▲ Artistic image of a Pakistani Rupee [Pixabay].

COUNTRY RISK REPORT / M. J. Moya, I. Maspons, A. V. Acosta

[Download the report]

April 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The government of Prime Minister (PM), Imran Khan, was slowly moving towards economic, social, and political improvements, but all these efforts might be hampered by the recent outbreak of the COVID-19 virus since the government must temporarily shift its focus and resources to keeping its population safe. Additionally, high logistical, legal, and security challenges still generate an uncompetitive operating environment and thus, an unattractive market for foreign investment in Pakistan. 

Firstly, in relation to the country's economic outlook, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was expected to gradually recover around 5% in the upcoming years. However, according to latest estimates, this growth will suffer a negative impact and fall to around 2%, straining the country's most recent recorded improvements. On the other hand, in the medium to long-term, Pakistan will benefit from the success of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is a strategic economic project aiming to improve infrastructure capacity in the country. Pakistan is also facing an energy crisis along with a growing demand from a booming population that hinder a proper economic progress. 

Secondly, Pakistan's political future will be shaped by Khan's ability to transform his short-term policies into long-term strategies. However, in order to achieve this, the government must tackle the root causes of political instability in Pakistan, such as long-lasting corruption, the constant military influence in decision-making processes, the historical discussion among secularism and Islamism, and the new challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Still, PM Khan's progressive reforms could represent the beginning towards a "Naya Pakistan" ("New Pakistan").  

Thirdly, Pakistan's social stability is contextualized within a high risk of terrorist attacks due to its internal security gaps. The ethnic dilemma among the provinces along with the government's violent oppression of insurgencies will continue to impede development and social cohesion within the country. This will further aggravate in light of a current shortage of resources and the impacts of climate change. 

In addition, in terms of Pakistan's security outlook, the country is expected to tackle terrorist financing and money laundering networks in order to avoid being blacklisted by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Nonetheless, due to a porous border with Afghanistan, Pakistan faces drug trafficking challenges that further destabilize national security. Finally, the turbulent Indo-Pakistani relation is the most significant conflict for the South Asian country. The disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir, a possible nuclear confrontation, and the increase of nationalist movements along the Punjab region, hamper regional and international peace.  

▲ Revolutionary Guard commandos naval exercises in the Strait of Hormuz in 2015 [Wikipedia].

essay / Ana Salas Cuevas

The Islamic Republic of Iran, also known as Persia, is a country of great geopolitical importance. It is a regional power not only because of its strategic location, but also because of its large hydrocarbon resources, which make Iran the fourth country in proven oil reserves and the first in gas reserves[1].

Thus, we are talking about one of the most important countries in the world for three fundamental reasons. The first, mentioned above: its immense oil and gas reserves. Secondly, because Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, which is the key to the entrance and exit of the Persian Gulf and through which most of the hydrocarbon exports of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain pass[2]. Finally, for the nuclear program in which it has invested so many years[3].

The Iranian republic is based on the principles of Shiite Islam, although there is great ethnic diversity in its society. It is therefore essential to take into account the great "strength of Iranian nationalism" in order to understand its politics. By appealing to its dominant position over other countries, the Iranian nationalist movement aims to influence public opinion. Nationalism has been building for more than 120 years, since the Tobacco Boycott of 1891[4] was a direct response to outside intervention and pressure, and today aims to achieve hegemony in the region. Iran's foreign and domestic policies are a clear expression of this movement[5].

Byproxy agent(proxy armies)

War by proxy is a model of warfare in which a country makes use of third parties to fight or influence in a given territory, instead of confronting each other directly. As David Daoud points out, in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Syria, "Tehran has perfected the art of gradually conquering a country without replacing its flag"[6]. The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) is directly involved in this task, training or militarily favoring the forces of other countries.

The GRI was born with the Islamic Revolution led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in order to maintain the achievements of the movement[7]. It is one of the main political and social actors in the country. It has great capacity to influence national political debates and decisions. It is also the owner of numerous companies in the country, which guarantees it a source its own financing and reinforces its character as an internal power. It constitutes a body independent of the armed forces, and the appointment of its senior officers depends directly on the Leader of the Revolution. Among its objectives is the struggle against imperialism, and it expressly commits itself to try to rescue Jerusalem in order to return it to the Palestinians[8]. Their importance is crucial to the regime, and any attack on these bodies represents a direct threat to the Iranian government[9].

Iran's relationship with the Muslim countries around it is marked by two main facts: on the one hand, its Shiite status; on the other, the preeminence it achieved in the past in the region[10]. 10] Thanks to the fact that its external action is supported by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, Iran has managed to establish strong links with political and religious groups throughout the Middle East. From there, Iran takes advantage of different resources to strengthen its influence in different countries. Firstly, by using soft power tools. Thus, among other actions, it has participated in the reconstruction of mosques and schools in countries such as Lebanon and Iraq[11]. 11] In Yemen, it has provided logistical and economic aid to the Houthi movement. In 2006, it was involved in the reconstruction of southern Beirut.

However, the methods used by these forces reach other extremes, moving to more intrusive mechanisms(hard power). For example, following the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Iran has been establishing a foothold there for three decades, with Hezbollah as a proxy, taking advantage of complaints about the disenfranchisement of the Shiite community. This line of action has enabled Tehran to promote its Islamic Revolution abroad[12].

