More on this topic
India hits Pakistan with ballistic missiles, Islamabad vows response
Press TV – May 6, 2025
India reports attacking nine sites in Pakistan and the Pakistan-administered Kashmir amid rising tensions between the countries following a terrorist attack in the Indian-administered Kashmir.
The Indian ministry of defense announced the strikes in a statement on Wednesday, saying they had hit the targets “from where terrorist attacks against India have been planned and directed,” describing the attacks as “Operation Sindoor.”
The statement said the ministry would release detailed briefing of the operation later in the day.
A Pakistani military spokesman told broadcaster Geo that sites struck by India included two mosques.
Both sides’ armies, meanwhile, reportedly exchanged heavy shelling and gunfire across the border between the Pakistan-administered Kashmir and the Indian-administered Kashmir in at least three places.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Islamabad was mounting a response, but did not provide details.
Muzaffarabad, the capital of the Pakistan-administered Kashmir, reported a blackout, while the eastern Pakistani border province of Punjab declared an emergency and put hospitals and emergency services on high alert.
Pakistan reports casualties
Pakistan said India had launched missiles towards three Pakistani regions, although New Delhi is yet to identify the nature of the deployed ammunition.
Islamabad also said at least three people had been killed and 12 others injured, according to an initial assessment.
The Pakistani military’s Inter-Services Public Relations said one of the fatalities was a child.
Sharif also condemned India’s attacks, and vowed that Islamabad would respond forcefully.
“The enemy has once again shown its deceitful nature,” he said, according to Geo.
The country had, on several occasions, announced recently that it had “credible information” pointing to pending Indian attacks, and vowed to retaliate accordingly.
India: Attacks were ‘surgical but non-escalatory’
The Indian ministry described the operations as “precision strikes at terrorist camps” and “terrorist infrastructure” in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
It, however, said, “Our actions have been focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature.”
“No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution.”
Pakistan: Targets were ‘civilian’
Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif, however, told Geo that all sites targeted by India were “civilian” and not terrorist camps.
He said India had fired missiles from its own airspace and the latter’s assertion of targeting “camps of terrorists is false.”
The developments follow the terror attack in the town of Pahalgam in the Indian-administered Kashmir that claimed the lives of at least 26 tourists on April 22, 2025.
The Indian defense ministry statement asserted that Operation Sindoor had come in the wake of the “barbaric” Pahalgam terrorist attack, identifying the fatalities as 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen.
“We are living up to the commitment that those responsible for this attack will be held accountable.”
Pakistan has rejected any role. Federal Information Minister Attaullah Tarar had most recently rejected, what he called, India’s narrative regarding ongoing issues, and said that New Delhi was facing “diplomatic embarrassment on the global stage.”
Conflict over water
After the terrorist indecent, both countries began taking tit-for-tat measures.
India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, a water-sharing agreement mediated by the World Bank and signed in 1960, and closed the Wagah-Attari border crossing.
On Tuesday, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said water from the country that once flowed across borders would be stopped.
“India’s water used to go outside, now it will flow for India,” he said in a speech in New Delhi, adding, “India’s water will be stopped for India’s interests, and it will be utilized for India.”
Pakistan has described India’s measures as tampering with its rivers that would be considered “an act of war.”
For its part, Islamabad has suspended visas issued to Indian nationals, closed its airspace to Indian airlines, and test-fired several long-range missiles.
India-Pakistan tensions show signs of easing
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | May 2, 2025
Time past is time present in India-Pakistan crisis. The ‘mediation’ by the United States from behind the scene on the diplomatic track appears to be once again working, which calls on both Delhi and Islamabad to show restraint and pull back from a military confrontation. The call for a responsible response by India — and for Pakistan to be cooperative — by the US Vice-President JD Vance serving under the leadership of a ‘peacemaker president’ epitomises the world opinion, for sure.
There are signs that life in India is moving on. The melancholy, long, withdrawing roar of a heavy heart is discernible. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is travelling out of Delhi. On Thursday, he was in Mumbai to inaugurate a 4-day summit, which is a landmark initiative to position India as a global hub for media, entertainment, and digital innovation.
On Friday, Modi will be in the southernmost state of Kerala to formally commission the Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport, touted as the country’s first dedicated container transhipment port, representing the transformative advancements being made by the Modi government in India’s maritime sector as part of the prime minister’s unified vision of Viksit Bharat, the initiative to achieve the goal and vision of transforming India into a developed entity by 2047, the centenary year of independence.
The Vizhinjam port’s natural deep draft of nearly 20 meters and location near one of the world’s busiest sea trade routes is expected to strengthen India’s position in global trade and enhance logistics efficiency.
Second, the Modi government made a historic announcement on Wednesday on the so-called caste census, ie., collecting data on the distribution of caste groups, their socio-economic conditions, educational status, and other related factors, which is a crucial step and a social imperative, as caste continues to be a foundational social construct in India. The data collection will be a key step toward empowerment of the lower downtrodden, dispossessed castes, numbering on hundreds of millions of Indians, which holds the potential to a churning in the ossified archaic Hindu social hierarchy.
Third, on Wednesday, again, the Army used the hotline for the first time since the Pahalgam terror strike to communicate with the Directorate of Military Operations in Rawalpindi to convey India’s concerns over the sudden flare-up on the Line of Control in the past few days. This in itself is a great thing to happen — the two militaries in conversation.
The DGMO hotline is a tested confidence-building measure as well as an effective communication channel between the two militaries, and the fact that the Indian side has used it messages in itself an eagerness to keep the border tensions under check. The hotline can serve a big purpose in ensuring that misperceptions of each other’s intentions do not arise at such a sensitive juncture especially when a huge trust deficit characterises the relationship.
Fourth, amidst the prevailing crisis atmosphere, the government has announced a revamping of the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) which will now be headed by a retired intelligence officer with vast experience who had headed both the RAW as well as the NTRO — especially the latter, the Cinderella of the ecosystem of India’s intelligence.
