Support Us

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

Writers Pool
About Us

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Home Blog Page 139

G20 Summit: Indian Trap of Stability in Kashmir

By
Sara Nazir
-
1

India has already begun setting the tone for its use of the G20 platform to promote its geopolitical and geoeconomic goals, which are primarily related to South Asian regional politics. To maintain regional politics in its favor, India’s tense interactions with Pakistan have launched several political and diplomatic maneuvers. Hosting the international community in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) can give them the chance for the world to witness the true suffering of the Kashmiri people. As the Indian government is working hard to transform the situation in Kashmir in the aftermath of the G20 summit, the Modi administration would undoubtedly not permit the visiting officials from other capitals to openly probe or evaluate the situation in the area. Almost two-thirds of the world’s population, representing all continents, is represented by the G20, which also includes significant national and regional actors for a number of the world’s current hotspots.

The G20, often known as the Group of Twenty, is an international organization made up of 19 states that account for two-thirds of the world’s population, 75% of worldwide commerce, and 85% of global GDP.

Under Narendra Modi’s rule, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) regime in India has implemented several ground-breaking policies to alter New Delhi’s role in international politics. Modi’s administration has adopted a variety of political measures against the countries that border India on a geographical basis, with Pakistan being the exception, to bring Indian internal politics into line with shifting trends in global politics. The main motivation for Modi’s choice to adopt increasingly aggressive and less conciliatory steps against Pakistan was the long history of tense interactions with New Delhi and Islamabad.

The core tenet of New Delhi’s South Asian strategy is to maintain India’s dominance in the region and its status as a major player on the global stage.

Its aggressive behavior in its territory is the outcome of combining both agendas. The Kashmir problem cannot be disregarded in discussions about India’s aggressive behavior within its own territory. The Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India has gone through several phases, reflecting the shifting characteristics of South Asian regional politics. Because of the two nuclear-armed adversaries’ rigid positions, an endless arms race has developed from India’s aggressive behavior and Pakistan’s defensive strategies.

The world should be reminded that Jammu and Kashmir is an internationally acknowledged “disputed” region between Pakistan and India. Furthermore, India’s intention to host the G20 summit in the disputed valley would be a clear violation of the relevant UNSC Resolutions, international treaties, and bilateral agreements. A cruel strategy to alter the demographics of IIOJK involves the killing and eviction of Kashmiris from their homes. Under international law, Modi’s conduct in Kashmir might be characterized as genocide or a war committed against humanity. Moreover, Pakistan firmly demands the world community force India to stop its flagrant and persistent impunity for human rights violations in IIOJ&K, retract its unlawful and unilateral measures from August 2019, and release all political detainees, including the real Kashmiri leaders. The move by the Indian government has been criticized by a representative for China’s foreign ministry, Zhao Lijian, who stated that “It is a legacy matter between India and Pakistan.” It must be properly resolved in compliance with the pertinent bilateral and UN resolutions. We must also resolve our differences through dialogue and consultation to safeguard peace and stability.

This Indian publicity attempt to host the G20 in Jammu and Kashmir is on display. In terms of internet freedom, the Modi administration placed last. Global internet outages are detailed in the study for 2022, with India’s largest criminal accounting for 58% of disruptions in IIOJK. How can the world community disregard such government actions and let the G20 be held in Kashmir, a territory that is not legally part of India? In response to India’s crimes of human rights in IIOJK, the world must denounce the action and apply penalties for it. To end the genocidal treatment of Kashmiris, the UN must intervene decisively. The G20 summit will be held in Kashmir in 2023 as part of the Modi administration’s effort to portray Jammu and Kashmir as normal areas. However, this policy is an attempt by India to hide the territory’s real nature. How the Indian government claims to be bringing the situation in the valley back to normal while impeding the locals’ basic rights. The Modi administration uses this as their sole tactic to divert attention away from violations of human rights and hold the G20 meeting in the valley.

In reality, the goal of holding the G20 summit there is directly related to the Modi administration’s attempt to undermine Pakistan’s posture towards the Kashmir conflict by projecting a sense of normalcy in the occupied parts of Kashmir.

The nations that engage in frequent economic exchanges with New Delhi bear a higher share of responsibility since those nations’ business relations with India might be useful in resolving the Kashmir problem.

The Indian government’s strategy is to make money off of its citizens and resources. The administration is solely interested in luring foreign investors who will promote their interests, not that of the local population. If the G20 summit is held in Jammu and Kashmir, it would only serve to advance the goal of the Indian administration rather than fostering regional stability. Moreover, it would suggest that Pakistan’s claims regarding IIOJ&K are no longer true. New Delhi’s aggressively rigid stance on the Kashmir conflict is primarily motivated by Islamabad’s necessity of having adequate counterbalancing potential over Indian regional hegemonic plans. The only option for the two nuclear neighbors is to resolve the Kashmir conflict peacefully, which might contribute to the spreading of peace and stability in the nuclearized region.

The Geopolitical Struggle for Dominance: An Analysis of the Saudi-Iranian Rivalry

By
Nadir Ali
-
0

The Saudi-Iranian rivalry is often narrowly portrayed from the perspective of sectarian conflict. Essentially, this rivalry between the Iranian theocracy and the Saudi monarchy is a geopolitical struggle for religious legitimacy, military, and economic supremacy, and imperial aspiration. This geopolitical struggle for dominance in the region predominantly emerged after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, also known as the Islamic Revolution. Moreover, in contemporary times, this enmity is fueled by proxies, Shia-Sunni ethnicity, the acquisition of advanced military technology, and predominantly by foreign encouragement. External powers like the USA, Russia, and Israel may also be successful in achieving political and military ambitions, especially in terms of the private military-industrial complex resulting from the dysfunctional relationship between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The regional hegemonic geopolitical, military, and economic objectives of both rival and external powers create regional instability by indulging both states in the arms race.

Furthermore, the elements of proxies sponsored by both states create a humanitarian crisis and threaten the peace and stability of the Middle East. From the theoretical perspective, neorealism, one of the shots of realism, which is a landmark theory of International Relations (IR), provides a concise, comprehensive, and better lens for the understanding of steps taken by both rivals.

After the revolution, under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran adopted a policy of nationalism and cut off diplomatic relations with the Western States. Whereas, Saudi Arabia has a rapidly expanding strategic alliance with the Western states, especially the USA. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia gets multidimensional benefits from the West. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Iran, because of its revolutionary, discriminatory, and incompetent nationalist policies, faced criticism and economic restraint from the West.

