- Welcome to WestCoastAftershock Online Forum.
Recent posts
#11
General Non-Music Discussion / Strengthening ties: What does...
Last post by Anonymous - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMStrengthening ties: What does the future UK-EU relationship look like?
Strengthening ties: What does the future UK-EU relationship look like?
20
May 2025 — 6:30PM TO 7:30PM
Anonymous (not verified)
29 April 2025
Chatham House and Online
As the UK Prime Minister prepares to meet with European leaders, how can the UK and EU build a more productive future relationship and address the challenges both face?
As the UK Prime Minister prepares to meet with European leaders, how can the UK and EU build a more productive future relationship and address the challenges both face?
The UK's Labour Government has invested considerable effort to improve relations with the European Union, following years of diplomatic turbulence between the two under the previous government. The first UK-EU Summit on the 19th May promises to be a pivotal event in shaping the future of the relationship and represents an opportunity for both parties to discuss proposals and opportunities for greater collaboration. Issues including trade, security, and regulatory alignment will be up for discussion as leaders look to solutions to European security, changing US trade policy and fostering economic growth both sides are desperately seeking.
However, the domestic UK climate remains uneasy about deepening ties with the EU. Political environments across the bloc are also complex, with populist parties embedding their presence in parliaments around the EU. This political fragmentation makes international cooperation harder. A better relationship is hard to see. Greater volatility and uncertainty around the world present external challenges that will also force UK and European leaders to adjust rapidly to events as they unfold. Can solutions be found?
During this panel discussion, experts will discuss:
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/events/all/open-event/strengthening-ties-what-does-future-uk-eu-relationship-look Apr 29, 2025, 10:42 AM
Strengthening ties: What does the future UK-EU relationship look like?
20
May 2025 — 6:30PM TO 7:30PM
Anonymous (not verified)
29 April 2025
Chatham House and Online
As the UK Prime Minister prepares to meet with European leaders, how can the UK and EU build a more productive future relationship and address the challenges both face?
As the UK Prime Minister prepares to meet with European leaders, how can the UK and EU build a more productive future relationship and address the challenges both face?
The UK's Labour Government has invested considerable effort to improve relations with the European Union, following years of diplomatic turbulence between the two under the previous government. The first UK-EU Summit on the 19th May promises to be a pivotal event in shaping the future of the relationship and represents an opportunity for both parties to discuss proposals and opportunities for greater collaboration. Issues including trade, security, and regulatory alignment will be up for discussion as leaders look to solutions to European security, changing US trade policy and fostering economic growth both sides are desperately seeking.
However, the domestic UK climate remains uneasy about deepening ties with the EU. Political environments across the bloc are also complex, with populist parties embedding their presence in parliaments around the EU. This political fragmentation makes international cooperation harder. A better relationship is hard to see. Greater volatility and uncertainty around the world present external challenges that will also force UK and European leaders to adjust rapidly to events as they unfold. Can solutions be found?
During this panel discussion, experts will discuss:
- How might EU-UK be able to boost the economic growth that both sides seek?
- Where are the areas for greater collaboration that will reap the best economic results?
- Can the EU-UK relationship offer the necessary security guarantees to support Ukraine and contain Russian aggression?
- How can the relationship best respond to the Trump administration's approach to tariffs and the European security umbrella?
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/events/all/open-event/strengthening-ties-what-does-future-uk-eu-relationship-look Apr 29, 2025, 10:42 AM
#12
General Non-Music Discussion / Trump’s 100 days have been li...
Last post by jon.wallace - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMTrump's 100 days have been like no other
Trump's 100 days have been like no other
Expert comment
jon.wallace
29 April 2025
But the scale and shock of the president's policymaking threatens to undermine his primary foreign policy objective: maintaining an advantage over China.
It has become routine to pronounce Donald Trump one of the 'most consequential' US presidents. But that understates his impact: no president has conducted a first 100 days in office like this.
At home, he has defied constitutional limits on executive power, using executive orders not legislation to enact policy (seeking to end birthright citizenship in one). Trump has also mounted an assault on institutions of 'elite' culture, education and science while cultivating fear among those who oppose him.
In foreign policy, he has ripped up global trade arrangements, taken the US out of climate accords, and cast doubt on Washington's commitment to NATO. Indeed, he has threatened to take over allies by force, whether by making Canada the 51st state or by seizing Greenland. With such actions he has withdrawn the US from much of its accustomed role in the world – and may well have surrendered his country's prime advantages to China.
He has been able to do all this because of an emphatic election victory and widespread support for his main campaign promises. Any judgement on his first 100 days has to acknowledge the popularity of some of what he is doing – whether seeking to reduce illegal migration, tackle China's role in world trade, insist that Europe pay for its own defence, or slim down the federal government.
Yet there is a growing question about how much of the president's actions will stick, given the chaos caused by his rapid decisions and forced U-turns. It may be no consolation to those grappling with the sharp end of his policies – in Lesotho, Kyiv, Gaza or Harvard – but he is running into constraints on what he can do.
Abroad, shock at the intensity of activity has turned to incredulity, even contempt.
Reactions by the bond markets have forced abrupt reversals on some tariffs, and on his threat to sack the head of the Federal Reserve for not lowering interest rates. US courts are beginning to contest his policy on deportation. And abroad, shock at the intensity of activity has turned to incredulity, even contempt. It is increasingly hard for other countries to see a 'grand plan' at work. Some ask whether we have seen 'peak Trump'.
