Domestic First, Global Last: The Risks of America’s Security Strategy

By: Azhar Azam

Immediately after the unveiling of the Trump administration's National Security Strategy (NSS), the Pentagon has become a center of heated debate over the orientation of American power abroad.

At the heart of this is Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s push to reorganize US combatant command structure to bring it in line with the strategy. These efforts, senior military officials warn, would lack regional expertise and weaken deterrence in Europe and Middle East.

Beneath these controversies, NSS principles are rapidly translating into concrete policy actions. Recently, Trump declared fentanyl a “weapon of mass destruction” and put it at par with chemical warfare, a highly-securitized framing that significantly broadens the document’s conception of national security threats.

Together with Europe’s willingness to lead a “multinational force” in Ukraine as part of the Trump-brokered peace deal between Moscow and Kyiv, these actions underline accelerated operationalization of “America First.”

This shift is already visible in NSS’ elevation of Western Hemisphere as the US' first line of defense, reflected in the administration's decision to order a naval blockade of Venezuelan oil tankers and intensify pressure on the Maduro government. This move signals implementation of Monroe-style doctrine, recast as the “Trump Corollary” in the strategy, to counter narcotics trafficking, illicit migration and China’s growing economic and strategic footprint in Latin America.

But the approach underestimates the challenge: China is the largest trading and strategic partner of several regional countries. Through its extensive investments in energy, infrastructure and technology and sustained cultural and diplomatic engagement, Beijing has embedded itself deeply across the region.

This reality represents a major obstacle to the Monroe-style approach; it remains unclear whether Washington can marshal enough economic, diplomatic and political resources to persuade regional countries into realignment and how many of them will actually be willing to do so on its terms.

Released earlier this month, the strategy articulates a momentous recalibration of American strategic priorities – moving away from decades of alliance-centric global leadership to domestic resilience and internal security, economic competitiveness and interest-based international engagement.

It marks a decisive break with past practices: long-standing security commitments are replaced by transactional arrangements, transnationalism – the idea to tackle global challenges like climate change jointly – gives way to nationalism and interventionist, ideology-driven policies yield to “Flexible Realism,” to cultivate commercial and peaceful relations with all nations.

While NSS emphasis on reindustrialization and production to support supply chains and securing critical minerals addresses genuine economic vulnerabilities – its transactional posture, reduced focus on allied security and dismissive stance towards multilateral institutions could undermine transatlantic unity.

The document’s non-interventionist and “look inward to project power outward approach” could ease military overextension and promote domestic renewal but at the cost of ceding global leadership and disengagement with allies. This risks creating strategic vacuums and encouraging partners to seek greater independence.

Nowhere is the shift more apparent than in Europe. The NSS asks allies to assume primary responsibility for their own and regional defense. With alliances now framed as transactional and the US stepping back from unconditional guarantees to European security, NATO cohesion will be weakened – emboldening Russia to exploit emerging fractures in the Alliance.

The strategy chastises Europe for migration policies, “censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition.” Such a damning assessment could fuel avoidable tensions and complicate efforts to maintain a unified position against shared challenges, accelerating Europe's pursuit of strategic autonomy.

In the NSS, climate change and net zero are labeled as “disastrous ideologies” This response to one of humanity's existential challenges offers short-term economic leverage to the US by boosting its fossil fuel exports and blunting China’s competitive edge in renewable energy and clean technology. Yet in the long-run, it could increase partners' reliance on Beijing to advance climate action and fast-track green transition.

In the Middle East and Africa, the strategy emphasizes limited involvement, focusing on preventing adversaries from dominating strategic regions and securing energy routes while avoiding long-term military commitments. This reconfiguration will reduce overseas burdens but may erode Washington's credibility among partners.

The Indo-Pacific is a rare exception where the US will build alliances over its potential to remain a key economic and geopolitical battleground. Even here, engagement is confined to preserving the US “prime position” in the world economy. For peace and stability, India will be encouraged to assume a leading role including through the Quad.

Fundamentally, the NSS represents a deliberate strategic redefinition rather than just a simple retrenchment. Its prioritization of domestic resilience, selective engagement and retreat from global leadership may yield short-term dividends; it risks hollowing out alliance structures that the US spent decades building.

Frictions within the Pentagon are an early indicator of this strategic gamble. The proposed overhaul of combatant commands could raise questions among allies about American reliability as a steadfast security partner, undermining US influence in key regions.

Concurrently, the administration's aggressive posture in Western Hemisphere – as exemplified by the Venezuela case – could drag US in “forever wars,” something NSS promised to evade and this time close to home with potentially some serious implications for American security.

In sum, the NSS codifies a historic geopolitical retreat, epitomizing America’s retrenchment from a global leader and steward of international order to just a regional actor. More strikingly, it constitutes an inadvertent admission that decades of wars have left the US economically strained and strategically exposed to cross-border threats.

By shrinking foreign commitments, this interest-driven approach may reinforce domestic resilience yet could lead to steady diffusion of American global power – paradoxically leaving the US more isolated, less credible and less influential than at any point in the postwar era.

*My article (Unedited) first appeared in Express Tribune

What New Delhi can learn from China’s war on air pollution

By: Azhar Azam

The air quality in New Delhi and its surrounding areas has turned hazardous as a dense layer of smog blanketed the Indian capital. Several parts of Delhi recorded an air quality index (AQI) of 400 and even 450 – a level considered as “severe” under international pollution standards.

Every winter, air pollution in Delhi spikes around this time when cold air traps smoke and fumes from fireworks, stubble burning and heavy traffic. The crisis is aggravated by vehicular and industrial emissions, massive road dust, construction activities and coal and biomass-fired residential heating.

As dozens of Indian cities grapple with “poor” or “very poor” air quality, per India’s pollution watchdog, China serves as a model for its neighbouring nation. Beijing, through stringent measures and effective air pollution control policies, has made a considerable effort to improve its air quality while also achieving impressive economic growth.

Twenty years ago, Beijing was crowned as the world’s smog capital. China’s temporary emission reduction regulations for the 2008 Beijing Olympics set the stage for its war on air pollution. With the launch of a five-year national action plan in 2013, the country introduced a raft of measures, including the closure of coal-fired boilers, promoting public transport and new energy vehicles, accelerating technological reform of enterprises and boosting innovation and green energy.

Special emphasis was given to slashing the “particulate matter (PM2.5)”. These inhalable particles, equal or less than 2.5 microns in diameter, are a major source of air pollution and pose the greatest danger to human health over their ability to penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream.

Beijing’s efforts, coupled with the establishment of an early warning and emergency response system, better regulation of pollution activities, relocation of factories from populated areas and incentives for farmers to discourage agricultural burning, made a lasting impact, showing a dramatic 35 percent improvement in highly polluted areas by 2017.

In the following years, Beijing continued its campaign against air pollution. Average PM2.5 concentration dropped by a half, from 72 micrograms per cubic metre (μg/m³) in 2013 to 36μg/m³ in 2019, dropping further to 29.3μg/m³ in 2024. Although substantially higher than the World Health Organization’s guidelines – 5μg/m³ – it still marked a major breakthrough in China’s push against air pollution.

Despite the challenges posed by the pandemic, China sustained its battle for blue skies, rolling out targeted air pollution control policies such as limiting construction-related emissions, deploying clean industrial technologies, cutting steel production, retiring old cars and encouraging the adoption of electric energy vehicles. The measures paid dividends as China’s capital transformed from an environmental backwater into an emblematic case of urban air quality governance. Blue skies are indeed back in Beijing, given PM2.5 concentration averaged 24.9μg/m³ in the first three quarters of 2025, per the government.

