Articulate Vol 13 July 2021

An initiative by CSSExamDesk.
com
Articulate for CSS 2022

July 2021 (Volume - 13)
1. The story of Pakistan’s public debt

2. The Afghan civil war — is Pakistan at the crossroads?
Compiled & Edited by Aamir Mahar
3. Population and Pakistan’s development

4. Islamophobia — how to encounter the new battle?
5. Great-Power Competition and Pakistan
6. Unparalleled belt and road cooperation
7. Modi’s new strategy on IIOJK
8. Behind the confrontation between US and China
9. Artificial intelligence, the Covid recovery & Pakistan
10. The rise and fall of the Taliban
11. Endangering global security
12. Global Impacts of NATO’s 2030 strategy
13. Global economic war and Pakistan
14. Russia’s Return to Southeast Asia
15. Understanding the emerging new world order
16. Pakistan - Threats and challenges ahead
17. China’s strides on the World Order
18. The future of democracy and peace
02
01 The story of Pakistan’s public debt
The PTI government claims that it has paid back record debt. This is correct. During the last three
years, the foreign debt repayments amounted to almost Rs3.5 trillion, much more than ever before.
PML-N claims that PTI added much more to the debt pool in three years, than it did in five. This is
also correct. While PML-N government added Rs10.6 trillion to the gross public debt from 2013 to
2018, the PTI government added Rs13 trillion so far (till March 2021). But then we must also mention
that the PPP government merely added Rs6.5 trillion to the gross public debt from 2008 to 2013. The
fact of the matter is that all sides pick numbers that suit their narrative, but the real story is somewhat
different. The nominal value of debt can be misleading. What really matters is the gross public debt as
percentage of GDP. The Fiscal Responsibility and Debt Limitation Act 2005 placed a cap on public
debt, limiting it to 60% of GDP. However, by 2013, the PPP government had breached the cap by
adding 5 percentage points, taking it all the way to 63.8% of GDP. The PML-N government further
added 8.2 percentage points, whereas the PTI government has so far added 9.3%, taking the gross
public debt to 81.4% of GDP. How come the PTI government added so much debt in less than three
years? The massive devaluation, which the government was forced to do in the wake of artificially
overvalued exchange rate, explains a big part of the debt pileup. Right after the devaluation, the net
addition to the debt slowed down, and the gross public debt as a percentage of GDP started to decline.
From June 2018 to June 2019, the rupee devalued by 34%, slipping from Rs121 per US dollar to
Rs162, whereas the gross public debt increased by 19 percentage points, reaching 86% of GDP. But
since June 2019, our gross public debt has actually gone down by almost 5% of GDP. Much of it can
be explained by the fiscal discipline imposed by the government and targeted reduction in primary
deficit. But the real test of the PTI government starts now, where it faces a tough choice between an
expansionary fiscal policy fueling growth but with rising level of public debt versus fiscal discipline
with continued reduction in debt with modest growth. The realisation of the ambitious target set for
FBR will also play a role.
The story of debt is not that hard to understand. The domestic debt is nothing more than
accumulation of fiscal deficit over the years, whereas the external debt is the accumulation of current
account deficit. The interest payments further compound the debt stock and as the government finds
it hard to repay the principal, the previous debts are rolled over. No political government restrains
itself from excessive spending (unless pushed by IMF), because any fiscal cushion it would create
would only benefit the next government. This twisted political economy creates perverse incentives
for each government to play its part in perpetuating Pakistan’s debt crisis. The country has now
reached a stage where it not only needs to borrow to run the government but also to service the
previous debt. In 2020-21, the federal government had net revenues of Rs3.7 trillion but paid Rs4.3
trillion as markup payments and foreign loans repayment. This is fiscally unsustainable but politically
unresolvable. The only way to lessen Pakistan’s debt burden is to broaden the tax net and reduce
circular debt, pension liabilities, losses of state-owned enterprises and most importantly,
non-productive civil and military government expenditures. (Published in The Express Tribune, July
6th, 2021).
02 The Afghan civil war — is Pakistan at the crossroads?
The anti-Taliban forces are in overdrive in one ominous prediction after another about the looming
civil war in Afghanistan, mainly because of the obduracy of the medieval savages, aka the Taliban, as
if dithering on the Doha Accord was okay for Ashraf Ghani. And the liberal brigade is at the forefront,
www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

03
in a sullen fall from grace at the hands of these very ragtags. Pakistan flip-flops quite
uncharacteristically. On July 1, 2021, the Parliamentary Committee on National Security had a
marathon in-camera session, attended by the COAS and DGISI to brief the committee. Press coverage
reveals some interesting positions.
While desisting from being seen ‘overtly pro-China’, the presenters emphasised balanced relations
with US and China and working on a relationship with America, ostensibly after the PM’s tough line
on US basing/partnership in war etc. In response to a sly question, Shahbaz Sharif was apprised that
the “PM had refused” to re-provide Shamsi, distancing the establishment. There are indications of
strategic reorientation of our foreign policy, that has implications for CPEC and Sino-Pakistan
relations. On Afghanistan, the meeting was informed of Pakistan not supporting the Taliban “forming
an emirate” as the 1990s, and that “the 18th century mindset is unacceptable.” That the extended
troika (Pakistan, US, Russia and China) does not support a Taliban military takeover. And that
Pakistan’s major strategic interest remains preventing Afghan territory from being used against
Pakistan. This obviously is a fraction of our strategic interest(s). That Islamabad frets over the
estimated 6,500 Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) fighters, joining hands with the Afghan Taliban, if
Kabul falls. That this eventuality would embolden other violent extremist groups in Pakistan. That the
TTP and the Afghan Taliban are “two sides of the same coin”. With dwindling influence on the Afghan
Taliban, Pakistan expects around 700,000 new refugees, if the situation escalates.
These are interesting iterations. First, re-pivoting to the US/West is the cherished goal of our sold-out
ashhrafiyya (elite), tasked to keep Pakistan in the West’s exploitative orbit, by scaring its leaders and
creating hurdles for projects like CPEC and friends like China. Their penetration is deep and
significant. Imran Khan might be a lone voyager. CPEC, one firmly believes, is Pakistan’s only chance
to break away from the US/western dependency. America, as a declining superpower is likely to be
second fiddle to China in a not-too-distant future, making pivoting to its side, a poor choice. Second,
the US did not sign the Doha accords (ignoring the puppet and puppeteer, Ashraf Ghani et al) out of
love for the ragtag. It was a sheer compulsion. For Biden’s America, Afghanistan is a far away and
insignificant foreign policy priority, a bottomless pit; unnecessarily distracting US policy from
containing an unstoppable Middle Kingdom and a resurgent Russia; besides, domestically, addressing
the worsening race-relations, crumbling infrastructure, faltering education system, Covid-induced
poverty and economic stagnation etc. The US, in tossing the proverbial Afghan “blanket”, and
hastening to exits is calling Ashraf Ghani’s bluff leaving him no choice but to sit with a more
conciliatory Taliban, that America considers more important. Why would it otherwise cut a deal with
an enemy, it fought for 20 long years? The world gets it, only we seem to not get it. Third, the “18th
century savages” are not replicating their 1996 version. Then, in a spontaneous reaction against
lawlessness, corruption and lack of governance; the seminary students burst on the national scene
routing the warlords. Then they were inexperienced in combat, governance, administration and
media handling. Their 2021 version is experienced in running a credible shadow government for two
decades under the nose of the US/NATO and Afghan government, providing security, administration
and other services in all provinces, following a proper chain of command. They are media-savvy and
very sensitive to their erstwhile unpopular legacy. And Taliban.21 are following an effective strategy.
Nibbling spaces, dominating the night, ruling the countryside so effectively that even the US/NATO
had been paying rahdari (toll) for their military movements; occupying areas surrounding major cities;
emphasising on the peaceful surrender (tasleem) invoking Afghan brotherhood, and issuing
reassuring broadcasts to allay fears and rumours are clever deeds. Taliban.21 are experienced in
diplomacy, negotiations and realpolitik. Their year-long Doha parleys establish their credentials in
dealing with a superpower, better than many states. They remain exposed to modern influences like
education, foreign habitation and media in all forms. Realising the power of unofficial media, their

04
footage regarding surrendered ANA troops, is poles apart from their 1996 model. Fourth, militarily,
they are getting boots on ground in the non-Pashtun highland (mainly north), sealing important
borders. This suppresses potential challenges to their rule, stopping Central Asian support for such
challengers. Pashtun east and south are theirs to take, as recent surrender of a Kandahar district
validates. This is not the work of the run of the mill, the uncouth and the unschooled. Today, the
Taliban occupy more areas than they did in the 1990s and follow a defined and efficacious chain of
command, keeping well-informed of popular pulse, strategic dynamics and ground situation.
So, who will fight them in the feared civil war? The warlords with no moral authority (if not
foreign-supported), the politicians already in secret parleys with the Taliban, the dispirited ANA
troops surrendering/fleeing in droves, the urban vigilantes and/or the general public? People lived
under their shadow government all these years, despite the almost 50 nations keeping over 150,000
troops on Afghan soil. We do not seem to get it. Yes, there would be panic flights, desertions and
localised violence. Those desperate to flee are either complicit in crimes against the Taliban, or
gullible and scared individuals, or opportunists fleeing for greener pastures. So, what to expect? With
the north pacified through military presence, a tasleem strategy delivers rural hinterland to the
Taliban. The restarted Doha parleys might lead to an outline political settlement. Pockets of defiance
(if any), would resist till foreign patronage runs out (the Taliban purposefully captured Tajikistan
crossing). And the Taliban patiently wait-out the fall of besieged cities, especially Kabul. The Taliban
would remain a US/West-reliant given the crucial US assistance ($4 billion yearly upto 2024) and
other aid under the Doha agreement. However, any dithering by the US would deliver Afghanistan to
an eagerly waiting China, under the Belt and Road Initiative. A sullen India would reluctantly reach
out to the Taliban, ditching Ghani (like Dr Najeebullah). Lastly, the Taliban rule may be the only
chance for regional/neighbourhood stability. Pakistan and the US knew it back in 1996. So, why is our
ashhrafiyya so afraid of sharia/Islam in our neighbourhood? China gets it, the Taliban get it, we do
not. (Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2021).
Stability in Afghanistan is an elusive concept: Defining the future of Afghanistan after
post-exit U.S forces is a difficult proposition. The Biden government has started withdrawing its
forces, and the aim is to move it to zero troops this year. “This is not condition-based. The president
has judged that a conditions-based approach. . . is a recipe for staying in Afghanistan forever. He has
reached the conclusion that the United States will complete its drawdown and will remove its forces
from Afghanistan before September 11th.” [The Washington Post quoting a senior administration
official: April 14, 2021] Different scenarios can emerge upon U.S forces exit from Afghanistan this
year, in August as envisaged by Biden. First is the creation of a government supported by the U.S
and the international community that includes Taliban in the existing set-up. This set-up is likely not
to stay long. There are two reasons for the predicted failure of this scenario. Ghani’s government is
fragile. Irrespective of over exaggerating the Afghan security forces strength, both Ghani and the U.S
government are aware that it will collapse like a house of cards without Allied Forces boots on ground.
Brig. R Sultan Mahmud succinctly sums it up in his piece, “The US has silently decided to leave the
Afghan military to deal with the Taliban alone! Have also made it clear that they will not provide any
air cover. However, there is again a method in this retreat and surrender. ‘It is better to cede territory
than get your soldiers killed’ is the phrase being advocated.” [4th July 2021] The second reason is that
not only Afghan government but also, its institutions rely heavily on external aid. Forty per cent of its
GDP came from external aid in 2018 according to a report of the World Bank. Withdrawal of the
forces may well lead to a drastic cut back in financial aid, as happened in 2014. One huge negative
impact of the financial aid’s cut back is that with less funds at disposal, it may become difficult to buy
loyalties of different factions. In a country as corrupt as Afghanistan, patronage fuels the corrupted
more by handling ethnic diversities and feeding local interests. These funds predominantly feed the

