Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog Page 122

A New Era of Partnership: The U.S.-UK Strategic Agreement

0

On March 21-22, 2023, U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai and the U.K. Secretary of State for International Trade, Anne-Marie Trevelyan, launched the first U.S.-U.K. Dialogues on the Future of Atlantic Trade in Baltimore, Maryland. This meeting represented a significant step toward reinforcing the long-standing relationship between the two nations. Stemming from the announcement of a new ‘Atlantic Charter’ by President Biden and Ex-Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the dialogues serve as a platform to advance mutual international trade priorities rooted in shared values, while fostering innovation and inclusive economic growth.

During the two-day event, Tai, White, and Trevelyan explored the Port of Baltimore and a local technology incubator, Fearless Tech. The dialogue involved roundtable discussions with a diverse range of national and local workers, businesses, and civil society stakeholders. Central to these discussions were strategies to enhance labor rights and environmental protection, fortify supply chain resilience, support a low-carbon transition, and create an environment conducive to SMEs’ export activities. The aim is to ensure the benefits of trade are evenly distributed across both nations.

Under the aegis of this partnership, a significant commitment was made by both countries to re-establish the UK-US SME dialogue, creating a forum for SMEs from both sides of the Atlantic to identify ways to support trade and investment. Another pivotal aspect was harnessing the potential of an open and competitive digital economy, with due safeguards for workers, consumers, and businesses. This ties into the G7’s first-ever set of Digital Trade Principles initiated under the UK presidency, which seeks to digitize paper-based customs and other border agency requirements to reduce bureaucratic red tape.

Simultaneously, a parallel agreement was reached between the U.S. and the U.K. to strengthen cooperation in science and technology. With an intent to create jobs and enhance national security, the partnership will facilitate advancements in research, innovation, commercialization, and the application of technology. This tie-up opens up avenues for cooperation in diverse areas, including defense, security, law enforcement, and intelligence. It aims to ensure technology acts as a force for good globally and reflects the values of liberal democracies, open societies, and open markets.

A key area of focus within this partnership will be the resilience and security of critical supply chains, battery technologies, and emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI). Another significant agenda is improving data accessibility and flow to promote economic growth, public safety, and scientific and technological progress. Efforts are also being channeled to realize the full potential of quantum technologies and develop future technology such as 6G. The intent is to strengthen collaboration on digital technical standards.

This U.S.-UK strategic agreement represents a holistic approach to economic and technological development, touching on areas of commerce, research, and societal impact. In their pursuit of shared values and mutual growth, the two countries are leveraging their shared histories, common language, and compatible legal and political systems to create a collaborative platform that can serve as a model for other international relationships. From expanding small business opportunities to harnessing the power of technology for societal good, the agreement sets the stage for a more cooperative, inclusive, and sustainable future.

This new era of collaboration, however, is not confined to the geographical borders of the two nations, and it carries broad regional implications that are worth examining. The first significant regional implication of the U.S.-UK strategic agreement is its potential to realign trade routes and influence economic trends. The commitment to fortify supply chain resilience comes at a time when the United States and the United Kingdom are looking to rely less on China as an export market or as a source of imports, including inputs for manufacturing. The trade agreement provides an opportunity to redefine the regional supply chain and enhance trade relations not only between the U.S. and the U.K. but also with other nations in the Atlantic region.

The strengthened U.S.-UK relationship could also serve as a counterbalance to the influence of other regional powers. This notion is reinforced by the AUKUS alliance, a strategic defense alliance involving the U.S., U.K., and Australia, which is aimed at addressing the perceived threat posed by the rise of China in the Indo-Pacific region. The strategic agreement between the U.S. and the U.K. complements the objectives of AUKUS, underlining the two countries’ mutual intent to collaborate in maintaining regional peace and stability.

This new Atlantic Charter, embodied by the dialogues and scientific partnership, underlines the two countries’ intent to lead the world in research and development, invest in expertise and capacity, and combat global challenges such as cancer, pandemic preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, and climate change. In its essence, it showcases a shared vision to create a world where technology and trade work in synergy, reflecting democratic values, fostering economic growth, and promoting global well-being. This comprehensive cooperation marks the dawn of a new era in the strategic relationship between the U.S. and the U.K., a partnership that is likely to shape the contours of international trade, technology, and global policy in the years to come.

A Catastrophe Unfolding: Putin and Erdogan Discuss the Kakhovka Dam Destruction

0

On a fateful day in early June, the Kakhovka Dam, a towering hydroelectric structure on the Dnipro River in southern Ukraine, ruptured, unleashing a wave of disaster that continues to ripple through the region. The ensuing devastation has not only brought to light a fraught geopolitical situation but also facilitated a crucial conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Putin decried the destruction of the dam as an “environmental and humanitarian catastrophe,” further accusing Ukraine of committing a dangerous act of aggression at the behest of Western powers. According to Putin, the Kyiv authorities are “committing war crimes, openly using terrorist methods, and organizing sabotage on Russian territory”.

However, Ukraine has strongly contested this claim, pointing the finger at Russia for the disaster. They argue that Moscow deliberately blew up the dam to divert attention away from their faltering offensive. The Kremlin dismisses this, arguing instead that Ukraine sabotaged the dam to constrict water supplies to Crimea.

While the two nations spar over the culpability for the catastrophic event, it is the innocent civilians who suffer the most. Thousands are at risk from flooding in Russian and Ukrainian-controlled areas along the Dnipro River, and Ukraine warns of the danger of floating mines unearthed by flooding and the spread of disease and hazardous chemicals.

Amid this geopolitical tangle, President Erdoğan has proposed the formation of an international commission to probe the incident. He discussed this proposal in separate calls with Putin and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, stressing the importance of conducting a comprehensive investigation that leaves no room for suspicion.

