Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
ON BRICS EXPANSION
BRICS expansion could be a bad idea: As leaders of
Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa meet for
their annual BRICS summit starting on Tuesday,
there is little doubt that the grouping has taken on
new importance amid intensifying great power
competition. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the
West’s increasingly aggressive sanctions campaign
against both Russia and China serve as the context in
which the global diplomatic community will be
watching the conclave in Johannesburg. Indeed, the
war in Ukraine has already cast its shadow on the
meeting. Russian President Vladimir Putin attending
only virtually to avoid South Africa any
embarrassment: The African nation is a member of
the International Criminal Court, which has issued a
warrant for Putin’s arrest on charges related to the
conflict, and would legally be required to take the
Russian leader into custody if he were to visit the
country. Yet with the possibility of any such drama
now ruled out, two more substantive and interrelated
developments will hold centre stage at the summit.
China and Russia have expressed interest in
expanding the group in an effort to grant it greater
weight in international affairs. Over 40 countries have
expressed interest in joining the BRICS group with 22
formally requesting membership. These include Arab
allies of the United States such as Saudi Arabia, the
United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt, and rivals
such as Iran. The list also includes countries from
Africa, South America and Asia.
The second issue is de-dollarisation. China and
Russia seem intent on using a larger BRICS forum as
a focal point of their efforts to cut their dependence —
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
and that of the global economy — on the US currency
that has dominated cross-border invoicing and
settlements since World War II. Beijing and Moscow
are already conducting most of their trade in local
currencies, especially the Chinese Yuan. Russia has
pitched for a new BRICS currency, perhaps backed by
gold, that would be used as an international medium
of exchange between the members instead of the
dollar.
For Russia and China, de-dollarisation has taken on
fresh importance as they’ve increasingly come under
sanctions from the West. Fear of how American and
Western economic statecraft can damage their
economies and limit their national security autonomy
is a major issue of debate in both Moscow and Beijing.
But while South Africa, Brazil and India have better
relations with the West, they too see lesser reliance on
the dollar as being a positive for their economic
growth and trade potential. Brazil’s President Luiz
Inacio Lula de Silva recently stated that “[e]very night
I ask myself why all countries have to base their trade
on the dollar”. To them, de-dollarisation is less about
overthrowing King Dollar from atop the hierarchy of
reserve currencies and more about carving out a
separate method to transact between member states
without the need for the dollar, the Western-based
SWIFT messaging system and the services of New
York banks. That being said, BRICS in its current
form already represents 26 percent of global gross
domestic product (GDP) and 16 percent of global trade.
So a successful effort in this regard is likely to have
ripple effects.
But will this new currency gambit work? There is too
little known about the plan to reach definite
conclusions. The BRICS track record on de-
dollarisation has been mixed. China and Russia have
successfully reduced their dependence on the dollar
for cross-border trade. On the other hand, the New
Development Bank, established by BRICS in large part
to facilitate the de-dollarisation of state lending is
largely dependent on the dollar and is now struggling
to raise that currency due to having Russia as a
founding member. Its chief financial officer recently
acknowledged that “You cannot step outside of the
dollar universe and operate in a parallel universe.”
The existing dollar hegemony is backed by an
intensive network effect and a convenience factor. The
stability of the dollar and deep dollar-denominated
markets allow for predictability, ease of use and lower
cross-border transactions. A new BRICS currency may
address some of these challenges but certainly not all.
There is also a significant imbalance in resolve
regarding de-dollarisation within the grouping. Where
sanctioned countries like Russia and China, as well as
prospective members like Iran, are eager to disabuse
the US of its ability to impose costly financial
sanctions, others will be less inclined to bear the cost
of such a transition. Like the Shanghai Cooperation
Organisation — which also includes China, Russia
and India among its members — a key issue
undermining the political impact of BRICS as a bloc is
the complex nature of relations between its nations,
and their differing approaches towards the West.
While they all dislike being called upon to abide by
Western sanctions, many of them have strong
relations with Western countries that they do not wish
to hurt. India and China are strategic rivals that don’t
see eye to eye on many issues. During last month’s
SCO summit, India refused to sign on to a key
economic document because it included Chinese
diplomatic language like references to Beijing’s Global
Development Initiative. India has broadly aligned itself
with Western interests against China. The availability
of Western economic support and access to technology
has increased significantly and West-India relations
are experiencing a new era. This has significant
economic benefits for India that make Modi very
sensitive about being seen as empowering a
counterbalance to the G7.
Brazil is being led by a left-wing president who is
worried about alienating Washington as a business
partner and is knowledgeable of how the US tends to
take an aggressive posture against South American
leaders who question its hegemony in the region.
South Africa is concerned that enhancing BRICS
membership will further reduce its influence in the
bloc. Officials in Pretoria are already concerned that
other BRICS countries are far more influential in the
group as its economic and social progress has stalled
in recent years. South Africa is also very concerned
about having to take sides in the emerging new Cold
War between the US and China — though it is under
a significant amount of pressure on South Africa to
align itself with the West. This is what has fuelled
demands by India, Brazil and South Africa for stricter
rules to determine whether an aspiring member
should be allowed to join or even become an observer.
India, in particular, has argued that democracies be
the focus of membership considerations. Such
differences have undermined the work of other major
global balancing organisations like the Organisation of
the Islamic Cooperation, G77 and the Non-Aligned
Movement, too. The ascension of various other
countries such as Argentina, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria,
with their own complex foreign policy preferences,
would not be seen favourably by Washington. But a
rapidly expanded BRICS won’t necessarily be more
powerful. Indeed, it could make the organisation more
incoherent and unable to reach a clear consensus on
anything of importance. (Author: Ahmadi Ali.
Published in Al Jazeera on August 22, 2023)
A warning to the US, but not a new Cold War: Last
week, the bloc of nations known as the BRICS took
the historic step of inviting six new countries for
membership. The grouping of Brazil, Russia, India,
China and South Africa will be joined by Saudi Arabia,
Iran, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates, Argentina
and Egypt as part of an expanded collective.
But these six new entrants are among dozens of
countries that have expressed interest in joining the
BRICS. Further expansions of an organisation many
have touted as a systemic rival to the G7 seem almost
certain to follow in future summits. As economic
tensions soar and geoeconomics becomes a
battleground, countries of the Global South seem
drawn to the BRICS group, which includes and is
partially led by China. So, why are so many countries,
including many US partners, participating in this
project and seeking to boost its mission?
Many argue we are in the midst of a new Cold War.
Even members of the United States Congress have
lent credence to that concept. But that is an imperfect
analogy. As many have pointed out, China is a peer
economy to the US and is likely to overtake it in gross
domestic product (GDP) soon, while the former Soviet
Union’s economy was, at its peak, only a third that of
the US. But what is critically different in the global
landscape of alliances is that many countries are in a
position to choose their alignment. Scholars and
analysts have been discussing the rise of the Global
South for decades, especially since the 2008 financial
crisis, pointing to how the unprecedented and
sustained economic growth of many countries outside
the West was redistributing global power. Researchers
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
have also concluded that while the global economy’s
centre of gravity was in the Atlantic, between the US
and Europe, in 1980, it had moved 4,800 miles
(7,725km) to Izmir, Turkey, by 2008 and will likely lie
somewhere between India and China by 2050. This
new environment presents the nations of the Global
South with options about how to respond to growing
friction among major powers and how to position their
nations in the midst of great power competition.
