Pakistan Press on Lennonist Ideals, Recognition of Israel and Terrorism: New Age Islam's Selection, 7 October 2020
By New Age Islam Edit
Bureau
7 October
2020
• Lennonist Ideals
By Mahir Ali
• Questions of Recognition of Israel
By Ashraf Jehangir Qazi
• Resurging Terrorism
By Syed Akhtar Ali Shah
• Unity via Karbala
By Farhan Bokhari
• US Presidential Election and Its Impact on
the Region
By Talat Masood
-----
Lennonist Ideals
By Mahir Ali
07 Oct 2020
BACK in the
summer of 1980, a muckraking small-town newspaper in Michigan was in trouble
with the forces of law and order. The Flint Voice irritated the authorities by
exposing local instances of racism, corruption and the like. Its newsroom was
under threat of being raided. Briefly, it became a cause célèbre in the United
States.
One day,
the newspaper’s 20-something editor, Michael Moore — then a young journalist
who had launched his first publication at the age of nine, today better known
as an indefatigable film-maker and activist — answered a phone call. “This is
John Lennon,” said the voice at the other end in a curious accent.
“Oh, Gary,
really funny,” responded Moore, and then hung up, convinced that he had been
pranked. Moore was suitably apologetic when Lennon called again a little while
later, having worked out by then that he had slammed the phone down on a
Beatle.
According
to Moore’s delightful early-life memoir, Here Comes Trouble, Lennon was
graciously understanding, saying: “I know a little bit about police
surveillance making your life a bloody hell.” He went on to say he was
wondering “if there was any way I could help. Maybe I could do a benefit or
something for your legal fund or your paper”.
The best of
John Lennon is never far off the radar.
He said he
was working on a new album and probably wouldn’t have time until the following
year, then added: “Well, I’ve been sorta quiet for a while, being a dad and
all. But I’m ready to get at it again, and now that I’m legally a resident of
your fine country, I plan to be more involved and exercise my constitutional
rights.”
In Moore’s
telling, the conversation concluded with Lennon saying: “Keep your spirits up,
mate. I’ll be around.”
Tragically,
he wasn’t. Lennon was assassinated on Dec 8 outside his Dakota apartment block
next to New York’s Central Park.
It was
rumoured at the time that the assassin might have been programmed by the CIA or
some other segment of the deep state to commit the evil deed in view of
Lennon’s radical proclivities and the risk that he might resume his subversive
activism.
It seemed
to be an absurd assumption, given that by then Lennon had seemingly relegated
to the past the rabble-rousing instincts that guided him towards the end of the
Beatles phase in the late 1960s and beyond, initially in Britain and then in
the United States where he teamed up with the likes of Jerry Rubin and Stokely
Carmichael, prompting the Nixon administration’s concerted (but ultimately
unsuccessful) effort to deport him.
There is
still no reason to assume Lennon’s assassination was part of a plot, but
Moore’s anecdote certainly puts paid to the idea that the ex-Beatle ever
succumbed to the temptation of aligning himself with an establishment he
frequently needled, and often irritated, ever since he announced the song Twist
and Shout at a royal command performance by The Beatles in 1963 by cheekily
requesting: “The people in the cheaper seats, clap your hands. And the rest of
you, if you’d just rattle your jewellery.”
In his
recent memoir, Reporter, the legendary American investigative journalist Seymour
Hersh recalls, in a footnote, encountering “a pleasant Brit and his Japanese
girlfriend” at a dinner party in the early 1970s. They sought his help, as a
New York Times staffer, to press the case for a green card. “It turned out the
Brit was John Lennon and his friend was Yoko Ono,” Hersh deadpans. “How was I
to know? Neither had anything to do with Watergate.”
He notes
that years later he visited the Lennons’ New York apartment, which was “filled
with dozens of framed drawings by the Beatle, all suggesting the world had yet
to see the best of him”.
The best of
him is, in fact, never far off the radar. Until the Democratic Party
establishment predictably scuttled Bernie Sanders’ candidacy earlier this year,
the “democratic socialist” candidate invariably arrived on the stage at
campaign rallies to the tune of Power to the People, an anthem Lennon composed
in 1971 after an extended encounter with a pair of left-wing journalists (one
of whom happened to be my brother, Tariq Ali).
