An initiative by CSSExamDesk.

com

Articulate for CSS 2022

April 2021 (Volume - 6)
Compiled & Edited by Aamir Mahar

Hot Topics inside:

1. Heart of Asia conference - 2021
2. Pakistan’s sustainable economic growth
3. Pakistan's stand in peace diplomacy
4. The new great game in Indo- Pacific
5. Provincial status for Gilgit Baltistan
6. Indo-Pak Peace initiative & Kashmir case
7. CAATSA & India's S-400 missiles deal
8. US revisiting relations with Iran
9. Russia's South Asian Strategy
10. Natanz nuclear plant attack
 Heart of Asia conference - 2021
Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was in
Dushanbe for a two days Heart of Asia
Ministerial Conference hosted by Tajikistan. The
theme of the conference was “Strengthening
Consensus for Peace and Development”. This
was the 9th Ministerial Meeting Conference in
the regional dialogue series held in order to build
regional response to the peace and development.
The conference was held at a critical time when
the US promise of withdrawing its forces loomed
close where the allies are still grappling with the
threat that the ‘they might miss the deadline” as
acknowledged by the US President. On the other
hand Afghan government is grappling with the
emerging threat of Taliban and wave of violence
unleashing across the country. It is happening at
the moment in the history of the region when
there is an urgent need for strong regional
consensus for peace and development in
Afghanistan. Afghanistan has been a lynchpin to
the regional peace and stability also considered
as the Heart of Asia due to its strategic
geopolitical and geo-economics significance on
the Silk Road. Before Heart of Asia
Conference-Istanbul Process, on March 18,
Russian Federation hosted an important
discussion on Afghanistan where the talks were
held between Afghan government and the
Taliban in Moscow. These talks were held in the
backdrop of the negotiations between Afghan
government and the Taliban that have stalled in
Doha while on 16th April, Turkey will be
holding a peace conference inviting stakeholders
to ceasefire and settling the power sharing
agreement in the war torn country. All of these
regional initiatives are meant to complement the
ongoing intra-Afghan peace negotiators going on
in Doha. In Dushanbe, Foreign Minister of
Pakistan has made his official statement during
the conference where he has highlighted the
important role played by Pakistan contributing
towards the Afghanistan peace and stability. On
the sidelines, he has also met with his
counterparts from Tajikistan, Turkey, Azerbaijan
and other countries.
The Heart of Asia-Istanbul Process is a joint
initiative by Afghanistan and Turkish
Page No. 02 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
government launched in 2011 with the main
objective “Istanbul Process on regional security
and cooperation for secure and stable
Afghanistan”. The major aim of this initiative is
to build regional consensus on resolving the
regional challenges through increasing economic,
political and security cooperation hence building
on the connectivity amongst the countries. There
are fourteen participating regional countries with
16 supporting countries and 12 regional and
international organization supporting and
participating this important initiative. The main
goal of this process is to strengthen peace,
stability, security and development in
Afghanistan and beyond. This Conference has
become one of the highly active and engaging
regional alliance for peacebuilding in
Afghanistan. The focused areas of the
consultation of this initiative is political dialogue
and consultation, implementation of the
confidence building measures and building
cooperation amongst the regional organizations
and initiatives. There is a defecto secretariat has
been created for this entire process in the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of
Afghanistan where the Director General of the
Regional Cooperation in the Ministry looks after
the entire coordination.
There are three main areas of cooperation in
Heart of Asia-Istanbul Process. First is the forum
is used to have political consultations creating a
regional consensus and synergies. These
consultations have the potential to foster
understanding to bring Afghanistan and its
neighborhood in the Heart of Asia region to make
work for peace and development. Second
important focused areas is to build Confidence
Building Measures (CBMs) among the leading
countries. There are eight CBMs led by countries
at the forum. First is counter terrorism led by
Afghanistan, Turkey and UAE, second counter
narcotics led by Azerbaijan and Russia, third is
disaster management and environment protection
led by Kazakhstan and Pakistan, fourth is culture
and education led by Iran, fifth is regional
infrastructure led by Azerbaijan and
Turkmenistan, sixth CBM is trade commerce and
investment opportunities led by India, seventh
agriculture development led by Pakistan and
Uzbekistan, eighth is women empowerment.
Each CBM has a desk at the responsible Director
General office at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of Afghanistan. There is a comprehensive
mechanism follow up process ongoing helping to
build the momentum and materialize the
opportunities. The over process has four main
decision making bodies. Highest level is
Ministerial Conference, then Senior Officials
Meetings, third is Ambassadorial Meetings and
Regional Technical Groups. These bodies take
the actions in a cohesive manner to take the
vision and mission of the entire initiative
forward.
Initiatives like Heart of Asia- Istanbul
Process are complementing the entire regional
support for building lasting peace in the region.
In the conference Afghan President proposed a
three step process for the making, building and
sustaining peace in Afghanistan while also
highlighting the importance of Afghan led and
owned peace process. During the conference his
idea was that the process should be in a phase
wise where he anticipated that in the first phase
the negotiated political settlement with the
Afghan Taliban endorsed by the Loya Jirga-
grand traditional assembly of influential Afghans.
According to President Ghani, this will also
include the much needed ceasefire including the
reaching an agreement to form “a government of
peacebuilding with the framework of the
constitution with a time bound mandate
culminating in an internationally supervised and
monitored presidential elections”. This phase will
lead towards the phase of national reconciliation,
reintegration of combatants and refugees, helping
the country to define Afghan led and owned new
governance, security and development priorities.
It is important to note here that the idea of
forming a transitional government differs with
what the current Afghan constitution emphasis
which is unacceptable to Afghan Taliban. The
formation of this kind of government also differs
with the fact to have elections as the base to
transfer power. On the other hand US, one of the
important stakeholder in Afghan peace process,
put emphasis on forming a “peace government”
Page No. 03 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
which is again according to the fact that how the
two side would agree but this should be
meaningful inclusion of women, ethnic and
minority groups in Afghanistan. It is expected
that President Ghani will discuss this proposal
during the upcoming conference in Turkey.
It is important to note that the support from
the regional and international partners is
significant in helping restore peace in
Afghanistan especially this ministerial meeting
held in Dushanbe is offering a much needed
momentum to build a consensus. This ministerial
meeting has also send a strong message of
togetherness and commitment from regional and
international stakeholders that there should be
Afghan led and Afghan owned end to the conflict.
