Support Us

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Writers Pool
About Us

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog Page 114

China’s Diplomatic Oasis: Navigating the Israel-Palestine Conflict

By
Usman Zulfiqar Ali
-
0

The melting of Ice between Iran and Saudi Arabi has enthusiastically drawn China’s aspirations to enhance its role as a peace mediator in the region. Beijing’s successive launch of the peace-making plans from February to April shows its struggle for the global good.

China offered a 12-point peace plan for Russo-Ukraine Conflict in February, followed by a successful détente between Iran and Saudi Arabia in mid-March.

Extending the Global Security Initiative, the concept paper of which has been published earlier this year, China has ambitiously taken charge to bring peace to the historic Palestine-Israel conflict. Beijing offered mediation to solve the conflict after stressing restraint during the clashes that erupted in al-Aqsa between Palestinians and IDF. Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang held separate phone calls with the counterparts from Israel and Palestine, offering lasting peace in the region.

Ostensibly, China has no rivalry or tension with Israel. The relations between Israel and them has begun after the Middle East Peace Conference and the Gulf War in 1991. On the part of Palestine, Beijing held a strong stance on the two-state solution. Chinese aspirations of bridging the gap between two ancient civilizations are not nascent, yet a repackaging of a two-decades-long peace mediation plan. Beijing for the first time proposed a 5 points peace plan in 2003, a draft provided by the first-ever Chinese Special Envoy to the Middle East. Although with the same content but President Xi had also proposed its Four-Point Peace Plan in 2013, a year after he took office. Diplomacy had also managed to bring the two on the table for a symposium in 2017 after President Xi Jinping in his personal capacity proposed to resume talks. The delegates of both countries took part in the discussion, finding little success in endorsing Beijing’s key role in promoting peace talks.

Why is China extending its role to bring peace between the historic rivals such as Israel and Palestine and to what extent Beijing would become successful? are the questions, answers to which can be found below.

Chinese call for mediation to resolve a frozen conflict came from its enthusiasm after the successful détente signed between KSA and Iran. China has placed its foothold where America was influential for the last 30 years. In recent times, Beijing’s ambitions have out-classed Washington’s strategy to hold influence on the oil exporting countries. And the successful thaw in Iran-Saudi Arabia between Israel and Palestine will enhance its credibility in the region. Earlier, America mediated between the rivals reaching a consensus at least once in the form of the Oslo Accord. Latter, American President Donald Trump also proposed the Middle East Peace Plan. Unfortunately, the plan couldn’t bring a wave of lasting peace to the region.

If China succeeds in its ambitions to bring normalization between Israel and Palestine, it will manage to do what the US couldn’t for years.

China has been ascending to global power status through its initiatives for public goods, presenting itself as a responsible world power. The successive global initiatives for Security and Civilization show their aspirations to bring global peace. The ‘Indivisible Security’ concept from the Global Security Initiative (GSI) which reinforces the security and just environment not at the expense of other countries, is backing up the lasting peace and reducing geopolitical security dilemmas between the arch-rivals such as KSA-Iran and Israel Palestine. Similarly, Global Civilization Initiative (GCI) proposes a people-to-people connection between the International civilizations respecting each other’s values and diversity. So, the expected re-engagements between the historic rivals and the regional foes are enhancing the scope of these initiatives for the Public good.

Middle East is also a part of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project. So, any attempt to bring peace to the region will sturdy China’s investment in the region. When America decided to bring Abraham Accord into the region, normalizing the ties between Arabs and Israel it bypassed the Palestinian people. Although UAE and Bahrain had normalized their ties with Israel, the plan is dormant since then.

The normalization of ties between Arabs can only go through the solution proposed under the UNSC resolutions and China has espoused the right direction to bring stability in the region by bringing peace between Israel and Palestine.

This will enhance China’s investment in the region, building an incentivized partnership with GCC countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Although China has reinstated the offers for peace mediation for Israel-Palestinian Conflict, the success of its ambitions is still uncertain. It is not that easy for Israel to bring peace to Palestine with Chinese mediation. Israel is the key ally and trade partner of the United States of America. The mighty iron dome technology of Israel has been supplemented by Washington. Going in peace with Palestine will give an impetus to diminishing the US role in the region. Similarly, If the mediation occurs with China in the middle, Israel will have to negotiate on equitable terms with Palestine which is not suitable for them. And last but not least, Israel would never minimize its position on the issue. Doing everything in which Palestine would get benefit or accepting Jerusalem as an International city will represent Israel stepping back and minimizing its position. So, no political leader whether it is Netanyahu or Beny Gentz will do a political suicide as the right winger in Tel Aviv is still holding their foot.

While on the other, China can use the economic leverage to convince Israel of the resumption of talks with Palestine. Both countries are advancing for the Free Trade Agreement and are expected to sign in 2023. In addition to it, China has also taken over Israel’s infrastructure Industry. China has invested US$ 19 billion in Israel from the year 2000 to 2020. Moreover, China is also importing arms and defense technology from Israel.

Despite that Beijing’s clout in the middle has been growing significantly, but it seems uncertain that it will harness a major diplomatic thaw in the region. Israel and China are interdependent in some respects yet, there seems to be little influence of China over Israel to bring them to the table.  As Compared to Beijing’s US$ 19 billion, the US has invested US$ 150 billion, and “China is not an ally of Israel. The United States is” as said by Dr. Calabrese quoted by Mathew Jaber Stiffler, Director of the Centre for Arab Narratives (CAN).

China has an enthusiastic character to rise as a global power and a responsible actor in the Middle East.

But what China is expecting is not so easy to get. Beijing wanted to enhance its role as it requires to protect its investment under BRI and for this, it has been transcending for global peace and public good.

High-Stakes 2023 Election in Turkiye

By
Dr. Usman
-
0

Turkey is heading towards one of the most important elections in its history in 2023, as the country is facing serious economic, social, and political challenges that have put significant pressure on President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government. The elections will be a significant test for Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), as it struggles to maintain its grip on power amid growing dissatisfaction among the Turkish people.

The elections will be a significant test for Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), as it struggles to maintain its grip on power amid growing dissatisfaction among the Turkish people.

