Category: 2. World

Tianjin, China
 — 

A much-anticipated meeting of the leaders of the world’s two most populous nations is underway, with China’s Xi Jinping welcoming India’s Narendra Modi on the sidelines of regional summit in Tianjin – as the neighbors explore a rapprochement accelerated by their shared frictions with the US.

Xi and Modi began their meeting at the Tianjin Guest House around noon on Sunday, Chinese state media reported, in the Indian leader’s first visit to China in seven years.

Modi is attending a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a Beijing-and Moscow-backed regional security grouping that has emerged as a cornerstone of Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s drive to rebalance global power in their favor.

The visit will also give Modi an opportunity to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, with the two expected to hold bilateral talks on Monday, according to Russian state media – talks that come just after hefty US tariffs on Indian exports kicked in, linked to Indian purchases of Russian oil.

Modi’s visit marks a milestone in relations between Beijing and New Delhi, which have begun to ease frictions elevated since a deadly border skirmish in 2020 – a shift that becomes more valuable to India in the wake of a surprise turn in US-India ties in recent weeks.

US President Donald Trump earlier this month levied significant economic penalties on India, initially placing its imports into the US under 25% tariffs and then slapping an additional 25% duties on the country as punishment for importing Russian oil and gas – which the Trump administration views as helping Russia wage war on Ukraine.

Those frictions threaten what has been decades of effort from US diplomats to drive a wedge between New Delhi and Moscow and a more recent push to cultivate India as a key counterweight in Asia to a rising and increasingly assertive China.

Beijing is widely seen as happy for those newfound frictions to reduce security ties between the two partners. Chinese officials have watched with unease the elevation of the Quad security dialogue between India, the US and its allies Australia and Japan, widely seen as a bid to counter China.

There has been a gradual normalization of ties between India and China after Modi and Xi met on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Russia last October, which came as the two sides reached an agreement on military disengagement along their disputed border.

In recent months, the countries agreed to restart direct flights cancelled since the Covid-19 pandemic, Beijing also recently agreed to reopen two pilgrimage sites in western Tibet to Indians for the first time in five years, and both started re-issuing tourist visas for each other’s citizens.

Earlier this month, following a visit from China’s top diplomat Wang Yi to New Delhi, the two announced “ten points of consensus” on the issue to further reduce tensions.

But observers say that even as the two leaders seek stability in their relationship, both in terms of trade and security, it will be hard for Xi and Modi to overcome their longstanding lack of personal trust.

Underlying tensions between India and China spiked in 2020 following a deadly conflict along their disputed Himalayan border, in which 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers were killed in hand-to-hand combat.

Both nations maintain a heavy military presence along their 2,100-mile (3,379-kilometer) de facto border, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC) – a boundary that remains undefined and has been a persistent source of friction since their bloody 1962 war.

Since joining the SCO in 2017, India has appeared to some observers as an uneasy member of the group; placing the world’s largest democracy in a club that includes a number of autocrats and one that the key partners – Beijing and Moscow – have sought to shape into a force to counter a US-led world order – an aim at odds with New Delhi’s more non-aligned foreign policy.

India also sits in SCO alongside its rival Pakistan. The Tianjin summit will serve as the first time Modi will gather alongside Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif since the two countries engaged in a deadly, four-day conflict earlier this year.

The summit will also give Modi a key opportunity to sit down with long-term partner Putin, at a moment when India’s purchases of Russian oil are under pressure from the American tariffs.

Chinese refineries have placed new orders for Russian crude that will be shipped from ports that typically supply India, as demand from the South Asian country for Moscow’s crude slipped following the tariffs, CNN reported earlier this month.

The Indian leader has been performing a tricky balancing act since Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, maintaining ties with both Washington, Moscow and Kyiv. India maintains neutrality in the war.

After his arrival in Tianjin, Modi said he spoke with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky in a phone call on Saturday.

“We exchanged views on the ongoing conflict, its humanitarian aspect, and efforts to restore peace and stability. India extends full support to all efforts in this direction,” Modi wrote on X late Saturday.

A flotilla carrying humanitarian aid and activists, including Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg, is due to leave from Barcelona on Sunday to try to “break the illegal siege of Gaza”, organisers said.

The vessels will set off from the Spanish port city to “open a humanitarian corridor and end the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people”, said the Global Sumud Flotilla.

They did not say how many ships would set sail or the exact time of departure.

The flotilla is expected to arrive at the war-ravaged coastal enclave in mid-September.

