Improving Pakistan-Bangladesh Relations

Bangladesh’s foreign affairs adviser, Touhid Hossain, recently stated that there is no longer any reason for strained relations with Pakistan. This shift in sentiment is underscored by the announcement of Pakistan Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar’s planned visit to Dhaka in April, signaling a thaw in decades of frosty relations.

The change can be traced to August, when Bangladesh's former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was ousted after 15 years in power. Her tenure was marked by a strong alliance with India, seen in bilateral agreements, trade, and security collaborations. However, her removal created a diplomatic shift, leading to a cooling of ties with New Delhi and an opening for improved relations with Pakistan.

This shift is significant given the historical grievances stemming from the 1971 Liberation War, which have long impacted relations. Despite this, recent months have seen several high-level engagements between Bangladesh and Pakistan, indicating a thaw. Notably, Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, an adviser to Bangladesh’s interim government, met with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif twice, highlighting the growing importance of ties with Pakistan over India.

Trade is emerging as a key area of cooperation. From August to December 2024, bilateral trade grew by 27%, and both countries signed an MOU in January to establish a joint business council. Similarly, in the defense sector, several high-level meetings between military officials from both countries have focused on regional security, joint military exercises, and arms trading. The term "brotherly countries" used by Pakistan’s military further signals a potential shift in South Asia’s security dynamics.

China also plays a strategic role, being a key partner to both nations. India’s concerns are rising, especially with Bangladesh’s interest in acquiring JF-17 Thunder fighter jets from Pakistan, which could alter the regional balance of power. This development has the potential to deepen the trilateral ties between Bangladesh, Pakistan, and China, prompting India to reassess its diplomatic and military strategies.

India must adapt to the changing dynamics by adopting a pragmatic approach that acknowledges Bangladesh’s evolving priorities while reinforcing historical ties. This will ensure India remains a key player in South Asia’s shifting landscape. Managing these relationships is crucial for all three nations. Bangladesh must balance its new ties with Pakistan and its economic dependence on India, while Pakistan must recognize its economic limitations. India, in turn, must address Bangladesh’s grievances to avoid further alienation.

Handled carefully, this evolving relationship could reshape South Asia, proving that diplomacy can overcome even the most entrenched divides. This moment presents an opportunity for Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India to redefine their futures in a geopolitically complex region.

ECO Regional Planning Council Meeting

The 35th Regional Planning Council (RPC) of Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) kicked off in Tehran with the participation of delegations from relevant ministries and organizations of ECO member countries. This council, as the key decision-making body of the organization, will discuss and approve the annual work program of the ECO.

This session is being held from February 24 to 27 at the ECO Secretariat with the presence of senior officials from ECO member countries to plan ECO activities for the year 2025.

The ECO Secretary General stated that in recent months, ECO activities to enhance cooperation between countries in various fields have seen a significant increase.

According to the ECO Secretary General, this meeting is of particular importance to mark 2025 as a milestone year with several important ministerial meetings in the fields of trade, tourism, finance, transportation, internal affairs, and sustainable development, as well as the 17th ECO Summit to be held on July 3-4, 2025, in Azerbaijan.

The RPC is the main technical planning body within ECO which comprises the heads of the Planning Organizations of the Member States as well as officials and experts from the national sectoral ministries and agencies. RPC convenes its annual meetings prior to the regular meeting of the Council of Ministers under the chairpersonship of the representative of the Member State holding the chairpersonship of the Council of Ministers. Meetings are normally held in the ECO Headquarters in Tehran.

The RPC is responsible for preparation of the programs of action for realizing the objectives of the Organization along with stocktaking of previous programs. It may also propose to the Council of Ministers the establishment of regional institutions and ad-hoc committees in priority areas of cooperation.

Annual RPC meetings are normally structured along one plenary session as well as several parallel sectoral committees dealing with the priority sectors of the Organization. One-year programs of work and ECO calendars of meetings are also developed by RPC meetings on the basis of the proposals made by the Secretariat and the Council of Permanent Representatives.

 

Arabs have no spine to reject Trump Gaza plan

I am obliged to share an article by Hilal Khashan published in Geopolitical Futures. The punch line is “Regional governments’ ability to resist will be limited by their need for Washington’s support”. This sees a harsh ground reality and it is feared that sooner than later Arabs would succumb to the US pressure. It may be recalled that Israel, with the help of United States has already brought Syria, Lebanon and Hamas on their knees and getting desperate to destroy Iranian nuclear and missile program.

Earlier this month, US President Donald Trump during a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced his plan to take over the Gaza Strip and resettle its residents in Egypt and Jordan. A week later, he reiterated his intention during a press briefing in Washington with Jordanian King Abdullah II, who appeared uncomfortable listening to Trump’s proposal but avoided challenging the president on the matter. Fearing a similarly embarrassing situation, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi canceled his own visit to Washington scheduled for February 18.