Moreover, the direct or indirect involvement of both states for geopolitical objectives, in the different conflicts like Yemen and Syrian wars and proxies in the region and outside the region intensified the relations between the two rivals. Recently, Iran’s ambition to become a nuclear power in the region and the rigorous policies of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, known as MBS, towards Iran, may prove the leading factors in the perpetual rivalry. When discussing the roots of the Saudi-Iran rivalry, it is also impossible to ignore the fact that both states have provided state support for militant groups operating in the region.

Ambitious and Perspectives of Iran

Iran has an extensive natural resource base, a crucial geostrategic location, a rich cultural heritage, and a long history of Persian civilization. Due to its unique strategic location, and religious and cultural influence in the region and throughout Central Asia and the eastern Mediterranean, Iran itself is considered the regional dominant power. In addition to this, some pro-Iranian scholars and journalists argued that Iran has superiority in the Persian Gulf, but the presence of the US has threatened Iran’s hegemonic aspirations and created obstacles for Iran to achieve its regional geopolitical objectives. Moreover, it is also claimed that alliances like the Islamic Military Alliance and a coalition like the GCC formulate to sabotage the Iranian political and economic structure.

Iran also considered Israel one of the obstacles to achieving the regional geopolitical objectives.

To eliminate the post-existential threats from hostile regional powers, Iran used asymmetrical tactics by using Islamist militant groups like Hezbollah, which is considered an integral part of the doctrine of Iranian regional engagement.

Iran employs proxies for deterrence and to avoid direct conflict with the major powers. Furthermore, the Iranian leadership justifies its nuclear program.

Saudi’s Ambitious Perspectives

Saudi Arabia was deeply agitated about Iranian geopolitical ambitions after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The Saudi monarch argued that they were betrothed to take steps to maintain the status quo counter to the expansionist regime of Shia theocracy and the militaristic and revolutionary ideology of Iran. Simultaneously, the Saudis themselves were considered the custodians of Islam, so they argued that they maintained the regional geopolitical order while Iran adopted a revolutionary ideology to disturb the regional order. Furthermore, it is clear from history that Saudi Arabia criticizes Iranian religious practices using the Wahhabi doctrine. The Saudi monarch considered Iran an existential threat to Saudi Arabia’s geopolitical ambitions.

Saudi monarch claim that the presence of Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, where 40% of world trade passes through, can create security and instability for the region and the entire world.

Is Rapprochement Possible?

MBS recently made it clear in a statement that the region would benefit more from good relations between these bitter rivals. He also emphasizes the need for mutual cooperation and de-escalation for the stability and prosperity of the Middle East. Whereas, the Iranian leadership appreciated the MBS initiative for de-escalation.

Contrarily, the two countries were previously opposing any initiative for negotiation; even Saudi Arabia labeled Iran a “revisionist nation.” But there the question has been raised “Is rapprochement possible or not?” Yes, a rapprochement is probable at any time. It has been observed that the worst enemies in history have fraternal relations today. As “it’s never too late,” the patterns of enmity can be erased from the base. Effective and trustworthy diplomatic channels are both desperately needed right now.

By encouraging bilateral and regional economic arrangements, both states can maintain good relations.

Conclusion

From history, it is evident that every conflict has been resolved through negotiation, not by violent means. For the sake of stability and regional development, it is imperative to negotiate a settlement to the political conflicts that have existed since the beginning of time. Since the region has a unique geostrategic location and rich natural resources, including oil, which contribute effectively to the world economic system. In a nutshell, without the stability of the Middle East, it is quite difficult to say that peace and stability would be possible in neighboring countries as well as across the entire globe.

The Road to Recovery: CPEC and Pakistan’s Economic Future

By
Saher Liaqat
-
0

In its seventy-fifth year, Pakistan’s economy is again mired in catastrophe, despite numerous episodes of economic crisis throughout its history. The country’s current economic situation is the consequence of the relentless issues in its economy’s structure, such as a flaring current account deficit and spiraling inflation owing to political turmoil in the country. Moreover, the appalling flash floods of 2022, an upshot of the drastic climate change, have also been proven to be a great blow to the country’s already crippled economy, inflicting a loss of billions of dollars.

At present, while Pakistan is confronted with abysmal economic challenges, there is a great need to diversify the country’s economy to put it back on track. In this regard, China Pakistan Economic Corridor offers Pakistan a great opportunity to strengthen its financial, geo-economic, and geostrategic standing and overcome this economic mayhem.

Pakistan’s vital geostrategic location_ a gateway to South Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Europe, gives a major benefit to it, which has been regarded as a focal point for regional connectivity by both Islamabad and Beijing.

Since early 2016, Pakistan has been projecting the CPEC, worth US$46 billion, as the pivot of regional connectivity for its economic progress. The Pakistani leadership of PML-N has been quite optimistic about making the country a regional hub of transit, trade, and economic activity. However, with the political transition, the CPEC experienced a severe slowdown during the government of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf. In realistic terms, Pakistan’s trade and connectivity with its neighbors, apart from China and Afghanistan, has remained relatively low.

Now, if we assess the potential of CPEC to uplift the deflating economy of Pakistan, CPEC, by increasing regional connectivity and setting up an affordable integrated transportation system, will lower the transportation fee for Islamabad. Moreover, the GDP of Pakistan is expected to rise by 7.5 percent by 2030, with an investment of more than $40bn in Pakistan’s infrastructural, energy, industrial, and agricultural sectors.

Through investment in manufacturing areas of the economy and development in energy production capacity, CPEC assures an increment of nearly two million jobs in the labor market.

The need for energy and fuel is also anticipated to increase exponentially due to rising economic activity and urbanization, leading to long-term effects on Pakistan’s energy supply security amid the country’s present energy crisis. CPEC can help cater to this need.

Pakistan’s Maritime sector is another important avenue with enormous scope and great potential to flourish economically under the umbrella of CPEC. Presently, maritime trade has become an indispensable element of the global economy. The significance of Gwadar port has grown exponentially in the blue economy, as it has the potential to increase Pakistan’s seaborne trade significantly. Unfortunately, Pakistan has not been able to realize its potential to become a marine hub, and current maritime tourism contributes only $300m in GDP, equivalent to 0.4 pc of total GDP, which is far behind the current maritime revenue of India valued at $6bn and Bangladesh’s valued at $5.6bn.

The poor access to the port, out-of-date policies rejecting foreign investment, bad governance models, inadequate finances for modernization projects, lack of local professional and technical skills, inept bureaucratic set-up, and marine pollution leading to the degradation of mangroves all undermine the potential of Pakistan to become a marine hub. However, the development of Gwadar port and transportation facilities under CPEC can provide Pakistan with a foundation for economic growth through seaborne trade. Likewise, this port will improve the prospects for the shipping industry to expand in Pakistan by lowering freight costs, saving foreign cash, promoting overseas commerce, and creating jobs. Experts estimate the improvement of travel and coastal tourism sectors to the international level only can contribute up to 10 percent of GDP by the next decade.