The recent improvement builds on prior gains. In 2022, average annual PM2.5 concentration across China fell to 29μg/m³, according to Chinese media, and the number of days classified as having good air quality in 339 cities reached 316 – a progress not many regional countries could match. As many parts of the world experienced rising PM2.5 levels, China’s steep reductions were so substantial that they single-handedly drove a decline in global pollution, highlighting the country’s outsized contribution to improving air quality worldwide.

Independent research supports the data. Thanks to timely government intervention, strong coordination between local and central administrations and international financial institutions, the Greater Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region notched a significant achievement. According to the Asian Development Bank, the region has made major gains in air quality: between 2015 and 2023, average annual PM2.5 levels fell by 44.2 percent, sulphur dioxide by 76.3 percent and nitrogen dioxide by 34.8 percent, while the share of days with good air quality rose by 10.3 points to 63.1 percent.

Experts underscore that China’s environmental frameworks have boosted cross-sector cooperation and spurred active participation from industries that were once major polluters. Over the years, Beijing has developed the world’s largest and most comprehensive new energy industrial chain. Its leadership in producing renewable energy and manufacturing electric vehicles positions it at the centre of the global clean energy transition, making it an important actor to combat air pollution at home and abroad.

With Chinese gross domestic product (GDP) growing by more than 73 percent between 2013 and 2024 and PM2.5 concentrations plunging to 26μg/m³ in the January-September period, the country demonstrates how a consistent, policy-driven approach can maintain a high growth rate and still strive to deliver clean air to its people. This experience offers a precedent for India and other nations, pursuing to curb pollution without impeding their development goals.

Air pollution is the greatest environmental health risk. It knows no borders, exacerbates climate change, causes economic losses and reduces agricultural productivity. Even in China, where three-quarters of cities met their annual PM2.5 targets in 2024, the monster is resurging sharply across several regions, urging Beijing to intensify its own measures and ensure enforcement.

The scale of this challenge necessitates strengthening cooperation and sharing best practices, particularly among countries in South, Southeast and East Asia that are worst affected. Being at the forefront of the air pollution crisis – what China faced a decade earlier amid rapid development and urbanisation – India cannot afford to be complacent in drawing valuable lessons both from Chinese past successes and nascent challenges.

By adopting elements of China’s clean-air playbook – from shutting down highly polluting factories and expanding electric bus fleets to establishing real-time dust monitoring at construction sites and reinforcing interprovincial coordination – India could make meaningful progress in securing cleaner air and a sustainable future for its people, while advancing its own development and economic growth.

*My article that first appeared in Al Jazeera

Saudi-Israel normalisation is dead — for now

By: Azhar Azam

Saudi Arabia’s approach to Palestinian issue has long been shaped by King Faisal’s vision. In 1967 – when Israel attacked and defeated Egypt, Jordan and Syria, captured Gaza Strip, West Bank, East Jerusalem and brought one million Palestinians under its control – he made East Jerusalem and Palestine the centerpiece of his diplomacy.

The 1973 Arab-Israel war further underscored his strategic acumen. As a shaking Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir pleaded with Washington for arms, Faisal accurately prophesied that US President Richard Nixon aimed to lift military pressure on Israel from Egypt, allowing it to consolidate its hold on East Jerusalem.

King’s assassination in 1975 marked the loss of a leader who confronted Zionist expansionism; it silenced a powerful voice for the Palestinian cause. By 1977, Sadat – at whose request Faisal imposed the 1973 oil embargo – was addressing the Knesset on peace and soon Cairo would become the first Arab country to normalize ties with Tel Aviv, fracturing regional consensus on Palestine.

Even so, Prince Salman (now King) sustained the mission Faisal entrusted in 1969, mobilizing public support for Palestine. In 2002, he countered Zionist slogan “A dollar you donate kills an Arab” with “A riyal you donate saves an Arab.” As a King, he has rejected any arrangement that excludes East Jerusalem from a future Palestinian state.

This stance is being tested as US President Donald Trump steps up pressure on Riyadh to join the Abraham Accords. Through the treaties – which omitted the Palestinian issue – the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan established formal ties with Israel to secure peace. Yet the so-called blueprint of reconciliation between three Abrahamic religions in practice cemented Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s faith in his military doctrine, encouraging him to pursue normalization without ending occupation.

Before Hamas attacks, even Riyadh was treading on this illusory path, having downgraded Palestine question from core of its foreign policy to merely a “very important” issue. But Israel’s war in Gaza terminated that flirtation. Veteran Saudi statesman Prince Turki al-Faisal’s blistering criticism of both Hamas and Israel for killing civilians and Western hypocrisy in valuing the Palestinian and Israeli lives laid bare the Kingdom's frustration with process derailment.

Israel’s genocidal campaign has since made normalization politically untenable and strategically unwise: driving Riyadh back to its earlier position: no recognition of Israel without establishment of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. Trump’s push to bring Riyadh into the fold faces another obstacle. Saudi conservatives resent the country's liberal direction and with polls showing 81% Saudis oppose the Accords, embracing Tel Aviv Israel now risks igniting public outrage.

Befuddling matters, far-right Israeli ministers – promoting ghastly ideas of expanding territorial expansion, starving Palestinians to death and resuming war – undermine any compromise. Netanyahu’s stubborn denial of a Palestinian state after his coalition partner Bezalel Stomrich’s derisive sneer – Riyadh can “keep riding camels in the Saudi desert” if it wants a two-state deal – reveal a deep schism between Saudi insistence and Israeli defiance to such a solution.

Trump’s vague nod to Palestinian statehood and Israeli threats to annex West Bank and several-hundred ceasefire violations reinforce the perception that while Washington wants to keep the illusion of a Palestinian state alive, Tel Aviv seeks to crush it outright. For Saudi Arabia, this rhetoric demands extreme caution.

Involvement of quasi-colonial figures like former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, condemned for his disastrous role in 2003 Iraq invasion, in postwar Gaza governance is rankling regional states too. His perceived bias toward Israel as Quartet envoy long ago discredited him as a neutral mediator.

For much of the Arab world, his return evokes harrowing reminiscences of British colonialism. The 1917 Balfour Declaration pledged a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine; the 1922 British Mandate, granted by the League of Nations authorized London to establish it. By Mandate’s end, Britain-backed Zionist forces had captured 77% of Palestine, proclaiming independence as Israel in 1948.

While Riyadh held its ground, Egypt’s breakaway from a unified Arab response eased pressure on Israel, opening the floodgates for others. Riding the tide of slow-motion fragmenting regional consensus, Israel has trumpeted the Accords as a symbol of peace even as Gaza is in ruins and Israeli military operations across the Middle East threaten escalation.

Prior to its attack on Iran, Israel had launched 35,000 air raids in 20 months; its invasion of Qatar in September marked the sixth strike on a sovereign nation in just three days. Tel Aviv’s offensives on regional countries and several-hundred truce breaches reflect a grim reality: normalization without Palestinian rights hasn’t moderated Tel Aviv’s policy; it has legitimized Israeli aggression, encouraging it to wield military power as a tool to force other countries into signing treaties or face hostility.

