Category: 2. World

They roll down Beijing streets, some covered from prying eyes by huge tarpaulins, but the silhouettes of missiles, tanks and undersea vehicles are unmistakable as China prepares for its most revealing military parade in six years.

For military watchers, the procession of veiled armaments is offering valuable clues to what might be on show at a massive military parade on September 3, which China says will reveal the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “new generation” of domestically produced, active-duty weaponry. It will be the largest display of advancements in China’s military hardware since the 2019 National Day parade.

That parade celebrated 70 years since the founding of the People’s Republic of China. This year’s parade will celebrate the 80th anniversary of another landmark moment in Chinese history, the end of World War II following the surrender of Imperial Japan, whose invasion of China began in 1931.

The 2019 parade saw the PLA unveil weapons including a road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile, a medium-range ballistic missile mated with a hypersonic glide vehicle, and its first undersea drone.

Beijing has pursued a head-turning military buildup under Chinese leader Xi Jinping, during which the PLA – previously not even one of the strongest in Asia – has started to rival, or in some categories surpass, the US military in analysts’ estimations.

On September 3 military watchers are expecting new versions of some of the weaponry and technology that debuted in 2019.

Parade rehearsals have shown what are almost certainly new types of hypersonic missile systems and huge undersea drones among other weaponry, masked by tarpaulins and fabric coverings.

Officials on Wednesday ran down a categorical list of what the PLA will show off on September 3.

“The parade involves more than 10,000 personnel, over a hundred aircraft, and several hundred ground vehicles,” Maj. Gen. Xu Guizhong, executive deputy director of the Parade Command Office of the PLA’s Central Theater Command, told a briefing in Beijing.

More than 100 different types of equipment will be included, all of it battle ready and domestically produced, Xu said, adding that a large proportion would be new armaments making their debut.

The general ticked off a range of China’s most modern weaponry that it’s never shown the world before: cutting-edge drones, directed-energy weapons, electronic jamming systems, hypersonic systems, air-defense and missile-defense technologies, and strategic missiles.

And there will be the normal formations of fighter jets, tanks and troops, Xu said.

The plans seem to satisfy the wish list of one Chinese citizen CNN spoke to as speculation swirled in recent days.

“I’d like to see whether there will be some drone displays, or how the different troops will present themselves in different orders. I’d also be interested in our military strength, such as tanks,” said Liu Hongmei, a tourist from Yunnan province who was visiting Beijing.

Comments on the micro-blogging platform Weibo reflected strong enthusiasm for the upcoming parade, with many people asking for a national holiday so they could catch it on TV.

“Can we get a day off to watch the live broadcast?” one poster asked, getting more than 2,000 likes.

“I’m definitely taking a day off to watch on September 3, canceling all my plans,” another wrote.

And it’s something the public seems to want more of, according to some enthusiastic posts.

“Only 70 minutes? That’s not enough to watch!” one post said.

And it looks like the PLA will keep stoking the excitement.

The PLA has promised more details to come in the weeks before September 3, when it won’t only be residents of China who are tuning in for an update on the country’s military arsenal.

“As for the specific models of the showcased equipment, please stay tuned; more information will be available soon,” Xu told Wednesday’s press briefing.

Joyce Jiang contributed reporting.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has said it “deplores” new US sanctions on its judges and prosecutors.

On Wednesday, the US State Department announced new sanctions on two judges and two prosecutors in the ICC for engaging in efforts to prosecute US and Israeli citizens.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused the ICC of being a “national security threat” and “an instrument of lawfare” against the US and Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has welcomed the US move. The ICC has issued arrest warrants against Netanyahu and his former defence minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity over Israel’s war in Gaza.

France also joined the ICC in denouncing the US move, expressing “dismay” as one of its judges, Nicolas Guillou, was among those sanctioned.

The three other ICC officials named by the US are judge Kimberly Prost of Canada as well as deputy prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal.

