Category: 2. World

WASHINGTON: The United States sent 10 F-35 fighter jets to Puerto Rico as part of its war on drug cartels amid mounting tensions with Venezuela over Washington’s military build-up in the Caribbean.

The planes will join US warships already deplo­yed to the southern Carib­bean as President Donald Trump steps up pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, whom the United States accuses of leading a drug cartel.

The standoff has grown in recent days as the Pentagon said two Vene­zuelan military planes flew near a US Navy vessel in international waters on Thursday in a “highly provocative” move.

US forces on Tuesday blew up an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean that Trump said belonged to the Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan criminal organisation he tied to Maduro, killing 11 people.

The high-tech F-35 jets will be deployed to an airfield in Puerto Rico, a US Caribbean island territory of more than three million people.

Maduro — a leftist firebrand whose election victory last year was seen by Washington as illegitimate — has denounced the US build-up as “the greatest threat our continent has seen in the last 100 years”.

Declaring his country prepared for “armed struggle in defence of the national territory”, he has mobilised Venezuela’s mili­tary, which numbers 340,000, and ‘eight million reservists’.

Published in Dawn, September 6th, 2025

• Starmer reshuffles portfolios after his embattled deputy Rayner steps down over property tax scandal
• David Lammy named new deputy PM; Yvette Cooper moves to Foreign Office
• Ex-Columbia University president Shafik named PM’s chief economic adviser

LONDON: Faced by crises on multiple fronts, UK PM Keir Starmer overhauled his cabinet on Friday, picking David Lammy to replace his embattled deputy PM, and bringing in Shabana Mahmood to head the Home Office.

Former deputy PM Angela Rayner quit after an investigation found that she had breached the ministerial code, underpaying a property tax in the purchase of a flat in southern England.

Her departure prompted Starmer to carry out the first major cabinet reshuffle of his stuttering 14-month-old premiership.

The shake-up comes after Rayner’s resignation dealt the latest blow to Starmer’s flagging government that has lurc­hed from one storm to another since he became prime minister in July last year.

It has been forced to U-turn on welfare reforms and fuel benefits for the elderly, while its failure to stop undocumented migrants arriving on small boats has bolstered support for Reform, led by anti-immigrant firebrand Nigel Farage.

Lammy’s post as Britain’s top diplomat will be taken by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who will in turn be succeeded by Ms Mahmood, the BBC reported.

This means that for the first time, all three of the most senior and historically important cabinet positions will be held by women, as Rachel Reeves is the current chancellor of the Exchequer.

Others leaving key posts include leader of the House of Commons Lucy Powell and Secretary of State for Scotland Ian Murray.

Meanwhile, economist Nemat Talaat Shafik has been named Starmer’s new chief economic adviser.

Baroness Shafik was previously the president of Columbia University, and was pushed out following fallout from the 2024 Gaza protests. She has also served as a deputy governor at the Bank of England.

Rayner’s troubles

Rayner’s resignation followed her self-referral to the independent adviser on ministerial standards.

She disclosed on Wednesday that she had underpaid stamp duty — a property tax — on an apartment following days of reports suggesting that she had saved thousands of pounds by removing her name from the deeds of another property.

After reviewing her case, Laurie Magnus wrote to the PM, saying that in his opinion, she had breached the ministerial code.

He pointed out that while the tax rules Rayner was dealing with are “complex”, the fact that she didn’t seek expert advice means that she did not meet the “highest possible standards of proper conduct”, as required by the Ministerial Code.

In her resignation, Rayner took full responsibility for the error. In response, Starmer said she had done the right thing.

Rayner had been tipped as a potential future Labour leader and has been a top target for political attacks by the opposition Conservatives and right-wing media.

Despite the circumstances of her exit, Starmer told her: “You will remain a major figure in our party”.

Shabana’s rise

Shabana Mahmood, the 44-year-old Labour MP for Birmingham Ladywood, has had a rapid rise. She becomes the second Home Secretary of Pakistani-origin, with Tory minister Sajid Javid being the first in 2018.

Born in Birmingham to parents with roots in Mirpur in Azad Kashmir, Mahmood often links her political outlook to her family’s migration story and the values she absorbed growing up around a corner shop in inner-city Birmingham.

In a New Statesman interview, she linked her parents’ politics to the party “that made them feel they had a stake in British society“, adding that her family “found opportunities in this country that would not have been available to us in the village that we hail from in Kashmir and then Pakistan.”