Netanyahu’s continued belligerence even after achieving all of his Gaza war goals, resistance to a Palestinian state and military campaigns across the region have made it increasingly difficult for Saudi Arabia to defend any rapprochement with Israel.

As a result, Riyadh now finds itself embroiled in a strategic quagmire: it wants to straighten out relations with Israel while preserving its historic mantle as guardian of Palestinian cause and steward of Islam’s two most sacred places, Mecca and Medina.

Only a firm Israeli commitment to Palestinian statehood could help Saudi Arabia to navigate this dilemma. In short, Riyadh’s accession and credibility across the Muslim world pivots on Netanyahu – who has stubbornly denied any Palestinian state.

Saudi Arabia may still envisage a future where pragmatism prevails but not at the cost of internal stability and historical identity. Trump’s elusive promises and Netanyahu’s intransigence to Palestinian statehood and Israel’s settlement expansions and ceasefire violations further complicate any Saudi move to formalize ties with Tel Aviv anytime soon.

From the Camp David Accords that established the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty to the 2020 Abraham Accords, normalization that sidestepped Palestinians did nothing to advance regional peace. Instead, they emboldened Israel to entrench its occupation and consolidate regional dominance.

With public anger boiling and support for the Accords collapsing across the Middle East, any Saudi move to forge ties with Israel risks igniting domestic outrage and eroding its standing in the Muslim world. As long as Israel’s war machine grinds on and Palestinian state remains a mirage, the prospect of Riyadh’s accession to the treaties anytime soon is remote.

*My article (unedited) first appeared in Express Tribune

China champions a safer, fairer global internet

By: Azhar Azam

Lead: China is shaping global internet governance to be more inclusive and cooperative, promoting multilateral reforms that prioritize broad participation, digital equity, and cybersecurity as part of a shared future for all nations.

The 2025 World Internet Conference (WIC) Wuzhen Summit concluded successfully this weekend in the historic water town of Wuzhen in the city of Jiaxing, east China's Zhejiang province. This year's event drew more than 1,600 participants from over 130 countries and regions.

Ten years since Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed building a community with a shared future in cyberspace, the summit has evolved into a key forum for promoting international cooperation on shaping an open, stable and secure multilateral system of global internet governance.

Relatedly, behind the rapid growth of China's digital economy is an effective domestic internet governance framework that has made connectivity more inclusive and far-reaching. As of June 2025, China had more than 1.12 billion internet users, according to the China Internet Network Information Center. The number of internet users aged 60 and above reached 161 million and, while those who lived in rural areas totaled 322 million.

Internet penetration in China has risen to about 80%, with rural connectivity exceeding 69% and 5G services covering more than 90% of administrative villages across the country's vast hinterlands. This expansion has helped narrow the rural-urban digital divide, empowering communities in remote areas to harness the benefits of technology.

Thanks to China's widespread 5G rollout in rural areas, farmers now use livestreaming to promote and sell their products directly to online consumers. This digital transformation has not only fueled business growth but also revitalized rural economies, fostering new models of digital cultural tourism and creating digital employment opportunities.

China's concept of jointly building a community with a shared future in cyberspace draws inspiration from its domestic achievements and builds on the four principles and five proposals President Xi introduced at the 2015 WIC. Rather than advancing a Chinese model of internet governance, it envisions a multilateral approach to shaping the global digital order.

Its key priorities include speeding up the development of international internet infrastructure, promoting online cultural exchanges and mutual learning, enhancing cybersecurity, fostering ethical growth in artificial intelligence, and bridging the digital divide. Together, these efforts underscore a commitment to cooperative—rather than unilateral—reform of global internet governance. The core goal is inclusive internet development and broad participation in international digital governance institutions to achieve shared development, common security, joint governance and mutual benefit.

As part of its efforts to build a resilient global internet governance system, China has been actively engaged with U.N.-led platforms such as the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and has deepened cooperation with U.N. specialized agencies on cyber affairs. For several years, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) have cohosted the Wuzhen Summit, underscoring Beijing's role in encouraging multilateral participation to shape a robust and equitable framework for universal cyberspace governance.

China's contributions at the IGF focus on establishing a responsible governance framework and exploring common governance practices to achieve co-governance and mutual benefits. Established in 2020, the China IGF — certified by the U.N. IGF — encourages China's domestic internet community to share its governance practices with international counterparts and contribute to the development of global internet governance.

China has attached importance to expansion of internet access across the world. Although global internet use has surged over the years, yet about 2.6 billion people — roughly one-third of the world's population — remain in digital darkness, highlighting a persistent digital divide. To address the challenge, China has urged the international community to work together to expand internet infrastructure in developing countries.

Beijing has, in particular, helped expand universal and affordable internet access in the least developed countries, demonstrating its commitment to reducing the digital divide and showing how technology can help alleviate poverty. China-ITU projects such as Digital Uganda and events like the WIC are accelerating Africa's digital transformation and boosting its ability to fight poverty through the deployment of digital technology.

Since its launch by China in 2017, the Digital Silk Road (DSR) has supported the development of digital infrastructure in several countries, improving telecommunications networks, AI capacity, cloud computing, e-commerce, mobile payment systems, surveillance technology, smart cities and other high-tech fields.

Through the DSR initiative, nations across Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Latin America and Southeast Asia have acquired affordable, high-quality technology to expand wireless and broadband coverage. The Fiber-to-the-Home project in Indonesia and the first phase of Johor Data Center in Malaysia, both involving Chinese firms, illustrate the DSR's global impact.

China's efforts to jointly develop the DSR and share the benefits of its digital growth, including internet access, have been lauded by leading international organizations such as the WIPO. The capability and price competitiveness of Chinese AI startup DeepSeek further empower partner countries to develop their own reliable AI tools, advancing technological self-reliance and innovation-driven digital growth.

China has also given priority to building a secure and stable cyberspace and jointly enhancing cybersecurity. It has deepened cooperation with other countries and international organizations on data security, information protection and combating cybercrime and cyberterrorism. In addition, China has led or participated in the formulation of more than 50 international standards on cybersecurity, playing a constructive role in multilateral cybersecurity processes.

Beijing's global initiatives on data security and on AI governance, along with cooperation with 100 countries and regional organizations to implement these initiatives, underscore its commitment to promoting multilateralism and safeguarding personal privacy and global data security. As a responsible international stakeholder, China has also supported the formulation of a global convention against cybercrime within the U.N. framework, carrying out joint operations with multilateral mechanisms such as Interpol, BRICS and the ASEAN Regional Forum.

While AI offers substantial benefits, it also presents ethical challenges, including potential abuses that could undermine human dignity, equality, and social stability. To prevent misuse and foster responsible AI development, China has worked at the multilateral level to build consensus on ethical guidelines and norms — focusing on algorithmic bias, data privacy, and security risks. It has also taken a series of measures to help raise global standards for ethical AI development.

All these efforts and initiatives show that China's inclusive approach to digital governance contributes substantially to reforming and fostering multilateral participation in global internet governance frameworks — helping address pressing challenges such as the digital divide, cybersecurity and unregulated AI development.

However, some Westerners, suspicious of whatever China does in the world, are going all out to fan the so-called "China threat", describing China's efforts above as aimed at controlling global internet governance and winning the cyberwar.

Amid a U.S. retreat from key multilateral commitments — including the rejection of major global goals like poverty eradication, climate change mitigation and universal access to clean water and sanitation — framing Beijing's role in international internet affairs as a threat overlooks the core of China's long-term vision, reducing such analysis to a short-sighted narrative of great-power rivalry in the digital realm.