Erdoğan suggested that the commission should include representatives from the UN, the international community, and the warring parties, highlighting Turkey’s readiness to contribute to the investigative efforts. It’s noteworthy that as a NATO member, Turkey has maintained good relations with both Russia and Ukraine, positioning it as a potential mediator in the conflict.

Meanwhile, Putin has entrusted the responsibility of rescue efforts to the Emergency Situations Minister Alexander Kurenkov. However, the overwhelming flooding has already led to the evacuation of numerous settlements, and a grave humanitarian crisis looms large as tens of thousands remain at risk.

The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam and the subsequent diplomatic discussions underscore the volatile nature of the region’s geopolitics. As the floodwaters continue to surge, so do tensions between Ukraine and Russia. Amidst the blame game, it’s the pressing humanitarian crisis that needs immediate international attention. The proposed international commission, as suggested by President Erdoğan, seems to be the best hope for an impartial investigation into this disaster, but time is of the essence as the human and environmental costs continue to escalate.

The Kakhovka Dam catastrophe not only augments the existing humanitarian crisis but also has the potential to escalate geopolitical tensions in the region. The mutual accusations exchanged by Russia and Ukraine highlight the precarious nature of the relationship between these two nations and their respective international alliances.

As the floodwaters continue to surge, the international community waits with bated breath for the results of the proposed commission’s investigation. The assumptions drawn could impact not only Ukraine and Russia but also the broader geopolitical landscape of the region. The involvement of other nations such as Turkey indicates the complexity of the issue and the intertwined interests of different countries in ensuring stability and peace in the region.

Lastly, the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam is more than an environmental and humanitarian catastrophe; it is a profound geopolitical challenge. As Russia and Ukraine grapple with the immediate aftermath, the international community must brace for the long-term implications of this disaster. The discussions between Putin and Erdogan offer some hope for impartial resolution and justice, but the ultimate consequences of this incident are yet to be seen.

US Secretary of State’s Anticipated Visit to China: A Hope for Stability Amid Tensions

0

As the US Secretary of State, Antony J. Blinken, prepares for a visit to China in the coming weeks, the world watches with keen anticipation. This monumental journey, originally slated for February 2023 but postponed due to complications, could shape the course of US-China relations, which have faced significant strain and tumult in the recent past.

The impending trip by Blinken, his first to China as Secretary of State, is viewed as a crucial step in the complex relationship between the two superpowers. It aligns with the broad objectives of the meeting between President Biden and Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, in Bali, Indonesia, aimed at maintaining open communication channels and fostering candid discussions to avoid conflict.

The US and China, in an effort to reset normal relations, are expected to finalize trip details soon. The visit aims to nurture bilateral ties in a year marked by heightened tension and occasional discord.

For the US, Blinken’s visit underscores the importance of regular, direct dialogue at the senior level to keep this “competitive” relationship from spiraling into conflict.

The visit by the top US diplomat comes at a time when both nations are keen on managing their differences and improving relations. The need for such a dialogue was underscored by the meeting between President Biden and Xi Jinping in November 2022, with Blinken’s trip intended as a follow-up to that interaction.

Blinken’s original trip was scheduled for February, a date that would have marked his first visit to China and the first such visit by a US Secretary of State since October 2018 when Mike Pompeo met with then-foreign minister Wang Yi in Beijing. The postponement of this trip due to the controversial incident of a Chinese spy balloon transiting over the US, only underlines the delicate, complex relationship between the two nations.

In the current geopolitical context, the planned trip by Blinken carries significant importance. It signifies the intent of both nations to maintain dialogue, manage differences, and foster mutual understanding.

US officials have expressed the desire to compete vigorously, standing up for US interests and values, while engaging in candid and constructive exchanges.

A similar sentiment is echoed by the Chinese side. China’s foreign ministry spokesman, Wang Wenbin, welcomed the visit, emphasizing China’s desire for the US to adopt a correct view of China, advocating dialogue over confrontation. Such statements signify the importance of Blinken’s visit in setting the tone for future US-China relations.

While the visit signifies hope for improved US-China relations, it is also reflective of the challenging journey ahead. Key issues such as the status of Taiwan, human rights, economic conflicts, and the situation in Xinjiang will likely be central to discussions. However, the common understanding between both nations that open lines of communication are crucial for conflict avoidance offers a sliver of optimism for the future.

The visit could have profound impacts on the stability and balance of power in the region. The Indo-Pacific region, where both China and the US have significant strategic interests, will particularly be on the lookout for any shifts in diplomatic posturing. The recent rebuke of China by US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin for refusing to hold military talks underscores the sensitivities at play.

From China’s perspective, the visit presents an opportunity to assert its interests and expectations from the US. Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, Wang Wenbin, stated China’s desire for the US to adopt a correct view of China, highlighting the need for dialogue over confrontation.

How China responds to US overtures during this visit will likely influence regional dynamics, including the handling of contentious issues like the status of Taiwan, China’s aggressive posture in the South China Sea, and its human rights record.

Countries in the region will also watch closely for any indications of a change in the US’s commitment to its allies and partners, particularly as it concerns the regional balance of power and the US’s willingness to counter Chinese assertiveness.

Ultimately, Blinken’s upcoming visit to China marks a significant juncture in US-China relations and the broader regional dynamic. The stakes are high, as are the expectations. This trip, therefore, has the potential to either exacerbate existing tensions or pave the way for a renewed dialogue and greater understanding between the two superpowers. As such, the world, particularly the Indo-Pacific region, will be keenly watching the developments arising from this critical diplomatic engagement.

