Css 2019

Log In

Q.2: Prospective Foreign Policy Options for Pakistan in the Wake of the Russian Invasion of Ukraine (Feb 2022)

  1. Introduction

The Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 redefined global geopolitics, reawakening Cold War-style bloc politics. As global powers realign, Pakistan faces a challenging environment marked by economic vulnerabilities, regional instability, and strategic autonomy dilemmas. Pakistan’s foreign policy must now strike a delicate balance between Western expectations, Chinese strategic partnership, and a cautiously developing relationship with Russia.

  1. Overview of the Russia–Ukraine Conflict
  • Russia’s military intervention was framed as a response to NATO expansion and Ukrainian pro-Western tilt.
  • The West responded with:
    • Sweeping sanctions on Russia
    • Military and financial aid to Ukraine
    • Renewed emphasis on Western alliances (NATO, G7)
  • Resulted in:
    • Global food, fuel, and fertilizer crises
    • Polarization in international forums (UNGA, UNSC)
  1. Pakistan’s Current Foreign Policy Posture
AreaPosition
RussiaAvoided outright condemnation; pursued economic & energy talks
West (USA/EU)Strategic ties with IMF, FATF cooperation, diaspora relations
ChinaAll-weather partnership (CPEC, BRI) remains core foreign policy pillar
UkraineSupport for territorial sovereignty in UNGA resolutions (abstentions/votes vary)

Pakistan’s neutrality is largely pragmatic, aimed at economic survival and strategic autonomy.

  1. Strategic Dilemmas for Pakistan
  • Dependency on Western institutions (IMF, World Bank)
  • Strategic proximity to China, but potential to benefit from Russian oil/gas discounts
  • Desire to engage in multipolar diplomacy, but limited bandwidth due to internal political instability and weak economic fundamentals
  1. Prospective Foreign Policy Options
  2. Diplomatic Balancing
  • Maintain non-aligned diplomacy with a UN Charter–based neutrality.
  • Vote selectively in multilateral forums to avoid alienating either Russia or the West.
  • Support mediation and peace efforts within the OIC and SCO frameworks.
  1. Economic Pragmatism
  • Negotiate energy deals with Russia, especially discounted oil and LNG (as seen with India).
  • Diversify trade partners to include Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) members.
  • Protect access to Western markets and remittances while cautiously expanding Eastern linkages.
  1. Strategic Hedging
  • Avoid over-commitment to either axis.
  • Enhance defense diplomacy with Turkey, Iran, and Central Asian states to reduce dependence on Western arms or Chinese vetoes.
  1. Energy & Connectivity Diplomacy
  • Leverage CPEC to connect Russia and CARs to the Arabian Sea via Gwadar.
  • Join regional energy projects (e.g., Pakistan Stream Gas Pipeline, CASA-1000) with Russian cooperation but avoid violating sanctions regimes.
  1. Multilateral Rebalancing
  • Increase active participation in:
    • Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)
    • Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO)
    • OIC Contact Group on Ukraine Crisis
  1. Challenges in Policy Realignment
ChallengeExplanation
Economic ConstraintsReliance on IMF limits foreign policy maneuvering.
Western PressuresPossible diplomatic cost of Russian outreach.
Internal Political InstabilityLack of consensus hinders consistent policy articulation.
Energy Diplomacy RisksU.S. and EU sanctions could deter Russian deals.
  1. Conclusion

Pakistan’s foreign policy in the wake of the Russia–Ukraine war must be principled, but pragmatic. It should uphold sovereignty and international law, yet seek economic self-interest and strategic diversification. The best path forward is multi-vector diplomacy, where Pakistan nurtures regional connectivity, pursues energy security, and avoids becoming collateral in renewed great power rivalries.

Q.3: The 2021 Taliban Takeover of Afghanistan – Policies, Regional and Global Response