Rather than seeking control over international cyberspace, Beijing has advanced a multilateral strategy aimed at reforming internet governance mechanisms to strengthen cyber development capacity in developing countries, bridge the digital divide, and help implement the U.N. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Like in other areas, China's involvement in the global and regional digital initiatives is not about rewriting the rules of the international order. Instead, it reflects Beijing's commitment to multilateral reform and the advancement of universal internet governance — making it more inclusive, secure and equitable as part of its people-oriented push to build a community with a shared future in cyberspace.

*My article that first appeared in China Diplomacy in the New Era

Canton Fair boosts China's opening up with diverse, tailored services

By: Azhar Azam

Currently underway in Guangzhou, south China's Guangdong Province, the 138th China Import and Export Fair (Canton Fair) which has been running for almost 70 years (since 1957) has become a powerful symbol of China's high-quality opening-up and an important window for many foreign companies to better understand economic trends, trade developments and technological advancements in the world's second largest economy.

Born in an era featuring unilateralism, protectionism and geopolitical shocks, it has survived enormous challenges, making important contributions to China's economic growth and opening-up. The history of the Canton Fair, therefore, can be directly linked to the history of China's opening-up and integration into the global economy, which benefited companies and the world alike.

With the Canton Fair's accumulated export volume reaching $1.5 trillion and the number of overseas buyers, onsite and online, exceeding 12 million – the biannual event has emerged as an essential platform for international trade cooperation and economic engagement between China and the rest of the world.

The Canton Fair has been pivotal in advancing China's opening-up policy, exemplified by the establishment of the country's trade relations with 229 countries and regions. This high rate of participation positions the expo as one of the world's most significant international trade shows and endorses its role in accelerating China's economic liberalization and efforts to dismantle trade barriers.

Providing a level-playing field, the Canton Fair facilitates both domestic and international businesses to find suppliers and buyers for their products and gain access to each other's markets, encouraging exhibitors to sell products and investors to invest in China. This highlights Beijing's commitment to promote free trade and its longstanding promise to share development opportunities, unleashed by its opening-up, with the world.

Each new edition beefs up the Canton Fair's appeal. A surge from over 30,000 exhibitors at April's Fair to more than 32,000 this time around and increased attendance from emerging and mature economies, reassert the event's success. It cements global confidence in China's role in stabilizing international trade and supply chains, showcasing Beijing's strengthened economic resilience in defiance of U.S. threats to reignite the trade war.

The Canton Fair has powered high-quality trade growth and undergirded economic momentum. By hosting diverse activities and adding more personalized services, China is further leveraging the platform to deliver an inclusive, unforgettable experience to domestic and international exhibitors and investors – and elevate the level of its high-standard of opening up.

For instance, the Canton Fair in recent years has set up a food street, organized Yingge dance (a vibrant, traditional Chinese folk dance from Guangdong Province that combines martial arts, opera, and dance) and a musical called Bond of Love, established intellectual property complaint stations and rolled out the "Canton Cuisine Carnival." Events like the Canton Music and Cuisine Festival, set to take place in the current expo, are putting China's cultural heritage on display and enabling participants to savor more Chinese delicacies, promoting friendly social exchanges.

Notably, the event has launched a fast and transparent mechanism to strengthen intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and safeguard innovative development of the companies. At its 137th edition, high-standard IPR protection and trade mediation services were offered. Out of 356 cases of infringement, authorities identified 169 as alleged breaches while the rest were dealt with or mediated.

A strong emphasis is also being placed on providing convenient and quality services to potential buyers. By collaborating with financial institutions and partnering with travel agencies and air carriers – the event offers flight and hotel discounts, delivers whole-journey attendance services and facilitates trade matching for buyers. This collaborative synergy improves the travel experience of exhibitors and investors, reduces costs and makes participation accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises, bringing benefits to all.

Technological innovation is enhancing attendees' convenience and events effectiveness as well. The Canton Fair's upgraded app, offering booth navigation with AI-assisted tools, helps buyers to instantly find exhibitors and products; automated kiosks, tailored for overseas traders, and one-stop service centers expedite the entrance and custom procedures – saving time and creating a smarter, greener environment.

The Canton Fair has also introduced a comprehensive online platform for pre-exhibition credentialing, during-exhibition browsing and post-exhibition outreach. The digital transformation as well as translation services and convenient tax refund points boost procurement efficiency, improve cross-cultural communication and encourage higher inbound spending.

Since its inception in 2021, the "Trade Bridge" – an innovative project, aimed at fostering seamless, round-the-year matchmaking between Chinese suppliers and international buyers – has become the Fair's flagship initiative. In recent months, it has connected buyers, including top retailers like Japan's NITORI and Denmark's F&H Group with Chinese manufacturers – opening growth opportunities and imprinting a positive impact on global trade to the benefit of people around the world.

While the Canton Fair's matchmaking series events provide a personalized trade matchmaking service for professional buyers such as large retailers from the list of the Deloitte Global Retail 250, it offers similar services with enhanced features including exclusive sourcing of booths, leisure catering, business travel and conference facilities to key buyers such as Fortune Global 500 companies, contributing to an efficient and quality sourcing for buyers.

Compared to the last event, this edition has seen 12.5 percent more participation from international business organizations. This increase reflects global trust in China's opening-up and reveals why global companies view the Canton Fair as an indispensable platform to accelerate development, transform business, promote products and expand market access.

Regarded widely as a barometer of China's foreign trade, the Canton Fair has evolved into a testament of the country's high-standard of opening up. Through diverse activities, personalized services and dedicated booths for companies around the world, the platform surely stands as a testament to Beijing's commitment to breaking down cultural and multilingual barriers, pursuing common development and sharing the benefits of its opening-up with all.

*My article first appeared in CGTN

Why Middle East needs a multipolar security order

By: Azhar Azam

US President Donald Trump's Gaza peace plan builds on the New York Declaration, a resolution presented jointly by Saudi Arabia and France last month at the United Nations General Assembly and adopted by 142 votes. Calling for inclusive efforts to end the war in Gaza, it demanded Hamas to release all hostages, surrender its rule in the enclave and “hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.”

But Washington and Tel Aviv rejected it vehemently because the measure emphasized the implementation of a two-state solution immediately. In contrast, the peace plan unveiled by Trump and Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu centered on disarming Hamas and shelving the likelihood of Palestinian statehood for an indefinite period.

Hamas has given a partial nod to the peace plan, agreeing to release all hostages yet refusing to disarm until Tel Aviv’s full withdrawal from Gaza. However, Netanyahu’s forceful rejection of Palestinian statehood, history of reneging from ceasefires, genocidal ideology and far-right leadership further arouse concern that even if a deal is reached, it will briefly pause Israel's hostilities rather than promoting sustainable peace.

According to Axios, the version of peace plan agreed between Trump and Netanyahu differs significantly with the one presented to the Arab and Muslim leaders and shared with Hamas, enraging Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Türkiye.

The last-minute edits, especially linking Israel's troop withdrawal with Hamas disarmament, and the Times of Israel’s report revealed that some clauses were deliberately left ambiguous to protect Tel Aviv’s interests, denying the formation of a Palestinian state and retaining Israel’s control on occupied territories.