 

 

Nuclear Proliferation: Middle East’s Dilemma

0

Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East presents a multifaceted challenge with far-reaching implications for global security. While certain Middle Eastern countries already possess nuclear capabilities, others are actively pursuing their development. Anticipated in the coming decade is a significant expansion of nuclear power across the region. In 2021, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) became the second nation in the area, following Iran, to initiate a nuclear power reactor. Presently, the UAE is in the process of constructing its fourth reactor. Likewise, Egypt is embarking on a similar path, having recently commenced the construction of a four-unit nuclear reactor utilizing Russian technology. Furthermore, Jordan has also expressed its commitment to projects involving Small Modular Reactors and uranium extraction and mining.

The Middle East is witnessing a notable advancement in its nuclear landscape. However, the most prominent states playing a role in nuclear proliferation in the Middle East are Israel, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.

Iran’s Nuclear Development:

The Iranian nuclear program has a longstanding history, commencing in 1957 with the United States providing Iran with its initial research reactor, which is still operational in Tehran. However, the progress of Iran’s nuclear program was interrupted following the 1979 Iranian revolution.

In 2015, the Iran Nuclear Deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was brokered between Iran and the P5+1 countries (United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany) to address concerns surrounding Iran’s nuclear program. As part of the agreement, Iran consented to restrictions on its nuclear activities in return for the easing of international sanctions. During the Trump administration, the JCPOA faced controversy as President Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement in 2018 due to concerns regarding Iran’s regional activities and ballistic missile program.

In April 2021, negotiations commenced between the United States and Iran, aiming to restore the JCPOA. However, progress has been slow, and both sides have encountered challenges in reaching a mutually agreeable resolution. As obvious from the latest developments, reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal is not currently a primary focus of the Biden administration. White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby stated that the issue is not prioritized due to Iran’s domestic strife and its support for Russia in the Ukraine conflict.

Recent concerns have arisen regarding Iran’s nuclear activities, notably its decision to surpass the uranium enrichment levels permitted under the JCPOA. Additionally, Iran has faced accusations of researching advanced centrifuges, potentially facilitating quicker uranium enrichment. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors have reported that Iran enriched uranium up to 84%, just short of the 90% threshold required for nuclear weapons.

Despite Iran’s claims that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes, skepticism persists within the international community. This skepticism stems from Iran’s history of secrecy and deception surrounding its nuclear activities. While Iran asserts its non-proliferation intentions, the international community remains cautious, given past instances of secrecy and non-compliance.

Israel’s Nuclear Weapon:

Israel’s pursuit of nuclear weapons is primarily motivated by its security considerations. Given its small size and surrounded by rivals, Israel perceives its nuclear capabilities as an essential deterrent against potential threats. Despite possessing nuclear weapons since the 1960s, Israel has consistently adhered to a policy of nuclear opacity, refraining from officially acknowledging the existence of its nuclear program.

Israel’s decision to pursue nuclear weapons was largely influenced by its involvement in the 1967 Six-Day War, during which it successfully defeated the combined forces of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. This conflict exposed Israel’s susceptibility to conventional military attacks, emphasizing the necessity of having a nuclear deterrent. While Israel has not officially acknowledged conducting nuclear weapons tests, it is widely speculated that an atmospheric test took place in collaboration with South Africa in 1979, commonly referred to as the Vela Incident. Accordingly, Israel has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and is estimated to have sufficient nuclear material for around 200 nuclear weapons.

Israel faces a dilemma where the potential development of a nuclear warhead by Iran could diminish its sense of security, making its own nuclear deterrent more necessary. Paradoxically, some argue that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons might be one of the factors fuelling Iran’s nuclear program in the first place.

Some scholars believe that major powers, such as the United States, tacitly accepted the existence of Egyptian and Syrian chemical weapons stockpiles as a means to counterbalance Israel’s oeapons of mass destruction. This concession, albeit limited, aimed to dissuade these countries from pursuing nuclear weapons of their own.

Over the years, successive US presidents, starting from Nixon to Obama, have acknowledged Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons. However, likely, the United States would eventually prefer a Middle East region where all countries are devoid of weapons of mass destruction.

KSA endeavors to become nuclear:

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030 encompasses a comprehensive plan to transform Saudi Arabia’s economy from its heavy reliance on hydrocarbons to a more diverse, sustainable, and productive one. A crucial aspect of this vision involves the development of a civilian nuclear energy program. Since the unveiling of Vision 2030 in 2016, Saudi policy elites have consistently emphasized their unwavering interest in achieving nuclear fuel-cycle independence, aiming to domestically produce low-enriched uranium as nuclear fuel using their resources.

This strategic pursuit aligns with Saudi Arabia’s long-term goal of diversifying its energy sources and reducing dependence on fossil fuels.

Saudi Arabia has expressed its intentions to develop a nuclear program for peaceful purposes, primarily to address its increasing energy demands and reduce reliance on oil as the primary energy source. As one of the world’s leading oil-producing nations, Saudi Arabia heavily depends on oil revenues to fuel its economy. However, with the rising global demand for renewable energy sources, the country is seeking to diversify its energy mix by investing in nuclear power.

While energy diversification remains a key driver, concerns have been raised regarding Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions and the potential for acquiring nuclear weapons. The regional dynamics, especially Iran’s existing nuclear program, contribute to this concern. Saudi Arabia views itself as a regional power and may perceive a nuclear program as a means to balance Iran’s influence in the region. Notably, the Saudi Crown Prince has previously stated that if Iran were to develop nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia would pursue a similar path in response.

Saudi Arabia has outlined plans to develop its nuclear power program, but it would require signing a 123 agreement with the United States to access U.S. nuclear materials and technology. Such an agreement establishes the terms and enables cooperation for sharing U.S. peaceful nuclear energy resources, equipment, and materials with other nations.