One of the key challenges facing Erdogan’s government is the economic situation in the country. Turkey has been facing high inflation rates, rising unemployment, and a weakening currency in recent years, which has had a significant impact on the daily lives of Turkish citizens. Erdogan has promised to address these issues through economic reforms, but many Turks are skeptical of his ability to do so, and there is growing frustration over the government’s handling of the economy.

Another challenge facing Erdogan’s government is the deteriorating human rights situation in the country. Turkey has been criticized by human rights organizations for its crackdown on political opposition, civil society, and media in recent years. Erdogan has been accused of using the judiciary to silence dissent and of violating basic freedoms such as freedom of expression and assembly.

The upcoming elections in 2023 will be crucial in determining the future direction of Turkey. Erdogan’s AKP has been in power since 2002, and has won every election since then, with the exception of the Istanbul mayoral election in 2019. The AKP has traditionally relied on its strong base of support in rural areas and conservative religious groups to win elections. However, there are signs that this support is beginning to erode, as many Turks are becoming disillusioned with the party’s performance and policies.

The outcome of the 2023 elections will have significant implications for Turkey’s future. If Erdogan and the AKP win, they are likely to continue with their current policies, including their crackdown on opposition and civil society.

The main opposition parties in Turkey, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), are both hoping to capitalize on this dissatisfaction and win the upcoming elections. The CHP has been making significant gains in recent local elections, particularly in Istanbul, where it won the mayoral election in 2019. The HDP, which has faced significant pressure from the government in recent years, is hoping to increase its representation in parliament.

The outcome of the 2023 elections will have significant implications for Turkey’s future. If Erdogan and the AKP win, they are likely to continue with their current policies, including their crackdown on opposition and civil society. If the opposition parties win, they are likely to pursue a more liberal and democratic agenda, including reforms to the economy and the judicial system.

Turkey has been facing growing pressure from its Western allies over its human rights record, its role in Syria, and its relationship with Russia. The government’s crackdown on opposition and civil society has also led to growing concerns about the state of democracy in the country.

One of the factors that will play a significant role in the 2023 elections is the role of Turkey’s youth. Turkey has one of the youngest populations in Europe, with over half of its population under the age of 30. The country’s youth have been at the forefront of protests against the government in recent years, particularly in 2013 during the Gezi Park protests. The youth vote will be a key factor in the upcoming elections, and the opposition parties are hoping to capitalize on the dissatisfaction of young Turks with the AKP’s policies and performance.

Another factor that will play a significant role in the 2023 elections is Turkey’s relations with the international community. Turkey has been facing growing pressure from its Western allies over its human rights record, its role in Syria, and its relationship with Russia. The government’s crackdown on opposition and civil society has also led to growing concerns about the state of democracy in the country. The international community will be watching the 2023 elections closely, and the outcome will have implications for Turkey’s relationship with its Western allies and its place in the international community.

The COVID-19 pandemic is also likely to have an impact on the 2023 elections. Turkey has been hit hard by the pandemic, with a significant number of cases and deaths. The government’s handling of the pandemic has been criticized by some, and there is growing frustration among the population over the government’s response. The pandemic has also had an impact on the economy, with many businesses struggling to survive. The AKP’s ability to address these challenges will be a key factor in the upcoming elections.

In conclusion, the 2023 elections will be a crucial moment in Turkey’s history. The country is facing significant challenges, including economic problems, human rights violations, and growing dissatisfaction among the population. The elections will be a test of whether Erdogan’s government can address these challenges and maintain its grip on power, or whether the opposition parties can capitalize on the government’s weaknesses and win the election. The outcome of the election will have significant implications for Turkey’s future, including its relationship with the international community and its place in the world. The international community will be closely watching the election, and the pressure will be on the Turkish government to ensure a free and fair election.

 

China’s Tri-Ring” Strategy for Afghanistan Crisis and Beyond

By
Dr. Zukun Lyu
-
0

In the aftermath of the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan, China has adopted a “tri-ring” approach to the issue. This approach involves three key strategies: engagement, non-interference, and security cooperation. The tri-ring approach is an attempt by China to promote stability in Afghanistan and the wider region, while also protecting its own interests.

The first ring of China’s tri-ring approach is engagement. China has been engaging with the Taliban and other political forces in Afghanistan in an attempt to promote dialogue and reconciliation. This has included hosting Taliban representatives in China for talks and offering to play a role in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. China has also been engaging with other regional powers, such as Russia and Pakistan, in an attempt to coordinate efforts to promote stability in Afghanistan.

The second ring of China’s tri-ring approach is non-interference. China has been emphasizing the importance of respecting Afghanistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This has been a key element of China’s foreign policy in recent years, as the country seeks to avoid becoming embroiled in conflicts and disputes in other parts of the world. China has also been urging other countries to respect Afghanistan’s sovereignty and refrain from interfering in its internal affairs.

The third ring of China’s tri-ring approach is security cooperation. China has been working to promote security cooperation with other regional powers, such as Russia and Pakistan, in an attempt to promote stability in Afghanistan and the wider region. This has included joint military exercises, intelligence sharing, and other forms of cooperation. China has also been working to promote security cooperation with other countries, such as the United States, in an attempt to coordinate efforts to combat terrorism and other security threats.

 is not just limited to Afghanistan. China has been using this approach in other parts of the world, as it seeks to promote stability and protect its own

interests. For example, China has been using the tri-ring approach in its relations with North Korea, where it has been engaging with the regime while also emphasizing the importance of non-interference and promoting security cooperation.

China’s tri-ring approach is driven by a number of factors. One of the key factors is China’s growing economic and strategic interests in the region. China has been investing heavily in infrastructure projects in Afghanistan and other countries in the region, as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. This has given China a stake in the stability of the region and has increased its interest in promoting peace and security.

Another factor driving China’s tri-ring approach is the country’s desire to project itself as a responsible global power. China has been emphasizing the importance of multilateralism and cooperation in its foreign policy, as it seeks to counter the perception that it is a destabilizing force in the world. The tri-ring approach is seen as a way for China to demonstrate its commitment to stability and cooperation in the region.