“This will be the largest solidarity mission in history, with more people and more boats than all previous attempts combined,” Brazilian activist Thiago Ávila told journalists in Barcelona last week.

Organisers say that dozens of other vessels are expected to leave Tunisian and other Mediterranean ports on 4 September.

Activists will also stage simultaneous demonstrations and other protests in 44 countries “in solidarity with the Palestinian people”, Thunberg, who is part of the flotilla’s steering committee, wrote on Instagram.

As well as Thunberg, the flotilla will include activists from several countries, European lawmakers and public figures such as former Barcelona mayor Ada Colau.

“We understand that this is a legal mission under international law,” leftwing Portuguese lawmaker Mariana Mortágua, who will join the mission, told journalists in Lisbon last week.

Israel has already blocked two attempts by activists to deliver aid by ship to Gaza, in June and July.

In June, 12 activists on board the sailboat Madleen were intercepted by Israeli forces 185km west of Gaza. Its passengers, who included Thunberg, were detained and eventually expelled.

In July, 21 activists from 10 countries were intercepted as they tried to approach Gaza in another vessel, the Handala.

TAIPEI, Taiwan — Russian President Vladimir Putin, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and leaders of eight other nations are set to meet in northern China for the latest summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in a possible challenge to often incoherent approaches by the United States to trade and regional conflicts.

The 10-member group that will gather Sunday and Monday in the port city of Tianjin has grown in size and influence over the past 24 years, even while its goals and programs remain murky and name recognition low. Some call it the scariest grouping you have never heard of.

The full membership includes Russia, Belarus, China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Originally seen as a foil to U.S. influence in Central Asia, the original organization picked up four new members with the addition of India and Pakistan in 2017, Iran in 2023 and Belarus in 2024.

Some of those are clear foes of the West, especially Iran and close Russian ally Belarus. Others including India, China and Russia have a more nebulous relationship, either because of Washington’s wobbly stance on Russia’s war with Ukraine or because of chaos surrounding U.S. tariffs that have upended key trading relationships with countries such as China and India.

The SCO’s two-day summit may shed more light on issues surrounding the group’s activities and intentions.

Since its 2001 founding, the SCO primarily has been dominated by China, the regional economic superpower, with Russia seeking to use the group to maintain its influence over former Central Asian Soviet republics Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

While Russia’s economic influence has declined steadily, especially under increasingly severe Western sanctions, both Russia and China have used the alliance as a framework for regional military cooperation, albeitlimited to joint drills and firing competitions.

Belarus, Iran, Pakistan and India joined later in an apparent attempt to share in the SCO’s budding influence, though the value of their membership is debatable. Iran and Belarus have faced international condemnation over sanctions and human rights violations, while Pakistan is highly dependent on China for military hardware.

India has long stuck to a self-avowed policy of neutrality, though that may be part of a strategy of self-interest.

Since the Russia-Ukraine war began, India has become a major buyer of Russian oil, increasing tensions with Washington. Modi also remarked on “steady progress” in improving relations with China after meeting its top diplomat in August and noted “respect for each other’s interests and sensitiveness.”

India’s SCO entry potentially challenges Russian and Chinese domination over the association. Despite their trade ties, India is unlikely to offer meaningful support for Russia’s war in Ukraine or China’s claims to Taiwan and the South China Sea.

India has also long sought a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council but has received only tepid back from China and Russia, possibly to prevent their influence with the West from being diluted. Still, New Delhi stands to lose little as long as Washington continues to broadcast uncertainty with its foreign trade.

India has said it will not sign a joint statement with the SCO because it sees a pro-Pakistan stance in the omission of a mention of a deadly April 22 terror attack on tourists in Indian-controlled Kashmir. Yet expectations have not been high for India to sign.

Beijing has given few hints of what solid progress it expects from the summit, which is in keeping with the secretive nature of its diplomacy and politics.

The official Xinhua News Agency on Monday called the gathering the “largest-ever SCO summit in history” and said it would be used for “charting the blueprint for the bloc’s next decade of development.”

The leaders of about a dozen other countries are joining the summit as SCO dialogue partners or guests, including Egypt, Nepal and several Southeast Asian nations.

Xinhua spoke of the organization being guided by the “Shanghai Spirit, which features mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, consultation, respect for diverse civilizations and pursuit of common development.”

Citing growing trade and rail freight between China and other members, observer states and dialogue partners, Beijing seems eager to emphasize the bloc’s economic benefits.

Xinhua noted documents would be signed including a notice of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, which the ruling Communist Party will mark with a military parade in central Beijing on Sept. 3.

