The US Aimed at Iran But Might Have Hit Central Asia
The U.S. and Israeli attacks last month on Iran to 'obliterate' its nuclear program may have hit another target: Central Asia's interests in accesses the large Iranian market and use Iran's transport links to trade with the wider world.
Iran's 'Look East' policy was launched by then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005 to improve relations with Russia, China, and India to counter Western pressure over Iran's nuclear program and improve the economy. It was continued by Ahmadinejad's successors and now includes Central Asia, a region with which Iran has had numerous recent engagements.
On May 15, 2025, a free trade agreement between Iran and the Eurasian Economic Union (Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, and Kyrgyzstan) came into force.
In June 2023, Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev met Iran's then-President Ebrahim Raisi and Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The 2023 meeting netted cooperation pacts in agriculture, energy, customs affairs, sports, science, technology and innovation, cultural exchanges, health care, Chabahar port, the environment, industry, and tourism.
The June 2023 meetings followed a March 2023 visit by Uzbekistan's foreign minister, who met Iran's minister of foreign affairs and minister of industry, mines, and trade. Afterward, the parties announced efforts to increase trade turnover, and to foster business links and people-to-people ties. The ministerial meetings built on the September 2022 visit by Raisi to Uzbekistan that produced 17 agreements in areas such as energy, transport, and agriculture, and discussed how to increase trade.
In September 2022, Raisi had declared that improving relations with Central Asia was 'one of the first priorities of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.'
Iran wants to increase trade with Uzbekistan fourfold, to $2 billion (it was less than $520 million in 2023); trade with Kazakhstan and Tajikistan aims to reach $1 billion each; deals with Turkmenistan will jump by 30 percent. Although Tajikistan's economy is markedly smaller than those of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, in this case it sits alongside its heftier neighbors because of the language and cultural ties it shares with Iran and an existing defense cooperation agreement.
Tehran and Tashkent intend to develop a transport corridor through Turkmenistan, which Mirziyoyev first discussed with Turkmenistan's president Serdar Berdimuhamedov in October 2022. Transportation cooperation between Tashkent and Ashgabat started in 2017 with the opening of the Turkmenabat-Farab railway and car bridges that will link the countries and open opportunities for long-distance trade. Raisi pledged, 'The Islamic Republic of Iran is able to easily connect Uzbekistan to high seas via Turkmenistan and Afghanistan.' As Nargiza Umarova of the Institute for Advanced International Studies in Tashkent noted, 'Tehran plays a key role in the formation of the Eurasian land bridge to connect China and Europe by railroads.'
The U.S. and Israeli attacks made an impression in Tashkent. Immediately afterward Mirziyoyev 'ordered a review of foreign trade and transport routes, emphasizing the need to redirect cargo flows to safer ports amid instability in the Middle East,' changes that could raise logistics costs by 30 percent.
U.S. President Donald Trump declared the United States would attack Iran again if it has future concerns about the country's uranium enrichment capabilities. More military activity over Iran may degrade regional aviation safety and disrupt air travel from Central Asia to West Asia, requiring costly rerouting.
The impact on regional supply chains will no doubt be on the agenda for the 7th Consultative Meeting of the Heads of State of Central Asia, which will be held in September 2025 in Uzbekistan.
Iran is hydrocarbon-rich Turkmenistan's second-largest trading partner after Russia, and the two countries recently agreed to a roadmap to achieve $3 billion in trade, up from nearly $600 million in 2024. Also planned is an increase in the annual volume of cargo transit between the two countries to 10 million metric tons by the end of 2027
In 2024, Iran and Turkmenistan agreed to construct a new 125-kilometer natural gas pipeline, and Turkmenistan will deliver 10 billion cubic meters of natural gas for shipment to Iran, eventually rising to 40 billion cubic meters annually. Iran has a deficit of gas for its development plans and needs $45 billion of investments to boost gas production.
Trade between Kazakhstan and Iran is low, just over $300 million annually. Kazakhstan exports mainly agricultural products, and Iran exports mainly foodstuffs and industrial chemicals. In February 2025, the sides signed several agreements to boost trade, and Astana declared it was ready to supply Iran with 75 types of products valued at $250 million.
Iran is attractive to the landlocked Central Asian republics that seek redundant trade routes. In June 2021, Tashkent hosted a conference to highlight Central Asia-South Asia connectivity via Afghanistan and Pakistan. Two months later, the U.S. and NATO retreated from Afghanistan and the country plunged in chaos, so the republics had to consider alternatives.