Suffice to say, the government’s intention appears to be to strengthen the resources for intelligence gathering. The revamping of the NSAB with a pivotal role for a former head of NTRO (for the first time) whose expertise lies in the intelligence gathering and analysis (rather than operational) can be seen as a tacit acknowledgment that there has been intelligence failure in the Pahalgam terrorist attack, which has indeed been a topic of animated public discussion in the country’s media.
Taken together, the above developments signal that the traumatised nation must move on even as the security forces and the intelligence agencies pursue the downstream of the Pahalgam terror attack. Quite obviously, inflammatory public rhetoric serves no purpose. The exhortation by the widow of Naval officer Lt. Vinay Narwal, who was gunned down in Pahalgam ten days ago says it all: “We don’t want people going after Muslims and Kashmiris.”
What a chronicle of wasted time India and Pakistan are presenting! One had thought that the ‘peace dividend’ of the war in Afghanistan should do a world of good for India-Pakistan relations. But the opposite has happened. If the two countries are incapable of living in amity even after decades, why not seek the help of friendly countries to promote reconciliation? There is nothing obnoxious about it.
Some hard lessons need to be drawn. First and foremost, the raison d’être of India’s diplomacy in Kabul should be firmly and exclusively anchored on a bilateral grid of mutual benefit and mutual respect pivoting on friendship at people-to-people level. The temptation to reduce the Indo-Afghan cooperation as a ‘second front’ against Pakistan will always be there so long as Delhi harbours an adversarial mindset toward Islamabad, but we should be abundantly cautious not to create misperceptions in the Pakistani mind and end up adding yet another dimension to the boiling cauldron of existing differences, disputes and discords. The point is, the break-up in 1971 is a searing memory still in the Pakistani psyche, which it can only exorcise with some Indian help and understanding.
This calls for a deliberately passive diplomacy strategy to adapt to partner needs of Afghan friends while safeguarding India’s interests in the region. To my mind, the main platform must be in economic terms. Indians are agile enough to prepare such a precise and systematic strategy.
Second, the present crisis has exposed that while the world opinion is supportive of India’s concerns over terrorism, it is not inclined to put the entire blame on Pakistan, as some of us would have probably liked. Put differently, the world opinion also empathises with Pakistan as a victim of terrorism. Terrorism poses an existential threat to Pakistan manifold in gravity compared to what India faces. And something of the Pakistani allegations with regard to an ‘Indian hand’ may have come to stick in the world opinion even if not audible.
Third, most important, taking the above factors into account, the law of diminishing returns is at work in our decade-old strategy to slam the door shut on Pakistan, refuse to talk to Pakistan, spurn their overtures for dialogue. If the US can bring itself to have dialogue with Russia and Iran (or, conceivably, with North Korea in a near future) despite the backlog of very hostile relationships, we need to sense that in the emerging world order, dialogue is the preferred mode in inter-state relationship and it must be fostered with all means available.
The bottom line is, there has never been and never can be absolute security. No lesser a realist than Henry Kissinger highlighted the basic flaw in any quest for absolute security: “The desire of one power for absolute security means the absolute insecurity for all the others.”
When it comes to the South Asian region, this is even more so, as common security takes on special significance and urgency in the context of the nuclear stockpile and a sensitive flashpoint in the Himalayas and, of course, the strategic pivot of the region itself. Therefore, the attempt to resolve the Kashmir dispute unilaterally during the past six-year period since 2019 without any consultation / participation by Pakistan (or China, for that matter) is futile and betrays hubris.
Pakistan Activates Geran Doctrine: Looming Threat of Nuclear War in South Asia
By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – May 2, 2025
Since the Pahalgam attack in Indian administrated Kashmir, tensions between Pakistan and India have been brewing. Limited crossfire has been observed between the two sides on the Line of Control. Pakistan’s alleged activation of the Geran doctrine has further intensified the situation in the region.
Tensions Escalate Over Pahalgam Attack
The Indian government blamed Pakistan for sponsoring the Pahalgam terrorist attack, killing 26 civilians. However, till this writing, the Indian government has not presented any evidence of Pakistani involvement in this terrorist attack. Since then, tension between the two sides has been exchanging blame. According to media reports, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has green-lighted the Indian army to take kinetic measures against Pakistan.
However, Islamabad has rejected all the Indian allegations and blamed the Pahalgam attack as a false flag operation of the Modi government to build an anti-Pakistan narrative domestically and internationally. Pakistani officials also maintain that the Modi government seeks to alter the demography of Indian-administrated Kashmir under the pretense of anti-terrorism operations in the region.
Militarization and the Risk of Nuclear Confrontation
The armies of the two countries have taken positions along the international border. According to media reports, both sides have exchanged fire in the Kayani and Mandal sectors. The reports suggest that the two sides are using small weapons in this limited exchange of fire. However, Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarrar warned in his midnight press briefing on 30th April that intelligence sources have reported that India could take military action within the next 24-36 hours.
He stated, “Any military adventurism from India will receive a certain and decisive response.” Pakistan Director General of Inter-Services Public Relations Lt. General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhary, along with Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, also held a press conference on 30th April. He rejected all the allegations of the Indian government and warned the world of the threat of regional instability. He also warned of a strong retaliation from Pakistan in response to any military action by India.
Different international powers, including China, Turkey, the United States, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Russia have urged the two sides to show restraint. The UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has also warned both countries of tragic consequences. Public sentiment on both sides is running high. Pakistan and India both possess nuclear power. The two countries have already fought four wars over the Kashmir issue.
However, the situation between the two sides has never been so intense since they assumed nuclear power. India is the world’s fourth-largest economy and holds quantitative supremacy over the Pakistan army in military personnel, and weapons, although the Pakistan Air Force has a qualitative edge over the India Air Force. This quantitative imbalance further demonizes the predicament.
Some credible journalists in Pakistan have reported that the Pakistan Army has received clearance from Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to activate a localized version of the Geran Doctrine, an approach that permits preemptive strikes based on credible intelligence reports. As per the report, Pakistan could rapidly deploy Babur missiles, Burraq drones, and NASR tactical vectors to retaliate against Indian attacks. Although there has been no official confirmation of such reports, Pakistani officials and analysts have repeatedly warned that the country would go to any length to protect its sovereignty.