  1. Introduction
The Taliban’s return to power on August 15, 2021, following the U.S. withdrawal, dramatically altered Afghanistan’s internal landscape and regional geopolitics. While the Taliban promised a “moderate” regime, fears remain over extremism, women’s rights, terrorism, and refugee flows. The world faces the dilemma of engagement vs. isolation.
  1. Overview of the 2021 Taliban Takeover
  • The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan was re-declared after two decades of U.S.-backed democracy.
  • Taliban seized power with little resistance after the Ghani government collapsed.
  • The Doha Agreement (2020) was instrumental in paving the way for U.S. withdrawal.
  1. Anticipated Policies of the Taliban Government
Domain Policy Direction
Governance Theocratic model based on Deobandi-Islamic Emirate; absence of elected democratic structures.
Human Rights Severe restrictions on women’s rights, including bans on female education beyond Grade 6, jobs, and public participation.
Security Claims to combat ISIS-K, but provides safe haven to groups like TTP and Al-Qaeda.
Foreign Policy Pursues recognition, economic aid, and neutral diplomacy with neighbors; resists Western conditions.
Economic Management Dependent on UN humanitarian aid, informal trade, and opium economy; struggling with banking isolation.
  1. Regional Responses
  2. Pakistan
  • Initially supportive due to historical ties and desire for strategic depth.
  • Faces blowback due to TTP resurgence from Afghan soil.
  • Advocates for inclusive government, peace, and cross-border trade.
  1. China
  • Pragmatic engagement with Taliban; eyeing rare-earth access, Belt & Road expansion, and curbing ETIM extremism.
  • Signed tentative mining agreements and maintained Kabul embassy.
  1. Iran
  • Deeply cautious; concerned over Sunni extremism, Hazara Shia persecution, and refugee influx.
  • Engages via consular ties and hosted intra-Afghan dialogue.
  1. India
  • Initially alarmed; had invested heavily in Afghan infrastructure under the previous regime.
  • Gradually resumed humanitarian assistance, reopened embassy, and keeps security vigil on terror spillovers.
  1. Russia & Central Asia
  • Concerns over ISIS-K and heroin trafficking.
  • Conducted military drills in Tajikistan and engages Taliban diplomatically without formal recognition.
  1. Global Response
Entity Stance
United States Withdrawn militarily, but influential via financial sanctions, frozen reserves ($7 billion), and counterterrorism surveillance.
European Union Focused on humanitarian aid, women’s rights, and diplomatic conditionality. No recognition granted.
United Nations Operates UNAMA mission, offers humanitarian support, but stresses human rights compliance.
OIC Attempts to mediate and provide Islamic legitimacy-based aid, especially after bans on women’s education/work.
  1. Key Challenges
Challenge Details
Lack of Recognition No country formally recognizes the Taliban government.
Terror Sanctuaries Taliban failure to act against TTP, Al-Qaeda, and ISIS-K destabilizes the region.
Humanitarian Crisis Over 28 million Afghans need aid; 90% population under poverty line (UNDP).
Women’s Rights Near-total erasure of female public life; global backlash ongoing.
Illicit Economy Opium trade continues to thrive; funds insurgencies and mafia networks.
  1. Conclusion
The Taliban’s resurgence poses critical tests for regional peace, human security, and counterterrorism. Their governance model, though repackaged, retains hardline features of the 1996–2001 era. While the global community cautiously engages, formal recognition remains elusive. For Pakistan and the region, coexistence with containment, border security, and diplomatic vigilance will be the only viable path forward unless Taliban policies dramatically reform.

Q4: US–Russia Strategic Deterrence under the New START Treaty (2021) and Its Implications for Pakistan’s Nuclear Programme ________________________________________