University of Chicago political scientist Dali Yang said the SCO is one of the most prominent regional organizations China has cofounded.

“For China’s leadership, there is a lot of emphasis on maintaining existing relations in the international arena even though the SCO has not been effective in dealing with the major challenges of today,” Yang said.

The summit comes just days before a massive military parade through Beijing marking the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender at the end of WWII attended by Xi and other leaders, including a rare showing by North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, Yang said.

The SCO seems to show a desire to move from a dialogue platform to a “full-fledged mechanism of practical cooperation that brings tangible results to the citizens of the member states,” said June Teufel Dreyer, a University of Miami expert on Chinese politics. Yet the questions remain, ”to what end and how?”

For Xi, “presiding over the gathering in Tianjin should net him some favorable publicity and possibly further his image as leader of a new global world order,” Dreyer said.

US President Donald Trump has cancelled his planned visit to an upcoming Quad summit in India due to deteriorating relations between Washington and New Delhi, The New York Times (NYT) reported on Saturday.

Relations between the two countries have plummeted, with 50 per cent tariffs on many Indian exports to the US taking effect this week as retaliation for New Delhi’s large-scale purchases of Russian oil – part of Washington’s efforts to pressure Moscow to end its war in Ukraine.

As ties between both nations deteriorate, NYT reported on Saturday that the breakdown in relations was caused after a phone call on June 17.

“After telling [Indian Prime Minister Narendra] Modi that he would travel to India later this year for the Quad summit, Mr Trump no longer has plans to visit in the fall, according to people familiar with the president’s schedule,” the NYT reported, citing “interviews with more than a dozen people in Washington and New Delhi”.

WASHINGTON: The relationship between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Donald Trump has become increasingly tense following disagreements over the India-Pakistan conflict and escalating trade tensions, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

According to the report, a pivotal moment occurred during a June phone call, where Modi firmly rejected Trump’s claims of US mediation in the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, infuriating the US president.

During the conversation, Modi told Trump that “at no point during this entire sequence of events was there any discussion… on an India-US trade deal, or any proposal for US mediation between India and Pakistan”, as reported by India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri.

This direct denial came after Trump repeatedly and publicly claimed that his intervention had played a key role in ending a military escalation.

Nobel Prize

According to the newspaper, Trump “repeatedly, publicly, exuberantly” declared that he had resolved the conflict, even suggesting that Pakistan might nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize, a nomination that he had openly campaigned for.

The Times noted that Trump’s comments carried a “not-so-subtle implication” that Modi should support his Nobel bid — a suggestion the Indian leader refused to entertain.

Trump’s desire for a Nobel Prize added a personal layer to the tension. As the NYT reported, Trump took pride in his “diplomatic achievement”, and his insistence on being recognised for ending the conflict further frustrated Modi. Given Modi’s strongman image, especially in relation to Pakistan, acknowledging US mediation would have been politically damaging.

Swift fallout

The fallout from the June call was swift. Weeks later, amid stalled trade talks, Trump imposed a 25 per cent tariff on Indian imports and added a secondary 25pc tariff on India’s purchase of Russian oil, totalling a crushing 50pc. The New York Times highlighted that these penalties appeared to be more than just a response to trade imbalances — they were seen by many as a consequence of Modi’s refusal to recognise Tru­mp’s role in the ceasefire.

Richard M. Rossow of the Center for Strategic and International Studies pointed out: “The colossal penalties on India appear to be punishment for not falling in line.”

Despite multiple attempts by Trump to reach out to Modi, the Indian leader did not respond. “Modi did not respond to those requests,” two sources familiar with the matter told the newspaper.

This further signalled the unravelling relationship between the two leaders, who had once shared a close bond. Trump’s pursuit of recognition for the ceasefire and his efforts to claim credit for resolving the India-Pakistan conflict were central to the breakdown.

According to NYT, the dispute was exacerbated by Modi’s unwillingness to even subtly acknowledge any US involvement, illustrating how politically sensitive the Kas­h­mir issue remains for India.

Modi’s strong resistance to US intervention was also in line with India’s long-standing policy of rejecting third-party mediation in the Kashmir dispute.

Published in Dawn, August 31st, 2025

AFGHANISTAN is not a victim of any global power play, nor is there any conspiracy being hatched against it. The sole responsibility for the current state of affairs lies with the Afghan Taliban’s interim regime. Their policies are not aligned with their initial commitments, and they have disappointed experts and statesmen who once labelled them as ‘Taliban 2.0’, projecting them as different from the Taliban of the 1990s.