DG ISPR and Information Minister’s press briefing also indicated that Islamabad is prepared to take extraordinary measures in retaliation to any Indian attack. Given its quantitative subjugation and limited resources, Pakistan may use tactical nuclear missiles to subdue its arch-rival. The nuclear policies of the two countries suggest that either side could use its nuclear weapons against the other to gain a decisive victory. This puts the world in a tragic situation.
The Cost of Conflict: Human Development vs. Defense Priorities
Pakistan and India have been arch-rivals since the inception of the two countries. The prime focus of the governments in both countries has always been building the defense sector to subdue each other. This led to extreme poverty, inflation, and unemployment on both sides. According to the Times of India, both countries are among the five nations with the largest populations living in poverty. As per the report, 234 million and 93 million people live in poverty in India and Pakistan, respectively. Moreover, the unemployment rate in India is 7.90 percent. Pakistan’s unemployment rate also stands at 7.50 percent. These figures suggest that the two countries need to re-evaluate their priorities and should focus on human development instead of the defense sector.
Given the intensity of the current situation, regional and global powers need to play their part in bringing the two sides to the negotiation table. India considers China as its regional rival. Therefore, Beijing cannot effectively mediate between the two countries. Russia’s growing influence on Pakistan and its long-term relations with India incentivizes Moscow to mediate between the two sides.
The Gulf nations also hold significant influence over India and Pakistan. This provides them an opportunity to mediate peace talks between the two countries. Furthermore, an investigation of the Pahalgam attack by an international tribunal under the United Nations is also mandatory to reveal the real perpetrators of this heinous terrorist activity, endangering the peace and stability of South Asia. Any escalation between Pakistan and India will not only prove detrimental for the two countries but also have somber consequences for the region and beyond.
Abbas Hashemite is a political observer and research analyst for regional and global geopolitical issues. He is currently working as an independent researcher and journalist.
The Taliban’s approach to the TAPI pipeline: challenges, and obstacles
By Farzad Bonesh – New Eastern Outlook – April 24, 2025
Although TAPI has now taken on more of a bilateral partnership between Afghanistan and Turkmenistan, its earlier implementation will certainly have greater domestic consequences for Afghanistan.
The Taliban’s approach to the TAPI pipeline: challenges, and obstacles
The Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline, a combination of the first letters of the Latin names of the countries participating in the regional project, runs from Turkmenistan to India. The length of the 1,814-kilometer line is 214 kilometers in Turkmenistan and 816 kilometers in Afghanistan.
The TAPI project is intended to transport 33 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually from Turkmenistan’s The Galkynysh gas field to India.
In 2015, the leaders of the four TAPI participating countries celebrated the groundbreaking ceremony for the gas pipeline in the city of Merv. But apart from the laying of the Turkmen section, virtually no major activity took place.
After the Taliban returned to power, international financial institutions either refused to directly support the project due to legal and political considerations or showed no interest in investing.
The Afghan Taliban is not officially recognized, and international sanctions against the Taliban, political differences between India and Pakistan, and tense relations between Kabul and Islamabad have slowed down the implementation of the project.
However, in September 2024, former President of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov and Taliban Prime Minister Mullah Mohammad Hassan Akhund jointly launched the TAPI project in 2024 at a ceremony on the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan border.
Recently, Hedayatullah Badri, Minister of Mines and Petroleum, and a high-ranking delegation from Turkmenistan, visited the progress of the TAPI gas transmission project in Herat province and emphasized the acceleration of the work process.
Although Pakistan and India have not been involved much in the recent developments of the TAPI gas pipeline, the Taliban, adopting a pragmatic approach, have decided to take this energy transmission project step by step with the cooperation of Turkmenistan.
Political and geopolitical goals and interests of the Afghan Taliban:
From the perspective of TAPI, it is an opportunity to solve the security problem within the country, and Kabul hopes that the opposition will also agree to the construction of this pipeline, considering national interests. During the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan , the Taliban, in a statement, while supporting the TAPI project, saw TAPI as an important economic project and an important element in the country’s economic infrastructure.
Gaining greater regional and global support for this pipeline will further link Afghanistan’s security with regional and global partners. The passage of the TAPI gas pipeline through Afghanistan will link the tangible and real interests of several regional and global countries, and the neighboring countries will also ensure Afghanistan’s security.
The Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project has helped increase Afghanistan’s geopolitical position and strengthen relations and mutual interests among partner countries. Taliban leaders seem to believe that TAPI has the potential to expand relations between member countries and strengthen common interests. Also, from the perspective of many in Kabul, the pipeline’s passage through Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India will reduce Pakistan’s incentive to play a negative role in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, Kabul expects the TAPI project to encourage countries’ interests to move away from confrontation with each other in Afghanistan to a policy of tolerance.
In this approach, accurate and efficient management of the TAPI can have important effects on the public opinion of the people, show government efficiency, deal with the opposition, and satisfy nationalist feelings.
Economic goals and benefits:
Of course, this plan cannot pave the way for an economic revolution in Afghanistan, but it can be very useful for other major construction projects, reconstruction, economic development and production, trade, and transit in Afghanistan.
It will also employ about ten thousand people for the next few decades, creating thousands of direct and indirect jobs and reducing some of the unemployment problem.
Over the past few years, the Taliban have focused on several projects such as the TAP-500 energy system, the revival of important energy transmission and transit projects, including CASA-1000.
In addition, the Taliban have planned and inaugurated some infrastructure and economic projects, such as solar power generation over the past two years. The Taliban consider energy projects important in the development and self-sufficiency of the country, saving Afghanistan from poverty and dependence on expanding energy production, and managing water resources.
The implementation of TAPI can help transform Afghanistan’s energy consumption infrastructure from oil and coal to natural gas, and help increase the country’s production and economic growth.
For the first time, Afghanistan can achieve reliable natural gas for domestic and industrial use. For example, the TAPI pipeline passing through Herat province (the economic hub of Afghanistan) could be a driving force for other local industries.
Afghanistan could be an actor in a major transit route for Central Asia and a bridge between Central Asian energy-consuming and exporting countries. South Asian countries are in great need of energy, and Central Asian countries have abundant gas and electricity resources. Afghanistan has the potential to connect the two sides.