During her childhood she also lived for a period with her family in Taif, Saudi Arabia. She went on to study at the University of Oxford and graduated with a BA in Law, later working as a barrister.

Mahmood also became one of the UK’s first Muslim parliamentarians when she was elected in 2010 alongside other MPs.

She has spoken directly about representing Britain’s Pakistani communities.

“I…take pride in representing one of the biggest ethnic minority groups in the UK,” she told the British Pakistan Foundation in an interview, arguing that the government should work at the community levels.

She also rejected claims that Pakistanis do not hold British values, saying: “They respect the rule of law, they want to live in a democracy.”

Published in Dawn, September 6th, 2025

Shabana Mahmood, a British lawmaker of Pakistani origin, was named the country’s new interior minister on Friday as Prime Minister Keir Starmer undertook his first major cabinet reshuffle since becoming premier in July 2024.

Starmer brought in his “loyal friends” on Friday in a sweeping reshuffle intended to restore his authority after the resignation of his deputy, Angela Rayner.

After reshaping his Downing Street team last week to bolster his economic advice, a ministerial reshuffle had been expected.

Mahmood, 44, a former barrister and the most senior Muslim in UK politics, takes charge of the Home Office after serving as justice minister.

She has been an MP since 2010 and has held several shadow portfolios, but declined to serve in Jeremy Corbyn’s team when he was party leader.

The shake-up followed the resignation of deputy premier Angela Rayner. Other key moves saw Yvette Cooper, previously at the Home Office, become foreign minister, while David Lammy moved up to deputy prime minister and justice secretary.

Rayner’s departure meant it was much deeper than widely predicted, forcing Starmer to draw a line under more than a week of distracting speculation over her tax affairs.

Starmer could do little to protect Rayner after Britain’s independent adviser ruled that she had breached the ministerial code by failing to pay the correct tax.

“Angela is a ‘big beast’ and hard to replace,” said one Labour lawmaker, adding that the three new appointments were “sound” if not overly exciting. 

Between August 31 and September 1, national leaders gathered in Tianjin, China, for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit. The grouping — founded in 2001 by China, Russia, and four Central Asian states as a regional organization — has grown to include India, Pakistan, Iran, and Belarus. In total, SCO has 10 members, 2 observers, and 14 dialogue partners. China continued its high-profile week of diplomacy two days later when Beijing hosted a massive military parade commemorating the 80^th anniversary of the end of WWII, highlighting the sacrifices that China made in that conflict and showcasing its military and economic development over the subsequent decades. 

Experts at Stimson assess these developments and their implications. 

What had China hoped to achieve from this summit week, and did it deliver on those expectations? 

Yun Sun: Beijing had defined the SCO Summit as its signature foreign policy event of the year, and China almost certainly achieved its main diplomatic and strategic aims. This summit was noteworthy for being the largest SCO meeting yet, with more than 20 state leaders and heads of 10 international organizations in attendance. The week included Putin’s unprecedented 4-day visit and Modi’s participation, which was not assured until the recent deterioration of India-US relations. SCO members passed the organization’s development strategy for the next decade, including the start of a process to found a SCO Development Bank. The summit also announced plans to establish four centers for countering security threats, securing information, combating organized crime, and countering illicit narcotics. Participants agreed to pursue cooperation in other areas, including energy. 

The debate in the policy community on SCO has always been focused on whether it is more than merely a talk shop. The question is well-justified, as the SCO’s concrete cooperation mechanisms and deliverables have so far remained limited. However, from the Chinese perspective, the SCO has served as an effective mechanism to manage Russia, its close neighbor with a complex history. The international isolation Russia has faced since the Ukraine war has given China an opportunity to push the SCO to expand cooperation beyond the narrow security focus that had long been Moscow’s preference. 

The four security centers and the political process to found a SCO Development Bank are important additions to the current existing structures to beef up SCO’s substantive mechanisms. In addition, the group’s agreement to promote cooperation in capacity building, training, green economy, and digital economy are signs of the organization’s future potential. 

How does the SCO summit fit in the context of Russia’s foreign policy agenda, and what lessons should the Trump administration learn from the gathering? 

