Introduction

In order to address the development issues that middle-income countries (MICs) face in the contemporary global economy, Morocco’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs hosted a high-level ministerial conference on Middle Income Countries (MICs) on 5-6 February, 2024. The conference’s theme was “Addressing Development Challenges in Middle-Income Countries in a Changing World.” The meeting in collaboration with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa was attended by 32 countries, 23 UN development agencies, and other international and regional institutions. The MICs still face a number of challenges, such as high rates of poverty, various forms of inequality and obstacles in attaining sustainable development. Therefore, the goal of this high-level ministerial conference was to come up with actionable solutions and innovative approaches to enhance cooperation among the countries.

Importance of Middle-Income Countries

The World Bank defines middle-income countries as economies with gross national incomes (GNI) per capita ranging from $1,136 to $13,845. MICs are comprised of both upper- and lower-middle-income nations. The MICs account for around one-third of the world’s GDP and play important role in global growth. Moreover, the world’s middle-income countries contain 75% of the total population and 62% of poor people, making them a diversified group in terms of size, population, and income level. For that matter, it is crucial to accelerate the efforts for SDGSs in order to achieve sustainable development and to tackle the inequalities by 2030. For the world economy to continue growing and being stable, MICs are essential. Sustainable growth and development in MICs particularly in areas like international trade, sustainable energy development, food and water security, poverty reduction, and global cross-border concerns like climate change will have a positive global influence. At the “Addressing Development Challenges in Middle-Income Countries in a Changing World” coference, the MICS have reaffirmed their commitment to promoting collective interests and providing realistic, inventive, and effective solutions to the challenges faced by Middle-Income Countries in attaining sustainable development.

Economic Growth: MICs represent a significant portion of the global population and its economic influence is also growing. As they achieve sustainable development, their economies will become more stable and contribute to global economic growth. This translates to increased trade i.e. rise in demand of goods and services, stronger partnerships and a diversified global market. This will benefit people at large scale by opening up new options for both developing and developed countries.

Social Progress and Stability: Focusing on sustainable development will result in more empowered and healthier communities, which will contribute to the overall stability. By formulating and implementing strong social policies for healthcare and education, and improving economic possibilities within MICs will lead to social change and a cross-border ripple effect. Furthermore, a more just and inclusive society will emerge from addressing poverty and inequality in MICs, leading to positive global trends.

Climate Resilience: Many MICs are rich in natural resources and biodiversity but they necessitate responsible management. It is important that MICs adopt sustainable practices and build a strong foundation to withstand the challenges of climate change in order to ensure a sustainable and prosperous future. In addition to safeguarding their own populations and economies, MICs by prioritizing climate resilience will also support international efforts to mitigate climate change.

Conclusion

The MICS has urged development partners, international financial institutions, Multilateral Development Banks, and stakeholders to improve the fiscal space of developing and middle-income countries. As a result, these countries will be able to secure concessional and non-concessional finance in an efficient manner. The Middle-income countries contribute significantly to global GDP and other trends, but they also face considerable problems. Current frameworks and tools are inadequate for meeting the needs of the people of these countries. Therefore, coherent and consistent policies at both the national and international levels are critical, that also align with the unique demands specifically in areas like human development and climate change, to effectively handle the effects of existing crises and ensure long-term sustainability in Middle-income countries. By working together, MICs can accelerate progress towards sustainable development through knowledge sharing platforms, cooperative initiatives on common challenges, capacity building programs, and data-driven policy making.

In an attempt to mediate a new ceasefire in Israel’s war on Gaza, which has persisted despite a ceasefire proposal, the United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in Saudi Arabia on February 5, 2024 at the first spot of his fifth visit to the Middle-East since Israel launched its deadly war on Gaza. The United Nations reports that 60% of Gaza’s infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed and that 85% of the population is internally displaced due to the war, which is also causing severe shortages of basic necessities including food, drinking water and medical supplies.

According to the United States Department of State, “The US Secretary will continue diplomatic efforts to reach an agreement that includes a humanitarian pause that will allow for sustained, increased delivery of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza.” In reality, over 28,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel’s relentless bombing, the most of them being women and children. It is unfortunate that the United States has not openly condemned the ongoing genocide against the Palestinian people. The United Stated and its allies in the West are actually still unwilling to demand a ceasefire. It is important to understand that the situation in Gaza is not just a humanitarian crisis, but peace and stability in the region are also at risk. This will have an impact not only on the Middle East, but also for world geopolitics.

The ongoing Israeli war has exacerbated the position of Arab countries, as several countries have renewed diplomatic relations with Israel. At first, the majority of these nations reacted carefully, refraining from condemning Israel’s invasion. However, public outrage has put pressure on the governments, leading to a noticeable shift in their stance. Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan called a meeting in Riyadh with the foreign ministers of Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Hussein al-Sheikh, the Secretary-General of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), after Blinken’s Middle East regional visit. According to Saudi state news agency SPA, the Arab ministers stressed “the importance of taking irreversible steps to implement the two-state solution, referring to Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state” and the necessity of an immediate and total ceasefire in Gaza. To conclude, the regional countries should abandon their biased support, demand a complete cease-fire in Gaza and begin advocating for a solution that reduces the sufferings caused by Israel. The international community, which positions itself as the champion of human rights, should call for an end to the Israel’s hostilities and acts of aggression and brutality in Gaza.

The beginning of this year was marked with escalating tensions between Iran and Pakistan. Early in January, an aggressive military action took place in which Iran launched missile attacks within Pakistan’s Balochistan province in hopes to target an Iran based terrorist group “Jaish al Adl”, this attack resulted in casualties including minors.
This faction, with known activities in Pakistan, has been linked to violent incidents within Iran’s southeastern regions. It emerged from a larger separatist organization “Jundallah” and claims to fight for the Baloch minority in Iran, advocating for enhanced living standards and greater rights.
Pakistan’s military response came swiftly, employing an array of weaponry to engage targets within Iranian territory associated with Baloch insurgent groups such as the BLA and BLF. The counterstrike, as per Iranian reports, resulted in several fatalities, none of whom were Iranian citizens.