The Gwadar port’s completion can be a great landmark in making Pakistan a regional trade hub. It has great potential to contribute to Pakistan’s blue assets upon becoming fully functional. With CPEC investment, Vision 2030 seeks to increase the trade-to-GDP ratio from 30% to 60% by 2030. This will only be achievable following FDI inflows into Pakistan via CPEC, where Gwadar is the epicenter of the development process.

However, since every opportunity comes with certain risks, a project of this large scale undoubtedly also faces significant challenges. At present, obstacles to CPEC completion include Pakistan’s domestic challenges, primarily political and economic turmoil, insecurity and violence, Afghanistan’s unstable condition, competing interests of immediate neighbors like India and Iran, particularly India’s suspicions, and US worries over the project and most recently COVID-19 pandemic that had the severe blow to the economies of the countries worldwide. Unless these issues are practically addressed, the CPEC will no doubt face various implications in the long run.

Currently, the corridor risks exasperating political turmoil flared social divides and new fonts of conflict in Pakistan. Therefore, the likely outcome of CPEC is heavily reliant on our collective response capacity, including the Federal, provincial, and local governments, the business community, the media, and civil society, all functioning in harmony with each other. If this occurs, the benefits to Pakistan’s economy and society, notably in underprivileged Balochistan and Southern KPK, will certainly outweigh the costs. However, suppose we continue our current course of rivalries, blaming, point scoring, limited territorial and personal considerations, red tape, hesitancy, and delays in problem-solving and removing bottlenecks. In that case, we will undoubtedly incur a heavy financial load.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor presents great potential to bolster Pakistan’s distressing economy by augmenting economic and strategic ties with China, one of the most important regional and global economic powers.

CPEC has the full potential not just in making Pakistan a large consumer market by increasing its regional connectivity but also in terms of the possible upgradation of its economic structure, leading to considerable investment inflows in the country and accelerating the local economic growth via resource mobilization, thereby enabling Pakistan to make an economic turnaround.

Earthquake Leaves Turkiye’s Food Security in Jeopardy

By
Abu Hurrairah Abbasi
-
0

The recent catastrophic earthquakes in February this year have added to the already fragile economy of Turkiye. The immense damage inflicted on the nation’s agricultural sector – a vital business area – could be the tipping point for an economic crisis. As the cropping season approaches rapidly, farmers in the earthquake-affected area need expedited aid to avert potential food deficits throughout the country.‎

Inflation has long been a persistent issue in Turkey. The Turkish Statistical Institute (TSI) found that Turkiye’s yearly inflation rate for January 2023 was 57 percent. In contrast, the Economic National Analysis Group (ENAG), a non-governmental research institute, estimated it to be 121 percent. Experts predicted that inflation would decrease before the elections in May; however, this now appears to be an improbable event.

The approximate $25 billion worth of losses incurred in production due to the earthquake is estimated to act as an impetus to the inflationary cycle, particularly concerning foodstuff prices.‎

The adverse effects of the calamity on the food sector have already been identified. Within seven days of the seismic activity, the cost of beef significantly increased in the aftermath of the devastation inflicted upon the area’s abattoirs. The supplies were detrimentally impacted, as the most seriously affected provinces comprise 12 percent of Turkiye’s bovine industry. Since the start of the year, the price of one kilogram of meat has increased drastically, reaching approximately 180 lira, equivalent to US$9.49, representing an increase of close to forty percent.‎

The 11 provinces affected by the earthquakes are integral to sustaining the nation. They constitute 15.5% of Turkiye’s agricultural output, generating more than 85 billion lira. Approximately one-fifth of the total is comprised of vegetables. Turkey’s registered farmers comprise over 13% of the nation’s total. They are mainly situated in this region, where villages that have suffered destruction are still cut off from external assistance.‎

It has been observed that the prices of other foodstuffs have been steadily rising. In February, there was a 7% increment in the food basket, with vegetables increasing by 24% and fruits rising by 10%. It is foreseeable that foodstuff inflation will persist, mainly if agricultural production in areas affected by earthquakes does not revive speedily.‎

Some farmers have been reimbursed for the damages they have incurred. Since the disaster, Turkey’s Agricultural Insurance Pool has disbursed 11 million lira in indemnity payments. Approximately 20% of Turkish farmers have insurance; however, most of the agrarian population responsible for food for the nation have no insurance, thus requiring them to rely on limited government subsidies for production.‎

Turkey’s arable land is expeditiously sown with millet, rice, soybeans, and sunflower. To meet the expectations associated with the seasonal ‎calendar and prevent the country from facing a food crisis, growers should be provided with assistance in acquiring seeds, ‎fertilizers, and diesel fuel. Turkiye’s Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has declared that it will dispense a financial aid package of 2.8 billion lira to registered farmers who have endured damage caused by the earthquake.‎

To meet the expectations associated with the seasonal ‎calendar and prevent the country from facing a food crisis, growers should be provided with assistance in acquiring seeds, ‎fertilizers, and diesel fuel.

Despite the potential for fulfilling these pledges, the labor status is yet to be ascertained. What strategies could encourage those displaced from their homes, separated from their families, and estranged from their friends to resume work and cultivate the land? ‎

The workforce deficiency is one of the principal impediments to the advancement of Turkey’s agricultural sector. In Hatay province, approximately 100,000 tons of lemons were projected to export for an estimated $186 million in 2022; however, those lemons remain on trees with no one to harvest them. An additional 300,000 tons stay in storage, awaiting to be allocated.‎ The time sensitivity of the agriculture industry necessitates rapidly diminishing the time window for harvesting fruit and planting vegetables. Therefore, Turkiye’s government must develop an action plan immediately.‎

Regrettably, Ankara appears to be incapable of fulfilling its responsibilities. At present, the government is making strenuous efforts to extricate itself. The United Nations Development Program has determined that the number of debris created by the collapse of thousands of edifices due to the earthquakes was estimated to be a maximum of 210 million tonnes, a record-breaking amount of rubble for a single catastrophe. In comparison, the 1999 Marmara Earthquake registered a release of 13 million tons.‎

Removing the debris is a contentious issue for the nation’s authorities. The Turkish population has expressed deep concern about the visuals shared online, which depict garbage being disposed into water bodies and along shorelines, a practice that could potentially cause irreversible environmental detriment. An image that has been widely disseminated shows a considerable aggregation of refuse that has accumulated on the shoreline of Hatay, the habitat of turtles and over 300 distinct avian species. A video originating from a rural locality in Gaziantep depicts detritus being disposed of into tanks of water that rural cultivators employ for raising their livestock.‎

Turkiye is presently undergoing an extraordinary renewal. According to a recent report by the World Bank, the earthquake’s physical devastation was worth $34.2 billion, corresponding to approximately 4% of Turkiye’s 2021 gross domestic product. The costs associated with rebuilding could be twice the initial value or even higher. Louisa Vinton, the ‎UN Development Program’s representative in Turkey, declared that the damage inflicted exceeded one hundred billion US dollars.‎

The extent to which Turkiye’s agricultural network could feasibly be made earthquake-proof is questionable; however, how the government responds to the current situation is likely to have a considerable impact on the defense of the agricultural sector from further disasters. If the necessities of farmers are not met, it can result in long-term food insecurity problems. Turkiye has the potential to avert an additional economic crisis, yet to do so, a comprehensive and durable rural economy infrastructure plan must be adopted to ensure the maintenance of rural employment and the nation’s food supply.