The answer will depend on those who elected him: will they register their disapproval in midterm elections, frustrated by a rising cost of living? Or does Trump represent something historic – a wave of change in the American political psyche? Could the past 100 days, in fact, prove to be the authentic flavour of years to come?
Ripping up alliances – and principles
European allies may not have enjoyed the language that Trump and Vice-President JD Vance have used about them. But the point the new administration makes is an old one: the US is fed up with carrying the burden of Europe's defence.
Related content
Trump's 'electroshock' on Ukraine ends the debate: Europe cannot rely on the US for its security
European countries are now scrambling to boost their security budgets, even if it will take many years to make good the US contribution, where that is possible. That sense of 'Europe alone' will endure beyond Trump. He has shattered the assumptions underpinning the post-war alliance and convinced Europe it can no longer count on the US as an ally.
It is his declared interest in taking over Canada and Greenland that has proved more shocking. The president's statements display no interest whatsoever in a near-universal principle of global governance: that taking over territory by force is wrong and the aggressor should expect retribution.
The one-sided deal Trump is trying to impose on Ukraine, blaming it for starting the conflict by provoking Russia, offends the same principle. Even when Trump leaves office, the spectacle of a US president shrugging off these norms as an irritation will have reduced Washington's ability to lead in the way it has for the last 80 years.
The defining contribution of Trump's first 100 days has been the injection of uncertainty.
Given this upheaval, it is surprising that the Trump team are apparently making progress on one objective: pressuring Iran to restrain its nuclear programme. That success, however, may well stem more from regional events than US skill in 'dealmaking'. The fall of Syria's Assad regime and the colossal damage inflicted on Hezbollah and Hamas by Israel have been severe setbacks for Tehran's policy.
Signs of pushback?
The defining contribution of Trump's first 100 days has been the injection of uncertainty: into international relations, into trade – and at home, into whether the famed checks and balances of the US constitution can constrain a president. Much of what he does fulfils campaign pledges. Yet it is impossible to know what he will do next, as the improvised tariffs have shown.
But the markets have served as a real constraint on Trump, most directly by threatening to push up interest rates or the cost of government borrowing, forcing the president to back down.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/trumps-100-days-have-been-no-other Apr 29, 2025, 07:26 AM
Trump's 100 days have been like no other
Expert comment
jon.wallace
29 April 2025
But the scale and shock of the president's policymaking threatens to undermine his primary foreign policy objective: maintaining an advantage over China.
It has become routine to pronounce Donald Trump one of the 'most consequential' US presidents. But that understates his impact: no president has conducted a first 100 days in office like this.
At home, he has defied constitutional limits on executive power, using executive orders not legislation to enact policy (seeking to end birthright citizenship in one). Trump has also mounted an assault on institutions of 'elite' culture, education and science while cultivating fear among those who oppose him.
In foreign policy, he has ripped up global trade arrangements, taken the US out of climate accords, and cast doubt on Washington's commitment to NATO. Indeed, he has threatened to take over allies by force, whether by making Canada the 51st state or by seizing Greenland. With such actions he has withdrawn the US from much of its accustomed role in the world – and may well have surrendered his country's prime advantages to China.
He has been able to do all this because of an emphatic election victory and widespread support for his main campaign promises. Any judgement on his first 100 days has to acknowledge the popularity of some of what he is doing – whether seeking to reduce illegal migration, tackle China's role in world trade, insist that Europe pay for its own defence, or slim down the federal government.
Yet there is a growing question about how much of the president's actions will stick, given the chaos caused by his rapid decisions and forced U-turns. It may be no consolation to those grappling with the sharp end of his policies – in Lesotho, Kyiv, Gaza or Harvard – but he is running into constraints on what he can do.
Abroad, shock at the intensity of activity has turned to incredulity, even contempt.
Reactions by the bond markets have forced abrupt reversals on some tariffs, and on his threat to sack the head of the Federal Reserve for not lowering interest rates. US courts are beginning to contest his policy on deportation. And abroad, shock at the intensity of activity has turned to incredulity, even contempt. It is increasingly hard for other countries to see a 'grand plan' at work. Some ask whether we have seen 'peak Trump'.
The answer will depend on those who elected him: will they register their disapproval in midterm elections, frustrated by a rising cost of living? Or does Trump represent something historic – a wave of change in the American political psyche? Could the past 100 days, in fact, prove to be the authentic flavour of years to come?
Ripping up alliances – and principles
European allies may not have enjoyed the language that Trump and Vice-President JD Vance have used about them. But the point the new administration makes is an old one: the US is fed up with carrying the burden of Europe's defence.
Related content
Trump's 'electroshock' on Ukraine ends the debate: Europe cannot rely on the US for its security
European countries are now scrambling to boost their security budgets, even if it will take many years to make good the US contribution, where that is possible. That sense of 'Europe alone' will endure beyond Trump. He has shattered the assumptions underpinning the post-war alliance and convinced Europe it can no longer count on the US as an ally.
It is his declared interest in taking over Canada and Greenland that has proved more shocking. The president's statements display no interest whatsoever in a near-universal principle of global governance: that taking over territory by force is wrong and the aggressor should expect retribution.
The one-sided deal Trump is trying to impose on Ukraine, blaming it for starting the conflict by provoking Russia, offends the same principle. Even when Trump leaves office, the spectacle of a US president shrugging off these norms as an irritation will have reduced Washington's ability to lead in the way it has for the last 80 years.
