Russia had conducted a first test launch of its Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, a new addition to its nuclear arsenal which President Vladimir Putin said would give Moscow’s enemies something to think about. The Sarmat has been under development for years and so its test-launch is not a surprise for the West, but it comes at a moment of extreme geopolitical tension due to Russia’s eight-week-old war in Ukraine. The new complex has the highest tactical and technical characteristics and is capable of overcoming all modern means of anti-missile defence. It has no analogues in the world and won’t have for a long time to come.

This truly unique weapon will strengthen the combat potential of our armed forces, reliably ensure Russia’s security from external threats and provide food for thought for those who, in the heat of frenzied aggressive rhetoric, try to threaten our country.” The Sarmat is a new heavy Intercontinental Ballistic Missile which Russia is expected to deploy with 10 or more warheads on each missile, according to the US Congressional Research Service. The Sarmat super heavy intercontinental ballistic missile is designed to elude anti-missile defence systems with a short initial boost phase, giving enemy surveillance systems a tiny window to track. Weighing more than 200 tonnes and able to transport multiple warheads, Putin says the missile can hit any target on Earth.

Sarmat is the most powerful missile with the longest range of destruction of targets in the world, which will significantly increase the combat power of our country’s strategic nuclear forces. A senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the launch was an important milestone after years of delays caused by funding issues and design challenges. He said more tests would be needed before Russia could actually deploy it in place of ageing SS-18 and SS-19 missiles. Sarmat’s ability to carry 10 or more warheads and decoys, and Russia’s option of firing it over either of the Earth’s poles, posed a challenge to ground and satellite-based radar and tracking systems. Editor in chief of Russia’s National Defence magazine, told RIA news agency it was a signal to the West that Moscow was capable of meting out “crushing retribution that will put an end to the history of any country that has encroached on the security of Russia and its people”. Ukraine has mounted stiff resistance and the West has imposed sweeping sanctions to try to force Russia to withdraw forces Moscow says are on a special operation to degrade its southern neighbour’s military capabilities and root out people it calls dangerous nationalists.

The RS-28 Sarmat (NATO name Satan-II) is reported to be able to carry ten or more warheads and decoys and has the capability of firing over either of the earth’s poles with a range of 11,000 to 18,000 km. It is expected to pose a significant challenge to the ground-and-satellite-based radar tracking systems of the western powers, particularly the USA. The world is entering in a new arm race and it will badly effect the state to state relations.

As the Russian-Ukraine war continues, there are questions arising about NATO’s intervention in the conflict. If we look at the landscape, member states of NATO are bordered with Ukraine but officially it is not a member ally. Russia has one demand on the table that is non-negotiable which is Ukraine cannot be a part of the organization. However, Ukraine wants to join NATO as a member country and whenever it has floated the idea, internal strife erupt because of the presence of pro-Russian supporters in the Donbas region. Also, Russia has warned of political and military consequences as Putin did in the case of Finland and Sweden’s potential alliance membership. It is not the case that NATO is not intervening in the Ukrainian territory because of the country’s membership, there are some other reasons, as we have seen NATO involving in countries issues that are not its members.

Ukraine is seeking NATO’s help but the foreign ministers rejected any possibility of intervening against Russian forces in Ukraine, whether on the ground or in the air, as stated by Jens Stoltenberg the secretary general of NATO alliances. He has also said that “Allies are agreed upon the fact that we should not have NATO planes operating over Ukrainian airspace or NATO troops operating in Ukrainian territory”. Ukrainian leaders have called for a no-fly zone above Ukraine’s airspace, but NATO is opposed to the idea, fearing that engagement may lead to a confrontation with Russia and might result in a full-fledged war in Europe which will involve many more countries and causing far more damages. Therefore, the stance of NATO is explicit that it will not intervene but will offer assistance while remaining neutral in the conflict.