In Iraq, the GRI sought to destabilize Iraq internally by supporting Shiite factions such as the Badr organization during the Iranian-Iraqi war of the 1980s. Iran, on the other hand, involved the GRI in Saddam Hussein's uprising in the early 1990s. Through this subject of influences and embodying the proxy army paradigm, Iran has been establishing very direct influences over these places. Even in Syria, this elite Iranian corps has great influence, supporting the Al Assad government and the Shiite militias fighting alongside it.

For its part, Saudi Arabia accuses Iran and its Guard of supplying weapons in Yemen to the Houthis (a movement that defends the Shiite minority), generating an important escalation of tension between the two countries[13].

The GRI is thus consolidating its position as one of the most important factors on the Middle East scene, driving the struggle between two opposing camps. However, it is not the only one. Thus, we find a "cold war" scenario, which ends up transcending and becoming an international focus. On the one hand, Iran, supported by powers such as Russia and China. On the other, Saudi Arabia, supported by the US. This conflict is developing, to a large extent, in an unconventional manner, through proxy armies such as Hezbollah and the Shiite militias in Iraq, Syria and Yemen[14].

Causes of a confrontation

Tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran have spread throughout the Middle East (and beyond), creating two well-defined camps in the Middle East, both with claims to hegemony in the area.

To interpret this scenario and better understand its civil service examination , it is important, first of all, to distinguish between two opposing ideological currents: Shiism and Sunnism (Wahhabism). Wahhabism is an extreme right-wing Muslim religious tendency of the Sunni branch, which today is the majority religion in Saudi Arabia. Shiism, as previously mentioned, is the current on which the Republic of Iran is based. However, as we shall see, the struggle developing between Iran and Saudi Arabia is political, not religious; it is based more on ambition for power than on religion.

Secondly, the control of oil traffic is another cause of this rivalry. To understand this reason, it is worth bearing in mind the strategic position that the countries of the Middle East play on the global map, as they are home to the world's largest hydrocarbon reserves. A large issue of contemporary struggles are in fact due to the interference of the major powers in the region in an attempt to play a role in these territories. Thus, for example, the Sykes-Picot agreement [15] of 1916 for the sharing of European influence continues to condition current events. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran, as we have been saying, have a special role in these confrontations, for the reasons described above.

Under these considerations, it is important to point out, thirdly, the involvement of external powers such as the United States in these tensions.

The effects of the Arab Springs have weakened many countries in the region. Not so Saudi Arabia and Iran, which in recent decades have sought to consolidate their position as regional powers, largely thanks to the support provided by their oil production and large oil reserves. The differences between the two countries are reflected in the way they try to shape the region and in the different interests they seek to achieve. In addition to the ethnic differences between Iran (Persians) and Saudi Arabia (Arabs), their alignment on the international scene is also opposite. Wahhabism presents itself as anti-American, but the Saudi government is aware of its need for US support, and the two countries maintain a reciprocal convenience, with oil as a base. The same is not true of Iran.

Iran and the US were close allies until 1979. The Islamic Revolution changed everything and since then, with the US embassy hostage crisis in Tehran as a particularly dramatic initial moment, tensions between the two countries have been frequent. The diplomatic confrontation has become acute again with President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed in 2015 for Iran's nuclear non-proliferation, with the consequent resumption of economic sanctions towards Iran. In addition, in April 2019, the United States placed the Revolutionary Guard on its list of terrorist organizations[16], holding Iran responsible for financing and promote terrorism as a government tool [17].

On one side, then, is the Saudi side, supported by the US and, within the region, by the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain and Israel. On the other side, Iran and its allies in Palestine, Lebanon (pro-Shiite side) and recently Qatar, to which could be added Syria and Iraq (Shiite militias). Tensions increased after the death of Qasem Soleimani in January 2020. In the latter camp we could highlight the international support of China or Russia, but little by little we can observe a distancing of relations between Iran and Russia.

When speaking of the struggle for hegemony in the control of oil traffic, it is essential to mention the Strait of Hormuz, the crucial geographical point of this conflict, where both powers are directly confronted. This strait is a strategic zone located between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Some 40% of the world's oil passes through it[18]. Control of these waters is obviously decisive in the confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Iran, as well as for any of the members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries of the Middle East (OPEC) in the region: Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.

One of the objectives of the economic sanctions imposed by Washington on Iran is to reduce its exports in order to favor Saudi Arabia, its major regional ally. To this end, the U.S. Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, is tasked with protecting commercial shipping in this area.

The Strait of Hormuz "is the escape valve used by Iran to relieve the pressure exerted from outside the Gulf" [19]. From here, Iran tries to react to the economic sanctions imposed by the US and other powers; this is what gives it a greater voice on the international scene, as it has the capacity to block the strategic passage. Recently there have been attacks on oil tankers from Saudi Arabia and other countries[20], something that causes great economic and military destabilization in each new episode[21].  

In the final, the skill between Iran and Saudi Arabia has an effect not only regionally but also globally. The conflicts that could break out in this area are increasingly reminiscent of a well-known Cold War, both in terms of the methods on the battlefront (and the incidence of proxy armies on this front), and the attention it requires for the rest of the world, which is perhaps more dependent on this result than it is aware of.

