|
Rafia Zakaria // DAWN: 22 February 2025
THE week before Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was to arrive in the United States, he received an unwelcome gift. A military plane from the US carrying around 100 undocumented Indian migrants was sent to Indian Punjab.
The men had endured the 40-hour journey from detention centres in the US to India in shackles. More such flights followed, with the total number of Indian deportees from the US crossing 330 in under two weeks. Heartrending ordeals have been described by the deportees who have been subjected to such treatment by President Donald Trump’s administration that is intent on getting them out of the US.
It must, therefore, have been a humiliating time for Modi, who has long been a fan of Trump with whom he shares the same authoritarian inclinations. Ever since Modi’s 2019 visit to the US and Trump’s return trip the next year, with both men speaking to packed audiences during their respective visits, Indians in general and Modi in particular had imagined that the bromance between the two leaders set them apart from the rest. Considering the punishments that the Trump administration has been raining down on so many other countries, they thought that they would be spared.
But the first plane full of deportees undoubtedly rattled nerves. In the run-up to the actual meeting, India television anchors continued to praise the two men’s cosy relationship plastering screens with images from the rallies in Houston and Ahmedabad. The nerves were not just because of the planeload of deportees. In the new era of trade that the Trump administration seems eager to pioneer, tariffs reign supreme and trade deficits are determinative. By these metrics, India would be hit hard.
This became obvious hours before the meeting when President Trump announced that the US would be slapping reciprocal tariffs on every country who charged America tariffs. The Trump administration was also peeved about the enormous trade deficit between the two countries — $45.6 billion in favour of India.
In the Trumpian worldview, such deficits are the direct result of the high tariffs that a particular economy — in this case India — is charging the US for access to their consumer market. During his election campaign, Trump had actually referred to India as a “big abuser” of trade ties. He said that India would need to step up its purchases of gas, oil, and defence equipment from America.
During his recent visit, when Modi embraced Trump, the latter did not seem to be as effusive. While Indian media streaming the event live tried to put a positive spin on the two men’s meeting; highlighting what Trump said about Modi’s negotiating skills — “he’s a much tougher negotiator than me, and he’s a much better negotiator than me” — the meeting, by any objective standard, was not a success, central to which was the fact that Modi came back without any waivers on the reciprocal tariffs issue.
According to Reuters, in 2023, India imposed an aggregates weighted tariff of 11pc on American goods, which is higher than what the US charges India. In certain sectors, tariffs were even higher.
For instance, the White House said in a fact sheet: “The US average applied Most Favoured Nation … tariff on agricultural goods is 5pc. But India’s average applied MFN tariff is 39pc. India also charges a 100pc tariff on US motorcycles, while we only charge a 2.4pc tariff on Indian motorcycles.” The last example virtually ensures that no American manufacturer can sell motorbikes to the Indian consumer market.
With such announcements coming out of the White House even before Modi’s arrival in Washington, the outcome of the meeting was more or less expected. Trump announced no waivers just because India was ‘special’ or because he and Modi were ‘good buddies’. “Prime Minister Modi and I have agreed that we will be in negotiations to address the long-running disparities,” Trump said, instead, referring to the US-India trade relationship. But really, we want a certain level of playing field, which we really think we’re entitled to.“
Modi walked away having been told that his country which now buys oil and gas from other countries would now have to buy it from the US and then ship it all the way from the US to India. This purchase will be a lot more expensive than the ones India has been used to.
Trump also offered the possibility for India purchasing F-35s — something that may sound good but that camouflages the fact that India would now likely have to buy whatever expensive defence goods the US chooses to produce or sell to it so that the trade deficit narrows.
All this is not good news for Modi. Despite the support for Trump, the right-wing Hindutva establishment that props up Modi was essentially given a scolding. The reciprocal tariffs are likely to slow down India’s growth rate even further as it has to buy expensive things it does not need to bring down the trade deficit. All this may even cause Indian manufacturers to have decreased access to the American consumer market if Modi does not bring down tariffs.
The US is in the process of instituting a new foreign policy; one which is harsh and unapologetically self-serving. India — where Islamophobia has been made a part of national culture — felt that the also Islamophobic Trump may make exceptions for them. The new America under Trump, however, is simply not interested.
At the press conference during his visit, Modi mouthed an overwrought comparison and combination of ‘Make America Great Again’ and ‘Make India Great Again’ — “mega partnership for prosperity”. To nobody, except the Modi supporters in the room, did this statement make sense.
The writer is an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy.
rafia.zakaria@gmail.com
Published in Dawn, February 22nd, 2025
===============================================================================
DAWN EDITORIAL: 22 February 2025
IT has now come to this: five judges versus the president, the federation, the Judicial Commission, the registrars of the Supreme Court and the high courts of Sindh, Punjab, Balochistan and Islamabad, and three of their fellow judges.