There was a sense of urgency in the entire
conversations as the conflict has been nearly
three decades long especially as there will be 20
years of anniversary of War on Terror and 9/11
attacks this year. It is also pertinent to note that
this 9th meeting has also sent clear message to
expect a steady progress on the political
settlement and both side’s especially Afghan
government and the Taliban should engage with
each other through serious and meaningful
dialogue. This will not be happening if there will
not be any compromises from not only both sides
but global community. There is a strong need for
all the parties to build peace by not resorting to
violence in Afghanistan as only innocent people
are the victims of these power games. We are at a
juncture where there is a high hopes for peace in
Afghanistan after nearly four decades of war,
destruction. All of the regional countries in the
neighborhood of Afghanistan need to play their
constructive and positive role to help Afghan led
and Afghan owned peace. (Daily Times, April 10,
2021)
Pakistan’s sustainable economic growth
Pakistan’s economic growth is dependent on
its exports by earning foreign income to finance
imports, service debt, stabilize its currency and to
overcome the persistent problem of the balance
of payment deficit. In addition to being
competitive, a country’s exports should be in line
with market trends and quality, and be certified
on internationally acceptable standards. In
Pakistan, the investments required to bolster
Pakistan’s exports are short in supply. Pakistan’s
non-conducive investment environment stems
from uncertainty. Volatility of output growth is
an indicator of the unpredictability of demand
and volatility of inflation is an indicator of
macroeconomic uncertainty. These indicators
have been found to adversely impact investments,
especially private investments. The Tax,
Investment and Exports (T.I.E) nexus is essential
for guaranteeing the desired level of growth in an
economy. T.I.E. as a percentage of GDP has
declined substantially in Pakistan in recent years
and has thus negatively impacted growth. Lack of
investment is one of the core reasons why
Pakistan’s growth in exports has been negative
over a 10-year period. Other reasons include
higher tariff structure, erratic growth trends, low
penetration in global markets, lack of
infrastructure and technological advancement.
Furthermore, exports are also handicapped by
government’s irrational policies and complex
incentives offered to industry. Other competing
Asian countries have managed growth by
pursuing export led growth strategies with high
savings and investment rates, specializing in
areas of competitive advantage, and resulting in
rapid industrialization. The questions is: how can
Pakistan increase exports for sustainable
economic growth?
1. Difficult times demand innovative thinking,
and out-of-the-box solutions: Pakistan needs
to capitalize on exportable services and
products requiring minimal infrastructure and
investments. For example, there is a growing
global demand for software and IT solutions.
It is easier to establish a software house than
to set up a manufacturing unit. Analysts
predict global Software Engineering Market
to develop at an 11.72% CAGR between
2016 – 2022. We accredit the vigorous
growth of the software market to the growing
demand for automation from different
industries to enhance their program
manufacturing processes and design quality.
Pakistan’s IT exports increased by 44% to
USD 379 million during the first quarter of
Page No. 04 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
the fiscal year 2020-21, and there is a lot of
potential to grow more and explore avenues
to enhance software export. India’s
information technology and back-office
sector will grow by 7.7% in fiscal 2020 to
USD 191 billion, with exports touching USD
147 billion. There is no shortage of talent in
Pakistan. With minimal efforts and support
from the government, Pakistan’s IT sector
can expand to contribute USD 1 billion
annually. The Trade Development Authority
of Pakistan (TDAP) should note this
fast-changing reality and leverage artificial
intelligence and big data to help exporters
harness the potential of online marketing
platforms (World Bank).
2. Improving export competitiveness in the
global market essential for increasing
Pakistan’s exports: Exports are a victim of
protectionist tendencies which incentivize
production for the domestic market rather
than global markets. A paradigm shift to
provide incentives to industries to move their
production from low value to high value
products is needed. For instance, global ratio
for MMF to Cotton is 70:30, whereas,
Pakistan’s composition ratio is 30:70 owing
to lack of prioritization or incentivization by
the government. Reforms to address this
issue will exponentially enhance export
potential. Moreover, one key measure to
make exports competitive is to ease import
restrictions. For instance, anti-dumping duty
on Polyester Staple Fiber (PSF) will hurt the
industry by increasing cost of raw materials,
rendering exports uncompetitive.
3. Empowering SMEs: The Pakistani economy
comprises almost 3.3 million Small and
Medium Enterprises. These may comprise
(amongst many other variants) service
providers, manufacturing units and startups.
SMEs make up over 30% of Pakistan’s GDP
and approximately 25% of generating exports.
We need policies that empower SMEs and
allow them to reach their true potential.
Offering access to finance, easily available
subsidized credit, lower interest rates on
loans, LTFF for purchase/import of
 machinery and skills training/development
programmes can be a reasonable starting
point to unleash SME’s potential. Public
procurement can potentially achieve
outstanding economic and social benefits by
ensuring government supply chains include
SMEs. Benefits range from creation of
skilled jobs, increased domestic tax revenue,
to more robust domestic economic growth.
Well-designed public procurement policies
also have the potential to catalyze technical
development, increasing trade margins, and
overall productivity.
4. Improving the Duty Drawback Schemes: We
can improve standard duty drawback
schemes by (a) making them accessible also
to indirect exporters and extending them to
imported inputs used in production of
exported final products; (b) eliminating duty
pre-payment for exporting firms in order to
reduce credit requirements
5. Simplifying Regulations: The government
should simplify regulation related to exports;
cumbersome bureaucratic procedures
negatively affect new exporters. At the same
time, governments should improve
information collection and dissemination
about foreign markets and requirements for
exporting.
6. Entrepreneurship and Workforce
Development: Improve the productivity and
technological content of domestic goods, and
provide incentives to nurturing innovation,
making Pakistani products globally
competitive. For that to happen, we need
comprehensive focus on nurturing
entrepreneurship. A UNDP National Human
Development Report has highlighted skilled
unemployment level of 20% (college
graduates) in Pakistan. Unemployment levels
remain high, with the ‘educated’ constituting
a large proportion of the unemployed
population. With this state of employment,
Pakistan cannot reap the economic returns
required for economic growth. The ease of
doing business in Pakistan must be
prioritized to encourage innovation for better
quality diverse products and services.
Page No. 05 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
Entrepreneurship creates a virtuous cycle of
prosperity as the people not only get
employed themselves and create value for the
society and the economy, but also promote
employment opportunities.
7. Establish a cell in Ministry of Commerce
Cell Focusing on Export-Related Issues of
Services: Experts on trade needs to be hired
for policy formulation. A public-private
partnership can be mutually beneficial in
developing reforms/policy/frameworks that
can holistically focus on exports; diversity of
products, prioritizing services sector,
implementation of simple, easy to
comprehend, schemes and incentives.
Moreover, the Cell organizes structured trade
missions to specific markets which allow
businesses to meet with buyers and attend
relevant events.
8. Performance Linked and Time Bound Export
Subsidies: Export subsidies, where given,
must be linked to the performance of the
recipient firms and be automatically
withdrawn when thresholds are crossed. This
requires advancement is technology to
develop and deploy frameworks and systems
to fully mechanize transactions improving
the overall efficacy. The systems will be
efficient and transparent and most
importantly, simple, concise and clear. (Read
this complete report on: PIDE.org.pk)
Pakistan's stand in peace diplomacy
For the readers of international relations, it
remains the stark fact that is not only the UN
peacekeeping mission where Pakistan has been
keeping an epoch- making record but also in the
domain of international peace diplomacy,
Pakistan has set a historical record as a peace
mediator. Recently, Dr Henry Kissinger, the
former US Secretary of State boldly admitted
Pakistan’s role in felicitating the US-China peace
dialogue during the peak of the Cold war period.
This confession was made during a high-level
webinar event organized by China’s State
Council in Beijing last month. As a harbinger of
global Peace, Pakistan seeks harmony and peace
among nations. Remembering the US-China
tensions during the Cold war, Dr Kissinger
recounted how the first message from China was
in the form of a handwritten note, which was
personally dictated to him in the White House by
the then Pakistan Ambassador in Washington,
Agha Hilaly. Speaking next after Dr Kissinger,
Senator Mushahid Hussain, representing Pakistan,
said that this historic breakthrough in China-US
relations became possible due to the
‘indispensable role of Pakistan. Pakistan enjoyed
the trust of both China and the United States,
when then President, Richard Nixon, had
tremendous affection and goodwill for Pakistan.
