Imagining Oxford in Chaos: The Populist Chancellor

October 15, 2024

Imagine a distinguished professor at Oxford University penning a critical piece on the university’s newly-appointed chancellor, Imran Khan, serving a jail sentence in Pakistan. Within hours, the professor is bombarded by online harassment – not from Britain’s academic peers but from Imran Khan’s fervent Pakistani supporters. A digital mob floods social media and university inboxes, outraged at the audacity to criticize their leader. ‘How dare he critique Khan!’ Thousands of emails attack the professor’s academic integrity and personal life.

Imran Khan has repeatedly aligned himself with regressive forces, most notably resettling the TTP from Afghanistan into Pakistan and declaring Osama bin Laden a martyr.

This scenario isn’t far-fetched. During his political career in Pakistan and now as he campaigns for Oxford’s chancellorship, Imran Khan’s supporters have demonstrated the power and peril of unchecked populism. Imran Khan, who is currently incarcerated on corrupt practice charges, has turned his political movement into a global cult, weaponizing social media to silence critics and push his narrative of victimhood. But when we look at the broader picture, one must ask: Can Oxford afford to invite this level of chaos and disruption into its academic environment?

Also read: Imran Khan, Extremism, Social Fragmentation And the Only Alternative

Imran Khan’s candidacy also raises significant concerns about the role of populism in global academia. He has overwhelmingly dominated social media discussions in this race for Oxford’s chancellorship, overshadowing other respected candidates like Sir William Hague, the former Conservative Party leader; Peter Mandelson, a Labour Party heavyweight and former European Commissioner; Elish Angiolini, a prominent Scottish legal figure; and Jan Royall, a senior Labour peer and former Leader of the House of Lords.

His campaign is not about qualifications or a vision for the university; it’s about leveraging populist support to drown out opposition. This is exactly how populist leaders gain control – by overwhelming the discourse, sidelining merit and expertise, and turning public institutions into political battlegrounds.

Imran Khan’s candidacy also raises significant concerns about the role of populism in global academia.

Can Oxford afford to become the next victim of such tactics?

Then there is his chequered past in academia. Imran Khan once served as Chancellor of the University of Bradford from 2005 until 2014, a controversial tenure. Despite holding the post, he regularly missed key university events, including graduation ceremonies. In February 2014, the University of Bradford Union proposed his removal due to his ongoing absences, prompting Imran Khan to announce his resignation, effective November 30, 2014, citing political obligations in Pakistan. However, the reality was far grimmer – his commitment to the role had long been questioned. How can Oxford expect him to fulfil his duties when past performance clearly shows disinterest?

Oxford, an institution of profound academic heritage, has nurtured some of the brightest minds and upheld values of integrity, independent thought, and reasoned debate. Imran Khan, on the other hand, represents the exact opposite. His candidacy is not a reflection of academic excellence but a testament to his populist ambition. And while his followers might see him as a hero, his legacy tells a different story. His populist appeal in Pakistan was built on incendiary rhetoric, divisive tactics, and the undermining of democratic institutions. The problem becomes even clearer when you examine his political history.

Imran Khan has repeatedly aligned himself with regressive forces, most notably resettling the TTP from Afghanistan into Pakistan and declaring Osama bin Laden a martyr in his National Assembly speech. His disturbing remarks in support of the Taliban – calling their oppressive governance a step towards “breaking the shackles of slavery” – speak volumes about his worldview. How can someone with such views be entrusted with leading an institution like Oxford, which stands for freedom of expression, gender equality, and intellectual liberty?

Furthermore, Imran Khan’s views on women’s rights are deeply troubling. He has openly suggested that women’s clothing is a factor in sexual harassment, a regressive stance that has no place in the leadership of an institution that has consistently advocated for women’s education and empowerment. Oxford has been a pioneer in championing gender equality, and electing someone like Imran Khan would send a chilling message about the university’s commitment to these values.

The real danger lies in how his populist movement operates. His supporters do not just support him; they aggressively campaign against anyone who dares criticize him.

Imran Khan’s current legal troubles also make him an unfit candidate for the role. He is in prison in Pakistan, convicted of corrupt practices and misuse of state funds in what has been termed the Toshakhana case, where he was found guilty of profiting from state gifts. His supporters might claim he is the victim of political vendettas, but the legal realities are far less kind. The man is embroiled in controversy and any university that associates itself with him risks being dragged into a political quagmire.

The real danger lies in how his populist movement operates. His supporters do not just support him; they aggressively campaign against anyone who dares criticize him. A recent example in Pakistan saw his followers not just protest but attack state institutions when he was arrested. It’s not hard to imagine the same tactics being applied to Oxford – an online army that descends on any academic or faculty member who questions their chancellor’s integrity. For an institution that thrives on intellectual discourse and debate, the chilling effect of such a phenomenon would be catastrophic.

Therefore, Imran Khan’s bid for Oxford University’s chancellorship is more than just a political stunt – it is a dangerous proposition for one of the world’s most respected academic institutions. His track record of supporting repressive regimes, promoting divisive rhetoric, and undermining democratic and academic institutions makes him unfit for the role. Oxford deserves a chancellor who embodies integrity, intellectual rigor, and a commitment to academic freedom. Imran Khan, with his populist cult following and troubling political history, offers none of these qualities. Instead, his election would only embroil Oxford in controversy, division, and chaos.

People Or Territories: The Question That Ukraine Is Facing

Professor Alexander Kostyuk

October 15, 2024

The beginning of the Cold War, the 1950s, formed the basic rules of the geopolitical game. Any war that directly or indirectly involves countries that possess nuclear weapons must be ended in a timely manner, before a direct military clash between them. That is, the war ends not when the participants have achieved their goal, but when the war has reached the rubicon, which opens a war between nuclear-armed countries.

The Korean War of 1950-1953 is worth mentioning here. At the outbreak of the war, each side aimed for military victory and further unification of Korea under the rule of the South or the North, meaning expansion of the sphere of influence of either the West or the communist USSR and China. During the first year of the war, both sides reached a rubicon in terms of the intensity of conventional warfare, and it was either the use of nuclear weapons, but President Truman did not agree to this, or the search for a political settlement of the war. The political instrument of ending the war was chosen, and it eventually ended in July 1953.

The West wants to leave the issue of the occupied territories to the political process, diplomacy, and time.

At the same time, the war could have ended much earlier, in 1951, but it lasted almost two years because of Truman’s demand that North Korean and Chinese prisoners of war be allowed to choose whether they wanted to return home after the war or not. Eventually, after President Eisenhower took office and Stalin died on March 1, 1953, the US and the USSR quickly reached an understanding and by early spring 1953, the plan to end the war was finally ready, thus preventing an irreversible military escalation between the US and the USSR.

But then the President of South Korea Syngman Rhee stood in the way of ending the war, as he did not agree to end the war without achieving the previously defined goal of unifying Korea under the rule of the pro-Western South and withdrawing Chinese troops from North Korea. The South Korean population resorted to mass demonstrations in June 1953 to prolong the war in order to achieve this goal.

According to Gideon Rose, editor-in-chief of Foreign Affairs, in his book How Wars End, there were thoughts in the corridors of the White House to remove the South Korean president from power so that he would not interfere with peace. In the end, the United States rejected this idea and resorted to peace coercion, among other things, by offering a postwar security instrument to South Korea. Hence, the United States declared its readiness to leave its army in South Korea. Coercion worked, and in July 1953, a truce was established, which, except for occasional border escalations, continues to this day.

President Zelensky cannot rationally insist on continuing the war to restore the country’s territorial integrity.

The war in Ukraine is approaching its third anniversary, which means that it is approaching the Korean War in terms of timing. As early as 2023, the Biden administration began to state quite publicly that the war in Ukraine should not cross the same rubicon as a war between nuclear powers.

Perhaps for the first time, such a statement was made in early July 2023 by White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan when he sharply rejected the idea, voiced increasingly by some Washington strategists, that Biden is overplaying the Russian nuclear threat and deterring NATO from all-in support for Kyiv. The hawks, he said, argue: “This nuclear threat is complete nonsense. Don’t worry about it at all. It’s to be completely discounted.”

Also read: The Moral Imperative Of The Collective West And The Ukraine War

Sullivan rebuffed the no-worry approach: “It is a threat. It is a real threat. It’s one we need to take seriously. And it’s one that does evolve with changing conditions on the ground.”

This was followed by President Biden’s public statement in December 2023, in which the US leader said, “We want to see Ukraine win the war. Winning means Ukraine is a sovereign, independent nation. And it can afford to defend itself today and deter further aggression”. At the same time, Biden did not mention the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity within the 1991 borders by military means, and Western leaders have consistently stated that they do not recognize Russia’s occupied territories. In other words, the West wants to leave the issue of the occupied territories to the political process, diplomacy, and time.

It is Washington that should show leadership in the West and offer reliable security instruments to Ukraine.

This statement brings us back to the events of 1939-1944, the war between the USSR and Finland, which began with Soviet aggression in late 1939 and lasted intermittently until 1944. The commander-in-chief of the Finnish army, and later the country’s president, Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim, had a choice: either to continue the war for the sake of the country’s eastern territories or to end it. Continuation of the war could have resulted in the loss of state sovereignty and independence of the country, and the death of a large number of Finns. In this difficult dilemma, Mannerheim chose the lives of his fellow citizens, Finnish state sovereignty and independence. As a result, Finland and the USSR ended the war politically by negotiating and signing an armistice, and Mannerheim became a legendary hero for his military talent, political foresight, and love for the people of Finland.