According to reports from the New York Times, Saudi Arabia has said that it might consider normalizing relations with Israel if the United States offers security guarantees, assistance in its civilian nuclear program, and lifts restrictions on arms sales to the kingdom. However, the U.S. has rejected providing such guarantees, leading Saudi Arabia to seek closer ties with its historical rival, Iran.

The involvement of China in brokering the KSA-Iran deal is seen by some as a failure of U.S. and Israeli foreign policy in the Middle East.

Preventing the Nuclear Proliferation:

Efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation in the Middle East have achieved notable progress. The Iran nuclear deal of 2015 marked a significant advancement in preventing nuclear proliferation in the region. Although the agreement received widespread acclaim, its fate became uncertain after the United States withdrew from it in 2018. Another encouraging development has been the proposal to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Discussions surrounding the creation of such a zone have been ongoing since the 1970s. In 1995, a United Nations resolution was passed, calling for its establishment.

During the 10th review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Arab states restated their longstanding position in favor of establishing weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-a free zone in the Middle East. However, given the growing interest in nuclear technology in the region and the ambiguity surrounding nuclear activities in Iran and Israel, concerns about potential proliferation have been raised. To address these concerns, it is crucial to pursue a robust and inclusive WMD-free zone.

While bringing Israel into such a zone presents significant challenges, the other countries in the region and concerned parties like the United States, Russia, and China need to initiate discussions with Israel on nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Although finding a resolution may be complex, starting the dialogue is a crucial step in addressing the concerns and laying the groundwork for future progress.

Conclusion:

The pursuit of nuclear weapons by these major states has triggered an arms race and poses a significant threat to regional stability. The proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East is a pressing concern for the international community. The United States and China have both expressed their commitment to preventing further nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.

The U.S. has taken a leading role in negotiating a deal with Iran, aiming to limit its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. However, progress has been slow and challenging.

With China’s success in brokering a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, some analysts believe that China can also play a constructive role in reviving the Iran Nuclear deal, an area where the U.S. has faced difficulties thus far.

Efforts to prevent further nuclear proliferation in the Middle East require sustained diplomatic engagement, cooperation among international actors, and a commitment to finding peaceful resolutions. It is crucial to continue dialogue, negotiations, and efforts to revive or establish effective agreements that can mitigate the risks and promote stability in the region.

China’s Ambitions in Southeast Asia: Challenges in a Changing Global Order

0

A global order characterized by multiplexity entails a diverse array of state and non-state actors actively influencing the norms of governance according to their distinct cultural perspectives. In stark contrast, a hegemonic world order is marked by the dominance of a single power that propagates a uniform narrative.

China’s ambitious pursuit of hegemony in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly Southeast Asia, faces a formidable hurdle due to its unsophisticated and unsubtle approach to international relations.

Beijing’s diplomatic, economic, and military initiatives over the past ten years and beyond have undeniably increased China’s influence throughout Asia. Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, China’s relations with Russia, as well as those with developing nations of Central Asia, India, Southeast Asia, South Korea, and Japan, have reached an all-time high. This expansion of Beijing’s influence and Asia’s response to Chinese initiatives are inescapable in the long run. Undoubtedly, China is the dominant nation in continental Asia, and it has a thriving economy that, while competing with those of other Asian nations, also drives overall economic growth.

However, to ostensibly stop China from becoming a regional hegemon, the United States and its Asian allies seek to maintain a delicate balance of power in the Indo-Pacific. They worry that Beijing will gradually persuade its neighbors to turn away from the United States, accept Chinese preeminence, and abide by Beijing’s preferences in key foreign policy decisions. Thus, a dominant power wielding its power in this way makes itself less vulnerable to blockades and other forms of coercion while also gaining the respect of weaker states within its sphere of influence, even in the absence of direct rule. The lack of local threats makes it easier for the regional hegemon, should the need or desire arise, to project power into other global domains.

Despite being a key component of hegemonic ordering, China’s increased economic and financial power in South Asia has not yet resulted in the creation of a regional structure that is in line with its own security, economic and ideological interests.

In particular, India has surpassed China in both size and proportion of young people due to its rapidly growing economy and population. Significant increases in defense spending show that many of China’s neighboring countries are actively engaged in vigorous balance efforts. In addition to the United States, other nations, such as Australia, India, and Japan, are working together. These countries will probably respond with even more resolute measures as their worries about Chinese hegemony grow.

Despite that, South Asia has historically rarely been a focus of American efforts to establish global hegemony. However, under Xi’s leadership, China has increasingly manipulated its role as a regional benefactor, showing a tendency to use force and take sides, particularly in relation to India’s territorial disputes with its neighboring states. The goal of China’s engagement policy is to maintain its strategic advantage over maritime communication routes. This strategy has forced the region into a precarious balance in which economic cooperation and strategic implications must be carefully navigated. The region has shown assertiveness on a few issues and has chosen to co-opt each other’s interests despite China’s materially inferior capabilities.

Due to its lack of cultural legitimacy as a superpower and its preference for extensive economic activism, China’s pretended win-win scenario for Asia as a whole has been called into question. As they interact with the prevailing norms at various levels of state and society, as well as state and non-state actors, the sectors that support China’s aspirations for hegemonic dominance are constantly contested, opposed, renegotiated, and reproduced.

China’s rise has unquestionably been imperative to maintain global economic growth, with its market playing an important role.

In a world where our omnipotence in all fields is no longer absolute, Americans will face difficult adaptation challenges. We can adapt to change, though, because we have a flexible and resilient nature. Both the United States and China will continue to pursue their respective national interests as they see fit. In summary, since multiple countries, not just the US or China will participate in power sharing, the future world will likely be more complex than the past and will be characterized by increased “democratization.” There will be numerous opportunities for nations with reliable ties to both Beijing and Washington to control their level of involvement in international affairs. There shall be no dominant force and there shall be no such thing as a “G-2”.

