<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" version="2.0"><channel>
                        <title>Politics | Political News, Videos and Analysis | eTribune</title>
                        <atom:link href="https://tribune.com.pk" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
                        <link>https://tribune.com.pk</link>
                        <description>politics</description>
                        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 26 03:56:12 +0500</lastBuildDate>
                        <language>en-US</language>
                        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
                        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
                        <generator>https://laravel.com/</generator><item>
			<title>Old fault lines of the new law</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2595130/old-fault-lines-of-the-new-law</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2595130/old-fault-lines-of-the-new-law#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 26 21:37:44 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ahsan Jehangir Khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2595130</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The existence of teeth within a statute does not guarantee a willingness to bite]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Whilst I am not one to doubt the competence of the legislature, it does increasingly seem that all legislation considered &ldquo;progressive&rdquo; or even vaguely first-world-esque in Pakistan is the result of international commitments rather than internal evolution. Perhaps the most glaring example remains the moratorium on the death penalty that has emerged not out of any deep domestic introspection but as a consequence of Pakistan&rsquo;s GSP+ trade status with the European Union. At other times, such legislative movement is the product of sustained pressure by non-governmental organisations. All of this is, in principle, fine. If outsourcing legislative momentum leads to legislation, then at least something moves.

But Pakistan is also an over-legislated country. Laws, rules, regulations, and statutory instruments exist in abundance. The real question then is why we almost never see these laws in practice &ndash; save for when the State is angry with you?

Start with something as basic as littering. Since the dissection of the law that follows pertains to the federal capital territory, many of the examples discussed here will be those applicable to Islamabad. The Capital Development Authority (CDA) enacted Solid Waste Management Regulations in 2023 &ndash; though versions of them existed earlier in fragmented form. Regulation 3(14) clearly states that no one within the limits of Islamabad is permitted to throw solid waste on streets or in public places. The penalties are not insignificant: fines that may extend up to 500,000 rupees and even the possibility of six months&rsquo; imprisonment for violations of the regulatory framework, including Regulation 3(14).

Yet waste remains a common sight across Islamabad. And Islamabad extends beyond the three or four sectors most readers routinely visit. There is an entire rural Islamabad that is conveniently forgotten. The point is simple: there exists a fundamental gap between law and enforcement. That gap is usually explained away through budgetary constraints, lack of employee monitoring, administrative indifference, or the ever-present lubrication of small-time bribery.

This brings us to the recently enacted Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act, 2026, applicable to the Islamabad Capital Territory. On content alone, it is a landmark piece of legislation. The definition of who may be considered an &ldquo;aggrieved person&rdquo; is expansive. It includes women, men, transgender persons, children, vulnerable persons, or any other individual &mdash; including persons with disabilities or those of old age &mdash; who are or have been in a domestic relationship with the accused and who allege having been subjected to domestic violence.

The definition of domestic violence itself is similarly extensive. It encompasses all acts of physical, psychological and sexual abuse &mdash; other than offences already defined under the Pakistan Penal Code or any other law &mdash; committed by an accused against a person within a domestic relationship, where such acts cause fear or physical or psychological harm.

More notably, the Act expressly incorporates psychological and verbal abuse within its ambit, an area long discussed socially but only inconsistently addressed legislatively. Psychological and verbal abuse is defined, in the Act, to include patterns of degrading or humiliating conduct such as obsessive jealousy and repeated invasion of privacy, insults and ridicule, threats of physical harm, threats of divorce or second marriage based on baseless allegations of insanity or infertility, false accusations impugning character, wilful or negligent abandonment, stalking, harassment, and even compelling a wife to cohabit with any person other than her husband.



On paper, therefore, the legislation attempts to move beyond a purely physical understanding of domestic violence and into the realm of dignity, psychological harm, and coercive control.

But the familiar question lingers: is this another paper-tiger statute, destined to join the long list of well-drafted but poorly implemented laws, or does it possess the institutional architecture necessary to develop real teeth? And perhaps more importantly, even if the law itself has teeth, is there a State willing to bite except in moments of selective outrage?

While those two questions will be answered in due time &mdash; and many of you will be quick to answer them for yourselves &mdash; I shall, for now, leave you at that cliffhanger and return to the Act itself.

If one momentarily suspends cynicism and engages purely with the text, the Act is not timid legislation. Its architecture is unusually interventionist for Pakistan. Protection orders, residence orders, monetary relief, custody orders &mdash; and, crucially, the power to grant all of these in the interim &mdash; place formidable tools in the hands of the courts. For our jurisdiction, these are extraordinary protective mechanisms.

It is therefore curious that when the Act existed merely as a bill introduced in the National Assembly by the Pakistan Peoples Party&rsquo;s (PPP) Sharmila Farooqi, it faced opposition from members of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam Fazl (JUI-F). Senator Atta Ur Rehman of the JUI-F suggested that the bill be referred to the Council of Islamic Ideology before being put to a vote in the upper house. Though no reasoning was offered, one can safely assume it was: the possibility that the legislation might be repugnant to the injunctions of Islam.

The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, in Article 229, provides that the President, a Governor, or a legislative house where one-fourth of its members so require, may refer to the Council of Islamic Ideology any question as to whether a proposed law is or is not repugnant to the injunctions of Islam. The constitutional threshold, therefore, is repugnancy.

The JUI-F can perhaps comment better on whether its members were unable to make that assessment themselves. To simplify matters: nothing in the present Act is repugnant to the injunctions of Islam. What, precisely, is un-Islamic about preventing violence within the home?

But the repugnancy debate has become almost ritualistic whenever legislation intrudes into the sanctified territory of the &ldquo;family&rdquo;.

And perhaps that is precisely where the discomfort lies. Domestic violence is still widely perceived &mdash; by legislators, law enforcement, and even segments of the judiciary &mdash; as a domestic matter rather than a violent one. The adjective domestic has a curious ability to neutralise the noun violence. This is where the implementation conundrum begins.

If those tasked with enforcing the law hear only the word &ldquo;domestic&rdquo; and instinctively retreat at the word &ldquo;violence&rdquo;, then the most carefully drafted statute will struggle to come alive. The first point of contact for most victims is not the court but the police station. And the police station operates on its own hierarchy of urgency. A complaint of assault within a household is often met first with attempts at calming, then with persuasion, and finally with a kind of procedural lethargy. The underlying assumption is that the parties will eventually reconcile, that scarce police resources ought not to be expended on what is perceived as a &ldquo;family matter&rdquo;.



This, of course, assumes that those same resources are deployed with extraordinary efficiency for crimes considered higher up the pecking order. An assumption that may be charitably optimistic, but that is perhaps a discussion for another day.

To the drafters&rsquo; credit, the Act appears to anticipate this institutional reluctance. Section 5 creates a direct procedural route to the Court. An aggrieved person, or any person authorised by them through a Protection Officer, may present a petition before the Family Court within whose jurisdiction the aggrieved resides or where the parties last resided together. The Court must fix the first date of hearing within seven days. Notice is to be issued within seven days. The petition is to be decided within ninety days, with adjournments recorded in writing.

Time, in other words, is not meant to be an ally of delay.

Even more significantly, a joint reading of sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 reveals a framework of interim relief that is unusually robust for Pakistani law. At any stage of proceedings, the Court may grant interim protection orders upon a prima facie showing. These may restrain further acts of violence, prohibit communication, mandate distance, require the respondent to vacate the shared household in cases of grave danger, restrain dispossession, direct the return of property or documents, and even compel police assistance in implementation.

Monetary relief provisions extend beyond symbolic compensation. Courts may order payment for loss of earnings, medical expenses, damage to property, economic abuse and maintenance, and may even direct employers or debtors to deduct sums directly from the respondent&rsquo;s salary in cases of non-compliance. Custody orders, too, may be granted at any stage, including temporary custody arrangements in the best interests of a child or in accordance with the wishes of an adult aggrieved person.

Further protection lies in the durability of these orders. Interim and protection orders remain in force until discharged and may be altered only upon recorded reasons. The legislative intent is unmistakable: speed, protection and continuity. It attempts to create a procedural scaffold capable of responding swiftly to violence within the home.

And yet &mdash; returning to the cliffhanger left earlier &mdash; the existence of teeth within a statute does not guarantee a willingness to bite.

Part of that willingness to bite problem has already been addressed as a broader societal issue. Matters of the home are still not to be made bare for all to see. To dwell at length on why domestic violence remains prevalent in Pakistan &mdash; and, in this context, within the federal capital itself &mdash; would be an exercise in stating the obvious. Even prior to this Act, penal provisions existed. Assault, hurt, criminal intimidation, wrongful confinement &mdash; none of these required fresh legislative inventions. Yet under-reporting persists. It is a consequence of entrenched social conditioning, lack of awareness, the instinct to protect family reputation, financial dependency, and the ever-present hope that matters will somehow resolve themselves behind closed doors.



If a case is fortunate enough to attain virality on social media, then perhaps someone from the ruling class &mdash; provided they have no remote connection to the alleged perpetrators &mdash; will demand action by reposting a video or placing a well-timed phone call to the relevant police officials. This is not unique to domestic violence. It is true for most crimes in the country. We are, after all, a profoundly reactionary nation. Institutional response often begins where public outrage trends.

Nevertheless, the second dimension of the &ldquo;lack of teeth&rdquo; problem lies within the architecture of the Act itself. Many of its definitions, though expansive and progressive, carry an inherent element of vagueness. That vagueness is not necessarily fatal as courts are routinely called upon to interpret and refine statutory language. However, it does leave considerable room for judicial discretion in determining how broadly or narrowly the law is to be applied.

More structurally significant is the institutional machinery the Act seeks to create.

The Protection Committee envisaged under Sections 15 to 17 is to be constituted within three months of the passage of the Act. It is to comprise representatives from family protection and rehabilitation centres, the National Commission on the Status of Women, a medical or psychosocial professional, a law officer, and a police officer not below the rank of Inspector &mdash; preferably female &mdash; alongside a designated Protection Officer who will serve as its Secretary. The Committee is tasked with informing aggrieved persons of their rights, facilitating medical treatment, assisting with relocation where necessary, aiding in the preparation of petitions, maintaining records of incidents, and coordinating with service providers.

On paper, this is a multidisciplinary response mechanism. In practice, one must ask: will this committee actually do anything?

Or will it become the latest vehicle for unlocking international donor funding &mdash; leading to a predictable cycle of conferences at five-star hotels, panel discussions with the same three-point agenda, and carefully worded resolutions issued at day&rsquo;s end? Gatherings attended by socialites, ministers, judges and consultants, all seeking to polish already impressive curricula vitae, while the lived reality of domestic violence remains stubbornly unchanged.

The Act further envisages the appointment of Protection Officers &mdash; one male and one female &mdash; to be designated within a month of the framing of rules. Their duties are extensive. They are to file applications for protection orders where desired by the aggrieved person, prepare domestic incident reports, ensure access to legal aid, maintain lists of service providers, arrange safe accommodation, facilitate medical examination, and ensure compliance with monetary relief orders. Service providers, too, are to be integrated into the framework, tasked with recording incidents, arranging shelter, facilitating medical care and providing assistance.

In theory, this is a comprehensive support structure. In practice, it raises familiar concerns.

Will these newly created positions become yet another avenue for nepotism and kinship-based appointments? Another set of government posts carrying perks, privileges, official vehicles and staff &mdash; but little accountability? We already have a police force that is often overburdened and under-motivated. The creation of parallel structures risks adding additional layers of bureaucracy without necessarily improving outcomes. There is also the uncomfortable question of integrity. What prevents these officials, like many before them, from being influenced by money, political pressure, or informal instructions to quietly bury certain cases while pursuing others with sudden zeal?

And then there is the final, often overlooked but decisive element: rules.

Every Act ultimately lives or dies by the rules framed under it. Section 24 empowers the Federal Government to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act, and the failure to frame them &mdash; or the framing of them in a skeletal, unimaginative manner &mdash; would be problematic enough. But the opposite risk also deserves mention. Overly elaborate rules that prioritise committees, secretariats, vehicles, allowances and institutional comfort over function can be just as damaging. The statute itself already provides a reasonably clear procedural roadmap: petitions lie before family courts, interim relief may be granted swiftly, timelines are prescribed, and enforcement powers exist. In other words, the procedural backbone is largely settled. What remains uncertain is whether the rules will facilitate implementation or merely create another well-funded administrative layer around it. Because in the end, regardless of how many committees, officers or service providers are notified, the Act will still operate within the same judicial ecosystem &mdash; before the same courts, the same investigative machinery, and the same structural constraints.

Thus, the difference between a living law and a decorative one often lies not in the statute itself, but in what follows after its passage.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>The year of conflicts and crises ends without resolution</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2585349/the-year-of-conflicts-and-crises-ends-without-resolution</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2585349/the-year-of-conflicts-and-crises-ends-without-resolution#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 26 23:10:29 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[HAMMAD SARFRAZ]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2585349</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Peace, climate cooperation, and respect for international law remained in short supply]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[It is the first weekend of 2026. The world wakes to a social-media post from Donald Trump, one year into his second term as president, claiming US forces have captured Venezuela&rsquo;s Nicol&aacute;s Maduro. A bold statement, delivered with the casual certainty of a post on Truth Social, it lands against a world already fraying at the edges.

Since Trump returned to the White House, the rules that once governed international power have been tested and bent. Laws meant to restrain leaders are applied selectively. Multilateral institutions struggle to assert influence. Meanwhile, wars that should have ended continue to cause death and destruction. In Gaza, a ceasefire the president called peace has collapsed repeatedly. In Ukraine, negotiations between Trump, Vladimir Putin and European capitals have yet to produce an end to the suffering that began in 2022. In Sudan, a brutal conflict continues, attracting far less international attention than its scale demands.

Accusations of war crimes hang over multiple leaders. Putin and Sudan&rsquo;s Omar al-Bashir face international warrants and are treated as outlaws by the west. While Benjamin Netanyahu faces similar charges, he recently traveled freely over Italy and Greece to meet the US president at Mar-a-Lago, apparently without consequence.

The epitaph of 2025 is written not only in conflict and broken law. The world emerged from another UN climate summit in November that failed to commit to ending fossil fuels or even outline a credible plan to phase them out. Scientists report that 2025 was the hottest year on record, marked by unprecedented heatwaves and climate disasters. While leaders continue to dither and delay, nature is taking its own course, and none of us will escape its consequences.

The year ended with no relief in sight, and 2026 opens under the same shadow of unresolved crises&mdash;conflicts that refuse to end, leaders whose actions flout law, and a climate that grows ever more volatile. Experts say optimism is scarce, and nothing suggests relief is coming anytime soon.

Alongside wars and climate disasters, human rights face mounting pressure in 2026. Governments across the world, particularly in the global south, are leaning toward authoritarianism, tightening control over dissent and undermining democratic norms.

Amid a world of such encroachments and failing norms, Kenneth Roth argues that the demand for human rights remains strong. &ldquo;People around the world continue to want their rights. No one wants to be executed or tortured, imprisoned for their political views, discriminated against, or deprived of housing, education, or healthcare. These are universal needs and desires.&rdquo;

Roth cautions, however, that the system is under pressure. Authoritarian governments&mdash;China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt&mdash;and manipulated democracies such as Turkey, Hungary, and Pakistan are testing its limits. At the same time, Trump&rsquo;s alignment with autocratic leaders reflects a broader pattern in which powerful states are emboldened to disregard democratic norms. &ldquo;Yet, as mass protests in Iran and elsewhere show, people continue to demand democracy as the most reliable safeguard for their rights.&rdquo;

Through it all, President Trump&rsquo;s administration remains the single major unknown factor for 2026. Ashok Swain, a Sweden-based expert on international politics, conflict, and climate, argues that Trump&rsquo;s election has further weakened the rules-based order by treating international norms as optional and transactional.

He adds that over the next three years, this approach is likely to reinforce a system in which power and loyalty matter more than law and consistency. Alliances, he notes, are pressured rather than strengthened -- institutions are used instrumentally, and multilateral cooperation is viewed with suspicion.

According to Swain, a professor of peace and conflict at Uppsala University, this dynamic encourages other states to follow suit, accelerating a global shift away from shared rules toward ad hoc deals, unilateral actions, and coercive diplomacy. Even when framed as strength or realism, he warns, the long-term effect is greater instability and less predictability.

Conflicts and illusion of peace

The conflict in Gaza dominated the headlines over the past twelve months. More than 71,000 Palestinians were killed during Israel&rsquo;s military assault on the Strip, which began in 2023 following a Hamas-led attack. A momentary ceasefire was announced by Trump, accompanied by a number of Middle Eastern and Western leaders. Praise from figures including Pakistan&rsquo;s Prime Minister was lavish, seemingly intended to flatter the president, but on the ground the reality remained grim: more than 400 were killed in Gaza since the ceasefire was announced in late October, and over 1,000 were injured. Independent estimates suggest Israel has violated the ceasefire more than 500 times over the past two months.

Swain warns that the war-torn Palestinian enclave is likely to enter 2026 trapped in a familiar cycle of death and destruction. He notes that ceasefires, while announced with political fanfare, often fail to alter the underlying dynamics of the conflict. &ldquo;What was presented in 2025 as a functioning ceasefire increasingly resembled a temporary pause without protection, allowing violence to continue under a different name,&rdquo; he notes. Without accountability, Swain adds, such arrangements only freeze the conflict while suffering deepens. He emphasizes that a genuine and lasting peace would require an enforced ceasefire with independent monitoring, unrestricted humanitarian access, an end to large-scale territorial control and forced displacement, and a political settlement that restores Palestinian self-determination rather than treating Palestinians as a permanent security problem. Without these measures, he cautions, reconstruction will remain a cycle of destruction and repair, with no horizon of dignity or safety.



Roth observes that Trump has provided Israel with room to carry out atrocities without accountability. &ldquo;The US president has attempted to block justice for alleged war crimes in Gaza, including by imposing sanctions on International Criminal Court prosecutors and judges.&rdquo; Yet, he emphasizes, few governments have joined Trump in opposing accountability. Most ICC members, he explains, continue to back the court, and several governments supported South Africa&rsquo;s genocide case against Israel before the International Court of Justice. &ldquo;Strong condemnations have also come from the UN General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Council, though the UN Security Council has been blocked by the US veto.&rdquo;

According to Roth, the broader global system remains resilient, as the vast majority of states continue to uphold norms, pursue accountability, and resist unilateral obstruction. That resilience appeared to be on display after Trump&rsquo;s recent claim of attacking Caracas and taking Venezuela&rsquo;s president into custody. Even a close ally such as the UK felt compelled to publicly distance itself, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer clarifying that Britain had no involvement in the operation.

When asked whether global responses, or inaction, have exposed the fragility of international law, Roth acknowledges that longstanding exceptions remain. He points to Israeli repression&mdash;its military actions in Gaza, apartheid policies across the occupied territories, and systematic repression of Palestinians&mdash;as a striking example where Western claims of promoting human rights have always been selective. At the same time, he notes, double standards persist elsewhere. &ldquo;The European Union, for instance, largely overlooks severe repression in Egypt under President Sisi, motivated by his cooperation on migration control.&rdquo;

In Gaza specifically, the former HRW executive director points out that the problem is not the ceasefire itself. Temporary pauses in fighting can be a necessary step toward a lasting peace, he notes. The real question is what comes after the ceasefire. &ldquo;Trump&rsquo;s abandoned vision for a &ldquo;Gaza Riviera&rdquo;&mdash;a Gaza without Palestinians&mdash;has been replaced with promises of reconstruction. Yet, other governments remain hesitant to contribute troops for stabilization or fund rebuilding efforts while the occupation continues. They insist on a pathway toward Palestinian statehood, a demand Israel refuses to meet.&rdquo; Roth points out that this creates a tension: &ldquo;although Trump&rsquo;s peace plan references Palestinian self-determination, it is unclear whether he will apply sufficient pressure on Israel to turn those words into action.&rdquo;

Elsewhere, the picture is no less complicated. In Ukraine, now approaching its fourth year of conflict, Trump&rsquo;s approach has whiplashed traditional alliances, favoring a more conciliatory stance toward Vladimir Putin, who had been treated as a pariah by previous US administrations. The former HRW executive director notes that Trump initially sought to push Ukraine into accepting Putin&rsquo;s maximalist demands&mdash;a move that would have left its democracy highly vulnerable to further Russian aggression. The former HRW executive director notes that the US president has not yet enforced the &ldquo;severe consequences&rdquo; he had promised for Russian intransigence.

In Sudan and eastern Congo, according to Roth, Trump was initially reluctant to publicly name the main perpetrators. &ldquo;Only recently has his administration acknowledged Rwanda as the invading force in eastern Congo, and it continues to allude to&mdash;without explicitly naming&mdash;the United Arab Emirates&rsquo; role in arming Sudan&rsquo;s genocidal Rapid Support Forces.&rdquo; The former HRW executive director points out that these conflicts will not end without sustained international pressure on both Rwanda and the UAE.

The erosion and selective application of international law adds another layer to the crisis, Swain explains. The Sweden-based expert points out that inconsistent enforcement will make resolving ongoing conflicts even harder. When violations of international law continue unchecked and Western governments shield allies like Israel from consequences, he notes, the legal order does not collapse suddenly&mdash;it erodes quietly through hypocrisy. Law increasingly appears as a tool applied to adversaries while close partners enjoy exceptions. Swain warns that this encourages other states to ignore rulings they dislike, weakens international institutions, and reduces human rights to rhetoric rather than obligation. He emphasizes that reversing this trajectory will require consistent enforcement of the law, including against allies, with real consequences tied to arms transfers, sanctions, and diplomatic relations.



Sudan, the academic adds, illustrates the consequences of selective international attention. As the conflict dragged through 2025 with minimal sustained focus, mass displacement, famine, and systematic violence became normalized. By 2026, Swain warns, this neglect risks locking Sudan into prolonged state collapse with serious regional repercussions. He points out that the global rights-based order has developed a reputation for selective empathy, where outrage depends less on the scale of suffering and more on geopolitical interest and media visibility. Such selectivity, he argues, sends a dangerous signal: some lives appear to matter less than others, and extreme violence can continue with impunity when it occurs outside the spotlight.

The climate conundrum

The global environmental crisis accelerated sharply in 2025, with no shortage of climate-related tragedies and human suffering. Extreme weather events struck with alarming intensity, from deadly typhoons in the Philippines and Indonesia to devastating floods and heatwaves across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Mexico. Record-breaking rainfall triggered landslides and mass displacements, while prolonged droughts worsened water scarcity and agricultural losses. Scientists confirmed that 2025 was the hottest year on record, breaking previous temperature highs and intensifying disasters tied to climate and ecological disruption. The relentless impact of human-driven emissions and environmental degradation has made it clear that nature&rsquo;s wrath is impartial&mdash;no region, rich or poor, is immune.

Despite mounting evidence, global climate and environmental diplomacy once again fell short. The UN climate conference in Brazil toward the end of the year offered little more than lip service. Negotiations on emissions reductions, fossil fuel phase-outs, and broader environmental safeguards remained stuck in rhetoric, with delegates struggling to achieve meaningful commitments. Current trajectories suggest the world could exceed 2&deg;C of warming between 2030 and 2050, with cascading consequences: severe food insecurity, intensified natural disasters, displacement, and threats to human survival and social stability.

Swain, who has recently authored a book on climate and conflict, points out that the summit failed to match the scale of the crisis. He notes that it &ldquo;offered incremental progress while avoiding hard decisions on fossil fuels.&rdquo; The Sweden-based expert cautions that the world is heading toward more extreme heat, floods, food insecurity, and climate-driven displacement, yet environmental crises continue to be treated politically as future problems rather than urgent realities. He adds that one of the greatest dangers lies not only in rising temperatures but in the political response: securitized borders, abandonment of vulnerable populations, and authoritarian measures justified in the name of stability.

For Swain, what will determine whether 2026 marks a turning point is decisive action rather than new promises. &ldquo;Rapid fossil fuel reduction, massive investment in clean energy and adaptation, real climate finance delivered now, and a just transition that protects livelihoods&mdash;these are the measures that can align policy with reality. Without them, climate and environmental responses will continue to lag behind the urgency of the crisis, with profound consequences for humanity,&rdquo; he concludes.

Neglect, trends, and looking ahead

While headlines often focused on conflicts and crises, several of last year&rsquo;s most consequential human rights violations, Roth points out, went largely unnoticed.

&ldquo;In Africa, the UAE-backed Rapid Support Forces continue to carry out out a genocide in Sudan, while the Rwandan-supported M23 inflicted slaughter and sexual violence in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Beyond the continent, China&rsquo;s systematic persecution of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang continued unabated.&rdquo; These atrocities, Roth notes, expose the depth of human suffering that too often escapes sustained international attention.

The former HRW executive director stresses that last year was less a rupture in the global order than an acceleration of existing trends. While violations were widespread, they were widely condemned, and some steps toward accountability were taken. &ldquo;When there is crime on the street, we don&rsquo;t call it the end of criminal law unless the crime is officially authorized,&rdquo; he observes. &ldquo;The same principle applies to human rights: abuses were never legitimized, but the year reinforced the urgent need to strengthen global pressure on those responsible.&rdquo;

For the months to come, Roth warns that media coverage alone is insufficient. Crises in Gaza, Ukraine, and increasingly Sudan are known to the world, but the crucial task is sustained pressure on the perpetrators&mdash;Israel, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates&mdash;to halt their atrocities. Some progress has begun, he notes, but the year ahead demands an intensification of international commitments, ensuring that the most abusive governments are compelled to curb their actions. &ldquo;Without decisive enforcement, human rights risks remaining a principle rather than a practice, perpetually vulnerable to impunity and selective attention,&rdquo; he concludes.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>L'Oreal deepens its scented empire</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2573324/loreal-deepens-its-scented-empire</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2573324/loreal-deepens-its-scented-empire#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 25 19:59:45 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Paris]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2573324</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[L'Oreal deepens its scented empire]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Paris

The fashion and beauty industries are poised for a shake-up after luxury group Kering agreed to sell its beauty business to French cosmetics giant L&#39;Or&eacute;al for 4 billion ($4.66 billion) &ndash; the biggest acquisition in L&#39;Or&eacute;al&#39;s history.

This also marks a strategic retreat by Kering, which is seeking to cut debt and refocus on its core fashion labels. The sale includes the prestigious perfume house Creed and long-term fragrance and beauty licences for Kering&#39;s fashion brands, including Bottega Veneta and Balenciaga.

It will also give L&#39;Or&eacute;al rights to the Gucci fragrance line once Kering&#39;s current licensing deal with Coty ends in 2028. For L&#39;Or&eacute;al, which already handles Yves Saint Laurent perfumes, the acquisition deepens its hold over luxury fragrance, a segment now outpacing other beauty categories in growth.

For Kering, owner of Gucci, Saint Laurent and Balenciaga, the sale is both a concession and a correction. The company launched its beauty division only last year under former CEO Fran&ccedil;ois-Henri Pinault, following the 3.5 billion purchase of Creed.

But despite the investment, the business failed to take off, reporting a 60 million operating loss in the first half of this year. With Gucci&#39;s sales plunging 25% amid slowing Chinese demand, the new chief executive, Luca de Meo, moved quickly to streamline operations and reduce Kering&#39;s 9.5 billion debt.

Analysts have called the sale &quot;bitter but necessary medicine.&quot; It marks the first major move by De Meo since taking charge in September, signalling a decisive shift away from the beauty ambitions of his predecessor.

For L&#39;Or&eacute;al, the timing could not be better. The group&#39;s luxury division has been expanding rapidly, driven by strong demand for high-end perfumes. Experts say L&#39;Or&eacute;al&#39;s scale, marketing reach, and beauty expertise could finally give brands like Balenciaga and Bottega Veneta the visibility they lacked in cosmetics.

As Kering retrenches to stabilise its finances, L&#39;Or&eacute;al emerges stronger - a rare winner in a luxury market facing uneven recovery. The deal underscores how the worlds of fashion and beauty are once again converging, but this time, L&#39;Or&eacute;al clearly holds the mirror.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Aleema Khan condemns violence against journalists by PTI workers</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2565818/aleema-khan-condemns-violence-against-journalists-by-pti-workers</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2565818/aleema-khan-condemns-violence-against-journalists-by-pti-workers#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 25 10:02:40 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Our Correspondent]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2565818</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[On questions about properties in US, says a journalist's job is to report with evidence]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Aleema Khan strongly condemned the violence against journalists, speaking to the media near Adiala road, Dahgal Naka, Rawalpindi.

She accused certain elements of intentionally provoking and escalating the situation. &quot;When someone is sent intentionally, that is not journalism,&quot; she added, &quot;It was done on purpose to incite people.&quot;

Read: Journalist assaulted outside Adiala after Aleema query

Aleema Khan defended her business interests against allegations, challenging critics to provide evidence. &quot;It is a journalist&#39;s job; if they have proof, they should bring it forward,&quot; she stated, &quot;I am saying my property is from my rightful, lawfully-earned money.&quot;

She dismissed the allegations that the egg-throwing incident was staged. &quot;If I had an egg thrown at me on my own orders, then why did the police take those two women away to protect them?&quot;

&quot;If my sons had come,&quot; she claimed, &quot;they would also have been charged with terrorism. That is exactly why we came here alone today.&quot;

&quot;Whatever Naeem Panjutha did&quot;, she added, &quot;ask Naeem Panjutha&quot;.

Read more: PTI workers not egg-cited to see Aleema Khan

Earlier on Monday, a journalist was assaulted outside Adiala Jail after he posed a question to Aleema Khan, sister of PTI founder Imran Khan, about her alleged properties in the United States.

