Indonesia’s senior economic minister and top negotiator said on Friday ( Apr 25 ) that it wants a” fair and square” trade relationship with the US, giving its national interests precedence in the ongoing negotiations over US tariffs. Since last week, Sri Mulyani Indrawati and Airlangga Hartarto, the head ofContinue Reading
ABC News
Images courtesy of GettyI’m on my way to satisfy a machine in Hanover, Germany, on a beautiful spring day.
At the Hannover Messe, one of the largest professional trade shows in the world, I was invited to see the humanoid robot G1, which was created by Chinese company Unitree.
G1, which measures around 4’3″ ( 130cm ), is smaller and more affordable than other humanoid robots on the market and has such a wildly flexible range of motion and dexterity that videos of it performing dance numbers and martial arts have gone viral.
Pedro Zheng, the Unitree selling director, is currently in charge of the G1.
He states that users may configure each G1 to perform independent functions.
Passers-by quit and earnestly try to interact with the G1, which is incomparable to a lot of the different machines being demonstrated in the cramped conference room.
They slam G1 in the face or wave it in the backwards, make quick moves to see if it will answer, and apologize if they bump into it. Amazing as it may be, its human shape has a certain something about it that makes people feel at ease.
One of the dozens of companies creating computers with a mortal form is Unite, which is just one of many.
The upside is enormous: it promises a workplace that doesn’t need vacations or raises.
It might be the best piece of home equipment as well. After all, who wouldn’t want a microwave that can load and do the housework?
However, some technical issues remain. Although portable computers and robotic arms have been around for a long time, there are still safe working conditions at those locations.
Many more challenging is the case with introducing a human machine to a less predictable setting, such as a household or restaurant.
Humanoid robots would need to be strong to be beneficial, but that also means that falling over at the wrong time could be harmful.
There is a lot of work to be done on the artificial cleverness that do operate such a system.
A Unitree spokesman tells the BBC,” The Artificial simply has not yet reached a milestone time.”
They said today’s robot AI presents a challenge for understanding and carrying out difficult tasks in a reasonable manner.
Their G1 is currently being promoted to research institutions and software companies that can use Unitree’s open source software for growth.
Companies are currently concentrating their efforts on creating human-like computers for factories and warehouses.
Elon Musk is one of those with the highest page. Tesla, his vehicle firm, is working on a human machine called Optimus. He predicted that” some thousand” of Tesla factories will be constructed this year and that they will be performing “useful stuff” in January.
Another automakers are making equivalent mistakes. Humanoid drones were just introduced in a US manufacturer by BMW. Hyundai, a North Korean manufacturer of automobiles, has also placed an order for tens of thousands of computers from Boston Dynamics, the 2021 acquisition.
Thomas Andersson, the leader of the research firm STIQ, tracks 49 businesses that are creating human-like robots that have two arms and legs. He looks at more than 100 companies if you broaden the definition to computers with two wings who can move themselves on tires.
According to Mr. Andersson, Taiwanese businesses are likely to have a business monopoly.
The supply chain and the whole robotics ecosystem are very large in China, and it’s very simple to run developments and conduct R&D. He claims that D is “research and creation.”
Unitree emphasizes that advantage, noting that its G1 is inexpensive ( for a robot ) and has an advertised$ 16,000 ( £12,500 ).
Additionally, according to Mr. Andersson, the funding benefits Asian countries.
In a new report, STIQ points out that about 60 % of all cash for human-robots has been raised in Asia, with the US accounting for the majority of the rest.
Foreign businesses also benefit from the support of the local and federal governments.
For instance, in Shanghai, dozens of human robots are undergoing teaching at a state-backed coaching facility to complete tasks.
Images courtesy of GettyHow then can American and European machine manufacturers compete with that?
Bren Pierce, a native of Bristol, has founded three automation businesses, with Kinisi the most recent one, the KR1 machine.
The machine was created and manufactured in the UK, but it will also get produced in Asia.
You have to purchase all these sub-components from China in the first place, which is the issue you have as an American or European organization.
When you could simply put them all together at the cause, which is in Asia, it becomes terrible to buy your motors, capacitors, and circuits halfway around the world to put them up. “
Mr. Pierce keeps expenses down by not opting for the whole human variety, along with making his drones in Asia.