There are also challenges to China’s tri-ring approach. One of the biggest challenges is the difficulty of engaging with the Taliban and other political forces in Afghanistan, given their history of human rights abuses and support for terrorism. China’s engagement with the Taliban has drawn criticism from some quarters, who see it as a tacit endorsement of the group’s actions.

Another challenge is the difficulty of balancing China’s interests with those of other regional powers. Russia and Pakistan, in particular, have their own interests in the region, and China’s efforts to promote stability and cooperation may not always align with theirs. China will need to navigate these competing interests in order to successfully implement its tri-ring approach.

The success of China’s tri-ring approach will depend on a number of factors. One of the key factors will be the willingness of other regional powers to cooperate with China. Russia and Pakistan, in particular, will play a key role in implementing the tri-ring approach, given their own interests in the region. If these countries are willing to cooperate with China, the tri-ring approach may have a greater chance of success.

Another factor will be the ability of China to navigate the complex political landscape in Afghanistan. The country has a long history of conflict and instability, and it will not be easy for China to engage with the various political forces in the country. However, China’s experience in other conflict zones, such as North Korea, may prove useful in navigating this complex landscape.

In conclusion, China’s tri-ring approach to the Afghanistan issue and beyond is an attempt by China to promote stability and protect its own interests in the region. The approach involves engagement, non-interference, and security cooperation, and is driven by a desire to project China as a responsible global power. However, there are challenges to the implementation of this approach, including the difficulty of engaging with the Taliban, the need to balance China’s interests with those of other regional powers, and the potential backlash from other countries and organizations that view China’s engagement with the Taliban as problematic. Nevertheless, the tri-ring approach is a significant development in China’s foreign policy, as it represents a departure from the country’s previous policy of non-intervention in the affairs of other countries.

 

The United States and the CSTO in Central Asian Affairs

By
Dr. Fatime Mehdi
-
0

The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is a military alliance comprised of six former Soviet republics: Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. The CSTO was established in 1992 to promote collective security and defense among its member states, and it has been involved in a number of regional security issues in recent years. One of the key issues that the CSTO is currently grappling with is its relationship with the United States in Central Asia.

The United States has been involved in Central Asia since the collapse of the Soviet Union, with a particular focus on promoting democracy, economic development, and security in the region.

The United States has been involved in Central Asia since the collapse of the Soviet Union, with a particular focus on promoting democracy, economic development, and security in the region. The United States has also been involved in military operations in the region, including the war in Afghanistan. This has put the United States in competition with the CSTO for influence in the region, particularly in terms of security cooperation.

One of the key challenges in the CSTO’s relationship with the United States is the question of Afghanistan. The CSTO has expressed concern about the security situation in Afghanistan and the potential for instability in the region. The United States has been involved in efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, including the training and equipping of Afghan security forces. The CSTO has expressed concern about the potential for these efforts to destabilize the region, particularly if they lead to a further escalation of conflict.

The United States has been involved in a number of military training programs and exercises in the region, particularly in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The CSTO has expressed concern about these activities, particularly in light of its own military capabilities

Another challenge is the question of military cooperation between the CSTO and the United States. The United States has been involved in a number of military training programs and exercises in the region, particularly in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The CSTO has expressed concern about these activities, particularly in light of its own military capabilities and the potential for these activities to undermine its influence in the region.

Despite these challenges, there have been some efforts to improve cooperation between the CSTO and the United States. For example, the United States has been involved in efforts to promote regional security and stability, including through the C5+1 initiative, which brings together the five Central Asian states and the United States to promote economic and security cooperation in the region.

There have also been efforts to promote dialogue and cooperation between the CSTO and the United States on security issues. For example, the CSTO has held a number of meetings with representatives of the United States and other international organizations to discuss regional security issues, including the situation in Afghanistan.

However, there are significant challenges to improving cooperation between the CSTO and the United States. One of the key challenges is the lack of trust between the two sides. The CSTO has expressed concern about the United States’ intentions in the region, particularly given the history of U.S. involvement in Central Asia. The United States, on the other hand, has expressed concern about the CSTO’s relationship with Russia and its potential for undermining regional stability.

Another challenge is the question of regional alignment. The CSTO is closely aligned with Russia, and there are concerns that improved cooperation with the United States could undermine this alignment. The United States, on the other hand, has been working to promote a rules-based regional order that is based on international law and respect for sovereignty. This can put the United States at odds with the CSTO, which has been accused of violating human rights and suppressing political opposition in some of its member states.

The CSTO is closely aligned with Russia, and there are concerns that improved cooperation with the United States could undermine this alignment. The United States, on the other hand, has been working to promote a rules-based regional order that is based on international law and respect for sovereignty.

One area where the CSTO and the United States could potentially work together is in promoting regional economic development. Central Asia is home to significant natural resources, including oil, gas, and minerals, and there is enormous potential for economic growth in the region. The United States has been involved in efforts to promote economic development in the region, including through investment and trade initiatives. The CSTO could potentially play a role in promoting greater economic integration and cooperation among its member states, as well as with other countries in the region.

Another area where the CSTO and the United States could work together is in promoting

regional security and stability. This could include efforts to address common threats, such as terrorism and transnational crime, as well as promoting greater cooperation and coordination among the countries of the region on security issues. The United States has been involved in efforts to promote regional security, including through the provision of military assistance and training. The CSTO could potentially play a role in promoting greater regional security cooperation and dialogue, as well as in addressing common security challenges.

Finally, the CSTO and the United States could work together to promote greater respect for human rights and democratic governance in the region. Central Asia is home to a number of countries with poor human rights records, and there is a need for greater international attention and engagement on these issues. The United States has been involved in efforts to promote human rights and democracy in the region, including through support for civil society and political opposition groups. The CSTO could potentially play a role in promoting greater respect for human rights and democratic governance in its member states, as well as in promoting regional dialogue and cooperation on these issues.

The United States has been involved in efforts to promote human rights and democracy in the region, including through support for civil society and political opposition groups.

In conclusion, the relationship between the CSTO and the United States in Central Asia is complex and challenging, but there are opportunities for greater cooperation and dialogue on a range of issues. Improving cooperation between the two sides will require a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue and find common ground, as well as a commitment to promoting regional stability, economic development, and respect for human rights. By working together, the CSTO and the United States can help to address the many challenges facing the region and promote a more stable, prosperous, and democratic future for the people of Central Asia.