Conclusions

For several years now, a regional confrontation has been consolidating that also involves the major powers. This struggle transcends the borders of the Middle East, similar to the status unleashed during the Cold War. Its main agents are the proxy armies, which promote struggles through non-state actors and unconventional warfare methods, constantly destabilizing relations between states, as well as within states themselves.

To avoid the fighting in Hormuz, countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have tried to transport oil by other routes, for example by building pipelines. This tap is held by Syria, through which the pipelines must pass in order to reach Europe). After all, the Syrian war can be seen from many perspectives, but there is no doubt that one of the reasons for the meddling of extra-regional powers is the economic interest in the Syrian coast.

From 2015 until now, Yemen's hushed civil war is being fought. At stake are strategic issues such as the control of the Mandeb Strait. Behind this terrible war against the Houthis(proxies), there is a latent fear that the latter will take control of access to the Red Sea. In this sea and near the strait is Djibouti, where the great powers have installed military instructions for better control over the area.

The most affected power is Iran, which sees its Economics weakened by constant economic sanctions. The status affects a population oppressed both by the government itself and by international pressure. The government itself ends up misinforming the society, causing a great distrust towards the authorities. This generates a growing political instability, which manifests itself in frequent protests.

The regime has publicized these demonstrations as protests against US actions, such as the assassination of General Soleimani, without mentioning that many of these revolts are due to the great dissatisfaction of the civilian population with the serious measures taken by Ayatollah Khamenei, who is more focused on seeking hegemony in the area than on solving internal problems.

Thus, it is often difficult to realize the implication of these confrontations for the majority of the world. Indeed, the use of proxy armies should not distract us from the fact of the real involvement of the major powers of the West and the East (in true Cold War fashion). Nor should the alleged motives for keeping these fronts open distract us from the true incidence of what is really at stake: nothing less than global Economics .

Logo of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence organization. It depicts Pakistan's national animal, Markhor, eating a snake [Wikipedia].

ESSAY / Manuel Lamela

Jihadism continues to be one of the main threats Pakistan faces. Its impact on Pakistani society at the political, economic and social levels is evident, it continues to be the source of greatest uncertainty, which acts as a barrier to any company that is interested in investing in the Asian country. Although the situation concerning terrorist attacks on national soil has improved, jihadism is an endemic problem in the region and medium-term prospects are not positive. The atmosphere of extreme volatility and insistence that is breathed does not help in generating confidence. If we add to this the general idea that Pakistan's institutions are not very strong due to their close links with certain radical groups, the result is a not very optimistic scenario. In this essay, we will deal with the current situation of jihadism in Pakistan, offering a multidisciplinary approach that helps to situate itself in the complicated reality that the country is experiencing.

1. Jihadism in the region, a risk assessment

Through this graph, we will analyze the probability and impact of various risk factors concerning jihadist activity in the region. All factors refer to hypothetical situations that may develop in the short or medium term. The increase in jihadist activity in the region will depend on how many of these predictions are fulfilled.

Risk Factors:

A1: US-Taliban treaty fails, creating more instability in the region. If the United States is not able to make a proper exit from Afghanistan, we may find ourselves in a similar situation to that experienced during the 1990s. Such a scenario will once again plunge the region into a fierce civil war between government forces and Taliban groups. The proposed scenario becomes increasingly plausible if we look at the recent American actions regarding foreign policy.

A2: Pakistan two-head strategy facing terrorism collapse. Pakistan's strategy in dealing with jihadism is extremely risky, it's collapse would lead to a schism in the way the Asian state deals with its most immediate challenges. The chances of this strategy failing in the medium term are considerably high due to its structure, which makes it unsustainable over the time.

R3: Violations of the LoC by the two sides in the conflict. Given the frequency with which these events occur, their impact is residual, but it must be taken into account that it in an environment of high tension and other factors, continuous violations of the LoC may be the spark that leads to an increase in terrorist attacks in the region.

R4: Agreement between the afghan Taliban and the government. Despite the recent agreement between Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Albduallah, it seems unlikely that he will be able to reach a lasting settlement with the Taliban, given the latter's pretensions. If it is true that if it happens, the agreement will have a great impact that will even transcend Afghan borders.

R5: Afghan Taliban make a coup d'état to the afghan government. In relation to the previous point, despite the pact between the government and the opposition, it seems likely that instability will continue to exist in the country, so a coup attempt by the Taliban seems more likely than a peaceful solution in the medium or long term.

R6: U.S. Democrat party wins the 2020 elections. Broadly speaking, both Republican and Democratic parties are betting on focusing their efforts on containing the growth of their great rival, China.

R7: U.S. withdraw its troops from Afghanistan regarding the result of the peace process. This is closely related to the previous point as it responds to a basic geopolitical issue.

R8: New agreement between India and Pakistan regarding the LoC. If produced, this would bring both states closer together and help reduce jihadist attacks in the Kashmir region. However, if we look at recent events, such a possibility seems distant at present.