As Israel’s bombardment of Gaza escalates tension across the region, the increased threat of a full-blown conflict has sent Islamabad and Tehran scrambling to pull back and rebuild diplomatic relations. On 29 January 2024 Iran’s foreign minister Hossein Amirabdollahian landed in Islamabad for “in-depth talks” with his Pakistani counterpart, Jalil Abbas Jilani both seeking to calm relations after carrying out tit-for-tat air strikes on each other’s territories. Amid the escalating tensions and the situation in Gaza, it has become crucial for Pakistan and Iran the two self-proclaimed superpowers of South Asia and the Middle East to build a facilitating relationship and obliterate any other possibilities for future conflict. In this article we will explore potential avenues that both the nations can, and have agreed to work on to strengthen their ties.

Economic Interests:

Both Iran and Pakistan have significant economic ties, with legal trade worth around $1.5 billion per year, further working to improve trade is crucial for both the nations to improve relations. After the January 29th meeting, both the nations have embarked on an ambitious journey to strengthen their economic relationship, with the target set to escalate their mutual trade to approximately $5 billion within the next five years. This vision is reinforced by the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline initiative, poised to address Pakistan’s critical energy demands while securing a dependable customer for Iran’s abundant natural gas resources. The successful completion of this gas pipeline project is viewed as a milestone in strengthening the economic interdependence of both the countries.

There is also a focus on transport connectivity, which is crucial for facilitating trade and people-to-people exchanges, enhancing the potential for economic development in border areas. The two nations have recognized the importance of institutional mechanisms like the Joint Economic Commission (JEC) and Joint Trade Committee (JTC) for fostering closer cooperation. dialogue is underway to establish border markets to facilitate ease in trade and the movement of commodities, potentially catalyzing the growth of border regions and fostering broader economic cooperation in the area. This plan also aims at the elimination of trade hurdles and the implementation of a Comprehensive Trade Agreement to simplify the trade of a wider array of goods and services. Moreover the scope of this cooperation also includes joint developmental endeavors and investment opportunities, with Iran demonstrating considerable interest in expanding collaboration in diverse sectors. This includes fortifying banking operations and commercial interactions, aimed at not only increasing economic progress in both nations but also contributing to the stability and prosperity of the larger region.

Military Cooperation:

In response to the missile strikes exchanged between the two countries, Iran and Pakistan have agreed to broaden their political and security cooperation to confront terrorism. This includes deploying liaison officers in their respective border towns of Turbat and Zahedan to strengthen ongoing security and intelligence cooperation. Regular high-level meetings at both ministerial and military levels are planned to prevent future misunderstandings and ensure smooth communication. Furthermore Iran and Pakistan have recently agreed to deepen their defense and security collaboration, highlighted by the signing of a significant Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Pakistan Maritime Security Agency (PMSA) and the border guards of Iran. This agreement marks a pivotal move towards enhancing mutual cooperation in critical sectors like maritime security, anti-terrorism efforts, and boosting regional economic links.
The agreement places a strong emphasis on securing maritime regions, a priority for both nations due to their strategic maritime locations and the crucial role of sea routes in global commerce and energy transit. Central to the MoU is a shared commitment to combat terrorism. This encompasses intelligence sharing, joint strategies to counter cross-border terrorist activities, and reinforcing the capacity to handle maritime security threats. The MoU also seeks to improve economic ties through enhanced maritime channels, which includes developing port infrastructures and promoting maritime trade routes, thus contributing to regional economic growth. The agreement potentially opens doors for combined naval drills and shared training programs, aimed at improving operational synergy and mutual understanding between the naval forces of both countries. It extends beyond counterterrorism to address other security issues like piracy, human trafficking, narcotics trade, and illegal fishing activities. The enhanced maritime cooperation between Iran and Pakistan is a significant step towards ensuring peace and stability in the Arabian Sea and the broader Indian Ocean area.

Combating Drug, Weapon and Human Trafficking:

Iran and Pakistan share a border of over 900 kilometers. Due to a volatile situation in Afghanistan there is an influx in trafficking along the Pak Iran border. Both the nations need to collaborate to tackle this issue in order to strengthen their ties. In the past Iran and Pakistan have made substantial efforts to strengthen their cooperation in combating drug trafficking. This collaboration is particularly vital given the challenges posed by the increase in poppy production in the region. To address these issues effectively, both countries have emphasized the importance of enhanced border cooperation. Both countries are focused on improving the exchange of information and intelligence to effectively combat drug trafficking. Efforts are being made to enhance border security, particularly in areas prone to smuggling activities. This includes identifying and addressing narcotics demand in regions close to the border. There is a willingness to conduct joint operations against drug traffickers. Additionally, Iran has offered to train Pakistani forces, reflecting a commitment to share expertise and resources in the fight against drug trafficking. The approach to combating the drug problem includes addressing production, demand, supply, and consumption, recognizing that overcoming these challenges can enhance overall societal peace. The commitment to mutual assistance and strengthening relations and cooperation between the anti-narcotics forces of both countries highlights the shared understanding of the seriousness of the drug problem and the need for collaborative efforts.

Controlling refugees:

Iran and Pakistan, both face similar challenges due to the influx of undocumented Afghan refugees, both the nations can collaborate effectively to manage this issue and strengthen their ties. As Pakistan has been successful in the past a key component of this collaboration involves sharing experiences and strategies to address the refugee crisis, including providing humanitarian aid and support for sustainable reintegration. Both countries can work together, Coordinating efforts to provide humanitarian assistance to Afghan refugees. This includes addressing basic needs such as food, shelter, and healthcare and Working with international organizations like the UNHCR and IOM to ensure effective management and support for refugees. Both nations need to develop programs for sustainable return and reintegration of refugees in Afghanistan, in collaboration with the Afghan government and international partners, Sharing data and conducting joint research to understand the dynamics of refugee movements and their impact on host communities.
By working together on these fronts, Iran and Pakistan can not only address the immediate needs of Afghan refugees but also contribute to the stability and development of both the regions.

