Articulate

Edited & Compiled by Aamir Mahar

for CSS 2022

November 2021 (Volume - 17)
Hot Topics inside:
The energy landscape in Pakistan
Global order in the 21st century
Flexing muscles in the Asia-Pacific
India’s collapse in the Indo-Pacific
Conflicts in the world: Myth and reality
Empowering the electorate in Pakistan
History says don’t panic about inflation
Cyber security Challenges and responses
Afghanistan’s unfolding humanitarian crisis
Everything about the COP26 climate summit

 CSS 2022 MCQ Based

Preliminary Test (MPT)
Personalised one-on-one guidance
and student-centric approach

Topic-wise exclusive (for General

Ability) & Referral lectures

Provision of notes
in hard copy using
leopards courier

50+ Topic-wise practice tests in

on-line format with instant results

Affordable fee
structure for every
candidate i.e. 3600 Rs.
Discussion forum to ask the
concerns and live Q&A sessions.
Session started on 10th November,
2021. Interested candidates canstill
be the part of it. For details, contact:
www.CSSExamDesk.com
 Everything about the COP26 CLIMATE SUMMIT
Where is the Conference of the Parties (COP)? The Conference of the Parties (COP) is an annual
event that brings governments together to discuss and review how climate change is being managed
domestically and internationally. It is the main decision making body of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an agreement made by 197 countries to
stabilise greenhouse gas emissions and avoid dangerous climate change. The UNFCCC was
established to work towards “stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.”
It laid out a list of responsibilities for the member states which included:
1. Formulating measures to mitigate climate change
2. Cooperating in preparing for adaptation to the impact of climate change
3. Promoting education, training and public awareness related to climate change
The COP members have been meeting every year since 1995. The first COP meeting was held in 1995
in Berlin, Germany. At COP3 held in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, the famous Kyoto Protocol was adopted.
It commits the member states to pursue limitation or reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. It entered
into force on 16 February 2005 and there are 192 Parties in the Kyoto Protocol. One of the most
important conferences, COP21 took place from November 30 to December 11, 2015, in Paris, France.
www.CSSExamDesk.com

Member countries agreed to work together to ‘limit global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5
degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels.’
The twenty-sixth COP (COP26) was scheduled to take place last year but it was postponed due to the
Covid-19 pandemic. The conference has taken place this year from 31 October until 12 November. The
UK Government hosted it in Glasgow.
What is the 1.5 degree target? Why is it so important? Since the Industrial Revolution, the world’s
average surface temperature has risen by around 1 degree Celsius. It might sound like a tiny number,
but it has had an enormous impact on nature and human life. Glaciers and ice sheets have melted, sea
levels have risen, and extreme weather events are on the rise. The vast majority of scientists agree that
greenhouse gases, released into the atmosphere by human activity, are the cause of this warming. And
scientists project that limiting warming to 1.5°C (2.7°Fahrenheit). would reduce the worst impacts of
climate change. The Paris Agreement adopted at COP21 had a goal of limiting global warming to well
below 2°C (3.6°Fahrenheit) – preferably 1.5 degrees Celsius. It was a legally binding international
treaty adopted by 196 parties at the 2015 conference. Countries also agreed to limit their CO2
emissions to ‘net zero’ by 2050. However, despite this landmark agreement, we are currently on track
to a temperature rise of 2.4 degrees above pre-industrial levels before the end of the century.
What will happen at 1.5 degrees of global warming? It’s important to remember, 1.5 degrees of global
warming, while the best case scenario, is still quite grim. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) predicts 1.5 degrees will see extreme heatwaves, oceans rising, and the destruction of
70 to 90 per cent of coral reefs. This is why the 1.5 figure is so important, because it is where the line
must be drawn. A greater rise in temperature would be catastrophic…
What will happen at 2 degrees of global warming and beyond? What is the difference between 1.5
degrees and 2? Well, a lot, according to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).
1) At 2 degrees, seas will rise another 10cm on average by 2100 -causing flooding, habitat destruction,
and dangerous weather events like hurricanes

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 2) 1.7 billion more people will experience severe heatwaves at least once every five years
3) 61 million more people in urban areas will be exposed to severe drought
4) Several hundred million more people could become exposed to climate-related risks and poverty
5) Coral reefs could decline as much as 99 per cent, sharply decreasing ocean biodiversity and
impacting half a billion people
6) Animals, plants, and insects will lose more than half their habitats
7) Many species will go extinct almost half the world’s species by 2100 if we carry on the way we are
going
What have world leaders agreed at COP26? Are we on track for 1.5 degrees?
After two weeks of hard negotiations with governments squabbling over provisions on phasing out coal,
cutting greenhouse gas emissions and providing money to the poor world, the annual climate change
summit came to an end with the adoption of a weaker-than-expected agreement called the Glasgow
Climate Pact. While most countries insisted that the agreement was an important, though small, step in
keeping alive the hopes of achieving the 1.5 degree Celsius temperature goal, observers and civil society
groups saw it as a missed opportunity to enhance global climate action.
www.CSSExamDesk.com

The main task for COP26 was to finalise the

rules and procedures for implementation of
the Paris Agreement. Most of these rules had
been finalized by 2018, but a few provisions,
like the one relating to creation of new carbon
markets, had remained unresolved. However,
due to clear evidence of worsening of the
climate crisis in the six years since the Paris
Agreement was finalized, host country United
Kingdom was keen to ensure that Glasgow,
instead of becoming merely a “procedural”
COP, was a turning point in enhancing
climate actions. The effort was to push for an
agreement that could put the world on a 1.5
degree Celsius pathway, instead of the 2
degree Celsius trajectory which is the main
objective of the Paris Agreement.
Hence, more than 100 heads of states and
governments were invited to attend the
meeting and lend their political weight behind the process. So many leaders have assembled on only
two earlier occasions, at the climate meetings in Copenhagen in 2009 and Paris in 2015. On both those
occasions, the COPs were aiming to deliver a major agreement. Copenhagen had failed in that, but
Paris had succeeded. Glasgow did benefit from the presence as many of them also announced new and
enhanced climate actions. However, the final agreement was a mixed bag, as most such pacts
invariably are.
a) Mitigation: The Glasgow agreement has emphasised that stronger action in the current decade
was most critical to achieving the 1.5-degree target. Accordingly, it has:

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 1. Asked countries to strengthen their 2030 climate action plans, or NDCs (nationally-determined
contributions), by next year
2. Established a work programme to urgently scale-up mitigation ambition and implementation
3. Decided to convene an annual meeting of ministers to raise ambition of 2030 climate actions
4. Called for an annual synthesis report on what countries were doing
5. Requested the UN Secretary General to convene a meeting of world leaders in 2023 to scale-up
ambition of climate action
6. Asked countries to make efforts to reduce usage of coal as a source of fuel, and abolish
“inefficient” subsidies on fossil fuels
7. Has called for a phase-down of coal, and phase-out of fossil fuels. This is the first time that coal
has been explicitly mentioned in any COP decision. It also led to big fracas at the end, with a
group of countries led by India and China forcing an amendment to the word “phase-out” in
relation to coal changed to “phase-down”. The initial language on this provision was much more
direct. It called on all parties to accelerate phase-out of coal and fossil fuel subsidies. It was
watered down in subsequent drafts to read phase-out of “unabated” coal power and “inefficient”
fossil fuel subsidies. But even this was not liking to the developing countries who then got it
changed to “phase down unabated coal power and phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies
www.CSSExamDesk.com

while providing targeted support to the poorest and the most vulnerable in line with national
circumstances…”. Despite the dilution, the inclusion of language on reduction of coal power is
being seen as a significant movement forward.
b) Adaptation: Most of the countries, especially the smaller and poorer ones, and the small island
states, consider adaptation to be the most important component of climate action. These countries,
due to their lower capacities, are already facing the worst impacts of climate change, and require
immediate money, technology and capacity building for their adaptation activities. As such, the
Glasgow Climate Pact has:
1. Asked the developed countries to at least double the money being provided for adaptation by
2025 from the 2019 levels. In 2019, about $15 billion was made available for adaptation that was
less than 20 per cent of the total climate finance flows. Developing countries have been
demanding that at least half of all climate finance should be directed towards adaptation efforts.
2. Created a two-year work programme to define a global goal on adaptation. The Paris Agreement
has a global goal on mitigation — reduce greenhouse gas emissions deep enough to keep the
temperature rise within 2 degree Celsius of pre-industrial times. A similar global goal on
adaptation has been missing, primarily because of the difficulty in defining such a target. Unlike
mitigation efforts that bring global benefits, the benefits from adaptation are local or regional.
There are no uniform global criteria against which adaptation targets can be set and measured.
However, this has been a long-pending demand of developing countries and the Paris Agreement
also asks for defining such a goal.
c) Finance: Every climate action has financial implications. It is now estimated that trillions of
dollars are required every year to fund all the actions necessary to achieve the climate targets. But,
money has been in short supply. Developed countries are under an obligation, due to their
historical responsibility in emitting greenhouse gases, to provide finance and technology to the
developing nations to help them deal with climate change. In 2009, developed countries had

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 promised to mobilise at least $100 billion every year from 2020. This promise was reaffirmed
during the Paris Agreement, which also asked the developed countries to scale up this amount
from 2025. The 2020 deadline has long passed but the $100 billion promise has not been fulfilled.
The developed nations have now said that they will arrange this amount by 2023.
What does the Glasgow Agreement say? A deal aimed at staving off dangerous climate change has
been struck at the COP26 summit in Glasgow. The pact has:
1) Expressed “deep regrets” over the failure of the developed countries to deliver on their $100
billion promise. It has asked them to arrange this money urgently and in every year till 2025
2) Initiated discussions on setting the new target for climate finance, beyond $100 billion for the
post-2025 period
3) Asked the developed countries to provide transparent information about the money they plan to
provide
d) Loss and Damage: The frequency of climate disasters has been rising rapidly, and many of these
cause largescale devastation. The worst affected are the poor and small countries, and the island
states. There is no institutional mechanism to compensate these nations for the losses, or provide
them help in the form of relief and rehabilitation. The loss and damage provision in the Paris
Agreement seeks to address that. Introduced eight years ago in Warsaw, the provision hasn’t
www.CSSExamDesk.com

received much attention at the COPs, mainly because it was seen as an effort requiring huge sums
of money. However, the affected countries have been demanding some meaningful action on this
front. Thanks to a push from many nations, substantive discussions on loss and damage could take
place in Glasgow. One of the earlier drafts included a provision for setting up of a facility to
coordinate loss and damage activities. However, the final agreement, which has acknowledged the
problem and dealt with the subject at substantial length, has only established a “dialogue” to
discuss arrangements for funding of such activities. This is being seen as a major let-down.
e) Carbon Markets: Carbon markets facilitate the trading of emission reductions. Such a market
allows countries, or industries, to earn carbon credits for the emission reductions they make in
excess of their targets. These carbon credits can be traded to the highest bidder in exchange of
money. The buyers of carbon credits can show the emission reductions as their own and use them
to meet their reduction targets. Carbon markets are considered a very important and effective
instrument to reduce overall emissions. A carbon market existed under Kyoto Protocol but is no
longer there because the Protocol itself expired last year. A new market under Paris Agreement is
yet to become functional. Developing countries like India, China or Brazil have large amounts of
carbon credits left over because of the lack of demand as many countries abandoned their emission
reduction targets. The developing countries wanted their unused carbon credits to be transitioned
to the new market, something that the developed nations had been opposing on the grounds that
the quality of these credits — the question whether these credits represent actual emission
reductions — was a suspect. A deadlock over this had been holding up the finalisation of the rules
and procedures of the Paris Agreement. The Glasgow Pact has offered some reprieve to the
developing nations. It has allowed these carbon credits to be used in meeting countries’ first NDC
targets. These cannot be used for meeting targets in subsequent NDCs. That means, if a developed
country wants to buy these credits to meet its own emission reduction targets, it can do so till 2025.
Most countries have presented climate targets for 2025 in their first NDCs. The resolution of the
deadlock over carbon markets represents one of the major successes of COP26.

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 e) Green technology: More than 40 world leaders - including from the US, India, Australia, Turkey,
the EU and China - have agreed on a UK-led plan to speed up affordable and clean technology
worldwide by 2030. The first five goals have been dubbed the "Glasgow breakthroughs" and cover
more than 50% of global emissions. They are: • Power: Clean power becomes the most affordable
and reliable option worldwide • Road transport: Zero-emission vehicles become the new normal
and are accessible, affordable and sustainable in all regions • Steel: Near-zero emission steel is the
preferred choice in global markets, with efficient use and near-zero emission steel production
established and growing in all regions • Hydrogen: The aim is for affordable renewable and low
carbon hydrogen to be globally available • Agriculture: Climate-resilient, sustainable agriculture
becomes the most attractive and widely adopted option for farmers everywhere
f) Methane: The US and the EU launched an initiative to cut methane, a powerful greenhouse gas
that comes from sources including fossil fuel extraction and livestock farming. Methane is said to
contribute 80 times more to global warming than carbon dioxide. Dozens of heads of state have
signed up to the pledge, which commits to countries cutting methane emissions by 30% by 2030.
COP26: Pakistan all set for ‘Global Net Zero’
1. According to the World Bank, Pakistan is one of the top five vulnerable countries, despite
having no significant contribution to climate change. Another report mentions: “In 2019, CO2
emissions for Pakistan was 223.6 million tons. Between 1970 and 2019, CO2 emissions of
www.CSSExamDesk.com

