Goebbels of PTI: It Is Jibran Ilyas Who Runs the Party

By

-

September 29, 2024

ISLAMABAD – It seems Jibran Ilyas – the US-based PTI social media team head – dictates the terms and is powerful enough to question even the party chairman, Barrister Gohar.

At the same time, there shouldn’t be any doubt that Jibran is the actual spokesperson of Imran Khan, the PTI founding chairman, as he executes the orders directly given by the jailed leader.

The proof are the screenshots of WhatsApp conversations shared by the party sources, which also show that Imran has empowered Jibran to regulate the PTI leadership. It also shows the fascist nature of the party where Imran is the supreme leader and everyone down the line is nothing but a puppet saying yes to every word uttered by the puppet master.

Meanwhile, this saga also explains the anti-state attitude adopted by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur, as he is threatening the state again and again. Certainly, Gandapur is just conveying the message of Imran. If Gohar can’t speak for himself, then Gandapur, a provincial chief minister, too has been executing the policies of Imran.

TALK TO ME. I AM THE BOSS:

On June 3, Jibran in a WhatsApp group “Jibran and PTI Top Leadership”, said, “If you need to ask something about the investigation, then you can ask in this group. I will reply happily, but don’t say anything on basis of assumptions.”

“Like I do not have any account of the PTI founder and social media isn’t operated from abroad.”

“We do have a good number of [workers] in the country, but this suggestion that the [party] workers’ addresses should be shared isn’t good.”

These instructions came in connection with the probe held by the FIA into the controversial statement about 1971 issued through the official X account of PTI.

FAST AND FURIOUS:

As the FIA grilled Gohar and Raoof Hasan, the then information secretary, the former admitted in a written statement provided to the investigators that “Jibran Ilyas and Azhar Mashwani run the social media accounts from abroad”.

It made Jibran furious. He shared the TV channel screenshots with Gohar on June 5, making him give explanations, which is certainly not the way a normal political party works.

Gohar said he didn’t name either of the two as the handler of the post. “You should ask me if you find may statement. Please don’t get me involved in any other thing [affair],” he said, while reminding him that he had talked to him for 30 minutes and explained everything.

He then went on to say that Gibran should please call him again in case there was any other question.

To prove his “innocence”, he also mentioned that “some sources say I have given your names and some [others] say Raoof has named you.”

DENY IT THEN:

In this response, Jibran asked him to deny everything, to which Gohar said, “I had told you earlier too that I would refute when the FIA completes the process.”

Also read: May 9: PTI Mercenaries Led by Raoof And Jibran Target The State

“When I came out [of the FIA office], I said the matter is sub judice and the high court has directed us to appear in person. Therefore, I do not want to give answers in detail.”

WORTHLESS LEADERS vs GOEBBELS:

The latest revelations show that the party leaders have no value in the eyes of Jibran whose reach to the top, Imran, is undeniable.

At the same time, everyone within the PTI knows that the party official social media accounts, running an anti-state campaign designed to incite violence, are managed from outside Pakistan.

Meanwhile, the iron grip on the PTI affairs enjoyed by Imran through Jibran and others also negates the myth of democracy, as the state of affairs only points to the fascist approach and structure of the party.

In short, it is Goebbels of the 21st century who is managing the PTI affairs for Imran who gives statements daily to create anarchy in Pakistan so that he can’t be held accountable for his actions like the botched May 9 coup attempt.

Gandapur Pushing For Governor’s Rule. You’re Gonna Get It

By

Editorial

-

September 29, 2024

0

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur in his latest video message has warned of attacking Punjab and threatened to use violence yet again, as he incited the people – especially the tribesmen – to unite for his “holy war” against the Federation and the constitutional order.

The incarcerated PTI founder is the one who had advocated for opening the offices of TTP. Given an opportunity, he later settled thousands of TTP terrorists in the province his party has ruled for 11 years.

It is a clear sign that the PTI – the party founded by Imran Khan – doesn’t believe in political process and democracy. Surprised? No, certainly not.

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

One must never forget that the incarcerated PTI founder is the one who had advocated for opening the offices of TTP. Given an opportunity, he later settled thousands of TTP terrorists in the province his party has ruled for 11 years.

He had even agreed to nullify the merger of the tribal belt into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa at the behest of Afghan Taliban and al-Qaeda, with the purpose of providing a safe haven to all kinds of jihadists in our border region.

Imran’s desperate push for violence stems from the possibility of his military trial in connection with the May 9 events, aimed at mutiny in the armed forces, and a tough sentence in the 190-million-pound corruption case.

He is desperate because of the findings of the inquiry against former ISI chief Lt-Gen Faiz Hameed clearly establishing the link between the two.

Meanwhile, the 190-million-pound case is also enough to get him sentenced for a long jail term.

On one hand, the Taliban terrorists have somehow managed to gain the status of championing the Afghan nationalism, and on the other, they are fortunate to see PTI – the allied party in Pakistan – fuelling the Pakhtun nationalism to their advantage.

No wonder why Imran and his associates had decided to push Pakistan back into the vicious circle of terrorism by importing the expelled TTP.

On one hand, the Taliban terrorists have somehow managed to gain the status of championing the Afghan nationalism, and on the other, they are fortunate to see PTI – the allied party in Pakistan – fuelling the Pakhtun nationalism to their advantage.

This alignment on both sides of the Durand Line – the international border separating Pakistan and Afghanistan – is the gravest security threat Pakistan has ever faced. Why? Because terrorism and politics have mixed together.

Given that Gandapur, who holds the constitutional office of chief minister, is using his province as a base to attack the state, the only practical option left is imposition of governor’s rule.

But the most alarming factor complicating the affairs is the failure to punish those involved in the failed May 9 coup attempt. It has emboldened Imran and his party as they think that the state is so weak thanks to the presence of facilitators at different levels that it cannot go after them.

Also read: Address The Bullies Before They Become Frankensteins

So, weakening the state is an objective shared by both the Taliban and the PTI. In fact, they are working hand in glove to achieve the goal.

Those arguing that the PTI shouldn’t be labelled as a Taliban proxy must answer a question: why a party ruling Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for over a decade is against any action against the terrorists in the province?

Fast dwindling public support of the PTI in Punjab displayed vividly during recent botched calls for protest by the party in the province means that it will go even more violent to ensure its survival. A party earlier claiming to be a federal party is now fast turning into a narrow nationalist, religious extremist and terrorist mode. The “promised revolution” isn’t coming through the streets of Punjab. Therefore, the PTI is now solely banking on the instigating violence in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and using the extremists it has been associated with.