Peter Slezkine: For Putin, the SCO summit in China was a second act on center stage. After his red-carpet handshake with Trump in Anchorage, Putin stood at Xi’s right side throughout the SCO meeting in Tianjin and the Victory Day celebration in Beijing. He also followed up his recent ride in Trump’s Cadillac by inviting first Modi and then Kim to take a spin in his Russian-made Aurus limousine. In the most iconic moment of the summit, Putin and Modi walked hand in hand to have a conversation with Xi. The three leaders’ display of solidarity served as a public rebuff of Trump’s attempt to pressure China and India to cut purchases of Russian energy. A subsequent announcement that Putin and Xi had signed a legally binding memorandum to build the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline only reinforced the message that Europe’s (partial) refusal to buy Russian energy would simply result in greater exports to Asia. 

For the United States, the display in China should be more instructive than concerning. The SCO hardly amounts to an anti-American conspiracy (as Trump suggested in a recent “truth”), and the Russia-India-China troika will never be free of tension. There is no need for geopoliticians in Washington to worry about a Eurasian “heartland” uniting against the West. Yet the Trump administration would do well to remember that there is a world beyond the West, and that what works within the American empire might backfire when attempted beyond its bounds. The United States’ “allies and partners” are, in effect, subordinate entities in a single structure, and they have had little choice but to accept Trump’s trade terms. Russia, India, and China exist outside of this system, and while Washington can inflict pain, it cannot dictate decision-making. 

Did India and China really resolve their differences at the summit? 

Elizabeth Threlkeld: While policymakers in Washington and beyond are right to note the warming ties between India and China, India’s careful balancing act, coupled with the slow pace of tangible progress, suggests that underlying structural tensions and deep-seated distrust still impede a genuine reset. 

The visit was Modi’s first to China since 2018, and notably his first since the 2020 border clash between Indian and Chinese troops, in which 20 Indian soldiers were killed. In Modi’s meeting with Chinese President Xi, the two leaders termed their countries “development partners and not rivals,” adding that “their differences should not turn into disputes.” They expressed a desire for progress towards a boundary resolution along with the resumption of mechanisms to strengthen economic and people-to-people ties. Xi called for “the dragon and the elephant [to] dance together.” 

Despite this warmth, caution is warranted in assessing both the potential of the India-China thaw and the extent to which it is being driven by a summer of unanticipated India-US tension. Modi emphasized the latter point in his meeting with Xi, noting that China-India ties “should not be seen through a third country lens.” Indeed, the India-China rapprochement predates US-India troubles, with both sides having laid the groundwork in their October 2024 border disengagement deal. India was also careful to balance Modi’s visit to China with a prior stop in Quad partner Japan, where the two sides outlined extensive cooperation and expressed concern over Chinese coercion, albeit without naming Beijing. The Indian Army also conducted a high-altitude warfare exercise in Arunachal Pradesh as the SCO summit unfolded, a clear show of strength in a territory Beijing claims as its own. And while Modi appears to have confined his remarks on the May India-Pakistan crisis to criticizing support for cross-border terrorism, Beijing’s continued military backing of Islamabad remains a significant obstacle to deeper India-China rapprochement. 

How did Pakistan use the summit to advance its own aims with China, India, Iran, and Russia? 

Asfandyar Mir: While India set the tone at this year’s SCO leaders’ summit — with Prime Minister Modi’s full-court presence and a media narrative portraying the gathering as strategically weighty, even a counter to U.S. influence — Pakistan adopted a steadier, more workmanlike posture. It maintained top-level attendance and leveraged the SCO as a forum where it appears alongside major powers. Islamabad is not a prime mover in the putative multipolar order, but it generally prizes clubs of global powers like the SCO that don’t marginalize Pakistan or singularly elevate India. 

On substance, Islamabad will count the joint declaration’s language as a win: SCO leaders “strongly condemned” the March 11 Jaffar Express hijacking and May 21 Khuzdar bombing in Pakistan, in addition to the April 22 Pahalgam terrorist attack. The condemnation of violence on Pakistani soil drew attention to Pakistan’s security concerns, complicating efforts by India to portray Pakistan solely as a perpetrator of regional instability. It also contributed to a broader international consensus against the violence of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), which was designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States in August. 

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir held a trio of high-level meetings on the sidelines of SCO. The most consequential was with President Xi Jinping. Beijing’s official readout situated the relationship within “once-in-a-century transformations” and pledged Chinese support for enhancing Pakistan’s “national strength” — suggesting Beijing’s continued commitment to building Pakistan’s military capabilities, particularly relevant after the May India–Pakistan clash. 