Police have registered a case against Khan, PTI lawmaker Tanveer Aslam, Bushra Bibi&#39;s focal person Naeem Panjutha and 40 unidentified workers for their alleged involvement.

According to the FIR lodged on the complaint of journalist Tayyab Baloch, the incident occurred following the hearing of the Toshakhana-II case.

Baloch stated that he was present outside the Adiala Jail gate with other media representatives when Aleema Khan began a media talk.

During the interaction, Panjutha allegedly shouted, &quot;Teach him a lesson for questioning Aleema Khan&quot;.

The complaint said that PTI MPA Tanveer Aslam, along with party workers identified as Azfar and Tuma, grabbed Baloch, threw him to the ground, and subjected him to severe violence.

Around 40 other workers, including Intesar Satti, also joined in, according to the FIR.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Prophecy, politics &amp; the poetic imagination</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2561722/prophecy-politics-the-poetic-imagination</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2561722/prophecy-politics-the-poetic-imagination#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 25 08:16:18 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Dr Aftab Husain]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2561722</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Humans crave order &amp; meaning in face of chaos. Waiting for a saviour turns hope into a tool of control]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[To wait for a saviour is to inhabit a paradox &mdash; where passivity masks longing, and hope suspends time. This condition resists easy categorisation: it is neither purely mystical nor wholly political, neither na&iuml;ve faith nor mere deferral. At its core lies a fundamental tension between the unbearable present and an imagined horizon &mdash; one that promises not just change, but transformation. This horizon may be divine or secular, collective or intimate, abstract or vividly embodied. The figure awaited may never arrive; yet the act of waiting continues to shape our dreams, define our silences, and haunt the thresholds of our becoming.

Walter Benjamin reminds us that &ldquo;the Messiah comes not only as the redeemer, he comes as the subduer of Antichrist.&rdquo; This duality &mdash; redeemer and destroyer &mdash; reveals the messianic figure as not just a bearer of peace, but a force of historical rupture. Benjamin further warns that even &ldquo;the dead will not be safe from the enemy if he wins,&rdquo; insisting that the task of hope is as much about redeeming the past as anticipating the future. Franz Kafka, with his paradoxical clarity, wrote: &ldquo;The Messiah will come only when he is no longer necessary... on the very last day.&rdquo; This deferral of arrival mirrors the way hope often remains just beyond reach. Yet Ernst Bloch distinguished between false hope that enervates and &ldquo;concretely genuine hope&rdquo; that fortifies the soul. And perhaps Che Guevara captured the ethical charge of such hope in its most radical form when he exhorted: &ldquo;Be realistic, demand the impossible!&rdquo;

Such waiting, then, is not a singular or static experience &mdash; it emerges from a web of human needs, histories, and narratives. Beneath its various forms lies a layered architecture of emotion, ideology, and belief. These dimensions may differ in their source or articulation, but they are all animated by the same inner ache: the yearning for another presence to enter the scene of absence, to alter the course of what seems unchangeable.

Psychological and existential need

Humans crave order, redemption, and meaning, especially in the face of suffering or chaos. Waiting for a saviour externalises hope &mdash; placing the burden of resolution onto another imagined presence. This impulse reflects a profound existential tension: the yearning to be rescued versus the terror of being ultimately alone and responsible for one&rsquo;s salvation. The longing for an external saviour becomes a proxy for confronting internal fragmentation. It is not merely romanticism but an ontological hunger &mdash; a need deeply embedded in the very condition of being human.

Political and social function

Waiting for a redeemer often becomes a tool of ideology or control. It urges inaction in the face of injustice, whispering that change is always on the horizon but never in the moment. Political regimes and institutions have long exploited this impulse, urging citizens to wait for the revolution, the leader, the next election. The narrative of an impending saviour becomes a method of deferral &mdash; pushing justice, reform, or transformation into a nebulous future.

However, this same waiting can also mobilise resistance. The image of a coming change sustains hope, fortifies solidarity, and keeps oppressed communities enduring through pain. In some cases, the figure of the awaited one functions like a placeholder for collective will, anchoring revolutionary imagination. Thus, the messianic becomes double-edged: it can be opium that dulls or oxygen that sustains, depending on how it is interpreted and held.

Religious and mythic archetype

The awaited one emerges as a mythic constant across cultures and epochs. From Christ to the Mahdi, Maitreya to Kalki, traditions everywhere are haunted by the promise of a final redeemer. According to thinkers like Carl Jung and Mircea Eliade, such figures are not merely religious inventions but archetypes &mdash; expressions of the psyche&rsquo;s deep longing for order, justice, and transcendence.

These messianic narratives are not passive fantasies. They are containers for moral and metaphysical longing &mdash; stories of balance restored, injustice defeated, harmony regained. In this sense, waiting becomes not inaction but ritualised hope. It is an embodied narrative structure, enacted in prayer, poetry, and political imagination alike.

Romanticism, yes &mdash; but in the Classical Sense

In the classical Romantic tradition, the act of waiting gains its own value. Romanticism privileged longing over fulfilment, the sublime over the rational, the journey over the destination. In this sense, waiting itself becomes meaningful &mdash; not merely as a means to an end, but as a state of heightened consciousness.

To wait is to be fully present in one&rsquo;s yearning, to recognise the sacred in incompletion. The awaited one becomes less a solution and more a mirror, reflecting our deepest desires. Thus, the romanticism of the awaited figure is not na&iuml;ve, but tragic-hopeful &mdash; a mode of enduring and meaning-making.

Modern critique

Modern philosophers and activists have mounted serious critiques of the saviour complex. Figures like Frantz Fanon, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Angela Davis have warned against waiting as a form of disempowerment. The mantra &ldquo;we are the ones we&rsquo;ve been waiting for&rdquo; rejects the deferral of agency, insisting that change must emerge from the collective self, not an external redeemer.

Derrida&rsquo;s concept of &ldquo;the messianic without a messiah&rdquo; captures this shift. It speaks to a radical openness toward the future &mdash; an ethical readiness to be transformed &mdash; without clinging to the image of a specific saviour. Here, the figure of the awaited one dissolves, but the impulse toward justice and change remains.

The Awaited One in literature

Literature has long been the hearth where mythic and philosophical flames burn together, where private longing and public history meet in the form of image, rhythm, and paradox. The figure of the awaited one &mdash; at once eschatological and existential &mdash; finds one of its most poignant and challenging expressions in the work of two poets: Forugh Farrokhzad and Jaun Elia. While earlier thinkers and poets such as Iqbal imagined the awaited one as a moral and spiritual imperative, Farrokhzad and Elia place the figure under the sharp lens of modern disillusionment, forging from their distinct poetics two radically divergent critiques of messianic hope.

In Farrokhzad&rsquo;s poem &quot;Someone Who Is Not Like Anyone&quot; (kasi keh mesl-e hichkas nist), the awaited one is neither divine nor doctrinal. She frames her entire vision through the innocent but knowing eyes of a child. This child does not wait for a Mahdi or a Christ but for a figure of intimacy, dignity, and quiet transformation. The poem lists what this awaited one is not: he is not like the father, not like Yahya, not like the mother. In this series of negations, Farrokhzad destabilises traditional relational archetypes, refusing inherited roles.

Yet what emerges is not absence but potential &mdash; the awaited one, the poem insists, can do things no one else does. He can read hard words. He can subtract a thousand from twenty million. He can buy things on credit. He can distribute Pepsi and hospital numbers. These banal gestures shimmer with the poet&rsquo;s genius: Farrokhzad displaces the messianic from the heavens to the street corner. The awaited one is neither supernatural nor victorious &mdash; he is the one who understands systems, who has access, who can navigate bureaucracies and basic needs.

The tone here is revolutionary in its restraint. There is no thunderclap of prophecy, no eschaton; instead, there is gentle insistence. Farrokhzad&rsquo;s saviour is made from the materials of this world. The child&rsquo;s imagination is not na&iuml;ve &mdash; it is fiercely precise. Farrokhzad&rsquo;s awaited one is, in essence, a dream of dignity reconstituted in the aftermath of social trauma. He is an ethical figure who has no miracle to perform other than restoring fractured dailiness. The poem, therefore, becomes a quiet theological coup: Farrokhzad trades metaphysics for material justice, but retains the sacred tone of longing.

Thus, Farrokhzad transforms absence into ethical imagination. Her awaited one may never arrive in a grand sense, but she dreams nonetheless &mdash; and through that dreaming, constructs a world worth saving. The tone is tender yet defiant, childlike yet visionary. She rejects messianic spectacle, but not the right to hope.

If Farrokhzad&rsquo;s voice is the quiet reimagining of presence, Jaun Elia&rsquo;s is the sardonic dirge for presence itself. In one of his most philosophically charged couplets, Elia writes:

Woh jo na āne wālā hai nā, us se mujh ko mat̤lab thā / Āne wāloṅ se kyā mat̤lab &mdash; āte haiṅ, āte hoṅge (That one who is not going to come &mdash; it was he that I cared about. / What do I have to do with those who come? They come; they will come.)

This line encapsulates Elia&rsquo;s radical anti-messianism. The saviour is meaningful precisely because he is absent. The act of waiting becomes, in Elia&rsquo;s hands, a psychological theatre of deferral &mdash; not because we believe in arrival, but because we need the illusion. The poet exposes a deep truth of the human condition: we attach value to what remains just out of reach. Arrival is banal; it closes the loop. Non-arrival sustains the myth, nourishes desire, and preserves the sublime distance between hope and its object.

Unlike Farrokhzad, whose tone holds pain and possibility in a kind of luminous suspension, Elia&rsquo;s tone is irreverent, ironic, and often cruel. His awaited one is a spectre &mdash; conjured not from belief, but from absence. There is no tenderness, only razor-sharp scepticism. Where Farrokhzad seeks to repair the world through re-imagined hope, Elia seeks to unmask it &mdash; to show that our longing for salvation is often a refusal to face the emptiness of the present.

This is not to say that Elia lacks emotion &mdash; on the contrary, his poetry is saturated with loss, disillusionment, and intellectual despair. But he never gives this despair the crutch of transcendence. His awaited one never comes &mdash; and this non-arrival is not a disappointment, but a metaphysical condition. Elia&rsquo;s messianic is an infinite postponement, a paradoxical affirmation of futility that becomes, strangely, a form of honesty.

Comparative reflection: two poetics of longing

Farrokhzad and Elia dramatise two radically different responses to the collapse of traditional messianic belief. Farrokhzad channels this collapse into a new ethics of presence &mdash; where waiting is infused with care, imagination, and earthly justice. She holds onto longing not as a weakness but as a radical act of reconstruction. Her awaited one is reconfigured through secular compassion.

Elia, by contrast, does not reconstruct; he demolishes. He does not offer an alternative saviour &mdash; he questions the very grammar of salvation. His tone is that of someone who has seen too much, who refuses to lie to himself. For Elia, the saviour matters only because he never arrives. His poetry is not about deferred redemption, but about the exposure of our dependence on deferral itself.

Together, these two voices &mdash; one Persian, one Urdu; one marked by hope, the other by irony &mdash; articulate the dialectic of modern waiting. Farrokhzad lifts the ruins of theology and builds small altars of kindness. Elia sets the ruins ablaze, revealing the absurd architecture of longing. Both, in their way, preserve the sacred tension between expectation and abandonment.

The Awaited as mirror

The awaited one, as seen through these poets, is not always a divine emissary. Sometimes he is a projection of our needs, a critique of those needs. Sometimes, he is a question we refuse to answer. In Farrokhzad&rsquo;s poem, he is the soft silhouette of dignity glimpsed through the eyes of a war-scarred child. In Elia&rsquo;s, he is the absent cypher of a longing that mocks itself even as it persists.

To wait, then, is not always to believe. It can be to imagine otherwise, to bear witness, to laugh, to resist. The awaited one becomes, in the end, not a saviour from without, but a mirror held up to our most persistent human condition: the hope that someone, somewhere, will make sense of it all.

And so, we wait &mdash; not for the end, but for the meaning forged in the act of waiting itself.

&nbsp;

Aftab Husain is a Pakistan-born and Austria-based poet in Urdu and English. He teaches South Asian literature and culture at Vienna University

All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author

&nbsp;

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>The day after doctrine: Russia’s nuclear dilemma &amp; the South Asian precedent</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2553206/the-day-after-doctrine-russias-nuclear-dilemma-the-south-asian-precedent</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2553206/the-day-after-doctrine-russias-nuclear-dilemma-the-south-asian-precedent#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 25 00:08:33 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Abdul Munim]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2553206</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[As thresholds dissolve and deterrence becomes theatre-specific, nuclear restraint risks becoming obsolete]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[On 3 June, the Daily Mail ran a headline that many dismissed as melodramatic, but few could ignore: &ldquo;Putin knows a nuclear revenge attack will force Ukraine&#39;s surrender. These are the four ways he&#39;d strike... and we&#39;re powerless to stop this holocaust.&rdquo;

Quoting Col Richard Kemp, a former British commander in Afghanistan, the piece imagined multiple escalation scenarios where Russia, cornered by battlefield setbacks and deep strategic losses, might resort to tactical nuclear use. The framing may have sounded like tabloid frenzy but it struck a chord with the evolving anxiety in the West: that nuclear deterrence, as traditionally conceived, is disintegrating. That tactical nuclear use, long treated as a taboo, is now entering the realm of possibility &mdash; not by miscalculation or accident, but as a calculated tool of escalation management. That the post-Hiroshima threshold is not merely at risk but already structurally breached.

Ukraine&rsquo;s deep-strike campaign against the air leg of Russia&rsquo;s nuclear triad marks more than a tactical success; it is a doctrinal rupture. A claimed 20 per cent degradation of Russia&rsquo;s strategic long-range fleet, achieved using low-cost drones and remote-inserted assets, pierced directly into the Soviet legacy posture. This wasn&rsquo;t a battlefield blow, it was strategic. It signalled that a top-tier nuclear state has failed to protect its second-strike assets from sub-strategic encroachment. The world has sleepwalked into a new nuclear reality.

Technically, Russia&rsquo;s 2020 declared deterrence doctrine has been breached. If &ldquo;critical military infrastructure&rdquo; includes nuclear-capable bombers and their launch sites, then the threshold for retaliation was crossed. But enforcement isn&rsquo;t automatic, it&rsquo;s political. The absence of response so far can only be attributed to structural hesitation or political calibration.

Strategic restraint remains a possibility, if Moscow still calculates long-term positional gain rooted in the attritional phase of its war doctrine. More likely, however, is operational unreadiness. Few of Russia&rsquo;s tactical nuclear platforms are both survivable and deployable under current battlefield conditions.

Doctrinal hesitation seems less convincing. Had the strikes carried a NATO signature, escalation might already have occurred. But the &quot;Ukrainian&quot; label, even if nominal, offers Moscow political cover to absorb, for now.

But the SBU&rsquo;s operation revealed more than Ukrainian capability; it exposed the fragility of the triad&rsquo;s symmetry. The air leg now appears a soft, centralised, and non-survivable underbelly. If the calculus for escalation is grounded in survivability, then Russia and other nuclear nations face a strategic imbalance. Submarines and ICBMs must now carry the entire burden of escalation credibility. That shift has consequences far beyond Ukraine. It fractures the predictability of nuclear thresholds. It dissolves the assumptions underpinning INF and New START. It redefines the sub-strategic space under a nuclear horizon.

Yet, deterrence doesn&rsquo;t survive on ambiguity. It must survive impact. A tactical Russian nuclear strike &mdash; even a single sub-kiloton yield, battlefield-contained use &mdash; would not be about battlefield outcomes, but reestablishing doctrinal red lines. But the fallout would not remain in theatre. It would globalise.

For China, this would be doctrinally liberating. The American Indo-Pacific Command&rsquo;s persistent theatre-posturing &mdash; especially its simulated decapitation &ldquo;left-of-launch&rdquo; scenarios against mainland targets &mdash; already pressures Beijing to shorten its response timeline. A Russian precedent would remove the final moral hesitations. It would rationalise tactical nuclear signalling as legitimate escalation management, not taboo. Expect China to invest in regionalised, non-strategic nuclear options designed to deny US naval or ISR dominance around Taiwan &mdash; and to validate &ldquo;first countervalue, then counterforce&rdquo; as a pre-emptive logic, not a reactive one.

But the deeper detonation, however, may occur in South Asia.

India&rsquo;s doctrinal drift away from &ldquo;No First Use&rdquo; &mdash; through both ambiguity and posture &mdash; is already incentivising Chinese and Pakistani &ldquo;use-it-or-lose-it&rdquo; anxieties. India&rsquo;s alignment with Israeli precision warfare and American surgical decapitation has fostered a belief that strategic risk can be managed through deniable, calibrated strikes. But unlike Tel Aviv or Washington, New Delhi operates within a regional theatre defined by compressed warning timelines, low tolerance for ambiguity, and adversaries conditioned for reflex. This borrowed strategic grammar, when applied to a nuclear dyad like Pakistan, risks translating Western hubris into subcontinental catastrophe.

If Russia demonstrates that tactical nuclear use can be decoupled from strategic Armageddon, then Pakistan will finally possess a template to formalise the battlefield nuclear doctrine it has long reserved but never operationalised. The full logic of NASR &mdash; once a deterrent symbol, now a potential tripwire &mdash; will become active: no more a signal but a standing battlefield option. The danger is that Pakistan&rsquo;s ROEs will evolve past Riposte and into deterrence-by-interdiction. Any visible IBG buildup near the border, or persistent scavenging for sub-strategic manoeuvre space under the nuclear ceiling, may trigger a counter-concentration strike before hostilities formally begin.

Unlike Russia or China, Pakistan doesn&rsquo;t operate behind oceans or with redundancy. It operates with existential immediacy. It cannot afford to absorb. Its threshold is not calibrated in megatons, but in minutes.

The United States, meanwhile, will face a strategic reversal. For decades, it managed nuclear escalation through centralised alliance structures and deterrence hierarchies. But a likely Russian breach, especially if absorbed by the West without proportional response, would flatten that structure. It would reveal that nuclear use can be absorbed, normalised, and locally managed. That is not deterrence resilience; it is signalling failure.

The Cold War built nuclear norms through symmetry, transparency, and globalised fear. The new reality is asymmetrical, obscured, and psychologically decoupled. Escalation thresholds are being reinterpreted in regional dialects. Deterrence is being broken not in theory, but in precedent.

For the first time in history, if a nuclear strike occurs outside superpower initiation, in a contested theatre, by a major power struggling to retain parity, then Washington&rsquo;s entire nuclear architecture &mdash; based on managed escalation, centralised decision nodes, and predictability &mdash; would fracture. The gatekeeping function of American deterrence would be voided. Allies would begin to hedge. Adversaries would begin to test.

But if Russia absorbs these Ukrainian sabotage and continues the war conventionally, the implications may be deeper still.

That would confirm a precedent even more subversive than retaliation: that a nuclear power can suffer strategic degradation without escalation. That the air leg of its deterrent can be degraded, mocked, and exploited without cost. That the bluff can be called &mdash; and nothing happens.

That would rewrite the global deterrence script in real time.

In such a scenario, for China, the lesson would not be symmetrical. It would be inverse. The Taiwan scenario would evolve past porcupine defences and passive deterrence. Taipei&rsquo;s planners may assume they can strike Chinese missile bases or early-warning nodes in a prolonged attritional campaign without triggering a nuclear response. Whether true or not, that assumption itself would be destabilising. If a top-tier nuclear state can&rsquo;t protect its second-strike assets, then deterrence must be made more reflexive, more automated, more decoupled from politics.

China&rsquo;s command-and-control systems &mdash; already shifting toward dual-use ambiguity &mdash; may become hair-trigger by necessity. Meanwhile, the PLA&rsquo;s own deterrence posture will face renewed pressure. If Russia cannot secure its bombers, can China secure its rail-mobile launchers? Expect a doctrinal pivot: from posture-by-denial to posture-by-pre-emption. Thresholds will tighten, not widen. Response timelines will compress. And the pressure to demonstrate readiness, before a shot is fired, will grow exponentially.

For Pakistan, Russia&rsquo;s restraint would be a warning, not reassurance. It would reveal the limits of deterrence signalling in the face of deniable strikes. If restraint buys degradation, then restraint must be shortened. Deterrence posture would move from &ldquo;second-strike assuredness&rdquo; to &ldquo;first-strike necessity.&rdquo; Tactical nuclear use may become essential to restore credibility.

For the United States, Russia&rsquo;s non-response would appear as strategic victory &mdash; but only briefly. It would signal that nuclear impunity is now negotiable. It would not matter that NATO ISR assisted the Ukrainian operation. That detail would be strategically irrelevant. What would matter will be this: Ukraine has demonstrated that nuclear deterrence is no longer the exclusive domain of superpowers. Escalatory logic is being localised. Sub-strategic space is being democratised. That is the real rupture. The West no longer gatekeeps the escalatory script &mdash; it only reacts to it.

So, the choice is stark.

Strike and trigger the world&rsquo;s first precedent for tactical nuclear signalling in a modern battlefield, with ripple effects across every nuclear flashpoint from Kaliningrad to Kashmir. Or absorb and allow the world to infer that nuclear doctrine can be breached without consequence. That deterrence is a decaying art, not a governing science.

This choice is starker still because India and Pakistan are sleepwalking through a transformation in nuclear logic without corresponding public debate, institutional preparedness, or political mechanisms. Parliamentary oversight is absent; military wargaming remains siloed; and civilian elites continue to treat doctrine as a legacy relic, not a living architecture.

As thresholds dissolve and deterrence becomes theatre-specific, the region&rsquo;s opacity is no longer stabilising &mdash; it is actively dangerous. Without transparent review of red lines, retaliation postures, or escalation ladders, South Asia may become the world&rsquo;s first nuclear region where deterrence fails not due to intention &mdash; but inertia.

A few days ago, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio remarked: &ldquo;If it weren&#39;t for the US-Russia ties in 1961, the world could have collapsed during the Cuban Missile Crisis.&rdquo; The world learnt many lessons from those 13 days. Doctrines were developed, safeguards installed, hotlines opened.

India seems to have learned nothing from that even after 63 years. It, perhaps, cannot.

This is the country that &ldquo;accidentally&rdquo; fired a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile into Pakistan in March 2022. A Russian-engineered P-800 Oniks, rebranded as BrahMos, went off-course and landed deep inside a nuclear-armed neighbour. No heads rolled. No systems reviewed. Just a sorry scapegoating at IAF. What other nuclear power in the world could have done this without consequences?

In 2010, a Delhi university lab disposed of radioactive cobalt-60 into a scrap market. One person died. Several were injured. In 2017, a GPS malfunction sent an Agni-II nuclear-capable missile near a populated area. In 2014, a valve failure at Kakrapar threatened radiation leaks. In 1995, a coolant pipe burst at Rajasthan&rsquo;s reactor. In 2002, fuel rod mishandling at Kalpakkam spiked radiation dangerously close to local communities.

Between 1994 and 2021, there have been 18 reported cases of nuclear material theft or loss in India. Uranium on the black market. Californium in private hands. The Bhopal disaster remains the world&rsquo;s worst industrial catastrophe &mdash; and still, no full-scope IAEA oversight. No accountability. Not even regulatory autonomy. India&rsquo;s own Comptroller and Auditor General has called out the AERB&rsquo;s lack of independence.

Indian leaders routinely issue conventional threats to nuclear neighbours. It&rsquo;s a uniquely juvenile understanding of deterrence &mdash; only possible in Delhi. With immature, nuclear-sabre-rattling leadership threatening a region of 2 billion people, India&rsquo;s belligerence is no longer an internal risk. It is a regional liability &mdash; and a global one.

This is the country that the West chose to proliferate nuclear technology with. Through BECA and other agreements, the US has effectively endorsed recklessness. This is not just hypocrisy. It is strategic malpractice.

One lesson of the Cuban Missile Crisis was the visible posturing of No First Use policies to reduce escalation risks. Instead, India has embarked on a visible First Use threat, with aggressive and strategic attack platforms. Crisis stability theory, shaped by the 1962 near-catastrophe, warns that such posturing creates a preemptive incentive for Pakistan or China, heightening the risk of miscalculation in a tense region.

Pakistan and China, by contrast, continue to be recognised for nuclear responsibility. IAEA and US officials have acknowledged their command systems as stable and disciplined. No major nuclear accidents or incidents have been publicly reported at Pakistani facilities. Pakistan maintains its nuclear assets under tight security with a robust command and control structure through the Strategic Plans Division (SPD) and the National Command Authority (NCA). Pakistan has improved its regulatory framework, including joining several international treaties like the Convention on Nuclear Safety.

The world was lucky in 1962. It may not be again.

This is not a game of nerves. These are doctrines in freefall. And to the empire-builders in Taipei, Tel Aviv, and New Delhi &mdash; and their borrowed faith in absolute escalatory control &mdash; this may be a final warning: Are you prepared to be the first ideologues in history who confuse tactical advantage with thermonuclear immunity &mdash; and stake your grand civilisational myths on the hope that the other side blinks first?

&nbsp;

Abdul Munim is a freelance contributor and electrical engineer. He posts on X using the handle @Munimusing and can be reached via email at munimusing@proton.me

All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump’s war on the undocumented</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2552108/trumps-war-on-the-undocumented</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2552108/trumps-war-on-the-undocumented#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 25 08:30:28 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Hamza Rao]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2552108</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Brutal raids reopen America’s colonial wounds, redrawing who counts as human, citizen and expendable]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[It begins in the dead of night &ndash; ICE agents raiding factories, restaurants and farms, while families sleep unaware as the state flexes its full disciplinary muscle, reviving the ghosts of America&rsquo;s exclusionary past with a vengeance that is unmistakably contemporary.

What Donald Trump hails as &ldquo;the largest deportation operation in American history&rdquo; is unfolding as a dark and sweeping expansion of state machinery &ndash; an iron-fisted blend of ICE raids, sprawling detention centres and legal shortcuts dug up from the dustiest corners of America&rsquo;s statute books to shore up both physical and social borders.

Framed as the fulfilment of his campaign vows, Trump&rsquo;s vision for a &ldquo;new America&rdquo; rests on what Italian philosopher Roberto Esposito terms &lsquo;immunitas&rsquo;: the sovereign&rsquo;s feverish attempt to insulate itself from perceived contamination.

In the Trumpian worldview, the &ldquo;disposable labour&rdquo; extracted from nations long ravaged by US foreign policy is now being cast aside like a used tool &ndash; mercilessly and by design.

Even some of Trump&rsquo;s allies are starting to shift in their seats. Joe Rogan, one of his most prominent supporters, recently sounded an alarm: &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve got to be careful that we don&rsquo;t become monsters while we&rsquo;re fighting monsters.&rdquo;

However, the warnings from the populist leader&#39;s base remain steeped in the same obscene necropolitical logic that draws lines between the human and the subhuman &ndash; the &ldquo;monsters&rdquo;.

The protests now erupting across the US are not new but mark a renewed moment of convergence between immigration enforcement and a long, bloody history of racialised labour control. From the Chinese Exclusion Act to ICE&rsquo;s post-9/11 rise, the American state has always policed its borders by criminalising racialised &ldquo;others&rdquo; while exploiting their labour.

The Trump-era raids echo the worksite crackdowns of the 1980s and Obama&rsquo;s courthouse arrests. However, with 80-strong factory raids, convoys blocking roads and National Guard troops deployed without state consent, this is a new escalation.

There is no new crisis driving the ongoing assault but an old political trick: manufacture the spectacle of invasion to fuel nationalist panic and weaponise it against workers and dissent.

Across the country, working-class communities &ndash; immigrant and non-immigrant alike &ndash; have taken to the streets. From handcuffed migrants to student walkouts, from union banners to handmade placards reading &ldquo;Mi familia, no se separa,&rdquo; the resistance is multi-generational and deeply grounded.

The border wars and the street wars have converged.

For many, the raids are not just about immigration. They reject the logics of neoliberal &ldquo;security&rdquo;, challenging the premise that human life can be reduced to economic cost or to statistics in a detention ledger.

In Washington, a different story is being told. The Trump administration, flanked by DHS officials and amplified by mainstream networks, insists this is a crackdown on &ldquo;criminals&rdquo;. Protestors are dismissed as &ldquo;lawless mobs&rdquo;.

Trump, in his typical red meat rhetoric, even declared that Los Angeles had been &ldquo;invaded and occupied&rdquo; and vowed to &ldquo;liberate&rdquo; it. Attorney General Ashley Bell pledged to prosecute protestors aggressively.

However, immigrant communities, organisers and rights activists see through the smoke, contending that the real criminals are those tearing families apart to prop up a neoliberal system that depends on cheap, precarious and deportable labour.

Undocumented migrants have long formed a surplus army for US capitalism, hyper-exploitable because their fear makes them compliant.

Seen through this lens, border enforcement is a farce dressed as a national security issue. It&rsquo;s about preserving racial capitalism, disciplining people of colour and preserving profit margins. The &ldquo;rule-of-law&rdquo; narrative is thus inverted: the deeper violence lies not in protest, but in decades of war, trade policy and austerity that drive migration.

Colonial Legacies and Necropolitics

The domestic clashes cannot be understood without their global and historical context. The US border is not a neutral line. It is a colonial scar. From Indigenous dispossession to wars in Mexico and the Caribbean, the very idea of the border was forged in empire.

Migrants fleeing violence and poverty in Central America or the Caribbean are not &ldquo;invaders&rdquo;, they are survivors of systems created, in part, by US policy. Their displacement is the aftershock of coups, land grabs and extractive economics.

