Energy supplies that are reliable and economical are essential for the European economy, but European states do not have nearly enough energy resources to meet their needs. Currently, imports are required to provide almost 90% of the EU’s oil needs. The EU has lots of options for most of its energy imports; oil is abundant and can be traded and delivered around the world in a variety of ways. Russia is a country having tense relations with the EU. The EU’s measures to fight energy insecurity have both internal and external aspects. Within the EU, renewable energy and energy efficiency are encouraged, as well as the integration of European gas markets. Energy is at the core of the EU’s relationships with international bodies on the outside. Environmental challenges because of their energy consumption can also not be neglected.

The possibility of the worst stagflation crisis to reach energy importing economies has been increased due to the rising prices of oil and gas which is caused by the Ukraine crisis and Western views. Crude oil prices have seen to be increased after the secretary of the U.S stated that Washington has been in very active negotiations with European Union allies about the Russian oil embargo. U.S lawmakers assessed bipartisan legislation, while Europe planned strategies to minimize dependency on Russian Fossil fuels. It is difficult because the EU’S reliance on Russia for oil has fostered a sensitive issue in which guaranteed energy supplies and diplomatic independence have become a national political matter. Oil prices surged to above $139 a barrel while European gas prices reached €335 per megawatt-hour, up around €16 a year ago. The rise in these prices would generate higher inflation and will put a huge strain on consumers.

40 percent of the European Union country’s gas is being imported from Russia. According to the economists, if the high rates of energy will resume then it will lead European economies into recession. Oil price shocks of the 1970s are an example of triggering intense inflation and recession in most industrialized nations. Due to the ongoing Ukraine and Russia conflict, EU countries may suffer because the EU receives natural gas directly from Russia. Refugees will also affect the economy of the EU and the EU like every other country, has not even recovered from the economic crisis caused by COVID. The European Union strives to protect the environment and the livelihoods of its million citizens. It must broaden its sources of energy rather than restrict them to upgrade its economy and people’s lifestyles. Otherwise, this will not be the last catastrophe.

Sri Lanka is facing its worst economic crisis since its independence 1948. This is sparked by, lack of foreign currency reserves to pay most essential items of imports. In last two years Sri Lanka foreign currency reserves has fallen by 70%, this solution let to shutting down of three Embassies abroad. Authority has decided to extend cut of power supply due to unavailability of fuel to generate electricity. Therefore people of Sri Lanka will have to face 13 hours nationwide blackout. As result, most of the public sectors are in constant trouble to maintain their operations. Hospital are out of life saving drugs and suspending routine surgeries as well. The biggest medical facility in Sri Lanka, The National Hospital stared abandoning their patients and it has stopped routine diagnose testing. The economic crisis in Sri Lanka has forced the country to give up on its primary needs including healthcare. Everyone is talking about how bad things are in Sri Lanka inflation, high unemployment and shortage of everything from food to medicine. People are blaming current government over their corruption, bad governess and mismanagement of national resources.

In political context, India-China rivalry in Sri Lanka has been playing out for years now but the unprecedented economic crisis in the island nation has given it fresh push. Over the last few months, New Delhi and Beijing have both been going out of their way to help Colombo through loans, credit lines and even medicines to ensure surgeries, hoping to gain more influence in return. On the other hand, Sri Lanka feeling hesitation to reach IMF and relaying on its neighboring countries in term of economic assistance. Earlier this month, New Delhi provided Colombo with a $1 billion line of credit (LoC) for procuring food, medicines and other essential items. A day after India announced the $1 billion LoC, China’s Ambassador to Sri Lanka Qi Zhenhong said that, Beijing is considering a request from Colombo for a $2.5 billion assistance package, including a $1.5 billion credit line and $1 billion loan. So in the competition between two regional powers, Sri Lanka is the one, who enjoying the relief package. China is also pushing Sri Lanka to immediately conclude the China-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement (FTA) which the Chinese claim will benefit Colombo’s local market and products. Now future will decide which countries economic policies prevail over starving Sri Lanka.