Recently the region has seen new transport projects that cross Iran, such as the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) a 7,200-kilometer multi-mode network that spans India, Iran, Azerbaijan, and Russia. The corridor will rely on Chabahar port in Iran and will allow Tehran to solidify its ties with Moscow and Delhi. In May 2025, Iran and China launched a railway route from Xi'an in western China to the Aprin dry port near Iran's capital, Tehran. It will cut travel time from 30 days via sea to 15 days and will avoid the Malacca Strait and the Strait of Hormuz chokepoints. And Iran's Rail Ministry intends to build the Iran-Afghanistan-China corridor, likely through the Wakhan border.
Also in May 2025, representatives of China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, and Turkiye met to plan a new transport corridor. The Istanbul-Tehran-Islamabad railway, a 6,500-kilometer rail link was launched in 2009 on a trial basis, then revived in 2021, but poor railway infrastructure is still a hurdle. The Ashgabat Agreement proposed a multimodal transport agreement between the governments of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, India, Pakistan, Armenia, and Oman that may connect with the INSTC. Finally, the Southwest Corridor, from the Persian Gulf/India-Iran-Azerbaijan-Georgia-Ukraine-Europe (or Turkiye-Europe) may cut transport time from India to Europe from over 30 days to 10-12 days.
Central Asia may make use of Iran's ports, Chabahar and Bandar Abbas, though there is now a risk of U.S. and Israeli attacks against the ports to weaken Iran's economy. In January 2022, Iran and Uzbekistan concluded an agreement to give Uzbekistan access to Chabahar port on the Gulf of Oman. Iran can offer a large internal market (over 90 million people, 68 percent under 35); a space free of the violence that harms Afghanistan and Pakistan; organized and functioning government agencies; and ports adjacent to the markets of India (Chabahar) and the Persian Gulf (Bandar Abbas).
The Central Asian republics are not burdened by Washington's sense of grievance against Iran, especially as there will be an economic cost to joining the U.S. campaign against the Islamic Republic with no offsetting compensation, other than maybe a thank-you note from the U.S. ambassador.
The states of Central Asia want a reliable partner to help them deal with instability in Afghanistan. Iran shares that interest and has no territorial aspirations in Central Asia, though it will seek political support in fora such as the United Nations and wants a larger regional role through groups like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Iran's position as a transport node makes it a prime target for U.S. and Israeli attacks by military and financial (sanctions) means. Tel Aviv and Washington may be concerned that as the Central Asian nations increase their trade with Iran, they will support Tehran in fora such as the United Nations. Increased economic activity may benefit the government in Tehran and preserve its legitimacy, while destabilizing the regional supply chains will increase economic distress of Iranian citizens. If Central Asia suffers, that's a sacrifice Washington is willing to make.
The U.S. thirst for revenge and Israel's anxieties about an Iran that enjoys normal relations with the rest of the world are a tax on the region. Is Washington ready to subordinate its talk about advancing sovereignty and economic prosperity in Central Asia to trying to isolate and impoverish the Islamic Republic?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
2 hours ago
- The Diplomat
The Embarrassing Reason Xi Talks about ‘Great Changes Unseen in a Century'
Haven't you heard? The world is undergoing great changes unseen in a century. And Chinese leader Xi Jinping is doing his level best to make sure everyone knows. In front of the cameras – and microphones – of the Western media in 2023, he told his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin: 'Now is the moment of change unseen in a century. We are jointly driving it forward.' Of course, Putin could only agree. But agree with what, exactly? The formulation clearly means something important. Xi enshrined it at the 19th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party in October 2017, and has used it many times in other key speeches and documents. The phrase is even used to describe Xi's approach since taking charge at the 18th National Party Congress in 2012. But what does it mean? Maybe Wikipedia can help. The dedicated page on the topic relies on a 2024 European Council on Foreign Relations e-book. The authors trace the origin to Yuan Peng and his 2009 article 'The Financial Crisis and U.S. Economic Hegemony' in the Chinese academic journal Contemporary International Relations. Wikipedia and the ECFR authors also cite the dedicated entry in the Center for Strategic Translation's glossary, which tells us the phrase was: … first used by Chinese academics following the Great Recession. The phrase is associated with the dangers and opportunities posed by American decline, and has been adopted by THE CENTER as a programmatic assessment of the trajectory of the current world order. The trends which can be feasibly linked to this trajectory are diverse. The source for this is Rush Doshi's 2021 book, 'The Long Game.' Doshi writes, in turn: The concept first emerged from conversations about Western decline after the Global Financial Crisis. One of its first usages was in a 2009 essay titled 'The Financial Crisis and American Economic Hegemony' written by Yuan Peng… Yuan Peng observed that the United States 'for the first time in the history of its hegemony' was suffering from a series of grave challenges, that these were producing 'great changes unseen in a century' Yuan's article has an original Chinese version and a translation. Doshi's quotes are his own translation. As it turns out, both versions mistranslate Yuan. The original Chinese refers to: 'The 'eastward shift of global power' and the rise of emerging powers have brought about changes not seen in centuries.' (emphasis mine) Earlier in the article, Yuan referred to Henry Kissinger's 'theory' of 'great changes unseen in 400 years' and how Kissinger saw the ''eastward shift of power'' as 'an inevitable trend.' So is Xi's catchy phrase just one more thing Kissinger gave China, along with decades of what the Chinese call 'strategic opportunity'? Maybe. But why 'centuries' not 'a century'? Why did Yuan write about '400 years' not '100 years'? In trying to glean the origins of the phrase, we shouldn't be too influenced by the specific Chinese character formulation. Yes, Yuan's quote is exactly the same as Beijing's official phrase with the addition of a shu to specify several centuries and the subtraction of the da that indicates the changes are great. But both follow the famous line (at least in Chinese histro-literary culture) from late Qing Dynasty statesman Li Hongzhang, about 'great changes unseen in thousands of years.' And others have used the same formulation before it became an official slogan, such as a literature professor in 1993. To establish descent, we want both the focus on great hegemonic changes and a single century. Funnily enough, this brings us back to Kissinger. The first line of the first chapter of his 1994 book 'Diplomacy' stated: 'Almost as if according to some natural law, in every century there seems to emerge a country with the power, the will, and the intellectual and moral impetus to shape the entire international system in accordance with its own values.' One Chinese paying attention was Liu Mingfu, author of the bestselling book 'China Dream' published in January 2010. With that quote from Kissinger and references to some other Western scholars as support, Liu asserted something much like an actual natural law. According to Liu, there is a hundred-year cycle of new 'champion countries' rising up to transform the world as they transform themselves, driving historical progress forward for the benefit of humankind. China's dream is its destiny, Liu proclaimed, and it will replace the U.S. as the champion country. Unlike hegemonic Uncle Sam, the People's Republic of China will be a leader, drawing on the Chinese distinction between a bullying hegemon and those who lead the 'Kingly Way.' But military strength is key – the only way to righteously push a selfish U.S. into doing what's best for itself and humanity as whole, starting with stepping aside as Taiwan gets 'unified.' Strong circumstantial evidence points to Liu as the source of the phrase about 'great changes unseen in a century.' Xi's signature 'China Dream' is the very title of Liu's book. As Xi ascended to power he ordered the creation of a website to educate cadres, which recommended Liu's book in 2013. In his first 2012 meeting with the new military leadership, he pointed to 'great changes unseen before.' Most if not all of the ideas in the book have prominent analogues in Xi's policies. The 2019 'China and the World in the New Era' white paper contained thinly disguised Liu Mingfu. Explainers for internal consumption on 'great changes unseen in a century' and the 'Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation' recapitulate the themes of Liu's book. And in a dog-that-didn't-bark way, they do so without mentioning Liu. Liu, no fool, understands that it's embarrassing that Xi Jinping Thought is derivative of a popular nonfiction book. Interviewed by the foreign media when Xi unveiled the 'China Dream' slogan, Liu was triumphant (As the BBC put it: 'Colonel Liu Mingfu seems to think that he has more capital than most to tell Xi Jinping his dreams') but careful not to stick his neck out too far: The world today is undergoing a major change unseen in a century, but this also means we have the opportunity to make major changes. China's national goal is nothing less than to realize the 'Chinese Dream', the great rejuvenation of the Chinese people. Its core strategy is the 'Belt and Road' initiative to connect the world and bring happiness through cooperation. The ultimate goal will be to build a community with a shared future for mankind. And he needs to be careful. The better connected and more powerful Liu Yazhou, who provided the foreword to Liu Mingfu's book, is reportedly in prison on a commuted death sentence. No wonder Liu wanted a photo showing him smiling as he holds up books on Xi Jinping Thought next to a plate with Xi on it. But still, he must be satisfied with how his decision to read Kissinger's book turned out. While Xi is driving great changes unseen in a century with Putin and others, Liu knows that he was the first mover in driving great changes in Xi's head.