Also read: A Leader Without Strategy: Collapse of USSR And Ukraine War

The West does not see it appropriate to seek a military breakthrough by Ukraine in the war, making unequivocal statements about the need for a political settlement. Reason? The West believes that Ukraine, like Finland in 1944, has won by defending its sovereignty and independence. At the same time, the West is clearly trying to force Ukraine to peace, just as it did with South Korea in 1953.

Among the tools used by the West to force Ukraine to peace are the lack of permission for Ukraine to use long-range weapons from the West to strike at Russian territory, the unwillingness of Western countries to provide offensive weapons in the amount necessary for an effective counteroffensive (here it is worth mentioning General Zaluzhny’s analytical article in The Economist of December 2022), Germany’s position on the unwillingness to provide long-range Taurus missiles, and a sharp decrease in the total amount of military assistance to Ukraine starting in the second half of 2023.

The slow movement of Western arms manufacturers to establish joint ventures in Ukraine (a process that is probably politically driven), and the reduction in overall financial assistance to Ukraine, as a result of which Ukraine seeks to compensate for the loss of external revenues by increasing taxes from October 2024), are also these tools. And don’t forget September 30, 2023, when the US $32 billion lend-lease to Ukraine expired, and not a cent of it was allocated to Ukraine.

Can President Zelenskyy rationally insist on continuing the war to restore the country’s territorial integrity in the face of the West’s growing pressure on Ukraine to make peace?

To answer this question, it is worth clarifying under what conditions the restoration of Ukraine’s 1991 borders would mean the end of the war. This is possible only if tensions within Russia increase, leading to its collapse or a change of government to a democratic one. The West realizes that neither the first nor the second scenario is possible now and will not be possible for many years. It is here that the West, through Biden, emphasizes to the Ukrainian authorities that Ukraine has already won the victory by defending its sovereignty and independence, and it is time for the Ukrainian authorities to make a choice between keeping people in Ukraine and further attempts to return the 1991 territories by military means, realizing that this will still not be the end of the war.

There is an opportunity to reconsider all red lines in relations between the West and Russia, and even in a broader geopolitical context involving China and countries of the Global South,

Biden’s statement in the summer of 2024, that the war in Ukraine had reached its escalation rubicon and that if it was not stopped politically, World War III was a realistic development that the West could not accept. A similar statement was made by Biden’s political opponent, Republican presidential candidate Trump in October 2024 and even before. So, Washington’s political elites are answering the question above: No, President Zelensky cannot rationally insist on continuing the war to restore the country’s territorial integrity. Therefore, coercion of Ukraine to peace will continue to gain momentum until the goal is achieved and the war is over.

What can Zelensky rationally insist on in such a difficult situation?

The experience of South Korea will not work here – the US military will not be in Ukraine either during or after the war. Washington sees no political reason for this step, but it will create a huge pretext for Russia to escalate. It is probably worth remembering the experience of Germany in the 1950s and the dilemma of Chancellor Adenauer: Germany will be united or it will be in NATO.

For Zelenskyy, this dilemma is losing its clear structure and turning into a question to be outlined in the next paragraph. Furthermore, to become united again now within the 1991 borders requires agreement and much greater Western support for continuing the war and expecting Russia to collapse or change to a democratic government in the near future. This is unlikely, if not impossible. In other words, the first part of Chancellor Adenauer’s dilemma is not an option for President Zelensky.

This dilemma of Adenauer is being transformed into Zelensky’s question: Is the West ready to invite Ukraine to NATO or use other instruments to ensure Ukraine’s post-war security and put the country on the path to recovery?

This question has an obvious addressee: the West, namely the United States. It is Washington that should show leadership in the West and offer reliable security instruments to Ukraine. One of these instruments is Ukraine’s membership in NATO. Here, it is worth considering very carefully the options of extending an invitation to Ukraine within the territories under its control. In addition, the so-called East German model with a modification may be an option – extending an invitation to Ukraine within the territories under its control, without deploying NATO troops, but with NATO weapons and using Article 5 of the NATO Charter in relation to these territories under Ukraine’s control. And, of course, those Western countries that signed security agreements with Ukraine in 2023, and there are more than 20 such countries, must properly fulfill their obligations.

This would be the best solution for Russia as well, because, as Henry Kissinger noted in January 2023, Putin, by invading Ukraine in 2022, personally erased his own red line on Ukraine’s NATO membership, which he had announced to the US Ambassador to Russia, William Burns, in 2008. Right now, in the context of the world disorder, there is an opportunity to reconsider all red lines in relations between the West and Russia, and even in a broader geopolitical context involving China and countries of the Global South, and finally correct the geopolitical and security mistakes of the West in the 1990s regarding Ukraine, which should finally get rid of its buffer zone status. It is obviously that an exact moment for the strategic dialogue with all parties involved directly and indirectly has come. Only a world security rubicon is further.

Jaishankar In Pakistan For SCO: It’s Not A Favor From Either Side

Ambassador Abdul Basit

October 15, 2024

India’s Minister for External Affairs Dr Subrahmanyam Jaishankar in Pakistan to attend the 23rd meeting of the Council of Heads of Government (CHG) of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). In Pakistan, analysts and commentators are still trying to decipher what India’s participation in the SCO meeting holds for relations between the two countries which have been stuck in a gridlock since August 5, 2019. While some are interpreting Jaishankar’s presence in Islamabad as a good augury for bilateral relations, others do not seem to be very impressed or optimistic about prospects.

By keeping itself away from the summit in Islamabad, India would have conveyed a message that it is treating the SCO the same way as it does SAARC.

In Pakistan, we have the habit of creating unnecessary hype, especially when it comes to our relations with India. As he stated before he arrived in Islamabad, Jaishankar is not here for a bilateral meeting. He is here to attend the SCO summit as he did in October last year in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic. Both Pakistani and Indian premiers never attended the CHG’s meetings. Unlike the other SCO member countries, we are parliamentary democracies. Accordingly, our prime ministers would attend the Council of Heads of State meetings which is the highest decision-making body of the SCO.

Let us be very clear. India has not done any favor to Pakistan by being present in Islamabad. SCO is an important organization, and by keeping itself away from the summit in Islamabad, India would have conveyed a message that it is treating the SCO the same way as it does SAARC. India had no other option but to attend the summit as Pakistan attended the SCO foreign ministers meeting in Goa, India, last year.

Also read: Pakistan-India Super Normalization? Not So Fast

Nor did Pakistan do any favor to India by inviting Prime Minister Modi. This is how things are in the SCO. Pakistan could not have invited India’s foreign minister or vice president of India to the CHG meeting. It was the prerogative of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to nominate anyone to represent India in Islamabad. And the obvious choice was Jaishankar given the vexed nature of India-Pakistan relations.

As for any possible breakthrough, chances are slim as neither country has proposed a bilateral meeting on the sidelines. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar would have opportunities to shake hands with Jaishankar and exchange pleasantries. Anything happening beyond this is looking difficult at this stage, if not impossible. A meeting would take place only if the two countries have been in touch on the back channel and discussing how to break the deadlock as a meeting without any proper spadework would likely create more problems than addressing the issues at hand.

As for any possible breakthrough, chances are slim as neither country has proposed a bilateral meeting on the sidelines.

Pakistan can ill-afford to agree to resume talks under the framework as contained in the lopsided Ufa Joint Statement of 10 July 2015. India’s unilateral and illegal actions on August 5, 2019, abrogating the special status of the occupied Jammu and Kashmir, was too serious a step to be ignored by Pakistan. In my assessment, India may be willing to resume a formal dialogue process without any preconditions, for that would further undermine Pakistan’s principled position on Kashmir. Hence, I have been suggesting that engaging on the back channel would make more sense from Pakistan’s perspective than resuming formal talks. Pakistan must be certain whether or not India is ready to have result-oriented talks on Kashmir. More of the same would not work.

Some in Pakistan are still wedded to the approach of taking baby steps aimed at creating a conducive environment, enabling the two countries to subsequently address difficult and core issues like Kashmir.

I for one don’t see much merit in this approach, especially after what India did to Kashmir. There is no space left for Pakistan to continue entertaining hackneyed and tested diplomatic approaches. India’s insistence since January last year to reopen the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty is a case in point. Simply put, it would like to have a one-sided agenda pushing Kashmir to the margins. I am not sure if Pakistan can accept unilateralism in Kashmir.

The question remains if India is able to dispense with its intransigence and move from conflict management to conflict resolution.

Also read: Post-Hasina Bangladesh: Is Pakistan Up To The Task?

There is no denying the fact that peace is in our mutual interest. The question remains if India can dispense with its intransigence and move from conflict management to conflict resolution. It needs to be stressed that regional organizations such as SCO and SAARC cannot realize their potential if there are serious intra-regional disputes.

As for the SCO, India has serious issues with both China and Pakistan. It is developing its strategic partnership with the US in leaps and bounds. Therefore, it is hardly surprising that India is the only SCO country openly opposing China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

Over time, India will likely become the biggest impediment to SCO activities. India cannot have its cake and eat it too. China and Russia may still like to keep India in good humor for various reasons, but they would not like to see their initiative go down the drain.

Pakistan must play its cards skillfully and patiently. “Haste makes waste”.

Israel’s Deterrence Theory Proves To Be A Failure

Muhammad Hussain Baqeri

October 14, 2024

On the anniversary of the Al-Aqsa Storm and after the Operation True Promise II which showed the ineffectiveness of Israel’s defense in intercepting Iranian missiles, it can now be said with more certainty that Tel Aviv’s deterrence theory has failed miserably in the given environment.