  1. Introduction
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) is the last remaining bilateral nuclear arms control agreement between the United States and Russia. Initially signed in 2010 and extended for five years in February 2021, it plays a critical role in strategic nuclear deterrence, arms limitation, and global non-proliferation diplomacy. While Pakistan is not a signatory, the precedent it sets has indirect implications for Pakistan’s defence posture and regional deterrence stability.
  1. Understanding the New START Treaty (2021 Extension)
Component Description
Signatories United States & Russian Federation
Limits 1,550 deployed strategic warheads; 700 deployed launchers (ICBMs, SLBMs, bombers)
Verification On-site inspections, telemetry exchanges, and notifications
Validity Extended on Feb 3, 2021, until Feb 4, 2026 (5 years)
  1. Impact on US–Russia Strategic Nuclear Deterrence
  2. Stability Through Predictability
  • The treaty caps nuclear competition, preventing a full-blown arms race.
  • Encourages strategic dialogue amid rising tensions (e.g., Ukraine War, NATO expansion).
  1. Mutual Trust & Verification
  • Re-establishes confidence-building measures, though inspections were paused during COVID-19 and later due to the Russia–Ukraine conflict.
  1. Limitation, Not Disarmament
  • It does not limit tactical nuclear weapons or newer hypersonic systems (e.g., Avangard, Burevestnik).
  1. Extended Relevance
  • Treaty sets precedent for future talks (though currently suspended as of 2023–24 due to Ukraine crisis).
  1. Evolving Strategic Stability: Key Prospects
Possibility Impact
Breakdown of Treaty Risk of unconstrained buildup; collapse of strategic restraint mechanisms
Multilateral Expansion Potential future inclusion of China, India, Pakistan, etc., in broader frameworks
Modernization Race Pushes non-signatory states to maintain parity via technological upgrades
  1. Implications for Global Non-Proliferation Norms
  • Double standards persist: NPT-recognized powers like the US and Russia are allowed arsenals, while others (e.g., Pakistan, Israel) face pressure.
  • Pakistan views such treaties as exclusive, potentially cementing nuclear apartheid.
  • Nonetheless, such treaties shape norms, which Pakistan must monitor to avoid diplomatic isolation.
  1. Implications for Pakistan’s Nuclear Programme
  2. Deterrence Posture & Defence Doctrine
  • Pakistan follows a minimum credible deterrence (MCD) doctrine in response to India’s conventional and nuclear buildup.
  • India’s development of ballistic missile defence (BMD) and submarine-based second strike capability compels Pakistan to retain strategic flexibility.
  1. Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNWs)
  • Unlike New START’s focus on strategic weapons, Pakistan emphasizes short-range nuclear delivery systems (e.g., Nasr) to counter India’s Cold Start doctrine.
  • Such posture could become controversial in expanded arms control regimes.
  1. Strategic Autonomy vs Global Pressure
  • If global regimes evolve post-New START to include threshold states (India, Pakistan, Israel), Pakistan may face pressure to:
    • Cap arsenal size
    • Accept fissile material cut-off
    • Join international verification
  1. Risk of Discriminatory Inclusion
  • Western states may push India into a future arms control regime while excluding Pakistan—posing risks of strategic imbalance and parity erosion.
  1. Conclusion
While the New START Treaty (2021) is bilateral in nature, it significantly impacts global nuclear norms and strategic stability. For Pakistan, the treaty is a signpost of future global attempts to universalize arms control frameworks. To maintain its strategic deterrence, Pakistan must remain vigilant, resist discriminatory regimes, and proactively advocate for regional strategic stability, particularly with respect to India’s growing arsenal and technological shifts

Q.5: Disunity in the Muslim Ummah – Causes and Pragmatic Pathways to Unity ________________________________________

  1. Introduction
Despite a shared religious identity, the Muslim Ummah remains deeply fragmented across political, sectarian, and strategic lines. The failure to forge unity has left the Muslim world vulnerable to external intervention, domestic crises, and diplomatic irrelevance. The way forward demands a pragmatic, interest-based, and reformist approach rather than idealistic calls for symbolic unity.
  1. Present State of the Muslim Ummah
  • Comprises over 1.9 billion people in more than 50 countries.
  • Rich in natural resources (oil, gas, minerals) yet underrepresented in global power structures.
  • Witnesses ongoing crises in Palestine, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, and Kashmir.
  1. Key Causes of Disunity
  2. Political Fragmentation
  • Competing national interests and authoritarian regimes make cooperation difficult.
  • Absence of a collective political vision (like EU or ASEAN).
  1. Leadership Vacuum
  • Lack of a charismatic, visionary, and consensus-based leader accepted across regions (Middle East, South Asia, Africa).
  1. Sectarianism
  • Sunni-Shia, Arab-Persian, and ethnic divides exacerbate conflicts (e.g., Saudi-Iran rivalry, intra-Shia tensions in Iraq, Bahrain, Lebanon).
  1. Geopolitical Rivalries
  • Rival blocs within the Ummah: Saudi-led bloc, Iranian axis, Turkish-Qatari partnership.
  • Dependency on Western military alliances and arms procurement weakens independent policy stances.
  1. Institutional Weakness
  • The OIC, meant to be the political voice of Muslims, lacks legal authority, political will, and financial independence.
  1. Impact of Disunity
Area Impact
Palestine Issue No unified stance; fragmented support for resistance or peace processes.
Kashmir Issue Rarely prioritized in joint Muslim agendas.
Global Forums (UN, IMF, G20) Lack of a unified bloc weakens bargaining power.
Socioeconomic Development 60% of world’s refugees come from Muslim countries (UNHCR, 2023).
Perception of Islam Global Islamophobia rises unchecked due to absence of collective diplomatic strategy.
  1. Ways and Means to Unite the Muslim Ummah (Pragmatic Approach)
  2. Leadership Reforms and Neutral Mediation
  • Encourage countries like Turkey, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Indonesia to act as neutral mediators between rival Muslim states.
  • Shift from monarchy-driven alliances to people-centric diplomacy.
  1. Revival of the OIC
  • Reform the OIC Charter to allow:
    • Decision-making powers
    • Joint military and humanitarian responses
    • Binding economic coordination (e.g., joint sanctions, boycotts)
  1. Economic Integration
  • Create a Muslim Free Trade Zone (MFTZ) and enhance intra-OIC trade.
  • Launch a joint investment fund for crisis-affected Muslim nations (e.g., Sudan, Palestine, Yemen).
  1. Counter-Sectarian & Counter-Extremism Narratives
  • Promote a universal Islamic narrative of tolerance via joint religious declarations.
  • Establish regional councils of ulema from all sects to diffuse ideological extremism.
  1. Education, Science & Media Cooperation
  • Launch joint academic networks and Pan-Islamic research institutes.
  • Create a unified media platform (e.g., OIC News Channel) to counter Islamophobia and Western bias.
  1. Joint Foreign Policy Stances
  • Establish an OIC Permanent Seat in the UN General Assembly to coordinate Muslim responses on:
    • Palestine
    • Islamophobia (e.g., Quran burning in Sweden)
    • Rohingya & Kashmir issues
  1. Role of Pakistan
  • Act as a bridge-builder among competing blocs.
  • Continue playing mediatory roles (e.g., Pakistan’s role in Saudi-Iran thaw brokered by China).
  • Lead Islamic financial, scientific, and climate diplomacy initiatives.
  1. Conclusion
Unity in the Muslim Ummah must move from emotional slogans to institutional cooperation. A multi-tiered strategy—starting from economic integration and shared education to political cohesion and security alignment—is needed. While historical grievances and geopolitical rivalries exist, mutual interests, shared threats, and faith-based identity offer strong foundations for pragmatic unity. The Muslim world must rise not just as a community of faith, but as a civilization of purpose.