Fast dwindling public support of the PTI in Punjab displayed vividly during recent botched calls for protest by the party in the province means that the PTI will go even more violent to ensure its survival.

In short, Imran, rightly named as Taliban Khan, wants anarchy and create an environment where the state becomes ungovernable.

However, the brighter side is that Pakistan hasn’t reached a point where the state institutions can’t be overhauled and reformed. No one has fully lost the control.

But the state needs to take decisive steps. Otherwise, things could reach a point of no return.

Given that Gandapur, who holds the constitutional office of chief minister, is using his province as a base to attack the state, the only practical option left is imposition of governor’s rule.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif must convene an all-parties conference minus the PTI and develop a consensus over the issue and create a broad-based front against the new terrorist threat emanating both from within and without. Time is running out. Democracy doesn’t mean that the state could be held hostage by the anti-state elements as they have a “difference of opinion”.

The dynamics Of US Involvement In China-Philippine Tensions

By

Wajeeha Ashfaq

-

September 29, 2024

0

The recurring maritime tensions in the South China Sea, especially as seen in the recent standoff between the Philippines and China over Sabina Shoal, provoke pertinent questions about the involvement of the United States in the region. As the Coastguard of China aggressively hauled away a Philippine vessel, important questions arise regarding whether the US would commit fully to such involvement, its implications, and the prospects of Chinese retaliation.

US AND ITS COMMITMENT TO ALLIES

For several decades now, the US has presented itself as a protector of international law and treaty allies like the Philippines. The 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty ensures that the United States will aid the Philippines if an armed attack occurs. Still, it cannot be determined whether the United States would engage military confrontation with China by escalating its involvement.

This region is strategically important. Around one-third of the global maritime trade passes through there. To the United States, it comes as no surprise that protecting freedom of navigation and supporting its allies against coercive practices in the region is of prime importance. Full military engagement is problematic because it holds substantial risks, including potential military conflicts that may become part of a larger conflict.

POTENTIAL INVOLVEMENT BY THE US: RISKS AND CONSIDERATIONS

Although there are obvious legal and moral grounds on why the United States should be involved in the support for the Philippines, a series of factors make immediate direct military involvement quite complicated. Firstly, the US does not want to trigger China, which is an actual nuclear power, into a full-scale war. Risks of escalation, miscommunication, as well as the devastating results of a military clash weigh heavily on US decision-makers.

Secondly, the geopolitical context has also evolved over the course of years. China has developed diversified military capabilities and pushed its borders into the region. Its conflict with the United States now has stakes much higher than before: any potential US intervention would provide a clear ground to China to involve in full scale war.

THE IMPLICATIONS FOR US-CHINA RELATIONS

In case of direct US military involvement in the South China Sea, the dynamics in the relations between the US and China would fundamentally change: such an incident could be perceived as an existential threat by China, and it may probably lead to a more aggressive posture from Beijing. At the same time, it would cement the US alliances in the region, reassuring its commitment to international law and principles of freedom of navigation.

However, this confrontation could deteriorate US-China relations for a longer time, with complications in global issues like climate change, trade, and public health, and one may think of the looming potential of a Cold War, with one nation digging itself into an opposing camp.

CHINESE RETALIATION: THE PROSPECTS

In all likelihood, if the US does intervene militarily, then it could generate a reaction in China that may be asymmetric warfare and cyber operations or even enhancing military deployment in disputed areas. What history teaches us is that China would not step back and is likely to expand its claims and behavior in the South China Sea. China’s non-compromise over its sovereignty and national interest makes such reaction quite obvious.

Keeping in mind The Scarborough Shoal Incident 2012 , history would recall China to be prepared at all times to assert control once being challenged in disputed territories. This is the reason why any form of military US involvement would set off retaliation, thereby, propelling a wave of increased instability in the region.

ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES: TECHNOLOGICAL AND NON-MILITARY ENGAGEMENT

Besides the traditional steps in diplomacy, it is time that the US moves on in finding new ways to flex its muscles against Chinese aggression. It can make use of new technologies like AI and unmanned systems to enhance surveillance capabilities for itself and its allies in terms of gaining and reporting real-time data that could lead to greater responsiveness towards provocations.

This is also worth the relationship of the US in regional multilateral forums beyond the discussion of security. Economic cooperation through trade packages and investments in infrastructures can create a vast network of partnerships which does not just offset China’s influence but also leads towards stability and development in the region.

COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY FRAMEWORKS

The South China Sea disputes cannot be solved by military force only, but through a holistic framework of security that includes economic, environmental, and social components. The US must step forward in proposing the establishment of a multilateral maritime security agreement between the Southeast Asia countries. Working together on these suggestions will start to intensify regional cooperation on issues for search-and-rescue operations, disaster response, and environmental protection. This would instill mutual trust within the community of nations, minimize the possibilities of miscalculations, and act as a foundation for building views on issues that cannot be settled, which otherwise would lead to a cold war.

CONCLUSION: A DELICATE BALANCING ACT

As the situation in the South China Sea changes, the US will need to walk a tightrope. Of course, it is an imperative to be by the side of its allies, such as the Philippines, but the cost of a fully engaged military engagement with China might be catastrophic. A differentiation approach giving much space for diplomatic engagement, technology application, and comprehensive cooperation on security may provide the best route to reducing tensions and ensuring stability in the region.

This feat will require the US to recognize that it is important, not just to regional allies but also to its strategic interests within this constantly changing global landscape, to seek the establishment of a cooperative security framework in the South China Sea. Through new strategies and a focus on multilateralism, the US will be able to utilize new tools to present a workable level of countervailing influence against China, coupled with continued peace and stability within the region.

Dangerous Nuclear Saber-Rattling By Russia

By

Shahzad Masood Roomi

-

September 28, 2024

0

The Ukraine war has taken a drastic change since Ukrainian incursion into the Kursk region of Russia in early August 2024. Kyiv has now made fresh requests to the US to allow using long range NATO supplied weapons against the targets located deep inside Russia. Though this appeal was declined, a large ammunition depot of Russian forces situated in Treves region, which is about 470 kilometers from Ukraine-Russia international border, was attacked by a drone. The storage facility, three kilometers in length and a kilometer in width, was completely destroyed. It provoked a reaction from Moscow which responded in the form of a new updated doctrine of Russian nuclear arms.