The defining contribution of Trump's first 100 days has been the injection of uncertainty.
Given this upheaval, it is surprising that the Trump team are apparently making progress on one objective: pressuring Iran to restrain its nuclear programme. That success, however, may well stem more from regional events than US skill in 'dealmaking'. The fall of Syria's Assad regime and the colossal damage inflicted on Hezbollah and Hamas by Israel have been severe setbacks for Tehran's policy.
Signs of pushback?
The defining contribution of Trump's first 100 days has been the injection of uncertainty: into international relations, into trade – and at home, into whether the famed checks and balances of the US constitution can constrain a president. Much of what he does fulfils campaign pledges. Yet it is impossible to know what he will do next, as the improvised tariffs have shown.
But the markets have served as a real constraint on Trump, most directly by threatening to push up interest rates or the cost of government borrowing, forcing the president to back down.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/trumps-100-days-have-been-no-other Apr 29, 2025, 07:26 AM
#13
General Non-Music Discussion / The struggle for justice in U...
Last post by Anonymous - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe struggle for justice in Ukraine
The struggle for justice in Ukraine
12
May 2025 — 5:30PM TO 7:00PM
Anonymous (not verified)
25 April 2025
Chatham House and Online
An assessment of Russia's crimes and options for accountability.
An assessment of Russia's crimes and options for accountability.
As Ukraine seeks to prosecute over 140,000 war crimes cases, the international legal landscape and its accountability mechanisms directly impact efforts to deliver justice to victims/survivors of conflict.
A recent report by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine found that sexual violence has been used systematically by Russian authorities as a method of torture in detention settings. The report underscores that conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) affects civilians and prisoners of war alike and constitutes a significant proportion of war crimes being prosecuted in Ukraine.
However, international mechanisms critical to upholding accountability have come under attack. US President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order in February 2025 authorizing sanctions against the International Criminal Court (ICC), including its Chief Prosecutor. Concurrent freezes on foreign aid are also disrupting accountability and justice initiatives in Ukraine and beyond.
What does this mean for victims of sexual violence and broader efforts to pursue accountability?
This event examines:• The gendered impact of conflict-related sexual violence in Ukraine.• Practical options and creative pathways for sustaining transitional justice efforts in a constrained and shifting geopolitical environment.• The growing threats to international justice, and the implications for peace and accountability in Ukraine.
This event is organised in partnership with All Survivors Project , with project funding from Global Affairs Canada and the Peace and Human Rights Division , Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs.
A drinks reception will follow this session.
By registering for this event, attendees agree toour Code of Conduct , ensuring a respectful, inclusive, and welcoming space for diverse perspectives and debate.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/events/all/research-event/struggle-justice-ukraine Apr 25, 2025, 12:52 PM
The struggle for justice in Ukraine
12
May 2025 — 5:30PM TO 7:00PM
Anonymous (not verified)
25 April 2025
Chatham House and Online
An assessment of Russia's crimes and options for accountability.
An assessment of Russia's crimes and options for accountability.
As Ukraine seeks to prosecute over 140,000 war crimes cases, the international legal landscape and its accountability mechanisms directly impact efforts to deliver justice to victims/survivors of conflict.
A recent report by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine found that sexual violence has been used systematically by Russian authorities as a method of torture in detention settings. The report underscores that conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) affects civilians and prisoners of war alike and constitutes a significant proportion of war crimes being prosecuted in Ukraine.
However, international mechanisms critical to upholding accountability have come under attack. US President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order in February 2025 authorizing sanctions against the International Criminal Court (ICC), including its Chief Prosecutor. Concurrent freezes on foreign aid are also disrupting accountability and justice initiatives in Ukraine and beyond.
What does this mean for victims of sexual violence and broader efforts to pursue accountability?
This event examines:• The gendered impact of conflict-related sexual violence in Ukraine.• Practical options and creative pathways for sustaining transitional justice efforts in a constrained and shifting geopolitical environment.• The growing threats to international justice, and the implications for peace and accountability in Ukraine.
This event is organised in partnership with All Survivors Project , with project funding from Global Affairs Canada and the Peace and Human Rights Division , Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs.
A drinks reception will follow this session.
By registering for this event, attendees agree toour Code of Conduct , ensuring a respectful, inclusive, and welcoming space for diverse perspectives and debate.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/events/all/research-event/struggle-justice-ukraine Apr 25, 2025, 12:52 PM
#14
General Non-Music Discussion / The Kashmir attack will renew...
Last post by LToremark - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe Kashmir attack will renew hostilities between India and Pakistan
The Kashmir attack will renew hostilities between India and Pakistan
Expert comment
LToremark
25 April 2025
Following the worst terror attack in Kashmir since 2019, military escalation is likely.
On 22 April, a terror attack in the Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam in Indian-administered Jammu & Kashmir claimed the lives of 26 people, mostly Indian tourists. This is the deadliest attack in the disputed territory since 2019 when a car bomb targeting a convoy of buses carrying Indian paramilitary soldiers killed 40 people in Pulwama. More alarmingly, it is the biggest attack targeting civilians in over two decades. The Resistance Front (TRF) , a proxy for Lashkar-e-Taiba – a Pakistan-based terrorist organization – has claimed responsibility for the attack, while the civilian government in Pakistan has denied any involvement.
