Asia
Pakistan Sadiq Khan’s souvenir to the Afghan Taliban
Some areas of Barmal district in Afghanistan’s Paktika province were targeted by the airstrikes of the Pakistan Army at a time when Mohammad Sadiq Khan, the country’s newly appointed representative for Afghanistan, was engaged in highly diplomatic and intensive talks with some high-ranking Taliban officials in the capital city, Kabul.
The Taliban claimed that more than 46 civilians (women and children) were killed as a result of this attack and denied Pakistan’s claim that the casualties were fighters of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Talian said that the majority of the casualties are civilians and Waziristan immigrants who lived in the areas in the last 10 years.
The Taliban have called this attack a clear violation of Afghan territory and have spoken of severe revenge. Also, the Taliban Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the charge d’affaires of the Pakistani Embassy in Kabul and handed him a letter with objectionable content.
In connection with this attack and its possible consequences, a few points can be speculated.
First,
The world’s silence regarding Pakistan’s daily light attack on Afghanistan is surprising. Not any of the countries in the world, not even the United Nations mentioned anything about the attack. Perhaps the world has realized that Pakistan has taken the risk of attacking Afghanistan not out of drunkenness but out of urgency and with the intention of suppressing TTP.
When the world has reached this understanding, the correctness of the Taliban’s claim of sheltering the TTP will become clearer than before, which will be to the detriment of this group. Pakistan’s weight in international relations can also be understood from the world’s silence, especially when the conflict in Afghanistan is in the middle.
On the other hand, it can also be understood that the Taliban are not important enough in the eyes of the world that an open violation of their sovereign territory would offend anyone, or a country and provoke a reaction. Of course, the loss of statelessness can also be strongly felt. If Afghanistan had a strong and legitimate government, maybe Pakistan would not have been so bold. In that case, if Pakistan had attacked, it would definitely have faced the overwhelming reaction of the countries.
Second,
The well-known movements against the Taliban, like the countries of the world and the United Nations, have given themselves to heavy silence. Indeed, some people have condemned, exactly those who do not want anything from the Taliban, except the reopening of girls’ schools, regardless of the quality of the content of the educational curriculum.
For example, the National Assembly for the Salvation of Afghanistan, the National Resistance Front, the Freedom Front, the Supreme Council of the National Resistance for Salvation, etc., are the current anti-Taliban movements that have avoided condemning the attack so far.
These groups know very well that TTP is walking under the shadow of Afghan Taliban and Pakistan’s concern is understandable in their opinion. Not only that, but they may also be happy with Pakistan’s attack, because while the relationship between Islamabad and the Taliban is strained, the problem of terrorists taking shelter in Afghanistan becomes more apparent, which will be to the detriment of the Kabul regime.
If the tension between Pakistan and the Taliban increases, the former may also establish contact with the opposing current groups, and the reaction to the recent attack can close the door of communication. Even the criticisms of the citizens are more towards the Taliban than towards Pakistan. It is not known how this group understands the silence of the world and the minimal reactions of its opposing forces and citizens.
Third,
Until now, Pakistan has tried to convince the Afghan Taliban to curb the TTP by resorting to dialogue, but it has not succeeded. The re-appointment of Sadiq Khan has no meaning except Islamabad giving importance to negotiations. Now, the attack on Paktika showed that the Pakistani army likes to avoid resorting to force in parallel with negotiations – what is not known is whether Islamabad will achieve its goal or not.
More importantly, by doing this, Pakistan showed that the Afghan Taliban, with the dismissal of Asif Durrani, the re-appointment of Sadiq Khan and his dispatch to Kabul, should not be trapped in the illusion that Islamabad is bound to sit around the negotiating table. To say that Sadiq Khan was not aware of the quality of the “souvenirs” he presented to the Taliban may not be true. Because the current Pakistani civilians and military have reached a consensus to curb TTP.
However, what is clear is Pakistan’s avoidance of a “decisive war” with the Taliban. For now, Islamabad’s preference is to launch sporadic airstrikes and at the same time keep the door open to dialogue. That’s it. Of course, the Taliban also hate to enter the war and instead, they seek to establish a government and extend the life of their rule, not to get involved with Pakistan, which was and is their serious supporter.
Fourth,
It should also be said about the possible response of the Taliban. Although this group has spoken of revenge, the fulfillment of the promise, if not impossible, is not very likely. The fact is that the Taliban do not have the ability to retaliate against Pakistan’s attack.