While peering in through the diplomatic history,
one can logically argue that with the timely and
befitting interventions of Pakistan’s diplomats in
the situation of international conflicts, the peace
trajectory evolved in diffusing the intensity of
conflict –as evidenced from a multifaceted
Pakistan’s role in lowering the conflict intensity
in Muslim word—despite a conceptual
delineation between ‘cold’ and ‘hot’ wars. In
almost six key areas, the role of Pakistan peace
diplomacy has been pivotal in both the Cold war
and the post-Cold war periods.
1. Pakistan peace diplomacy in the Geneva
accord: The year 1988 was a turning point in
world politics. In this year a disastrous
decade came to an end that caused much
bloodshed and destruction in Afghanistan
and threatened the security of Pakistan.
Geneva Accord has a very significant role in
changing the political scenario of the world.
It is obvious that Pakistan’s international
credibility boosted due to the Geneva accord
and became an important mediator in the
world affairs. Pakistan, Soviet Union,
Afghanistan and the US were the participants
of the Geneva accord in which Pakistan
played key role in settling the terms to
resolve the Afghan issue. After the Accord,
many changes took place in the relations of
Pakistan with other participants.
2. Pakistan peace diplomacy at the UN: Having
joined the world body in September 1947,
Pakistan attaches great importance to
international co-operation through this
organization. The country fully adheres to its
Page No. 06 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
pristine principles of promoting peace and
prosperity, fighting hunger and disease,
promoting literacy and helping nations in
times of natural or man-made disasters. Its
commitment to the UN system can be gauged
from the fact that Pakistan has been elected
seven times as a member of the Security
Council and has been a leading contributor to
UN peacekeeping contingents. Pakistani
missions in New York and Geneva have been
consistently active at the multilateral level.
3. Pakistan’s role in the OIC: Pakistan’s peace
diplomacy remained proactive to use the OIC
forum to resolve tensions among the Muslim
states. Pakistan played a leading role in
enabling the PLO to get observer status at the
UN, and likewise, Islamabad used the OIC
forum to echo the rights of Kashmiris. With
Pakistan’s support, the OIC decided to
appoint its own Contact Group on Kashmir.
Pakistan successfully played a role during the
Iran-Iraq war while it remained neutral in the
Yemen conflict, Pakistan always sustained a
diplomatic approach to diffuse tensions
between Washington and Tehran. Pakistan
also intermittently utilized peace diplomacy
to diffuse tensions between Riyadh and
Tehran.
4. The Afghan war & the Doha Peace Accord:
It goes without saying that since 2001, the
world has witnessed Pakistan’s proverbial
role –in the WOT–harnessed by its proud
military. The Doha Accord concluded in
February last year, is the triumph for
multilateral peace diplomacy. US Defence
Secretary Lloyd J. Austin has praised
Pakistan’s cooperation for peace in
Afghanistan. While concluding the Doha
Peace Accord , Pakistan gave value to the
vision of the Afghan Study Group (formed
under the auspices of the US Congress)
recommendation floated at the USIP that say
that the blue print of the future Afghan state
must be the reflection of—-an Afghan state
that exercises sovereignty over its borders
and internal affairs and governs in terms that
reflect the popular will and
self-determination of the Afghan citizenry
 while managing conflict peacefully through
accountable civilian institutions. An Afghan
state that supports and protects minorities,
women’s rights, the democratic character of
the state, and a free press but that could
include Taliban figures. Therefore,
Washington must avoid making any lull in
the Afghan peace process.
5. The current US-China tensions & Pakistan’s
stance: Like in the past, today, Pakistan
advocated for peaceful relations between
Beijing and Washington. A time-tested
Pakistan-China friendship notwithstanding,
Pakistan maintains the urge of rebalancing its
relations with both Washington and Beijing.
Rather, Pakistan suggests a restraint strategy
to settle the US-China differences over the
trade deal, global warming, human rights, the
South China Sea, Taiwan and the Hong Kong
issues “We are not in the business of picking
sides. From our prospective, the U.S. is a
critical strategic partner. We depend on the
U.S. a lot, the U.S. depends on us a lot,” Dr
Moeed Yusuf Pakistan’s NSA recently told
the Atlantic Council think tank. In the
ongoing race for global powers’ competition,
Islamabad remains highly indifferent.
6. The urge of South Asian peace resolution:
Today, the South Asian leadership has
expressed a bilateral desire for promoting
peaceful relations between India and Pakistan.
Pakistani Army chief General Qamar Javed
Bajwa has stressed the imperative of peace
negotiations after the militaries of both
countries last month announced to honour the
2003 ceasefire agreement along the LoC, a
disputed border in Kashmir. The PM Imran
Khan while responding Modi’s good will
letter of March 23rd said, “We are convinced
that durable peace and stability in South Asia
is contingent upon resolving all outstanding
issues between India and Pakistan in
particular the Jammu and Kashmir dispute’’.
New Delhi needs to revoke or annul Modi’s
unjust, illegal and immoral initiative of August 5
2019– altering the erstwhile status quo in
Kashmir. For the sake of regional peace and
prosperity, the Modi administration must sit on
Page No. 07 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
the dialogue table with Pakistan to discuss the
modus vivendi regarding the Kashmir conflict
resolution. (Daily Times, April 14, 2021)
The new great game in Indo- Pacific
The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue in common
parlance termed as The Quad consisting of The
US, Australia, Japan and India was joined by
France in a Naval exercise in the Indian Ocean
which ended on 7thApril. The Indian media
opined that the exercise was carried out with “an
eye on China”. The Times of India, a mouthpiece
of the government more often than not, asserted
that the exercise reflected ‘The growing strategic
congruence in ensuring a secure and stable
Indo-Pacific in face of China’s belligerence in
the region”. According to media sources, in
addition to France some other European countries
such as Germany and UK have also expressed
their intention to come on board the “Quad
Chariot”. There are reports that some ASEAN
Countries including Philippines, Malaysia and
Vietnam are being vowed to join The Quad to
make it Quad Plus. Some Chinese analysts have
equated Quad Plus to the “Eight Nation Alliance”
which refers to troops from the US, the UK,
Germany, France, Russia, Japan, Italy, Australia
and Austria-Hungary that invaded North China in
1900. Earlier on 12th March, The Quad leaders
including the US President Joe Biden, Australian
Prime Minister Scot Morrison, Japanese Prime
Minister Yoshihida Suga and the Indian Prime
Minister Narendra Modi held a virtual Summit
— the first summit of The Quad top leaders since
the founding of the Quadrate — the brainchild of
the former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
For President Joe Biden the summit was the first
top level engagement since taking office as the
46th President of the US on 20th January, 2021.
Although the agenda of the summit was couched
in benign language including global collaboration
to fight Covid-19 pandemic, cyber space, critical
technologies, countering terrorism, quality
infrastructure investment, humanitarian
assistance and disaster relief, yet the summit
communiqué emphasised the support to rule of
law, freedom of navigation over flights and
territorial integrity of the regional countries; a
clear pointer to China which invoked an expected
severe reaction from Beijing.