The Palestinian question was the focal point of Arab foreign policy until the 1967 Six-Day War. Since then, Arab countries have sought various peace treaties with Israel and grown dependent on US protection for their survival. Though they cannot endorse Trump’s plan to evict Palestinians from Gaza and transform the strip into a “Riviera of the Middle East,” neither can they simply dismiss his assertions. Trump has challenged Arab leaders to come up with an alternative plan for Gaza, knowing they likely cannot.

Many observers have compared Trump’s proposal to resettle Palestinians in neighboring countries to Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s willingness to host them in Sinai in the early 1950s. But the conditions that led Nasser to favor the resettlement of Gazan refugees differ fundamentally from the situation in the region today.

After the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, it was the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) that proposed resettling refugees who had fled to Gaza during the conflict, in accordance with UN General Assembly resolution 194. The initiative would not have affected the 80,000 Gaza residents who were living there before the war. Arabs generally viewed it as a humanitarian endeavor, given the wide range of relief services the agency provided, rather than a liquidation plan, as opponents of Trump’s proposal see it.

The UN-sponsored initiative ultimately collapsed. In 1953, UNRWA and Egypt, under Nasser, signed a plan to resettle 120,000 refugees from Gaza. Two years later, they agreed that the Egyptian town of Qantara, located east of Suez and 220 kilometers (140 miles) southwest of Gaza, would be the location of a new settlement for the refugees. But in retaliation for the United States and Britain’s refusal to fund the construction of the Aswan High Dam, Nasser withdrew his support from the project.

The Palestinian issue has long been a sensitive topic in the Arab world. Arab governments know they cannot be seen as supportive of a US plan to remove Palestinians from Gaza. Still, Arab countries’ responses to the proposal have been weak and indecisive. They even postponed an emergency Arab League summit scheduled for the end of this month to discuss an alternative plan for Gaza, under the pretext that some Arab heads of state had prior commitments.

El-Sissi launched a fierce media campaign to try to convince the Egyptian public that Cairo will not give in to threats and blackmail. (Pentagon officials had hinted to Egyptian officials that military aid, including repairs to equipment and spare parts, could be affected by Egypt’s position on the Trump plan). Egyptian officials also helped organize demonstrations against the proposal, hoping to convey a message to Washington that the Egyptian people (and not just the government) rejected the relocation plan. Egypt’s top mufti called the proposal irresponsible and provocative and said it violates international norms and humanitarian standards – sentiments Arab leaders dare not say themselves.

El-Sissi said the relocation of Gazans to Egypt would be a direct threat to his regime, as Palestinians would disseminate a culture of resistance and promote their own interests inside Egypt. In a public address, el-Sissi described the displacement of Palestinians as an injustice in which Cairo cannot participate and insisted that he would not tolerate any actions that harm Egyptian national security, without specifying how resettling Gazans in Sinai would do so.

He reiterated his determination to work with Trump and said the US president still wants to achieve a two-state solution. Despite believing that Israel will not allow the establishment of a Palestinian state, Egypt at least officially continues to focus on the importance of cooperation with the United States to achieve a just peace between the Palestinians and Israel and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Egyptian officials told the US director of national intelligence that Cairo will cancel its peace agreement with Israel if the Trump administration continues to push to displace Gaza residents or stops the flow of US aid. However, the most el-Sissi can do is temporarily suspend the Camp David Accords, knowing the consequences of fully repealing the treaty would be intolerable for Cairo. The Egyptians fear that Trump’s global ambitions go beyond annexing Canada and Greenland and acquiring Ukraine’s mineral resources. They believe he could be eyeing the Sinai Desert, given its strategic location, abundance of natural resources and tourist attractions.

Egypt has learned the lessons of the 1967 war. It is not serious about a military confrontation with Israel, no matter what happens to Palestinians in Gaza, and it will not create the conditions for another disastrous conflict, despite the uproar. The Egyptian government even released a statement saying the Egyptian and US presidents agreed on a number of topics during a recent call, avoiding any mention of Trump’s Gaza proposal.

Elsewhere in the Middle East, most Arab countries, including Jordan, issued perfunctory statements rejecting Trump’s calls to displace people from Gaza. But they failed to announce any measures to counter the plan. Their responses likely won’t go beyond verbal denunciations, a time-honored practice for Arab officials.

Future of dark fleet after Ukraine war ends

According to the Seatrade Maritimes News, three years on from Russian invasion of Ukraine some kind of peace agreement is looking increasingly possible with talks between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Ukraine officials saying a minerals deal with the US has been agreed. There are though still significant hurdles to be overcome between all sides in United States, Europe, Ukraine and Russia.

If a peace deal is agreed and sanctions on Russia by the United States, European Union, and Britain are rolled back it raises the question of what will happen to the shadow fleet of mainly elderly, poorly maintained tankers that are currently serving the sanction Russian oil trades.