As protesters take to the streets with Mexican and Black flags, slogans like &ldquo;Here we stay&rdquo; invoke historical truth: these cities were built by the very people now being hunted.

Through the lens of Frantz Fanon, one sees how the immigrant becomes a &ldquo;zone of non-being&rdquo;, excluded from rights so the state can justify violence and deprived of the &lsquo;right to have all rights&rsquo;.

Fanon&rsquo;s psychology of the oppressed reveals that the migrant is demonised in discourse precisely to justify state violence. Indeed, as Fanon noted, the social order locks &ldquo;white people into whiteness, Black people into blackness&rdquo;.

The point is both theoretical and practical: immigrants exist outside the democratic community in the state&rsquo;s eyes, made &lsquo;other&rsquo; so their rights are negotiable.

Under such logic, US immigration policy embodies what Achille Mbembe has called necropolitics: the power to define who may live and who must die or suffer. Migrants in detention centres are literally at the mercy of a system designed to wear them down psychologically and physically.

Reports of children in cages, or men packed into vans with little water, reveal a state&rsquo;s willingness to inflict slow violence. One organiser reported that &ldquo;intimidation and terror&rdquo; &ndash; the kind seen in San Diego&rsquo;s restaurant raids &ndash; is now routine.

The state is not just locking people up to fight crime. It is managing poverty while disciplining surplus lives. That&rsquo;s the essence of what Lo&iuml;c Wacquant calls &lsquo;prisonfare&rsquo;. Immigration raids slot neatly into this logic: not just law enforcement, but a pipeline into the detention-industrial complex.

While the discourse on criminal justice reform grows louder, migrants remain outside its moral perimeter &ndash; detained without charges, deported without explanation, excluded from rights others are beginning to reclaim.

&nbsp;

By the Numbers

Trump&rsquo;s ambition is staggering: one million deportations in his first year. The US currently houses around 13 million undocumented immigrants&mdash;roughly 4% of its population. Nearly 80% have lived in the US for over a decade, many with US-born children. In 2022, undocumented immigrants contributed $69 billion in taxes.

And yet, they are being targeted en masse. ICE has just 6,000 officers, but Trump has expanded its powers, enlisted other federal agencies like the IRS, and reopened detention facilities. He has even floated reactivating Alcatraz.

Legal protections are being stripped. Trump has fired immigration judges, expanded expedited removals and invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelans without hearings.

Some were sent not to Venezuela, but to a supermax prison in El Salvador. Justifications included tattoos, nationality and assumed gang affiliation &ndash; no due process, no evidence.

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from Venezuela, Haiti and Afghanistan is also on the chopping block. Collateral arrests and raids in schools, churches, and hospitals are back.

Even programs like Project Homecoming, which offer $1,000 to &ldquo;voluntarily&rdquo; return, function as soft coercion.

One calculation found that 72,000 people were deported in Trump&rsquo;s first 98 days, roughly 737 per day, nearly double the daily average under Biden.

What remains, then, is a moral and political question: who belongs, and on what terms? If the answer depends on citizenship, productivity or compliance, then millions will remain outside the circle of rights.

In the mainstream imagination, human rights are often tethered to the sanctity of citizenship. However, as Hannah Arendt famously warned, the stateless are those who have lost the &ldquo;right to have rights&rdquo;.

If rights are contingent upon national membership, then what remains for the undocumented, the displaced, the &ldquo;others&rdquo; at the border of recognition?

What happens next is uncertain. The administration has vowed to intensify its programme of detentions and deportations. But activists report that every raid is now met with instant organising by union halls, churches and community centres.

Grassroots patrols spot ICE vehicles in advance, legal teams mobilise at courthouses and protest waves continue. Even as the White House drums up images of chaos, those on the ground insist their cause is orderly and just.

In the words of a young organiser at a Philly vigil, this is more than crisis management &ndash; it is a moment of international morality: &ldquo;We&rsquo;re fighting for the working class, for immigrants, for our freedom. We won&rsquo;t back down.&rdquo;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>The weaponised fool</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2552106/the-weaponised-fool</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2552106/the-weaponised-fool#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 25 08:24:18 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Suhaib Ayaz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2552106</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[From the US to India, the UK to Argentina, the ‘fool’, it turns out, is not a bug in modern politics. He is a feature]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Not long ago, I stumbled upon an old clip of George W Bush hosting Vladimir Putin at his Texas ranch. Bush, in his usual casual swagger, spoke in awkward metaphors, grinned too often, and seemed unable to put together a sentence without either fumbling or reaching for something vaguely Texan. &ldquo;I looked into his soul,&rdquo; he said of Putin, almost as if he were describing a horse instead of the president of a former Cold War rival. The moment felt surreal, borderline comical. But it triggered a question I haven&rsquo;t been able to shake since.

How could someone who came across as so visibly foolish rise to become the president of the most powerful nation on Earth?

At first glance, it feels like a fluke. A lucky son of a political dynasty who stumbled into the White House. But as I followed the trail, what I found was far more disturbing. Bush wasn&rsquo;t alone. And it wasn&rsquo;t just incompetence. It was a pattern. One I&rsquo;ve since come to think of as &#39;the rise of the weaponised fool.&#39;

This isn&rsquo;t about one country or party. It&rsquo;s a global phenomenon. Donald Trump in the US; Narendra Modi in India; Imran Khan in Pakistan; Boris Johnson in the UK; Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil. And now Javier Milei in Argentina. They all look and sound different. But they all rely on the same formula. Appear foolish. Speak in slogans. Bypass logic. Stir emotion. Dodge accountability. Win.

The fool, it turns out, is not a bug in modern politics. He is a feature.

Each of these leaders has embraced a carefully constructed image of being plainspoken, relatable, even laughable. They confuse, distract, and entertain. They dominate news cycles with outrageous quotes and absurd posturing. Trump suggests nuking hurricanes. Milei brings a chainsaw to rallies. Khan fumbles through basic policy questions and then claims divine inspiration. And yet, their supporters love them not despite these things, but because of them.

When I first started writing about this pattern, I thought it was just the failure of political institutions. But then I discovered the writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German theologian who was imprisoned and executed by the Nazis. In 1943, Bonhoeffer wrote something that struck me like lightning. He said, &ldquo;Against stupidity, we are defenseless.&rdquo;

Bonhoeffer wasn&rsquo;t talking about intelligence in the academic sense. He was describing a kind of moral blindness that overtakes people when they stop thinking critically and surrender to collective emotion. Stupid people, he argued, are not always unintelligent. But they are willingly passive. They let others think for them. And the most dangerous part? They believe they are being righteous.

He wrote, &ldquo;In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with him as a person, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of him.&rdquo;

That&rsquo;s when it clicked. These leaders aren&rsquo;t winning despite looking like fools. They are winning because the mask of foolishness is an effective shield. The world is far more forgiving of stupidity than of evil. If you make a monstrous decision but look like you bumbled into it, people shrug and say, &ldquo;He&rsquo;s just dumb.&rdquo; But if you look calculating and precise, you&rsquo;re a threat. In a strange way, the fool is safer than the villain.

This is how Bush was able to start two wars, let 9/11 happen on his watch, launch torture programs, and crash the global economy and still be remembered by some as a well-meaning doofus who painted dogs after retirement. His gaffes became a brand. The chaos became a distraction.

Milei is perhaps the most exaggerated version of this trend. He acts like a TV personality, makes exaggerated faces, yells about socialism like a cartoon character, and simplifies Argentina&rsquo;s economic collapse into &ldquo;the fault of the left.&rdquo; He speaks with all the nuance of a viral meme, but now sits at the top of a country in crisis. He offers no clear path, no real plan. Just volume. Just vibes.

Why is this so effective for the political right in particular? Because conservatism has always positioned itself as defending &ldquo;the common man&rdquo; against elites. So what better avatar than a leader who looks like the common man, speaks clumsily, mistrusts experts, and presents himself as a victim of the system? A leader who says, &ldquo;They&rsquo;re not laughing at me, they&rsquo;re laughing at you.&rdquo;

In this theatre of absurdity, the opposition rarely stands a chance. Because they try to argue with facts, present white papers, offer detailed policies. But you can&rsquo;t win a rap battle with a research paper. The fool doesn&rsquo;t respond to logic. He drowns it.

The media tries to fact-check, but ends up amplifying. The institutions try to prosecute, but only deepen the narrative of persecution. The public tries to resist, but often ends up confused and exhausted. In this fog of performative stupidity, real damage happens quietly, to democracy, to rights, to the rule of law.

Meanwhile, powerful players lurk in the background. Billionaires like Elon Musk, who publicly mock these leaders but privately align with them. Trump&rsquo;s trade war made no sense economically, but it handed power to American monopolies. Modi&rsquo;s populism is embraced by India&rsquo;s corporate elite. Khan&rsquo;s posturing distracted from disastrous economic management, but made great television. These leaders are not puppets. They are willing performers. But they are not pulling all the strings either.

As Bonhoeffer warned, the battle is not just political. It is moral. The danger of the weaponised fool is not in how he thinks, but in how he teaches others not to think. In a world where simplicity is power, where memes defeat reason, where loyalty replaces law, stupidity becomes a political tool. Not a condition. A strategy.

So what can we do?

First, we must name the pattern. Laughing at these men only makes them stronger. We must expose the method behind the madness.

Second, we must stop underestimating what looks like buffoonery. Beneath the chaos is calculation.

Third, we must build movements that speak to emotion without surrendering to stupidity. People want clarity. But clarity does not mean shallowness. We must learn to communicate better without dumbing things down.

Because the age of the fool is far from over.

And if we keep mistaking the mask for the man, it will be us, not them, who end up looking foolish.

&nbsp;

Suhaib Ayaz is a freelance contributor

All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Polish opposition candidate Nawrocki wins presidential vote</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2549071/polish-opposition-candidate-nawrocki-wins-presidential-vote</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2549071/polish-opposition-candidate-nawrocki-wins-presidential-vote#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 25 06:27:12 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2549071</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Poland runoff sees record 71.3% turnout, Karol Nawrocki wins with 50.9% of vote, according to the election commission]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Polish nationalist opposition candidate Karol Nawrocki won the second round of the country&#39;s presidential election with 50.89% of the votes, the electoral commission said early on Monday, in a blow to the reform agenda of the pro-European government.

His rival, Rafal Trzaskowski, the liberal Warsaw mayor and an ally of the government led by Donald Tusk, got 49.11%. An exit poll on Sunday had shown Trzaskowski winning with a razor-thin majority.

Nawrocki, 42, a eurosceptic historian who ran a national remembrance institute, campaigned on a promise to ensure economic and social policies favour Poles over other nationalities, including refugees from neighbouring Ukraine.

The amateur boxer won despite his past dominating the last days of the presidential campaign, from questions over his acquisition of a flat from a pensioner to an admission that he took part in orchestrated brawls.

While Poland&#39;s parliament holds most power, the president can veto legislation, and the vote was being watched closely in Ukraine as well as Russia, the United States and across the European Union.

Nawrocki, supported by the Law and Justice party (PiS), is expected to continue the policies of his predecessor, President Andrzej Duda, also an ally of the largest opposition party, including blocking any attempts by the government to liberalise abortion or reform the judiciary.

On social media platform X, Duda thanked Poles for going to vote in large numbers. Turnout was 71.31%, the electoral commission said, a record for the second round of a presidential election.

&quot;Thank you! For participating in the presidential elections. For the turnout. For fulfilling your civic duty. For taking responsibility for Poland. Congratulations to the winner! Stay strong Poland!&quot; Duda wrote.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Germany lifts missile limits for Ukraine after Russian strikes</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2548076/germany-lifts-missile-limits-for-ukraine-after-russian-strikes</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2548076/germany-lifts-missile-limits-for-ukraine-after-russian-strikes#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 25 07:49:59 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2548076</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Allies show growing unity after weekend attacks on civilians]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Germany and other key Western allies have lifted restrictions on Ukraine using long-range missiles to strike inside Russian territory, Chancellor Friedrich Merz confirmed on Monday, signalling a sharp shift in support for Kyiv amid an intensifying aerial campaign by Moscow.

&ldquo;There are no longer any range restrictions on weapons supplied to Ukraine,&rdquo; Merz said at a European forum in Berlin. &ldquo;Neither from the British, nor from the French, nor us. Nor by the Americans.&rdquo;

He added: &ldquo;In other words, Ukraine can now also defend itself by attacking military positions in Russia, for example.&rdquo;

The move marks the first time Ukraine has been authorised to use Western-supplied weaponry against targets inside Russia &ndash; a significant departure from the previous stance of several NATO countries.

The announcement follows a weekend of record-breaking drone and missile attacks by Russia on Ukrainian cities, killing over two dozen civilians. Ukraine has increasingly called on its allies to allow retaliatory strikes beyond its borders.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is expected to visit Berlin on Wednesday, said on Sunday that Russia&#39;s brutality would not stop without &ldquo;really strong pressure&rdquo; from the West.

Chancellor Merz, who replaced Olaf Scholz earlier this month, has taken a more assertive approach towards supporting Ukraine. While Merz had previously backed supplying Kyiv with Germany&rsquo;s long-range Taurus missiles, he did not clarify on Monday whether Berlin would now provide them.

The United States lifted its restrictions last November, with then-President Joe Biden authorising Ukraine&rsquo;s use of US-supplied ATACMS missiles inside Russian territory &ndash; a decision reached after months of internal debate.

Russia responded with stark warnings, suggesting that such decisions could provoke broader conflict with NATO. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov condemned Merz&rsquo;s remarks on Monday, calling the development &ldquo;rather dangerous&rdquo; and a threat to ongoing political settlement efforts.

Western officials, including US lawmakers, have urged increased military support for Ukraine. &ldquo;The US and allies must arm Ukraine to the teeth,&rdquo; Republican Congressman Don Bacon wrote on social media.

As pressure mounts on Moscow, US President Donald Trump has reportedly grown frustrated with Putin, calling the Russian leader &ldquo;absolutely crazy&rdquo; during remarks on Monday. However, Trump also criticised Zelensky&rsquo;s rhetoric as &ldquo;causing problems.&rdquo;

The war, now in its fourth year, continues to escalate despite intermittent calls for diplomacy. Western capitals are bracing for potential consequences as Ukraine gains broader authority to strike deeper into Russian territory.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Ukraine reports Russia’s largest drone attack since war began</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2546651/ukraine-reports-russia-launched-largest-drone-attack-of-the-war</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2546651/ukraine-reports-russia-launched-largest-drone-attack-of-the-war#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 25 07:57:36 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2546651</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Ukrainian officials said 88 drones were intercepted while another 128 veered off course without causing damage.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[One woman was killed and at least three others injured, including a four-year-old child, after Ukraine said Russia launched its largest drone attack since the start of the full-scale invasion.

The striking multiple regions overnight &mdash; just hours ahead of planned ceasefire talks between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Ukrainian officials said 88 drones were intercepted while another 128 veered off course without causing damage.

&ldquo;I could clearly hear the drone flying right towards my house,&rdquo; said Natalia Piven, 44, standing in the ruins of her family home. &ldquo;We ran to the kindergarten shelter. Our house is gone.&rdquo;

The latest assault surpassed Russia&rsquo;s previous drone strike record of 267 in February, on the third anniversary of the invasion.

Ukrainian intelligence has warned that Russia may conduct a &ldquo;training and combat&rdquo; launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile as a show of force. Moscow has not responded to the claim.

Despite international calls for a truce, Moscow shows little sign of easing its offensive. Ukraine&#39;s top presidential aide, Andriy Yermak, called recent negotiations in Istanbul &ldquo;a pretence,&rdquo; adding, &ldquo;Putin wants war.&rdquo;

On Friday, Ukraine and Russia held their first face-to-face talks in over three years. Under pressure from President Trump to agree to a ceasefire, both sides agreed to swap 1,000 prisoners each but failed to make progress toward a truce.

Ukrainian negotiators rejected Moscow&rsquo;s demands, which included halting Western arms supplies, territorial concessions, and permanent neutrality. A member of the Ukrainian delegation said the terms were &ldquo;non-starters.&rdquo;

President Zelensky said he would accept Trump&rsquo;s proposal for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russia insists no truce can be made without addressing what it calls the &ldquo;root causes&rdquo; of the war.

Trump is expected to speak with Putin. Ahead of that call, the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, and Poland will meet virtually with Trump to discuss the situation, according to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

The European leaders, who recently visited Kyiv, are pushing for tougher sanctions on Russia if no breakthrough is reached.

Asked whether new sanctions were imminent, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Meet the Press, &ldquo;President Trump has made it very clear that if President Putin does not negotiate in good faith, the United States will not hesitate to up the Russia sanctions along with our European partners.&rdquo;

The Kremlin says any lasting peace must include Ukraine abandoning its NATO ambitions, downsizing its military, and ceding disputed territories&mdash;conditions Kyiv calls unacceptable and equivalent to surrender.

Russia currently controls about 20% of Ukraine, including Crimea, annexed in 2014.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Maori MPs face suspension after Haka protest in New Zealand parliament</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2546015/maori-mps-face-suspension-after-haka-protest-in-new-zealand-parliament</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2546015/maori-mps-face-suspension-after-haka-protest-in-new-zealand-parliament#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 25 10:36:23 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2546015</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Supporters say the MPs stood firm for indigenous dignity and history]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A group of Indigenous Maori lawmakers could soon be banned from New Zealand&rsquo;s parliament after staging a haka protest against a divisive race relations bill, drawing sharp condemnation and reigniting debates over indigenous rights.

In November, 22-year-old Maori Party MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke ripped up a copy of the proposed &quot;Treaty Principles Bill&quot; during a passionate chant.

She was flanked by co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, who marched onto the chamber floor performing Ka Mate, the ceremonial haka made famous by the All Blacks rugby team.

A parliamentary committee on Wednesday evening recommended suspending Waititi and Ngarewa-Packer for three weeks, and Maipi-Clarke for seven days.

The full chamber will vote on the decision next week, where approval is widely expected.

The Maori Party called the penalties some of the harshest ever imposed in New Zealand&rsquo;s legislative history.

&ldquo;When tangata whenua resist, colonial powers reach for the maximum penalty,&rdquo; the party said in a statement, referring to the Maori term for Indigenous people. &ldquo;This is a warning shot to all of us to fall in line.&rdquo;

Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters criticised the trio, calling them &ldquo;out-of-control MPs who flout the rules and intimidate others with outrageous hakas.&rdquo;

The controversy centres on the now-defeated Treaty Principles Bill, which sought to reinterpret the Treaty of Waitangi &mdash; New Zealand&rsquo;s foundational agreement signed in 1840 between Maori chiefs and British officials.

Critics viewed the bill as an attempt to roll back hard-won rights for the country&rsquo;s 900,000 Maori citizens.

Parliament ultimately voted down the legislation last month, but the protest and its aftermath have reignited tensions over indigenous recognition, protest rights, and the boundaries of parliamentary conduct.

Maipi-Clarke, the youngest MP in New Zealand&rsquo;s parliament, has not commented publicly since the committee&rsquo;s recommendation. The Maori Party has vowed to continue resisting what it calls &quot;legislative colonisation.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump talks with Syria's al Sharaa to normalise Washington-Damascus ties</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545841/trump-talks-with-syrias-al-sharaa-to-normalise-washington-damascus-ties</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545841/trump-talks-with-syrias-al-sharaa-to-normalise-washington-damascus-ties#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 25 11:12:35 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2545841</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Trump urges al-Sharaa to deport Palestinians classified as “terrorists” and sign the Abraham Accords with Israel.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[United States President Donald Trump has announced that Washington is exploring the normalisation of ties with Damascus, following a historic meeting with Syria&rsquo;s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa &ndash; the first such encounter in over two decades.

Trump confirmed the development on Wednesday during a summit with Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) leaders in Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s capital, Riyadh.

He also said the US would be lifting all sanctions imposed on Syria.

&ldquo;With the support of the great leaders in this room, we are currently exploring normalising relations with Syria&rsquo;s new government,&rdquo; Trump said.

He described the lifting of sanctions as a &ldquo;fresh start&rdquo; for the war-ravaged nation and added that he had consulted with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan about the move.

Removing US&nbsp;sanctions that cut Syria off from the global financial system will clear the way for greater engagement by humanitarian organisations and will ease foreign investment and trade as the country rebuilds from a civil war.

The White House said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio will hold talks with Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani in T&uuml;rkiye to continue discussions on bilateral ties.

According to a White House statement, Trump urged al-Sharaa during their meeting to deport Palestinians classified as &ldquo;terrorists,&rdquo; sign the Abraham Accords with Israel, and assume responsibility for Daesh detention centres in northeast Syria.

The meeting came after months of speculation following the toppling of former President Bashar al-Assad in December during a rapid offensive by opposition fighters aligned with al-Sharaa.

Trump&rsquo;s declaration was met with applause from Arab leaders present at the summit and celebrations in several Syrian cities on Tuesday night.

Saudi Arabia&#39;s Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al-Saud told a press conference Riyadh will support Syria&#39;s economic recovery and that there are many investment opportunities in the country after sanctions are lifted.

US&nbsp;ally Israel has opposed sanctions relief for Syria and has escalated its military operations since Assad was toppled, saying it will not tolerate an Islamist presence in southern Syria.

Israel has seized ground in the southwest of the country, warned the Syrian government against deploying forces there, and has blown up much of the Syrian military&#39;s heavy weapons and equipment in the days after Assad fell.

The announcement marks a dramatic shift in US foreign policy towards Syria and is likely to reshape the country&rsquo;s diplomatic position in the region after decades of isolation.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>UN mission calls for de-escalation after militant group leader killed in Libya</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545803/un-mission-calls-for-de-escalation-after-militant-group-leader-killed-in-libya</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545803/un-mission-calls-for-de-escalation-after-militant-group-leader-killed-in-libya#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 25 07:06:46 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2545803</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Violence reported after Abdulghani “Ghaniwa” Kikli, SSA commander linked to Libya’s GNU, was killed in Abu Salim.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Armed clashes broke out on Monday evening in Libya&rsquo;s capital, Tripoli, after reports emerged that a senior militia leader had been killed, prompting a call for de-escalation from the United Nations.

Gunfire echoed through several neighbourhoods, including Abu Salim and Salah Eddin, as fighting intensified. Three residents told that they heard heavy shooting and saw flashes in the sky.

&ldquo;I heard heavy gunfire, and I saw red lights in the sky,&rdquo; one resident said on condition of anonymity.

The violence reportedly followed the killing of Abdulghani Kikli, known as &quot;Ghaniwa&quot;, the commander of the Support Force Apparatus (SSA) &mdash; a powerful armed group based in Abu Salim.

SSA is affiliated with Libya&rsquo;s Presidential Council and operates under the Government of National Unity (GNU), formed in 2021 through a UN-backed process

The UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) said it was &ldquo;alarmed by the unfolding security situation&rdquo; involving heavy weaponry used in densely populated civilian areas.

In a post on X late Monday, the mission urged all sides to halt fighting immediately and warned that attacks on civilians &ldquo;may amount to war crimes.&rdquo;

The Government of National Unity&rsquo;s (GNU) health ministry instructed hospitals to prepare for emergencies, while the interior ministry advised citizens to stay indoors for safety.

The University of Tripoli announced a suspension of all academic and administrative operations until further notice.

Libya has been divided between rival governments in the east and west since the 2011 overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi.

Despite a 2020 ceasefire, sporadic violence continues, often involving powerful militias vying for control of territory and energy assets.

UNSMIL reminded all factions of their responsibility to protect civilians and avoid targeting civilian infrastructure.

The flare-up comes as the Trump administration in the United States considers plans to deport migrants to Libya. Migrants were reportedly held for hours on a bus last week before being returned to a detention facility.

The White House declined to comment on the deportation plan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump kicks off Middle East tour with visit to Saudi Arabia</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545599/trump-kicks-off-middle-east-tour-with-visit-to-saudi-arabia</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545599/trump-kicks-off-middle-east-tour-with-visit-to-saudi-arabia#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 25 09:34:19 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2545599</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Trump descended Air Force One to a warm welcome from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[US President Donald Trump landed in Saudi Arabia early Tuesday, kicking off his first major international tour of his second term with a high-profile state visit in Riyadh.

Air Force One touched down at 9:49 am local time. Trump descended a purple-carpeted staircase to a warm greeting from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

The two leaders walked the tarmac together, briefly speaking with top Saudi officials before entering the Royal Terminal for a coffee ceremony.

Inside, they were joined by senior officials from both governments, seated in plush purple chairs beneath portraits of Saudi royals.

Among the US delegation were Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.

The official welcome reflected Riyadh&rsquo;s efforts to spotlight its global stature. Streets were decorated with American and Saudi flags, and Saudi F-15 jets escorted Air Force One during its final approach to the capital.

Later Tuesday, Trump is expected to attend a formal arrival ceremony at the Royal Court, a CEO lunch, bilateral meetings, and an agreement-signing session.

He will also deliver remarks at a US-Saudi Investment Forum and tour the Dir&rsquo;iyah and At-Turaif UNESCO World Heritage site before a formal dinner with the crown prince.

The visit marks Trump&rsquo;s return to the region he prioritised early in his first term and signals an attempt to renew strategic momentum.

Prince Mohammed, who has cultivated ties with Trump since 2017, is emerging once again as a key regional partner, particularly in US efforts to mediate conflicts such as the war in Ukraine.

A broader regional agenda

Trump&rsquo;s trip includes stops in Doha, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, later this week.

While official discussions are expected to focus on investment and security partnerships, regional observers suggest more sensitive topics are unlikely to be raised publicly.

&ldquo;It&rsquo;ll be a key moment and a real opportunity to showcase what Saudi has to offer,&rdquo; said Dina Esfandiary, Middle East lead at Bloomberg Economics.

Esfandiary noted the Middle East has changed significantly since Trump&rsquo;s last visit during his first term, with Saudi Arabia now engaged in tentative diplomatic outreach to Iran and seeking to avoid entanglement in regional conflicts.

&ldquo;The leadership in Riyadh will try to demonstrate that it is a stable country with a &lsquo;no problem with neighbours&rsquo; policy, that it is open for investment, and that it has a lot of big, heavy-hitting ideas.&rdquo;

&quot;While energy remains a cornerstone of our relationship, the investments and business opportunities in the kingdom have expanded and multiplied many, many times over,&quot; Saudi Investment Minister Khalid al-Falih said as he opened the forum.

&quot;As a result ... when Saudis and Americans join forces very good things happen, more often than not great things happen when those joint ventures happen,&quot; he said before Trump&#39;s arrival.

Trump is hoping to secure trillions of dollars of investments from the Gulf oil producers. Saudi Arabia had pledged $600 billion but Trump has said he wants $1 trillion from the kingdom, one of Washington&#39;s most important allies.

Private interests and quiet diplomacy

Despite the formalities, questions persist over potential conflicts of interest related to the Trump Organization&rsquo;s ongoing real estate ventures in the Gulf.

The company, now managed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, has active business interests in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE.

No members of the Trump family are accompanying the president on this trip, though Eric Trump previously highlighted the importance of Gulf ties.

&ldquo;This whole region is dependent on a strong America. And I hear that time and time again. I hear that from the biggest leaders in the Gulf,&rdquo; he said in Dubai last month.

While Trump is unlikely to publicly address Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s human rights record or gender equality during the visit, the Saudi government has reiterated its &ldquo;deep commitment&rdquo; to providing opportunities for all its citizens.

As Trump begins this high-stakes tour, both allies and critics will be watching for signs of how US policy might evolve in a region where economic ambition, political instability, and strategic rivalries remain tightly intertwined.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Israel attacks ports in Yemen's Hodeidah</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545373/israel-attacks-ports-in-yemens-hodeidah</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545373/israel-attacks-ports-in-yemens-hodeidah#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 25 07:00:56 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2545373</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Prior to attack, Israel issued warning to three Red Sea ports ie Ras Isa, Hodeidah, and Salif ports.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Israel attacked Yemen&rsquo;s Hodeidah province with airstrike after telling&nbsp;residents of three Red Sea ports under Houthi control to evacuate, according to the Houthi-run interior ministry.

The warning named Ras Isa, Hodeidah, and Salif ports, which Israel claims are being used by Iranian-backed Houthi forces.

The timing of the attacks follow&nbsp;days after a missile launched from Yemen was intercepted en route to Israel.

Nasruddin Amer, head of the Houthi-run Saba news agency, denied that any Israeli attacks had taken place on the ports.

Israel has yet to issue an official statement.

The escalation comes ahead of a planned visit to the Middle East by US President Donald Trump and amid heightened tensions in the region.

Trump launched a renewed military campaign against the Houthis on 15 March, targeting strongholds across Yemen.

However, he later accepted a ceasefire deal brokered by Oman. The Houthis said the agreement did not extend to Israel.

Despite the ceasefire, Houthi forces have continued launching missiles and drones at Israel and have targeted shipping lanes in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.

They say their actions are in support of Palestinians in Gaza.

Earlier this week, Trump said the Houthis had agreed to halt disruptions to critical international shipping routes.

Israel has conducted several retaliatory airstrikes on Houthi positions in Yemen over the past months.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump to sign order cutting US drug prices to match lowest global rates</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545365/trump-to-sign-order-cutting-us-drug-prices-to-match-lowest-global-rates</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545365/trump-to-sign-order-cutting-us-drug-prices-to-match-lowest-global-rates#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 25 06:14:58 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2545365</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Effort may reshape global drug pricing dynamics]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[US President Donald Trump said on Sunday he will sign an executive order to reduce the price of prescription drugs, aligning them with the lowest rates paid by other wealthy nations.