On the other hand, President Joe Biden of the United States has stated repeatedly that the Western alliance will remain neutral in the war between the two countries as long as Russia does not strike NATO territory. Last month, a summit was held where member countries participated, the Russia-Ukraine issue was discussed in response to which new sanctions against Russia were issued but no military option was mentioned. A British officer has also warned that NATO is not prepared for a conflict with Russia. Since Russia’s invasion began, the Alliance countries have provided weaponry and financial aid to Ukraine, but they have been careful not to engage in any activities that could pull them into the conflict. The other justification for not intervening is that, US has faced the consequences because of war on terror in Afghanistan. It is not going to be popular politically for United States and European countries to enter Ukraine with the help of military forces.

It is clear that NATO is not planning to intervene and sending troops to Ukraine. But it needs strong advocacy and diplomacy and it is more likely that it will continue with weapons supplies, providing diplomatic as well as political support to Ukraine in the ongoing war.

Last year in August 2021, the United States in accordance with Afghan peace deal withdrew its forces from Afghanistan after 20 years. After which Taliban formed a new Government in Kabul. Pakistan has played an important role in making the deal possible as Pakistan has suffered hugely in form of terrorism due to war in Afghanistan. Pakistan has made rigorous efforts to combat terrorism from country through military operations which helped to down terrorist’s threats, improve security and achieve peace. Now, as Taliban walked back in Kabul and took control of Afghanistan once again, there is increasing concern of Pakistan’s Government over security in Afghanistan and its implications for Pakistan. The developing security situation in Afghanistan is becoming a point of central attention not only for Pakistan but for other regional states.

US intelligence and officials have suggested the presence of militant groups including Daesh in Kabul. Moreover, various reports including United Nations Security Council pointed out the active status of almost two dozen militant groups. This has posed a serious threat to region stability and particularly Pakistan’s security. Pakistan is needed to work in a specified way for threat across the border that is extended to its own territory. This is a worrisome situation regarding security as these groups might reorganize themselves against Pakistan and can bring a surge in terrorists and other activities as:

Sectarianism: Tahrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) escalated insurgencies have already observed in Pakistan after Taliban’s takeover in Afghanistan. TTP and Daesh both have political and ideological interests, so, Daesh can create spillover effect in Pakistan in a way that TTP may collaborate or gain support of militant organization. Radicalization of Jihadist narrative, extremist ideas and narratives is possible to which young minds may fell prey. Besides this traditional challenges to internal security can also occur in kind of ethno-political, religious and sectarianism. The recent Peshawar suicide bombing inside a Shia mosque is an evidence of sectarian violence to which Daesh claimed the responsibility.

Cross-border infiltration: Cross-border illegal activities with the return of Daesh cannot be neglected. There is a possibility of illegal cross-border activities such as drug trafficking, exchange of illegal weapons between the non-state actors, and cross-border terrorism. Furthermore, refugee crisis can also be created with the return of Daesh in Afghanistan. Afghanistan may face security issues because of the Daesh and this will lead to the migration of Afghan population to Pakistan.

Indian-factor: Indian non-state actors can also use Daesh against Pakistan. Last year in 2021, Pakistan Army in a statement mentioned that with India’s support and RAW, the terrorist group Daesh is operating in Afghanistan against Pakistan. Also, Pakistan’s foreign Minister said that Pakistan has evidence of five Daesh training camps operating in India. This can result in grouping of Indians and Daesh against Pakistan for their vested interests.

To conclude: Afghan Taliban authorities must address security concerns of neighboring countries like Pakistan and do not let anyone use its soil for malicious purposes in order to ensure national interests of states and regional stability.

Saudi Arabia has been at war with the Houthis since 2015, when Saudi Arab intervened in Yemen’s civil war to fight the Houthis. The official media in Saudi Arabia reported rocket and drone strikes targeting an oil station in Jeddah and other sites in Riyadh, Yemen’s Houthis rebels have confessed to a series of attacks on the country in March, 2022. Houthi Military spokesman confirmed the attack and said that it was a response to the escalation of aggression in Yemen of Saudi’s coalition. This also increased tensions in the Persian Gulf, which were already strong due to a stalemate between the US and Iran. The major concerns remained unanswered though, such as, where the drones were launched from and how were the Houthis able to reach structures 500 miles from Yemeni land. Iran is being suspected for backing the Houthis and according to some reports, Iran made Cruise Missiles were used. Houthis have also rejected the talk’s proposal and this can escalate the conflict. This will also worsen the situation in Yemen since the population can face the consequences if Saudi Arabia attacks back at Yemen. People in Yemen are already dying from hunger and violence.