Rubio condemned the court’s “politcisation, abuse of power, and illegitimate judicial overreach” in a statement announcing the sanctions.

The ICC is a global court with the power to bring prosecutions for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

The court called the latest sanctions “a flagrant attack” against its independence and impartiality.

“They constitute also an affront against… the rules-based international order and, above all, millions of innocent victims across the world,” it added.

France’s foreign ministry criticised the sanctions as “in contradiction to the principle of an independent judiciary”, the AFP news agency reported.

Meanwhile, Israeli PM Netanyahu welcomed the decision, calling it a “firm measure against the mendacious smear campaign against” Israel.

According to the US State Department, Gillou is being sanctioned for authorising arrest warrants against Nethanyahu and Gallant.

The US said Prost, the Canadian judge, is sanctioned for an investigation into US personnel in Afghanistan, adding that Khan and Niang are both responsible for “illegitimate actions against Israel”.

The penalties mean any property and interests the four officials hold in the US are blocked.

This latest round of sanctions comes after the US imposed similar restrictions on the ICC’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan KC, along with four other judges earlier this year.

UN’s human rights chief previously demanded the US withdraw its sanctions on the four judges, saying the decision runs directly counter to “respect for the rule law”.

In July, the US also sanctioned UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who has been a prominent critic of Israel’s military offensive in Gaza.

Rubio cited Albanese’s support for the ICC and her participation in the court’s decisions to prosecute American or Israeli nationals as justification for the move.

In response, Albanese reposted support for the ICC on social media, saying she came from the court’s founding country Italy where lawyers and judges had “defended justice at great cost and often with their own life”.

“I intend to honour that tradition,” she added in the post.

Benjamin Netanyahu has ignored pleas from Australian Jewish groups to calm his feud with Anthony Albanese, further criticising the prime minister and escalating an ugly spat between the two leaders.

Australia’s peak Jewish group, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), on Wednesday labelled Israeli prime minister Netanyahu’s attack on Albanese as “inflammatory and provocative”, and a “clumsy intervention” which had affected Australia’s Jewish community.

ECAJ’s president, Daniel Aghion, wrote letters to both leaders, critical of the conduct of Albanese and Netanyahu and urging a resolution “in the usual way through diplomacy rather than public posturing”. The group’s co-executive, Alex Ryvchin, had additionally called for “both governments to remember what’s at stake to ensure that calm heads prevail and to conduct their matters of state privately, diplomatically”.

But in a new interview with Sky News, Netanyahu again labelled Albanese “weak”.

“I’m sure he has a reputable record as a public servant, but I think his record is forever tarnished by the weakness that he showed in the face of these Hamas terrorist monsters,” he said, in a clip broadcast by Sky.

“When the worst terrorist organisation on earth, these savages who murdered women, raped them, beheaded men, burnt babies alive in front of their parents, took hundreds of hostages, when these people congratulate the Prime Minister of Australia, you know something is wrong.”

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

The full interview will be broadcast on Thursday night.

When Albanese’s office was contacted for comment, a spokesperson referred Guardian Australia to the prime minister’s statement on Wednesday, where Albanese said he wouldn’t take Netanyahu’s comments personally.

“We had a long discussion prior to the cabinet meeting which was held last Monday morning. At that time, I gave prime minister Netanyahu a clear indication of my view and Australia’s view going forward … I gave him the opportunity to outline what political solution there was,” Albanese told reporters.

“I don’t take these things personally. I engage with people diplomatically, he [Netanyahu] has had similar things to say about other leaders.”

In a statement distributed by the Palestinian delegation to Australia, the Palestinian ministry of foreign affairs called Netanyahu’s criticism of Australia and France in recent days “unjustifiable and hostile to peace”.

“The Ministry affirms that conflating recognition of the State of Palestine with antisemitism and interfering in the internal affairs of France and Australia is unjustifiable, hostile to peace, and contrary to the international consensus on the principle of the two-state solution,” it said.