Five years
ago, I tracked down the original, graffiti-strewn Lennon Wall in Prague. Since
then, ‘Lennon walls’ have appeared all across Hong Kong as part of the
territory’s quest for democracy. The latest recycled, remixed, remastered
Lennon compilation is titled Gimme Some Truth, after one of the songs on his
Imagine album, a timely reminder, in the age of fake news, of the artist’s
relentless quest in what would have been the year he became an octogenarian.
Had he
survived, John Lennon would have turned 80 on Friday, Oct 9 — twice the age he
was when his life was brutally cut short. But it’s gratifying that his spirit
and his ideals live on, and Give Peace a Chance is still sung.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1583708/lennonist-ideals
-----
Questions of Recognition of Israel
By Ashraf Jehangir
Qazi
October 7,
2020
This is a
question which surfaces from time to time among the political elite of
Pakistan. What have the Arabs or Palestinians done for Kashmir? Why should
Pakistan deny itself additional access to US favours through Israel? Why should
India alone reap the benefits of recognizing Israel?
Pakistan
and Israel have never fought a war against each other. Israel has always
welcomed the prospect of diplomatic relations with Pakistan. Moreover, as of
2020, over 160 out of 193 member states of the UN, including a number of OIC
member states recognize Israel while being critical of its policies towards the
Palestinians. Why can’t Pakistan emulate their example?
Indeed, on
several occasions Pakistan has probed the possibility of normalizing relations
with Israel, only to pull back for fear of reaction by its people and the
reactions of its Gulf benefactors. Now these benefactors are lining up to
recognize Israel for fear of Iran, and because of their existential dependence
on their own benefactor, the US, which is pushing them to do so. It is only a
matter of time before Saudi Arabia does so. It will expect Pakistan to follow
suit.
But there
are arguments against recognizing Israel. The Palestinian problem for non-Arab
Muslims, including Pakistanis, is not just an Arab problem; it is much more a
Muslim or Ummah issue. It is the direct outcome of Western colonialism and
Western-abetted Jewish settlement, conquest and repression of a predominantly
Muslim people, the majority of whom were expelled and compelled to leave their
homeland, where the third holiest site for Muslims is located. All this legally
fits the crime of genocide.
The
Palestinian issue, like the Kashmir dispute, represents the brazen flouting of
international law including the UN Charter and UN resolutions, the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, etc which were supposed to be the foundation of
the post-war and post-colonial world order.
Accordingly,
Pakistan cannot adopt contradictory stands on Palestine and Kashmir without calling
into question its commitment to international law, and the assumptions and
values of the Pakistan Movement that brought it into existence. Short-term
cost-benefit ratios are irrelevant if transcending values, which are the
product of historical experience and provide the justification for Pakistan,
are ignored.
Zulfiqar
Ali Bhutto while at a Pakistan Envoys Conference in 1972 in Izmir, Turkey, said
that while great powers could flout international law, principles and norms
smaller countries could not without paying a dire price for it. Pakistan had
just lost East Pakistan.
Moreover,
the assumption that recognizing Israel would reduce Western and Israeli bias in
favour of India, to Pakistan’s advantage, is unfounded. India recognized Israel
in 1950, and in partnership with the US, has developed a wide-ranging strategic
relationship with it.
On August
13, President Trump tweeted that the UAE’s recognition of Israel could “presage
a broader re-alignment in the region.” He said “now that the ice has been broken
I expect more Arab and Muslim countries will follow UAE’s lead.” Apart from
leveraging a post-Omar Bashir Sudan, he probably had Pakistan in mind.
The UAE and
Bahrain’s decision to normalize relations with Israel is part of the Kushner
Middle East plan which is supported by Saudi Arabia. If the Kingdom has held
back on recognizing Israel so far, it is because it is the custodian of the two
holiest sites of Islam, the headquarters of the OIC, the financial giant of the
Muslim world and, accordingly, has to consider the sentiments of all Muslims.
However, if
Trump’s electoral prospects worsen – and his health is a massive question mark
– Saudi Arabia could come under US pressure to recognize Israel before the US
elections. What would that mean for Pakistan? What should it mean for Pakistan?
What is the Kushner Plan, which Pakistan would in effect support, if it
followed suit?
Despite
Gulf Arab claims that recognizing Israel prevents the annexation of the West
Bank and preserves the possibility of a two-state solution that Arab countries
and UN resolutions have endorsed, the truth is the exact opposite.