Cultural and Media collaboration:

Pakistan and Iran are taking steps to enhance their cultural and media collaboration, with a focus on joint film productions. One such significant project is a film about the renowned poet Allama Muhammad Iqbal, a shared cultural heritage of both countries. This initiative is part of a broader effort to develop cultural and artistic ties between Iran and Pakistan. The film project was discussed during a meeting between cultural representatives of both countries on the sidelines of a meeting of the Ministers of Culture of Islamic countries in Doha. This collaboration indicates a commitment to not only strengthen bilateral relations but also to celebrate and promote shared cultural legacies

Introduction

On January 30, 2024, the Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. signed two significant agreements with Vietnamese officials intended to boost maritime security cooperation in the South China Sea, while on a state visit to Hanoi, Vietnam. The agreement between Vietnam and the Philippines came at a time when Beijing and the Philippines have been engaged in tense standoffs in the disputed seas in recent months, and Chinese ships fired water cannons at Philippine vessels. The agreement is being recognized as a pillar of maritime security and deepening of the strategic cooperation between Vietnam and Philippines. This will also support the joint efforts of the coastguards of the two nations to manage and prevent incidents in the disputed waters. Moreover, this partnership seeks to create guidelines for handling future conflicts, avoid misconceptions, and mitigate tense situations. However, tensions are still high along the strategically important waterway, with over $3 trillion in yearly ship commerce. China claims nearly the whole South China Sea, whereas Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei have also competing claims to different islands and reefs.

Philippines Military Modernization

The Philippine government has approved ‘Re-Horizon 3,’ a new plan for military modernization that could cost up to two trillion pesos ($35 billion) over ten years. The Re-Horizon 3, which was signed by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., is the result of a modernization project that was started in 2013 and was divided into three phases due to China’s presence in the South China Sea. The adoption of the Re-Horizon 3 plan is being considered as a significant move in the Philippines’ national security. The acquisition of modern weapons and equipment will help to counter threats, particularly that are emerging in the South China Sea. The primary objective of the strategy is to enhance the country’s capabilities in critical areas such as domain awareness, connectivity, surveillance, reconnaissance, and intelligence gathering.

The Philippines aims to improve its monitoring of territorial waters and airspace to better respond to any threats. Improved links will allow for better communication and coordination among all the forces, while surveillance and reconnaissance technologies will give real-time intelligence. The Re-Horizon 3 plan is an important step towards strengthening the Philippine defense system, but it is only one part of a larger effort due to the complex and evolving geopolitical landscape.

International Cooperation

In January 2024, a major advancement in the United States and the Philippines military cooperation was made when the two nations carried out their second joint patrol in the South China Sea. As a Maritime Cooperative Activity (MCA), the joint patrol comprised four Philippine Navy ships and four U.S. Navy ships, USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70), USS Princeton (CG-59), USS Kidd (DDG-100), and USS Sterett (DDG-104). During their combined drills in the South China Sea, two destroyers of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy monitored Philippine and American ships. The United States and the Philippines’ activities were denounced by Chinese Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin as “muscle-flexing, provocative military activities” after the MCA, calling on both nations to stop acting irresponsibly and to respect regional countries to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea. Despite China’s objections, the Philippines is open to wider international cooperation for patrols in the disputed South China Sea. They have previously collaborated with the United States and Australia, and further partnerships are planned with Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada, and France. While China accuses them of meddling, the Philippines counters that China’s own actions pose the real threat to regional stability.

Conclusion

The South China Sea issue between China and the Philippines continues to escalate due to tough rhetoric. In response to recent incidents, such as the reported collision of Philippine and Chinese vessels on Second Thomas Shoal, both countries responded strongly. China’s official media issued a warning against provocations, and China was accused of manipulating information by the Philippines. Despite similar issues with China, Vietnam is developing security agreements with the Philippines, which could further exacerbate tensions. In January 2024, China held military drills in the South China Sea, while the United States and the Philippines also conducted joint exercises in the same waters. The high-seas clashes are raising worries of a wider conflict. Therefore, in this complicated geopolitical situation it is crucial to reach a peaceful resolution through dialogue and diplomacy with continued efforts and dedication from all sides to avoid and unintentional escalation and miscalculations in future.

Background on North Korea’s Weapons Testing

North Korea’s pursuit of missile and nuclear capabilities has been a central aspect of its national defense strategy for decades, placing it at the heart of numerous international crises and negotiations. The country’s journey towards becoming a nuclear-armed state began in earnest in the late 20th century, but it has seen significant accelerations and provocations in the 21st century, punctuated by key milestones that have shaped its current posture on the global stage.

Key Milestones in North Korea’s Weapons Development:

1980s to 1990s: North Korea launches its missile development program’s first tests of ballistic missiles. The technologies established during this epoch served to lay the foundation that would hold for its future successes in missile technology.
2006: North Korea tests its very first nuclear weapon that electrifies the world and without doubt sets out its stall to amass nuclear weapons. Although the test signifies North Korea’s entrance to the nuclear club, it is done while the condemnation from the rest of the world approaches universal dimensions.
2016-2017: Duran 62 Intense testing activities such as several nuclear tests conducted by North Korea and approximately 13 launches of ballistic missiles led to a sharp growth in the firing range and potential of capabilities, including intercontinental ballistic missiles that reach theoretically the United States.
2018-2019: An interim de-freezing sign in the relations, North Korea practices diplomacy with the United States and South Korea, which is the impromptu restraint of testing activity. Nevertheless, discussions tend to break down and more testing is undertaken.
2020-2023: North Korea increased its arsenal with frequent missile testing since a new stunner was demonstrated in virtually all sub-class of missiles, including short-range, submarine-launched, and hypersonic missile tests being humongous and the array has displayed such drastic sophistication.