South-South Cooperation: Achieving Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development

0

As we enter the final and most challenging decade to achieve the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, South-South Cooperation (SSC) has gained enhanced mandate and momentum.

The United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres characterized SSC’s role in today’s development agenda as offering a “unique pathway” that accelerates the global efforts towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

South-South Cooperation (SSC) is both an old concept and a new idea, an old analysis, and a new policy directive. In recent years, South-South Cooperation (SSC) has witnessed a remarkable resurgence in terms of its importance to the conduct of international affairs. Observers ranging from academics to policymakers and diplomats to media and global investment firms have noted the growth of SSC within governance initiatives, diplomacy, and trade. SSC is not particularly new as the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), established in 1961, sought to bolster such South-South linkages as a means of countering colonialism and the push and pull of super-power politics during the Cold War. Although the notion has existed for decades, it has grown in importance and function, especially since the early 2000s. SSC has transformed global economic structures, forcing the international community to redefine traditionally understood words, like “region” and “development.” It has manufactured new alliances, new trading partners, and new methods for economic development, especially for emerging countries.

Developing countries experienced rapid economic growth in the years immediately before the 2008 financial crisis. While this was a continuation of a long and stable trend in East and South Asia, it was a welcome new trajectory for countries in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa, where economic activity had stagnated for nearly a quarter of a century. The rapid growth was accompanied by rising investment levels and increasing integration with the world economy, as well as increased interaction among developing countries.

In recent decades the global South has recorded its highest economic growth rates in history, lifting a large number of people out of poverty.

Many developing countries have accumulated and are eager to share their knowledge and resources for development with other countries. Innovative forms of knowledge exchange, technology transfer, emergency response, and recovery of livelihoods led by the South have demonstrated the capacity of SSC in transforming economies and positively affect the lives of the people. South-South cooperation can thus be described as a manifestation of solidarity among peoples and countries of the South, also known as the Global South, which contributes to their national well-being, their national and collective self-reliance, and the attainment of internationally agreed development goals. Over the decades the Global South has made increasingly significant contributions to global development.

According to statistics, the countries of the South contributed more than half of the world’s growth in recent years; intra-south trade is also higher than ever before, accounting for more than a quarter of all world trade; the outflows of foreign direct investment from the South represent a third of the global flows. The number, nature, and scope of such partnerships have expanded greatly, particularly in Africa, South America, and parts of Asia and the Middle East, and many have gone beyond regional boundaries and traditional partners. The acceleration of globalization and the “rise of the South” has, therefore, opened up opportunities for experimentation on the design and implementation of development policies across the developing world.

2022 was a difficult year that derailed the world’s efforts to achieve SDGs by 2030 in many different ways. According to UN reports, the world witnessed the highest number of violent conflicts since 1945, with more than 103 million people forcibly displaced worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic continued to disrupt economies, education, and health systems, and the global climate catastrophe spiraled further out of control, with heat waves, droughts, floods, and other disasters affecting billions. Additionally, economic inequalities grew alarmingly, with 75 million to 95 million more people living in extreme poverty in 2022 compared with pre-pandemic levels. In order to rise to the challenge of these troubling and growing negative trends and overlapping challenges, enhanced South-South Cooperation is of paramount importance.

The ambitious and transformational 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development cannot be achieved without the ideas, energy, and tremendous ingenuity of the countries of the Global South.

It is, therefore, important to figure out how South-South cooperation can be turned into an invaluable opportunity to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Being a developing country and part of the Global South, China has since the early 1950s leveraged its strong history of domestic achievement to support other ‘developing’ countries through its South-South cooperation and in the 70 years since, has grown into a preeminent provider of financing for global development. As part of the philosophy of a “new era of shared future for mankind”, China also makes strong links to the UN SDGs and uses the 2030 Agenda to frame its development efforts. China is increasing its emphasis on governance, climate change, health, humanitarian assistance, agriculture and food security, infrastructure, and education and training and these areas are central elements of China’s development effort. Projects in these sectors tend to follow “tried-and-true” models that can be implemented in different contexts, as required.

China supports partner countries with their economic development through agriculture and infrastructure projects, and with their socio-cultural development through education and training programs, some of which are used as a mechanism through which China can transfer knowledge from its own experience with urbanization, economic growth, and poverty alleviation to partner countries. In the context of Climate change response, China has indicated its support for low-income countries trying to mitigate the effects of climate change, the establishment of a South-South Climate Cooperation Fund (SSCCF), initiatives to support low-and middle-income countries making the transition toward renewable energy, and environmental management and sustainable development training programs. Given China’s recent commitments to climate, it seems likely that climate finance will feature more prominently in the years ahead.

While China is far ahead of Pakistan in attaining the SDGs, Pakistan is struggling to meet the SDGs requiring targeted action and financial assistance to deliver on its SDG commitments. It is therefore, important for Pakistan to not only carefully study China’s strategy for socio-economic development, poverty alleviation, and countering the negative impact of climate change but also draw lessons for improving its sustainable development markers and tap China’s Global Funding Schemes, Bilateral Agreements, and Private Sector for achieving SDGs and to mitigate the effects of climate change on Pakistan. In the context of financing for the UN Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030, it is relevant to state that there are numerous streams of Chinese financing available with which Pakistan could align its SDG agenda and propose projects to secure development financing.

The China–Pakistan development partnership under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is an example of SSC.

CPEC is a multidimensional project under the umbrella of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and is the leading development process in Pakistan for sustainable development. The development of infrastructure will be helpful in socio-economic development, poverty alleviation, and improving the living standard of people. Further, it will also be helpful in the reduction of the development gap between different regions. The goal of sustainable development can be achieved only through a multidimensional development project.