2. The ties between the ISI and the Taliban and other radical groups

Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) has been accused on many occasions of being closely linked to various radical groups; for example, they have recently been involved with the radicalization of the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh[1]. Although Islamabad continues strongly denying such accusations, reality shows us that cooperation between the ISI and various terrorist organizations has been fundamental to their proliferation and settlement both on national territory and in the neighboring states of India and Afghanistan. The West has not been able to fully understand the nature of this relationship and its link to terrorism. The various complaints to the ISI have been loaded with different arguments of different kinds, lacking in unity and coherence. Unlike popular opinion, this analysis will point to the confused and undefined Pakistani nationalism as the main cause of this close relationship.

The Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, together with the Intelligence Bureau and the Military Intelligence, constitute the intelligence services of the Pakistani State, the most important of which is the ISI. ISI can be described as the intellectual core and center of gravity of the army. Its broad functions are the protection of Pakistan's national security and the promotion and defense of Pakistan's interests abroad. Despite the image created around the ISI, in general terms its activities and functions are based on the same "values" as other intelligence agencies such as the MI6, the CIA, etc. They all operate under the common ideal of protecting national interests, the essential foundation of intelligence centers without which they are worthless. We must rationalize their actions on the ground, move away from inquisitive accusations and try to observe what are the ideals that move the group, their connection with the government of Islamabad and the Pakistani society in general.

The Afghan Taliban

To understand the idiosyncrasy of the ISI we must go back to the war in Afghanistan[2], it is from this moment that the center begins to build an image of itself, independent of the rest of the armed forces. From the ISI we can see the victory of the Mujahideen on Afghan territory as their own, a great achievement that shapes their thinking and vision. But this understanding does not emerge in isolation and independently, as most Pakistani society views the Afghan Taliban as legitimate warriors and defenders of an honorable cause[3]. The Mujahideen victory over the USSR was a real turning point in Pakistani history, the foundation of modern Pakistani nationalism begins from this point. The year 1989 gave rise to a social catharsis from which the ISI was not excluded.

Along with this ideological component, it is also important to highlight the strategic aspect; we are dealing with a question of nationalism, of defending patriotic interests. Since the emergence of the Taliban, Pakistan has not hesitated to support them for major strategic reasons, as there has always been a fear that an unstable Afghanistan would end up being controlled directly or indirectly by India, an encirclement strategy[4]. Faced with this dangerous scenario, the Taliban are Islamabad's only asset on the ground. It is for this reason, and not only for religious commitment, that this bond is produced, although over time it is strengthened and expanded. Therefore, at first, it is Pakistani nationalism and its foreign interests that are the cause of this situation, it seeks to influence neighboring Afghanistan to make the situation as beneficial as possible for Pakistan. Later on, when we discuss the situation of the Taliban on the national territory, we will address the issue of Pakistani nationalism and how its weak construction causes great problems for the state itself. But on Afghan territory, from what has been explained above, we can conclude that this relationship will continue shortly, it does not seem likely that this will change unless there are great changes of impossible prediction. The ISI will continue to have a significant influence on these groups and will continue its covert operations to promote and defend the Taliban, although it should be noted that the peace treaty between the Taliban and the US[5] is an important factor to take into account, this issue will be developed once the situation of the Taliban at the internal level is explained.

2.2. The Pakistani Taliban (Al-Qaeda[6] and the TTP)

The Taliban groups operating in Pakistan are an extension of those operating in neighboring Afghanistan. They belong to the same terrorist network and seek similar objectives, differentiated only by the place of action. Despite this obvious similarity, from Islamabad and increasingly from the whole of Pakistani society, the two groups are observed in a completely different way. On the one hand, as we said earlier, for most Pakistanis, the Afghan Taliban are fighting a legitimate and just war, that of liberating the region from foreign rule. However, groups operating in Pakistan are considered enemies of the state and the people. Although there was some support among the popular classes, especially in the Pashtun regions, this support has gradually been lost due to the multitude of atrocities against the civilian population that have recently been committed. The attack carried out by the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP)[7] in the Army Public School in Peshawar in the year 2014 generated a great stir in society, turning it against these radical groups. This duality marks Pakistan's strategy in dealing with terrorism both globally and internationally. While acting as an accomplice and protector of these groups in Afghanistan, he pursues his counterparts on their territory. We have to say that the operations carried out by the armed forces have been effective, especially the Zarb-e-Azb operation carried out in 2014 in North Waziristan, where the ISI played a fundamental role in identifying and classifying the different objectives. The position of the TTP in the region has been decimated, leaving it quite weakened. As can be seen in this scenario, there is no support at the institutional level from the ISI[8], as they are involved in the fight against these radical organizations. However, on an individual level if these informal links appear. This informal network is favored by the tribal character of Pakistani society, it can appear in different forms but often draw on ties of Kinship, friendship or social obligation[9]. Due to the nature of this type of relationship, it is impossible to know to what extent the ISI's activity is conditioned and how many of its members are linked to Taliban groups. However, we would like to point out that these unions are informal and individual and not institutional, which provides a certain degree of security and control, at least for the time being, the situation may vary greatly due to the lack of transparency.