Escalation at Sea: North Korea’s Latest Missile Tests and the Call to Arms

In a series of actions that have raised tensions in Northeast Asia and made North Korea more famous for using military power to cause trouble, the country has fired another offshore cruise missile. In addition to the fourth incident with these kinds of launches in Pyongyang in 2024, this latest act of defiance is one of many that have been happening to test weapons. Of course, the fact that the regime has been testing weapons steadily and without stopping can also be seen as a sign of a determination that has been hidden.
When North Korea’s strength is on full display, its leader, Kim Jong Un, has sent a chilling message to speed up war preparations, especially for making North Korea’s navy stronger. His calls were made while a full review of naval projects was being carried out in a meeting on the west coast of the country, which was set up in Nampho. Kim Jong Un’s way of ignoring North Korea’s naval forces doesn’t show how important it is to strengthen regional force posture in three ways. This shows that Kim Jong Un is determined to make his country stronger and more militarised. It also shows that he is open about his plans to use military showmanship as a diplomatic tool to build a nuclear-armed superpower. This goal is a well-thought-out response to growing threats from other countries, especially from Pyongyang’s point of view, especially against the US, South Korea, and Japan, which work together to boost their military power, in part because North Korea is making progress on its nuclear weapons and missile programs. Encouraging the spread of naval warfare through North Korea in particular is a threat to regional stability that affects the security problems of North Korea’s neighbors and the whole world. One problem with this is that as Kim’s country’s military gets ready in this way, the effects go far beyond the seas where these missiles land, causing many people to worry about how they will affect peace, order, and safety in a region that has a history of tensions. It’s important to note that 2024 is another step in North Korea’s determined pursuit of nuclear and missile technology. It will also mark the fourth round of tests of cruise missiles. This escalation is important not only because it happens so often, but also because it shows how strong technology is. When compared to ballistic missiles, cruise missiles pose very different risks because they fly much lower and can’t follow a straight line. Their development shows that North Korea wants to get around missile defence systems and gives them more short-term strategic advantages in a possible relationship landscape.

But Pyongyang’s actions this year make it clear that they want to improve their ability to strike, their tactical and strategic options, and send a very clear message to their enemies about how determined they are to protect their sovereignty through advanced military means. The focus on cruise missiles and the ongoing development of nuclear capabilities show a dual strategy: making it easier to attack and send defensive signals, which makes things more dangerous for its peers and the world as a whole.

Regional and International Response
Reactions from South Korea, the United States, and Japan
South Korea, the US, and Japan were all worried about this and called the tests a threat that didn’t help the peace process in the region. Following the United States’ lead, South Korea has increased its monitoring and armed readiness, doing joint military drills to improve its ability to defend itself. To show how serious it is about protecting South Korea and Japan, strategic assets have been sent to make a show of force and also to prepare for a possible attack from North Korea. Japan has also been pushing for tougher international sanctions against North Korea, and it works closely with its allies, like South Korea and the US, to make their missile defence systems stronger. The United Nations and other international groups have also taken notice of North Korea’s missile drills. When the UN Security Council doesn’t like North Korea’s missile and nuclear tests, it always uses sanctions against the country. This is because sanctions make the Pyongyang government very angry and make them stop the testing. On the other hand, it has become harder to agree on new sanctions or measures once it has been reached because permanent members have different views. A kaleidoscope of regional forums, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), has called for peacefully denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. These forums have also made it clear that tensions should be resolved through dialogue.

Conclusion

North Korea’s recent increase in weapons tests, along with its efforts to build a navy armed with nuclear weapons, marks a turning point in the security situation in Northeast Asia. Kim Jong Un’s change in strategy not only shows that he wants to be more aggressive in the military, but it also makes things more difficult for peace efforts around the world and in the region. The responses from South Korea, the US, Japan, and international groups show that everyone is worried and ready to use a mix of diplomatic, military, and economic strategies to stop North Korea from acting provocatively. As the world tries to figure out what North Korea’s growing power means, the best way forward is to find a good balance between dialogue and deterrence. Peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula can only be achieved through long-term international cooperation, creative diplomacy, and a dedication to resolving tensions peacefully. The situation makes it clear that all parties need to start talking to each other in a constructive way right away if they want to denuclearize and make peace last in the region. There will be many problems along the way, but there will also be chances for peace to win out over conflict.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), an intergovernmental organization comprising eight member states, has emerged as a pivotal force in shaping the geopolitical landscape of Eurasia. Since its inception in 2001, the SCO has played a crucial role in fostering regional cooperation, promoting economic integration, and addressing shared security challenges. For Pakistan, a full member of the SCO since 2017, the organization has been a catalyst for growth, development, and enhanced global engagement.

The legislation is being considered as a global standard for governments seeking to use AI’s potential advantages while mitigating the threats associated with it. Amid a highly fragmented landscape of rules and regulations worldwide, the EU bill is regarded as the most comprehensive attempt to date to regulate AI.

Economic Transformation and Infrastructure Development

Within the SCO, an institution that strongly prioritizes energy cooperation among its member states, there has been discussion about cooperation in the energy sector. Joint ventures for energy production and exploration, as well as support for renewable energy initiatives, fall under the purview of the SCO and align with the overarching goals of fostering sustainable development and fortifying economic ties. Pakistan’s incorporation into regional and international commercial networks has also been made easier by the SCO. It seeks to increase commerce among SCO member states by lowering tariffs on a variety of items. Furthermore, the SCO has played a significant role in advancing regional connectivity by means of programs like the SCO Road Transport Agreement and the SCO Railway Cooperation Plan.

Energy Security and Resource Diversification

Cooperation in the energy sector has been debated within the SCO, an organization that places a strong emphasis on energy cooperation among its member states. Within the framework of the SCO, joint ventures in energy exploration and production, together with assistance for renewable energy programs, are in line with the larger objectives of strengthening economic connections and promoting sustainable development. This can help Pakistan in combatting it’s needs for energy.

Security and Shared Challenges:

Pakistan’s security concerns are deeply intertwined with the broader security dynamics of the region. The SCO, with its diverse membership and focus on regional cooperation, provides a valuable platform for Pakistan to address these concerns and collaborate with other member states on shared security challenges. Additionally, major actors in the SCO including Russia share a good relationship with India. Matters of cooperation can be ensured through platform of SCO to ensure peace in Asia.