If they are determined to attack, this is different from border conflicts, which are largely unorganized. In this case, the next reaction will be followed by Islamabad, and again, not this country, but the Taliban will suffer. We all remember Pakistan’s immediate response to Iran’s missile attack. That act of Pakistan showed that it is no joke in defending its territory. It is unlikely that the Taliban did not understand this point.
Apart from that, the Taliban cannot be considered as Iran or Israel if the people of the world are watching the response of this group. As the attack on Taliban territory has not been reacted to, the silence of this group will not be accompanied by sarcasm but with the silence of the world.
If we pay close attention, Pakistan’s open attack reminds viewers, readers and listeners of Israel’s air attack on post-Assad Syrian territory. Therefore, as the new rulers of Damascus have been silent, the new rulers of Kabul will do the same.
But one factor can provoke the Taliban – Zalmay Khalilzad’s statements (Forer US peace envoy). He has claimed on his X page that the Taliban will probably respond. Khalilzad’s view towards Pakistan is very unfavorable. For this reason, a few days before the US sanctioned its missile program, it not only supported, but also demanded more sanctions. He is also unhappy with the imprisonment of Imran Khan, the former prime minister of Pakistan.
The return of Donald Trump to the White House may not benefit Pakistan, because his view is not favorable towards this country. Therefore, Khalilzad may encourage parts of the Taliban to attack.
There are already reports doing rounds in the media that Taliban and Pakistani border troops on Friday engaged in intense clashes in Dand-e-Patan district of Afghanistan’s Paktia province.
Local sources said that the clashes lasted for several hours, with both sides exchanging heavy fire. The Taliban and Pakistani officials did not comment on the incident so far. There is also no immediate report on the casualties.
Asia
South Korea emerges as major beneficiary of shifts in global arms market
Uncertainty in the global arms market, driven by the United States reassessing its relationships with allies and a broad rearmament drive across many countries, is creating major commercial opportunities for South Korea. According to an analysis published by Politico, Seoul has become the world’s fastest-growing supplier of military equipment.
The report said that large-scale conflicts around the world have created urgent demand for weapons as countries seek both to support allies and strengthen their own defenses against potential future confrontations. At the same time, changes in the US role within the global arms market have opened new opportunities for South Korean manufacturers. Statements and policy decisions by US President Donald Trump regarding NATO have led allies to question Washington’s reliability in times of crisis, increasing uncertainty across the global market. In addition, the diversion of a large share of US weapons supplies to the Middle East because of ongoing conflicts has placed further strain on already overstretched supply chains.
European countries increase purchases from South Korea
Faced with what Politico described as the Trump administration’s more distant approach toward allies, European countries in particular have accelerated arms purchases from South Korea. The publication noted that Seoul’s growing influence as a supplier has been driven largely by major defense contracts signed with Poland.
Following the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine, several Eastern European capitals, including Warsaw, transferred portions of their military inventories to Kyiv, relying on German support to replenish their arsenals. However, Berlin’s slow pace in replacing allied stockpiles generated frustration across the region.
South Korea emerged as an alternative supplier during this period and became a reliable source of military equipment for Eastern European countries. Poland became Seoul’s largest customer through a $13.7 billion agreement covering the purchase of tanks, rocket launchers, self-propelled howitzers and other military equipment.
“We were originally preparing against North Korea, but now we are ready to provide these solutions to customers around the world,” said Choo Hyung-kim, head of the Security Management Institute, a defense analysis organization affiliated with South Korea’s National Assembly.
Lack of political baggage gives Seoul an advantage
Politico reported that one of the greatest advantages enjoyed by South Korean defense companies is the absence of the “political baggage” associated with major arms exporters such as the United States, China, Russia and Israel.
According to the figures cited, the combined projected revenue of South Korea’s largest defense companies, including Hanwha Group, Hyundai Rotem, LIG Nex1 and Korea Aerospace Industries, is expected to reach approximately $37 billion in 2026. That would represent a fourfold increase from their combined revenues in 2021.
Meanwhile, an official from the office of former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol told the Yonhap news agency in 2024 that the scale of any weapons shipments to Ukraine would depend on Russia’s approach to its relationship with North Korea. Seoul later clarified that it had no plans to provide ammunition directly to Ukraine.
Asia
DeepSeek raises $7.4 billion in funding round, surpasses $50 billion valuation
Chinese artificial intelligence startup DeepSeek has raised more than 50 billion yuan ($7.4 billion) in its first funding round. According to Reuters, citing The Information, the company’s valuation has surpassed $50 billion.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the capital will be used to support the costly development of advanced artificial intelligence technologies.