05
anti-Taliban elements. Based on these facts, withdrawal of U.S forces convey a message to the
multi-factions in Afghanistan of lack of political commitment of the U.S government to the future
political outcome in Afghanistan. This can lead to an unsavory outcome of U.S and allied forces failing
to negotiate a settlement between the Taliban, the Afghan government and other forces of multi-hues
on ground.
The second scenario is the Afghan government presently in place is replaced with a dominant Taliban
presence. Such a set-up is likely to include powerbrokers from central highlands and the north. Can
this kind of joint sharing sustain long? The question to how Taliban wants to run the country
according to its version of Islam and approach of other stake holders may prove to be the point from
where paths of the uneasy bed partners diverge. This may happen sooner than later.
Third is what one feels will be a more likely outcome in times to come i.e. outbreak of a civil war. The
ethnic divisions of Afghan nation are deep and divisional. These include linguistic divisions, these
may at times and at others may not overlap ethnic divisions. Besides this comes divisions of tribals.
Pashtuns are not one entity as generally bundled under one umbrella. They are divided into the
Ghilzai, Shinwari, Waziri, Durrani, Mohmand, Yusufzai and innumerable smaller tribes. These tribes
themselves are not homogeneous in themselves. Many are subdivided into smaller ones. To take one
example only the Durrani tribe is further broken down in seven sub-divisions. The Achakzai, Barakzai,
Popalzai, Alikozai, Nurzai, Alizai and Ishakzai. These in turn are divided into clans. In other words, all
these divisions can be added up in one word: a headache. The importance of using funds to buy
loyalty becomes abundantly clear. But the question raised here is different. So, the Taliban, though
emerging from religious seminaries as a movement for Pashtuns, cannot represent the entire Pushtun
divided population. Nor the non-Pashtun origin population. Though dominated by ethic Pashtuns,
who constitute one third of the population, the two thirds and their voices cannot be ruled out.
Though Pashtuns are mainly Sunnis [not the Pashtun Turi tribe that is Shi’a], Tajiks hail from both
religious divisions. The Badakhshan Tajiks are Ismailis, whereas the Shi’a Tajiks live in western
Afghanistan. Rest is Sunnis. With a cross-mix of tribes, clans, ethnicities, religious groups- it becomes
next to impossible for Taliban to be a unanimous leader-unless it has the foresight to include leaders
of different groups as stakeholders within its fold. And then to deliver on whatever promises are made.
Failing a civil war is a foregone conclusion.
A broader engagement between the multifaceted Afghan society is a must for a peaceful coexistence.
Key questions must be addressed with stakeholders, both having a prominent voice and those who
currently do not have one that prominent. Hameed Hakimi will otherwise be proved right when he
says, “a heedless military withdrawal will pave the way for a regional proxy war in Afghanistan.
Pakistan, India, Iran, China, Russia and the Arab Gulf states could all resort to military competition
through their proxy clients within Afghanistan.” [CHATHAM HOUSE: 4 JUNE 2021] (This article was
published in The Daily Times, July 9th, 2021).
03 Population and Pakistan’s development
The world is going through a serious demographic change that was predicted but not to the extent it is
actually happening. These changes will have a number of important consequences; some positive, the
other negative. The world population is expected to increase from 7.8 billion in 2020 to 9.9 billion by
2050. The current global total fertility rate is 2.3 births per woman. However, 91 countries have
registered fertility levels below 2.1 which is the population replacement level. This means that these
countries have entered the phase of population decline. The United States, most of Europe, and China
now have declining populations. In late April, the American Census Bureau began to release basic
information from the population count conducted in 2020. The numbers confirmed what

06
demographers have been warning for years. The US along with China and most of the countries in
Europe is undergoing “demographic stagnation”. These countries are transitioning from relatively
fast-growing nations of young people to slow growing countries of older people. As Farhad Manjoo
wrote in his column for The New York Times, “Demographic transition could bring its own costs,
among them a steady reduction in dynamism, productivity and slowdown in national and individual
prosperity.” For the US and China this transition could mean a diminishment of global power.
The United States Census Bureau predicts that sometime in the next decade, Americans over 65 will
outnumber those younger than 18 for the first time in the country’s history. America will cross the
400-million population mark sometime in late 20-50s. By that time about half of Americans will be
over the age of 45 years, and one-fifth will be older than 85. An aging and declining population could
be catastrophic for the countries that are heading towards that situation. In a recent paper, Chad
Jones, an economist at Stanford University, argues that a global population decline could reduce the
fundamental innovativeness of mankind. If increased births are not a feasible option, the only other
way is to bring in more people from the outside. In a recent report authored by Ali Noorani, the chief
executive of the National Immigration Forum, and his coauthor Danilo Zak suggest that increasing
legal migration by slightly more than a third each year would keep America’s ratio of working young
people to old people stable over the next half century. Those who should be brought in should come
from the countries that have large surpluses of people to export and have the skills — or can be given
the skills — that countries such the US and China need. This is where Pakistan enters the picture. To
paint it I will present some vital population statistics about Pakistan. Demography is one reason for
rethinking Pakistan’s economic priorities. The country stands out in the world that is now witnessing
rapidly declining birth rates. There are now 14 countries that have more than 100 million people each.
Pakistan, with 220 million people in 2021, is the fifth largest. Of the 14 largest, Pakistan, with a
population growth rate of 2% a year, has the third highest growth rate. Only Nigeria and Ethiopia,
both at 2.6% a year rate of population increase, have higher growth rates. A birth rate sustained at
this level over a period of time means a very young population. World’s median population is 30.6
years which means that one-half of the population is below that age. Pakistan’s median age is only
23.8 years or 78% of the global average. The Pakistani population is very young.
How does the Pakistani demographic situation compare with that of some of the more populated
countries? Three of the 10 largest countries in terms of the size of their population are in South Asia.
Pakistan, with an estimated increase of 2% a year, is seeing its population growing at a rate twice as
high as those of Bangladesh and India. That notwithstanding, the country, at 287 people per square
kilometre, is the least densely populated of the three. Bangladesh has the highest density with 1,265
persons per square kilometre. The Indian density with 464 persons is considerably higher than that of
Pakistan. Of the 10 largest countries, six are net exporters of people. India with net outmigration of
533,000 people in 2020 is the largest exporter followed by Bangladesh at 370,000 and Pakistan at
233,000. These numbers translated in terms of the proportion of the population tell a different story.
Bangladesh is exporting 0.2% of its population, twice as high as Pakistan’s 0.1%. India sends abroad
out only 0.04% of its population. A very large proportion of South Asian outmigration is to the oil
exporting countries in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, with a population of 35 million, brings in 2.2
million people from the outside, mostly from South Asia and Egypt. United Arab Emirates, with a
population of 10 million, has 84,000 foreigners being added every year. The US imports 955,000
people a year while four other English-speaking countries — the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia
and New Zealand — also have large number of people moving in. Canada brings in 242,000
immigrants a year, Australia 158,000 and New Zealand 15,000. These numbers mean that for
Pakistan such a large and young population could become either a burden or an asset. To be the latter,
public policy must be designed in a way that the youth could add to the country’s economic strength.

07
The youth’s involvement in two sectors can produce this result. One is the development of
information technology. The other is the development of small and medium enterprises that could
enter global supply chains. Both need educated and well-trained workforces. Pakistan needs to invest
in developing institutions both in the public and private sectors designed to produce such worker
streams. Pakistan is in a position to take advantage of the developing demographic situation in the US.
Although the history of South Asian migration to the US is not as long and intense as that of the
Chinese, the Sub-continent has one of the fastest growing population groups in the country. The
number of South Asians in the country has increased from 2.2 million in 2000 to 4.9 million in 2015.
In the six years since then, another 1.4 million South Asians came in, bringing the total to 6.3 million.
The Indians have 70% of the South Asian migrants in the US. Pakistanis, with 700,000 people, has
the second largest South Asian group. Those from Bangladesh number 182,000. South Asians
including Pakistanis have high concentrations in the coastal cities of America; on the East and West
coasts as well as on the coastal states in the country’s south.
It is important for the Pakistani policymakers to work with those already living in the US to develop a
working plan to facilitate the migration of Pakistanis to the US. The Pakistani diaspora could help out
in making the Pakistani youth major contributors to the county’s growth. (Published in The Express
Tribune, May 31st, 2021).
04 Islamophobia — how to encounter the new battle?
The literal meaning of the word phobia is an inexplicable fear against an object, belief, class, or
situation. Islamophobia denotes the prejudice against the Muslim community which results in
discrimination, fear, hate speech, marginalisation, bias, and in extreme cases leads to violence too.
Over the past few years, western society has exhibited negative perceptions and discrimination
against Muslims. Though Islamophobia existed before 9/11 too, but the terrorist attacks of 9/11 have
witnessed a gradual increase in frequency. Research by the United Nations Alliance of Civilisations
and the League of Arab States, shows the aftermath of terrorist attacks made lives of Muslim
community difficult in western countries. Anti-Muslim sentiments increased in the West, not the
mere dislike of the Muslim community but linking them to terrorism and violence got prevalent.
Post-9/11 era showed an increase in the civil rights cases filed by the Muslim community in the West
and most of the cases got dismissed by the judges. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids any kind of
discrimination on the basis of ethnicity or religion. These were the most common cases filed by the
Muslim community. At the workplace, Muslims faced discrimination too and those cases were met
with the same fate too. Recently, there are multiple incidents that showed islamophobic tendencies.
In 2011, France imposed a ban on women to wear a full-face veil and became the first European
country to ban hijab in public places. Switzerland passed a referendum in 2009 to ban the
construction of minarets on the mosques. The minaret on local Turkish cultural association mosque
in Wangen bei Olten, was the prime stimulus for the proposed initiative. There were many other
controversies that emerged concerning the construction of mosques in some western states. Also, the
widely debated sketches of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) made by Denmark are another example.
A recent most example of an Islamophobic incident in London, Ontario is where a man bumped into
five members of a Muslim family and four of them got killed. Canadian prime minister Justin
Trudeau has termed the attack an act of terrorism and hate.
It’s time to address the rise behind anti-Muslim sentiments and evaluate the Islamophobic tendencies
at the individual level. There is no particular definition of islamophobia, some scholars termed it as a
new form of racism that is targeted against a specific religious community. Most of the people in the
West that show prejudice or anti-Muslim sentiments, have little to no knowledge about Islam in