Infrastructure development under the CPEC is also important and beneficial for the sustainable development of Pakistan and will contribute to the socio-economic paradigm of Pakistan by helping in the achievement of sustainable development goals. China has supported Pakistan in addressing its energy and infrastructure gaps and is setting the stage for rapid industrialization. China is further assisting Pakistan by encouraging its private sector to take benefit from the Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in Pakistan by setting up industries and relocating excess industrial capacity which will have a direct impact on the socio-economic development of Pakistan and assist in the meeting the Sustainable Development Goals in different ways.

Under the CPEC, the transformation of human capital knowledge and technology will play a vital role in the development of Pakistan. Physical capital is expected to improve the urban sector through industrialization, which will further stabilize the economy of Pakistan. Infrastructure-led development is the foundation of socio-economic development. Natural resources and social infrastructure are planned to be effectively used under the CPEC. Pakistan has introduced many institutional reforms in the industrial sector to improve domestic economic growth. Additionally, the CPEC has become a source of FDI, which will play a catalyst role in the stabilization of the shaking economy of Pakistan.

In view of the strong link between external financing and its potential to contribute to socio-economic development, there are significant prospects associated with Chinese SSC in the form of CPEC in Pakistan. Substantial investments in socio-economic development have the potential to promote three SDGs, including Goals 7, 8, and 9. These three SDGs ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all (Goal 7), promote sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all (Goal 8), and focus on building resilient infrastructure, promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and fostering innovation (Goal 9) (UNGA, 2015, p. 14). Thus, the execution of CPEC is expected to directly contribute to attaining these three SDGs.

Alongside contributing towards promoting the above SDGs directly, CPEC-related investments are likely to help in achieving various SDGs indirectly. For example, Goal 1 states to “end poverty in all its forms everywhere” (UNGA, 2015, p. 14). CPEC projects have created more than 75,000 direct jobs for Pakistanis and the government estimates that it would generate two million more jobs in the long run. This means if two million people secure employment, two million families will have a better means of livelihood and, subsequently, will achieve food security (Goal 2) as well as will have access to better health services (Goal 3), quality education (Goal 4), and clean water and sanitation (Goal 6). In other words, the effective execution of CPEC has enormous potential to contribute towards achieving a number of SDGs in Pakistan.

Pakistan has always called for further intensification of cooperation among developing counties to complement North-South cooperation, calling it critical as the world contends with interlinked crises of finance, food, and climate change.

South-South cooperation is a form of solidarity among peoples and nations in the South that helps to their national well-being, national and collective self-sufficiency, and achievement of globally accepted development goals, such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

However, South-South cooperation is not a substitute for, but rather a complement to, North-South cooperation, and the developed countries must fulfill their commitments to North-South cooperation. It is important that the South-South partners continue to promote collaboration based on equal footing, mutual benefits, and win-win outcomes.

Erdoğan’s Victory and Future Course for Türkiye

0

The cards have been dealt and the dust has settled. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan not only won the presidential election but also swept the parliamentary elections with his AKP party in alliance with MHP. This is in stark contrast to what was being claimed by the Western observers that there will be a change of guard in Türkiye. The same observers are left rethinking their assumptions as President Erdoğan proved once again that the keys to the presidential palace in Ankara will stay with him till 2028. Thus, the piece will delve into the reasons highlighting Erdoğan’s victory and what is next for Türkiye.

There was mass hysteria that President Erdoğan will lose this election; that this will be the last of him.

It was claimed that the earthquake which devastated Türkiye coupled with a tanking economy, a sinking lira and President Erdoğan s politics of patronage will be the Achilles heel for his two-decade-long rule. All that ailed Türkiye under Erdoğan was to be replaced by the united opposition known as the Table of Six, headed by Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. With Kilicdarouglu’s nationalist rhetoric and anti-immigration stance, it was prophesized that an opposition win would usher in a new era of democratic politics with Türkiye returning to a parliamentary form of governance.

USA and Europe certainly welcomed such a scenario where Türkiye’s leadership will finally change hands. Nothing of the sort happened and now Erdoğan is dubbed as the “Electoral Autocrat”

The burning question that follows is how did this come to pass? A multitude of causes can be identified for Erdoğan’s victory which should be viewed as a whole and not in isolation. First, the competition or the opposition was weak from the start. The opposition took a long time putting forth a united front against the behemoth that is Erdoğan and his party the AKP. The opposition was only united in their aim to dislodge Erdoğan, other than that the table of six as the opposition came to be known was fractured. Second, the opposition’s candidate Kılıçdaroğlu was a weak contender against President Erdoğan. Where President Erdoğan and his party the AKP have been in power for two decades and won all the elections, Kılıçdaroğlu and his party CHP did not win any signification electoral victory since that time. However, they did manage to get a decent representation in the parliament. The only exception was when CHP won the mayorship of Istanbul and Ankara in the local elections of 2019. As a corollary, the opposition did not have much progress to offer to the masses except promises and commitments in the 2023 elections. President Erdoğan on the other hand has transformed Türkiye into a regional power, expanding its economy and leading a proactive foreign policy since 2003. Thus, when it came to the candidates for the presidency, the opposition’s bet on a candidate with no record of victory was a non-starter. Last and most significant, it must be noted that people voted for Erdoğan. Not the presidential candidate, not the head of AKP, but Erdoğan as their leader. President Erdoğan’s appeal resonates with the masses on an ideological level. This link between the masses and the candidate was found wanting in the case of Kılıçdaroğlu and the opposition at large. Thus, Erdoğan gets to retain the presidency till 2028.