Sharif and Munir also met Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian. Against the backdrop of U.S. Secretary of State Rubio’s mention of Pakistan’s willingness at “mediating conversations” between the U.S. and Iran, this engagement can have broader implications. A further meeting with Russian President Putin saw Sharif emphasize that Pakistan respects Moscow’s close partnership with India while nonetheless seeking to deepen ties with Russia. 

Together, the summit likely advanced Pakistan’s commitment to the SCO as well as its bilateral relations with China, Iran, and Russia. Yet domestically, the impact was still modest compared to the exhilaration that followed Army Chief Munir’s lunch meeting with President Trump, which is viewed as strategically the most consequential diplomatic event for Pakistan in 2025. 

How was Beijing’s high-profile week of diplomacy received in Washington, and what are its implications for the United States? 

Daniel Markey: Not surprisingly, the SCO summit, bilateral meetings, and subsequent WWII commemorative parade went down poorly with President Trump. Initially, the president’s focus — and that of other top administration officials — was fixed on India. Trump, Peter Navarro, and Scott Bessent took India to task, especially for its continued purchase of Russian oil. Soon, however, Trump’s gaze shifted to the WWII celebrations, which he critiqued both for being a venue for anti-U.S. conspiracy and for inadequately crediting U.S. wartime contributions against the Nazis and Imperial Japan. 

By the end of the week, Trump circled back to observe: “Looks like we’ve lost India and Russia to deepest, darkest, China. May they have a long and prosperous future together!” Trump’s words were presumably intended to mock or taunt India and Russia for sliding closer to a dangerous China, not to accept U.S. responsibility for pushing major world powers into Beijing’s willing embrace. Still, the Trump administration’s critics will be correct to wonder whether Trump is committing a major strategic blunder, at least with respect to India. 

Generally, the SCO summit week touched a nerve in Washington. For years, the U.S. news media has characterized Chinese-led groupings like the SCO and BRICS as reflections of an alternate global order, raising American concerns that they could one day supplant gatherings like the NATO and G-7 summits. This week’s ubiquitous photo spreads featuring Chinese, Russian, and Indian leaders in warm conversation, followed by Beijing’s massive military parade that showcased weapons systems obviously intended to rival those of the United States, played into existing American anxieties far more than the limited tangible achievements of the SCO would necessarily suggest. At a moment of profound partisan division at home and when U.S. alliances and partnerships are being tested abroad, this week may long be perceived as an important, if mainly symbolic, milestone along the path to diminished U.S. leadership on the world stage. 

This year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory of the World Anti-Fascist War and the founding of the United Nations. In this special historical moment of taking stock of the past and envisioning the future, Chinese President Xi Jinping solemnly proposed the Global Governance Initiative (GGI) at SCO Tianjin Summit, calling on all countries to build a more just and equitable global governance system and advance toward a community with a shared future for humanity. The initiative champions core principles including sovereign equality, international law, multilateralism, people-centred development and action-oriented approaches, further contributing China’s wisdom and presenting China’s solution to strengthen and improve global governance.

The GCI actively aligns with the prevailing trends of our times. Eighty years ago, the international community learned profound lessons from the scourge of two world wars and founded the UN, thus writing a new page in global governance. Over the past 80 years, the visions and practice of global governance — such as the international system with the UN at its core, the international order underpinned by international law, and the basic norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter — have made historic contributions to maintaining world peace and development.

Today, while the historical trends of peace, development, cooperation and win-win remain unchanged, the Cold War mentality, hegemonism and protectionism continue to haunt the world. New threats and challenges have been only increasing. The world has found itself in a new period of turbulence and transformation. Advancing the reform and improvement of the global governance system has become a major focus of the international community, with countries around the world looking forward to greater Chinese contributions and solutions.

Against this backdrop, President Xi creatively proposed and elaborated on the GGI, which is both timely and crucial, responding to the common aspirations of international communities and meeting the urgent needs of the world today. Since its proposal, the GGI has been welcomed and supported by leaders of participating countries and international organisations, and will surely gain broad recognition from the international community.