The five, who are “serving confirmed judges” of the Islamabad High Court, have formally challenged the manner in which three justices were recently transplanted to the IHC from other high courts, how the IHC’s seniority list was subsequently changed, and how far more senior, confirmed IHC judges were summarily replaced on important committees by the freshly transferred judges.
The petitioners have called on the apex court to exercise its original jurisdiction under Article 184(3) to hear their pleas, as they believe what happened at the IHC is tantamount to a “dismantling of the salient features of the Constitution”; specifically, “the independence of judiciary, separation of powers and federalism”. They seem to have made a strong case.
It may be recalled that the trouble at the IHC began last year when several judges formally raised the issue of routine meddling by security agencies in court affairs. The contents of their complaint, addressed to the then chief justice, Qazi Faez Isa, were corroborated by similar complaints made subsequently by other high courts as well. Unfortunately, the former chief justice never had the bandwidth to address these complaints, and the matter was not addressed.
Now, and especially after the 26th Amendment, a perception has been building up that all judges who are perceived as a ‘threat’ by the current regime are being systematically sidelined and ‘neutralised’ by being denied their due promotions and/ or deprived of any important administrative responsibilities they may have held.
The way things have played out in the SC and the IHC in recent months certainly seems to have lent considerable credibility to that perception.
It has been most disappointing to observe that the petitions against the 26th Amendment have not been taken up with the seriousness and urgency they ought to have attracted from the SC. The judiciary’s image as an independent and impartial arbiter has continued to deteriorate as a result.
This petition, if it is taken up, will at least compel various actors to place on the record legal justifications for various actions and decisions which have been publicly perceived as having deprived the judiciary in general, and the IHC in particular, of their institutional independence, autonomy and ability to function without fear or favour.
It must also be reiterated that it is only proper that petitions pertaining to the independence of the judiciary as an institution are heard by a full court so that there is no complaint regarding conflicts of interest. The institutional leadership cannot ignore the growing criticism forever.
Published in Dawn, February 22nd, 2025
==============================================================================
Sufiyan Bin Muneer // DAWN: 22 February 2025
WE live in a world where our attention is the most valuable commodity. I use the term ‘commodity’ deliberately — Big Tech corporations have commoditised our focus. The business model of social media revolves around one principle: engagement. Algorithms meticulously designed to maximise clicks, views, and shares prioritise novelty over depth and emotion over reason. Research reveals that content with emotional words gets 20 per cent more engagement. The result? A world hooked on endless streams of superficial content.
Nowhere is this more disturbing than in the face of severe crises. The tragedy in Gaza — a genocide in all but name — is drowned out by viral videos and fleeting headlines. Instead of becoming a catalyst for change, outrage is reduced to a passing phase. Tristan Harris, president of the Centre for Humane Technology, has warned about the ‘attention economy’ which exploits the vulnerabilities of human psychology. Social media platforms warp our collective psyche, dull our empathy, and reduce our ability to focus on urgent global issues.
Originally, social media aimed to connect people and support businesses. Fairly, it has. But there is a harsh reality: the race for attention has downgraded our ability to confront injustices, from global crises to local challenges. The commodification of attention by tech giants like Meta, Google, and Apple has created a business model that perpetuates distractions while deepening desensitisation. These companies generate revenue by predicting and influencing user behaviour, selling certainty to advertisers. As they say, “social media companies don’t sell software; they sell influence”.
Zooming into Pakistan, the situation becomes even more troubling. Sham elections, human rights violations, political polarisation, and fake news dominate. The algorithms designed to boost engagement in one way, promote outrage and emotions, and deepen divisions.
Social media, once a tool for connection, has devolved into a battlefield where measured voices struggle to gain traction in a space driven by likes and shares. For the youth, social media has become a blind spot. Their aspirations — handsome salaries, beautiful homes, etc — are shaped by curated reels and filtered realities. The effect is that they lose focus on what matters. Social media distracts us and has also taken the steering wheel of decision-making. It has trapped most of us in a loop of hopelessness and heedlessness.
To build a better future, we must reassess the role of social media in our lives and its effect on our well-being. Now is the time to question how much access it has to our thoughts and behaviour. The only way forward is the collective solution. Strong regulations in the form of international treaties are essential. While this might seem daunting, agreements like the Paris Climate Accord show that global cooperation is possible.
Legal experts have long argued for regional treaties, where regional players negotiate better consumer protections and hold tech companies accountable for the social and economic harms caused in these regions. The ‘right to know’ framework can help regulate tech companies to open up about how their algorithms operate, what data they collect, and how they monetise user behaviour. More transparency would enable individuals and policymakers to take more informed steps on the growing influence of Big Tech.
