The Global Tidings

Putin's People - The origins of Putin's worldview and the rise of Russia's new ruling class

2022-03-19T17:12:00.002+05:00

Rising Pakistan Institute: Weekly Book Review

Putin's People

The origins of Putin's worldview—and the rise of Russia's new ruling class

by Catherine Belton

Reviewed by: Team Rising Pakistan Institute

Vladimir Putin has often been described as Russia's "accidental president." On the surface, this seems like an appropriate term. His rise to power did happen extraordinarily quickly. After his appointment as Russia's prime minister, many were shocked that a grey-suited nobody like Putin had suddenly found himself with so much power.

Nevertheless, Putin's ascension was not a matter of chance at all. Former KGB agents had been closely observing his career ever since he joined the mayoral administration of Leningrad. They had been testing his loyalties and noting the sort of image he projected in public appearances.

Putin has hobnobbed with KGB agents before, and throughout his time in politics, Putin has hobnobbed with KGB agents. His presidency has ensured that their power is cemented in Russian politics. In this review, readers will find out exactly how that happened – and how it affects both Russians and Westerners today.

Before entering politics, Vladimir Putin was a member of the KGB.

From childhood, Vladimir Putin dreamed of joining the KGB, the Soviet Union's secret police force. He was eager to follow in his father's footsteps – so eager that he called up the local Leningrad KGB office and asked to join before he had even graduated school.

Putin was careful to enrol in the programs and classes that the KGB office directed him toward throughout his education. He followed their orders with the utmost precision. All the while, he vented his aggression by practising judo.

As a newly minted member of the KGB, Putin arrived in Dresden, East Germany, in 1985. There, he first encountered secret missions, smuggling, and assassinations.

From being an agent to state's face: the beginning of the journey:

When Vladimir Putin arrived in Dresden, the city was known as little more than an East German backwater. In total, there were just six KGB officers posted there. Meanwhile, East Germany was on the verge of bankruptcy, and the ruling Communist Party was in danger of collapse.

Sensing these issues, the KGB launched a secret mission called Operation Luch. Its goal was to build up a network of agents to join political circles. The KGB's presence in Germany would survive, even if the country were reunified.

Much of Putin's role in this operation remains a mystery. Nonetheless, we know that Putin eventually became the main KGB liaison officer with the Stasi, the East German secret police. He even had his own Stasi identification card. That gave him access to Stasi buildings and made recruiting agents for Operation Luch easier.

Terrorism was also a major part of the mission. In particular, the secret police were deeply involved with the Red Army Faction, a Marxist group in West Germany that helped protect KGB interests. On one occasion, the chairman of the major financial institution Deutsche Bank was driving to work when a grenade in his car was detonated, killing him instantly. It is believed that a Red Army Faction member triggered the blast, and we know that this group learned precise military detonation techniques at training camps connected to the Stasi. With the chairman's death, Deutsche Bank was weakened, and a Stasi-affiliated bank had an opportunity to gain strength.

These secret operations with the KGB and the Stasi were just the start of Putin's long rise to power.

In the 1990s, a group of young business tycoons began to gain more power than the KGB.

At the time of the Soviet Union, the ruling Communist Party and the KGB were like peas in a pod. The laundry list of financial crimes they committed together is practically endless.

One of their joint schemes involved the KGB physically smuggling millions of dollars to left-leaning groups abroad. These funds had to be pulled from donations to the Communist Party. So, the government sent its own money to Communist Party members. Then they transferred it abroad via the KGB.

Through the Communist Party, the KGB was essentially in control of the entire country's finances and economy. However, everything changed in the age of liberal reforms under Boris Yeltsin. He took over the presidency from Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991.

In October 1991, President Yeltsin signed an order abolishing the KGB. He broke it up into four separate domestic departments. Despite this change, former KGB operatives served as advisors, held government positions, and controlled the oil sector throughout the first half of the 1990s.

However, soon, the agents' power began to erode. Thanks to Yeltsin's sweeping democratic reforms. These included the privatisation of several industries. Suddenly, a group of young business tycoons – later known as oligarchs – started gaining power.

Despite his attempts at reform, Yeltsin's state coffers were running dry. In response, a banker named Vladimir Potanin proposed an ingenious scheme. It became known as loans-for-shares privatisation. In exchange for helping out the Russian government with loans, he and his fellow tycoons would receive stakes in some of the nation's biggest oil and other resources enterprises.

The loans-for-shares privatisations allowed the tycoons to gain enormous power and influence, far eclipsing former KGB officials. One of these deals, for instance, gave Potanin a controlling stake in Norilsk Nickel, a company whose profits were $1.2 billion in 1995. He had to loan $170 million to the government to get that stake. As expected, the government defaulted on the loan. So Potanin got the share in Norilsk Nickel for little more than the loan price.

The new oligarchs now held massive power over Russia's various industries. However, in St. Petersburg, KGB agents still exerted their control nearby.

Thanks to Vladimir Putin, the KGB was heavily involved in St. Petersburg's economy.

Early in 1990, as the Soviet Union was collapsing, Vladimir Putin was ordered to return to Leningrad, as St. Petersburg was then known. There, he set his sights on Leningrad's burgeoning pro-democracy movement. The movement seemed dangerously likely to disrupt the Communist Party's dominance over the city's politics.

Soon, Putin became the liaison between the KGB and a man named Anatoly Sobchak. Sobchak was a charismatic law professor who frequently spoke in favour of democracy and against the KGB in public. However, he may have had unofficial dealings with the organisation in private. By May of that year, Sobchak was appointed the new city council chairman, with Putin as his right-hand man.

Soon, Sobchak became mayor, and the city was in bad shape. Its coffers were empty, shop shelves contained little more than pickled cucumbers, and policing was lax, which meant organised crime groups had free reign to extort local businesses.

It was nothing less than chaos. However, what emerged from that chaos was an alliance between Putin and the KGB that allowed the organisation to run the city's economy for itself.

The KGB's enrichment began with creating a slush fund, or Sobchak. This fund could funnel cash to the KGB for its personal use and strategic operations.

Putin's committee gave $95 million worth of export licenses to a series of front companies to create this Sobchak. Ostensibly, the companies would bring in food imports. The starving city desperately needed the food – but almost none of it ever arrived. The money had gone into the Sobchak instead.

Along with the Sobchak, the KGB also took control of the Leningrad seaport, run by Viktor Kharchenko. One day in 1993, Kharchenko was stopped by police. They hauled him off the train he was travelling on and charged him with embezzlement. Though he was eventually released, Putin's KGB men nonetheless installed their own man in his place.

