Asia
Dynamics of Afghanistan-Pakistan relations
Afghanistan-Pakistan relations are characterized by a complex interplay of historical grievances, geopolitical controversies, security dilemmas, economic dependencies, and ethnic identities. Unless and until, understanding these layers, it could be hard for all those interested in fostering peace and cooperation in this volatile region, which is much more essential for people of both the neighboring countries facing similar security, economic and political issues.
No one can neglect the fact that the historical narrative of Afghanistan and Pakistan is linked in a very complicated manner, characterized by a series of complex interactions and interferences that have frequently involved accusations, blame-shifting, and concealed motives. Beginning from the British colonial period, various events have played pivotal roles in shaping these dynamics. Prior to the British Empire’s involvement in the region laid the groundwork for future geopolitical tensions and alliances, almost all parts and parcels of both the neighboring countries remained part of one or several empires and intruded rulers, which is now considered bone of contention between the two. Following this era, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan marked a critical turning point, as it not only altered local power structures but also drew international attention and intervention into the whole region. This was further complicated by the subsequent involvement of the United States lead allies, which aimed at countering Soviet influence, commenced during the Cold War.
What went wrong in the past five decades
Focusing on the past five decades, Pakistan has consistently altered its approach to each new Afghan government that has emerged following various political transitions and takeovers. This pattern of behavior is often viewed as a strategic maneuver, deeply rooted in Pakistan’s desire for what it terms “strategic depth.” This concept refers to the idea that an unstable Afghanistan serves Pakistan’s geopolitical ambitions by providing a buffer zone against perceived threats, particularly from India. Visibly, the instability in Afghanistan allows Pakistan to exert influence over its neighbor while simultaneously pursuing its own national interests but internally it causes stock of issues and hurdles to its powerful military establishment.
Pakistan’s well discussed “strategic depth”, that was planned or originated in the early years following its independence, aimed to counterbalance India’s regional influence. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 marked a significant turning point that reinforced this outlook, when Pakistan emerged as a pivotal player in supporting Afghan’s armed resistance by (Afghan Mujahideen calling them freedom fighters, scattered in various armed groups, thereby deepening its involvement in Afghan affairs and solidifying its role in the geopolitical dynamics of South Asia.
The biggest issue is the use of proxy’s forces on the part of Pakistan’s policy toward Afghanistan
The usage of proxies policy represents a significant miscalculation on the part of Pakistan’s policy makers responsible for ups and downs in neighboring Afghanistan. No doubt to mention that this perspective complicates Pakistan’s foreign policy and undermines the possibility of establishing a stable and cooperative relationship with Afghanistan, ultimately jeopardizing Pakistan’s security as well. By framing its approach to Afghanistan apparently through the lens of rivalry with India, Pakistan risks intensifying tensions and conflicts that could further destabilize both nations. Such a strategy fails to acknowledge the intricate socio-political dynamics within Afghanistan and neglects the opportunities for collaboration that could yield mutual benefits for both countries.
Problematic domestic and isolated foreign policies
No one can neglect that the problematic domestic and isolated foreign policies of Taliban-led Afghan government, has further fuelled hardships for Pakistan as, “no other than Pakistan is considered responsible for its (Taliban)re-empowering.” By patronizing Tehrik Taliban Afghanistan also called Emirate Islami Afghanistan, Pakistan’s powerful junta had ignored the fact that TTA founder Mullah Muhammad Omar Akhund has been declared as their unanimous supreme leader by like minded islamists from both the countries. Afghan Taliban in accordance with the guidelines of Mullah Omar are reluctant to honor Pakistan’s demand of either extraditing banned TTP militants or taking action against them. Pakistan is also ignoring another fact that TT established by Mullah Omar Akhund is trying for Islamic State of Khurasan, which is also a threat to geographical limits of several regional countries.
Calling them as Taliban are not new but they are creation or production of US patronized Afghan War. Majority of them were part of different Jihadic groups. Amongst the Jihadis, Haqqannis headed by late Maulvi Jalal Ud Din Haqqani, Hizb-e-Islami Afghanistan faction headed by Maulvi Younas Khalis and several others like Ustad Yasar of Prof. Abdul Rab Rasool Sayaf led Ittehad Islami were the first one who had announced joining of TTA soon after its inception.