Now that the die has been cast, what lies in store for Türkiye in general and President Erdoğan in particular? It needs to be stated that President Erdoğan is now the longest-serving president of Türkiye, outshining Türkiye’s founder Kemal Ataturk who ruled as president for 18 years.

It will be under President Erdoğan’s rule that the republic will complete its 100 years since its inception further giving hype to annulling the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923.

These facts actually strengthen Erdoğan’s hand in domestic politics. Thus, if his balcony speech can be a guiding post for what lies ahead then it can be argued that President Erdoğan has set his eyes on the local elections 2024. Victory in the local elections is significant because President Erdoğan wants to retake two important cities-Istanbul and Ankara-the mayor ship of which his party lost to AKP. Only then will his control over Türkiye’s political landscape will give the semblance of control.

The second short-term challenge will be to manage the economy that is spiraling out of control. The lira has lost its value and inflation is soaring eating away at people’s purchasing power. News is circulating that President Erdoğan is looking to hire Mehmet Simsek, an economic expert to lead the economy. He carries vast experience and enjoys a good reputation in financial circles. His inclusion in the economic team will bring some confidence in Türkiye’s economy.

The third long-term challenge for Erdoğan will be to balance Türkiye’s foreign policy with the West. The EU has already prepared for “More of the Same” as Erdoğan is not expected to change course in his interactions with the EU. However, given the war in Ukraine, the EU and the USA are pushing for Türkiye’s nod for Sweden’s membership in NATO. So far Erdoğan has not budged from his earlier stance of resisting Sweden’s entry into NATO. And with five more years in power, it remains to be seen. Nevertheless, it will be a bone of contention between Türkiye and the West.

It was refreshing to see that Türkiye underwent an election exercise with a high voter turnout. And that opposition did their best to oust President Erdoğan.

However, it did not come to pass as Erdoğan has been at the helm of affairs for the past two decades and shares an ideological affinity with the masses. But these realities do not change the challenges facing Türkiye, that is upcoming local elections of 2024, an ailing economy, and an anti-Erdoğan West.

Role of Nuclear Technology in the Agriculture Sector of Pakistan

0

Pakistan has emerged as a leading example of a country that effectively harnesses peaceful nuclear technology to drive advancements in its agriculture sector. Through the utilization of nuclear techniques, Pakistan has achieved remarkable progress in increasing crop yields, improving soil and water management, enhancing food security, and addressing agricultural challenges. In order to use nuclear technologies to address challenges of human security, the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) created four agro and biotechnology institutes.

PAEC conducts nuclear research and development in the fields of agriculture, plant breeding, soil science, plant protection, plant physiology, and animal sciences. It is impressive what PAEC has accomplished with nuclear agriculture.

The four institutions—Nuclear Institute for Agriculture (NIA), established in Tandojam, Sindh, in 1962; Nuclear Institute for Agriculture & Biology (NIAB), established in 1972; National Institute of Biotechnology & Genetic Engineering (NIBGE), established in Faisalabad, Punjab, in 1994; and Nuclear Institute for Food & Agriculture (NIFA), established in Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, in 1982—work in areas such as crop improvement, insect pest control, Numerous kinds of wheat, cotton, rice, mung bean, chickpea, lentil, sugarcane, castor bean, kinnow, sesame, tomato, and brassica have been created as a result of their study. These types have more nutritional content, are heat tolerant, resistant to insects and diseases, and yield more.

The major research and development institute of PAEC is PINSTECH, which ensures balanced research in peaceful uses of nuclear technology for the country’s socio-economic development.

NIAB-78, a cotton variety developed by PAEC scientists, generated an additional income of Rs. 90 billion for Pakistan from its cultivation began in 1983 until the early 2000s. NIAB-78 revolutionized cotton production in Pakistan, covering almost 80 percent of cotton-cultivated areas in Punjab and Sindh. The increase in cotton production due to mutant varieties created by NIAB has added $6 billion to Pakistan’s national economy. Cotton and textile products make up 60 percent of Pakistan’s overall exports. By increasing cotton yield and quality, Pakistan can generate much-needed revenue and support the textile sector. Pakistani experts have also created 125 new crop varieties using nuclear technology, which has helped the nation’s funds grow by $7.4 billion. Pakistan is the fifth-largest cotton producer in the world, and cotton exports are extremely dependent on cotton production.

Through mutation breeding techniques, the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recently developed new cotton varieties that are more climate resilient and better adapted to the dangerous effects of climate change in collaboration with local partners. In fact, these new varieties currently account for 40% of Pakistan’s total cotton production. Due to this, the cotton yield increased in 2021–2022 from 7064 thousand bales to 8329 thousand bales of cotton, despite a decrease in the amount of cultivated land used for cotton production. This shows that nuclear technology can have a significant impact on the agriculture sector if given the necessary attention and financial support.

Pakistan has effectively employed nuclear techniques to control and manage pests, including the use of radiation technology to sterilize insects. The Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) involves the release of sterilized male insects, which mate with wild females but do not produce viable offspring. This method has been successfully implemented to combat pests like fruit flies and moths, reducing their populations and minimizing crop losses without the need for chemical pesticides.

Pakistan has utilized nuclear techniques to improve soil and water management practices. Isotopic and nuclear-based hydrology techniques have been employed to assess water availability, understand groundwater dynamics, and optimize irrigation practices.

These techniques involve the use of isotopes to trace the movement and availability of water in different soil layers, facilitating informed decision-making regarding water allocation, conservation, and efficient irrigation methods. By understanding water availability and optimizing irrigation practices, Pakistan has effectively combated water scarcity issues, improved water-use efficiency, and increased crop production.

Pakistan’s effective utilization of peaceful nuclear technology has transformed its agriculture sector, bolstering crop productivity, soil and water management, pest control, and food safety. Through continued investment in research, collaboration, and knowledge transfer, Pakistan is poised to further enhance its agricultural development and contribute to global food security objectives.