Finally, KGB officers took control of Leningrad's seaport and oil terminal through Ilya Traber, a man linked to the Tambov organised crime group. Putin and his deputy issued licenses that allowed Traber to control the port and the oil terminal, along with one of Putin's KGB colleagues, Gennady Timchenko. All of these men went on to take senior executive positions in the country's strategic assets after Putin assumed the presidency.

Upon his move to Moscow, Putin quickly climbed the political ladder.

St. Petersburg's mayor, Anatoly Sobchak, lost his campaign for reelection in the summer of 1996. Vladimir Putin, loyal to Sobchak, immediately resigned from the city's administration.

Less than a month after his resignation, Putin was invited to Moscow. He was asked to take the deputy head of the Kremlin administration. He was ultimately blocked from that role. However, he became head of the Kremlin's foreign property department in its place. The position represented the core of Russia's imperial wealth. This was a major promotion for Putin.

However, it was far from the end of Putin's dramatic rise in the ranks.

Putin received several other promotions in quick succession after his promotion to head of the Kremlin's foreign property department. First, he became head of the Control Department. There, he was in charge of ensuring the president's orders were carried out within what were regarded as "unruly" regions. Three months later, he was appointed head of the FSB – the security services agency that succeeded the KGB. Then, on Monday, August 9, 1999, a shock announcement came: Putin was to become the nation's new prime minister.

How was Putin able to rise in the ranks so quickly? Looking back, it seems that former KGB generals were propelling him. They needed an individual willing to cooperate with them, follow orders, and appear strong on television. Putin was exactly that individual. However, he was still a nobody in the public's eye.

That all changed in September 1999, when three deadly bombings tore through apartment complexes across Russia. It caused a nationwide panic.

Amid the crisis, Vladimir Putin stepped up to the plate. He became, essentially, the country's commander-in-chief. The bombings had been blamed on Chechen fighters, so Putin led a campaign of airstrikes across Chechnya. He publicly addressed the Russian people, vowing to fight back and avenge the innocent Russians who had died.

Questions still swirl around these events. Some even believe that the FSB secretly coordinated the bombings. Whether this is true or not, the bombings certainly enabled Putin to garner major support from the public. In Putin, people saw a strong and tough leader. It was only a matter of time before Yeltsin handed him the presidency.

After taking over the media, Putin began a campaign to seize the oil industry by manipulating minds through MEDIA.

At the beginning of Putin's reign, few people predicted that the country was heading toward authoritarianism and kleptocracy. However, a few people did see the writing on the wall.

One of these prescient few was an oligarch named Boris Berezovsky. Among other businesses, he owned a television channel called ORT. The channel devoted much of its airtime to criticising Putin. On one occasion, it repeatedly played footage of Putin riding on a jet ski in the aftermath of a Russian submarine's tragic explosion.

Furious with how ORT had portrayed him, Putin ordered an investigation of Berezovsky over embezzlement claims. Eventually, these accusations forced Berezovsky to flee Russia. Putin's takedown of ORT signalled the beginning of his seizure of Russia's free media and the oligarchs that controlled it. Next, he set his sights on taking out the oil tycoons.

After the Soviet Union's collapse, the Russian state lost its monopoly over the oil industry, which promptly splintered into four separate companies: Lukoil, Yukos, Surgutneftegaz, and Rosneft. Thanks to Yeltsin's privatisations and the loans-for-shares scheme, the oil industry was firmly in the hands of the oligarchs.

When Putin took over from Yeltsin, oil prices had begun to surge, so the oligarch's massive fortunes increased. It became Putin's mission to wrest back control over the oil sector. Rosneft was already under state control, and the director of Surgutneftegaz was closely connected to the KGB. That left two companies to wrangle: Lukoil and Yukos.

Like Putin's media crackdown, his takeover of Lukoil began with a bogus investigation.

In 2000, one of Lukoil's directors, Vagit Alekperov, was accused of tax fraud. Then, two years later, Lukoil's first vice president was drugged and kidnapped by masked men wearing police uniforms. A week later, the government announced that Lukoil had agreed to pay the government $103 million in back taxes. Lukoil and the Kremlin seem to have reached an agreement: some of Alekperov's stake in Lukoil would secretly belong to Putin – although Lukoil denies this was the case.

The last oil major left to take over was Yukos. However, the oil company's owner – who happened to be Russia's richest man at the time – would not hand over his business willingly.

Putin's takeover of Yukos signalled the KGB's triumph over the oligarchy.

Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the Russian oligarch once the chairman and CEO of the oil company Yukos, is a self-described adrenalinschik –adrenaline. In his youth, he was fond of rock-climbing without any equipment. Later, he slept soundly in prison even when threatened by knife attacks.

So when Vladimir Putin sought to take control of Yukos, Khodorkovsky refused to bend to the president's will. He hired Western executives and drilling equipment manufacturers to entrench the company in Western markets. Putin created Open Russia, a philanthropic organisation that taught Russian teenagers the principles of democracy. He even gave a presentation accusing the Russian government of corruption – at a meeting where Vladimir Putin was present.

However, despite Khodorkovsky's bold moves, Putin's crackdown proved too much for him to handle.

THE RISE of RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS

Throughout the early 2000s, Khodorkovsky poured millions of dollars into funding Putin's political opponents, including those in the Communist Party. His political sway was considerable: he had secured enough parliamentary votes to block Kremlin bills from passing.

One evening, Putin ordered Khodorkovsky to stop funding the Communists at a private dinner. As expected, Khodorkovsky resisted. Putin quickly began taking major actions against the oligarch and Yukos.

First, the police arrested Yukos's security chief, Alexei Pichugin, and charged him with murder. Then, they arrested Khodorkovsky's right-hand man, Platon Lebedev. The investigations caused Yukos's stock to plummet. Then, a few months later, FSB commandos bearing machine guns began raiding Yukos-related locations across Moscow. Finally, Khodorkovsky himself was arrested.

Khodorkovsky was detained in a Moscow prison for eight months before his trial. He claimed this was an illegal abuse of power that set a dangerous precedent. Moreover, the court proceedings themselves – the trial was rushed, and laws were applied retroactively and selectively. Khodorkovsky was ultimately given an eight-year jail sentence for tax fraud.

In public, Putin and his men repeatedly insisted that Khodorkovsky's trial was not about a power grab; it was just about one rogue oligarch who needed to be brought to heel. Nonetheless, the proceedings ended with the Kremlin breaking up Yukos and seizing many of its assets. Before Yukos's breakup, 80 per cent of Russia's oil output had been in private hands. By the end, it was just 45 per cent.