These attacks on the Saudi’s oil field will impact the world economy. As, the global oil prices are on fire. There are ongoing energy crisis because of the Ukraine-Russia war as well. So, the point here is that U.S could have availed the chance to have better relations with Arab, but it remained to stay away from this matter. U.S had already cut off the supplies of weapons to KSA for the war against Yemen. Saudi Arabia is looking forward to deal with Iran and Yemen itself. Bin Salman is also pushing for the direct engagements with Iran. This shows the decline in the influence of the superpower in one more region, Arab.

Re-building ties with U.S is one option for the Saudi’s to deal with Houthis. It also needs to boost up its defense system and rebuilding ties with U.S can help it from the shortage of its missiles and defense capabilities. On the other hand, close ties with U.S can also influence King Salman’s decision of direct engagements with Iran. If the Houthis violence continues against Saudi Arabia, this will badly affect the Saudi-Iran relations as there is this one perception that the Houthis are an Iranian proxy.

Earlier this month, on 9th March, Indian missile misadventure happened which was a clear violation of Pakistan’s air space. It is not for the first time that India did an airstrike attack on Pakistani soil. Before that, in 2016 and 2019, India launched surgical strikes in Azad Jammu Kashmir and Balakot. India admitted the landing of the missile and called it an accident which occurred due to a technical malfunction. In response to this, Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry condemned the issue and warned India of unimaginable consequences. Also, the foreign minister urged India to give information regarding the specification, route and trajectory of the missile. Silence of India over the issue until Pakistan demanded an answer has been pointed out, adding that the aftermath of this scenario had all the potential to initiate a full-fledged nuclear war between the world’s two most volatile nuclear adversaries right now. According to ISPR’s statement, “Such dangerous incidents can act as a trigger and seriously endanger regional peace and strategic stability”. Therefore, Pakistan has asked for a “joint probe” and demanded clarification from India over the safety mechanism and security protocols of missile launches in a nuclearized environment.

It is reported by Bloomberg, that dozens of national and international flights indicated busy activity in Pakistani and Indian airspace on the same day, the jets narrowly missed through the direct trajectory of the missile. If the missile had hit a commercial plane, it would have resulted in unpleasant repercussions in view of endangering a populous area, lives and property damage. In this regard, Pakistan has approached international community and raised the issue with United Nations Secretary General. Pakistan has asked relevant international forums to address the situation by investigating the safety and security protocols of Indian nuclear assets, because implications of the particular event expand beyond the security of neighboring countries and the region. In a letter to UNSC President for March, Ambassador Lana Zaki Nusseibeh (UAE) and Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi asked that Pakistan strongly condemns this blatant violation of its airspace in the presence of international aviation safety regulations. Also, while addressing the two-day Islamabad Security Dialogue 2022, Army Chief has given remarks “We expect India to provide evidence to assure Pakistan and the world that their weapons are safe and secure. Unlike other incidents involving strategic weapons systems, this is the first time in history that a supersonic cruise missile from one nuclear-armed nation has landed in another”.

It is important to note that, this event will result in escalating the already tensed relations between India and Pakistan after Indian pilot case in 2019. Missile launch is an episode that had the potential to prove disastrous for both the countries. It must be dealt with seriousness that it deserves and proper investigation must be undertaken in order to avoid any similar incidents in future which could have catastrophic results. Fortunately, this time the issue was met with a cautious response from the Pakistani military, which avoided military confrontation between two countries.

Due to the history of colonial rule as well as internal factors in the Middle-East, it has always been an unstable region. The establishment of Israel, which many Arab countries saw as illegitimate and infringing on Palestinian rights, has been one of the most aggravating points in the Middle East. These grievances ignited major conflicts, such as the Arab-Israeli conflicts of 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973, as well as the emergence of a number of non-state violent actors who carried out terrorist attacks against Israel.