Pakistan grew substantially from 17.7 to 223.6 million tons rising at an increasing annual rate
that reached a maximum of 15.38 percent in 1987 and then decreased to 1.33 percent in 2019.”
2. The drastic decrease in carbon emissions is, surely, the result of steps taken by Pakistan under its
Climate Action – the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13. The flagship project, Ten Billion
Tree Tsunami (TBTT), is not just a tree plantation movement, but a comprehensive initiative for
ecosystem conservation and management. More than a billion new plantations, revised plans for
forest management and development across the countries with the engagement of provinces and
administrative entities, and capacity of institutions have already been noticed and appreciated by
the national and international environment and climate watchdogs.
3. The Sustainable Development Report 2020, written by a group of authors led by Prof. Jeffrey
Sachs, President of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), and published by
Cambridge University Press, has declared Pakistan accomplished all targets of the SD-13 ten
years ahead of the actual date – 2030. The UNDP SDGs report has also shown Pakistan’s
remarkable progress on SDG-13 Climate Action.
The 26th Conference of Parties (COP26) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) took off on Sunday, October 31 for 13 days. The top target of the conference is to
set a tone to secure global net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century and keep the 1.5 degrees Celsius
rise in the global mean temperature within reach. Countries are being asked to come forward with
ambitious 2030 emissions reductions targets that align with reaching net zero by the middle of the
century. To deliver on these stretching targets, countries will need to accelerate the phase-out of the use
of coal, curtail deforestation, speed up the switch to electric vehicles, and encourage investment in
renewables. The second target for the countries is to adapt framework mechanisms to protect
communities and natural habitats by protecting and restoring ecosystems and to build defences,
warning systems and resilient infrastructure and agriculture to avoid loss of homes, lives and
livelihoods. The third target is to push the developed countries to make good on their promise to
mobilize at least $100bn in climate finance per year by 2020. International financial institutions must
play their part towards unleashing trillions in private and public-sector finance required to secure global

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 net zero. The fourth key target of the conference is to pave a path for partnerships to rise for the
challenges of the climate crisis by working together.
Generously acclaimed globally, Pakistan’s performance on Climate Action – SDG 13 in the last three
years has been further strengthened by the launch of three country strategies by the mid of October
2021. They are REDD+ Country Strategy, the first-ever National Wildlife Strategy, and the updated
National Climate Change Policy 2021. A national framework for policy advocacy, communication and
outreach is in the process. The Generating Global Environmental Benefits (GEB), the GEF and UNDP
supported project of the Ministry of Climate Change, is on it. Pakistan’s Intended Nationally
Determined Contribution (INDC) document, presented at the COP26, is being considered as one of the
best, setting up ambitious targets for 2030. All commendation for Special Assistant to Prime Minister
Malik Amin Aslam for translating the prime minister’s vision into national policy frameworks that will
contribute to the Global Net-Zero agenda for the reduction in carbon emissions.
Deforestation and forest degradation is the second largest anthropogenic source of atmospheric carbon
dioxide emissions. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC)Fifth
Assessment Report, deforestation and forest degradation contributes about 11 per cent towards Global
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. At the same time, the forestry sector has the potential to sequester
31 per cent of CO2 emissions, which constitute one of the main greenhouse gases. Halting and
reversing deforestation is, therefore, one of the most important activities to mitigate the impacts of
climate change. The Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is a
www.CSSExamDesk.com

concept adopted by the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) at Sixteenth Meeting of Conference of Parties (COP16), Cancun 2010. It is a forest-based
climate change mitigation approach where participation of countries in REDD+ is voluntary. It is also
recognized in Article 5 of the very popular Paris Agreement. Pakistan has successfully completed the
first phase of the REDD+ that is ‘Readiness’ with all required research, feasibility studies, and policy
frameworks. Now, Pakistan has to find funds for the demonstration phase to be eligible for the third
phase – the ‘Full Implementation’ one to access results-based payments against fully measured,
reported and verified actions. All four provinces and the two administrative entities have fully
supported the REDD+ Readiness phase with the all-out support and dynamic participation, and by
showing their commitments and contributing to the research, feasibility studies and their inputs to the
country framework approved and launched early October 2021. They have already started robust and
transparent forest monitoring through drone technology, provided by the REDD+ project. National
Forest Reference Emission Level has also been prepared to monitor the difference afterwards besides
the REDD+ Safeguards Information System.
The National Ozone Unit of the Ministry of Climate Change has a long history of interventions in
Pakistan on reducing the substances causing the depletion of the Ozone Layer under the Montreal
Protocol 1987. Pakistan signed and ratified the Protocol in 1992. Being a signatory, Pakistan is
committed to phasing out the use of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS). The National Ozone Unit
(Ozone Cell) was established in 1996 to monitor and ensure the implementation of the Montreal
Protocol. It is a matter of great satisfaction that Pakistan is in full compliance with regard to the import
and consumption of all Ozone Depleting Substances. The NOU extends assistance to the local
ODS-based industry for its conversion into Ozone friendly technology through the implementing
agencies such as UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO and World Bank with the financial assistance of the
Multilateral Fund (MLF). UNDP has also extended support for the institutional strengthening of the
Montreal Protocol Project – the NOU while the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
extends assistance in capacity building and awareness activities. Now, the NOU is forwarding to the

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 National Cooling Action Plan, which will lead the country to a green energy and energy-efficiency
regime. (Published in Daily Times on November 3, 2021)

CONFLICTS IN THE WORLD: MYTH AND REALITY

As opposed to private-sector conflicts or disputes between people and organisations, an international
conflict between nation states entail deaths, destruction, famine, displacement of millions of people and
sometimes a change in the world map. The continued trend of creating and winning wars has lasting
implications and destructive consequences. This approach has generated long-term uncertainties
thereby leaving humanity’s negative imprint on the global stage. The direct and indirect economic
impact of prevailing tensions in the world needs to be realised and understood if the ultimate objective
is to achieve lasting peace. Otherwise, this perfectly delimitted situation may end up destroying the
very essence of existence in the coming years. The prevailing political unrest and economic injustice is
making it increasingly difficult to visualise a comparatively peaceful future for the human race on
planet Earth. Whether economic injustice breeds political unrest or vice versa, the unfortunate fact
remains that advancement in technology has further widened the yawning gap between the rich and the
poor besides quietly taking away the most important facet of existence–life.
Rather than trying to address and resolve the existing conflicts and work towards global peace, precious
mental and material resources are being used to find ways of subduing the enemy through innovative
ways and means. Centuries’ old cause of conflict relating to the thought ‘this is mine’ still remains
www.CSSExamDesk.com

relevant when one looks around and closely observes what is happening around the world. The irony is
that the majority of these conflicts are being addressed by those who actually were involved in creating
them in the first place, sometimes openly, other times from behind the scenes. The situation gets even
more complicated when the locals claim a war imposed by foreigners as their own. Presently, there are
several war-zones wherein human and economic loss has become a routine matter. Socio-economic
grievances and ethno-nationalism have resulted in the killing of hundreds and displacing of millions,
bringing Ethiopia perhaps on the verge of becoming another Yugoslavia. Yemen, being the critical fault
line in the Middle East rivalry between two Muslim states has already claimed more than 100,000 lives
with local, regional and international involvement. Ever since Qaddafi was overthrown in 2011, Libya
is split into two parallel administrative units. The tribal clashes and other factors have made it another
area of outside competition amongst at least four Muslim countries.
Militants are waging insurgency in Burkina Faso, displacing over 500,000 people and bringing the
country on the verge of collapse. Presence of local IS and Al Qaeda elements are further aggravating
the already gloomy political and social scenario. Syria, a story of broken promises and false hopes, has
become a coliseum for international show of force, killing more than 400,000 people since 2011 while
displacing millions. Seven million people of the oil-rich Venezuela need humanitarian aid after
experiencing crushing poverty, controversial elections, two governments at the same time and a
possible collapse of public services. Ukraine’s over seven-year-old conflict with separatists in the
country’s eastern Donbas region is awaiting a comprehensive ceasefire and further disengagement at
front-line positions. The simmering tensions amongst Iran, Israel and the US particularly after the
Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement and impose mounting
unilateral sanctions against Tehran and ending already-limited exemptions on Iran’s oil sales add to the
existing tensions in the Persian Gulf region. Then there are military tensions in the Himalayan border,
Taiwan and the South China Sea. Add into it the threats of nuclear annihilation, stepping up
short-range ballistic missile tests and the ongoing US-North Korea deadlock; Israeli military strikes
inside Syria, Lebanon & Palestine; Jammu and Kashmir dispute and unending tensions between India
and Pakistan and one could clearly see a number of flash points ready to explode by design or by