During the Cold War, one could awkwardly divide the
world into three camps: the Western bloc, the Soviet
bloc and the countries that were part of the so-called
non-aligned movement. After the Cold War, many of
the norms of the Western bloc formed what is often
referred to as the liberal rules-based international
order. This new order was enshrined into new
organisations like the World Trade Organization and
older venues like the United Nations during a
“unipolar moment”, when democratic capitalism and
trade liberalisation seemed to have vanquished every
foe. But today, the rising power balancing the US is
not looking to form a Soviet-type bloc. The reasons are
both material and ideational. China does not have the
military capacity to project power over large parts of
the planet and make security guarantees to faraway
friends. It also has a grim history with alliance politics
– such as its fallout with the Soviet Union. So it
eschews the kind of alliances that define the US’s
relationship with its linchpin allies in Europe and
East Asia. Beijing has many partners, even
“comprehensive strategic partners”, but no allies.
Beijing also has a precarious relationship with the
international order Washington built. The order is one
designed and carried out with US interests and
preferences in mind – and to a lesser extent those of
its close allies. As China rises, the West, and the US
in particular, jealously guard the rules they’ve crafted
and the pegging order within those organisations.
China’s voting power and position in international fora
are still extremely small compared with its economic
weight. For example, China has a 5 percent voting
share in the World Bank’s main lending arm despite
representing 16 percent of the global GDP.
China has repeatedly asked for its voting power, and
those of other emerging economies, to be increased to
represent modern global economic distribution to no
avail. This is a rather enticing combination to many
countries of the Global South. Many of them also see
their preferences and interests underrepresented or
ignored in the world order as currently constituted.
Additionally, aligning with organisations like BRICS
does not mean binding commitments to one side of
the new Cold War. The Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO) may be a security cooperation
forum like NATO but it lacks any Article 5 feature. If
the worst-case scenario, a Sino-American military
confrontation, came to pass, US allies would be
expected to quickly join it in the war but China’s
partners would not. In fact, an increasingly large
coalition of countries with competing and conflicting
political systems, ideologies and approaches to the
West may produce an increasingly unwieldy
organisation and exacerbate its collective action
problem. But China is clearly gambling that a larger,
more geographically and economically diverse set of
countries can eventually be marshalled towards the
goal of enhancing their collective representation in the
world order. For example, the inclusion of more
countries, especially major commodity exporters like
Saudi Arabia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates, may
make greater economic integration among BRICS
states and the use of non-dollar currencies in trade
among them more appetising. Scholars who have
examined Beijing’s relationship with the international
order argue that China seeks to engage international
institutions to argue for its preferences. But when it is
denied what it sees as power commensurate with its
global position, it seeks to create parallel institutions.
This can be seen in the form of the Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank, the SCO and BRICS.
The US and its linchpin allies have common values
and deep social interaction. More importantly, they
have similar forms of government and economic
management. This both binds them together and
solves collective action problems regarding world
affairs. US partners in the Global South, however, are
not under this umbrella and instead court
multipolarity to maximise their bargaining position
vis-à-vis duelling powers. Joining a forum like the
BRICS is less a declaration of alignment with Beijing
and more an assertion by a country that they wish to
remain neutral or play both sides in line with their
specific national interest. (Author: Ahmadi Ali.
Published in Al Jazeera on August 31, 2023)
Multipolar world — BRICS vs G7 — spurring return
of coups in Africa? A series of violent change of
governments in recent times in French-speaking West
and Central Africa by military men is raising the
spectre of a return to the hoary days of dystopia and
tyranny rampant in the continent between the 1960s
and the end of the Cold War. The Cold War
represented a global system of bipolarity in which the
United States and the Soviet Union competed
intensely for global domination. Relations between the
Soviet Union and the US were driven by a complex
interplay of ideological, political, and economic factors,
which led to shifts between cautious cooperation and
often bitter superpower rivalry over the years. The
interventions and alliances birthed in Africa between
the 1960s and 1980s helped to shape the realities of
the bipolar world system. During the Cold War, west,
central, eastern and southern Africa proved to be
fertile grounds for proxy war as the US and the Soviet
Union found it critical to expand their spheres of
influence, largely by promoting leadership in the
‘Third World’ that would be sympathetic to their
causes. Out of the 486 attempted or successful
military coups carried out globally since 1950, Africa
accounts for the largest number with 214, of which at
least 106 have been successful. Data compiled by
American researchers Jonathan M. Powell and
Clayton L. Thyne show that at least 45 of the 54
nations across the African continent have experienced
at least a single coup attempt since 1950. Between
1958 and 2008, most coups in Africa occurred in
former French colonies, as did six of the seven since
2019. Similarly, 12 of the 20 coups in the sub-region
since 2010 happened there. The latest successful
putsch in Burkina Faso came on the heels of two
attempted ones, in 2015 and 2016. The end of the
Cold War also saw the end of the bipolar world system.
After the Cold War, a neoliberal democratic
programme was inaugurated in Africa. It promised to
free the continent from authoritarianism and military
seizures of power, in favour of political pluralism and
the rule of law. Thus, many decades later, coups were
supposed to be rare, if not a thing of the past, and
dictatorships were supposed to be on the decline.
In February, 1989, Francis Fukuyama gave a talk on
international relations at the University of Chicago.
With the Cold War coming to an end, he foresaw a
spread of liberal democracies throughout the world.
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
On the contrary, Samuel Huntington presented his
self-fulfilling prophecy, namely the “clash of
civilisations”, where he argued that international
politics would now be centred by the interplay of West
and non-Western civilisations and thus lead to conflict.
Ultimately, it was some 30 years of peace and quiet in
Africa until recent times. The soldiers are coming back.
From Burkina Faso to Mali, Niger, Guinea, Chad,
Sudan and now Gabon, mainly western-trained army
officers are seizing back the reins of power from
politicians. Researchers Hakeem Onapajo and
Muhammad Dan Suleiman assert that “the quest for
strategic influence and advantage by foreign powers in
Africa has involved them in coups in the continent”.
“They tolerate local politics and authoritarianism as
long as their strategic advantage is served,” they said.
With more of the region’s elected governments at risk
of violent overthrow, French President Emmanuel
Macron has warned that “all the presidents across the
region are more or less aware of the fate that awaits
them” unless democracy is restored. “I think coups in
Africa are a contagion now,” Feyi Fawehinmi, an
author and researcher, said. For Cheta Nwanze, a
partner at the Lagos-based consultancy SBM
Intelligence, the rising spate of coups “is part of a
trend that is largely sweeping across Francophone
Africa (for now) as French-supported autocrats
pretending to be democrats slowly lose their grip on
power”. “There’s a risk it would jump to Anglophone
Africa, as there’s also dissatisfaction with the
economic outcomes of 30 years of civilian rule in those
countries, but the risk is mostly in French Africa.
Cameroon and Togo are likely next,” he added. The
widening ‘coup belt’ across the Sahel, West Africa and
Central Africa demonstrates a repudiation of US and
western influence and pressure.
Years of unipolar power dominance and influence by
the US and its western allies in the continent through
aid, loans, sanctions and threats of sanctions has left
many Africans unimpressed. The continent has made
little economic progress during this period. Onapajo
and Suleiman said: “Governance deficits, non-
fulfilment of the entitlements of citizenship, frustrated
masses (most of whom are young) and growing
insecurity are chief among the inward-looking causes.
International factors, including external influence, are
among the outward-looking.”
These immediate factors, according to them, “exist in
a broader context that allows immediate causes to
persist long enough to spark coups. Unimpressive
democratic conditions in countries, and the
consistency of foreign influence in African countries,
make it unsurprising that there have been recent
attempted and successful military takeovers of
government”. While the US’ Africa policy promises
economic partnerships in areas that speak to both
African economic priorities and US strengths, for
many in the continent, the west is more interested in
the political and economic mileage it can get from
Africa.