Combating Terrorism and Extremism:

Pakistan’s battle against terrorism and extremism heavily relies on the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) of the SCO. Pakistan can effectively tackle these threats thanks to RATS, which makes intelligence sharing, cooperative exercises, and capacity building among member states easier. Combating cross-border terrorism and stopping the spread of extremist beliefs have benefited greatly from the organization’s emphasis on exchanging best practices and promoting regional cooperation.

Afghanistan and Regional Stability:

Pakistan and the wider region are seriously concerned about security due to the current situation in Afghanistan. Through its ministerial meetings and summits, the SCO offers Afghanistan’s neighbors a forum for communication and collaboration, fostering regional stability and preventing unrest from spreading to other nearby nations. Long-term peace in the area also depends on the organization’s work to alleviate the humanitarian situation and aid Afghanistan’s economic development.

Cyber security:

Pakistan is receiving more and more assistance from the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) to improve its cyber capabilities and tackle cybersecurity issues. Pakistan’s cyber resilience has increased thanks in large part to the organization’s emphasis on capacity building, information sharing, and regional cooperation.

Through its Working Group on Information Security collaboration, the SCO has created a framework for regional cybersecurity collaboration. The working group gives member nations a forum for exchanging intelligence regarding cyberthreats, creating cooperative cybersecurity plans, and working together on cybersecurity exercises. To help member states share cyber threat intelligence, the SCO established the Cyber Information Sharing Centre (CISC). Member states can exchange information regarding cyber threats, vulnerabilities, and incident response protocols via a secure site offered by the CISC. Member states are better able to defend their vital networks and infrastructure against cyberattacks thanks to this information sharing. To assist Pakistan in improving its cyber capabilities, the SCO has put in place several training and capacity-building initiatives. Professionals in Pakistani cybersecurity is trained in subjects like digital forensics, incident response, and cyber threat analysis through these programs. The training enhances Pakistan’s capacity to identify, stop, and mitigate cyberattacks.

Cyberterrorism concerns are being addressed by the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS). Cyberterrorism scenarios are part of the collaborative counterterrorism exercises that RATS undertakes. By participating in these exercises, member states can better coordinate and cooperate in the fight against cyberterrorism. Apart from these regional endeavors, Pakistan has received bilateral support in the field of cybersecurity from the SCO. For instance, Pakistan received equipment and training from the SCO in 2019 to aid in its efforts to combat cybercrime. The SCO will probably become more crucial in assisting Pakistan in addressing cybersecurity issues as the cyber threat scenario changes. The organization is dedicated to advancing cybersecurity cooperation with Pakistan and assisting the nation in creating a more secure and resilient cyberspace.

Global Engagement and Regional Leadership

Pakistan now has a platform to expand its international presence and fortify its relationships with powerful nations thanks to the SCO. Pakistan has benefited from the organization’s summits and ministerial meetings, which have given it the chance to highlight its development accomplishments, advance its foreign policy objectives, and interact with important regional and global partners. Pakistan’s standing as a regional leader has also increased because of its SCO membership. Pakistan now has a forum to discuss regional concerns including commerce, energy, and security from the standpoint of the organization. Pakistan’s status as a responsible and constructive regional actor has been reinforced by its active participation in SCO efforts.

Geopolitical Maneuvering:

SCO membership enhances Pakistan’s position as a key player in Eurasian geopolitics. The SCO offers an alternative to Western-dominated institutions, allowing Pakistan to engage with a multipolar world order. This promotes a multi-faceted approach to global challenges and a stronger voice for developing nations. Increased interaction with regional partners like China, Russia, and Central Asian states strengthens Pakistan’s strategic partnerships and fosters a multi-dimensional foreign policy approach. SCO provides a platform for dialogue and conflict resolution, where Pakistan can play a constructive role in mediating regional disputes and fostering greater understanding between India and other member states. SCO membership elevates Pakistan’s international image as a responsible and proactive player in regional and global affairs. Increased engagement through SCO initiatives showcases Pakistan’s commitment to regional cooperation and strengthens its image as a reliable partner. Cultural exchanges, educational collaborations, and other SCO-led initiatives create avenues for Pakistan to showcase its rich cultural heritage and project a positive image on the international stage.
By fostering communication and cooperation with other member states, Pakistan can address biased narratives and showcase its positive contributions to regional stability and development.

Conclusion

The growth, development, and international participation trajectory of Pakistan has been significantly impacted by the SCO. The organization’s framework for comprehensive collaboration has promoted economic integration, boosted security cooperation, improved energy security, and given Pakistan a platform to further its international engagement. Pakistan is well-positioned to gain greater advantages from its participation in the SCO as it develops and broadens its reach, thereby enhancing stability, prosperity, and interconnectivity in the Eurasian area.

Introduction

The European Union (EU) has taken a groundbreaking step in regulating artificial intelligence (AI) with the EU AI Act 2023. This landmark legislation, provisionally agreed upon on 9th December 2023, aims to ensure the safe and ethical development and deployment of AI. The European Parliament and Council negotiators came to a provisional agreement on the EU AI Act after three days of intensive talks. This legislation creates a world-class regulatory framework to guarantee the safety, legality, reliability, and respect for fundamental rights within AI systems, making it the first act of its own kind specifically for artificial intelligence (AI).

Significance of the AI Act

The EU AI Act is a significant step forward in regulating AI and setting global standards for responsible development. It aims to ensure that AI benefits society while mitigating potential risks and protecting fundamental rights. The AI Act would prohibit uses which pose an unacceptable risk and mitigate harm in sectors including public services, healthcare, education, border monitoring, and other sectors where deploying AI poses the greatest risk to basic rights. The AI Act seeks to promote AI innovation within the EU in addition to governance and enforcement regarding AI. In keeping with the EU’s coordinated plan on artificial intelligence, which contains rules to promote a unified market for AI applications, it also aims to stimulate investment in AI throughout Europe.

The legislation is being considered as a global standard for governments seeking to use AI’s potential advantages while mitigating the threats associated with it. Amid a highly fragmented landscape of rules and regulations worldwide, the EU bill is regarded as the most comprehensive attempt to date to regulate AI.