Thursday’s comments from Netanyahu are the latest in an escalating row between Australia and Israel. It followed Australia’s pledge to recognise a Palestinian state, joining the vast majority of countries to recognise statehood, and Australia speaking more strongly amid a chorus of international condemnation of Israel’s deadly military campaign in Gaza, which has seen the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians.

Albanese claimed Netanyahu was “in denial” at the suffering of civilians in Gaza.

Australia’s refusal of a travel visa for the far-right Knesset member Simcha Rothman stoked criticism from Jerusalem, sparking a tit-for-tat which saw Israel then revoke the visas of Australian representatives to the Palestinian Authority.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Numerous members of Netanyahu’s government have made repeated criticisms of Australia in social media statements and media interviews.

The growing diplomatic argument has alarmed Jewish groups in Australia.

ECAJ warned both leaders that Australia’s Jewish community “will not be left to deal with the fallout of a spat between two leaders who are playing to their respective domestic audiences”.

Aghion, in his letter to Albanese, was critical of the prime minister accusing Netanyahu of being in denial, claiming the accusation was “gratuitously insulting” and “unseemly”.

Aghion also criticised Netanyahu for alleging Albanese had abandoned Australia’s Jews.

“These comments have played straight into the hands of opponents of Israel and antisemites, to the detriment of the Australian Jewish community,” Aghion wrote.

“Had we been consulted, we would have warned against such a clumsy intervention into Australia’s domestic politics. The charge of antisemitism, whether made directly or indirectly, is a serious one and never to be made lightly.”

Alex Ryvchin, ECAJ’s co-chief executive, also disagreed with some of Netanyahu’s comments, saying the Jewish community had concerns about the government’s handling of antisemitic incidents but “we’ve never felt abandoned”.

Frank Caprio, a retired municipal judge in Rhode Island who found online fame as a caring jurist and host of ”Caught in Providence,” has died. He was 88.

His official social media accounts said Wednesday (August 20, 2025) he “passed away peacefully” after “a long and courageous battle with pancreatic cancer.”

Caprio billed his courtroom as a place “where people and cases are met with kindness and compassion.” He was known for dismissing tickets or showing kindness even when he handed out justice.

Last week, Caprio posted a short video on Facebook about how he had “a setback,” was back in the hospital and was asking that people “remember me in your prayers.”

Caprio’s show was filmed in his courtroom and featured his folksy humour and compassion. Clips from the show have had more than 1 billion views on social media.

During his time on the bench, Caprio developed a persona at odds with many TV judges — more sympathetic and less confrontational and judgmental.

In his bite-sized segments on YouTube, Caprio is often seen empathizing with those in his courtroom. Many of the infractions are also relatively minor, from failing to use a turn signal to a citation for a loud party.

Caprio also used his fame to address issues like unequal access to the judicial system.

“The phrase, ‘With liberty and justice for all’ represents the idea that justice should be accessible to everyone. However it is not,” Caprio said in one video. “Almost 90% of low-income Americans are forced to battle civil issues like health care, unjust evictions, veterans benefits and, yes, even traffic violations, alone.”

Caprio’s upbeat take on the job of a judge drew him millions of views. His most popular videos have been those where he calls children to the bench to help pass judgment on their parents. One shows him listening sympathetically to a woman whose son was killed and then dismissing her tickets and fines of $400.

In another clip, after dismissing a red-light violation for a bartender who was making $3.84 per hour, Caprio urged those watching the video not to duck out on their bills.

“If anyone’s watching I want them to know you better not eat and run because you’re going to get caught and the poor people who are working hard all day for three bucks an hour are going to have to pay your bill,” he said.

On social media, his family described Caprio “as a devoted husband, father, grandfather, great grandfather and friend.”

“Beloved for his compassion, humility, and unwavering belief in the goodness of people, Judge Caprio touched the lives of millions through his work in the courtroom and beyond,” the family wrote. “His warmth, humor, and kindness left an indelible mark on all who knew him.”

State and local politicians mourned his passing and celebrated his life.