Pakistan is suffering from his persistently unsuccessful policies toward its neighbor Afghanistan
No one having the intention to oppose or under mind Pakistan’s harsh criticisms concerning the presence of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) sanctuaries on Afghan soil, but no one can neglect the fact that both countries they have suffered significant harm as a result of Pakistan’s persistently unsuccessful Afghan policies. Instead pursuing failed or flop policies, Pakistan is in possession of stock of opportunities, entering into friendly and trustworthy relations with Afghanistan. Moreover, they could strengthen their ties through economic collaboration, including the negotiations of trade agreements, joint infrastructure development projects, and partnerships in the long-awaited mega energy projects in the region. From a geopolitical perspective, Pakistan and Afghanistan have the opportunity to collaborate on initiatives aimed at promoting regional connectivity and engage in diplomatic endeavors to foster peace and stability within the region.
The conflicting narratives from both sides, especially Pakistani leaders’ remarks only serve to fuel mistrust and escalate tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Instead of working towards resolving their differences and addressing common security challenges, each side continues to point fingers at the other. This vicious cycle of blame and counter-blame not only undermines efforts towards regional peace but also creates an environment conducive to the growth and spread of extremist groups. It’s generally believed in Afghanistan that Pakistan’s assertions are driven by this country’s long-term policy of strategic depth of having an unstable and unsecured Afghanistan in its western border, rather than a genuine concern for security. They think that Pakistan uses the threat of TTP presence in Afghanistan as a pretext to justify its continued involvement in Afghan affairs or to divert attention from internal issues. Others suggest that Pakistan is seeking international support and sympathy by portraying itself as a victim of terrorism.
Meanwhile, Pakistani Taliban (TTP) cannot be defeated through military means
The assertion that the Pakistan establishment is behind the turmoil in Afghanistan is a complex issue with multiple factors at play and holds merit based on historical context, strategic interests, support for insurgent groups, geopolitical considerations, and implications for regional stability.
Regardless of the motives behind Pakistan’s assertions, it is clear that the current strategy of relying on military action alone will not address the security challenges facing Pakistan. The TTP is an adaptive adversary that cannot be defeated through military means alone. A more realistic and comprehensive approach is needed, one that addresses the root causes of extremism and terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan, such as poverty eradication, depreciation, lack of education, and political instability.
Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan are diverse, covering economic, security, stability, and regional influence considerations. However, significant challenges arise when Pakistan engages in proxy conflicts against successive Afghan governments regardless of their prior friendly relations. This long standing policy of supporting armed opposition groups against ruling authorities has persisted for decades, harming trust and posing a dual threat to both countries. From the last couple of years, the exchanges between Pakistani officials and Taliban representatives highlights a complex web of accusations regarding terrorism and security in South Asia. Both sides appear to be deflecting responsibility while emphasizing the other’s role in perpetuating regional instability. Instead, results oriented dialogues may be encouraged for building up consensus on both sides for addressing common issues of security, extremism, poverty and backwardness.
The issue of IS and controversy surrounding Bagram Airfield to the US drones is a big challenge
Across the border in Afghanistan, the reports of Pakistan’s recent engagement with Afghan warlords, the allegations of harboring ISKP terrorists on its soil against Afghanistan, and the controversy surrounding the provision of air bases to U.S. drones are issues that promote anti Pakistan sentiment and raise concerns for Afghanistan. It is crucial for Pakistan to promptly and effectively address these matters. In their pursuit of military and political strategies, Pakistani policymakers intentionally create an imaginary emotional narrative that positions Pakistan as a nation sandwiched between two antagonistic neighbors, which serves to rationalize their actions on both domestic and international fronts. This approach not only marks a shift from previous alliances but also underscores the intricate nature of regional politics, where allegiances can swiftly alter in response to immediate strategic requirements.
The implications of this evolving policy are profound for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. For Afghanistan, continued instability may hinder economic development and exacerbate humanitarian crises. For Pakistan, while it may gain short-term advantages through manipulation of Afghan politics, its long-term consequences could include increased militancy within its borders and strained relations with international partners who advocate for stability in the region.
Asia
Pentagon plans covert spy ring for economic war on China, report says
The US Department of War (Pentagon) is reportedly planning to establish an extensive network of deep-cover agents to wage economic warfare against China and other adversaries of the US.
According to a report by The Washington Post citing six sources familiar with the initiative, the plan has not yet been put into effect. The newspaper reported that the initiative remains at the planning stage. The Pentagon, however, denies that any such initiative exists.
The report said the operatives would pose as entrepreneurs or private sector employees while concealing their ties to the US government. The network’s mission would be to gather economic intelligence and counter China.