2.3. ISI and the radical groups that operate in Kashmir

Another part of the board is made up of the radical groups that focus their terrorist attention on the conflict with India over control of Kashmir, the most important of which are: Lashkar-e-Taiba (Let) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). Both groups have committed real atrocities over the past decades, the most notorious being the one committed by LeT in the Indian city of Mumbai in 2008. There are numerous testimonies, in particular, that of the American citizen David Haedy, which point to the cooperation of the ISI in carrying out the aforementioned attack.[10]

Recently, Hafiz Saeed, founder of Let and intellectual planner of the bloody attack, was arrested. The news generated some turmoil both locally and internationally and opened the discussion as to whether Pakistan had finally decided to act against the radical groups operating in Kashmir. We are once again faced with a complex situation, although the arrest shows a certain amount of willpower, it is no more than a way of making up for the situation and relaxing international pressure. The above coincides with the FATF's[11] assessment of Pakistan's status within the institution, which is of great importance for the short-term future of the country's economy. Beyond rhetoric, there is no convincing evidence that suggests that Pakistan has made a move against those groups. The link and support provided by the ISI in this situation are again closely linked to strategic and ideological issues. Since its foundation, Pakistani foreign policy has revolved around India[12], as we saw on the Afghan stage. Pakistani nationalism is based on the maxim that India and the Hindus are the greatest threat to the future of the state. Given the significance of the conflict for Pakistani society, there has been no hesitation in using radical groups to gain advantages on the ground. From Pakistan perspective, it is considered that this group of terrorists are an essential asset when it comes to putting pressure on India and avoiding the complete loss of the territory, they are used as a negotiating tool and a brake on Indian interests in the region.

As we can see, the core between the ISI and certain terrorist groups is based on deep-seated nationalism, which has led both members of the ISI and society, in general, to identify with the ideas of certain radical groups. They have benefited from the situation by bringing together a huge amount of power, becoming a threat to the state itself. The latter has compromised the government of Pakistan, sometimes leaving it with little room for maneuver. The immense infrastructure and capacity of influence that Let has thanks to its charitable arm Jamaat-ud-Dawa, formed with re-localized terrorists, is a clear example of the latter. A revolt led by this group could put Islamabad in a serious predicament, so the actions taken both in Kashmir and internally to try to avoid the situation should be measured very well. The existing cooperation between the ISI and these radical groups is compromised by the development of the conflict in Kashmir, which may increase or decrease depending on the situation. What is certain, because of the above, is that it will not go unnoticed and will continue to play a key role in the future. These relationships, this two-way game could drag Pakistan soon into an internal conflict, which could compromise its very existence as a nation.

▲ Vision on mineral extraction on an asteroid, from ExplainingTheFuture.com [Christopher Barnatt].

GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNAL / Mario Pereira

[14-page document. download in PDF]

INTRODUCTION

The American astrophysicist Michio Kaku recalls that when President Thomas Jefferson bought Louisiana from Napoleon (in 1803) for the astronomical sum of 15 million dollars, he spent a long time in deep fear. The reason for this lay in the fact that he did not know for a long time whether the referenced territory (mostly unexplored) hid fabulous riches or, on the contrary, was a wasteland of no great value... The passage of time has more than proved the former, just as it proved that it was then that the march of the American pioneers began: those people who - just like the "Adelantados" of Castile and Extremadura in the 16th century - set out for the unknown in order to obtain fortune, discover new wonders and improve their social position.

Today's Jeffersons are the Musks and Bezos, American businessmen, owners of huge financial, commercial and technological emporiums, who, hand in hand with new "pioneers" (a mix between Jules Verne/Arthur C. Clark and Neil Armstrong/John Glenn) seek to reach the new frontier of Humanity: the commercial and mining exploitation of Outer Space.

Faced with such a challenge, there are many questions that we can (and should) ask ourselves. Here we will try to answer (at least briefly) whether the existing international and national rules and regulations concerning the mining of the Moon and celestial bodies constitute - or not - a sufficient framework for the regulation of such projected activities.

▲ lunar base proposal for obtaining helium, taken from ExplainingTheFuture.com [Christopher Barnatt].

GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNAL / Emili J. Blasco

[8-page document. download in PDF]

INTRODUCTION

The economic interest in space resources, or at least the reasonable expectation about the profitability of obtaining them, explains to a large extent the growing involvement of private investment in space travel.

In addition to the commercially strong artificial satellite industry, as well as the scientific and defense industries, where the state sector continues to play a leading role, the possibility of exploiting high-value raw materials present on celestial bodies, such as entrance asteroids closest to Earth and the Moon, has awakened a kind of gold rush that is fueling the new degree program in space.

The epic of the new space barons -Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos- has monopolized the public narrative, but alongside them there are other New Space Players, with varied profiles. Behind all of them there is a growing group of capitalist partners and restless investors willing to risk assets in the expectation of profits.

To speak of a fever is certainly exaggerated because the real economic benefit that can be achieved from space mining - obtaining platinum, for example, or lunar helium - has yet to be demonstrated, because although the technology is becoming cheaper, which financially allows us to take new steps in outer space, bringing tons of materials to Earth has a cost that in most cases detracts from the monetary sense of the operation.

It would be enough, however, that in certain situations it would be profitable for the issue space missions to increase, and it is assumed that this traffic in itself would generate the need for an infrastructure abroad, at least with stations where to refuel fuel - so expensive to lift to the firmament - manufactured from raw subject found in space (the water of the lunar poles could be transformed into propellant). It is this expectation, with a certain basis of reasonableness, which feeds the investments that are being made.

