Support Us

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Writers Pool
About Us

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog Page 113

The Geopolitical Significance of the Gulf-Central Asia Summit

By
Dr. Usman
-
0

The Gulf-Central Asia Summit and the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have emerged as crucial events shaping global trade, geopolitics, and regional cooperation. The BRI, led by China, aims to establish a vast trade network and strengthen China’s position as a global economic powerhouse. On the other hand, the Gulf-Central Asia Summit seeks to foster ties between Central Asian countries and the Gulf nations. This research delves into the significance of these two events, their objectives, and their potential implications for the participating nations and the broader international community.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is an ambitious project launched by President Xi Jinping with the goal of creating a comprehensive network of trade routes that will connect Asia with Europe, Africa, and beyond. The BRI’s primary focus is on enhancing infrastructure and connectivity, fostering economic cooperation, and promoting cultural exchanges among the participating countries.

The BRI aims to strengthen China’s economic presence and influence globally by building infrastructure projects in various countries. The initiative encompasses a wide range of sectors, including energy, transport, real estate, technology, and tourism. It seeks to enhance regional connectivity and promote economic development through the construction of roads, railways, ports, pipelines, and more.

Some of the notable BRI projects include the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), gas pipelines in Central Asia, railway developments in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Kenya, as well as investments in Greece’s Piraeus port. The CPEC, a flagship project, is a massive undertaking that focuses on power plants and grants China access to Pakistani ports and markets.

However, the BRI has not been without challenges. Some agreements have been canceled in Malaysia, Kazakhstan, and Bolivia due to concerns about debt sustainability and perceived overreliance on Chinese investments. These issues have raised questions about the long-term viability and transparency of some BRI projects.

The Gulf-Central Asia Summit serves as a platform for leaders from Central Asian countries and Gulf nations to enhance economic and diplomatic cooperation. Central Asia is strategically significant for China, as it connects China with Eurasia through the Belt and Road Initiative. The Gulf countries, on the other hand, represent a major economic powerhouse and provide a crucial link to global markets.

During the summit, leaders engage in discussions on various issues, including trade, investment, security, and regional stability. The goal is to foster partnerships and cooperation that can lead to mutual economic benefits and geopolitical influence in the region. Joint statements are signed, reaffirming commitments to collaboration and development under the BRI.

In a statement during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) gathering in Bangkok, Chinese President Xi Jinping expressed China’s consideration to host the third Belt & Road Forum for International Cooperation in 2023. This announcement comes despite the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The forum aims to bring together global leaders to discuss the progress and challenges of the BRI and explore opportunities for further collaboration.

The Gulf-Central Asia Summit provides an opportunity for Central Asian countries to diversify their economic ties and gain access to the lucrative Gulf markets. For the Gulf nations, cooperation with Central Asia can offer new avenues for investment and strategic partnerships. Furthermore, the Belt and Road Initiative opens doors for infrastructure development and regional connectivity, which can boost economic growth and development for participating countries.

However, the success of the BRI and the Gulf-Central Asia Summit relies on addressing challenges such as transparency in project financing, ensuring environmental sustainability, and mitigating potential debt burdens for participating countries.

Both the BRI and the Gulf-Central Asia Summit have significant geopolitical implications. China’s increasing economic presence through the BRI has drawn attention from other major powers, leading to debates about its intentions and influence. The summit, on the other hand, could shape regional power dynamics and create new alliances that may impact the broader geopolitical landscape.

The Gulf-Central Asia Summit and the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative represent crucial events that will shape trade, diplomacy, and geopolitical dynamics in the coming years. While the BRI opens opportunities for infrastructure development and regional cooperation, it also faces challenges related to financial sustainability and transparency. The Gulf-Central Asia Summit, in turn, offers Central Asian countries a chance to enhance economic ties with Gulf nations and diversify their partnerships. As these initiatives progress, it will be essential for the participating nations to address challenges effectively and capitalize on the opportunities for mutual benefit and shared prosperity.

The Geopolitical Battle Under the Ocean

By
Naila Ahmed
-
0

The internet has become an integral part of modern society, connecting people and businesses across the globe. One crucial but often overlooked aspect of the internet’s functioning is the vast network of subsea cables that lie on the ocean floor, responsible for transmitting over 95% of the world’s data. These undersea cables serve as the backbone of global communications, enabling data to flow between continents and supporting various activities, from personal internet use to critical government communications.

In recent years, China’s role in the subsea cables ecosystem has drawn significant attention. As China continues to assert its influence in various technological and geopolitical domains, its behavior in the cyberspace is increasingly reflected in its activities related to subsea cables. It’s vital to explores how China’s cyber behavior is manifested in the subsea cables ecosystem and the implications it holds for global data security and international relations.

China’s rapid economic growth and advancements in technology have fueled its ambition to become a dominant player in the global technology landscape. This ambition extends to the realm of undersea cables, where China seeks to establish itself as a major player.

One of the significant developments in this regard is the construction of the $500 million undersea fiber-optic internet cable network called EMA (Europe-Middle East-Asia), aiming to connect Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. This project, led by Chinese state-owned telecom firms and HMN Technologies Co Ltd, is seen as a direct response to a similar U.S.-backed initiative, reflecting the escalating tech war between China and the United States.

China’s investment in subsea cables aligns with its broader digital ambitions, including the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which seeks to improve international internet connectivity and promote digital infrastructure. The Digital Silk Road, a component of the BRI, focuses on enhancing digital connectivity between Asia, Africa, and Europe, presenting China with opportunities to exert influence in critical communication channels.