Success in this project could accelerate the construction of power transmission lines, railways, fiber optics, etc., in the field of regional cooperation. If TAPI is completed at a cost of more than $7-10 billion, it could also help attract foreign investment to the country. In addition to meeting the gas needs of its growing economy, Afghanistan could also receive $1 billion in gas transit rights annually. This amount could be a major contribution to the economy.
TAPI could be an important step towards strengthening the economic diplomacy of the Kabul government. Apart from the main role of Turkmen Gas Company, with an 85% stake, in July 2024, Pakistan and Turkmenistan agreed to accelerate the progress of the TAPI gas pipeline project.
Kazakhstan also seems to be willing to join the project. Russian companies may participate in the TAPI project, “as soon as the situation in Afghanistan stabilizes”.
Challenges and Outlook
TAPI suffers from major challenges, from insecurity to political complications, regional instability, the international isolation of the Taliban, and doubts about the investment capacity.
The TAPI project in the Turkmen section has been completed. The Taliban also plan four phases for construction from the Turkmenistan border to the city of Herat; Herat to Helmand; Helmand to Kandahar; and Kandahar to the Pakistani border. But as of April 2025, just 11 kilometers of pipeline have been laid in Afghanistan.
Large investments require security and stability, and major extremist groups such as ISIS can be a significant threat in Afghanistan.
The Afghan section of TAPI (in Herat, Farah, Nimroz, Helmand, and Kandahar provinces) passes through some of the most unstable parts of the country. The Taliban is not yet a legitimate government, with legal standing as an economic contracting party and a reliable partner. Critics have warned that the Taliban government does not have national legitimacy and international and legal recognition.
Pakistan and India appear to be cautiously refraining from immediately participating in the TAPI gas pipeline, waiting for conditions in Afghanistan to change.
While the Taliban has not been recognized yet, it is also not possible to secure financial assistance or loans from international institutions.
In addition, the full and successful construction and operation of the pipeline requires the political will of the leaders of the four countries and serious bilateral and multilateral discussions with all partners.
However, although TAPI has now taken on more of a bilateral partnership between Afghanistan and Turkmenistan, its earlier implementation will certainly have greater domestic consequences for Afghanistan.
Trump: Everybody Should Get Rid of Their Nuclear Weapons
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | March 6, 2025
President Donald Trump restated his desire to abolish nuclear weapons during a White House presser on Thursday.
“It would be great if everybody would get rid of their nuclear weapons. [I know] Russia and us have by far the most,” the president told reporters in the Oval Office. “China will have an equal amount within four to five years. It would be great if we could all de-nuclearize because the power of nuclear weapons is crazy.”
Currently, nine countries – the US, UK, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel – possess nuclear weapons. With global tensions on the rise, several nations, including the US, are adding to their strategic capability.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, Beijing is working to ramp up its production of nuclear weapons. Last year, the agency predicted that China could have over 1,000 nuclear weapons. However, that would still give Beijing a far smaller arsenal than Washington and Moscow, which each have around 1,500 deployed nuclear weapons and thousands more in storage.
Shortly after returning to the White House in January, Trump said he spoke with President Vladimir Putin about denuclearization during his first term, and that the Russian leader was receptive to the idea. “We were talking about denuclearization of our two countries, and China would have come along. China right now has a much smaller nuclear armament than us, or field, than us, but they’re going to be catching [up] at some point,” Trump said.
“I will tell you that President Putin really liked the idea of cutting back on nuclear, and I think the rest of the world, we would have gotten them to follow, and China would have come along too. China also liked it,” he added. “Tremendous amounts of money are being spent on nuclear, and the destructive capability is something that we don’t even want to talk about. It’s too depressing.”
Trump has also discussed negotiating a deal with Moscow and Beijing that would see all three countries drastically cut military spending.
However, while Trump has at times voiced support for demilitarization and denuclearization, during his first term in office he scrapped two major arms control agreements, the Open Skies and the Intermediate Range Nuclear Force treaties.
Additionally, Trump refused to engage in bilateral discussions with Russia on extending the last nuclear arms control agreement between the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals, the New Start Treaty. He insisted that Moscow must pressure Beijing to make it a trilateral deal, a demand that almost led to the downfall of the landmark deal.
Though President Joe Biden was able to reach an agreement with Putin to extend the treaty for five more years in 2021, it is set to expire next year without another extension.
India: The “Water Issue” (and Beyond) in Relations with Neighbors
By Vladimir Terehov – New Eastern Outlook – January 29, 2025
All participants in the current phase of the “Great Global Game”, especially the major players, face certain challenges in their relationships with neighboring countries. However, our focus is on India, which has recently found new reasons to pay closer attention to developments in the territories of its neighbors: China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and others.
China Announces Construction of a Hydropower Plant in Tibet
At the end of last year, Xinhua reported that the Chinese government had approved the construction of a hydropower plant on the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo River. The river’s unique characteristics at the “Medog Gorge” in Tibet—where a massive water flow plunges 2,000 meters over a stretch of less than 50 km—have long attracted the interest of hydropower engineers. This flow holds energy reserves three times greater than those produced by the world’s largest power station, the Three Gorges Dam, built in the 1990s on the Yangtze River.
Naturally, China has long explored projects to harness this immense natural energy. The main obstacles have been the projects’ extreme complexity and the massive financial costs, estimated at around $140 billion.
But why should this internal Chinese matter concern India? Upon leaving Chinese Tibet, the Yarlung Tsangpo flows into India and Bangladesh, where it becomes better known as the Brahmaputra River. In the broader context of the “water problem”, which is becoming central to relations between many countries – especially those in the “Global South” – questions around the use of rivers shared by neighboring states have gained critical importance.
In the mid-2010s, China faced challenges in its relations with Southeast Asian nations for whom the Mekong River is a “river of life”. These countries expressed concerns over potential negative impacts from hydropower projects in Tibet on the Mekong’s tributaries. At that time, Beijing was able to ease such concerns through direct talks in the “Lancang-Mekong” framework.
Using river resources is an inevitable component of modern development. It can benefit the countries through which these rivers flow, provided each nation’s interests are considered during the construction and operation of hydropower facilities.
