trade between Turkey and Pakistan has surged, approaching the $2 billion mark.
This is a high-profile event with the timing being particularly notable. It is a time of internal instability and external pressures for both Turkey and Pakistan who are facing economic instability and political restructuring and evolving security threats in a multipolar world. The pragmatism of maintaining closer strategic ties with partners such as Pakistan for Turkey, with its ambition to connect with China Global TV itself on the global stage, is understandable, given both the pressures it faces domestically, and internationally. Strengthening the relationship between Pakistan, a strategically placed country in the intersection of South and Central Asia, can be viewed in a positive light as a way to improve the security and stability of the region.
The guard of honor is for sure a strong symbol of mutual respect, but we will see its final meaning when substantive policy shifts and collaborations follow. Today alliances are constantly being tested and alliances are constantly being broken in the volatile international environment of shifting interests and challenging global problems.
The realization that such acts of solidarity reflect the persistent value of trust and cooperation is essential. Both countries are on a course of uncertainty and it is yet to be seen whether will this renewed camaraderie result in a deeper and more integrated partnership that can determine the stability in the region or will this camaraderie continue to fade away into the pages of diplomatic history?
The guard of honor symbolizes mutual respect and a commitment to deeper collaboration.
It is the grandeur of the ceremony vs. the grandeur of the deficit that divides. Any of the diplomatic overtures of today may well decide whether today’s world will be stable tomorrow.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
Balochistan is the largest province of Pakistan by area and of great strategic importance, however, despite its vast natural resources including rare earth metals, and strategic location, Balochistan remains one of the most underdeveloped provinces of Pakistan, facing recurrent insurgencies and law and order situation which in a way also highlights reasons for its current state of affairs.
Balochistan covers nearly 44% of Pakistan’s total land area but houses only about 5-6% of its population.
I had the unique privilege of serving in Balochistan as a senior military officer. I was posted to Balochistan soon after the killing of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti and then stayed there continuously for four long years from 2007 to 2011. The insurgency situation was at its peak and law enforcement agencies were actively involved in maintaining law and order situation. Just to share the gravity of the situation, once I landed at Quetta airport in 2007, was asked to stay at the airport for over an hour, as there were incidents of intermittent firing on the road leading to the Cantt area, since the firing of rockets from surrounding hills to Cantt and adjoining city area was a common feature.
The Author of this article talking to local commanders and people of Balochistan.
To understand its importance and the challenges it faces, a comprehensive look at its history, economic potential, and the factors behind the insurgencies is essential to propose a way forward for ushering it into an era of stability and prosperity.
Geographic and Strategic Importance
Balochistan covers nearly 44% of Pakistan’s total land area but houses only about 5-6 % of its population. Its geographic importance stems from its location, bordering Afghanistan and Iran, and its proximity to the Arabian Sea. The province is home to the deep-sea Gwadar Port, which is a key component of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Gawadar’s strategic location makes it a gateway for trade routes between Central Asia, South Asia, China, and the Middle East, providing significant economic opportunities for both Pakistan and its regional countries.
Gawadar deep-sea port also offers a shorter, cost-effective route for Chinese goods, bypassing the Malacca Strait. Additionally, Gwadar enhances regional connectivity, energy security, and economic integration, making it the “crown jewel” of the region’s geopolitical and economic landscape. Moreover, Balochistan is rich in natural resources, including natural gas, coal, copper, gold, iron ore, chromite, barite, sulfur, gypsum, limestone, marble, granite, rare earth metals including lithium, uranium, Chromite, Fluorite, lanthanum, neodymium, and cerium etc etc, so you name a mineral or metal, it’s there in Balochistan.
Despite its vast natural resources… Balochistan remains one of the most underdeveloped provinces of Pakistan.
The Sui gas field, discovered in 1952, has been one of Pakistan’s largest natural gas reserves and is vital to the country’s energy security. It is providing gas to the whole country but people living in Sui till today are being provided gas on an ad-hoc basis. This also highlights reasons for the perceived sense of deprivation among the people of Balochistan. Reko Diq and Saindak are among the richest copper and gold reserves in the region.
Reko Diq was discovered in the 1990s and holds an estimated 12.3 million tons of copper and 21 million ounces of gold, making it one of the largest undeveloped mining projects in the world. Saindak was explored in the 1970s and became operational in 2002, currently producing copper, gold, and silver under a lease agreement with a Chinese company. Economically, both projects have the potential to generate billions in revenue, boost exports, and create jobs. Recently, Pakistan reached a settlement with Barrick Gold for Reko Diq’s development, with production expected to begin by 2028.
Despite these natural riches, Balochistan remains economically marginalized, with poverty, unemployment, and lack of infrastructure pervasive throughout the province. To quote an example, the important districts of Kohlu and Dera Bugti which are rich in natural resources are not connected with a metalled road even today and the provincial government to maintain routine law and order situation keeps grappling with A and B areas thanks to the so-called local Sardars, politically elected representatives and failure by federal and provincial governments to ensure transparency and making sure that financial resources allocated to Balochistan reaches the grassroots level. Even as of now challenges like governance issues, security concerns, infrastructure development, and unemployment remain critical for unlocking the full potential of the largest province of Pakistan.
History of Insurgency and Unrest
Balochistan has a long history of unrest, marked by several insurgencies primarily fuelled by some Sardars with the support of foreign elements. The grievances of the Baloch people have revolved around issues of political autonomy, economic marginalization, unequal distribution of resources, and a perceived sense of deprivation. Military and Law enforcement agencies have been called many times by the provincial government to maintain law and order.
I have personally experienced that wherever in Balochistan, the Pak Army has operated, people of the area developed lifelong relationships with them and if it was up to the locals they would never want the Pak Army to go back leaving them again at the mercy of local Sardars and inept political and civil administration. The Chamalong Coal mining project is one such example that was undertaken and managed by my formation, it changed the economic and financial complexion of people living in District Loralai and Kohlu in a short span of two to three years. People earlier riding bicycles in the area were now moving in parados and land cruisers.
The author of the article holds the Balochi children of Kohlu District in his arms as a goodwill gesture.
The Challenges: Grievances and External Influences
1- Political Exclusion: Balochistan has long sought greater political autonomy. Many Baloch nationalists believe that the province should have more control over its affairs, particularly its resources. The centralization of power in Islamabad has often alienated the province, though this has been greatly addressed by the 18th amendment (2010) in the Constitution of Pakistan by which Balochistan has been granted greater autonomy in the province, addressing long-standing demands for provincial control over resources and governance. It transferred key subjects like health, education, agriculture, and minerals from the federal government to the province, allowing Balochistan to manage its development. A major impact is on natural resources, as the amendment has given provinces a greater share in revenues from local oil, gas, and minerals.