According
to the Kushner Plan, the Palestinian state would: (i) be permanently
demilitarized; (ii) obliged to disarm Hamas in Gaza; (iii) have to recognize Israel
as a Jewish state; (iv) withdraw all complaints against Israel and the US from
the ICC; (v) never approach the ICJ; (vi) accept Israeli responsibility for its
security, control over its airspace and “electromagnetic spectrum,” and over
all its imports, especially military imports; (vii) agree not to have security
and intelligence agreements with any country without Israeli permission; and
(viii) accept united Jerusalem as Israel’s “eternal capital” including Masjid
al Aqsa. This is a total denial of Palestinian sovereignty and statehood.
In response
to this Kushner Plan, the UN secretary general said the only plan he could
accept was the one that respected UN resolutions and international law. That is
a settlement which acknowledges the Palestinian right of self-determination,
regards Palestinian territory today as under “belligerent occupation,” and
Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the annexation of East Jerusalem as
illegal.
For
Pakistan, to even implicitly support such a bogus plan by recognizing Israel at
this juncture would be to render its Kashmir policy completely non-credible.
Pakistan needs to be consistent by supporting the implementation of the
relevant UN resolutions as the only basis for a peace settlement in both cases.
Moreover,
if principled positions consistent with UN resolutions are adhered to, it may
become possible to eventually reach principled compromise settlements that take
account of both current realities and the UN acknowledged rights of the people
primarily concerned – the Palestinians and the Kashmiris respectively.
But India
in the case of Kashmir, and Israel backed by the US in the case of Palestine,
has made principled compromise settlements impossible. The Kashmiris and the
Palestinians have not even been consulted about their future. Instead, they are
told to accept their fate and move on. Otherwise, their situation will get even
worse. Can Pakistan even indirectly associate itself with such a policy without
mortally wounding itself?
It is tru
that, doing the right thing by Kashmir and Palestine will entail significant
costs. The US will try to punish Pakistan. India will threaten war. Saudi
Arabia and its Gulf cohorts may halt their financial assistance. Remittances
could dry up. Pakistan’s economy would be negatively impacted. Internal
divisions may be externally stoked. Etc.
So, what is
the choice for Pakistan? Remaining true to itself or betraying its soul for a
supplicant soft state survival – which, at best, would only be for a while?
However,
this is a false choice. It assumes Pakistan’s debilitating political and power
structures are permanent. It assumes that morality, good faith, commitment, and
the people are irrelevant in the ‘realpolitik’ of foreign policy. It assumes
the wisdom and foresight of Quaid-e-Azam and ZAB are irrelevant in a Morgenthau
world of power politics. It counterposes pragmatism to credibility and moral
imperatives.
In fact,
so-called ‘realism’ and pragmatism are a vital assist to principled policy,
including principled compromise. But outside the context of a moral and
political imperative, they provide little or no policy direction.
A
comprehensive national transformation priority, in conjunction with
significantly upgraded strategic cooperation with China, can maximize the range
of principled choices and feasible options for Pakistan on Kashmir and other
issues.
Accordingly,
the challenge of doing right by our Kashmiri and Palestinian brethren may,
indeed, be daunting; it is not overwhelming. And not taking up the challenge is
likely to be fatal. Words can do no more.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/725670-questions-of-recognition
----
Resurging Terrorism
By Syed Akhtar Ali
Shah
October 07,
2020
Three
militants killed in an encounter in Malakand division; Balochistan CM condemns attacks
on FC; two terrorists killed in Naurang; soldier martyred, three injured in
blast in North Waziristan; four terrorists killed in encounter near Bahawalpur;
two traffic policemen among five injured in Peshawar blast; two soldiers
martyred in North Waziristan; retired SSG commando killed in encounter; soldier
martyred in North Waziristan attack; seven terror suspects killed in two
operations in K-P; officer martyred, 2 terrorists killed during security
operation in DI Khan: ISPR; two terrorists killed in gun battle were TTP
members: Langove; FIR of Quetta mosque bombing registered.
The above
are few of the recent headlines from the newspapers amplifying the gravity of
the landscape of terrorism.
Although
independent sources such as AP also reported that terror attacks in Pakistan
dropped by more than 85% as compared to figures 10 years ago, the problem is
far from over. The figures indicated by the reports found that terror attacks
dropped from nearly 2,000 in 2009 to fewer than 250 in 2019. Similarly, the
United States Institute of Peace also expressed more or less the same views
stating therein that the country continued to be grappling with multiple
sources of internal and external conflict. While incidences of domestic
terrorism have reduced, in part due to measures taken by the Pakistani state,
extremism and intolerance of diversity has grown.