Situationer : Counter-Terrorism Strategy: Pakistan, China, and Iran -Trilateral Manoeuvre

0

The first meeting of the Pakistan-China-Iran Trilateral Consultation on counter-terrorism and security was held in Beijing, marking an important milestone in the cooperation between these three nations. The meeting aimed to address various issues related to regional anti-terrorism efforts and cooperation against cross-border terrorists. Senior diplomats from Pakistan, China, and Iran actively participated in the meeting, and significant decisions were made to enhance collaboration in the field of counter-terrorism.

Meeting Details

The meeting took place on 7th June 2023 in Beijing, China, and brought together high-ranking officials from the three countries. Mr. Abdul Hameed, the Director General of Counter Terrorism at Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, led the Pakistani delegation. Representing China was Mr. Bai Tian, the Director General of the Department of External Security Affairs at the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Iranian delegation was headed by Mr. Seyed Rasoul Mosavi, the Assistant to the Iranian Foreign Minister and Director General of South Asia at the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Discussions and Decisions

During the meeting, the delegations engaged in detailed discussions on the regional security situation, with a particular focus on the threat of terrorism faced by the region. The discussions emphasized the need for collective efforts to combat terrorism effectively. Based on the outcomes of these consultations, the three nations decided to institutionalize the Trilateral Consultations on counter-terrorism and security. While further details regarding the institutionalization are yet to be worked out, this decision underscores the commitment of Pakistan, China, and Iran to strengthening their cooperation in countering terrorism.

Bilateral Consultations

In addition to the trilateral meeting, China also held separate bilateral consultations on anti-terrorism with both Pakistan and Iran. These consultations reflect the significance of individual relationships between China and each country in combating terrorism. The separate discussions further enhanced mutual understanding and coordination among the participating nations.

Summary of the Discussions

The discussions during the meeting revolved around the regional security situation and the significant threat posed by terrorism. The delegations acknowledged the need for close collaboration to effectively tackle this menace. They emphasized the importance of sharing intelligence, coordinating operations, and promoting information exchange to enhance counter-terrorism efforts.

The Trilateral Consultation serves as a platform for the three countries to develop joint strategies and action plans to address the evolving challenges of terrorism in the region. By institutionalizing these consultations, Pakistan, China, and Iran aim to establish a framework for regular dialogues and cooperation in countering terrorism and ensuring regional security.

Conclusion

The first meeting of the Pakistan-China-Iran Trilateral Consultation on counter-terrorism and security in Beijing signifies a significant step towards fostering closer cooperation among the three nations. The meeting laid the foundation.

 

Nuclear Worries Return: Unveiling the New Nuclear Order and Global Insecurity

0

Nuclear war seemed to be a problem of the past before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nuclear weapons never went away, but with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, nuclear worries are making a comeback.

The possibility of nuclear conflict appears to be greater than it has ever been in recent years as great-power competition intensifies.

The emergence of non-nuclear long-range precision strike capabilities (including hypersonic weapons), as well as renewed interest in exotic nuclear delivery methods, and more obvious techniques of counter-space, anti-submarine, and cyber warfare, are all taking place in a real-time and permeable nuclear information space. Indeed, these developments may change the dynamics of regional nuclear deterrence. Relations between the major nuclear powers have become tense, the spread of nuclear weapons to new states has led to unsettling regional nuclear orders, and technological advancements are posing new threats and may even introduce new instabilities. There is a new nuclear order in place that combines long-standing worries with unique new threats. When major nations fear that their competitors may threaten their hold on power, they may use nuclear weapons to assert their own dominance, escalating the risk of a nuclear exchange.

Following the Russia-Ukraine war, The US decided not to direct military support for Ukraine following Russia’s second incursion earlier this year because of worry that sending soldiers or establishing a no-fly zone may trigger a nuclear World War III. The US and European governments’ support for Ukraine make Russian President Vladimir Putin aggressive and threatened to use nuclear weapons in case of support for Ukraine. The AUKUS submarine which has signed between the UK, the US, and Australia in 2023 also has implications for global arms control and non-proliferation efforts.

The use of nuclear power in submarines raises concerns about the potential for nuclear accidents and it has been criticized by some as a step away from efforts to reduce the world’s reliance on nuclear weapons.

April 2023, South Korean Presidents Yoon Suk-Yeol and Joe Biden of the United States have agreed to increase deterrence against North Korea, including by transferring nuclear-armed US submarines to South Korea. The New START Treaty, the final remaining nuclear arms control pact between the United States and Russia, was announced by Vladimir Putin to be suspended on February 21, 2023. Additionally, it raises concerns about the future of weapons control and raises the possibility of an accelerated nuclear arms race between key
powers.

Russian concerns are not the only ones, which further complicate matters. For instance, China is rapidly increasing its arsenal, this may lead to a nuclear exchange over Taiwan. The unpredictable North Korea is still conducting ballistic missile tests, and Iran is making progress toward obtaining nuclear weapons. The United States is still developing its nuclear capabilities while also providing nuclear security to at least 30 other nations. The risk comes from the fact that having more nuclear weapons in more hands raises the concern that at least one of these devastating weapons will be used. There can be no assumption of deterrence or responsible custody.

Possession of nuclear weapons can act as a kind of shield that could increase the prevalence of non-nuclear aggression.

It is believed that the nuclear crisis was an artifact of the Cold War. The world is edging closer to a time when nuclear weapons may define it even more clearly. It is a fallacy to believe that having more nuclear weapons makes you safer. More nuclear weapons make you less safe at a certain point. The goal is to keep both sides’ arsenals at a minimal deterrence level such that, even in the worst-case scenario, the human race and the world
civilization is not in danger.