The GGI accurately addresses the challenges of our times. As a permanent member of the UNSC, China has always been firmly committed to building world peace, contributing to global development, safeguarding the international order and providing public goods. China’s GGI proposal is precisely aimed at addressing the defining challenges of our times: “what kind of global governance system to build and how to reform and improve global governance.” It focuses on tackling three major shortcomings of the current international mechanisms — the severe under-representation of the Global South; the erosion of authority; and the urgent need for greater effectiveness — with the goal of increasing the representation of the Global South, rectifying historical injustices, upholding the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, safeguarding the authority of UNSC resolutions and accelerating the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

At the same time, priority will be given to areas where governance is in urgent need and scant supply, such as the reform of the international financial architecture, AI, cyberspace, climate change, trade and outer space. Hopefully the international communities will increase?communication and cooperation in these areas to build consensus, identify deliverables and bring about early harvests.

The GGI strives to propose solutions that respond to the call of our times. The concepts of GGI elucidate the principles, methods and pathways that need to be followed to reform and improve global governance. Sovereign equality is the foremost premise of global governance. All countries, regardless of size, strength or wealth, have the equal right to participate in international affairs. The unequal situation in which a few countries monopolise global governance should no longer continue. International law is the fundamental safeguard for global governance. International law and international rules are common standards, which should be jointly formulated, maintained and implemented by all countries, and there is no and should be no exception. Multilateralism is the basic pathway of global governance.

Global governance is a matter for all countries, and concerns the vital interests of each country. It needs coordination and cooperation rather than unilateralism and bullying. The people-centred approach is the underpinning value of global governance. At its core, global governance is about turning people’s longing for a better life into reality and jointly building a world in which all can enjoy affluence and contentment.

Taking real actions is an important principle of global governance. It is necessary to focus on both the present and the long term, and to address the practical issues concerned by all countries, especially the vast number of developing countries. The initiative also advocates that major countries should lead by example by providing more public goods to the international community and instilling confidence and strength into global peace and development. Developed countries, on their part, must earnestly fulfil their responsibilities by delivering on their commitments to development assistance and climate finance.

The GGI is another important global public good that China has contributed to the world following the three major global initiatives — the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, and the Global Civilization Initiative. Each of the four global initiatives has its own focus, yet they are mutually reinforcing, addressing development, security, civilisation and governance, respectively. Together, they inject stability and certainty into a turbulent world, showcasing China’s responsibility and actions in international affairs. The core concepts of the GGI stem from the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

To reform and improve global governance does not mean to overturn the existing international order or to create another framework outside the current international system. Rather, the goal is to make the existing international system and international institutions better at taking actions, working effectively, adapting to changes, responding promptly and effectively to various global challenges, and serving the interests of all countries, particularly developing ones.

Facing a world of changes and chaos, China will continue to stand on the right side of history, on the side of human progress, and on the side of multilateralism, strengthening coordination and communication with the Global South, including our “iron-clad” friend Pakistan, to build stronger synergy, enhance mutual support and collective self-reliance, and work together to create a brighter future for global governance, thereby making greater contributions to the noble cause of peace and development for humanity.

We live in spite of history, not because of it. Nothing at birth can equip us for a past so full of suffering and in which we had no agency. When we are born, we are given an identity, and we have to live and die by it. And despite our incredible flaws, we mortals, bless us, do a decent job of protecting this identity. But this should not misguide us. Behind each identity is a beating human heart, full of the same aspirations and fears as you or I.

History is basically to learn from human follies. And this is where human agency comes into action. You can choose to mimic your oppressors, or you can have a clean break and a fresh start. India and Israel chose the former. In Israel’s ongoing genocide and an Indian owning today’s East India Company, it shows. China, however, deserves all the credit for choosing the latter course of action and accomplishing a lot in doing so.

Shanghai is one place where you can see civilisation breaking the shackles of history and progressing at a breakneck speed. In its breathtaking skyline, you find the legacy of the international settlement, an entity formed by the merger of the British and American concessions, though not limited to them. The mark of other foreign forces, Japan, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Peru, Mexico and Switzerland, is also preserved in the buildings left behind, as is that of the French concession.

Then you come across the newly built skyscrapers. The infrastructure shrugs and moves past the colonial legacy as if it amounts to nothing. For a nation with five thousand years of recorded history, which still has a long way to go, a century of colonial oppression is just a flash in the pan. What a pleasant rebuke to the oppressors.

The message is clear: we see the scar you gave us, but we will not let it define us. In conversations, one rarely comes across any mention of that tragic past. This stands in striking contrast to how such scars surface in every second sentence of a conversation in, say, New Delhi or Mumbai.