Additionally, existing antitrust frameworks were not designed to address the influence and monopoly of attention brokers like Facebook and Google. This legal blind spot leads to unchecked market dominance, less competition, and fewer options for users on how their attention is monetised. Attention is a finite resource, and its legal recognition can drive powerful yet meaningful regulatory change, compelling social media platforms that the design of these platforms aligns with societal well-being rather than mere profit. Individually, we must become more mindful of how we consume content. Educators, policymakers, and civil society should work together to ensure people understand what’s happening behind the screen.
In this technopolar world, Big Tech is more than just a corporate player; it shapes international relations and personal lives. The more our attention becomes a commodity, the less we connect with others. As a result, people are more distracted, making it harder to focus on real global and local issues. We must decide whether to remain passive participants in this economy or actively reshape its role. As history shows, collective action and cooperation are not impossible — they are essential.
The choice is ours: Will we reclaim our attention or let it slip away in the endless scroll?
The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.
sufiyan7576@gmail.com
Published in Dawn, February 22nd, 2025
===============================================================================
IT was a year ago when, in the tumultuous aftermath of the 2024 elections, the state banned X. Today, it remains banned — for seemingly everyone except government officials, who continue to use the platform via VPNs. The ban represents not just a violation of constitutional rights, it is also an example of the phrase ‘rules for thee, not for me’ in action. The government’s justification has seen dramatic swings from ‘national security concerns’ to an admission by a ruling party member that the ban aims to control the PTI’s social media presence. This has exposed the political motivations behind what should be matters of public policy and free expression. Unfortunately, this is not our first foray into digital censorship. The YouTube ban of 2012-2016 is a painful reminder of how such restrictions hobble society’s advancement while failing to achieve stated objectives. That ban cost our creative industry millions in lost revenue, stifled digital literacy, and forced Pakistanis to seek technological workarounds — much as they do today with X.
The economic impact of the X ban extends far beyond its reportedly 4.5m local users. Small businesses have seen their digital reach curtailed. Journalists and academics find themselves cut off from global discourse. Tech startups, already struggling in a challenging economy, face another barrier to growth. Most concerning is the message this sends to the international community. As nations worldwide embrace digital transformation, Pakistan appears intent on retreating into digital isolation. This not only damages our reputation but also deters potential investors and partners who value digital freedom and transparency. The government’s suggestion that X might be restored after implementing new social media rules under Peca is cold comfort, given the already restrictive nature of our cyber laws. What Pakistan needs is not more digital restrictions, but an open digital ecosystem that serves all citizens, and not just those in power.
Published in Dawn, February 22nd, 2025
==============================================================================
DAWN NEWS: 21 February 2025
DUBAI: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has invited the leaders of Gulf Arab countries, Egypt, and Jordan for a meeting in Riyadh on Friday, the Saudi state news agency SPA reported on Thursday.
Arab states have pledged to work on a post-war plan for the Gaza Strip’s reconstruction to counter US President Donald Trump’s proposal to redevelop the enclave as an international beach resort after resettling its Palestinian inhabitants elsewhere.
Saudi Arabia said Friday’s meeting would be unofficial and held within “the framework of the close brotherly relations that bring together the leaders”, SPA said.
“As for joint Arab action and the decisions issued regarding it, it will be on the agenda of the upcoming emergency Arab summit that will be held in the sisterly Arab Republic of Egypt,” SPA added, referring to plans for an emergency Arab summit on March 4 to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Trump has called for Egypt and Jordan to take in resettled Palestinians from Gaza, a suggestion they both rejected.
The plan has united Arab states in opposition, but disagreements remain over who should govern the war-ravaged Palestinian territory and how to fund its reconstruction.
Umer Karim, an expert on Saudi foreign policy, called the summit the “most consequential” in decades for the wider Arab world and the Palestinian issue.
Trump triggered global outrage when he proposed the United States would “take over the Gaza Strip” and that its 2.4 million people would be relocated to neighbouring Egypt and Jordan.
A source close to the Saudi government said Arab leaders would discuss “a reconstruction plan counter to Trump’s plan for Gaza”.
Meeting with Trump in Washington on Feb 11, Jordan’s King Abdullah II said Egypt would present a plan for a way forward. The Saudi source said the talks would discuss “a version of the Egyptian plan”.
The official Saudi Press Agency, citing an official, confirmed on Thursday that Egypt and Jordan were participating in the Riyadh summit along with the six country members of the Gulf Cooperation Council with the aim of “strengthening cooperation... and with regard to joint Arab action”.
The agency also said decisions issued by the “unofficial fraternal meeting” in the Saudi capital would appear on the agenda of an emergency Arab League summit to be held in Egypt on 4 March.
Previously a Saudi source said the Palestinian Authority would also take part in the meetings. Two diplomatic sources said on Thursday that the summit would take place in Riyadh behind closed doors, with no access for the public or media.