08
general. Globally, Muslims are the most common religious community vulnerable to discrimination
and unfair treatment. Many Muslims in Western societies report not feeling safe and respected by
people in the West. Several elements are responsible for the respect among Muslim and western
communities; differences in religion, culture, ideas, and values shape a person’s opinion towards
another. Most of the surveys show culture and religion as the root cause of tension between the West
and the Muslim world. Though Islamophobic tendencies increased post 9/11, but it can hardly be
declared as the sole factor responsible. The rise of anti-Muslim sentiments dates back to the 1980s,
though the term “Islamophobia” was coined much later. By far, the most comprehensive definition of
Islamophobia is provided by the Runnymede Trust report entitled “Islamophobia: A Challenge for us
All”. The report highlights that Islamophobia can be understood as a concept involving multiple
dimensions. It includes fear of Islam, to view Islam as a political ideology and inferior to the West,
them versus us mentality, and the report also justifies that Islam is a new kind of religious prejudice.
Plus, Western media has widely played its role to influence people’s minds by linking Islam with
terrorism. Many times media reports showed veiled Muslim women’s pictures with the news of
terrorism to create a link between violence and Muslims. Media cultivates the brain of the general
population, its bias and prejudice towards a particular religious community would certainly cause
detrimental effects in the society. To understand attitudinal determinants responsible for the spread
of Islamophobia, one can analyse religious intolerance and racism under the light of some prominent
theories (cognitive capability approach, social identity theory, perceived threat theory). All these
theories collectively employ a narrative that is based on the perception of us versus them or in-group
and out-group mentality. Such stereotypes create sentiments of hate and discrimination among
people and in extreme cases can lead to violence too.
Today, the world is witnessing the worst kind of Islamophobia causing the loss of precious human
lives. Prejudice against the Muslim community has reached unprecedented levels; discrimination and
hate are converting into physical violence and harm. The media needs to stop feeding people with
xenophobic tendencies against Islam and the Muslim community. A neutral approach by mainstream
international media is a prerequisite to eradicate the misperceptions in the West. Besides, Muslim
countries should together take an initiative to spread the knowledge about Islam. The most significant
role and responsibility still hinge on the media to adopt an unbiased narrative. (Published in The
Daily Times, June 19th, 2021).
05 Great-Power Competition and Pakistan
Great-power competition has been a recurrent theme in history since its emergence in the late 4th
millennium BC. The current prevailing competition involves an ongoing push-pull among the US,
China and Russia for global strength and dominance. It is far more convoluted than a military or
economic problem. Despite growing apprehensions about an armed conflict over South China Sea,
neither the US nor China posture a genuine military threat to the other’s sovereignty or independence.
The two states are simply too large, too populous, too restrained and too far away for each other to
contemplate a direct military intervention or even to impose their intent on the other decisively.
China is not to become a multiparty democracy, and the US would not become a one-party state
capitalist regime. Neither country pursues to convert the other to its preferred political ideology and
thus, both have to coexist with each other for a long time. If that is the case, what are they trying to
compete or contest for? A major part of the competition will be “coercive and domineering” as each
country seeks to defend and promote the rules or customs of the political system it believes the global
order should be based on. The most important conclusion is that while GPC is a historical norm,
relative decline and violent clash among rivals are not predestined in any way.

09
China’s preferred world order is territorial sovereignty, noninterference and safety for autocracy.
Therein, universalists claim that individual rights do not jeopardise the authority of the Chinese
Communist Party or inspire criticism of its internal policies. The US, by contrast, has long promoted a
world order where so-called liberal values are preferred; promoting and encouraging respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction. Of course, neither the US nor
China lives up to these standard declarations. Yet, the normative preferences displayed by the US and
China are not just empty rhetoric. The US has, at times, used its power to expand the sphere of
democratic rule and pressurise or cold-shouldered states that rejected these ideals.
Americans may be accustomed to thinking the arc of history bends toward justice, and ideals of
freedom are destined to triumph even if takes many decades before they are fully realised. But it
would be wise not to assume it because China’s preferred set of rules is likely to prove attractive in
many places. Nondemocratic leaders of the world may prefer a world order that gives each state the
right to determine its own system of government. China’s willingness to provide development
assistance without conditioning it on domestic reforms has proven to be appealing. Therefore, China’s
defence of noninterference and rejection of liberal norms are going to win support from a lot of
autocrats. China’s live-and-let-live rhetoric is quite reassuring to nations that do not share its
autocratic character. China’s position is less vulnerable to the charge of duplicity or hypocrisy,
asserting that all states should be permitted to develop as they see it fit to do business with
democracies, military dictatorships, and monarchies. Some countries might find this stance more
attractive than the US perception that all governments ought to become democracies eventually. The
US looks two-faced, when it proclaims liberal principles, but continues to support close allies that
routinely violate these ideals. Given all this, one might think China’s live-and-let-live approach to
world order would eventually displace the US’ liberal ideals, and the normative foundation. I think
that conclusion is premature because China’s rational position is not without its specific liabilities.
The past two decades have been a rough patch for many of the world’s democracies, despite the
favorable position they enjoyed as the 20th century came to a close. The US stumbled into several
costly wars, triggered a global financial crisis, and is presently facing a level of dysfunction and
partisan division unseen since its Civil War. Japan has been treading waters economically. Europe has
faced recurring economic crises and parochial challenges. It is a mistake to believe conspiracy
theories, but it is also a mistake to assume that they bear no relation to reality. The world’s major
democracies have performed poorly as of late and West is in a condition of terminal and self-inflicted
decline. A geo-economic power shift has occurred. Historically, Pakistan has maintained robust
relationships with both the US and China based on security, political, and economic interests. Current
pillars of Pakistan’s relationship with the US include Pakistan’s ongoing cooperation in
Afghanistan—required well past the US military drawdown. Conversely, China has initiated
unprecedented economic cooperation via CPEC. Pakistani strategists also count on China for
consistent support to contend with asymmetrical rival India and moral support in helping
internationalise the core issue of Kashmir. Pakistan has to constantly walk a tightrope in the existing
great powers competition. (Published in The Daily Times, July 5th, 2021).
06 Unparalleled belt and road cooperation
On June 23, the Asia and Pacific High-level Conference on the Belt and Road Cooperation was
successfully held. It was attended by political leaders from 29 countries, and representatives from six
international organisations including the United Nations. Chinese president Xi Jinping delivered
written remarks. State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi presided over the meeting. H E
Foreign Minister Qureshi addressed the function. The conference, where attending parties vowed to
enhance efforts to jointly fight the pandemic and boost the green economy for a sustainable recovery,

10
is regarded as a signal to show that the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the 2013-born framework, has
endured the test of COVID-19 and continues to be vigorous in buttressing regional economies hit hard
by the pandemic. As an influential and popular initiative, the BRI has withstood the test of times, with
distinguished characteristics.
First, the BRI is not meant for geopolitics, nor for competition, but for practical needs for
development. As President Xi Jinping points out, the BRI aims to carry on the Silk Road spirit
and co-build an open platform for cooperation to generate new driving forces for the development
of all countries. Therefore, China realised that the infrastructure and energy sectors were major
obstacles for many developing countries, which could not be solved due to lack of funds. China
has committed itself to investing in the BRI countries to meet their urgently needed projects.
Take the energy projects under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) for example. They
now stand at a quarter of Pakistan’s power supply, and have become the guarantee of the
wellbeing of people and the functioning of the economy.
Second, the BRI is not a slogan, but an endeavour that yields tangible results and progress. Over
the past eight years, the BRI has evolved from vision into reality, and brought about enormous
opportunities and benefits to countries around the world. Trade between China and the BRI
partners has exceeded 9.2 trillion US dollars. Direct investment
Third, the BRI is built for connectivity, not for confrontation or isolation. We have launched a
large number of pragmatic cooperation projects to benefit the public, and established the
multi-dimensional and comprehensive connectivity partnership. To date, up to 140 partner
countries have signed documents on Belt and Road cooperation with China. The BRI is beyond
the scope of transportation connectivity, and has become the bridge for trade, commerce and
people-to-people connectivity, thus serving as the world’s broadest-based and largest platform for
international cooperation.
Fourth, the BRI is world-oriented, instead of driven by political blocs. It follows the philosophy of
openness, inclusiveness, and win-win cooperation, and sticks to the principle of extensive
consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits. The BRI and its core value have been written
into the relevant documents of the United Nations, the G20, APEC and other regional
organisations, and has become the most well-received international public good. Take CPEC as an
example, various activities have already been held in many places around the world to promote
CPEC third-party cooperation, such as Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, and Singapore.
Fifth, the BRI sets its goal high, that is for a better life, and sets its standard high, that is for green
development. According to a World Bank study, the BRI could help lift 7.6 million people out of
extreme poverty and 32 million people out of moderate poverty. It could boost trade by 2.8 to 9.7
percent for the BRI countries, and increase the global real income by 0.7 to 2.9 percent. The BRI
is also striving to build a community of harmony between humanity and nature, and has launched
a series of green action initiatives, including green infrastructure construction, green energy,
green transport and green finance. To create a just and reasonable global environmental
governance system through eco-environmental cooperation, now becomes the feature of the BRI.
The above-mentioned characteristics are all embodied in the development of CPEC, the pilot project
of the BRI. With our joint efforts, 46 CPEC projects have been completed or under construction, with
a total investment of US$25.4 billion, and bring about 75 thousand job opportunities at its peak.
Against the backdrop of Covid-19, the CPEC projects strictly complied with the SOPs and went on
smoothly without suspension, withdrawal of people, or any layoffs of workers. Look forward to the
future, as Foreign Minister Qureshi pointed out at the Asia and Pacific High-Level Conference on Belt

11
and Road Cooperation; “We must seize this opportunity to transform our economies into ones that
are development-oriented and environmentally sustainable”. China and Pakistan should enhance
cooperation in promoting high-quality development of CPEC, give more focus to industry, agriculture,
and ICT sectors, so as to enhance export competitiveness, increase export and tax revenues, and
achieve sustainable development with better production capacity. We should also jointly put forth the
Initiative for Belt and Road Partnership on Green Development to inject new impetus into building
the green CPEC, and step up cooperation in areas like green infrastructure, green energy and green
finance, and set a new pilot for high-quality development under the BRI framework. (Nong Rong, the
Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan. Published in The Nation, July 6th, 2021).
07 Modi’s new strategy on IIOJK
The miseries of Kashmiris started in 1846 when Kashmir was sold to Gulab Singh and the treaty
brought into existence the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Upon the partition of the
sub-continent, the British had laid a criteria for deciding the future of princely states, which included
geographical contiguity, majority of population and economic dependence. Under these conditions
Kashmir naturally would have been part of Pakistan. Contrary to all this, the Radcliffe Commission
gave a strip of Muslim majority areas to India. After the first war on Kashmir, some parts of Indian
Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) were liberated and India took the issue to the UN.
The UNSC Resolution recognises Pakistan and India as party to the dispute and left it up to the people
of Jammu and Kashmir to decide their future. Despite commitments by Nehru and Gandhi, nothing
happened and issue of self-determination continues to remain. On August 5, 2019, the BJP led
government revoked the special status of IIOJK by abrogating Article 370 and 35A of the constitution.
India continuously denied the right of self-determination which forced the peaceful protesters to take
up armed resistance against the occupational forces in 1990. Indian barbarism against Kashmiris
included indiscriminate shooting, massacres, targeted killings of innocent civilians irrespective of age
and sex, raids and rapes, all of which become a routine. Thousands of mass graves have been
unearthed in IIOJK and the occupation forces gives the impression to the locals that these are foreign
militants. These crimes are a part of their tactic to instil fear among the Kashmiris.
The Kashmir issue can be compared to East Timor where the UN was able to secure the right to
self-determination for the people. In the case of IIOJK, it failed miserably, even though their struggle
has been longer in duration and bloodier. This reflects the double standards of the international
community and the UN. Indirectly, the UN continues to allow India to occupy the area. The BJP led
government has also initiated steps to change the demography of the region. Domiciles are being
issued to Hindus through a policy issued by government of India. Efforts are in hand to facilitate the
mass settlement of Hindus in IIOJK, allowing the purchase of land and property to create a
demography imbalance. According to Pakistan’s foreign office spokesperson, India has issued over 3.4
million fake domicile certificates to non-Kashmiris. Recently, India deployed an additional 70
companies of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) in IIOJK. This indicates some fresh plans for
IIOJK which, according to reports, include making new divisions of the Kashmir valley and merging it
with others. On June 24, 2021, Indian PM Modi met 14 so pro-Indian politicians from IIOJK in Delhi
for the first time after the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35 A. It was not a surprise move as behind
the doors, RAW was making preparations with these so called leaders while the actual leaders remain
behind bars. Holding a conference with some so called politicians is not acceptable to Kashmiris as it
gives a false impression to the international community that India is serious in bringing normalcy to
IIOJK. It has been agreed during this conference that Kashmir will be declared a state similar to any
other Indian state. Secondly, elections will be held on the completion of delimitations. Thirdly, issues
related to domiciles, allotment of land and job will be sorted out later, but most importantly there is