Additionally, Balochistan’s share in the National Finance Commission (NFC) Award has increased, improving financial resources for infrastructure and social programs. However, despite these gains, challenges like governance, capacity, security concerns, and efficient resource management continue to affect the province’s ability to fully benefit from this autonomy. Ironically since Balochistan and its provincial capital Quetta have not been developed as other provinces and their capitals, most of the people who matter in Balochistan are generally found in Karachi, Lahore,e or Islamabad.
Similarly, key personalities at the helm of affairs in Islamabad whenever go to Balochistan, like prefer a day trip or at max an overnight stay, whereas keeping in view the peculiar security situation, they need to devote more time to Balochistan. The special security situation in Balochistan requires special measures to address it wholeheartedly and comprehensively.
2- Economic Marginalization: Despite Balochistan’s wealth in natural resources, the local population has seen little benefit. The region remains underdeveloped, with limited access to basic services like healthcare, education, industries, job availability, and infrastructure. The Baloch people feel that the federal government and external investors are exploiting their resources without adequately compensating the local population.
3- Unequal Distribution of Resources and Perceived Sense of Deprivation: Balochistan, despite being Pakistan’s largest and resource-rich province, faces unequal distribution of resources and a deep-rooted sense of deprivation among its people. Although it contributes significantly to national energy and mineral wealth, including natural gas, copper, gold, and coal, it remains Pakistan’s least developed region, with poor infrastructure, low literacy rate, and inadequate healthcare facilities.
Many locals feel that revenues from natural resources are unfairly controlled by the federal government, with minimal reinvestment in provincial development. The lack of employment opportunities, political marginalization, and security concerns further fuel grievances. Though various law enforcement agencies and intelligence organizations are doing their best to bring normality to the security situation of the province they lack proper coordination and operate under different umbrellas. There is a need to create synergy in the efforts of police, Frontier Corps, Army, and intelligence agencies operating in Balochistan by placing them operationally under one command or authority till the security situation is fully stabilized.
4- External Factors: The geopolitics of the region has also played a role in the insurgency and present state of affairs in Balochistan. Baloch separatist movements have been allegedly supported by external actors, particularly by neighboring countries like India operating from its safe havens in Afghanistan with the support of the current Afghan government and in addition covert financial support of some regional and extra-regional countries, which some in Pakistan believe seeks to destabilize the region to counter CPEC and other strategic projects.
During my stay in Balochistan in one of our formal meetings with Commander ISAF/NATO and Afghan Military Commanders of the time admitted that there are Baloch miscreant camps present in and around Kandahar, fuelling the insurgency-like situation in Balochistan. The establishment and presence of the Indian Consulate in Kandahar province close to our Chaman border area highlight the Indian interest and involvement in Balochistan. A recent UN Security Council report about the presence of over two dozen terrorist groups in Afghanistan having substantial financial support in millions of dollars and their operations in Pakistan have stamped Pakistan’s genuine security concern and the gravity and complexity of the security situation in this part of the world.
Way Forward:- Stabilizing and Prosperous Balochistan
Achieving long-term stability and prosperity in Balochistan requires a multifaceted approach that addresses both the economic and political grievances of the local population while promoting inclusive development and also ensuring zero tolerance for any anti-state activity. Some of the key steps being suggested for the way forward include:
1- Political Reconciliation:Addressing the political grievances of the Baloch people is crucial for long-term stability. The federal government must engage in meaningful dialogue with Baloch nationalist groups and political leaders to ensure greater political autonomy and representation for the province. Devolution of power through the 18th Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan has provided some autonomy to provinces, but more needs to be done to ensure that Balochistan has a stronger voice in national decision-making.
2- Economic Empowerment: Balochistan’s rich natural resources must be harnessed for the benefit of its people. The provincial and federal governments should work together to ensure that revenues from natural gas, minerals, and other resources are reinvested in the province’s infrastructure, education, and healthcare. Local communities should be given a stake in the development of major projects, such as CPEC, Gwadar Port, Saindak and Riko Diq through employment opportunities, revenue-sharing agreements, training programs and development of local communities.
3- Inclusive Development:The development of infrastructure in Balochistan, such as roads, schools, hospitals, and electricity, is essential for improving the quality of life in the province. Special focus should be given to rural and remote areas, which have been particularly neglected. Developing Balochistan’s human capital through education and vocational training is key to empowering the youth and creating opportunities within the province.
4- Security and Rule of Law: While economic and political measures are essential, ensuring security in Balochistan remains critical. A balanced approach involving security forces and local law enforcement, alongside efforts to win the hearts and minds of the local population is needed. Genuine human rights abuses must be addressed to prevent further alienation of the people, and steps should be taken to rehabilitate insurgents willing to renounce violence.
5- Creation of a Joint Civil Armed Forces Command at the Federal Level (JCAFC): Creating a Joint Civil Armed Forces Command at the federal level and placing CAFs of all provinces and police under this command may be made. It will yield better results in terms of centralized command and control and decentralized execution aspects and also ensure judicious and effective use of resources and synergy among its elements.
6- Uniform Rule of Law: To ensure uniform rule of law and maintain effective law and order in Balochistan, all B areas may again immediately be made A areas. In addition, measures like taking locals on board to immediately report the presence of any anti-state element in their respective areas, upgrading intelligence networks making use of digital and AI tools to pre-empt any terrorist activity and finally those apprehended and found involved directly or indirectly in any anti-state or terrorist activity be speedily tried in courts with capital punishment.
The Author of this article flew over an operational area in Balochistan
Conclusion:
Balochistan, with its vast resources and strategic importance, has the potential to become a cornerstone of Pakistan’s economic development. However, decades of neglect, political marginalization, and insurgency have kept it from realizing this potential. A combination of economic empowerment, political reconciliation, inclusive development, and improved security can pave the way for a more stable and prosperous Balochistan. With the right approach, Balochistan can not only contribute to Pakistan’s growth but also serve as a bridge between South Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East and even East Asia.
Achieving long-term stability and prosperity in Balochistan requires a multifaceted approach that addresses both the economic and political grievances of the local population.
In conclusion, I would like to say that, Pakistan has come a long way and now stands wiser and stronger than ever. We are an established nuclear power having one of the best professional armed forces in the world which are backed by 250 million intelligent and resilient people with rivers, snow-clad mountains, glaciers, vast fertile land, deserts, beautiful sea, and beaches. All we need to do is learn from our mistakes, put our house in order by ensuring a uniform rule of law, and uniform development in all parts of Pakistan, make people-centric policies, and last but not least, place our beloved country Pakistan above our petty self-interest.