Trump, in a post on Truth Social, announced that the order would be signed Monday morning and would enforce a &ldquo;most favoured nation&rdquo; pricing model. Under the policy, the United States would pay no more for prescription drugs than the lowest-paying country worldwide.

&ldquo;We will pay the same price as the nation that pays the lowest price anywhere in the world,&rdquo; Trump wrote, calling the initiative a step toward &ldquo;fairness to America.&rdquo;

The US currently pays more than any other country for many prescription medications &mdash; often up to three times more than other developed nations. Trump did not provide full details of the plan or how it would be implemented.

Photo: Trump post about the major step in pharmaceutical industry



https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/114491534347862682



Four pharmaceutical industry lobbyists told the media they had been briefed by the White House and expect the order to apply beyond the drugs covered under President Joe Biden&rsquo;s Inflation Reduction Act.

That law initiated the first-ever price negotiations for 10 drugs under Medicare, set to take effect next year.

More medicines are scheduled for negotiation later in 2025.

&ldquo;Government price setting in any form is bad for American patients,&rdquo; said Alex Schriver, spokesperson for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the leading drug industry lobbying group.

This is not Trump&rsquo;s first attempt to implement international reference pricing. A similar proposal in his first term was blocked in court. At the time, the policy was expected to save US taxpayers more than $85 billion over seven years.

The US government currently spends over $400 billion annually on prescription drugs.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Ukraine arrests two Hungarians over alleged spy plot</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544929/ukraine-arrests-two-hungarians-over-alleged-spy-plot</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544929/ukraine-arrests-two-hungarians-over-alleged-spy-plot#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 25 11:29:23 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2544929</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[SBU says the “traitors” had used their past military experience to gain access to sensitive locations.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Ukraine&rsquo;s security service said on Thursday it had dismantled a spy network allegedly run by Hungarian military intelligence, accusing two former Ukrainian soldiers of gathering classified defence information in a western region that borders Hungary.

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) said the detained suspects, a man and a woman, had been collecting data on air defence systems, law enforcement activity, and public sentiment in the Zakarpattia region, home to a large ethnic Hungarian population.

&ldquo;For the first time in Ukraine&rsquo;s history, the Security Service has exposed a Hungarian military intelligence network conducting espionage activities to the detriment of our state,&rdquo; the SBU said in a statement.

It said one of the suspects had travelled to Hungary to report to his alleged handler, receiving cash and a secure communication device.

The SBU described the suspects as &ldquo;traitors&rdquo; and said they had used their past military experience to gain access to sensitive locations. Authorities seized phones and other alleged evidence during raids on their homes.

The pair face charges of treason, which in Ukraine can carry a life sentence.

The Hungarian government has not publicly responded to the accusations.

Although Hungary is a member of the EU and NATO, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has maintained warm ties with the Kremlin and opposed multiple EU efforts to support Ukraine since Russia&rsquo;s full-scale invasion in 2022.

Orban&rsquo;s government has previously blocked military aid packages, voiced resistance to Ukraine&rsquo;s EU membership, and continued energy dealings with Moscow.

While Zakarpattia lies far from the front lines in the south and east, where fighting continues, the SBU said the nature of the alleged espionage &ndash; focused on military infrastructure &ndash; made the case especially serious.

Former UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told that it was not the first time Ukraine had accused Hungary of undermining its security, but said the new claims raised deeper questions about loyalty within NATO.

&ldquo;There needs to be some serious discussion within NATO about members that behave that way,&rdquo; Wallace said.

Tensions between Hungary and Ukraine have flared repeatedly in recent years, particularly over the rights of Zakarpattia&rsquo;s ethnic Hungarian minority.

In 2021, Ukraine expelled Hungarian diplomats over reports of Budapest distributing passports in the region.

According to the most recent Ukrainian census in 2001, about 150,000 Hungarians live in the Zakarpattia region.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Indian authorities detain journalist Hilal Mir for sharing poem on social media</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544907/indian-authorities-detain-journalist-hilal-mir-for-sharing-poem-on-social-media</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544907/indian-authorities-detain-journalist-hilal-mir-for-sharing-poem-on-social-media#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 25 08:58:54 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2544907</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[International journalist accused of 'contact with foreign numbers linked to suspicious activity.']]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A senior journalist based in Srinagar city of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) has been detained by Indian authorities&nbsp;for posting a poem on social&nbsp;media.

Hilal Mir, who has worked with Indian and international outlets including as a freelancer for Turkish state-run Anadolu Agency news agency, was taken into custody by the Counter Intelligence Kashmir (CIK) wing last week. He was questioned over a Facebook post he shared on May 1 and later deleted.

The post featured a photograph of an elderly woman walking through the debris of homes reportedly demolished by security forces in south Kashmir following a recent Pahalgam terrorist attack.

The image was accompanied by Mir&#39;s text:

&ldquo;My schizophrenic Kashmiri soul, don&rsquo;t spread yourself thin. Think. The side you should be on has already been chosen for you. Focus. Don&rsquo;t look elsewhere. You are the victim. You have been trampled upon, dispossessed, brutalised, humiliated, maimed, for no sin of yours. You are being erased. You don&rsquo;t owe anything to anyone, least of all to those who revel in your misery, who have on their mind the medieval Spain and Gaza as templates for your annihilation. Take rest, or a 15-day chilla if you may. Contemplate. You alone are in danger, vulnerable, weakened. You alone are the target.&rdquo;

According to a police statement released on Monday, Mir was detained for allegedly &ldquo;inciting sentiments among young minds and instigating secessionist sentiment by portraying Kashmiris as victims of systemic extermination&rdquo; through social media.

CIK statement described Mir as a &ldquo;radical social media user&rdquo; accused of sharing &ldquo;extremist and distorted content with an intention to disturb peace and promote disaffection and secessionist ideology and present India in a bad shape.&rdquo;

Authorities claim Mir&rsquo;s content &ldquo;reflects a veiled attempt to cultivate public resentment which is a threat to security/sovereignty&rdquo; of India. Mir&#39;s laptop and phone have also seized by police.

&ldquo;A preliminary inspection of the &lsquo;digital devices&rsquo; revealed access to the radical account along with incriminating materials and other extremist, distorted content and propaganda,&rdquo; the CIK statement,

Adding that Mir was &ldquo;found in touch with some suspected foreign based cell numbers involved in suspicious activities.&rdquo;

A family member told local media that Mir, who has worked&nbsp;as a free lancer for TRT world and also work as an editor at prominent Kashmir based English newspaper was in contact with Anadolu news Agency colleagues and also a part of jouranlist Whatsapp group.

Police said Mir was &ldquo;presumably taking dictation from the adversary for disturbing the peace and tranquillity in the valley which is a matter of investigation&rdquo;. It said that Mir has been &ldquo;brought within the ambit of investigation and further probe is in progress.&quot;

&quot;In a 2019 article for Turkey-based TRT World titled &#39;How India silenced Kashmir&#39;s leading newspaper columnists,&#39; published after the revocation of Article 370, Hilal Mir wrote about how authorities &#39;arm-twisted&#39; the local press in J&amp;K, forcing critical opinion writers to either moderate their write-ups or &#39;stop writing&#39;.&quot;

Mir was also one of four journalists whose homes were searched by IOJK Police in 2021 during an investigation into a controversial post by the blog &lsquo;Kashmir Fight&rsquo;.

The blog had pointed out several individuals, including journalists, and alleged their collaboration&nbsp;with security agencies and the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US-UK trade deal expected as Trump promises 'big announcement'</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544712/us-uk-trade-deal-expected-as-trump-promises-big-announcement</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544712/us-uk-trade-deal-expected-as-trump-promises-big-announcement#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 25 09:17:15 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2544712</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Deal may boost US-UK ties while easing pressure on tech firms and manufacturing sectors.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[US President Donald Trump has hinted at the announcement of a major trade deal with the United Kingdom, in what could mark the first concrete step towards easing tariff tensions that have rattled global markets.

&ldquo;Big News Conference tomorrow morning at 10:00 A.M., The Oval Office, concerning a MAJOR TRADE DEAL WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF A BIG, AND HIGHLY RESPECTED, COUNTRY,&rdquo; Trump wrote on Truth Social late Wednesday.



Photo: Truth Social



https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/114469488580251681



Though he did not name the country, a source familiar with the matter confirmed it is the United Kingdom.

If confirmed, the deal would represent a rare breakthrough after months of global uncertainty caused by Trump&rsquo;s tariff-heavy trade policies.

The Financial Times reported that the deal could see the UK exempted from certain non-tariff trade barriers, such as its 2% digital services tax on US tech firms. In exchange, the US may ease 25% tariffs on British aluminium, steel and autos.

Peter Navarro, Trump&#39;s top trade adviser, told that the UK was among the most likely candidates for a first agreement, alongside India, South Korea and Japan. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve got a little twist in the India story,&rdquo; Navarro said, hinting at delays there, &ldquo;but there will be deals.&rdquo;

Despite the promise, trade analysts remain sceptical. Jacob Jensen, a trade policy expert at the American Action Forum, said any agreement announced Thursday is likely to be a memorandum of understanding, rather than a full treaty.

&ldquo;Deals that carry real economic weight typically take months, even years, to finalise,&rdquo; he said.

Provisional terms are likely to offer short-term relief from some tariffs but fall short of a comprehensive trade pact. The Trump administration has said it is in talks with more than a dozen nations but has yet to sign any binding agreements.

In recent weeks, Trump has signalled willingness to reimpose tariffs if talks falter. &ldquo;There won&rsquo;t be another extension,&rdquo; he warned last month, referring to the 90-day tariff pause introduced in early April.

Meanwhile, signs of diplomatic thaw have emerged on other fronts. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer are expected to meet Chinese officials in Geneva this week.

While not expected to yield a major breakthrough, the meetings could lower tensions.

Washington currently imposes tariffs of at least 145% on most Chinese goods, while China maintains 125% duties on American exports.

Trump has so far refused to lower tariffs as a precondition for talks with Beijing, potentially stalling negotiations.

The global economic toll has been steep. The US economy contracted in Q1 2025 &mdash; its first quarterly decline in three years &mdash; as businesses stocked up in anticipation of Trump&rsquo;s &ldquo;Liberation Day&rdquo; tariffs.

Economists at the IMF, OECD, and World Bank have all warned that prolonged tariff wars could drag down global growth and reignite inflation.

Despite securing the USMCA trade deal during his previous term, Trump later reversed course, reimposing tariffs on Mexican and Canadian goods.

Analysts warn that similar reversals could follow any new deal, adding to global uncertainty.

Still, any sign of easing trade restrictions may bring relief to businesses and consumers facing rising costs. As talks continue, Thursday&rsquo;s announcement is expected to be closely watched by markets and allies alike.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Top US and China trade envoys to hold crucial meeting in Geneva amid trade war</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544517/top-us-and-china-trade-envoys-to-hold-crucial-meeting-in-geneva-amid-trade-war</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2544517/top-us-and-china-trade-envoys-to-hold-crucial-meeting-in-geneva-amid-trade-war#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 25 09:06:47 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2544517</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Analysts say face-to-face talks could ease strains on global trade and reduce uncertainty.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Top US officials are set to meet with a senior Chinese delegation in Geneva this weekend, marking the highest-level bilateral talks since President Donald Trump imposed sweeping tariffs that sparked an ongoing trade war between the two global powers.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will lead the delegation, with China&rsquo;s Vice Premier He Lifeng representing Beijing, both sides confirmed on Tuesday.

The meeting, announced amid growing concern over inflation and disrupted supply chains, is viewed as a possible first step toward easing tensions.

The White House said the discussions would aim to address &ldquo;longstanding trade imbalances&rdquo; and come as tariffs between the two countries have risen to historic levels &mdash; 145% for US&nbsp;duties on Chinese goods, and 125% for Chinese tariffs on American products.

Bessent described the current situation as &ldquo;isn&rsquo;t sustainable ... especially on the Chinese side.&rdquo; He added that &ldquo;the equivalent of an embargo. We don&rsquo;t want to decouple. What we want is fair trade.&rdquo;

Trump previously asserted that the US&nbsp;and China were engaged in talks to reduce tariffs, a claim China denied, insisting that any dialogue could only begin if Trump first eased the steep duties he had imposed.

China&rsquo;s Ministry of Commerce said the meeting was agreed upon after &ldquo;The Chinese side carefully evaluated the information from the US side and decided to agree to have contact with the US side after fully considering global expectations, Chinese interests and calls from US businesses and consumers,&rdquo; said a ministry spokesperson.

However, it warned Beijing would not compromise its &ldquo;principles or global equity&rdquo; in pursuit of any agreement.

The talks come as American businesses face rising costs and uncertainty. Many US&nbsp;firms have begun delaying investments and cancelling orders from China.

Economists have warned that the tariffs are likely to be passed onto consumers, contributing to price hikes in food, housing, and vehicles &mdash; a growing burden as recession risks mount.

Wendy Cutler, a former US trade official and now vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said the Geneva meeting was a &ldquo;welcome development&rdquo; but cautioned against expecting quick results.

&ldquo;As the first face to face meeting between senior US&nbsp;and Chinese officials since Trump&rsquo;s inauguration, it&rsquo;s an important opportunity to have initial talks on unwinding some tariffs, mapping out a path forward, as well as raising concerns,&rdquo; Cutler said.

&ldquo;We should not expect any quick victories &mdash; this will be a process that will take time.&rdquo;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump’s cowboy capitalism and 'anti-Nixon Shock'</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2543845/trumps-cowboy-capitalism-and-anti-nixon-shock</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2543845/trumps-cowboy-capitalism-and-anti-nixon-shock#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 25 00:35:34 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Hamza Rao]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2543845</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The US president’s economic strategy is torching wallets at home, while weaponising the dollar]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Imagine a cowboy on a turnpike, six-shooter in one hand, a foreclosure notice in the other, galloping toward Beijing on a horse he can&rsquo;t afford to feed &mdash; that&rsquo;s the spirit of US President Donald Trump&rsquo;s new trade plan.

Now picture a man in a red hat, standing at the border, waving a pistol made of tax forms, shouting: &ldquo;This is how we beat China!&rdquo; before slapping a 60 per cent tariff on a blender made in Ohio. This is Trump&rsquo;s performance art of policy &ndash; and the audience? Poor American households.

Scholars call it &ldquo;transgressive enjoyment&rdquo;. Supporters call it &ldquo;finally a president who tells it like it is&rdquo;. Economists call it &ldquo;Jesus Christ, not again&rdquo;.

This is the logic of lighting your kitchen on fire so the neighbours stop stealing your recipes.

The longest 100 days have been a postmodern opera of economic sadomasochism, where the tariff plan is less about trade and more about libidinal economics &ndash; the national thrill of self-sabotage masquerading as rebellion.

As Freudians might note, there is &lsquo;jouissance&rsquo; &ndash; a French term for a libidinal &ldquo;enjoyment&rdquo; that goes beyond rational benefit &ndash; in this pain. Americans are told to suffer proudly, to pay more for less, and to feel clean about it.

What Trumpism offers is a high &mdash; a collective orgasm of grievance, decked out in red hats and shattered supply chains. It has morphed into a national revenge fantasy: you may be broke, but at least the other guy&rsquo;s eating dirt too. It&rsquo;s revenge for the very theft of enjoyment.

In Trump&rsquo;s America, schadenfreude costs less than a carton of eggs, and eggs are $7 a dozen.

On the world stage, Trump is acting like a man holding a smoke bomb and demanding respect. Allies have responded to his tariff threats by building coalitions, excluding Washington.

The WTO? Irrelevant. NATO? Suspicious. Canada? Suspiciously polite. Trump&rsquo;s diplomacy is now a blend of 1980s action movies and apocalyptic sermons. &quot;They laughed at me in Davos. Who&rsquo;s laughing now?&quot; (Spoiler: everyone.)

Meanwhile, China can&rsquo;t help but chuckle: Trump&rsquo;s tariffs are capitalism devouring its own tail, greasing the wheels of Beijing&rsquo;s industrial juggernaut.

&lsquo;Biting tarifflation&rsquo;

The performance is loud and unruly, but economists warn it&#39;s taking a serious toll.

A recent Yale Budget Lab study shows the average US tariff rate has surged to 22.5 per cent, the highest since 1909. That alone could raise overall consumer prices by about 2.3 per cent, translating into roughly $3,800 in added costs per household this year. The burden falls hardest on low-income families.

At the same time, GDP growth is projected to shrink by 0.5 to 0.9 percentage points in 2025, with long-term output down about 0.6 per cent, a hit amounting to tens of billions in lost economic activity.

In essence, Trump&rsquo;s cowboy-style tariff crusade is inflicting real pain at home, even as it boasts big returns on paper.

The administration expects to raise around $3.1 trillion in tariff revenue over the next decade, but even that figure is undercut by an estimated $582 billion in losses from slower growth.

The damage is widespread. Bottom-decile incomes are expected to drop by 2.3 per cent, compared to 0.9 per cent for the wealthiest. Sectors like apparel, autos and groceries are already feeling the pinch, with prices up 17 per cent, 8.4 per cent and 2.8 per cent respectively.

Financial markets have reacted sharply: Treasury yields posted their biggest weekly spike since 2001, gold prices broke records, and consumer confidence nosedived, with inflation fears reaching levels not seen since 1981.

Despite the bravado, the math is sobering. By branding the tariffs a national security emergency, Trump has slapped de facto tariffs on hundreds of billions in imports, from steel to semiconductors. He declares victory from the podium, but behind the scenes, analysts are quietly counting the cost.

In sum, economists warn tarifflation is biting. The tough cowboy may call it &ldquo;protecting jobs,&rdquo; but workers are feeling the pinch at the pump, in the grocery aisle and on their paychecks.

Global frontier

Meanwhile, Trump&rsquo;s tariff turnpike fight has spun the world economy into a diplomatic dance. Friend and foe alike are scrambling for cover or counterpunch.

Canada, America&rsquo;s most loyal neighbour, swiftly slapped back. In early March, Canada unveiled 25 per cent retaliatory tariffs on $30 billion of US imports, with plans to expand them to a whopping $155 billion if the US keeps its levies.

Ottawa&rsquo;s finance minister warned darkly that Trump&rsquo;s actions will make &ldquo;Americans pay more at grocery stores and gas pumps, and potentially lose thousands of jobs&rdquo;.

Among the first affected: orange juice, peanut butter, wine, clothing, even electric vehicles and meats in phase two.

The message is clear: Canada will not absorb these costs quietly, and its economy is preparing to buckle if necessary.

At the same time, Brussels is mustering a response. EU leaders agreed to propose a $28 billion package of counter tariffs on US goods.

This would target everything from agricultural imports (meat, grains) to consumer items (bicycles, bourbon, vacuum cleaners, even chewing gum and dental floss), essentially matching steel and aluminium by taxing traditionally red state goods.

The calculus is grim: Trump&rsquo;s tariffs already cover 70 per cent of EU exports to the US (about &euro;532 billion in 2024 trade). In effect, Europe has joined Canada and China in a NATO of tariff retaliation.

Policymakers worry that a full-blown trade war will eventually hike prices for all their citizens and trim euro area GDP. For now, unity prevails: an EU official says the bloc will &ldquo;strike back&rdquo; against &ldquo;bullying&rdquo; and protect its industries.

The true superpower opponent, China, has gone on the offensive. Within days of Trump&rsquo;s tariff proclamation, Beijing raised tariffs on US imports up to 125 per cent.

The Chinese foreign ministry publicly vowed to &ldquo;oppose US bullying,&rdquo; and stock markets shook: commodities fell (oil slid ~7 per cent), bond yields spiked, and investors dumped the dollar. In short, China no longer plays patty cake. Its response makes US exports effectively impossible.

Even close allies like Japan are caught in the crossfire. Trump has already warned Japan with a 24 per cent tariff on its exports (most of it on hold while he negotiates) plus a 25 per cent car levy.

Prime Minister Ishiba is under pressure: grant US demands on rice, autos and let American beef flood in, and face a domestic revolt before next summer&rsquo;s election.

Other US partners &ndash; the UK, South Korea and Mexico &ndash; nervously await their turn, watching Trump demand deals on trade and even currency with his occasional insults. The overarching effect is unsettling, as every country must now decide whether to bargain or escalate.

In short, Trump&rsquo;s &ldquo;turnpike tollbooth&rdquo; has triggered a global rodeo. Allies have no choice but to play along &ndash; Canada raising tariffs, the EU targeting goods, Japan eyeing concessions &ndash; while China has refused to yield.

The &lsquo;burden of dollar supremacy&rsquo;

While Trump claims to be levelling the playing field, a deeper economic strategy may be at play, a plan to reshape the global monetary order.

Perhaps no one has framed Trump&rsquo;s strategy more clearly than Marxist economist Yanis Varoufakis.

Writing in mid-February 2025, he argued that Trump&rsquo;s &ldquo;tariff fixation is part of a global economic plan&quot;.

In Varoufakis&rsquo;s analysis, the president has sophisticatedly realised that the key to US &ldquo;manufacturing decline&rdquo; lies not in skill but in dollar supremacy.

He explains that Trump believes foreign central banks are &ldquo;hoarding dollars&rdquo; and not allowing the greenback to weaken naturally, thus undermining US exports and jobs.

Varoufakis opines that Trump genuinely believes America has been &ldquo;dealt a bad deal&rdquo; by the global dollar regime. He argues that Trump sees the dollar&rsquo;s &ldquo;exorbitant privilege&rdquo; as an &ldquo;exorbitant burden&rdquo; on US workers.

The remedy, in Trump&rsquo;s mind, is simple toll-taking: tit-for-tat tariffs to rebalance trade. &ldquo;Reduce the value of the dollar&hellip; to make American exports more competitive,&rdquo; Trump himself boasted, while still &ldquo;maintaining the hegemony of the dollar&quot;.

By that logic, he&rsquo;s a cowboy demanding others stop &ldquo;free-riding&rdquo; off Uncle Sam&rsquo;s bucks.

Trump&rsquo;s tariff deluge, Varoufakis contends, is Phase One of a master plan: to economically bully trading partners into weakening their currencies. The tariffs &ldquo;shock&rdquo; markets so that foreign central banks cut rates and let the yuan, euro and yen &ldquo;soften relative to the dollar&rdquo;.

In effect, the very tariff targets end up paying for them by selling dollars and propping up the US currency. American consumers, Varoufakis points out, thereby avoid most of the import price hikes, while US producers get cheaper exports.

Meanwhile, those collected duties fill the US Treasury &ndash; potentially $2.1 trillion over the next decade, according to the Tax Foundation, which Trump can spend largely at will.

Varoufakis explains that by raising duties, Trump hopes to &ldquo;pressure friends and foes to unload their dollar holdings and buy more long-dated bonds.&rdquo; In plain terms: he wants foreign central banks and investors to swap their greenbacks into US debt rather than euros or yuan.

&lsquo;Anti-Nixon shock&rsquo;

According to the economist, Trump is channelling an &ldquo;anti-Nixon shock&rdquo;: devalue the dollar to revive manufacturing, yet cement US financial hegemony. As Trump himself bragged, the aim is to &ldquo;reduce the value of the dollar&hellip; to make American exports more competitive,&rdquo; while still &ldquo;maintaining the hegemony of the dollar.&rdquo;

Trump&rsquo;s crypto fixation plays into this.

Varoufakis recounts the bizarre notion that the US might strong-arm countries like Japan to dump dollars into Bitcoin or stablecoins. Japan&rsquo;s banks hold over $1 trillion in US reserves. Trump fantasises that by endorsing cryptocurrencies, he could make Tokyo trade some of that hoard for digital assets he controls.

The recent executive order to hoard Bitcoin &ldquo;never to be sold&rdquo; looks less like random crypto-caprice and more like a bargaining chip: a way to nudge allies into buying dollars (and Bitcoin) to keep the system afloat.

In Phase Two, Trump would parlay this pressure into grand bargains: China and Japan would be forced to sell US treasury bonds or buy dollars outright; Europe would swap or write down some of its debt, allow factories to relocate to America, and buy more US arms.

Varoufakis&rsquo;s assessment is dry but ominous. Tariffs are not an end in themselves but a means to &ldquo;recast the global economic order in America&rsquo;s long-term interest&rdquo;.

They&rsquo;re designed to coerce oil-rich sheikhs, Asian banks and European treasuries into underwriting US debt &ndash; or face punishing trade costs. Trump&rsquo;s cowboy act is not just nationalism. It is state-sponsored financial warfare, complete with digital gold.

As Varoufakis puts it, Trump is plotting an &ldquo;anti-Nixon shock&rdquo; that employs both old-school tariffs and new-age crypto to &ldquo;keep the dollar at the centre&rdquo; of the global system.

Varoufakis even predicts a world split into two blocs: one under the US &ldquo;security umbrella&rdquo; but paying dearly (through currency appreciation and mandatory purchases), the other aligned with China/Russia but cut off from US markets except through ongoing tariffs.

Disturbing as it sounds, Varoufakis warns one cannot dismiss the plan as mere nonsense &ndash; he calls it &ldquo;solid&hellip; albeit inherently risky&quot;.

At the very least, Trump&rsquo;s team believes they&rsquo;re leveraging America&rsquo;s &ldquo;exorbitant privilege&rdquo; to force others to bear the burden of global finance. The stakes, Varoufakis warns, are nothing less than the stability of the post-war monetary order.

Trade wars as class wars? 

In their 2020 book Trade Wars Are Class Wars, Michael Pettis and Matthew Klein argue that trade conflicts reflect domestic inequality. Deficits, they contend, stem not from foreign trickery but from rich countries over-saving and poor households under-consuming.

&ldquo;Trade disputes&hellip; are often the unexpected result of domestic political choices to serve the interests of the rich at the expense of workers,&rdquo; Klein and Pettis write.

By this logic, today&rsquo;s trade war is a class war: decades of bailouts for corporations and property holders have suppressed worker demand, generating global imbalances. Tariffs become a Hobsonian &ldquo;false economy of distribution&rdquo; &mdash; the rich&rsquo;s answer to workers&rsquo; inability to buy.

Where does Trump&rsquo;s cowboy logic fit in? He postures as a frontier hero, accusing foreigners of &ldquo;stealing&rdquo; jobs and promising protection for the little guy.

However, Klein&rsquo;s diagnosis complicates the tale. In reality, the tariffs fall hardest on US consumers and workers, those already shortchanged. As the Yale model shows, poorer households lose more (about 4 per cent for the second decile) than the rich (roughly 1.6 per cent for the top 10 per cent).

Trump, then, has inverted the class narrative: rather than taxing elites and boosting demand, he blames foreigners for inequality while his policies further burden the middle and poor.

Meanwhile, as Americans pay more for less, they are told, once again, that freedom is not free. It costs $3,800. But it comes with a free cowboy hat. Made in China. For now.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Economic fears and US threats loom over Canada’s election day</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2542758/economic-fears-and-us-threats-loom-over-canadas-election-day</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2542758/economic-fears-and-us-threats-loom-over-canadas-election-day#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 25 08:12:35 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2542758</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Strong voter enthusiasm highlights the growing stakes for Canada's political and economic path.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Canadians are voting on Monday in a closely watched election shaped by trade disputes, economic turmoil, and annexation threats from the United States.

Voters will decide whether interim Prime Minister Mark Carney should secure a full four-year mandate or if it is time for the Conservative Party, led by Pierre Poilievre, to return to power after nearly a decade of Liberal rule.

Polling stations opened at 8:30 am&nbsp;local time (7 am&nbsp;ET) in Newfoundland and Labrador, kicking off a day that could reshape Canada&#39;s political future.

The campaign has been overshadowed by Canada&rsquo;s increasingly fraught relationship with the United States. President Donald Trump&rsquo;s tariffs on Canadian goods and provocative comments about absorbing Canada as the &quot;51st state&quot; have sparked widespread outrage.

&quot;I reject any attempts to weaken Canada, to wear us down, to break us so that America can own us,&quot; Carney told reporters in March. &ldquo;We are masters in our own home.&rdquo;

The election contest is mainly between Carney&rsquo;s Liberals and Poilievre&rsquo;s Conservatives. Carney, a former central banker, took office in March after Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting polls.

Since assuming leadership, Carney has maintained retaliatory tariffs against the US and sought to position himself as a steady hand during economic volatility.

&quot;I understand how the world works,&quot; Carney said in a podcast interview in October, pledging to strengthen Canada&rsquo;s economy through new infrastructure and clean energy projects.

Conservative leader Poilievre has framed the election as a fight between ordinary Canadians and entrenched political elites. He has vowed to slash taxes, reduce government spending, and boost resource development.

&quot;Conservatives will axe taxes, build homes, fix the budget,&quot; Poilievre said at a March rally, promising to unlock Canada&rsquo;s economic potential.

Early voter turnout hit a record high, with Elections Canada reporting that 7.3 million people voted ahead of election day, up 25% from 2021.