The Diplomat
8 hours ago
- The Diplomat
Exclusive Interview With Detained Activist Dr Mahrang Baloch
The Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) has been advocating for Baloch rights since it was founded in 2020. Since its early days, when the movement was known as the Bramsh Yakjehti Committee, the BYC has organized peaceful protests against the excessive use of force by the Pakistani state in Balochistan – including forced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and other forms of repression. Also since its beginning, the BYC has been led by women – including Dr. Mahrang Baloch. The 32-year-old became an activist after her father was 'disappeared' in 2009. He was released – only to be abducted again in 2011, and this time killed. Ever since, Mahrang had been a central figure in the movement for human rights and justice in Balochistan, including being honored by Time magazine as of the 100 most influential leaders of 2024. Led prominently by women, including Dr. Mahrang Baloch herself, the BYC represents a new generation of progressive political activism in a region long marred by conflict and marginalization. The Pakistani state has responded to this peaceful mobilization with a sweeping crackdown and arrests, disinformation campaigns, and detentions without due process. In March 2025, Mahrang – along with several other BYC leaders – was arrested, and she has been held in detention ever since, where they report 'continuous mistreatment and harassment.' This exclusive interview with Mahrang, conducted via an intermediary who was able to visit her in prison, offers a rare and urgent insight into the thinking of a movement that, in recent months, has mobilized tens of thousands across Balochistan in protests against enforced disappearances and state repression. Mahrang offers her perspective on the current state of the BYC and its leadership while under state custody, as well as the broader challenge of extremism and the future of political activism and human rights advocacy under increased state repression and now threats from the Islamic State's local branch. In recent months, Balochistan has witnessed a troubling surge in religious extremism, most notably with the emergence of Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), a group that appears to operate at both regional and international levels. This group has singled you out, publishing your photo in a booklet and labeling you as 'evil' and a 'Western puppet.' How do you respond to these personal attacks? And more broadly, what does the rise of such groups signal for the future of progressive politics in Balochistan? Balochistan has a peculiar and complex history with religious extremism. However, the roots of this extremism are not embedded in Baloch society itself. Based on clear evidence, we assert that religious extremism was imposed upon Baloch society – it was, in a sense, installed from the outside. The influence of religious radicalism in Balochistan began to emerge prominently during the Afghan War and became more pronounced after 9/11. If we study Baloch society from a historical perspective, it is inherently secular, a society that has traditionally embraced religious, ethnic, and regional tolerance and coexistence. The emergence of Islamic State in Balochistan and the threats made against me or declaring me an apostate are not something new. For the past two decades, we have witnessed how religious extremists have been used as a tool against the progressive Baloch political movement and against progressive educators, writers, intellectuals, and journalists. For example, Professor Saba Dashtiari, a Baloch intellectual and teacher at the University of Balochistan, openly criticized the state for human rights violations in Balochistan. In 2011, he was murdered in broad daylight in front of the university. A religious extremist group claimed responsibility for his assassination through the media. Similarly, Professor Razzaq Zehri in Khuzdar was killed merely for promoting co-education and free education for all deserving students. Likewise, in Gwadar, Sir Zahid Askani was also murdered for the same reason. And just last year in Turbat, another educator, Sir Rauf Baloch, met a similar fate. Progressive political activists in Balochistan, those who criticize the policies of the Pakistani state and advocate for human rights, face a dual threat. On one hand, they are subjected to enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings by the state of Pakistan. On the other hand, they receive death threats from religious extremist armed groups. Last month, Islamic State released my photo, branded me a European agent and an apostate, and warned the public not to attend our events. This rhetoric mirrors the language used against me by ISPR [Inter-Services Public Relations, the media wing of the Pakistani military] in their press conferences. I had long anticipated that a group like Islamic State would eventually be activated and deployed against us, because we have been observing this pattern in Balochistan for the past 20 years, as exemplified by the cases I mentioned above. I believe that threats from Islamic State or their activation against us will not significantly impact progressive politics in Balochistan. The Baloch political society has matured considerably, and the people of Balochistan are well aware of the truth, specifically, who is backing these religious extremists and why. The public fully understands this reality. Our greatest success is