In the current times, the emergence of friendly relations between Israel and some Gulf Arab states is an important new dynamic in the Middle East. This dynamic has taken on a powerful strategic obligation for the Gulf side, in particular. A region that has been troubled by widespread turmoil and civil war is now shifting geopolitical links, and competition between rival coalitions in order to grow their areas of influence and accomplish goals in weak and fragmented states of the region. While, the insensitivity of the Israeli-Palestinian issue has long kept a formal relationship with Israel at away. The Palestinian national movement’s weakened ability to influence regional politics has allowed Gulf states more flexibility to emphasize their own national parochial interests over Arab ones.

The question arises here that will the friendly relations between the Arabs and Israel cause stability or instability in the Middle-East? Since the Israel’s independence, it has gained more diplomatic recognition than at any other period in the recent years. Netanyahu’s outreach in the Middle East aims to show that Israel can do deals with main Arab neighbors without even surrendering on their violations in Palestine. The connection has a risk attached to it. Backing for the Palestinian cause is one of the last remaining areas of agreement and unity among Arab states, which is an important element in a region that is not seen. The Arab Peace Initiative is also notable for bringing together the Arab world’s commitment to normalize relations with Israel by compromising the protection of the Palestinians. Even if it had failed to acquire support during the past couple of decades, abandoning Palestine is a serious mistake. The loss of cohesive support for the Palestinian people is also a sacred duty for the region and the humanity, as safeguarding their freedom and rights remains a moral duty for the Arab region and the world.

So, this is quite obvious that normalization of Arab relations will not bring peace in the Middle-East rather there is a risk of mobilization. Israel is openly doing violations in Palestine and Gaza knowing that Arab world will not condemn or speak against it because of their deals. Also there will be instability in a region because not all the countries in the Middle East are pro-Israel. Israel can indeed destabilize the region of Middle-East by building friendly relations with Arab.

Russian-Ukraine war is on headlines for weeks now, it has been creating, instability in all sector of life from Traditional security to non-traditional security of the world. Russia as strategic actor in international economics and politics, and its involvement in conflict is not working for many countries across the World because of their dependency on the mighty Bear (Russia). Most of the Europe depends on Russian Gas and Oil to fulfill their energy needs, Germany as alone import its 25% of energy from Russia. The conflict has caused an increase in energy prices as well as food prices. The United Nations is particularly concerned about one of the potential consequences of the conflict: the risk of famine. It has never seemed more important in some countries, and it may become more so in others. The dizzying rise in the price of agricultural and energy commodities could plunge 44 million people into famine. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the war in Ukraine may cause 8 to 13 million additional people to go hungry, primarily in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. However, hunger already affects one out of every ten people in the world, and one-third of the world’s population is food insecure as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and rising energy prices.

Why there are too many things are on stake because of this conflict. Just look at the dependency “world” have on these states in term of Food security, Ukraine and Russia are major exporters of wheat, corn, rapeseed, barley, and sunflower, accounting for more than one-third of global grain exports. Russia is even the leading wheat exporter, with Ukraine ranking fifth. The two countries sell 70% of the sunflower oil produced. Wheat, on the other hand, is a staple food for 35% of the world’s population, and its price is skyrocketing. The increase is due to the blockage of exports from Ukrainian Black Sea ports. The next harvest in Ukraine, scheduled for June/July, is not guaranteed to take place. Russia has threatened to halt all exports until June 30. Its Black Sea ports are open, but the sanctions have made trading difficult and caused the ruble to fall sharply, potentially raising prices still further. Another major reason for this increase is that Russia is the world’s largest exporter of gas and the world’s second largest exporter of oil, both of which have seen significant price increases as a result of the war. The gas is used to produce synthetic nitrogen fertilizers, of which Russia is the world’s largest exporter, supplying no less than 25 countries. Furthermore, the rise in the price of gas and oil has an impact on the operation of agricultural machinery, transportation, and product processing.

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.