The KR1 is made for businesses and stores, but it lacks legs.
” All of these sites have flat floors,” they say. Why would you want to pay more for a pretty sophisticated design? when could it be simply installed on a portable center? “” he inquires.
His KR1’s tires are the same as those on an electric scooter, with the exception of the mass-produced parts.
Get as many things off the table as you can, according to my philosophy. Therefore, he claims that all of our vehicles, chargers, computers, cameras, and other mass-produced pieces are commercially available.
Mr. Pierce claims that the true” key sauce” is the software that enables the machine to interact with people, like his rivals at Unitree.
Many businesses release quite high-tech computers, but after that, you have to have a PhD in automation to actually install and use them.
Your typical warehouse or factory worker does really pick up the machine in a couple of hours, according to Mr. Pierce.
He claims that a man has performed a work on the KR1 after performing it 20 or 30 days.
This time, aircraft customers will receive the KR1.
KinisiWill computers always enter homes from factories? Yet Mr. Pierce, who is positive, claims that things are still far away.
” For the past 20 years, my long-awaited desire has been to create the entire machine. This is what I was doing my PhD in, and I do believe that is the end aim, but it’s a very challenging job, says Mr. Pierce.
Although I also believe they did exist someday, I believe that will take at least ten to fifteen years. “
From a study view, scientists ‘ reality is that financing rarely arrives unless a significant earthquake strikes to derail it, which is both locally and abroad. Hetényi points out that the Gorkha collapse in 2015 was an excellent illustration of this.  ,
You can recall how anxious the inhabitants was for a while before it was simple to obtain financing for studies in Nepal. Then, abruptly, attention turned abroad, and people were forgetting everything, especially in foreign countries. That’s a problem, he said, so that’s.
According to Karplus, the recent earthquake in Myanmar, which occurred on the Region problem and connects the Himalayan region geologically, may open up new avenues for research. It could at least elicit some interest from residents of regions with a risk.  ,
” Having regional disasters serves as a reminder and perhaps a wake-up call or alert to neighborhoods.” Because it prompts people to make decisions, particularly officials, Karplus said.
Growing knowledge and research capacity in a nation with GDP less than 10 % of Singapore’s and quite significant tectonic risks is not an easy task in Nepal.
” Scientific development is very similar to the country’s political framework and business. In India and Nepal, for instance, there is no such thing as an MIT, Banerjee said, referring to the renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the US.
These are real problems, the author writes. The real problem is to put a solution into practice, but we are aware of it.
Researchers concurred that collecting information should be a top priority for the nations in the area. From that, it could be made available outside to experts who can help unravel some of the treasures of tectonic activity, of which there are still some.
It’s crucial to understand the shape of those failings. The more information we have, the better we may realize the structures that are influencing how large the fissures are, and that can aid in understanding and preparation,” said Karplus.
A brand-new online resource created by Wales ‘ Aberystwyth University may help spread the word about Nepal’s potential effects from various hazards, including earthquakes.
The multi-hazard mapping tool, known as MiMapper, is open to the public and uses geographic data to depict healthy hazard risk across the nation.  ,
According to Neil Glasser, the master vice-chancellor of the school’s Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, the earthquake visualization builds in social and vulnerability factors like the types of housing available and the population density.
It should be noted that it doesn’t foretell when these events will occur. Because, if we could, isn’t that the Holy Grail, isn’t it? he continued.  ,
It serves as a resource for those who are considering growth and planning. And in nations like Nepal, they are only constantly trying to find ways to build the nation in times of natural disasters.
Beijing clearly reminded the place that” China is a great country and other countries are smaller countries, and that’s just a point” at an ASEAN-led conference, no less. Additionally, South China Sea claimants are well aware of what a geographically extreme China is capable of.  ,
Given Southeast Asia’s significance in the world technological value chain, Beijing’s most recent caution against any deals between the United States and other nations “at the cost of Taiwanese interests” is timely.
Trump, however, has also made it clear that it will revert to its royal instincts, declaring in his second inaugural address that” the United States will once again regard itself as a growing country… one that raises our expectations, raises our expectations, and carries our symbol into new and beautiful perspectives.”
