Humans have always pretended we can resist new inventions, from the printing press to electricity to computers, only to discover that the world shifts regardless. AI is different only in degree, not in pattern. It moves faster than our debates, scales faster than our regulations, and integrates faster than our instincts. The question is no longer whether AI will matter. It is whether we will matter in deciding how it is used.
The broader geopolitical implications of Modi’s visit are equally significant. India’s expanding footprint in West Asia reflects its transition from a traditionally non-aligned actor to a proactive participant in regional affairs. Unlike major powers that often approach the region through rigid alliances, India seeks flexible partnerships rooted in strategic autonomy. Its engagement spans Israel, the Gulf monarchies, and Iran, allowing it to maintain a diversified diplomatic portfolio.
The larger lesson is sobering. Pakistan’s experience illustrates the perils of instrumentalising militant proxies for short-term strategic gain. Strategic depth, once viewed as a force multiplier, has become a source of strategic vulnerability. As Islamabad turns to air power to manage a problem decades in the making, the deeper fracture lies not just along the Durand Line—but within the logic of proxy warfare itself.
However, a balanced assessment suggests that India’s superpower trajectory could also generate opportunities for Bangladesh. Enhanced regional connectivity, expanded market access, greater investment flows, and improved regional stability could benefit Dhaka—provided cooperation and mutual respect remain central to bilateral engagement. Ultimately, the impact on Bangladesh will depend not only on India’s power trajectory but also on how both countries manage diplomacy, trust-building, and regional cooperation in an evolving geopolitical landscape.
Pakistan, on the global stage, once again struggled to maintain credibility. In a widely viewed CNN interview, Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif failed to present evidence supporting claims of downed Indian jets. When pressed, he deflected by citing “Indian social media,” culminating in a moment of international embarrassment.
It is no exaggeration to say that if Bangladesh were to fall further into the orbit of India’s adversaries, the Chicken’s Neck becomes a chokehold. In wartime, an adversarial Bangladesh could cut off India’s northeast with little provocation. Even peacetime sabotage—intelligence disruptions, smuggling of insurgent arms, or cross-border terrorist infiltration—could cripple India’s internal security.
South Asia’s media is at a crossroads, where its democratic function as a watchdog is at odds with its struggle for financial viability. While the ever-expanding digiverse continues to offer immense opportunities for journalism and its potential to expose corruption and human rights violations as well as challenge mainstream and official narratives, the big question remains – how does the media sustain itself?
Reportedly, the Kirana Hills—near the fortified underground nuclear storage site at Mushaf-Sargodha—were struck by a BrahMos missile. According to idrw.org, the strike on Rawalpindi’s Noor Khan base sent shockwaves through the Pakistan Army leadership, especially its chief, General Asif Munir. The operation exposed critical vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence.
Kashmir is no longer a remote valley; it is the litmus test of global resolve against state-sponsored terror for reasons other than the wellbeing of its people. Pakistan’s duplicity is an open dossier. FATF grey-listing (2018-22) barely dented its war-chest because petrodollars kept the financial arteries open. Arun Shourie labelled this “strategic mendicancy milking Western fears of a failing nuclear state while fertilising jihad". The Pahalgam attack proves the scam endures.
Perhaps, the truth lies elsewhere, in the gaping holes of a failing system, the persistent lapses in security, intelligence and governance. And this, despite allocating billions in public funds, our money, our labour, to national security year after year. And yet, it is ordinary citizens who remain vulnerable, targeted again and again.
India’s Operation Sindoor is not just a military retaliation—it is a signal of strategic transformation. With an emphasis on long-term credible deterrence, operational depth, and multi-domain pressure, New Delhi is redefining the rules of engagement with Pakistan. Islamabad would do well to recalibrate its approach and recognize the new reality: any miscalculated aggression will now face an overwhelming and multi-layered response.
For the Modi government generally and the prime minister particularly, who has mastered the art of messaging and social media optics, deploying the two women is widely seen as a smart symbolism. Their gender and religions, incidental in the context of the armed forces, carried a strong message for Pakistan and the rest of the world.
But this time, the condemnation is unanimous and intense. I cannot recall another instance where all of Kashmir shut down in protest against terrorists who were not only Muslims but also backed by Pakistan, a country that once enjoyed sympathy among a significant section of the population.
If South Asia is to overcome its myriad challenges—from religious extremism to geopolitical rivalries—it must reaffirm its commitment to secularism, inclusion, and regional cooperation. The costs of continuing down the current path are too high—not only in lost opportunities but in human lives.
Terrorism cannot be fought through centralization and alienation. Disempowering local leadership and repeatedly failing in intelligence and security—as seen in Pulwama and now Pahalgam—are grave concerns. Kashmir, as an integral part of India, must be given the dignity of full democratic participation.
The original principles behind May Day—demanding an eight-hour workday, fair wages, and safe working conditions—are still far from being fully realized in Bangladesh. Without addressing these core issues, the country risks falling behind others in achieving inclusive and sustainable economic development.
Twenty-six people died. Civilians. Tourists. Possibly women, children, families. Innocents. Their stories never reached us. Not because of censorship, but because no one cared enough to look for them. In Pakistan, people were too busy winning the meme war to ask who the victims were—or what their lives meant.
A recent article by Pakistani Army veteran Adil Raza offers disturbing insights. He writes that Pakistan, gripped by internal military desperation, has teetered on the edge of conflict not due to provocation but due to the Pakistan Army’s desire to manufacture crises to mask its domestic failures.
The path to sustainable peace will not be easy. There will be setbacks, and there will always be those who seek to derail the peace process. Sometimes, even conflict is framed as a path to larger peace—but such actions must always be the absolute last resort. Nations must ensure that voices of hatred do not drown out those of reason and compassion.