 

Reflections on Dialogue with TTP – China-Pakistan-Afghanistan Triptych

By
Asma Khan Durrani
-
0

Amidst the shifting winds of diplomacy, a trilateral bond emerges. China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, entwined in destiny’s embrace, have embarked on a voyage of shared aspirations, their interests in unison. A narrative of forging stronger ties unfolds, weaving a tapestry of unity and hope, in the realm of security, economy, and defense.

The Trilateral Foreign Minister’s Security Dialogue between China Afghanistan and Pakistan was held in which Pakistan and Afghanistan reviewed their bilateral relations in various areas including politics, economics, trade, connectivity, peace and security, and education. The Afghan Foreign Minister held meetings with Pakistani leaders. China’s Foreign Minister Qin Gang participated in the trilateral dialogue. Pakistan is committed to pursuing continuous and practical engagement with the Afghan Government and desires a peaceful, prosperous, stable, and connected Afghanistan.

China, as the third participant in the dialogue, has significant interests in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Beijing is a key economic and defense partner of Pakistan and has made substantial investments in the country, including $60 billion in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. However, in recent years, armed groups have carried out multiple attacks targeting Chinese nationals and interests in Pakistan. In response, China has requested that Pakistan ensure the safety of its citizens and investments. Chinese involvement in Afghanistan is more to do with security concerns than economic interests. China’s primary concern in Afghanistan is to reduce the threat posed by the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an al-Qaeda-affiliated armed group that has carried out attacks in China in pursuit of creating “East Turkistan” on the Chinese mainland. This is why Beijing continues to engage with the Afghan Taliban. China has maintained its diplomatic presence through the Afghan contact group and other multilateral forums under the SCO and beyond. This positions China to mitigate immediate security threats.

The Foreign Minister of Afghanistan, Amir Muttaqi, called upon both Pakistan and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to engage in dialogue. Muttaqi expressed the importance of fostering a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflicts in the region. His visit to Pakistan signifies a significant step towards diplomatic engagement between the two neighboring countries. Muttaqi urged for the resumption of discussions between Pakistan and the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Whilst analyzing, the potential fallout of the probable dialogue which may ensue could constitute the following outcomes. Positive outcomes could entail conflict resolution by engaging in dialogue with the TTP, it could provide an opportunity to address the root causes of the conflict and work towards a peaceful resolution. Open communication channels may help identify common ground and find areas for compromise. Through dialogue it could potentially lead to a reduction in violence. If both Pakistan and the TTP commit to peaceful negotiations, it could result in a decrease in terrorist attacks and a more stable security situation. Similarly, reintegration opportunities through dialogue, as it can provide a platform for the TTP to express their concerns, grievances, and demands. It may offer an opportunity for the group to explore options for reintegration into mainstream society, thereby reducing their militant activities. By Involving the TTP in dialogue it can contribute to a broader peace process in the region. If successful, it may encourage other militant groups to consider peaceful means of resolving conflicts, leading to a more peaceful and stable environment.

Furthermore, it is imperative to be abreast of the negative considerations as well, as trust and intentions when engaging in dialogue with a militant group like the TTP raises questions about their trustworthiness and their true intentions. There is a risk that the TTP may exploit the talks to buy time, regroup, or gain legitimacy without genuinely committing to peace. Likewise, there is a potential for escalation as in some cases, dialogue with militant groups can lead to an escalation of violence if the talks break down or if the group uses the opportunity to launch new attacks. There is a need for caution and robust security measures to mitigate these risks. Correspondingly there could be misconception by public perception and political backlash, as dialogue with the TTP might be faced with criticism from sections of society that view negotiations with militant groups as appeasement or a compromise on principles. Political backlash and public perception can impact the effectiveness and sustainability of the dialogue process. Moreover, inclusion of stakeholders in paramount as the success of dialogue depends on the involvement of all relevant stakeholders. If certain factions within the TTP or other militant groups refuse to participate, it may limit the effectiveness of the dialogue process and hinder the chances of a positive outcome.

FM Muttaqi discussed security issues with Pakistani officials and expressed hope that problems can be resolved through diplomatic channels and negotiations. He believes that the situation will improve in the future. He refuted claims that the TTP is launching attacks on Pakistan from Afghan territory. These comments were made in the context of a recent increase in terrorist attacks in Pakistan, many of which have been claimed by banned groups including the TTP. The increase in attacks occurred after talks between the TTP and the Pakistani government, hosted in Kabul, broke down, leading to the end of a ceasefire in 2022.

Regarding the Taliban government in Afghanistan, the minister stated that their first priority at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was to communicate their desire for a new foreign policy based on cooperation and joint interactions. Their initial focus with Pakistan was on strengthening economic ties and connectivity. Muttaqi stated that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) has fulfilled its responsibility by bringing both sides to the negotiating table and hosting talks between Pakistan and the TTP. He also sought to distance the Afghan Taliban, which came to power in Kabul in 2021, from any responsibility for the TTP. He argued that the TTP is not a new movement and mentioned that Pakistan has acknowledged that 80,000 Pakistanis have died in the past 20 years. He assured Pakistan that his government is working towards peace in the region and stated that their official policy is to prevent bloodshed in Pakistan.

Muttaqi also noted that the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan extends beyond being neighbors. He stated that economic and people-to-people ties have been hindered by political and security concerns, resulting in missed opportunities. He expressed his commitment to turning these challenges into opportunities for positive economic relations. The minister emphasized their efforts to increase regional connectivity through projects such as TAPI, CASA 1000, TAP-500kV, and the Afghan-Trans railway. They recently facilitated the transfer of gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan, reducing the distance to Quetta to 900km. They are committed to supporting this as a permanent route that benefits Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, and Pakistan. During a lecture at the Institute of Strategic Studies on the final day of his four-day visit to Pakistan, FM Muttaqi stated that he hopes that Pakistan’s government and the TTP can resolve their issues through dialogue. He also mentioned that trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan has doubled from US$1.1bn to $2.4bn in the past year and he hopes to increase it to over $5bn. Muttaqi emphasized the need for open communication channels and encouraged both Pakistan and the TTP to come to the negotiating table. He highlighted that dialogue is crucial to achieving stability, peace, and prosperity in Afghanistan and the wider region.