Trump’s America First policy is merely an unfiltered reflection of the long-standing utilitarian US policy toward Southeast Asia, which has seen a number of revisions over the years, starting with the intellectual conflict that divided the continent from the intense Global War on Terror, which declared much of maritime Southeast Asia the” next front” of its campaign.  ,
Beijing and Washington battle it out in the race for scientific supremacy, bringing the region’s significance back into focus once more.
On the political, financial, and socio-cultural fronts, Southeast Asia has undoubtedly benefited from competing major power statecraft. Plan leaders instead of rehashing old arguments about why the area matters to the self-interested stare of metropoles near and far may be better served in the 21st century by utilizing Southeast Asia’s shared ability in novel and inventive ways.  ,
After all, if the earth is to be rearranged, but really its stories.
Elina Noor is a senior colleague in the Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, DC. The Interpreter, the Lowy Institute’s blogging, originally contained this remark.
The World Bank discontinued one of its key initiatives in 2021: the Doing Business Index, a world rating system that evaluated the ease of starting and operating a business in 190 nations.
That came after an impartial investigation revealed that World Bank authorities had manipulated the rankings to favour wealthy nations like Saudi Arabia and China. Concerns were raised over the use of international benchmarks to influence growth policy following the scandal.
The lender is then retrying. It released its most recent premier record, Business Ready, in October 2024. The World Bank’s and its sister organisation, the International Monetary Fund, will hold their annual meeting in spring 2025, marking the first time the statement will be officially presented to delegates as part of the institution’s high-level plan.
The document, which is referred to as B-READY, aims to analyze business surroundings through more accurate data. The monthly examination aims to assess social addition, environmental conservation, and public service delivery in a wider sense this time.
We have taken a closer look at B-READY because we are experts on global organizations, laws, and growth. We appreciate that a comprehensive analysis of the economic health of nations can be done through the participation of secret stakeholders, but we worry that the most recent work from the World Bank could turn around many of the issues that plagued its father.
It’s worthwhile to recall what the Doing Business score measured in order to know what’s at stake. The premier report was used by administrations, investors, and World Bank officials to determine any given nation’s organization atmosphere between 2003 and 2021. It ranked nations based on how simple it was to launch and operate a company in each of the 190 nations.
In order to prioritize those measures, the index frequently praised reforms that eliminated business taxes, environmental protections, and work protections in order to improve the “efficiency” of common laws versus civil law jurisdictions.
According to scholar Joseph E. Stiglitz in 2021, the Doing Business score embodied the values of the so-called Washington Consensus, a growth model rooted in restructuring, liberalization, and market reform.
Critics have long argued that the Doing Business score promoted a worldwide “race to the bottom.” Countries competed to rise in the ranks, frequently by adopting implausible constitutional changes.
In some cases, the World Bank’s domestic data manipulation penalized governments that didn’t appear to be properly business-friendly. In the end, these structural imperfections and the political forces that drove them eventually led to the site’s fate in 2021.
The World Bank’s strategy is to restore its standing following the Doing Business incident. In recent years, there has been both internal and external pressure to develop a son, and B-READY answers to that desire while working to address the scientific shortcomings.
B-READY attempts to understand how regulations engage with facilities, services, and equity considerations, while maintaining a focus on the business environment in theory.
B-READY, which initially includes a number of 50 nations, does not assign a solitary report to the countries it ranks. Instead, it provides more reliable information on 10 topics divided into three columns: the regulatory framework, the public services, and administrative efficiency. Additionally, the report includes fresh themes like gender equity, environmental conservation, and modern access.
B-READY publishes its entire technique and makes its statistics publicly accessible, unlike the Doing Business score.
This appears to be improvement at first glance. However, B-READY is criticized for providing only a more disjointed ranking system, one that is more difficult to interpret and also influenced by the same investor-driven economic assumptions.
The platform, in our opinion, continues to represent a narrow definition of what constitutes a prosperous legal and economic system, not just for investors but also for society as a whole.
How B-READY covers labour standards is a major issue. Expert sessions and firm-level surveys are the key main data sources for the report.
The World Bank consults attorneys with national skills to evaluate labor and social security laws. However, the report relies on research that ask businesses whether labour costs, departure privileges, and public services are “burdens” when it comes to how these rules actually work.