On 24, February 2022, Russia lunched a full scale war on Ukraine. Ukraine as compared to Russia is quite smaller in size having limited military resources, therefore it cannot hold their defence and doomed in a week. Ukraine as a favorite child to western democracies received lot of military aid to stop Moscow because they cannot put boots on the battle field for some political reasons. After the cold response from the NATO and the United States, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s appealed, “Anyone who wants to join the defense of Ukraine, Europe and the world can come and fight side by side with the Ukrainians against the Russian war criminals.” Ukrainian authorities are welcoming the international individuals in their “international legion” brigade. Dozens of Americans, Canadians, and other foreigners are already trying to take up arms on the name of democracy and even they are motivated by the right wing white supremacy.

Moreover U.K. foreign secretary, Liz Truss showed her support for British nationals. The privatization of war and its support by the elected government is not a new concept. In Iraq and Afghanistan, US had used private militaries against enemies fighter to overcome their loses in the war. “Black water”, “New Century” and many more were the private militaries who got the contract over that period. From the perspective of state, private militaries are cheap and above the international law which can operate freely in the conflicted zone. It also reduce the cost of war and it also provide a way to politician to not stand accountable in front of people. The foreign fighters and private militias are often more useful in an insurgency and civil war, Ukraine may become like Afghanistan, Syria or Iraq. For guerrilla conflicts, the foreigners’ dedication is vital and their limited firepower is less of a disadvantage. The main problem in the privatization of the military is regarding the human rights violations, discrimination between combats and non-combat is very tough to make during conflicts, greed and revenge also dictate private militias to miss-use their power over civilians. In this scenario, rational thinking should be prevail in Ukraine war and international community should discourage such irresponsible privatization of war, and take some necessary actions to prevent foreign fighters to enter the Ukraine for the sake of innocent people. They should learn lesson from the distractive war of Afghanistan and Middle East, where private militaries and non-state actors were used to gain political objective by the parties in the conflict.

With the increase in trend of acquisition of nuclear weapons by states, the nuclear theft has become a serious threat to regional and global security. In February 2022, two Indians among eight has arrested by Nepal police for illegal trade of Uranium, last year two similar cases of the same nature were disclosed. It is not something new, since 1994; there are a number of cases that have been reported in which India found of stealing and smuggling radioactive material like Uranium. During the past two decades, an alarming amount over 200 kilograms of uranium have been stolen from Indian facilities. India has appeared as a potential spot of illegal trade of nuclear material and technology for state and non-state actors.  It poses serious risks of nuclear terrorism and concerns for state security.

Pakistan and China share borders with India have raised their concerns regarding recurring incidents of nuclear material theft in India. China has requested all the countries to work together for non-proliferation that focus nuclear safety. Pakistan has called out international community for rigorous investigation to guarantee nuclear safety and security. The trafficking and theft of Uranium can lead to manufacturing of improvised nuclear and exposure devices as well as nuclear proliferation. India is a member state of United Nations Security Council and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), their core objective is to make states abide by the measures for the prevention of nuclear materials falling into wrong hands. The nuclear facilities in India are not following strict security standards and are vulnerable to black marketing. It is because there are not regulations within the country to acquire nuclear material for any puposes. In addition to that, India is not complying with IAEA requirements to secure its nuclear materials and reserves. The nuclear safeguard analysts have urged the agency to consider a strict monitoring system for radioactive materials in India.

India is also a major beneficiary of Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and by intimation New Delhi must ensure a strong surveillance system over nuclear safety. Despite of the fact that India has failed to comply with the conditions, there is western silence over the issue which is dissatisfying. The role of the IAEA is of significant importance to play in India’s poor mechanism and the existence of a black market for nuclear materials within India. Nuclear security is a national issue but nuclear threats and the possible effects of nuclear terrorism can go beyond borders and also can be used by non-state actors for terrorism and harmful intentions. Therefore, IAEA must consider the grievances of India’s neighboring countries and respond to the occurrence of back to back India’s Uranium theft incidents. An accounting system must be implemented that maintains a check on Uranium exports for greater interests of global and nuclear security. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) should follow its standards independently and a regulatory framework can be instigated for scrutinizing India’s nuclear activities in order to fulfill the gaps of nuclear safety and security.