China’s active involvement in the subsea cables ecosystem has raised concerns among other nations, particularly the United States. Undersea cables are essential for both economic and military purposes, and their control could confer significant advantages in the ongoing great power competition between China and the U.S. The sheer volume of data traffic carried by these cables makes them valuable targets for state-sponsored cyber espionage and potential disruption.

One of the key areas of concern is the involvement of Chinese companies, such as Huawei, in subsea cable projects. Huawei’s presence in critical communication infrastructure has raised suspicions in some countries due to its perceived close ties to the Chinese government.

Critics worry that Huawei’s involvement may pose data security risks, potentially allowing unauthorized access to sensitive information or data rerouting to China.

Furthermore, China’s reported obstruction of subsea internet cable projects in the South China Sea has intensified concerns over data infrastructure control. Stricter permit requirements imposed by Beijing have led companies to avoid routes in the region, causing delays in cable deployment and raising questions about the free flow of information in international waters. This issue has not only affected the subsea cable sector but also encompasses broader geopolitical tensions involving fishing, oil exploration, and shipping routes.

The interconnected nature of the global internet and the reliance on subsea cables for critical services have intensified concerns about data privacy and security. China’s involvement in the subsea cables ecosystem has raised questions about the potential for state-sponsored cyber-espionage and data manipulation. The possibility of unauthorized data access or rerouting to China has prompted countries to evaluate the risks associated with data transmission through these cables.

Addressing data privacy and security concerns requires international cooperation and robust cybersecurity measures. The U.S. government, along with private sectors and its allies, is actively investing in the security and resilience of undersea cables to safeguard against potential espionage and disruptions.

China’s cyber behavior is indeed reflected in the subsea cables ecosystem, given its growing involvement and ambitious initiatives in this domain. As China asserts its influence in the global technology landscape, its actions in the subsea cables arena have significant geopolitical implications. Concerns over data security and privacy in the face of increasing cyber threats require nations to prioritize investment in the security and resilience of these critical infrastructures.

The competition for control over undersea cables is a manifestation of the broader geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States. Striking a balance between national security interests and international cooperation will be essential in addressing the challenges posed by China’s cyber behavior in the subsea cables ecosystem. Maintaining a secure and reliable subsea cables network is critical for the continued functioning of the global internet and the preservation of open and secure communication channels in the digital age.

 

The Asian NATO Debate and Refusal

By
Dr. Zukun Lyu
-
0

In recent years, there has been growing discussion about the establishment of an “Asian NATO,” a regional security alliance similar to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) but focused on the Asian region. This idea aims to enhance security cooperation and counter potential threats in the region, particularly from North Korea and China. However, both China and North Korea have expressed their refusal to participate in such an alliance, citing their own concerns and geopolitical considerations.

China, as a rising global power, has been vocal about its opposition to the formation of an “Asian NATO.” The Chinese government views it as an attempt by the United States and its allies to contain China’s influence in the region. China perceives the expansion of NATO-like alliances as a threat to its national security and regional interests. Chinese President Xi Jinping has voiced concerns about the expansion of military alliances and coercion of other countries into taking sides, warning of potential conflicts and instability.

China prefers to pursue a multipolar world order and regional security arrangements that reflect its own interests and promote its vision of a harmonious and inclusive Asia.

North Korea, on the other hand, has accused the United States, South Korea, and Japan of attempting to create an “Asian NATO” to contain its regime. North Korea sees joint military exercises between the United States and South Korea as rehearsals for invasion and considers them a direct threat to its national security. The regime believes that the formation of an “Asian NATO” would further isolate and target North Korea, leading to increased tensions and instability in the region.

The refusal of both China and North Korea to participate in an “Asian NATO” highlights the complex geopolitical dynamics and differing perspectives in the region. While some countries in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Japan and South Korea, may see value in strengthening security cooperation and deterrence against potential threats, others like China and North Korea have their reservations and concerns about the motives and implications of such an alliance.

Moreover, it is important to consider the broader implications of establishing an “Asian NATO” beyond the immediate regional security concerns. The formation of a military alliance in Asia could potentially exacerbate tensions, increase the risk of miscalculations, and create a more polarized security environment. It may lead to a new arms race and further complicate diplomatic efforts to address existing conflicts and promote dialogue in the region.

Instead of focusing solely on the establishment of an “Asian NATO,” efforts should be directed towards fostering constructive dialogue, promoting confidence-building measures, and strengthening existing regional frameworks for security cooperation, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. These platforms provide avenues for engagement, dialogue, and addressing security challenges in a more inclusive and comprehensive manner.

The refusal of China and North Korea to join an “Asian NATO” can have economic and political implications in the region. China, as a major economic power, plays a crucial role in the global economy. Its refusal to participate in an “Asian NATO” could disrupt economic cooperation and trade relations among countries in the region. China’s economic influence and its emphasis on regional economic integration, exemplified by initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative, suggest that it prioritizes economic cooperation over military alliances. North Korea, on the other hand, is economically isolated and heavily reliant on China for trade and aid. Its refusal to participate in an “Asian NATO” could further isolate the country and limit its economic prospects. However, the economic impact may be limited, given that the primary drivers of economic growth in the region are not directly tied to the establishment of a security alliance.