The shadow or dark fleet of over 1,000 vessel is not solely the result of Russian invasion as some ships do also serve sanctioned trades with the likes of Iran and Venezuela, the large majority of the fleet has grown out of employment on Russian oil trades.

The question of what would happen with the shadow fleet if war in the Ukraine ends was one that a conference panel on commodities shipping in Singapore last week grappled with.

Peter Kolding, VP Commercial & Management for tanker owner Hafnia noted that given Russian business was comparatively high risk due to sanctions there was a premium for vessels on those trades.

“Those trades are operated by the oldest part of the fleet and good parts of that fleet would in an ordinary world probably be on a beach now to be scrapped, but they've been kept alive because of the premiums on the trade. If the war ends and the sanctions are lifted, those trades will go back with mainstream players requiring mainstream ships,” he told delegates at the conference during Commodity Trading Week Asia.

The elderly vessels currently employed in the shadow fleet would likely have difficulty finding employment on other trades resulting in ships gradually being sent for scrap.

Capt Subhangshu Dutt, Managing Director of tanker owner OM Maritime, agreed that the shadow fleet would have great difficulty in finding employment, and would likely not pass even the first round of vetting with oil majors. However, some might be used by intermediate traders or teapot refineries.

The tanker markets have benefitted over the last three years from the change in trading patterns and increased in tonne miles brought about by sanctions and tightening demand and supply balance.

Kolding noted that while the end of the war and return to previous trading patterns would be negative in terms of ton miles it would also trigger a considerable amount of scrapping from the shadow fleet so these factors would balance each other out. “So, from a Hafnia perspective we don't see an end to the war and an end to sanctions as a main negative anymore.”

However, there would be a time lag between the ending of sanctions and the large-scale scrapping of vessels in the shadow fleet that would put pressure on tanker rates.

Kolding estimated a period of 12 – 18 months where the market would feel some pain before owners were pushed into scrapping older, unprofitable ships.

 

Germany: Merz to host war criminal Netanyahu

Friedrich Merz, expected to be Germany’s next chancellor, told reporters on Monday that he would make sure Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can visit Germany despite an arrest warrant issued against him by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip.

By inviting Netanyahu to Germany, Merz is emboldening the Israeli war criminals, violating the ICC statute, and presenting himself as subservient to the butcher of Gaza.

“In the event that he [Netanyahu] plans to visit Germany, I have promised myself that we will find a way to ensure that he can visit Germany and leave again without being arrested,” Merz said from Berlin.

Germany says it has been a strong backer of the ICC. After the ICC’s decision against Netanyahu and his war minister Yoav Gallant in November, a German government spokesperson said, “The federal government was involved in the drafting of the ICC statute and is one of the ICC’s biggest supporters. This position is also a result of German history.”

To the shock of the international community, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government was the biggest supporter of the Netanyahu regime in its 16-month barbaric acts in Gaza. Germany has also been the second biggest supplier of deadly arms to Israel after the United States. However, it seems that Merz, still not forming a government, wants to present himself as a stronger supporter of Israel.

As a member state of the court, Germany is required to detain suspects facing arrest warrants if they set foot on their soil, but the incoming Marz government is sending signals that it is joining certain countries, including the United States, which are defying international order.

Viktor Orban was the first European leader who invited Netanyahu to visit Hungary in a show of disdain for the ICC ruling. Now, Merz is following in the footsteps of Orban, whose policies are not in conformity with the European Union.

Merz said, “I think it’s a really absurd idea that an Israeli prime minister can’t visit the Federal Republic of Germany. He will be able to visit Germany.”

Contrary to Merz’s claim, it is absurd to invite a war criminal to Germany as the most important member of the EU and as a country rightly or wrongly considered the most law-abiding nation.

Netanyahu is already buoyed that he has been invited to make a trip to Germany. His office said in a statement that Merz had invited the prime minister to make an official visit to Germany, in overt defiance of the scandalous International Criminal Court decision to label the Prime Minister a war criminal.

Before Merz welcomed Netanyahu’s possible future visit to Germany, the Biden administration and hawks in the American Congress had demonized the ICC to the extent that Senator Tom Cotton had threatened military action against the ICC and insulted its chief prosecutor Karim Khan.

Cotton said, “The ICC is a kangaroo court and Karim Khan is a deranged fanatic.”

The statement by Merz has even irritated the ICC, saying that states have a legal obligation to enforce its decisions. It said, “It is not for states to unilaterally determine the soundness of the court’s legal decisions.”

Merz either has been too busy to notice what degree of crimes Netanyahu and lieutenants have been doing in Gaza or he does not care about the tragedies that the Gazans have gone through.

It is not necessary to mention the horrific crimes that Israel committed in Gaza. They are obvious to the world. It is just enough to notice that thousands of Palestinians, mostly women and children, are still missing under the rubble.