Over the period of time, center of world economics and politics has been shifting from West to East. Resurgence of China and India as economic powers and their influence in Indian Ocean and South China Sea respectably opened window of opportunity for Asian struggling economies. The South China Sea in particular is a boiling pot of potential conflict and economic activities at the same time because of its strategic location and natural resources, with oil reserves of several billion barrels, an estimated nine hundred trillion cubic feet of natural gas. China’s claims over territories in South China Sea and its military buildup in Indian Ocean means that it will likely be a pivot point for global war and peace for the foreseeable future.

Robert Kaplan a well-known journalist and political commentator, argued in his latest book “Asia’s Cauldron”, he turns to the South China Sea, a waterway that he describes as being “as central to Asia as the Mediterranean is to Europe”. If we look at the geographical significant of Asian Cauldron, it contains part of the Pacific Ocean, the South China Sea covers an area from Singapore and the Malacca Straits to Taiwan. It consists of more than 200 small islands, rocks and coral reefs, about three dozen of which are permanently above water. These are subject to overlapping claims from China, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines. China as a big player in global economy lays claim to almost the entire South China Sea by feature of what is known as the “nine-dash line”. The sea is fast becoming “the most contested body of water in the world”, the main arena for geopolitical competition between a rising China and a US. With the rise of Dragon, the old order of American military unipolarity in the waters of the western Pacific is slowly fading. US strategic partnership with Japan, South Korea and India in Eastern hemisphere is the key to counter Chinese economic dominance. US motives to contain China is supplementary based on the security reasons rather than economic. China’s strategic aim must inevitably be to “exercise de facto hegemony over their own Asian Mediterranean”. Beijing wants to achieve its strategic goal while maintaining cordial relations with Western powers and tempering anxiety in Southeast Asia.

However, Modern China dominates world trade, following major reforms introduced in 1978 that were more focused on market-oriented economic development. The country’s economy is ranked at second position in the world after the United States, but China has been the world’s biggest exporter of goods since 2009 to up till now. China’s economy jumped 18.3% in 2021, compared to earlier years. In 2022, according to open data available on internet, China’s GDP worth is 14.236 trillion USD and it is rapidly increasing and sustains the 5.7% of economic growth bar. Moreover, China will overtake the US economy by 2028. The COVID-19 Pandemic and corresponding economic fallout have certainly tipped economic rivalry between China and West, and it ended in China’s favor. In Asian hemisphere, Japan is set to remain on 3rd position in World economic ranking with the GDP of 5.O6 trillion USD. In South Asia, India is also competing in economic race with 3.25 trillion USD worth of GDP. After overviewing the table, when Global economy is considered, Asian region is the most significant part of the world.
Apart from economic emergence, Cauldron States are perceiving the threat in South China Sea from China and its dream to be World super power. Therefore, they are pushing China, with an attempt to dominate the area even while acknowledging the presence and claims of other states in the South China Sea. China’s domination in the South China Sea would certainly clear the way for key Chinese air and naval influence throughout the Indian and Pacific Oceans. In that scenario, the US is at the center of the Asia-Pacific’s political and defense affairs which cannot be ignored. While most Southeast Asian states are cultivating their economic relations with China, they acknowledge the US’s role and in fact want the United States to remain involved in regional affairs. If only to be an effective balance to the rising economic and military power of China. The military superiority of the US is expected to offset China’s geographic, demographic and economic advantage.

On the other hand, China expanding her influence by relying on relatively weak economic states to maintain its superiority in the region. China is practicing the Anti-Area Access Denial (2A-AD) strategy in South China Sea and beyond. Over the last two decades, Russian technologies combined with China’s efforts, including industrial espionage has gradually enhanced the capabilities of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to challenge U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific region. The Anti-Aria Access Denial (A2/AD) is the strategy, with the aim of keeping out U.S. military intervention in its immediate areas of concern, including the disputed waters in the region.
As above mentioned Pros and Cons, Asian Cauldron has its own significance in World economy and politics, alongside it would be boiling pot for potential conflict which might create uncertainty in international Affairs. US trade war with China, and US support to Taiwan as autonomic State are the circumstances of it. Thug of war between two world best economic powers might leave negative impact on the weaker states of the region in coming years.