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 accident. The Sino-US race for global governance and dominance has made it perhaps the most
important area of future conflicts. As if it was not enough, the sudden conquering of Afghanistan by its
own people has added a totally different dimension to the nature of existing conflicts. Not that the
world is unaware of different approaches, techniques, processes, mechanisms or strategies to resolve an
international conflict. Neither is there any dearth of regional and international frameworks of
interaction to forestall or effectively deal with any conflict. There exists a wealth of general as well as
usable knowledge of addressing intrastate and interstate conflicts, from structural prevention to
operational prevention to normative and formal to multilateral peace process to establishing Truth
Commissions, an array of institutionalised frameworks is available to successfully deal with
international disputes. Not only will the powerful international actors be able to efficiently address an
existing international dispute, but they are also able to prevent a conflict beforehand. One wonders at
the extreme wisdom with which they move, employing discreet or open means to bringing out the most
‘desirable’ outcome and that too with lightening speed such as a regime change in any third world
country. The world’s attention is accorded more to ‘conflict of interest’ rather than ‘conflict resolution’.
Furthermore, the world’s attention span on such ‘routine’ matters as the assassination of President
Jovenel Moïse of Haiti and removal of Tunisian PM Mechichi in July is not more than a few minutes.
The world’s attention may momentarily be diverted to any other emerging event next day before
coming back to the prevailing conflicts in its fervent bid to exhibit willingness to contribute to the
maximum to address these permanently and completely. Even if we know that such disputes would
remain as such and the announced efforts would not go beyond mere lip service unless some powerful
www.CSSExamDesk.com

actors’ national interest was brought into it seeking support for undertaking rectifying measures, we
unconsciously express ‘surprise’ while still holding firm opinions on each and every international
conflict. The presence of ‘hope’ and ‘surprise’ is apparently keeping us moving forward. Otherwise, the
ever-increasing indifference and psychological helplessness would have long consumed us. (Published
in The Nation on November 15, 2021)

THE ENERGY LANDSCAPE IN PAKISTAN

Energy is a global issue which is directly linked with the global climate crisis. The global reliance on
fossil fuel for electricity generation, vehicle combustion, and industrial usage has resulted in an
unprecedented amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is a major chunk of the climate change problem as
traditional energy sources are reasons for pumping tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The rise
of hydro-powered electricity made energy greener and cheaper as the production resource became a
renewable source with water. With the progress of science, different energy production avenues have
been explored which include biomass, solar, wind, tidal, nuclear, and others. The diversification of the
energy portfolio is an asset as reliance on a single source is not wise from the security perspective.
However, the diversification option is available to resourceful countries because of the huge initial
capital investments required to build any production infrastructure. Pakistan, like other countries, has
relied on fossil fuels for electricity production and the current energy mix of the country reflects that
with thermal power at 59.4 percent, hydel at 30.25 percent, nuclear at 7.82 percent, and renewable at a
meagre 2.23 percent. Pakistan’s energy crisis began in the 1990s because of the increased demand in
electricity and the inability of the government to fill the energy deficit. The energy deficit led to
excessive load shedding which affected industries and citizens equally.
Pakistan announced the Alternative and Renewable Energy (ARE) Policy 2020, with an objective to
increase the share of ARE to 20 percent by 2025 and 30 percent by 2030. These numbers exclude
hydropower and the government plans to include hydropower in the ARE category so the cumulative
share would go to 60 percent by 2030. A World Bank study projected that Variable Renewable Energy
(VRE) , if increased to 30 percent by 2030, would save Pakistan 5 billion dollars in the next 20 years.

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 The heavy reliance on fossil fuel imports for electricity generation is impacting the current account
deficit with the domestic energy demand not slowing down, thus causing a balance of payment issue.
Almost 60 percent of Pakistan’s electricity comes from thermal power. The government has stopped
further development of more coal projects because of increasing climate concerns and Imran Khan’s
vision for a clean and green Pakistan. The current government has been very dedicated to the climate
change cause and has spearheaded multiple projects to cater to climate change consequences. Pakistan
hardly produced 1 percent of greenhouse gases, yet it is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate
change. The sitting government has set ambitious targets to increase ARE production to 60 percent by
2030. To meet the 2030 targets, Pakistan needs to install 24000 MW of solar and wind energy. With
multiple solar, wind and hydropower projects in the pipeline, Pakistan hopes to achieve the said target
within the time frame.
According to the Alternative Energy Development Board (AEDB), six solar power projects are
operational with the capacity of 430 MW and 22 with a total capacity of 890.80 MW under different
stages of development. Currently, there are 24 wind power installations producing 1235.20 MW and
AEDB is working on another 40 projects with a capacity of 2010.2 MW. Bioenergy installations also
add to the overall renewable production. At present their contribution stands at 259.1 MW and a
cumulative production of 878.4 is still under different process for implementation. Off-grid small
hydropower stations are also included in renewable energy units. These units are very common in
northern districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Gilgit Baltistan on natural river flow and they have
www.CSSExamDesk.com

been developed in Punjab and Sindh on different canals. According to AEDB, small hydro power units
are producing 125 MW, another 877 MW is under implementation and 1500 MW is available for
development. Pakistan has huge potential for renewable energy production, but due to a lack of
investment funds new development is delayed. Some energy experts studying the energy landscape in
Pakistan contend that there are powerful policymakers, bureaucrats, and hydropower lobbies against
solar and wind power installations. Moreover, land acquisition and delayed approvals also discourage
investments.
Renewable energy will have many benefits including cheap, improved, and independent energy supply
and reduced environmental pollution. The adoption of the National Electric Vehicle Policy is also a
step in the right direction. Giving incentives and tax relaxation will also help attract Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) in the renewable energy sector. Moreover, human resources must be simultaneously
trained to manage and run these installations. Pakistan has huge potential for hydro, solar and wind
energy production which if tapped will solve not only domestic energy problems but also make the
country a net energy exporter. (Published in The Nation on November 13, 2021)

GLOBAL ORDER IN THE 21ST CENTURY

Since the origin of international relations as a discipline a hundred years ago, the debate has been
revolving around two opposite paradigms; liberalism and realism. Realism suggests that, in an anarchic
world, the security of a nation state is the responsibility of no one else but the state itself. Liberalism
promotes cooperation among states to avoid wars. In broader concepts of security in domestic affairs,
economy and politics fall under security but at the global level these are two separate things. A political
alliance among nations may not necessarily be covering trade; similarly a joint economic venture may
not be focusing on military security. If we broadly look at the existing structure of the
twenty-first-century world order, it is evident that global political and economic institutions do not
have common goals. The role of international economic institutions like the IMF and the World Bank
also need a comprehensive review. The present world order was formed after the end of World War II.
The world changed from multipolar to bipolar. The US and USSR took charge of global leadership.