This approach captures the employer’s view, but it disregards the actual effects labour rights have on the workers ‘ lives. The grading system occasionally also rewards weaker safeguards. For instance, nations are encouraged to include a minimum-wage rules on the books but penalized if the salary is” to great” in relation to the gross domestic product per person. This causes people to feel pressure to keep income low in order to appear more aggressive. And while that may be beneficial for international businesses looking to lower their labor costs, it won’t actually benefit a nation’s monetary well-being or the local workforce.
This technique, according to the International Trade Union Confederation, runs the risk of promoting metaphorical changes without significantly enhancing worker protection. Georgia, for instance, comes close to the top of the B-READY workers assessment despite having no updated its minimum wage since 1999 and placing it below the poverty level.
Another disturbing place for us as quantitative law specialists is how B-READY analyzes legal issues. It measures how fast business courts resolve issues, but it disregards the rule of law’s freedom. In consequence, nations like Hungary and Georgia, which have received a lot of negative feedback for their political underperformance and their disregard for the rule of law, come out remarkably higher. Not coincidentally, both administrations have already used these values for political gain and advertising.
This reflects a bigger issue, in our opinion. B-READY does not use the legal system as a platform for common responsibilities, but rather as a means of attracting investment. It assumes that everyone will benefit from making things easier for companies. However, that notion runs the risk of discrediting the people who are most impacted by these laws and institutions: staff, communities, and civil society organizations.
B-READY brings more accountability and public data, which is undoubtedly a step away from its father. However, in our opinion, it also fits the description of a “good” legitimate system: one that might bring efficiency to businesses but not necessarily justice or collateral to society.
B-Ready will determine whether it becomes a tool for effective reform or just another restructuring scorecard, depending on the World Bank’s capacity to fight its persistent biases and hear its critics.
Both Dhaisy Paredes Guzman and Fernanda G. Nicola are American University’s laws professors.
The Conversation has republished this essay under a Creative Commons license. Learn the article’s introduction.
Anxiety over synthetic knowledge is great. Employers are afraid of their employment. Some researchers are concerned about the individual race.
According to some, businesses are speeding up the development of smart equipment without having however made sure they can hold them firmly rooted in human values. A health researcher lately left a leading AI development company, OpenAI, declaring that he was “pretty terrified” by the pace of development.
Artificial general intelligence ( AI ) that can think and learn the way people do, carry out tasks unprogrammed, and compete with or even surpass humans in terms of creativity, flexibility, and abstract reasoning is a top priority for the AI industry. It’s a theory that is the subject of more than one discussion.
Researchers are divided on whether AGI will ever be reached. Those who predict it will have a different opinion of how quickly. And there is a lot of disagreement regarding whether achieving it would be beneficial. When I consider where I’ll raise a future family or how much to save for retirement, the scholar who just left OpenAI said,” I can’t help but wonder: Will society also make it to that stage”?
Author Reid Hoffman asks us to take a break from watching the Terminator shows and look at the positive aspects while speaking in support of AGI. Hoffman is a heavy in Silicon Valley and a venture capitalist. He co-founded LinkedIn and sits on the boards of more than one Artificial company.
In a recently released text, Hoffman and co-author Greg Beato argue that the potential risks are far greater than the potential benefits, which can be attained through “iterative growth” and democratization. By that, they mean releasing AI advances slowly to a wide range of consumers, enabling understanding, and allowing defects to be discovered and fixed.
Hoffman describes himself as a “techno-humanist.” He disagrees with the Silicon Valley” solutionists,” who view AI as the solution to all problems and favor gung-ho, no-holds-barred development, nor with the “problemists,” who only support technology when it is proven to pose zero risks and favors stringent regulation or even bans.
Hoffman is more concerned with the problemists than the two. His criticism of the “precautionary rule” will appeal to British farmers who have gone through the GMO wars. In his discourse of attitudes toward technology in general, he uses example from a range of fields, including agriculture.
Hoffman doesn’t repeat,” no regulation, always.” He does, however, request that we be aware that development is itself a form of rules, while strict adherence to the precautionary principle you suppress innovations that may increase a technology’s safety.
He cites the first, illegal days of the car to illustrate the idea of innovation as regulation, when automakers introduced several safety features that we take for granted for economical reasons. Up until 1911, when Charles Kettering developed the electric start, many wrists, hands, and jaws were broken by individuals trying to crank-start vehicles.