Long Live Pakistan, Pakistan Zindabad.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
The twenty-first Century is the century of non-traditional security predominantly taking over conventional security concerns in the global political framework. One of the most pressing issues of the decade, climate finance, comes with several implications for developing nations. Initially stemming from the higher global carbon emissions significantly by the developed countries, the climate challenge, though beyond borders, has been cruel to the poor and underdeveloped nations due to the North-South gap.
Developed nations bear significant responsibility for historical emissions and must boost climate finance.
Global North, the developed world is referred to as because of industrialization which eventually contributes to global warming with higher carbon emissions. While the South, yet struggling with complex economic situations, financial disasters, corruption etc., becomes vulnerable to the crisis for not having enough financial resources to cope with this existential threat.
Recently, the 29th edition of the Conference of Parties (COP-29) was held with special emphasis on missing climate finance and put up the issue as a concern for basic human rights. Moreover, developing nations also need to work on securing the available funds.
As the environmental challenges become more intense with every passing year, the consequences are for the low-income states at the cost of their security and stability. The science is very clear that carbon emission being the root cause of this global risk needs to be controlled to enhance the mitigation process which categorically demands an immense reduction in the production and energy transitions.
Global North, not solely, but as a major contributor is responsible for higher carbon emissions. According to a recent study, the United States is the highest carbon emitter country followed by China, India and then Russia respectively. The top three states contribute around 46% of the global carbon emission. India stands third globally, second in Asia and first in South Asia among the high carbon emitter states. With these facts, it is quite evident that the higher emitters suffer less for having enough economic strength to cover the ultimate disasters caused by climate change.
The recent Conference of Parties (COP) 29 was held on November 11 – 22, 2024 in Baku, Azerbaijan. The wealthier nations, at this event, were demanded a rise in what they owe to the Global South for causing the damage with their hazardous historical emissions. Initially, the amount of USD 100 billion reserved for climate funds back in 2009, is about to end next year. This has now been raised to USD 300 billion for annual climate financing as pledged by the wealthier nations.
Public investments in renewable energy and rapid adaptation are crucial for sustainable growth.
Though the current pledged figure is a significant increase from the last one but far away from the USD 1.3 trillion call from the New Collective Quantified Goal by 2035. Private sector investment seems almost impossible as the investor might not be interested in investing in the global south with no returns. Furthermore, the absence of world leaders at COP 29 and Trump’s executive orders to pull out from the Paris Agreement, an eventual elimination of the climate funds, underscores the lack of serious commitment of the leaders and leading states’ non-serious attitude towards this grievous issue.
Even though the rising gap in global climate finance is a big challenge other particular factors are overshadowed by this debate which can be influential to not reduce but to cope with this rising gap. The factors include public funds, private investments, and a mechanism to deliver through the available funds. First of all, the public investment for efficient mitigation and adaptation i.e., infrastructure development, research and development, and approaching the marginalized sections are necessary eventually to mobilize a shift in the private sector to attract climate finance.
According to the economists, by the year 2030, the developing countries shall require public international finance of an estimated 1 trillion dollars per annum increasing to USD 1.3 trillion in 2035. Secondly, the private sector with an amount of USD 210 trillion held assets, is another major contributing factor to climate finance as it comes up with climate-resilient innovations for the net zero emission goal. Proliferating the energy shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy resources, introducing new technologies, clean transport, and green infrastructure are some of the few areas where huge private investment and initiative are required to achieve global biodiversity goals.
Last but not least, a developed mechanism to utilize the available funds to address the existing challenges effectively. The local financial institutions in most of the middle-income countries in the south are more focused on mitigating strategies, undermining the adaptation plans and projects for capacity building. Almost 90% of the international climate finance goes to the mitigation to limit global warming, while there is a certain economic rationale to promote climate investment more in adaptation rather than mitigation for it builds the capacity and helps maintain climate resilient infrastructure.
Technological innovations and robust ESG strategies can transform energy sectors and reduce fossil fuel dependency.
Though multiple international institutions have been actively engaging with various state and non-state actors, the response cannot be scaled better as per the perceived intensity of the threat. There are still gaps to fill amid the increasing demand for capital from the states with lower emissions and higher vulnerability. An increase in public funds and private investment is vital for this pressing issue to be resolved. Finally, putting all the aforementioned efforts in a timely is critical for if not met quickly, the risk may rise higher demanding a more intense response in the future.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
‘The American dream seems to be crashing down. Human rights have become a joke, and elections are choosing monsters.’ This was the opinion of an American youth who voted for Donald Trump for the first time and had expected the system’s efficient functioning that earlier on seemed paralytic during the Biden regime. What he watches now is beyond his comprehension.
Trump’s comeback marks a radical shift to an isolationist, populist foreign policy.
‘Our White House has become an interrogation center which used to be the focal point for global diplomacy’. He stated. His voice resonates with almost half of the population, which thinks the White House has moved from diplomacy to trade organization since Donald Trump took office.
Recently, many heads of government have visited the White House, the latest being the Indian Prime Minister Narender Modi. How the policies are imposed upon them has created fear among friendly or enemy countries. They no longer seem to be treated as equals or as representatives of their countries, at least not even for a façade. Instead, they have had to face a stern taskmaster in Trump, compelled to listen and comply with his demands, mostly placing the wealthiest democracy in the dock.
To illustrate, consider the visits of leaders like the Japanese Prime Minister, who was made to pledge trillions to spend in America, and the Israeli Prime Minister, who was shocked to know about the US takeover of Gaza. However, he had already destroyed and turned it into a rubble. Jordan’s King Abdullah’s twitching eye expressed his discomfort about the Middle East restructuring plan. Then, there was the most hyped visit of the Modi of India. His visit was significant, given Trump’s status as his close friend and their shared right-wing ideologies. Wealthy tycoons surround both, and they are seen to be the policymakers of these countries.
The first notable moment came when, per protocol, Trump did not greet Modi at the White House entrance, starkly contrasting the receptions given to other leaders. This moment received considerable attention and commentary. Later, footage of hugging, kissing, and tapping was released. and media was informed of a closed-door meeting between two leaders.
The press conference was more than expected in the new setup. Many observers noted the tense expressions on both leaders’ faces, contrasting with Modi’s earlier support for Trump among the Indian diaspora. Modi appeared stiff, and the chemistry felt different, with the dialogue more candid. A few sycophancy questions of Indian journalists to Trump hardly changed his stance. The press conference was fun to watch.
Modi’s stiff reception at the White House underscores a new, coercive diplomatic dynamic.
Although Modi engaged in friendly discussions with tech giants and Trump’s close associates before meeting the boss, he played an incredible role in reciprocal tariffs, with Trump having previously labeled him the “king of tariffs.”