Also read: Ukraine War: Failed Interplay Of Russia’s Hybrid And Hard Power?

Recent changes suggested by President Vladimir Putin specifically refer to Russian nuclear doctrine, mentioning the nuclear “triad,” which has three elements: ICBMs based in land, SLBMs, and strategic bombers. The posturing of Russia’s nuclear triad of strategic forces has seen some major changes.

Expanded use of nuclear weapons has emerged the most vivid change in Russian nuclear doctrine changes.

He also said that the nuclear triad constitutes “the most important guarantee” of Russia’s security. As such, there is a commitment to maintaining and modernizing these three elements for establishing an effective deterrence against currently perceived threats.

Expanded use of nuclear weapons has emerged the most vivid change in Russian nuclear doctrine changes. The updated doctrine allows for the potential use of nuclear weapons in response to conventional military threats, especially if such threats are considered critical for Russia or its allies, including Belarus. This, in fact, suggests a more general interpretation in terms of when nuclear force could be justified, thus lowering somewhat the threshold for their use.

What is odd here is that the military doctrine of Belarus explicitly stipulates the use of nuclear weapons, and tactical nuclear weapons stationed on the territory of Belarus by Russia. Of course, this represents a somewhat new turn in Belarusian military policy and is closely aligned with strategic interests of Russia.

Changes in response to missile threats also illustrate the manner in which this nuclear saber-rattling by Russia is threatening regional and world peace. New proposals comprise consideration for nuclear responses upon the detection of a “massive launch of missiles or drones” crossing Russian borders. This adjustment itself points out a readiness as well as the willingness to respond with nuclear force in the face of conventional military actions.

The new doctrine labels aggression by non-nuclear states, especially when abetted and aided by nuclear states, as a form of joint attack on Russia.

Overall, there seems to be an emphasis on non-nuclear aggression apparently by a NATO state. The new doctrine labels aggression by non-nuclear states, especially when abetted and aided by nuclear states, as a form of joint attack on Russia. This might increase the aggressiveness of international behavior and push the tensions higher with NATO and other military coalitions.

Although certain details regarding modernization were not disclosed, this attention suggests that the development and credibility of the country’s nuclear triad are continuous in the pursuit of maintaining a salient state of every part of the triad as threats evolve over time.

Putin’s new doctrine speaks of a “significantly lowered threshold” for nuclear weapons use.

The shift in the nuclear doctrine of Russia may have significant strategic implications for the global security dynamics. Through reinforcement of the role of the nuclear triad and extension of circumstances under which nuclear weapons are permissible, Russia is thus declaring its willingness to move more aggressively in areas where it perceives its sovereignty to be under threat. This naturally brings miscalculations and escalatory risks to the fore in an already tense geopolitical environment. Some key concerns leading from these modifications are:

Putin’s new doctrine speaks of a “significantly lowered threshold” for nuclear weapons use. He said Russia could respond with nuclear force to conventional attacks that present a “critical threat” to its sovereignty, a vague term that could embrace a broad range of military actions. This shift may result in seemingly minor conflicts blowing up to become nuclear wars if taken as a “threat” by Moscow.
The new doctrine expands what it has classified as aggressive to include the attack on a non-nuclear state, especially with the support of a nuclear state. Putin had warned that this would be included under a “coordinated assault on Russia”, therefore, bringing in other countries under hypothetical nuclear war conditions. Thus, this position warns the Western world of what it perceives as Western support for Ukraine and that military aid will invite a nuclear attack by Russia.
These changes become a kind of ‘amber light’ for the West, but specifically against backing Ukraine. It has explicitly made it clear that the Kremlin considers any conventional attack on it, especially if it has the nuclear powers of the world behind it, a valid reason for the use of nuclear attacks. Therefore, these changes do not just escalate the risks associated with the ongoing war in Ukraine but also give a wake-up call about some other emerging security dynamics between NATO and others on the planet.
The new doctrine also extends Russia’s nuclear umbrella over Belarus, meaning Russia can use nuclear force if it feels such an ally is being threatened. This further adds to the regional instability and may become a catalyst towards further militarization in Eastern Europe since the way security has been approached and strategized may be reviewed under these shades of threat perception.

In total, Putin’s new nuclear doctrine presents a “very dangerous escalation” of rhetoric and policy that increases the opportunities for military tensions and miscalculations on the international arena. The implications of these are deep and profound, with the potential to shift the very fabric of international relations and significantly increase the risk of a nuclear conflict in this already increasingly volatile geopolitical landscape.

Again, some have argued that this updated nuclear doctrine of Russia may also be part of its diplomatic efforts to convince Kyiv about a possible deal as per Russian aspirations which says Ukraine must not be allowed to join NATO. But it is less likely as this new approach happened when the Ukrainian president was in US with his ‘victory strategy’ against Russia; an update which vividly tells us that Ukraine is not going to think of any kind of negotiated settlement of this prolonging conflict. Both sides must take heed of those who are warning about what may turn into an imminent human crisis before it’s too late!

Gaza’s Humanitarian Crisis: A Catalyst For Regional Conflict

By

Aqsa Shafqat

-

September 27, 2024

0

The unending Israeli aggression has brought more sufferings to the people of Gaza as they remain trapped in a vicious circle of war, eviction, and hunger. The Palestinians continue facing bombings, ground invasions, and, most recently, an embargo, and nobody seems to come forward and do something about it.

Since October 2023, continued airstrikes and ground assaults have led to great devastation, resulting in over 41,000 deaths, including thousands of children, with more than 92,000 people injured. This has, therefore, led to questioning of the tactics used by Israel as well as the unethical standards, which are tantamount to war crimes, for military operations targeting civilian structures such as homes, schools, and hospitals. Such losses in the Gaza Strip are the chief characteristics of a plan that punishes an entire population for the actions of a few from certain militant groups.

Continued airstrikes and ground assaults have led to great devastation, resulting in over 41,000 deaths, including thousands of children.

Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world and has been transformed into an open prison for more than two million people. The conditions have only worsened over time, since every new fighting phase, deteriorates the already weak structures.

Due to the current challenges, the healthcare system in Gaza has almost collapsed. Many of the hospitals have destroyed and the few remaining ones are overstretched for resources. At the same time, many doctors and other healthcare professionals have been purposely attacked or killed, thus causing a long-term damage to the infrastructure. In fact, the loss of doctors and other staff can be listed as even more severe than the destruction of physical infrastructure.