The rise of the BRICS group of nations and its recent
expansion poses a counterweight to the G7 western
powers. Originally, the countries came together as a
grouping in the late 2000s to coalesce around issues
of finance, development and trade. However, the bloc
has now grown to symbolise one side of the ledger in a
world of bitter strategic rivalry and growing
multipolarity. “Great attention to the BRICS around
the world has helped China and Russia’s rhetorical
campaign to pin ‘the West’ against ‘the rest’,” Andrew
Cheatham, senior advisor, Global Policy at the United
States Institute for Peace, said. Kamissa Camara,
Mali’s former minister of foreign affairs, believes that
Russia’s role in these coups and western charges of
toxic influence by Moscow in the continent is always
overstated. Camara said: “These Russian flags that
you see right after a coup has taken place have been
planted there. I have absolutely no doubt about that.
“I do not believe that Russia is an important player in
this region. I believe that there is definitely a Russian
propaganda at play. But culturally and even looking
at these youth in West Africa, they speak French,
most of them. They study in French, and they either
want to immigrate to France or the United States. I do
not see any of them queuing in front of the Russian
embassy.” But focusing on foreign influences ignores
each country’s internal politics and security, as well
as the effects they have on each other. On a cursory
look, Deji Olatoye, a lawyer, said: “The Ali Bongo
overthrow plays into the succession of coups that we
have seen in the last couple of years across Africa.
However, Gabon is not an Islamist-ridden Sahelian
country. It may even appear to play into the so-called
“messy middle” thesis of the Economist magazine —
the idea that Africa’s key dysfunctional places stretch
from the Sahel in West Africa through Sudan to
Central Africa. However, it signals something different.
Gabon, though resource-rich like DRC, has managed
a facade of stability in the last few decades. “I think
the clearest signal is that there is a notice now being
served on democracies that have failed to properly
launch across the continent. We expect incipient
democracies to totter at first, but then to mature as
time goes on. What we have seen in the last decade is
that the wave of democratisation that swept through
Africa from the early 90s have largely produced
regimes that did not go beyond the box-ticking of
election cycles.
“There is a crying legitimacy gap, not just in the
quality of elections, but in the outcome – the so-called
democracy dividends – for the populace. This has
manifested in diverse ways across the continent. In
places like Gabon, Togo, Cameroon and Equatorial
Guinea, it has manifested in effete sight-tight regimes
and dynasties. The clearest signal from Gabon is to
these other sight-tight regimes, including in
neighbouring Cameroon where President Biya’s regime
is deepening separatist disaffection. For other parts of
the continent where election cycles are deteriorating,
no matter how we choose to see or not see what has
happened in Gabon, Ali Bongo’s overthrow is also a
notice.” The challenge to majority rule in Africa,
Camara concurs is that “democracy as we understand
it in the west has not been that successful in some
African countries, including the ones that have
recently experienced the coup”. “And so, first of all,
what I’m hoping is that the youth in these countries
define their own path and design the institutions that
they want to see,” she said. “And my second hope is
that we, as international partners, put our emphasis
on the private sector, which will be able to create the
jobs that will be needed in the next few years when
these millions of youth will come onto the drug market
seeking a better future.” (Author: Nosa Igbinadolor.
Published in Business Today on September 1, 2023)
China’s vision for the Global South:
When the BRICS recently decided to invite six
countries to join as new members, Chinese President
Xi Jinping hailed the expansion as a historic move
that highlights the resolve of the BRICS to pursue
unity and cooperation in the developing world. Beyond
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
the BRICS, Xi’s comment is precisely a reflection of
what China envisions for the Global South. Since war
broke out in Ukraine, the US-led West has found itself
in a somewhat awkward position where, despite its
lobby and charm offensive, the Global South can’t be
persuaded into siding with the West on this war. In a
recent example, a July summit between the European
Union and Latin America failed to reach even a bland
statement on the war due to their huge rift on this
issue. The root cause of this “West against the rest”
phenomenon is that the West has in many ways failed
to grasp the real concerns and priorities of the Global
South. To most developing countries across Asia,
Africa and Latin America, there are much more
pressing issues to worry about – recovery from the
Covid-19 pandemic, indebtedness, food security,
climate change, etc. Plus, ties with Russia also matter
to many of them, so they have pragmatically taken a
neutral position that enables them to better navigate
the geopolitics related to the war. In addition,
Washington’s narrative in framing the war – in fact,
many other international issues as well – as
“democracy versus autocracy” is certainly not helpful
in winning the hearts of the Global South countries. A
little critical thinking would tell us that to define
whether or not a country is a democracy using
Western criteria alone is in and of itself undemocratic,
and it only runs a risk of entrenching the existing
ideological divisions in the world today.
China’s ideas such as “community of shared future”
and “balanced, sustainable security architecture”
appear to better dovetail with the realistic need of the
Global South countries. In essence, China’s worldview
calls for shelving frictions and prioritizing cooperation
for the sake of mutual prosperity, rather than pushing
countries to choose sides. More importantly, China’s
proposals on global governance are not empty slogans.
Instead, they are based on concrete actions in China’s
foreign policy. When it comes to helping mitigate
conflicts, for instance, China supplies more UN
peacekeeping troops than the other four permanent
members of the UN Security Council combined. Since
1990, Chinese soldiers involved in UN peacekeeping
missions have left their footprints in more than 20
countries and regions across Southeast Asia, the
Middle East and Africa. During a June visit to China
by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Xi Jinping
raised a three-point proposal aimed at working
towards peace between Palestine and Israel. In fact,
China has been involved in mediating between the two
sides since 2002, when China set up its special envoy
for the Middle East. Some observers might view the
Iran-Saudi Arabia rapprochement as China enjoying
the fruits of earlier diplomatic work done by others,
but the deal was actually a result of many years of
balanced diplomacy and trust building that China has
carried out in the Middle East. In China’s mentality,
peace and development come hand in hand. While the
former certainly paves the way to the latter, the latter
can also enhance the former in return. Let’s not forget
that China’s growing economic ties with both Iran and
Saudi Arabia are an indispensable factor behind
Beijing’s successful brokering of the Iran-Saudi
rapprochement. And at a time when ASEAN has
become China’s largest trading partner, there are
more incentives on both sides to maintain stability in
the South China Sea. In terms of development, it is no
secret that China has made enormous efforts to
promote trade, cross-border investment, and
infrastructure connectivity across the Global South.
According to data compiled by the Chinese
government, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has
over the past decade driven investments worth close
to $1 trillion by incubating over 3,000 projects around
the world. As a result, some 420,000 jobs have been
created and nearly 40 million people have been lifted
out of poverty in countries involved in the BRI. To a
large extent, it is the success of the BRI that has
prompted Western countries to roll out their own
initiatives in a bid to compete with China, such as the
G7’s Build Back Better World and the EU’s Global
Gateway.
From China’s perspective, anyone’s promise to invest
in the Global South is not a bad thing. In fact, the BRI
itself represents a platform that is open to the West as
well, and some Western corporations have already
benefited from it. In 2016, the General Electric gained
orders worth $2.3 billion for construction and
engineering projects under the BRI. Similarly,
Siemens has worked with over 100 Chinese partners
on BRI-related energy and mining projects. Citibank
and Deutsche Bank have participated in the financing
of BRI projects. By comparison, given the fact that a
starting point of the Western initiatives is to compete
with the BRI, whether they’ll provide opportunities to
Chinese companies remains an open question. Trade
and investment are one aspect of China’s contribution
to development in the Global South. Furthermore, its
economic rise over the past few decades represents a
victory for the mentality that each country deserves a
development path in accordance with its own
conditions. China has pursued its economic
achievements through a path featuring not only
learning from the advanced economies but also
keeping its own DNA. In this sense, there could be
tremendous inspirations for underdeveloped countries
regarding how to manage their future destiny. It looks
like multi-polarity is becoming a reality in the world
today. In one example, the G7 industrialized
countries’ share of global GDP declined to less than
45% in 2021, compared to nearly 70% in the late
1980s. As a major power in the developing world,
China has a responsibility to help bolster unity and
prosperity in the Global South. The goal is to establish
a more equitable world order with increased
representation of the Global South in international
affairs. (Author: Ding Heng. Published in Pakistan
Observer on September 5, 2023)
BRICS & the future of Chinese influence: BRICS
has taken a significant step in expanding its
membership to six influential countries in the Middle
East, Africa, and South America. This includes
Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and
the UAE. The inclusion of these six countries is seen
as a major win for BRICS, es-pecially China. It is
generally believed that a new eco-nomic and political
order is on the rise as influential Middle Eastern
countries rally behind China’s led diplomatic and
economic initiatives.