The South
Asian Portal indicates that 136 incidents — featuring the killing of 142
civilians, 137 security forces personnel as well as eight terrorists — took place
in the year 2019. As compared to 2019, with figures till October 1, 2020, where
the incidents of killing accounted for 140, which included the killing of 112
civilians, 140 security forces personnel and 124 terrorists.
Even though
the aforementioned figures and events have occurred in different parts of the
country at different times, they are not to be taken in isolation. These are
not the acts of isolated individuals or of a specific gang but are orchestrated
by well-organised networks possessing enormous resources. As such, thorough
analysis is needed to diagnose and solve the issue.
The current
incidents of terrorism are the offshoots of militancy of two different
dimensions; one propelled by ethno-nationalism and the other by religious
militancy. The focus of this discourse is more on the religiously motivated
militancy. This breed of militancy is of transnational character, drawing
inspiration not only from local leaders but also across borders. Therefore, the
developments within our region and the Middle East cannot be delinked. The
stronger the Taliban get in Afghanistan, the greater will be the impact on
militant organisations within Pakistan, as such organisations have been drawing
their inspirational support from Mullah Umar and Tehreek-i-Taliban Afghanistan.
Reports
from various sources suggest that Al Qaeda has not been completely eliminated
and is still operative. Analysts of international repute have not been able to
certify whether the Taliban have cut their ties with Al Qaeda or provided demonstrable
proof of doing so. The UN reports of 2019 and May 2020 also suggest that the
Taliban met frequently and remained in contact with Al Qaeda to coordinate
“operational planning, training and the provision by the Taliban of safe havens
for Al Qaeda members inside Afghanistan”. This aspect is also quite worrying
from the Pakistani perspective.
Afghanistan
has observed an escalation in the level of violence since the inking of the
Doha agreement between the US and the Taliban. During the talks, the Taliban
had been adamant that they would not stop violence and go ahead with their
jihad till an eventual takeover of Kabul and the government based on the strict
interpretation of Sharia. The past experiences have shown that negotiations
have been used as tools to capture power. The Taliban in Pakistan and other
militant organisations also harp on the same theory.
The
strategic goal of the militant organisation is to establish the Islamic Emirate
with no scope for pluralism. The word of the caliph or Ameer in such a polity
assumes finality. Such groups avoid facing the organised might of the state,
and making tactical retreats whenever military operations are launched. They
remain at bay, gain time and space, regroup and then strike with regular
intervals in order to preserve their human resource, while still remaining
effective.
In this
backdrop, the recent organisational restructuring of the Tehreek-i-Taliban
Pakistan under the leadership of Noor Wali Mehsud — who has political exposure
and is considered a religious scholar, ideologue and author of a book — is
quite alarming. Reportedly, rather than being carried away by short-lived
tactical dividends, he adopted a long-term plan, using all his energies on a
strategic reorientation of the group.
The major focus
of Wali has remained on re-articulating TTP’s ideological orientation. He has
simultaneously issued a code of conduct to infuse organisational discipline
within the terror group. Ever since, the organisation is regularly circulating
a propaganda magazine, Mujallah Taliban, to highlight the group’s position on
different issues. The TTP also got published two issues of Sunnat-e-Khaula, a
magazine focusing on female recruitment and radicalisation in Pakistan.
In this
context, a current UN report has suggested that there were 6,000 to 6,500 TTP
militants in Afghanistan. This number, along with the aforementioned mergers as
well as dormant supporters within Pakistan poses a serious threat to our
security. This also means that militant organisations are still capable of
recruitment, training and execution, and an imminent counter-terrorism
challenge to Pakistan. It also raises question marks on our efforts to exhibit
zero tolerance against extremism leading to violence. It is high time for us to
implement all the 20 points of the National Action Plan, lest it is late and we
have to pay a higher price.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2267232/resurging-terrorism
----
Unity via Karbala
By Farhan Bokhari
October 7,
2020
The
commemoration of the ‘Chehlum’ [40th day after the passing] of Imam Hussain
(a.s.) on Thursday (October 8), presents Pakistan with timely lessons amidst
reports of an increasing sectarian divide.