“Judge Caprio not only served the public well, but he connected with them in a meaningful way, and people could not help but respond to his warmth and compassion,” Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee said in a statement. “He was more than a jurist — he was a symbol of empathy on the bench, showing us what is possible when justice is tempered with humanity.”

Robert Leonard, who co-owned a restaurant with Caprio, said he was “going to be sorely missed” and was “all around wonderful.”

“There is nothing he wouldn’t do for you if he could do it,” Mr. Leonard said.

Caprio retired from Providence Municipal Court in 2023 after nearly four decades on the bench.

According to his biography, Caprio came from humble beginnings, the second of three boys growing up in the Federal Hill neighborhood of Providence, Rhode Island.

“I hope that people will take away that the institutions of government can function very well by exercising kindness, fairness, and compassion in their deliberations. We live in a very contentious society,” he said in 2017. “I would hope that people will see that we can dispense justice without being oppressive.”

Published – August 21, 2025 07:57 am IST

PRESIDENT Donald Trump claims to have helped end six wars in different parts of the world since he returned to the White House early this year.

He now appears highly optimistic about being able to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine soon to bring to an end the bloody conflict between the two countries — “…if I can get to heaven, this will be one of the reasons”, the American leader told the media ahead of the meeting he hosted for the leaders of Ukraine and seven European countries at the White House.

One of Trump’s campaign promises was to end the war that began more than three and a half years ago when Russia invaded Ukraine. But resolving one of the largest conflicts to have occurred in recent years may not be as easy as Trump thinks. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed so far on both sides in the conflict, which has virtually turned it into a European war. The Russian invasion was seen as the most serious security threat to the entire West and has united Europe more than at any other time in recent history.

America, too, was one of the largest suppliers of arms to Ukraine before Trump broke away from the ranks, hugely weakening the anti-Russia alliance. His initial efforts failed to get the two sides to agree to a ceasefire. The terms of peace were too vague to be accepted by either side.

While Moscow is not willing to cede the territories it has occupied during the war and accept Nato’s presence in the region, Ukraine is not prepared to make any compromise on its sovereignty. The trust gap is too wide to be bridged. Trump’s threat to completely stop America’s arms supply to Ukraine will not work as Europe stands solidly behind the country. In fact, European military support for Kyiv has increased significantly in recent months.

The Alaska meeting has cemented the rapprochement between Russia and the US.

Meanwhile, Russia intensified its military offensive, occupying more territories over the past few months. It was apparent that even the multiple sanctions clamped on it by the US and its Western allies failed to deter Moscow. Some reports suggest that Russia has not only recouped its military losses but has also expanded its military capabilities. Russia has reportedly lost 250,000 soldiers so far, but even such a large number of casualties has not affected its war efforts.

After an initial setback, Trump has revived peace efforts in recent weeks. He sent his special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow earlier this month to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin. The meeting took place days before Trump’s deadline for Russia to reach a peace deal with Ukraine or face economic sanctions. The three-hour meeting with Putin proved very productive. A White House official said the meeting went well and that Russia was eager to continue engaging with the US. The Moscow parleys paved the way for a Trump-Putin summit soon after.

Last week, the US president met his Russian counterpart for the first time since 2019. Trump welcomed Putin back on the world stage with a red carpet welcome when he landed in Alaska. It was Trump’s typical style of diplomacy. It was a remarkable moment for the Russian leader who was spurned by Western nations after Moscow launched the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Putin’s international travel has since been largely limited to nations friendly to Russia. The International Criminal Court had issued a warrant for his arrest on war crime charges.

The Alaska summit failed to produce a ceasefire agreement, as was expected by Trump, but was seen as a victory for Putin. His grand welcome on American soil was beyond expectations. Within a moment, Putin has gone from being a pariah in the West to a partner and friend of the US. The meeting ended earlier than expected without any agreement, yet Trump appeared satisfied.