Unity
Rebuilding Gaza will be a key issue, after Trump cited reconstruction as justification for relocating its population.
Cairo has yet to announce its initiative, but former Egyptian diplomat Mohamed Hegazy outlined a plan “in three technical phases over a period of three to five years”.
Published in Dawn, February 21st, 2025
===============================================================================
The China miracle: human capital made it possible
It signifies the quest to excel when others are dismissive and look down upon you.
[Purpose of Reading: Food for thought]
Imtiaz Gul: Tribune: 22 February 2025
An old Confucian saying likens a leader to a boat and the people to water. Water can both support and topple the boat. Mao modified the thought further to underscore the importance of citizens. The communist party is like fish and people are like water, and fish cannot live without water.
This underlines the primacy of the bond between the state and the people; an unflinching belief in people's power and the top leadership's affection for them. While pursuing development, the state accorded high priority to human resource development to convert the huge population into a real advantage for the country.
In the 1960s and 1970s, Pakistan's per capita was actually higher than China's but it lagged far behind in health and education indicators.
As the economy opened up to foreign investment, foreign firms began trickling in for cheaper and voluminous production. German companies like Volkswagen and Audi were the earliest car producers to go to China. And with their cooperation, the Chinese set up technical and vocational education centres.
And look where the Chinese automobile or aviation industry stand today.
They also took loans from ADB and the World Bank for that purpose but then went on to develop their own financial muscle for upgradation and further development through the extensive network of technical vocational education centres across the country.
China's Robotaxi industry is surging ahead, with firms like WeRide benefiting from the country's booming EV sector and cheap, scalable tech.
While US companies like Waymo expand, others struggle - GM killed Cruise after spending $10 billion. Meanwhile, China's Baidu and Pony AI are adding thousands of autonomous vehicles.
It signifies the quest to excel when others are dismissive and look down upon you. This stems from China's national spirit and the insatiable love to experiment, learn to be on their own - the urge to be independent of external influences. Once they see something is working, then they would build on and take it all across the country.
They still remember what Chairman Mao told them over seven decades ago - the path to progress will be fraught with thorns but keep marching regardless of how difficult the path may be.
Most Chinese reflect what their great philosopher Confucius had said thousands of years ago - never tire of learning and never tire of teaching others. "And that is something which you see when you live in China," a friend Hamid Sharif told me while recalling his ten years of professional life in China.
On several occasions, whenever I would get into a taxi, the driver would either be listening to something quite technical or a classic sort of a play, and very rarely would it be some idle music. It was quite a fascinating experience indeed in sharp contrast to South Asia, where I never found officials as keen to learn as those in China. Officials in South Asia, on the contrary, are hardly ready to learn or embrace new ideas once they have covered a good part of their bureaucratic journey.
Humility is another hallmark of the Chinese society. However highly placed, officials are always eager to learn and teach. And they're very humble about the learning - ready to sit with anybody as long as they can learn. Their quest for learning is boundless - a tremendous feature of the Chinese society that is manifest in literature, art, architecture, industry, etc.
Sharif recalls how during his ten years in Beijing, he saw young Chinese innovate, invent and excel in all fields. The WeChat, for example, combines WhatsApp, a payment system, a video system, all rolled into one. And similarly, the breakthroughs in artificial intelligence in China, electric, electrical vehicles, the battery technology.
I think, certainly, if you look historically, China has never been a colonial power but saw itself as a prosperous and advanced civilisation compared to others. And it wanted the recognition of that. This recognition has come about in this century and that too with a bang.
China historically sees trade as a way to advance links with other countries and that is what leads to peace, the Chinese believe. And hence notions such as shared destiny, win-win for all, collaborative framework, etc. It never was a colonial power and that is why only a Chinese leader such as Xi Jinping could have come up with the idea of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which centres on trade connectivity.
This, of course, stems from the Chinese interest in and the need for markets abroad but based on the idea of "sharing the dividends of prosperity" with neighbours - rooted essentially in the collaborative spirit than in confrontationist and coercive policies. BRI has created markets for China but has opened itself up for being a market to others - a win-win situation for all.
The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is yet another example of the collaborative spirit rooted in the Confucian thought and a reflection of President Xi Jinping's vision for modernisation of China. The Bank began operations in Beijing in 2016 and has since grown to 110 approved members worldwide.
As US President Donald Trump has begun his second term with fresh wave of protectionist measures, including tariffs to incentivise domestic investment and production, China has not only responded with its own tariffs on US exports but also decided to further liberalise the economy for foreign investors. President Xi also seems determined to pursue his visionary concepts such as Global Development Initiative (GDI) and the Global Security Initiative (GSI) as part of the Chinese drive for a prosperous, peaceful and safer world.
|