Benign neglect or strategic restraint?
When the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed power in 2014, it extended an olive branch to Pakistan, inviting then Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and other South Asian leaders to Modi's inauguration. Modi even visited Sharif on his birthday in 2015.
But relations between India and Pakistan have since deteriorated. In 2016, India carried out so-called 'surgical strikes' inside Pakistan-administered Kashmir in response to an attack on an Indian army facility in Uri. In 2019, India launched airstrikes inside Pakistani territory following the Pulwama terror attack. The Modi government's decision to end the special autonomous status of Indian-administered Kashmir in August 2019 further soured relations between New Delhi and Islamabad.
New Delhi has sought to focus on India's global role and aspirations rather than its chronically difficult relationship with Pakistan.
A degree of benign neglect has since crept into the bilateral relationship with Islamabad preoccupied with internal instabilities and tensions on its borders with Afghanistan and Iran , while New Delhi has sought to focus on India's global role and aspirations rather than its chronically difficult relationship with Pakistan. This became apparent during last month's Raisina Dialogue – India's premier foreign policy conference – where there was hardly any discussion on India's neighbourhood .
Whether due to the deterrent effect of the two countries' nuclear arsenals or simply due to other priorities, there has been a degree of strategic restraint in the India–Pakistan relationship in recent years. A ceasefire along the Line of Control (LoC) demarcating Indian and Pakistan-administered Kashmir has largely held since 2021. In 2022, a missile accidentally launched by India landed in Pakistani territory, but did not trigger a retaliatory response by Islamabad. And despite its more assertive posturing, New Delhi has sought to minimize collateral damage in its retaliatory actions. Of all the countries that Pakistan shares borders with, the border with India has been the most stable in recent years.
Political and geopolitical undercurrents
The attack comes at a time when the Pakistani military is on the back foot following a string of terrorist attacks inside Pakistan and eroding public support for the army following the arrest and imprisonment of former prime minister Imran Khan and the persecution of his supporters. Pakistani army chief Asim Munir has sought to reaffirm the importance of the military to the preservation of the Pakistani state. In a speech last week he also referred to Kashmir as Pakistan's 'jugular vein' .
A robust response by India should be expected – including possible military action.
Although the civilian government in Islamabad has denied involvement, there is precedent for attacks on India taking place during periods when the Pakistani military feels it is being marginalized. In 1999, an attempt at rapprochement between the civilian governments in Islamabad and New Delhi – referred to the Lahore bus diplomacy – was derailed after Pakistani military-backed militants launched attacks in the Kargil area of Kashmir, leading both countries to war for the fourth time.
The attack also took place when US Vice President JD Vance was visiting India, suggesting it was timed to draw international attention to the Kashmir issue while the spotlight was on India. Similarly, a terror attack took place in Kashmir shortly before President Clinton's India visit in 2000.
Expect a robust Indian response and Pakistani retaliation
The Modi government has been tough on security since assuming power and Modi himself has been referred to as India's 'chowkidar' (or guard) – akin to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 'Mr Security' moniker. The government has pledged to pursue terrorists wherever they may be ('ghus ke marenge'). In a speech earlier this week, Modi stated that 'India will identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backers,' and would pursue the perpetrators 'to the ends of the earth'. A robust response by India should therefore be expected – including possible military action.
The Indian government has already taken the unprecedented step of suspending the 1960 Indus Water Treaty. This World Bank-brokered water-sharing agreement for rivers that traverse both countries has survived several periods of hostility between India and Pakistan. The Pakistani government has declared any attempt by India to divert waterflows in violation of the treaty an 'act of war' . New Delhi has also ordered the closure of the Attari-Wagah border crossing, reduced the diplomatic presence in both countries, and imposed further restrictions on Pakistani nationals travelling to India.
During previous periods of heightened tensions, the US has played a prominent role in de-escalating tensions, but not this time.
Pakistan has responded in kind and has also closed its airspace to Indian-owned and operated airlines and suspended trade with India, including through third countries. It has also threatened to suspend all bilateral agreements with India, including the Simla Agreement, which established the LoC. A breakdown of the ceasefire along the LoC and a broader tit-for-tat military escalation cannot be ruled out. Limited skirmishes have already been reported.
New Delhi had been lauding the return of stability to Kashmir in recent years. Elections held in the territory last autumn were largely peaceful with a high voter turnout. Investment and tourism have flourished. This progress will be derailed by the latest attack.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/kashmir-attack-will-renew-hostilities-between-india-and-pakistan Apr 25, 2025, 05:47 AM
The Kashmir attack will renew hostilities between India and Pakistan
Expert comment
LToremark
25 April 2025
Following the worst terror attack in Kashmir since 2019, military escalation is likely.
On 22 April, a terror attack in the Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam in Indian-administered Jammu & Kashmir claimed the lives of 26 people, mostly Indian tourists. This is the deadliest attack in the disputed territory since 2019 when a car bomb targeting a convoy of buses carrying Indian paramilitary soldiers killed 40 people in Pulwama. More alarmingly, it is the biggest attack targeting civilians in over two decades. The Resistance Front (TRF) , a proxy for Lashkar-e-Taiba – a Pakistan-based terrorist organization – has claimed responsibility for the attack, while the civilian government in Pakistan has denied any involvement.
Benign neglect or strategic restraint?