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 America maintained the global order on alliances under the military umbrella and the USSR mostly
countered the alliances through alliances or other means and pursued its interest vigorously where
needed. A bipolar world gave rise to the cold war and clandestine operations from both sides. After the
disintegration of the USSR in 1989, the US emerged as the sole superpower. This contradictory
approach of the US—attaining political dominance and hegemony on the global economy has been a
major factor for disorder in the world. The US’ unipolar moment began to erode after its 2003 invasion
of Iraq. Since then, power has pivoted towards the Eurasian heartland and rimland. The emergence of
China, an indignant and self-assured Russia, a defiant North Korea, a challenging Iran, an
unceremonious withdrawal of the US from Afghanistan and many other global challenges including
the energy crisis, climate hazard, a troubled environment in the South-China sea are no longer
favourable to the existing global order.
The pandemic has further stressed the order by draining governments, dividing societies, intensifying
tensions between the United States and China, and exhibited a noticeable gap between problems being
faced by the world and the ability of the world to address these challenges through existing
international institutions. The international order thus faces a paradox. Despite political reasons, the
structural issues are a big impediment for its prosperity. The success of existing structure is dependent
on the success of globalisation, but the process produces a political reaction that often works counter to
its aspirations. The most important aspect of the new world order will be the positioning of China. At
no time in history has any nation brought so many people out of poverty as quickly as has China. It
www.CSSExamDesk.com

will soon be the world’s largest economy and the second largest military power. The Belt and Road
Initiative (BRI) has further added complexity to the emerging order. The US and its allies view the
project as a threat to their global influence. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a bilateral
arrangement between two time-tested friends, is the flagship programme of BRI.
The US has come up with a project in cooperation with its allies, G7 countries, which they have
termed ‘Build Back Better World (B3W)’. B3W is a retaliatory approach. The old order is in flux while
the shape of the replacement is highly uncertain. Reconstruction of the international system is the
ultimate challenge for the US and other powers. To play a responsible role in the evolution of a
twenty-first-century world order, the United States, China and Russia must be prepared to answer a
number of questions, particularly, what do they desire to achieve or prevent for themselves and for the
world? China needs to move patiently in line with the global pace. Abrupt and phenomenal successes
create panic for adversaries. India needs to adopt a rational approach, leaving behind the practices of
lies, deceit and propaganda against other nations. India is the main destabilising force in South Asia.
The goal of this era must be to achieve that equilibrium while restraining the proponents of war.
Pakistan has paid a heavy price in the global war against terrorism during the last two decades.
Pakistan needs its due share in global prosperity. The new world order must be focused on shared
prosperity, cooperation and the well being of all states, not a few rich and powerful states. (Published in
The Nation on November 12, 2021)

INDIA’S COLLAPSE IN THE INDO-PACIFIC

The Cold War between China and the United States is being ‘fought’ at multiple fronts—in the South
China Sea, in Afghanistan and Central Asia, in parts of the Middle East, in eastern Europe, across the
Pacific, and in various ‘economic theatres’ (i.e. trade war). But the ‘warmest’ front of this Cold War,
however, remains the stand-off between India and China—which has resulted in the loss of more than
1,000 Km/Sq of Indian land. Clearly, India has no response to China in Ladakh. Or in Sikkim. Or
Arunachal Pradesh. The shutting down of a few dozen apps (e.g. TikTok) and restrictions on Chinese
companies cannot be considered a commensurate response to loss of actual land area, and the death of

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 uniformed soldiers. So, what ‘real’ options does India have against China? Well, the answer (sadly for
India) is hard to ascertain. Can India opt to reclaim its territory through conventional war? No; China
is far superior in its military and technological capabilities. Can India negotiate a return of its land?
Does not seem likely; even after dozens of rounds of talk, there has been no meaningful breakthrough.
Can India call its ‘allies’ to its military aid? Not really; if it could, it would have done so by now. Can
India participate in the Pacific theatres to cause troubles for China? No; India is having trouble holding
on to its own territory and waters. Dabbling in the Pacific seems like empty rhetoric of an ill-found
‘Indo-Pacific’ strategy.
So, what can India do? The most plausible option, if India can muster the courage for it, is to choke the
Malacca Straits, which forms a critical bottleneck in China’s oil supply and trade routes. Will India be
foolish enough to do this, thereby tempting further aggression from China? Unlikely. Cognisant of the
risks in Malacca Straits, China has already started to look for alternative routes; some other way to
access the Indian Ocean for trade and oil supply lines. This, for now, includes two options: 1) CPEC,
through Pakistan, which forms the most convenient access route to the Indian Ocean; and 2) The Thai
Canal, cutting through Thailand’s Kra Isthmus, the narrowest point of the Malay peninsula, which
would open a second sea route from China to the Indian Ocean. This Thai Canal, or Kra Canal, would
allow the Chinese navy to quickly move ships between its newly constructed bases in the South China
Sea and the Indian Ocean, sidestepping more than 700 miles around Malaysia, through the Malacca
Strait. And for this, China has offered Thailand up to $30 billion to dig the canal.
www.CSSExamDesk.com

These two routes, once functional, would kill the (already dying) Indo-Pacific dreams of curtailing
China and its Belt and Road Initiative in the region. By extension, it would also serve as a final nail in
the Indian coffin of portraying itself as a counterweight to China in this region. The ill-conceived idea
of ‘Indo-Pacific’, built upon India’s promise to counter China in this region, dates back to 2018.
Specifically, on May 30, 2018, the United States Defence Secretary of the time (Jim Mattis) announced
that Pentagon’s Pacific Command was being renamed as the ‘Indo-Pacific Command’, giving India a
larger role in the Pacific theatre, in pursuit of containing and countering China. This was a significant
policy shift in Washington. It symbolised that Delhi had convinced the Pentagon that it could serve as
a counterweight to China in the Pacific theatre, while also destabilising China’s economic interest
across the region—particularly, the CPEC project.
At the time, no one knew whether India would deliver on its promise. Could it really act as a
counterweight to China in this region? Would it be able to help the United States ‘contain’ China, and
its growing power? India certainly claimed that it could. That was the very reason for its de-linking
with South Asia, and introduction in the Pacific theatre. However, the 18-months have exposed India’s
bluff. As China infiltrated through the borders of Indian-held Ladakh, claiming important vantage
points in Pangong Lake and the Galwan Valley, there has been no real resistance or counter from India.
Not even a peep. In fact, the one time that India tried some adventurism, it lost 20 of its soldiers,
without winning an inch of land back from China. According to available reports (including those from
India), the Chinese walked into Ladakh with virtually no resistance from the Indian Army, and since
then have refused to entertain discussion on returning the territory. Not just that, emboldened by
Chinese actions, Nepal also claimed territory within the Indian boundary, and the Eastern areas of
Nagaland et al are also shunning the grip of the Indian State. Bangladesh has signed commitments with
China for inclusion in the BRI. Sri Lanka has leased its Colombo port to China. Myanmar is being
supported by China. Iran has signed a long-term strategic deal with China. The Taliban are in
conversation with China about the rebuilding efforts in Afghanistan. And China has continued to
expand its influence (and military presence) across the Indian Ocean (including Gwadar), with no real
challenge or interference from India.