The October 7 operation – conducted by Hamas last year after breaking the Israeli defense wall and shocking the Zionist forces – produced the highest number of casualties, which was unprecedented in the history of Israel.

The deterrence theory has failed in the Middle East region, especially in Israel’s case, and it will take a long time to find an alternative.

And on the northern front, Hezbollah destroyed the defense structure of Israel in a way that the residents of the Al-Jalil region inevitably had to relocate to safer areas.

Yemeni missiles also occasionally bypassed the Israeli air defense and entered the lands occupied by Israel.

It was said that Ibrahim Aqeel, the martyred commander of Hezbollah, was planning to enter the Galilee region and carry out an operation similar to the Al-Aqsa Storm. If such a statement is true, it means that Israel no longer has a safe place, and its terrain and skies are open to the Axis of Resistance.

The Israeli regime spent many years adopting the latest technological achievements of the United States and the West as well as the use of costly equipment and weapons.

With the presence of the Iron Dome, the David Sling, and the Arrow 3, they believed that it could intercept any short-range and long-range projectile.

Israeli authorities saw and arrogantly ignored the measures that were being taken by the Axis of Resistance, like digging tunnels and stockpiling weapons. They thought that their complex defense system had created a sufficient and complete deterrence for Israel’s safety.

However, things have changed.

By examining the actions of the resistance axis and especially the Operation True Promise, it has been determined that all of Israel’s security measures on the ground and in the air, as well as advanced communication and telecommunication technologies, have not prevented heavy strikes deep into the occupied land.

It seems that the military commanders, angry at the inefficiency and poor performance of these defense systems, have received a clear message that no place in Israel is safe anymore, and their strategic deterrence has failed.

The Israeli regime spent many years adopting the latest technological achievements of the United States and the West as well as the use of costly equipment and weapons.

Israel’s aggressive behavior in recent weeks should be analyzed in this framework:

So, Tel Aviv intends to announce that if Israel is not safe, then the entire Middle East should not be safe either.

How? By activating various fronts – West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq – as well as increasing the operations deep in Syria and intensifying aggression against Gaza, and also creating a front with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The current situation is proof of a new arrangement intensifying tensions and disturbing the region’s geostrategic balance.

Also read: Netanyahu Is Dragging Everyone Into War

The continuous Israeli bombings in various countries of the region now threaten not only the Middle East but the whole world.

Many countries in West Asia are now worried about the spread of war and getting into unwanted conflicts. This issue is clearly raised by Abdul Fattah Al-Sisi, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, King Abdullah II, the Gulf Cooperation Council leaders and others.

The uncertainty about the future of Gaza, Hamas, ceasefire, the two state solution and Lebanon along with the situation in the West Bank are threatened due to the expansion of Israel’s insecure activities. As a result, the fate of not only the Middle East but also the whole world is unknown.

The world is waiting every day for the surprises of this devastating war. The collapse of Israel’s deterrence theory and the heavy losses – especially wasting billions of dollars to counter the cheap resistance-oriented missiles – it suffered has brought the regime’s aggression to its peak. In fact, Israel had been taken out of its deterrence lock.

The Abrahamic Accords are meaningless without Saudi Arabia’s participation, and the Saudi leaders are unlikely to join these until the idea of the two states is finalized.

Moreover, Israel’s aggressive behavior in dealing with the defenseless people of the region has also put Arab countries under severe pressure, especially those which had normalized relations with Tel Aviv.

Israel currently does not make any distinction between militiamen and civilians, resistance people and ordinary people, Shia, Sunni, and Druze. The blind killings, which the Zionist regime claims to be targeted, put the leaders of the Arab countries, who are not happy with the Axis of Resistance either, in such an awkward position that they cannot remain indifferent to the war crimes committed by Israel.

Hence, the Abrahamic Accords are meaningless without Saudi Arabia’s participation, and the Saudi leaders are unlikely to join these until the idea of the two states is finalized.

Some analysts may think that Israel’s current destructive actions against Hamas and Hezbollah are part of Israel’s deterrent actions in restoring security to its land borders. How? By removing the resistance from the core of the Israeli regime in the triangle of Haifa, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem. It means that the resistance would be stopped forever by destroying infrastructure and eliminating key figures. But it seems that these ideas do not match with the reality.

At least, Israel’s experiences in the 33-day and 22-day wars against Hezbollah and Gaza showed that the resistance quickly rises from the ruins. By renewing its strength and learning from the defeats, it will appear stronger and more powerful in the field.

At the same time, expanding the war in the region into a regional war is a double whammy: If it flares up, it will also involve the great powers in the conflict.

The war between Russia and Ukraine has brought the relations between the great powers to the lowest levels. Such developments make conflict resolution difficult.

At the level of West Asia, it will not only become more complex with time but also lead to a further increase in tensions between the global powers.

On the other hand, the experience of last year’s negotiations to resolve the Gaza crisis showed that the United States alone, and even with its European and regional allies, is not able to resolve regional issues. The unilateral support extended by the US and the Western to Israel under “the right of self-defense” has not only jeopardized the security of American forces in the region but also provoked protests from different countries. As a result, public opinion around the world and pressure has increased even among the American elites.

Although China and Russia have a massive presence behind the scenes of the events in the region, this does not mean that they are trying to solve the crisis. Perhaps, both countries benefit from the West’s involvement in Middle East issues.

Russia has interests in disrupting the concentration of the West in supporting Ukraine and China in disrupting the India-Israel corridor. In addition, not only the war in the Middle East has cost America and Israel billions of dollars, but also affected international transportation.

Also, the inflationary effects of this war have affected all countries and damaged the region’s foreign investments, tourism revenues, and other economic sectors.

Although separating the Axis of Resistance from each other is on Israel’s current agenda, it will not be able to restore the balance of violence to the balance of peace.

In the medium term, the Israeli regime struggles to create a strategic compromise and launch the Abrahamic Accords. Israel does not have the necessary options to maintain and guarantee the security of the corridor between India and Israel and is also unable to surrender before the Axis of Resistance.

Because the majority of voters associated with synagogues and the Israeli elites do not agree with the two states solution.

Thus, Israel no longer has a suitable solution to encourage Saudi Arabia and other countries to join the Abrahamic Accords.

Although separating the Axis of Resistance from each other is on Israel’s current agenda, it will not be able to restore the balance of violence to the balance of peace despite the severity of the destruction.

The Middle East region is now facing two completely different scenarios:

A delayed ceasefire scenario, in which the level of tension increases and sometimes the exchange of long-range fire between Iran and Israel as well as the continuation of attacks by Hezbollah, Ansarullah, Hashd al-Shaabi [Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF)] and other groups may eventually force Israel to reduce the tension and accept a peace agreement by bearing heavy losses.

Tel Aviv will use everything within its power to the divide the resistance front during the opening between the ceasefire agreement and a full-scale war.

Alternatively, the region could enter into a full-scale war with the presence of United States and its Western allies, in which the Axis of Resistance attacks the American bases in the region and probably drags the Arab countries, Russia, and China into the conflict.

Despite extending absolute and unlimited support to Israel while ignoring the war crimes and genocide as well as heavy military presence in the region, the US does not want to engage in a full-scale war. The reason is simple: a full-scale war can reduce the United States’ ability to deter against to challenge posed by Iran, Russia, and China. At the same time, it may shake internal status quo in the US more than before.

However, Israel wants maximum bloodshed and destruction in the vacuum created by the US presidential election and the inaction on the part of international community.

Therefore, Tel Aviv will use everything within its power to the divide the resistance front during the opening between the ceasefire agreement and a full-scale war.

On the other hand, the resistance front still has the necessary efficiency and hidden surprises. The deterrence theory has failed in the Middle East region, especially in Israel’s case, and it will take a long time to find an alternative.

Modern Tragedy: US Sanctions Saga In A Security-Scared Environ

Dr Gulshan Rafiq

October 12, 2024

In the shadowy realm of realpolitik, where power and principle intertwine, the US sanctions on China and Pakistan for their missile cooperation emerge as another complex tale of state-centrism. This blends the grandeur of contemporary conflicts, rich in historical and geopolitical drama, with far-reaching consequences for the region and beyond.

To decipher the moral of these sanctions, one must consider the geopolitical landscape through the lens of literary tradition. Much like the intricate plots of Shakespeare’s tragedies, where ambition and retribution drove the fates of sovereigns, the lone superpower sanctions are a manifestation of the broader struggle for control and influence on the global stage. Shakespeare’s characters, from Macbeth’s relentless pursuit of power to Othello’s tragic descent into jealousy, mirror the underlying tensions and strategic maneuvers that define this conflict.

As the narrative of US sanctions against China and Pakistan continues to unfold, it serves as a reminder of the complexities inherent in international relations.

The sanctions are ostensibly designed to curb the proliferation of ballistic missile technology, reflecting an effort to uphold the principles enshrined in international arms control frameworks like the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). This initiative, aiming to prevent the spread of missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, is reminiscent of the ancient Roman quest for stability and order, a pursuit captured in Virgil’s “Aeneid.” Just as Aeneas struggles to establish a new order in a turbulent world, the US seeks to maintain a semblance of global equilibrium amidst the challenges posed by emerging missile capabilities.