When the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed power in 2014, it extended an olive branch to Pakistan, inviting then Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and other South Asian leaders to Modi's inauguration. Modi even visited Sharif on his birthday in 2015.
But relations between India and Pakistan have since deteriorated. In 2016, India carried out so-called 'surgical strikes' inside Pakistan-administered Kashmir in response to an attack on an Indian army facility in Uri. In 2019, India launched airstrikes inside Pakistani territory following the Pulwama terror attack. The Modi government's decision to end the special autonomous status of Indian-administered Kashmir in August 2019 further soured relations between New Delhi and Islamabad.
New Delhi has sought to focus on India's global role and aspirations rather than its chronically difficult relationship with Pakistan.
A degree of benign neglect has since crept into the bilateral relationship with Islamabad preoccupied with internal instabilities and tensions on its borders with Afghanistan and Iran , while New Delhi has sought to focus on India's global role and aspirations rather than its chronically difficult relationship with Pakistan. This became apparent during last month's Raisina Dialogue – India's premier foreign policy conference – where there was hardly any discussion on India's neighbourhood .
Whether due to the deterrent effect of the two countries' nuclear arsenals or simply due to other priorities, there has been a degree of strategic restraint in the India–Pakistan relationship in recent years. A ceasefire along the Line of Control (LoC) demarcating Indian and Pakistan-administered Kashmir has largely held since 2021. In 2022, a missile accidentally launched by India landed in Pakistani territory, but did not trigger a retaliatory response by Islamabad. And despite its more assertive posturing, New Delhi has sought to minimize collateral damage in its retaliatory actions. Of all the countries that Pakistan shares borders with, the border with India has been the most stable in recent years.
Political and geopolitical undercurrents
The attack comes at a time when the Pakistani military is on the back foot following a string of terrorist attacks inside Pakistan and eroding public support for the army following the arrest and imprisonment of former prime minister Imran Khan and the persecution of his supporters. Pakistani army chief Asim Munir has sought to reaffirm the importance of the military to the preservation of the Pakistani state. In a speech last week he also referred to Kashmir as Pakistan's 'jugular vein' .
A robust response by India should be expected – including possible military action.
Although the civilian government in Islamabad has denied involvement, there is precedent for attacks on India taking place during periods when the Pakistani military feels it is being marginalized. In 1999, an attempt at rapprochement between the civilian governments in Islamabad and New Delhi – referred to the Lahore bus diplomacy – was derailed after Pakistani military-backed militants launched attacks in the Kargil area of Kashmir, leading both countries to war for the fourth time.
The attack also took place when US Vice President JD Vance was visiting India, suggesting it was timed to draw international attention to the Kashmir issue while the spotlight was on India. Similarly, a terror attack took place in Kashmir shortly before President Clinton's India visit in 2000.
Expect a robust Indian response and Pakistani retaliation
The Modi government has been tough on security since assuming power and Modi himself has been referred to as India's 'chowkidar' (or guard) – akin to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 'Mr Security' moniker. The government has pledged to pursue terrorists wherever they may be ('ghus ke marenge'). In a speech earlier this week, Modi stated that 'India will identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backers,' and would pursue the perpetrators 'to the ends of the earth'. A robust response by India should therefore be expected – including possible military action.
The Indian government has already taken the unprecedented step of suspending the 1960 Indus Water Treaty. This World Bank-brokered water-sharing agreement for rivers that traverse both countries has survived several periods of hostility between India and Pakistan. The Pakistani government has declared any attempt by India to divert waterflows in violation of the treaty an 'act of war' . New Delhi has also ordered the closure of the Attari-Wagah border crossing, reduced the diplomatic presence in both countries, and imposed further restrictions on Pakistani nationals travelling to India.
During previous periods of heightened tensions, the US has played a prominent role in de-escalating tensions, but not this time.
Pakistan has responded in kind and has also closed its airspace to Indian-owned and operated airlines and suspended trade with India, including through third countries. It has also threatened to suspend all bilateral agreements with India, including the Simla Agreement, which established the LoC. A breakdown of the ceasefire along the LoC and a broader tit-for-tat military escalation cannot be ruled out. Limited skirmishes have already been reported.
New Delhi had been lauding the return of stability to Kashmir in recent years. Elections held in the territory last autumn were largely peaceful with a high voter turnout. Investment and tourism have flourished. This progress will be derailed by the latest attack.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/kashmir-attack-will-renew-hostilities-between-india-and-pakistan Apr 25, 2025, 05:47 AM
#15
General Non-Music Discussion / The IMF must keep pace with a...
Last post by thilton.drupal - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe IMF must keep pace with a changing world economy
The IMF must keep pace with a changing world economy
Expert comment
thilton.drupal
25 April 2025
The International Monetary Fund needs finances and governance that reflect the underlying balance in the world economy if it is to remain universal and effective.
The Trump administration's recent criticism of the IMF has put the institution's future global role into the spotlight. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has accused the Fund of failing to hold China to account while Project 2025 has raised fears that the US might withdraw entirely from the institution. However, other commentators have pointed out that the IMF has historically been a vital instrument for Washington's economic and financial policy and continues to serve US interests.
The IMF itself defines its mission as 'furthering international monetary cooperation, encouraging the expansion of trade and economic growth, and discouraging policies that would harm prosperity.' It aims to pursue these goals by providing policy advice, acting as the lender of last resort to countries, and helping to develop countries' technical capabilities in macroeconomic and financial policy.