Statements from Qatar and Pakistan – Trump’s plan “requires clarification and negotiation” and the 20 points “made public are not ours” – amplify suspicions the initiative is carefully crafted to skew it overwhelmingly in Tel Aviv’s favor.

The underlying objective behind these revisions was to provoke Hamas' dismissal of Trump’s peace proposal – thereby enabling Netanyahu deflecting political backlash at home. Hamas, by expressing its willingness to resolve the crisis, undercut these attempts. If enacted in its current form, the plan would only halt, not cease, Israeli hostilities. In the long-run, it could expose vulnerable Palestinians to future Israel’s assaults.

Such an outcome would embolden Tel Aviv to entrench its dominance and threaten the sovereignty of other nations as illustrated by its attacks on other countries and unprecedented strikes on Hamas leadership in Qatar.

Netanyahu’s apology to Doha and Trump’s executive order, pledging to consider “any armed attack” against Qatar as a threat to America’s peace and security, is largely symbolic. The presidential directive bypasses the Senate, making it nonbinding for the future US administrations.

At face value, the initiative seems assuaging region-wide skepticism on US security guarantees. It also reflects unease in the White House over the Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement (SMDA) between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Although the Riyadh-Islamabad pact was in making for years, Israel’s aggression against Qatar and initial US tepid response accelerated its signing.

Over the last few years, the Gulf has seen the rise of "more pragmatic, less ideological" leadership. These Gen-Z leaders viewed Hamas, over its historical ties with Muslim Brotherhood, as a threat to their dynasty rule. While regional countries didn’t criticize the movement, fearing a public backlash – they drew closer to India and embraced Abraham Accords to secure strategic dividends from normalized ties with Israel.

But Tel Avis’ ceaseless violations of regional sovereignty have shifted the same pragmatism in Islamabad's favor. In response, they have been trying to diversify their security partnerships away from Washington. The SMDA signals this tectonic shift in the Middle East geopolitics.

America’s fragile-now-selective commitment to Gulf security urges regional nations not to solely rely on unilateral initiatives or assurances and pursue alternative, multipolar defense arrangements. Netanyahu’s pursuit of “Greater Israel” – a controversial term used in reference to areas including East Jerusalem, West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights Israel captured in the 1967 war – gives them a blunt warning: after disarming Hamas, they will be the next.

With its veto powers at the United Nations Security Council and political and military influence in the Middle East, the US has granted Israel an unbounded authority to act with impunity.

And its stated position – to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge and bolster its ability to “counter and defeat” all kinds of military threats from any state or coalition of states as well as ensure unrestrained supply of arms to eliminate Hamas – stipulate it to protect Israel no matter what consequence result from Tel Aviv’s expansionist goals.

The volatile regional security landscape demands the Arab and Islamic world to move beyond rhetorically condemning Israel’s actions and ambitions and begin institutionalizing defense cooperation into a comprehensive multipolar security partnership.

Such an inclusive regional security order, to which the SMDA could serve as an effective platform, won’t abandon security partnerships with America. This mechanism will aim to add an extra layer of defense, contributing to building robust regional security architecture that is capable of maintaining strategic balance and promoting durable peace in the Middle East.

*My article (unedited) appeared in Brussels Morming and Express Tribune

Trump’s Ukraine peace push is a dangerous delusion

By: Azhar Azam

President Donald Trump’s push to broker a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow reflects less an instinct for mediation than an impulse to appease. He has acted as Russian President Vladimir Putin’s henchman – leaving Russia emboldened, Ukraine isolated, allies abandoned and international security at risk.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy discovered this harsh reality when he, earlier this year, sought Trump's support to deliver a strong response to Russia’s unprovoked invasion. Against all expectations, he received no assurances – just public humiliation.

Trump’s blunt tone and abrasive treatment of a partner under siege revealed that under his presidency, Washington’s foreign policy will be driven by self-interest, not commitment and values.

By making overtures to Moscow, Trump is tearing apart a coalition of 50 nations, his predecessor painstakingly stitched together to shore up Kyiv’s defense. He appears willing to surrender Ukraine’s sovereignty and undermine Europe’s security.

Trump’s placation of a revisionist leader has transcended all limits. He has placed the onus of ending the war on Ukraine, painting Russia as a victim. Not long ago an impassioned defender of democratic freedoms, human rights and transatlantic cohesion – America under new president has defected to an authoritarian adversary – branding Zelenskyy as a “dictator” and dismissing conflict as a European war.

Chasing personal glory and rapid-fire peace deals, he has talked of territorial swaps, nixed Ukraine’s Nato membership, refused security guarantees to Ukraine and pressured Zelenskyy to end the war on Putin’s terms – ceding Crimea to Moscow. Trump’s “deal-making” normalizes aggression and encourages Russia to demand recognition of “new territorial realities.”

This isn't diplomacy – it's capitulation. This doesn’t just reward aggression – it hails tyranny. Worse, this approach shakes the foundation of transatlantic security and casts serious doubts on US commitment to allies.

His action to trade away Ukraine's sovereignty for self-projection has broader implications for global security. It set a dangerous precedent for other powers to resort to use of force – emboldening Israel to flex its muscles beyond Gaza as exemplified by its military campaign in Qatar, a staunch US ally, to target Hamas top leadership.

Trump's abandonment of Ukraine will reinforce the global south's suspicions on US reliability as a security partner and guardian of the rules-based international order, hastening their embrace of a China-led global governance model – not out of ideological convergence but out of disillusionment with America’s negotiable commitments with partners.

To prevent this drift, Washington must reestablish its credibility. Clinging to an arrogant obsession of the world's lone-superpower won’t change the global south’s perception.

For America to change this view, it must treat existing allies as equals, build new partnerships – not alliances – with individual countries and demonstrate that it values its allies regardless of economic and military weight.

Even Europe is growing wary. The bloc’s 2025 Strategic Foresight Report underscores that security has become a “key vector” for all European policies, stressing “We are witnessing the erosion of the rules-based international order and fracturing of the global landscape.” Britain, Belgium, France and Portugal and several US allies have announced to recognize Palestine – apparently in a backlash against Trump’s protectionism and ambivalence toward European security.

Moscow, meanwhile, is exploiting Trump’s whimsical approach. Far from tempering its stance, it has hardened its conditions to end the war, demanding most of the territory it has seized and some of which it's yet to, accepting Zelenskyy only as a “de facto” head of a “regime” rather than as a leader of a sovereign state.

Putin continues to pin the blame of his invasion of Ukraine on the “(2014) coup” and Kyiv’s accession to Nato – a narrative echoed by some Western scholars but belied by Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian land.

More than a decade later, the West’s assessment has prevailed with Russia seizing almost 20% of Ukraine. And despite Trump’s assurance to deny Nato membership to Ukraine, Putin is seeking more – let alone returning the occupied territory. His dizzying pace and bountiful concessions to Moscow have shocked allies and invited escalation.

If this is the peace deal, he boasted on his campaign trail to clinch in 24 hours, Ukraine and Europe are rightly alarmed. Surrender, dressed up as statesmanship, won’t bring peace – it will weaken Ukraine, fracture transatlantic bonds and strengthen authoritarian rivals.

Trump must reverse course. To reestablish US credibility and sustain its global leadership, he must deter aggression, reaffirm Washington’s commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and allies including those in the global south and strengthen – not undercut – the rules-based international order.

Inaction is not an option. Failure to act risks dragging the world back to the prewar era – only this time, not with bayonets, but with far deadlier weapons and nuclear stockpiles – a catastrophe for both America and the rest.