It was made accessible on Cadillacs the following year, helping to establish the pleasure label’s image. It gradually developed into common products.
Even as the authors respond to AG I’s critics, they continue to make references to all the great things that technology will allow. They observe progress in people’s lives in occupations ranging from agriculture to manufacturing, health care to schooling.
What if every infant on earth had access to a professor who was as intelligent as Big Bird and as wise as Leonardo da Vinci?
Superagency is a well-informed, thought-provoking guide. The authors ‘ idea that gaining the technology into the hands of a sizable amount and of different people is particularly intriguing to me.
Using AI, which I’ve only just begun, has undoubtedly altered my outlook on things. In my research of Italian, AI devices like Gemini and Perplexity are incredibly helpful. My view of AI has changed from being entirely negative to fairly optimistic.
The problem Hoffman and Beato fail to address,” How critical is the risk of a Terminator situation,” is the reason I’m not even more optimistic. What’s the best way to take the risk if it isn’t minor? You have to know if creativity alone could maintain this risk at bay if you accept the innovation-is-regulation premise.
Hoffman does have a compelling response, I believe. I would have liked to know how he had shared it.
In one of the many marketing tidbits for the book, Yuval Noah Harari, the author of the book” Sapiens,” spoke for some.
The book” Superagency” offers society a interesting and insightful perspective on the era of AI. Despite my disagreement with some of its key points, I apologise for my inconsequential opinions. Learn it, and then make your own judgment.
Urban Lehner, a former long-time Asia journalist and director for the Wall Street Journal, is DTN/The Progressive Farmer’s editor emeritus.
This post, which was originally published on April 22 by the latter news business and is now being republished by Asia Times with authority, is entitled” Copyright 2025 DTN/The Progressive Farmer.” All trademarks are reserved. Follow , Urban Lehner , on , X @urbanize ,
What does China, and specifically the Chinese Communist Party, do now that Donald Trump has imposed a 145 % tariff on them? The majority of commentators appear to believe they will negotiate tariffs with the United States, whine violently, and then slowly release feelers to end a bargain. And Trump has suggested, suggested, and now is doing that.
Possibly. If we were Xi Jinping, that is what we would perform. But don’t anticipate Xi’s response to be as American-style.  ,
Any pain that Xi Jinping may cause will be subsided by his own people. And he has been urging them to “eat sorrow” for decades. He has also spent years putting a stop to the Chinese market. He’s never vulnerable either, despite not being there at the moment.
China has banned exports of certain rare earth, unusual earth, and mineral products, has ordered Chinese companies not to buy andnbsp, Boeing and other aircraft, and has imposed 125 % tariffs on American goods.
Additionally, it has enlisted US proxies, of whom there are no lack, to support the claim that the American state may crumble if Walmart’s daily low prices rise.  ,  ,
Beijing will also use the force from US business to entice the masses.
Xi is not seen caving in to immigrants. His numerous private rivals could actually take him out if he does, in his own words.  ,  ,
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP ) is in a battle to the death with the free world, which is even more fundamental. Only one of the two may survive, according to the CCP’s definition of survival: flexibility poses a threat to communism.
But Xi and his successors have spent years getting ready for war. State-linked media has reported on China’s “people’s battle” against the US since at least 2019.
Additionally, at his direction, Xi’s military, the People’s Liberation Army ( PLA ), is now competent enough to spread its wings both inside and outside the first-island chain. If done correctly, the PLA may yet sneeze at Americans.  ,  ,  ,
Maybe Xi Jinping considers starting a shooting war to be a viable choice? He may be surprised, of course. The Americans don’t believe he did ( or don’t want to think that’s possible ).  ,
With all that involved, it shouldn’t be against the US, but it might be against Taiwan, the Philippines, or both. This may cause a significant shock for the US and everyone else. Trade conflict and a possible nuclear conflict are two distinct items. People will continue to blame President Trump, particularly as Xi claims that “you Americans pushed me into it”…
President Lai Ching-te of Taiwan ( seated right ) and US Senator Pete Ricketts ( standing ) have a meeting at the Presidential Office in Taipei on April 18th. Central News Agency picture
First and foremost, every Democrat on Capitol Hill and many Republican Nationals ( Republicans in Name Only ) will blame Trump. As well as Wall Street’s entire business group and the majority of its counterparts. Remember how many people were upset that Osama bin Laden had been attacked by the US in some way after 9/11?