China and Pakistan, however, perceive these sanctions through a different lens, one that evokes the themes of resistance and survival prevalent in both Western and Eastern literary traditions. For Pakistan, the development of ballistic missile technology represents not just a strategic asset but a crucial component of its national defense strategy, akin to the heroic efforts of ancient figures who sought to protect their realms from encroaching threats. This perspective is reminiscent of the archetypal heroism depicted in Homer’s “Iliad,” where warriors like Achilles are driven by the necessity of defending their honor and securing future. Similarly, Pakistan’s missile capabilities are viewed as a deterrent against its traditional adversary, India.

Amidst this geopolitical bait, the US-India defense collaboration emerges as a significant subplot.

China’s role in this episode reflects its own complex strategic calculus, akin to the character of the dragon in Chinese mythology – a symbol of immense power and wisdom. The dragon’s dual nature, embodying both a force of great strength and a protector of tradition, mirrors China’s position as a major global player supporting Pakistan’s defense technology. This relationship can be seen as part of a broader strategic vision, echoing the principles found in Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War,” where alliances and strategic depth are vital for maintaining balance and advancing national interests. In this sense, the US sanctions challenge China’s strategic ambitions and its role as a stabilizing force in the region.

Amidst this geopolitical bait, the US-India defense collaboration emerges as a significant subplot. This alliance, often portrayed as a counterweight to China’s influence, underscores a shared vision of strategic stability and regional security. Much like the alliances in ancient epic tales – where coalitions are forged to confront common adversaries – the US-India partnership represents a renewed effort to create a new status quo in the Indo-Pacific region.

The sanctions also illuminate the broader theme of unilateralism versus multilateralism in international relations. In Shakespearean terms, they could be seen as a dramatic device, a means of highlighting the limitations and consequences of solitary actions. Much like the tragic flaws of Shakespeare’s heroes, the unilateral imposition of sanctions may not always achieve its intended outcomes.

The sanctions also bring to light the evolving nature of global diplomacy, where information warfare and economic pressures play increasingly prominent roles.

Critics argue that such measures could entrench positions and exacerbate existing tensions rather than resolve them. This perspective is suggestive of the insights found in Chinese literature, where the futility of certain struggles and the inevitability of fate are recurring themes. Du Fu, the great Tang dynasty poet, often reflected on the futility of human endeavor’s against the backdrop of larger, immutable forces, a sentiment that resonates with the current discourse on the effectiveness of sanctions.

The sanctions also bring to light the evolving nature of global diplomacy, where information warfare and economic pressures play increasingly prominent roles. In this context, one might recall the image of the classical stage, where the interplay of characters and themes was crucial to the unfolding drama. The modern stage, however, includes the digital realm, where information is wielded as a weapon and economic sanctions as a strategic tool. This transformation parallels the shift from classical to modern literature, where the themes of power and influence adapt to new forms and technologies.

As the narrative of US sanctions against China and Pakistan continues to unfold, it serves as a reminder of the complexities inherent in international relations. It underscores the enduring relevance of literary themes – such as the quest for power, and the nature of resistance, within the realm of global politics. The ultimate resolution of this conflict, much like the resolution of a great literary work, will depend on the interplay of its central characters – the nations involved, and their ability to maneuver through diplomacy, strategy, and international law.

In this context, one is reminded that the pursuit of balance and stability in the global order is both a noble and challenging endeavor. The lessons gleaned from this modern saga echo through history and literature, revealing the timeless nature of the inevitable human quest for security, sovereignty, and peace. As with any great literary work, the resolution of this paradigm will shape the future course of international relations and provide insights into the evolving dynamics of global power.

Imran Khan, Extremism, Social Fragmentation And the Only Alternative

Arsalan Raja

October 11, 2024

A spectacular failure to achieve the ill-defined destructive goals of “Project Imran” and a frightening creation of the fascist force leading to sociopolitical fragmentation mean Pakistan is now in a vortex. The current scenario limits its ability to tackle a plethora of challenges which are already complicated by the elements associated with Imran Khan, the incarcerated PTI founding chairman.

We need to find a solution because it has been nurtured as a social phenomenon. You can’t just wait and see. Procrastination is a national habit, but this approach has always produced devastating results by worsening the state of affairs.

Also read: Pakistan Whither? Where Do We Go From Here?

So, what is the problem?

The mindset groomed and solidified into a cult called the PTI has penetrated deep into the society and the state, requiring an urgent action which is already delayed for the reasons that must be explained. It only represents either a wrong belief that the things would eventually return to normal or a strategy that society should remain divided.

Ironically, this projection of the playboy cricketer came at a time when the newscasters were forced to wear headscarves “dupatta” on their heads.

But just like any other issue or disease, treatment requires a proper diagnosis to understand its origins.

THE FANTASY:

Imran Khan was presented as a poster boy by Ziaul Haq to promote a soft image at a time when he was radicalizing the society through an unending Islamization process. Hindsight suggests Zia was absolutely right and deserves recognition for his selection – not policies and actions – as Imran Khan proved to be a wonderful choice for advocating the cause of extremists and attracting the modernized urban upper middle and middle classes thanks to the backing of elite.

Ironically, this projection of the playboy cricketer came at a time when the newscasters were forced to wear headscarves “dupatta” on their heads, while the male and female actors in dramas kept a two-feet distance between themselves on PTV – the sole TV channel at that time.

Before moving forward, an example should be shared both on a lighter and serious note since it explains why we are here. It was the same period when Michael Jackson became a global star. However, we were barred from becoming a part of this process, as Zia persisted with imposing extremist thoughts not only through laws but also formal and informal education. Our heroes were all armed and were riding a horse while we lived in the 20th century. We had no room for anything related to the good old Industrial Revolution, forget about postmodernity.

As we missed the train, we were also not ready to take advantage of the globalization triggered by the fall of Berlin Wall and the dismemberment of the USSR after the death of Zia in a plane crash on Aug 17, 1988. Oh Gosh! We have missed so many trains since August 14, 1947.

Let’s come back to Imran Khan now.

Once you are in a limelight, you obviously become an attraction. The paucity of heroes in sports, music and other performing arts meant that Imran Khan had been developed into the only choice during 1980s and 90s.

Just imagine if we had access to Michael Jackson or produced our own versions of Michael Jackson, Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Emma Thompson, Sharon Stone, Jodie Foster, Julia Roberts, or Meryl Streep.

Things would have been certainly different had we not faced this worst form of social engineering, as we opted for mainstreaming religious extremism.

We can find the origins of Imran Khan as a cricketer-cum-politician in the posh localities of Lahore and Islamabad.

It is in this backdrop that on March 25, 1992, when Pakistan won the ICC World Cup – an event that enabled the producers like Lt-Gen (R) Hameed Gul to cement Imran Khan’s case as a savior against the two “evils” – the Bhutto of Larkana and the Sharifs of Lahore. Afterall, Qazi Hussain Ahmed had failed miserably in the PIF (Pakistan Islamic Front) project – an attempt to replicate Algeria’s Islamic Salvation Front (PIF) – in the 1993 elections. The failure was so huge that the Jamaat-e-Islami hasn’t been unable to recover from the loss, resulting in its decline in electoral politics despite a huge boost given by the MMA – an alliance of religio-political parties formed in 2002.

THE ORIGIN:

Once you are in limelight, you are a star. In this case, Imran Khan was the only available star, as the playing field had been levelled in his favor. Thus, a romance began between the elite and Imran Khan, which was reinforced by their hate towards democracy.

That’s why we can find the origins of Imran Khan as a cricketer-cum-politician in the posh localities of Lahore and Islamabad. He met all of their conditions – an Oxford-educated man who speaks English fluently and doesn’t look desi [native] while partying with the British elite as a playboy.

And they found a natural ally in the shape of upper middle class which was a direct product of the economic system and also a beneficiary of globalization just like the elite, meaning that they had similar social and political views.

However, the circle expanded given that Pakistan’s urban middle classes, generally also have anti-democracy leanings and are religious in nature – in total contrast to the what we see in the developed world or in other developing countries.

Now, we must identify the reasons responsible for this trend.

THE EXPANSION:

Imran Khan’s influence among the paradoxical and hypocritical urban classes of all sorts is rooted in their social alienation and influence of the Islamization process. They found a messiah who represented their contradictions – modern but also a bigot, westernized lifestyles but also championing the cause of pseudo conservative cultural values, eulogizing the West for personal freedoms but also promoting fascism, calling for uprooting the system but also being its direct beneficiary, pleading the case for punishing the corrupt but also having a solid bond with the corrupt, so on and so forth.

Imran Khan’s influence among the paradoxical and hypocritical urban classes of all sorts is rooted in their social alienation and influence of the Islamization process.

It was a fascinating deal that offered everything to everyone. But again, the social alienation and the desire to become part of the affluent classes made them follow the rules and plans set by those living in the poshest of the posher neighborhoods of Lahore and Islamabad.

Also read: Address The Bullies Before They Become Frankensteins

One can’t miss the irony that the urban middle and upper middle classes – especially the professionals – complain about the corrupt system and the corrupt politicians, but are one of the most corrupt themselves. A cursory look at the FBR record will speak for themselves.

This hate towards democracy and admiration of the repressive cultural values – like Jirga and panchayat experienced by those living in rural and backward areas – for one reason or the other stem from the fact that Pakistan’s urban middle and upper middle classes are not a product of industrialization. By the time this article was being written, we are a still quasi-feudal, quasi-tribal society.

It leads us to a conclusion that there seems to be some serious problems with the educated and wealthy urban classes which are supposed to lead social transformation anywhere in the world. And the absence of a real generation gap in Pakistan’s society summarizes the state of affairs.

Yes! Pakistan has never really a generation gap, as one generation after another is transmitting the same old values and thus the same worldview to the younger minds.