*My article (unedited) that first appeared in Brussels News and Express Tribune with the title "Need to reverse course reestablish US credibility"

CAEXPO reaffirms China's enduring commitment to a peaceful, prosperous ASEAN

By: Azhar Azam

The 22nd China-ASEAN Expo (CAEXPO) concluded in Nanning, the capital of the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in south China. The five-day event, covering a total exhibition area of 160,000 square meters, spotlighted artificial intelligence (AI) as its central theme – boosting cooperation in a field that is rapidly transforming every walk of life.

In recent years, CAEXPO has promoted cooperation between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in emerging areas such as digital and green economies, fostering growth and advancing sustainable development across both sides. The upgraded China-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement 3.0 pledges to deepen cooperation in these two areas as well as supply chain connectivity – three overarching drivers likely to shape the world's future.

Since the turn of the century, China has promised friendly relations with regional countries – a relationship based on "good neighborliness, security and prosperity" and non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation to safeguard regional stability and economic interests.

This neighborhood policy – guided by important principles such as amity, sincerity, mutual benefit, inclusivity and shared future – continues to form the bedrock of China's regional approach. In the middle of intensifying conflicts, it seeks to strengthen regional peace and economy by pursuing the Asian model of security and promoting high-quality Belt and Road cooperation.

ASEAN holds a prominent place in China's neighborhood diplomacy. Underpinned by strong political and economic relations, bilateral relationship has blossomed over the recent decades. CAEXPO itself is a symbol of economic, trade and investment cooperation, enhancing strategic consensus and political trust between China and Southeast Asian nations.

Data speaks for itself. China has been the bloc's largest trading partner for 16 consecutive years and the relationship has notched a new milestone with Beijing's imports and exports hitting the $694 billion mark in the first eight months of 2025. CAEXPO, among others, has been pivotal to this trajectory as bilateral trade increased more than sevenfold by 2024 since the inaugural expo in 2004.

This underscores that Beijing and Southeast Asian countries have common interest to protect regional peace and prosperity and jointly uphold multilateralism. Encouragingly, ASEAN leaders are demonstrating a commitment to multilateralism and calling for strengthening mutual trust, implementing strategic connectivity projects and enhancing people-to-people exchanges and cooperation across all areas – endorsing China's push to work together in securing a stable and sustainable region.

Given the latest edition drew high-level political and diplomatic participation and a tourism exhibition took place in Guilin, CAEXPO served as a platform for Beijing's neighborhood policy to bolster China-ASEAN ties, advance regional economic integration and further reinforce political trust, cultural exchanges and multilateral cooperation.

CAEXPO isn't just a marketplace for trade and investment deals or launchpad for new products and business partnerships; it's an avenue of dialogue and mutual learning among civilizations. Some 3,200 companies from 60 countries participated in the expo while the Belt and Road International Exhibition Area hosted 33 countries including Pakistan, South Korea and New Zealand.

With business and youth representatives of diverse cultures and nationalities gathering and interacting at a single place, it reflected China's ethos of openness and inclusivity and the expo's role in deepening understanding and furthering mutual learning. Beijing's visa-free policy, triggering a sharp rise in inbound travel from ASEAN, hasn't promoted just connectivity but also economic development.

China and ASEAN have deep, historical cultural and economic bonds. Unprecedented economic and security challenges are drawing them closer, fortifying their belief in cooperation, stability and shared responsibility for collective success.

CAEXPO – by holding several dozen sideline events and high-level forums such as on AI, blue, green and digital economies and roundtable dialogues – could carry this consensus forward, accelerating the implementation of building a community with a shared future.

Building a resilient, innovative, dynamic and people-centered ASEAN – one that is inclusive, respects political, social and cultural diversity and upholds multilateralism – anchors the regional organization's Community Vision 2045. To achieve this ambitious goal, it prioritizes embracing blue, green and digital economies, resolving disputes peacefully, maintaining stability in the region and developing robust economic partnerships.

*My article that first appeared in CGTN

Global Governance Initiative lays groundwork for inclusive global system

By: Azhar Azam

Lead: China's Global Governance Initiative proposes a pathway toward multilateral reform, emphasizing sovereign equality and shared benefits over Western-dominated international system.

At the "Shanghai Cooperation Organization Plus" Meeting on Sept. 1, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the Global Governance Initiative (GGI), calling on all countries to work together for a more just and equitable global governance system and advance toward a community with a shared future for humanity.

The GGI represents the fourth transformative initiative Xi has unveiled since 2021. It builds on the three other major proposals made previously: the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative. Together, these frameworks aim to create an open, inclusive, clean and beautiful world that enjoys lasting peace, universal security and common prosperity by revitalizing global development partnerships, strengthening the U.N.'s central role in international security governance and promoting cultural exchanges between diverse civilizations with the common goal of worldwide peace and prosperity. Of course, it will serve to accelerate the U.N. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The GGI is grounded in five guiding principles: sovereign equality, respect for international law, multilateralism, a people-centered approach, and concrete action. This framework offers a new paradigm of inclusive global governance to guide the world from confrontation toward peace, development, cooperation and mutual benefit.

It considers sovereign equality as the most important norm governing state-to-state relations, casting it as a core premise of global governance and the foremost principle observed by the U.N. and all other international institutions and organizations.

The initiative doesn't intend to develop a global governance system where Chinese views and norms are decisive. Rather, it emphasizes that all countries, regardless of size, strength and economic power, should be equal partners in decision-making and equal beneficiaries of global governance. The GGI advocates greater democracy in international relations to ensure the system reflects the interests and aspirations of all nations, not just those of one or a small number of countries.

Affirming respect for sovereignty and the right of every country to choose its social and development model, the GGI maintains that internal affairs brook no external interference. Against the backdrop of America's normalization of high tariffs as a tool for "conquering markets and interfering in domestic issues," the initiative shares a vision to protect the territorial integrity and economic security of all countries.

Some Western observers frame partner nations' support for the GGI as obsequious and describe its language as abstract or ideological, attempting to downplay the initiative's significance due to long-held bias. However, endorsements from Malaysia, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and many other nations demonstrate that its emphasis on principles, including sovereign equality, has compelling resonance for a wide array of countries.

The GGI puts commitment to the rule of law at the bedrock of global governance, stressing equal application of international law and rules. Xi said there should be no double standards and that "house rules" must not be imposed on others.

Countries across the Global South have intensified their criticism of Western hypocrisy in the application of international law and the U.N. Charter. These double standards have eroded the confidence of many countries across Asia, Africa, Latin America and even Europe in the existing international order.

The U.S. administration's protectionist approach, disrespect for multilateral institutions and international law, dismissal of existential threats such as climate change and rhetoric toward partners have awakened a desire in the Global South to pursue a multipolar world order and expand partnerships.

Leaders of developing and emerging economies are pressing hard for a more just, equitable and representative world order based on universally recognized principles of international law. By advocating consensus-based international rules and uniform enforcement of international law, the GGI intends to purge double standards from the global governance system, which has long helped powerful nations tilt the system in their favor.

Multilateralism is the cornerstone of global governance. Rooted in extensive consultation and joint contribution, the GGI rejects unilateralism and maintains that the governance system, resting on inclusive decision-making and true multilateralism, should be built by all, with its benefits shared by all.