In its November ruling, the ICC said there are “reasonable grounds” to believe that Gallant and Netanyahu “intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity.”

Naturally, Merz like other Germans must repent what Germany did against Jews during World War II which is famous as the Holocaust.

Merz must be reminded that Israel committed another Holocaust against the Palestinians in the third decade of the 21st century.

 

TRACECA meeting begins today in Tehran

Iran is hosting the 17th meeting of the Intergovernmental Commission of the Europe-Caucasus-Asia Transport Corridor (TRACECA) for the first time on Wednesday, February 26, the head of the International Affairs Center at Iran's Transport and Urban Development Ministry said.

According to a report by the ministry, Amin Taraffo’ stated that a preliminary meeting of TRACECA national secretaries was held on February 25 to review and finalize documents for decision-making at the main session the following day.

The official emphasized the significance of the event for Iran, noting that the meeting provides an opportunity to advance regional initiatives within the 14-member commission.

He added that Iran aims to leverage the platform to enhance transit cooperation and boost regional trade.

TRACECA is an international transport program involving the European Union and 12 member states of the Eastern European, Caucasus, and Central Asian region. 

The program aims at strengthening economic relations, trade, and transport in the regions of the Black Sea basin, South Caucasus, and Central Asia.

It has a permanent Secretariat, originally financed by the European Commission, in Baku, Azerbaijan, and a regional office in Odesa, Ukraine. Since 2009, the organization has been entirely financed by member countries.

TRACECA was established in May 1993 in Brussels, upon the signing of a Multilateral Agreement on International Transport for the development of transport initiatives (including the establishment and development of a road corridor) between the EU member states, Eastern European, Caucasus and Central Asian countries. The program supports the political and economic independence of former Soviet Union republics through enhancing their access to European and global markets through road, rail and sea. 

The objectives of TRACECA were underlined by the Baku Initiative of 2004, followed by a further ministerial conference in Sofia, Bulgaria, in 2006.

TRACECA has five working groups: maritime transport, aviation, road and rail, transport security, and transport infrastructure.

In July 2023, it was announced for TRACECA to join the eTIR international system.

 

EU partially lifts sanctions on Syria

On Monday, foreign ministers of European Union (EU) decided to suspend a series of far-reaching sanctions against Syria to help the country's economic recovery and reconstruction after nearly 14 years of civil war.

According to Reuters, the Council decided to remove five financial entities (Industrial Bank, Popular Credit Bank, Saving Bank, Agricultural Cooperative Bank and Syrian Arab Airlines) from the list of entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and to allow funds and economic resources to be made available to the Central Bank of Syria.

The EU has also suspended sectoral measures in the oil, gas, electricity, and transport sectors and introduced exemptions to the ban on banking relations between Syrian banks and financial institutions in the EU to facilitate transactions for humanitarian and reconstruction purposes, as well as for the energy and transport sectors.

The bloc will monitor the country’s situation to guarantee that suspensions remain appropriate with Kaja Kallas, the EU's top diplomat, stressing that "if everything does not go right, then we are also ready to put the sanctions back".

"Any kind of government needs to be all-inclusive and taking into account all the different groups that are in Syria,” she said.

Most of the EU's sanctions were imposed following Bashar al-Assad's violent crackdown on Syrian protesters in 2011, including broad restrictions on trade, financial transactions, and key industries such as energy and transport.

The sanctions led to the collapse of EU-Syria economic relations, with trade flows worth €396 million in 2023.

The regime of Bashar al-Assad was toppled in December last year by the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which has since been calling for the lifting of wide-ranging sanctions to help the war-torn country's economy.

There have also been calls to remove HTS and its leader Ahmed al-Sharaa from international terrorist lists, but the Council decided to maintain such lists in relation to the al-Assad regime, as well as those on arms trafficking, dual-use goods, the chemical weapons sector, and illicit drug trafficking, among others.

The EU's blacklist, which was renewed in November, covers 318 individuals and 86 entities. All are subject to an assets freeze and a travel ban.

More than 90% of Syrians live below the poverty line and at least 16.5 million people across Syria rely on some form of humanitarian assistance to meet their basic needs, according to a report by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

Last week, Human Rights Watch (HRW) warned that sweeping EU, US, and UK sanctions on Syria are hampering the country's economic recovery and preventing millions of Syrians from accessing essential services such as electricity, health care, water, and education.

“Rather than using broad sectoral sanctions as leverage for shifting political objectives, Western governments should recognize their direct harm to civilians and take meaningful steps to lift restrictions that impede access to basic rights,” said Hiba Zayadin, senior Syria researcher at HRW.

“A piecemeal approach of temporary exemptions and limited waivers is not enough. Sanctions that harm civilians should immediately be lifted, not refined,” Zayadin added.