According to the Gaza health officials, at least 700 medical experts have so far been killed, including key doctors. That’s why a healthcare worker said, “We can fix our hospitals, but who will step up to replace the doctors we’ve lost.”

Healthcare system in Gaza has almost collapsed. Many of the hospitals have destroyed and the few remaining ones are overstretched for resources.

These individuals had acquired knowledge with many years of training and were committed to saving others. Their loss is incalculable.

In this connection, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has strenuously criticized these actions, stating, “Attacking healthcare professionals is a war crime.”

Essential to saving lives during and after the conflict, these healthcare professionals are the target of a direct attack on the civilians in Gaza. Israel claims the use of force is needed to protect its people from the rocket attacks by Hamas and other militants, but the fact is that it not only has vastly superior firepower but also a variety of other resources. The Iron Dome of Israel is effective in downing most of rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, thus limiting the loss of life and property among Israelis. On the other hand, the people of Gaza have no such protection against airstrikes.

The loss of lives and properties in Gaza is massive, that’s why it is being listed a genocide which has raised a lot of concerns over Israel’s “right to defend” and whether their actions are justified. Thus, the myth of self-defense is designed to justify the occupation and displacement, the reason behind the Palestinian resistance.

To Palestinians, it is not about rockets or armed conflict, it is about the decades of occupation, the seizure of their homes and territory, and the refusal to accept their rights as a people. During the events leading to and after the formation of Israel in 1948, the Palestinians have been subjected to the process of ethnic cleansing. They have been forced into confinement after losing more and more of lands and homes – from the expansion of settlements in the West Bank to the siege of Gaza.

The myth of self-defense is designed to justify hide the occupation and displacement, the reason behind the Palestinian resistance.

The Palestinians, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank, are living in violence, poverty, and despair, with no hope of the world recognizing their rights as a nation. Each time bombs are dropped, they kill the hopes of a family, reduce the number of homes, and make the future darker.

At the same time, children in Gaza do not know anything besides war and suffering and their dreams of a better life have become pipe dreams. In fact, the real cost of the conflict is not shared equally by the two parties. Though Israel might be experiencing rocket attacks and security issues, it enjoys all the requisite resources, be it in the form of technology or most importantly international support to provide it with a protective buffer from the worst of the conflict.

The struggle in Gaza and Israel is not the only battle; its effects are starting to spread to the entire region. There have been recent airstrikes from Israel across Lebanon, which resulted in the deadliest day for the country. These attacks aimed at Hezbollah in Lebanon has left at least 600 people dead.

António Guterres has told the world leaders, “This is a time for the world to come together in demanding an end to this foolish violence. A more extensive war will damage the region seriously and may have untold impacts around the world”. The international community now cannot ignore the extensive threats posed by this conflict. In case of any failure to arrest the trend, this war has the potential to threaten nearby states, motivating actions that might threaten global peace. The escalating tensions mean that the international community must institute powerful actions to block this bloodshed from going any further.

Both diplomatic announcements and symbolic resolutions have long past their due date. Resolving this issue is critical, which means there must be an immediate end to the fighting and an assurance that humanitarian help reaches those critically in need. Without a strong intervention, the conflict can escalate dangerously, causing serious harm to the people in Gaza and throughout the Middle East.

India Wavered And Wobbled, China Prevailed

By

Saleem Samad

-

September 27, 2024

0

When India was busy trading tirades against Bangladesh, the incumbent interim government chief adviser, Dr Muhammad Yunus, had two separate agendas on his mind. At the same time, the Chinese were already on the playground with no defender to protect the goalpost.

India often boasts of top diplomatic skills and maneuverability, a legacy of Chanakya who is regarded as a great thinker and diplomat in India. However, New Delhi has continued mishandling Bangladesh, which produced diplomatic blunders.

New Delhi’s South Block from day one has been playing with Hindu card since Dr Yunus took the oath of office on August 9.

Hindus have been attacked and the Bangladesh government has failed to protect them, is the official Indian mantra.

New Delhi’s South Block from day one has been playing with Hindu card since Dr Yunus took the oath of office on August 9.

Why is India playing the Hindu card?

India has functional democratic institutions and is apparently a secular state, but the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) under Narendra Modi stands for Hindutva – a right-wing ethno-nationalist political ideology that defines the cultural identity of India in terms of Hinduism and desires to make India an overtly Hindu nation state.

Anyway, the Indian media has been upbeat with the recent attacks, vandalism of Hindu business establishments, and desecration of temples, and is cursing Dr Yunus that he will go down in history for his failures.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi raised the Hindu card with Dr Yunus when they held a phone conversation a few days after the latter took oath of his office.

Meanwhile, the Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, the Adivasis (ethnic communities) and even the Ahmadis were soft targets of the radicalized Muslim majoritarian Bangladesh in the mayhem that followed the tumultuous events leading to the escape of Sheikh Hasina.

The ousted Sheikh Hasina administration always gave an impression that China, Russia and of course India are ‘all-weather friends’ of Bangladesh.

China stood with Pakistan and ignored calls for condemnation of the Pakistan’s atrocities leading to the birth of Bangladesh in 1971.

The ousted Sheikh Hasina administration always gave an impression that China, Russia and of course India are ‘all-weather friends’ of Bangladesh.

When Pakistan recognized Bangladesh in February 1974, China continued refusing to extend diplomatic recognition of an independent Bangladesh. In fact, Beijing deliberately blocked Bangladesh’s membership twice in the United Nations. China also opposed its membership of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), a forum of 120 countries.

Yes, Beijing recognized Dhaka in August 1975, a few days after the architect of Bangladesh’s independence Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated in a military putsch. That is history but we don’t live in history and relationship change, sometimes into the very opposite.

Bangladesh is of strategic importance to China. Its location in the eastern part of the Indian Ocean means it is ideally situated for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Chinese President Xi Jinping’s signature project aimed at boosting China’s economic and political influence by implementing a raft of infrastructure projects and trade networks worldwide, writes Dang Yuan, in Deutsche Welle.

Meanwhile, China has been involved in several infrastructure projects in Bangladesh, with some completed and some ongoing. China is also discussing to advance and continue these projects with the Yunus administration.

China has been Bangladesh’s largest trading partner for 12 years in a row. “China has built 12 roads, 21 bridges and 27 power plants in Bangladesh,” Yao Wen, China’s ambassador to Bangladesh, said during a BRI event in Dhaka in September 2023. “Chinese companies have created 550,000 new jobs here,” wrote the Deutsche Welle journalist.