However, Modi’s stiffness didn’t ease up. In the context of cross-border terrorism, which has become a stumbling block between India and Pakistan, Modi inevitably addressed the issue of cross-border terrorism. The extradition of Pak-origin Canadian citizen, Tahawwur Rana, alleged to be involved in the Mumbai attacks, emboldened Modi to speak more loudly against border terrorism without mentioning Pakistan. Yet, this prompted a strong response from the Pakistani Foreign Office, which dismissed Modi’s statements as baseless and one-sided, lacking proof.
Pakistan had anticipated more substantial discussions regarding Kashmir and Imran Khan’s incarceration during the Trump-Modi conference, but these topics did not arise in the press conference or subsequent briefings. Some analysts believe that Modi’s emphasis on cross-border terrorism aimed to secure Trump’s assurance of support in case India decided to take action along the Line of Control (LoC) but politicians did not buy this thought.
A few reports suggest a possible confrontation at the LoC, with military assets reportedly being transported to the Line of Control in recent months. ‘While the ceasefire at the LoC remains intact, Adani’s establishment of industrial projects near the border has not indicated imminent conflict’, as per defense analyst Ravinder Acharya. Yet, Indian leaders have increasingly spoken about Pakistan’s medalling in JK and the increase in militant activities in border areas of Jammu.’
Pakistan has been silent on Kashmir since it has been mired in internal political turmoil. Only recently, the Army Chief’s visit to LOC areas and then the release of a statement of continuing support for Kashmir raised eyebrows in India. A few in Kashmir reacted by saying that ‘Pakistan has again raised the bogey of Kashmir, but there seem very few takers of it’.
Tensions over Kashmir and tariffs indicate a departure from traditional alliances.
According to Acharya, ‘Apart from a few soft statements, Pakistan usually does not pay much attention to Indian remarks, likely due to backdoor diplomacy between the two nations, including the meetings between the spy heads a few years back. Diplomatic talks have continued despite tensions within. As long as the Sharif family and the military establishment in Pakistan remain aligned, India is not viewed as an enemy. Indirect trade, media and cultural exchanges have continued without significant interference from the Pakistani establishment.’
The view from Pakistan is somewhat different. ‘Given the challenges facing Pakistan, mainly its volatile borders with Afghanistan and Iran, the country cannot afford to engage in conflicts on multiple fronts. So, the border with India must remain calm, but India seems to be taking advantage of Pakistan’s vulnerabilities by redirecting attention away from his side of Kashmir.’ The view was expressed by a Pakistani defense analyst who desired to remain anonymous.
In Modi’s earlier meeting with Trump in 2019, it was learned that he convinced Trump to remain silent regarding the abrogation of Article 370, which drew little international condemnation.
US actions now resemble coercion rather than cooperative diplomacy.
There was no mention of Indian-administered Kashmir in the joint press conference, indicating that the abrogation has since been accepted as a settled issue. For India, the only remaining question is how to integrate the parts of Kashmir under Pakistan into India. Modi has succeeded in legitimizing the scrapping of Article 370 and building a new narrative of integrating Pakistan-administered Kashmir with the Valley.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
In a rapidly evolving global economy, with significant changes taking place, the oil and gas sector is entering a key juncture, which will reshape traditional industries. Even the most entrenched fossil fuel giants are being pressured to change their business models by investors, regulators, and the public.
Global ESG investments exceeding $35 trillion are redirecting capital away from fossil fuels.
Globally, ESG assets of more than $35 Trillion have moved away from industries that struggle to meet modern conceptual sustainability standards. The story is equally compelling in Pakistan, where the country is fighting its way through energy security and environmental issues for renewable projects.
Today a local commitment to a sustainable energy future has been made as renewable energy capacity has grown approximately 5,000 MW, or roughly 10 percent of the country’s total installed capacity, as noted by the Pakistan Ministry of Energy (2022).
Yet, the oil and gas industry has caused environmental degradation and generated social controversies historically. However, change is coming in the future. Shell and BP are global titans that have publicly committed to be net zero-emitting by 2050 and, in Shell’s case, it plans to spend $2bn a year on low-carbon technologies by 2025. These are powerful commitments to a fundamental change of corporate priorities.
Stakeholders have become more and more demanding of comprehensive ESG disclosures, which have become a prerequisite for the capture of investment. According to a McKinsey survey, more than 70 percent of institutional investors are integrating ESG criteria into their decision-making processes, and it shows how financial risks posed by ignoring climate change have accelerated recently.
It is compelling for oil and gas firms to re-examine their traditional business strategy so as to integrate ESG principles. Digital technologies, connected with or combined with advanced analytics, are now straws in the wind that are inspiring companies to develop opportunities to transform their operations, more specifically, in reducing emissions, improving efficiency and reducing energy consumption thus providing a significant change in industry standards that are being redefined through smart grids, blockchain-enabled supply chain transparency and artificial intelligence for predictive maintenance.
Digital innovation is transforming operational efficiencies in Pakistan’s energy sector.
These advances that are being brought in by technological advancement mitigate environmental impact and bring about tremendous cost savings which further strengthens the case for a broader application of ESG frameworks.
The sector is stuck in trying to achieve profitability while simultaneously bringing down its carbon footprint. While everyone is talking about ESG transformation journey, oil prices are still fluctuating, and the geopolitical dynamics are unpredictable. Some critics say that some of these initiatives may appear to be shallow in terms of appeasing regulators and investors, but nothing else will work except real change.
The increasing incorporation of ESG determinations into risk management and strategic planning indicates that sustainable actions are less the option, and are instead important only for staying afloat in the future.
The oil and gas sector pivots toward ESG in Pakistan, where soaring energy needs and high environmental vulnerabilities can provide a road map for ensuring sustainable development.
Pakistani energy companies are confronted with both an unprecedented challenge and an unprecedented opportunity due to the fact that global capital increasingly favors green investments. With the convergence of international ESG trends and local imperatives, there is ample possibility for a transformative shift in how energy is produced and consumed in the region.
Integrating renewable energy is essential to break free from traditional, volatile energy sources. Strategic policy reforms are crucial to secure long-term competitiveness in a low-carbon economy.
In this age of unprecedented climate crisis, the future of the oil and gas sector will most probably depend upon its commitment to ESG principles. This is not about moral imperatives, this is about a strategic necessity, and the transition of an economy to a low-carbon economy.
If they do not adapt, companies risk going out of business in a market where sustainable practices are the currency of imminent growth. In the end, the legacy of the past will not be oil and gas, but the power to change and make the new world of sustainability the future of oil and gas.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
The latest UN Sanctions Monitoring Team report echoes that terrorism in Afghanistan is not just homegrown or foreign aided instead it’s very inextricably linked between international networks and terrorist organizations operating there; something that is quite explosive.
The inimitable proof is given in the report that Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), Al-Qaeda (AQ), East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), and Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP) are thriving in Afghanistan, thanks to the tacit support and connivance of Interim Afghan Government (IAG).