With Donald Trump and China involved, things will be even simpler. Trump disorder syndrome is similar.
Are the taxes on the PRC, as high as they are, enough to produce waging war seem like a wise choice for Xi?  ,  ,
It may not be as restrictive as the crude and economic restrictions placed on Japanese imperialism in 1941. But, it’s bad enough in its own method for the CCP. Particularly if major or even smaller nations resolve their differences with the US or refuse to accept China’s rising export, which may overtake their own home business.
Although the Chinese may resist punishment, the Ponzi scheme’s market depends on exports to generate hard currency. Additionally, are imports of British and European systems.  ,  ,
The CCP must match its US dollar-denominated responsibilities even though it doesn’t have half the international exchange . Or to purchase what it requires, such as Australian iron iron to produce material for PLAN boats. It lacks US systems like the detective balloon that flew over America in 2023, for instance.
And Xi favors keeping citizens employed. In China, 600 million people still live on$ 5 per day, while many others continue to live on less.  ,  ,
It is a tense location. And perhaps Trump is considering rebalancing the deal imbalance and more than tariffs. This could be causing significant decoupling between the Chinese market and the free- and “unfree world” investing alliances.
The Trump administration’s America First Investment Policy, or AFI, was worrying China with its tightened restrictions on inner Chinese investment even before the levies. And just as poor, limiting National investment and technology transfers to the PRC.
In the 53 decades since Richard Nixon’s visit, the US has not put pressure on China in this way. There has been a lot of talk but not many real pressure, aside from during Trump 1.0, which was only for a few years and never attempted the jugular.
Xi may now anticipate that Americans will lose attention, be placated, strung along, and start to ease up, and all of that.
What if, however, the Americans realized that China and the United States are already at conflict with one another? Although the US didn’t start this conflict, it appears for the first time that it is getting ready to battle.
Even Xi will decide that this is the right time to shoot, or “go dynamic” in modern jargon. A firing conflict might not be how we would listen to taxes. However, we are never Xi Jinping.
Grant Newsham is a former US minister and former US Marine agent. When China Attacks: A Warning to America is his book, which he is the creator of.
This article was previously published by Japan Forward, and it is now republished with authority.
Although South Asia has experienced some political bulwarks, New Delhi’s most recent move may have spelled out a risky new chapter of geographical brinkmanship.
India unilaterally suspended the Indus Waters Treaty ( IWT ) with Pakistan, a cornerstone of bilateral cooperation for more than 60 years, on April 23 just one day after a deadly terrorist attack in the Kashmir-administered region, killing 26 people.
The decision was made in addition to the closing of a significant border crossing, the termination of Pakistani citizens ‘ regional immigration privileges, and the deterioration of diplomatic ties. With liquid at the center of what started out as a drama at Kashmir’s Pahalgam hill station and then having the opposite effect, it is quickly turning into a political crisis.
Kashmir Weight, a violent organization that claims responsibility, is a common name in a region full of acronyms and confusion.
However, India has taken a number of punitive measures that target Pakistan’s monetary arteries and, more dangerously, its waters lifeline without providing any practical evidence of external involvement.
Fears of an escalation are now growing in Islamabad, according to press reports. Social insiders and national security officials worry that India might consider engaging in punishing military action once more, in a similar vein to the Pulwama-Balakot incident in 2019, in which 40 Indian paramilitary staff were killed in an attack on which India responded with cross-border strikes.
Pakistan then launched its own airstrikes, and for a quick, menacing moment, the region sank on the verge of a full-fledged conflict between two nuclear powers.
Major military and civilian officials from Pakistan’s government met for an emergency meeting of its National Security Committee on April 24. The meeting was chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar called out India’s actions as “premature and provocative,” noting that no evidence of Pakistani involvement in the attack has been made public.
The Indus Waters Treaty itself, however, is the true powder tank.
The convention has been a unique, resilient bridge between two nuclear-armed foes, as it was mediated by the World Bank in 1960. The Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab river, which account for nearly 80 % of Pakistan’s water supply, are distributed according to their rules.