Introduction:

The current repetition of interest in disinformation is not because the idea is innovative, but rather there is a growing consent that the digital revolution has greatly enhanced public vulnerability to manipulation by information, therefore, action needs to be taken to counter it. The related concept of propaganda has been around far longer, but many people see this as a means of driving engagement and mobilization for social or political change, rather than simply to mislead. The relatively new term ‘fake news’ covers a far wider range of content, often with financial motivations rather than political ones. Disinformation is the new tactical method in modern conflicts to create an environment where institutions can justify their violence, Governments can build their narratives and non-state actors preach their political ideology. Misinformation and fake news are new bombshells which are lunched from social platforms that leave impact on the human minds in large numbers. Modern militaries and actors in the conflict called this Hybrid warfare that is more effective and impactful than the actual military operations. Psychological operations by using the power of social media have become the part of military strategies in the realm of defense policies.

Disinformation Impact on Human lives: 

According to the World Risk Poll, “fake news” topped the list of concerns for internet users in 2022. Military and civilian actors alike have made gainful use of disinformation in order to control the narrative regarding the conflict. The deep civil disintegration individuals of conflict settings amplifies the effect of such disinformation by creating echo chambers that intensify confirmation bias and accelerate the uncritical sharing of inaccurate events or reports. Practically, conflict-affected persons may be especially vulnerable to the ill effects of disinformation due to their frantic living conditions, elevated exposure to violence and lack of access to trustworthy sources of information. Compounding the potential for harm is the fact that conflict environments have proven especially fertile incubators for disinformation, as evident by its recent flourishing nature in Israel and Palestine, Libya, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict:

In the recent confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, CNN reported that, “The Russian assault on Ukraine is not just an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation that is producing horrific destruction and civilian torment. It is also the biggest war of the modern misinformation era”, some scholars argued that, Russia’s misinformation offensive impedes diplomatic efforts to end the war. Russian state media has portrayed Russian’s as victims of the war and covered the invasion as an attempt to liberate the Ukrainian population even as bombs and missiles rain down on civilians. On diplomatic forum, Russians has been denying the existence of war. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov claimed with a straight face after talks with his Ukrainian counterpart in Turkey which, not surprisingly failed, that “Russia did not attack Ukraine”. It is an approach that has multiple payoffs for Moscow. It can be used as cover for atrocities and potential war crimes like the attack on the maternity hospital. Misinformation also plays into the Kremlin’s narrative about the nature of the war, that it is the victim, which is served up to Russians on state media networks. The Russian claims might be absurd but they also find an audience among conspiracy theorists on social media and can be used by propagandists, even in Western countries to cast doubt on the credibility of leaders building a united front against Moscow.

The disinformation fight:

The Oversight Board was created in 2020 by Zuckerberg but it is an independent body made up of former world leaders, activists and top lawyers to make decisions on the most significant content moderation challenges on Facebook and Instagram. Disinformation and misinformation are major challenges on these platforms and have always been important issues for the board because of the wide use of these social applications. Although social media companies have a big impact on people’s lives but the disinformation fight cannot be solved by Big Tech alone. United States and UN should step out to mitigate these challenges on domestic level as well as on international platforms. In Pakistan, Government had passed Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), through ordinance to handle fake news and disinformation on social media. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) takes a remarkably lenient approach to such misinformation actions and stratagems with one exception. Combatants may not resort to perfidy, defined in Article 37 of Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions as “inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence”. Belligerents thus may not, for example, disingenuously accept a truce or announce their capitulation, feign injury or illness, or claim civilian or other protected status.

In the next paragraph of Article 37, however, explicitly permits ruses as “acts which are intended to mislead an adversary or induce a person to act recklessly but which infringe no rule of international law applicable in armed conflict and which are not perfidious”. While this particular provision only pertains to international armed conflicts (IACs), ruses are likewise licensed in non-international armed conflicts under customary international law. But modern applications of misinformation or more accurately, disinformation call into question its reflexive characterization in IHL as a ruse for several reasons. First, while ruses are presented in source materials as being intended to mislead an “enemy” or “adversary”, disinformation campaigns during armed conflict today are instead often oriented primarily towards the civilian population. Under that obligation of IHL, Militaries can mislead their enemies on the battle field, but they cannot misguide or mislead the population in International armed conflicts.