Contrary to claims the GGI showcases Beijing's ambition for a new global economic and security order, it actually pursues defending the U.N.'s status and authority, augmenting its "irreplaceable" role in global governance. At a time when the world has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation with rising unilateralism, it could help build a unified, multilateral response to global crises, from climate change, poverty and pandemics to inequality and socioeconomic regression.

The GGI draws on China's people-centered approach, following which it achieved dramatic progress against poverty, inspiring Global South leaders. The initiative strives to reform global governance to meet people's needs and improve their well-being by accelerating development, bolstering resilience to shared challenges and advancing common interests. In doing so, it has the potential to help narrow the North-South divide, act as a bridge between them and serve the interests of both the developed and developing countries.

The GGI affirms that governance is about concrete actions, not making statements. The initiative calls for adopting a systematic and holistic approach, coordinating global actions, mobilizing resources and boosting practical cooperation. It further necessitates addressing both root causes and symptoms to achieve sustainable outcomes.

Global governance lacks substance unless it produces tangible results. By placing problem-solving at the core of global governance and urging developed and developing countries to shoulder their respective responsibilities of providing more resources and contributing their best efforts, the initiative aspires to forge a synchronized effort against interconnected global challenges and generate visible outcomes for the world.

Despite growing skepticism surrounding the effectiveness of global governance and international institutions, the GGI doesn't aim to abandon or overturn the existing international order. Instead, it seeks to reform and strengthen this system by embedding fairness, inclusivity and transparency into its structure so it can respond to global needs and deliver lasting benefits to developed and developing nations alike.

The GGI sets out bold and ambitious goals. It vows to harness platforms provided by the U.N. and regional, sub-regional and international multilateral institutions to infuse energy into the global governance system. The initiative also focuses on building consensus to address governance gaps in areas such as international financial architecture, artificial intelligence, climate change and trade.

Anchored in multilateralism and aligned closely with the U.N. Pact for the Future, the initiative reaffirms its commitment to the U.N.-centered international system and the international order underpinned by international law. The framework envisions cooperation with all progressive forces to build a community with a shared future for humanity.

For a world facing a cascade of threats and challenges from environmental degradation and terrorism to Cold War thinking, hegemonism and protectionism, the GGI maps out the course for a fairer and more equitable global governance system, one built on the principle of mutual consultation and pledging peace, prosperity and security to all.

*My article first appeared in China's Diplomacy in the New Era

Climate injustice no excuse for Pakistan’s climate inaction

By: Azhar Azam

From abstract threat to an existential challenge, climate change has sped through the planet – wrecking ecosystems, lives, social structures and livelihoods particularly of vulnerable countries and small islands.

The world’s descent to this point isn’t abrupt – it’s been gradual and deliberate. Unchecked fossil fuel combustion, industrial expansion and exploitation of natural resources over the last two centuries engendered a phenomenon, called global warming. The scorching heat accelerated climate-induced disasters such as droughts, water scarcity, wildfires, floods, biodiversity loss and spread of infectious diseases.

Pakistan is highly exposed to climate change. Arguably the worst in its history, the 2022 floods submerged a third of the country, affected 33 million people, resulted in 1,700 deaths and caused $30 billion in damages and economic losses, according to the Word Bank.

Islamabad has sharply climbed up the ladder vis-à-vis weather extremes. It was ranked at #5 in countries most affected by the extreme climatic events by GermanWatch's Climate Risk Index 2020. The country now tops the list, mainly due to its monsoon-driven exceptionally high relative economic losses between June to September 2022.

A climate catastrophe is in the offing as climate-related calamities have triggered 802 fatalities including 203 children in the ongoing rainy season, mostly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), aside from wreaking havoc on infrastructure, crops and livestock.

Glacial melt led to creation of thousands of glacial lakes in northern areas. The process, kindled by excessive heat, sharply elevated the specter of glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs). These sudden events – over their potential to cause significant downstream damage by releasing millions of cubic meters of water and debris in a few hours – are a persistent threat to life, infrastructure and livelihoods of 7 million people in KP and Gilgit-Baltistan.

Pakistan’s government often singles out climate injustice and “lopsided allocation” – receiving $2.8 billion from international creditors against pledges of $10 billion – of green funding for its failure on climate action. Yet it remains unwilling to address its own governance weaknesses and step up climate adaptation efforts.

For instance, the UN-backed $37 million GLOF-II project faced criticism for failing to contribute to disaster preparedness and deliver early warnings, partially because the funds were allegedly misused. Other projects were also accused of being plagued by institutional incompetence and corruption or eroded in value over unimpeded deforestation.

Similarly, poor access of climate-smart technologies to farmers and major policy distortions such as in wheat procurement and inequitable subsidies continue to block Pakistan's agricultural transformation and harm rural communities.

At the COP27, loss and damage fund was hailed as a quantum leap in climate finance but as of June, 27 countries had pledged just $789 million – a minuscule fraction of hundreds of billions required annually

Developed countries authored the climate destiny of vulnerable nations; the government mustn't dawdle, watching Pakistan sleepwalk into climate catastrophe. It has to iron out cracks in its governance.

For Pakistan to imprint a sustainable impact on climate change, it shouldn't rely squarely on international climate financing and must mobilize domestic resources. Rather than merely shifting blame on the wealthy nations, it should expand the network of technology providers (largely concentrated in Punjab) across Pakistan and encourage private investment in renewable energy and climate-resilient infrastructure to boost productivity and lower emissions.

Establishing effective risk-sharing mechanisms such as crop insurance, promoting initiatives like issuance of green bonds and experimenting alternative climate finance models for example debt-for-climate swaps should be expedited to protecting farmers and generate climate finance.

The country’s energy mix is highly dominated by oil, gas and coal. Albeit shrinking, circular debt in the energy sector is both a threat to climate adaptation and economic stability, butting heads with terrorism and insurgency for the country’s biggest challenge.

Considering Pakistan’s economic fragility and tiny forex reserves, its heavy reliance on fossil fuels could be acceptable only as short-term necessity to foster transition toward long-term climate resilience.

Still, the government can’t lurk behind climate injustice to evade climate action. This will be akin to courting disaster. Fixing systemic inefficiencies such as low tax-to-GDP ratio, strengthening accountability mechanisms and controlling transmission and distribution losses and unproductive subsidy regimes could create a fiscal space to shore up Pakistan’s climate resilience.

In the coming decades, Pakistan is projected to stay amongst the group of countries most vulnerable to climate change and extreme weather. The country’s high exposure to torrential downpour, floods, cloudbursts and GLOFs urges a collective, nonpartisan national response.

By lacing up climate action with climate injustice or resorting to cosmetic measures – viewed by experts as taxation levies framed as climate mitigation efforts while climate adaptation funding has declined from 40% to 10% in a decade – the government shouldn't pretend to act.

The monsoon that once whispered of bliss and euphoria now fetches pain and affliction. What was rejoiced as a boon is being mourned as a doom. Climate change isn’t alone responsible for this tragic reversal. Chronic Governance failures too have magnified this crisis. Addressing systemic weaknesses is crucial to boost climate adaptation and build a climate-resilient Pakistan.

*My article (unedited) that first appeared in Asia Times and Fair Observer with the title "Pakistan must confront its climate challenge"

Why Trump is tightening up India's screws?