In turn, the increased space activity and the skill to obtain the sought-after resources project beyond our planet the geopolitical concepts developed for the Earth. The location of countries (there are particularly suitable locations for space launches) and the control of certain routes (the succession of the most convenient orbits for flights) are part of the new astropolitics.

▲ US X unmanned space plane, returning from its fourth mission, in 2017 [US Air Force].

GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNAL / Luis V. Pérez Gil

[10-page document. download in PDF]

INTRODUCTION

The militarization of space is a reality. The major powers have taken the step of putting satellites into orbit that can attack and destroy the space apparatus of the adversary or third States. The consequences for those who suffer these attacks can be catastrophic, because their communications, navigation and defense systems will be partially or totally disabled. This scenario raises, as in nuclear war, the possibility of a preemptive attack aimed at avoiding being in the hands of the adversary in an eventual war. The United States and Russia have the capability to carry out such actions, but the other powers do not want to lag behind. The rest are trying to follow the great powers, who dictate the rules of the system.

The great powers also compete in space to maintain their primacy in the global international system and try to ensure that, in the event of a confrontation, they can disable and destroy the adversary's command and control, communications, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, because without satellites their ability to defend themselves against the demolishing power of precision-guided weapons is reduced. From this follows the rule that whoever dominates space will dominate the Earth in a war.

This is one of the fundamental tenets of Friedman's work on power in international relations in this century, when he states that the wars of the future will be fought in space because adversaries will seek to destroy the space systems that allow them to select targets and the navigation and communications satellites to disable their warfare capabilities.

As a result, both the United States and Russia, as well as China, are financing large space programs and developing new technologies aimed at obtaining unconventional satellites and space planes, so that we can speak unequivocally of the militarization of space, as we shall see in the following sections.

But, before continuing, we must remember that there is a multilateral international treaty, called the Outer Space Treaty, initially signed by the United States, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union on January 27, 1967, which establishes a series of limitations to operations in space. According to this treaty, any country launching an object into space "shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, as well as over all staff carried thereon, while in space or in a celestial body"article 8). It also establishes that any country "shall be internationally manager for damage caused to another State party (...) by such an object or its component parts on Earth, in airspace or outer space"article 7). This means that any space satellite may approach a device of another country, follow it or make remote observations, but may not alter or interrupt its operability in any way. It should be clarified that, although nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction are prohibited in space, there is no limitation on the installation of conventional weapons on space satellites. At the urging of Russia and China, the United Nations General Assembly has been pushing since 2007 for a project multilateral treaty banning weapons in outer space, the use of force or the threat of force against space objects, but it has been systematically rejected by the United States.

▲ In addition to Moon return and Mars landings, asteroid travel programs also accelerate [NASA].

GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNAL / Javier Gómez-Elvira

[8-page document. download in PDF]

INTRODUCTION

Since time immemorial, human beings have imagined themselves outside the Earth, exploring other worlds. One of the first stories dates back to the second century A.D. Lucian of Samosata wrote a book in which his characters reached the Moon thanks to the impulse of a whirlwind and there they developed their adventures. Since then, numerous science fiction novels or stories can be found that take place on the Moon, Mars, other bodies of our Solar System or even beyond. Somehow all of them lost a bit of their fiction in the middle of the last century, with the first steps of an astronaut on our satellite. Unfortunately, what seemed to be the beginning of a new era did not go beyond 5 missions in 2 years.

The first stage began when President Kennedy uttered his famous phrase: "We choose to go to the Moon.... We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too". Although perhaps the end was written in the beginning: the only goal was to demonstrate that the US was the technological leader over the USSR, and when this was achieved the project was stopped.

▲ Scene about anchoring on an asteroid to develop mining activity, from ExplainingTheFuture.com [Christopher Barnatt].

GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNAL / Emili J. Blasco

[8-page document. download in PDF]

INTRODUCTION

The new space degree program is based on more solid and lasting foundations -especially economic interests- than the first one, which was based on ideological skill and international prestige. In the new Cold War there are also space developments that obey the strategic struggle of the great powers, as occurred between the 1950s and 1970s, but today the exploration and defense aspects are joined by commercial interests: companies are taking over in many aspects from the protagonism of the States.

However debatable it may be to speak of a new space age, given that since the emblematic launch of Sputnik in 1957, there has been no end to programmed activity in different regions of space, including human presence (although manned trips to the Moon have ended, there have been trips and stays in the Earth's leave ), the truth is that we have entered a new phase.

Hollywood, which so well reflects the social reality and generational aspirations of each time, serves as a mirror. After a time without special space-related productions, since 2013 the genre is experiencing a resurgence, with new nuances. Films such as Gravity, Interstellar and Mars illustrate the moment of takeoff of a renewed ambition that, after the short horizon of the shuttle program - recognized as a mistake by NASA, as it focused on the Earth's orbit leave -, connects with the logical sequence of the perspectives opened by the arrival of man on the Moon: lunar instructions , manned trips to Mars and space colonization.

At the level of the collective imagination, the new space age starts from the square where the previous one "ended", that day in December 1972 when Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 astronaut, left the Moon. Somehow, in all this time there has been "the sadness of thinking that in 1973 we had reached the peak of our evolution as a species" and that later it stopped: "while we were growing up we were promised rocket backpacks, and in exchange we got Instagram", states the graphic commentary of one of the co-writers of Interstellar.