Here an example should suffice. A study conducted by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE) says 98.5% of the respondents had parents who are linguistically homogenous. We are not leaving the same old caste and creed practices.

And the PIDE study also show that “ethnic exogamy is more prevalent in urban Pakistan (1.9%) than rural” and “a slightly increasing trend for ethnic exogamy is observed with increasing education and income levels”.

Pakistan has never really a generation gap, as one generation after another is transmitting the same old values and thus the same worldview to the younger minds.

All these things prove why the urban educated classes prefer and admire Imran Khan who has the distinction of justifying and promoting social repression. Yes! He is the only one. Not a single political leader, and that too in mainstream politics, has ever pleaded the case for Jirga and panchayat. Not even any feudal or tribal leader had ever dared to do so in national politics.

Ask any of the Imran Khan’s supporter having an urban background about his or her views on Jirga and panchayat. He or she will endorse the leader while rejecting the very possibility of becoming part of the same cultural practices.

Someone with the same background once opined that there is nothing called forced marriage. We can list as a forced marriage only if a woman is ordered to marry against her will at gunpoint. These expert views shared by a multiple degree-holder woman are enough to explain a complete lack of knowledge about the dynamics of traditional society. It also shows what they think about the ordinary people.

Meanwhile, Imran Khan’s urban supporters also have favorable views about the Taliban.

Wait! But Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is a stronghold of Imran Khan. How can one explain this phenomenon when it is the urban elite who introduced the idea of Imran Khan as the savior and others living in the cities followed the course? Doesn’t it mean the story narrated above is baseless?

No, it isn’t, unfortunately. It only reflects the wider audience Imran Khan has due to his contradictions.

THE PAKHTUNS:

You shouldn’t be surprised by the acceptance enjoyed by Imran Khan in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa because it is a result of sociopolitical process which started with the Afghan jihad in 80s.

So, here is the story. The Afghan jihad meant creation of Mujahideen and the required mindset in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – along with the parts of north western Balochistan – as the project necessitated the involvement of Pakhtuns. It required a network of large and small madrassas. Although the same exercise was repeated in other parts of the country, the mutual affiliation among the Pashto-speaking population on both sides of the border affected Pakhtuns the most.

Initially, the religious parties represented this mindset at the political level. However, years of indoctrination started weakening the nationalist forces and national political parties in the province, previously known as NWFP. But the lack of appealing leadership allowed other political parties to enter the assemblies and form governments till 1990s, as this mindset hadn’t been congealed politically so far.

However, the MMA presented the first opportunity for vote consolidation in 2002. This electoral alliance comprising religio-political parties was able to form government on its own after winning 48 out of 98 seats while five independents also joined its ranks.

Five years of the MMA government in the province produced an environment where this mindset further flourished and started getting mainstreamed in the province.

Although the 2008 elections saw ANP leading the coalition provincial government, the Taliban terrorists targeted the party leaders and workers for their views during the period 2008-13. It is claimed that the ANP lost around 700 leaders and workers despite being in the government, as the erstwhile FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – the erstwhile NWFP renamed during the same period – faced the brunt of terrorism.

The full-fledged launch of Project Imran meant that a political force was being raised which wasn’t on the Taliban’s radar before the 2013 elections.

One of the reasons behind the MNA’s failure in 2008 was the imminent return of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto to power in Islamabad. However, she was martyred before the people could go to polls. At the same time, the religio-political parties were on an overall decline in electoral politics, as they remained unable to ensure a sustainable expansion their hardcore support base.

However, the full-fledged launch of Project Imran meant that a political force was being raised which wasn’t on the Taliban’s radar before the 2013 elections. While political leaders and workers of other parties – ANP, PPP and PML-N – restricted their activities due to constant threats, the PTI was slowly allowed to fill this vacuum. In this scenario, the things reached a point when the PTI wiped out others in 2018. Another case of levelling the playing field for one and only Imran Khan.

Also read: Populism Or Fascism? How Imran Khan’s Vendetta is Shaking Pakistan

It is in this backdrop Imran Khan emerged as a leader with the full backing of the power circles. This section of the society recognized him as an individual who praised and advocated the case of those influenced by the jihad process. Imran Khan is the culmination of a process that also led to the shrinking appeal of JUI-F as Jamaat-e-Islami because of the religious symbols used by him.

THE MODEL:

In honest retrospection, one can easily see that we as a people have tried to avoid addressing the basic question: how should we deal with extremism?

This denial obviously produced an approach that pushed us towards creating an environment when anything resembling to reasoning is blasphemous. Hence, we instead of reversing the social fragmentation caused by the unchecked spread of extremist thoughts, maintain the status quo. In fact, we even allowed entities like the TLP to prop up at a time when we were engaged in fighting the TTP and other terrorist organizations.

Therefore, we still somehow find a solution in Zakir Naik – a preacher who openly advocates the views similar to that of the Taliban and Al Qaeda – as a role model. Therefore, the rise of Imran Khan was a natural consequence of the continuous process.

Societies aren’t machines that can be operated from a dashboard. Once you unleash a social force, you can’t push a button to place it back in some storage room or change it automatically.

But who could be the model?

Honest answer? The very people we regularly contact for financial assistance – Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

One doesn’t need to go into the details of how the UAE has worked over the last five decades to develop as a society which is open socially with zero tolerance for extremism.

However, the transformation of Saudi Arabia under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is even more interesting case, as he has bulldozed the forces that could hamper the process.

THE SOLUTION:

One has to admit first that the extremism has been Pakistan’s main problem which the Imran Khan factor complicated by mainstreaming a brand of politics mixing fascism, extremism and terrorism. There is no other choice but to reprioritize the goals and select a model.

After you have chosen a model, the next step is to devise a plan to achieve the objectives according to your particular ground realities. The solution in our case is painful because you cannot move forward without extracting the destructive mindset from both the society and the state.

For the long-term changes, the education system as a whole with a particular focus on curriculum needs a complete overhaul. Students must know about their geography and [actual] history as well as the modern world and the socioeconomic changes that produced the North-South divide. They require complete understanding of the historical developments, leading to the developed West.

Pakistan immediately needs is a “purge” so that elements promoting extremism and associated with the views upheld by Imran Khan are systematically removed from all institutions.

At the same time, science should be our focus, but the scientific minds need critical thinking. So, lift the blanket ban imposed on reasoning and make development of critical thinking a prerequisite for schooling from an early age.

However, what Pakistan immediately needs is a “purge” so that elements promoting extremism and associated with the views upheld by Imran Khan are systematically removed from all institutions, including media and education. The suggestion may seem harsh and unrealistic, but the fact remains that you won’t move forward unless drastic steps are not taken, as these elements would sabotage every move both at the societal and state levels.

For this purpose, one can take a leaf out of the McCarthyism or even the Stalinist Purges. The two historical examples are certainly not good ones; however, using the same techniques for a better cause is not a bad idea.

All we need is to set goals that can make Pakistan part of the global journey towards integration and progress, especially when the two Gulf States – Saudi Arabia and the UAE – are leading the unprecedented transformative changes in the region. Staying in the vicious circle would be our own choice, blaming others won’t serve any purpose. Just don’t miss another train.

Nuclear Security: Radioactive Material Theft Signals Potential Crisis

Arshad Mehmood

October 10, 2024

Pakistan has expressed deep concerns over repeated incidents of theft and illegal sale of nuclear and other radioactive materials in its eastern neighbor, India, calling on the United Nations Security Council to take the issue seriously. The demand comes, as nuclear security is a major global concern.

During a Wednesday briefing on the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1540, Munir Akram – Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN – emphasized the need for a thorough investigation into these incidents.

He urged the Security Council to take decisive measures to prevent such occurrences in the future.

Pakistan highlighted the recent incidents in which a group in India was found illegally in possession of highly radioactive and toxic material known as californium, valued at $100 million. Additionally, three other cases involving the theft of keys related to sensitive materials were reported in India in 2021.

Akram emphasized that these incidents suggest the existence of a black market for such sensitive materials, raising serious concerns about regional and global security.

NON-PROLIFERATION:

In his statement, Akram reaffirmed Pakistan’s commitment to the non-proliferation of nuclear materials and its adherence to UN Security Council Resolution 1540.

He emphasized that Pakistan has effectively fulfilled its obligations under the resolution as a responsible nuclear power.

“We have established a robust command and control system, enacted stringent legislation to regulate the transfer of sensitive goods and technologies, and implemented a comprehensive export control system that meets the highest international standards,” Akram stated.

Akram noted that Pakistan has submitted six comprehensive reports outlining its efforts to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1540. These efforts include:

These steps, he added, reflect Pakistan’s proactive approach to upholding the resolution’s objectives.

DUAL-USE TECHNOLOGIES:

Akram also emphasized the importance of protecting states’ rights to the peaceful use of dual-use technologies and the need for a balanced approach in export control systems to ensure that they are not coerced or used as a tool of discrimination.

He proposed that either the Security Council or the General Assembly should form an inclusive, open-ended working group dedicated to ensuring equitable access to technology and tackling issues related to denial, discrimination, and developmental barriers.

NUCLEAR MATERIAL BLACK MARKET:

The recent incidents of theft and illegal sale of nuclear and other radioactive materials in India have sparked serious concerns about regional and global security.

Hence, the discovery of a black market for such dangerous substances in one of South Asia’s nuclear-armed states has brought into sharp focus the potential risks of nuclear terrorism and the broader implications for international stability.