&quot;I voted on the first day of advance polls and I waited 45 minutes,&quot; said Kristina Ennis of St. John&rsquo;s, Newfoundland. &quot;I know people who waited over an hour.&quot;

With Canada&rsquo;s political landscape deeply polarised, Monday&rsquo;s vote could mark a turning point in its national identity and its future relationship with the United States.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>From Pulwama to Pahalgam</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2542527/from-pulwama-to-pahalgam</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2542527/from-pulwama-to-pahalgam#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 25 02:46:09 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Naveed Hussain]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2542527</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[7 years after Pulwama &amp; Balakot, India once again follows the same script after the Pahalgam attack]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[It&rsquo;s the year 2018. India prepares to head to poll next year. &ldquo;Narendra Modi is facing an unexpected image problem: he&rsquo;s starting to look weak,&rdquo; writes Nikhil Kumar in an analysis for CNN. Modi&rsquo;s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party lost a number of key state-level elections in December 2018, with the Congress vanquishing the BJP in Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Madhya Pradesh. The charisma of Modi, who has portrayed himself as the champion of the poor, is waning amid growing unemployment, rising inflation, agrarian crisis, rampant corruption, and the Rafale deal controversy.

And then Pulwama happens.

On Feb 14, 2019, 40 Indian reserve police personnel are killed in a suicide attack on their convoy in the Pulwama district of the disputed Jammu and Kashmir state. As if the BJP was waiting for this godsend; the Modi government quickly dumps blame on Pakistan, dial up tensions with its neighbour, and starts drumming up war hysteria at home. Modi and his cabinet aides make sombre public appearances with the coffins of the dead police personnel draped in the national flag. National security and jingoism become the single agenda of BJP&rsquo;s election campaign as party leaders trigger a raucous chorus of calls for revenge. Suddenly, the issues that haunted Modi are drowned in the cacophony of jingoistic frenzy.

And then Balakot happens.

On Feb 26, 2019, Indian jets violate Pakistan&rsquo;s airspace, fly over the densely-wooded Balakot area of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and bomb a purported militant training camp. Pakistan delivers &ldquo;Swift Retort&rdquo; within hours, carrying out air raids deep inside disputed Kashmir state and shooting down two Indian warplanes in dogfights. Modi&rsquo;s PR team, aided by a pliant media, portrays the inconsequential incursion as a tremendous military feat. &ldquo;What Narendra Modi&rsquo;s team designed was a classic dodge, distract, derail scheme,&rdquo; wrote noted political scientist Yogendra Yadav.

The scheme works &ndash; and Modi gets his poll mojo back.

The 2019 polls defied all projections. The BJP emerged as the single largest party, clinching 303 seats against 282 in the 2014 elections. The party and its National Democratic Alliance strengthened their electoral wins in states like West Bengal, Odisha, Telangana, and Karnataka, where their performance in the 2014 election was lacklustre. This surprising electoral victory was made possible by a 67% turnout as Indians imbued with jingoistic euphoria turned out in huge numbers to vote for BJP.

Tellingly, most of the police personnel killed in Pulwama were low-caste Hindus, who were apparently used as cannon fodder for the revival of BJP&rsquo;s political fortunes. &ldquo;The 40 jawans were primarily from lower-caste communities &ndash; 19 from the Backward Classes, seven from Scheduled Castes, five from Scheduled Tribes, four from Upper-Caste backgrounds, one High-Caste Bengali, three Jat Sikhs, and one Muslim. Only five out of the 40 jawans, or 12.5%, came from Hindu Upper-Caste backgrounds,&rdquo; wrote Ajaz Ashraf in his research article for &ldquo;The Caravan,&rdquo; a journal of politics and culture.

Modi managed to kill multiple birds with one stone. He successfully sold the Balakot &ldquo;military feat&rdquo; to the nation to quell the controversy surrounding the purchase of Rafale jets at an escalated cost. &ldquo;India&#39;s airstrike by Mirage 2000 planes in Balakot could have brought better results had the Rafale planes been used,&rdquo; he later said at the India Today conclave. Modi blamed the rival Congress for delaying the Rafale deal for &ldquo;vested interests.&rdquo;

Turned out Pulwama was a drama!

Years later, Indian politicians began to doubt Modi&rsquo;s narrative. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee called the Pulwama attack &ldquo;fake and staged&rdquo;, while former IIOJK governor Satya Pal Malik concluded that it was a &ldquo;systemic failure involving gross security and intelligence lapses.&rdquo; Similarly, Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut and Tripura Chief Minister Manik Saha suspected that it was a &ldquo;conspiracy hatched by the BJP to win the 2019 elections.&rdquo;

Fast-forward to 2025. India is caught in a diplomatic tight spot.

Delhi has long been carrying out &ldquo;pre-emptive assassination&rdquo; of dissidents and critics it perceived as disloyal to the government. However, such extrajudicial killings sharply escalated during Modi&rsquo;s tenure &ndash; perhaps because he thought his country is an emerging power in the new geopolitical competition which the US cannot afford to alienate. RAW became so emboldened in the use of Israeli intelligence&rsquo;s playbook that its hitmen assassinated a dissident Canadian Sikh leader, Hardeep Singh Nijjar in a brazen violation of Canada&rsquo;s sovereignty.

India was wrong. It may be a darling of the West, but India is not Israel. It cannot expect the same level of Western protection as Tel Aviv. Canada&rsquo;s then prime minister Justin Trudeau publicly blamed &ldquo;the government of India&rdquo; for Nijjar&rsquo;s murder. As if this wasn&rsquo;t enough, the FBI also thwarted an Indian plot to assassinate another Sikh leader on American soil.

&ldquo;The foiled assassination was part of an escalating campaign of aggression by RAW against the Indian diaspora in Asia, Europe and North America,&rdquo; The Washington Post reported in April 2024. &ldquo;RAW officers and agents have faced arrest, expulsion and reprimand in countries, including Australia, Germany and Britain,&rdquo; according to officials who provided details to The Post that have not previously been made public.

After the RAW extrajudicial killing spree was exposed, the US Commission on International Religious Freedoms recommended in its 2025 report that sanctions be imposed on the Indian agency.

In further damning proof of RAW&rsquo;s rogue activities, Britain&rsquo;s Guardian newspaper published an expos&eacute; of how the Modi government had orchestrated as many as 20 extrajudicial killings of Kashmiri and Sikh leaders through a complex network of spies, arms dealers, and assassins in Pakistan since 2020.

Turned out that India &ndash; which accuses Pakistan of exporting terrorism &ndash; was itself perpetrating transnational terrorism. Modi, who has vowed to make Pakistan a pariah state, ended up isolating India globally. Foreign Minister Jayshanker, who called former Pakistani counterpart Bilawal Bhutto &ldquo;spokesperson of terrorism industry&rdquo;, deserved that label himself. Facing growing international scrutiny and diplomatic heat over RAW&rsquo;s transnational terror campaign, India desperately wanted to shift the spotlight.

And Pahalgam happens.

On April 22, 26 tourists were killed in a gun attack at Pahalgam&rsquo;s Baisaran area, dubbed &ldquo;mini Switzerland&rdquo; for its mist-veiled meadows. The Indian media, as if reading from the post-Pulwama script, quickly trained their guns on Pakistan and whipped up war hysteria. A little-know group, The Resistance Front, was identified as the culprit which Delhi claims is an affiliate of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) militant group. 

Pahalgam is deep inside the disputed Kashmir state and the nearest distance to the Line of Control is more than 100 kilometres (as the crow flies), while Baisaran is heavily guarded due to frequent VIP movement in the idyllic resort. This raises a few questions: 1) how could the attackers cross the heavily-militarised and surveilled LoC, evade multiple layers of security, trek to Baisaran unnoticed, segregate non-Muslim male tourists, and massacre them before disappearing in a region where India has over 700,000 troops deployed? 2) Why security forces didn&rsquo;t respond to the 30-minute-long rampage even though a security post is located just 10 kilometres away from the crime scene? How come the FIR was registered within 10 minutes after the attack and how come it named the perpetrator group without any details? And 3) Why RAW-affiliated social media accounts started pointing finger at Pakistan within five minutes of the incident?

All day long, Indian media rattled all sabres in its arsenal with hyperventilating anchors and analysts baying for revenge. In the evening, India&rsquo;s top diplomat made a TV appearance to share the official version. And it wasn&rsquo;t different from what the media had spun throughout the day. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri officially blamed Pakistan and spelled out several punitive measures, including suspension of the Indus Water Treaty with Pakistan, closure of the Wagah-Attari border crossing, and downgrade of diplomatic ties.

The timing of the Pahalgam incident was significant as US Vice President JD Vance was in India on a private tour, while Modi was in Saudi Arabia signaling a need to control diplomatic optics. The episode appears to be a choreographed attempt by India to once again portray itself as a &ldquo;victim of terrorism&rdquo; and quash the global portrayal of its top spy agency as a &ldquo;perpetrator of transnational terrorism.&rdquo;

But it wasn&rsquo;t the only bird Modi wanted to kill with one stone. The Pahalgam victims belonged to several major cities &ndash; including Mumbai, Haryana, Uttarakhand, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Indore, Kanpur, Bihar, Bangalore, Pune, Bhavnagar, Tamil Naido, and Gujarat &ndash; where the incident stirred up anger against Muslims. The Modi government may cash in on this nationwide outrage to snub widespread opposition to the controversial Waqf Amendment Bill which critics believe is part of the hardline Hindu nationalist government&rsquo;s plan to reshape the country&rsquo;s socio-political landscape, particularly that of the Muslim community.

India has long sought to scrap the World Bank-brokered Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. The desire stems from its strategic plans to build hydroelectric and storage projects along the western rivers &ndash; including Pakal Dul, Ratle, Kiru, and Sawalkot &ndash; which have long been delayed due to objections from Pakistan. In the Pahalgam incident, Modi found an excuse to execute these plans. There&rsquo;s also a sinister side to it. By turning off the tap, India plans to undermine crop yield to cause food insecurity, which it believes will trigger social unrest in Pakistan.

Pakistan, however, has warned that such a move will be considered &ldquo;an act of war&rdquo; because water is a &ldquo;vital national interest.&rdquo; Rightly so, because water is a matter of life and death for millions of people in Pakistan, where agriculture is 90% dependent on the Indus drainage system. There&rsquo;s a strong possibility that if and when India tries to build any dam by stopping or diverting river water, Pakistan will militarily take out that facility.

Right now, India is turning up the heat on Pakistan. But once the dust settles and the war hysteria fades, what if Pahalgam turns out to be another Pulwama?

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>GOP Rep. Don Bacon admits they "made a mistake" with Trump’s tariff powers</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2536923/gop-rep-don-bacon-admits-they-made-a-mistake-with-trumps-tariff-powers</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2536923/gop-rep-don-bacon-admits-they-made-a-mistake-with-trumps-tariff-powers#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 25 08:18:32 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2536923</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[GOP Rep. Don Bacon calls for restoring tariff authority to Congress as Trump’s trade policies face scrutiny.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Republican lawmakers are increasingly questioning former President Donald Trump&rsquo;s broad tariff authority, with Nebraska Rep. Don Bacon suggesting Congress reclaim control over trade policy.

Bacon told CNN on Thursday that Congress &ldquo;made a mistake&rdquo; in previously granting the president temporary tariff powers, arguing that such economic decisions should be legislative matters.

&ldquo;Tariffs should be a Congressional-initiated action,&rdquo; Bacon said. &ldquo;I think we should look back and maybe restore the power back to Congress.&rdquo;



GOP Rep. Bacon: &quot;We made a mistake. We passed legislation that gave the president some temporary tariff authorities. I think we should look back and maybe restore the power back from Congress and take away the authorizations.&quot;
&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-03-27T15:50:54.925Z


His comments come as tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports are set to take effect next week, alongside a newly announced 25% duty on foreign-made vehicles. Some GOP lawmakers fear the policy could lead to sharp price increases on consumer goods, triggering voter backlash.

North Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman acknowledged the economic strain but expressed cautious optimism about Trump&rsquo;s approach. He told CNN the auto tariffs would be &ldquo;painful&rdquo; for American consumers but said he would &ldquo;leave that up to [Trump].&rdquo;

Phill Swagel, head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, also warned of short-term consequences. Speaking to CNBC, Swagel said the tariffs would &ldquo;reduce the efficiency of the economy&rdquo; and &ldquo;boost the price level,&rdquo; though he did not expect sustained inflation.

Despite concerns, some Republicans remain supportive of Trump&rsquo;s trade strategy. Indiana Rep. Marlin Stutzman told NewsNation that while tariffs introduce uncertainty, they could strengthen U.S. negotiating leverage.

&ldquo;There&rsquo;s some uncertainty,&rdquo; Stutzman said. &ldquo;But my hope is that these other countries will realize that they need us as a partner&hellip; We knew it was going to be a little rocky.&rdquo;

As trade tensions escalate, calls to rein in presidential tariff authority may gain traction in Congress, setting up a potential policy shift within the Republican Party.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Minnesota sues Trump’s EPA and Citibank over Green Bank funding freeze</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2536919/minnesota-sues-trumps-epa-and-citibank-over-green-bank-funding-freeze</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2536919/minnesota-sues-trumps-epa-and-citibank-over-green-bank-funding-freeze#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 25 07:48:39 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2536919</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Minnesota sues Trump’s EPA for freezing green bank funds, calling it an illegal climate policy rollback.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Minnesota has taken legal action against the US&nbsp;Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Citibank, arguing that the federal government unlawfully froze $25 million in green energy funding.

The lawsuit, led by Attorney General Keith Ellison, is part of a broader legal battle over the Trump administration&rsquo;s decision to halt climate-related spending.

At the centre of the dispute is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a $20 billion programme established under the Inflation Reduction Act to support green banks&mdash;institutions that finance clean energy projects.

Minnesota&rsquo;s state-run green bank had planned to use its share of the funds for initiatives such as geothermal heating in public housing and solar panel installations in schools.

However, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin halted the programme in March, calling it a &ldquo;gold bar scheme&rdquo; and alleging that billions in taxpayer dollars had been placed in outside financial institutions with limited oversight.

The claim was based, in part, on a hidden-camera video from the conservative group Project Veritas, in which an EPA employee described efforts to distribute grant money before Trump took office as &ldquo;throwing gold bars off the Titanic.&rdquo;

Minnesota&rsquo;s lawsuit argues that the EPA&rsquo;s actions violate the Administrative Procedures Act and the Impoundment Control Act, which prevent federal agencies from withholding congressionally approved funds.

A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order blocking the EPA from withdrawing the money, but a final decision remains uncertain.

With $5 billion in loan requests already submitted to Minnesota&rsquo;s green bank, the outcome of this case could determine the future of state-led clean energy projects.

As legal proceedings continue, the dispute highlights the broader clash between the Biden administration&rsquo;s climate policies and the Trump administration&rsquo;s push to roll them back.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Florida sues Healthcare company for $5M repayment, alleges funds fueled CEO's US Congress campaign</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2521302/florida-sues-healthcare-company-for-5m-repayment-alleges-funds-fueled-ceos-us-congress-campaign</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2521302/florida-sues-healthcare-company-for-5m-repayment-alleges-funds-fueled-ceos-us-congress-campaign#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 25 12:06:37 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2521302</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Florida sues Trinity Health Care, claiming $5M overpayment funded CEO's congressional campaign amid ethics complaints.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Florida has filed a lawsuit against Trinity Health Care Services, alleging the company knowingly accepted over $5 million in accidental overpayments and used the funds, in part, to support a congressional campaign.

The lawsuit, filed in Leon Circuit Civil Court, accuses Trinity of exploiting emergency conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic to retain funds far exceeding the intended payment.

In June 2021, the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) contracted Trinity to assist with COVID-19 vaccination registration.

The agency mistakenly transferred $5,057,850.00 instead of the intended $50,578.50, a hundredfold overpayment. Despite the apparent error, Trinity did not return the funds. Additional overpayments during the period brought the total amount to over $5.7 million, according to state records.

The situation resurfaced in 2024 when FDEM formally demanded repayment. The lawsuit alleges that Trinity, under the leadership of then-CEO Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, knowingly processed the inflated payments and failed to return them. The state claims this occurred during a national state of emergency, exacerbating the issue.

Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, who served as Trinity&rsquo;s CEO at the time, later ran for and won a seat in Congress. Florida officials now allege that a portion of the overpaid funds was used to finance her 2021 congressional campaign.

The Office of Congressional Ethics has also released a report detailing allegations of campaign finance violations against Cherfilus-McCormick. The report claims her campaign committee accepted unreported contributions exceeding legal limits and failed to disclose transactions between the campaign committee&rsquo;s and her business&rsquo;s bank accounts.

While Cherfilus-McCormick currently faces unrelated ethics complaints, the lawsuit adds further scrutiny to her tenure at Trinity. Florida&rsquo;s legal filing asserts that Trinity exploited the emergency conditions of the pandemic to retain funds it was not entitled to.

Trinity&rsquo;s current CEO, Edwin Cherfilus, has declined to comment on the lawsuit or the allegations against the company.

Florida is seeking full repayment of the overpaid funds as the case unfolds. Meanwhile, Cherfilus-McCormick&rsquo;s political career faces heightened scrutiny over fresh legal and ethical allegations.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump's controversial deportation plan: The Bahamas says "No Deal"</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2514374/trumps-controversial-deportation-plan-the-bahamas-says-no-deal</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2514374/trumps-controversial-deportation-plan-the-bahamas-says-no-deal#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 07 Dec 24 07:57:05 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[NEWSDESK  ]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2514374</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Trump’s deportation plan aims to send migrants to nations they don’t know — but resistance is mounting.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Donald Trump&rsquo;s incoming administration is stirring controversy with an ambitious &mdash; and polarising &mdash; plan to deport migrants to countries they have no ties to.

The Bahamas has already drawn a firm line, rejecting the proposal outright, while other potential destinations are similarly resistant. The scheme, which aims to execute what Trump calls the &ldquo;largest deportation operation&rdquo; in U.S. history, is already meeting stiff international opposition.

According to NBC News, Trump&#39;s team has a list of countries &mdash; including the Bahamas, Turks and Caicos Islands, Panama, and Grenada &mdash; they want to use as drop-off points for deported migrants if their home countries won&rsquo;t take them back. But key details remain murky. For instance, it&rsquo;s unclear whether deportees would be allowed to work in these countries, or how Trump plans to pressure these nations into cooperation.

The Bahamas isn&rsquo;t interested in playing along. On Thursday, Prime Minister Philip Davis&rsquo;s office made it clear that the country had &ldquo;reviewed and firmly rejected&rdquo; the plan.

Their neighbor, the Turks and Caicos Islands, echoed this sentiment, with Immigration Minister Arlington Musgrove saying deportation flights weren&rsquo;t welcome there either.

While Trump&#39;s plan is making waves, the concept of relocating migrants to third countries has precedent. During his presidency, Joe Biden explored similar options, negotiating with Suriname to accept Afghan refugees held in Kosovo.

The UK&rsquo;s Conservative Party also attempted to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, but the plan was declared unlawful by the UK Supreme Court in 2023.

Even after adding security guarantees and ratifying a new treaty, the policy was scrapped when the Labour Party took power in 2024.

In Europe, countries like Turkey, Albania, and several EU member states have also participated in similar deals, agreeing to host migrants as part of broader political arrangements.

Trump&rsquo;s approach is raising eyebrows for its scale and implications. Critics argue that relocating migrants to nations with no connection to them breaches international law and endangers asylum seekers fleeing violence.

During Trump&rsquo;s first term, a smaller version of this plan sent deportees to Guatemala &mdash; a policy halted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) took Trump to court over that measure, a case still ongoing.

Lee Gelernt, an ACLU lawyer, didn&rsquo;t mince words: &ldquo;We sued because it was illegal and put asylum seekers at grave risk.&rdquo;

The ACLU has warned that if Trump returns to office, his administration will aggressively pursue mass deportation, promising to fight back every step of the way.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>BJP accuses US State Department and 'deep state' of targeting India over Adani and Modi</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2514201/bjp-accuses-us-state-department-and-deep-state-of-targeting-india-over-adani-and-modi</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2514201/bjp-accuses-us-state-department-and-deep-state-of-targeting-india-over-adani-and-modi#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 24 11:18:17 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[NEWSDESK  ]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2514201</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[BJP accuses US State Department, 'deep state' of destabilising India over Adani, Modi ties.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi&#39;s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has accused the US&nbsp;State Department and &quot;deep state&quot; elements of attempting to destabilise India, claiming they are working alongside a group of investigative journalists and opposition leader Rahul Gandhi.

This accusation has raised eyebrows, as India and the US&nbsp;have built a strong relationship over the past two decades, with both countries vowing to further strengthen ties despite some ongoing differences.

The BJP&#39;s accusations come in response to the Congress party&#39;s use of reports from the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), which have focused on the Adani Group and its alleged ties to the Indian government.

The BJP claims that these reports are being used by Gandhi to undermine Modi. In particular, OCCRP&#39;s articles have spotlighted allegations that Adani Group chair Gautam Adani and others were involved in a $265 billion scheme to bribe Indian officials&mdash;a claim that the Adani Group has strongly denied.

The OCCRP has accused Indian state-sponsored hackers of using Israeli-made Pegasus spyware to target government critics, a charge the Indian government has also denied.

The BJP has previously accused Gandhi, the OCCRP, and 92-year-old billionaire financier George Soros of attacking Modi.

On Thursday, the BJP cited a French media report claiming that OCCRP receives funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and other &quot;deep state&quot; figures, including Soros.

The BJP then accused the U.S. State Department of being behind this alleged effort to destabilize India, stating, &quot;It has always been the U.S. State Department behind this agenda&hellip;OCCRP has served as a media tool for carrying out a deep state agenda.&quot;

Sambit Patra, a BJP spokesperson, reiterated these accusations in a media briefing, citing the French report that claimed 50% of OCCRP&#39;s funding comes directly from the US&nbsp;State Department.

The BJP further alleged that OCCRP had served as a vehicle for this &quot;deep state&quot; agenda.

Neither the U.S. State Department, USAID, Soros, nor the Congress party responded to the accusations. The Indian foreign ministry also did not comment on the BJP&#39;s claims against the US&nbsp;State Department.

In response, OCCRP issued a statement asserting that it is an independent media outlet, clarifying that while the US&nbsp;government provides some funding, it has no influence over OCCRP&rsquo;s editorial processes or reporting.

The accusations come at a time when the Indian government is facing scrutiny over the US&nbsp;indictment of Gautam Adani, which opposition leaders have used to argue that Modi has long protected the billionaire.

Last week, India&#39;s parliament was suspended multiple times as opposition lawmakers demanded a debate on the issue. Both Modi&#39;s BJP and Adani have denied the allegations.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Ex-PTI media coordinator apologises to Nawaz Sharif</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2514193/ex-pti-media-coordinator-apologises-to-nawaz-sharif</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2514193/ex-pti-media-coordinator-apologises-to-nawaz-sharif#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 24 10:49:06 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[NEWSDESK  ]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2514193</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Javed Badar apologizes to Nawaz Sharif for past 'slanders' and 'mistakes' during his PTI tenure]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Javed Badar, the former media coordinator for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has&nbsp;apologised to Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) President Nawaz Sharif for spreading &quot;false narratives and slanderous accusations&quot; during his time with the Imran Khan-led party.

In an open letter, Badar expressed deep regret for his actions and sought forgiveness from Nawaz Sharif, his family, and the PML-N.

He explained that the apology was prompted by personal reflection and a fear of divine accountability, stating, &quot;This letter is written purely out of fear of the hereafter and the voice of my conscience, without any pressure or temptation.&quot;

Badar admitted to fabricating and spreading false propaganda about Nawaz Sharif and his family, which he acknowledged had harmed their reputation.

He also acknowledged his role in pursuing power through dishonest means, including the dissemination of false narratives. &quot;I regret the harm I caused and apologise for the slanderous remarks I made,&quot; he wrote.

He further condemned the unjust cases filed against Nawaz Sharif that led to his imprisonment, noting that &quot;Allah&#39;s justice has restored Nawaz Sharif&#39;s honour and position.&quot; Badar explained that his departure from PTI was influenced by internal corruption and mismanagement within the party, particularly under the influence of Bushra Bibi, Imran Khan&rsquo;s wife.

He highlighted incidents such as Usman Buzdar&rsquo;s appointment as Chief Minister of Punjab and the widespread corruption during her watch, saying, &quot;I left PTI when corruption was openly allowed under Bushra Bibi&#39;s watch.&quot;

Badar also criticised the PTI government for depleting the national treasury, straining international relations, and encouraging rebellion against the military. In contrast, he praised Nawaz Sharif&rsquo;s leadership, acknowledging the efforts of Sharif, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz in stabilising the country and improving diplomatic relations.

&quot;Your leadership, alongside Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, has brought stability to Pakistan,&quot; Badar noted.

In his letter, Badar apologised not only to Nawaz Sharif but also to the Pakistani nation and the parents of PTI supporters, admitting that the party had misled the youth and created divisions.

&quot;We in PTI have poisoned Pakistani politics and confused young minds, a mistake for which we will pay the price for generations,&quot; he confessed.

Confirming the authenticity of his apology, Badar told Geo News, &quot;I am the one who wrote this open letter to Nawaz Sharif.&quot; He concluded by pledging to take full responsibility for his past mistakes and expressed his desire to meet Nawaz Sharif personally.

&quot;If I ever meet Nawaz Sharif, I will admit my mistakes to him directly,&quot; Badar said.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Trump to attend Notre Dame's reopening in Paris on first overseas trip</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2513499/trump-to-attend-notre-dames-reopening-in-paris-on-first-overseas-trip</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2513499/trump-to-attend-notre-dames-reopening-in-paris-on-first-overseas-trip#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 24 11:25:21 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[newsdesk.]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2513499</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Trump's first overseas trip since winning elections will mark event celebrating completion of cathedral’s restoration.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[US president-elect Donald Trump will travel to Paris this weekend to attend the grand reopening of the historic Notre Dame Cathedral, marking his first overseas trip since winning the election.

The event will celebrate the completion of the cathedral&rsquo;s restoration, following the devastating fire in 2019 that caused extensive damage, including the collapse of its iconic spire.

The ceremony, set for Saturday and Sunday, is expected to attract around 50 heads of state and government, with heightened security around the event.

Trump made the announcement on his Truth Social platform, expressing his honor to attend the reopening and praising French President Emmanuel Macron for overseeing the restoration of Notre Dame.

&ldquo;It&rsquo;s an honor to announce that I will be traveling to Paris, France, on Saturday to attend the reopening of the magnificent and historic Notre Dame Cathedral, which has been fully restored after a devastating fire five years ago,&rdquo; Trump wrote. &ldquo;President Macron has done a wonderful job ensuring that Notre Dame has been restored to its full glory.&rdquo;

The fire in 2019 threatened one of the world&rsquo;s most famous landmarks, known for its remarkable stained glass windows and intricate architecture

At the time, Trump, who was president, offered suggestions on how to tackle the blaze, including the use of water tankers.

French officials responded, clarifying that water-bombing aircraft could damage the cathedral&#39;s structure.

In addition to the historical significance of the reopening, the weekend will include a series of cultural events. On Saturday, Paris Archbishop Laurent Ulrich will lead a service to mark the cathedral&#39;s reopening, ceremoniously banging on the cathedral&rsquo;s doors to open them.

Following the service, a star-studded concert will feature performances by international artists, including opera singers Pretty Yende and Julie Fuchs, pianist Lang Lang, and cellist Yo-Yo Ma.







On Sunday, an inaugural Mass will be held, along with the consecration of the cathedral&rsquo;s new altar. A public viewing area will be set up along the Seine River for up to 40,000 spectators, as the &Icirc;le de la Cit&eacute;, where the cathedral is located, will be closed to tourists during the events.

Trump&rsquo;s trip to Paris also comes amid ongoing discussions with European leaders, including Macron, who has been a key diplomatic counterpart for the US president during his term.

Trump recently announced plans to nominate real estate developer Charles Kushner, father-in-law of Jared Kushner, to serve as ambassador to France.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Politics of enemies at fever pitch</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2512961/politics-of-enemies-at-fever-pitch</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2512961/politics-of-enemies-at-fever-pitch#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Nov 24 21:46:07 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[rizwan.shehzad]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2512961</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Polarisation &amp; populism are making political violence the first option rather than last resort]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[On November 13, Imran Khan, the incarcerated founding chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, gave the final call for his release, among other demands. Since it was the final call, expectations were high that the PTI leadership would emerge, descend on the capital and stay put until their demands were met. Party workers hoped that the leadership would come up with a different plan to achieve the objectives this time around and would not abandon them like the previous occasion.

Usually, it takes a couple of hours to reach Islamabad from Peshawar. But given the blockades set up with heavy containers, teargas shelling and clashes with law enforcers deployed on the way, the party workers led by Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur accompanied by Imran&rsquo;s wife, Bushra Bibi, took almost three days to finally reach the edge of the planned destination: D-Chowk. Some even entered the Red Zone, forcing the law enforcers to briefly retreat.

For a brief period, they captured the high-security zone, roamed freely and even sat on the containers placed there, leaving the government red-faced. However, the batch of protestors soon realised that they were the only ones standing face-to-face with the security officials as the party leadership had stayed at a distance from the promised venue. This lack of coordination between the workers and PTI leadership allowed the government to regroup. The scene quickly changed as the authorities wrest back control of the situation.

By then, it was evident that the much-touted final call would soon fizzle out. The absence of key party leaders and any reasonable strategy added insult to injury &ndash; which the party leaders have questioned, asking where were all those who have been sitting in the assemblies after winning the elections in the name of Imran Khan. And, as the sun set, the lights were switched off and an operation was launched on the capital&rsquo;s Blue Area road. Next, the protestors were not only pushed back but faced betrayal once again as they were abandoned by the leaders present in the rally as well as those who had urged them to come out. As Gandapur along with Bushra disappeared from the scene, the protest quickly fizzled out amid an onslaught by the law enforcers. Within hours, the government ministers showed up at D-Chowk and announced that PTI leaders had &ldquo;fled&rdquo; the scene.