In terms of validity, Pakistan’s long-held assertion that Afghanistan is a safe haven for terrorists’ launchpad threatening regional security, was vindicated in this latest dossier.
Terror groups like TTP, ISKP, and Al-Qaeda are thriving in Afghanistan due to Taliban support.
Pakistani intelligence has so far intercepted the high-level ISKP operatives that are linked to the Kerman suicide bombing in Iran and the Crocus City Hall attack in Moscow, the report adds. Militants involved in recruitment, travel and funding of the fighters such as an Afghan (name mentioned as Tariq Tajiki) who led the Kerman attack through a courier network and is still at large, or apprehended in Afghanistan were key figures. The arrests of these operatives indicate how far the reach of these terror networks expands as they are transnational and disposed to transcend the regional borders to attack.
Furthermore, the report also reveals how the backing from the Afghan Taliban to terrorist groups like TTP has helped it to consolidate its operational prowess further using Afghan soil. TTP receives weapons, logistical, and financial support from the Taliban while cadres of Al-Qaeda and AQIS have provided active support to TTP for its cross-border raids into Pakistan.
This disturbing turn is an ominous sign of an emerging trend in which the Afghan interim government directly and probably indirectly fuels rapidly increasing acts of terror on Pakistani soil. This report confirms that Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan is in active cooperation with TTP, TIP, Jamaat Ansarullah, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and these units are all a part of a formidably complex, well-spread, and coordinated terrorist network that poses a grave threat to the international security.
The UN report vindicates Pakistan’s long-held assertion that Afghanistan is a safe haven for terrorists.
This nexus is sustained by financial support. For instance, the report says that the Afghan Taliban leadership pays the family of Mufti Noor Wali Mehsood a monthly sum of $43,000, which sharply underscores just how much the family is invested in the terror operations. But this also enables the establishment of new training centers in critical provinces like Kunar, Nangarhar, Khost, and Paktika, and their steady flow of funds supports operational logistics as well.
These facilities are serving as recruitment processes, where fighters are indoctrinated and radicalized getting even members of the Afghan Taliban under the influence of TTP. As the network has grown, it has become more difficult to coordinate regional counter-terrorism efforts.
The report further adds another layer of complexity and warns of a worrying link between the Baloch Liberation Army (Majeed Brigade) and terrorist organizations like TTP, ISKP, and TIP further aggravating Pakistan’s security dilemma. IAG has repeatedly dismissed the allegation as unfounded and has repeatedly warned Islamabad against these connections without success.
This not only serves to increase suspicions about how far terrorist groups really are being helped by those in Afghanistan, but their denial in the face of such strong evidence is rather concerning. These revelations are vindicating for a nation like Pakistan, which has been hit on the front line by cross-border terrorism.
High-level terror operatives linked to major attacks have been intercepted, confirming a vast transnational network.
The findings of the report are shared at a time when the international community is increasingly nervous about safe havens for terrorists. This constitutes a damning indictment against a regional strategy that, by giving this sanctuary community a free hand, allows failure to compromise Pakistan’s national security as well as its bedrock contribution to help to maintain the larger stability of the global community.
The UN report is a sobering sign that to the contrary, without dictated and coordinated action against terrorism, these networks will become even more emboldened as they are met with impunity and no accountability.
This is a moment of utmost importance in which we must demand: Will the international community with time, endeavor finally stand up to these entrenched terror networks and allow them to run their course; or will politics’ inertia prevail once again?
This question will carry enormous implications for peace in the region and across the globe, and it will require an increased resolve to tear down the safe havens that have become fertile grounds for extremism.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
During, the First World War (1917), Britain promised to establish independent states for both Arabs and Jews, in case of fall of Ottoman Empire. However, the conqueror, instead of creating two states as promised, initially in 1918, settled 100,000, Jews and then again after the aftermath of the Second World War, sent 250,000 Jewish refugees earlier stranded in displaced person camps of Europe.
Trump’s evacuation plan for Gaza has ignited intense international criticism.
Despite US President Harry Truman’s pressure the British declined to lift its ban on immigration and admit 100,000 Jews. Thus settling them once again in Palestinian areas. The sole objective behind increasing settlement of Jews was to convert majority population into a minority population in Palestinian-dominated areas. Therefore, it can be said, “Middle East; a region of 19 countries, came under flames, as a result of irrational divisions by British Rulers of the occupied area”.
Anyhow, Britain, handed over 56 percent of the area to Jewish minority during 1947 and 1948. Though Palestinians were in a majority but they were deprived of establishing a separate Independent state for themselves. On the other hand, Arab rulers of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen protested but failed to make any impact . Instead they pulled back their support from the Palestinians and gave preference to safeguard their national interests.
Meanwhile, due to liberal immigration policies, thousands of Jews from all over the world migrated and got asylum in Europe and USA. With each passing day, Jews got a strong foothold by capturing business in the overall US economy. According to Pew Research Organization, “overall U.S. Jews fall in high income earning group, their household income is $100,000 annually, which is much higher than the American group.
Moreover, 50 per cent Jews are living very comfortably whereas three-in-ten are meeting their basic expenses with a little money and the remaining though hard pressed are meeting their basic expenses. Migration of Jews in Israeli-occupied area of Gaza is still continuing against the wishes of the Palestinians.
Consequently, a troublesome situation resulted in starting the Palestinian armed struggle against Israel that then spread all over the Middle eastern region. USA and some western countries openly started supporting the Tel Aviv political stance, of establishing Jewish colonies, their defence and development, growing and strengthening economy, nuclear programme, supplying of conventional weapons against Arab countries and Palestinians.
Netanyahu and Trump’s policies signal an aggressive shift in regional dynamics.
On the other hand, many freedom fighters groups including, Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Al-Fatah, Hamas, Hizbulla, Hizbul Mujahedeen emerged and started resistance due to Israeli brutal actions in occupied areas. Later on, a time came when Palestinian freedom fighters and groups successfully forced Israelis to leave some areas and handover the control of Gaza Strip and WestBank to them. However, three major Arab wars were fought between rivals, which resulted in bloodshed, and an unending conflict.
In recent most past, Hamas launched its deadly attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, prompting the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to engage in aerial campaigns and ground operations within the Gaza Strip. Efforts to free more than one hundred remaining Israeli and foreign hostages taken by Hamas have been largely unsuccessful, and their location and health status are unknown.
Almost two million Gazans—more than 85 percent of the population—have fled their homes since October 2023. Recent casualty estimates from the Hamas-run Gazan Health Ministry place the death toll in Gaza at around 46 645 , though hard evidence of this claim is not possible due to limited international access to the strip. Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is attempting to facilitate a ceasefire and hostage release deal between the two parties.