The presence of radioactive materials in unauthorized hands poses a direct threat to regional stability, particularly in South Asia, where tensions between nuclear-armed neighbors like India and Pakistan remain high.

In a region already marred by historical hostilities and a volatile security environment, any potential leak of nuclear or radioactive materials could have catastrophic consequences.

NON-STATE ACTORS:

Such incidents could enable non-state actors or terrorist groups to gain access to materials that could be weaponized, leading to a new and dangerous security dynamic in the region.

Experts warn that the existence of a black market for radioactive materials heightens the risk of such materials being used in acts of terror, potentially targeting urban centers or strategic infrastructure.

The use of even a small quantity of radioactive material in a dirty bomb could create widespread panic, cause significant casualties, and disrupt economic activities, resulting in a crisis that would extend beyond the borders of South Asia.

The issue of nuclear security is not confined to regional dynamics; it has far-reaching global implications. The potential for radioactive materials to be sold on the black market and used in acts of nuclear terrorism represents a challenge to global non-proliferation efforts.

The international community has long sought to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials, and incidents like those reported in India threaten to undermine these efforts.

STORAGE OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS:

Incidents of this nature underscore the importance of robust and transparent regulatory frameworks for the handling and storage of nuclear and radioactive materials.

They also highlight the need for stringent measures to secure nuclear facilities and prevent unauthorized access. While South Asian countries have made strides in nuclear security, these incidents suggest that more needs to be done to ensure that radioactive materials do not fall into the wrong hands.

COORDINATED EFFORTS:

The recurring reports of illegal activities related to radioactive materials in India have prompted calls for a coordinated international response. Observers suggest that the UN Security Council and other international bodies should take notice of these developments and work with regional actors to ensure that appropriate security measures are enforced.

Addressing these concerns requires a multi-pronged approach, including sharing intelligence, enhancing border controls to prevent the smuggling of radioactive materials, and providing technical assistance to improve regulatory frameworks. Strengthening regional cooperation through dialogues and joint initiatives could help build trust and ensure that all countries in the region are taking necessary steps to prevent such incidents.

The broader global community must remain vigilant in supporting these efforts, as the consequences of radioactive materials falling into the hands of non-state actors could be devastating, not only for South Asia but for the entire world.

The international community must emphasize the importance of adhering to frameworks like UN Security Council Resolution 1540, which aims to prevent non-state actors from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

As the world grapples with evolving security challenges, the need for strict nuclear security measures has never been greater. The incidents in India serve as a stark reminder of the risks posed by insufficient regulation and the potential dangers of a thriving black market for radioactive materials.

But addressing these risks will require concerted efforts at the national, regional, and international levels to ensure that nuclear materials remain secure and that incidents of theft or illegal trade are swiftly addressed.

The stakes are high, and the international community cannot afford to overlook the potential consequences of such incidents. A failure to act could result in a security crisis with implications that extend far beyond South Asia, threatening the safety and stability of populations around the globe.

Transforming Pakistan’s Youth Into A Driving Force For Sustainable Growth

Tayyaba Khurshid

October 9, 2024

Pakistan, a nation with a burgeoning population of over 220 million, has the potential to transform its youth into an asset rather than liability. The youth of any country are the driving force towards its economic growth and sustainable development. If a country has an educated, skilled, dynamic and employed youth population, no force can stop social and economic progress. The real transformation lies in the youth, as they are the present and the future of any state. It is just a cliche to say that the potential of Pakistan’s youth to spearhead an economic revival is immense, given their energy, creativity, and adaptability to technological advancements, albeit whenever given an chance.

History is full of examples, where the youth became a driving force in revolution. Bangladesh recently have witnessed a revolution led by youth, where the corrupt leadership was left with no option but to leave the country.

Economic revolution can be brought in Pakistan, if the youth work in the right direction and realize their immense potential. The abilities of youth can be harnessed properly through strategic alignment of policies, resources and opportunities.

No real progress can be made without addressing a major challenge that has been affecting the conservative societies like Pakistan – it is gender inequality.

This essay explores the vital role of youth in driving Pakistan’s economic revolution, highlighting the challenges they face and the strategies needed to empower them as catalysts of change.

The great poet Iqbal highlighted the potential a man of strong character holds.

“The man of strong character who is master of himself will find fortune complaisant.

He will dig up the foundations of the universe and cast its atoms into a new mold.

He will subvert the course of time,

And wreck the azure firmament.

By his own strength he will produce,

A new world which will do his pleasure.”

The youth in Pakistan aged between 15 and 29 make up around 64% of total population. This unique bulge of youth, if utilized effectively, can serve as a catalyst for economic expansion. Their curiosity and inventive spirit enable them to bring a change and work that lead to growth and sustainable development. Born and raised in technology, the Gen-Z are more aware of their surroundings and adaptive towards new domains of earning as well as learning skills that are required globally. In fact, they are more prepared to take risks for their personal growth.

Young people have been leading an increasing number of entrepreneurial projects in Pakistan in recent years. They are simultaneously tackling social challenges and generating new economic possibilities through tech companies and social enterprises.

The rise of Pakistan’s startup ecosystem – particularly in cities like Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad – offers a positive outlook towards economic growth where young people are creating opportunities not only for them but for others as well. Pakistan needs startups that can create employment opportunities as job market is now more saturated than ever. As a result, a majority of youth finds it hard to get job.

Moreover, these startups not only generate employment but also contribute to diversification of economy, which is crucial for long-term stability and growth.

Globalization has led to interconnectedness and the skilled youth now have an opportunity to work for foreign clients while sitting in the comfort of their homes. However, these opportunities can be availed with strong internet and skilled youth. The government needs to focus on the building infrastructure essential for fast internet and must ensure its availability 24/7. Many young people have started their YouTube channels and are used social media platforms for changing their lives while earning in dollars. However, more can be achieved in this domain as well.

CHALLENGES FACED BY THE YOUTH:

Despite their potential, the major chunk of youth in Pakistan faces significant challenges that hinder their ability to contribute effectively to economy. One of the most urgent problems is a dearth of high-quality skill development and education. Even though Pakistan’s literacy rate has increased, there is still a large gap in the quality of education between urban and rural regions. The options accessible to youth, especially those from disadvantaged classes, are restricted by this discrepancy, thus resulting in absence of human resource development.

Social change was considered a prerequisite for economic progress as the Saudis went for executing the Vision 2030.

While those living in big cities can make their way out due to exposure and facilities, a large share of population living in rural areas are wasting time scrolling phones and becoming a liability for both the society and the country. The state needs to cater their needs and bring them to mainstream for economic growth. The individuals that are out of school should have other opportunities to learn skills that are required for today’s technologically advanced world.

Another major issue is unemployment. High youth unemployment rate results from Pakistan’s labor market’s inability to accommodate the enormous number of graduates who enter the workforce each year. The mismatch between the skills provided at educational institutions and the demands of the labor market exacerbates this predicament. Young people are often underemployed or employed in sectors unrelated to their qualifications, which limits their productivity, dampens potential and adds to economic stagnation.

Simultaneously, there is no link between industries and education system, which leads to producing graduates with degrees that have no relevance with the job market. Unfortunately, the universities are running as business firms. To avoid these issues, the industries should guide these institutions to offer relevant degree programs for the present and the future.

And then comes the issue of young entrepreneurs lacking access to financing. Although there are several initiatives aimed at supporting startups like the Prime Minister’s Youth Loan Program and the establishment of National Incubation Centers, many young people struggle to secure the necessary funding to bring their ideas to fruition. This approach is seemingly a result of the belief that investing in youth-led businesses carries a significant risk. Hence, many bright business ideas are not executed.

GROWTH-CENTERED EMPOWERMENT STRATEGIES:

Keeping in view the abovementioned challenges, multiple strategies can be implemented to harness the potential of Pakistan’s youth and ensure that they play a central role in the economic growth. Obviously, a skilled and educated workforce is required to achieve the goal of a vibrant economy.

The government must address two issues: ease of doing business and cost of doing business.

To ensure that the young people have equal access to quality education irrespective of the socioeconomic background, Pakistan has to go for huge investment in education system, with an emphasis on vocational education and occupational training according to the needs of the modern economy. However, there may be potential for public–private partnership to achieve the target, as the business sector may help align the educational activities with the market needs.

In order to encourage more young people into commercial enterprises, both the public and private sectors must strategize their priorities to develop an environment conducive to setting up new businesses. In other words, the government must address two issues: ease of doing business and cost of doing business.

This will require increasing the availability of funds through grants and loans at reduced interest rates or through venture capitals as well as mentorship programs. It will prepare the entrepreneurs of the next generation, as school and college children can also be nursed towards risk taking and innovative culture through various means like the use of incubators, accelerators and education on entrepreneurship. In particular, it is necessary to involve young people in the process of policy making to address issues that concern them. Thus, providing outlets to the youth for participating in governance and policy formulation is a must.

Meanwhile, technology is a potent weapon for economic transformation in the digital era. Pakistan’s youth can take the lead in the global digital economy by investing in digital infrastructure, fostering IT education, and supporting the growth of tech firms. Although programs like the Digital Pakistan Vision are a positive start, they must be strengthened and backed by strong legislative frameworks. There are many examples of young students who are bringing dollars home through their skills and using platforms like Fiver and Upwork. But more needs to be done.

On the other hand, the recent government decision to install a firewall resulted in the loss of digital work opportunities and millions of dollars. These steps demotivate the youth, as those working hard to change their fate often get frustrated. And this frustration is also leading the youth to settle in foreign countries in search of employment. The state has to devise policies to make youth our strength instead of a liability and stop the brain drain.