A Look at Major Countries AI Regulation Efforts

In October 2023, President of the United States, Joe Biden issued an executive order titled as “Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.” This order addressed the possible advantages and disadvantages of artificial intelligence, with a specific focus on two areas i.e. discrimination and national security. To ensure that all relevant agencies are working together to leverage AI for national security effectively.

China has been rapidly establishing AI regulations, among them are regulations governing recommendation algorithms, which are the most widely used type of artificial intelligence on the internet. But it is necessary to promote AI development which is consistent with China’s political and social values. Among others, China’s three most significant and practical legislation pertaining to algorithms and artificial intelligence are the recommendation algorithms regulation from 2021, the deep synthesis for synthetically generated content regulations from 2022, and the generative AI draft regulations from 2023. The AI governance framework that is being structured by China will help country to have more profound insights on how the technology is developed and used domestically as well as internationally.

France has taken a broad approach to AI policy, emphasizing innovation, ethics, and regulation. announced a major AI investment. The French government in July 2023, announced €500 million to support the creation of AI champions. This project is a symbol of France’s ambition to play a significant role in the global AI landscape. The French government also passed a new artificial intelligence law in 2021, which lays out the guidelines for the country’s AI regulations. Before that, the government unveiled a national AI strategy in 2018 that plans to dominate the world in AI by 2030.

Regulations and frameworks focusing on particular aspects of AI, such as data privacy and consumer protection, have also been adopted by countries like the UK and Japan. In 2021, the United Kingdom unveiled its National AI Strategy, which outlined objectives for the development of ethical and responsible AI. Whereas, Japan supports AI development and economic progress. The country actively participates in international discussions on AI regulation and aims to harmonize with global standards.

Conclusion

Unlike the fragmented approaches adopted by many other countries, the EU’s AI Act offers a comprehensive framework addressing various aspects of AI development and deployment. It covers issues like transparency, fairness, accountability, and risk mitigation categorized into four levels ranging from minimal or no risks to unacceptable risks. Other countries including developing countries should consider AI regulation and can learn from the EU’s Act. Countries can create strong and efficient AI governance frameworks depending upon their needs and requirements that support ethical AI development. This is not just a technological race, it is a race for a better world, and every country has a stake in it. It is because artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to become a powerful engine of innovation, driving advancements across diverse sectors. By embracing AI responsibly, investing in its development, and addressing ethical concerns collaboratively, countries can unlock its potential to create a more prosperous, sustainable, and equitable world for all.

South Africa, the current head of the BRICS group, hosted the “Extraordinary Joint Meeting on the Middle East situation” on Tuesday, November 21. This meeting aimed to highlight the contrasting perspectives among India and the other BRICS-plus members regarding the current situation in Israel and Palestine. The alliance based on economic interest has expressed its dislike for the actions of Israel against civilians in Gaza. This is the first time that the group has opted to issue statements on political matters. The grouping has called for an end to war crimes and easing of hostilities from both parties, aiming to alleviate the escalating humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has seen the active involvement of the United States for over fifty years. Its engagement began post-World War II when it joined the UK in a 1946 inquiry suggesting the resettlement of one hundred thousand Holocaust survivors in Palestine, envisioned as a state neither exclusively Jewish nor Arab. In 1948, the U.S. became the first nation to recognize Israel’s sovereignty. Following the 1967 Six-Day War, the U.S., along with other nations, attempted to mediate the broader Arab Israeli conflict. The pivotal moment came in the 1973 war, prompting the U.S. to take the lead in diplomacy. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger played a crucial role in shuttle diplomacy in 1974-75, easing tensions and facilitating disengagement.

The group was unable to produce a joint statement, but each representative including Russia, China, India, Brazil, and South Africa have reflected their opinion on the matter through their speeches at the online summit.

Initially, China’s stance was unequivocal as until the day next of the October 7th attacks, China referred to both parties in an equal manner for collaboration. It was until a week after the continuous attacks that the attitude of the Chinese diplomats shifted, the Chinese diplomat’s see Israel’s action as Collective punishment being imposed on Gaza. China believes that Israel’s right to self-defense must be guided by International law and should be at the cost of innocent civilians. The Chinese president, Xi Jinping said, “It is necessary to ensure the safe and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance and stop the collective punishment against the people of Gaza through forced eviction, as well as turning off water, electricity and oil,” Xi said on Tuesday via video link at the summit hosted by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. Xi repeatedly vouched for a two-nation stance, which will ensure peace among the two.

In the case of Russia, Vladimir Putin stated that it is due to failed policies of the United states that the people of Gaza are suffering. It cautioned Israel to show restraint and to agree upon a political settlement between the two conflicting parties. Putin expressed sympathy for Palestine stating, “Due to the sabotage of U.N. decisions, which clearly provide for the creation and peaceful coexistence of two independent and sovereign states – Israel and Palestine – more than one generation of Palestinians have been brought up in an atmosphere of injustice towards their people, and the Israelis cannot fully guarantee the security of their state,”. He called the large-scale deaths of Palestinian children “terrible” on Tuesday and added that seeing operations done on youngsters without anesthesia “evokes special feelings”.

Putin and Xi hit more focused notes, asking for a cease-fire and the release of civilian hostages. Both the countries unleashed the same level of criticism on Israel’s atrocities in Gaza.

The South Africa President, Cyril Ramaphosa had the most sensitizing approach in all the countries that formulate BRICS. “The atrocities that we have witnessed are the latest chapter in a painful history of suffering, oppression, occupation, and conflict going back more than 75 years. The root cause of this conflict is the illegal occupation of Palestinian territory by Israel as reflected in UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which states that “Israeli settlements constitutes a flagrant violation under international law.” We therefore urge the international community to agree on urgent and concrete actions to end the suffering in Gaza and establish a path towards a just and peaceful resolution of this conflict,” he said. The President of South Africa accused Israel of War crimes and acts “tantamount to genocide”. Ramaphosa also condemned Hamas for its attacks and claimed that both the sides involved are violating International Law. Ramaphosa started his speech by saying that “The collective punishment of Palestinian civilians through the unlawful use of force by Israel is a war crime,” and that “The deliberate denial of medicine, fuel, food and water to the residents of Gaza is tantamount to genocide”. “We affirmed … that a just and lasting solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict can be achieved by peaceful means.”