The US has an already strong Strategic
military alliance with Japan and Australia, while
the US and India have concluded strategic
military agreements like COMCASA and BECA
which lay foundations for interoperability of the
two armed forces insinuating significant security
implications for China — their antagonist in the
Indo-Pacific theatre . Despite Quad summit’s
eyewash peace agenda, the Malabar Naval
exercises as well as the last week-concluded quad
plus Naval exercise unambiguously suggest that
Quad alliance is heading towards a military
alliance creating a military balance of power
favourable to the existing super power, that is,
US and posing serious threats not only to the
emerging superpower, that is, China but also to
the countries in the South East Asia and South
West Asia. It appears that the Indo Pacific region
is emerging as a “Global Hot Spot” with serious
Geo-Strategic and Geo economic implications for
the entire Indian Ocean Rim Countries and
beyond. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov who
visited Delhi and Islamabad recently, while
commenting on the QUAD said, “We discussed
in detail (the) situation of Asia-Pacific. Uncertain
processes are happening; The US is pushing
certain constructs in the region. We are
categorically against new division lines”. His
referring to “Asia-Pacific rather than Indo-Pacific
that has lately been coined by the US clearly
outlines Russia’s displeasure for the new anti-
China alignment led by the US.
India finds itself on the horns of a dilemma to
strike a balance between its newly-found
strategic partnership with the US within the
framework of QUAD on one hand and on the
other hand, maintaining its traditional friendship
with Russia. Last week, India received the first
shock of the new military tensions in the Indian
ocean when The US Navy Ship John Paul entered
the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The
Indian Ministry of External Affairs issued a press
statement saying that “Indian concerns have been
conveyed to the Government of the United States
through Diplomatic channels”. The ministry
further elaborated, “The Government of India’s
Page No. 08 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
stated position on the United Nations Convention
on the Laws of the Sea is that the Convention
does not authorise States to carry out in the EEZ
and on the Continental Shelf, military exercises
or manoeuvres, in particular those involving the
use of weapons or explosive, without the consent
of the coastal state”. The US Navy in its
statement asserted that India’s requirement of a
prior consent for military exercise in its exclusive
economic zone was in contravention of
international law”.
The unprecedented undiplomatic spate
exchanged between the US and Chinese
Delegations led by their respective top diplomats,
the secretary of state Antony J. Blinken and
Foreign Minister Wang Yi which met in
Honolulu are symptomatic of a growing distrust
between the two global superpowers. The
emerging new military alliances are apparently
heading towards New Bipolar World Order
(NBPWO), with Asia being its kingpin. Pakistan
will have to play its diplomatic cards carefully,
by continuing to strengthen strategic economic /
political and military relationship with China,
while keeping the US constructively engaged in
Afghanistan, as well as in other mutually
beneficial undertakings. (Daily Times, April 13,
2021)
Provincial status for Gilgit Baltistan
Pakistan is set to elevate Gilgit Baltistan to
provincial status. With this single move, Pakistan
will be able to meet at least seven decades old
demand of people of Gilgit-Baltistan to merge
with main land constitutionally, secure vital
geo-strategic route of China Pakistan Economic
Corridor and protect tourism, promote economic
potential and push farther its water and energy
interests (Bunji & Diamer-Bhasha Dam etc.).
However, some quarters have raised objections to
the move on varying narratives which need to be
addressed. All stake holders including key
political parties have agreed to the proposal of
grant of provisional provincial status to the Gilgit
Baltistan. This historic decision will meet the
long term aspirations of people and will help
address local concerns and issues of
representation, by all means possible. In
September 2020, the Government of Pakistan
announced its intention to make Gilgit-Baltistan
an interim province that had representation in the
parliament. On November 1, 2020, Prime
Minister Imran Khan announced that his
government would give the provisional
provincial status to the beautiful region blessed
with vistas of nature making a tourists’ paradise.
The government also issued a new political map
on August 4, 2020, showing the entire state of
Jammu and Kashmir, including Gilgit-Baltistan,
as a disputed region awaiting settlement based on
the United Nation Security Council resolution.
On March 9, 2021, the Gilgit-Baltistan
legislative assembly unanimously adopted a
resolution to make the region an interim province
of the country. The resolution stated that a bill to
amend the constitution of Pakistan to declare
Gilgit-Baltistan a province should be passed
keeping in view Pakistan’s principled stance on
Kashmir. The happy omen is that the opposition
parties have agreed, in principle, to support the
move to make Gilgit-Baltistan an interim
province. The people of the region want their
area to be merged into Pakistan and thereby be
declared as a separate province. This action will
have no negative implications for the Kashmir
issue as it will be linked to the final settlement of
the issued based on Pakistan’s principled stance.
The people of Gilgit-Baltistan would continue to
extend their moral support to their Kashmiri
brothers at political and diplomatic fora. Pakistan
is only granting provisional provincial status to
Gilgit-Baltistan while its stance on United Nation
Security Council resolutions on Kashmir remains
the same. Pakistan and China jointly built the
majestic KKH through Gilgit-Baltistan and now
China Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC)
follows the same route. It may be recalled that
the Supreme Court of Pakistan in its seven-
member judgment in 2019 had directed the
government of Pakistan to take necessary
measures within fortnight to grant citizens’ right
to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan and those would
remain contingent upon the settlement of the
issue according to the UN Security Council
resolution. The 15-member Sartaj Committee in
its recommendations in 2015 also recommended
Page No. 09 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
similar policy decisions of mainstreaming the
people of the region enabling them to realize the
full potential of the socio-economic development
of resource-rich Gilgit- Baltistan. It may be
mentioned here that in the recently held elections
in GB, all the political parties’ leadership in their
election campaigns promised unequivocally and
eloquently to grant the provincial status to the
region as their first priority. Let us positively
hope that it will not be cast to the four winds like
other tall promises made to local people in the
past. This may not be delayed anymore, and the
time is right to address the economic and political
deprivations of the people as per the recent
unanimous resolution reflecting the aspirations of
the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. Further delay may
be equated as betrayal and this can be simply
unaffordable because of the sensitivity of the
region.
It is pertinent to note that the key elements of
joint resistance on Kashmir have been fully taken
into confidence and they already understand that
India relies on twisting of facts and manipulation
of fake news. Pakistan political and military
leadership has raised the issue of Indian illegal,
unjust and unconstitutional occupation of Jammu
and Kashmir on international fora (United Nation
Security Council, UNGA, UNHCR, ICJ, HR
organizations etc.) and there is no compromise on
right of self-determination for Kashmiris as
envisaged by UN resolutions. Unfortunately, the
past governments followed a policy of
appeasement with India and put the Kashmir
issue at the back burner. That confused and weak
stance on Kashmir encouraged Modi to change
the status of Indian illegally occupied Jammu and
Kashmir. Pakistan’s Armed Forces responded
aggressively in February 2019 through Operation
Swift Retort. Likewise, the brave people of
Gilgit-Baltistan have also valiantly fought for
liberation of Gilgit-Baltistan and have now
openly demanded for the provisional status of a
province. The new arrangement will have a
provision to cater for plebiscite as per United
Nation Security Council resolution for final
settlement of the issue. Hence, grant of provincial
status to the Gilgit-Baltistan will be a landmark
step in opening new avenues of development for
the area. The Federal Government has already
embarked upon a comprehensive program for
development of tourism in Northern Areas
including Gilgit Baltistan, a region known to the
world as second to none in natural beauty,
mesmerizing charm and warm hospitality. China
Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) related
infrastructural developments have further eased
the traveling and will contribute to a host of
developments in the region. Although not yet at
par with Pakistan’s four full provinces, the
proposed provisional provincial status should
considerably increase Gilgit-Baltistan’s
constitutional rights and enhance its legislative
assembly’s administrative powers. So why has
Khan decided to break years of status quo? The
obvious answer (and subject of much media
coverage): China, Pakistan’s “all-weather friend”.