Putin exploited terrorism to bolster his image.

On Wednesday, October 23, 2003, it was at Moscow's Dubrovka musical theatre, a few miles south of the Kremlin. Nine hundred audience members packed the seats as tap dancers leapt across the stage.

As the second act of the musical opened, the unthinkable happened: 40 armed Chechen fighters stormed into the theatre, firing warning shots from assault rifles into the air. They began to wire the building with explosives and sealed off the auditorium. Women wearing black hijabs and explosive belts positioned themselves amongst the rows.

The Chechen fighters occupying the theatre demanded an end to Russia's war in the Chechen Republic. They gave the government seven days to withdraw its troops – otherwise, they would blow up the theatre. However, was the situation as straightforward as it seemed?

Using Chechens bodies to rise to power- Putin and violence:

Three days into the siege, Russian security services released a gas containing the opioid fentanyl into the auditorium. The gas was indiscriminately deadly: it knocked out the Chechens and killed 113 hostages. Moreover, rather than bringing them in for questioning, the FSB shot the Chechens dead.

The reason for the situation's mishandling is still shrouded in mystery. However, one Kremlin insider claims that the FSB chief had planned the attack at the time, Nikolai Patrushev, to increase national support for the Chechen war and paint Putin as a hero.

Whether this is true or not, the situation did cause global and local leaders to praise Putin. In their view, he had ensured that the situation did not turn out even worse. His ratings in Russia surged, the FSB was rewarded with an increase in funding, and the military was allowed to escalate its activity in Chechnya.

The apparent terrorist attack provided a useful myth to help Putin's regime forge a national identity. However, this was just one tactic used in this fashion.

Putin was also attempting to revive the Russian Orthodox religion, emphasising the great sacrifices and suffering Russia had endured throughout its history. On top of that, Putin sought to vilify the West, so he blamed another Chechen terrorist attack on Westerners – even though there was no proof whatsoever that the West was involved. Moreover, as pro-Western revolutions occurred in Russia's backyard – in Ukraine and Georgia – the anti-West rhetoric only continued to escalate.

The Kremlin created a slush fund to enrich itself and fund operations abroad.

In 2004, just when Yukos was being broken up and its assets vacuumed up by the Kremlin, a few other transactions on Moscow's stock exchange brought further power to Putin.

Shares in an insurance company called Sogaz – which belonged to the state-controlled Gazprom – were sold at a discounted price to three obscure companies. All three turned out to be connected to Bank Rossiya, a St. Petersburg bank that was the stronghold of Yury Kovalchuk, an old Putin ally.

The Gazprom transfers transformed Bank Rossiya into a major financial powerhouse. Moreover, the Kremlin could use it however it wanted.

In large part, this new Sobchak was used to enrich Putin and his KGB cronies personally. It provided the capital with which they could build lavish mansions. Putin's was four thousand square meters large and included three helipads, a marina, and a teahouse.

However, personal enrichment was not Sobchak's only function. It was also used to fund political operations abroad – starting with Ukraine.

In November 2005, a year had passed since the pro-Western candidate Victor Yushchenko won the Ukrainian presidency. Russia was angered and upset by this, so it retaliated. Knowing Ukraine still depended on Russia for gas, the Kremlin threatened to hike gas prices dramatically. Unless Ukraine agreed to a compromise deal, gas prices would remain cheap if Ukraine agreed to purchase more gas through a middleman company called RosUkrEnergo.

Ultimately, Yushchenko agreed. RosUkrEnergo was granted a monopoly on all gas supplies to Ukraine, plus access to half its domestic distribution market. It would make a profit of potentially billions of dollars for the company's primary shareholder and Putin's crony, Dmitriy Firtash.

Of course, it turned out that RosUkrEnergo was little more than a front company, used to provide kickbacks to Gazprom. More than that, the deal was widely viewed as having compromised President Yushchenko. Soon after, the Ukrainian parliament passed a no confidence in the government. By August 2006, the pro-Russia former presidential candidate, Victor Yanukovych, had become prime minister.

Russia's network of shady companies and slush funds was just beginning to expand internationally. Its next target was London.

Russia began to infiltrate London with a series of financial schemes.

Thanks to rising oil prices, Russia's fortunes grew throughout the early 2000s. A burgeoning middle class could now shop at Western-style malls cropping up in city centres. Even in remote Siberia, restaurants served lamb from New Zealand and wine from France.

These days, plenty also allowed Russian companies to slowly begin listing their shares on Western stock exchanges, especially in London. In 2005 alone, they gained more than $4 billion in share sales in the British capital. Comparatively, in the 13 years after the Soviet collapse, Russian company shares had only netted $1.4 billion in all markets combined.

Putin's recipe to infiltrate western capitalism with Soviet socialism:

London's stock exchange was particularly enticing for the Russians. Compared to the requirements for companies to be listed on the New York Stock Exchange, London's requirements were lax. Still, many in the West believed that, by forcing the Russians to adhere to a Western standard of transparency, they would discourage shady financial dealings on the Russians' part.

However, the Russians' presence in London did exactly the opposite: it infected the West like a virus.

The infection began in many ways with Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich. He had risen to prominence during the Yeltsin era yet proved himself loyal to Putin.

So when Putin asked Abramovich to head to London and purchase Chelsea Football Club, Abramovich did as he was told. Putin had accurately guessed that getting British people to accept Russian presence could be done via their national sport, soccer.

By this time, the Russian government had a 51 per cent stake in several major Russian companies, like the savings bank Sberbank and the former Soviet trade bank, VTB. That meant that Westerners were free to divvy up the other 49 per cent of the stakes in each company.

Londoners were blinded by the cash flow that had become available. They ignored the fact that Russia had all but shunned its democracy. Even now, Russian cash flows through London via offshore front companies. Moreover, Russians continue to splash out for London real estate brokers while the city's lawyers and bankers rush to service the Russian oligarchs' billions of dollars.

Through London, Russia had flexed its financial might in the West. Next, it was time to make political moves.

Russia used Ukraine to wage a proxy war against the West.

After Putin's second term ended in 2008, Dmitry Medvedev assumed the Russian presidency. Many in the West hoped he would move his country's economy back to a freer market system. His willingness to cooperate with Western leaders seemed like a sign that liberalism was back on the rise in Russia.