It all comes down to the overall state of relations between neighbors. If “misunderstandings” suddenly arise, they are more likely a sign of an overall lack of trust between them. Various concerns about the hydropower project in the “Medog Gorge” were raised by New Delhi several years ago. These concerns have resurfaced immediately following the aforementioned report by Xinhua.
Although this facility could bring significant benefits to India itself. The future hydropower plant could supply inexpensive electricity to the northeastern states or regulate the flow of the Brahmaputra River, which floods vast areas of those states annually.
Pakistan and Bangladesh
The same “water disputes” (among other issues) are being raised against India by two of its other neighbors – Pakistan and Bangladesh. This also reflects the poor state of India’s relations with Pakistan. Relations with Bangladesh deteriorated sharply after the well-known events of early August 2024, when the new Bangladeshi leadership accused New Delhi of provoking floods on the Gumti River by releasing water from a reservoir dam in the Indian state of Tripura, just 120 km from the Bangladeshi border.
As for Pakistan, relations in the mid-2010s reached the point of nuclear threats after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hinted at the possibility of blocking the upper reaches of the Indus River in response to a series of violent incidents in the then-state of Jammu and Kashmir. Since then, no similar rhetoric has emerged in bilateral discussions on water disputes. However, the issue remains embedded in the framework of Indo-Pakistani relations and has been repeatedly emphasized in recent months by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
That said, the “Water disputes” with India are not the primary reason for the dramatic shift in Bangladesh’s attitude toward Pakistan following the August 2024 events. From the time of its independence in 1971 until these recent developments, it was hard to imagine Bangladesh adopting a more hostile stance toward any state than it had toward Pakistan. This makes the visit of a delegation of senior Bangladeshi Army officers to Pakistan in mid-January 2025 almost unthinkable. For India, this is a deeply concerning and alarming signal.
Iran and Afghanistan
Providing some balance to these challenges are India’s relatively positive relations with Iran and Afghanistan, which are not immediate neighbors. Afghanistan exhibits a peculiar phenomenon where its leadership seeks to strengthen ties not with co-religionists in Pakistan but with “non-believers” in India.
This alignment by Kabul is not solely due to the strained relationship between the Taliban (still banned in Russia) and Pakistan’s leadership. Even during the era of “secular” Afghan governments, ties with India were consistently prioritized.
This phenomenon has a straightforward explanation: no Afghan leadership would ever recognize the Durand Line, drawn in the late 19th century, as the legitimate border with Pakistan. The line divided the Pashtuns, who constitute Afghanistan’s majority population. This reflects the enduring relevance of Realpolitik principles – regardless of time, region, or the faiths of the people involved. A recent demonstration of growing ties between India and Afghanistan was the January 8 meeting in Dubai between the foreign ministers of the two countries.
Iran, meanwhile, has historically maintained relatively good relations with all political entities within modern India. Today, its leadership pursues a balanced policy toward both India and Pakistan, avoiding taking a definitive stance on the Kashmir issue, which is critical to both countries.
A landmark moment in Iran-India relations was the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding in May 2016 during Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Tehran. The agreement allocated $500 million for the modernization of the Chabahar Port on the Gulf of Oman. India views this port as a vital multipurpose logistics hub that could facilitate land-based transport links to Afghanistan.
These agreements were reaffirmed during Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s visit to New Delhi in February 2018. In May 2024, the agreements were extended for another 10 years. A wide range of bilateral issues was discussed during the January 2025 visit of Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi to New Delhi.
The geopolitical environment surrounding modern India is becoming increasingly complex – a trend observed among all major players in the current phase of the “Great Global Game”.
But then again, who in today’s world has it easy?
Vladimir Terekhov, expert on the issues of the Asia-Pacific region
Imran Khan jailed for 14 years
RT | January 17, 2025
Former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi have been convicted in a £190 million ($232 million) land corruption case involving the Al-Qadir Trust, local media reported on Friday.
According to ARY News and Dawn, an anti-corruption court in the northern city of Rawalpindi sentenced Khan to 14 years in prison and Bibi to seven years, with the verdict being announced at Adiala Jail.
Khan and Bibi have also been fined $3,600 and $1,800, respectively, with the failure to comply carrying an additional imprisonment term.
The Al-Qadir Trust case centers on allegations that Khan and Bibi were involved in a quid pro quo scheme that saw the politician and his wife receive land worth millions of dollars from a property mogul during the establishment of an eponymous university in exchange for legal protection.
The former Pakistani prime minister has denied the charges, calling them “politically motivated.” Before the verdict, Khan said the case lacked evidence and would embarrass the authorities. “My sentencing is being sought in a case where neither have I derived a single penny of personal gain, nor has the government suffered a single penny of financial loss,” he said.
Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party condemned the ruling, calling it a “black verdict,” while sharing a video purportedly showing protests against the decision outside the National Assembly.
A cricketer-turned-politician, Khan served as prime minister from 2018 to 2022, when he was ousted from office in a no-confidence vote, with the opposition accusing him of mismanaging the economy and foreign policy. Khan, however, claims that he was overthrown as a result of a US conspiracy.
He has been embroiled in numerous legal battles, with looming charges of corruption. In 2023, he was found guilty of illegally buying and selling state gifts he had received during his premiership, although the sentence was suspended. One year later, he was also sentenced to ten years for leaking state secrets, a charge he has denied. His earlier arrests and sentences sparked nationwide protests, some of which turned violent.
From Bangladesh to Pakistan: The Ripple Effects of Political Turmoil and Non-Democratic Influence in South Asia
By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – 18.08.2024
Political uncertainty looms large over the South Asian region. Governments in all the regional countries are suspicious about their future. A massive uprising in Bangladesh and the consequent ouster of the country’s Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajid has significantly impacted the neighboring countries. This inculcated fear among the governments of the neighboring countries. In Pakistan, the government was already facing public backlash due to the alleged sham elections. Moreover, the opposition supporters are also protesting against the incumbent government due to the incarceration of the Pakistan Tehreek E Insaf (PTI) government. The Bangladesh uprising has motivated the PTI youth to start a new campaign against the sitting government, which can lead to significant instability and chaos in the country.