But no real progress can be made without addressing a major challenge that has been affecting the conservative societies like Pakistan – it is gender inequality. Without working on gender equality, no country or people can reach their full economic potential. Sustainable economic development will remain a dream without mainstreaming the more than half of the population by providing equal opportunities to the women.

This means changing societal views that constrain women participation in workforce and thus in economy as well as implementing legislations that provide for gender equality at workplace, in education and access to the windows of finance.

It is not that we don’t have an example or model to follow. Just look at Saudi Arabia which under the visionary leadership of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is transforming the conservative mindset for producing a vibrant and progressive society. That’s why social change was considered a prerequisite for economic progress as the Saudis went for executing the Vision 2030 to make the Kingdom a global hub for investment, trade and manufacturing through sustainable development.

Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates, another Muslim country, has already been experiencing an exponential growth only thanks to an open society for decades now.

Pakistani youth are not only the leaders of tomorrow but today’s agents of change. If given the right tools and prospects, they can trigger a socioeconomic change that will transform the whole nation for the better. However, one has to tackle these obstacles and introduce policies required to meet the goals.

Karachi Terror Attack: Chinese Investment Is the Target, Rest Is Just Smokescreen

Arsalan Raja

October 8, 2024

ISLAMABAD – Two Chinese engineers were killed and another injured in the latest terror attack on Sunday evening, coinciding with the PTI’s attempt to storm Islamabad, amid Pakistan’s efforts to attract Chinese investment through CPEC.

Meanwhile, the outlawed Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it involved an improvised explosive device (IED).

The terrorist group has targeted Chinese nationals on multiple occasions in the past as well.

It raises serious questions about the motives and timing, given the fact that Pakistan is set to host the Shanghai Cooperation Council (SCO) Summit next week on Oct 15 and 16.

The mega event is preceded by the arrival of Prime Minister Li Qiang in Islamabad on Oct 14, who will be first the top leader from China to visit Pakistan in over a decade.

Foreign Office Spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch on Monday condemned the Karachi terrorist attack and targeting the Chinese nationals. The blast was so powerful that over a dozen vehicles were also either destroyed or damaged.

Earlier in the day, the Chinese embassy in Islamabad asked “the Pakistani side to thoroughly investigate the attack, severely punish the perpetrators, and take all necessary measures to protect the safety of Chinese citizens, institutions and projects in Pakistan.”

Meanwhile, one cannot ignore the global politics.

“The critical point to note is the role of spoilers outside the region, which are against Chinese economic and global leadership status,” said Prof Shabana Fayyaz of Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad. “They are also at work here.”

“What’s happening in Pakistan vis-à-vis CPEC also needs to be approached from this angle,” she emphasized.

MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT:

But it isn’t just China and the SCO, that provide an alternative to the US-dominated world order, as Israel under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expanded his aggression to Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen after killing more than 42,000 Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Thus, Israel clearly wants to drag everyone into a direct military conflict that no one in the region wants.

How the US is going to resist the temptation remains the most vital question after the powerful far-right elements in the country have been presented with an opportunity by Netanyahu to target Iran. Thus, people like John Bolton are now calling vociferously for regime change in Iran.

So, a holistic view of the current developments presents an alarming trend, as Pakistan has been witnessing a rise in terror attacks in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. This trend is a product of a “well thought out decision” made by the then prime minister Imran Khan, under which he allowed the TTP terrorists to resettle in the country.

Imran has been advocating the cause of the Afghan Taliban as well as of al Qaeda, besides offering to open the offices of TTP, in the past. It was only a matter of time before the Afghan Taliban returned the favor. No wonder, Imran is known as Taliban Khan.

That’s why Mushahid Hussain Sayed – who served as a senator and federal minister – cites geopolitics is one of the main reasons behind the rising terrorism in Pakistan. He mentions Indian isolation in South Asia and India’s role in the New Cold War against China as the factors in this connection.

However, Mushahid Hussain also sees the administrative vacuum in Pakistan due to a “weak” and “ineffectual government” as the reason.

SECURITY BREACH:

Ihsanullah Tipu, an Islamabad-based journalist who covers terrorism in the region, described the terror attack as a serious security breach.

He says it is clear that the terrorists had complete information about the movement of these Chinese. The ability to target them near a sensitive location near the Jinnah International Airport also shows their reach and a complete failure on the part of the security apparatus to protect the Chinese working in Pakistan.

IMPROVISATION VS LACK OF INNOVATION:

According to Tipu, the security and intelligence community in Pakistan has failed to adapt themselves according to the changing times and latest technological developments.

Many planned terror attacks have been foiled in Europe and the US by constantly relying on technology, but this isn’t the case in Pakistan.

On the other hand, the terrorist groups are evolving and improvising continuously, making it very difficult to track their movement and plans, Tipu notes.

Mushahid Hussain too agrees with Tipu, as he says the terrorists are seemingly well-equipped and well-trained as well as more sophisticated in their tactics. The Indian intelligence agency, RAW, is probably working overtime to destabilize Pakistan, he added.

Baloch insurgents have remained very active since the start of 2024, claiming over 200 attacks under the umbrella of the Baloch armed groups Baloch Raaji Aajoi Sangar (BRAS), says Iftikhar Firdous whose work focuses on violent conflicts and ideologies.

According to Firdous, the bombing squads of BLA (Jeeyand) have carried out major attacks, using more than 24 suicide bombers against sensitive military installations in Bolan, Gwadar, and Kech. It signals a shift in the strategy of these groups from hit-and-run to direct assaults on bases of the Pakistani security forces and intelligence.

On the other hand, there has been a resurgence of the BLA (Azad) faction with attacks, particularly in the Makran and Rakhshan divisions.

This trend, Firdous notes, indicates the ability of these groups to expand their activities.

It is certainly an alarming development, as it begs attention: why and how the terror groups in Balochistan can attract more and more people.

On the other hand, Prof Shabana Fayyaz highlighted another phenomenon. “Unfortunately, economic, social and political disparities in the ecosystem have generated certain groups that act as freelancers in tandem with the outfits like TTP and BLA, and become proxies of the enemies of both China and Pakistan.”

ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY:

Tipu says the inability to punish the officials concerned means the sense of responsibility remains missing. The maximum punishment given in Pakistan is suspension instead of termination, he regretted.

In this regard, he cited the example of the Dasu and Shangla terror attacks in which Chinese nationals were killed as well as the recent IED blast which targeted a convoy of foreign diplomats in Swat.

According to Tipu, foreign diplomats openly complain that they do not and cannot rely on Pakistan’s law enforcement agencies.

SERIOUS COMPLICATIONS:

Citing past examples, Tipu says Pakistan’s relations with China had experienced a major setback after the terror attacks in Dasu and Shangla, as Beijing had demanded strict action against the perpetrators.

These concerns were shared by the top Chinese leadership, he recalled.

He is right. It was Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif who had to repeatedly apologize and promise security to the investors and leaders during his last visit to China. That’s why he has again visited the Chinese embassy in Islamabad to offer his condolences and expressed his determination to punish the culprits.

Tipu expects a strong reaction from Beijing this time too, which, he says, is justified as the Chinese nationals are being targeted frequently.

Similarly, Mushahid Mushahid feared that China would lose confidence in Pakistan’s ability to protect its citizens. This would be a very negative development for foreign investment, as they would feel unsafe and insecure, he added.

Moreover, Mushahid Hussain also believes such incidents are bad for national morale as internal violence and destabilization spawn insecurity among citizens.

WHY BALOCHISTAN IS THE FOCUS:

Firdous lists three major catalysts for the increased acts of violence in Balochistan. The first is the highly charged political divide and Mahrang Baloch’s march to Islamabad. Second is Pakistan’s relationship with Iran and cross-border missile strikes by both countries. And lastly, foreign investment in Balochistan is seen as “occupationist” in its nature by the insurgent groups, who also claim it’s a prerequisite for further “militarization”.

That’s why Tipu mentions the planned launch of CPEC 2 – the next phase of the Belt and Road Initiative’s flagship project – as a motive to target the Chinese.

SOLVING THE PUZZLE:

Tackling the challenge of terrorism head-on is a must for Pakistan, as internal and external forces can’t afford the country to experience economic progress.

It is a multidimensional task. Pakistan needs to address internal issues as well as external challenges.

That’s why there is an urgent need to address the political issues related to Balochistan with prudence while engaging the locals.

But in the current geopolitical environment where the US and China are practically engaged in a trade war while trying their best to expand their respective sphere of influence, the increase in terrorist acts across Pakistan isn’t a surprise.

Meanwhile, the Afghan Taliban, who are housing the TTP terrorists, in a statement have “advised” Islamabad to solve the prevailing political instability through dialogue. This “advice” directs Islamabad to make peace with the PTI exactly the way they have been asking Pakistan to accept the demands of the TTP.

23 Years Since US Invasion Of Afghanistan: Pakistan’s Lasting Cost Of ‘War On Terror’

Arshad Mehmood

October 8, 2024

Twenty-three years ago on October 7, 2001, the United States launched its invasion of Afghanistan, a move that would reshape the geopolitical landscape of South Asia. Termed as the “war on terror,” the invasion was a direct response to the September 11 attacks orchestrated by al Qaeda. The US and its allies sought to dismantle its operational base in Afghanistan and capture its leader, Osama bin Laden. In the initial stages, the invasion rapidly overthrew the Taliban regime which had provided safe haven to the terrorist organization. But what began as a mission to root out terrorism morphed into a protracted conflict, lasting two decades and concluding with a chaotic US withdrawal in 2021.