12
no mention of Article 35 A which is the root cause. Fourthly, a settlement has been agreed to
according to which Kashmiri pandits will be back in IIOJK. Fifthly, political prisoners will be released
after consultation with the security forces but there was no mention of the Hurriyat leaders.
According to reports, the meeting did not go according to the expectations held by Modi. Mehbooba
Mufti has made it clear that her party would not contest elections until 370 and 35A are restored and
asked Modi to resume dialogue with Pakistan. According to an article in The Hindu, “Withdrawal of
statehood was a clever negotiating ploy to eventually force a trade-off between the return of statehood
and tacit acceptance of the removal of article 370”. The Kashmiri people have denounced the move as
a drama and eyewash. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Qureshi termed Modi’s meeting a ‘drama’ and ‘a
PR exercise’. Imran Khan, in a recent interview with the New York Times, said that if India continues
with the status quo in IIOJK, the consequences will be disastrous. The issue cannot be resolved unless
the Hurriyat leaders and Pakistan not engaged. (Published in The Nation, July 5th, 2021).
08 Behind the confrontation between US and China
In recent times, a burgeoning rivalry between the US and allies, and China has begun to intensify. In
this, the common view is that the US feels threatened by an increasingly powerful China. Yet, China
has no real stated objectives of challenging American world dominance. Conversely, China has been
on course to avoiding a full-fledged confrontation with the US and allies for years. Over decades,
official Chinese government discourse has consistently centered on righting historical wrongs that
were meted out to China over the past century and a half, mostly as a result of extant colonial
enterprise. This view is usually mated with a stated Chinese aspiration to end poverty and forge a
“moderately prosperous society”. Similarly, any and all international disputes that China has, and
which are often touted as proof of Chinese aspiration to setback American power and dominate the
world, are related to China’s neighbors. As such, none of the disputes pose any real, existential threat
to the US, NATO or other US allies. Therefore, one is left wondering why the US and allies are so
intent upon setting up a confrontation with China. Usually commentators proffer the view that an
economically powerful China will challenge American and western economic hegemony. While that
might be, history has also shown that a rising economic power can just as likely join the hegemonic
clique. A case in point is Japan. Into the 1980s and 90s, when Japan was also registering its own
meteoric rise – also backed by technological innovation, manufacturing prowess and cheap exports –
there were concerns around Japan displacing the US. However, over time, Japan has instead joined
the “Global North”, become part of the current world order and is now counted amongst the countries
that feel threatened by China’s rise. Thus, the cause for current concerns around China’s rise may be
more than just apprehensions over loss of economic hegemony. While the cause(s) will naturally be
complex and dynamic, I will point out one aspect that is underestimated in the Global South and is
generally unacknowledged in the Global North: Continuing psycho-cultural, Orientalist fear of the
“East” or, as in here, of the Chinese. Over the centuries, the “East” has often been viewed with fear,
suspicion and hostility. There is actually quite a history to this that begins in the 13th century. Here,
when the Mongols were galvanized by Genghis Khan into becoming a world power, they also invaded
Europe. Not only that the Mongol hordes wrought defeat, death, destruction, pillaging, et al, upon
Europe, they also remained unstoppable for a very long time. Now, that experience of continual
Mongol invasions sunk a fear of the “East”. One should remember that this was an era of the crusades,
and the Church was highly mobilized and influential during this period. As the Mongols decimated
European power structures and killed off political leadership, it came upon the Church to become a
site of resistance.

13
As a response, the Church did what it knew best how to do: It used religion to foster resistance to the
Mongols. Here, in particular, the Christian Bible in the Book of Revelation, Chapter 16, Verse 12,
mentions demonic “Kings from the East” who are meant to come as a flood, and trigger a final
apocalypse. It is possible that this was invoked by the Church to create a specter of a ‘final war’
between belief and disbelief, between the heathen marauders and the ‘good’ Christendom. Indeed, at
one point in 1241, Pope Gregory IX even ordered an unsuccessful crusade (or, ‘holy war’) against the
Mongols. This apocalyptic “end of the world” image seems to have stuck and, then, seems to have
persevered through a continuum provided by the enduring and influential Church. So powerful has
been its impact that it has reverberated through the centuries. Whenever an eastern power has arisen,
European powers have resorted to Biblical, mostly apocalyptical, tropes to reframe the challenge as
one between the rightly guided Christian world and the evil of a heathen East. All of this is well
documented. Always, Easterners are painted as ungodly and heathen (‘godless communist China’);
inherently corrupt and base (‘China manipulates currency and global trade regulations; steals
intellectual property; copies western products’); driven by evil, occult powers (‘China conducts
cyber-espionage’); and, ultimately, uncivilized and in need of superior western assistance (‘China
lacks democracy, is economically illiberal and a threat to a rules-based international system’). One
need only to pick up any event that saw a China-vs-West confrontation to see how things panned out.
During the British-Chinese Opium Wars of 1840s, British media painted the Chinese as base,
uncivilized, almost subhuman criminals. During the anti-colonial Boxer Rebellion of 1899-1901,
western media was rife with references to the Chinese “flooding” western-dominated regions (in a
throwback to the “Kings of the East” trope) and perpetrating unspeakable crimes upon westerners (a
throwback to the Mongol invasions). In this case particularly, the Chinese anti-colonists were
essentially attacking western colonial collaborators and actual western casualties were low. Yet, eight
European powers got together, landed armies in China, and sacked Beijing in one of the most brutal
and gruesome instances of war crimes in recorded history.
Similarly, in the US – a country settled by Europeans – the Chinese became an object of racist and
xenophobic hatred as early as 1870s. This is because an expanding America was in need for cheap
labor. In 1868, the US signed the Burlingame Treaty with China, allowing import of labor. Soon after,
American labor began to agitate against the Chinese saying they were taking away “American jobs”
(sound familiar?). Over the next two decades, local Americans formed anti-Chinese leagues, carried
out pogroms and enacted discriminatory laws specifically targeted onto Chinese (see, for example,
Anti-Coolie Act, 1862; Page Act, 1875; Chinese Exclusion Act, 1882, among others). Surrounding all
these hardly-remembered events were racist, stereotypical tropes of uncouth, uncivilized, base
Easterners inundating the civilized west in an effort to decimate its society and polity. Over time,
these extant mores mutated in multiple and interesting ways. The geo-politics of 20th century Europe
saw rise of the specter of the “Yellow Peril”, whereby Imperial Japan was seen to pose a threat to
Russian and German Empires; and the Kuomintang of Chiang Kaishek was seen as fighting for
western ideals of democracy and liberal economy as part of China’s Civil War. The notion of “Yellow
Peril” eventually mutated into the “Red Scare”. Here, old religious, xenophobic and colonial
discursive frameworks were reformulated into anti-communist tropes. Notions of “oriental
despotism” were resurrected in the shape of concepts of “totalitarianism”. Based on these, an
ideational, abstracted (Cold) war was consummated, supposedly, between western liberal democracy
and authoritarian communist regimes. Reverberations of all this can be seen rippling through western
cultural production. Note, for example, the Chinese evil villain, Dr. Fu Manchu who featured in at
least 14 popular Max Rohmer novels and one Hollywood movie. In all of them, Dr. Fu Manchu was
shown as being out on a quest to destroy western civilization and dominate the world. There are
countless other essentially Chinese evil characters that have appeared in innumerable western novels,
plays, movies, and more.

14
Thus, with all said and done, the core thesis here has been that the concerns of the US and its allies
over China’s rise on the world stage have, at least in part, to do with extant psycho-cultural fears and
anxieties. Some of them are rooted in Medieval historical events, while others have been
context-specific, often regionalized, responses to conditions obtained in certain areas at certain points
in time. Yet others have been products of imperialism, colonialism and, later, an anti-Communist
Cold War. While this article has tried to present a broad, summary-like, but ultimately inexhaustive,
context to the core thesis, deeper engagement with history and acknowledgment of influence of such
psycho-cultural mores on present-day geopolitical policy-making can help develop political clarity,
reduce cultural tension and, ultimately, help mitigate confrontation between China and, the US and
allies. (Published in The Daily Times, July 5th, 2021).
09 Artificial intelligence, the Covid recovery & Pakistan
There is a lot of hype surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the first step in assessing the extent
of its impact is to solve the puzzle and understand what it has to offer. While being attributed to
machines with a human level of intelligence, it is viewed as an “umbrella” concept that spans a variety
of disciplines and technologies, including machine learning, deep learning, and cognitive computing,
among others. According to Ray Kurzweil, American inventor and futurist, computers will have the
same level of intelligence as humans by 2029. Several artificial intelligence-based projects on machine
learning, data science or big data are being used in a wide range of fields to effectively predict, explain
and manage the possible scenarios which can be caused by different health crises. There is no doubt
that the Covid-19 pandemic is the first global public health crisis of the 21st century. It has already
caused a recession, with the global economy shrinking by 5.2 percent last year as per the World Bank
Global Economic Prospects report, triggering a dramatic rise in extreme poverty. Moreover, with
increasing unemployment it has also resulted in unprecedented levels of debt around the world.
According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the repayments of
developing countries with respect to their public external debt will reach between $ 2.6 trillion and
$ 3.4 trillion in 2020 and 2021. Moreover, the World Bank has also alarmingly predicted that the
pandemic is pushing around 40 to 60 million people into a state of extreme poverty.
Pakistan stands at a much greater risk when confronting these challenges. Many health experts across
the nation are of the view that artificial intelligence can play an integral role in not only managing the
process of creating efficient boosters for Covid-19 variants, but also for the distribution of vaccines to
maximum people across the country. In addition to this, artificial intelligence systems can also
effectively assist in building actionable data sets, allowing doctors to analyse and study root causes of
the pandemic. For example, we have seen how machine learning algorithms and computational
analyses have played a central role in the vaccine development journey.
Due to the benefits of AI, pharmaceutical companies have now increasingly begun to explore its
application to disease-related concerns. In fact, much can be achieved through artificial intelligence
by driving innovation in four key areas—drug discovery, vaccine development, public
communications, and integrative medicine. With respect to innovation in public communications,
government departments can use chatbots via media services such as Facebook Messenger to
suppress panic and provide clinical information to the public. Such government-licensed or approved
chatbots can comparatively provide truthful and reliable information to citizens. At present no aspect
of integrative medicine specifically for the management of Covid-19 has been validated as being
effective in human trials. However, as more becomes known about the pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2,
an AI-based approach can offer great utility in screening possible integrative medicine techniques to
reduce the risk of Covid-19. For example, AI based screening methods could be used to specifically