I spent four days in Shanghai this week, and it was a beautiful experience. When you go to such a big, developed and fast-paced city, which can give any modern city a run for its money, you usually do not expect warmth or hospitality. Who has the time for an individual? But if that was the expectation, it was soon proven wrong.

From our incredible hosts, about whom more will follow shortly, to the staff at the hotel and restaurants, to ordinary cab drivers and shopkeepers with whom one could haggle infinitely, I found everyone brimming with kindness, affection and warmth. It was something I could easily get used to. My Pakistani identity could be one of the reasons. But then in the hotel lobby and meetings, I came across many other nationalities with similar stories.

This was a busy week for China. First, the SCO summit in Tianjin and then the spectacular display of national power in the parade to mark the anniversary of the end of World War II. Our business in Shanghai was slightly different from these two events. I accompanied a delegation of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad, led by its Director General, Ambassador Sohail Mahmood. Other than myself, the delegation included Ambassador Masood Khalid, Vice Admiral (retired) Ahmed Saeed, Dr Talat Shabbir, Dr Salma Malik and Asadullah Khan.

I mention them all to point out that if anyone was likely out of their depth in this company, it was me. Yet it speaks highly of the delegates’ forbearance that this was never pointed out. I was one with the team.

The Shanghai Institutes of International Studies, our hosts in China, left no stone unturned in hospitality. Its president, Dr Chen Dongxiao, had only kind words for Pakistan and other South Asian countries. This brings us to the purpose of our visit: a high-level interaction between think tanks of China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives.

As was noted by our hosts, global and regional challenges keep mounting, and the development deficit of South Asia keeps increasing. There should be an initiative to share the fruits of development and better governance among South Asian countries. It must be noted here that, for all practical purposes, China is now part of South Asia.

Of course, a framework exists to do that in South Asia. While it was still active, SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) was moving towards becoming a bridge between all these countries. However, in its remarkable haste to redefine foreign policy after its own image, the Modi government let it sink into a deep coma.

Meanwhile, its proposed alternative, BIMSTEC (the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation), despite its ambitious title, could not take off. This left the region without a connective tissue. If the idea was that Adani or Ambanis could pick up the pieces, it had its own limitations. The new multilateral initiative does not aim to bypass India. It simply wishes to keep going, even if India does not come to its senses.

In other words, the door is always open for India to join. But despite the international media spin about the West losing Modi to China, I saw little change of heart in New Delhi’s behaviour.

Nevertheless, connecting with some of these countries’ brightest public intellectuals was an excellent opportunity. I learned a lot about each country’s developmental challenges and experience with its peculiar regional political economy.

In addition to this forum, we had many bilateral interactions, the scope of which goes beyond this piece. Suffice it to say that whosoever came up with the idea of China’s containment did not think it through. China has arrived.

For India, which has not, there is cautious optimism. For Pakistan, there is love, affection and rock-hard solidarity. And while I looked carefully, I could not find any malice for America or the West. There were only apprehensions and concerns about the attempts to oppose China’s peaceful rise. There is nothing that cannot be overcome by a formal meeting between President Xi and President Trump.

If an average American can shake off the Western media and pundit class’s propaganda about the allegedly irreconcilable systems, he or she may find America’s own image in this great nation. Despite their different paths, both overcame foreign repression and forged paths independent of their oppressors. Both kept improving upon their experiments and are busy bettering the lives of their constituents in accordance with their worldview.

My fondness for the Chinese people has only grown because of the love they gave me. For this, my heart will always remain in debt.

It was the stuff of Bond villains. Two ageing autocrats, their younger ally in tow, ambled down a red-carpeted ramp before a military parade in Beijing when a hot mic picked up a question that seemed to be on their minds: how long could they keep going – and, between the lines, might science allow them to rule for ever?

With advances in technology, Russia’s Vladimir Putin assured Xi Jinping via his translator that “human organs can be constantly transplanted, to the extent that people can get younger, perhaps even immortal”.

The Chinese leader replied: “By the end of this century, people may live to 150 years old.”

Nearby, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un – three decades younger than the two 72-year-olds – appeared to take note with a smile.

Beijing’s hot-mic moment has stirred gossip about the leaders’ shelf life, and inevitably, chatter about just how far they will push to keep the clock from running out.