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 All attempts by India to involve its coalition partners from the Quad (i.e. United States, Australia, and
Japan) have fallen on deaf ears. Except for a few token statements by the Australian Prime Minister,
Japan and Australia do not seem to have any desire to enter into a conflict with China or its growing
influence across the region. So, in the circumstances, what happened to the whole idea of Indo-Pacific?
Serious policy circles, in Washington and across the globe, are asking what benefit can India provide in
the Pacific (against the Chinese) if they cannot even retrieve their own (claimed) territory from China?
If its forces cannot face the Chinese military in Ladakh, can India really be expected to send warships
to the South China Sea? Or into the deep blue waters of the Indian Ocean? Can it curtail or hinder the
CPEC route, when it is having trouble keeping the Chinese at bay in Sikkim? And if India cannot stand
up to China—especially now, when the United States needs it the most—what is the purpose of having
an ‘Indo’ Pacific strategy? Isn’t India merely a liability for the United States? Not only can it not
counter China, it may help destroy the myth of powerful Western alliances in the region.
India’s bluff has been called. And without firing so much as one bullet, China has put India back in the
box that it belongs: a developing nation in South Asia. Not a regional power in the Indo-Pacific. This
collapse of the Indo-Pacific dream is a staggering loss of face for India on the international stage. And
coupled with recent developments in Afghanistan, India might find itself back where it started: as
Pakistan’s jingoistic neighbour, who is at daggers drawn with the new global power in this region.
(Published in The Nation on November 7, 2021)

FLEXING MUSCLES IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC

www.CSSExamDesk.com

The shift in geopolitical power from the west to the east makes the Asia-Pacific region more important
to the United States today than ever before. The region is already an engine of the global economy, and
major Asian countries are becoming global economic and political actors. Yet, as Asia’s importance
has grown over the last decade, Washington has often been focused elsewhere. The world’s three
foremost geopolitical players and leading military powers of the day—the United States of America,
the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation—find themselves in a complex triangular
relationship. America is in a state of confrontation with China and Russia; China and Russia are
strategic partners; while the United States is bolstering NATO to oppose Russia and simultaneously
expanding and intensifying its relations with Asia-Pacific countries in the form of the AUKUS pact and
Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) to counter the rise of China, Beijing and Moscow have
created an informal alliance to jointly stand up to the United States and its allies.
Recently, both Beijing and Moscow flexed their muscles by conducting the first ever joint patrol using
warships in the western part of the Pacific Ocean during October 17 to 23. “The tasks of the joint
patrolling were to demonstrate the state flags of Russia and China, maintain peace and stability in the
Asia-Pacific region and also protect facilities of both countries’ maritime economic activity,” Russia’s
Ministry of Defence said in a statement. During the patrol, the group of warships passed through the
Tsugaru Strait for the first time. The route taken by the joint Chinese-Russian patrol through the Osumi
Strait at the end of their journey as well as through the narrow Tsugaru Strait between the main islands
of Honshu and Hokkaido earlier in the week, has also attracted a considerable amount of attention.
That’s because when the US Navy or foreign navies transit the Taiwan Strait between Taiwan and the
Chinese mainland, Beijing condemns them as destabilising. For instance, after US and Canadian
warships sailed through the Taiwan Strait earlier this month, the Chinese military’s Eastern Theatre
Command accused the two sides of colluding to “stir up trouble” and “seriously jeopardise peace and
stability” in the strait.
At 100 miles (160 kilometres) wide at its narrowest point, the Taiwan Strait is huge compared to the
passages between the Japanese islands. The Osumi Strait, for example, is just 17 miles (27 kilometres)

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 wide at its narrowest point. While the Chinese and Russian warships weren’t in violation of
international law, a news segment broadcast on Chinese state TV showed just how close they came to
Japanese territory. It was a power show to convey a message not only to Washington but the countries
aligned in AUKUS and QUAD. The US is trying to rope in more countries into the Western Pacific
and Indo-Pacific regions to contain its strategic competitors. This may have a negative impact on
China’s maritime security. Against this backdrop, the China-Russia joint naval drill includes new
subjects and displays high levels of mutual trust. China has a strong and reliable partner in the Western
Pacific: Russia. This time, China has sent its most advanced 10,000-ton-class Type 055 large destroyer,
while Russia dispatched the main force of its Pacific Fleet. This demonstrates that China and Russia
attach great importance to defence cooperation.
In addition, the joint anti-submarine operations between China and Russia are also worth people’s
attention. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy has sent multiple types of main battle equipment
to the drills, including the fixed-wing anti-submarine patrol aircraft. This year, the US has increased
spy ship activities in the South China Sea. By demonstrating joint anti-submarine capabilities, China
and Russia have sent a warning to the US: The US nuclear submarines should not act rashly at the
doorsteps of China and Russia, especially in the Western Pacific. In other words, if the US wants to
conduct a strategic blockade and siege, China and Russia will be likely to coordinate their stance or
integrate the power of both countries. This way, they aim to break the US strategic blockade and
military encirclement, as well as to completely crush its attempt to use AUKUS for strategic
www.CSSExamDesk.com

containment. What Washington wants is to stir up trouble in China’s neighbouring countries. In this
context, Moscow can coordinate with Beijing to counter AUKUS. Both China and Russia take a
responsible approach to affairs in the Western Pacific region. They can coordinate their positions to
speak out together in the face of US military hegemony on the sea. For example, in August, the Type
055 destroyer reportedly sailed in international waters near Alaska. Some analysts believe this time,
there is a possibility of the destroyer approaching the US again. In any case, the PLA Navy’s activities
will always be reasonable and legal. The Pacific is not the sphere of influence exclusive to the US. To
maintain its strategic interests, the PLA Navy needs to enter the deep ocean, such as in-depth areas, to
exercise and practice its combat capability. It should make response plans to prevent the US military
from disturbing its normal exercises. AUKUS keeps challenging strategic competitors such as China
and Russia. But it is not capable of counterbalancing China and Russia at the same time. The UK’s
defence expenditures determine that it cannot afford to deploy a major marine force in Asia for a long
time. In fact, the main objective of the UK is still in the Atlantic.
Under such circumstances, China and Russia will boost their own national strength and military
capabilities in the first place and then engage in active strategic deterrence. Besides, they can coordinate
more on international occasions while the process is going on. They can also reveal Washington’s plots
when the US woos allies to create military alliances and coerce other countries. In defence, China and
Russia can cooperate more and display their strength and determination to maintain stability in the
Asia-Pacific. (Published in The Nation on November 6, 2021)