The presence of the Afghan and Chinese FM in Pakistan underscores the growing recognition of Pakistan’s role in facilitating peace talks and reconciliation efforts. Pakistan has long been involved in facilitating discussions between different Afghan factions and has been instrumental in hosting previous rounds of talks. Muttaqi’s call for dialogue with the TTP is a significant gesture towards initiating a peaceful resolution within Afghanistan. The TTP, an extremist organization, has been responsible for numerous acts of violence and instability in the region. By urging the TTP to engage in talks, Muttaqi aims to address the root causes of conflict and find a path towards reconciliation.

The international community will closely observe the response of Pakistan and the TTP to this call for dialogue. The success of such negotiations could have a profound impact on the security situation in Afghanistan and the broader stability of the region. It is hoped that all parties involved will seize this opportunity for constructive engagement and work towards lasting peace in Afghanistan.

In conclusion, the potential positive outcomes of Pakistan holding dialogue with the TTP include conflict resolution, reduced violence, reintegration opportunities, and contributing to a broader peace process. However, it is crucial to carefully consider the negative considerations, such as trust issues, potential for escalation, public perception, and stakeholder involvement. A comprehensive assessment of these factors is necessary before determining the potential for a positive outcome from such dialogue.

Together, China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan script a tale of unwavering resolve, etching their names in the annals of history. This trilateral dialogue is rooted in trust and shared interests, which pave the way for a future where security, economy, and defense unite nations alike.

Religious Intolerance in India

By
Asad Malik
-
0

Religious freedom is important part of the society. No country can flourish without giving freedom to its people. Some countries in the world are using religion as a political tool to get maximum political mileage. Religion card is being played in some countries at the behest of government by some religiously motivated organizations. India is one of the states who have been using religion (Hindutva ideology) in order to accomplish particular and politically driven objectives. The endorsement of which came from US this time around.

Religion card is being played in some countries at the behest of government by some religiously motivated organizations. India is one of the states who have been using religion (Hindutva ideology) in order to accomplish particular and politically driven objectives. The endorsement of which came from US this time around.

India has been designated as a country of particular concern (CPC) on religious freedom by US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). The USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan US federal government commission that monitors and reports on religious freedom issues around the world. India was designated as a CPC in the USCIRF’s 2021 annual report, citing concerns about Indian government’s treatment of religious minorities, including Muslims, Christians, and Sikhs. The report highlights incidents of violence against religious minorities, including mob violence and lynching, as well as discriminatory laws and policies that restrict their rights and freedoms.

The USCIRF has also been critical of India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which was passed in 2019 and provides a path to citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from neighboring countries. Critics of the law argue that it discriminates against Muslims and undermines India’s secular constitution. However, Indian government has rejected the USCIRF’s designation as baseless and biased. The government has also maintained that it is committed to protecting the rights of all its citizens, including religious minorities. However, concerns about religious freedom in India continue to be raised by human rights organizations and other groups both within and outside the country.

Indian government has rejected the USCIRF’s designation as baseless and biased. The government has also maintained that it is committed to protecting the rights of all its citizens, including religious minorities

India has been witnessing massive crackdown against non-Hindu communities under the government of PM Modi. There have been concerns raised by some individuals and organizations about religious intolerance in India under ruling BJP and PM Modi. Critics allege that the government and its supporters (Radical Hindus) have been promoting a Hindu nationalist agenda that discriminates against religious minorities, particularly Muslims.

There have been incidents of violence against religious minorities, including mob lynching and attacks on individuals for allegedly consuming beef or transporting cows, which are considered sacred by Hindus. Critics also point to the passage of laws that they say discriminate against Muslims. In addition, some have raised concerns about the government’s actions regarding religious sites, such as the Babri mosque in Ayodhya, which was destroyed in 1992 by Hindu nationalists who wanted to build a temple on the site. In 2019, Indian Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hindu claimants to the site and ordered the construction of a temple, which some saw as a victory for Hindu nationalists.

Concerns about religious intolerance and discrimination in India continue to be raised by some individuals, organizations, and international bodies.

The Indian government and BJP supporters have rejected allegations of religious intolerance and argue that the government is committed to protecting the rights of all citizens, including religious minorities. They also argue that the government’s policies are aimed at promoting economic development and national unity. It’s worth noting that opinions on this issue are divided, and there are also many who do not see the situation in the same way. However, concerns about religious intolerance and discrimination in India continue to be raised by some individuals, organizations, and international bodies.

There are certainly concerns that the Indian government has not done enough to address incidents of religious intolerance and discrimination. While the government has taken some steps to address these issues, including passing laws against hate speech and violence, critics argue that more needs to be done to protect the rights of religious minorities.

Some have also criticized the government’s response to incidents of violence and discrimination, arguing that it has been slow or insufficient. In some cases, government officials have been accused of making statements that appear to justify or condone violence against religious minorities. It’s worth noting that the Indian government has denied allegations of religious intolerance and discrimination and has taken steps to promote religious harmony and tolerance. However, the issue remains a contentious and divisive one in India, with strong opinions on both sides. Ultimately, the situation in India is complex, and there are no easy solutions to the issue of religious intolerance and discrimination. What is clear, however, is that more needs to be done to protect the rights of religious minorities and promote religious tolerance and understanding in the country.

The addressing of issues such as religious intolerance and discrimination requires a collective effort from all stakeholders, including governments, civil society organizations, and individuals.

International organizations and governments can play a role in promoting religious freedom and tolerance through advocacy, monitoring, and providing support to local organizations and individuals working to promote these values. They can also use diplomatic channels to engage with Indian government to encourage Modi government to take action to protect the rights of religious minorities and promote tolerance.

Overturning of Liberal International Order : Challenges to the UN

By
Tayyaba Khurshid
-
7

Since the end of World War II, the most dominant state, the United States, has held a hegemonic position over the International liberal order. It is appropriate to assert that the US has been responsible for establishing this order by promoting interdependence, economic liberation through trade and commerce, democratic principles and values, recognition of human rights, and prioritizing international cooperation through inter-state organizations.