15
screen for integrative options that can help mediate the inflammatory responses to SARS-CoV-2
infection. Such an AI based approach can lead to a far more rapid deployment of integrative medicine
techniques in the fight against Covid-19. Another new use of AI is in contact tracing or tracking people
who have come into contact with the virus in order to contain it. By tracking potential user
information including the health and location of individuals and using AI facial recognition, these
tools can effectively enforce social distancing and inform citizens of exposure to positive cases. In
these challenging times, it has become imperative for pharmaceutical companies and scientific
laboratories in Pakistan to partner with industry leaders like Google and IBM who have powerful AI
capabilities. For example, in China, users are assigned a coronavirus score that affects their access to
public transport, work, and school. And US government officials have now begun increasing the
possibility of mass surveillance by collecting “anonymised, aggregated” data on the location of users
from tech giants including Facebook and Google in order to proactively map the spread of Covid-19.
While the situation may seem dire, it is important to raise awareness of AI technologies in the country
so that we can alleviate some of the most pressing problems this pandemic has created. The
tremendous potential of artificial intelligence must be utilized in the fight against rapid spread of
Covid-19 in order to save maximum lives and limit the economic devastation caused by this horrific
disease. The situation today is a stark reminder of the need to make serious and sustained long-term
investments in science long after this crisis has ended. (Published in The Nation, June 30th, 2021).
Our national AI policy: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a multibillion-dollar industry. By the end of
2021, the revenues from the AI market, including software, hardware, and services, are expected to
reach 327.5 billion USD. This market will likely hit the 500 billion USD mark by 2024 or even earlier
with the current growth rate. With the fast-paced growth of the information technology (IT) sector in
Pakistan, which is currently contributing around 1 percent of the national GDP (approx. 3.0 billion
USD), the share of AI-related products and services is also increasing. Pakistani AI startup companies
have shown their potential, and many of them are prospective unicorns. The incumbent Government
of Pakistan is aggressively pushing the concepts of the knowledge economy and digital Pakistan. Such
initiatives are indeed in line with recent ongoing international trends. They are also much needed to
cope with the fast-paced modern world. However, what is currently sorely lacking is a clear national
AI policy for Pakistan. A national AI policy is a fundamental step in any nation’s journey to its “smart”
future. It characterises how AI technologies will shape the country’s economic future by critically
rethinking and making drastic changes to reap productivity gains and create new avenues of growth.
A typical AI policy includes identifying projects of national interest, such as defence, smart cities and
urban planning, healthcare, safety and security and large-scale manufacturing, where AI will be used
to address critical challenges and deliver a strong socioeconomic impact.
The development of AI policy has already become a concern of paramount importance for many
countries in the last few years. The Russian president Vladimir Putin has already predicted that
whichever country leads the way in AI research will dominate global affairs. It is expected that China
will become the worldwide leader of AI research by 2030 by having almost half of the total AI
contribution to the world GDP. The US, the EU, the Russian Federation, and India all are poising to
take the leadership role in this arena and have already introduced their respective AI policies. In
Pakistan, we desperately need a similar policy to harness the potential of AI fully. This policy should
include at least three cornerstones. First, it should identify critical areas of national strategic
importance, which require immediate attention and resources. It would be wise to locate certain niche
areas instead of keeping a broader and generic spectrum. However, identifying our strongholds and
where we should tap on the advances made by others require careful planning and conscious
decision-making. Second, the policy should chalk out how authorities, enterprises, research
establishments and varsities can harmonise to provide collective good. Data, skills, legislation, and

16
integration are essential ingredients of a successful AI recipe to achieve any sustainable development
goal. A plan catering to the needs of all relevant stakeholders will indeed be critical in this regard.
Third, the policy should address concerns and risks raised by the rise of AI. One of such concerns is
the overtaking of jobs by upcoming AI systems. Since Pakistan is a developing nation where
automation is still in progress, the risk of unemployment due to AI systems is relatively low. However,
this situation may change quickly, and the AI policy needs to carefully assess the cases that might
arise in the near/distant future. Another concern is associated with security and privacy laws. Since
AI systems are data-hungry, they require a lot of data. Therefore, AI systems’ access to sensitive data
could be either a security threat or, at least, a privacy issue. Currently, Pakistan has somewhat lax
privacy laws compared to Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), for example.
However, any new legislation may significantly impact the available data sets required by the AI
systems, thus disrupting their functionality. Hence, we need to incorporate such risks in advance in
our policy. What the government and decision-making authorities need to do as soon as possible is to
start a national discourse about the importance and effectiveness of AI in socioeconomic settings by
inviting the relevant stakeholders. One of such initiatives has already been taken by the Sino-Pak
Center for AI (SPCAI): an application-oriented research and development facility funded by the
Ministry of IT and Telecommunication. The SPCAI plans to hold the first national AI forum (NAIF) in
Pakistan on September 02, 2021. The proposed forum aims to gather relevant policymakers,
regulators, practitioners, experts, innovators, end-users, investor groups, researchers, educators,
entrepreneurs, interested public, and representatives from industries from Pakistan and abroad
under one roof. The NAIF is an effort to develop an awareness of the role and impact of AI in
Pakistani society, industry and industrial processes, social fabric, and economic growth. The NAIF is a
perfect platform to initiate the discussion about a coherent national AI policy.
To remain relevant in global economics, Pakistan needs to formulate its national AI policy on an
emergency basis. Pakistan is already very slow in reaping the benefits of the 4th industrial revolution.
Missing the AI wave as well would be an irreparable loss to the national cause. (Published in The
Nation, June 27th, 2021).
10 The rise and fall of the Taliban
The increasingly perilous situation in Afghanistan is leading towards civil war among various
mujahedeen factions including the Taliban. It looks like the US will permanently withdraw military
support being provided to the Afghan government, which obviously means a challenge for the present
government. The cycle of troubles connected to Afghanistan has always brought common troubles to
both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Pakistan has suffered in the past because of uncertainty and wars in
Afghanistan. It looks like efforts are made by certain anti-Pakistan forces to once again push the
Afghan war to Pakistan hence we need to exercise vigilance to avoid this. This present situation
reminds me of the beginning of a winter season while I was sitting at office; my operator connected
me through the old bureaucratic landline black phone to Gen Naseer Ullah Babar, the then Interior
Minister of Pakistan who asked me to come to his office and I found him a bit excited on the phone. I
proceeded to the Minister’s office of Narcotics Divisions in Blue Area. Upon my arrival, we moved into
the conference hall where I was introduced to Mullah Omar who was present there wearing his
Turban with one defective eye. I found that Mullah Omar and two other Taliban accomplices seemed
confident enough to take over control of Qandahar. Gen Babar was pretty close to the Mujahideen
including Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who actually was brought up by Gen Babar when he was the
governor of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Gen Babar told me that he had earlier had been assigned by Z A
Bhutto to look after the friends from Afghanistan and so over time, as Major General he became the

17
Special Assistant in the first PPP government and thereafter he became the Interior Minister and fully
utilised his influence to create the Taliban and had a real good hold on Afghan leaders. Soon, he was
able to gather the entire leadership of Taliban over lunch along with some Western diplomats. He was
assisted by Maj Gen Zulfiqar and Maj Gen Abdul Aziz who became famous after their role in the coup
against PM Nawaz Sharif. I worked with Gen Babar closely and witnessed the emergence of the
Taliban against Northern Taliban, hence, he decided to consolidate a group against the Northern
Alliance led by Ahmed Shah Masood who was operating under the control of India and Iran. Later on,
the Northern Alliance also started getting the support of the US. The Taliban not only resisted the
Northern Alliance but the Taliban along with our support took over the control of Afghanistan as well.
The Taliban government was recognised by the USA and Saudi Arabia as they were honoured by
President George Bush senior in the White House who had also dealt with the Afghanistan desk as
former Deputy Director of CIA. It was a huge blunder by the Taliban to push Gulbuddin Hekmatyar
away and invite Osama Bin Laden to assist them. Hekmatyar got exiled after the Taliban came to
power in 1996 and drove him out of the country. Around the same time, Osama Bin Laden made his
entry in Afghanistan, aboard a chartered flight on May 18, 1996 and forged a close relationship with
Mullah Omar. Osama Bin Laden was already on the CIA radar from Sudan but he managed to get out
of Sudan and reached Afghanistan via Egypt. He was able to sabotage surveillance and even got the
fuel for his C-130. His friendship with Mullah Omar was in fact the beginning of the downfall of the
Taliban regime. During that time, the life and circumstances here in my own country had forced me to
flee the country via Afghanistan after a life attempt on me. This was the time when Afghanistan was
under the full control of the Taliban. A friend of mine from Peshawar who had also close relations
with the Taliban facilitated me to travel through Afghanistan and helped me in flying to Europe. I had
observed myself that the Pakistani Taliban were in an advanced warzone when I was there under the
cover of a journalist. The downfall of the Taliban started after 9/11 when Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir
Bhutto and I were in exile. She had assessed that the US attack on Afghanistan was imminent to get
Osama Bin Laden and she asked me to use my old contacts to avert this forthcoming war as this could
spread around both sides of the border. I contacted a very close associate of the Taliban who was even
in direct contact with Mullah Omar and was also close to some important Middle Eastern countries.
My friend spoke to Mullah Omar and he agreed to hand over Osama Bin Laden to a third country for
trial. When Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto conveyed this to the Americans through a friendly
country, this proposal was declined with the observation that it was too late. It was around the same
time when Gen Musharraf was forced to agree to all the demands of the Americans. Shaheed
Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and I could not avert this war; the Afghan friend is still a well-respected
political leader of Afghanistan and perhaps he might become the head of interim government soon if
all stakeholders agree. Ayman Al-Zawahiri (another hard-core terrorist) who succeeded Osama as
head of the Al Qaeda was also found to be hiding in Pakistan’s tribal areas; the world must be aware of
who Al Zawahiri was as he was involved in the murder of Anwar Sadat upon orders from Islamic
Jihad Group. After he graduated as a surgeon from Egypt, in 1980–81, Al Zawahiri arrived in Pakistan
as a relief worker with the Red Crescent in Peshawar, Pakistan, where he treated refugees affected by
the Afghan War. During that time he made several crossborder trips into Afghanistan to conspire for
the killing of Anwar Sadat, where he witnessed the warfare firsthand. I had then arrested young Al
Zawahiri who managed to escape with the help of the director of Red Crescent Cairo; uncle of Yousif
Ramzi, namely Zahid Al Sheikh and elder brother of Khalid Al Sheikh. Al Zawahiri is one of the most
dangerous terrorists and may reemerge if he is still alive. The triangular bond of Afghan Taliban, TTP
and Al Qaeda grew at the cost of defeat of the Taliban/Zaliman unity whereas Hekmatyar got refuge
in Iran and Osama Bin Laden managed to escape via Tora Bora. The rise and fall of Taliban on both
sides is now history and in fact, the original hardcore leaders are the Haqqanis. The wheel of time is
very strange and time itself chooses the destinies of the nation and individuals. Taliban growth was
phenomenal and now they are no more like the old united Taliban. They have forgotten how Pakistan

18
brought them up and trained them. Unfortunately, today’s Taliban leadership is closer to India
instead. Pakistan has given its blood, refuge to economic support and assistance to Afghanistan, and
now when Pakistan should have been honoured, the Taliban have joined hands with its enemies. All
the Afghan stakeholders need to use their abilities to bring peace to their country. (Senator A.
Rehman Malik and Twitter @Senrehmanmalik)
11 Endangering global security
It is surprising that international media did not give appropriate coverage to the recent cases of
uranium theft in India, which are likely to endanger global security. In this regard, Indian police
arrested seven people in Jharkhand on June 3, this year and seized more than 6 kilos of uranium from
two of the accused, as they were trying to sell it in the market. Police Superintendent Chandan Kumar
Jha stated: “The uranium can be used to make nuclear weapons…Seven mobile phones and a
motorbike were also seized.”
The uranium seizure is the second such incident in India in less than a month, after the Indian
police’s Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) had arrested two men with at least seven kilogrammes of natural
uranium in Mumbai on May 7. One of the suspects, a uranium dealer, also tried to sell the material. In
this respect, Pakistan’s Foreign Office (FO) spokesperson Zahid Hafeez Chaudhri said in a statement
that Pakistan has demanded a thorough investigation into the reports of illegal uranium trade in India,
after seven more people were arrested for possessing radioactive material. He elaborated that these
incidents are “a matter of deep concern as they point to lax controls, poor regulatory and enforcement
mechanisms, as well as possible existence of a black market for nuclear materials inside India.” The
FO statement added that Pakistan reiterated its call “for strengthening the security of nuclear
materials to prevent their diversion…to ascertain the intent use of the attempted uranium sale, its
relevance to international peace and security as well as the sanctity of the global non-proliferation
regime.” Notably, The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540, the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) makes it
binding on states to ensure stringent measures to prevent nuclear material from falling into wrong
hands. While, India’s past record proves various kinds of incidents of safety lapses regarding various
nuclear plants and sites—leakage and theft, including smuggling of the related sensitive materials.
Indian media reported on July 5, 2018 that the Kolkata police arrested five men with 1 kilogramme of
uranium. In 2016, police confiscated almost 9 kilogrammes of depleted uranium in the Thane area of
Maharashtra. In October 8, 2014, at Kalpakkam, a soldier of Central Industrial Security Force (CISF)
responsible for protecting nuclear materials, went on a rampage to destroy the security of the facility,
leading to nuclear material theft by criminals. Besides other similar events, in July 1998, India’s
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seized 8 kilogrammes of nuclear material from three engineers
in Chennai, which was stolen from an atomic research centre.
On November 7, 2000, IAEA disclosed that Indian police had seized 57 pounds of uranium and
arrested two men for illicit trafficking of radioactive material. IAEA had revealed that Indian civil
nuclear facilities were vulnerable to thefts. On January 26, 2003, CNN pointed out that Indian
company, NEC Engineers Private Ltd. shipped 10 consignments to Iraq, containing highly sensitive
equipment entailing titanium vessels and centrifugal pumps. In December 2006, a container packed
with radioactive material had been stolen from an Indian fortified research atomic facility near
Mumbai. However, such events continued in India, putting the security of atomic components and
their related materials at high stake. It is notable that during his first visit to New Delhi on November
6, 2010, the then US President Barack Obama announced the measures America would take regarding