Anyhow, sparking of this conflict increased regional tensions across the Middle East. Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon have engaged in cross-border conflicts with the IDF, Yemen’s Houthi rebels have shot missiles at Israel and commercial ships in the Red Sea, and other Iran-backed groups have launched dozens of attacks on U.S. military positions in Iraq and Syria. (For more on the direct confrontation between Iran and Israel and the role of the United States, visit the “Confrontation with Iran” page. For more on the direct confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel, visit the “Instability in Lebanon” page).
As per agreement, ceasefire of Hamas and Israel War took place on 19 January 2025, a day before President Trump took over the US throne. The agreement will be concluded in three phases. It started with temporary ceasefire, release of Israeli and Palestinian captives, and return of displaced Palestinians in their destroyed homes. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has killed at least 47500 Palestinians and injured 110,000 – an average of 100 Palestinians killed every day over the past 475 days.
Global actors, including the UNO, reject the proposed plan as violating human rights.
Tel Aviv carried out air raids on Gaza even after the agreement which resulted in more killings and injuries. Gaza’s estimated population is around 2.3 million people, half of whom are children and out of that only six percent population is left since the war began. In short, October 7, 23 conflict was converted into a Middle East Continental War, and if not stopped by resolving the issue between them it may convert into Third World War.
Three phases of recently concluded agreement between Israel and Hamas have been completed but still it seems to be provisional in nature since Tel Aviv is constantly targeting the Lebanese and the Gazans. Except returning of prisoners and temporary ceasefire, no glaring outcome has been noticed so far since Israel is determined to push Palestinians out of Gaza. USA is supporting every illegal and inhuman action against Palestinians.
On February 4, 25, after one to one dialogue, in a joint press conference, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and United States President Donald Trump expressed the Palestinian evacuation plan and stressed that Jordan and Egypt should accomodate the Palestinians and vacate Gaza. President Trump has shocked the world when he stated his intention of landing US forces for Gaza takeover.
Later on, Trump’s foreign office took a “U turn” to cover the presidential statement by stating that in fact, he had meant to say that the US troops would help with the cleaning and rebuilding of Gaza. But Trump has retreated from his intention of first purchasing or taking control over Gaza land, then evacuation, developing and rebuilding of Gaza. About Iranian nuclear program, he added that Washington would be ready to have a nuclear agreement with Iran instead of attacking her. At the same time, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu showed determination to implement the Trump Plan and stressed that Iran would not be allowed to develop nuclear capability.
UNO, China, Russia, Pakistan, Arab countries, Iran, and Palestinians have totally rejected Trump’s plan of Palestinian evacuation from Gaza and asked Israel to stop its brutality towards Palestinians immediately. OIC Foreign Ministers conference is going to be held on February 27 this year and it aims to deliberate on current Middle East development for defeating Netanyahu and Trump collaboration, stand shoulder to shoulder with Palestinians, and reconstruction of demolished Palestinian areas by Israel in war.
The plan underscores the urgent need for renewed diplomatic efforts and a two-state solution.
Conflict resolution lies, firstly, if, Israel agrees to accept division of land into two independent states, i.e. “Palestine” having Jerusalem as its capital and immediate evacuation of Israeli forces from Gaza, rebuilding of the West Bank and Gaza would then be a result of the proposed two states creation.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
Weeks before former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled to India, who is now living in exile somewhere in Delhi, the country erupted in anti-government street protests that turned violent last year. Now the United Nations Human Rights Office (OHCHR) in a damning report points fingers at the crackdown by security forces and it is said to have committed human rights violations with impunity.
The UN report documents systematic, extrajudicial killings and torture by security forces under Hasina’s regime during anti-government protests.
The brutal July-August crackdown by the Hasina regime was tantamount to crimes against humanity as stated by the former ruling party, Awami League, the security and intelligence agencies together systematically engaged in such violations against protesters of Monsoon Revolution, which ousted the 15-year-old autocratic rule of Hasina.
“To cling on to power, the former Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League government with all its political apparatus – including security and intelligence forces – used systematic and brutal violence against student-led mass protests in July-August last year,”. The UN Human Rights Office report is based on credible testimonies from senior officials and other evidence such as serious human rights violations by security forces during the protests, including extrajudicial killings, excessive use of force causing serious injuries to thousands, mass arbitrary arrests and detentions, and torture and other mistreatments.
The testimonies and evidence gathered by the UN fact-finding mission painted a disturbing picture of rampant state violence and targeted killings, which are among the most serious violations of human rights, and which may also constitute international crimes.
The deaths reported have been verified by sources, the UN report estimates that 1,400 people, around 12 per cent of those were children, may have been killed between 1 July and 15 August (45 days) last year, and over 13,500 were injured, the vast majority of whom were shot by Bangladesh’s security forces. Bangladesh Police also reported that 44 of its members were killed.
The fact-finding report found evidence to prove that Hasina oversaw the July protest killings!!! The report also states that former senior officials directly involved in handling the protests and other inside sources described how Hasina and other senior officials directed and oversaw a countrywide large-scale crackdown from a command center, in which security and intelligence forces shot and killed protesters or arbitrarily arrested and tortured them.
Testimonies and evidence indicate that Hasina directly oversaw a large-scale, coordinated crackdown aimed at suppressing dissent.
The fugitive home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal deployed the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) as a strike force and even specifically demanded the deployment of more helicopters to scare protesters in the way that the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) had used them, the report elaborated.
“The testimonies and evidence we gathered paint a disturbing picture of rampant state violence and targeted killings, which are amongst the most serious violations of human rights, and which may also constitute international crimes. Accountability and justice are essential for national healing and for the future of Bangladesh,” said UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk at a press conference in Geneva on 12th February.
“The brutal response was a calculated and well-coordinated strategy by the former government to hold onto power in the face of mass opposition,” said Türk. At the request of Chief Adviser Prof Mohammed Yunus, the UN Human Rights Office dispatched a team to Bangladesh in September, including human rights investigators, a forensics physician, and a weapons expert, to conduct an independent and impartial fact-finding into the deadly events.
These violations raise concerns under international criminal law, warranting further investigations to determine whether they amount to crimes against humanity, torture as a stand-alone crime, or serious violations under domestic law, according to the report. It found patterns of security forces deliberately and impermissibly killing or maiming protesters, including incidents where people were shot at a close range.
Violations during the protests included evidence of violence incitement by armed Awami League supporters, excessive use of force by Police, RAB, and BGB — resulting in extrajudicial killings — along the Army’s involvement in the use of excessive force.
The report recommends disbanding repressive forces like the RAB and establishing independent commissions to ensure accountability.
The report also documents cases in which security forces denied or obstructed critical medical care for injured protesters, interrogated patients and collected their fingerprints in hospitals, intimidated medical personnel, and seized hospital CCTV footage without due process, in an apparent effort to identify protesters and to conceal evidence of the extent of violence carried out by state forces.