that the majority of the Baloch people stand with us. And as long as that remains true, the use of extremist groups like Islamic State against us will not put an end to our struggle. The progressive political circles in Balochistan are deeply rooted. Tactics like these will not silence the progressive political movement in Balochistan, nor will threats from Islamic State silence us. You have now been imprisoned for over three months. During this period, Pakistan's military spokesperson, in multiple ISPR press briefings, has described you as a 'proxy of terror' and used terms like 'evil face' in reference to your activism. How do you respond to these characterizations by the state's military apparatus? For the past three months, I have been detained unlawfully. During this time, according to the information available to me, ISPR has mentioned me in three to four press conferences or media briefings. In each instance, the same baseless accusations were repeated, such as: 'Mahrang is a proxy of terrorists,' or 'Mahrang is a foreign agent,' and so on. Despite being a powerful state with a 600,000-strong army, numerous intelligence agencies, and various civil institutions, ISPR has not presented even one piece of actual evidence against me. Instead, they have relied solely on false accusations and a media trial aimed at character assassination. The military spokesperson has repeatedly misrepresented the press conference I held on March 19 at the Quetta Press Club. That press conference was not about the armed attack on the Jaffar Express or the return of the bodies of armed individuals. In reality, it was held to highlight the harassment faced by our fellow human rights defenders at the hands of Pakistani security forces. We had also submitted related cases to the United Nations Human Rights bodies. The video and written transcript of that press conference are still publicly available in the media. At the end of the press conference, a journalist asked a question regarding the return of bodies lying in the Civil Hospital Quetta to their families. In response, I merely said that the bodies should be identified and handed over to the families, as this is their constitutional right. That is the only comment I made on the matter. The full recording of the press conference exists, and any institution can verify that I made no unlawful or unconstitutional remarks during it. The second allegation that the Pakistani military repeatedly makes against me and my colleagues is that we broke into the gates of the Civil Hospital Quetta to retrieve the bodies of armed individuals. I challenge the Pakistani military to provide evidence to support this claim. If they can, I will declare myself guilty. On that evening, I was at the Quetta Press Club, and afterward, I went straight to my home. Any independent investigative body is welcome to review CCTV footage from the Quetta Press Club and the city of Quetta, or to interview individuals present on that day. My colleagues, our organization, the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), and I have consistently spoken out against violence and injustice. Wherever I've had the opportunity to speak or write, whether in Pakistan or internationally, I have clearly and unequivocally opposed violence. This is our well-established policy. I believe the real issue ISPR and the Pakistani military have with us is that we raise our voices against the state's violent policies and human rights violations in Balochistan. We question them, we hold different views, and our position has gained international recognition. Our peaceful struggle has been acknowledged globally, and our voice is being heard. This is what troubles the Pakistani military most. That is why ISPR, in its repeated press conferences, is branding me and our organization, the BYC, as terrorists without providing a shred of evidence. The purpose of these statements is clearly to create a false international narrative that Mahrang and the BYC are proxies of terrorists, in an attempt to silence international discourse on human rights violations in Balochistan and to delegitimize our voice. However, it seems the Pakistani military wrongly assumes that international human rights organizations operate like domestic Pakistani media – that they will believe anything, no matter how baseless. But no credible person or institution accepts accusations without evidence. They demand proof or valid evidence. In response to ISPR's false allegations, I have issued a legal notice demanding that either ISPR prove these allegations in court or issue a formal apology. Now we will see how the Pakistani judiciary fulfills its responsibility and whether it will hold the military spokesperson accountable. Reports have emerged through social media, open letters, and messages from your colleagues that you and other detained members of the Baloch Yakjehti Committee have faced harassment, mistreatment, and denial of basic rights in prison. There are accounts of torture, a hunger strike, and the severe case of Beebow Baloch. Can you describe the conditions of your imprisonment and your other colleagues and the nature of the treatment you and other BYC detained leaders have received? Yes, in prison, we have been subjected to continuous mistreatment, harassment, and denial of our basic rights. On the night of April 24 at 8:00 p.m., personnel from the Quetta Police and Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) unlawfully entered the prison and brutally assaulted me and my