From the onset of the invasion, Pakistan was a critical partner for the US. Islamabad’s strategic location, sharing a long and porous border with Afghanistan, made it indispensable in the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda. The country was designated a “major non-NATO ally” by the US, a status that granted Pakistan certain military and financial support in exchange for its cooperation. The partnership was fraught with challenges, as Pakistan navigated the delicate balance between supporting the US while managing its own security and domestic political concerns.

the relationship between Washington and Islamabad was often marred by mutual distrust, accusations of duplicity, and diverging strategic priorities.

In the years following the 2001 invasion, Pakistan provided logistics, air bases, and intelligence support to American forces. However, the alliance came with significant sacrifices. Pakistan became a frontline state in the fight against terrorism, facing the blowback from terrorists who targeted its cities, towns, and military installations in response to its alignment with the US. Despite its substantial contributions, the relationship between Washington and Islamabad was often marred by mutual distrust, accusations of duplicity, and diverging strategic priorities.

The human and economic costs of Pakistan’s involvement in the war on terror have been staggering. Since 2001, over 70,000 Pakistanis — both civilians and security personnel — have lost their lives in terrorist attacks. This toll includes the devastating wave of suicide bombings that struck public spaces, schools, and places of worship, leaving behind a trail of destruction and trauma. The erstwhile tribal areas, particularly North and South Waziristan, became battle zones as the Pakistani military launched operations against militants who sought refuge there.

The emergence of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) further exacerbated the country’s internal security challenges. Formed in the aftermath of the 2001 invasion, the TTP capitalized on the instability along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, targeting the Pakistani state through a series of deadly attacks. The group’s campaign included the infamous 2014 massacre at the Army Public School in Peshawar, which left 132 children dead and shocked the nation. For many in Pakistan, the war on terror felt like an unending cycle of violence, even as the country played a pivotal role in assisting US counterterrorism efforts.

The emergence of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) further exacerbated the country’s internal security challenges.

Beyond the loss of life, Pakistan’s economy suffered immensely due to its involvement in the war on terror. The frequent terrorist attacks deterred foreign investment, strained public resources, and disrupted economic growth. According to official estimates, Pakistan’s economy suffered losses amounting to over $150 billion due to the war. The conflict also strained Pakistan’s infrastructure and social services, with millions of internally displaced persons (IDPs) fleeing the violence in the tribal regions and seeking refuge in other parts of the country.

Pakistan also bore the burden of hosting millions of Afghan refugees, both from earlier waves during the Soviet invasion and from the new influx following the US invasion. The presence of these refugees put additional pressure on the country’s economy and social fabric, creating tensions between local populations and refugee communities. Despite the challenges, Pakistan continued to provide refuge, even as it navigated complex relations with Kabul and Washington.

In August 2021, the United States made a hasty exit from Afghanistan, ending its military presence after 20 years of war. The withdrawal marked a dramatic and chaotic conclusion to a conflict that had defined the region for two decades. The rapid collapse of the US-backed Afghan government, followed by the Taliban’s swift return to power, created a power vacuum in the country, triggering a humanitarian crisis as thousands of Afghans attempted to flee.

The presence of these refugees put additional pressure on the country’s economy and social fabric, creating tensions between local populations and refugee communities.

For Pakistan, the US withdrawal brought new challenges. The instability in Afghanistan led to a resurgence of militant activities in the border regions, with the TTP and other extremist groups becoming emboldened. Cross-border attacks and the movement of militants into Pakistani territory further complicated the security situation. Despite its sacrifices, Pakistan felt abandoned by the US, left to manage the fallout of a war it had supported at great cost.

The shift in American strategic focus towards China and the Indo-Pacific region left Islamabad struggling to maintain relevance in Washington’s new geopolitical calculations. As the US pivoted away, Pakistan faced an increasingly hostile security environment, including tensions with India and a resurgence of terrorist activities. The fragile security situation, coupled with economic challenges, has made it difficult for Pakistan to stabilize the region and achieve lasting peace.

As the world marked 23 years since the US invasion of Afghanistan, the legacy of the war on terror remains a subject of deep reflection. For Pakistan, the conflict brought both international recognition and immense suffering. It highlighted the country’s strategic importance but also exposed the vulnerabilities and complexities of its internal dynamics. While the US may have closed the chapter on its longest war, the conflict’s aftershocks continue to shape the realities of the region.

In Afghanistan, the return of the Taliban to power has raised concerns about the re-emergence of extremist ideologies, with al Qaeda reportedly re-establishing a presence in the country. Pakistan, facing the spillover effects of this renewed instability, continues to grapple with the challenges of cross-border terrorism and internal security threats. The promise of a peaceful and stable region remains elusive, as the shadow of the war on terror looms large over both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The return of the Taliban to power has raised concerns about the re-emergence of extremist ideologies, with al Qaeda reportedly re-establishing a presence in the country.

The story of Pakistan’s involvement in the war on terror is a cautionary tale about the complex dynamics of international alliances and the unintended consequences of military interventions. As Islamabad navigates a new era without the strategic support it once received from Washington, the hope for a more stable and secure future lies in regional cooperation and a long-term strategy to address the root causes of extremism.

1...171819...147 Page 18 of 147

temp mail on Why Web Development Matters?December 23, 2024
Standing ovation! This post perfectly balances depth with accessibility. Your thorough research and expert explanations make this an invaluable resource.…
Blue Tech on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – Falling Out From State System?December 10, 2024
Blue Techker Good post! We will be linking to this particularly great post on our site. Keep up the great…
Blue Tech on What is Behind Putin’s Nuclear Threats?December 10, 2024
Blue Techker You’re so awesome! I don’t believe I have read a single thing like that before. So great to…
Blue Tech on Nouveau DemocratDecember 10, 2024
Blue Techker Good post! We will be linking to this particularly great post on our site. Keep up the great…
Blue Techker on India’s Nuclear Submarine Program Raises Security Concerns for PakistanDecember 10, 2024
Blue Techker I truly appreciate your technique of writing a blog. I added it to my bookmark site list and…

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

StratheiaPolicy Journal

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

Imran Khan has repeatedly aligned himself with regressive forces, most notably resettling the TTP from Afghanistan into Pakistan and declaring Osama bin Laden a martyr.

Imran Khan’s candidacy also raises significant concerns about the role of populism in global academia.

The real danger lies in how his populist movement operates. His supporters do not just support him; they aggressively campaign against anyone who dares criticize him.

The West wants to leave the issue of the occupied territories to the political process, diplomacy, and time.

President Zelensky cannot rationally insist on continuing the war to restore the country’s territorial integrity.

It is Washington that should show leadership in the West and offer reliable security instruments to Ukraine.

There is an opportunity to reconsider all red lines in relations between the West and Russia, and even in a broader geopolitical context involving China and countries of the Global South,

By keeping itself away from the summit in Islamabad, India would have conveyed a message that it is treating the SCO the same way as it does SAARC.

As for any possible breakthrough, chances are slim as neither country has proposed a bilateral meeting on the sidelines.

The question remains if India is able to dispense with its intransigence and move from conflict management to conflict resolution.

The deterrence theory has failed in the Middle East region, especially in Israel’s case, and it will take a long time to find an alternative.

The Israeli regime spent many years adopting the latest technological achievements of the United States and the West as well as the use of costly equipment and weapons.

The Abrahamic Accords are meaningless without Saudi Arabia’s participation, and the Saudi leaders are unlikely to join these until the idea of the two states is finalized.

Although separating the Axis of Resistance from each other is on Israel’s current agenda, it will not be able to restore the balance of violence to the balance of peace.

Tel Aviv will use everything within its power to the divide the resistance front during the opening between the ceasefire agreement and a full-scale war.

As the narrative of US sanctions against China and Pakistan continues to unfold, it serves as a reminder of the complexities inherent in international relations.

Amidst this geopolitical bait, the US-India defense collaboration emerges as a significant subplot.

The sanctions also bring to light the evolving nature of global diplomacy, where information warfare and economic pressures play increasingly prominent roles.

Ironically, this projection of the playboy cricketer came at a time when the newscasters were forced to wear headscarves “dupatta” on their heads.

We can find the origins of Imran Khan as a cricketer-cum-politician in the posh localities of Lahore and Islamabad.

Imran Khan’s influence among the paradoxical and hypocritical urban classes of all sorts is rooted in their social alienation and influence of the Islamization process.

Pakistan has never really a generation gap, as one generation after another is transmitting the same old values and thus the same worldview to the younger minds.

The full-fledged launch of Project Imran meant that a political force was being raised which wasn’t on the Taliban’s radar before the 2013 elections.

Pakistan immediately needs is a “purge” so that elements promoting extremism and associated with the views upheld by Imran Khan are systematically removed from all institutions.

No real progress can be made without addressing a major challenge that has been affecting the conservative societies like Pakistan – it is gender inequality.

Social change was considered a prerequisite for economic progress as the Saudis went for executing the Vision 2030.

The government must address two issues: ease of doing business and cost of doing business.

the relationship between Washington and Islamabad was often marred by mutual distrust, accusations of duplicity, and diverging strategic priorities.

The emergence of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) further exacerbated the country’s internal security challenges.

The presence of these refugees put additional pressure on the country’s economy and social fabric, creating tensions between local populations and refugee communities.

The return of the Taliban to power has raised concerns about the re-emergence of extremist ideologies, with al Qaeda reportedly re-establishing a presence in the country.

Share with Us

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.