When it comes to defense ties, China supplied 72 per cent of the weapons Bangladesh needed between 2019 and 2023, according to SIPRI, a Swedish think tank focusing on global conflict and security, wrote Dang Yuan.

China has been Bangladesh’s largest trading partner for 12 years in a row.

China played a key role in the construction of the “BNS Sheikh Hasina” naval base south of Chittagong. The base was inaugurated in 2023 and has a space for six submarines and eight warships.

Beijing had also supplied two submarines BNS Nabajatra and BNS Joyjatra, commissioned in 2017, as well as a significant proportion of frigates and corvettes to the Bangladeshi navy which are already stationed there for more than a year.

Among the friends in the past, the quick summersault was first made by China when the Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi said Beijing would also encourage greater cooperation and partnership between the companies of the two nations. He said Bangladesh would also benefit from the Chinese decision to allow zero-tariff access to all goods from the Least Developed Countries (LDC).

On the other hand, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi meet Dr Yunus at the margins of the United National General Assembly in New York.

China took a clear line in its response to the recent ouster of Sheikh Hasina and the formation of an interim government. “We want to further develop the ‘all-round strategic partnership’ with the new government in Bangladesh,” said a Chinese spokeswoman recently.

This confirms that Beijing switched allegiance from Hasina to Yunus when a medical team from the Chinese Red Cross arrived in Bangladesh to treat the students and protesters writhing in pain from grievous injuries during the Monsoon Revolution in July-August people’s uprising.

Earlier, Hasina, during her autocratic 15-year rule, learned how to balance Bangladesh’s ties between the two Asian powers. As a reliable partner, she did not want to upset New Delhi, but she also wanted to win over Beijing.

After her controversial re-election in January 2024, she first visited India, then China weeks later. And since a mass uprising forced her to flee the country, Hasina has found refuge in India.

Dr Yunus thanked China for their understanding, cooperation and collaboration which will strengthen the Bangladesh-China bilateral relationship.

The chief adviser stressed closer relations with China and talked about opening “a new chapter” in the ties between the two countries. Bangladesh also welcomed Chinese investment in solar companies.

While there is a hope that this is the first step in a democratic transition, Bangladesh will find itself stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Wang described Dr Yunus as “an old friend of the Chinese people,” and congratulated him for assuming the leadership of the new government.

“We have full confidence that you will live up to the expectations of the people,” he said, adding he would unite the country.

Earlier on August 25, Chinese Ambassador Yao Wen met with Dr Yunus and said that China strictly follows the principle of non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs, respecting the development path independently chosen by the Bangladeshi people, and expressed hope that Bangladesh will achieve unity, stability, development, and prosperity soon.

The Chinese ambassador in recent weeks has made hectic diplomatic engagements with members of the new government.

According to the website of the Chinese embassy, since 1 September, Yao has met with Muhammad Fouzul Kabir Khan (Adviser of new government), Wahiduddin Mahmud (Planning and Education Adviser), Nurjahan Begum (Health and Family Warfare Adviser), Shafiqur Rahman of Jamaat-e-Islami and Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

Analysts say the ambassador’s extensive outreach to various sectors in Bangladesh indicates that bilateral relations are likely to remain stable despite domestic political changes and these frequent interactions are expected to further strengthen cooperation between the two countries.

Bangladesh’s transition to democracy will be challenging. At the same time, Bangladesh’s geopolitical position embroils it in the larger geopolitical competition for regional dominance between China and India in South Asia. With India seemingly protecting Hasina from extradition to face a trial in Bangladesh, ties between the two are likely to worsen.

India may also reject Bangladesh’s next government as tilting toward China. While there is a hope that this is the first step in a democratic transition, Bangladesh will find itself stuck between a rock and a hard place, wrote Jacob Dickinson in Dyami, a security intelligence think-tank based in the Netherlands.

EU’s Digital Services Act May Make Musk Pay Billions In Fines

By

Info Desk

-

September 25, 2024

0

BRUSSELS – With the European Union (EU) investigating X – the social media platform owned by Elon Musk – over breaching content moderation rules, the billionaire, who champions himself as the free speech champion, may end up paying billions in fines.

Also read: EU Warns Musk Against Promoting Hate Speech

Reason? That’s because the EU could calculate fines not just on the basis of X’s turnover but on the revenues of Musk’s entire business empire, including Tesla and SpaceX.

The probe is a result of alleged violation of the Digital Services Act (DSA), a landmark legislation introduced by the EU in October 2022. It is expected a decision would be made withing months after starting the investigation in December last year, as regulators are still probing how it tackles the spread of illegal content and information manipulation.

But the it is not just the EU, as Musk has already been dealing with the affairs in Brazil where his failure to remove the accounts associated with hate speech turned into a global news.

Earlier in August, X was shut down in Brazil after it did not comply with orders from the top court related to hate speech moderation in the social platform. But X representatives have recently started to publicly talking about the intentions to address the court demands, even though the firm had previously said it would not meet them.

AUSTRALIA JOINING FORCES AGAINST DISINFORMATION:

Earlier this month, Australia warned of imposing fine on internet platforms, which can go up to 5% of their global revenue, for failing to prevent the spread of misinformation and disinformation.

The legislation targets false content that hurts election integrity or public health, calls for denouncing a group or injuring a person, or risks disrupting key infrastructure or emergency services.

It is the Australian leaders who have saying that foreign tech platforms are overriding the country’s sovereignty, as X has removed most of the content moderation tools after the takeover by Musk.

“Misinformation and disinformation pose a serious threat to the safety and wellbeing of Australians, as well as to our democracy, society and economy,” Communications Minister Michelle Rowland had said in a statement.

The Australia Communications and Media Authority said it welcomed “legislation to provide it with a formal regulatory role to combat misinformation and disinformation on digital platforms”.

Meanwhile, Musk in his reaction likened the Australian government to “fascists”.

X vs TWITTER:

Regarded as the most prominent and influential social media platform despite having less number of users than Facebook and others, X has become a controversial entity. Reason? Musk bought the Twitter and renamed it as X – a brand name reflecting SpaceX, his top new venture.

But it didn’t stop there as Musk removed the restrictions concerning hate speech and incitement to violence. Meanwhile, he also started making a source of direct income other than advertisements by charging the users for the famous blue tick by making them upgrading their accounts.