Unfortunately, many of Russia's actions early in Medvedev's presidency undermined this hope. In August 2008, Russia escalated military action in the Western-leaning former Soviet republic of Georgia. This military adventurism ended any hope the country had of joining NATO. Moreover, Medvedev extended the term of his successor to six years instead of four. This abrupt political change was a clear signal that Putin was waiting in the wings to return as Russia's president. Moreover, this time, Putin was ready to extend his political reach even further.

Once Putin regained the presidency in 2012, his and his cronies' financial schemes continued full force. However, all was not well for Russia economically. Oil price growth was slowing, and businesspeople were afraid to invest in a system that could raid, threaten, or jail them at any moment. Rather than attempt any reforms, though, Putin chose to continue his project of imperial expansion.

In February 2014, Russia threatened to go to war with Ukraine over a Russian military base in Crimea if Ukraine did not reverse its pro-Western trajectory. On February 27, masked troops bearing no military insignia stormed the Crimean parliament. They hoisted a Russian flag over the building. A referendum was quickly called for a vote on Crimea joining Russia; Crimeans voted overwhelmingly in favour.

Europe and the US implemented sanctions targeting Putin's inner circle in response. Nevertheless, the conflict in Ukraine continued to escalate and spread to eastern Ukraine. Russian fighters – or "volunteers," as Russia cagily called them – were joined by local pro-Russia militants using Russian military hardware. Putin finally admitted that some of these so-called "volunteers" had been Russian troops only after the Crimean annexation was complete. The resulting death toll from the fighting stands at 13,000 today; a quarter of those killed have been civilians.

The annexation of Crimea and subsequent war in eastern Ukraine was nothing less than a proxy war against the West. What happened there was a warning sign of the turbulence the Russians were soon to create elsewhere.

After annexing Crimea, Putin continued to funnel cash and culture into the West.

Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, Putin and his men were funnelling black cash into the West through a series of complex money-laundering schemes.

These schemes involved offshore companies that received payments from tycoons close to Putin. Others involved shell companies signing fake loan agreements between themselves – agreements used to siphon money out of Russia. Then there were mirror trades. These allowed investors to buy Russian stocks in Russian rubles while seemingly unconnected companies sold the same amount of stock through Deutsche Bank in London.

With tricks like these, Russia funnelled money into the West. However, along with the cash, Putin also wanted to spread culture.

Western NGOs like George Soros's Open Society try to spread the principles of liberalism, democracy, and human rights across the world. Putin's KGB men began to form their own NGOs, taking inspiration from these organisations. Theirs, however, sought to cultivate an ideology based on the tenets of Russian Orthodoxy. It focused on tradition, subservience to the state, and intolerance of homosexuality.

To this end, Russian cash – both official and unofficial – was used to create a web of agencies. The agencies promoted the Kremlin's version of world events and popularised the Russian language and culture. The same cash was used to fund Russian Cossack paramilitary youth camps; a paramilitary biker group called the Night Wolves and the Foundation of Saint Vasily the Great, whose goal was supposed to spread Orthodox values in reality, funded pro-Kremlin separatists in Ukraine.

Along with spreading this particular flavour of Slavic culture through NGOs, Putin's men used slush funds to support European anti-establishment parties on the extreme left and right, particularly in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Austria.

By cultivating extremism in these countries, Russia aimed to weaken the EU and potentially break its consensus on sanctions against Russia. However, soon set its sights on bigger Western European targets like France, Germany, and Italy. Furthermore, in the UK, Kremlin cash poured into Tory coffers. Russia's security chief, Nikolai Patrushev, even developed a close relationship with Boris Johnson, the man spearheading the Brexit campaign that would further weaken the EU.

It did not take long before the US also came into Russia's crosshairs in the form of Donald Trump.

Russia found an ally in US President Donald Trump.

Long before Donald Trump ever announced his intentions to run for president, he had dealings with Russians.

It all started with Shalva Tchigirinsky; an antique smuggler rumoured to have ties to the infamous Solntsevskaya organised crime group. He first met Trump at the Taj Mahal in Atlantic City, New Jersey. He was impressed by the casino's glitz and glam.

Tchigirinsky was only the first in a long list of KGB-linked financiers Trump had dealings with, starting in the 1990s and continuing into the present.

Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, Trump became close to the Russian emigrant people in business who frequented his Taj Mahal casino. In one instance, emigrants Felix Sater and his partner, Tevfik Arif, offered to finance and build a series of luxury developments for Trump. Sater and Arif used the development projects to get cash into the US.

Many other businesspeople proposed projects to Trump; most of these failed to materialise. Nevertheless, as Trump made his bid for the presidency, beginning in 2015, the Russians ramped up their dealings with him. Sater developed a relationship with Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen. They discussed a potential Trump Tower in Moscow. Sater wrote: "I will get Putin on this program, and we will get Donald elected."

Trump's family also began to get involved. In June 2016, an English journalist wrote to Donald Trump Jr., Trump's son, that he knew a Moscow lawyer who could offer dirt on Hillary Clinton – and Donald Jr. seemed interested. Initially, the offer seemed to be a bust. However, in mid-June 2016, a Russian hacker group called Guccifer 2.0 hacked the Democratic National Convention's computer servers. Then, a month before the election, WikiLeaks began releasing emails sent from Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.

When the news broke in the Russian parliament that Trump had won the election, the entire hall erupted in applause.

Despite their celebrations, it does not seem as if Russia had pulled off a massive scheme to install a Kremlin-controlled candidate in the White House. For them, Trump's election victory was a win in itself. His populism and divisive messages have sown discontent within America; he has argued against NATO and encouraged Brexit. The beneficiaries of these policies are Putin and his circle of KGB cronies.

Climate change: a threat missing in NISP

2020-04-08T04:29:00.000+05:00

Climate change: a threat missing in NISP

By: Sohail Ahmed Memon

Climate change is the biggest threat to life on our planet. Wildfires in the Amazon forests, the Bushfires in the Australia and the fatal torrential rains in Pakistan are all signs of climate change. Sadly, Pakistan does not give proper ear to the threats posed by climate change. Evidently, Pakistani policy makers do not think of it as a threat to internal security which shows why it is missing from the National Internal security Policy (NISP) 2018.

"Notwithstanding the ambit of NISP has been widened to include cyber terrorism, the absence of the climate change is far-reaching. Therefore, another R should be added to “Revisit the NISP” be added in a report as Climate change is the biggest threat to internal security of Pakistan."