Moreover, President Modi of India was not able to attend the summit due to election campaigns in Rajasthan. Instead of Prime Minister Modi, the External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar joined them. India has condemned the killing of the civilians in Palestine but has been unable to outwardly call for a ceasefire. The Indian government has requested Israel to practice restraint. The Indian government is seen to side with the Western block on the matter of the conflict as they abstained from voting in the United nation General Assembly. Moreover, Mr. Modi skipped the meeting with President of China and Russia on the issue of Israel and Palestine but did host the G20 summit online the next day.

According to commentators, South Africa, the smallest of the BRICS nations and a nation that endured harsh apartheid for over 40 years, sees parallels in the Palestinian cause and has continuously been among the most vocal proponents of a ceasefire. Argentina’s Foreign Minister Santiago Cafiero stated that his nation accepted Israel’s right “to legitimate self-defense while strictly respecting humanitarian international law”. Ebrahim Raisi, the President of Iran, has suggested that Palestinians should hold a referendum to determine their future. This is a significant departure from the previous Iranian government’s position, which was to support a one-state solution in which Palestinians and Israelis would live together in a single state.

The Paris Peace Forum is an annual event that started in 2018 in Paris, France. It was created to remember 100 years since the end of World War I. The goal of this forum is to bring people together from all over the world to talk about and find solutions to big global problems. This includes leaders from different countries, experts from organizations, businesses, and schools. They discuss many important topics like peace, how to help countries grow, taking care of the environment, new technology, and making the economy fair for everyone. The forum not only talks about these issues but also shows different projects that are trying to solve these problems. It usually happens in November every year. The forum keeps working all year to make sure the ideas and projects they talk about really happen and make a difference. This event is all about working together with people from different places to solve big world problems.

Goals of Paris peace forum:

The main goals of the Paris Peace Forum are to:
• Promote Global Cooperation: It aims to foster international collaboration and dialogue among various stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, civil society, and the private sector.
• Address Global Challenges: The forum focuses on tackling key international issues such as climate change, peace and security, development, global health, and the digital revolution.
• Support Innovative Projects: It showcases and advances innovative projects and initiatives that offer solutions to pressing global problems.
• Strengthen Multilateralism: The forum seeks to reinforce the importance and effectiveness of multilateral action in a time when international cooperation is often challenged.
• Facilitate Action and Implementation: Beyond discussion and debate, the forum emphasizes the importance of taking concrete actions and implementing solutions to the challenges discussed.

The sixth edition of the Paris Peace Forum, which began on 10th November 2023 in Paris, addresses a variety of global challenges, including climate change and migration. A key focus of this year’s event is on the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in development, especially in Africa. Despite issues like high costs for internet access and low internet penetration, experts emphasize the importance of adopting and integrating AI into daily practices now, rather than waiting for perfect conditions.

Sally Bilaly Sow from Guinea Check highlighted the need for immediate adoption of AI and raising awareness of its positive aspects. Steve Mengn, from Cameroon, pointed out the challenges in remote African villages, such as lack of networks and electricity, which hinder AI’s impact. However, in areas with better connectivity, AI has great potential to transform sectors like health and agriculture with applications designed for specific local needs.
Vilas Dhar, president of the Patrick J McGovern Foundation, expressed inspiration by the AI advancements across the continent, citing examples from Morocco, South Africa, and Senegal, the latter of which recently introduced a national AI strategy.

The discussions at the Paris Peace Forum underscore the critical role of AI in development, particularly in Africa. However, there’s a need for global cooperation to balance technological innovation with responsibility, ensuring that AI benefits are extended to areas that currently lack the necessary infrastructure. This approach aligns with the forum’s broader goal of addressing global challenges through collaborative and innovative solutions.

Historical Background

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a decades-old dispute with roots in the early 20th century, when Jewish and Arab nationalism arose in response to the Ottoman Empire’s decline. The British government’s 1917 Balfour Declaration pledged a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, spurring Jewish immigration and settlement. This heightened tensions between Jewish and Arab communities, both of which claimed the land. The conflict is fueled by competing narratives and territorial disputes.

How has the U.S. been involved in the conflict?

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has seen the active involvement of the United States for over fifty years. Its engagement began post-World War II when it joined the UK in a 1946 inquiry suggesting the resettlement of one hundred thousand Holocaust survivors in Palestine, envisioned as a state neither exclusively Jewish nor Arab. In 1948, the U.S. became the first nation to recognize Israel’s sovereignty. Following the 1967 Six-Day War, the U.S., along with other nations, attempted to mediate the broader Arab Israeli conflict. The pivotal moment came in the 1973 war, prompting the U.S. to take the lead in diplomacy. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger played a crucial role in shuttle diplomacy in 1974-75, easing tensions and facilitating disengagement.

In 1978, President Jimmy Carter hosted the Camp David peace talks, resulting in frameworks for future Mideast diplomacy. Although excluded from the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords, the U.S. played a significant role in 1998, sponsoring talks leading to the Clinton Parameters for a two-state solution. While mediating, the U.S. shielded Israel from international criticism, frequently using its UN Security Council veto power. The Trump administration departed from the long-standing U.S. policy of neutrality, siding with Israel and brokering the 2020 Abraham Accords between Israel and the UAE.

The Biden administration signals a shift, emphasizing equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians over a resolution of the overarching dispute. Biden supports Israel’s right to self-defense while pledging humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza.

What is the U.S. position on Palestinian statehood?

Biden has reiterated U.S. backing for a two-state solution, advocating the creation of separate Israeli and Palestinian states with borders resembling those pre-dating the 1967 war, encompassing the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and parts of East Jerusalem. The Clinton Parameters outlined the establishment of a Palestinian state and the resolution of final status issues. George W. Bush, in 2003, became the first U.S. president to publicly endorse a Palestinian state through the Road Map for Peace, a plan jointly presented by the U.S., the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations.