Something similar is what George W. Bush had expressed when in 2004 he commissioned NASA to start preparing for man's return to the Moon: "In the last thirty years, no human being has set foot on another world or ventured into space beyond 386 miles [621 kilometers in altitude], roughly the distance from Washington, DC, to Boston, Massachusetts".

The year 2004 could be considered the beginning of the new space age, not only because manned trips to the Moon and Mars have been back in NASA's sights since then, but also because it was the first milestone in private space exploration with the experimental flight of SpaceShipOne: it was the first access of a private pilot to orbital space, something that until then had been considered the exclusive domain of the government.

The American priority then went from the Moon to some of the asteroids and then to Mars, to return to the trip to our satellite to occupy the first place in the space diary . Returning to the Moon, the idea of a "return" to space exploration takes on a special significance.

GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNAL #2 / March 2020

[download the PDF of the complete Journal ]

The horizon is up again:

Powers and companies fight for space

PRESENTATION

We are witnessing a new space age, which is here to stay. This time it is serious. It will not be a one-flower crop, like the arrival of the human being on the Moon, which is soon to wither away. The return of geopolitical tension to Earth also has its projection in space, conceived no longer as a place of incursion or strategic support territory but as a domain in its own right, of the same importance and proximity as the others (land, sea, air... and network). Although the space priority of the superpowers may be modulated according to the ups and downs of international relations, humanity has become so dependent on artificial satellites that space is now a definitive part of our direct environment. However, it is the awakened economic interest in the business prospects of the space sector, manifested in the degree program of various private companies to take over activities that previously, due to the enormous budgetary requirements, were only undertaken by certain states, which ensures the continuity of a stage that is opening not to close.

The horizon returns to this one above - return to the Moon, flight to Mars, asteroid mining - after the unsustained efforts carried out half a century ago. To that horizon we wanted to dedicate this year's issue of Global Affairs Journal, following the launch of this monographic publication in 2019 with the focus on another issue of great strategic importance, the geopolitics of demographics and the demographic challenges of the great powers. So welcome and bon voyage to the stars!

Index

THE HORIZON IS UP AGAIN:

POWERS AND COMPANIES FIGHT FOR SPACE

presentation

p. 5[PDF version].

SPACE: NEW MILITARY AND ECONOMIC DOMINANCE

Introduction by the director of GASS

p. 6-13[PDF version].

BACK TO SPACE EXPLORATION

Javier Gómez-Elvira

Director of INTA's department of Payloads

p. 14-21[PDF version].

MILITARIZATION OF SPACE:

THE DEVELOPMENT OF INSPECTOR SATELLITES

Luis V. Pérez Gil

Expert in Space Force, University of La Laguna, Spain

p. 22-31[PDF version].

DEGREE PROGRAM FOR SPACE RESOURCES:

FROM MINING TO ROAD CONTROL

Emili J. Blasco

Professor of Applied Geopolitics, University of Navarra, Spain

p. 32-39[PDF version].

INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORKS RELEVANT TO

THE EXTRACTION AND USE OF SPACE RESOURCES

Mario Pereira

Professor of Law, University of Navarra

p. 40-54[PDF version].

RECOMMENDED READINGS

L. V. Pérez Gil, E. J. Blasco

Ramón Barba, Ángel Martos

p. 54-56[PDF version].

▲ Gurdwara Darbar Sahib Kartarpur, also called Kartarpur Sahib, is a Sikh holy place in Kartarpur, in the Pakistani Punjab [Wikimedia Commons].

ESSAY / Pablo Viana

Punjab region has been part of India until the year 1947, when the Punjab province of British India was divided in two parts, East Punjab (India) and West Punjab (Pakistan) due to religious reasons. After the division a lot of internal violence occurred, and many people were displaced.

East and West Punjab

The partition of Punjab proved to be one of the most violent, brutal, savage debasements in the history of humankind. The undivided Punjab, of which West Punjab forms a major region today, was home to a large minority population of Punjabi Sikhs and Hindus unto 1947 apart from the Muslim majority[1]. This minority population of Punjabi Sikhs called for the creation of a new state in the 1970s, with the name of Khalistan, but it was detained by India, sending troops to stop the militants. Terrorist attacks against the Sikh majority emerged, by those who did not accept the creation of the state of Khalistan and wished to stay in India.

The Sikh population is the dominant religious ethnicity in East Punjab (58%) followed by the Hindu (39%). Sikhism and Islamism are both monotheistic religions, they do believe on the same concept of God, although it is different on each religion. Sikhism was developed during the 16th and 17th century in the context of conflict in between Hinduism and Islamism. It is important to mention Sikhism if we talk about Punjab, as its origins were in Punjab, but most important in recent times, is that the Guru Nanak Dev[2] was buried in Pakistani territory. Four kilometers from the international border the Sikh shrine was conceded to Pakistan at the time of British India's Partition in 1947. For followers of Sikhism this new border that cut through Punjab proved especially problematic. Sikhs overwhelmingly chose India over the newly formed Pakistan as the state that would best protect their interests (there are an estimated 50,000 Sikhs living in Pakistan today, compared to the 24 million in India). However, in making this choice, Sikhs became isolated from several holy sites, creating a religious disconnection that has proved a constant spiritual and emotional dilemma for the community[3].