"The citizens of Pakistan are our Priority", written under the picture of the, then Premier Shahid Khaqan Abbasi in the National Internal Security Policy (NISP) report 2018. Sadly, it seems that the people killed in the rain-related incidents in 2018 and specifically in 2019 in which 137 people have been killed (NDMA), were not the priority of our parliamentarians. To our dismay, climate change could not find its place as a threat in the report.

Only a few months back under the government of PTI "The German watch" report revealed that Pakistan is the fifth most vulnerable country to climate change. The people from the treasury benches may contend that they have accomplished a Bonn challenge with regard to climate change and have been also lauded by the WEF for their ‘tree plantation program’ in the KPK province however, there is a need to do more but the first thing would be to add the threat of climate change in the new comprehensive NISP framework as Climate change is hazardous directly as well as indirectly to our internal security.

Climate change is the more profound challenge to internal security of our country than extremism. In fact, " the year 2019 has been the safest year in terms of terrorist attacks" quoted by the Prime Minister Imran khan to various foreign journalists. To verify, he seems right as the news suggests that around innocent 130 people were killed in terrorist attacks or related incidents in the said year. However, climate change alone took away around precious 240 lives in the same year.

At the outset of the second decade of the second millennium, the country was welcomed with the harsh winter. In its south-west province capital city Quetta saw its record snowfall which resulted in the tragic loss of 31 people. Besides, there was also a deadly avalanche in Azad Kashmir which took away the life of more than a hundred people. Thus, Climate change is the direct threat to Pakistanis.
Besides direct threats, climate change poses indirect threat to the internal security by affecting water resources, food security and already faltering economy which would ultimately lead to accelerate the inter-provincial rifts. Moreover, the climate change would exacerbate the unplanned urbanisation ending in the sprawling of the slums in the big cities. This way a new cycle of pollution to climate change to internal security to pollution begins resulting in the chaos.

Notwithstanding the ambit of NISP has been widened to include cyber terrorism, the absence of the climate change is far-reaching. Therefore, another R should be added to “Revisit the NISP” be added in a report as Climate change is the biggest threat to internal security of Pakistan.
That said, Hopefully, this would be taken seriously as the matter is urgent so our Premier should formulate a new internal policy and work collectively to counter this threat before the “Winter” finally may befall the land of the pure.

~Sohail Ahmed Memon
The author is a researcher at Climate and Global Politics

Future of Capitalism and Karl Marx

2020-04-05T10:50:00.002+05:00

Future of Capitalism and

Karl Marx

by: Saddam Hassain Magsi

Staggering income stagnation, burgeoning socio-economic inequality, looming environmental catastrophe and astounding spread of pandemic depict that Capitalism is going to face new anxieties in the future. According to Karl Marx, a period of growth is followed by recession and depression and we have already entered a recession. He was right. In the midst of capitalist creed, the world is witnessing geographic, class and global divides. On one hand, Capitalism has produced booming metropolis, having it all and the winners. On the other hand, broken cities and left behind are bitter pills to swallow. Now, having left its ideological competitors in the dust, the system is confronting its own flaws. Private capitalism, as well as state capitalism, is struggling to avoid the issues created by the system. Today, two capitalist camps are battling for ascendancy: A liberal meritocratic one, marshaled by the advanced industrial democracies, and a state-led, the political one, headed by the People’s Republic of China. Problems are looming ahead for both the systems. Technological disruptions, climate change, economic crisis, rich and poor divide; problems in public policies are a harsh reality. Therefore, overcoming these countervailing challenges is pressing need of the hour to provide breathing space to the world. It is high time we faced new realities and tackled the problems head-on.

"On one hand, Capitalism has produced booming metropolis, having it all and the winners. On the other hand, broken cities and left behind are bitter pills to swallow. Now, having left its ideological competitors in the dust, the system is confronting its own flaws."

Evolution of Capitalism: quite successful as a system of political economy

Capitalism emerged in the 18th century, lifted off in the 19th century, conquered the world in the 20th century and is in decline in the 21st century. There is no denying the fact that capitalism is an efficient system. It provides employment opportunities, generates capita and so forth. Today’s advancements are owing to the capitalist system. At the same time, it also brings inequality, poverty, hunger, and divide. Oxfam Study found that the richest 01 % bagged 82% of wealth created last year. These startling figures show that the future of Capitalism is definitely going to face certain bottlenecks.

Relevancy of Karl Marx in the 21st century: Every Growth period is followed by recession and depression.

Capitalists always try to maximize the profit. The purpose is nothing but “Profit Maximization”.

Karl Marx maintained that capitalist societies have a business cycle: A period of growth is followed by recession and depression. As society becomes mature these cycles become more frequent and severe: A high will be too high and low will be too low. The available literature suggests that we have already entered a period of recession. Trade War between The USA and China hurt the global economy, it brought us to the brink of global economic crisis. The spread of COVID-19 triggered the already deteriorating situation. Now, the world is going through a nightmare scenario.

Hurdles and Bottlenecks are looming ahead in the pathway of Capitalism

Capitalism is currently facing umpteen economic, social and environmental challenges. Many countries continue to be victims of absolute poverty. Studies suggest that “More than one in three people in OECD countries are estimated to be economically vulnerable “. Capitalism has survived such challenges in the past. It is yet to be seen whether capitalism sustains these shocks or not.

How to overcome the Anxieties: the way-forward

Issues remain in place, but, efforts are going to surmount them. It is time to face the realities. Either we can bury our head in the sand and hope that problem would resolve itself, or we can tackle the problem head-on. It is rightly said that realizing the problem is the first step towards solving it. Likewise, we need a new form of capitalism based upon principles of morality and ethics. The predatory capitalism can wreak havoc only. We also need to decentralize responsibilities and restore inclusive societies.

~ Saddam Hassain Magsi

The author has deep interest in International security and peace studies.

He can be reached at: magsisaddamhussain@gmail.com

Disclaimer: Global Tidings is an initiative to evolve the culture of research in Pakistan.
Feel free to share us your write-ups at sangiwaqas@yahoo.com
Let's educate the nation together!

Is Plato still alive?

2020-04-05T07:23:00.000+05:00

Is Plato still alive?

By: Hasnain Ahmed Abro

Who was Plato? What were his ideas? What are its modern day relevance? And most importantly, is Plato still alive? All of these questions could only be answered when one understands Plato and his legacy. Plato was a post-Socratic philosopher. A remarkable one, founder of Platonic school of thought, and he wrote numerous full-length books on philosophy, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics and much more.