19
removal of Indian space and defence companies from a restricted “entities list”, and supported Indian
demand for membership of four key global nuclear non-proliferation regimes.
As part of the double standards in relation to India and Pakistan, America set aside India’s poor
record regarding the safety of nuclear weapons and their related materials. Despite, Indian violations
of various international agreements and its refusal to sign Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and Additional Protocol with the IAEA, Washington signed a
pact of nuclear civil technology with New Delhi in 2008. During President Obama’s visit to India, on
January 25, 2016, the US and India announced a breakthrough on the pact which would allow
American companies to supply New Delhi with civilian nuclear technology. America also pressurised
IAEA and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to grant a waiver to New Delhi for obtaining civil
nuclear trade on a larger scale. Evidence indicates that India has not fulfilled the conditions of the
NSG waiver. At least, eight of India’s nuclear reactors are outside safeguards which are a big question
mark on the credibility of its nuclear safety and security standards. In fact, the US supports Indian
nuclear programme in the pretext of an anti-China and anti-Pakistan approach.
In this connection, in November, 2020 at a joint press conference and a joint press briefing, Director
General of ISPR Major-General Babar Iftikhar and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi
unveiled a dossier containing “irrefutable evidence” of India’s sponsorship of terrorism in Pakistan.
They revealed: “We have apprehended a RAW-sponsored sleeper cell in Karachi, which wants to
create unrest in the country…India united Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan [TTP] with banned dissident
[Terror] organizations…Indian intelligence agencies are also trying to establish
Daesh-e-Pakistan…has recently shifted 30 terrorists of Daesh to Pakistan.” Afterwards, Pakistan’s
Ambassador to the UN Munir Akram handed over the dossier to the UN Secretary General Antonio
Guterres. In its 27th report, dated February 3, 2021, the UN Security Council’s monitoring team for
tracking terrorist groups verified Pakistan’s dossier, while acknowledging Pakistan’s efforts in
arresting individuals engaging in terrorism financing and noting the threat from the TTP—the
reunification of splinter groups [of TTP] in Afghanistan, which enhanced the threat of terrorism not
only to Pakistan but the entire region. (Published in The Nation, June 26th, 2021).
12 Global Impacts of NATO’s 2030 strategy
NATO’s strategy adopted by representatives of all 30 members of the military bloc who had gathered
in Brussels on June 14, 2021 to discuss the current challenges that the alliance is facing is indicative of
either some perceptible cleavage with the US’ threat perception, priorities and strategic plans or else
US’ tacit approval of allowing NATO to remain focused on Russia while America with new allies takes
care of the newly identified Asia-Pacific region. The joint communiqué said that they agreed to
“further strengthen NATO as the organising framework for the collective defence of the Euro-Atlantic
area, against all threats, from all directions”. The alliance stated that they were facing “systemic
competition from assertive and authoritarian powers as well as growing security challenges”; naming
Russia and China (in that order) among the main causes of their security concerns. “We are
increasingly confronted by cyber, hybrid, and other asymmetric threats, including disinformation
campaigns and by the malicious use of ever-more sophisticated emerging and disruptive
technologies”, the joint statement said. As stated, part of the renewed NATO strategy will apparently
be continued confrontation with Russia based on the pretext of Moscow allegedly engaging in
behaviour not compatible with international law. The member states agreed not to return to the
pre-2014 relations with the Kremlin unless it changes this supposed behaviour. The members of the
bloc also rejected Moscow’s proposal for mutual non-deployment of missiles previously banned under
the INF Treaty, which was abandoned by the US in 2019. The joint statement claimed that the

20
proposal is inconsistent with Moscow’s actions. The NATO countries further vowed to respond to the
growing Russian missile arsenal in a “measured [and] balanced” way, while stressing that they have
no plans to deploy land-based nuclear weapons in Europe.
The members of the alliance have also drawn special attention to China, claiming that the country’s
goals and behaviour present “systemic challenges to the rules-based international order”. They
accused Beijing of being involved in “coercive policies”, covertly upgrading its armed forces and using
disinformation to achieve its goals and asked her to “act responsibly” in the international system and
to respect its commitments. At the same time, the communiqué stopped short of identifying China as
NATO’s rival. “China’s growing influence and international policies can present challenges that we
need to address together as an Alliance. We will engage China with a view to defending the security
interests of the Alliance”, the statement said. Beijing has harshly responded to the joint statement,
insisting that it “deliberately slandered” China and arbitrarily interfered in its internal affairs. China
suggested that it was a product of the “sinister intentions” of a few countries, including the US.
The communiqué of the NATO members also endorsed efforts directed at restoring the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, also known as the Iran nuclear deal), praising its
“non-proliferation benefits”. They also hailed efforts that have been made so far by the signatories to
the deal and the US aimed at salvaging the accord. At the same time, the bloc’s members condemned
Tehran’s alleged involvement in arming militant groups in the Middle East, including providing
missile technologies. They separately called on Iran to cease all missile activities that go against UN
Security Council Resolution 2231 and urged Tehran to refrain from developing and testing missiles
that are capable of delivering nuclear warheads. However, the resolution’s wording on the matter is
not legally binding and Iran has repeatedly rejected any attempts at discussions on limiting its missile
programme. The Islamic Republic insists that it is its sovereign right to develop weapons for the
defence of the country.
It goes without saying that the creation of the NATO security alliance in the backdrop of WW-II was
primarily to contest and contain the former Soviet/Warsaw Pact bloc. However, after the dissolution
of the Soviet Union due to a failed adventure in Afghanistan (1979-1989), the NATO Alliance was
gasping for new threats to justify its existence and huge military expenditures. Consequently, since
the mid 90s, NATO gradually got sucked in by USA led endless wars based on conjured threat matrix
far away from homeland or from Euro-Atlantic theatre. The US led wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya,
Yemen, and Syria added to copious economic, domestic and foreign policy challenges for the NATO
members; besides unaffordable human and economic losses. The disenchantment of NATO with wars
in Afghanistan and Syria got aggravated by former US president Trump’s obduracy and pressure on
NATO countries to bear more economic burdens for keeping the security umbrella intact. Therefore,
NATO has shown due prudence in sequencing and prioritising their perceived threats and theatre of
war, which are not wholly in line with USA priority. America has taken almost a decade in identifying,
sequencing and prioritising the new strategic theatre of conflict by consistently shifting focus to the
Asia-Pacific zone to contest and contain China by forming a new mini NATO comprising of USA,
Australia, Japan and India with the hope of other like-minded countries like South Korea, Philippine,
UK and France to join. Needless to say that despite the US’ Asia-Pacific Rebalancing Policy in place
for over a decade now, finally NATO seems to be following her own strategic course and squeezing
back by focusing on Russia as a prime threat and by supporting engagement with China to cooperate
where they can and compete where they must; besides, work with America to restore JCPOA with
Iran. How will America woe-betide disinterested NATO countries will be a great test for POTUS Joe
Biden and his administration. On the other hand, the Chinese BRI project and re-assertive Russian
policies under Putin are showing consistent successes and expansion in respective spheres of

21
influence and even far beyond that, resulting in return to multi-polarity and emergence of new
strategic economic and security alliances.
For a country like Pakistan which has suffered the most both during Soviet as well as during
America/NATO’s invasion of Afghanistan, missing the wider context of global conflict and saving
one’s own house from burning is an unavoidable imperative. The strategic strands of our domestic,
foreign, security and economic policies need to remain cognisant of the fact that any bait that involves
Pakistan in a conflict must repeated must not be given a bite again. We need to strive hard for
economic independence by hanging the culprits and recovering the plundered national wealth to pay
off external and internal loans, stay in the rightly chosen strategic security and economic alliances,
effectively seal our borders and expel all aliens as top most priority to defeat hostile multi-directional
covert war launched inside Pakistan and deliver the death blow to the proxies in their launch bases
inside or outside Pakistan with strongest punch that we have. No half-cocked or soft approach in
dealing with the foreign proxies, Trojan horses, moles and extremists is likely to succeed. Last but not
the least, pursuance of wrong-footed peace with India or any other foe misled by academician is a
recipe for further disaster; hence no appeasement and no compromise on our long sought after
national interest with Kashmir (IIOJ&K) on top of the list is suggested to the incumbent national
decision makers. “The reputation of those countries which cater to the foreign policy interests of other
states at the expense of their own national interests will go down regardless of how they explain their
actions”. (Published in The Nation, June 25th, 2021).
13 Global economic war and Pakistan
Time is changing at a swift pace. The world has altered the tactics of war. New alliances are forming
rapidly. There are issues of new strategies among countries, political alliances, distribution of
resources, future planning, military cooperation, cognisance of problems, regional integrity, defence
of geographical boundaries, water resources, self-sufficiency in oil, gas, science and technology but
more than that, the need of the hour is economic development and increase in trade. A country that
doesn’t acknowledge this fact or even tries to ignore it will become collateral among the nations of the
world in the near future. At present, the economic war is at its zenith in the form of a third world war.
Powerful countries are facing off against each other. Plans are being made to wreck others
economically in order to win the war on the economic front. The coming ten years are crucial in this
economic warfare because economic changes are taking place at an unimaginably fast speed. The
world’s powers are striving hard to improve and buttress their economic and financial position and
resources but only that nation will emerge victorious which has the ability to do something practically
through effective planning, sound strategy and tireless hard work.
In the new political horizon, China is ready to swoop down like an eagle. By the end of this decade, the
world will have to acknowledge the new rising power because China has left America behind in trade
and investment. As per recent statistics issued by the United Nations, China has beaten America in
new direct foreign investment. Last year, new direct investment by foreign companies in America has
declined to almost half of what it used to be, while according to United Nations’ data, this same
investment has increased four times in Chinese firms. This has given China a prominent position
globally. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development has stated in its report that in
China, the volume of direct foreign investment was 163 billion dollars while America’s share was just
134 billion dollars. This is a warning bell for America. In 2019, the American share was 251 billion
dollars and China got 140 billion dollars, but now the situation has changed completely. According to
the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) in England, China, which is currently locked