The emergence of China as a global economic powerhouse has elevated its status to that of a significant stakeholder on the world stage. This has led to a shift in the Liberal Order’s power balance in favor of China. Moreover, under the leadership of Donald Trump, the United States has promoted nationalist policies, deviating from its role as a leader of the world order. This created a void/space in the global leadership that was eventually filled by China, a rising power that not only challenged the US-led world order but also gradually secured its position and influence in various international organizations, including the United Nations, WTO, IMF, and others.

The United Nations was established in 1945 to replace the League of Nations, with the objective of preventing future conflicts and uniting all nations under a single platform to facilitate cooperation and conflict resolution. However, China views the United Nations as a tool to shape the current world order to serve its interests. Consequently, the growing influence of China poses a challenge to the UN’s conflict prevention approach.

The existence of permanent members in the Security Council has impeded the prevention of conflicts, as the permanent members, namely the US, China, Russia, Britain, and France, possess veto powers that they may exercise to prevent the passing of any resolution that contradicts their interests or the interests of their allies. China, unlike the other powers of the liberal order, is a communist state and has shaped the current world order according to its own communist tendencies. It has benefited from the current order and aims to establish a new world order with communist traits.

In the current global order, China plays an active role under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, holding a significant position in world affairs. China desires to reform the governance of the world to align with its current interests and future aspirations.

China, through its Belt and Road Initiative, has endeavored to establish global connectivity and is actively participating in investment projects across various regions such as Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. By investing in development projects, China aims to establish relationships with all states and counter the influence of the US in various regions, thereby gaining influence and say in world politics.

The Chinese government perceives the United Nations as a universal organization of all governments established to address various threats and challenges. In this multipolar world order, both the US and China are competing with each other for global hegemony. This competition is evident in the UN dispute settlement mechanisms, where both countries attempt to influence the organization and pursue their interests.

From a realist perspective, the UN has become a tool for powerful states such as China and the US to pursue their interests. The fundamental problem lies in the veto power of the Security Council, which allows any state to block any resolution that runs contrary to their will and interest. Consequently, the UN appears to operate as a puppet in the hands of these major powers.

UN Conflict Prevention Approach

The United Nations (UN) has established a mechanism to prevent conflicts and maintain a peaceful and stable global environment. The UN’s efforts include mediation and resolution of disputes between conflicting parties, as well as deployment of peacekeeping forces in areas where conflict may arise. The primary responsibility for ensuring global peace and stability rests with the UN Security Council (UNSC), which is composed of 5 permanent members and 10 non-permanent members.

The UN has a primary goal of preventing conflicts, and the decline of the liberal world order has presented numerous challenges to this approach. China’s rise and its pursuit of global hegemony also occur within the context of the UN, with the current Chinese leadership viewing China as a responsible player in global politics with a responsibility to establish a world order that supports China’s long-term goals. China has actively participated in the UN, contributing more troops and peacekeeping forces than any other permanent member. Moreover, China has become the second-largest contributor to the UN budget and holds significant positions within the organization.

China’s economic and military power is being used to assert its dominance in various regions, and the UN is not exempt from China’s assertive policies.

China has articulated its aim to reform the existing world order by constructing parallel institutions to wield greater influence in the global arena. With the intention to counter the existing liberal institutions, China has taken assertive steps to establish its own institutions. For instance, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has enabled China to penetrate key regions of the world. Furthermore, China has set up the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) as an alternative to the World Bank and has been actively engaging in the Middle East to further its economic interests and address the void caused by the United States’ retreat from the region. China’s past experiences of the Century of Humiliation suggest that it is more focused on economic and military buildup, and national interests take precedence over conflict prevention and human rights concerns.

The Dragon and The Bear: China’s Impact On The Russia-Ukraine Conflict

By
Dr. Usman
-
0

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been a source of tension and instability in the region. In recent years, China has emerged as a significant player in the conflict, with its actions and statements having an impact on the situation in the region. China’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict has been one of neutrality, with the Chinese government taking a cautious and measured approach to the situation. China has consistently called for a peaceful resolution to the conflict through diplomatic means and has urged all parties to exercise restraint and avoid any actions that could escalate the conflict.

China has emerged as a significant player in the conflict, with its actions and statements having an impact on the situation in the region. China’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict has been one of neutrality, with the Chinese government taking a cautious and measured approach to the situation.

However, despite its neutral stance, China’s actions and statements have had an impact on the situation in the region. One area where China has played a significant role is in the area of energy. Russia is a major energy supplier to China, and China has been reluctant to take actions that could jeopardize its energy supply from Russia. At the same time, China has been exploring alternative sources of energy, including increasing its imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from other countries.

Another area where China’s actions have had an impact on the Russia-Ukraine conflict is in the United Nations Security Council. China is a permanent member of the Security Council and has the power to veto any resolutions proposed by other members. China has used its veto power in the past to block resolutions on Syria, and there is concern that it could do the same in the case of Ukraine.

China’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict has also been influenced by its relations with both Russia and Ukraine. China has traditionally had a close relationship with Russia, and the two countries have cooperated closely on a range of issues, including energy and security. However, China’s relationship with Ukraine has also been growing in recent years, and China has expressed a willingness to cooperate with Ukraine on a range of issues, including trade and infrastructure development.

China has traditionally had a close relationship with Russia, and the two countries have cooperated closely on a range of issues, including energy and security.

The potential impact of China’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is significant. China is a major global power with significant economic and political influence, and its actions can have a significant impact on the situation in the region. China’s continued reliance on energy supplies from Russia could limit its ability to take actions that could potentially damage Russia’s interests in the region. At the same time, China’s growing relationship with Ukraine could provide an alternative source of leverage in the conflict.

Another area where China’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has been significant is in the area of diplomacy. China has been actively involved in diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict, both through bilateral channels and through multilateral forums. In 2023, China hosted a trilateral meeting between the foreign ministers of Russia, Ukraine, and China, aimed at finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

China’s neutral stance and its emphasis on dialogue and diplomacy have provided a constructive voice in the peace process.