Collaborating to Combat Terrorism: Pak-US Counterterrorism Dialogue

By
Musavir Hameed
-
0

Senior officials from the US and Pakistan hold two days of Counterterrorism Dialogue on March 6th and 7th 2023 in Islamabad to discuss collaborative efforts in countering regional and global threats, improving cooperation, preventing violent extremism, and combating terrorism financing. It reaffirms their shared determination to contribute to both regional and global security and stability.

The new wave of terrorism in Pakistan particularly in the area of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is hitting hard the country’s goal to get rid of terrorism.

Many reports claimed that the attacks of terrorist organizations have increased manifold. The major target of these outfits is the police and law enforcement agencies. Throughout 2022, Pakistan witnessed a total of 512 terrorist incidents. The targets of these attacks were both security personnel and civilians, resulting in a devastating toll of 980 fatalities and 750 injuries. Of the total casualties, at least 283 were security personnel who made the ultimate sacrifice in their line of duty. In December 2022 alone, 40 security personnel lost their lives in the line of duty. These alarming figures indicate a 14.47 percent increase in fatalities as compared to the preceding year, 2021, during which 850 individuals lost their lives to terrorism in Pakistan. The ongoing threat of terrorism in Pakistan remains a grave concern and demands continuous vigilance and action to ensure the safety and security of the country and its people.

The recent victim of these attacks is the Deputy Superintendent of Police Iqbal Momand among three other police officers in Lakki Marwat and the serving Brigadiers of Inter-Service Intelligence Mustafa Kamal Burki. Keeping the prevalent situation, it is a win-win situation for both Pakistan and the USA to be inclined towards reviving their longstanding relationship and collaborating against terrorism, particularly in combating the increasing attacks of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The ongoing talk is lent credence to it.

It is a win-win situation for both Pakistan and the USA to be inclined towards reviving their longstanding relationship and collaborating against terrorism, particularly in combating the increasing attacks of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

It is worth highlighting that the leadership of the TTP has suffered casualties as a result of US drone strikes. Bait Ullah Mehsud was the founder and first leader of the TTP. He was a prominent militant leader in the tribal areas of Pakistan and was known for his attacks against the Pakistani military and government. He was killed in a US drone strike in 2009.

After Bait Ullah Mehsud’s death, Hakim Ullah Mehsud became the new leader of the TTP. He continued the group’s violent campaign against the Pakistani government and military and was responsible for several high-profile attacks, including the 2010 Times Square car bombing attempt. He was killed in a US drone strike in 2013.

Mullah Fazlullah, also known as the “Radio Mullah” due to his regular radio broadcasts, became the new leader of the TTP after Hakim Ullah Mehsud’s death. He was known for his brutal tactics, including ordering the shooting of schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai. He was killed in a US drone strike in Afghanistan in 2018.

It’s worth noting that the TTP is a decentralized group, and several other commanders have significant influence within the organization. Some of these commanders have split from the TTP to form their factions, while others have joined the Islamic State or other militant groups. The TTP has also formed alliances with other militant groups, such as the Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Ostensibly, the incumbent head of TTP Noor Wali Mehsud got triumphed to reunite some of the factions to TTP and came up with sophisticated strategies and weapons. The Government of Pakistan is struggling hard to combat the menace of terrorism on its own. It will be beneficial for Pakistan to work jointly with the USA to combat the TTP’s insurgence.

The government of Pakistan can work with the USA in the following areas: First, Intelligence Sharing: America has a robust intelligence gathering mechanism that can help Pakistan in tracking down the TTP. Sharing intelligence with Pakistan will help them to identify the key leaders and operatives of the group and take action against them. America can provide military support to Pakistan to help them in their efforts to eradicate TTP. This could include training and equipping Pakistani security forces with the latest technology and weapons.

Pakistan needs to improve the socio-economic conditions of the areas where the TTP is most active. America can provide development assistance to Pakistan to address the root causes of the TTP’s rise, such as poverty and unemployment. TTP is known for spreading extremist ideologies. Pakistan and America can collaborate to counter these narratives by promoting moderate and inclusive values through education, media, and community-based initiatives.

Pakistan and the USA must continue to work together to combat the TTP’s insurgence and promote regional and global security and stability.

Collaboration between the two nations in intelligence sharing, military support, development assistance, and counter-narratives is crucial to eradicating terrorism in the region

Space Nuclearization: Mapping Pakistan’s Space Program

By
Ambreen Liaquat
-
0

The political economy of space nuclearization is an emerging interdisciplinary field, which examines the relationships between economics, politics, and the prospects of nuclear-powered activities in outer space. Space nuclearization has become an increasingly critical area of study in recent years, particularly as nations strive to improve their space capabilities and explore the potential of nuclear power for propulsion and energy generation in space. Exploring the political economy of space nuclearization with a focus on Pakistan, the current state of Pakistan’s space program, the country’s potential involvement in space nuclearization, and the political, economic, and strategic implications of such involvement for Pakistan.

Space nuclearization has become an increasingly critical area of study in recent years, particularly as nations strive to improve their space capabilities and explore the potential of nuclear power for propulsion and energy generation in space.

Pakistan’s Space Program: A Brief Overview

Pakistan’s space program, led by the Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), was established in 1961. Although the program has made some progress in the development of satellites, remote sensing, and telecommunication, it lags behind regional and global peers in terms of capabilities and resources. Limited funding, lack of political will, and brain drain have impeded the growth and development of Pakistan’s space program.