EMPOWERING THE ELECTORATE IN PAKISTAN

Pakistanis are apparently the only nation in the Westphalian state-system who talk of elections day in
and day out, but do not go to polls on D-day. This is why the turnout since the first general election in
the 70’s has never been more than 45 percent of the registered voters. This is an enigma of sorts with
reference to popular participation, and at the same time poses credibility questions on the viability of
the parliamentary system of governance in a country whose literacy rate is less than 55 percent.
Notwithstanding the dismal trajectory of democracy and the never-ending phenomenon of rigged

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 elections, Pakistanis are democratic at heart. Almost all civil and corporate structures of lifeline have
elected bodies. Be they bar elections, teachers’ bodies, trade and student unions, professional entities
such as engineers, doctors or charter-accountants; all are very particular and vehemently believe in the
supremacy of being elected and exercising their powers. There is a dichotomy, though. The same
nation is denied municipal or local bodies’ polls, as they are seldom held. Political parties across the
divide, who do not stop chest-thumping to marvel at the indispensability of vote, do not campaign for
local bodies. This is hypocrisy and double-standards at their best. The only reason that stops them from
having their heart in the local elected tier is that they apparently do not believe in empowering the
grassroots level! This attitude, perhaps, has much to do with their own undemocratic genesis. No
political party in Pakistan has an evolving democratic structure. It is either dynastic in essence or an
inverted pyramid sort of dictatorial hierarchy. Most of the top slots are decided in drawing room
politics. The only marginal exception is Jamaat-e-Islami. This has bred zero-tolerance towards dissent,
and led to a culture of sycophancy. Men at the helm of affairs remain disoriented from ground realities,
and the electorate longs in desperation.
Electoral reforms are no less than a mantra. They are, indeed, a non-starter. All political entities yell for
them, but none muster the courage to put it in black and white. Prime Minister Imran Khan, a voice for
change, too has bowled short-of-length. His reforms’ ambition in the realm of elections, police,
judiciary and the bureaucracy are in the doldrums. Now with the focus on electronic voting machines
(EVM) and the right to vote for expatriates, there is an opportunity to roll out a comprehensive set of
www.CSSExamDesk.com

legislation. It is no small initiative that the government plans to introduce more than 400,000 EVMs to
voters across the country, who to this day were preoccupied with Form-45 discrepancies, and held their
breaths as ballots were counted. But this is not enough. The intention should be to make the ballot
more popular and, in fact, mandatory. It is ridiculous that less than 50 percent or so go to vote, and the
winner seizes the throne with a mere 25 percent of total votes cast. The turnout in 2018 was 51.7
percent, and the winning PTI clinched around 32 percent votes.
There are two ways out: Introduce proportional representation and make voting a compulsory national
duty like conscription. More than 24 nations have made it a compulsion to vote and have linked it with
constitutional duties and responsibilities. Why shouldn’t we do it too? After all, the nation and the
politicians are so passionate about the philosophy of the ballot. Universal suffrage will not only
empower and educate the people, but also strengthen national institutions, especially the executive and
the parliament. Peoples’ assertiveness will result in self-accountability, and do away with ad-hocism,
perjury and abuse of power. This is what democracy is all about, and the very fruition of adult
franchise. The government and the opposition must see through the same prism while introducing
electoral reforms with the thrust being on empowering the doctrine of one-man, one-vote. No point in
cribbing over it under assumptions. One hopes the autumn of 2023, when the nation will go to poll,
wont be a season of discontent. (Published in The Nation on November 6, 2021)

AFGHANISTAN’S UNFOLDING HUMANITARIAN CRISIS

Afghanistan is on the verge of collapse and a full-fledged humanitarian crisis. Despite two decades of
international assistance, the Afghan government remained unable to develop a sustainable economy.
With the ouster of President Ghani and the withdrawal of international forces, the emergent Taliban
caretaker setup seems neither willing nor able to address the growing plight of ordinary citizens. The
country is facing multiple challenges including economic meltdown, international isolation, and a
breakdown of an already struggling public service delivery mechanism. An abrupt halt to the
development assistance which made up at least 75 per cent of the previous government’s budget and
the freezing of exiting Afghan assets — amounting to nearly $9.5 billion — had precipitated the current

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 crisis. On the heels of the American decision to stop the flow of funding to the emergent Taliban setup,
the European Union also cut off its development assistance to the country, followed by the IMF and
World Bank. The situation on the ground has fast become dire. UN agencies have warned of an
outright famine. The World Food Programme has found one in three Afghans is already acutely
hungry and an estimated 14 million Afghans in need of food assistance. Western countries remain
reluctant to aid the Taliban regime, after having spent billions of dollars trying to dislodge this same
group. However, due to increasing international and domestic criticism, G20 countries have been
trying to find ways to send humanitarian aid to those most in need, without it being subjected to the
Taliban’s authority or control. The European Union has pledged over $1 billion, and the US has
committed a modest $144 million, which is meant to support the work of international humanitarian
efforts in the country.
Whether emergency aid can be distributed in a transparent and impartial manner by the Taliban
remains to be seen. The Taliban’s record since assuming power does not evoke much confidence.
Despite promises of forming an ‘inclusive’ government, the Taliban installed an all-male caretaker
cabinet dominated by hardliners. Perhaps they did so due to the fear of attrition by more radical
elements within their own folds and to prevent those elements form joining more radical militant
outfits, especially the Islamic State. Nonetheless, the unwillingness of the Afghan Taliban to show
more moderation has not won them sympathy amongst the international community at large.
Moreover, recent Taliban attempts to prohibit many women from operating as aid workers has become
www.CSSExamDesk.com

another source of consternation. Such restrictions not only squeeze women out of public life but also
imply that incoming aid will reach fewer families in need, particularly women-headed households.
Whether the Taliban will be able to engage with humanitarian agencies to enable aid to reach ordinary
civilians may become a litmus test for their increased international recognition. Ultimately, the
international community also has the compulsion of engaging with Afghanistan’s new Taliban rulers
not only to ensure counterterrorism goals, but to help avert complete socio-economic collapse of the
country which can destabilise the broader region as well. On their own, humanitarian groups cannot
stave off these broader challenges, nor can they prevent nearly 97% of the country sinking below the
poverty line over the next six to eight months, as predicted by the UNDP.
Neighbouring countries like Pakistan has been advocating for a wider recognition of the emergent
ground realities in Afghanistan, including the need to recognise the Taliban. Pakistan understandably
does not want economic collapse in Afghanistan accompanied by another wave of Afghan refugees.
However, instead of trying to unreservedly back the hardline Taliban setup, Pakistan could focus on
supporting targeted goals, such as working with their caretaker setup to ensure that incoming
humanitarian aid is not misappropriated or withheld from those in need. Similarly, Pakistan can play
an important role in trying to convince and support the Taliban in addressing other international
reservations based on which their desperately needed international recognition hinges. (Published in
The Express Tribune, November 12th, 2021).