China’s involvement in the diplomatic process has been welcomed by both Russia and Ukraine. China’s neutral stance and its emphasis on dialogue and diplomacy have provided a constructive voice in the peace process. China has also been actively involved in supporting peace talks through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a regional forum that includes both Russia and China.

Another way in which China’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has been significant is in its relationship with the United States. The United States has been a vocal supporter of Ukraine in the conflict and has imposed sanctions on Russia in response to its actions in the region. China’s relationship with the United States has been strained in recent years, particularly in the area of trade, but the two countries have also cooperated on a range of issues, including climate change and North Korea. China’s position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict could have an impact on its relationship with the United States, particularly if China were to take actions that were seen as supporting Russia’s position in the conflict.

China’s relationship with the United States has been strained in recent years, particularly in the area of trade, but the two countries have also cooperated on a range of issues, including climate change and North Korea. China’s position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict could have an impact on its relationship with the United States

Overall, China’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2023 is one of cautious neutrality, with China taking a measured approach to the situation. While China has not taken any actions that could be seen as directly supporting either side in the conflict, its actions and statements have had an impact on the situation in the region. China’s emphasis on diplomacy and dialogue has been welcomed by both Russia and Ukraine, and its involvement in the peace process has provided a constructive voice in the region. However, the potential impact of China’s relationship with both Russia and the United States on the conflict remains a significant factor in the situation.

Greece-Turkey Geopolitical Competition in the Aegean Islands

By
Hashim Kamal
-
0

The Aegean Islands and the surrounding waters have been a continuous source of tension for both Greece and Turkey for many years. This is evident from the fact that both countries have been involved in occasional military conflicts and border skirmishes over the years. The political and historical complexities of this region are deeply interlinked, making the issue of the Aegean islands a challenging one to resolve. In 2020, the two sides were on the brink of war when Turkey and Greece sent military and commercial ships in pursuit of natural resources near the Greek island of Kastellorizo. Currently, this dispute between Greece and Turkey has become more complex due to the lack of diplomacy and the latest tensions between the two countries exacerbate it.

The two NATO allies are indulging in a dispute over islands in the Aegean Sea as Turkey rejects what it calls the militarization of the Aegean islands by Greece. In present times this dispute is of prime significance as Europe can’t afford another conflict amidst the Russia-Ukraine war.

Geo-strategic significance of the Aegean Islands

The recent dispute over the Aegean island between Greece and Turkey is persistent in nature. Both countries emphasize the strategic importance of the Aegean Islands as these islands are geopolitically significant from their positioning, as well as their role in case of a military confrontation. Both countries conflict with the natural resources research in the Aegean Sea and are at loggerheads over territorial claims in the Aegean Sea.

The conflict takes on a geopolitical turn in the region as both countries want the upper hand in the Aegean Sea and the surrounding region.

The legal dimensions are very significant in this dispute as there exist several international treaties over the maritime problems between both countries. According to Lausanne Treaty Greece was given sovereignty over the islands near the Turkish coast, and thus it takes benefits from the processes of exploration and extraction of natural resources from the sea. Greece aims to maintain the status quo over the islands however, Turkey wants to challenge it as of now it feels threatened due to the ongoing militarization of the Island by Greece in recent times.

Rising tensions on the Aegean Islands

Amidst the growing military buildup of Greece on the Aegean Islands close to Turkey’s coastline, the Turkish government has warned Greece to back off and that it will take necessary actions if Greece does not stop militarizing the Islands. Turkey insists that the entire island needs to be demilitarized as this violates certain conditions in the treaties between the two countries. The Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu stated at a conference that “If Athens does not want peace, Ankara will do whatever is necessary. We cannot remain silent about the disarmament of the islands, we will take the necessary steps both legally and on the ground”. This statement from the state official indicates a possible military conflict at some stage as well.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “I warn Greece to avoid dreams, acts, and statements that will result in regret. Come to your senses”. The statement came after he observed large-scale military drills in Izmir on the western coast of the country. On the other hand, Greece is of the view that the Islands need to be militarized for its security and that Turkey misinterprets the treaties on purpose, and that they have legal grounds to defend themselves against any supposed hostile actions by Turkey.

Potential spillover effects of Conflict in Europe

The European Union should take an active role in resolving the latest tensions between Greece and Turkey because any sort of aggravation in this dispute can have spillover effects for the whole of Europe. The exacerbation of this conflict between both countries could lead to a refugee crisis if there is a prominent increase in the number of people seeking asylum in Europe. This means that Greece, in particular, would be heavily affected by a refugee influx, as it is the European Union’s main gateway for refugees and migrants coming from Turkey and other Middle Eastern states.

The conflict also has the potential to pose security concerns for the EU, as it could lead to an increase in tensions between Greece and Turkey. This could potentially impact the broader security architecture of the European region and can lead to a destabilization of the Balkans as well. Moreover, the conflict could have economic implications for the EU, particularly if it leads to disruptions in trade and investment between Greece and Turkey. This could have broader implications for the European economy, particularly if it affects the stability of the eurozone.

The Aegean region is of strategic significance to the EU’s energy security, as it is a transit route for pipelines carrying natural gas from the Caspian region and the Middle East to Europe. Any disruptions in the region could have significant implications for the EU’s energy security as well.

Likely scenario post-upcoming elections

With elections approaching in Turkey on May 14 and Greece a week later it would be interesting to see what happens in context with the ongoing Agaean Islands dispute between both countries. Both Greek and Turkish officials had met in recent weeks, in the wake of the devastating earthquakes in Southern Turkey in February. Both countries have promised to shelve disputes that have caused tensions and even the risk of war over decades.

But in my point of view, with the coming elections the geopolitical and diplomatic maneuverability to de-escalate will be limited and this will not allow the pragmatism to prevail over the potential conflict. Furthermore, I assume that after the end of Greece and Turkey’s elections, both countries will now be the closest to war that we have experienced in a century. It is possible that both nations could get involved in a direct kinetic engagement if necessary actions are not taken by the international community to resolve this conflict between both countries as soon as possible.