Meanwhile, Musk opened the floodgates in favor of far-right by disposing of the previous effective content moderation mechanism. It is an open secret, with world’s richest person personally propagating fake news and disinformation. From suggesting the possibility of civil war in the United Kingdom during the recent anti-immigrant riots to backing Trump, his association with far-right ideology has become one of the main sources of disinformation.

Also read: Freedom of Inciting Violence: Billionaires Shaping The World

That’s why a spokesperson for the European Commission, which is handling the investigation, said in August that it could take handling of harmful content related to the recent UK riots into account.

DSA vs DISINFORMATION?

The legislation notes “systemic risks on society and democracy”, and says it “fully harmonizes the rules applicable to intermediary services in the internal market with the objective of ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment.”

But how? By “addressing the dissemination of illegal content online and the societal risks that the dissemination of disinformation or other content may generate.” However, it protects the “fundamental rights” enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The DSA mentions the issue of organized propaganda and its effects.

“When recipients of the service are presented with advertisements based on targeting techniques optimized to match their interests and potentially appeal to their vulnerabilities, this can have particularly serious negative effects. In certain cases, manipulative techniques can negatively impact entire groups and amplify societal harms, for example by contributing to disinformation campaigns or by discriminating against certain groups.”

It also shares broader guidelines to the social media platforms

“Providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines should, in particular, assess how the design and functioning of their service, as well as the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation and use of their services, or the systemic infringement of their terms of service, contribute to such risks.”

“Such risks may arise, for example, through the inauthentic use of the service, such as the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots or deceptive use of a service, and other automated or partially automated behaviors, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination to the public of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s or online search engine’s terms and conditions and that contributes to disinformation campaigns.”

When it comes politics and public security, it identifies manipulative techniques.

“Very large online platforms or very large online search engines should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements presented on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality.”

As the DSA talks about crisis response mechanism for very large online platforms and very large online search engines, it notes that the European Commission “may initiate the drawing up of voluntary crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross-border response in the online environment.”

“Such can be the case, for example, where online platforms are misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or where the need arises for rapid dissemination of reliable.”

The Great Illusion Of India Being A Global Power

By

Dr Khurram Abbas

-

September 25, 2024

0

The current geopolitical environment has been gradually transforming the world into a multipolar order. Several countries based on their rising economic and political clout are aspiring to be one of the poles in this multipolar world order. India is one of those aspirants that considers itself legitimate candidate ready to assume the role of ‘global power’.

Being the most populous country of the world along with the fifth largest economy, New Delhi believes that India fulfils the criteria of a ‘global power’. Hence, it should be treated at the global level accordingly. Based on aforementioned criteria, the tone and demeanor of Indian political leadership has also changed, often dubbed as arrogant and disrespectful.

Interestingly, there is almost a consensus within Indian strategic community that India has already assumed the role of a global power. To further cement this idea, New Delhi has also announced that it is the so-called leader of the Global South, without taking into consideration that China and Pakistan are also part of Global South and both countries do not consider India as a leader.

India is one of those aspirants that considers itself legitimate candidate ready to assume the role of ‘global power’.

A careful review of the global history and emergence of global powers suggests that Indian assumption of being the ‘global power’ is nothing but an illusion, as New Delhi lacks criteria to be part of elite club of the nations.

Based on their political and economic influence along with military muscle, global powers often serve as a factor of stability in their respective regions. They also develop organizations and institutions for cooperation within their respective regions. Global powers are often perceived as mediators with an ability to minimize likelihood of armed conflicts between two states.

Similarly, global powers often create an arc of stability along their immediate neighborhood by constantly engaging with their neighboring countries – politically and economically. They have capability to influence international monetary institutions and financial governance systems. At the same time, global powers resolve their domestic armed conflicts before being acknowledged as major power at global arena.

New Delhi fulfils none of the above criteria to be considered as a ‘global power’.

No country with border conflicts with its immediate neighborhood can assume this role. India has border conflicts with Pakistan, China, and Nepal. It has a dispute with Sri Lanka over maritime boundary. The inability to resolve these territorial disputes depicts that New Delhi lacks diplomatic skills as well as necessary criteria to become a global power, thus challenging its ambitions.

The risks are as acute as a single armed conflict with any immediate neighbor of India can convert the positive economic trajectory of New Delhi into negative. Similarly, India has played an instrumental role to make the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) – the only regional organization that has potential to increase intra-regional trade and cooperation – dysfunctional. SAARC could have served Indian global ambitions far better than any other regional or sub-organizations.

India does not even match with the influence and capability of regional powers such as Qatar to assume role as mediator in major armed conflicts in the world. Since 1947, India has not been able to successfully mediate any armed conflict between two states depicting its shortcomings such as lack of political will, and limited political influence. Rather becoming mediator to resolve international conflicts, India has tried to garner economic and strategic benefits out of those international conflicts.

India does not even match with the influence and capability of regional powers such as Qatar to assume role as mediator in major armed conflicts in the world.

Indian ineffectiveness as mediator and peace broker in international conflicts also indicates that New Delhi should not be considered as a credible international partner for military alliances. Hence, the idea of offering role by Western powers to New Delhi as a ‘net security provider’ in Asia Pacific seems to be flawed.

Indian political leadership is celebrating Indian standing as fifth largest economy in the world with an ambition to be elevated to third largest economy with around $5 trillion by 2026. Although it is indeed a rejoicing moment for Indian leadership, the gap between first two major economies and third largest economy presents a different picture. US and China with an estimated nominal GDP of $28 trillion and $20 trillion respectively depict that there will have roughly $15 trillion gap between the second and third largest economies of the world. The gap of per capita income between China and India further indicates that Indian economy requires a significant time to overcome domestic challenges.

Indian contributions to global political and financial institutions are also meagre. As compared to US and China that contribute 22 per cent and 16 per cent respectively at the United Nations (UN), India contributes less than 1 per cent to UN’s regular budget. India holds roughly 3 per cent voting power in World Bank and around 2.75 percent share in International Monetary Fund (IMF), making it the second-tier contributor in global financial governance institution. Hence, India has no significant role in global financial governance.

Similarly, New Delhi has declared itself as ‘Vishwa Guru’ (teacher of the world) – a veiled desire of being treated as a leader in the evolving world order. What would the ‘Vishwa Guru’ offer lessons to the world regarding handling of armed insurgencies, suppression of minorities especially Muslims, and the conflict between Meitei and Kuki in Manipur?