Potential Involvement in Space Nuclearization

While Pakistan has not yet demonstrated significant advancements in space nuclearization, the country’s expertise in nuclear technology and energy could potentially be leveraged to develop nuclear-powered spacecraft or propulsion systems. Pakistan has developed a robust nuclear program for civilian and military purposes, and its expertise in nuclear technology could be harnessed for space nuclearization. However, the country faces significant challenges, such as a lack of funding, limited technological infrastructure, and international non-proliferation concerns, which may hinder its ability to actively pursue space nuclearization.

Political, Economic, and Strategic Implications

The political economy of space nuclearization has far-reaching implications for Pakistan, with potential consequences in the political, economic, and strategic realms.

Political Implications

Pakistan’s involvement in space nuclearization could elevate the country’s international standing and influence, particularly among its regional neighbors. By developing nuclear-powered space capabilities, Pakistan could counterbalance the space advancements of regional powers such as India and China, contributing to the geopolitical landscape of South Asia. However, Pakistan’s pursuit of space nuclearization could also raise concerns regarding nuclear proliferation and compliance with international non-proliferation regimes.

Economic Implications

Investing in space nuclearization could have significant economic benefits for Pakistan, including technological advancements, increased international cooperation, and potential commercial opportunities. A successful space nuclear program could attract foreign investment and promote public-private partnerships, spurring economic growth and job creation. However, the high costs associated with the development of nuclear-powered spacecraft and propulsion systems may strain the country’s limited resources and divert funds away from other critical sectors if the national income sources are not diversified as needed.

Strategic Implications

Pakistan’s involvement in space nuclearization could have strategic implications in terms of its defense capabilities and regional security dynamics. Developing nuclear-powered space assets could enhance Pakistan’s space-based surveillance, reconnaissance, and communication capabilities, thereby strengthening its national security and military posture. However, such advancements could also trigger a regional space arms race, exacerbating tensions with neighboring countries, particularly India, and destabilizing the already fragile security environment in South Asia.

Economic Aspects of Space Nuclearization that need attention

The current debate on the political economy of space nuclearization highlights the potential benefits and challenges of using nuclear power in outer space. The potential benefits of space nuclear power include longer mission durations, enhanced capabilities, and reduced reliance on solar power. However, the development of nuclear-powered spacecraft involves high upfront costs, regulatory hurdles, and potential risks. Market dynamics and commercial interests also play a significant role in shaping the future of space nuclearization. The growing importance of public-private partnerships in space exploration has implications for the development of space nuclear power systems. Private companies such as SpaceX, Blue Origin, and others have shown interest in exploring the potential of nuclear-powered spacecraft.

Engaging private sector stakeholders in the development and implementation of space nuclearization projects can help reduce the financial burden on the government while encouraging innovation and efficiency.

Pakistan can explore several avenues to secure funding for initiating a space nuclearization program. Some potential sources of funding include; The government can prioritize space nuclearization in its budgetary planning and allocate funds to develop the required infrastructure, research facilities, and human resources. Engaging private sector stakeholders in the development and implementation of space nuclearization projects can help reduce the financial burden on the government while encouraging innovation and efficiency. PPPs can be an effective means of sharing risks, costs, and expertise between the public and private sectors.

Pakistan can seek foreign investment and technical assistance from countries with advanced space capabilities, such as China, Russia, or the United States. Building partnerships and collaborative agreements with these countries can help Pakistan access the necessary financial resources and expertise to develop its space nuclearization program. Pakistan can also explore funding opportunities from international financial institutions like the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and other regional development banks. Additionally, the country can seek bilateral assistance from friendly nations, particularly those with an interest in regional cooperation and space technology development. Pakistan can apply for international research and development grants focused on space technology, nuclear propulsion, or related areas. These grants can help support the research and development aspects of space nuclearization. By developing commercial space services, such as satellite launches, Pakistan can generate revenue to help fund its space nuclearization program. Additionally, the country can explore opportunities to license or export its space technology, which can also contribute to financing the program.

 By developing commercial space services conducting satellite launches, Pakistan can generate revenue to help fund its space nuclearization program.

It is essential to note that securing funding for space nuclearization is only one aspect of the challenge. Pakistan must also address other factors, such as building the necessary infrastructure, developing human resources, and adhering to international non-proliferation norms and regulations. Balancing these considerations while ensuring efficient use of resources and effective collaboration with international partners will be crucial for the successful initiation and implementation of a space nuclearization program. The political economy of space nuclearization has profound implications for Pakistan, touching on political, economic, and strategic aspects. While the development of nuclear-powered space capabilities offers potential benefits in terms of international influence, economic growth, and defense capabilities, it also presents significant challenges and risks.

Pakistan must carefully weigh the potential advantages against the associated risks, considering the impact on regional security dynamics, compliance with international non-proliferation regimes, and the allocation of limited resources.

As Pakistan contemplates its involvement in space nuclearization, it must carefully weigh the potential advantages against the associated risks, considering the impact on regional security dynamics, compliance with international non-proliferation regimes, and the allocation of limited resources. A balanced and strategic approach to space nuclearization, taking into account both the opportunities and the challenges, will be crucial for Pakistan’s successful navigation of this complex and rapidly evolving domain.

Indus Water Treaty Is Inviolable

By
Moazam Khan
-
0

The Indus Water Treaty is a water-sharing agreement signed between India and Pakistan in 1960, which governs the sharing of the water from the Indus River and its tributaries. The treaty was brokered by the World Bank and is considered to be one of the most successful water-sharing agreements in the world. The treaty is based on the principles of sharing and cooperation, and it is aimed at promoting regional stability and economic development in both India and Pakistan. It has been in operation for over six decades, and despite the occasional tensions between the two countries, the treaty has been adhered to by both sides. The Indus Water Treaty is a legally binding agreement, and it cannot be violated by either India or Pakistan. Any violation of the treaty would be a breach of international law, and it could potentially lead to serious consequences.

The treaty is based on the principles of sharing and cooperation,  it is aimed at promoting regional stability and economic development in India and Pakistan. It has been in operation for six decades, and despite the tensions between the two countries, the treaty has been adhered to by both sides.

India has expressed reservations about the use of the Court of Arbitration to settle disputes related to the Indus Water Treaty. One of the primary reasons for this opposition is the concern that the Court of Arbitration process could lead to a loss of control over the shared water resources of the Indus River. India has argued that the Indus Water Treaty provides for a mechanism of bilateral talks and a Permanent Indus Commission to resolve disputes between the two countries. India believes that the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanism, which is based on mutual consultation and negotiation, is adequate to address any issues that may arise between the two countries. Another concern that India has expressed is related to the Court of Arbitration’s lack of expertise in the complexities of the Indus River water-sharing arrangement. India has argued that the Court of Arbitration is ill-equipped to fully understand the technical and historical aspects of the Indus Water Treaty.