Conclusion:

The Aegean island dispute is not just a bilateral issue between Greece and Turkey; it has wider implications for the geopolitical landscape of the Mediterranean and Europe. To conclude we can say that the Aegean Island dispute is a complex issue that requires a diplomatic solution. Both Greece and Turkey must engage in meaningful dialogue and compromise to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict after the upcoming elections. As the dispute has implications for the wider geopolitical landscape of the Mediterranean and Europe so it requires the involvement of the international community to ensure a peaceful resolution of the conflict between both nations.

Amidst Discord and Detente: A Critical Appraisal of the Saudi-Iran Thaw

By
Asma Khan Durrani
-
0

Saudi Arabia and Iran, two influential powers in the Middle East, have long been engaged in a bitter rivalry that has intensified regional tensions and impacted global affairs. However, recent developments have shown signs of a possible normalization of relations between the two nations. This appraisal explores the historical context, key issues, and potential implications of a Saudi Arabia-Iran rapprochement, shedding light on the prospects of stability and cooperation in the region.

The Saudi Arabia-Iran rivalry can be traced back to the Islamic Revolution of 1979, which led to the establishment of the Islamic Republic in Iran, challenging the Saudi-led Sunni dominance in the region. Over the years, the two nations have engaged in proxy conflicts in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, supporting opposing factions and exacerbating sectarian divisions. Diplomatic ties were severed in 2016 following the storming of the Saudi embassy in Tehran, further deteriorating relations.

In recent years, there have been several notable developments indicating a potential shift towards normalization. One crucial factor has been the change in leadership in both countries. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia and President Hassan Rouhani in Iran have expressed a willingness to engage in dialogue and reduce tensions. Additionally, the appointment of Ibrahim Raisi as Iran’s president, known for his hardline stance, has sparked speculation that his administration might pursue a more pragmatic approach to regional relations. Moreover, the devastating consequences of the Yemeni civil war, where Saudi Arabia and Iran have been backing opposing sides, have highlighted the urgent need for de-escalation. The war’s toll on civilian lives and infrastructure has fostered international pressure on both nations to seek a peaceful resolution.

The normalization of Saudi Arabia-Iran relations would have far-reaching implications for the Middle East and beyond. Firstly, it could pave the way for increased stability in the region, reducing the likelihood of proxy conflicts and sectarian violence. A de-escalation of tensions would also create an environment conducive to addressing other pressing issues, such as the Syrian conflict, where Saudi Arabia and Iran have supported opposing factions, prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people.

Economically, the two nations have much to gain from improved relations. Saudi Arabia and Iran possess significant oil reserves and are key players in the global energy market. Cooperation between the two could lead to greater stability in oil prices and enhanced economic prospects for the region. Furthermore, joint investments in infrastructure projects, trade partnerships, and tourism initiatives could provide a much-needed boost to their respective economies.

From a geopolitical standpoint, a Saudi Arabia-Iran rapprochement would likely shift regional power dynamics. It could lead to a more balanced regional order, reducing the influence of external actors and allowing the countries in the region to have a greater say in shaping their own destinies. This would foster greater autonomy and self-determination for Middle Eastern nations.

However, achieving normalization will not be without challenges. Deep-rooted mistrust, ideological differences, and competition for regional dominance will require significant diplomatic efforts and confidence-building measures. The involvement of neutral mediators (China and Russia) or international organizations, such as the United Nations, could play a crucial role in facilitating dialogue and fostering an environment of trust.

Trust-building measures are crucial in overcoming deep-rooted mistrust. Confidence-building measures could include reciprocal gestures such as the release of political prisoners, the easing of travel restrictions, and the reopening of embassies. These actions would signal a genuine commitment to reconciliation and pave the way for more substantial progress.

Engaging in cultural and people-to-people exchanges can also contribute to fostering understanding and empathy between Saudi Arabian and Iranian citizens. Educational and cultural programs, sports events, and joint artistic collaborations could help bridge the divide and promote a sense of common identity beyond political differences. Additionally, addressing regional conflicts where Saudi Arabia and Iran are involved as rival actors is essential. Yemen, Syria, and Iraq are prime examples of areas where cooperation between the two nations could have a transformative impact. Working together to support peace initiatives, humanitarian aid, and post-conflict reconstruction efforts would demonstrate a shared commitment to regional stability and the welfare of affected populations.

In addition to the steps mentioned earlier, there are several other measures that can contribute to the normalization of Saudi Arabia and Iran relations. Track II diplomacy involves unofficial, non-governmental channels of communication. Utilizing think tanks, academic institutions, and civil society organizations, Saudi Arabia and Iran can engage in dialogue and exchange ideas outside the confines of formal diplomacy.These platforms provide an opportunity for open and constructive discussions, fostering understanding and trust between the two nations.

Economic cooperation can be a powerful incentive for both Saudi Arabia and Iran to seek normalization. The establishment of joint economic ventures, trade agreements, and investment partnerships would not only enhance economic growth but also create interdependencies that promote stability and cooperation. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) can play a crucial role in facilitating economic integration between the two countries.

As custodians of Islam’s two holiest sites, Saudi Arabia and Iran have the potential to exert significant influence over the Muslim world. Engaging in religious dialogue and promoting tolerance can help bridge sectarian divides and foster a sense of unity among Muslims. Joint initiatives, conferences, and interfaith dialogues can contribute to a more harmonious relationship based on shared religious values.

Water scarcity and environmental challenges are pressing issues in the region. Collaborative efforts in managing shared water resources, promoting sustainable development, and addressing environmental degradation can provide a platform for Saudi Arabia and Iran to work together on common challenges. These efforts can build confidence and demonstrate a commitment to shared regional interests.

The path to normalizing Saudi Arabia and Iran relations requires a multifaceted approach that includes diplomatic engagement, trust-building measures, economic cooperation, cultural exchanges, and addressing shared regional challenges. By taking these steps, both countries can move towards a more constructive relationship, leading to stability and prosperity in the Middle East. It is through sustained efforts, dialogue, and a genuine commitment to reconciliation that the longstanding rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran can be transformed into a partnership that benefits both nations and the region as a whole.

1...113114115...130Page 114 of 130

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