Gilgit-Baltistan provides Pakistan’s only
contiguous border with China and is the entry
point for the $87 billion China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor (CPEC), an ambitious
infrastructure project. Connecting the city of
Kashgar in China’s landlocked Western Xinjiang
province to Pakistan’s southern Gwadar port, the
CPEC will present an alternate supply route to
the congested Malacca Strait, the primary
shipping lane linking the Pacific and Indian
Oceans. Offering easier access to West Asia and
beyond, the shorter trade route will on
completion protect the 40% of Chinese exports
and 90% of oil imports currently passing through
the Malacca Strait should any tensions flare-up in
the contested South China Sea region. Beijing
has long pushed for regularizing
Gilgit-Baltistan’s legal status to safeguard
substantial Chinese investment in the region, part
of the wider Belt and Road Initiative forming the
centerpiece of President Xi Jinping’s foreign
policy. Not surprisingly, China’s reaction to
Khan’s announcement was subdued, starkly
contrasting its sharp response to last year’s
restructuring of Indian-administered Kashmir.
From Islamabad’s perspective, stronger
relations with China will ultimately allow
Pakistan to serve as a more effective
counterbalance to India in South Asia,
strategically benefitting both allies. Solely
Page No. 10 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
focusing on China also overlooks how this
change benefits Pakistan’s economic interests – a
2010 World Bank report published in
collaboration with the Asian Development Bank
cited Gilgit-Baltistan’s unclear legal status as a
major impediment to private and foreign
investment, and provincial status could spur
economic development of the mineral-rich region
which also has major hydroelectric potential.
Khan’s claims of a new era of development in
Gilgit-Baltistan are not entirely unfounded. The
other widely cited key driver behind Khan’s
announcement hinges on Gilgit-Baltistan’s status
as part of the Kashmir dispute. Many
commentators have termed Pakistan’s move a
response to India’s reorganization of Kashmir – a
reassertion of claims on both sides. While such
analysis regards Islamabad’s decision as a
defensive one, it could alternately equally be
interpreted as a pragmatic, realist policy action.
By abandoning its long-standing policy and
making Gilgit-Baltistan a province, Pakistan is
effectively acknowledging the unlikeliness of any
change in Kashmir’s status quo. This could
possibly be a step towards accepting the military
Line of Control (LoC) with India as the
international border – and subsequent resolution
of the dispute.
The pressing demand of the local people of
GB is long overdue and has remained unfulfilled
due to various political apprehensions and
constitutional impediments. First of all, it
remained in the limbo because of the disputed
territory as per UN Security Council resolution
that includes the Jammu and Kashmir state
including the then Northern Areas under
Pakistan’s jurisdiction. Secondly, it was surmised
that the overwhelming majority of Kashmiri
people across the LOC might be against such
demand fearing it will weaken their stance on
self-determination. Thirdly, the political pundits
argued that the merger of the Gilgit-Baltistan into
Pakistan territory might weaken our principled
position on Indian government’s unconstitutional
revocation of the special status of the Indian held
Kashmir when it promulgated changes in the
Article 370 and 35A in the Indian constitution in
August 2019. But it hardly makes any sense to
continue to deprive the people of Gilgit-Baltistan
from the conditional citizenry status while our
adversary India has been flouting all norms of
international law and diplomacy with impunity.
Pakistan’s reluctance, so far, in granting even
conditional status to the GB has been quite
frustrating by any standards of progressive
realization of the citizenry rights. Therefore, in
the ultimate analysis we may infer that it is rather
unfair to keep the people of Gilgit-Baltistan
disadvantaged and marginalized in the face of
vicious circle of uncertainties and complexities
involved in the peaceful settlement of the
long-standing Kashmir issue even after more than
seven decades. The local people have stayed
loyal and unflinching in their love for Pakistan,
all the way from inception. They have already
waited long and suffered hard. Time has come
for some concrete action on the ground. The time
to act is now. (Daily Times, April 11, 2021)
Indo-Pak Peace initiative & Kashmir case
Peace between India and Pakistan is a UN
Charter obligation and good neighbourly
relations between India and Pakistan remain a
common purpose of the leadership of the two
countries. A direct war or a subterranean proxy at
the end of the day have their sell by date. The
common interest in peace, progress and
development of the people surges as a priority. It
is a welcome sign (as reported) that the military
leadership in Pakistan and the National Security
Advisor in India have started writing a preface
for the road map. National Security Advisor of
India Ajit Doval has served in Kashmir and he
may have associated himself with activities,
which may attract a criminal and civil liability.
The people of Kashmir do not have any such
grievance against Army Chief of Pakistan
General Bajwa. He has raised their hopes that
Kashmir flows in his blood. There is no reason to
disbelieve him. This statement however, has its
own difficulties under the UN template on
Kashmir.
We have supported peace at the Third Global
Structures Convocation on “Human Rights,
Global Governance and Strengthening the United
Nations” in February 1994 in Washington.
Page No. 11 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
JKCHR addressed an appeal to the Assembly
urging it, to assist India and Pakistan, in stopping
to invoke the enemy image of each other, so that
the two countries could unlock their men and
material, otherwise locked to respond to an
inherent threat and divert the freed resources to
development, health, education, elimination of
hunger and peace projects. Appeal also asked the
Assembly to take regard of the fact that India has
insulated Kashmir from outside world and that
UN should re-orient its priorities to accomplish
its unfinished agenda in conflict zones, like
Kashmir. The two countries have short listed
eight issues in 1997 that remain outstanding and
Kashmir remains one of them.
Kashmir could not be like any other seven
issues in these peace talks. India has explained
the equation at the 533rd Meeting of Security
Council held on 01 March 1951 and said –
“There is a tendency in certain quarters to assume
that this is just a dispute between India and
Pakistan, and that the views of the lawful
government of Kashmir need not be considered.
This is a mistaken assumption. As I have already
said, the authority of the Government of India
over the Government of Kashmir is limited to
certain subjects; outside that sphere, it can only
advise and cannot impose any decision.” The
impression that Indian action of 5 August 2019
has no anti-dote and is irreversible has no merit.
Even if Pakistan backs out (we hope not) from its
political, moral and diplomatic support to the
people of Jammu and Kashmir, an unwilling
people could not be quieted and vanquished by
Indian use of military brutality.
India and Pakistan have both on 01 January
1948 and 15 January 1948 made written
submissions to the UN Security Council that their
engagements under article 33 of the UN Charter
have failed and that the failure has brought them
to the UN Security Council.On 15 January 1948
Government of India, surrendered the accession
of 26th October 1947, at the 227th Meeting of
UN Security Council, for a UN supervised vote.
India has asked as follows: “The question of the
future status of Kashmir vis-à-vis her neighbours
and the world at large, and a further question,
namely, whether she should withdraw from her
accession to India, and either accede to Pakistan
or remain independent, with a right to claim
admission as a Member of the United Nations- all
this we have recognized to be a matter for
unfettered decision by the people of Kashmir,
after normal life is restored to them.” Kashmir
does not have any accession with India today.
India can’t occupy and colonise a people, which
had (and continue to have) their own constitution,
their own flag, their own national anthem, their
own penal code and their own law of nationality.
This special status of Kashmir until the holding
of a vote on the provisional agreement (called
accession) is carried out under UN supervision, is
discussed at page 4 of Report of The State
Autonomy Committee published in July 2000 in
Srinagar. It states, “But it is relevant to mention
here that whereas other Princely States signed the
instrument of Accession to India and
subsequently the instruments of merger, the
accession of J & K State was limited only to the
areas of Defence, External Affairs and
Communication”. The Committee was set up by
the J&K Government on 29 November 1996.
In view of this submission by India at the UN
SC the people of Kashmir have a jurisprudence to
prosecute their case against India. If Pakistan
overlooks it and awards an advantage to India in
any peace initiative involving a quid pro quo, it
would be doing it at its own peril. People of
Jammu and Kashmir (minus the auxiliaries) will
regard it as an unfriendly act of Pakistani military
leadership. There would be serious questions on
the merits of the start of militancy and support of
Hurriet in Kashmir. The present presence of
900000 Indian forces in Kashmir and the 5
August 2019 Indian actions, flow from the
indiscipline and mediocrity found in these two
disciplines. United Nations has placed three
restraints on the behaviour, number and location
of the Indian forces in Kashmir. What India has
done is a crime against peace, against a people
subject of a Plebiscite under UN supervision.
Under UN template “The party that would dare to
violate an agreement thus reached would load
upon itself a very grave offence against the other
party, against the United Nations, and against the
right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to
Page No. 12 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
self-determination”. India without doubt has
“loaded upon itself a very grave offence.” The
PDP-BJP agenda for minimum programme is
also a public document and Indian Government
has accepted to negotiate with Pakistan. Indian
Government has set up five working groups to
negotiate with the people of Jammu and Kashmir
and Government of Pakistan. The Jankinath
Wazir CJ and Shahmiri J judgement in May 1951
in Meghar Singh Case and many other High
Court Judgements, help us in domestic courts and
at the international level.
If Pakistan finds itself unprepared and
pressured, it should not trade future of Kashmir
for the Indian ‘hand-shake’. UN SC has agreed to
let India and Pakistan engage bilaterally provided
that the result is ‘consistent with the principles of
UN Charter”. Bilateral efforts are not infinite and
it is time for the article 103 of UN Charter to
assume itself. China is a reliable friend of
Pakistan. We should recall what China has said at
the 765th meeting of the UN Security Council
held on 24 January 1957. China has said, “This
dispute has another peculiar feature. From the
very beginning, the Council began with an
agreement between two parties. In fact, before
the two parties directly concerned ever appeared
before the Council, the two parties agreed that
the plebiscite should be the answer.” We have the
tools to prosecute our case against India.
Unfortunately we are shouting at India from this
end of the river. It is time to take a boat across
and stare India in the face. Webinars are an
engaging exercise but not a substantive one. We
have to graduate and make it clear that India has
not only to honour its obligations but remains
liable to pay reparation and compensation. (Daily
Times, April 12, 2021)
CAATSA & India's S-400 missiles deal
Indian plans to acquire the Russian missile
defence system S-400 are likely to mar US-Indo
ties. The US Congress had passed the Countering
America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act
(CAATSA) in 2017 stipulating the imposition of
sanctions on any country that purchases military
equipment from Russia or conducts transactions
with Iran or North Korea. The US had already
imposed sanctions on Turkey for its acquisition
of the S-400 Missile System from Russia and as a
punitive measure, discontinued Turkey’s
participation in the development of the F-35
advanced fighter jet programme. It must be
remembered that Turkey is a valued ally and an
important regional security partner for the United
States, yet it faced economic sanctions for
accepting the Kremlin’s missile system. Despite
the US-Indo ties of warmth and bonhomie, the
US has warned India that it will impose sanctions
if it goes ahead with the purchase of S-400. In
January 2021, the US has expressed its
displeasure at the deal and had issued a warning
and had expressed its concerns again during the
US Defense Secretary, Lloyd Austin’s, visit to
New Delhi in March 2021.
The S-400 is an advanced missile defence
system, which comprises an array of radar
systems and missile pads. The Long-range
surveillance radar tracks objects and relays
information to the command vehicle, which
assesses potential targets. After identification of
the target as a hostile intruder, the command
vehicle orders missile launch. The data for the
launch is sent to the best placed launch vehicle,
which releases surface-to-air missiles. The
engagement radar helps guide missiles towards
the target. The Missile Defence System has a 400
km range and can engage and shoot 80 targets
simultaneously. It can detect and destroy
incoming bombers, airplanes and ballistic
missiles. Induction of the S-400 systems would
tremendously boost India’s air defence, as well as
missile defence capability. India already has its
indigenous two-tiered missile defence system
based on Prithvi Air Defense for high altitude
interception and Advanced Air Defense system
for lower altitude interception. The Indian
Missile Air Defence System is now operational
and can provide protection to two major Indian
cities – New Delhi and Mumbai. The acquisition
of the S-400, if it goes ahead, will further
strengthen India’s missile defence capabilities.
This will have a direct effect on the nuclear
deterrence equation between India and Pakistan.
The resulting imbalance is theoretically going to
render India invulnerable to incoming missile
Page No. 13 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
attacks, which may embolden the Indian defence
planners to indulge in adventurism against
Pakistan like it did on February 26, 2019, which
had backfired.
The US is not being cognizant of an arms
imbalance in the region but is desirous of taking
retributive action against Russia, denying it the
opportunity to sell defence equipment.
Apparently, this was the main stimulus for the
US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin while
discussing the proposed Indian acquisition of the
Russian S-400 with his Indian counterpart,
Rajnath Singh, on March 20. When asked a direct
question if the US would sanction India if it
proceeded with the acquisition, his response was
that the question of sanctions against India is not
on the table as India has not taken delivery of the
system. He did not elaborate on what will happen
when India does receive some S-400 systems
later this year. Readers may recall that earlier this
year, in January 2021, a US embassy
spokesperson in Delhi issued a similar warning
over S-400 plans by India. He had warned all US
allies and partners to forgo transactions with
Russia that risk triggering sanctions under the
CAATSA. He had elaborated that the CAATSA
does not have any blanket or country-specific
waiver provision. India, which has been relying
on Russian defence equipment for decades, will
be badly hit if sanctions are imposed by the US.
In its defence, India has argued that the process
for acquisition of the S-400 system began in 2016,
before CAATSA was introduced in 2017 by the
Trump administration.
The Indian deal for five S-400 systems worth
US$5.5 billion was inked on October 5, 2018,
between Russian President, Vladimir Putin, and
Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi. All five
S-400 regiments were scheduled to be delivered
between October 2020 to April 2023. The S-400
is one of the most advanced air defence systems
in the world and India has already made a
payment of $800 million in 2019 toward the
S-400 deal and the first set of missile batteries
are expected to be delivered by end of 2021.
Since its improvement of ties with Washington
DC, New Delhi has edged closer to the US and
Israel for acquiring weapon systems. The US has
emerged as one of India’s biggest arms sellers, in
the near past. India has plans to buy armed
drones from the US as well as a large order for
over 150 combat jets for the air force and the
navy to help build-up its conventional
capabilities. However, the Indian S-400 purchase
has cast a shadow over the budding Indo-US
Strategic Partnership. The US officials – both in
the outgoing Trump administration and the new
Biden Administration have warned India that
going ahead with the deal will trigger CAATSA
sanctions. At the moment, it is a contest of wills
where the US is pressuring India to abandon the
deal while the latter has refused to back down
from it.
The US must be in a quandary over
sanctioning India for the S-400 purchase under
CAATSA, for which a precedent has been set
against Turkey. As per the CAATSA act, the US
must sanction India on the purchase of the
Russian S-400. The caveat that the US faces is
that India is the cornerstone of America’s
Indo-Pacific strategy and a founding member of
the Quad established to counterbalance Chinese
influence in the region. It would also jeopardise
future arms transactions between the US and
India such as high-end fighter aircraft and armed
drones. (Daily Time, April 9, 2021)
US revisiting relations with Iran
Of the many rash foreign policy decisions that
former United States president Trump took the
one that has caused immense harm to the
credibility of the US and the sanctity of
international treaties was the revocation of the
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA),
commonly referred as the Iranian nuclear deal.
Over and above, it imposed severe sanctions to
cripple Iran’s economy hoping these measures
would bring the downfall of the regime. This
unilateral action in cohort with Israel reflected
the deep animosity of the Trump administration
toward the present Iranian government. Besides
Israel, it was also meant to feed into the strong
anti-Iran sentiment prevalent in Saudi Arabia and
a few other Middle Eastern countries. These
measures did cripple Iran’s economy but were
unable to weaken its resolve to stand up to US
Page No. 14 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
pressure and continue unabated with the
enrichment and missile programmes. America’s
breaking away from the nuclear deal gave Iran’s
power elite to further tighten its grip and pursue
the nuclear programme with less inhibitions. It
has gone past the enrichment limits that were part
of the original agreement.
Incidentally, the Iran nuclear deal was the
outcome of years of serious deliberations and
was worked out by highly seasoned professionals
on both sides. These were painstaking
negotiations, as Iran is a hard country especially
when it comes to working out a detailed
agreement on high security and strategic issues.
The most redeeming aspect of the deal was that it
allayed the fears of its adversaries and the world
at large that Iran’s ambitions, if any, to be the
tenth nuclear power, have been stemmed at its
roots. As a member of the Pugwash Council, an
eminent international organisation that focuses
on nuclear proliferation and reduction of nuclear
threat, I had visited Iran a few times and had the
opportunity of seeing some of their nuclear
installations including the enrichment facility. As
our group consisted of members from several
countries including China and the US, it was
clear that Iran was demonstrating that it was
imposing self-restrictions to adhere to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) despite its
undeniable technological and scientific prowess.
So, for Trump to revoke the nuclear deal without
any sound basis apart from pleasing Israel and a
few Arab countries and quelling his anti-Iran
sentiment was certainly ill-advised. Subsequent
developments did affirm these apprehensions.
After the US set aside the agreement the P-4
and Germany were left to fend for themselves. Of
course, Trump was insisting that they take similar
action. To an outsider it seemed they had frozen
their options — not wanting to displease the
superpower and not totally aligned with its policy.
Once the US abandoned the agreement, Iran’s
power elite was unshackled to take a course that
it saw fit for it. Another aspect generally
overlooked is that when a country feels
threatened it would hasten to build its defenses
even more resolutely. The answer lies in bringing
Iran back in the international fold and the two
sides should take appropriate measures to reduce
mistrust and not be influenced by countries that
have their axe to grind.
Pakistan’s position on Iran’s nuclear
programme is unambiguous. It wants Tehran to
remain in full compliance of the nuclear deal.
Any departure from it raises undue tensions in
the Middle East and widens the rift and
apprehension among Muslim nations, particularly
between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The
extraordinary breakthrough in Saudi-Israel
relations or UAE-Israel relations are largely a
fallout of the growing hostility between Iran and
the Arab states that was fully exploited by the US
and Israel to mostly their advantage. According
to press reports, the US recently claimed to have
floated very serious ideas on reviving the
agreement but so far Tehran has not responded.
Although reports indicate talks between Iran and
the European Union, with the US watching from
the sidelines, have been encouraging. However,
President Rouhani choosing to inaugurate a
cascade of advanced centrifuges for producing
enriched uranium at the Natanz facility gave
contradictory signals. Perhaps it was meant to
indicate that despite the very harsh sanctions,
through sheer determination Iran has made a
major breakthrough in development of nuclear
technologies and equipment. And hopes that this
would lend weight while conducting the tough
negotiations.
The latest cyberattack on the underground
Natanz facility, apparently by Israel, so soon
after its commissioning, could adversely impact
the current negotiations. It is indeed unrealistic
on the part of Israel to contend as though it has
the right to be the sole nuclear power in the
Middle East. In fact, its possession of nuclear
power and aggressive policies are a major source
of instability of the region. The US must have
realised that building pressure on nations does
not necessarily work. In most cases it strengthens
the nation’s resolve to stand up to it. Pakistan is
no stranger to these pressures. It was dealt with
so severely and unfairly when it was building its
nuclear capability, but through sheer
determination it steered its way through. True,
the people suffer as they have to bear the burden
Page No. 15 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
of sanctions and its long-term ill effects. Another
disturbing aspect is how the US and the West
generally have happily reconciled and even
helped Israel in acquiring its nuclear capability
and deliberately overlooked India’s nuclear build
up. This was in sharp contrast to how Pakistan’s
nuclear programme was viewed.
As regards Iran, the attitude is equally harsh.
There is however a big difference between Iran
and Pakistan’s nuclear policies. Iran is a
signatory to the NPT whereas Pakistan is not and
the logic of its nuclear build-up is to counter the
Indian capability, lest it be unfairly
disadvantaged. To point out these contradictions
is to highlight the reality that major powers
support or oppose proliferation not on principles
but on sheer expediency. The monopoly of the
big five as nuclear powers is by itself a
contradiction and a paradox that is not going to
change even in the distant future. (Published in
The Express Tribune, April 14th, 2021).
Russia's South Asian Strategy
The historic, special, and privileged
Russian-Indian Strategic Partnership (as it’s
officially referred to by both Moscow and New
Delhi) has been a mainstay of South Asian
geopolitics for decades but resulted in Moscow
being a partisan player in the region. While the
aforementioned relationship was reaffirmed
during Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov’s visit to
South Asia last week, Russia also made
enormous strides in advancing its fast-moving
rapprochement with Pakistan. The end result is
that Russia successfully restored balance to its
South Asian strategy, which helps stabilise
Eurasia and could unlock many exciting
opportunities for all.
Up until his trip, Russia was regarded by
some – and not without reason either – as taking
India’s side in regional disputes at the perceived
expense of Pakistan. The perfect case in point
was Moscow’s full support for New Delhi’s
abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019 on the
basis that it’s an internal matter, which contrasts
with the country’s historical stance of regarding
this as an international issue in accordance with
existing UNSC Resolutions on the issue. This
raised concern from observers such as myself,
who published a piece shortly thereafter about
“Russia, Pakistan, And The ‘Bait Theory’”. I
postulated that the recent Russian-Pakistani
rapprochement might have up until that point
actually been partially predicated on both side’s
desire to increase their negotiating leverage with
their traditional Indian and American partners
respectively. Russia’s hyper-partisan approach to
the issue of Article 370’s abrogation appeared to
be proof of this theory in practice. I even
published an analysis at the end of the year titled
“2019: The Year That Russia’s South Asian
‘Balancing’ Act Became Unbalanced” to further
elaborate on my concerns. Thankfully, these were
put to rest after Foreign Minister Lavrov’s visit
last week. A lot has changed in the over year and
a half since Article 370’s abrogation. Russia is
more aware and worried about India’s new de
facto military alliance with America that many
observers fear is directed against China despite
New Delhi’s denials. Moscow has also worked
very closely with Islamabad to promote peace in
Afghanistan via the Taliban, which has greatly
increased mutual trust. Moreover, Pakistan
unveiled its new multipolar grand strategy shortly
before Foreign Minister Lavrov’s visit during the
inaugural Islamabad Security Dialogue, which
coincided with the historic Chinese-Iranian
Strategic Partnership deal that advances
W-CPEC+. Unlike before, Russia nowadays
seems to appreciate Pakistan’s status as the
global pivot state, which finally dawned on its
strategists in light of the aforementioned events.
This is convincingly reflected in what Foreign
Minister Lavrov revealed during the press
conference that he held with his Pakistani
counterpart in Islamabad where the Russian
diplomat spoke about his country’s eagerness to
comprehensively expand relations with his hosts,
importantly including in the military (particularly
anti-terrorist) dimension. Furthermore, the
Express Tribune cited an unnamed diplomatic
source who claimed that Russia offered a “blank
cheque” to Pakistan.
That report should be read together with my
earlier analysis asking, “Why Did The Russian
Ambassador To Pakistan Describe His Country
Page No. 16 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
As A ‘Developing’ One?”, which emphasised
that Russia isn’t in the economic position to be a
so-called “donor state” but is “looking for
mutually advantageous investment which will
give us some profit” according to the envoy
himself. Although he said just two months ago
that “I don’t see any on the agenda which will
give us mutual profit”, he might have just playing
his cards close to his chest as its typical for any
diplomat in order to not spoil what might have
been the speculative negotiations at the time over
forthcoming Russian investments of the sort that
RT reported his country exploring back in
December 2019. The promising future of
Russian-Pakistani relations that Foreign Minister
Lavrov’s historic trip made possible crucially
doesn’t come at any perceived expense to Indian
interests unlike how his country’s support of
New Delhi’s abrogation of Article 370 arguably
affected Pakistani interests. Russia’s top diplomat
held an excellent press conference with his
Indian counterpart the day before he visited
Pakistan where he reaffirmed their special and
privileged strategic partnership. He also
significantly said that his country is against the
creation of any new alliances, be it with China or
anyone else, which should hopefully allay Indian
concerns about Pakistan.
Contrary to what unnamed top sources
alleged in India’s popular online media outlet
ThePrint last week about Russia supposedly
“hyphenating” its relations with India and
Pakistan, Moscow is actually balancing them in
accordance with its 21st-century grand strategy
which aims to advance its visionary Greater
Eurasian Partnership (GEP). This initiative for
integrating the supercontinent through peaceful
means can’t succeed unless Russia has positive
relations with all countries on the landmass,
including non-traditional partners like Pakistan.
In fact, Pakistan is actually the last piece in
Russia’s GEP puzzle. Their long-overdue
rapprochement fills in the gaps of Russia’s South
Asian strategy, which in turn enables the
Eurasian Great Power to finally unleash the
GEP’s full potential after the other pieces in
Southeast Asia, West Asia, and elsewhere in the
supercontinent east of Europe had already fallen
into place earlier. The coincidental timing with
which Pakistan unveiled its new multipolar grand
strategy and the fact that it so closely aligns with
the GEP makes it possible for these two countries
to complement one another’s grand strategic
designs for the first time in history. Ironically,
Afghanistan will be the focal point of the
Russian-Pakistani strategic convergence.
When last week’s immensely successful
outcome of Foreign Minister Lavrov’s visit to
South Asia is coupled with February’s
near-simultaneous synchronised disengagement
between China and India and the Indian-Pakistani
ceasefire, as well as the subsequently visible
thawing of Indian-Pakistani relations (at least for
now), there’s no doubt that the region’s
geopolitical future seems brighter than it did at
the beginning of the year. The Covid-19
pandemic is of course still causing a lot of
disruption and regrettably also plenty of deaths
too, but its inevitable end could lead to a new
future for South Asia if the region’s positive
political trends remain on track. (Written by
Andrew Korybko. Published by The Express
Tribune on April 12, 2021)
Natanz nuclear plant attack
AS the P5+1 and Iran try to breathe life back
into the JCPOA, as the nuclear deal is officially
known, it appears that Israel is resorting to
subterfuge and sabotage to try and derail any
solution and keep the Middle East on a
knife-edge. On Sunday, the Iranian nuclear
facility of Natanz was targeted by a “small
explosion” which Tehran has squarely blamed on
Tel Aviv, while sections of the Israeli and
American press have also pointed to the Jewish
state’s role. Israel has long been trying to
neutralise Iran’s nuclear capabilities. In the past,
it was believed to have targeted the Islamic
Republic’s nuclear programme with Stuxnet
malware, while a number of assassinations of
Iranian nuclear officials — most recently that of
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh last year — were also
believed to be the handiwork of Tel Aviv.
However, such reckless behaviour has its limits,
and there is a high possibility that this covert and
proxy war may transform into a ‘hot’ war.
Page No. 17 — www.CSSExamDesk.com
Already there have been numerous attacks on
both Iranian and Israeli vessels in Middle Eastern
waters, with each side blaming the other for the
incidents. If the international community,
especially Israel’s Western backers, want to truly
revive the nuclear deal and prevent a fresh
conflagration in the Middle East, they must
communicate to their friends in Tel Aviv that the
current path of sabotage must be abandoned.
Indulging in a cloak-and-dagger game, which
Israel has been adept at since its inception, is
relatively easy; containing a conflict in a volatile
region with multiple battlefronts will be a very
difficult task. Therefore, diplomacy must be
given a chance to succeed and the parties to the
JCPOA must continue their negotiations
undisturbed by hostile actors seeking
confrontation. And while Tehran should
demonstrate restraint, Tel Aviv will bear the
brunt of the responsibility should a wider conflict
break out. Moreover, this time the front line will
likely be drawn from the waters of the Gulf to the
shores of the Levant. (Published in Dawn, April
14th, 2021)
Have a blessed Ramazan!
For regular ITS Session 2021 (Phase — II)
for FPSC, PPSC & SPSC General Recruitment
Tests: The deadline to get registered is 24th April,
2021. For the ITS Session (on Merit-based
Scholarship): The last date for registration is 17th
April, 2021. In case of any queries, you may
contact here www.CSSExamDesk.com. Thanks.