According to Oxfam’s inequality report of 2023, top 1 per cent of India’s population holds more than 40 per cent of the country’s total wealth.

In fact, ‘Vishwa Guru’ is facing acute socioeconomic disparity, often dubbed as ‘K-Shaped’ economy. According to Oxfam’s inequality report of 2023, top 1 per cent of India’s population holds more than 40 per cent of the country’s total wealth, while the bottom 50 per cent of the population has a share of just around 3 percent. Similarly, approximately 800 million people (about 800 million) in India are eligible to receive subsidized food grains through ration cards, which depicts acute poverty in Indian society. On technological front too, India significantly lags behind the major powers. Hence, New Delhi is relying heavily on US and EU for provision of semiconductors, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, robotics and advanced civil and military applications.

It is true that being the most populous country and fifth largest economy of the world, Indian economic influence and political clout has increased significantly. However, the idea of becoming global power of the world is nothing but an illusion until and unless New Delhi alters its policies towards the region, resolves territorial disputes with its immediate neighbors, and develops its capacity as a manufacturing hub of modern technologies as well as present itself as a mediator in global and regional conflicts.

Trump vs Harris: A Battle of Ideologies

By

Dr. Raziq Hussian

-

September 25, 2024

0

There was a shocking absence of substantive public interest discussion during the 2024 US presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. However, it became evident in this particular debate that instead of focusing on the critical issues facing the country, the two contenders resorted to political maneuvering and personal attacks in an effort to assign blame. Foreign policy, economic woes, and domestic concerns like healthcare, education, and infrastructure were noticeably absent from the conversation. Instead of providing a clear strategy to address the challenges America faces, the discussion revolved around accusations, pointing fingers, and attacking characters.

A more pessimistic and hostile tone in American political discourse raises concerns about the state of democracy in the country. The United States has long been an advocate for open political discourse, civic engagement, and democratic ideals, earning the reputation as the world’s most democratic nation. However, considering how these principles are undermined throughout this debate, it raises the question of whether American democracy continues to be the global model it formerly was. The credibility of the voting process is undermined and the important talks that voters need to hear in order to make informed decisions are sidelined when attacks on individuals are prioritized above criticism of policies.

A more pessimistic and hostile tone in American political discourse raises concerns about the state of democracy in the country.

Nonetheless, the disparity was glaring when compared with previous US presidential debates. What was once a platform for candidates to lay out their plans for the country’s future is now more akin to the negative spectacle associated with political wrangling in developing nations. It is rather alarming how political debate is erasing public interest from front stage. This argument ultimately reflects a more general degradation in the ideals that once distinguished American democracy. The conversation between Trump and Harris’s tone and substance do not inspire faith in the state of US democratic norms.

Electing a president depends much on public choice and merit as the American people consider the performance of the present government and the qualifications of the contenders. Regarding the Biden administration, a lot of difficulties have surfaced both locally and internationally. Often seen as a disaster, the Afghanistan pullout had a long-lasting effect on US foreign policies. Biden oversaw the humanitarian situation in Gaza, rising tensions with China, and the continuous Ukraine conflict. Concerns about America’s diminishing global power also stem from the worldwide movement toward de-dollarization and BRICS growth.

Americans have struggled greatly domestically as well. Many people feel insecure from unemployment, inflation, economic instability, growing incidence of bigotry and violence. Based on their performance over the last four years, these elements have resulted in a rising belief that the Democrats would find it difficult to win the next presidential contest.

Many people feel insecure from unemployment, inflation, economic instability, growing incidence of bigotry and violence.

Though she brought diversity, female, non-White candidate connected to the Obama and Biden administrations, Harris was not first positioned to head the Democratic ticket. Her candidature arose because President Biden resigned during the first debate with Trump, therefore providing Harris with an unexpected path. Though symbolic, her candidacy may not be sufficient to help the Democrats overcome their difficulties.

Conversely, the Republican rival Trump likewise has a lot of issues and flaws. Nevertheless, the erratic character of politics makes the result still unknown. The American people will ultimately have to make the decision on who they think would be most qualified to guide the nation through these stormy years.

The people will assess the contenders according on their history, future vision, capacity to handle urgent problems both locally and internationally. Public opinion may change quickly as usual in politics, so the ultimate choice one that only the people can decide.

Particularly at a period of unfriendly, turbulent, and severe geopolitics, the world expectations from the American presidential elections are noteworthy. In a scene where economic progress, expansion, and prosperity are much required, the globe is seeking a leader who can provide peace, stability, and assurance. An ideal American president is supposed to promote international collaboration, friendly relations with other countries, and help to turn the planet into a better, more habitable environment.

An ideal American president is supposed to promote international collaboration, friendly relations with other countries, and help to turn the planet into a better, more habitable environment.

Hoping that conflicts and disagreements would be settled peacefully inside the framework of the United Nations Charter, the world community wants the end of continuous wars and confrontations. Additionally, highly anticipated are free and fair trade policies that help everyone and solve world problems like poverty, natural catastrophes, climate change, education, and healthcare.
Without any kind of empire, superiority, or compulsion, nations all over seek equitable treatment. Regardless of a nation’s size, wealth, or strength, they demand respect of national sovereignty. Many feel the next US president should maintain justice, impartiality, and law-based administration as they guarantee the fair treatment of all nations. The world community essentially wants for a president who can encourage peace, mutual respect, and cooperation by means of interpersonal interactions, therefore fostering a better and more equitable global order.

Iran Gas Pipeline and Pakistan’s Energy Future

By

Dr. Zukun Lyu

-

September 24, 2024

0

After failing to finish a natural gas pipeline linking the two countries a decade ago, Pakistan has no viable choices in negotiating the legal maze and Iran’s anger. For Islamabad, missing a much-needed supply of a quite clean fossil fuel results in a double blow because the project stands next to zero prospects of materializing.

Pakistan may, however, use the knowledge gained to do a thorough review of the viability of mega-energy projects prior to their commitment. A good national energy strategy depends on such sharpness throughout the political and bureaucratic administrative apparatus. This is especially true in a nation struggling under years of economic and energy crises. Tehran sent Islamabad a last ultimatum to complete its share of Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline; otherwise, prepare to be taken to the Paris-based International Court of Arbitration, where it may be fined around $18 billion.

For Islamabad, missing a much-needed supply of a quite clean fossil fuel results in a double blow because the project stands next to zero prospects of materializing.