The Indus Water Treaty outlines specific provisions for the sharing of the water from the Indus River and its tributaries. One of the key provisions of the treaty is that India is required to inform Pakistan of any new hydroelectric project it plans to undertake, at least six months in advance.

Additionally, India has expressed concern that the Court of Arbitration process could be politicized, leading to a situation where the court’s decision may be influenced by external political factors. Overall, India’s opposition to the use of the Court of Arbitration to settle disputes related to the Indus Water Treaty is primarily based on its belief that the treaty’s existing dispute resolution mechanisms are sufficient and that the Court of Arbitration process could lead to a loss of control over the shared water resources of the Indus River.

The Indus Water Treaty outlines specific provisions for the sharing of the water from the Indus River and its tributaries. One of the key provisions of the treaty is that India is required to inform Pakistan of any new hydroelectric project it plans to undertake, at least six months in advance. The dispute resolution mechanism of Treaty remained “paused” for more than five years, which denied Pakistan access to redressal mechanisms under the Treaty. This provision is aimed at promoting transparency and cooperation between the two countries in the development of hydroelectric projects on the Indus River. It allows Pakistan to assess the potential impacts of the new project on its water resources and to raise any concerns or objections it may have before the project is initiated.

Pakistan initiated of Request for Arbitration under Article IX (5) of the Indus Water Treaty, which allows either India or Pakistan to seek the resolution of a dispute through the appointment of a neutral expert or a court of arbitration. Pakistan objects to India’s construction of the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects on the western rivers of the Indus River system.

In 2016, Pakistan initiated the process of Request for Arbitration under Article IX (5) of the Indus Water Treaty, which allows either India or Pakistan to seek the resolution of a dispute through the appointment of a neutral expert or a court of arbitration. Pakistan made this request in response to India’s construction of the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects on the western rivers of the Indus River system. Pakistan argued that the construction of these projects by India violates the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty, specifically the requirement for India to inform Pakistan of any new hydroelectric projects it plans to undertake. Pakistan claimed that the construction of these projects would have a significant impact on its water resources and would harm its agricultural and power generation capabilities. India, on the other hand, argued that the Kishanganga and Ratle projects were in compliance with the treaty’s provisions and that they would not affect the flow of water to Pakistan.

Pakistan argues that the construction of these dam projects by India violates the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty. Pakistan claimed that the construction of these projects would have a significant impact on its water resources and would harm its agricultural and power generation capabilities.

The request for arbitration was transmitted to India by the World Bank, which had a role in the resolution of disputes under the treaty. However, the process of arbitration was suspended in November 2016, after both countries agreed to resolve the dispute through bilateral talks. Since then, both India and Pakistan have been engaging in discussions to resolve their differences over the Indus Water Treaty.

Ever since (May 2014) with Modi elected as PM of India problems started raising their ugly head mainly due to belligerent attitude of Modi. On 27 September 2016, PM Modi uttered that blood and water cannot flow together hinting something sinister in his mind. Recently, India sent a notice to Pakistan suggesting therein to modify the accord and asked for reply within next 90 days. The fact is that India cannot unilaterally annul the IWT under the pretext of not receiving the reply or receiving belated reply of notice sent to Pakistan.

Problems started raising their ugly head mainly due to belligerent attitude of Modi. PM Modi uttered that blood and water cannot flow together hinting something sinister in his mind.  India sent a notice to Pakistan to modify the accord.

After existing ‘dispute resolution mechanism’ could not address Pakistan’s observations with regard to India’s dams’ (Kashanganga on Jhelum River and Ratle on Chenab River) designs, Pakistan approached WB from there matter has been referred to ‘Arbitration Court’. Taking the impasse to World Bank Appointed Arbitration Court is no a breach of agreement. Apparently India is likely to lose the case there. Pakistan has strong argument that is entitled to take its grievances under the treaty to the relevant forum. Both countries invoked two simultaneous forums for dispute resolution, instead of a ‘graded process’ on the same question. India thinks this could lead to a potential contradictory outcome; therefore, it constitutes a material breach and hence there is a need to ‘modify’ the treaty. But again the institution which brokered the accord has referred the matter to Arbitration Court. Hence India’s observations are legally invalid as there is a sinister move on part of India as it is trying to find lame excuses to unilaterally withdraw from the agreement. The breach of Indus Water treaty will also be the violation of ‘Vienna Convention’ on the Law of Treaties (1969) that binds states to follow the procedure agreed by them for withdrawal or termination.

Reliving The Cuban Missile Crisis

By
Musfirah Rashid
-
0

Six decades ago, the thirteen days showdown brought the world to the brink of a nuclear war. The Cuban missile crisis was among the most petrifying episode of the Cold War. Cuba was a close ally of the United States under the command of General Batista, but the picture transposed following the 1959 revolution piloted by Fidel Castro. Castro sought to patch things up but the Eisenhower administration put its step back without understanding the consequences. Castro was lured to communism by Khrushchev’s government’s camaraderie and cooperation. He nationalized every American-owned business in Cuba and steadfastly refused to make restitution. The US now had a pro-communist state in its backyard, which tested its policy of containment.

The recent cataclysmic events display that the world is once again on the verge of another nuclear calamity.

As the Russia-Ukraine war ingress, more than the 400th day, the scenario takes unforeseen turns. While events unfold, Russian President, Vladimir Putin enunciates that they are willing to take this war to the next level. Russia and Belarus’ neighbors endorsed that Moscow could station tactical nuclear weapons on its territory, without violating the non-proliferation treaty. Putin proclaim that for a prolonged period, the United States had nuclear weapons stationed on the soil of its European allies. Subsequently, we are merely shielding ourselves and not breaching any obligations.

Furthermore, Russia contends that they have already positioned 10 aircraft in Belarus that are capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons including several Iskander tactical missile systems. The US moved very cautiously on Putin’s statements believing that there is no direct indication that Moscow is intending to use nuclear weapons that compel them to adjust their strategic nuclear posture. Though the US didn’t securitize Russia’s recent statements the international community is concerned, as International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) deemed Russia’s proclamation an extremely dangerous escalation.

With all the humans at stake, West needs to move very carefully on the recent events. The likelihood of any miscalculation and misinterpretation is extremely possible. Political figures can make grave mistakes in traditional warfare and still ensure that the human race survives, wrecked but intact. The standoff between the two nuclear powers worsens the situation and risks catastrophic humanitarian consequences. Even a small misunderstanding or miscommunication gaffe during a nuclear standoff can have devastating implications. The Cuban missile crisis is often referred to as the pivotal conflict of the contemporary era and the closest the world has ever been to experiencing nuclear war. With Vladimir Putin having put himself in a bind by claiming that vast portions of neighboring Ukraine are “forever” Russia’s and the odds of nuclear escalation are there, the war in Ukraine poses perils of at least a similar scale.