In post-summit comments, Trump asserted that ‘great progress’ was made in the talks. But he did not share any details on the question of whether any concrete steps were being taken to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict. There was no mention of any of the ‘severe consequences’ that Trump had threatened would follow if a ceasefire was not reached. Putin made it clear that Moscow was not willing to initiate an immediate ceasefire as demanded by the US and European leaders. There were also some reports that Russia would require Ukraine to give up some of its territory in exchange for ending the violence.

There may not be any tangible agreement on peace in Ukraine but the Alaska meeting has certainly cemented the rapprochement between Russia and the US. Both leaders agreed to continue the peace process. In his comments at the press talk, Putin made no promises, no concessions and no compromises. He appeared to be in full command of the situation.

Before wrapping up his remarks, he referenced one of the American president’s frequent talking points — that the conflict in Ukraine would have never started had Trump been in power then. It seemed the comment was enough to massage Trump’s ego. Putin looked at Trump and said in English: “Next time in Moscow.” Caught by surprise, Trump replied “Oh, that’s an interesting one.”

Days after the Alaska summit Trump hosted a round-table meeting for the Ukrainian president and seven other European leaders at the White House. The major concern of the European leaders is Ukraine’s security. They want security guarantees that oblige members to defend an ally under attack, meaning that Ukraine should be provided with similar protection even without formal Nato membership. They argue that a security agreement should be made a part of any peace deal. Russia has made it very clear that it will not accept any Western security cover for Ukraine that would threaten its own security.

Notwithstanding Trump’s desire to end the Russia-Ukraine war, which he believes will earn him a place in heaven besides winning him a Nobel Peace Prize, there is little hope of his wishes materialising at least in the near future.

The writer is an author and journalist.

zhussain100@yahoo.com

X: @hidhussain

Published in Dawn, August 21st, 2025

Moscow has said it must be part of any international talks on Ukraine’s security, as Russia continues to stall on Donald Trump’s push for a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said on Wednesday that Moscow must be included in any talks on Ukraine’s security guarantees, dismissing European diplomacy as “aggressive escalation” and a “clumsy effort to sway Trump”.

“To discuss security guarantees seriously without Russia is a road to nowhere,” Lavrov said during a working visit to Jordan.

Lavrov also said that China, Russia’s ally in the war, should be among Ukraine’s security guarantors – reviving a proposal first put forward by Russian negotiators during talks in Turkey in spring 2022.

European leaders have begun exploring post-conflict security guarantees for Ukraine, following Trump’s pledge to help protect the country under any deal to end Russia’s war.

Russian officials have repeatedly said Moscow would not accept the deployment of European forces to Ukraine, one of the key security guarantees under discussion.

Kyiv is likely to view with scepticism any prospect of China, a supporter of Russia during the war, acting as a security guarantor.

Lavrov, meanwhile, avoided any direct reference to a possible Putin-Zelenskyy summit, highlighting the Kremlin’s apparent plans to delay any concrete planning of a meeting.

Trump announced this week he had “begun the arrangements” for the first meeting between the two leaders since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Trump later claimed he had set up a bilateral meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy, explaining: “I thought I’d first let them meet.”

Opening direct talks with Zelenskyy would cut against the storyline Putin has cultivated since the 2022 invasion – portraying Ukraine’s president as an illegitimate figure and a mere puppet of the west.

Putin, who almost never refers to Zelenskyy by name and instead speaks of the “Kyiv regime”, has repeatedly cast doubt on whether his Ukrainian counterpart even holds the authority to sign a peace agreement. “You can negotiate with anyone, but because of his illegitimacy, he [Zelenskyy] has no right to sign anything,” Putin told Russian officials earlier this year.

But Trump’s promise of a meeting puts Putin in a difficult spot: rejecting it risks tension with the US president, while agreeing to one would elevate Zelenskyy to equal status and confront Putin with a media-savvy rival ready to meet almost without preconditions.

Moscow has shown scant sign of preparing for such an encounter.