For now, there is no sign that any of the three leaders intend to loosen their grip on power. Each looks set to rule for as long as their bodies hold out, and none has offered a clear succession plan.

Under constitutional changes he pushed through in 2020, Putin could remain in power until 2036, when he will be 83 – surpassing even Joseph Stalin’s tenure.

Xi, through purges of allies and rivals alike, has torn up the Communist party’s once-scripted tradition of grooming successors. In totalitarian North Korea, succession has traditionally been determined only by death.

The leaders’ drive for longevity is nothing new. Rulers have long searched for ways to stretch their lives and their rule.

The first emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang (259–210BC), sent expeditions to the mythical Mount Penglai in search of elixirs of eternal life – though the mercury brews he swallowed may actually have hastened his death.

Alexander the Great, legend has it, roamed the “Land of Darkness”, a mythical and perpetually dark forest, in his quest for the water of life.

Many centuries later, Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi approached the same problem with customary flamboyance – hair transplants, cosmetic surgery and blood treatments – in his attempt to appear invincible on the political stage.

Around the same time, Nursultan Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan’s autocratic president, ordered an institute in Astana to study “rejuvenation of the organism”, the human genome and gene-based medicines.

“As for the medicine of the future, people of my age are really hoping all of this will happen as soon as possible,” Nazarbayev pleaded with local Kazakh scientists in 2010.

Berlusconi eventually died at 86, after a battle with a routine lung infection; Nazarbayev was pushed aside after unrest in Kazakhstan in 2022, his family swept from power; he is now 85.

Putin, who knew both men well, appears to be taking it further – pursuing the most ambitious and lavishly funded path toward longevity and the science of extending life.

The Russian leader has long been obsessed with health: he is said to rely on his team of doctors and turn to alternative medicine in his quest for vitality.

But those who study him say this is not just about staying healthy, it is about extending life itself.

“In his conversation with Xi, Putin spoke about a topic that genuinely interests him,” said Mikhail Rubin, a Russian journalist who recently co-authored a biography of the president.

“It’s important to understand that even at the time of this exchange, there was almost certainly a whole team of doctors somewhere nearby,” he added.

According to Rubin, there is little to indicate that Putin needs constant medical care; he appears healthy for his age, but still routinely travels with a large entourage of doctors from various specialisations.

“That suggests the Russian president is preoccupied with his health and longevity,” Rubin said.

“I believe Putin dreams of ruling for many more years, and places great hopes on the progress of modern medicine,” he added.

Putin has made little secret of his fascination with prolonging life, and on Wednesday showed no reluctance to repeat his private musings on longevity at a press conference.

“Modern means and methods of improving health, even various surgical [operations] involving organ replacement, allow humanity to hope that … life expectancy will increase significantly,” Putin told reporters in Beijing.

Mikhail Kovalchuk, a longtime family friend often described as Putin’s favourite scientist, is said to be spearheading Russia’s research into immortality.

According to the independent outlet Meduza, Kovalchuk has established several institutes with millions in state funding to invest in new technologies, including organ-printing with lab-grown cells to create replacement organs.

Putin’s eldest daughter, Maria Vorontsova, a trained endocrinologist, has also received large government grants to study extending human health and longevity, and is involved in a genetic research programme linked to Kovalchuk.

Russia’s ageing elite’s quest for eternal life has already seeped into the country’s pop culture.

It was the premise of a 2024 satirical novel by the Russian writer Ivan Filippov, Mouse, which tells the story of an infected rodent that escapes from a scientific institute where researchers are developing a drug to prolong Putin’s life

“To be honest, I wasn’t that surprised [about Putin’s hot mic comments],” Filippov told the Guardian.

“Because my story was born out of reality. And with Putin, it’s obvious: he is practically obsessed with the idea of living for ever, or at least longer than fate allows,” he said.

“In my book, this obsession ends badly for everyone,” Filippov added.

Quick Guide

Contact us about this story

Show

The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know.

If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods.

Secure Messaging in the Guardian app

The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.

If you don’t already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select ‘Secure Messaging’.

SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post

If you can safely use the tor network without being observed or monitored you can send messages and documents to the Guardian via our SecureDrop platform.

Finally, our guide at theguardian.com/tips lists several ways to contact us securely, and discusses the pros and cons of each. 

Illustration: Guardian Design / Rich Cousins