By: Azhar Azam

For many years, India successfully leveraged US tensions with China and Russia to its advantage, playing both ends against the middle. On one side, New Delhi spotlighted its potential as a counterweight to China and on the other, it reaffirmed its allegiance to Chinese- and Russian-led geopolitical blocs, BRICS and SCO, which America believes pointedly challenge its global leadership by pursuing to construct an alternative international order and upend US dollar dominance.

Employing Machiavellian diplomatic maneuvering and lofty claims, India framed itself as a prized American partner whose indispensability was central to implement US Indo-Pacific strategy. Tactics worked as Trump, in his first term, pitched India as a vital ally in the Indo-Pacific to set off a new cold war with China. His successor Joe Biden, after initially pressing India to cut back its oil purchases from Moscow over its invasion of Kyiv, too inveigled it to advance shared interests in the region.

India’s archetypal practice of changing goalposts when it suits its interests, what New Delhi calls a non-aligned policy, drove it to circumvent rifts with China, swindle the West and boost trade with Russia. Its trade with Moscow last year topped $68 billion, about six times the pre-pandemic levels. Shockingly, India’s imports from Russia accounted for almost 93% of bilateral trade including $50.3 billion spent on buying Russian discounted crude.

The Indian refined oil exports to Europe surged a whisper below 250% from 2019, largely because it shipped Russian crude after refining to European countries. India’s staggering trade with Russia, redirected oil shipments to Europe and supply of components for Russian drones for its military campaign in Ukraine hid New Delhi’s treacherous currents to exploit the conflict on European shores for its economic gains while supporting the Russian war economy. This binary approach further allowed India to abuse its strategic partnership with the US to evade sanctions and benefit from America’s “friend-shoring,” becoming for the first time the leading smartphone supplier to the US.

Once Trump returned, New Delhi betted on personal bonhomie between him and Modi to navigate choppy terrain and brave the former's tariff blitz but the president tormented India’s lofty plans. After embarrassing it by wooing its arch rival Islamabad and rubbing salt in India’s wounds – declaring trade and joint oil exploration deals with Pakistan – Trump ordered a tariff hike of 50% on India in response to its “most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary Trade Barriers” and oil purchases from Russia.

Deals with Islamabad may cloak Washington’s geopolitical interests in mineral-rich Balochistan such as monitoring Iran’s nuclear program and counter Chinese influence; America’s presence in insurgency-riven province will represent complex challenges for India’s subversive agenda of stoking sedition in neighboring country through support for secessionist movements and terrorist organizations.

The goal behind Trump’s India bashing is, unarguably, transactional. Unlike Moscow, New Delhi maintains a jaw-dropping trade deficit in goods with Washington of $45.8 billion. He wants to rebalance this lopsided trade relationship that is heavily tilted toward India owing to its tariff and non-tariff barriers with his rhetoric dispatching New Delhi in a state of paranoia.

Data from World Trade Organization (WTO) reckons India’s simple average tariff rate at 17% compared to America's 3.3%. These high tariffs and factors such as import restrictions, import licensing and medical device price control as well as poor environmental standards, with particular matter (PM2.5) roughly 10 times the World Health Organization’s guidelines, stifle foreign competition and unfairly bolster domestic competitiveness.

Modi’s vision, “Atmanirbhar Bharat” or “Viksit Bharat 2047” replicates Trump’s “Make America Great Again” to “Make India Great Again” including by imposing a simple average agricultural tariff of 39% in contrast to the US’ 5%. Such protectionist policies had, hitherto, allowed New Delhi to take advantage of its strategic location in the Indo-Pacific to reap trade and economic advantages from America yet have now put India at Trump’s point-blank range whose volley of tariff bullets threaten to shave off half a percent of Indian GDP.

Not only Trump’s claim, India is “selling (Russian oil) on the open market for big profit,” is precisely accurate; He’s also right when he labels India a “tariff king” with “one of the highest tariffs in the world.” It's New Delhi’s indisposition to cut taxes rather than Trump’s stubbornness that poses risks to US-India decades-old relationship.

Expecting him to underrate India's economic potential and strategic significance would, however, be naïve. His core objective instead is to weed out irritants from the bilateral relationship, which could propel US-India strategic partnership into obfuscation, to strengthen the US and India hyphenation for long-term geopolitical goals in the Indo-Pacific. It was illustrated by “US-India COMPACT for the 21st Century” that pledged to “elevate military cooperation across all domains” in the region.

But first, he seeks to settle the trade score. Since February, Trump’s aides have negotiating a deal with New Delhi to address the bilateral trade deficit by augmenting sale of US military equipment and oil and gas to India. Despite several rounds of talks, there’s no progress on a US-India deal, insinuating the latter's reluctance to open its market for US businesses and buy defense gear and energy supplies from Washington. India would hope to go scot-free over US broader objectives to use India as a strategic hedge against China yet Trump, this time, is in an unforgiving mode.

More than two decades after supporting China’s accession to the WTO, the US is bewailing its strategic lapse of clearing the way for Beijing’s dominance in world manufacturing. By tightening up the screws on India, Trump is buckling down to minimize the specter of another “China Shock” that would be a death knell for US competitiveness and its downward-leaning global leadership.

*My article that first appeared in Express Tribune

What makes the SCO's security strategy exceptional

Security is the cornerstone of national stability and the foundation of development and people's wellbeing. Sustainable development cannot be achieved without peace. In today's world, national security and regional stability are inextricably linked. No country is secure unless all are secure, and cooperation based on dialogue, mutual respect and multilateralism is essential to achieving true security.

Built on this premise, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is committed to resolving disputes through dialogue, countering the lingering zero-sum mentality of the Cold War.

As part of its efforts to foster universal peace and build a new, democratic, and just economic and political international order, the SCO has adopted a unique approach anchored in the "Shanghai Spirit," a foundational philosophy emphasizing mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, consultation, respect for diverse civilizations, and the pursuit of common development. 

This ethos translates into external policies of non-alignment, non-confrontation, and non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. This commitment to dialogue over diktat forms the bedrock of the organization's operations.

Through concrete institutions and agreements, the SCO translates its guiding principles into actions. Since its establishment, the organization has prioritized combating the "three forces" of terrorism, separatism, and extremism, as well as drug trafficking and other transnational organized crimes. This effort was institutionalized by the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS), established in 2004 and regarded as one of the SCO's most tangible outcomes. RATS has become a central pillar for intelligence sharing, extraditions and joint military exercises among members, serving as the backbone of the organization.

Recognizing that security challenges know no borders, the SCO has actively forged initiatives and built partnerships. It has established partnerships and signed memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with international and regional multilateral organizations. Its Anti-Drug Strategy, Anti-Drug-Center and collaboration with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime support efforts against illicit drug-trafficking while MOUs with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and others strengthen the fight against terrorism, extremism, separatism and transnational crimes. 

These initiatives contribute to regional stability while reinforcing the implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.

Counterterrorism has been a primary area of SCO cooperation. The goal and its promotion of non-use of force or threat of use of force are consistent with the UN Charter and distinguish the SCO from the U.S.-dominated alliances with a history of invading sovereign nations to ensure the security and prosperity of a few. It opposes unilateral sanctions and protectionist actions, which hinder global development. Instead, the SCO upholds the principles of the UN Charter and confirms that all human rights are universal.

The bloc does not seek to advance the economic agenda or strengthen any single country. It advocates resolving disputes through dialogue and developing joint responses to common security challenges, with the goal of insuring true security for all and promoting regional social and economic development.

*My article that first appeared in CGTN