Theatrics and optics are important in today’s world.
Narratives also play a key role in global poli-tics.
There is a mixed narrative and debate on BRICS and
the way China has asserted its influence. It depends
on how one views the developments.
The criticism of BRICS is that it does not have any
planned and well-elaborated membership criteria.
Therefore, becom-ing part of BRICS does not actually
mean much. It also does not have a well-chalked-out
strategic direction for what the goal and ultimate aim
of including these six countries in BRICS would be. It
should also be kept in mind that there are limits to
cooperation among rival states in the Middle East.
Would new-ly evolved rivals like the UAE, KSA, and
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
Iran merge their inter-ests in BRICS, or is it merely
about securing a seat at the table? This is the
developing criticism of BRICS and its expansion that
might see new critical points in the coming weeks.
There is also appreciation for BRICS. And it comes in
abundance. The general public in the global south
celebrates the expan-sion. China is their new hero, at
least in terms of optics. To them, China is the big
country that is out there to build con-sensus,
cooperation, and address issues like regional rivalry.
Recent diplomatic developments like the Saudi-Iran
détente are considered a Chinese masterstroke and a
diplomatic win. A plethora of former diplomats in the
region, experts, and academics have appreciated the
rapprochement, which has added much value to the
Chinese diplomatic narrative. The BRICS expansion
and inclusion of six states is yet another feather in the
cap for China.
As diplomatic developments take place rapidly, it is
impor-tant to take stock of the future of Chinese
influence. Influence has many tools. At the moment,
the Chinese strat-egy seems to be focused on creating
an image that the world wants to see. The last two
decades of ravaging wars, politi-cal upheavals, and
changing alliances have created anxieties for the
Middle Eastern states. During these periods, they
have wished to extricate themselves from the
quagmire of conflict that could end up toppling
governments and kingdoms. The Middle East has
been in the eye of the storm for too long.
Con-sequently, it wants to see a world of certainty,
predictability, and stability. China offers just that.
China proposes to put an end to potential and
anticipated cri-ses in the Middle East through
diplomacy. This is a relief for many apprehensions
that the region has had. How long that will last is yet
to be seen. Its durability is not the issue in question.
The real challenge is putting the fears to rest for the
moment.
BRICS boasts to represent 40% of the global
population and a quarter of global GDP. With six
influential states joining the mechanism, the total
wealth would be around 31 trillion dollars. However,
where China lacks is a durable regional mechanism
that can actually perform and bring about change at
the grassroots level. This requires cooperation and
foolproof economic mechanisms outlined by the states.
At the moment, the Middle Eastern countries have not
outlined a proper mechanism for cooperation. It is still
in a nascent stage. The region is recovering from
decades of wars, like Afghanistan, and is infested with
terrorist organisations operating from the Far East to
Africa. Economic stagnation, terrorism, and regional
rivalries are some of the many issues that plague the
regions of the Far East, Asia, the Middle East, and
Africa. China is probably not commit-ted to
addressing all of that. For a ‘Chinese order’ to take off,
it needs to offer something that would address these
issues at the earliest. China has captured the
imagination of many. The influ-ence has started to
show some signs. However, sophistication and
political finesse are still needed. (Author: Dr. Taimur
Shamil. Published in The Nation on August 30, 2023)
Navigating the 21st century requires solidarity not
polarity. Over the past decade or so, signs that the
American-dominated world order is crumbling have
become increasingly more visible. The rise of China –
boosted by its entry into the World Trade Organization
in 2001 – has challenged the unipolarity maintained
by the United States. Beijing has undoubtedly become
a dominant force in the global economy, bolstering its
military and strategic capabilities. But it has not been
the only power trying to assert itself in recent years.
Russia under the revisionist leadership of Vladimir
Putin has also sought to regain its status as a world
power. To that end, the Russian president has
adopted more assertive politics vis-à-vis the West and
moved closer to China, especially after Xi Jinping
became China’s leader in 2013. Russia’s full-scale
invasion of Ukraine has accelerated the showdown
over global leadership and prompted new questions
over who should lead the ever more complicated
international system. Some have argued for a
multipolar world system, claiming it would make it
easier to manage global challenges, such as climate
change, pandemics and cybercrimes. They say it is
fairer, more equitable and democratic than the
unipolar or bipolar world systems. Others contend
that there is no one better suited to lead a fair and
democratic world than the world’s leading democracy,
America, along with its democratic allies. After all, it
remains the dominant military and economic
superpower, dwarfing China, India, Russia, Japan
and others in terms of its hard, smart and soft powers.
Indeed, none comes even close to contesting US
geopolitical clout, forward military deployments or
maritime projection. The US has about 750 bases in
at least 80 countries worldwide. China commands one
base – in Djibouti. Similarly, there is no match for its
economic dexterity and vitality, high-tech innovations
and commercial successes, not to mention the
unrivalled Brand America. These claims hold much
truth and may have been totally convincing back in
the 1990s when the US emerged victorious from the
Cold War after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
But they no longer are. In the past two decades,
America’s political and economic decline has taken its
toll over its global leverage and authority, and its
Faustian deals with unsavvy autocrats have damaged
its credibility. Strategically, US military entanglements
in the Greater Middle East under the pretext of the
“global war on terror” since the 9/11 attacks have
greatly undermined US power projection. The
disastrous war in Iraq and the long and humiliating
defeat in Afghanistan showed the limits of the US
military force. Strategic disengagement and
retrenchments under Presidents Barack Obama’s and
Donald Trump’s administrations made it difficult to
shape events and influence leaders, who increasingly
deemed the US an erratic and unreliable partner.
On the economic front, the 2008 financial crisis,
which started in the US and threatened the collapse of
the global financial system, has dealt a blow to its
neoliberal system, pushing more countries to diversify
their economic relations. It also paved the way for the
rise of the G20, and the emergence of mid-size powers,
which now exercise growing influence on the global
stage at the expense of the US and its G7 allies.
Meanwhile, Brand America suffered bigly, not least
because of the advent of Trumpism in 2016,
symbolising the retreat of Western liberalism and the
rise of populist, corrupt and autocratic forces in the
West and beyond. These trends rendered American-
promoted liberalism a harder sell to the rest of the
world. US President Joe Biden’s declaration that
“America is back” after he defeated Trump in the 2020
election was not followed by a notable resurgence of
US power. His attempts to salvage US leadership
through the so-called “rules-based international
system” have failed. This system has been viewed as a
rigged scheme that favours the West against the rest
and, in the process, bypasses international law. And
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
yet, the alternative – a multipolar world – is not such
a bright prospect as other powers step in to fill the
void. Multiple world powers competing and fighting to
enhance their interests and advance their influence
does not necessarily add up to a better world. Rather
the contrary: Diversity shaped by animosity could also
lead to anarchy and chaos.