The establishment of such an alliance would require political alignment and shared strategic interests among participating countries. China’s refusal is driven by its perception of the alliance as a containment strategy by the United States and its allies.

China emphasizes the need for an inclusive and multipolar regional security architecture that respects its interests and promotes cooperation. North Korea’s refusal reflects its desire to preserve its regime and resist perceived external pressures.

The political impact of the refusal can be seen in the dynamics of regional relationships and alliances. China’s economic and political clout allows it to pursue alternative avenues to advance its interests and shape regional dynamics. Moreover, the refusal of China and North Korea to participate in an “Asian NATO” raises questions about the future of security cooperation in the region. It highlights the divergent security priorities and strategies pursued by different countries, making it challenging to build consensus and address common security challenges.

Eventually, the decision to establish an “Asian NATO” or any similar security alliance rests on the willingness and consensus of the countries involved. The concerns and refusal expressed by China and North Korea reflect their own geopolitical considerations and priorities. Moving forward, a balanced approach that respects the diverse perspectives and interests of all stakeholders in the region will be essential in promoting regional stability, peace, and cooperation.

AI: A Potential Apocalypse or Global Priority?

By
Dr. Nhien Tran
-
4

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has indelibly marked our lives, transforming everything from daily routines to global industries. Yet, as we stand on the brink of unprecedented advancements, prominent voices within the tech community caution us about the potential risk of AI-induced extinction.

In an open letter signed by more than 350 executives, researchers, and engineers, experts are heralding the need for AI regulation, asserting that mitigating the risks of AI should be a global priority, comparable to other existential threats such as pandemics and nuclear war. Among the signatories are industry pioneers and thought leaders, including the heads of OpenAI and Google DeepMind, along with representatives from AI startup Anthropic and AI luminary Geoffrey Hinton, who recently resigned from Google citing the existential risks associated with AI.

The threats posed by unregulated AI expansion are manifold. The Centre for AI Safety’s statement underscores potential risks ranging from weaponization of AI, AI-driven disinformation campaigns, concentration of AI power enabling surveillance and censorship, and the human race’s increasing dependency on AI.

The fear is that unbridled AI development could lead to a world where AI systems not only surpass human intelligence but also become an independent force capable of catastrophic actions.

Despite these warnings, there is resistance against such apocalyptic scenarios from some quarters, emphasizing the need to address immediate issues such as bias and unfairness in AI systems. However, it is clear from the wide-ranging group of experts that the debate on AI’s potential risks has transcended the boundaries of academic discourse and entered the public arena.

The consensus among these thought leaders is that AI, left unchecked, could result in a form of extinction event for humanity. Some have compared the current situation to the debates that surrounded the creation and control of nuclear weapons in the last century.

Global leaders, including Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, have called for regulation, although concerns remain about potential over-regulation. However, there is a broader call for guardrails on AI systems, including a pause in training more powerful AI systems, to manage potential pitfalls like systemic bias, misinformation, malicious use, and weaponization.

However, given the complexities and the range of threats, a multi-pronged approach is necessary. Regulation alone may not suffice; industry leaders must also shoulder the responsibility for the ethical deployment of AI. It’s not just about building powerful AI, but also about building safe and responsible AI.

Eventually, while we cannot stop the progression of AI, we can guide its trajectory. The potential risks associated with AI, particularly the existential risk, underline the need for all stakeholders – governments, scientists, companies, and the general public – to engage in the conversation and ensure that AI serves the best interests of humanity, and not vice versa. This call for making AI’s existential risk a global priority is not just a wake-up call; it’s a call to action for humanity’s survival and well-being.

The crucial step is not just acknowledging the risks but also taking actionable steps to prevent potential disasters. This initiative requires global cooperation and an integrated effort that goes beyond national boundaries and organizational hierarchies.

Addressing AI’s risk should be as integral to our survival strategies as our responses to climate change, pandemics, and nuclear warfare. We must remember that AI is a tool created by us, and its future will depend on the choices we make today. It’s time we paid heed to these warnings and made mitigating the risks of AI a global priority. As we forge ahead on our technological journey, we must strive to ensure that AI remains our servant and not become our master. As an intelligent and responsible species, let’s shape AI as a force that safeguards and enriches our world, rather than one that endangers it.

As more and more AI technologies become part of our everyday life, the stakes are higher than ever. We need to implement stringent regulations, ensure transparency, and encourage ethical practices in AI development and usage. This requires fostering a culture of responsible innovation where developers, regulators, and users have a shared understanding and commitment towards mitigating AI risks.

Education and awareness are key. The general public must be made aware of AI’s capabilities, limitations, and potential risks. They should be encouraged to participate in discussions and decision-making processes about AI. This collective involvement can ensure a democratic and inclusive future where AI benefits all and harms none.

The next few years will be crucial in determining the direction that AI takes. Will it be an era marked by responsible and equitable AI that upholds the values of humanity and ensures our survival? Or will it be an era where we grapple with unchecked AI leading to widespread chaos and potential extinction? The choice is ours, and the time to act is now.

In the end, it all boils down to one fundamental question: how do we, as a species, want to define our relationship with AI? It’s high time we paid serious attention to this question, for our answer will shape not just our future, but possibly the future of life on Earth.

Competition between U.S. and China in Artificial Intelligence

By
Tayyaba Khurshid
-
6

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become increasingly crucial in state strategy due to its transformative capabilities and potential to provide a competitive edge in various domains. Major powers worldwide recognize the significance of AI and deploy it extensively in their military strategies.