The RAB should be disbanded, and the roles of the BGB and the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI), military spy agency must be confined to their original mandates. It has been advised that independent commissions must be created to investigate police violations, as well as to establish similar accountability and justice mechanisms for the Bangladesh Armed Forces and BGB.
The UN report recommends reforming the security and justice sectors, abolishing a host of repressive laws and institutions designed to stifle civic and political dissent and implement broader changes to the political system and economic governance.
The most crucial observation of the UN probe report strongly recommended that the Bangladesh authorities should refrain from nominating military or police personnel for peacekeeping missions who have served with the RAB, DGFI, or Dhaka Metropolitan Police Detective Branch, or in BGB battalions deployed to the 2024 protests or other force-suppressed protests until a human rights screening mechanism is established.
The report did not hesitate to document the aftermath of the protests, and the report also found police officers being revengefully targetted, Awami League members, and the police were perceived to be aligned with the Awami League, as well as some journalists presumed to be affiliated with Hasina’s regime.
Former Ambassador Humayun Kabir, chairman of Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, an influential think-tank when approached to comment on what is going to happen next, said now it is clear that Hasina is likely not to be tried in Bangladesh.
The UN fact-finding report is an authenticated investigative document which would be produced at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, The Netherlands.
The ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan after at a parley with Nobel laureate Prof Yunus has agreed to investigate and start a due process for the trial of Hasina for crimes against humanity. Once the ICC agrees to put Hasina on the docks to face crimes she has committed, The Hague court will seek her extradition from India, where she is living in exile since 5 August.
The ICC has signaled it may investigate and potentially extradite Hasina from her exile in India, posing a significant diplomatic challenge for New Delhi.
It will surely be a severe diplomatic embarrassment for the bigwigs at New Delhi’s South Block where they do not have enough legal reasons to scuttle her extradition to The Hague.
On the other hand, despite a formal request by Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministry through diplomatic channels, Delhi has remained silent, except for the spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs who has acknowledged receiving the ‘note verbale’ from Dhaka of her extradition.
Well, regarding the deportation of Hasina to Bangladesh, India has several arguments for not sending her to stand trial at the International Crimes Tribunal in Dhaka. But giving excuses to the ICC will be difficult for India.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
This study is well known by the Kremlin team, which actively practices the application of its key thesis. One of them, which is directly related to the current situation around the war in Ukraine and the broader agenda of relations between the United States and its opponents, including Russia, is given below:
‘Since the ‘innovator’ is, by his own actions, moving into a delegitimised context where fortune rules and human behaviour cannot be relied upon, he is obliged not to look too far ahead and to act on the spot – and, in this sense, to innovate. Therefore, action in a very precise sense is a virtue: when the world is destabilised and the unexpected is a constant threat, to act – to do things that are not contained in the structures of legitimacy – is to shape fortune.’
Trump’s return signals a revival of isolationist, protectionist policies that prioritize short-term populism over long-term global stability.
The ‘actions’ and ‘delegitimised context’ are the Kremlin’s actions in Crimea, the South-East in 2014 and the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. All of this is contrary to international law, i.e. delegitimized. The Kremlin relies on fortune. For it, ‘innovation’ is another act of violation of international law, and the action associated with it, such as war, is a virtue. Also, the Kremlin itself has admitted that it played the role of ‘innovator’ during the conflict in Syria during the second decade of this century. It is likely that the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was also a game of ‘innovator’, but broken plans and a long war have significantly limited the Kremlin’s innovator’s room for maneuver.
How to counteract an ‘innovator’ in geopolitics? Most importantly, how to overcome such an ‘innovator’? By becoming an ‘innovator’ yourself. This is Trump’s model of behavior. There is a need to disorient him. Actions and decisions should be constant, unexpected, and fast, isolating the sources of information for making such decisions. In other words, the world is now witnessing a kind of geopolitical battle between two ‘innovators’ – Trump and Putin – where the former has the initiative.
In fact, the ‘innovator’ is used to provoking chaos, plunging his opponents into it, causing them defeat, and solving the problem in the end. It works when done quickly. Very quickly. That is exactly what Trump is going to do. This is a kind of approach to peace enforcement. Here, speed plays a key role.
Successful passage of the Machiavellian Moment implies that the ‘innovator’ has mastered a kind of irrational art of dealing with the exceptional, the random, the unpredictable when one should abandon all hope of subordinating the course of events to the rule of law. This resembles the deliberate provocation of chaos and its subsequent ordering on terms that are as close as possible to the interests of the country represented by the ‘innovator’.
The imposition of hefty tariffs on key U.S. trading partners may trigger a trade war with far-reaching global economic consequences.
What is the main topic of the Machiavelli Moment? It is about ‘the role of active citizenship and its virtues in the evolution of Western European political thought’. Pocock’s ideas are still relevant today because from time to time, countries evolutionarily experience their ‘Machiavellian moment’ – ‘the time when a young republic faces a crisis of its proclaimed values and institutions’. That is, it is a clash between virtue on the one hand and fortune and vice on the other.
Virtues should be shaped by active citizenship, but in the absence of it, the leader gets the opportunity to shape virtues, calling any of his actions virtuous, such as geopolitical pressure, disregard for obligations, and norms of behavior, which in some cases can culminate in war or dictatorship. To this end, political leaders resort to the tactics of the ‘innovator’ to gain political and, as it turns out, even geopolitical influence.
Machiavellianism is a kind of behavioral model for politicians that allows them to disregard moral norms and use brute force to achieve their political goals. Thus, the world is now witnessing the dominance of Machiavellianism in the formation of a new world order. We should not forget that we are talking about a multipolar world with a whole cohort of political leaders who are inclined to innovate in order to gain influence. The moral imperative of geopolitics has been put in a drawer. For now. So, what should be the outcome of Trump’s Machiavellian moment in order to bring order to the war in Ukraine and ultimately achieve sustainable peace?
In November 2023, Foreign Affairs published an article by Richard Haass and Charles Kupchan on a possible scenario for ending the war in Ukraine. Trump likely adopted the main theses of these two well-known foreign policy experts. What did Haas and Kupchan predict?
‘The time has come for Washington to lead the effort to formulate a new policy that sets achievable goals and aligns means and ends.’
Ukraine must adopt a cautious, hedging strategy to navigate turbulent geopolitical dynamics under Trump 2.0.
Wasn’t Biden’s lack of a strategy for ending the war the obvious Achilles’ heel of his policy? ‘The United States should begin consultations with Ukraine and its European partners on a strategy that centers on Ukraine’s readiness to negotiate a ceasefire with Russia while simultaneously shifting its military emphasis from offense to defense.