Lavrov cautioned on Wednesday that any contact between the two leaders would need to be arranged “with the utmost care”, while other Russian officials dismissed Zelenskyy as a lightweight unworthy of serious attention.

But, as often is the case, Moscow has avoided closing the door entirely, hinting that the Putin–Zelenskyy encounter could take place, while giving no sign that it is actually on the horizon.

Several countries have offered to host a possible Putin-Zelenskyy meeting, including the Vatican, Switzerland and Hungary.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

The Russian leader reportedly suggested to Trump that his counterpart travel to Moscow for talks – an idea Russia knew Kyiv would reject because of the obvious risks to Zelenskyy’s safety.

Analysts suggested that the Russian leader would probably only meet Zelenskyy to accept Russia’s maximalist conditions, which would equal Ukraine’s capitulation.

“Putin will not meet Zelenskyy under the current circumstances,” said Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. “He has repeatedly stated that such a meeting would only be possible if there were well-prepared grounds, which in practice means Zelenskyy’s acceptance of Russia’s terms for ending the war.”

Figures close to the Kremlin have emphasised that Putin sees no need to rush into a meeting with Zelenskyy.

“Simply put, Putin only sees value in a meeting with Zelenskyy if it ends with a capitulation,” wrote the nationalist commentator Alexei Mukhin. “If Zelenskyy is unwilling to sign one, the Kremlin will keep ‘working on’ the idea of a meeting until he is,” Mukhin added.

Putin now faces a situation reminiscent of earlier moments when Trump pressed him to agree to a ceasefire. At the time, he managed to manoeuvre around the pressure, and analysts believe he is likely to take a similar approach now – downplaying the prospect of talks without rejecting them outright.

The key question is whether Trump will seek to put pressure on Kyiv to accept some of Russia’s demands to clear the way for a meeting between the two leaders.

Russia’s leadership on Wednesday showed no sign of compromise. Lavrov said the US was beginning to gain a clearer understanding of the “root causes” of the war – a phrase Putin has used to describe demands ranging from Ukraine’s formal renunciation of Nato membership to its “demilitarisation” and “denazification”, a vague formula that in practice would mean removing Zelenskyy.

The Russian foreign minister also pointed to the April 2022 talks in Turkey between Russia and Ukraine as a model. Those failed negotiations centred on Moscow’s demands for Ukraine’s disarmament, political neutrality and the abandonment of its ambition to join Nato.

Meanwhile, Russian officials told Reuters that Moscow was preparing to raise taxes and cut spending to sustain high defence outlays and keep the war effort going.

Last week it was Putin. This week it’s all of Europe. Ever since Donald Trump’s sit-down with the Russian president in Alaska, that icy stage for the grandmaster spectacle, leaders across the Atlantic have been lining up at his door.

Suddenly the same capitals that questioned his authority to negotiate on their behalf are outdoing each other to pucker up and secure favour before the next big move.

And poor Zelenskyy, always a pawn in these games, must be wondering what happened. After all, it wasn’t too long ago that Washington played him as the gambit on the European chessboard. He was hailed as a symbol of resistance, showered with weapons, promised unyielding support.

Now it’s the same White House that’s implicitly endorsing a Russian carve-up of Ukrainian territory. That’s the trouble with proxy wars. When the players switch seats, the proxies lose their place on the board.

But while that game plays out in Europe, another one is unfolding closer to home. This time it is India in the hot seat. And here too, Trump is using the same tools of coercion and spectacle. Only the stick is different. Enter America’s infamous exorbitant privilege. Just when talk of dedollarisation was gathering pace and headlines questioned the future of dollar dominance, that same privilege has come roaring back — not as incentive but as punishment. The unique status of the dollar as the global reserve currency is once again being wielded to bend policy, shape alignments, and punish disobedience.