The programme is led by Tom Rakusa, who spent 39 years at the CIA. Rakusa serves as a senior adviser to Deputy Secretary of Defence Steve Feinberg.
The proposed spy network is seen as part of a broader policy by the Donald Trump administration to sharpen economic competition with other countries.
The US is already resorting to tariffs, export controls, and investment in strategic sectors, alongside expanding its economic intelligence gathering.
According to The Washington Post, the new initiative demonstrates the Pentagon’s growing influence under the Trump administration. The department is currently seeking a record budget of $1.5 trillion.
Trade war flares up again with Trump’s return to the White House
The trade friction between the US and China flared up again following Donald Trump’s return to the White House. In April 2025, Washington raised tariffs on Chinese goods to as much as 145%, and Beijing retaliated with tariffs of up to 125%.
In May, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described China as the primary geopolitical challenge facing Washington. Rubio said that to avoid war, the two sides needed to manage their conflict of interests.
In July, Chinese expert Zheng Yongnian did not simply warn that underestimating the US could prove to be a “fatal mistake”; he stated it explicitly.
According to Zheng’s assessment, the US maintains its primacy through the role of the dollar, its military superiority, and its technological advantages.
Even so, the two sides agreed in June to declare a truce and lower tariffs. In autumn 2026, the US and China extended their trade truce until 10 January 2027.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the extension would give the parties more time to discuss economic issues.
Trade deals do not eliminate the strategic contradictions between the two countries. Financial Times columnist Rana Foroohar likened the race between the two nations for commercial, technological, and geopolitical influence to the 19th-century “Great Game” between the Russian and British empires.
Foroohar cited China’s standing in shipbuilding and commercial maritime transport, as well as its expanding footprint in overseas ports, among its key advantages.
Asia
Japan plans curbs on short-term home sales to cool urban prices
Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) plans to restrict short-term property trading to rein in surging home prices in major urban centres, particularly Tokyo.
Led by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, the party aims to make support for working households a core priority ahead of local elections scheduled for April next year.
The LDP’s research commission on housing and land policy met on Wednesday to discuss the issue.
According to a report by the Nikkei Asia newspaper, Commission Chair and LDP lawmaker Midori Matsushima said at the opening of the meeting: “Prices of newly built condominiums across Tokyo’s 23 wards have doubled over the past decade. We must work on measures ensuring that people who wish to live in these homes can actually afford to buy them.”
Homeownership in the capital has become virtually unattainable for broad segments of the population. According to data from the Real Estate Economic Institute, the average sale price of a newly built condominium in Tokyo’s 23 wards rose %18.5 in fiscal 2025 compared with the previous year, reaching 137.84 million yen (around $872,000).
Meanwhile, statistics from the Ministry of Labour show that the average annual income of a full-time worker in the capital remained at 6.78 million yen in fiscal 2025. This widening gap between incomes and residential property prices is directly shaping political priorities.
During its campaign for the House of Representatives election in February, the LDP pledged to curb speculative transactions across metropolitan Tokyo and other regions. Earlier this month, a party project team focused on policies concerning foreign nationals also submitted a recommendation urging the government to introduce immediate tax measures against rising home prices.
Under current legislation, profits realized from properties sold within five years of acquisition are classified as “short-term capital gains”. These returns face a tax rate approaching %40, including income tax and local inhabitant tax.
Although this rate is twice the approximately %20 levied as “long-term capital gains” tax on properties held for more than five years, several party members argue it remains insufficient to deter speculation. Calls to tighten the framework may be considered as part of the annual tax reform package to be drafted in December alongside the LDP’s coalition partner, the Japan Innovation Party.
The ruling bloc wants to present concrete housing pledges to voters heading to the polls in April across numerous urban centres, including 22 of Tokyo’s wards where local assembly terms expire.
“We need to support families with children, who are typically at the stage of purchasing a home,” a senior LDP official said.
Opposition parties are also preparing alternative proposals that target not only prospective homebuyers, but also residents forced into the rental market by high property prices and now affected by escalating rents.
Tax steps take precedence over limits on foreign buyers
Several countries seeking answers to housing affordability pressures have imposed direct restrictions on foreign purchasers. In South Korea, real estate policies played a major part in the declining public approval ratings of President Lee Jae Myung.
In August 2025, authorities in Seoul introduced an approval requirement for foreign nationals buying homes in the capital and adjacent areas, while also mandating that buyers reside in the properties for at least two years.