In recent
years after the departure of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussain, the
commemoration of the Chehlum in Iraq has drawn anywhere between 30 million and
50 million pilgrims. They have included a large community of those traveling on
foot from the city of Najaf, the final resting place of Hazrat Ali (a.s.), to
Karbala where Imam Hussain rests along with at least 72 of his followers’.
Together, the events surrounding this commemoration offer a powerful message to
Muslims worldwide, urging them to unify and defy injustice.
The roughly
100 kms route has been marked with up to 1400 poles, together signifying the
number of years since that epic battle placed Imam Hussain (a.s.) and his
followers on one side and anywhere between 30 thousand and 70 thousand soldiers
of Yazid opposing them.
The
martyrdoms of Karbala and the subsequent captivity of the women and children
left behind in inhuman conditions logically should have been long forgotten.
And, yet, the enduring legacy of this tragic event remembered year after year
must account for its purely miraculous character.
Travelers
to Karbala in recent years have witnessed a spectacular turnout. The travelers
have also included non-Muslims, present in Karbala to pay homage to the
enduring legacy of the martyrs. The show of solidarity in Karbala has become a
powerful yearly event to inspire Muslims across the world.
Ahead of
Thursday’s commemoration in Karbala, reports of hardline activists across
Pakistan protesting against members of one Islamic sect have badly revived an
uncomfortable truth.
Since the
1980s, such activists who appear to be numerically insignificant but indeed
very vocal, have repeatedly come forward to target believers of the Shia sect.
Meanwhile,
prominent Shia Muslims who have been targeted in assassinations have ranged
from doctors to businessmen, engineers and members of the cultural community.
The killings have widened an already dangerous divide across Pakistan.
Following
the latest protests, ruling politicians and senior security officials have
classified them as primarily the work of foreign intruders seeking to
destabilize Pakistan. Yet, irrespective of what has driven the ugly protests,
the onus of responsibility to curb such blatant divisions lies upon members of
Pakistan’s ruling structure.
Left
unattended, the consequences of this divide are impossible to imagine.
Pakistan’s already troubled effort to secure the country internally and revive
a largely weak economy is doomed to fail with such attempts at divisions in the
name of Islam left unattended.
With the
stakes so high, it is essential for Prime Minister Imran Khan to step ahead and
begin bridging the divide with two essential steps.
On the one
hand, it is essential to reach out to leaders of a broad-based set of
stakeholders, to press ahead with a renewed message of Islamic unity. Such an
assembly must go beyond just Islamic scholars representing different Muslim
sects. Representing society at large, such an assembly ought to include
politicians and civil society leaders of different shades, members of different
professional cadres, past and present members of the civil services and former
members of the armed forces. Together, such a new coalition must become the
launching pad for confronting a new threat which at best seeks to widen the
present divide. At worst, the recent protests could lead Pakistan to further
bloodletting at a time when the country can hardly afford more instability.
On the
other hand, Prime Minister Imran Khan cannot afford to oversee the continuation
of what appears to be his rudderless administration, notably across the
province of Punjab which is Pakistan’s proverbial heartland. A failure to
respond to large or small crises across the province which is home to about 60
percent of Pakistan’s population has exposed Punjab to a wider conflict flowing
from attempts to widen the sectarian divide.
Ultimately,
Pakistan’s future security must be protected through bridging the divide. And
there couldn’t be a more appropriate time to renew Pakistan’s commitment to
this cause than the remembrance of the sacrifice by Imam Hussain (a.s.) and his
followers.
----
Farhan Bokhari is an Islamabad-based journalist
who writes on political and economic affairs.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/725674-unity-via-karbala
-----
US Presidential Election and Its Impact on the
Region
By Talat Masood
October 07,
2020
Not that
the United States’ governments were generally considered anchored in principles
or torchbearers of morality, but in many ways its Constitution, foundational
principles and democratic governance did attract emerging and even mature
democracies as a model to look up to.
This
admiration is now a thing of the past as America’s image has been torn to
shreds by President Trump’s frequent impetuous utterances, erratic behaviour
and brazen flouting of democratic norms. The ugly scenes witnessed during the
recent Presidential debate were the unpleasant manifestation of it.
Not
surprising that the world looks eagerly at the outcome of the presidential
elections in November from their own lens. Will the situation change for the
better by electing Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, and be a victory of the
voices of sanity? And bury the legacy of Trump and be a strong setback to the
white supremacist who have been his most ardent supporters?