The importance of AI in state strategy stems from its ability to process and analyze vast amounts of data quickly and accurately, enabling informed decision-making and improved operational efficiency.

AI-powered systems can detect patterns, trends, and anomalies that might go unnoticed by human operators, enhancing situational awareness and enabling faster responses to emerging threats. Additionally, AI can optimize resource allocation, streamline logistics, and improve cyber defense, crucial elements of modern warfare.

Role of AI in the Military Strategy of Major Powers

Major powers like the United States, China, and Russia have embraced AI in their military strategies. The United States, for instance, has recognized AI as a national security priority and established initiatives like the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) to accelerate AI adoption across its defense forces. The U.S. military employs AI algorithms for data analysis, predictive maintenance, and autonomous systems, enhancing intelligence gathering, reconnaissance, and surveillance capabilities.

China has also prioritized AI as a critical component of its military modernization efforts. The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) actively explores AI applications, including autonomous weapon systems, intelligent command and control, and data-driven decision-making.

China’s ambition to become a global AI leader is evident in its investments in research and development and its focus on integrating AI into its military infrastructure. Likewise, Russia has recognized the potential of AI in bolstering its military capabilities. The Russian military has been exploring AI applications in areas such as autonomous drones, cybersecurity, and information warfare. The country’s emphasis on AI-enabled systems aims to enhance its reconnaissance capabilities, optimize logistics, and improve the effectiveness of its missile defense systems.

Competition between US and China

According to a report, the U.S. will deploy $1.5 bn to compete with China in A.I. The two powers have been working on developing A.I. to have superiority and hegemony over the use of A.I. Regarding the development of A.I. technology, two states, China and the U.S., are competing with each other to gain an edge. U.S. started using and developing A.I. in 1960 and has been efficiently working on A.I. through DARPA. Still, since the last decade, China has surpassed the US AI capacity, and as per Stanford University research, China is taking the lead in A.I. and research and development. A.I. index 2021 data shows that China produced more A.I. research papers in 2020 than the U.S. because China aims to become an A.I. leader worth $150 billion in 2030. Apart from releasing Beijing A.I. Principles, the Chinese government has invested in A.I.-focused technology research parks. The Secretary of Defence of US Austin commits the U.S. to Responsible A.I. He also points out that A.I. will change many things about military operations. The U.S. looks forward to winning the A.I. arms race with China by spending nearly 1.5 billion on A.I. research and development over the next five years. As per Lloyd Austin, China has already been using A.I. for various missions, from surveillance to cyber-attacks and autonomous weapons. And in the A.I. realm, China poses a challenge to the U.S. The U.S. aims to compete with China correctly, and the use of A.I. must be responsible, equitable, traceable, reliable, and governable.

A.I. strategies and development are not limited to just U.S. and China. Still, other states like the U.K., European Union, France, Germany, Japan, and India are also working on A.I. development through National strategies and action plans for Artificial Intelligence. China unveiled its next-generation artificial Intelligence plan in 2017. U.K. finalized an A.I. sector deal in 2018, and Britain’s new defense strategy also puts A.I. front and center; France unveiled its A.I. strategy in 2018  and announced 1.5 billion euros public funding for the advancement of A.I. and recently France announced 1.8 billion Euros public funding to the development of A.I. Israel is a leader in autonomous weapons field The determination and willingness of all significant states identify a global A.I. race, which has impact the strategies states used to adopt before. With the pouring of much money into the A.I. development sector by all states, there are also security concerns that the future might bring autonomous killing robots, which will change the complete outlook of state strategy. As per Germany’s foreign minister Heiko Maas “An arms race is already underway, we are in the middle of it, and that’s the reality we have to deal with. ”There is also a belief among the major powers that A.I. can make a difference on the battlefield in the future, and that’s why they are frenetically investing in it.

AI has the potential to shape the balance of power and influence in several ways, both in military and non-military domains. In terms of military strategy, both the US and China are actively pursuing AI applications to enhance their capabilities.

AI-powered systems can improve intelligence gathering, autonomous weapon systems, cybersecurity, and command and control functions. As both countries seek to leverage AI for military advantage, an AI arms race is possible, leading to increased competition and potentially escalating tensions. Moreover, AI can also have implications for strategic stability in non-military areas. Economic competition between the US and China is significant, with AI playing a crucial role in the technology, manufacturing, and finance industries. The use of AI in economic domains can lead to disruptions in traditional sectors and potentially impact the balance of economic power between the two nations. Additionally, AI has implications for information warfare and cybersecurity. AI-enabled technologies can be employed to conduct cyber attacks, spread disinformation, or manipulate public opinion. The ability to rapidly process and analyze vast amounts of data can give an advantage in influencing narratives and shaping public perception. The use of AI in these areas can have implications for the stability of the information environment between the US and China. The impact of AI on the strategic stability between the US and China will depend on various factors, including the pace of technological advancements, the adoption of AI in military and non-military domains, and the willingness of both countries to collaborate and establish frameworks for responsible AI use.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, Artificial Intelligence has changed the strategy of states when dealing with military and economic affairs. Rapidly changing technology will change our armed forces’ need to operate, including how we provide humanitarian support for other countries. 21st-century warfare incorporates the AI-weapon system of autonomous drones, jets, small chip viruses, and malware to compete and combat enemies.

The deployment of AI in military strategy by major powers signifies its critical role in shaping the future of warfare.

However, it raises concerns regarding ethical considerations, transparency, and the risk of unintended consequences. Therefore, as AI evolves, nations must balance harnessing its potential for military advantage while ensuring responsible and ethical use to maintain global stability. To mitigate the potential risks and foster strategic stability, the US and China need to engage in dialogue and establish norms and rules regarding the use of AI. International cooperation in transparency, ethical considerations, and AI development and deployment standards could help build trust and reduce the likelihood of misunderstandings or miscalculations.

Pak-IMF Deal: Road to Stability

By
Khadija Asif
-
0

Pakistan is at a crossroads in its financial history in a world where economic stability is essential for long-term progress. A recent agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has provided light for the country as it tries to overcome its economic woes, paving the way for stability in 2023. The relevance of the IMF deal is addressed in this opinion piece, emphasizing how it can provide the required framework for Pakistan’s economic revival.

Budget deficits, rising inflation, and an increasing debt load have all damaged Pakistan’s economy. These issues have slowed economic progress, deterred foreign investment, and hampered development. However,

The most recent IMF deal represents a watershed moment, providing Pakistan significant support to rectify its economic imbalances. The IMF accord is a comprehensive package that targets various elements of Pakistan’s economy rather than providing financial assistance.

Fiscal reform, to reduce the budget deficit is an essential component. Pakistan may reclaim control of its finances and reduce its debt by implementing measures such as reducing unnecessary spending and enhancing tax collection systems. Furthermore, the IMF accord emphasizes structural reforms in businesses such as energy, taxation, and government administration. These improvements will increase productivity, attract investment, and pave the way for long-term growth. For example, by reorganizing the energy sector, Pakistan may address its ongoing power shortages, boost industrial productivity, and nurture a business-friendly climate.

New IMF funding would provide Pakistan with short-term economic assistance, allow for more financing from top foreign creditors, improve chances for foreign direct investment, and avert a debt default. However, while the agreement may let Pakistan step back from the precipice, it will not fix the country’s economic issues in the long run. They will remain entrenched unless significant policy reforms are made.

Until recently, Pakistan’s chances of reaching an agreement with the IMF were slim. The administration boosted energy subsidies to improve its dwindling popularity, which violated the IMF’s austerity requirements. Islamabad likewise struggled to develop a clear rehabilitation strategy. Senior IMF officials have recently expressed concern about Pakistan, citing its economic policies and volatile political situation. The IMF’s rejection of the country’s budget earlier this month appeared to be the final nail in the coffin.

At the same time, inflation in Pakistan reached a record 38 percent. Poverty is prompting some people to abandon the country, such as the more than 100 Pakistani migrants who died in a shipwreck off the coast of Greece earlier this month. According to Pakistani officials, greater border control along land and air routes has increased the number of persons attempting risky water routes to Europe.

Economic stress is affecting more than just Pakistan’s poor. Wealthy and educated Pakistanis are also departing, worsening the country’s chronic brain drain. According to the country’s Bureau of Emigration, more than 750,000 people left Pakistan in 2022, a threefold rise from 2021. They included doctors, engineers, information technology specialists, and accountants. The repeal of COVID-19 travel limitations may explain some of the movement. Still, it is likely attributable to an increasing desire among skilled and educated employees to seek better opportunities abroad.

An IMF agreement would ease but not erase the economic burden fueling this flight. This is because the fundamental structural issues that caused Pakistan’s current crisis would remain in place.

These include a significant reliance on expensive fuel imports and a top export textile industry that is struggling to compete globally, an inefficient agricultural sector dealing with water and energy shortages, and a political and economic elite that is corrupt and unwilling to invest more in public welfare.

An IMF agreement would provide Pakistan with some economic breathing room and help the existing government and its allies in the run-up to elections. However, it would be a Pyrrhic victory: unless urgently required large-scale reforms are implemented that are politically hazardous, the next economic catastrophe could be only around the horizon.

The IMF accord boosts Pakistan’s economic stability by instilling confidence in international investors. With the IMF’s support, Pakistan’s economic policies gain credibility and attract foreign direct investment (FDI). For example, global corporations previously hesitant to invest in Pakistan may now find it a desirable site, resulting in the foundation of new sectors, job creation, and knowledge transfer.

Furthermore, the IMF agreement may improve Pakistan’s creditworthiness. Better fiscal management, lower debt loads, and structural reforms may improve the country’s credit ratings, making it easier for the government to access global capital markets. Reduced borrowing rates would free up funds for social welfare and development programs.

The agreement with the IMF is significant because it has the potential to enhance regional stability that extends beyond Pakistan’s borders. If Pakistan is peaceful and prosperous, it can act as an economic hub, facilitating commerce and connection between South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the flagship initiative of the Belt and Road Initiative, would be enhanced further by Pakistan’s improved economic stability, attracting more international money and transforming the region.

International organizations and economies are keeping a careful eye on Pakistan’s progress. If the IMF deal is successfully executed, it can serve as a model for other developing countries experiencing similar challenges.

Pakistan’s experience demonstrates the importance of international cooperation, fiscal restraint, and policy reforms in establishing economic stability. The IMF deal in 2023 will assist Pakistan tremendously. In addition to financial support, it provides a comprehensive framework for addressing the nation’s economic difficulties. By enacting fiscal reforms, making structural improvements, and attracting foreign investment, Pakistan can create the conditions for long-term prosperity, job creation, and poverty reduction. The IMF accord has the potential to revitalize Pakistan’s economy and serve as a model for other countries seeking stability. As it travels along this bridge to peace, Pakistan must take this chance to construct a prosperous and inclusive future for its people.

Data is the New Oil

By
Ambassador Syed Sajjad Haider
-
0

Oil has evolved the world into a better place by creating affluence. In recent years there’s been debate about data replacing oil as the world’s most important supply.

The basic argument is that in the digital economy, data and what we extract from data and process it “is similar to oil a century ago.” An unexploited asset can have vast benefits depending on how we use it.

“The value of crude comes from the refinement into a commodity. For oil, it is exploration and energy extraction”. Data possibly hold comparable potential, i.e., gathering information and knowledge extraction. “A key difference is that oil is finite, limited, and non-reusable, while data can be endless.” The value of data increases as it is shared, manipulated, and used. Businesses can make informed decisions and better understand their customers by leveraging data-driven insights. Data can be used for innovation, creating products and services, and developing new models to forecast potential trends and behaviors.

Oil has been one of the most expensive resources, and those who controlled it also ruled the world. Hence, in today’s digital economy, data and insight from it make it more precious. “Like unrefined oil, raw data is of no use of its own.” The value is enhanced upon collection and accuracy. When properly analyzed, data becomes a decision-making tool providing information to public sector organizations and companies to respond proactively. Oil requires resources and involves transportation, while data can go around in seconds.

With rapidly changing markets, political and economic uncertainty, and shifting consumer attitudes, businesses today are working with small margins of error. They collect actionable information as much as possible and then use it to make better decisions. This common-sense strategy applies to personal life, the public sector, and business. No one makes important decisions without first discovering what is imperative and the possible outcomes. Similarly, only companies that want to succeed make decisions based on good data. Organizations need information; they need data. This is where data analysis or data analytics proposes suitable actions or alternatives.

Understanding data is one of the growing industries in today’s day and age, where data is considered the ‘new oil’ in the market.

Governments, business enterprises, and marketers know or can infer an increasing number of data items about aspects of our daily lives that, in previous eras, we could assume were considered private (e.g., ethnicity, religion, gender, health information, income, credit rating, and history, travel history and spending habits). Devices to collect, store, and process data are becoming cheaper and faster; simultaneously, the computational power to handle these data is also increasing. “Digital technologies have made possible the ‘datafication’ of society, affecting all sectors and everyone’s daily life.”

Why data analysis is important?

Data analysis is the process of cleaning, amending, changing, and processing raw data and extracting information that helps businesses make proper and timely decisions. The procedure helps reduce inherent risks by providing valuable insights and statistics, often presented in images, tables, and graphs. An excellent example of data analysis can be seen when we decide on our daily lives by evaluating what has happened in the past or the consequences if we make that decision. This is the analysis of the past or future and making an appropriate decision based on that analysis.

Data-backed decision-making has a constructive impact on organizations. Companies that do well at integrating data into their plan, operations, and culture are outpacing their competitors in revenue and growth. Good data allows organizations to set up benchmarks and set performance goals.

For any country, one of the government’s most important responsibilities is to ensure people have access to water, sanitation, transportation, hospitals, and schools. The government needs to know the expected population levels at a given time to make a plan. The census provides a suitable database for analyzing a society’s demography and social and economic characteristics.

Big Data is recognized as an enabling feature that promises to change societies and industries. Extensive social changes enabled by data are gradually becoming part of our daily life, with benefits ranging from finance to medicine, meteorology to genomics, genetic or environmental research to statistics and business. Extensive data in government is the influx of information from different sources to govern better and manage the public sector.

Medical researchers and doctors also use big data to identify diseases and risk factors to help diagnose illnesses. Combining data from electronic health records and other sources allows healthcare organizations and government agencies to provide information on disease outbreaks.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic of recent years, the value placed on quality data exploded manifold. Organizations were forced to adjust their operations and follow digitally optimized models at record speed. And later, government agencies and media outlets frequently reported on the numbers of COVID-19 test results.

Data Usage by Companies

Big companies like Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft (but it can also imply other large technology firms such as Alibaba) have commoditized data. As we use their platforms, the business giants have access to and collect information about human behavior. That data gives them the power to influence, which is good for consumers. These companies can learn what we want and why we use their products.

E-commerce platforms use personal data frequently to drive sales.  Shopping at Amazon or other sites indicates product suggestions. The companies formulate their recommendations based on what customers have bought in the past, the items in their virtual shopping list, what items the customer reviewed, and what products the customer has viewed when visiting the site. The company increases sales by integrating recommendations into nearly every aspect of the purchasing process.

Companies use data to provide better customer service, create marketing support and take other actions that can generate revenue and increase profits. Businesses that use it effectively hold a competitive advantage over those that don’t.

The information revolution has gained thrust. The growth of data is unstoppable. Big data assists government organizations, relevant stakeholders, and business enterprises enhance and transform their industries. And this is only possible by transforming unprocessed data into helpful information, mainly when a large amount of data and different sources are involved. This is where data operation comes into play. It translates data into the required arrangement that can be mapped for extracting insights.

In short, data is the key to improvement, effectiveness, and growth in the digital age. “Black gold” is no longer the world’s most valuable reserve. It has been surpassed by data in terms of value and money.

The New Imperial Age: World Rents a New Thug

By
Amara Malik
-
0

We all are very well aware of what imperialism is. Still, for those who do not know, imperialism can be characterized as a notion, political strategy, practice, state policy, or advocacy that entails the expansion of the political and economic authority of one state over the other state or territory. But the main question here is; Has the age of imperialism ended? And the answer is No; it has not.

The contemporary world is still imperialized but in a new way called neo-imperialism; through the economic policies of financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank.

Globalization is the root cause of such a level of economic interdependence; it was believed that the more the world would become economically interdependent, the more it would become peaceful. But what happened is somewhat the opposite; there are no weaponry wars, but that does not mean that the peace has been sustained; in fact, the world has jumped into a new kind of war known as “Trade War,” and its consequences are no less than the weaponry war, endured by none but the poor peripheral states.

Globalization: The root cause of neo imperialistic world

Discussing how globalization has resulted in this, there were two vital consequences: Firstly, it extended the Third World Model to industrial countries. In the Third World, there are two-tiered societies- a sector of extreme wealth and privilege and a sector of enormous misery and despair among useless, extra people. And this division is deepened by the policies dictated by the West. It imposes a neo-liberal “free market” system that directs resources to the wealthy and foreign investors, with the idea that something will trickle down by magic sometime after the Messiah comes.

The second consequence is governing structures; throughout history, governmental structures have tended to merge with other forms of power. In modern times, primarily around economic power. So, when you have national economies, you have federal states. And this whole structure of decision-making is answerable to transnational corporations, international banks, etc. It is also an effective blow against democracy. All these structures raise decision-making to the executive level, leaving a “democratic deficit”– parliaments and populations with less influence.

The general population doesn’t even know what is happening, and it doesn’t even know that it doesn’t know! One of the factors is a kind of alienation from the institutions and their policies.

IMF and World Bank: instruments of neo-imperialism

Countries such as Pakistan do sign agreements with IMF for loans, but the financial policy reforms they imposed in return never let the state take advantage of the loan in the best possible way; the more they become dependent upon IMF, the more they suffer.  Various critiques have been raised against the IMF over time, most of which have centered on the terms of its loans. The IMF has also come under fire for its lack of transparency and propensity to provide loans to nations with a track record of violating human rights. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has faced criticism for its conditions of loans, which are conditional on implementing specific economic policies. These policies include reducing government borrowing, raising interest rates, allowing failing firms to go bankrupt, and promoting structural adjustment through privatization, deregulation, and reducing corruption. However, these policies can worsen economic situations, such as the Asian crisis 1997, which forced countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand to pursue tight monetary and fiscal policies. Critics argue that these policies fail to understand the dynamics of the countries they are dealing with and insist on blanket reforms.

The IMF has also faced criticism for allowing inflationary devaluations and neo-liberal policies like privatization, which can lead to private monopolies exploiting consumers.

Critics argue that the IMF is too interventionist and that bailing out countries with large debt creates moral hazard. Additionally, the IMF has been accused of lacking transparency and involvement, imposing policies without consultation with affected countries, and supporting military dictatorships.

Likewise, the World Bank is criticized for using structural adjustment loans as a coercive tool to compel nations to adopt neo-liberal- free-market principles. Whatever their other qualities, countries in a debt crisis accept the bank’s judicial and economic reforms package, and the bank agrees to lend them money. To be eligible for an adjustment loan, Argentina, Ecuador, and India changed their land laws or lowered their labor regulations. According to reports, 20 significant pieces of law have been altered in India.

Trade War and American Imperialism:

All these policies have favored the core– the global economies of the world, mainly the US as the economic reforms implemented by the countries following IMF and World Bank tend no one else but the US to compete with the semi-periphery- China, leading to Trade War that has at the end again effected the edge in the worst possible way by causing their exports to the respective countries, again leading towards the economic distress, making the periphery more dependent upon IMF and World Bank and the cycle continues.

Therefore, we can conclude that the world, specifically the dependent economies, has become neo-imperialized due to damaging policies of the IMF and World Bank, making the periphery more dependent on the core and semi-periphery, already indulged in a trade war.

China –Us Tensions in Space Technology

By
Tahoora Maryam
-
0

China launched the world’s first methane fuelled space rocket. Zhuque-2 carrier rocket blasted off at 9 am on Wednesday,12 July from Jiuquan satellite launch center in North West China’s Inner Mongolia. Successful launching of this 1st methane – liquid oxygen space rocket into orbit once again put China ahead of US space companies like Space X and blue origin. This news once again put China’s rivals into cut-throat competition with Beijing. It put Elon Musk’s Space X and Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin in the race for new technological escalation to develop space vehicles fuelled by methane. Its first attempt failed in December but China kept doing work on it. The US also tried to launch its methane-powered rocket Terran 1 but failed. The US failure enhanced the haughtiness of China. On the other hand, the successful launching of Zhuque- 2 put the US in a race for space dominance with China.

The space competition between US and China has the great potential to distort the international world order. It is noted that the countries that have been technologically advanced have held more power and they had greater ability to influence the remaining part of the world.

It is better to say that competition between the major powers is actually a thirst for more influence and a craving for dominance. The militarization of space could lead to severe tensions between countries, especially China and US. Significant advancements in space technology by both China and US led to a shift in power dynamics.  Now the launch of a new methane-fuelled rocket by China once again significantly proclaims the rise of the new space race between the US and China.  China’s successful launch of the ZHEGUE 2 rocket is evidence of an emerging landscape where Beijing is directly competing with the US for strategic supremacy.