Since then, the discussion moved back into the virtual space where both sides have their own versions of the event, especially, on the reported tragic deaths of PTI workers as well as security officials. What is more tragic is that the number of deaths keeps on changing with different PTI leaders putting the number from 12 to over 250. The government side not only denies the same but seeking proof of firing at the protestors and details of the deceased persons, accuses PTI of spreading &lsquo;false&rsquo; narrative through, what it has called, old posts of footage.

Nevertheless, the reported deaths of PTI workers in Blue Area and security officials in other areas during clashes between PTI protestors and government forces serve as a grim reminder of the dangerous path Pakistan&rsquo;s politics has taken. What has emerged is not only a protest spiralling out of control but a reflection of a deeper crisis: the transformation of political rivalry into hostility where opponents are no longer seen as rivals to be debated but as foes to be eradicated.

Democratic engagement has taken a back seat. Leadership and their supporters have started to see the opponents through the lens of existential threats. Polarisation, populism and rhetoric of destruction are dominating the political chessboard and have become a hallmark of the political discourse. This divide has not just added fuel to the aggression on the streets as well as in the virtual world but led to a deeper division in society as well as in the political arena; both in and outside the Parliament.

The reason is simple: the political forces have a keen desire to align with the powerful stakeholders, no matter the price. The competition has intensified the crisis as the political players keep on seeking proximity to the influential players, believing this is the only way to secure power. This has also promoted the culture of political enmity, occasionally leading to political violence in democratic periods. Moreover, another dangerous aspect of the whole situation is that political forces are not even trying to find a common ground beyond optics.

The belief that opposing viewpoints can peacefully coexist is either vanishing or being replaced by other ideas, such as using force to make ones demands met. The desire to become victorious often equates to eliminating the other side completely from the scene, taking the political rivalry to another level having devastating consequences. The result is an unending cycle of confrontation where no one seems to be willing to take a step back and normalise the tense situation.

Competitors turned enemies

What Pakistan is experiencing is not an isolated phenomenon. Across democracies worldwide, polarisation and populism are on the rise, creating conditions where political violence is no longer a distant possibility but becoming a reality. Michael Grant Ignatieff, a Canadian political thinker, author, academic and former politician, warns of the dangerous threshold societies cross when political opponents are viewed as enemies.

In his essay &lsquo;The Politics of Enemies&rsquo; published in Journal of Democracy, Ignatieff states that a politics of enemies treats political opponents as threats who must be eliminated or destroyed, saying the core accusation is that the opponents aim to lay waste to democracy itself. &ldquo;Since the threat they pose is existential,&rdquo; he writes, &ldquo;all means that might be used to combat them are fair.&rdquo; Restraint becomes a sign of weakness, he adds, saying the goal is &ldquo;to crush your enemies and see them driven before you&rdquo; while winning total victory for your own side.

&ldquo;A politics of enemies is venomously personal,&rdquo; Ignatieff maintains before adding that its purpose is to deny the opponent standing, that is, the right to be believed or even to be taken seriously. He explains that the attacks on the past, the character, the financial assets, and even the family of an opponent are designed to ensure that when an opponent speaks, listeners do not listen, because they have been persuaded that the opponent cannot be trusted. &ldquo;Attack a candidate&rsquo;s standing and you do not have to bother with their ideas or campaign agenda,&rdquo; he stated, adding the crucial way to deny standing is to question the patriotism of the opponent, to raise doubts about their commitment to widely shared values. &ldquo;When standing is effectively denied,&rdquo; he writes, &ldquo;the opponent is no longer a competitor: They have become an enemy.&rdquo;

This philosophy, rooted in the idea that political opposition is a threat, is dangerously alive in Pakistan. Surprising as it may seem, it mirrors world&rsquo;s most influential writer George Orwell&rsquo;s insight into political language: &ldquo;Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable,&rdquo; Orwell writes, arguing that the manipulation of language and rhetoric has created a climate where violence is increasingly justified as a necessary response to political adversaries. The Blue Area clashes epitomize this dangerous cycle. They were not just a moment of unrest but also the culmination of years of inflammatory rhetoric and growing populist fervour. Each side&mdash;government and opposition&mdash;sees the other as an existential threat, leaving little room for dialogue or reconciliation.

A way forward

The erosion of dialogue amid growing politics of enemies is eroding public trust in not just politicians but in the very structures of governance. Using violence, once a last resort, as a legitimate tool to achieve political goals has far-reaching consequences. As opposed to countries where institutions are strong and functional, Pakistan&rsquo;s democratic structure is already fragile, thus, the stakes are even higher. The recent violence highlights how quickly a political contest can devolve into chaos, leaving death and destruction in its wake. 

In Pakistan, the political elite faces a critical choice, raising questions if they will continue down the path of polarization and populism, or will they take steps to rebuild trust and restore democratic norms. The answer lies not just in policy or rhetoric but also in the willingness to see political opponents as rivals, not enemies.

The events in Blue Area are a warning: the politics of enemies leads only to destruction. If this moment does not serve as a wake-up call, Pakistan risks plunging further into a cycle of violence that could irreparably damage its democratic fabric. Political leaders must rise above the fray and prioritize dialogue, compromise and the greater good. Otherwise, the politics of enemies will claim not just lives but the future of democracy itself.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>RFK Jr. absent from niece's wedding amid alleged relationship with reporter Olivia Nuzzi</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2498099/rfk-jr-absent-from-nieces-wedding-amid-alleged-relationship-with-reporter-olivia-nuzzi</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2498099/rfk-jr-absent-from-nieces-wedding-amid-alleged-relationship-with-reporter-olivia-nuzzi#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 24 06:32:46 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Pop Culture &amp; Art]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2498099</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The Kennedy family gathered in Hyannis Port on Saturday, September 21, ahead of Grace Kennedy Allen's wedding.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has sparked controversy after being absent from his niece&#39;s pre-wedding festivities amid allegations of a personal relationship with New York magazine campaign reporter Olivia Nuzzi. The Kennedy family gathered in Hyannis Port on Saturday, September 21, ahead of Grace Kennedy Allen&#39;s Massachusetts wedding. However, Bobby, 70, who lives in Malibu, was nowhere to be seen.

The absence comes just two days after Nuzzi, 31, was put on leave from New York magazine after she revealed that she had engaged in a personal relationship with a former subject relevant to the 2024 presidential campaign. This was a violation of the magazine&#39;s standards around conflicts of interest and disclosures.

Nuzzi did not name the subject, but CNN identified him as Bobby. She explained that the relationship was never physical but should have been disclosed to prevent the appearance of a conflict. She apologized for not doing so immediately and regretted disappointing her colleagues at New York magazine.

A representative for Bobby said that he and Nuzzi only met once in his life for an interview she requested, which yielded a hit piece. The article, titled &quot;The Mind-Bending Politics of RFK Jr.&#39;s Spoiler Campaign,&quot; ran in New York magazine in November 2023.

Bobby ran for president in the 2024 race, dropped out in August, and subsequently endorsed Donald Trump. His wife, Cheryl Hines, was spotted without her wedding ring on September 20 and without Bobby. She celebrated her 59th birthday on September 21 in Milan with her daughter Catherine Young to support Bobby&#39;s daughter Kyra, a model walking in Gucci&#39;s Milan Fashion Week show.

The controversy surrounding Bobby&#39;s alleged relationship with Nuzzi has sparked questions about his involvement in the 2024 presidential campaign and his potential conflicts of interest.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Royce white enters political arena, challenging Klobuchar for senate</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2489183/royce-white-enters-political-arena-challenging-klobuchar-for-senate</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2489183/royce-white-enters-political-arena-challenging-klobuchar-for-senate#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 24 01:56:48 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Web Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2489183</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[With his sights set on the senate, White’s campaign faces an uphill battle against a well-established opponent]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Royce White, a former NBA player known for his outspoken and controversial views, is now running as a Republican candidate for the US Senate in Minnesota. 

Despite a promising start in basketball, where he averaged 13.4 points and 9.3 rebounds during his season at Iowa State University, White&#39;s professional career was derailed by mental health issues. Selected 16th overall in the 2012 NBA draft, White played only three games with the Sacramento Kings, totaling nine minutes on the court without scoring a single point. His struggles with anxiety, particularly a phobia of flying, kept him away from the league, and he eventually faded from professional basketball.

Now 33, White has shifted his focus to politics, securing a victory in the Minnesota Republican primary against Navy veteran Joe Fraser. He will face incumbent Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat who has held the seat since 2007 and is considered a strong contender.

White&#39;s campaign is built on populist rhetoric, as evidenced by the aggressive language on his candidacy website, where he accuses the government of corruption, distorting reality, and creating chaos to divide the American people. He specifically targets Klobuchar, claiming she is complicit in this corruption and must be replaced.

White&#39;s campaign has not been without controversy. He has been accused of anti-Semitism by the Republican Jewish Coalition, made disparaging remarks about women, supported conspiracy theories, and faced criticism for spending campaign funds at a strip club during a failed congressional run in 2022. Additionally, White, a father of four, has been involved in legal disputes over unpaid child support.

Despite these issues, White has received backing from the Minnesota Republican Party and support from far-right groups, including some led by former Trump associates. He believes he can broaden the Republican base in Minnesota by attracting African-American voters. However, his chances of unseating Klobuchar remain slim, given the stronghold she has on the seat.

White&rsquo;s journey from the NBA to politics is marked by his activism, particularly in the wake of George Floyd&#39;s murder in Minnesota, which fuelled the Black Lives Matter movement. He also participated in the Big3 basketball league, using his platform to promote political messages. Now, as the first Senate candidate born in the 1990s, White faces a challenging campaign in his bid for political office.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Far-right rising</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2485300/far-right-rising</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2485300/far-right-rising#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 03 Aug 24 18:00:04 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[HAMMAD SARFRAZ]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category><category><![CDATA[T-Magazine]]></category><category><![CDATA[Magazine]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2485300</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Far-right parties are gaining ground in Europe, reshaping the political landscape with global ramifications]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Once confined to the political periphery, far-right and nativist parties are now gaining ground across Europe, disrupting the Continent&rsquo;s delicate equilibrium. From Helsinki to The Hague, their rise is reshaping the political landscape, with mainstream parties sometimes adopting more populist agendas to retain voters.

In France, the spectre of far-right dominance came alarmingly close to becoming reality in last month&rsquo;s tense snap election, highlighting the increasing influence of these movements. Although the country narrowly averted a far-right takeover, the persistent shadow of rising nationalist sentiment continues to haunt Europe, posing a significant threat to its future direction.

While Marine Le Pen&rsquo;s Rassemblement National fell short of power in Paris, the party&rsquo;s growing momentum has invigorated the far-right movement within the Eurozone&rsquo;s second-largest economy, which, alongside Germany, has long been a pillar of the European Union. In the final tally, Le Pen&rsquo;s party secured the third spot in the French Parliament with 143 seats, a significant increase from the 88 seats it held in the previous assembly. As President Emmanuel Macron continues his political power struggle with Jean-Luc M&eacute;lenchon, the anti-capitalist leader of the far-left La France Insoumise (LFI) within the New Popular Union (NUPES), Le Pen, the doyenne of the Rassemblement National, claimed that her party&rsquo;s victory has only been &lsquo;delayed&rsquo; and that the far-right &lsquo;tide is rising.&rsquo;

The &#39;tide&#39; is by no means confined to France.

Earlier, in the Netherlands, a bastion of liberal ideals, far-right lawmaker Geert Wilders achieved a surprising electoral victory, pushing his anti-European Union party past the finish line. After months of negotiations, the Freedom Party (PVV) reached an agreement to form a right-wing coalition government with three other parties. Although Wilders has stepped back from his bid to become the Dutch Prime Minister, the veteran anti-Islam, anti-EU politician is expected to wield considerable influence as the leader of the largest political bloc in parliament. Analysts who have tracked Wilders&rsquo; political trajectory for the past decade see the rise of his Freedom Party as indicative of a broader trend of populist and far-right movements advancing into the European mainstream.

National-conservative and far-right parties now govern in seven of the EU&rsquo;s 27 member states: Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, and Slovakia. Additionally, a number of other EU countries are led by right-leaning coalition governments.

In Italy, Giorgia Meloni leads the most right-wing government since Benito Mussolini, with her party&rsquo;s neo-fascist roots shaping its policies. Far-right factions are also integrated into Finland&rsquo;s ruling coalition, and in Sweden, a minority government formed by three center-right parties relies on the Sweden Democrats for parliamentary support, giving the far-right party unprecedented influence over government decisions. Germany has witnessed a considerable rise in far-right popularity, with the Alternative f&uuml;r Deutschland (AfD) capturing significant support from young voters and securing second place in the recent EU Parliament elections.

Meanwhile, Viktor Orb&aacute;n, who has led Hungary&rsquo;s far-right government for over a decade, has formed an alliance with Marine Le Pen&rsquo;s National Rally to create a new bloc in the EU Parliament. Known as Patriots for Europe and led by Le Pen&rsquo;s prot&eacute;g&eacute; Jordan Bardella, this bloc is now the third-largest in the parliament, positioned to wield substantial influence over EU policy. 

Adding to Europe&#39;s political shift, a grand coalition of center-right, center-left, and liberal parties, which has long maintained a cordon sanitaire, or a firewall, around the far right, has seen a notable decline in the recent EU elections. According to the Centre for European Reform, a Brussels-based think tank, the vote share for populist right-wing and far-right parties has surged across many EU member states, driven by a number of factors. The Centre noted that in the first ballot since Brexit, the vote share for parties to the right of the conservative European People&rsquo;s Party (EPP) increased from 18 per cent in 2019 to just over 24 per cent, including hard-right parties currently seated in the non-attached group.

Reflecting on the long-term impact of the far-right&rsquo;s rise, Dr. Ashok Swain, a Professor of Peace and Conflict at Uppsala University, noted, &ldquo;In the long run, the rise of far-right parties is expected to impact EU policies.&rdquo; He explained that these parties typically push for stricter immigration controls, a rollback of climate change initiatives, and more nationalist economic policies. &ldquo;Such shifts could undermine the EU&rsquo;s commitment to liberal democratic values and alter its stance on global issues, including its approach to Russia and the Green Deal,&rdquo; Swain warned. He further highlighted that the erosion of traditional center-left and center-right parties has led to a more fragmented political landscape, making it increasingly difficult to form stable governments without right-wing support. &ldquo;This fragmentation could amplify the influence of far-right parties within the EU, shaping both domestic and international policy agendas,&rdquo; he added.

Commenting on the significant political gains made by the far right in the recent European Parliament elections, Dr. Francesco Nicoli, a Professor of Political Economy at Ghent University, said: &ldquo;The far right has indeed made significant strides, but it&rsquo;s important not to overstate their immediate impact. For these parties to influence economic and foreign policies substantially, they would need to secure victories in both France and Germany. Currently, it appears they will likely concentrate on domestic issues such as immigration and cultural policies that resonate with their base.&rdquo;

Fueling the right

The growing support for far-right parties is raising alarms among experts. Commenting on the factors behind the strong polling of these groups across the Continent, Swain said: &ldquo;The rise of far-right parties in Europe is driven by several factors. Economic concerns, such as inequality, job insecurity, and the rising cost of living, are major concerns for many voters who feel left behind by EU policies.&rdquo;

&ldquo;Their anti-immigration messages resonate with those who fear the repercussions of the 2015&ndash;16 migrant crisis and perceive threats to national identity,&rdquo; he added.

Swain noted that Euroscepticism contributes to this trend, as many Europeans view the EU as an unaccountable bureaucracy that undermines national sovereignty. Political disillusionment, he pointed out, is another driver of far-right gains. &ldquo;There is a perception that traditional parties are disconnected from real issues facing ordinary people. Moreover, media and social networks amplify the reach of far-right messages,&rdquo; the Sweden-based academic concluded.

Nicoli described several interrelated challenges fueling the rise of far-right parties across Europe. &ldquo;There is a strong economic component. Many voters are anxious about being left behind amid rapid economic changes. It&rsquo;s not necessarily those who have been left behind, but rather those who fear they might be. People concerned about the economic direction tend to support the far-right.&rdquo;

Like Swain, he also highlighted dissatisfaction with certain policies, such as the Green Deal, as contributing factors. &ldquo;Initially, there was broad support for the Green Deal, but as soon as the costs became apparent, enthusiasm waned.&rdquo;

Finally, Nicoli pointed to a broader sense of insecurity, not only economic or physical but also cultural. &ldquo;Many people feel that their roots, communities, and identities are under threat.&rdquo; Far-right parties, he noted, not only highlight these concerns but sometimes even exploit the situation for political gain.

While these parties will likely continue to influence domestic policies and sway voters, Nicoli downplayed their potential to significantly impact decisions in the EU Parliament. &ldquo;The far-right&rsquo;s influence will depend largely on their ability to stay united,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;At present, they are divided on key issues, such as support for Ukraine and fiscal policy.&rdquo;

Fading left

Reports indicate that liberal parties are grappling with the challenge of reasserting their influence. To remain relevant, some have increasingly turned to coalition governments with right-leaning parties. An analysis by Chatham House suggests that this shift is motivated by fears of losing voters to far-right alternatives.

Swain observed that this trend has helped normalize far-right positions, integrating them into mainstream political discourse. He attributed the weakening of left-wing parties to political disillusionment and fragmentation, which has favored more cohesive far-right groups.

According to The Guardian, several factors have diminished the appeal of left-wing parties across many countries, including the rising cost of living, the difficulties of pandemic recovery, and the impact of Russia&rsquo;s war in Ukraine.

Charming young voters

In the 2024 EU elections, far-right parties won a quarter of the seats, putting them on par with the largest bloc, the center-right European People&rsquo;s Party. The outcome was widely anticipated, with polls predicting the far-right&rsquo;s triumph. However, the current electoral landscape has exposed a significant shift: in both European and national elections, voters under 30 increasingly backed far-right parties such as Germany&rsquo;s AfD, France&rsquo;s Rassemblement National, Spain&rsquo;s Vox, Italy&rsquo;s Brothers of Italy, Portugal&rsquo;s Chega, Belgium&rsquo;s Vlaams Belang, and Finland&rsquo;s Finns Party. This voting pattern marks a sharp departure from the 2019 EU elections, when young voters overwhelmingly favored Green parties.

Swain noted that far-right parties have increasingly co-opted issues traditionally associated with the left. At the same time, Nicoli observed that the right has been moderating its stance to appeal to a broader electorate, appearing less extreme in its approach.

According to Simon Schnetzer, author of the 2024 study Jugend in Deutschland (Youth in Germany), concerns about future prosperity&mdash;not cultural nationalism&mdash;have driven the shift towards far-right politics among young people. Schnetzer&rsquo;s research indicates that while economic hardship can often lead to support for radical left-wing change, fears about losing social status more commonly foster conservative inclinations towards stability and security.

To lure young voters, parties like the French National Rally and the Dutch Party for Freedom often combine a commitment to liberal values&mdash;such as freedom of speech and gender equality&mdash;with appeals for social, economic, and cultural security. Two years ago, Le Pen&rsquo;s manifesto, for instance, proposed eliminating taxes for those under 30, offering financial support to student workers, and increasing student housing. Similarly, in the Netherlands, Wilders, the PVV leader, in 2023, campaigned on promises to invest in healthcare and housing, a promise also echoed by the leadership of the AfD in Germany.

The long-term impact

As newly elected lawmakers take their seats in the EU Parliament following the June elections, the continent&rsquo;s resurgent yet fragmented nationalist parties are gearing up to confront their rivals in Brussels. Analysts, however, caution that the degree of the far-right&rsquo;s impact on parliamentary proceedings will largely hinge on their ability to present a unified front.

&ldquo;Far-right influence on foreign policy is evident in their diverse positions on issues like the war in Ukraine, Palestine, and EU enlargement,&rdquo; said Swain. He noted that while the European Parliament has limited sway over foreign policy, an increased number of Eurosceptic and far-right MEPs could impact the EU&rsquo;s overall stance.

In the short and medium term, Swain warned of the challenge posed by obstructive member states in the European Council, such as Hungary, where populist leader Viktor Orb&aacute;n has been skeptical of sanctions on Russia and support for Ukraine. Populists in other countries, including Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, might mirror Orb&aacute;n&rsquo;s positions within the EU Council.

&ldquo;Overall, the rise of far-right parties will lead to significant shifts in policy and governance, affecting migration, climate action, and foreign policy,&rdquo; Swain cautioned. &ldquo;This trend is likely to reshape the political landscape, with potential long-term implications for the EU&rsquo;s cohesion and direction.&rdquo;

He added that the growing influence of Eurosceptic leaders and parties at the national level may affect member states&rsquo; positions in the European Council, potentially leading to a shift towards weakening the EU&rsquo;s policy and legislative powers in favor of national processes.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>One damn thing after the other</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2485317/one-damn-thing-after-the-other</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2485317/one-damn-thing-after-the-other#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 03 Aug 24 18:36:28 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Dr Muhammad Ali Ehsan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2485317</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Politics, both domestic and global, is no longer the answer for improving the overall human condition]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Henry Ford (1863&ndash;1947) was an American industrialist and is best known for being the founder of the Ford Motor Company. Once asked what he thinks about history and politics, he very inelegantly said: &ldquo;History is one damn thing after the other and politics is one damn thinker or one damn idea after another.&rdquo; Why I am reminded of his reply is the frustration I feel in the inability of politics, both domestic and global, in becoming an answer to improve the overall human conditions. In a world in which everyone is under the scrutiny of everyone, the democratic world today commits almost similar mistakes and crimes that it accuses the undemocratic world of committing. Israel strikes Tehran and kills Ismail Haniyeh. In the eyes of the world this act of war violates no international law and no UN Charter which is an instrument of law that all UN member states must follow. Is Israel not a UN member state? Or does it have a free ticket to defend its insecurity by attacking people and assassinating them in sovereign land that too during the inauguration ceremonies of a new president in an independent and sovereign state?

Israel can bank on the realistic logic and claim that a country may act in its own strategic interest. But what about the strategic interest of the US? By continuing to support Israel, the US ends up doing things that are not in its national interest and this contradicts realism. The US continues to damage its reputation in the Middle East and the greater Muslim world. There is no way Israel will get out of the troubles it has created for itself and it faces not two but three fronts &mdash; the war in Gaza, the war against Hezbollah in Lebanon and the war against Iran. The current chaos being created by Israel can return the world to the medieval conditions. So, what is the shape of things to come? To know it, we need to first find answers to a few questions. How will the war in Ukraine end? Which wars can President Donald Trump shut down if he returns to power after American elections in November? Will the world witness more surprises in the four months from August to November as the current US administration tries to influence American voters to win elections?

The first question is about the war in Ukraine. President Vladimir Putin&rsquo;s proposal for start of negotiations to end the war in Ukraine has been dismissed by the US and its Nato allies. So, if the idea is to strengthen the Ukrainian forces on ground and restore the balance of power on the battlefield, will it work? According to Professor John Miershimer, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is doing a poor job in promoting the best interests of his people. The professor thinks that Ukraine should accept the Russian conditions of commencement of negotiations. Russian Putin demands a complete withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. Moscow has also committed to ensuring the &ldquo;unhindered and safe withdrawal&rdquo; of Ukrainian forces if Kyiv agrees to such a concession. Kyiv has a problem. President Zelenskyy is not incompetent, it is the conflicting pressures that the US and Nato bring to bear on him and also the impossibility of the task that he is being asked to perform that is taking its toll on him. Just few days back Ukraine received the first batch of six F-16 fighter jets. Denmark has committed to donating 19 jets in total, while the Netherlands has promised to deliver 24 aircraft. Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway are committed to providing Ukraine with more than 60 F-16s over the coming months. Group of Seven nations have also agreed in principle to issue $50 billion in loans for Kyiv that are backed by the profits generated by $322 billion of Russian central bank assets frozen by the West. Will all this financial and military aid help Ukraine defeat Russia? The answer is simple no. From Hannibal against the Romans to Napoleon and Hitler, in military warfare there has always been one historic lesson &mdash; fighting far from home with insecure supply lines is the road to ruin. If Ukraine uses the UK-supplied Storm Shadow air-launch cruise missiles which have a range of 250 km and which the F-16s can carry and strike targets deep in Russian territory then Russia may step up and use the long-range missiles to try and destroy these F-16s on ground. The potential of the war in Ukraine is only to get further messy; the only solution to bring it to an end is through diplomacy and negotiations. That brings us to the second question. Which wars can Trump shut down if he returns to power?

In August 2019, President Trump declared himself &ldquo;history&rsquo;s most pro-Israel U.S. president&rdquo;. In fact, he asked the Americans not to vote for Democrats because if they did then they would be &ldquo;very, very disloyal to Israel and to the Jewish people&rdquo;. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also on record in terming Trump as &ldquo;the best friend Israel has ever had in white House&rdquo;. These statements suggest that Trump will have little incentive and motivation to end the war in Gaza but considering that Trump&rsquo;s first term was the first since that of Jimmy Carter (1977 to 1981) in which the US did not enter a new war or expand an existing conflict, Trump would like to keep it that way and be known in history as the most accomplished anti-war US president. If this is likely to happen then it becomes easier to answer the third question. Will the world witness more surprises in the four months from August to November as the current US administration tries to influence American voters to win elections?

So far the US has nothing to show to the American public on the question of ceasefire in Gaza. There is a story in how Israel is trying to eliminate Hamas in Gaza. Can this story be repeated in how and what Israel does with Hezbollah in Lebanon? And if Israel has the political, diplomatic and military backing of the US to do this, will it have a positive bearing on the fortune of Democrats in winning over the American public during the November elections? About 60,000 Israeli citizens have been displaced to central Israel due to the constant shelling of northern Israel by Hezbollah. There is hardly any other way that the Israelis know but a military way to fix this problem. With the eyes of the world shut on Israeli immoral ways of fighting wars as well as its inhumanity and cruelty, there is little doubt that it will not try to settle the Hezbollah problem in the small widow from August to November 2024. How right was Heny Ford &mdash; one damn thing after another, one damn thinker and idea after another. The world is a cruel place to live.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>JI chief calls on government to meet public's demands</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2485251/ji-chief-calls-on-government-to-meet-publics-demands</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2485251/ji-chief-calls-on-government-to-meet-publics-demands#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 03 Aug 24 11:18:58 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2485251</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Hafiz Naeem reiterated that JI's politics is focused on obtaining relief for people, whether anyone likes it or not]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan&#39;s leader, Hafiz Naeem-ur-Rehman, has called on the government, and&nbsp;Prime Minister to&nbsp;heed the public&#39;s demands.

The JI chief emphasised that the &#39;time for secretive government actions has passed.&#39;&nbsp;

He said that,&nbsp;&nbsp;&quot;The government team must come forward, or we may have to advertise to find them. The option of boycotting electricity bills and launching a movement to remove the government is available. We can announce a march to Islamabad at any time, and your containers hold no significance before us.&quot;

Read &#39;Our patience wearing thin over govt&#39;s inaction&#39;

In his address, Hafiz Naeem remarked that the Jamaat-e-Islami has strategic options like &quot;bouncers&quot; and &quot;yorkers,&quot; metaphorically referring to political maneuvers.

He said, &quot;The bowler is currently bowling with line and length. When it&#39;s our turn to bat, everyone will know.

The JI chief urged the government to focus on the public&#39;s demands, noting that people are participating in the sit-in despite rain, sunshine, and other challenges. &quot;The sit-in will also begin in Karachi today, and it will spread across the country. The government must reduce electricity prices at any cost, and we will continue the sit-in until our demands are met. People are being forced to sell household items to pay their electricity bills,&quot; he lamented.

Read more JI chief warns of expanding protests if demands are not met

He expressed surprise at how politicians, even at the Prime Minister&#39;s level, &#39;start denying public issues when politics begins to take its true direction.&#39;

Hafiz Naeem accused government parties and the Prime Minister of &#39;perpetuating politics focused on personal agendas.&#39;

&quot;Now, those with Form 47 have been imposed on us. Our politics is focused on obtaining relief for the people, whether anyone likes it or not. We will not leave until we get our rights.&quot;

Outlining the Jamaat-e-Islami&#39;s demands, Hafiz Naeem asserted, &quot;Our demands are simple. The public will not pay the IPPs&#39; capacity charges. There have been two rounds of negotiations with the government, and the government committee has not been able to label any of our demands as wrong. The Prime Minister should tell us who is pressuring him. Why can&#39;t the Chief Ministers, Governors, and military and civil officers give up their big cars and government privileges?&quot;

He further demanded that the tax slabs created in the current budget be withdrawn and criticised the government for making announcements without issuing notifications.

&quot;The negotiating committee is present here, and the government has no answer to any of our points. Why can&#39;t they prove in negotiations that the IPPs&#39; matter is feasible? The government has no justification for oppressing the people; they must provide relief. Our stance on the IPPs is clear: we will not accept that people pay for electricity that is not even being produced,&quot; Hafiz Naeem asserted.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Modi, Trump, Putin walk the ramp for Elon Musk’s AI runway</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2482493/modi-trump-putin-walk-the-ramp-for-elon-musks-ai-runway</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2482493/modi-trump-putin-walk-the-ramp-for-elon-musks-ai-runway#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 24 07:54:21 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Mahnoor Vazir]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Fashion]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2482493</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[World leaders take part in a fake fashion show dressed in bizarre - yet clever - outfits]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Tesla CEO Elon Musk, never one to shy away from spectacle, shared an AI-generated video on Monday that was as bizarre as it was entertaining. The video, that Musk captioned &quot;High time for an AI fashion show,&quot; on X, featured an array of prominent political figures, each donning outlandish, futuristic attire as they strutted down a digital runway. If the idea of the Pope in high fashion wasn&rsquo;t wild enough, the rest of the video surely took the cake.