President Donald Trump's new economic paradigm does not directly challenge the role of the IMF in the way that his tariff policies weaken the WTO or his cuts in US aid undermine the World Bank. Moreover, given the increasingly frequent shocks to the world economy, a global institution tasked with preserving macroeconomic and financial stability is needed now more than ever.
But while the IMF is good value for both the US and the world overall, this will only remain the case if the institution evolves to reflect fundamental changes in the global economy. These include the growing economic weight of some emerging economies, particularly China, the consolidation of the EU/eurozone as a single economic block, and the demands of many smaller economies for more influence over IMF policies.
While adapting to these changes will require the US and some other advanced economies to share power more equally within the IMF, it will allow them to retain the broad global benefits the Fund brings in the long term.
Influence within the IMF
At the heart of the issue is how countries are weighted within the IMF.
This is dictated by the system of quotas at the core of IMF finances and governance. Each member country is assigned a quota linked primarily to its economic size, but also other to factors including its degree of economic openness and level of foreign exchange reserves.
The quota enables a country to draw down funds in a crisis in the form of Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). These are valued using a basket of five major currencies (US dollar, euro, RMB, yen, sterling) and can be converted into member country currencies, including US dollars. A quota therefore represents both a right to access hard currency funds and an obligation on issuing countries to provide them to the IMF when needed.
The present formula for determining quotas substantially underweights emerging market and developing economies, including China.
Countries in need can negotiate access to additional funds outside of their quotas, provided that they accept IMF conditions. The IMF funds the bulk of its administrative expenses from fees and charges levied on the loans it makes.
Quotas also determine a country's overall voting weight in the Fund's governing board. Decisions are typically taken through consensus, but the underlying voting weights of different members have a very strong influence on the direction of policy. Quotas dictate whether a country has a board seat to itself and may also give a veto over the most important decisions which require an 85 per cent majority. Currently the US is the only individual country with a veto, although the EU/eurozone also has sufficient votes, collectively, to form a blocking minority.
6.4%
is China's quota share at the IMF.
A fundamental critique of the IMF's current structure is that the present formula for determining quotas substantially underweights emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs), including China. In total, EMDEs account for some 60 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP) but hold just 40 per cent of IMF votes. China's quota of 6.4 per cent is less than Japan's 6.47 per cent, while India's voting weight is just 2.75 per cent.
Quotas are reviewed every five years and the formula for determining their overall size and distribution can in principle be changed relatively easily, provided all members agree. But the last time a redistribution of votes was agreed was in 2010, at the height of the collaborative international response to the global financial crisis.
The latest review is due to end in June 2028 and geopolitical tensions between the US, EU, China and other emerging economies are likely to make negotiations very difficult.
The risk of rival institutions
This situation poses major risks.
China agreed to a $320bn rise in the total value of quotas at the end of 2023 without any change in distribution among countries. But it is unlikely to do so again. This would prevent the IMF from increasing its lending resources in line with likely growing needs.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/imf-must-keep-pace-changing-world-economy Apr 25, 2025, 05:24 AM
The IMF must keep pace with a changing world economy
Expert comment
thilton.drupal
25 April 2025
The International Monetary Fund needs finances and governance that reflect the underlying balance in the world economy if it is to remain universal and effective.
The Trump administration's recent criticism of the IMF has put the institution's future global role into the spotlight. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has accused the Fund of failing to hold China to account while Project 2025 has raised fears that the US might withdraw entirely from the institution. However, other commentators have pointed out that the IMF has historically been a vital instrument for Washington's economic and financial policy and continues to serve US interests.
The IMF itself defines its mission as 'furthering international monetary cooperation, encouraging the expansion of trade and economic growth, and discouraging policies that would harm prosperity.' It aims to pursue these goals by providing policy advice, acting as the lender of last resort to countries, and helping to develop countries' technical capabilities in macroeconomic and financial policy.
President Donald Trump's new economic paradigm does not directly challenge the role of the IMF in the way that his tariff policies weaken the WTO or his cuts in US aid undermine the World Bank. Moreover, given the increasingly frequent shocks to the world economy, a global institution tasked with preserving macroeconomic and financial stability is needed now more than ever.
But while the IMF is good value for both the US and the world overall, this will only remain the case if the institution evolves to reflect fundamental changes in the global economy. These include the growing economic weight of some emerging economies, particularly China, the consolidation of the EU/eurozone as a single economic block, and the demands of many smaller economies for more influence over IMF policies.
While adapting to these changes will require the US and some other advanced economies to share power more equally within the IMF, it will allow them to retain the broad global benefits the Fund brings in the long term.
Influence within the IMF
At the heart of the issue is how countries are weighted within the IMF.
This is dictated by the system of quotas at the core of IMF finances and governance. Each member country is assigned a quota linked primarily to its economic size, but also other to factors including its degree of economic openness and level of foreign exchange reserves.
The quota enables a country to draw down funds in a crisis in the form of Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). These are valued using a basket of five major currencies (US dollar, euro, RMB, yen, sterling) and can be converted into member country currencies, including US dollars. A quota therefore represents both a right to access hard currency funds and an obligation on issuing countries to provide them to the IMF when needed.
The present formula for determining quotas substantially underweights emerging market and developing economies, including China.
Countries in need can negotiate access to additional funds outside of their quotas, provided that they accept IMF conditions. The IMF funds the bulk of its administrative expenses from fees and charges levied on the loans it makes.
Quotas also determine a country's overall voting weight in the Fund's governing board. Decisions are typically taken through consensus, but the underlying voting weights of different members have a very strong influence on the direction of policy. Quotas dictate whether a country has a board seat to itself and may also give a veto over the most important decisions which require an 85 per cent majority. Currently the US is the only individual country with a veto, although the EU/eurozone also has sufficient votes, collectively, to form a blocking minority.
6.4%
is China's quota share at the IMF.
A fundamental critique of the IMF's current structure is that the present formula for determining quotas substantially underweights emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs), including China. In total, EMDEs account for some 60 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP) but hold just 40 per cent of IMF votes. China's quota of 6.4 per cent is less than Japan's 6.47 per cent, while India's voting weight is just 2.75 per cent.
Quotas are reviewed every five years and the formula for determining their overall size and distribution can in principle be changed relatively easily, provided all members agree. But the last time a redistribution of votes was agreed was in 2010, at the height of the collaborative international response to the global financial crisis.
The latest review is due to end in June 2028 and geopolitical tensions between the US, EU, China and other emerging economies are likely to make negotiations very difficult.
The risk of rival institutions
This situation poses major risks.
China agreed to a $320bn rise in the total value of quotas at the end of 2023 without any change in distribution among countries. But it is unlikely to do so again. This would prevent the IMF from increasing its lending resources in line with likely growing needs.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/imf-must-keep-pace-changing-world-economy Apr 25, 2025, 05:24 AM
#16
General Non-Music Discussion / Independent Thinking: Is the ...
Last post by john.pollock - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMIndependent Thinking: Is the US dollar losing its dominance?
Independent Thinking: Is the US dollar losing its dominance?
Audio
john.pollock
24 April 2025
Isabelle Mateos y Lago and David Lubin join Bronwen Maddox from the IMF Spring Meetings in Washington DC to discuss the instability in the US dollar.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2084971359&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
As the IMF Spring Meetings unfold in Washington DC, Bronwen Maddox asks whether we are witnessing the twilight of the US dollar's global dominance. Amid political shocks and shifting financial allegiances, could the world be inching towards a post-dollar era?
Bronwen is joined by Isabelle Mateos y Lago, chief economist at BNP Paribas, and David Lubin from Chatham House's Global Economy and Finance Programme to explore the dollar's uncertain future, the rise of digital and alternative currencies, and what it all means for global power and stability.
About Independent Thinking
Independent Thinking is a weekly international affairs podcast hosted by our director Bronwen Maddox, in conversation with leading policymakers, journalists, and Chatham House experts providing insight on the latest international issues.
More ways to listen: Apple Podcasts , Spotify.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/independent-thinking-us-dollar-losing-its-dominance Apr 24, 2025, 08:49 AM
Independent Thinking: Is the US dollar losing its dominance?
Audio
john.pollock
24 April 2025
Isabelle Mateos y Lago and David Lubin join Bronwen Maddox from the IMF Spring Meetings in Washington DC to discuss the instability in the US dollar.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2084971359&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
As the IMF Spring Meetings unfold in Washington DC, Bronwen Maddox asks whether we are witnessing the twilight of the US dollar's global dominance. Amid political shocks and shifting financial allegiances, could the world be inching towards a post-dollar era?
Bronwen is joined by Isabelle Mateos y Lago, chief economist at BNP Paribas, and David Lubin from Chatham House's Global Economy and Finance Programme to explore the dollar's uncertain future, the rise of digital and alternative currencies, and what it all means for global power and stability.
About Independent Thinking
Independent Thinking is a weekly international affairs podcast hosted by our director Bronwen Maddox, in conversation with leading policymakers, journalists, and Chatham House experts providing insight on the latest international issues.
More ways to listen: Apple Podcasts , Spotify.
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/independent-thinking-us-dollar-losing-its-dominance Apr 24, 2025, 08:49 AM
#17
General Non-Music Discussion / The Climate Briefing: The 202...
Last post by jon.wallace - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe Climate Briefing: The 2025 international climate agenda
The Climate Briefing: The 2025 international climate agenda
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
Former US Climate Envoy Todd Stern joins a conversation about prospects for climate action in 2025.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2015330779&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
Former US Climate Envoy Todd Stern and Director of Chatham House's Environment and Society Centre Ana Yang join hosts Ruth Townend and Anna Aberg to talk about prospects for climate action in 2025. Following Donald Trump's inauguration, what are the likely consequences for climate diplomacy, and how will Brazil balance domestic demands against international obligations as COP30 and BRICS president this year?
Other ways to listen: [soundcloud]https://soundcloud.com/chathamhouse/episode-48-the-2025[/soundcloud] .
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/01/climate-briefing-2025-international-climate-agenda Apr 16, 2025, 11:58 AM
The Climate Briefing: The 2025 international climate agenda
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
Former US Climate Envoy Todd Stern joins a conversation about prospects for climate action in 2025.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2015330779&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
Former US Climate Envoy Todd Stern and Director of Chatham House's Environment and Society Centre Ana Yang join hosts Ruth Townend and Anna Aberg to talk about prospects for climate action in 2025. Following Donald Trump's inauguration, what are the likely consequences for climate diplomacy, and how will Brazil balance domestic demands against international obligations as COP30 and BRICS president this year?
Other ways to listen: [soundcloud]https://soundcloud.com/chathamhouse/episode-48-the-2025[/soundcloud] .
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/01/climate-briefing-2025-international-climate-agenda Apr 16, 2025, 11:58 AM
#18
General Non-Music Discussion / The Climate Briefing: China’s...
Last post by jon.wallace - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe Climate Briefing: China's role in international climate diplomacy and action
The Climate Briefing: China's role in international climate diplomacy and action
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
Discussing the role of China in international climate negotiations and the production of green technologies.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2054278744&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
China is the world's largest emitter and dominates the production of low-carbon technologies worldwide. It thus plays a key role in global efforts to address the climate crisis.
How has China obtained its leading position in the production of green technologies? What role does China play in international climate negotiations? How important has the US-China relationship been in global efforts to reduce emissions, and what will happen now when Donald Trump is back in the White House?
To discuss this and more, Ruth and Anna are joined by Li Shuo (Director of China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute) and Chris Aylett (Research Fellow at the Environment and Society Centre at Chatham House).
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/03/climate-briefing-chinas-role-international-climate-diplomacy-and-action Apr 16, 2025, 11:31 AM
The Climate Briefing: China's role in international climate diplomacy and action
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
Discussing the role of China in international climate negotiations and the production of green technologies.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2054278744&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
China is the world's largest emitter and dominates the production of low-carbon technologies worldwide. It thus plays a key role in global efforts to address the climate crisis.
How has China obtained its leading position in the production of green technologies? What role does China play in international climate negotiations? How important has the US-China relationship been in global efforts to reduce emissions, and what will happen now when Donald Trump is back in the White House?
To discuss this and more, Ruth and Anna are joined by Li Shuo (Director of China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute) and Chris Aylett (Research Fellow at the Environment and Society Centre at Chatham House).
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/03/climate-briefing-chinas-role-international-climate-diplomacy-and-action Apr 16, 2025, 11:31 AM
#19
General Non-Music Discussion / The Climate Briefing: In conv...
Last post by jon.wallace - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe Climate Briefing: In conversation with Ana Toni, the CEO of COP30
The Climate Briefing: In conversation with Ana Toni, the CEO of COP30
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
What are the aims of COP30, and what does Brazil's diplomatic strategy look like?
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2061780412&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
Brazil is presiding over the next UN climate change conference, COP30. In this episode, Anna and Ruth are joined by the Chief Executive Officer of COP30, Ana Toni, to discuss what the aims of the conference are, what Brazil's COP30 diplomatic strategy looks like, and what the UNFCCC's post-negotiation phase means.
Other ways to listen: Apple podcasts .
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/03/climate-briefing-conversation-ana-toni-ceo-cop30 Apr 16, 2025, 11:23 AM
The Climate Briefing: In conversation with Ana Toni, the CEO of COP30
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
What are the aims of COP30, and what does Brazil's diplomatic strategy look like?
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2061780412&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
Brazil is presiding over the next UN climate change conference, COP30. In this episode, Anna and Ruth are joined by the Chief Executive Officer of COP30, Ana Toni, to discuss what the aims of the conference are, what Brazil's COP30 diplomatic strategy looks like, and what the UNFCCC's post-negotiation phase means.
Other ways to listen: Apple podcasts .
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/03/climate-briefing-conversation-ana-toni-ceo-cop30 Apr 16, 2025, 11:23 AM
#20
General Non-Music Discussion / The Climate Briefing: The geo...
Last post by jon.wallace - May 07, 2025, 01:48 AMThe Climate Briefing: The geopolitics of critical raw materials
The Climate Briefing: The geopolitics of critical raw materials
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
Discussing the interplay between critical raw materials and geopolitics – and the challenges associated with extraction.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2073567532&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
Critical raw materials – like rare earths, cobalt and lithium – play a central role in the energy transition and profoundly influence geopolitical dynamics. Their extraction may also amplify conflict and fragility risks in host countries.
In this episode of the Climate Briefing, Ruth and Anna speak to Olivia Lazard (Fellow at Carnegie Europe) and Sophia Kalantzakos (Global Distinguished Professor, Environmental Studies and Public Policy, NYU Abu Dhabi) about the interlinkages between critical raw materials and geopolitics, the challenges associated with extraction, and what a 'good' strategy for securing future access might look like.
More ways to listen: Apple podcasts .
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/climate-briefing-geopolitics-critical-raw-materials Apr 16, 2025, 10:56 AM
The Climate Briefing: The geopolitics of critical raw materials
Audio
jon.wallace
16 April 2025
Discussing the interplay between critical raw materials and geopolitics – and the challenges associated with extraction.
[soundcloud]https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/2073567532&visual=&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=false&show_user=false&show_reposts=false&color=%23ff5500[/soundcloud]
Critical raw materials – like rare earths, cobalt and lithium – play a central role in the energy transition and profoundly influence geopolitical dynamics. Their extraction may also amplify conflict and fragility risks in host countries.
In this episode of the Climate Briefing, Ruth and Anna speak to Olivia Lazard (Fellow at Carnegie Europe) and Sophia Kalantzakos (Global Distinguished Professor, Environmental Studies and Public Policy, NYU Abu Dhabi) about the interlinkages between critical raw materials and geopolitics, the challenges associated with extraction, and what a 'good' strategy for securing future access might look like.
More ways to listen: Apple podcasts .
Source: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/04/climate-briefing-geopolitics-critical-raw-materials Apr 16, 2025, 10:56 AM