colleagues, Beebow Baloch and Gulzadi Baloch. During this incident, Beebow Baloch was transferred from Hudda Jail Quetta to Pishin Jail, where she was severely tortured during the transfer. Surveillance cameras were even installed inside her barracks and restroom, violating her privacy. In protest against her transfer and the inhumane treatment she faced, we went on a five-day hunger strike. Ten days later, Beebow Baloch was brought back to Hudda Jail, and she continued her hunger strike for ten consecutive days. Inside the prison, we are continuously harassed and threatened. Our family has been denied access to basic facilities and necessities on multiple occasions, and we have had to suspend visits and meetings with legal counsel. Following the Jaffar Express attack, the Pakistani state – through its media apparatus, official channels, and social media team – directly accused you and the Baloch Yakjehti Committee of supporting terrorism. Yet the BYC is widely known, both locally and internationally, as a peaceful human rights movement. Why do you believe the state is attempting to criminalize your activism? What political calculations or anxieties do you think lie behind this campaign? In March 2025, following an armed attack on the Jaffar Express in Balochistan, the state used the incident as a pretext to target our peaceful political organization, the BYC. A severe crackdown was launched against us, despite the fact that we had no any type of connection to the attack or any act of violence. The entire episode appeared orchestrated, with one clear objective: to silence or dismantle the Baloch Yakjehti Committee, as we have been a strong and consistent voice against human rights violations in Balochistan. We have always raised our voices against all forms of injustice and abuse, and it is this peaceful dissent that the state finds intolerable. Consequently, efforts were made to associate our non-violent struggle with an act of armed violence. However, the BYC is a peaceful political organization. We have never engaged in nor endorsed violent politics. Since our inception, our position and method of struggle have been clear: we resist the state's oppression and brutality in Balochistan through non-violent means. To date, not a single stone has been broken at any of our gatherings or protests – yet we have faced violent crackdowns from the state from day one. After the Jaffer Express attack, the state launched an aggressive media campaign against the BYC, attempting to malign our peaceful political efforts by falsely linking us to the incident. We were repeatedly pressured to issue condemnations that served the state's narrative. But our stance has always been unequivocal: we do not support armed struggle or violence in any form, and this position has been documented in the media multiple times. Nevertheless, our organization has faced an intense crackdown. Following the attack, the Balochistan government suspiciously buried several unidentified bodies in the Kaasi Graveyard in Quetta. Some bodies were stored in the morgue at Civil Hospital Quetta, with no access granted to anyone. This sparked panic and fear among the families of Baloch victims of enforced disappearances, as they feared their missing loved ones might be among the dead. For years, the state has used armed attacks as a cover to execute extrajudicial killings. Victims of enforced disappearances are taken from secret detention centers, killed, and then falsely portrayed as militants killed in combat. Sometimes, the bodies of actual militants are accompanied by those of forcibly disappeared persons to suggest they died together. These incidents are not isolated; as an organization, we have documented evidence of many such cases. The same fear gripped families once again. Every day, relatives of missing persons visited Civil Hospital Quetta, demanding a basic and constitutionally protected right: access to the bodies or disclosure of their identities, so they could determine whether their loved ones were among them. In retaliation for these lawful and peaceful demands, the state brutally targeted these families, subjecting them to violence and further enforced disappearances. The Baloch Yakjehti Committee stood with these families, raised their voices, and supported them through this painful ordeal. As a consequence, our leadership and members have faced the harshest state repression. The recent crackdown against our organization began on March 20, when, at 5 a.m., our colleague Bibagar Baloch was arrested at his home. When we launched a peaceful protest against his arrest, the state responded with violent repression and opened direct fire on the protesters. This resulted in the deaths of three people, including a young child, and left dozens injured. We then held a peaceful sit-in alongside the bodies of those killed. It was during this protest that Beebow Baloch and I were arrested, followed by the arrest of several of our other members. The real reason behind the state crackdown on the BYC is our non-violent resistance to Pakistan's human rights violations, violence, and injustice in Balochistan. Instead of acknowledging our peaceful movement or addressing our demands for justice, the Pakistani state continues to delegitimize our struggle by leveling baseless accusations and using force against our activists. I believe that my arrest and the arrest of my colleagues, the crackdown on the BYC, the state-led media campaign to malign us, and ongoing efforts to damage our reputation are all part of