What a landmark a defining visit for China and Saudi Arabia – during President Xi Jinping’s rare visit to Riyadh, both countries signed investment deals worth $34 billion. Their bilateral trade has already crossed $ 80 billion. And the warm send-off Prince Mohammad bin Salman gave to President XI after three days was equally worth-watching and probably reflected a new beginning. It also bespoke the mutual vows to take the relationship to new levels. This unusual warmth evoked several eyebrows in the western political quarters and evoked riveting responses. “Time will tell, but judging from the cold and humiliating reception of Biden, and the extremely warm reception of China, the US is no longer a close Saudi ally,” said the above Twitter handle. The deals in Saudi Arabia take Chinese investments in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar to a staggering $ 95 billion in the last few years, with a promise of a massive uptick in bilateral trade as Arab rulers hunt for new investment opportunities at home and eastwards. The push for investments and trade connectivity through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) sharply contrasts with the billions of dollars these countries have dished out to the US and leading NATO nations for arms purchases. In August 2022, for instance, State Department approved a $3 billion sale of Patriot missiles to Saudi Arabia and $2.2 billion to the United Arab Emirates. It is contrary to what Biden had promised in the 2019 election campaign, i.e., to make Saudi Arabia a pariah. Earlier on May 20, 2017, President Trump and Prince Salman bin Abdul Aziz signed a series of letters of intent for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to purchase from the United States totaling US$110 billion immediately and $350 billion over ten years. It was a geopolitically driven move that underscored the two countries’ old alliance. Beijing, on the contrary, has pursued geo-economics through the BRI – making it a harbinger of change through trade, economic cooperation, and...

The US invaded Afghanistan with arrogance but withdrew in disgrace. The strategic failure of the so-called “war on terror” has shattered the US war frenzy. None of the parties directly or indirectly involved,  seem to be satisfied with the achievement of the so-called “war on terror” and the outcome of the Doha agreement, while the world has become even more, dangerous than it used to be two decades earlier. Khalilzad is an Afghan-American diplomat who has long been involved in Washington’s Afghan policy and is known for his treacherous character in Afghanistan and as per Trump’s remarks in the US as well.  At the first Bonn conference during the US invasion of Afghanistan, he played a significant role in handing over the power to the warlords that subsequently contributed to defamation of the system.  He was a key figure in drafting the constitution and the formation of the presidential system in Afghanistan. Having experience and skills in deceiving American and Afghan politicians, Khalilzad is accused of working for his interests as well. The author will never think of declaring Ashraf Ghani’s innocence, but in the context of the Doha agreement, Ashraf Ghani has not considered himself obligated to implement the provisions of the agreement, and he was by no means part of it. It has been bad luck for Afghanistan that the Ex-president has never openly or implicitly spoken of giving up power for the sake of peace.  Even in meetings with Afghans, the former President rejected the establishment of an interim government and repetition of Dr. Najeebullah’s mistake to resign and clearly said, it was unacceptable. So in such circumstances, why the US failed to expect an even harsher response from such a selfish man with an authoritative mentality?  Considering the vast intelligent network in Afghanistan, the US should have anticipated or even intercepted the president’s escape from Afghanistan or should have brilliantly admitted sharing the multi-dimensional...

The following information was laid out by National Counter-Terrorism Authority (NACTA) to the Senate Standing Committee on Interior: The Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf’s (PTI) strategy for engaging in discussion with the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has failed and, on the contrary, encouraged TTP terrorist activity in Pakistan. With TTP’s base still intact in Afghanistan, the US military withdrawal from Afghanistan “provided impetus to TTP activities.” TTP’s resurgence in Swat and surrounding areas “can be attributed to their efforts to gain pulse of locals and response by the state.” The division of Malakand was described as “susceptible” to terrorism because of its “central location and access to inhabited regions” in the study. Although there has been a drastic increase in terrorist activities, strong opposition to the terror group from all social groups can be termed as a positive development. Locals have requested protection for their communities, particularly for the political leadership involved in the conflict with the militants. With the onset of weather, it is likely that TTP fighters may leave their present location and merge in with the local population hence all militant activities should be closely monitored. NACTA also recommended in-camera discussions concerning security-related matters, peaceful rallies and promoting tourism. Finally, the Committee on Interior approved the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2022 to address the rise in incidents of child sexual exploitation and cybercrime in light of Pakistan’s constitutional obligations and international commitments. For more info: https://www.dawn.com/news/1725422/ttp-used-peace-talks-to-swell-its-ranks-nacta  

The ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia has placed Europe in a dilemma. For years now, Europe has been dependent on Russian gas supplies during winter. However, as a consequence of the conflict and Western-imposed sanctions, Europe has been under pressure by the US to diversify its requirements. Furthermore, the Biden administration’s manipulative use of the Russian-Ukrainian war to advance its own interests at their expense has infuriated Europeans. A case in point is the US charging the Europeans four times more for natural gas supplies than it does for domestic sales, especially in these times of crisis. Ever since the election of Democratic candidate Joe Biden as President of the United States, the hawkish European NATO partners have heaved a sigh of relief. It is no secret that former President Donald Trump was not in favor of continuing support for the US-led NATO alliance, mainly for political and financial reasons. Europe got cold feet as it began to feel left out of any form of defensive shield and realised that, if there ever was a threat from Russia, it could not defend itself without US support. However, all that changed with Joe Biden`s election as President. Being a staunchly anti-Russian and anti-communist follower, one of his first declarations that he announced as President was “America is back”. His statement was made specifically to pacify his NATO allies in Europe and assure them of continued US support to the alliance, unlike his predecessor Donald Trump. Unfortunately, though, he brought the US and Russia back to the Cold-War era, with Europe helplessly following. Under US pressure and direction, NATO has been pursuing an expansionist policy in Europe for a while. Its principal objective is to corner Russia, despite the fact that this strategy has backfired. They say that, if you keep poking a bear with a stick, it will react, hence Russia seeing itself cornered by NATO`s insistence on Ukraine to join the alliance, the bear reacted...

This show of missile tests by North Korea was a retaliation to the ongoing largest ever joint military drill of South Korea and the US, in which thousands of military personnel and 240 aircraft were taking part. At a time when the USA is already engaged in multiple global challenges like the Ukraine war, the Russian threat of using nuclear weapons, Iran’s nuclear plans, and deteriorating relations with China on the Taiwan issue, opening up another front to comply with its security agreements with Japan and South Korea is another challenging task for US and North Korea knows it very well. Last month (November,2022), the tension on the Korean peninsula escalated after North Korea fired 23 missiles in one day on 2nd November and then launched another  six missile the next day; one of which  was suspected be an intercontinental ballistic missile. Japan claimed that one of these missiles had flown over its territory and it was the second occurrence in a month. South Korea reacted by firing several missiles on the next day. Earlier, a missile was fired by North Korea that had crossed the maritime border with South Korea for the first time and caused a panic leading to televised announcements for the residents of the border area to “evacuate to the nearest underground shelter”. This show of missile tests by North Korea was a retaliation to the ongoing largest ever joint military drill of South Korea and the US, in which  thousands of military personnel and 240 aircraft were taking part. In response to this provocative military exercise, North Korea had warned that it might take  “more powerful follow-up measures” from Pyongyang[1]. What happened on 2nd November was in line with this warning but there are more reasons for the rise of tension in the region. It wasn’t the first time  North Korea had fired missiles directed towards the Sea of Japan or South Korea. On 28 September, it fired two short-range ballistic missiles off its east coast a day before the arrival of US...