When the Taliban seized Kabul in August 2021, they promised a break from their 1990s image by announcing a roadmap centred on general amnesty, an inclusive Islamic government, respect for women’s rights within the Sharia, freedom of the press and assurances that Afghan soil would not be used against other countries. They also pledged to maintain constructive relations with the international community and to support education and reconstruction. However, these commitments quickly unravelled: the interim government became an exclusive Taliban-dominated setup, women and girls were barred from education and most work, the press was muzzled, extremist groups regained space and Afghanistan remained diplomatically isolated, with engagement limited to humanitarian aid and migration control.

Even so, the world remains divided, engaging with the Taliban only for humanitarian purposes and to curb the outflow of migrants from Afghanistan, with much of this focus directed towards the West. This is why several European countries are engaging with the Taliban.

The Taliban have ruled Afghanistan for four years but have failed to earn international goodwill.

Those who were jubilant after Russia’s recognition of the Taliban regime would have been disappointed that Afghanistan was not invited to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit scheduled for Aug 31 to Sept 1 in Tianjin, China. Afghanistan holds observer status in the SCO, and it is up to the host to decide whether to extend invitations to observer states.

It was up to China to invite the Afghan interim foreign minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi. After the Chinese foreign minister’s recent visit to Kabul to attend a trilateral meeting, which included Pakistan, it was hoped that his Afghan counterpart would be invited to participate in the summit, and Russia, which had recognised the Taliban regime, was expected to put its weight behind the bid.

The US has become vindictive, since Moscow has recognised the Taliban regime and has a strict travel ban on the Taliban leadership, which were imposed on the Taliban leadership under UN Security Council Resolution 1988 (2011). Amir Muttaqi was not even allowed to visit Islamabad, where he had been several times on an official visit. One understands that he also has a scheduled visit to Delhi, which both Washington and Islamabad are not in favour of, but more surprising is that he will miss the SCO summit.

Several interpretations are circulating in the media, ranging from references to the UN Security Council resolutions to suggestions that the move was a punitive action against the Taliban for failing to fulfil their promises to China and Pakistan to act against terrorists operating from Afghan soil. Others believe that the Taliban’s arrogance was the real trigger. In this context, Afghanistan’s government recently terminated a 25-year oil exploration and extraction contract in the Amu Darya basin, previously awarded to the Chinese firm Xinjiang Central Asia Petroleum and Gas Company (CAPEIC), locally known as ‘Afchin’. Signed in early 2023, the $540 million agreement required an initial investment of $150m in the first year.

Interestingly, on one hand, the Taliban have revoked the agreement with the Chinese firm, while on the other, they are offering incentives to Central Asian companies for the same contract. But how can these firms realistically invest in a project that has already become controversial, one from which a significant economic power has been pushed out?

The Taliban have ruled Afghanistan for four years, yet they have failed to build goodwill with the international community. Even neighbouring states from Central Asia to China and Pakistan are reluctant to deepen cooperation, despite their interests in sustaining Afghanistan’s fragile economy and ensuring regional order. The Taliban have attempted to leverage Afghanistan’s natural resources, minerals, agriculture and water for diplomatic and geopolitical influence. However, to exploit these assets, Afghanistan must demonstrate compatibility with international norms and fulfil its commitments. Instead, the Taliban’s domestic order remains as draconian as it was in the 1990s, and their approach to neighbours remains unchanged. How then can they expect the world to treat them differently this time?

Many countries, especially in Europe, are engaging with the Taliban largely out of fear of uncontrolled migration and to prevent a collapse that could trigger another civil war. Yet uncertainty persists: in the event of renewed internal conflict, where will the Taliban stand? Will they revert to being the same militia they were before the Doha Agreement, aligned with Al Qaeda, the TTP, and other regional and global terrorist networks?

Pressure on the Taliban is mounting not only from the US but also its close ally China. Beijing remains uncertain about whether the Taliban can be trusted to engage in long-term mineral extraction and transnational infrastructure projects, as its initial experiences with the regime have been far from reassuring. The recent trilateral meeting in Kabul, involving Afghanistan, Pakistan and China, was significant in this regard. While China has excluded Afghanistan from CPEC, it is still exploring new bilateral geo-economic avenues, attempting to simplify its regional ambitions. Yet, for such cooperation to materialise, the Taliban must first prove themselves trustworthy to both their neighbours and the wider world.