"To Plato, justice was only for minority of ruling class at the expense of majority. He made these two airtight compartments and placed ruling class and ruled inside them"

A guy named Alfred North Whitehead famously said that all of western philosophy, subsequently after Plato, consists of a series of footnotes to him. Now that’s something huge. But what was his philosophy? To make this comprehensive, his philosophy was based on idealism. Although, idealism itself is a hydra but we call Plato’s idealism as Platonic idealism. Plato was of the view that apart from our world, a perfect world existed. A world where concepts of justice, morality and beauty were perfect. That world was different from our materialistic world and he also gave us a sneak peek of that world through his work “Republic”. Now close your eyes and think for a moment what the deepest desire of a human being is? What has mankind yearned for centuries? Immortality? Yes. However, it is not possible. Yet, one tend to become immortal in a limited time by being father to someone, a son or through any other form. Now, the father, the son or any other form are human being, matter, but the name and the feelings attached to it are abstract.

Same goes for concept of justice, morality, freedom and others. Thus, to achieve these notional qualities and to perfect them was Plato’s idealism. And, to make the materialistic world perfect, he presented his blue print through his ideal-state.

"Yet again, the world needs another Plato but a different one, and with a different kind of idealism that actually benefits people. That actually believe in notional concepts of justice, equality and others"

Now, does his ideas hold modern-day relevance? Well, in my opinion, No! To make it more understandable, one may take the following example: Plato identified all trees as one. He thought of them as similar. However, trees are different. There is difference of branches, leaves, bark, trunk and roots. We cannot confine all trees into a specific set. Same goes for people. To Plato, justice was only for minority of ruling class at the expense of majority. He made these two airtight compartments and placed ruling class and ruled inside them. Moreover, some people call Plato the first feminist but in actual, he reduced their status to a mere animal. By calling for communism of family, he completely backtracks from core concepts of ethics and morality. He prioritized women’s productive rights over reproductive. Whatever little freedom he gave women could only be exercised by those belonging to elite class. It is his thoughts that align with ‘Survival of the fittest’ that allow eugenicists like Toby Young to comment that helping COVID19 infected people is a waste of tax-payer’s money. To add more, one may also find similarities between Platonic idealism and fascism: rule of minority, Plato’s Hellenistic belief and fascist’s ultra-nationalism and much more.

Is Plato still alive? Yes! His legacy is strong and his thoughts live on. But, the world does not need Platonic idealism—eugenicists and fascists are its example. And just to be clear, one cannot blame Plato for his thoughts as they were masterpiece in his cultural and temporal settings. Yet again, the world needs another Plato but a different one, and with a different kind of idealism that actually benefits people. That actually believe in notional concepts of justice, equality and others. It is not a sin to believe in idealism, in fact, it has proven to be a catalyst for positive social change.

For example, the lawyer’s movement in Pakistan had not been successful if the people did not believe in independence of judiciary. The modern democratic states had not existed if the people did not believe in equality. Feminism had not taken its roots if the women did not believe in their freedom. Currently, as The Economist March 2020 magazine cover said that the Earth is closed due to COVID19, the world needs idealism. The world needs to huddle up and decide the future course of history.

~Hasnain Ahmed Abro
The writer is a Civil engineer and loves to read and write about philosophy, mysticism, and world politics.

Disclaimer: Global Tidings is an initiative to evolve the culture of research in Pakistan.
Feel free to share us your write-ups at sangiwaqas@yahoo.com
Let's educate the nation together!

The dark clouds of COVID-19 and feeble South Asia: buckle up!

2020-04-04T07:43:00.001+05:00

The dark clouds of COVID-19 and feeble South Asia: buckle up!

by: Muhammad Ali Nutkani

When the talks of rise of Asia, particularly of China were echoing all across the globe, the novel threat of Corona Virus aka COVID-19 had shown up. None has ever thought that the world would be witnessing such a pandemic that would baffle the international and national platforms alike. The countries which are too vulnerable to this situation are the world's least developed countries (LDCs). According to World Economic Forum, 900 million people are at risk from coronavirus.

Likewise, the countries in South Asia would suffer more and could hamper the expected rise of Asia. South Asia is of great importance, half of the top 10 most densely populated cities in the world—Dhaka, Chennai, Mumbai, Kolkata, and Kathmandu—are located in South Asia.

"This is a ray of hope for the SAARC to come as a powerful organization. Pakistan has not yet made any contribution and was sought to have gone for the consent with China over the SAARC fund. Pakistan should go with all states of the region."

2020 has not been good so far for South Asia: growth is marred by the political instability; Afghanistan conundrum; communal riots in India; Asia’s demographic dilemma; Pakistan’s CPEC issues; Asia’s refugee crisis -Afghanistan and Myanmar; and much more mammoth problems. What would happen to these already-fragile states amid the recent COVID19 threat? Obviously, it would have drastic effects on the Asian region. Firstly, it would affect the economy of Asia and particularly of China; China is the source of imports for 9 out of 10 Southeast Asian countries. By the trade being halted, China would suffer and the effects could go beyond Asia as well. Further, some economy pundits suggest that China’s economy may shrink for the first time since 1970s. This could ultimately effect Pakistan as Islamabad is connected with Beijing in financial terms. And according to the Pakistan’s ministry of planning, two crore people will be getting unemployed.

Secondly, it would socially disturb the fabric of region; shortage of things could urge masses to adopt illegal means for their survival. Likewise, ban on religious gathering would give hatemongers a chance to incite the impulse of violence.

Thirdly, it would have grave implications on national politics. National and international institutions are facing criticism alike. Criticism on Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro ; suspension of activities in parliaments of countries ; dismissal of administrators of Communist Party of China (CPC) ; skirmishes within EU ; delayed election in Syria ; and criticism on Pakistan’s PM Imran khan are some worth mentioning examples. Beside this, there is a growing pressure on national governments to deal with the situation, which is making international institutions less valuable. Moreover, the already-fragile regional organization SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) would become more sluggish amid the constraints on cooperation among countries.

Last but not the least, regional peace would further deteriorate due to the pandemic. On the international front, lack of cooperation is in vogue because of the nationalistic wave in the recent years. It seems like that global leadership has gone into quarantine when the world is in dire need to be rescued. Moreover, the confirmed case in Bangladesh’s Cox Bazar has panicked the aid workers. This could hamper the international efforts to curb the virus menace. The point is that if international cooperation is fraying then it would be viable to foster regional cooperation. South Asian nations must brace themselves to counter the threat with unprecedented level of cooperation. The intention of Narinder Modi to call the leaders of SAARC to “chalk out a strategy” to combat the virus is a positive trajectory for SAARC nations. He proposed for the Emergency Fund for the region to fight the pandemic. India has announced US$10 million as its initial contribution; Bangladesh US$1.5 million; Nepal and Afghanistan each announced that they would contribute US$1 million; Srilanka pledged to give US$5 million. This is a ray of hope for the SAARC to come as a powerful organization. Pakistan has not yet made any contribution and was sought to have gone for the consent with China over the SAARC fund. Pakistan should go with all states of the region.