However, the Indus Waters Treaty is not a typical diplomatic deal. Because it is a part of global laws, it cannot be. Pakistan can make a compelling argument that it is in the international community’s best interest to preserve partnerships made through meticulous politics.
This is philosophical, not just a political complexity. The Indus program is a major source of power for all four of Pakistan’s counties. Pakistan’s vulnerability is normal, absolute, and agricultural with few other sources, most prominently a few Afghan rivers.
Not only for Pakistan but for the entire place, the increase is deeply disturbing. More than any other asset, water reveals the power imbalance between upstream and downstream says in South Asia.
India’s decision to “hold the treaty in abeyance,” a legitimate grey area without any real precedent, creates a disturbing example. In a time of grief and anger, it weaponizes a shared tool, undermining both local norms and international legislation.
For its part, New Delhi has not been overly diplomatic about its long-standing frustration with the convention. It fully sent a notice to Islamabad last year asking for a revision of the terms, which Pakistan quickly rejected.
The coercive “abeyance” of this week appears to be an illegal attempt to put Pakistan on the defensive. Beyond the constitutional posturing, there is a more nuanced calculus, known as financial attrition.
Analysts believe that India’s overall intention is to stifle Pakistan’s now depressed economy, especially its agriculture, which is largely dependent on the Indus River system.
Practically speaking, withholding water may require a large amount of equipment on a scale that isn’t currently in place. Even if these projects were started soon, they may require years and billion to be realized.
Also, symbolism has the potential to be effective. Yet symbolic techniques may have long and short tempers in South Asia, where recollections are long and emotions are small.
And what guarantees do the region’s smaller North Asian countries, like Bangladesh and Nepal, have?
A collective message from South Asia’s louder regions, such as Dhaka, Colombo, and Kathmandu, is now desperately needed to convince New Delhi and Islamabad of their obligations to the wider South Asian area.
The continent cannot afford for diplomacy to be stricken by fractious politics, and rivers to be used as retaliators.
Muktadir Rashid serves as Bangla Outlook, a media website based in Dhaka.
PUBLISHED: 24 Apr 2025 at 19: 24
SURAT THANI: The government is moving forward with the development plan for the Southern Economic Corridor ( SEC ), a development project for economic and transportation infrastructure that will improve the link between the Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Thailand while promoting more robust economic growth.
At a pondering conference on Thursday in Surat Thani, assistant transportation secretary Manaporn Charoensri and public and private parties from Surat Thani, Ranong, Chumphon, and Nakhon Si Thammarat regions exchanged views.
All of these individuals were representatives of organizations that were influencing this grouping of southern counties ‘ economic growth.
The minister said,” The authorities now treats the advancement in the South as important because it has a demonstrated ability to grow in terms of both financial and hospitality development.”
If properly developed, the country could possibly offer better carry links to Asia via the region, according to Ms. Manaporn, who lives between the Andaman and the Gulf of Thailand.
A land bridge to connect the two coasts is included in the draft bill that the ministry’s Office of Transport and Traffic Policy and Planning ( OTP ) has created for the SEC, she continued.
The SEC, which was approved by the government on August 21, 2018, includes financial developments in Chumphon, Ranong, Surat Thani, and Nakhon Si Thammarat as well as a number of transportation projects, including a double-track coach system passing through these southern provinces, as well as a hospitality enhancement job.
Prior to a conference, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the administrators of these southern regions, as well as other local government and civic organizations, agreed that the creation of a transportation system to better connect the Andaman and the Gulf of Thailand needed to be done more quickly, according to Ms Manaporn.
By bypassing the Malacca Strait, the area gate may significantly increase the ease of moving goods between the Indian Ocean and Asia, she said.
According to Ms. Manaporn, the OTP has consulted with traders, created an environmental impact assessment, a business development plan, and made suggestions for investors.
On Wednesday night, really over 24 hours after militants killed 26 people in Indian-administered Kashmir, New Delhi suspended a water-sharing agreement, announced the closing of the major property border crossing with Pakistan, downgraded diplomatic relations, and withdrew applicants for Pakistanis. Expelling American diplomats and postponing permits for Indian nationals wereContinue Reading