Bangladesh’s Youth Uprising: Causes, Impact, and Speculations
For the first time in the history of Bangladesh, the youth of the country forced a sitting Prime Minister to resign and flee the country. Rising unemployment in the country, the job quota system, and inflation were among the prime reasons and motivations behind these student protests. However, there are speculations that a foreign hand is also involved in the ouster of Sheikh Hasina Wajid. Although Hasina’s rule is termed a fascist government, the country made significant strides under her government. She developed Bangladesh’s road and energy infrastructure. The road network during her rule expanded to 90000 km from a mere 50000 km in 2005.
Furthermore, she provided electricity to 90 percent of the country’s households. Industrialization also increased during her government. However, the reinstatement of the quota system by the High Court sparked massive student protests around the country due to a decline in job opportunities in the private sector.
The public sector appears attractive to most of the Bengali youth due to the job security and rapid increments. Reports suggest that annually, 400000 aspirants compete for 3000 civil services jobs in Bangladesh. However, analysts hold that these were not the prime reasons behind the ouster of Hasina Wajid. Her tilt towards China is deemed as the prime reason behind her ouster from the government. Nonetheless, the reasons behind her ouster could be debatable, but these protests have spread fear among most of the regional countries.
Regional Implications: The Influence of Bangladesh’s Crisis on Pakistan and Other South Asian Nations
People in India and Pakistan have accused their governments of rigging the 2024 elections. The Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PML-N) government already faces backlash from the majority public due to the alleged rigging in the recent elections. Almost all the opposition parties have accused the government of robbing their mandate. Numerous complaints about the issuance of bogus results by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) were reported after the 2024 elections. Moreover, the incarceration of the PTI leaders under the current government has also added to the chagrin of the incumbent PML-N government in Pakistan.
The country has observed different protests from opposition parties in recent months. The anti-government student protests in Bangladesh have inculcated a new spirit in the anti-government protests in Pakistan. On the other hand, the Pakistani government is scared of a new wave of protests by the opposition parties. The majority of the Pakistani youth stand with opposition parties. PTI’s youth wing has started a novel campaign to malign the government through public gatherings and protests. Pakistan’s religious political parties are also mounting pressure on the government over some religious and economic issues. This has increased the fear among the PML-N officials of a possible uprising against their government. To counter any possible uprising, the government of Pakistan has restricted internet in the country. The Pakistani government seems oblivious to the fact that the Bangladeshi government also used similar tactics to control anti-government protests. However, it further exacerbated the situation.
Navigating Political Turmoil: The Role of Non-Democratic Forces and the Need for Democratic Reforms in South Asia
Most of the citizens in Pakistan and regional countries see the anti-government protests in Bangladesh as a revolution, ignoring the realities behind these protests. In the previous few decades, most such protests, including the Arab Spring, led the countries into mere turmoil and chaos. The countries where leaders were forced to resign through protests led to military coups and political instability in the past. The consequences of Bangladesh’s so-called revolution are yet to be seen. The Bengali military has already intervened in the system by setting up an interim government in the country.
Furthermore, the fate of the country will be decided by the transparency of the upcoming elections. Such situations open the way for the non-democratic forces to intervene in the democratic system of the country. Bangladesh’s history is also a substantiation of this. Since the creation of the country in 1971, Bangladesh has been the victim of 29 military coups. This happened due to the increased role of the Bengali military in the creation of their country and their nexus with the Mukti Bahini. Pakistani youth should not overlook the significant influence of non-democratic forces in the country’s electoral and democratic process. Moreover, they should be cautious to prevent external forces, especially the United States and Israel, from exploiting their hostility towards the incumbent government. On the other hand, the sitting government should also promote democracy in the country to ensure political stability. The forceful suppression of dissent will lead to increased frustration against the government, which could prove detrimental to the stability of the country.
Sheikh Hasina speaks up on US plot
Bangladeshi Hindus fleeing to India for safety gather at the international border, Sitalkuchi, Cooch Behar, August 9, 2024
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | August 11, 2024
The exclusive report in today’s Economic Times carrying Sheikh Hasina’s first remarks after her ouster from power will come as a slap on the face of the nincompoops in our country who are waxing eloquently about developments in that country as a stand-alone democracy moment in regional politics.
Hasina told ET, “I resigned, so that I did not have to see the procession of dead bodies. They wanted to come to power over the dead bodies of students, but I did not allow it, I resigned from premiership. I could have remained in power if I had surrendered the sovereignty of Saint Martin Island and allowed America to hold sway over the Bay of Bengal. I beseech to the people of my land, ‘Please do not allow to be manipulated by radicals.’”
The ET report citing Awami League sources implied that the hatchet man of the colour revolution in Bangladesh is none other than Donald Lu, the incumbent Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian affairs who visited Dhaka in May.
This is credible enough. A background check on Lu’s string of postings gives away the story. This Chinese -American ‘diplomat’ served as political officer in Peshawar (1992 to 1994); special assistant to Ambassador Frank Wisner (whose family lineage as operatives of the Deep State is far too well-known to be explained) in Delhi (1996-1997); subsequently, as the Deputy Chief of Mission in Delhi from 1997-2000 (during which his portfolio included Kashmir and India-Pakistan relations), inheriting the job, curiously enough, from Robin Raphel, whose reputation as India’s bête noire is still living memory — CIA analyst, lobbyist, and ‘expert’ on Pakistan affairs.
Indeed, Lu visited Bangladesh in mid-May and met with senior government officials and civil society leaders. And shortly after his visit, the US announced sanctions against then Bangladesh army chief General Aziz Ahmed for what Washington termed his involvement in “significant corruption.”
After his Dhaka visit, Lu told Voice of America openly, “Promoting democracy and human rights in Bangladesh remains a priority for us. We will continue to support the important work of civil society and journalists and to advocate for democratic processes and institutions in Bangladesh, as we do in countries around the world…
“We [US] were outspoken in our condemnation of the violence that marred the election cycle [in January] and we have urged the government of Bangladesh to credibly investigate incidents of violence and hold perpetrators accountable. We will continue to engage on these issues…”
Lu played a similar proactive role during his past assignment in Kyrgyzstan (2003-2006) which culminated a colour revolution. Lu specialised in fuelling and masterminding colour revolutions, which led to regime changes in Albania, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan and Pakistan (ouster of Imran Khan).