This is a vital time for South Asian states to rise and prove to be more cooperative than EU which is itself in crisis. Whatever motive Modi has behind this SAARC move, it could help Pakistan and China too because Pakistan is inept in dealing with the crisis due to ample socio-economic reasons. Although the cases in South Asian subcontinent are not more than 500, but tenable measures are needed to prevent it. So, to fight the pandemic, Asians must adopt short terms and long terms measures. Short terms measures include: states must make tests affordable and extensive; tracing and isolating; early social distancing; and making individuals to realize the situation.

While long terms measures include: strengthening the national and regional platforms; need to change thinking from geostrategic to geoeconomic ; focus on technology and Artificial Intelligence (AI) ; progressive taxation ; and more focus on Human Development Index. Moreover, if Asia wants its rise then China is the biggest player with state-capitalism. In the present situation, countries are adopting the China’s way: Government control.

This could help China to confront “Washington Consensus” with the “Beijing Consensus”. This could help Asia to keep on their rise while West is struggling with the version of globalization it had created. Further, it is unknown that for how long EU and USA will be on lockdown effecting the global trade and ultimately the ASEAN states. So, cooperation between SAARC and ASEAN could provide some cushion to the issue in future. The globalization has been already on the way of shifting from West to East; virus has now acted as an impetus. Hesitations of West in cooperating with East are no longer hold logic because West has to cooperate as virus sees no boundaries.

Moreover, failure of the West in dealing with the corona virus and better performance of East is manifesting that this could be the Asian century or more specifically -Chinese century. The only thing is that for how long Asia could hold it amid ample other issues. Lastly, closing borders won’t be viable for long terms as global problems need global solutions

~Muhammad Ali Nutkani

The author is member of 'Board of Directors, The Global Tidings and a security analyst

Disclaimer: Global Tidings is an initiative to evolve the culture of research in Pakistan.
Feel free to share us your write-ups at sangiwaqas@yahoo.com
Let's educate the nation together!

COVID-19: Liberties Evaporate in a Thin Air

2020-04-04T02:59:00.001+05:00

COVID-19: Liberties Evaporate in a Thin Air

by: Saddam Hassain Magsi

The Corona-virus disease is spreading at a break-neck speed. The pandemic has become a serious nightmare across the globe. Given its unparalleled spread, health, psychological, mental, and economic costs have yet to be realized. Recent studies show that we have already entered a recession. In a similar vein, while dealing with the response to corona virus, civil liberties are given a hasty burial. Unable to exercise their constitutional rights and guarantees, People are in shut-down orders. Liberal thinkers such as J.S Mill and John Locke talk about the state of perfect freedom. John Rawls, an American liberal philosopher says that liberty is a fundamental liberal principle. If it is curtailed, it is deemed as a violation of fundamental human rights. China is a case in point in this regard. It is a totalitarian regime. China’s aggressive and ruthless measures lead to fruition. It has become relatively successful in the containment of the virus. But, such measures may not work in other countries.

"Therefore, Politicians in the corridors of power need to mull-over the violations of individual and collective liberty. People often resort to violence when they are asked not to go to a church or a mosque, as they want to exercise their liberties guaranteed by a constitution."

Let’s take an example of the USA. People of America love their freedom and liberties.

It is a highly consumerist society in nature. They despise the idea of being told what to do and what not to do. Therefore, complete lock-downs would possibly not be possible in the USA. As a result, the world is already witnessing the deteriorating situation across the Atlantic Ocean. At the same time, the ideas of civil liberties are already making headlines. Given this state of dilemma, how to justify the present situation of lock-downs? Without minimizing the seriousness of the pandemic, with recognizing that this is a global crisis, it is equally important to be wary of the fact that democratic countries have constitutions and constitutional rights: the right to assemble the right to free speech, and the right to religious freedom. What is striking is that the blithe way in which the politicians, elected- officials and the law-enforcing institutions are abridging these rights at whim.

Presently, the world is seeing an animus against constitutional rights; using the virus as a pretext to deny the citizens their rights and basic liberties. Developed countries have strong institutions. There are well-established checks-and balances about the abuse and the misuse of power. However, the developing world has weak institutions and poor checks and balances. Policy approval is not in the hands of institutions but leaders. Consequently, power is easily abused. Therefore, Politicians in the corridors of power need to mull-over the violations of individual and collective liberty. People often resort to violence when they are asked not to go to a church or a mosque, as they want to exercise their liberties guaranteed by a constitution.

Governments also need to come up with an exit strategy before the civil-unrest unfolds and it becomes too late. Not only Pakistan but the entire world is lacking an exit strategy. Lock-downs may lead to fruition for a short period of time, but in the long term, it is unsustainable.

~ Saddam Hassain Magsi

The author has deep interest in International security and peace studies.

He can be reached at: magsisaddamhussain@gmail.com

Disclaimer: Global Tidings is an initiative to evolve the culture of research in Pakistan.
Feel free to share us your write-ups at sangiwaqas@yahoo.com
Let's educate the nation together!

COVID-19 and the changing global power dynamics

2020-03-31T22:06:00.007+05:00

COVID-19 and the

changing global power dynamics

by: WAQAS ZULFIKAR SANGI

Humanity has never before confronted a crisis quite like COVID-19, one that has concurrently challenged both the limits of public health systems everywhere and the ability of countries to work together on a shared challenge of transnational security threats. And while its geopolitical, geo-economic, and geostrategic implications are drastically changing the world order, and the cradle of liberalism—USA— has done nothing so far to save the dying spirit of globalism.

Global orders have a tendency to change gradually at first and then all at once; thanks to globalization and related effects. The question on the credibility of the global institutions, USA. being a global superpower, and the ideas such as ‘end of history’ thesis are under threat. Meanwhile, China as the first country to tackle the menace of COVID-19 has proved that it is not only the democracy that ensures the public well-being and safety domestically and globally, but authoritarianism can also do it in a better way. Is this a resurgence of an alternative political ideology? Is the world moving towards yet another nationalism? Do we still need super-sonic missile systems and nuclear weapons? Is COVID-19 more harmful than the looming threats of climate change? Let's analyze the impacts of COVID-19 on global power dynamics.