Kyiv will not give up on restoring its territorial integrity or holding Russia economically and legally accountable for its aggression, but recognises that its immediate priorities must shift from trying to liberate more territory to defending and rebuilding the more than 80 per cent of the country still under its control.’
Aren’t these theses now being used by Trump in his policy to end the war in Ukraine? ‘It is possible that the prospects for a mutually agreed ceasefire and further negotiations on territory will improve significantly after the 2024 US presidential election.’
Haas and Kupchan looked at it like water: That’s exactly what happened.
‘If the United States is committed to continued transatlantic solidarity and further efforts to ensure Ukraine’s security and sovereignty, Putin will have little reason to believe that time is on his side. But the US elections are still a year away, and they could lead to an outcome that would put Ukraine in a difficult position.’
And so it happened: 2024 was a difficult year for Ukraine, and the Kremlin took advantage of Biden’s strategic indecision. ‘Neither Washington nor Kyiv should take that risk. The United States needs to work with Ukraine now to move to a new strategy that reflects military and political realities. To do otherwise would be to recklessly risk Ukraine’s future.’
‘Ukraine’s friends in the West can and should sweeten what could be a bitter pill for Ukrainians. The United States and individual NATO members (the coalition of friends of Ukraine) should commit not only to long-term economic and military assistance but also to guaranteeing Ukraine’s independence. This commitment could be modeled on Article 4 of the NATO Treaty, which provides for immediate consultations when the ‘territorial integrity, political independence or security’ of an Ally is threatened.
Structural reforms and increased private sector engagement are crucial for Ukraine to overcome its reliance on IMF support and achieve sustainable growth.
The European Union, which has recently announced its intention to start accession talks with Kyiv, should accelerate the timetable for Ukraine’s membership and offer it a special facilitated deal with the EU during the transition period. Western allies should also make clear that most sanctions against Russia will remain in place until Russian troops leave Ukraine and that they will help Ukraine restore its territorial integrity at the negotiating table.’
Here, Haas and Kupchan remind Europe of the contribution it can make to the long-term security of Ukraine and the region: Admit Ukraine to the EU on an expedited basis. So, Europe, this is the geopolitical moment you should not miss!
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has long been a vocal critic of the West’s strategy to “inflict a strategic defeat on Russia,” a stance that has earned him the label of a “pro-Russian” politician in many EU circles. Similarly, Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico, who secured victory in the October 2023 elections, faces the same accusation. However, this characterization is deeply misleading. Orbán and Fico are not driven by allegiance to Moscow but by a commitment to national sovereignty—a position that has increasingly put them at odds with Brussels and other major European capitals.
European sovereigntists argue that EU membership compromises national independence.
Both leaders argue that EU membership should not come at the expense of their nations’ independence. On the issue of Ukraine, they see no benefit in pursuing a confrontational approach toward Russia, either for their own countries or for Europe as a whole. They reject the notion that the conflict can be resolved by forcing Moscow into capitulation, warning that such efforts would only exacerbate the situation and harm their citizens. This pragmatic, sovereignty-focused strategy has gained renewed momentum following Donald Trump’s re-election as U.S. President and is resonating with some other EU member states and beyond, in such candidate countries as Serbia or Georgia.
Yet, this stance is increasingly viewed as a threat by European elites, who are determined to counter it. Last year, the prospect of a similar sovereigntist politician rising to power in Romania sparked a fierce backlash, with unfounded accusations of “Russian interference.” The first round of Romania’s presidential elections, won by Călin Georgescu, was annulled by the Constitutional Court following claims that his TikTok campaign was financed by Russia. However, it was later revealed that the campaign was actually funded by the pro-European National Liberal Party, which sought to divert votes from Georgescu’s main rival. The absence of Russian involvement underscored that Georgescu’s success was driven by widespread discontent and protest voting.
Georgescu, along with his rival Elena Lasconi, criticized the Constitutional Court’s decision and called for the second round of elections to proceed based on the first-round results. However, the Romanian government annulled the results altogether and scheduled new elections for May 4. Georgescu remains a leading candidate and his position has certainly been boosted by US Vice President JD Vance’ speech at the Munich Security Conference when he mentioned a European commissioner who “sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election,” citing “flimsy suspicions of an intelligence agency and an enormous pressure from its continental neighbours.”
The sovereigntist movement in Central Europe is likely to gain momentum, potentially drawing in countries like the Czech Republic and Austria. In the Czech Republic, former Prime Minister and Eurosceptic Andrej Babiš is the frontrunner in the upcoming parliamentary elections in October. Meanwhile, Austria’s Freedom Party, which won last year’s elections, is often described as “Russia-friendly.” Its leader, Herbert Kickl, tasked with forming a new government, is already being compared to Orbán. Like his Hungarian counterpart, Kickl advocates for national interests, conservative values, and criticizes sanctions against Russia and unconditional support for Ukraine. However, as of this writing, Kickl’s party has been unable to form a cabinet amid stalled coalition talks.
Leaders like Orbán and Fico reject the idea of confronting Russia through EU policies.
The “pro-Russian” label frequently attached to Central Europe’s sovereigntist leaders is largely detached from reality but remains a potent weapon in political battles, as evidenced by the protests against Fico in Slovakia. In contrast, their ties with the United States are openly acknowledged and well-documented. Leaders like Orbán, Fico, and Babiš view former President Donald Trump with admiration, sharing his ideological platform and setting themselves apart from most Western European leaders. Across the Atlantic, Orbán is seen as a potential blueprint for Trump’s policies, sparking fears of an “Orbanization of America.”
But what practical implications will this ideological alignment between American conservatives and Central Europe’s sovereigntists have? Trump’s threats—such as imposing tariffs on European goods if the EU fails to purchase more American LNG or demanding that NATO members increase defence spending up to to 5 per cent of GDP—directly impact these countries.
While aligning with the U.S. conservative wave is one thing, complying with demands that could harm their economies is another. For instance, potential U.S. tariffs on European cars would hit Hungary and Slovakia hard, given their integration into EU supply chains. Similarly, restrictions on technological and investment cooperation with China would undermine the ambitions of both countries, which view such partnerships as crucial to their economic growth.
Trump’s tariff threats are reshaping trade dynamics and pressuring Central European economies.
The EU is cautiously navigating Trump’s combative rhetoric, which has yet to solidify into a coherent trade policy. Analysts predict that the EU will propose a compromise, offering concessions in exchange for the U.S. dropping its tariff threats. For the Central European sovereigntists, the most concerning elements of a potential transatlantic deal are the shifting of Ukraine’s military aid burden onto European NATO members and restrictions on cooperation with China. How these nations face these challenges will serve as a critical test of the resilience of their strategy and their ability to defend national interests in an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.
Disclaimer:The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.