Canada and Australia have enacted temporary bans on foreign residential purchases, while Singapore levies a %60 additional stamp duty on foreign buyers.
The role of overseas investors in Japan’s property market also drew debate during the February election. However, restrictions aimed directly at foreign nationals are viewed as potentially conflicting with international trade and services agreements.
Consequently, rather than imposing restrictions based on the nationality of buyers, the government is discussing tax measures aimed at speculative real estate deals, such as rapid resales.
Fears that sharp market measures could shake regional banks
Concerns have also surfaced that aggressive steps to force down prices could harm the wider national economy.
A senior LDP tax official cautioned that a steep drop in land prices could weaken local financial institutions, warning: “We must consider the impact on regional banks.”
The real estate sector accounts for roughly %18 of total lending by Japanese banks. This proportion sits well above the %10 level recorded during Japan’s bubble economy of the mid-to-late 1980s.
At certain regional banks, property lending accounts for nearly half of total loan portfolios.
According to March 2025 data from the Financial Services Agency, approximately one-quarter of all loans extended by regional banks to the real estate sector are concentrated directly in Tokyo’s five central wards.
Buoyant asset valuations, supported in part by rising stock indices, have underpinned strong public approval for the Takaichi administration. Observers note that property interventions designed to cool the market could drag down equity prices and weaken the government’s standing.
A senior official on the LDP research commission stressed that decision-makers must act with caution regarding the scope and timing of any measures intended to bring price increases under control.
Asia
South Korea plans $120B spend on eight US nuclear power plants
South Korea will spend $120 billion to construct eight nuclear power plants in the US under an agreement that provides for $350 billion in investments in exchange for lower tariffs.
The South Korean government also announced that Seoul and Washington will begin examining a liquefied natural gas (LNG) project in Alaska comprising a large-scale pipeline to transport natural gas from the north of the state to the south, alongside the construction of an LNG terminal for exports overseas.
Seoul stated that a decision regarding the LNG project will be made following a commercial feasibility study. However, US President Donald Trump said that South Korea would invest $54 billion in the project, pointing to an apparent lack of full coordination between the two sides on the matter.
Trade and Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan said in a statement: “This announcement opens a new horizon of cooperation where the two countries join forces to develop joint commercial ventures in strategic areas directly linked to economic security and future sectors such as artificial intelligence, nuclear energy, and LNG.”
“We will adhere to the principle of prioritising national interests and investing solely in commercially viable projects,” Kim said.
Speaking at the White House, Trump characterised South Korea’s plans as “one of the largest energy infrastructure investments in American history”.
The announcement followed a meeting between Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae Myung roughly one year ago at the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting held in South Korea, where they agreed on the creation of a $350 billion investment fund.
Under that agreement, $150 billion was allocated to the shipbuilding sector and $200 billion to other sectors. In return, the US announced it would reduce tariffs imposed on goods imported from South Korea from 25% to 15%.
Under the nuclear power project, South Korea’s state-controlled utility will build two plants in the US, while Pennsylvania-based Westinghouse Electric will construct six plants.
According to the South Korean government, this will mark the first instance in which a foreign country builds its own nuclear power plants in the US.
South Korean firms are also evaluating the possibility of acquiring a stake in Westinghouse as part of negotiations over sharing profits generated by the project.
South Korea additionally announced that it will build a $22.3 billion natural gas-fired power plant in Texas with a capacity of 6,472 megawatts.
The facility will be designed to supply electricity directly to nearby data centres. The project’s first phase is targeted to begin commercial operations in 2029, with full-capacity operations slated for 2032.
Seoul also disclosed that it had agreed to allow the US to receive 50% of the profits generated by the projects until South Korea recoups all of its investments.
After South Korea fully recovers its total investment amount, 90% of the profits will go to the US.
-
America2 weeks agoHow will Brazil’s presidential runoff work?
-
Europe2 weeks agoBerlin Left Party backs Israel’s right to exist for coalition pact
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoThe West is preparing for war not with Russia, but with its own people, French analyst Georges Kuzmanovic insists
-
Russia2 weeks ago71 EU lawmakers demand closure of Russian Houses in 15 member states
-
Europe2 weeks agoMI6 investigates potential leaks after former BND chief is detained
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russian figures discuss American stake in Nord Stream lines
-
Russia2 weeks agoDrone strike shuts down Yandex data centre in Russia’s Ryazan region
-
America1 week agoTrump weighs presidential memorandum to cut surging US diesel prices