In order to let the Sikhist population visit the Gurdwara Darbar Sahib[4], the Kartarpur Corridor was created in November 2019. However, there is an incessant suspicion in between India and Pakistan that question Pakistan motives. Although it seems like a generous move work of the Pakistani government, there is a clear perception that Pakistan is engaged in an act of deception[5]. Thus, although this scenario might seem at first beneficial for the rapprochement of East and West Punjab, it is not at all. Pakistan is involved in a rhetorical policy which could end up worsening its relations with India.

The division of Punjab in 1947 was like the division of Pakistan and India on that same year. Territorial disputes have been an issue that defines very well India-Pakistan relations since the independence. In the case of Punjab, there has not been a territorial discussion. The division was clear and has been respected ever since. Why would Pakistan and/or India be willing to unify Punjab? There is no reason. East and West Punjab represent two different nations and three religions. If we think about reunifying Pakistan and India, the conclusion is the same (although more dramatic); too many discrepancies and recent unrest to think about bringing back together the nations. However, if the Kartarpur Corridor could be placed out of bonds for the territorial disputes between Pakistan and India (e.g. Kashmir), Islamabad and New Delhi could use this situation as a model to find out which are the pressure points and trying to find a path for identifying common solutions. In order to achieve this, there should be a clear behavior by both parties of cooperation. Sadly, in recent times both Pakistan and India have discrepancies regarding many topics and suspicious behaviours that clearly show that they won't be interested in complicating more the situation in Punjab searching for unification. The riots of 1947 left a terrific era on the region and now that both sides are established and no major disputes have emerged (except for Sikh nationalism), the situation should and will most likely remain as it is.

The Indus Water Treaty

The Indus Waters Treaty was signed in 1960 after nine years of negotiations between India and Pakistan with the help of the World Bank, which is also a signatory. Seen as one of the most successful international treaties, it has survived frequent tensions, including conflict, and has provided a framework for irrigation and hydropower development for more than half a century. The Treaty basically provides a mechanism for exchange of information and cooperation between Pakistan and India regarding the use of their rivers. This mechanism is well known as the Permanent Indus Commission. The Treaty also sets forth distinct procedures to handle issues which may arise: "questions" are handled by the Commission; "differences" are to be resolved by a Neutral Expert; and "disputes" are to be referred to a seven-member arbitral tribunal called the "Court of Arbitration." As a signatory to the Treaty, the World Bank's role is limited and procedural[6].    

Since 1948, India has been confident on the fact that East Punjab and the acceding states have a prior and superior claim to the rivers flowing through their territory. This leaves West Punjab in disadvantage regarding water resources, as East Punjab can access the highest sections of the rivers. Even under a unified control designed to ensure equitable distribution of water, in years of low river flow cultivators on tail distributaries always tended to accuse those on the upper reaches of taking an undue amount of the water, and after partition any temporary shortage, whatever the cause, could easily be attributed to political motives. It was therefore wise of Pakistan-indeed it became imperative-to cut the new feeder from the Ravi for this area and thus become independent of distributaries in East Punjab[7]. The Treaty acknowledges the control of the eastern rivers to India, and to the western rivers to Pakistan.

The main issue of water distribution in between East and West Punjab is then a matter of geography. Even though West Punjab covers more territory than East Punjab, and the water flow of West Punjab is almost three times the water flow of East Punjab rivers, the Indus Water Treaty gives the following advantage to India: since Pakistan rivers receive much more water flow from India, the treaty allowed India to use western rivers water for limited irrigation use and unlimited use for power generation, domestic, industrial and non-consumptive uses such as navigation, floating of property, fish culture and this is where the disputes mainly came from, as Pakistan has objected all Indian hydro-electric projects on western rivers irrespective of size and layout.

It is worth mentioning that with the World Bank mediating the Treaty in between India and Pakistan, the water access will not be curtailed, and since the ratification of the Treaty, India and Pakistan have not engaged in any water wars. Although there have been many tensions the disputes have been via legal procedures, but they haven't caused any major cause for conflict. Today, both countries are strengthening their relationship, and the scenario is not likely to get worse, it is actually the opposite, and the Indus Water Treaty is one of the few livelihoods of the relationship. If the tensions do not cease, the World Bank should consider the possibility of amending the treaty, obviously if both Pakistan and India are willing to cooperate, although with the current environment, a renegotiation of the treaty would probably bring more complications. There is no shred of evidence that India has violated the Indus Water Treaty or that it is stealing Pakistan's water[8], although Pakistan does blame India for breaching the treaty, as shown before. This is pointed out by Hindu politicians as an attempt by Pakistan to divert the attention of its own public from the real issues of gross mismanagement of water resources[9].

Pakistan has a more hostile attitude regarding water distribution, trying to find a way to impeach India, meanwhile India focuses on the development of hydro-electric projects. India won't stop providing water to the West Punjab, as the treaty is still in force and is fulfilled by both parties. Pakistan should reconsider its role and its benefits received thanks to the treaty and meditate about the constant pressure towards India, as pushing over the limit could mean a more hostile activity carried out by India, which in the worst case scenario (although not likely to happen) could mean a breakdown of the treaty.