Globalization: an end or more interdependency?

The new corona-virus is appearing to be an enormous stress test for globalization. As serious supply chains break down, and nations reserve medical supplies for domestic use only and air blockade to preserve territorial and national integrity, the crisis is demanding the reassessment of the interconnected global economy. Not only has globalization allowed for the rapid spread of contagious disease but it has also fostered deep interdependence between private companies and nations making the world more vulnerable to the virus [as it was the Chinese cheap labor that frequently traveled all around the world under the vision of Xi’s new globalization—BRI]. However, it is also the same globalization that has been saving the world. For instance, China under its mask diplomacy is filling the power vacuum of the leading superpowers. Globalization has now become an inevitable phenomenon. The only way to save the earth is to learn the art of living together.

USA: a wounded tiger in the search of global credibility

Throughout its history, the United States has had visionary, charismatic leadership at the time of great crises: George Washington during the revolution and the American war of independence, Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression and World War II. Richard Nixon during the communist Soviet's resurgence with his containment policy, Eisenhower’s ‘Atom for Peace’ initiative for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Nonetheless, Trump, due to his conservative, polarized and racist ideology, unfortunately, has not proved himself to be anywhere close to such a leader. The ‘America first’ slogan has made the US a wounded tiger that isn’t fit to protect the jungle anymore. COVID-19 has further cemented the argument that the populism leads to a catastrophic state of affairs. Trump’s negligence towards the pandemic has made the US a country with maximum deaths leaving even the Italy behind. Although US foreign policy now under Trump is nationalism-oriented, yet it is ready to go to any means to stop the rise of China. When the entire world is busy tackling the virus; Trump is pronouncing it as ‘just another flu’ and now it is facing the music. USA must come out of IRAN, and NORTH KOREA-phobia, it is high time USA prioritized the non-traditional security threats in its international agenda or else the world would soon lose its faith in the USA’s credibility.

China: the new sphere of influence

Although China hid the crisis from the world in its critical early days yet it has again emerged from the ashes to play its responsible role on the world stage. China’s mask diplomacy is filling the holes left by the USA and consequently helping China to mold globalization, soft power, and public opinion in its favor. China is rising peacefully. The way it has been rising according to its strategic culture—Silently, and cooperatively. Xi’s other achievement after neutralizing Hong Kong protests is the saving of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the pandemic crisis. He once again is using the notion of civilization-state and nationalism to stay in power. COVID19 is helping China to alter the liberal world order as ‘Confucian World order’. Citizens of Italy have replaced the EU flag with China’s red flag, the region which was once considered ‘kingdom of globalism and capitalism’ is now influenced by the ‘reds’. The containment policy seems to be against the USA now. COVID19 did no harm to BRI, Chinese soft power, regionalism, and neoliberalism instead it has further consolidated the Xi’s thought.

Nationalism versus the globalism: let the fight begin!

The COVID19 has unleashed a debate: whether the world need nationalism or the globalism? The answer is ambiguous. But one thing is for sure, the world would surely go for regionalism and nationalism. The political leaders due to their inefficiency have learned the art of blaming abstract globalization and immigration inflow towards their respective countries. Nonetheless, the pandemic is now further helping them to support their authoritative notion of sealing the borders. However, the leaders around the world must understand that the spirit of globalism could only save them from the curse of corona-virus and other non-traditional security threats.

Technology: a good servant and a bad master

The emergence of Artificial intelligence has changed the course of almost everything. The 21st century appears to be a competing arena for ‘data’ which could be used as a tool for staying in power. The algorithms would be used to maintain the personal health statics, record, surveillance of all the individuals over the cost of healthy life. And the same data would be manipulated by the strongmen for extending their power base. Gone are the days when authoritarians used to have millions to spy in the city, social media has made it easy for them. The global agenda for using technology as a blessing is missing, making it vulnerable to power-mongers. COVID-19 is undoubtedly going to help them all.

Fake news and propaganda: controlling minds is controlling the world

COVID19 has also helped fake news to strengthen its roots to distort the image of truth. TV channels are busy in telecasting the fake news about the virus’ outbreak. The conspiracy theories in such times when humanity is crippling for its survival could bring the world on the verge of another global war. Soon the pandemic is going to be over but the culture of lie and fake news is going to stay with us.

The third world countries: money makes the mare go!

COVID19 would now work as an eye-opener for the poor nations. The biggest challenge here is to China to help its fellow BRI countries and regional key players of Asia such as Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh to materialize its dream of ‘Asia for Asians’. The war-torn regions are now on the biggest hit of the virus. It was only Pakistan that agreed to help Afghanistan when even the USA, and India abandoned it. Similarly, the Palestinians’ responsibility lies upon Israel’s shoulders, Syria’s on Russia and Turkey, Iraq's on Iran, and Africa in the sphere of influence of China. This might be the biggest test of their temperament and spirit of a collective good. No country has, however, emerged as victorious in this game of morality.

Failing global institutions: the feeble organizations amid the geopolitical rivalry

The United Nations is silent and politically biased under Antonio's leadership. The World Trade Organization (WTO) hasn’t been able to reduce the tariff barriers on the medical items. World Health Organization (WHO) presents a useful global plane but lacks a global consensus to agree upon. European Union (EU) faces existential threats and has altered the essence of its very foundation by closing borders to their neighbors for the first time in generations. The geopolitical rivalry has made global organizations weak and toothless. The only country responsible for this entire mess in the global arena is the USA. First the Jerusalem episode, then the maximum pressure policy on Iran, covert operation to kill Qasim Sulemani- the former commander in chief of the Iranian Quds force, hasty withdrawal from the war-torn areas and now the global indifference towards the non-traditional security threats. In the backdrop of all this chaos, the institutions must work on their financial system as to get rid of biased approached and dictation of a single hegemonic player.

Not too late: humanity would survive

The world in these crucial times has to make a firm decisions. Staying with democracy or authoritarianism? Believing in global institutions or dismantling them all? Playing global responsible role or upholding the notion of nationalism? Ending trade barriers on medicines or adopting protectionist trade policies at the expense of their local industry? Every decision taken today would shape our future for generations to come. Stay home and stay safe everyone!

~Waqas Zulfikar Sangi
The writer is an activist and member of PAK-US alumni network.

He can be reached at sangiwaqas@gmail.com

Disclaimer: Global Tidings is an initiative to evolve the culture of research in Pakistan.
Feel free to share us your write-ups at sangiwaqas@yahoo.com
Let's educate the nation together!