22
in a trade war with America, will leave the rest of the world behind by 2028. After this it will become
impossible to defeat China in the economic sphere.
On the other hand, Chinese endeavours in Gwadar are playing a pivotal role in extracting Pakistan
from economic destitution and making it a pivotal global economic hub. China is also using its
influence in oil and gas agreements with Iran and Russia and in the Kashmir-Ladakh issue. All these
efforts will more or less come to fruition after the current decade. At this moment, China’s defence,
diplomatic and trade assistance to Pakistan will change history because in addition to
Pakistan—Russia, Iran and Turkey are other important players of this bloc. Indisputably, Pakistan’s
currently worsening economic condition is at its peak. In a recent report, total debt has reached 113
billion dollars out of which only 18 billion is from the last years because when PTI came to power. The
debt was 95 billion dollars which is now touching new heights. The economic team of the Prime
Minister has miserably failed. It is absolutely pertinent to raise questions about the efficacy of the
team which can’t ensure just distribution of resources to the level of the common man.
In fact, the government has no control over the current situation since inflation, corruption, plunder
and black marketing have become the fate of this nation and the government is calmly witnessing this
whole drama as a silent spectator. Instead of keeping mum the government should learn a lesson
from the changes that are taking place in the global economic scenario. The cat won’t leave a pigeon
alone just because it has closed its eyes. (Published in The Nation, June 19th, 2021).
14 Understanding the emerging new world order
Post WW2, the world was dominated by two superpowers, the USA and USSR. Most of the countries
in Europe and elsewhere became supporters of these two countries. The US was accepted as the
leader in the Western world to fight communism. The US concluded a number of pacts and treaties
with countries across the globe to deal with the threat of communism and in an attempt to hold the
Soviet Union at bay. This led to a Cold War and each side tried to influence the other. The term Cold
War was first used by Bernard Baruch in 1947. He said in a speech, “Let us not be deceived, we today
are in the midst of a cold war”. The distrust between the US and Soviet Union and their allies led to
the Cold War. A state of tension between the two powers in which each adopted policies to strengthen
itself and weaken the other. The disintegration of the USSR gave way to a unipolar world which led to
another concept of a new world order led by the US. The crumbling of the USSR had a serious
destabilising impact on the entire world.
New alignments have also emerged due to changing developments across the globe. Some of the
alliances that are detrimental to the US’ interests are being prevented from growing. The US is also
wary of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
China has emerged as a power to match US influence in the world and is the world’s second largest
economy. Similarly China has a strong military force which has demonstrated a glimpse of its power
recently in Indian Occupied Ladakh. Countries are forging closer economic and political ties with
China. On the other hand, India is now in the US’ camp and is being empowered to contain China and
Pakistan. There are several alliances to contain China and one such is the Inter Parliamentary Alliance
on China. The alliance includes countries like the US, Germany, UK, Japan, Australia, Canada,
Sweden, Norway and members of the European parliament. Their focus is taking a strong stance on
Chinese policies, especially on the status of Hong Kong and the origin of Covid-19. Then there is the
Quad which comprises Australia, India, Japan and the US and the aim is to counter a perceived threat
from China. On November 2, 2020, the Trump administration signed five agreements with India and
the most prominent one was the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA). Through this,

23
both countries will share classified satellite data and military technology. According to media reports,
India will get real time access to American intelligence that will enhance the accuracy of weapons like
missiles and drones. Joint All Domain Command and Control is a new American concept and
according to the Centre for Strategic International Studies, sensors and shooters in all domains—air,
land, sea, space and cyberspace—are linked and can rapidly target adversary forces. The European
Union is another emerging powerful group. They have a single currency, skilled workforce,
democratic governments and a strong say on international issues. The relations of the US and Europe
are legitimised by the common need to prevent Chinese and Russian influence from expanding. The
United States wants to expand NATO’s hold to check Russian influence which can be seen in the
recent Ukrainian crisis. There is an increasing competition among various players for the control of
resources and markets across the globe. Similarly there is regrouping and new alliances in the Middle
East. Russia has been supporting Syria in its civil war along with Iran and Hezbollah. Then there is an
alliance between Iran, Iraq and Syria to control Lebanon and influence the region. Recently there has
been marked improvement in relations between Saudi Arabia and China. Saudi Arabia is reducing its
reliance on the US. China is a bigger consumer of oil and Saudi Arabia is the biggest single supplier of
oil. The Biden administration has shown its tilt towards Iran while ignoring Saudi Arabia. Pakistan
played an effective role in war torn Afghanistan as a mediator and brought the Taliban to the
negotiation table and persuaded them to sign the agreement with the US. India is not happy with this
development in Afghanistan and as a result, will use its proxies to destabilise and undermine the
situation. There is an upcoming alliance of Pakistan, China, Turkey and Russia for ensuring peace and
stability in Afghanistan. The world at large believes that the US is bent upon the political and
economic domination of other states and their resources. Therefore, it is likely that the US will
continue to maintain its supremacy in the foreseeable future. China, the main challenger to the US,
now has aligned with Russia. During the recently concluded G7 meeting in Cornwall, England, it has
been decided that all countries should challenge the increasing economic influence of China and bring
to light its human rights violations in Xinjiang and Hongkong. A new cold war has started now
between China and the US and their allies. (Published in The Nation, June 22th, 2021).
15 Russia’s Return to Southeast Asia
After a long absence of nearly 30 years, Russia is more involved in Southeast Asia than it has been
since the Cold War ended. While the punditry is obsessed with China’s influence in the region, it’s
worth reviewing recent Russian activities. Russia will always be a minor player in the region, dwarfed
by China and the United States, but Southeast Asia is a cost effective place for Moscow to advance
some of Russia’s national interests. Although its influence in Southeast Asia is largely predicated on
arms sales, Moscow has proven to be adroitly opportunistic, especially when it perceives weakness or
disengagement from Washington. Southeast Asia is peripheral to Russia’s security interests, which
entail a buffer around Russia and frozen conflicts that it can escalate or de-escalate at will, using
asymmetric force, “little green men,” active measures, and cyber operations. While Russia’s security
posture has an implicit recognition of “spheres of influence,” it clearly sees an opening in Southeast
Asia. Southeast Asia is far from Russia’s borders and while its security interests may be peripheral,
the region does have utility for President Vladimir Putin. Southeast Asia has proven to be a very low
cost place, free of prolonged conflicts that could drag Russia into another Syria-like quagmire, to
advance five key Russian interests:
1. Undermining the U.S.-led liberal international order;
2. Sowing mistrust in democracy and promoting authoritarian-led governance;

24
3. Undermining the United States’ network of alliances;
4. Ensuring that Russia has a seat at the table to resolve any global issue, and indeed reminding
states that Russia still has global interests and is not just a European power;
5. Not just selling arms, but rendering the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act
(CAATSA) sanctions effectively moot.
The End of the Cold War: In 1991, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia relinquished
its naval base in Vietnam’s Cam Ranh Bay. While some face was saved with the concurrent U.S.
withdrawal from Subic Bay in the Philippines, it was still a humiliating retreat for a bankrupt Russia.
Moscow, however, continued to maintain a signals intelligence facility in the country. By 1990, all
Soviet military and economic assistance to Vietnam and its two clients, Cambodia and Laos, ceased.
While sizable at the time, the aid was largely wasted due to the economic inefficiencies of central
planning. Throughout the 1980s, Russia provided Vietnam with an average of $1 billion annually in
military assistance and another $1 billion annually in economic assistance; it also provided roughly $1
billion a year to the governments of Laos and Cambodia, then clearly satellites of Hanoi. Nonetheless,
Russia had little to show for its investments in the region. Indochina was a blackhole that Moscow
shoveled rubles into, and its influence immediately dissipated. Russia’s first foray back into Southeast
Asia came through arms sales to a new customer base, in a desperate attempt to keep Russian
weapons factories open. Russia began to supply Malaysia and Indonesia with fighter jets, weaning
them of their reliance on Western armaments.
16 Pakistan - Threats and challenges ahead
Forget Pakistan’s contributions and positive roles in history, We may keep aside the functions of
Pakistan in cold-war, the Afghan War in the 1980s, against the USSR’s invasion, the War on terror in
the middle east, or the US invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11 in 2001. The recent role of Pakistan, in
bringing the Taliban to negotiating table and ensured the Doha deal to be reached satisfactorily. The
safe withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan is Pakistan’s facilitation. Pakistan has been
providing land and air access to Afghanistan for the supply of food, medicines, and all necessities of
life for Allied troops in Afghanistan. Even, while evacuating from Pakistan, yet, it is Pakistan
providing a safe air passage for the troop’s withdrawal. Particularly the recent role of Pakistan was
acknowledged by the US administrations of President Trump for bringing the Taliban to negotiations
and by President Joe Bidden for providing safe exit and face-saving. Pakistan’s positive role is
recognized by many world leaders and international organizations. Pakistan has learned bitter lessons
in the past and has decided not to side with anyone in any war, aggression, or conflict. Pakistan
supports only peace, stability, progress, developments, and prosperity. Pakistan cannot provide
military bases to the US for attacks inside Afghanistan. It is a policy decision of the Government of
Pakistan backed by 220 million brave Pakistanis. Furthermore, while stationed in Afghanistan for two
long decades, supported by 46 strong allies, troop’s strength reached 150,000, utilizing the most
advanced tactics, weapons, technologies, the US could not achieve success, and how can airstrikes
from outside Afghanistan bring positive results. Illogical! Irrational! The US is annoyed on the refusal
of providing a military basis to attack in Afghanistan in the post-withdrawal era. Let the international
community decide the logic and rationale. However, Pakistan is cooperating and facilitating where
ever it is deemed necessary. Yet Pakistan is coerced, pressurized, punished, and targeted is beyond
understanding. Pakistan is struggling hard to come out of the grey list and has already satisfied 26
action points from the given list of 27. It is a big achievement. Its score is even better than in some of
the most advanced countries. Thus, it is pathetic to note that some advanced countries with a score

25
lower than Pakistan are still on the white list. It is ridiculous that these same countries are leading the
propaganda against Pakistan. FATF decision is bias and discriminatory. Pakistani Government and
the public are annoyed by this attitude. Let the international community judge the situation and stand
in support of Pakistan. As a matter of fact, FATF is being used as a tool to coerce other nations. This
episode urges us to look at the history, evolution, and working of the FATF. Created as a result of the
G-7 recommendation, it is a club of the powerful economic elite of the world. Since its inception, it has
acted as a tool for G-7. It is an institutional form of an economic hitman. It has double standards. If
look carefully, at the countries on the blacklist or grey list, all are political adversaries of the US or its
allies. FATF has been politicized. Unfair!
The FATF has miserably failed to name the most powerful money launders and facilitators, leave
alone take action against them. The most shocking but commonly known fact is that paradises of
money laundering are running the show of FATF. It is a slap on the face of the so-called international
rule-based system of the West. FinCEN leaks are the most recent event, which has jolted the whole
world. The leading banks of the West are the main facilitators of money laundering, knowingly or
unknowingly. JP Morgan, HSBC, Standard Charted Bank, Deutsche Bank, UAE Central Bank, and
Barclays Bank are just a few examples. Almost forty banks in India are involved in Money laundering
and India is involved in terror financing, yet, is not noticed by FATF. Besides, according to the
FinCEN leak, London is the hub of major money laundering activities. It was reported to have links
with about 3000 such companies. Already, a report by Transparency International, UK, has flagged
around 86 UK banks and financial institutions for assisting dirty money holders in buying assets. The
Rich countries are the beneficiary of money laundering. If the corrupt rulers of developing or
underdeveloped countries stop depositing their black money in the developed countries, they might
collapse immediately. FATF also remained silent over the Uranium sale openly in India. It rang the
alarm bells among the wider diplomatic, defense community, and experts. Uranium is extremely
lethal and can play havoc with human lives, even countries. Terrorists can use it against civilians,
which would be a huge disaster. It is not the first time that Uranium is being made available in the
open market across India. It is not the first time, It has already happened before. Unfortunately, the
FATF could not take an effective move. Although it has direct relevance with terrorism, rather,
terrorist attacks, India is still enjoying immunity. Injustice!
Pakistan is observing the worst impacts of political victimization. The G-7 is using it as economic
coercion. The media is using this opportunity to malign Pakistan and distorting its image. It also has
economic implications for us as the international business community avoids doing business with
grey-listed countries. There is a broader consensus among independent scholars that the FATF is
being used against Pakistan as an arm-twisting tool. It is being used to compel Pakistan to bow down
in front of the US and Western demands. It is the immediate reaction to Pakistan’s refusal to provide
a military basis. It is an established open fact that Pakistan has been pursued and pressurized to leave
the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). President Trump and his administration were
hell-bent on convincing Pakistan to part ways with China and BRI or CPEC. It was even discussed at
the highest levels. Think tanks, media, and digital space were all used to fan propaganda against the
CPEC. President Biden’s administration is no different from President Trump’s. Rather, it is trying to
further complicate the situation for Pakistan. He might be polite on the surface but hard at actions.
However, Pakistan has refused to accept this pressure. Pakistan has made it clear that the CPEC is our
need and there would be no compromise on our relationship with China. Just like many other
countries, Pakistan wanted to keep good relations with all nations and our relations with China are
not a threat to any other third country. IMF is also being used to pressurize Pakistan. After refusal to
grant Military bases, the IMF has applied strict conditions and undeclared demand “Do More”. IMF
under the US influence is also a political tool to achieve political goals and recently active in Pakistan.