According to the newspaper, citing sources familiar with the matter, investors valued the company at more than $50 billion. The valuation makes DeepSeek the most valuable AI startup in China.
DeepSeek founder Liang Wenfeng reportedly owned about 90% of the company before the funding round. Liang is said to have contributed roughly $3 billion during the fundraising process, making him the largest participant in the round.
According to Reuters, the transaction was structured in an unusual way that allows Liang to retain control of the company.
Rather than investing directly in DeepSeek, investors were required to invest through a limited partnership managed by a senior executive of the startup. Under the arrangement, investors were not granted voting rights. The report also said restrictions were placed on the use of invested funds for a period of five years.
The sole exception was the China National Artificial Intelligence Industry Investment Fund. The fund reportedly invested approximately $150 million directly in DeepSeek, allowing it to retain both voting rights and full discretion over its stake.
Other major investors in the funding round included Tencent, which invested approximately $1.5 billion, and Contemporary Amperex Technology, which invested about $740 million.
Bloomberg previously described the transaction as one of the largest fundraising rounds undertaken by a Chinese startup. According to the agency, the investment marks a new stage in the efforts of leading Chinese AI companies to compete with their US rivals.
DeepSeek told prospective investors that it would prioritize foundational and transformative AI research over short-term commercialization.
Based in the Chinese city of Hangzhou, DeepSeek emerged as one of Beijing’s most prominent AI companies after unveiling a more powerful and lower-cost model more than a year ago. The WSJ reported that interest surrounding the company has accelerated AI adoption in China and increased investor appetite for domestic startups.
Liang Wenfeng has previously said he intends to continue developing open-source AI models and ultimately aims to achieve artificial general intelligence (AGI). According to Bloomberg, the strategy continues an approach that has contributed to the spread of open models and influenced companies across China’s AI market, including Alibaba’s Qwen platform.
Bloomberg added that while global rivals such as OpenAI and Anthropic are exploring public offerings and revenue-generation strategies, DeepSeek has maintained its “research first” approach.
Asia
China issues white paper on global governance reform, urging support for UN-centered international system
China’s State Council Information Office on Wednesday released a white paper titled “A More Just and Equitable Global Governance: China’s Principles, Proposals and Actions.”
The white paper was issued to introduce China’s principles, proposals, and actions regarding global governance, to foster a broader consensus within the international community, to enable more effective responses to global challenges, and to build a more just and equitable global governance system.
The document states that global governance is a common endeavor concerning the well-being of all humanity, and that building a just and equitable global governance system is a shared vision long pursued by people around the world. It also emphasizes that China has always been an active participant, contributor, and builder of global governance.
According to the white paper, in the new era, Chinese President Xi Jinping has put forward the vision of building a community with a shared future for mankind. Advancing a global governance system shaped on the basis of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, Xi has called for true multilateralism to promote an equal and orderly multipolar world and an economic globalization that is inclusive and beneficial for all.
In 2025, Xi proposed the Global Governance Initiative (GGI). This initiative was designed to offer China’s solutions to two urgent questions of the era: What kind of global governance system should be established, and how should global governance be reformed and improved?
The white paper notes that shortly after its introduction, the GGI received support from approximately 160 countries and international organizations, with more than 60 countries joining the Group of Friends of the Global Governance Initiative. It states that the international community is of the view that the GGI sends a clear message: to defend multilateralism, join forces, and strive for a just future.
According to the white paper, the GGI aligns with the growing trend toward greater democracy in international relations and strengthens international confidence in the practice of multilateralism. The initiative provides a clear and actionable roadmap for the improvement of global governance, injecting valuable stability and positive energy into a turbulent world.
The white paper emphasizes that China proposed the GGI to accelerate the construction of a more just and equitable global governance system. The document states that firmly defending the authority and status of the United Nations is of fundamental importance for the effective implementation of this initiative.
According to the white paper, success will also depend on major countries acting with a sense of responsibility and all nations working together in unity to bridge deficits in peace and development. It states that rather than attempting to reinvent the wheel, all countries must firmly defend the international system with the UN at its core, maintain the international order based on international law, and uphold the fundamental norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.
In addition to the preface and conclusion, the white paper consists of five chapters: “Today’s World Faces Severe and Complex Challenges,” “The Global Governance Initiative Responds to the Challenges of Our Era,” “China’s Contribution to the Development of Global Governance,” “Directing the Course of Change Toward a Bright Future,” and “Advancing Hand in Hand at a Critical Juncture in History.”
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoTürkiye calls for Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty, highlights normalization steps with Yerevan
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