That is why, as the debate over the new global
leadership rages, the more important question to ask
is how this new order will be led and managed. It can
be either driven by strategic and ideological hostility –
which would have a devastating impact on the world –
or by a more pragmatic, power-sharing scheme
shaped by expansive economic and commercial
relations. If history is any guide, there is no hope to be
had from international law or international
agreements when world powers are at loggerheads.
Worse, the management of global challenges would
suffer. The past 30 years of unipolarity and the
preceding 30 years of bipolarity may have failed
miserably to bring peace and security to the world,
IEA GOVERNMENT IN AFGHANISTAN
THE concept of economic interdependence and its
associated theories of liberal inter-governmentalism
and neo-functionalism serve as the key driver for the
regional integration of states across the world. The
South Asian region has been prone to conflict since
last four decades, particularly the two major wars
fought in Afghanistan had its dynamic implications for
the geopolitics and regional integration. Liberals and
realists have argued that economic interdependence
and conflict amongst states are inter-related with each
other and while states tend to cooperate to further
their trade relationship; consequently, they are keen
to initiate a conflict to attain their hegemonic designs.
China has emerged as one of the global powers in the
world with its deep-rooted geoeconomic interests
around the world. Being a neighbouring state,
Pakistan’s relationship with China has been cordial
and diplomatic and both states have collaborated and
supported each other in their global and regional
initiatives. China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)
as a flagship project of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
had been initiated in 2013 with a vision to transform
and integrate the geoeconomics of the region. Through
its energy, infrastructure and transportation projects,
China has pledged to invest more than $62 billion in
different projects in Pakistan in order to enhance the
actual trade potential of the region. Gwadar is being
envisioned as one of the busiest deep sea-ports in the
near future while trade connectivity with Central Asia
through Afghanistan will transform a conflict prone
region into an economic hub. Chinese influence in
Afghanistan and its investment in the country has
been evident since the Ghani Administration. As the
United States ended its diplomatic presence in the
country in August 2021, China furthered its politico-
diplomatic relationship with Taliban Administration.
Recently, a Chinese firm signed a 25-year multimillion
dollar contract to extract oil from Afghanistan. Such a
venture indicates China’s long-term interest and its
geoeconomic relationship with Afghanistan. Though it
is a fact that China has also not recognized the
Taliban government in Afghanistan as of now,
however, its economic and diplomatic engagement
cannot be overlooked, keeping in view its vision of
reviving the old Silk Route.
Afghanistan is geostrategically positioned at the
crossroads of South and Central Asia and
materializing the dream of transforming the region in
to an economic hub is conditional to peace and
but make no mistake, the previous 300 years of
multipolarity were utterly disastrous, leading to
devastating regional, colonial and imperials wars of all
strands and horrors. And so, it seems to me that
despite having the advantage of a cleareyed historical
perspective, today’s world powers seem as rash as
their 19th and 20th century predecessors,
approaching world affairs as a zero-sum game instead
of a win-win gambit. In the not-so-distant past, world
powers tended to be hypocritical, but today they are
increasingly cynical as if it is naive to be righteous
and smart to be cruel. In sum, multipolarity should
not be confused with multilateralism. A bunch of
competing world powers do not make for a responsible
international community. As long as international
relations are driven by power and greed, not
cooperation and shared creed, the world will suffer
regardless of who or how many are at the top. Given
the choice, the world should embrace solidarity over
polarity and collaboration over hostility. (Author:
Marwan. Published in Al Jazeera on June 19, 2023)
stability in the country. It is an undenied fact that the
after effects of conflict in Afghanistan over the last
four decades and militancy in the region has the
tendency to negatively influence the geoeconomic
realities. Strained relationship between the Taliban
administration and Pakistan will add to the challenges
for the varying sides. Moreover, the spillovers of
Russia-Ukraine conflict as well as any possible future
US intervention in the region is also a major challenge
since the human rights issues as well as ban on
female education by Taliban Administration in
Afghanistan is a major challenge for the international
community. China’s constructive engagement with the
political leadership of Pakistan and Afghanistan as
well as its active support in the economic survival of
both these states is undenied; however, the futuristic
geoeconomic realities of the region require a varying
perspective to be envisioned. Peace and stability in
Afghanistan are the foremost requirement for any
inter-state economic relationship and this issue needs
to be addressed by taking regional as well as global
stakeholders on board. Rather sidelining Taliban, the
global community needs to recognize the Taliban
Administration in order to engage them politico-
economically. First step needs to be taken by a global
power preferably, the United States and rest are
expected to follow the course. Soft diplomacy by
Taliban can actually help them attain this objective
much swiftly. Once the Taliban Government is
recognized by states around the world, their global
interaction will help them to initiate economic
engagement with states across the world. Moreover,
enhanced economic activity in the country will lead to
reduced poverty and decline in terrorism and
militancy. Taliban Administration also needs to halt
their support to the TTP in order to strengthen their
relationship with Pakistan. Conversely, if Taliban
government is not recognized by any state, the world
may witness another tragic attack like 9/11 leading to
another global conflict. Political reality like Taliban
must not be undermined and if the United States can
negotiate and sign Doha Accord with them, it can
recognize their government as well, particularly after
they have survived around 18 months with a torn
economy. China, Pakistan and Afghanistan will
become a regionally integrated economic reality, only
if Afghanistan and Pakistan will stabilize their political
economy and mend their relationship with the rest of
the world. Recognition of Taliban government followed
by initiation of their economic relationship with the
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
rest of the world, eradication of militancy followed by
peace and stability in Pakistan and Afghanistan,
mature political relationship amongst the political
parties of Pakistan and a collective effort aimed at
working for national interest and balance in the
relationship with the global powers are some of the
prerequisites for an integrated geoeconomic vision to
transform into a reality. Cooperation for all the states
Nuclear weapons should be relics of the past
In the quiet and peaceful steppe of Kazakhstan, a
dark and ominous legacy lingers beneath the surface.
Over four decades between 1949 and 1989, 456
nuclear bombs were detonated by the Soviet Union at
the Semipalatinsk Test Site in northern Kazakhstan.
While the echoes of nuclear explosions have long
faded, the scars of nuclear testing run deep. More
than 1.5 million people in Kazakhstan were exposed to
the toxic fallout from those tests. Countless lives were
irreversibly altered, and the environment was forever
scarred. I am a living testament to the horrors of
nuclear testing, as I was born without arms due to the
effects of nuclear radiation.
Decades have passed since the Semipalatinsk Test
Site was used as a canvas for nuclear experimentation,
yet the threat to the world from nuclear weapons
remains all too real. The global confrontation between
major powers has raised the possibility that nuclear
weapons could be used, even if accidentally. The
spectre of mutually assured destruction looms large,
reminding us that the line between peace and
catastrophic conflict is paper-thin. It is a line we can
no longer afford to tread. The recent diplomatic efforts
and agreements aimed at halting nuclear testing and
proliferation have shown promise, but they are merely
steps on a longer journey. The Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which seeks to ban
all nuclear explosions, is a crucial instrument in this
endeavour. Yet, despite its adoption by a vast majority
of nations, it awaits ratification by some key states,
preventing its full implementation. Governments and
leaders must recognise that the pursuit of security
through the possession of nuclear weapons is a fallacy.
Kazakhstan once had the fourth-largest nuclear
arsenal in the world. But my country voluntarily
relinquished these weapons after gaining
independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. Despite
being a young sovereign nation, the lack of nuclear
weapons did not threaten our security and stable
development. Quite the contrary. Through its multi-
vector foreign policy, Kazakhstan has developed good
relations with all its neighbours and beyond.
Kazakhstan’s case is proof that true security can be
achieved through the complete elimination of nuclear
weapons. Our path forward is clear. We must
advocate for the universal ratification of the CTBT,
leaving no room for ambiguity regarding the end of
nuclear testing. This will require not only political will
but also a collective commitment to securing a safer
world for generations to come. The pursuit of
disarmament must be a shared endeavour that
transcends borders, ideologies and differences. All
nuclear-armed states must demonstrate their
commitment to disarmament through substantial
reductions in their arsenals.