CYBER SECURITY CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES

The October 29 cyber-attack on the National Bank of Pakistan once again reminds us of the complexity
of cyberspace and the enormous impact of a cyber-attack. Cyberspace is a mam-made domain. It is
pervasive and ubiquitous, and acts as an enabler to operate and live in natural domains. Advancements
in cyberspace have led to information revolution which has been transformed into the fourth industrial
revolution (4IR) where cutting-edge technologies such as AI, machine learning and big data are helping
accelerate digital transformation in public and private sectors. The cyberspace has created opportunities
for state and non-state actors to maximise their gains and further their agenda. While cyber criminals

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 are involved in hacking for monetary gains, states are also using cyberspace as another domain to
maximise their power. Military-graded cyber weapons are being used for strategic gains. The Stuxnet
malware added new dimension to cyber weapons and proved that now sophisticated software can be
used for physical destruction of intended target. The Pegasus spyware is another example of
sophistication of cyber weapons where a call by predator — whether attended or not — can
compromise a prey’s cellular phone and can steal sensitive data. Due to its multi-dimensional impact,
the cyberspace has become central to hybrid war. Information operations have always been playing a
significant role during conflicts since ages. However due to the increased role of cyberspace,
information operations are also becoming frequent and sophisticated.
Pakistan is a developing country but its internet penetration is much satisfactory, with 77.7% mobile
subscription. In 2018, the government launched Digital Pakistan initiative aimed at increasing
connectivity, providing enhanced digital infrastructure and encouraging innovation and
entrepreneurship. The previous governments too provided an enabling environment for the IT sector by
reducing tariffs. Initiatives such as the PM Laptop Scheme also effectively contributed to enhancing
computer literacy. IT solutions such as NADRA database, land automation record, safe city project,
and online tax return system are part of digital transformation. The IT industry also blossomed during
the Covid-19 pandemic and IT solutions such as edTech and FinTech helped sustain life. E-commerce
business growth also accelerated during this period. However, no significant measures have been taken
to prevent cyber threats. National Cyber Security Policy — 21 was approved in July this year for data
www.CSSExamDesk.com

safety and privacy of local users. The policy mandates a central body to oversee implementation,
remove bureaucratic hurdles and carry out capacity building for changing landscape of cyber threats.
But there is no significant headway. Pakistan’s cyberspace is under constant attack. According to
official figures, one million cyber-attacks have been launched on Pakistan since January 2021. Even
though the attacks were thwarted by the National Telecom Company, offence has a significant
advantage over defence in cyber space, due to the frequently changing threat vectors. Hence it was
observed that the FBR data centre was successfully marginalised by hackers on August 14, 2021 and
recently the NBP system was also compromised. Pakistan is a vibrant IT market ready to harness 4IR
benefits and poised to tackle the relevant challenges due to the availability of the required infrastructure.
The government needs to implement NCSP-21. Efforts should be made to enhance capacity building of
existing IT experts in public sector and more cyber security experts should be inducted in organisations
responsible for cyber security. The government should initiate an information security campaign to
educate people. It should also consider legislation for prosecution of defaulters for any data loss as
accountability will help improve performance of all those responsible for cyber security. (Published in
The Express Tribune, November 6th, 2021).

HISTORY SAYS DON’T PANIC ABOUT INFLATION

Back in July, the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers posted a thoughtful article to its blog
titled, “Historical Parallels to Today’s Inflationary Episode.” The article looked at six surges in
inflation since World War II and argued persuasively that current events don’t look anything like the
1970s. Instead, the closest parallel to 2021′s inflation is the first of these surges, the price spike from
1946-48. Wednesday’s consumer price report was ugly; inflation is running considerably hotter than
many people, myself included, expected. But nothing about it contradicted CEA’s analysis — on the
contrary, the similarity to early postwar inflation looks stronger than ever. What we’re experiencing
now is a lot more like 1947 than like 1979. And here’s what you need to know about that 1946-48
inflation spike: It was a one-time event, not the start of a protracted wage-price spiral. And the biggest
mistake policymakers made in response to that inflation surge was failing to appreciate its transitory

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021

 nature: They were still fighting inflation even as inflation was ceasing to be a problem, and in so doing
helped bring on the recession of 1948-49.
About Wednesday’s price report: It looked very much like the classic story of inflation resulting from
an overheated economy, in which too much money is chasing too few goods. Earlier this year the rise
in prices had a narrow base, being driven largely by food, energy, used cars and services like air travel
that were rebounding from the pandemic. That’s less true now: It looks as if demand is outstripping
supply across much of the economy. One caveat to this story is that overall demand in the United
States actually doesn’t look all that high; real gross domestic product, which is equal to real spending
on U.S.-produced goods and services, is still about 2% below what we would have expected the
economy’s capacity to be if the pandemic hadn’t happened. But demand has been skewed, with
consumers buying fewer services but more goods than before, putting a strain on ports, trucking,
warehouses and more. These supply-chain issues have been exacerbated by the global shortage of
semiconductor chips, together with the Great Resignation — the reluctance of many workers to return
to their old jobs. So we’re having an inflation spurt.
On the plus side, jobs have rarely been this plentiful for those who want them. And contrary to the
cliche, current inflation isn’t falling most heavily on the poor: Wage increases have been especially
rapid for the lowest-paid workers. So what can 1946-48 teach us about inflation in 2021? Then as now
there was a surge in consumer spending, as families rushed to buy the goods that had been unavailable
in wartime. Then as now it took time for the economy to adjust to a big shift in demand — in the 1940s,
www.CSSExamDesk.com

the shift from military to civilian needs. Then as now the result was inflation, which in 1947 topped out
at almost 20%. Nor was this inflation restricted to food and energy; wage growth in manufacturing,
which was much more representative of the economy as a whole in 1947 than it is now, peaked at 22%.
But the inflation didn’t last. It didn’t end immediately: Prices kept rising rapidly for well over a year.
Over the course of 1948, however, inflation plunged, and by 1949 it had turned into brief deflation.
What, then, does history teach us about the current inflation spike? One lesson is that brief episodes of
overheating don’t necessarily lead to 1970s-type stagflation — 1946-48 didn’t cause long-term inflation,
and neither did the other episodes that most resemble where we are now: World War I and the Korean
War. And we really should have some patience: Given what happened in the 1940s, pronouncements
that inflation can’t be transitory because it has persisted for a number of months are just silly.
Oh, and for what it’s worth, the bond market is in effect predicting a temporary bump in inflation, not a
permanent rise. Yields on inflation-protected bonds maturing over the next couple of years are strongly
negative, implying that investors expect rapid price rises in the near term. But longer-term market
expectations of inflation have remained stable.
Another lesson, which is extremely relevant right now (hello, Sen. Manchin), is that an inflation spurt
is no reason to cancel long-term investment plans. The inflation surge of the 1940s was followed by an
epic period of public investment in America’s future, which included the construction of the Interstate
Highway System. That investment didn’t reignite inflation — if anything, by improving America’s
logistics, it probably helped keep inflation down. The same can be said of the Biden administration’s
spending proposals, which would do little to boost short-term demand and would help long-term
supply. So yes, that was an ugly inflation report, and we hope that future reports will look better. But
people making knee-jerk comparisons with the 1970s and screaming about stagflation are looking at the
wrong history. When you look at the right history, it tells you not to panic. (by Paul Krugman | The
New York Times | November 13, 2021).

Articulate (Vol 17) November 2021