The Obama administration also pursued a two-state solution, but talks collapsed in 2014 due to disputes over settlements, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and other issues. In 2016, Secretary Kerry outlined principles for a two-state solution based on those final status talks.

Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” plan proposed a Palestinian state but granted Israel sovereignty over an essentially undivided Jerusalem, including the Old City and holy sites, with the Palestinian capital relegated to a portion of East Jerusalem. The plan did not allow Palestinian refugees the right to return but promised a $50 billion investment in a developing Palestinian state. The conceptual map indicated a 30% reduction in Palestinian territory in the West Bank as Israel annexed the Jordan Valley and settlements. Despite historical support for a two-state solution, the U.S. has traditionally opposed Palestinian statehood bids at the UN, insisting on negotiations with Israel. Since 2011, the Palestinian Authority has sought full UN membership for Palestine, a move requiring Security Council approval, where the U.S. holds veto power. In 2012, 138 countries at the UN General Assembly voted to recognize Palestine as a nonmember observer state.

What is the U.S. position on Jerusalem?

When the UN General Assembly voted in 1947 to partition British-controlled Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states, it designated Jerusalem as a corpus separatum, acknowledging its shared religious significance for Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Nevertheless, upon gaining independence, Israel established its government in the western part of Jerusalem and later took control of East Jerusalem from Jordan in 1967. Israel subsequently expanded the city’s municipal borders to encompass nearby Palestinian towns, effectively annexing the territory.

In the 1993 Oslo Accords, a pivotal agreement in the conflict, Israel and the PLO affirmed that decisions regarding Jerusalem would be part of final status negotiations. Presently, Israel considers the entirety of Jerusalem its capital, while the Palestinian Authority regards East Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state, viewing Israel’s control as an occupation.

For many years, the U.S. and most other countries with relations with Israel maintained their embassies in Tel Aviv to avoid prejudicing potential peace negotiations. However, in 2017, Trump departed from this practice by moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and officially recognizing the city as Israel’s capital. This decision led Palestinian officials to sever ties with the Trump administration. Although President Biden has restored these relations, he has confirmed that the U.S. embassy will remain in Jerusalem.

In 2021, Biden expressed his intention to reopen the Palestinian mission in Washington and the U.S. consulate in East Jerusalem, both of which were closed by Trump. However, as of mid-2022, they remained closed. Reopening these diplomatic missions faces challenges, as a law from 1987, evaded by Trump’s predecessors, prohibits Palestinians from having a mission in the U.S. Moreover, the Trump administration enacted legislation to prevent future leaders from waiving this restriction. Reestablishing the consulate in East Jerusalem would necessitate the approval of the Israeli government, a prospect deemed unlikely.

What is the U.S. position on Israeli settlements?

Following the 1967 war, Israel initiated the construction of settlements in territories it had acquired. Initially started by Labor party governments to bolster defense in areas of the West Bank with significant wartime activity, settlement expansion gained momentum as some settlers regarded the land as their religious and historical entitlement, while others found economic incentives. By 2019, approximately six hundred thousand Israelis resided in settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. For years, the United States officially criticized these settlements, labeling them as hindrances to peace. However, the U.S. refrained from outright declaring them illegal to prevent potential international sanctions against Israel. A 1978 State Department legal opinion asserted that Jewish settlements in occupied territory violated international law, yet President Ronald Reagan, in a 1981 interview, described the settlements as “ill-advised” but “not illegal.” George H.W. Bush was the first president to tie the amount of aid to Israel with its settlement construction, deducting the cost of such construction from U.S. loan guarantees. However, Clinton later permitted exemptions for settlement building in East Jerusalem and for “natural growth.”

In 2004, George W. Bush, in a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, acknowledged that the “new realities” (i.e., settlements) would make it impractical for Israel to return to pre-1967 borders in any peace agreement. While the Obama administration shielded Israel from political movements penalizing Israeli businesses in the West Bank, it also criticized Israel’s settlements by abstaining from a UN Security Council vote declaring them illegal. The Trump administration adopted a notably pro-Israel stance on Jewish settlements, aligning with its broader approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Biden administration has not officially articulated a position on the legality of the settlements.

How much U.S. aid goes to Israelis and Palestinians?

The United States has been a longstanding ally of Israel, primarily due to its support for the existence of a Jewish state. During the Cold War, Israel was seen as a key partner in countering Soviet influence in the Middle East, and it later became a significant contributor to U.S. counterterrorism efforts. In the present day, Israel remains the United States’ closest strategic partner in the Middle East. Both nations share concerns about Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its support for Islamist militants, particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas. In light of these common interests, the U.S. has committed to ensuring Israel’s military superiority over any potential hostile combination of countries in the region.

U.S. military assistance to Israel began after its withdrawal from Arab territories as part of the peace process, with the United States providing more foreign aid to Israel than any other country since the end of World War II. While economic assistance was substantial from 1971 to 2007, Israel now primarily receives military aid due to its economic growth since the 1990s. President Biden’s fiscal year 2022 budget included more than half of the foreign military aid earmarked for Israel. A 2016 memorandum of understanding solidifies the commitment to provide nearly $4 billion annually to Israel, including $500 million for missile defense. Additionally, following the 2021 Israel-Hamas conflict, the U.S. provided an extra $1 billion in missile defense funding.

The United States also extends aid to Palestinians, primarily for government and humanitarian programs, totaling more than $5 billion between 1994 and 2018. Over $6 billion has been provided to the UN Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA) since 1950. However, U.S. aid to Palestinians diminished under the Trump administration in 2018, with reductions in assistance to the West Bank and Gaza and discontinuation of contributions to UNRWA.

In 2019, Trump signed an antiterrorism law allowing lawsuits against recipients of U.S. foreign aid over alleged complicity in acts of war. The PA, fearing legal action, requested aid cessation. While the antiterrorism law remains in effect, the Biden administration has resumed aid to the West Bank and Gaza. Over $600 million has been announced for UNRWA, along with $100 million for East Jerusalem hospitals and $15 million to address food insecurity exacerbated by the war in Ukraine, pending congressional approval for some funds.