Nuclear disarmament is not a distant dream; it is a
tangible goal within our reach. The success of
initiatives like the International Campaign to Abolish
Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), which led to the adoption of
the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
(TPNW), demonstrates the power of global unity. The
number of nuclear weapons has declined from around
is the only way-forward to strengthen themselves as
well as transform the region in a geoeconomic hub;
however, prospects of conflict and interference of
global powers in the region with their strategic
objectives must not be overlooked as well. (Author:
Hassam Ahmed Siddiqi. Published in Pakistan
Observer on September 2, 2023)
65,000 in the mid-1980s to around 12,500 today,
thanks to the landmark Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). However, we
cannot stop here. As the world marks the
International Day against Nuclear Tests on August 29,
which the UN declared in 2009 to mark the closure of
the Semipalatinsk Test Site in 1991, we must embrace
global disarmament. It is a moral imperative, a duty to
future generations, and a responsibility we cannot
shirk. The resources currently spent on maintaining
and modernising nuclear arsenals could be
channelled into eradicating poverty, addressing
climate change, and advancing education and
healthcare. Education is a powerful tool in the fight
for disarmament. By raising awareness about the
devastating consequences of nuclear weapons and
testing, we can inspire collective action and public
demand for change. That is why I have dedicated my
life to urging the world to rid itself of the destructive
menace of nuclear weapons. Kazakhstan is hoping to
achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world by 2045, the
centennial of the founding of the United Nations. We
have just over two decades to make this a reality, but
the efforts must pick up pace now. The path towards
nuclear disarmament is not an easy one, but it is a
journey worth embarking upon. We owe it to ourselves,
our children, and the generations yet unborn. Let us
not be remembered as the generation that failed to
heed the call of reason and compassion. Instead, we
should be remembered as the generation that had the
courage to stand up and say, “No more.” Let us be the
ones to make nuclear weapons a relic of the past,
forever banished from our world. (Author: Karipbek
Kuyukov. Published in Al-Jazeera on August 29, 2023)
Diplomacy crucial to ending world’s escalating
arms race: Ten years since the Syrian regime
launched its atrocious chemical weapons attack on
Douma, killing more than 1,400 people, the state of
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
international affairs should be ringing major alarm
bells in terms of the potential combat use of weapons
of mass destruction, including nuclear.
At times, the world has come close. Nuclear-armed
powers India and Pakistan have faced off against each
other. As the years passed, previously closely guarded
secrets about the 1962 Cuban missile crisis have
revealed that the world was even closer than we
thought to a nuclear disaster between the US and the
Soviet Union. The success of the film “Oppenheimer”
may just jolt the world’s leaderships and publics from
the comfort blanket of complacency and inertia.
Firstly, global clashes and instability are thriving. The
standout issue is Ukraine and the Russian invasion,
as tensions with NATO descended into near-direct
confrontation. As the war has escalated, the US and
its NATO allies have been sucked in further, with ever-
increasing weapons supplies and training. For years,
NATO members have, in theory, agreed to a 2 percent
of gross domestic product target for defense spending.
In 2014 ,only three members achieved this, while this
year 11 are expected to do so.
Finland has joined NATO, with Sweden to follow, both
for their own security, while at the same time
escalating matters with Russia. Even Switzerland is
reexamining its long-term neutrality status with NATO
in mind. It has already declared that it wants to join
the European Sky Shield Initiative, a German-led
project to develop European air and missile defense
systems. Military spending in Europe grew by 13
percent in 2022, the largest rise since the end of the
Cold War.
In the longer run, the US-China relationship is
arguably far more perilous. Russian power is on the
wane — it is a mid-level economy with a rusting, aging
military machine. China is the surging global force
challenging the US at all levels. It is desperate to
assert its predominance in the Asia-Pacific, but some
fear farther afield too. Taiwan is just one of the hot
button issues that have to be managed carefully.
Chinese posturing is alarming not just to Taiwan, but
also other neighbors including India, Australia and
Japan. Australia has invested heavily in its own long-
range strike capabilities, purchasing US systems.
Beijing has told India to keep calm after an official
Chinese map appeared to lay claim to Indian territory
in northeastern Arunachal Pradesh state and the
disputed Aksai Chin plateau. On this map, China also
continues to maintain its claim to most of the South
China Sea. Keeping calm may not be so easy.
India has tensions with both Pakistan and China. If
China expands its arsenal, New Delhi may follow suit,
with a knock-on effect for Pakistan.
The more irrational and unpredictable actors include
North Korea. Pyongyang’s provocative missile tests are
commonplace. South Korea and others have been
compelled to ramp up their defensive and offensive
capabilities to counter this.
Iran is, of course, progressing ever closer to nuclear
power status. Its rapprochement with key actors like
Saudi Arabia could act as a brake and the reduction
in tensions is welcome, yet who is convinced this will
last?
New technologies also pose a threat. Could cyber
weapons be deployed to take down an entire state
infrastructure? How will artificial intelligence impact
military doctrines and decision-making? Will
hypersonic missiles render defensive systems obsolete?
What about space weapons?
Major powers are wary of any alterations to the
balance of power and threat that could weaken their
response capabilities. Mutual assured destruction, the
doctrine credited with staving off nuclear conflict
during the Cold War, is dependent on the confidence
of all nuclear-armed parties in their second-strike
options. Strategic stability is dependent on all sides
knowing there is no benefit to a first-strike option.
One would hope that increased tensions will energize
a renewed commitment to arms control mechanisms.
However, the opposite is happening, as the global
architecture is crumbling away. In the European
theater, the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in
Europe, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty
and the Treaty on Open Skies have all collapsed, with
European powers and the US blaming Russian
violations.
Most of these agreements were, in any event, not
applicable to a non-bipolar world. We are now closer
to a tripolar setup. Russia and the US may no longer
be prepared to limit their arsenals to 5,000 to 6,000
weapons. China is no longer willing to have a minimal
deterrent of a few hundred nuclear weapons, as in the
past. The US believes China will possess about 1,500
warheads by 2035, but at what point will Beijing
decide it has enough? Some in the US believe that the
only response should be that America has to maintain
parity in terms of the number of warheads with China
and Russia combined.
Proliferation also poses a danger in that it could
facilitate nonstate actors in acquiring ever more
powerful weapons. One of the fears following the
chemical weapons attack in Douma was that
extremists would be successful in their zealous quest
to steal such weapons from the Syrian regime’s
arsenal. Who knows if instability in Pakistan or
perhaps in North Korea could risk materials, even
weapons, falling into other hands?
None of this is helped by the inertia at the UN
Security Council. In theory, the major powers all agree
that arms control matters, but they have wildly
diverging positions on what this means. The Ukraine
crisis has shredded any sense of shared decision-
making in the global interest. The US and China are
going through the motions of dialing down the
temperature with mixed success. Confidence-building
measures are a minimum requirement.
But diplomacy is the most secure, cost-effective and
reliable exit from this dangerous escalation of tensions.
At a time when the planet requires huge investments
to tackle climate change, environmental damage and
the impact of myriad conflicts, the last thing billions
of citizens want to see is trillions splurged on
unnecessary doomsday weapons nobody ever wants to
see deployed. Medium-sized, non-nuclear powers may
be the parties that can corral the big boys to bring
their dangerous toys to the table and engage in the
grown-up talks we all need. (Author: CHRIS DOYLE.