Sheikh Hasina’s disclosure could not have come as surprise to the Indian intelligence. In the run-up to the elections in Bangladesh in January, Russian Foreign Ministry had openly alleged that the US diplomacy was changing tack and planning a series of events to destabilise the situation in Bangladesh in the post-election scenario.
The Foreign Ministry spokesperson said in a statement in Moscow,
“On December 12-13, in a number of areas of Bangladesh, opponents of the current government blocked road traffic, burned buses, and clashed with the police. We see a direct connection between these events and the inflammatory activity of Western diplomatic missions in Dhaka. In particular, US Ambassador P Haas, which we already discussed at the briefing on November 22.
“There are serious reasons to fear that in the coming weeks an even wider arsenal of pressure, including sanctions, may be used against the government of Bangladesh, which is undesirable to the West. Key industries may come under attack, as well as a number of officials who will be accused without evidence of obstructing the democratic will of citizens in the upcoming parliamentary elections on January 7, 2024.
“Unfortunately, there is little chance that Washington will come to its senses and refrain from yet another gross interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. We are confident, however, that despite all the machinations of external forces, the issue of power in Bangladesh will ultimately be decided by the friendly people of this country, and no one else.”
Moscow and Beijing have nonetheless taken a scrupulously correct stance of non-interference. True to Russian pragmatism, Moscow’s Ambassador to Bangladesh Alexander Mantytsky noted that his country “will cooperate with any leader and government elected by the people of Bangladesh who is ready for equal and mutually respectful dialogue with Russia.”
That said, both Russia and China must be worried about the US intentions. Also, they cannot but be sceptical about the shape of things to come, given the abysmal record of the US’ client regimes catapulted to power through colour revolutions.
Unlike Russia, which has economic interests in Bangladesh and is a stakeholder in the creation of a multipolar world order, the security interests of China and India are going to be directly affected if the new regime in Dhaka fails to deliver and the country descends into economic crisis and lawlessness as a failed state.
It is a moot point, therefore, whether this regime change in Dhaka masterminded by Washington is ‘India-centric’ or not. The heart of the matter is that today, India is flanked on the west and the east by two unfriendly regimes that are under US influence. And this is happening at a juncture when signs are plentiful that the government’s independent foreign policies and stubborn adherence to strategic autonomy has upset the US’ Indo-Pacific strategy.
The paradox is, the colour revolution in Bangladesh was set in motion within a week of the ministerial level Quad meeting in Tokyo, which was, by the way, a hastily-arranged US initiative too. Possibly, the Indian establishment was lulled into a sense of complacency?
British Foreign Secretary David Lammy reached out to External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar with a phone call on August 8 coinciding with the appointment of the interim government in Dhaka, which the UK has welcomed while also urging for “a peaceful pathway to an inclusive democratic future” for Bangladesh — much as the people of that country deserve “accountability.” [Emphasis added.]
India is keeping mum. The only way Bangladesh can figure a way out of the foxhole is through an inclusive democratic process going forward. But the appointment, ostensibly at the students’ recommendation, of a US-educated lawyer as the new chief justice of the Supreme Court in Dhaka is yet another ominous sign of Washington tightening its grip.
Against this geopolitical backdrop, a commentary in the Chinese daily Global Times on Thursday titled China-India relations easing, navigating new realities gives some food for thought.
It spoke of the imperative for India and China “to create a new kind of relationship that reflects their status as major powers… Both countries should welcome and support each other’s presence in their respective neighbouring regions.” Or else, the commentary underscored, “the surrounding diplomatic environment for both countries will be difficult to improve.”
The regime change in Bangladesh bears testimony to this new reality. The bottom line is that while on the one hand, Indians bought into the US narrative that they are a ‘counterweight to China’, in reality, the US has begun exploiting India-China tensions to keep them apart with a view to advance its own geopolitical agenda of regional hegemony.
Delhi should take a strategic overview of where its interests would lie in this paradigm shift, as the usual way of thinking about or doing something in our neighbourhood is brusquely replaced by a new and different experience that Washington has unilaterally imposed. What we may have failed to comprehend is that the seeds of the new paradigm were already present within the existing one.
Pakistan court acquits Imran Khan, but he remains in jail
Press TV – July 13, 2024
Imran Khan, Pakistan’s former prime minister, will remain in prison even after he and his wife were acquitted on charges of marrying unlawfully by a court in Islamabad.
Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi had been sentenced to seven years for allegedly marrying too soon after her divorce in an alleged breach of Islamic law.
On Saturday, Islamabad Additional District and Sessions Court judge Afzal Majoka announced their appeal was accepted.
The jail sentence, handed to Khan and his wife on February 3, followed two other convictions for him in separate cases. Both have since been overturned. Khan says all cases were filed against him by the military leadership to keep him away from power.
The acquittal in the marriage case seemed to have removed the last hurdle in the way of the former prime minister’s release from prison. But Khan and his wife remain locked up, according to a spokesman for his party — Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).
Spokesman Ahmed Janjua said in a statement that another court in eastern Lahore had approved his arrest over three cases alleging he incited riots in May 2023.
It was “yet another gimmick to keep the illegal imprisonment prolonged,” he said.
Khan was arrested in May 2023 from inside the High Court in Islamabad on corruption charges.
His arrest sparked protests during which supporters of his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party poured onto the streets and clashed with police.
Days before the February elections in the country, the former prime minister was slapped with more convictions, which according to Khan, were orchestrated to prevent his return to power.
Khan served as prime minister from 2018 to 2022, when he was ousted by a no-confidence vote after the military establishment turned against him and backed his political rivals.
A UN panel of experts said earlier this month that Khan’s detention “had no legal basis and appears to have been intended to disqualify him from running for political office.”
“Thus, from the outset, that prosecution was not grounded in law and was reportedly instrumentalized for a political purpose,” said the panel of experts, calling for his immediate release.