Q6: Proposing a Practical Political System for Good Governance in Pakistan

  1. Introduction
Pakistan’s political history is marked by frequent shifts between parliamentary and presidential systems, military interventions, and institutional disequilibrium. Despite having three constitutions, numerous amendments, and multiple democratic transitions, the quality of governance has remained suboptimal. What Pakistan needs now is not a change in name, but a reform in structure—a pragmatic hybrid model that combines accountability with stability.
  1. Historical Overview of Political Experiments
System Period Outcome
Parliamentary 1947–1958, 1973–1977, 2008–present Political instability, coalition fragility, executive confusion
Presidential 1958–1971 (Ayub), 1977–1988 (Zia), 2000–2008 (Musharraf) Authoritarianism, overcentralization, weak democratic culture
Hybrid (De facto) Post-18th Amendment Conflict between PM, President, and Establishment
  1. Structural Weaknesses of Past Systems
  • Frequent no-confidence motions
  • Weak local government systems
  • Personality cults over institutions
  • Civil-military power imbalance
  • Judicial overreach and inconsistent legal frameworks
  1. Proposed System: Hybrid Parliamentary-Presidential Model
A semi-presidential system, adapted to Pakistan’s context, blending the executive stability of a President with the democratic inclusiveness of a Parliament.
  1. Key Features
Institution Role
President (Directly Elected) Head of State and Executive; appoints key posts with parliamentary oversight; term limit of 5 years (max 2 terms)
Prime Minister (From Parliament) Head of Government; oversees day-to-day governance and policy legislation
Parliament (Bicameral) Legislative oversight, budget approval, confidence votes
Constitutional Council Institutional watchdog to prevent abuse of presidential powers (includes opposition, judiciary, military observers)
  1. Institutional Safeguards
  • Fixed four-year term for assemblies and executives
  • Mandatory mid-term performance review by an independent commission
  • Run-off elections for presidential seat to ensure broad mandate
  • Revival of Local Government System with constitutional protection
  • Appointment of technocrats in critical ministries (e.g., finance, climate, planning)
  1. Balance of Power
  • President handles foreign affairs, security, and emergency powers
  • PM leads domestic development, education, health, and legislative agenda
  • Judiciary retains oversight via constitutional courts for inter-institutional disputes
  1. Conditions for Successful Implementation
  1. Consensus-Building among major political parties (PPP, PML-N, PTI, others)
  2. Constitutional Amendment through 2/3rd majority in Parliament
  3. Civil-Military Code of Conduct defining clear civilian supremacy
  4. Electoral Reforms including EVMs, transparent funding, and independent ECP
  5. Devolution of Power to provinces and union councils via fiscal reforms
  6. Merit-Based Bureaucracy through civil service modernization
  1. Advantages Over Existing Models
Issue Existing System Proposed System
Political Instability Frequent breakdowns Direct presidential mandate ensures continuity
Executive Gridlock Conflicts between PM and President Role clarity prevents turf wars
Poor Local Governance Delayed LG elections LGs constitutionally protected
Lack of Accountability Party-dominated legislatures Separation of policy and administration
Military Interference Weak civilian leadership Balance of executive strength ensures deterrence
  1. Conclusion
Pakistan’s democratic journey demands a homegrown political architecture—one that ensures executive efficiency, legislative legitimacy, and judicial balance. A semi-presidential hybrid system, fortified with institutional checks, can deliver stability, meritocracy, and inclusive governance. For a country facing economic, strategic, and demographic challenges, good governance is not a luxury—it is a lifeline.