Published in Arab News on September 4, 2023)
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
As the legal battle over IIOJK continues
While hearing petitions against Jammu & Kashmir
Reorganization Act, the Indian Supreme Court asked
state authorities to respond if there was a timeline to
convert the occupied Kashmir from a union territory
to a state. Earlier, the top court had admitted
petitions challenging the revocation of articles 370
and 35-A that granted special status to the occupied
territory. Thus continues what is going to be a long
legal battle to take the case of Indian Illegally
Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (IIOJK) to its logical
conclusion.
A five-judge bench that has been hearing the petitions
for two weeks observed on August 30 that the
reorganization of the state was not “one of a kind” as
was pointed out by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
That bench, headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud
and including Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv
Khanna, BR Gavai and Surya Kant, noted that the
case of J&K bifurcation is no different from those of
other Indian states that have experienced the same.
The Chief Justice disagreed with the Solicitor General
who argued that the case of J&K is different because
the region shares border with two countries, and
mentioned that Punjab and Northeast also share
borders with foreign countries and can be equated
with J&K. Yet, the Chief Justice in the August 30
hearing took note of how matters of national security
may be critical in case of J&K.
The crisis that plunged the Indo-Pak relations into
another phase of degeneration was triggered on
August 5, 2019 when the Indian parliament ended the
special status of J&K and declared it — as well as
Ladakh — union territories to be governed directly by
New Delhi. After getting approval from the parliament
by a two-thirds majority, the reorganization bill was
signed by the president to become part of the Indian
constitution. Illegality was reflected in that bill
because according to article 370 of the Indian
constitution any change in the status of J&K had to
be approved by the Constituent Assembly of the state
which was non-functional at that time.
The Solicitor General tried to sidetrack the ground
realities in J&K while giving arguments before the
five-member bench by stating, “If Gujarat, or Madhya
Pradesh, was to be bifurcated, the parameters would
be different. But when [the same has to happen to]
Jammu and Kashmir; considering its strategic
importance, border state, history of terrorism, history
of infiltration, history of outside influence, there would
be some considerations. We share borders with at
least four countries, all of which may not be friendly
— to put it mildly.”
The Solicitor General’s strange logic was contested by
the Chief Justice, arguing that “India has many states
that share border with neighbouring countries, and
Jammu and Kashmir is no exception.” Citing the
“complex” situation of J&K in terms of national
security, the Solicitor General said, “The history also
shows how the situation in Kashmir is developing…
the deaths of civilians, the deaths of security forces,
the number of attacks, stone-pelting, the hartals,
paralyzing schools, hospitals, banks, businesses and
everything. All of these are policy considerations.
Whenever a state reorganization takes place, not only
are their policy considerations as to why but also a
blue print as to what the Center would do after the
state is reorganized. How to bring youth in
mainstream? How to employ, float schemes? There are
several considerations. We will have to start with
democratic local self-governance so people participate
in the internal institutions for their own good.”
It appears that the legal battle in the Indian Supreme
Court challenging the Jammu & Kashmir
Reorganization Act will continue but the bench is not
giving a free hand to the state arguing that the misuse
of authority and power by New Delhi in union
territories of Ladakh and J&K along with the absence
of democratic process tend to question the legitimacy
of the entire process that ended the special status of
J&K on August 5, 2019.
India’s top court is the last hope for those who are
determined not to accept the Jammu & Kashmir
Reorganization Act and want the country’s highest
legal organ to give a fair judgment which can restore
the special status of the Muslim-majority territory. To
what extent the Indian Supreme Court will give a
judgment adhering to the supremacy of law remains
to be seen. While the Solicitor General stated before
the Supreme Court that the union territory status of
J&K was not permanent, he failed to mention how
much time the Center will take to restore the J&K’s
electoral status which has been suspended for many
years. While a roadmap for the restoration of electoral
democracy in J&K is sought by the five-member
bench, the Indian state has so far given no time
framework.
The ongoing legal battle needs to be examined from
two angles.
First, legally, technically and morally, there is
justification of absorbing J&K into the Indian state by
ending the special status granted to it under the
Indian constitution. When there was no Constituent
Assembly in Srinagar at the time the J&K
Reorganization Act was passed, how can that act be
deemed legal and constitutional? According to the law,
without the approval of the Constituent Assembly of
J&K, article 370 cannot be revoked. This legal point
has been focused by the petitioners challenging the
August 5, 2019 act. New Delhi can give all sorts of
reasons — ranging from threats to national security,
terrorism and violence — to justify the imposition of
the Center’s rule in Srinagar but cannot win the legal
battle if decided on merit.
Second, in view of its illegal stance on J&K, the Modi
regime will attempt a Pulwama-type, false-flag
operation and put the blame on Pakistan in order to
make a case before Supreme Court that it needs more
time to restore the democratic process in J&K. A
Pulwama-type operation would also help the BJP in
the May 2024 general elections.
The Modi regime after holding G-20 tourism
conference Srinagar in May this year is now planning
to hold Miss World contest in J&K on December 8 so
as to give the impression to the world that all is well in
the disputed region. Can India get away with its illegal
act of August 5, 2019 by holding such events? (Author:
Dr Moonis Ahmar. Published in The Express Tribune on
September 5, 2023)
Historical injustices in Kashmir
Antonio Guterres, the Secretary General (SG) of the
United Nations tweeted on August 23, 2023, ‘All
human beings are born free and equal in dignity and
rights. As we mark the 75th anniversary of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, our worst
enemy is complacency. We must continue to make
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
human rights real in the lives of people everywhere.’
Honorable Antonio Guterres, I had written to you on
January 7, 2017, upon assuming the office of the
Secretary General that the unanimity of the Security
Council is indicative of their wisdom in believing that
you are an ideal candidate with the character, vision
and talent to face the growing challenges in an ever-
expanding global community. Six years later, I still
believe that you are the right person to pave the way
to settle the complicated international conflicts like
Kashmir. It is often suggested by so-called experts of
South Asia that if people had jobs, there wouldn’t be
such turmoil and rebellion in the streets. But when
the human rights of Kashmiris are so consistently
violated that such suffering becomes the norm, world
powers seem to forget that the pain of losing one’s son
to a bullet or having the honor of one’s mother or
sister violated cannot be replaced with a job at an
electronics factory as suggested by Amit Shah, Interior
Minister of India. The cry for self-determination has
become deep and immersed in a bitterness that has
no substitute.
It is worth noting that Kashmiris’ claim to self-
determination is exceptionally strong even without the
UN’s recognition. Kashmir has been historically
independent, except in the anarchical conditions of
late 18th and the first half of 19th centuries. And also,
the territory of Kashmir is larger in size than 121
independent countries and bigger in number than 117
nations of the world. The nation of Kashmir still
remembers when Narendra Modi abrogated Article
370 & 35 A on August 5, 2019, his aim was not the
resolve the issue but to dissolve it? Then on August 8,
2019, you gave hope to 23 million Kashmiris by
articulating the principled position of the United
Nations that Kashmir issue has to be resolved under
UN Charter and applicable UN Security Council
resolutions. That signifies that the claim that Kashmir
is an integral part of India does not stand. Kashmir
has an international dimension that deserves the
attention of the U.N. and the global community.
It is important to observe that when we talk about the
international dimension of Kashmir, it is because it
has the sanctity of the UN Charter and UN Security
Council resolutions and has become a big hurdle or
obstacle in the growth and stability of both India and
Pakistan. The unresolved conflict over Kashmir
threatens the international peace and security of the
world. It is far past time for the UN to take forceful
action in order to restore peace to Kashmir. Perhaps
Pakistan amidst a polycrisis
The caretaker government has made a sensible
decision to link any possible relief in electricity bills to
the consent of the IMF in order not to jeopardize the
ongoing standby agreement.