Some Taliban leaders may realise that meaningful engagement with the international community cannot come solely through economic and trade partnerships; it also requires social and political transformation. But the central question is whether the Taliban leadership, especially Mullah Hibatullah, has the capacity or even the will to grasp this reality. Unless they learn to adapt, Afghanistan will remain trapped in isolation and continued suffering.

The writer is a security analyst.

Published in Dawn, August 31st, 2025

SANAA: Yemen’s Hou­this on Saturday confirmed that prime minister had been killed in an Israeli airstrike, the most senior official known to have died in a series of attacks during the Gaza war.

Ahmed Ghaleb Nasser Al-Rahawi, who was appointed last year, was killed along with other officials in the Israeli attack on Thursday, the Houthis said.

“We announce the martyrdom of the fighter Ahmed Ghaleb Nasser Al-Rahawi…along with several of his ministerial colleagues, as they were targeted by the treacherous Israeli criminal enemy,” a Houthi statement said.

“Others among their companions were injured with moderate to serious wounds and are receiving medical care since Thursday afternoon,” it added.

Separately, the Houthis announced that Deputy Prime Minister Mohammed Ahmed Miftah was appointed as interim prime minister following Rahawi’s martyrdom.

Israel has been striking Yemen for several months in response to missile attacks by the Houthis in the Red Sea. The group claimed that the attacks were launched in solidarity with the Palestinians, who have been facing Israeli aggression.

Israeli forces earlier on Friday said they struck a Houthi regime military target. The airstrike had targeted the Iran-aligned group’s chief of staff, defence minister and other senior officials, Israel said, adding that it was verifying the outcome.

Published in Dawn, August 31st, 2025

• Ruling however allows the levies to stay in place through mid-October
• US president vows to fight back

WASHINGTON: A US appeals court has ruled that many of President Donald Trump’s tariffs, which have upended global trade, were illegal — but allowed them to remain in place for now, giving him time to take the fight to the Supreme Court.

The 7-4 ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Friday affirmed a lower court’s finding that Trump had exceeded his authority in tapping emergency economic powers to impose wide-ranging duties.

But the judges allowed the tariffs to stay in place through mid-October — and Trump swiftly made clear he would put the time to use.

The appeals court “incorrectly said that our Tariffs should be removed, but they know the United States of America will win in the end,” he said in a statement on his Truth Social platform lashing out at the ruling.

He added that he would fight back “with the help of the United States Supreme Court”. The decision marks a blow to the president, who has wielded duties as a wide-ranging economic policy tool.

It could also cast doubt over deals Trump has struck with major trading partners such as the European Union, and raised the question of what would happen to the billions of dollars collected by the United States since the tariffs were put in place if the conservative-majority Supreme Court does not back him.

Friday’s case, however, does not deal with sector-specific tariffs that the Trump administration has also imposed on steel, aluminum, autos and other imports.

‘Diplomatic embarrassment’

Since returning to the presiden­cy in January, Trump has invoked the International Emergency Econo­mic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose “reciprocal” tariffs on almost all US trading partners, with a 10-percent baseline level and higher rates for dozens of economies.

He invoked similar authorities to slap separate tariffs hitting Mexico, Canada and China over the flow of deadly drugs into the United States.

The Court of International Trade had ruled in May that Trump overstepped his authority with across-the-board global levies, blocking most of the duties from taking effect, but the appeals court later put the ruling on hold to consider the case.

Friday’s ruling noted that “the statute bestows significant authority on the President to undertake a number of actions in response to a declared national emergency, but none of these actions explicitly include the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax”.

It added that it was not addressing if Trump’s actions should have been taken as a matter of policy or deciding whether IEEPA authorises any tariffs at all.

Instead, it sought to resolve the question of whether Trump’s “reci­procal” tariffs and those imposed over trafficking were authorised, with the document noting: “We conclude they are not.”

In a supplementary filing just hours before the appeals court released its decision, Trump cabinet officials argued that ruling the global tariffs illegal and blocking them would hurt US foreign policy and national security.

“Such a ruling would threaten broader US strategic interests at home and abroad, likely lead to retaliation and the unwinding of agreed-upon deals by foreign-trading partners,” wrote Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. He added that they could also “derail critical ongoing negotiations” with partners.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, meanwhile, warned that suspending the effectiveness of tariffs “would lead to dangerous diplomatic embarrassment”.

Several legal challenges have been filed against the tariffs Trump invoked. If these tariffs are ultimately ruled illegal, companies could seek reimbursements.

Published in Dawn, August 31st, 2025