The World can’t afford to spin the cylinder in this game of Russian roulette. The only way forwards is through the dialogue to prevent doomsday.

One can recall the lesson of history, before moving ahead. The back door diplomacy was applied by then-President John F. Kennedy to ease the situation and face-saving of both sides by striking a secret deal with Khrushchev. Both sides agreed on removing US nuclear missiles from Turkey in exchange for de-escalation from Cuba. So the crucial lesson learned was; a diplomatic compromise that Moscow and Washington must heed, as the world faces the threat of obliteration once again.

Age of Geo-perceptions: An Alternative Explanation of Global Politics

By
Dr. Iffat Naheed
-
0

Our world today is undergoing political developments and changes of unprecedented proportions. While on one end, there is an ongoing debate regarding the shift of global politics from unipolar to multipolar, there is also an emerging discourse on the evolution of geopolitics from the substratum of geostrategy to geo-economics. To explain different trends in global politics, the variables range from geographical dimensions of power politics to military power, diplomatic prowess, and more recently economic potential and resilience.

While geopolitics as an explanatory model for global political developments emphasizes the strong correlation of geography and politics while identifying the former as the decisive factor in terms of foreign policy behaviors of a nation-state, geo-strategy is ensconced on the identification of a certain territory for domination and use thereof, as a means for enhancing global influence. Geoeconomics, on the other hand, brings in the role of economy and investments as decisive factors in global politics.

The emerging global developments around, one cannot avoid noticing that these models are no more capable of explaining the tectonic shifts occurring on the geopolitical landscape.

There are examples galore to illustrate the inefficacy of geostrategy and geoeconomics to explain prominent global developments today and therefore this deficiency necessitates an alternative explanation for these global changes that are occurring around us.

One can begin with, for instance, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war where not only Russia employed its military strength to invade Ukraine in February 2022, despite certain political predictions to the contrary,  but rather continues with that policy unabated despite recent military reversals. Although, on the face of it, the above conflict appears to be a typical case of coveting and occupying the territory of a smaller state by some bigger state or hegemon through military means, a deeper critical appraisal of this conflict’s causal factors and Russia’s continued policy of brinkmanship, despite military reversals and economic sanctions, clearly demonstrates that it is neither solely a strategic decision nor singularly an economic imperative. On the contrary, this conflict appears to be a unique example of Russia’s perception of its territoriality encompassing not only the peculiar conceptualization of territory but an entire psychological and ideational space of Ukraine that Russia believes and perceives to be it’s own.

Ukraine does not represent a territory per se but a psychological paradigm that is part of the Russian perception of its sphere of influence.

Unlike territory, the concept of territoriality is essentially a social construct and identifies what a state feels or believes that belongs to it. Furthermore, the notion of territoriality is also linked to the specific role or characterization that a nation-state assumes for itself. Russia has historically associated with itself the role of a major power in the Eurasian space with its sphere of influence spread around this region. Accordingly, owing to these perceptions of territoriality, Russia continues with its operation against Ukraine despite multiple strategic challenges and reversals.

Let us move on to China for a moment and examine its Belt and Road Initiative which was launched in 2013 and includes around 136 beneficiary countries. There are various extensions or parts of this Initiative. One of these includes, for instance, China’s BRI investments worth US$ 32 billion in the western Balkans region with such a futuristic project as China–Europe Land–Sea Express Route. Are these far-flung economic projects in eastern Europe that are surrounded by frozen zones of conflict only meant for economic leverage or strategic assets of some sort? The answer to this question is again not as simple as it may appear. It is the Chinese concept of territoriality premised on the “all under heaven” (Tianxia) notion with China as the Middle Kingdom or the center and its peripheries serving as China’s tributaries, that forms the centerpiece of the thought process behind the above investment initiatives. This is also guided by China’s self-imagery of having suffered a century of humiliation and its commitment to regain its lost status of the Middle Kingdom.

Neither geo-strategy nor geo-economics explains China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) or other strategic economic moves sufficiently, but the Chinese Government’s ideational paradigm helps expound their overall BRI agenda.

Similarly, if we examine China-India relations, especially the recent border skirmishes, the entire premise of the China-India conflict is based on Chinese and Indian perceptions of their border areas as well as ideals of what should belong to them.

Let us now move on to European Union and attempt to understand what is causing the “enlargement fatigue” of the Union when it comes to the western Balkans region including Bosnia & Herzegovina, Kosovo, Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, and North Macedonia, although this region may act as a political void in near future that could be filled by Russia and China if EU does not integrate the countries of this region through EU’s membership. Again, it is pivotal to understand how historical perceptions regarding this region have shaped the EU’s current approach towards this region. Historically, the western Balkans region has remained dominated by Ottoman Empire. Europe, therefore, always considered this region to be part of the Orient and linked up to the Muslim Turks. Similarly, over a significant timeframe, certain parts of the western Balkans remained under the influence of Orthodox Christianity later supported by the Russian Empire. Even though certain countries of the Balkans such as Croatia and Slovenia now forming part of the EU remained under the tutelage of the Austro-Hungarian Empire for some parts of their history, the net result of the above perceptions regarding the Oriental past under the influence of Muslim Ottoman Empire or Orthodox Christian connection under the patronage of Russian Empire of the region was so dominant that while EU integrated the countries (Croatia and Slovenia) which historically once remained part of the then catholic Austro-Hungarian Empire, through the Union’s membership, remaining countries of the region still appear to have been practically “otherized” by the EU owing to their Muslim or Orthodox Christian characterization. In certain cases, the notion of territoriality of the region’s neighboring EU countries owing to their historical national perceptions has been so rigid that they refuse to recognize the national status of some regional countries, owing to the peculiar mass population transfers and territorial redistribution that occurred across the region in the wake of first and second Balkan wars. It is for the above reasons that countries such as Bosnia & Herzegovina which though itself remained annexed to Austro-Hungarian Empire from 1878-1914 are still far away from getting EU membership, essentially owing to its Muslim majority status. Similarly, North Macedonia has since long been disputed as a nation by Bulgaria and Greece questions North Macedonia’s state ideology and name as irredentist in character. Accordingly, at best, the EU approaches the western Balkans region as a colonial power. From these examples, we note that it is essentially the above-mentioned perception of “self” and “others” coupled with the peculiar notions of territoriality that Muslim-majority countries such as Bosnia & Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Albania are for all practical purposes not to be assimilated with the EU unless they do away with their Muslim identity and countries such as North Macedonia are forced to rename itself and therefore reinvent itself to keep EU and NATO bid alive. It is therefore evident that the EU approaches the western Balkans with a great degree of skepticism and hesitation.