Pakistan needs to stay under the IMF umbrella for at
least the next few years, not only to overcome its
chronic balance-of-payments challenges (dollar
shortage) and take much-needed policy and structural
reforms under IMF scrutiny but also to regain the
trust of local and international investors. This trust is
crucial to ensure both a steady flow of dollars and
prevent their hoarding or outflow. Without overcoming
the trust deficit, the value of the rupee will remain
under pressure.
As I write this piece, the dollar is trading at Rs305.50
in the interbank market, Rs330 in the open market,
and Rs345-355 in the hawala market. Despite
appreciating by Rs17 against the rupee in the last 13
invoking Article 99 ought to be recognised as an
option to consider in dealing with this problem,
because nothing else to date has worked.
Narender Modi and Dr. Jaishankar Ji know it well
that the United Nations resolutions can never become
outdated or obsolete or overtaken by events or
changed circumstances. Mere passage of time or the
flight from realities cannot alter the fact that these
resolutions remain unimplemented until today. The
passage of time cannot invalidate an enduring and
irreplaceable principle–the right of self-determination
of the people of Kashmir. If passage of time were
allowed to extinguish solemn international agreements,
then the United Nations Charter should suffer the
same fate as the resolutions on Kashmir. If non-
implementation were to render an agreement defunct,
then the Geneva Convention in twenty-first century in
many countries is in no better state than these
resolutions.
It is high time that we try to make a constructive
departure. The best point for doing so is to restore the
focus where it originally belonged and where it still
rests logically: the rights and interests of the people of
Kashmir itself. What should be the procedure for
putting the dispute on the road to a settlement? The
better way would be to ask the Secretary General of
the UN, with the concurrence of the Security Council,
to engage himself, directly or through a representative
of high international standing, in a sustained effort of
facilitation which should ensure that the position of
the people of Kashmir is fully taken into account and
aim at a settlement within a reasonable time-frame,
providing for a transitional period, if necessary, for a
calming effect. There cannot be a better agency than
the Secretary General of the United Nations himself to
mediate or facilitate between the parties concerned.
Secretary General has no ambition to assert
dominance while as great powers do. Mediation by the
Secretary General would be free from the jealousies
and the ambitions that characterise individual
initiative. The Secretary General will have to remain
under no obligation to please any particular power or
particular set of powers or groups. Yes, there will be
resistance from India but if India is impressed with
what she would gain by a just settlement of the
Kashmir dispute, her negativity may not be
insurmountable. (Author: Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai.
Published in The Nation on August 29, 2023)
days, the interbank rate of the dollar is still far behind
the open market rate, breaching the difference
threshold that Pakistan committed with the IMF.
On the other hand, high demand for imports, negative
market sentiments, hoarding, smuggling of
greenbacks to Afghanistan, and uncertainty on
election dates are pushing up the price of dollar
against rupee in the open market. In fact, the
difference between the hawala and interbank rates, as
well as open market and interbank rates, has once
again widened. This makes it unappealing for
remitters to send their remittances through official
banking channels.
Wonder why I am discussing the exchange rate in a
piece on energy prices? Please keep in mind that the
depreciation of the rupee has serious repercussions
for the electricity sector. Assuming that all other
factors, including the international oil, coal and gas
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask
Special readings for CSS 2023 (Special)/ 2024 exam by CSS Exam Desk Team
prices, remain unchanged, the current rupee
weakening would result in higher electricity bills after
two months.
This is due to two reasons: a higher fuel import bill
(reflected as fuel price adjustment every two months),
and higher capacity payment charges (which are
denominated in dollars) that the government is bound
to pay to electricity generation companies even if it
does not buy a single unit of electricity from them.
Politically motivated delays in recovering the cost of
generation of electricity during the last 16 years
resulted in accumulation of energy circular debt (ECD),
which, along with transmission and distribution
losses and cross-subsidies on tariff, piled up to Rs2.6
trillion by June 2023. For comparison, the ECD is one
and a half times higher than Pakistan’s current year’s
defense budget. An attempt to contain ECD in FY24 at
the Rs2.6 trillion level means full recovery of all costs
from consumers during the current financial year. The
result was exceptionally high electricity bills in August,
which will further inflate as the rupee depreciates
further.
We should also remember that it is not only the fuel
and transmission-distribution costs that are pinching
the consumers. A major chunk of our electricity bills
also consists of taxes and surcharges on those taxes,
which every consumer, regardless of his/her income
(and in some cases electricity consumption level), has
to pay to meet the government’s growing revenue
requirement.
Before discussing why the government uses electricity
bills for the generation of revenue, let us continue
with the impact of the depreciated rupee.
The depreciated rupee also increases the domestic
prices of petrol and diesel. The current rise in fuel
prices will result in another round of inflation and
likely another round of public discontent.
The textbook way of curbing inflation is to increase
the interest rate. However, high interest rates not only
adversely affect businesses and export
competitiveness but also increase the government's
domestic debt servicing cost, requiring additional
revenue. Due to chronic failure to generate revenue
through direct taxation, the government ends up
relying on indirect taxation. Electricity bills are one
such tool for collecting indirect taxes and that is why
successive governments are tempted to keep adding
taxes to them.
Amidst this vicious cycle where one economic problem
leads to another, the pressure on caretakers will
mount to provide relief, especially on energy costs.
However, in the current fiscal framework, they have
no cushion to provide such relief. To address the
growing discomfort among consumers, the caretaker
government should try to redesign the fiscal
framework. It needs to enhance revenue mobilization
and reduce its expenditure. Additional revenue can be
mobilized by bringing the ‘taxable untouchables’, both
elite individuals and pampered sectors of the economy,
into the tax net. Everyone knows who they are and
why – due to different political-economy
considerations, successive governments failed to tax
them.
On expenditure reduction: besides many symbolic
austerity measures, one of the ways to reduce
expenditures is to privatize the loss-making public-
sector enterprises (including electricity distribution
companies). The caretaker government must kickstart
the process of privatization of such units. However,
the time is too short for them to successfully complete
any privatization deal. The quickest way to reduce
expenditures is to slash ‘politically motivated’ brick-
and-mortar projects from federal and provincial
development plans. If the amount spent on proposed
relief in the energy sector is offset by a reduction in
PSDP, then the IMF may not object.
A cushion for such relief can also be created by
reducing the unit cost of electricity by reducing the
chronic inefficiencies, power theft, and misuse of
entitlements in the power system.
To contain the depreciation of the rupee, the
government would have to improve the inflow of
dollars. The two major sources of dollar inflow,
exports and remittances, are declining and must be
improved. However, in the short run, caretakers
should focus on securing some of the $9 billion
Geneva pledges for the 2022 floods. Those pledges
could not be materialized during the last fiscal year as
the IMF’s support for Pakistan remained suspended in
that period.
Now that Pakistan is back in the Fund’s programme,
access to those pledges depends on the preparation of
tangible and concrete projects for flood rehabilitation
and disaster preparedness. The best way to do it is
through a cabinet committee and inter-ministerial
coordination mechanism to prepare some convincing
projects for the Asian Development Bank, World Bank,
and Islamic Development Bank.
I can foresee some high-level visitors coming to
Pakistan in mid-September before or after the G-20
meeting in Delhi. Such visits would help boost the
market’s sentiments. However, a strong follow-up is
required to capitalize upon the bilateral consensus
achieved during such visits. Clarity on the expected
length of the present caretaker setup and the general
elections’ timeline is a prerequisite for such follow-up.
In the meantime, the caretakers should act swiftly
and decisively to break the vicious cycle of economic
and energy crises and pave the way for sustainable
recovery. (Author: Dr Abid Qaiyum Suleri. Published in
The News International on September 3, 2023)
www.CSSExamDesk.com
Compiled and Edited by Aamir Mahr | CSS Exam Dask