High time for an AI fashion show pic.twitter.com/ra6cHQ4AAu
&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2024


Now, I wouldn&rsquo;t be able to tell these politicians-turned-AI runway models apart in a line-up, but I do know fashion, whether it be meme-worthy or not.&nbsp;



&nbsp;

The show kicked off with none other than Pope Francis, who appeared dressed in an ensemble that can only be described as divine haute couture. Clad in a white Balenciaga-like puffer coat that could double as a luxury sleeping bag, the Pope&rsquo;s outfit was cinched at the waist with a gold belt that screamed &ldquo;Vatican bling.&rdquo; To complete his look, he carried a large, ornate cross in one hand and a holy water sprinkler in the other, because why not?&nbsp;

Next up was Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who appeared to have raided a technicolour dreamcoat factory. Modi&rsquo;s vibrant, multi-coloured ensemble featured a long, patchwork coat adorned with geometric patterns and symbols, merging traditional Indian design with futuristic flair. Adding a stylish twist, he sported dark sunglasses that made him look like a Bollywood star ready to take on the world. His outfit was a riot of colours and patterns, making one wonder if he was considering a new field of work, maybe as a hypnotist.



&nbsp;

Former US President Barack Obama made multiple appearances, each more surprising than the last. First, he was seen in a Goku themed outfit from the Japanese anime Dragon Ball Z.&nbsp;&nbsp;Confusing. This was followed by a basketball uniform, a clear nod to his well-known love for the sport. Finally, Obama appeared in several warrior-inspired outfits, channeling his inner gladiator. It was as if the AI couldn&rsquo;t decide if he was a diplomat, an anime hero, or a sports icon.



&nbsp;

Russian President Vladimir Putin, always one for understated elegance, was clad head-to-toe in Louis Vuitton. The luxury brand&rsquo;s logo was splashed all over his very strapless outfit, making him look more like a high-end luggage salesman than a world leader. My first thought was: &ldquo;This is so Rocky Aur Rani coded. Karan Johar would be proud.&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp;



&nbsp;

Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden appeared in a wheelchair, wearing sunglasses, and a US military uniform. A nod to his legacy as president maybe? 



&nbsp;

Donald Trump then appeared in an orange prison-like jumpsuit with handcuffs dangling off his waist. Musk really didn&rsquo;t shy away from the not-so-subtle jabs.



&nbsp;

Musk himself couldn&rsquo;t resist the temptation to feature in his own AI creation. He appeared in a costume that combined elements of a superhero outfit with Tesla branding and the X logo, looking ready to save the world&mdash;or at least sell it a few more electric cars.



&nbsp;

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un&rsquo;s ensemble was a fashion statement in its own right. He wore a baggy, long hoodie paired with a chunky gold necklace, the name &ldquo;KIM&rdquo; plastered across the front of his person. It evoked the image of a K-pop star who just raided a hip-hop wardrobe.



&nbsp;

Other notable appearances included Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who walked the runway in a red dress, embracing his inner fashionista with an attitude that suggested he was more than ready to break into the drag scene. Former First Lady Hillary Clinton turned heads in a bright red Supreme pantsuit, blending high fashion with streetwear in a way that only she (or at least her fake version) could pull off.



&nbsp;

Chinese leader Xi Jinping&rsquo;s outfit was perhaps the most whimsical of all. Dressed in a bright red set covered with playful, colourful teddy bear motifs, including a matching handbag, he looked ready for a costume party rather than a political summit. The outfit, a clever reference to the banning of Winnie the Pooh in China after the public started drawing similarities between the beloved honey-loving bear and Jinping. He clearly didn&rsquo;t find the comparisons amusing.

Unsurprisingly this is not AI&rsquo;s first foray into fashion. London Fashion Week this year announced before it&rsquo;s shows in February that it will showcase a host of AI-generated outfits and industry. As per The Guardian, insiders&nbsp;expressed a growing optimism about what the technology can do for the sector &ndash; from improving diversity to shortening the path from design desk to shop floor.

But after this stunt, we might have to keep reminding ourselves that this display was anything but real because Musk has managed to transform some of the world&rsquo;s most powerful people into memes that we just cannot take seriously.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Shafqat Mahmood announces retirement from politics</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2481538/shafqat-mahmood-announces-retirement-from-politics</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2481538/shafqat-mahmood-announces-retirement-from-politics#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jul 24 07:41:02 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2481538</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Former education minister says the decision was not influenced by any 'external pressure']]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Former Education Minister Shafqat Mahmood has officially announced his retirement from politics after a 34-year-long career, stating that he would dedicate his remaining years to writing and teaching.

In his statement, Mahmood clarified that his decision was not influenced by external pressures or an intention to join another political party.

Shafqat emphasized that his departure from politics is a personal decision, driven by the natural course of time and age. &ldquo;This announcement marks my formal exit from politics, driven by the natural progression of time and personal considerations,&rdquo; he explained.

Reflecting on his political career, Mahmood highlighted his varied experiences, including serving as a member of the Senate and National Assembly and holding both federal and provincial ministerial positions.

He also acknowledged his time in imprisonment with a sense of acceptance and pride in having carried out his duties with integrity.

As education minister, Mahmood made significant contributions by introducing a uniform curriculum in Pakistan and managing the education sector effectively during the Covid-19 pandemic.

He expressed gratitude to Chairman PTI Imran Khan for the opportunity to serve and thanked his constituency and the PTI for electing him twice.

Mahmood concluded by reaffirming his lifelong dedication to serving the country. He hopes to continue contributing through his future work in writing, teaching, and media.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>China's Li Qiang's landmark visit strengthens ties with Australia, New Zealand</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2471901/chinas-li-qiangs-landmark-visit-strengthens-ties-with-australia-new-zealand</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2471901/chinas-li-qiangs-landmark-visit-strengthens-ties-with-australia-new-zealand#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Jun 24 19:08:10 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2471901</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Premier aims to address past diplomatic tensions, promote cultural and environmental cooperation]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Chinese Premier Li Qiang arrived in Australia on Saturday, saying relations were &quot;back on track&quot; as he started the&nbsp;first visit&nbsp;by a Chinese premier to the major trading partner in seven years.

Australia is &quot;uniquely positioned to connect the West and the East&quot; and stands as &quot;an important force of economic globalization and world multipolarity,&quot; Li said at Adelaide&#39;s airport, according to a statement from the Chinese embassy.
Bilateral relations are &quot;back on track after a period of twists and turns&quot;, Li said.

Australia is the biggest supplier of iron ore to China, which has been an investor in Australian mining projects though some recent Chinese investment in critical minerals has been blocked by Australia on national interest grounds.

China imposed trade restrictions on a raft of Australian agricultural and mineral products in 2020 during a diplomatic dispute that has now largely eased.

Read more:&nbsp;India to work on border solutions with Pakistan and China, says foreign minister

During his four-day visit, Li will also visit the capital Canberra, and the mining state of Western Australia. &quot;A more mature, stable, and fruitful comprehensive strategic partnership will be a treasure shared by the people of both countries,&quot; Li said.

He is expected to visit a pair of pandas on loan from China to Adelaide&#39;s zoo on Sunday. A lunch with wine exporters until recently shut out of the Chinese market will show&nbsp;trade ties&nbsp;have smoothed after the dispute that suspended $13 billion in Australian agriculture and mineral exports last year.

Li arrived from New Zealand, where he highlighted Chinese demand for New Zealand&#39;s agricultural products.
China is the biggest trading partner of Australia and New Zealand. Canberra and Wellington are seeking to balance trade with regional security concerns over China&#39;s ambitions in the Pacific Islands.

In New Zealand, Li visited major dairy exporter Fonterra on Saturday after&nbsp;signing agreements&nbsp;with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon on trade and climate change, with human rights and foreign interference also on the agenda.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>The misdeed of seeking ‘intervention’</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2471534/the-misdeed-of-seeking-intervention</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2471534/the-misdeed-of-seeking-intervention#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 24 20:24:24 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Durdana Najam]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2471534</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The  misdeed of using shortcuts instead of arduous path of good governance to assume power]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Imran Khan wants to talk to the establishment. What is the establishment in Pakistan&rsquo;s political parlance? Is it the Pakistan army? But why does Imran want to talk to the army? Does he not believe in democracy? Does he not talk incessantly about the democratic process being allowed to run its course in Pakistan? Has he not, since time immemorial, been castigating the army&rsquo;s intervention in politics? But then he is also blamed for being a product of the establishment. For that matter, every political party is considered a product of the establishment. Even PPP, which was built on a purely ideological ground, sought the establishment&rsquo;s shadow for survival post-Benazir assassination. Instead of winning the hearts of voters through the painstaking and strenuous path of good governance, the party preferred the shortcut.

Remember what Asif Ali Zardari said about the Charter of Democracy, which both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif created to shut the doors of martial laws in Pakistan? He said it was not a binding agreement on the likes of a holy scripture. Later, he slipped into the lion&rsquo;s den.

The Sharifs too have a lineage that connects them to the establishment. Providence gave them a chance post-2017 to take off the cloak. Instead of getting fair relief from the judiciary on the sleazy financial deals and the empires built overseas through laundered money, the party chose to compromise. We may call the vote of no-confidence against the PTI government constitutional, but given Pakistan&rsquo;s democratic condition, the best way forward was to call early elections, surrender before the public, tell them the truth about the missing money trails, face jail trials, bring the stolen money back and rehabilitate both the exchequer and the trust of the people in the system.

That did not happen. Instead, what happened was May 9th. Mayhem. Further political disintegration, further manipulation of politicians, another political party thrown into the dungeon of their own misdeeds.

Misdeeds. That&rsquo;s the word. That&rsquo;s where both the prognosis and the treatment lie. To understand the word, we would have to go back to where I began this column &mdash; Imran Khan&rsquo;s insistence on talking to the establishment. For a better understanding, we can even go back to the last century.

The so-called 90s. The era of democratic revival in Pakistan. The era of the two-party system. The era of revolving governments. Also, the era of political parties washing their linens at the doors of the establishment. That&rsquo;s the misdeed of our politicians. They don&rsquo;t talk to one another. They cannot tolerate the other sitting at the helm. They do not want to compete with their rivals in the realm of governance. They want people to choose them, but not the people they have served, but the people who are thrown into the ballot boxes without their consent.

We talk so much about the Hamoodur Rehman Commission Report. The indictment of all those who severed this country into two. Lately, Prisoner 804 ran a social media campaign on the report. He asked the people of Pakistan to read it. But lo and behold, the 71-year-old politician had never read the report before he got into jail. Speak of reforming the country without knowing true history!

Let&rsquo;s go back to the misdeed part. Had Bhutto given, not as a matter of generosity but as a matter of constitutional right, the right to become the prime minister of Pakistan to Sheikh Mujibur Rehman, the shape of Pakistan would have been different.

The misdeed continued in the 90s. Nawaz Sharif and Benazir &mdash; both knocked at the GHQ doors to rid them of one another. The 8th Amendment came in handy every time the request was placed. As expected, both were soon out of the political equation.

When Musharraf came to power, he quickly eliminated two forces from the political landscape of Pakistan &mdash; the left-wingers and the so-called architects of NGOs. They fell like a ripe fruit into the lap of a dictator who threw money and stature at them as bait. The tainted pasts of the politicians, their hunger for more power, their shameless decision to ditch their parent organisations to form a new one &mdash; the PML-Q. This is all part of the misdeeds the politicians have been committing.

The misdeed of looking to the establishment for power.

The misdeed of becoming a Trojan horse to combat the parliament.

The misdeed of using the judiciary and the GHQ to wash their dirty linen.

The misdeed of using shortcuts instead of the arduous path of good governance to assume power.

The misdeed found a hiatus, though momentarily in 2008, when PPP and PML-N decided to allow the democratic process to continue. PML-N refrained from toppling the PPP government. Though no government was fallen, the misdeed surfaced masked in the support of the Memogate and all other tactics that weakened the government. Instead of talking it out with the party, instead of activating parliament, instead of settling the matter within, the judiciary was involved.

The interesting part is that whenever the judiciary is brought in, it brings all the darker sides of Pakistan&rsquo;s history to light. In due course, the Asghar Khan case unfolded, and FIA told us that Rs140 million were distributed among politicians, including Nawaz Sharif, to defeat Benazir Bhutto in the 1990 elections. The jury is out on who gave the money and with whom the politicians joined hands to grind their own axis.

Every political party is divided within. All political parties are divided among themselves. The system reeks of mistrust. Look at the PTI. There is a Gandapur, then there is a Chicago IT Cell, and there is an Adiala Broadcast. All humming a different language. For the PML-N &mdash; the two brothers are playing good-cop and bad-cop. The PPP is okay with Sindh as long as the 18th Amendment remains a sleeping dog.

Speaking of democracy! Without putting polity first, it is not possible. When politicians do not talk to one another, when they invite the third party, when they prefer elitism over nationalism, then don&rsquo;t be surprised to see them disrespected, dethroned, and dismantled on the charges of May 9.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Modi 2.75?</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2470338/modi-275</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2470338/modi-275#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 24 17:52:07 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Farrukh Khan Pitafi]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2470338</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Given Modi is new to coalition politics and his allies are political bargainers, many questions about the future arise]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[They say there are two tragedies in life. Not to get your heart&rsquo;s desire. And to get it. But what happens when you get what you want but only in a diminished quantity? When writing these lines, the following has transpired so far. On the evening of June 1, when you read my last piece, the Indian media released the eagerly awaited exit polls. All of them, and there are quite a few of those, showed the Modi government returning with a thumping majority. In fact, some of them seemed to fulfil Modi&rsquo;s prophecy of ab ki bar, char sau par (this time, we will cross the four hundred milestone). 

On June 4, vote counting began, and the BJP failed to meet the expectations. In a house of 543, it secured 240 with a loss of around 60 seats and 32 short of the majority mark. With his NDA allies, he easily makes the difference. In his career, this is a first. When he was appointed the chief minister of Gujarat in 2001, he had never been an MLA. Shortly after the riots, the state held an election, and Modi&rsquo;s government comfortably won a majority. Since then, he has never had to rely on coalition partners to rule. This time, he does.

Since the opposition INDIA coalition exceeded expectations and yet fell short of a majority, fear has grown in Modi&rsquo;s camp that his allies may switch sides. If they did, that would have been it for Modi, who has ruled India like his personal fiefdom for the past ten years. His electoral misfortunes have been compounded by a low-intensity insurgency within his party, where his lieutenant Amit Shah had spent the last year sidelining major contenders. So, to foil any attempts to replace him, he first took the NDA allies on board. And obtained his parliamentary party&rsquo;s support later. As these lines are being written, he has managed both. If all things go smoothly, he takes a fresh oath on Sunday.

Given that he is new to coalition politics and his allies are astute political bargainers, many questions about the future of this venture have arisen. Will all of this work? Will we see any change in his approach to governance? Will his party do to these allies what it has done to most of his partners &mdash; either steal their mandate over time or their entire party? If so, why are these partners risking it then?

Pundits call the next government Modi 3.0. I prefer to call it the NDA 3.0 or Modi 2.75 (two and three quarters). The reason is simple. It is almost but not quite a Modi government. His past governments have been known to enjoy sweeping powers. So much so that in the past ten years, there was no opposition leader in the Lok Sabha, the lower house of the parliament. No party got enough seats to cross that threshold. With no check on power, he did not need coalition partners who, in turn, needed his support to stay in power. Hence, addicted to power, they were forced to put up with the treatment meted out to them. 

That now changes, albeit for the time being. The smart money is on his minions using old pressure tactics within months to scavenge other parties (there is no distinction between allies and opponents) and increasing the BJP&rsquo;s tally to 272. This way, the blackmail of the allies can be put to an end.

But until that happens, he is forced to work with crutches. And a look at the allies tells you he is in thick soup. If the two leading coalition partners, the Telegu Desam Party (16 seats) of Chandrababu Naidu and the Janata Dal United (12 seats) of Nitish Kumar, withdraw their support even the NDA falls short of a majority. Both of them have worked with the BJP and Modi before. Both had to quit the coalition because of Modi&rsquo;s intransigence. Chandrababu even had to go to prison for a while. And both are hard bargainers. Nitish Kumar is the architect of the India coalition and gave it the winning formula of caste census. But since the opposition coalition was dragging its feet in appointing him the national coordinator, he quit his own creation and returned to the NDA.

If these two parties are among Modi&rsquo;s victims, why are they rescuing him from oblivion? First of all, they know that in the parts of the country where Modi has support, he is wildly popular. Aligning with a rightwing populist makes it easy for them to sustain whatever gains they make through bargaining. And some blame must rest with the opposition leaders, too.

But even so, their endorsement speeches at the BJP/NDA parliamentary party meet were illuminating. Nitish Kumar&rsquo;s speech seemed to carry a dual meaning. On the face of it, he said that whatever deficiency remained in Modi&rsquo;s development agenda, he would soon eradicate it. But to the ears trained to catch Kumar&rsquo;s dual meanings, it carried another layer. That whatever he was left with would be gone soon. 

Chandrababu&rsquo;s speech repeatedly called him a visionary and, at one point, referred to his power of visualisation, which seemed to lend credence to the rumours that Modi indulges in new thought magic. This earned him a startled look from Modi.

Both these allies are reportedly demanding quite a lot from the next government. We will wait and watch to see what becomes of those demands.

And you might be wondering what happened to the party&rsquo;s internal divisions. Well, only unconfirmed reports have emerged from an interaction with the RSS, his party&rsquo;s ideological mentor. He reportedly told his detractors that he intended to step down in about a year at the age of seventy-five, and they could choose to appoint his replacement at that time. If they believed this assurance, they may deserve what&rsquo;s coming. He could spend the intervening period rebuilding his brand and then call for a fresh election when he is done. For now, however, he is being asked to remove Amit Shah from power and send him back to the party.

While it is uncertain whether this experiment will work for long, his opponents clearly lack his &lsquo;will to power&rsquo;. And his party is still in his awe. So, I have made peace with the idea that we probably are in a dystopian Bollywood film, and this is our fate. Modi&rsquo;s critics often accuse him of possessing a washing machine, which he uses to clean and recycle the opposition politicians he accuses of corruption or targets due to political animosity. I am currently trying to locate that machine.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 8th, 2024.

Like Opinion &amp; Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Safe after being slapped at the airport, Kangana Ranaut concerned about 'rising terrorism' in Punjab</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2470220/safe-after-being-slapped-at-the-airport-kangana-ranaut-concerned-about-rising-terrorism-in-punjab</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2470220/safe-after-being-slapped-at-the-airport-kangana-ranaut-concerned-about-rising-terrorism-in-punjab#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 24 06:16:49 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Entertainment Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Bollywood]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2470220</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Incident took place at Chandigarh airport]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[In a scene worthy of a troubling Bollywood script, Kangana Ranaut found herself at the centre of a real-life drama on Thursday afternoon at Chandigarh airport. As reported by NDTV, the actor-turned-politician was slapped by a CISF guard in broad daylight, amidst a crowd, raising questions about airport security protocols.

The incident occurred as Ranaut, fresh off her Lok Sabha election win from Himachal Pradesh&rsquo;s Mandi constituency, was en route to New Delhi. The CISF woman constable involved, identified as Kulwinder Kaur, has since been suspended, with an FIR being lodged against her based on a written complaint from CISF officials. Local police have also received a complaint regarding the matter.

According to CNN-News18, the altercation happened after the security check when Ranaut was heading to the boarding gate. While the exact provocation remains unclear, sources suggest Kaur&rsquo;s actions may have been fuelled by anger over Ranaut&rsquo;s previous statements about the farmers&rsquo; protest in India.

In a video statement on social media, Ranaut reassured her fans of her safety but voiced concerns about terrorism and violence in Punjab. &ldquo;I have been getting a lot of phone calls from the media and my well-wishers. I am safe, I am perfectly fine. What happened at the Chandigarh airport today was during the security check. When I left after the security check, the CISF personnel hit me on my face. She abused me. When I asked her why she did it, she told me that she supports farmers&rsquo; protests. I am safe but my concern is, how do we handle terror in Punjab?&rdquo; she said.

Despite the gravity of the incident, CISF has yet to clarify what transpired, but an inquiry committee of senior officers has been established to investigate the matter. Retired Major Gaurav Arya condemned the constable&rsquo;s behaviour in a statement on X, asserting, &ldquo;CISF Constable Kulwinder Kaur who attacked Kangana Ranaut will be punished. She may lose her job. That is what she probably planned all along. This whole thing about supporting the farmer&#39;s protest is utter nonsense.&rdquo;

Ranaut then shared the Major&rsquo;s statement on social media and added a message of her own, alleging that the farmers&rsquo; protest was not actually the real provocation, but rather that Kaur was a supporter of the Khalistan movement which seeks to create a separate homeland for Sikhs.&nbsp;

&ldquo;This makes most sense to me, she strategically waited for me to cross her and in a signature Khalistani style quietly came from behind and hit my face without saying a word. When I asked why she did that, she looked away and started to speak into the phone cameras focused on her (can be seen in her videos) hogging sudden public attention. Farmers laws have been repealed and they don&#39;t concern anyone anymore. Probably this was her way of joining the Khalistani bandwagon which is getting major political seats in Punjab,&rdquo; wrote Ranaut.



&nbsp;

The National Commission for Women (NCW) also took note of the incident, condemning the actions of the CISF constable. &ldquo;The NCW is disturbed by today&rsquo;s incident with Kangana at Chandigarh Airport. We condemn this incident and call for immediate suspension and strict action against Ms Kaur if allegations are confirmed. A letter has been sent to Director General CISF,&rdquo; the NCW stated on X.

This shocking episode comes just days after Ranaut triumphed over her closest rival, Congress&#39;s Vikramaditya Singh, by a margin of over 74,000 votes to secure her seat in Mandi.

Have something to add to the story? Share it in the comments below.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>South Africa heads for coalition as ANC set for big fall</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2469158/south-africa-heads-for-coalition-as-anc-set-for-big-fall</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2469158/south-africa-heads-for-coalition-as-anc-set-for-big-fall#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 31 May 24 08:02:45 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[REUTERS]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2469158</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[ANC looks likely to remain the largest political force]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[South African political parties&nbsp;geared up for coalition talks on Friday as the governing African National Congress (ANC) looked set to fall well short of a majority in this week&#39;s election, the first time this has happened in 30 years of democracy.

With results in from 54.9% of polling stations, the party of the late Nelson Mandela had 42.1% of votes, a precipitous drop from the 57.5% of votes it secured in the last national election in 2019.

While the ANC looked likely to remain the largest political force, voters appear to have&nbsp;punished the former liberation movement&nbsp;for years of decline.

The ANC had won every previous national election since the historic 1994 vote that ended white minority rule, but over the last decade South Africans have watched the economy stagnate, unemployment and poverty climb and infrastructure crumble, leading to regular power outages.

Projections by South Africa&#39;s Council for Scientific and Industrial Research indicated the ANC would get 40.5% when full results are in.

So far the pro-business Democratic Alliance (DA) was in second place on 23.7%. uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK), a new party led by&nbsp;former president Jacob Zuma, was at 10.8% and eating into ANC support, particularly in KwaZulu-Natal, Zuma&#39;s home province.

MK had overtaken the radical Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), currently the third biggest party in parliament, which was sitting on 9.6%.

The results page on the electoral commission&#39;s website, which had been updating seamlessly since the start of the count, went blank for roughly two hours early on Friday due to a technical problem. The data reappeared shortly after 0700 GMT.

&quot;The data in the data centre remains intact and the results have not been compromised ... Result processing continues unaffected,&quot; the commission said in a statement.

By law the election commission has seven days to release full provisional results, but election officials have said they are planning for a Sunday announcement.

Doomsday Coalition

Political parties&#39; share of the vote will determine the number of seats they get in the National Assembly, which then elects the next president.

That could still be the ANC&#39;s leader, incumbent&nbsp;President Cyril Ramaphosa. However, an embarrassing showing at the polls risks fuelling a leadership challenge.

ANC chairperson Gwede Mantashe said on Thursday that the ANC still wanted to win a majority. &quot;A coalition is not our plan; it is a consequence. We will deal with that consequence when it happens,&quot; he said.

Investors and the business community have voiced concern over the prospect of the ANC entering a coalition with the EFF, which is calling for the seizure of white-owned farms and the nationalisation of mines and banks, or with Zuma&#39;s MK which also talks about land confiscation.

Though the DA says it wants to oust the ruling party, its leader&nbsp;John Steenhuisen&nbsp;has not ruled out a partnership to block what he has called a &quot;doomsday coalition&quot; with the ANC bringing the EFF or MK into government.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Humpty Dumpty had a great fall</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2468310/humpty-dumpty-had-a-great-fall</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2468310/humpty-dumpty-had-a-great-fall#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 25 May 24 18:56:38 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[m.bilal.lakhani]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2468310</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Arc of Pakistan’s history has now been rewritten towards civilian supremacy]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The precarious political situation in Pakistan reminds me of a famous children&rsquo;s nursery rhyme. It goes something like this: Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king&rsquo;s horses and all the king&rsquo;s men couldn&rsquo;t put Humpty Dumpty together again. It feels like all the political, economic and constitutional faultiness of Pakistan are converging towards a decision point. And everyone is sitting on the edge of that wall, waiting for a fall. 

At the centre of these faultiness is a simple and profound question: who rules Pakistan? The answer to that simple question is dramatic and complicated. Elections are typically an opportunity for the ruled to choose their rulers. In Pakistan, where black is white and white is black, the February 8th elections did not produce a change in rulers but it did change everything else. 

Who was the actual winner of the 2024 Pakistani elections? The answer to this question will be debated for generations in our history books. What shouldn&rsquo;t be debated though is: who was the biggest loser. That honour goes to Humpty Dumpty. 

On Feb 8th, PTI&rsquo;s voters may not have been able to force a change in their rulers immediately but they have rewritten the social contract between the rulers and the ruled in Pakistan forever. In the process, they have finally bent the arc of Pakistan&rsquo;s history definitively towards civilian supremacy and read out a namaz-e-janaza for the politics of the electable and the controllable.

Traditionally, electables in Pakistan are used to winning elections regardless of which party&rsquo;s symbol they&rsquo;re running on and which way the political winds are blowing. Moreover, once they win elections, electables are a convenient lever for the real power brokers in the country to gently direct the people&rsquo;s mandate in whatever direction they feel is best for the country.

The 2024 elections turned these traditional expectations on their head. Many of the electables lost to tier 2 and 3 PTI candidates with virtually no name recognition.

There&rsquo;s only one man who can take the credit or blame for this: Imran Khan. Over the last 18 months, he has electrified and educated the masses on the power of their vote to dilute the strength of unelected forces, which exert undue influence within the corridors of power. He builds on similar messaging delivered by other political giants before him. The difference is that Khan has been able to mobilise a larger number of people, including Gen Z, urban elite and traditionally pro-establishment constituencies on his message. More importantly, Khan and his supporters have shown extraordinary courage in the face of brutal state repression.

On a side note, remember when they said he wouldn&rsquo;t last more than three days in jail because of withdrawal from drugs or when they disqualified his marriage? That&rsquo;s what they threw at him. Everything and the kitchen sink. And this is what backfired for the electables. For the first time, the Pakistani people voted for something beyond their bread and butter issues &ndash; the thana katcheri patronage system that electables master. This time the Pakistani people voted for their basic rights, including the right to vote. And the electables chose to stand on the wrong side of history. 

In the longer arc of history, some irreversible gains have already been made by the Pakistani people this year. First, the Pakistani people are entirely capable of producing peaceful revolutions through the ballot box. An extraordinary feat when you consider how many other Muslim nations break out into civil war and violence when renegotiating social contracts between the ruled and the rulers. Second, the new &lsquo;electable&rsquo; candidate is the one who stands with the people of Pakistan. No backdoor deals or guarantees can withstand the sheer force of the Pakistani voter. And finally, that the Pakistani voter isn&rsquo;t dumb or unaware &ndash; even if you snatch their bat and shut off their phone. This was a vote for the right of their vote to count.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 26th, 2024.

Like Opinion &amp; Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Achakzai opposes permanent enmity in politics</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2465013/achakzai-opposes-permanent-enmity-in-politics</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2465013/achakzai-opposes-permanent-enmity-in-politics#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 24 11:39:35 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Rana Yasif]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2465013</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[“If someone comes for dialogue he must be welcomed,” says Achakzai]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Chairman Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP) Mahmood Khan Achakzai&nbsp;opposed on Friday the permanent enmity in politics, claiming that the country is on the verge of destruction and the only way to put it on the right track is to be united as a nation.

Addressing lawyers at the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA), Achakzai, accompanied by former speaker of National Assembly Asad Qaisar and others, underscored that &quot;we would have to send the message that we can not afford anyone&rsquo;s war in our territory&quot;.

&ldquo;The people living here must be ensured that they have the right to the country&rsquo;s all resources,&rdquo; he said.

Achakzai, highlighting the dichotomy between religious teachings and political realities stated that &quot;While Islam strictly prohibits lying, the truth remains that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) emerged victorious in the general elections on February 8, 2024&quot;.

&quot;On one side telling lies is a sin but if we speak the truth, some powerful camps are annoyed. There must be the supremacy of law and the parliament must be stronger but not through stealing the mandate of the people.&rdquo;

He further demanded a list of police officers who were involved in the abduction of people during elections.