According to Peter Navarro, the former trade adviser now back in Trump’s inner circle, India’s $43 billion trade surplus with the United States comes with strings attached. It’s not enough for India to earn dollars. Washington now wants to decide how those dollars are spent. Buying cheap Russian crude and reselling refined petroleum to other regions, Navarro says, is deeply corrosive to the effort to isolate Putin’s war economy. If India wants to be treated as a strategic partner, it must first act like one.

This is classic Trump. Strategic ambiguity masking tactical muscle. Publicly he frames it as partnership. Privately the pressure is applied. And if loyalty isn’t guaranteed, outcome the tariffs. As things stand, $87bn worth of Indian exports are now under threat of a 50 percent duty from Aug 27. That’s not a warning shot. That’s a loaded gun on the trade table.

The real pressure point is India’s dependence on dollar liquidity. How else will it pay for the $109bn it spends annually on imports from China? How else will it fund the next round of supply chain relocations, semiconductor capacity, or defence modernisation. That’s the leverage Navarro is now spelling out in public. That’s the same leverage Trump is wielding without hesitation.

To make matters worse for Modi, none of this is happening in isolation. If he thought the Russia relationship would give him oil independence, or that India’s new manufacturing push would shield it from trade retaliation, this past week has been a rude awakening. Not only has Trump made it clear that India must follow Washington’s rules, he’s also forcing New Delhi into the awkward position of having to re-engage China on economic terms just to soften the blow.

It’s not that Modi wants to pivot east. He can’t. After Beijing’s very public military and material support to Pakistan in the last India-Pakistan conflict, any meaningful strategic alignment is politically impossible. But economics does not care for loyalties. If India wants cheaper batteries, EV tech, or lithium-ion supply chains, it will have to look to the same Chinese companies it once barred. And when you’re being squeezed from one side by dollar hegemony and from the other by voter expectations at home, the middle ground starts to shrink.

So while Europe repositions itself around a re-empowered Trump, and India scrambles to salvage dignity without sacrificing market access, the real lesson is this. Donald Trump isn’t playing chess with individual nations. He’s playing a global game of leverage. And the currency isn’t just the dollar. It is control. And he loves it, because he knows he’ll win by default.

Which brings us, almost inevitably, to Pakistan.

So far, it has escaped the wrath of Trump’s transactional diplomacy. In fact, it has somehow ridden a wave of goodwill with the US president. He’s had lunch with the army chief. He’s publicly praised Pakistan’s role in regional stability. He’s even spoken positively about its cooperation on Afghanistan and anti-terror efforts. And while no one’s quite sure what has charmed him — was it the quiet capture of an ISIS commander in Afghanistan, the lobbying for a Nobel nomination during his last term? — the approval is real, at least for now.

But this is Trump. The same Trump who once turned on Islamabad with a single tweet. He declared “no more” in 2018 and froze aid while accusing Pakistan of lies and deceit. The same Trump who can pivot from handshake to sanctions faster than his advisers can draft the next memo.

Pakistan may have his attention, even his praise. But in this particular game, attention isn’t a guarantee. It is a spotlight. And nobody stays in that spotlight for long without eventually being told where to stand, what to say, sometimes even how to spend.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

TEHRAN: Iran said Wednesday it was prepared for any new Israeli attack, announcing it has developed missiles with greater capabilities than those used during their recent 12-day war.

“The missiles used in the 12-day war were manufactured… a few years ago,” Defence Minister Aziz Nassirzadeh said, quoted by the official IRNA news agency.

“Today, we have manufactured and possess missiles with far greater capabilities than previous missiles, and if the Zionist enemy embarks on the adventure again, we will undoubtedly use them.”

In mid-June, Israel launched a bombing campaign against Iran, triggering a war in which Iran responded with missile and drone strikes.

The Israeli offensive killed senior military commanders, nuclear scientists and hundreds of others, striking both military sites and residential areas.

The United States briefly joined the war with strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

A ceasefire between Iran and Israel has been in place since June 24.

Iranian officials have since warned that another round of fighting could erupt at any moment, emphasising that Tehran does not seek war but remains prepared for any confrontation.

