Ottawa’s admission that Khalistani extremist networks operate and fundraise on Canadian soil vindicates what New Delhi has argued for years. It also exposes a pattern of host-state tolerance — where diaspora political sensitivities have constrained law enforcement response.
Hamas was supposed to be destroyed. It has not been. Its survival — not as a governing force, but as a political and military reality — reshapes every calculation in the Middle East. The war’s original objective has failed. What comes next is being improvised.
Xi Jinping flanked by Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un sent a message requiring no translation. Three authoritarian leaders, three nuclear states, one parade. The image is not merely symbolic — it reflects a convergence that Western strategic planning cannot afford to dismiss.
Morgenthau is read as the theorist who stripped ethics from foreign policy. He is better understood as the thinker who insisted that power without moral limits destroys itself. His realism is not amorality — it is a different, harder ethics that the current moment demands.
While diplomats negotiated and envoys shuttled, conditions in Gaza continued to deteriorate. The gap between what was being discussed at the diplomatic level and what was happening on the ground was not a failure of information. It was a failure of will.
Donald Trump claimed credit for mediating between India and Pakistan. New Delhi immediately disputed it. The exchange reveals how Washington now approaches South Asia — as a transactional space where mediation claims serve domestic political purposes more than diplomatic ones.
India’s decision to share flood alert data with Pakistan during a humanitarian emergency signals something worth noting: even the most strained bilateral relationships retain a floor. Catastrophe diplomacy is not friendship. But it is evidence that pragmatism has not entirely expired.
Culture was always a tool of statecraft. What has changed is its weaponisation — by states promoting nationalist narratives abroad, by movements using identity as political mobilisation and by platforms that amplify grievance faster than diplomacy can respond.
Artificial intelligence is developing faster than the diplomatic frameworks designed to govern it. Autonomous weapons, AI-enabled surveillance and algorithmic decision-making are already deployed. The institutions meant to regulate them are still in committee.
Environmental geopolitics studies how ecological change — resource scarcity, climate disruption, biodiversity collapse — reshapes state behaviour. It is not a niche field. It is the lens through which the most consequential foreign policy decisions of this century will be made.
States have always kept their citizens under surveillance. What is new is the scale, the precision and the export of the technology. China’s surveillance infrastructure is being adopted across the Global South. Authoritarian governance is going global, one camera at a time.
The green energy transition runs on lithium, cobalt and rare earth elements — and most are concentrated in a handful of countries. The scramble to secure them is reshaping alliances, fuelling conflict in Africa and intensifying the US-China economic rivalry.