Q7: The Emerging World Order – Cold War 2.0? A Triangular Power Dynamic between US, China, and Russia

  1. Introduction
The US-China trade war that began in 2018 under the Trump administration signaled more than just economic protectionism—it revealed a deep strategic rivalry over technology, influence, and global leadership. As Russia challenges Western hegemony militarily (e.g., Ukraine), and China does so economically and technologically, many scholars and diplomats describe the current era as the dawn of a Second Cold War. Unlike the bipolar structure of the 20th century, this unfolding tri-polar contest involves China, Russia, and the US with a highly globalized and digitally interconnected backdrop.
  1. US-China Trade War as Prelude to Strategic Rivalry
Year Key Events
2018 US imposes tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese goods
2019 Huawei banned from US markets
2020–2022 Tech decoupling accelerates; 5G, semiconductors, AI restrictions
2023–2024 AUKUS, CHIPS Act, TikTok bans, Taiwan tensions
2024–2025 Continued sanctions on semiconductors and strategic exports to China
The trade war has morphed into a broader strategic conflict involving technology, military posturing (Taiwan Strait, South China Sea), and diplomatic blocs (Quad, BRICS+, AUKUS).
  1. Cold War 2.0: Concept and Parallels
Classic Cold War (1947–1991) New Cold War (Post-2018)
US vs. USSR US vs. China & Russia
Ideological: Capitalism vs Communism Strategic: Liberal Order vs Authoritarian Capitalism
Arms Race, Proxy Wars Tech Race, Economic Sanctions, Cyber Wars
NATO vs Warsaw Pact NATO/QUAD vs SCO/BRICS
Berlin/Taiwan flashpoints Taiwan, Ukraine, South China Sea
However, interdependence, non-aligned actors, and multilateral institutions make this Cold War more complex and multi-dimensional.
  1. Role of Main Actors
  2. United States
  • Leading the rules-based liberal order.
  • Strategic objectives: Contain China’s rise, weaken Russian aggression, retain Western leadership.
  • Tools: Sanctions, military alliances (NATO, AUKUS), technological restrictions, financial leverage (SWIFT, IMF, World Bank).
  1. China
  • Seeking to replace the US as the economic hegemon by mid-21st century.
  • Strategy:
    • Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) for geo-economic influence.
    • Yuan internationalization and dedollarization efforts.
    • Expansion of BRICS+, digital silk road, and AI leadership.
  1. Russia
  • Acts as a revisionist military power.
  • Challenging Western dominance via:
    • Ukraine invasion, gas diplomacy in Europe.
    • Strategic partnerships with China, Iran, and African states.
    • Weaponizing energy and cyber operations.
  1. Emerging Characteristics of the Future World Order
Feature Description
Multi-Polarism No single global hegemon; power shared among US, China, Russia, EU, and regional blocs.
Geo-Techno Politics Nations fight over AI, quantum computing, 5G, and semiconductors instead of nuclear arms.
Currency War Rise of Yuan, BRICS currency proposal, and dedollarization campaigns threaten US dollar dominance.
Bloc Formation Economic and security blocs solidify (QUAD, AUKUS vs BRICS+, SCO).
Proxy Zones Taiwan, Ukraine, South China Sea, and Africa become zones of confrontation.
  1. Possible Global Alignments
Bloc Core States Interests
US-led West US, EU, Japan, Australia Maintain status quo, NATO expansion, democratic values
China-Russia Axis China, Russia, Iran, Belarus Redefine world order, reduce US influence
Emerging Middle Turkey, India, Brazil, ASEAN Strategic autonomy, issue-based alliances
  1. Implications for Global South and Pakistan
  • Pakistan likely to lean toward China, but must balance ties with the West.
  • May benefit from economic diversification (BRI), but risks being caught in a new Great Power game.
  • Strategic autonomy and regional cooperation (e.g., via SCO, ECO) must guide Pakistan’s diplomacy.
  1. Conclusion
The future world order is shaping into a Cold Peace rather than a Cold War—marked by economic competition, strategic containment, and digital conflict rather than ideological warfare. With China rising, Russia resisting, and the US preserving, the balance of power will depend on technological supremacy, economic resilience, and diplomatic adaptability. Rather than a binary division, the world is heading towards fluid alliances, competing regionalisms, and a digitally polarized geopolitical ecosystem