Pakistan’s need for the gas is just as great as Iran’s need for the money from sales. Fast-growing domestic energy demand stretches thin the declining domestic gas supply of the South Asian nation, and it has battled to locate reasonably priced liquefied natural gas sources. Pakistan’s economy has been kept afloat by many International Monetary Fund bailouts from a severe energy crisis over many years typified by chronic fuel, gas and power shortages and high prices playing their role in crippling it.

With the most recent Iranian warning, Islamabad has reaffirmed its incapability in response to the potential of secondary US penalties for trading with Iran. Under pressure from Washington, Pakistan temporarily halted the pipeline project and sent a force majeure notice to Iran to exit from the gas sales and purchase agreement.

Following a historic agreement between major world powers and Iran, Pakistan had a window of opportunity that it did not seize in the years following which the latter was granted sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on its nuclear program. Pakistan’s political leaders have either flip-flipped or used ineffective rhetoric throughout the years on the subject of requesting a waiver from US sanctions to enable the Iran gas project to go forward.

Although US pressure and the possibility of secondary penalties on nations and companies engaged with Iran are genuine, they are just one of the many reasons Pakistan has been unable to keep up half of the bargain. It has grappled with certain other difficult issues. Pakistan’s political and economic unrest as well as foreign lenders reluctant to the risk being linked with Iran, funding for the project — which comes into a few billions of dollars — has been difficult to get.

Pakistan’s political and economic unrest as well as foreign lenders reluctant to risk being linked with Iran, funding for the project — which comes into a few billions of dollars — has been difficult to get.

China, who under a bilateral economic corridor project invests in infrastructure projects in Pakistan, is not interested; India, who had first considered purchasing Iranian gas by extending the pipeline into its territory, withdrew in 2009 after considering the geopolitical concerns.

The project come to pass, separatist violence and unrest in the southwest Pakistani province of Balochistan, through which the gas pipeline would have to pass, threaten construction and also compromise the safety and security of the infrastructure and gas flows. The rugged geography of the area presents building difficulties for the pipeline as well. Not even all the land required to route the pipeline across the nation has been bought by the federal government.

Transnational gas pipeline ideas abound in the cemetery of energy projects, especially in geopolitically and economically stable areas. Furthermore, evidence of the ugly face of worldwide energy weaponizing in geopolitical conflicts in today’s globe is the blowing up of the gigantic Nord Stream 1 and 2 underwater gas pipelines between Russia and Europe.

Like the rest of its emerging-economy colleagues in the Global South, Pakistan deserves the freedom to pursue its energy security.

Under the US-Pakistan Clean Energy Partnership initiative, the United States makes all the appropriate gestures of supporting the country’s aim of strengthening its electrical infrastructure and obtaining a share for renewable energies in its power sector. Pakistan’s economic engine must remain running in the interim from a consistent and reasonably priced supply of fossil fuels.

Like the rest of its emerging-economy colleagues in the Global South, Pakistan deserves the freedom to pursue its energy security, set the pace of decarbonization in a way most suited for its economic growth and obtain its needs from any supplier of choice, free from West arm-twisting.

But it must enter any megaprojects and long-term energy accords with its eyes wide open and put a reasonable dose of reality into its energy strategy. That involves making sure it will have the required funding, local regulatory and community support before pledging to undertake initiatives. Not as an afterthought, commercial and political choices involving sticky international problems must be realistically assessed with regard for the obstacles and engage all stakeholders from the beginning.

Write For Us!

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.

StratheiaPolicy Journal

A Global Digital Think-Tank on Policy Discourse.

The incarcerated PTI founder is the one who had advocated for opening the offices of TTP. Given an opportunity, he later settled thousands of TTP terrorists in the province his party has ruled for 11 years.

On one hand, the Taliban terrorists have somehow managed to gain the status of championing the Afghan nationalism, and on the other, they are fortunate to see PTI – the allied party in Pakistan – fuelling the Pakhtun nationalism to their advantage.

Given that Gandapur, who holds the constitutional office of chief minister, is using his province as a base to attack the state, the only practical option left is imposition of governor’s rule.

Fast dwindling public support of the PTI in Punjab displayed vividly during recent botched calls for protest by the party in the province means that the PTI will go even more violent to ensure its survival.

Expanded use of nuclear weapons has emerged the most vivid change in Russian nuclear doctrine changes.

The new doctrine labels aggression by non-nuclear states, especially when abetted and aided by nuclear states, as a form of joint attack on Russia.

Putin’s new doctrine speaks of a “significantly lowered threshold” for nuclear weapons use.

Continued airstrikes and ground assaults have led to great devastation, resulting in over 41,000 deaths, including thousands of children.

Healthcare system in Gaza has almost collapsed. Many of the hospitals have destroyed and the few remaining ones are overstretched for resources.

The myth of self-defense is designed to justify hide the occupation and displacement, the reason behind the Palestinian resistance.

New Delhi’s South Block from day one has been playing with Hindu card since Dr Yunus took the oath of office on August 9.

The ousted Sheikh Hasina administration always gave an impression that China, Russia and of course India are ‘all-weather friends’ of Bangladesh.

China has been Bangladesh’s largest trading partner for 12 years in a row.

While there is a hope that this is the first step in a democratic transition, Bangladesh will find itself stuck between a rock and a hard place.

India is one of those aspirants that considers itself legitimate candidate ready to assume the role of ‘global power’.

India does not even match with the influence and capability of regional powers such as Qatar to assume role as mediator in major armed conflicts in the world.

According to Oxfam’s inequality report of 2023, top 1 per cent of India’s population holds more than 40 per cent of the country’s total wealth.

A more pessimistic and hostile tone in American political discourse raises concerns about the state of democracy in the country.

Many people feel insecure from unemployment, inflation, economic instability, growing incidence of bigotry and violence.

An ideal American president is supposed to promote international collaboration, friendly relations with other countries, and help to turn the planet into a better, more habitable environment.

For Islamabad, missing a much-needed supply of a quite clean fossil fuel results in a double blow because the project stands next to zero prospects of materializing.

Pakistan’s political and economic unrest as well as foreign lenders reluctant to risk being linked with Iran, funding for the project — which comes into a few billions of dollars — has been difficult to get.

Like the rest of its emerging-economy colleagues in the Global South, Pakistan deserves the freedom to pursue its energy security.

Share with Us

Opinions, Analysis, and Rebuttals.