On Monday, First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said Iran should be “prepared at every moment for confrontation”.

“We are not even in a ceasefire; we are in a cessation of hostilities,” he added.

Iranian media reported that the army is to begin a two-day military exercise on Thursday, featuring a wide range of short and medium-range cruise missiles.

Western governments have repeatedly voiced concern about Iran’s missile programme, calling it a threat to regional security.

In July, France called for a “comprehensive deal” with Tehran that covers not only its nuclear programme but also its missile programme and its regional ambitions. Iran has insisted that its military capabilities are not up for negotiation.

ISLAMABAD: The Centre for Strategic Perspectives (CSP) at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), Wednesday, hosted a public address on “ECO, Regionalism and the New Geopolitical Dynamics.”

The event brought together a wide range of participants including academics, think-tank experts, and practitioners. Ambassador Dr Asad Majeed Khan, secretary general of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), was the guest speaker.

In his welcome remarks, Director General ISSI Ambassador Sohail Mahmood noted that the current global environment was marked by turbulence and transformation in which major power competition was accentuating and globalisation and multilateralism were under severe stress.

Regionalism, however, was not as challenged, except for in regions like South Asia. If ECO could provide a successful model of regional cooperation then there could be a good demonstration effort for the South Asian region.

While intra-regional trade rose to USD 96.5 billion in 2022 from USD 76 billion in 2021, he remarked that it still accounts for only 9.1 per cent of the region’s total trade—signalling untapped opportunities. He also noted persistent challenges, including border conflicts, terrorism, sanctions, and regional disputes.

Sanctions on certain member states have further restricted economic prospects, while tensions between Pakistan and India pose a challenge to regional stability and wider regional connectivity.

The Israel-Iran conflict of 2025 has also disrupted critical trade and energy routes, underscoring the fragility of regional integration. Ambassador Sohail Mahmood expressed cautious optimism, noting that recent US-mediated efforts at reconciliation between Azerbaijan and Armenia may open new trade and energy corridors in the South Caucasus.

In his wide-ranging public address, Ambassador Asad M Khan shared a comprehensive overview of ECO evolution and its institutional development. He also reflected on Pakistan’s enduring role as a founding member of ECO, tracing its origins from the RCD in 1964—Asia’s first regional development organisation—to its expansion in 1985 with the inclusion of Central Asian states, Azerbaijan, and Afghanistan.

He highlighted ECO’s natural basis for cooperation through shared cultural, religious, and economic ties and noted that its comprehensive institutional framework. Trade, he stressed, is central to ECO’s relevance, and efforts are underway to address challenges related to the ECO Trade Agreement (ECOTA) and the Visa Scheme.

Disparities in infrastructure, historic trade patterns, and geopolitical tensions exacerbated further challenges, but the Organisation is working actively to address them.

Ambassador Asad Majeed Khan warned that climate change is an existential threat, with floods, droughts, and water stress undermining development across ECO states, calling for greater cooperation in renewable energy, adaptation, and water management. Yet, he acknowledged progress in energy connectivity projects and tourism promotion, while underscoring the need for deeper private sector engagement beyond government-led efforts.

Reflecting on the 17th ECO Summit in Khankendi, he described it as a defining moment that renewed commitments to connectivity, trade facilitation, and sustainable development. With stronger political will, institutional reform, and regional solidarity, he expressed optimism that ECO could fulfill its founding vision and emerge as a meaningful platform for prosperity in the region.

Ambassador Inamul Haq highlighted ECO’s continued potential as a vehicle for regional integration, noting that its strength lies in fostering multilateral economic and developmental cooperation among member states. He emphasised the need to move beyond national-level approaches, particularly on pressing challenges like climate change, energy insecurity, and sustainable development, by adopting coordinated regional strategies.

Developing countries, he observed, can benefit greatly from enhanced South-South cooperation—pooling resources, sharing expertise, and jointly building resilience—rather than relying exclusively on external support for climate finance and technology transfer.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025