The harsh conditionalities remain in place for the EU membership of the countries of this region that could even cost these western Balkan countries their identities as notions of territoriality and nationhood.

Keeping focused on the western Balkans region, one cannot remain oblivious to the role of Muslim countries especially Gulf countries and Pakistan, especially in respect of Kosovo and Bosnia & Herzegovina. Neither the geographic location nor the economic situation of these two countries can explain the proactive moral and diplomatic support provided by Gulf countries and Pakistan to Bosnia & Herzegovina as well as Kosovo. It is essentially the perception of their “self”, premised on Muslim nationalism and the social construct of the Muslim world that defines the above phenomenon.

Lastly, let us observe the role and approach of India towards its South Asian neighbors. Historically, India’s notion of territoriality has been defined by Hindutva ideals where areas starting from central, south, and south-east Asia are considered part of some mythical Hindu culture. While under the once-ruling Indian National Congress, this mythical ideal was camouflaged as a cultural phenomenon, under Indian Prime Minister Modi, this goal has assumed far more sinister proportions while coveting extreme right-wing Hindu fundamentalism. India’s perception and role assumption of ‘self’ as the pivot of South Asia is premised on the above conceptualization as well.

This role assumption by India is not only geographical in sense but exists in terms of that country’s social construct of the “self”. Similarly, the otherization of Muslims within India is also based on the same exclusionary ideological and ideational premise of Hindutva.

From the above instances, we can distinguish some important observations. To begin with, it is the perceptions of ‘self’ and ‘others’ as well as ideas, ideals, beliefs, and norms that have been defining the foreign policy approaches of countries around the world towards each other. Alliances are being formed today among countries, not on economic or security threats and possible advantages per se but the perceptions of what constitutes an advantageous situation for their peculiar notions of territoriality and their flourishment. Security, be it strategic or economic, and achievement thereof are therefore social constructs and more of ideational notions today connected with the preservation of perceived notions of territoriality, beliefs, ideals, and norms of nation-states while denial of the same to their perceived adversaries or ‘others’. In essence, the sense of security or otherwise along with its geostrategic or geoeconomic dimensions is pivoted on perceptions and ideas as well as ideals, beliefs, and notions, coupled with a sense of who is a friend or foe. For instance, Pakistan and India’s deterrence postures against each other are guided by threat perceptions that they hold vis-à-vis each other. The military and diplomatic approaches of Pakistan, China, and India are also framed by their perceptions of territoriality as well as ideas of friends and foes.

As mentioned earlier, the ideals for ‘self’ and ‘others’ are also the key pivots on which foreign and security policies of nation-states revolve. For instance, in the case of Pakistan, it is Muslim nationalism, for India, it is Hindutva and “Akhand Bharat”, and for Albania as well as Kosovo, it is the emphasis on Albanian identity, as a subset of Europeanness that serves as the causal factors for the contouring of the foreign and security policies of these countries.

We can therefore deduce from the above discussion that it is essentially what we may call Geoperceptions i.e., psychological social construct and perception of ‘self’ and ‘others’; one’s role within a certain system; the sense of territory and territoriality, beliefs, norms, and value system that explains their actual foreign and security policy manifestations and maneuvers. In essence, what the world is today witnessing is indeed an age of Geoperceptions that guides the stream of geo-political events across the world. Geo-strategic and Geoeconomic actions today are indeed guided by perceptions of ‘self’ and ‘others’ as well as a conglomerate of role assumptions and conceptualization of territoriality in respect of ‘self’ and ‘others’ as well.

The solutions to global challenges are therefore as easy to achieve as they appear insurmountable. As it is the perceptions, ideas, and ideals that define foreign and security policy approaches of states towards each other, the nation-states can turn the conflict situations to their advantage by either modulating the perceptions of their adversaries towards themselves and others.

This theoretical approach of Geoperceptions, therefore, caters to and explains why certain conflicts remain frozen while others get heated up or ultimately resolved. Similarly, this approach explains why a perceptive miscalculation may often result in intended or unintended consequences for the political leadership of a country and thus end up in an anarchical state of affairs.

Refugee Integration through Education

By
Fatima Azhar
-
0

Globalization and increased human mobility have generated new challenges for policymakers to maintain social cohesion amongst diverse cultural, ethnic, and religious groups. When refugees arrive in a new country their presence is already viewed as a strain on the state’s infrastructure, labor market, and basic services. As a result, the local host communities harbor resentment toward them, making them vulnerable to discrimination, violence, and exploitation. As refugees cannot be viewed in isolation from their host communities, it is essential to extend support to their development as well. By expanding sustainable development opportunities for both groups alike, the process of refugee integration can be made more effective and smooth.

To foster social cohesion among them, refugee children need to have inclusive and equitable access to formal education institutes. They must be taught in the host country’s national curriculum as per the UNHCR’s global education strategy. This enables refugee students to move more easily from primary to secondary school and gives them access to accredited national-level examinations and certifications.

Schools in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan that support registered Afghan refugee students made this transition in 2018 which has greatly improved Pakistan’s national education systems quality and inclusiveness.

Three-quarters of Afghan refugees live in urban and rural regions alongside host communities. This figure includes approximately 500,000 school-aged children, who have benefited from Pakistan’s national education system. To further complement these efforts UNHCR’s Refugee-Affected and Hosting Areas (RAHA) program works with the government to facilitate the integration of refugees into the national education system.

The project has allocated resources worth $45 million to 730 projects to support the education system through a wide range of measures. Including rehabilitation of schools, investment in training of staff, and capacity building of parent-teacher associations to raise awareness on the benefits of enrolling children in institutions. These projects have impacted 785,000 individuals eighty-four percent of whom are Pakistani beneficiaries and the remaining sixteen percent are Afghan beneficiaries.

The assistance of the local host community members not only rewards them for generously sharing their resources with refugee communities for four decades but also increases people-to-people interaction, thereby fostering conditions for social cohesion.

Schools can be used as hubs for promoting social activities and community building. Engaging, students from host communities and refugee communities in looking into the implications of living in a diverse environment can break down social isolation and foster trust and bonding with each other. Similarly, by encouraging refugee children to share their stories and experiences with others it can create a system of peer support by generating empathy toward them. By not isolating one community for the benefit of the other, these practices reduce the generation of binaries of us versus them. Through children these values can then be permeated into their respective communities, eventually leading to building trust and change of perception. By implementing such policies, refugees can improve their well-being, contribute to the development of host communities, and help create inclusive and diverse communities.

1...138139140...146Page 139 of 146

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