There are
countries, especially those that are ruled by autocrats and despots in the garb
of democrats who would yearn that President Trump gets another term. This
includes India, whose Prime Minister openly expressed his support for Trump —
something most unusual and against accepted protocol.
Unfortunately,
Trump has turned America into a country that has now no set values. This is
diametrically opposite to what it once stood for and was valued for the world
over. His remarks during the presidential debate that implied he would not
accept any results that were not in his favour and would challenge them in the
courts, Congress and even not hesitate to use street power shows to what extent
he is desperate to cling to power and his respect for institutions.
President
Trump’s recent illness has thrown another wild card in the presidential
election. Apart from how he recovers from it is that it will have its own
consequences. For the world is watching how he faces the pandemic at the
personal level. For while facing a personal health challenge a person’s inner
self is revealed like an open book. No wonder that it has become the hottest
topic of US and international media with elections only weeks away.
A more
pertinent question for us in Pakistan is: does it really matter who is elected
the US president? Do we not have a history of US-Pakistan relations that
remained under severe strain during the Republican and Democratic regimes and
only blossomed when Washington needed our support or services? As was the
period in the early 50s as a critical ally of the US and member of its security
alliances, or during the Afghan jihad and later after the events of 9/11.
Will there
be any difference in how the Biden administration looks at CPEC to Trump’s? Or
would the Pakistan-India hostility be perceived with a different lens? There
could be marginal differences in nuance and issues where Pakistan’s support is
needed. The US would remain engaged with Pakistan in ensuring that it continues
to prod the Taliban leadership toward having a more flexible approach during
peace negotiations.
Pakistan’s
present political upheaval would be perceived by the incoming US administration
with considerable disdain. In Pakistan, basic democratic values have been set
aside and a major political storm is brewing with the opposition putting up a
united front against the government. It is not sure which direction it would
take. An environment of mutual abuse has become a common feature with millions
of Pakistani’s as sad spectators. In this situation, to expect support from any
US administration would be wishful thinking.
There could
be differences in the approach between President Trump and Biden in dealing
with Iran’s nuclear policy. President Trump having abandoned the nuclear
agreement, has been extremely hostile towards Iran.
A
Democratic administration would probably revive the 2015 long-term deal on its
nuclear programme with the P5+1 — the US, UK, France, China, Russia and
Germany, with a few caveats. Under the accord, which is known as the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran agreed to limit its nuclear activities that
had a potential of being used for military purposes. Although, Iran had all
along insisted that its entire programme was entirely peaceful.
The
reduction of US-Iran hostility and easing of embargoes on Iran would be in the
interest of Pakistan and the region. It would open up prospects of enhanced
formal trade and interaction between the two countries. In the longer term, it
could have a salutary impact on Iran-Arab relations as the threat of military
build-up would somewhat ease.
The Trump
administration has not been too sensitive about human rights issues. Knowing
that it would not invite international criticism, it is not surprising that the
authoritarian regimes in Eastern Europe, Asia, Latin America and elsewhere have
no qualms in suppressing dissent.
Another foreign
policy issue that has surfaced during the current debate is that President
Trump and his administration generally downplayed Russian involvement in the
last US elections. Furthermore, it remained under severe criticism for not
taking a tough stand on Russian human rights issues.
Disarmament
issues have not surfaced in the current presidential debate. Maybe these would
have been brought up in subsequent debates but that possibility is now no more.
The ongoing effort to renegotiate and replace the New START nuclear arms treaty
that is set to expire in February 2021, is also in doubt. The US apparently has
dropped its insistence that China is included in the treaty but its own
commitment to move forward is doubtful. Hopefully, the Biden administration would
take limiting nuclear arms seriously. This has implications for South Asia as
well. It emboldens India to pursue its nuclear ambitions more aggressively with
the cover that it is only countering the Chinese threat. But in reality the
greater impact would be on Pakistan and this apprehension is being highlighted
by it on international forums but it is doubtful if the West would be concerned
as they support India as a counterweight to China at the regional level.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2267231/us-presidential-election-and-its-impact-on-the-region
----
URL: https://newageislam.com/pakistan-press/pakistan-press-lennonist-ideals,-recognition/d/123064
New Age
Islam, Islam
Online, Islamic
Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in
Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In
Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim
Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism