Pakistan and water

Pakistan is a water-stressed country. It is totally dependent on the Indus Valley Basin for survival.

That is why it has threatened war in response to India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty following the killing of 26 Indian tourists in Kashmir.

The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty is considered the most successful treaty of its kind in the world. Probably in the history of the world. It has held through three wars and numerous skirmishes between two countries whose religious difference mean that they truly detest each other.

There are six rivers in the Indus Basin (Indus, Chenab, Ravi, Beas, Jhelum and Sutlej). India administers the three eastern rivers and Pakistan the three western rivers. Both countries use the network for transport, drinking water, hydro-electricity, agriculture and industry.

But here is the rub. The main headwaters for the Indus Basin are in India which gives it the power to control the flow of water downstream. And Pakistan needs the water more than India.

Ninety percent of Pakistanis live in the Indus Basin. The rivers provide 90 percent of the irrigation water needed for Pakistani farms which provide 24 percent of the country’s GDP and employ 34 percent of the labour force. Eighty percent of the water needed for domestic and industrial use comes from the basin and nearly a quarter of Pakistan’s electricity is hydro based.

Economists reckon that Indian withdrawal from the treaty would lead to a flight of capital from economically hard-pressed Pakistan and the destruction of the country’s economy. Even worse, it raises a spectre of a war for survival between the regions two nuclear powers.

The Easter Bunny

The Easter Bunny played a centre-stage diplomatic role this week. When Donald Trump announced the death of Pope Francis this week he stood next to an actor dressed as the Easter bunny.

The juxtaposition was symbolic. Trump hated the Pope and wanted to demonstrate this by belittling the announcement of his death.

He has proven form for such occasions. When the widely-admired Senator John McCain died, Congress directed that America’s flags be lowered to half-mast. McCain and Trump were enemies. Trump ordered that the White House flag stay up.

Donald Trump and Pope Francis could not have been more different. The Pope lived a life of poverty. Trump lives a life of gilded ostentatiousness.

There was also policy substance behind the stylistic differences—mostly on the issue of immigration and migrants. The centrepiece of Trump’s first election campaign was a “big beautiful wall” to keep out illegal immigrants.

On a trip to Mexico, Pope Francis said: “A person who thinks only about building walls…and not bridges, is not a Christian.”

Pope Francis believed that Christian love required compassionate care for migrants. Trump called them “rapists, murderers and terrorists.”

After Trump’s second election victory, the Pope gave a television interview in which he said it would be a “disgrace” if Trump implemented his mass deportation plans. He followed that up with a letter to America’s Catholic bishops in which he said: “I exhort all the faithful of the Catholic Church not to give in to narratives that discriminate against and cause unnecessary suffering to our migrant and refugee brothers and sisters.”

The Pope’s last visitor before he died was Vice President JD Vance, himself a Catholic convert. What the two men discussed is not known. But it was reported that after the audience JD Vance was sent to a Vatican cardinal to be lectured on the responsibilities of a Christian leader.

Who benefits from the Chinese/American trade war?

South American farmers are delighted with the Sino-American trade war. Especially those in Argentina and Brazil.

Chinese cooks love their soybeans. They use it for soy sauce, tofu production, soybean oil and a wide range of seasonings. But Chinese farmers don’t seem to be able to grow enough. Eighty-five percent of all the soy beans used in China are imported and nearly a quarter of them come from America.

That quarter earned American farmers $12.8 billion last year—nearly ten percent of the value of all US exports to China. China was the main market for America’s soy bean farmers. But the 125 percent counter-tariff that Beijing imposed on American imports has locked the farmers out of this lucrative market and threatens to devastate American agriculture.

But it is a boon for soy bean farmers in Brazil and Argentina. The two countries between them produce 52 percent of the world’s soy bean crop. Forty percent comes from Brazil alone. And with American farmers locked out of China, the prices have gone up ten percent since the trade war began and are expected to continue to rise.

This is the second time American farmers have been hit by a Trump-induced Sino-American trade war. There was another during Trump’s first administration and South American farmers benefitted from that one as well.

That trade war also made Beijing more wary of its dependence on American agriculture. Since 2017 it has been investing in warehousing, railroads and port facilities in Brazil to move more of that country’s soybeans onto Chinese ships. This investment is now paying off for and making it less likely that it will shift its soy bean purchases back to the US if and when tariffs are lifted.

So what happens to the American farmers? The US Soybean Export Council and the American Soybean Association are trying to shift exports to India, Mexico and Egypt. They are also investigating the possibility of soy beans as a biofuel. But it is estimated that it will take at least ten years before the farmers see any tangible results. American farmers, it should be added, are at the core of Trump’s MAGA base.

Iran and Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia and Iran are long-standing traditional enemies. It was not surprising therefore, that the Saudis welcomed Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal in 2017.

But eight years later, Riyadh has reversed its position and welcomed Trump’s offer to negotiate a new deal with Tehran.

So what has happened in the intervening period? Basically, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has decided to move the Kingdom out of its Islamic hermit shell, reduce its dependence on oil and diversify the economy to become a high-tech and tourism hub. To do that he needs regional peace which means eliminating the Iranian threat through diplomacy.

Saudi-Iranian relations began to seriously warm up in 2023 when the Chinese brokered a restoration of diplomatic relations between the two countries after a seven-year rupture.

This week the kingdom’s foreign ministry officially welcomed talks between the US and Iran which it said would enhance “peace in the region and the world.” Taking, Riyadh’s lead, other Arab states have issued similar statements.

Israeli Prime Benjamin Netanyahu, however, remains committed to the strategy of an attack to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities and destroy its bomb and missile-manufacturing capabilities. But President Trump is holding him back at the behest of Saudi Arabia—his other close regional ally.

However, as always, Trump could quickly change direction. He has already said that if current talks fail to result in the dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear weapons programme then “all Hell will break loose.”

* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and author of “The Encyclopaedia of the Cold War” and “America Made in Britain".