Q.8: Write Short Notes on the Following (10 Marks Each)

  1. a) Poverty & Trade in South Asia and the Role of SAARC
South Asia, home to over 1.9 billion people, hosts some of the world’s poorest populations, despite being rich in resources and human capital. Nearly 1 in 4 people in the region lives below the poverty line. Key Poverty Issues:
  • Income inequality, rural underdevelopment, and lack of social safety nets
  • High vulnerability to climate shocks and political instability
  • COVID-19 exacerbated unemployment and informal sector fragility
Trade Scenario:
  • Intra-regional trade is less than 5% of total trade (compared to ~25% in ASEAN).
  • Tariff and non-tariff barriers restrict economic potential.
Role of SAARC:
  • SAARC (founded 1985) was envisioned to boost regional cooperation, including trade, poverty alleviation, and cultural exchange.
  • Key initiatives:
    • SAFTA (South Asian Free Trade Area): underperforming due to India-Pakistan tensions
    • Poverty Alleviation Programs (SAPAP): limited impact due to low funding and weak implementation
Conclusion: SAARC holds immense potential, but political mistrust and bilateral conflicts impede collective action on poverty and trade. A revitalized SAARC 2.0 with an economic-first agenda can uplift millions. (b) A Comparison of Leadership Qualities Between Xi Jinping and Joe Biden Xi Jinping (China):
  • Autocratic and Strategic: Centralizes authority under “Xi Jinping Thought.”
  • Long-Term Vision: Projects like Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Made in China 2025.
  • Party Supremacy: Emphasizes loyalty to the Communist Party; purged rivals.
  • Assertive Diplomacy: Wolf warrior stance, focus on Indo-Pacific dominance.
Joe Biden (USA):
  • Democratic and Consensus-Oriented: Relies on coalition-building domestically and internationally.
  • Restorationist Agenda: “America is back” – reviving alliances (NATO, QUAD).
  • Institutional Respect: Balances presidential powers with judiciary, Congress.
  • Social Reformer: Focus on climate, infrastructure, and racial equity.
Comparison:
Trait Xi Jinping Joe Biden
Style Commanding Collaborative
Governance Centralized Decentralized
Focus Tech/military rise Global norms/democracy
Diplomacy Assertive Restorative
Conclusion: Xi embodies power-centric realism, while Biden reflects liberal democratic values. Both reshape geopolitics through distinct ideological and leadership lenses. (c) 2022 FIFA World Cup and Politics of the Arab World The 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar was not just a sporting event—it was a strategic political statement by the Arab world, especially the Gulf states. Key Political Dimensions:
  • Qatar’s Soft Power: First Muslim and Arab nation to host; challenged Western stereotypes.
  • Arab Solidarity Displayed: Widespread support for Palestine during matches (e.g., Moroccan fans waving Palestinian flags).
  • Criticism from the West:
    • Human rights concerns (migrant labor, LGBTQ+ issues)
    • Qatar responded with assertions of cultural sovereignty
Arab Unity and Image-Building:
  • The tournament fostered a rare moment of unity among Arab states post-2017 GCC blockade.
  • Countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Morocco used the global platform to rebrand themselves as modern, capable hosts of global events.
Conclusion: The World Cup marked a geopolitical coming of age for the Arab world, leveraging sports diplomacy to assert cultural identity, enhance soft power, and challenge the Western narrative monopoly.

. . Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 Current Affairs 2022 

You cannot copy content of this pages.