Read Achakzai gets breather as arrest warrant suspended

Addressing PTI&rsquo;s former speaker Asad Qaisar, Achakzai advocated for reconciliation in politics, asserting that &quot;there should be no room of permanent enmity in politics&quot;, adding that if someone comes for dialogue he must be welcomed. &quot;Keeping all reservations, the people should move forward rather than confining themselves to the past memories.&rdquo;

Asad Qaisar

PTI&rsquo;s former speaker for the National Assembly Asad Qaisar urged the legal fraternity to stand by the judiciary to express solidarity after the judges revealed intervention and influence into the court matters.

&ldquo;Any movement, if it is not started from Lahore has no authenticity,&rdquo; Asad said.

Demanding a judicial commission to investigate the May 9 riots, he highlighted electoral irregularities, declaring the events of 8 February as a theft of public mandate. Asad emphasized that all institutions should work together to have powerful armed forces.


&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>From proxy war to head on confrontation</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2463349/from-proxy-war-to-head-on-confrontation</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2463349/from-proxy-war-to-head-on-confrontation#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Apr 24 01:06:56 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Nizamuddin Siddiqui]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[POLITICS]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2463349</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Iran’s unprecedented attack this week shows it is no longer content with fighting Israel through its proxies]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[What seemed to be unthinkable once has finally happened as Iran, the country that has since long been locked in a shadow conflict with Israel through proxies, has hit the latter directly, with its projectiles causing damage to at least one military base in Israeli territory. Although the attack on 14th April was quite spectacular in scale (as no less than 300 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and ballistic and cruise missiles were let loose by Tehran in a publicly promised action meant to &lsquo;avenge&rsquo; the martyrdom of its two generals in a controversial Israeli attack last month), military personnel of Israel, the US, Britain, France and Jordan joined hands to shoot down most of the drones before they could enter Israeli territory, according to sources in Israel and its allies. Some Iranian missiles, however, did manage to enter Israel and cause some damage there.

From the looks of it, Israel and its allies did manage to foil the attack. So, did the Iranian attack come to naught? Well, one would suggest that this was not the case at all.

The fact of the matter is, Iran&rsquo;s attack was radically different from the stealthy and sneaky assault carried out on April 1 by the rogue regime of Israel, which seems to have gone rabid ever since the Hamas attack of October 7. Keep in mind that Tehran&rsquo;s attack came in response to a Tel Aviv attack on an embassy/consulate building in Syria, which left seven Iranian military personnel martyred. (We all know how lowly an attack on an embassy/consulate building fundamentally is).

In contrast, Iran&rsquo;s attack was a measured response as it was largely in accordance with international law. As is public knowledge by now, Iran had informed all the parties concerned well before time that an attack on Israel was imminent. That&rsquo;s why the Israeli prime minister had stated just a few hours before the arrival of Iranian drones near Israeli territory that Tel Aviv was fully &ldquo;prepared for the attack&rdquo;. Israel and Jordan proceeded to close their airspaces well in time as well.

Tehran had actually put both Israel and the US on notice way back on April 2 that the stealthy and ghastly attack on the Iranian consulate building in Damascus would not go answered. Come to think of it, that&rsquo;s a telling difference between how the two archenemies behaved in this conflict, but the West is largely blind to all that; they have yet to criticise Israel for targeting a consulate/embassy building, by the way.

Anyway, once the Iranian leadership had declared publicly that the martyrdom of the two Iranian generals would definitely be &lsquo;avenged&rsquo;, the element of surprise went out of the equation and the Israeli leadership began to set its defence mechanisms &mdash; read its &lsquo;Iron-Dome System&rsquo; &mdash; in order so that an expected missile attack could be foiled. The other major factor in the equation was the distance of about 1,700km between the two enemies; any UAV that leaves Iran takes hours to reach the doorstep of Israel. The missiles, however, take a fraction of that time.

This makes us wonder why Tehran decided to use a large number of rather slow-moving drones instead of much faster alternatives, in the attack. Was Iran more interested in creating an awe-inspiring spectacle rather than in killing people? Well, one definitely gets that impression.

A critical factor that cannot be ignored is the help that Israel got from its allies in fending off the Iranian attack. Here again the absence of surprise allowed Israel and its western and Arab allies in shooting down the UAVs unleashed by Iran. According to some sources, Iran had let loose more than 150 missiles and over a hundred explosives-laden drones during the attack. Had Israel&rsquo;s allies not taken part in defending Israel the results could have been far worse for it because Iran&rsquo;s attack was huge by any standards.

In the ultimate analysis, its April 14 attack shows conclusively that Iran is no longer content with fighting Israel through its proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthis. The unleashing of aircraft and missiles that flew directly from Iranian territories to Israeli areas shows Iran is now willing to openly challenge Israel to a grand duel, as the world looks on in shock, and in awe.

That&rsquo;s a drastic change in how Iran perceives matters relating to its archfoe and the unending plight of the Palestinians. If its war with Israel escalates further, Tehran may be required to render considerable sacrifices for the people of occupied Palestine &ldquo;who have largely been left in the lurch by Arab countries.&rdquo;

&nbsp;

Nizamuddin Siddiqui is an author and teaches journalism at Hamdard University, Karachi

All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the writer]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>The politics of pop!</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2461111/the-politics-of-pop</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2461111/the-politics-of-pop#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 24 21:58:20 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Faiza Shah]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[Life &amp; Style]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2461111</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Soft diplomacy through entertainment creates both a favourable image and big investment]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[I grew up on Hollywood films and MTV. English novels, from gothic romances to classic masterpieces. Disney cartoons and US comics. Yet, I grew up in Karachi and had never in my childhood set foot outside of Pakistan. 

In my college years when I did find myself in small-town America among a group of born and bred Americans; they didn&rsquo;t know what to make of my familiarity of US classic rock. Friends in Karachi were more used to my strange taste in alt rock than those Americans my age. 

When I was learning guitar from an American boy I had a crush on, he laughed and said it was so funny that I knew Bob Marley songs. My 60-year-old professor strumming his guitar at a campfire was startled when I sang Simon and Garfunkel along with him &ndash; when the other American students didn&rsquo;t know the lyrics. 

However, no Pakistani would bat an eyelid if one of us got up and belted out a Taylor Swift or crooned a Springsteen number. We have all consumed the same imported diet for entertainment for our reading, watching and listening pleasure. Kids in Lyari could imitate Michael Jackson&rsquo;s breakdance when he was alive as well as they can do Neymar&rsquo;s stepover cut during FIFA season. 

Western entertainment and art was more accessible to youth in Pakistan even before the internet. Now that&rsquo;s a mind-boggling statement that ought to give pause when you&rsquo;re thinking about the West&rsquo;s use of soft diplomacy. 

Cultural or soft power diplomacy involves influencing and winning hearts through cultural, intellectual, and emotional exchanges rather than through hard power tactics like military force or economic sanctions. A country utilises its cultural assets, values, and institutions to establish international relationships that can support political and economic interests and hence build trust.

Entertainment plays a significant role in soft diplomacy because movies, music, television shows, sports, and video games can cross borders effortlessly, carrying with them cultural values, languages, and lifestyles. This is what I absorbed as a child that created my impression of the world beyond Karachi. This is what shaped your likes and taste and hobbies. 



These forms of entertainment create a favourable perception of a country. Evident now in massive brain drain from Pakistan and immigration to places in the West like Canada, US and Europe. Or nowadays, to any place in any direction from Pakistan.

Close to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia is developing with renewed rigour a concrete site that employs cultural diplomacy and draws tourists. Mohammad bin Salman the Crown Prince has planned the city of Qiddiya to become in the near future the foremost global destination in the fields of entertainment, sports, and culture. It was revealed that the branding for Qiddiya will adopt the concept of &ldquo;play&rdquo; as its main motif. This is based on decades of research showing this to be vital for cognitive development, emotional expression, social skills, creativity and physical health.

The megaproject is expected to have a positive impact on the kingdom&rsquo;s economy and its international standing, enhancing Riyadh&rsquo;s strategic position and contributing to its economic growth. 

MBS&rsquo;s Saudi Vision 2030 aims to diversify Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s economy by creating new jobs and develop its youth population. For this goal, qualitative investment in the city of Qiddiya is a cornerstone for the crown prince&rsquo;s plan. 

The entertainment Qiddiya City is projected to draw 48 million visits annually with its state-of-the-art and avant-garde attractions and venues.



By attracting foreigners for entertainment events, countries boost their economy. Recent case in point is the controversial tactic employed by Singapore when Taylor Swift plays her first concert there early this month. After her famed Eras tour gave a bump to the US economy to the tune of at least five billion dollars in additional consumer spending her six soldout shows in Singapore were a pot of gold for the maritime Southeast Asian economy.

Thailand&rsquo;s Prime Minister claimed earlier this month that Singapore paid concert organisers up to three million dollars per show under an exclusivity deal. &ldquo;The Singaporean government is clever. They told [organisers] not to hold any other shows in [Southeast] Asia,&rdquo; he said, according to The Guardian. 

Philippines&rsquo; Joey Salceda, a legislator, called on his government to demand answers from the Singaporean government. In a statement, he said Singapore&rsquo;s decision to freeze out its neighbours runs against the consensus-based approach of ASEAN, the regional bloc for Southeast Asia. Singapore&rsquo;s deal with Swift is &ldquo;not what good neighbours do,&rdquo; he said.

It is, however, what clever neighbours do. And Singapore had its cake and ate it too. Tourism-related services make up about 10 percent of Singapore&rsquo;s GDP. Concert economics is a potential growth driver for the country as predicted by HSBC. 

In January, British band Coldplay performed six sold-out concerts. During that concert period, searches for accommodation in Singapore rose 8.7 times on the travel platform Agoda. 

However, Swifties come in hordes larger than the Huns. For March 1 to 9, Singapore&rsquo;s inbound flight bookings were 186% higher and hotel bookings 462% higher than for the March 15 to 23.

Similarly, Bruno Mars and South Korean pop star IU will perform in Singapore after Swift&rsquo;s visit. And it&rsquo;s not just concerts: The city will also host the World Aquatics Championship in 2025. It is also vying to be the host for the FIFA U-17 World Cup.

In terms of soft diplomacy, nothing has hit the digital age world in as short a period of time than South Korea&#39;s &quot;Korean Wave&quot;. K-pop and K-dramas have made waves by moving to mainstream media all over the world and in Pakistan. The boy band BTS has transcended borders of culture and language, and their country has placed them at its forefront in to enhance its soft power on the global stage.

Such is their meteoric rise and fame that in 2021 BTS even delivered a speech at the United Nations, a speech that received attention like no world leader can on the forum. The band promoted covid-19 vaccination, environmental consciousness and gender equality becoming spokespeople for the youth of the planet. . BTS&#39;s global success has not only contributed significantly to South Korea&#39;s economy but also exemplified the country&#39;s strategic use of the Korean cultural wave as a tool of soft diplomacy.



It is the entertainers that have put Seoul back on the map since it hosted the Olympics three decades ago. My Hollywood-indoctrinated brain too has rewired to consume more and more of the fare being produced in Korea and Japan be it dramas or films. The nuance that Koreans and Japanese actors can lend to romance and heartache is not found in other genres. In fact, a few years back Hollywood itself took a step back and presented an Oscar to a Korean director.

Though the Korean Wave clearly has benefitted South Korea the most, it has some positive impacts on other countries other than having an alternative to the previously Western-dominated media. The intrigue and interest that its dramas have created is such that fans from America to Pakistan aspire to see South Korea. This gives a great boost to the country&rsquo;s tourism but it also opens up opportunities for work and education for foreigners. I&rsquo;ve interviewed Pakistani K-pop dancers who are studying in Korea just because they feel they can express their passion there and have more space to be themselves. If they&rsquo;re not in Korea yet, they plan to do so just like we planned to go to colleges in the UK, US and Canada.

The takeover of Turkish dramas in Pakistan beginning with Ishq-e-Mamnoon and peaking with Ertugrul made Pakistanis dabble with learning Turkish. With Korean music and shows, fans are inclined to learn the language even more. A member of BTS has famously learnt English by watching American sitcom Friends; in turn his foreign audiences are learning Korean through listening to his music.

Today, K-dramas have succeeded in defeating Chinese soap operas and Japanese dramas in the preferences of Asian, Middle Eastern and Central Asian audiences. In fact, half of the world&rsquo;s audiences are watching K-dramas, and the international media have taken note. Netflix started including K-dramas in its list in 2008. A favourable step for the streaming service and for South Korea. The number of viewers of K-dramas increased worldwide during the Covid-19 pandemic and series such as Crash Landing on You and Squid Game became household staples.

Japan on the other hand, has effectively utilised manga as a key element in its soft power strategy. The strategic use of pop culture, including manga and anime, has been a significant part of Japan&#39;s post-World War II foreign policy, to promote Japan&rsquo;s global image. Along with video games, cartoons and comic books have retained Japan&rsquo;s image as a modern and artistic country in the cultural zeitgeist for generations. It has also led to an increase in people studying the Japanese language and culture worldwide.

Manga has been an adaptable global popular cultural product. Its impact on readers and their worldview has been magnified by the fact that most are young and impressionable when they first encounter it. In European countries people take up reading manga before the age of 10. Nearly half of the teens would be familiar with what manga is and continue reading it in secondary school. This is a crucial time for identity formation. Its impact has in fact been documented among British teenagers.

Pakistan has been utilising cultural diplomacy as a crucial part of its soft power strategy to project a positive image internationally. One notable initiative is Coke Studio which showcases our rich musical heritage. It&rsquo;s huge across the border. Indians love our music as much as we love their films. This exchange of culture fails to translate in political diplomacy. Yet it is a cherished bond in people-to-people interaction. Notwithstanding Javed Akhtar&rsquo;s Lahore visits.

Tension between the two neighbours was high at the Line of Control even back when Zindagi channel was launched. The platform aired Pakistani soaps in India and attracted many viewers for popular serials like Humsafar. Of course, Indians enjoyed our dramas and were fascinated by cultural similarities and in our languages. However, instead of allowing positive cultural exchange to rub off on political pessimism, the opposite occurred and the channel was shut down. Years later collaboration of Pakistani and Indian stars was also ceased. If we continue to be bound by parameters of hate of course soft diplomacy is not a tool that will be of any use to us, perhaps in the interactions that matter the most. 

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan’s politics and history: ignorance and denial</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2459552/pakistans-politics-and-history-ignorance-and-denial</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2459552/pakistans-politics-and-history-ignorance-and-denial#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 16 Mar 24 18:27:34 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Dr Muhammad Ali Ehsan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2459552</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[History hardly remembers the hangman, but the person hanged, beheaded for a righteous cause is remembered forever]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[George C Marshall served as the Chief of Staff of the US Army under President FD Rosevelt and Harry Truman and then as Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense under President Truman. But he is more famous for his &lsquo;Marshall Plan&rsquo; which was used by the US to provide unprecedented economic and military aid to foreign nations to contain communism. I came across a suggestion he gave during an address at Princeton in February 1947, saying that he doubted &ldquo;whether a man can think with full wisdom and with conviction regarding certain of the basic international issues today who has not viewed in his mind the period of the Peloponnesian War and fall of Athens.&rdquo; This encouraged me to read work of some renowned scholars and text of ancient times and when I finished doing that, I realised that &ldquo;the more things change, the more they stay the same.&rdquo; Many centuries separate us from the time the Peloponnesian wars were fought &mdash; between 431 and 405 BC. Yet, I could dig out so much that we can relate to what was happening then and what is happening now. In the context of Pakistan&rsquo;s politics many things are relatable. 

All Greek cities experienced revolutions except for one &mdash; Sparta &mdash; the stability of which all other cities envied. The reason for that was that Sparta was the only city the constitution of which never changed for centuries. The big Spartan concern was not who ruled the city but how those who wanted to rule could make it to the government. Wise, qualified and competent people made it to the government because only a functional constitution enabled them to do so. This I term as Lesson One: if we can&rsquo;t defend, protect and shield our constitution from unconstitutional forces, we will never achieve political stability. 

Then there are desires that are ordinary and there are desires that are perfect and ideal. A perfect and an ideal desire is one which not just a person in a position of influence and authority desires but because it is so valuable, useful, beneficial and advantageous that everyone else wants to desire it. Socrates was accused of impiety and corrupting the youth. His fault was that he stood up as initiator and driver of social change through the process of dialect. The unconstitutional forces preferred and found it much easy to silence him by means of hemlock rather than cure the ills of what he was complaining. He was over 70 and had never appeared before a court of law before he was indicted on charges of treason. This Greek philosopher from Athens lived during the times of the Peloponnesian wars and even today everyone knows who Socrates is and what he desired but hardly anyone has heard the names of Anytus, Meletus or Lykon who were his prosecutors and who accused him of introducing new divinities and teaching the youth about it. Lesson Two from ancient history is that public approval and public appreciation are more significant and long lasting than formal indictment, prosecution and punishment on trumped-up charges. History hardly remembers the hangman, but the person hanged, beheaded for a righteous cause is remembered forever. 

Macedonia was about 500 km from Athens and a man by the name of Alexander the Great ventured out from the city and in 10-year time i.e. from 334 to 324 BC conquered Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, Babylonia, Persia, Samarkand, Bactria and Punjab. To his credit he defeated the greatest empire of the time &mdash; the Persian Empire. He visited the famous scholar of the time, Diogenes, popularly known as Diogenes the cynic and as he approached him, he found him digging in the dirt. When Alexander asked him what he was doing the scholar answered, &ldquo;I am looking through the bones of the dead and I find no difference between the bones of the slaves and your father, the king.&rdquo; Lesson Three from ancient history is the lesson of humility. All men are mortal and a king or a ruler is best remembered if he is a liberator, a deliverer, a rescuer or a preserver. A tyrant king is also remembered but he is remembered for all the wrong reasons.

King Henry VIII appointed Thomas More as his chancellor but being a devout defender of Catholic Church, Thomas More continued to argue against Protestantism as he feared that Luther&rsquo;s reformation would weaken the church. He was tried by the king, convicted of high treason and beheaded. We all remember Thomas More for writing in 1516 his famous book Utopia in which he attempted to suggest ways to improve European society. People seeking flawlessness and perfectionism use the phrase utopian and Thomas More is remembered everyday more than the king that executed him. Lesson Four from history is that some men are destined to become famous not only when they are living but also after they are dead, and dying for a cause is more liberating than living as a consequence of a compromise that shatters the very values you stood up for and propagated. 

The Lesson Five that I want to quote from history is for the autocracy and the rulers that enjoy absolute power &mdash; the adherers of one-sided Machiavelli&rsquo;s doctrine. Machiavelli is more famous for writing The Prince, but his more detailed and long work was published in the form of his book, The Discourses. If you have read The Prince and not The Discourses, it is as if you have read Allama Iqbal&rsquo;s Shikwa and not Jawab-e-Shikwa. In The Prince, Machiavelli suggests that a ruler will perish if he is always good, so he must be as cunning as a fox and as fierce as a lion. He also suggests that a prince should keep faith as long as it pays to do so. So on occasions, he can be absolutely faithless. In The Discourses, one whole chapter seems to be written by Montesquieu and not Machiavelli as the chapter explicitly explains the doctrine of checks and balances. Machiavelli himself writes in the beginning of The Prince that he will not speak of liberalism and republic in this book as he has dealt with them elsewhere. The Lesson Five from history is that a leader needs to outgrow his individual biases, perspectives and interpretations and that can only happen if their intellectual curiosity doesn&rsquo;t stop at The Prince but they are ready to read and explore The Discourses as well. Stubborn and one-dimensional leaders must revision their biases and mental fixations and doing this is only possible if they allow their intellectual curiosity to create room for acceptance of varied opinions and assumptions which may come not from one but many sources.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 17th, 2024.

Like Opinion &amp; Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>SITUATIONER: Pragmatism takes center stage at China's ‘two sessions’</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2458748/situationer-pragmatism-takes-center-stage-at-chinas-two-sessions</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2458748/situationer-pragmatism-takes-center-stage-at-chinas-two-sessions#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 24 07:00:57 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Hammad Sarfraz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2458748</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Amid global uncertainties, Chinese leadership articulates comprehensive vision of wide-ranging domestic, int'l issues]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[China finds itself amidst a pivotal week in its national political calendar as the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People&rsquo;s Republic coincides with the convening of the National People&rsquo;s Congress, an annual gathering that serves as the premier platform for the country&rsquo;s leadership to set forth its agenda across various domains.

For over seven decades, the National People&#39;s Congress (NPC), the highest gathering of China&rsquo;s political elite, including national legislators and political advisors, has provided the global community with an early preview into Beijing&rsquo;s strategies in diplomacy, the economy, internal governance, and its evolving position in the global order. The 14th iteration of the NPC proved no different. Against a backdrop of global uncertainties, the Chinese leadership has articulated a comprehensive vision on a range of domestic and international issues, addressing both its local audience and the international community.

Presenting the annual report card, Chinese Premier Li Qiang emphasized the pressing &lsquo;economic challenges&rsquo; by unveiling conservative growth objectives for the world&rsquo;s second-largest economy. This move highlights the nation&rsquo;s determination to navigate through the current period of economic turbulence, which has somewhat tempered its previously vibrant growth trajectory.

While Premier Li openly acknowledged the &lsquo;many risks and hidden dangers&rsquo;, he, with the poised demeanor typical of Chinese leadership, also asserted China&rsquo;s ability to bounce back. Recent economic indicators corroborate this assertion. With a 5.2% growth rate, surpassing the 5.0% target set by former Premier Li Keqiang, China has already positioned itself as one of the top global performers in 2023. To meet this year&rsquo;s growth target, Premier Li indicated that the central government would aim for a variety of steps, including a headline budget deficit of 3% of GDP. Additionally, there will be a slight increase in the quota for &lsquo;special bonds&rsquo; issued by local governments, primarily allocated to infrastructure projects. Moreover, the central government plans to sell $140 billion worth of long-term special bonds this year, with further issuance expected in the coming years.

Even as Washington and pundits alike may paint a grim picture of the $18 trillion economy, the ongoing People&rsquo;s Congress reveals a discernible shift towards pragmatism within Beijing&rsquo;s corridors of power. Despite international scrutiny and prognostications about China&rsquo;s economic collapse, a closer examination of economic data, particularly in light of the details presented before the NPC, reveals a more resilient image of the nation, with the Chinese leadership committed to economic pragmatism. While the streak of untrammeled growth may experience interruptions for some time, there are currently no signs indicating the demise of China&rsquo;s economic prowess, at least not in the near future.

Rather than fixating our assessments of China&rsquo;s economic health on short-term fluctuations, it is essential to recognize the nation&rsquo;s enduring capacity for long-term vision and strategic planning, implementing policies aimed at sustainable growth and development. The details unveiled at the NPC reinforce this commitment, with substantial investments aimed at modernizing industries, increasing technology funding, and promoting emerging sectors.

It is noteworthy that initiatives aimed at bolstering domestic consumption, innovation, and addressing socioeconomic issues also highlight China&rsquo;s proactive stance on economic reform. Moreover, policies geared towards technological advancement and industrial enhancement affirm Beijing&rsquo;s dedication to promoting innovation-driven growth in the future.

In many ways, the agenda presented at the 14th NPC indicates that the central leadership is already configuring China for challenges beyond the current decade. Describing the global environment as &lsquo;more complex, severe, and uncertain&rsquo;, Premier Li also indicated that it was important for China to attain &lsquo;greater self-reliance and strength&rsquo; in science, technology &ndash; particularly Artificial Intelligence. So far, the most significant shift unveiled at the NPC has been an enhanced focus on investment in technology and developing emerging industries, with R&amp;D spending set to rise by 10%. It is this capacity to adapt and pursue long-term objectives that has consistently propelled China&#39;s transformation from a fledgling economy in the 1980s to a global powerhouse today. Despite facing numerous challenges along the way, including the recent global pandemic, the country has always defied naysayers and emerged stronger each time.

It is important to note that over the decades, China&rsquo;s leaders have also implemented policies aimed at sustainable growth and development, enabling the country to weather economic downturns more effectively than many other nations. The Covid-19 pandemic, which many predicted would deal a fatal blow to China&rsquo;s economy, was the most recent litmus test. This long-term perspective has allowed the country to prioritize investments in key sectors, such as infrastructure, technology and education, which contribute to its overall economic resilience.

Furthermore, Beijing has demonstrated a willingness to adapt its economic policies in response to changing global dynamics, including shifting consumer preferences, technological advancements, and geopolitical shifts. This adaptability enables China to capitalize on emerging opportunities and mitigate potential risks. Another key aspect that cements China&rsquo;s chances of full recovery is that despite facing criticism and geopolitical tensions, the country remains deeply interconnected with the rest of the world through trade, investment, and supply chains. This interconnectedness provides China with access to diverse markets and resources, contributing to its economic resilience and a solid chance for recovery from any temporary downturn. And as history has shown time and again, betting against Beijing&rsquo;s economic recovery is a risky proposition.

Geopolitics and China

Amidst the global turmoil plaguing regions from the Middle East to Ukraine, China emerges as an advocate for stability, offering a measured and consistent approach that sharply contrasts with the United States, its main rival.

On the sidelines of the annual legislative session, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi signaled Beijing&rsquo;s intent for a recalibration of its relationship with Washington, emphasizing mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and cooperation. This sets the tone for the ongoing power rivalry between the two giants.

Although not officially part of the National People&#39;s Congress declarations, Wang Yi&#39;s recent remarks shed light on Beijing&#39;s proactive approach to addressing pressing international issues through diplomacy and collaboration. Among these challenges is the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Wang Yi&#39;s vocal support for Palestine&rsquo;s full UN membership further emphasizes Beijing&rsquo;s steadfast advocacy for Palestinian rights and its pursuit of a just and lasting resolution to the Gaza conflict. By endorsing an immediate ceasefire and supporting a comprehensive two-state solution, China has reaffirmed its belief in multilateralism and dialogue as pathways to sustainable peace.

Moreover, Wang Yi&rsquo;s commentary on the Ukraine crisis, once again, displays Beijing&rsquo;s proactive stance on conflict resolution. Advocating for negotiations and a multilateral framework, China has called for an inclusive international peace conference recognized by all parties involved, rejecting unilateral actions or coercion as viable solutions.

China&#39;s policy of non-interference in global conflicts has been pivotal in promoting economic growth and stability domestically. Unlike some Western powers, which often resort to military interventions and geopolitical rivalries, China has adopted a pragmatic and non-confrontational stance in international relations. However, with the American presidential election intensifying rhetoric of toughness towards China, President Xi Jinping appears inclined to tread carefully to avoid direct confrontation with the United States. Premier Li&rsquo;s recent remarks emphasize China&rsquo;s opposition to hegemonic behavior and bullying tactics, with a subtle reference to Washington&rsquo;s actions. His comments regarding Taiwan reflect Beijing&rsquo;s firm stance against external interference while advocating for peaceful cross-strait relations.

Overall, China&rsquo;s strategy of non-interference has yielded numerous benefits, including prolonged economic growth and enhanced credibility in the global order, particularly in the global south. In the long run, this approach to geopolitics, marked by balance, pragmatism, and cooperation, offers a promising path towards a more stable world.

Military budget

While the announced 7.2% increase in the military budget raised many eyebrows across Western capitals, it is essential to contextualize Beijing&rsquo;s position within its highly confrontational relationship with its arch-rival, the United States. Last year, the US, under Biden, boasted the largest peacetime defense budget request at a staggering $886 billion. Unlike the US military, the People&#39;s Liberation Army has not been deployed on foreign territories and is not actively engaged in any conflicts or occupation of another country. Criticism of China&rsquo;s official military expenditure, which appears to be on par with last year&rsquo;s pace, is somewhat biased. While Beijing&rsquo;s official military spending, as a share of GDP, remains higher than Japan and Germany, it is significantly lower than that of the US.

Premature obituaries

While the National People&#39;s Congress deliberates on shaping China&#39;s future direction, Western narratives are rife with dire prognostications about the $18 trillion economy. From forecasting a grim future for Beijing to describing its economic slowdown as a ticking time bomb, a plethora of pessimistic scenarios have inundated the Western discourse on China. However, considering Beijing&#39;s track record and its ability to bounce back from adversity, premature obituaries for the Chinese economy appear both biased and unfounded.

Reflecting on the past four decades, during which Deng Xiaoping spearheaded market reforms, China&rsquo;s economic landscape has undergone a remarkable transformation. In 1980, China&rsquo;s economy was a mere 11% the size of the United States, whereas recent IMF estimates depict it as over 70% as large. Despite navigating through crises like the Asian financial downturn in 1997-1998 and the global recession in 2008-2009, China has emerged as a global economic powerhouse. Millions of Chinese citizens have risen out of poverty, and the nation has emerged as a leader in technology, particularly in Electric Vehicles, surpassing even pioneers like Japan.

Considering all of this, Arvind Subramanian&#39;s views on China&rsquo;s economy come to mind. Over a decade ago, in his book &#39;Living in the Shadow of China&#39;s Economic Dominance&#39;, the former Indian government economic advisor forecasted that the Chinese economy would surpass America&#39;s by the decade&#39;s end. As we approach 2030, it seems that Subramanian&#39;s prediction is on track. Despite the challenges, he anticipates that China will continue to outpace the US in growth for the remainder of the decade. Indeed, in just 75 years, China has achieved what many consider the greatest economic miracle in human history.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item>	</channel>
                </rss>