Kremlin comments on Türkiye’s SCO bid
Türkiye’s obligations to the US-led military bloc are not consistent with the Eurasian organization’s values, Moscow has said.
RT | July 12, 2024
Türkiye’s bid to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is not compatible with its membership in NATO, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.
Last week, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a summit of the Eurasian mutual defense group, in which his nation has observer status. While returning home from Kazakhstan, he told journalists that Ankara wants to “further develop” ties with the SCO and its founding members Russia and China. During the NATO leaders’ summit in the US this week, he said Türkiye wants to join the SCO as a permanent member.
Asked by journalists when Turkish accession could be expected, Peskov said there was a problem with such a proposal.
“There are certain contradictions between Turkish commitments and [its] position on fundamental issues as a NATO member and the worldview formulated in the founding documents of the SCO,” he explained.
The expansion of the SCO is of interest to many nations and remains on its agenda, but there is no specific timeline for accepting new members, he added. Commenting later during a press call on bilateral relations with Türkiye, Peskov said Russia was “open for attempts to reach agreements based on a certain worldview.”
Moscow perceives NATO as a hostile, aggressive military organization, which serves US geopolitical interests and is currently conducting a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.
Despite being a NATO member state, Türkiye has maintained a neutral stance on the Ukraine conflict, refusing to impose economic sanctions on Russia and serving as an intermediary between Moscow and Kiev on several occasions. Ankara helped to mediate a nascent peace deal in the early months of the hostilities, which Kiev eventually ditched in favor of continued fighting. The Russian government believes that the US and its allies, particularly the UK, forced Ukraine to reject the proposal.
The SCO was founded in 2001 and currently has ten full members: Russia, China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Belarus. Kazakhstan holds the rotating presidency this year and hosted the leaders of member states on July 3 and 4 in Astana.
One of the key pledges to which SCO members subscribe is not to seek the improvement of their own national security at the expense of the national security of other parties. NATO policy does exactly that, according to its critics, including Russia.
Featured Video
Israel’s diamond industry is dying. That’s a billion-dollar problem for the IDF.
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Mossad behind Italian ‘blackmail’ spying scandal
The Cradle | November 1, 2024
An Italian private intelligence firm that allegedly hacked government databases to collect information on thousands of prominent people, including politicians, entrepreneurs, and celebrities, is accused of working for Israeli intelligence and the Vatican, media reported on 30 October.
Police wiretaps leaked to Italian media show that Equalize, which employs former members of Italian intelligence, is accused of breaching the servers of government ministries and the police between 2019 and 2024 to collect information.
Yedioth Ahronoth reported that Equalize allegedly collected numerous classified files that contain sensitive information about prominent Italians to sell to clients – including major companies and law firms seeking information to gain an advantage over competitors, win court cases, or for blackmail and extortion.
Prime Minister Meloni described the alleged scheme as “unacceptable” and “a threat to democracy.” … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Bill Francis on Victoria Moves to Force Online… papasha408 on The Empire of Lies: How the BB… loongtip on US Weighs Port Restrictions on… Bill Francis on Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate… Sheree Sheree on I was canceled by three newspa… Richard Ong on Czech–Slovak alignment signals… John Edward Kendrick on Colonel Jacques Baud & Nat… eddieb on Villains of Judea: Ronald Laud… rezjiekc on Substack Imposes Digital ID Ch… loongtip on US strikes three vessels in Ea… eddieb on An Avoidable Disaster Steve Jones on For Israel, The Terrorist Atta…
Aletho News- Israel’s diamond industry is going extinct. That’s a billion-dollar problem for the IDF.
- Iran says no basis for inspection of bombed nuclear sites
- How reporting facts can now land you in jail for 14 years as a terrorist
- Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Ordered to Testify in Dutch COVID Vaccine Injury Lawsuit
- The vindication (and brutal punishment) of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
- US Department of State Discloses Names of 5 Europeans Sanctioned for Censorship Against US
- The Epstein Saga: Chapter 1, Mr. Clinton
- Bill Clinton is in the frame again, but this time it’s Trump who put him there
- US Navy effectively becomes a tool of modern piracy
- EU Morphing Into Its Own Worst Enemy – Viktor Orban
- If Americans Knew
- The Faces of AIPAC: the largest pro-Israel lobbying org in the US
- Gazan Christians mark 3rd Christmas under genocide – Not a Ceasefire Day 75
- Israeli scams children with cancer out of millions fundraised for their treatment, BBC finds
- Casey Kennedy Fired from AG Scientific Amid Zionist Troll Campaign Over Track AIPAC Work
- The Hasmoneans: The Jewish Dynasty That Gave Us Hanukkah Is a Symbol of Murder, Not Heroism and Hope
- Int’l NGOs may be blocked from Gaza starting Jan. 1 – Not a Ceasefire Day 74
- From Churches to ChatGPT: Israeli Contracts Worth Millions Aim to Influence U.S. Public Opinion
- Who is the Pro-Israel Clique behind TikTok’s US Takeover?
- Medical Crisis in UK Prisons – 800 Doctors Warn of ‘Imminent Deaths’ Among Palestine Action Strikers
- The New York Times ignores an essential part of the Jeffrey Epstein story — Israel
- No Tricks Zone
- Merry Christmas Everybody!
- Two More New Studies Show The Southern Ocean And Antarctica Were Warmer In The 1970s
- Der Spiegel Caught Making Up Reports About Conservative America (Again)
- New Study: 8000 Years Ago Relative Sea Level Was 30 Meters Higher Than Today Across East Antarctica
- The Wind Energy Paradox: “Why More Wind Turbines Don’t Always Mean More Power”
- New Study Reopens Questions About Our Ability To Meaningfully Assess Global Mean Temperature
- Dialing Back The Panic: German Physics Prof Sees No Evidence Of Climate Tipping Points!
- Astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon Challenges The Climate Consensus … It’s The Sun, Not CO2
- Regional Cooling Since The 1980s Has Driven Glacier Advance In The Karakoram Mountains
- Greenland Petermann Glacier Has Grown 30 Kilometers Since 2012!
Aletho News 