26
The US is using various other political tools too, like the Child Protection bill, etc. There are many
more threats for Pakistan in the days to come. The desperate US administration is blaming Pakistan
for its failure in Afghanistan. But forget that as long as they were cooperative with Pakistan, Pakistan
protected their interests and guaranteed that the US achieved all strategic goals in the region. The US
military leadership understands the potential of Pakistan and its strategic role, but political
leadership has a visible shift in its policies and ignored Pakistan in recent years. (Written by Prof.
Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan. Published by Modern Diplomacy on July 9th, 2021).
17 China’s strides on the World Order
Joe Biden held his first summit on becoming the 46th President of the United States on March 8,
albeit virtually because of the COVID pandemic. He held the summit with Prime Ministers of India,
Japan and Australia under Quad or the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, an informal group of these
countries, to counter China’s rising power diplomatically and militarily. The decision of President
Biden to hold his first summit with Quad partners of the United States worried some in the United
States that his administration would choose the path of conflict to deal with China’s phenomenal rise
on the world stage. Senator Bernie Sanders was one of them. He wrote an article in the Foreign Affairs
Journal on June 17 in which he stated that the Biden administration was working to build a consensus
in the country against China. He further wrote that such a consensus would be ‘dangerous.’ He
expressed concern about the move for the consensus because he believed that the new administration
considered ‘the US-Chinese relationship as a zero-sum economic and military struggle.’ The senator
feared that the Republicans as well as the ‘representatives of the military-industrial complex’ would
support the President’s anti-China policy ‘as the latest pretext for larger and larger defence budgets.’
The senator cautioned that the similar consensus of the two parties and the military-industrial
complex on the war on terror had cost the country $6 trillion, given ‘rise to xenophobia and bigotry in
US politics — the brunt of it borne by American Muslim and Arab communities’ and failed. The
senator, therefore, recommended an engagement with China to avoid a new era of a cold war that
would benefit the military-industrial establishment and do little to contain China.
Biden’s China policy: The worries of senator Sanders about Biden’s China policy were perhaps a
little premature. The president’s participation in the G7 Summit held in London in June 11–13 would,
no doubt, be sobering for him to tread the path on China that the senator feared he would by writing
his Foreign Affairs article. The British Foreign Policy Group, after the G7 Summit, stated that the G7
‘communiqué signalled a new language and era of coordination around China.’ The BFG statement
further stated that although much was left by the G7 Summit to be determined on the details and
some decisions fell short of expectations in vital areas such as ‘global vaccination, equitable taxation
and carbon disclosure’, there was, nonetheless, a sense of optimism in the group looking forward.
Importantly, the G7 saw China positively and not by any stretch of the imagination, the ‘zero-sum
economic military struggle’ that senator Sanders feared would form the core of President Biden’s
China policy. The G7 Summit would be a learning experience for President Biden on China. He
realised by his participation in the summit that all of the G7 allies of United States without Japan had,
during the four years that President Trump had been in power, built parallel channels of deep
economic relations and cooperation with China. The President found out first-hand that the
trans-Atlantic partners of the United States were unwilling to enter into any new era of cold war or
conflict with China and would only consider an alternative economic plan to counter China’s Belt and
Road Initiative (BRI).
G7 Summit: The President also realised that as a group, the G7 believed that engagement with China
would allow it to encourage it on human rights issues of concern to it such as those related to the

27
Uyghur Muslims and dissidents in Hong Kong. President Biden further realised by attending the G7
Summit how seriously President Trump had damaged the claim of the United States to lead the West
on moral and ethical issues. The G7 Summit thus flagged, albeit indirectly, China’s huge strides and
acceptance in world politics while President Trump pursued an isolationist and largely, unpredictable,
foreign policy. China made similar strides in other regions of the world, taking the advantage of
Trump’s foreign policy. (Published by Daily News on July 8th, 2021)
18 The future of democracy and peace
Across the globe, as governments grapple with how to move forward with the economic, political, and
psychosocial damage that the pandemic has spawned, once more we are reminded that
hyper-nationalism, unilateralism and inward-looking policies do not serve us in the long run. This is
what we witnessed amidst inward-looking populist nationalism that emerged in many Western
democracies. In many ways, such politics stoked deeper racial, ethnic and ideological divisions and
disregarded cooperation and multilateralism among states. Consequently, it not only limited the
ability of governments to contain the pandemic, but also fundamentally hampered the functionality of
liberal democracy, posing a threat to peace and security. Under this international political condition,
the key question we must ask is: What does the future of democracy and peace look like in Asia?
Democracy allows citizens to play a central role in deciding their future. It helps us to nurture our
collective interests, shared values and secure a common future. In that sense, peace—a dignified way
of living life for all citizens—is inseparably yoked in democracy. Sharing views is crucial for healthy
democracies. Citizens who believe in democracy participate in fierce debates and contestations with
their governments. Presently, we see such protests in the streets of the United States, Myanmar, Hong
Kong and Nepal, to name a few.
Democracy in decline But over the last 15 years, democracy has been in a steady decline. In 2005,
according to a Freedom House report, 89 countries were 'free' or democracies. In 2020, only 82 were.
Meanwhile, the number of 'not free' or authoritarian countries increased from 45 to 54. Most of the
countries that turned into authoritarian regimes are European Union countries: Poland, Slovenia,
Hungary and Serbia. Meanwhile, almost all Central Asian countries moved towards more entrenched
authoritarian governments. Strikingly, the Economist's Democracy Index recently downgraded the
US to 'flawed democracy' meaning not 'full democracy. What is the state of democracy in Asia?
According to Freedom House, four of the 10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
countries are 'partly free', and six are 'not free'. Meanwhile, almost all Middle Eastern countries fall
under the 'not free' categories. In South Asia, seven countries, which includes Nepal, were labelled
'partly free', and Afghanistan 'not free'. More interestingly, India, one of the biggest democracies and
the dominant power in the region, fell under democratic backsliding. Consequently, the country’s
global democracy ranking fell from 27th to 53rd. In the meantime, the Freedom House report ranks it
as a 'partly free' country. Unfortunately, democracy's decline in Asia will further deepen due to
patterns that emerged in Western democracies and have spread: self-serving, insular and
protectionist policies. As the Trump era indicates, inward-looking democracy damages not just
domestically but also internationally. In many ways, because of the 'America first' policy, increased
white supremacist and anti-immigration movement, the US globally lost its moral standing for
promoting democracy overseas. In Europe, the inward-looking populist trends such as Brexit and the
rise of ultranationalist or far-right parties have hurt the future of democracy and peace as well. A
glaring example of this is the emergence of widespread anti-immigration sentiment. Far-right
activists were touched neither by hungry and desperate immigrants nor by the bodies of dead migrant
children and adults that washed up on EU seashores. The illiberal populist activity impeded and hurt

28
nobody more than citizens in Asia’s 'illiberal democracies' who believe in democracy. For these
citizens, the key principles of democracy, namely tolerance, coexistence, equality, inclusion,
multiculturalism and multilateralism that Western democracies championed, seemed like a political
sham. Most importantly, these citizens felt like they were being cheated by the 'matured' democracies
such as the US and other Western democracies. Once the pandemic struck in these increasingly
illiberal democracies, cooperation and multilateralism among states—the hallmarks of the post-World
War II liberal order—seemed to have evaporated. Vaccine nationalism has further hurt the
functionality of liberal democracy. Meanwhile, call it 'vaccine diplomacy', Beijing's vaccines reached
the arms of people from Argentina to Azerbaijan, and from Nepal to Namibia.
Liberal vs. illiberal democracy Democracy can be flawed, messy and cumbersome. Making it
work for all requires citizens to engage and adhere to the rule of law. But many citizens from illiberal
democracies who are desperate to bring a change in their lives often find the system unhelpful; many
of them who live technologically driven lives wish for fast-paced public service delivery and improved
living conditions. They get impatient with lengthy, contentious and messy democratic processes.
These, in turn, cause political fatigue towards democracy. This condition opens a space for an
alternative to liberal democracy: illiberal democracy. If the US and Western democracies continue
their inward-looking nationalist 'democracy', Beijing will be more than happy to fill the space with its
'tributary system'—a fluid and bilateral 'Sino-centric' diplomacy, often called the 'debt trap' or
'wolf-warrior' approach. In such conditions, the Chinese version of international engagement, which
is fast because it does not go through messy democratic processes, provides a promising alternative
for illiberal democracies. Under such conditions, we are likely to see greater rivalry between the US
and China inciting more polarisation and division, potentially leading to violent conflict and
instability. This then certainly means a further decline in democracies, not just in Asia but across the
globe. The big losers in this geopolitical rivalry marked by inward-looking policies are the people who
want to live in an equitable, peaceful democratic system. What is needed then is to focus on holding
dialogue and discussion among and between governments. As one veteran diplomat told me, 'The
only way to resolve conflict is to sit down and talk about it.' Holding dialogue not only helps us to
resolve conflicts, but also provides us a space to share our values, interests, concerns and common
future—the key aspects of building democracy and peace that works not just for a few powerful people
but for all. (Published in The Kathmandu Post on June 10th, 2021)

Articulate Vol 13 July 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Articulate Vol 13 July 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An initiative by CSSExamDesk.

Articulate for CSS 2022

1. The story of Pakistan’s public debt

3. Population and Pakistan’s development

02 The Afghan civil war — is Pakistan at the crossroads?

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

03 Population and Pakistan’s development

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

04 Islamophobia — how to encounter the new battle?

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

05 Great-Power Competition and Pakistan

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

06 Unparalleled belt and road cooperation

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

07 Modi’s new strategy on IIOJK

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

08 Behind the confrontation between US and China

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

09 Artificial intelligence, the Covid recovery & Pakistan

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

10 The rise and fall of the Taliban

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

11 Endangering global security

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

12 Global Impacts of NATO’s 2030 strategy

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

13 Global economic war and Pakistan

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

14 Understanding the emerging new world order

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

15 Russia’s Return to Southeast Asia

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

16 Pakistan - Threats and challenges ahead

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

17 China’s strides on the World Order

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

18 The future of democracy and peace

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

www.CSSExamDesk.com (Articulate, July 2021 for CSS 2022)

You might also like