Methane fuelled rocket is more beneficial than traditional rockets. This rocket is going to help China in several ways. Firstly, it will reduce the cost of space missions as methane is most cost-effective than other rocket fuels. It will also reduce the environmental impact as methane is a more sustainable fuel than other rocket fuels. They have the ability to enable more ambitious space missions. This will help China to accomplish new scientific discoveries in space as it has the potential to explore the far reaches of our solar system and to make sure of human presence on other planets. It will make space exploration more accessible and affordable. This is one of the biggest recent achievements of China that is somehow terrifying the US as they failed to build the same rocket like Terran -1.

Due to this space rivalry and race for technology, there are significant economic implications. China and US both are investing hugely in space technology due to which it is expected that the space industry will grow very much in the coming years.

US and China are two main pillars in this industry and the competition between these two powers would lead to some new space developments and also the creation of jobs in this space market.

The global space economy could be worth over $1 trillion by 2040, according to the estimations of some experts. We can see some positive economical impacts due to this competition that is indirectly enhancing their power. For example, both countries are investing in space tourism, which could become a possible source of revenue for both countries. Virgin Galactic is a US company that is already promoting space tourism as they have sold tickets for sub-ocular space flights. Negative economic implications could also have seen in this competition. The arms race in space could lead to the evolution of unnecessary high–cost weapons systems. Space debris will definitely be created that will destroy the satellites and space infrastructure.

Besides these economic implications, there must be some societal implications regarding this debate. As both powers also possess allies and the support of many other countries, what are the concerns of these countries especially the third-world countries matter a lot? The development of space tourism would have social and cultural impacts so these impacts should be managed carefully and it should involve the perspective of other countries as they are part of this society. If we look at third-world countries, this competition brings opportunities and challenges for them at the same time economic opportunities are there for these countries as they would become the suppliers of components for the space industry. This race may cause exploitation of resources for third world countries.

The US-China competition reflects a critical pinch in the history of the space race. Policymakers should carefully consider the risks associated with this competition as it should be a source of innovations, peace, and progress for the coming generations rather than destruction.

Book Review- “Saving Time: Discovering a Life Beyond the Clock” by Jenny Odell

By
Dr. Usman
-
0

Jenny Odell’s “Saving Time: Discovering a Life Beyond the Clock” is an impressive exploration of our relationship with time in the context of contemporary societal and environmental issues. Her insightful exploration of the nature and structure of time offers a distinct perspective that challenges the conventional paradigms surrounding this critical yet intangible concept. This review aims to distill the essence of her complex narrative, casting light on her most significant discussions and revelations.

The book commences with Odell’s discussion of time’s interaction with climate change. She provocatively addresses the climate crisis’s impact on our perception of time, raising questions about our relationship with the past, present, and future. Odell’s portrayal of time as a fluid concept is brilliantly captured in her narrative structured around a daylong trip in the San Francisco Bay Area.

By juxtaposing the urgency of the on-demand economy against the eternity of the coastline’s geologic history, she creates a thought-provoking discourse on the perception of time and its scale.

One of the critical aspects of Odell’s work is her challenge to the deterministic view of time. By building upon her experiences during the COVID-19 lockdowns, she brings forth the notion of time as an elusive, fluid construct that disrupts our familiar notions and opens up new possibilities. This aspect of her work provides an introspective lens, which encourages the readers to reevaluate their understanding of time and consider alternative, non-linear perspectives.

The book’s unique structure, resembling a stream-of-consciousness narrative, is a tool Odell uses to eloquently present her evolving ideas. Some readers may find it challenging to draw concrete conclusions from this style, but it aligns seamlessly with the book’s central theme of challenging static perceptions of time. Her narrative serves as a conversation that invites readers to engage in a thought-provoking exploration of time, acknowledging its uncontrollable nature, and embracing the generative possibilities it brings.

Odell’s examination of time as a tool of domination and her challenge to the association between time and money is profound and transformative. She adeptly delves into the history of time-keeping systems, exposing the roots in the 19th-century industry, and draws attention to the harsh temporal discipline faced by factory workers. By tackling contemporary issues such as workplace surveillance and the commodification of leisure, she prompts readers to reconsider their relationships with time in their everyday lives.

Her work also touches on climate anxiety, an increasingly prevalent feeling in society. Odell’s observations on the perpetual rush against the clock and the anxiety surrounding climate change are perceptive and resonate with many in the contemporary era.

Through her reflections, she invites her readers to form a less painful and more meaningful relationship with time. However, some aspects of the book may be seen as less satisfying. The overwhelming presentation of loss, without proposing imaginative alternatives, can be off-putting for some readers. Moreover, the sudden incorporation of intersectionality, while crucial, seems abrupt and lacks a smooth integration with the rest of the narrative.

Despite these minor shortcomings, “Saving Time: Discovering a Life Beyond the Clock” offers a rich and transformative discourse on the concept of time. Odell invites her readers to challenge their preconceptions and encourages them to embrace a more liberatory perception of time. As such, her book is a notable contribution to philosophical discourse, instilling lasting impact and profound insights into contemporary existence.

1...112113114...147Page 113 of 147

Stratheia aims to be a global pioneer in the field of strategic intelligence. Our independent team of researchers cover topics ranging from the latest geopolitical events, to public policy, cyber security, and intelligence analytics.

Share with Us

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Write for us
About Us
Writers Pool

© All Rights Reserved. Stratheia, 2024