a deliberate attempt to psychologically pressure us into abandoning our political principles and programs. The aim is to silence our voice against human rights abuses in Balochistan, so that the Pakistani military can continue its exploitation of the region's resources and oppression of its people without resistance or accountability. With the emergence of ISKP in Balochistan, and given its explicit threats toward you and other BYC members, how does the Baloch Yakjehti Committee plan to respond? What strategies do you envision for navigating this increasingly volatile political and security environment? As I have already mentioned above, both Islamic State and the spokespersons of the Pakistan military are using the same language against us. Their tone is identical. Both are troubled by our struggle, both speak of eliminating us, both label us as foreign agents, and both feel threatened by our progressive stance. They view our political and human rights struggle as a danger, and in response, ISPR's press conferences and Islamic State's threatening audio-visual content and pamphlets have used hateful and violent language against us. I believe their sole aim is to silence me and my colleague, or to coerce us into abandoning our struggle. We are being subjected to relentless psychological pressure through various means. First, I was arrested. Then, ISPR held repeated press conferences against me, launching character assassination campaigns. A false and misleading media narrative was spread to manipulate international public opinion. The families of my colleagues, Dr. Sabiha Baloch and Beebow Baloch, were collectively punished. Over 300 of our members were detained. An undeclared ban was imposed on the political activities of our organization. The law was weaponized against me and my colleagues. Every peaceful protest was met with violence against our members. Despite all this, our colleagues have remained committed to their peaceful political and human rights activism. Even in the face of imprisonment, torture, arrest, media trials, and false accusations, neither I nor my colleagues have chosen silence. We have remained resolute in continuing our peaceful struggle against human rights violations in Balochistan. When our unwavering commitment became evident, Daesh ultimately became active against us, issuing death threats and calling for our elimination. Yet, we are fully determined that we will not remain silent about the human rights abuses in Balochistan. No matter the cost, we will continue our peaceful struggle, because our demands are simple and lawful: an immediate end to all forms of oppression and violence in Balochistan, and the constitutional and legal right of the Baloch people to make their own decisions regarding their future. Crackdowns on political dissent in Pakistan have intensified in recent years, affecting movements across the ideological spectrum, from the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Given this broader climate of repression, how do you see the future of the Baloch Yakjehti Committee? What role do you believe it can continue to play, both within Balochistan and nationally? From day one, the BYC has strived to unite all oppressed and state-affected people within Pakistan, to foster harmony among them, and to lead a collective struggle against human rights violations and for the attainment of public rights. This effort stems from the reality that every community and nation in Pakistan today is suffering under state oppression and injustice. A majority of political leaders have been imprisoned, peaceful political activism has been criminalized, dissenting voices are being silenced, the media is fully controlled, and even the judiciary is being manipulated through controversial measures like the 26th Constitutional Amendment. In essence, a full-fledged authoritarian regime is in place in Pakistan. In the face of this, it is imperative that all oppressed nations and communities come together in a united struggle against this dictatorship.
Yomiuri Shimbun
14 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Hamas Is Open to a Ceasefire. But Netanyahu Says There's No Room for Hamas in Postwar Gaza
CAIRO (AP) — Hamas and Israel staked out their positions Wednesday ahead of expected talks on a Washington-backed ceasefire proposal, with the militant group suggesting it was open to an agreement while the Israeli prime minister vowed that 'there will be no Hamas' in postwar Gaza. Both sides stopped short of accepting the proposal announced Tuesday by U.S. President Donald Trump. Hamas insisted on its longstanding position that any deal bring an end to the war in Gaza. Trump said Israel had agreed on terms for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza and urged Hamas to accept the deal before conditions worsen. The U.S. leader has been increasing pressure on the Israeli government and Hamas to broker a ceasefire and hostage agreement. Trump said the 60-day period would be used to work toward ending the war — something Israel says it won't accept until Hamas is defeated. He said a deal might come together as soon as next week. But Hamas' response, which emphasized its demand that the war end, raised questions about whether the latest offer could materialize into an actual pause in fighting. Hamas official Taher al-Nunu said the militant group was 'ready and serious regarding reaching an agreement.' He said Hamas was 'ready to accept any initiative that clearly leads to the complete end to the war.' A Hamas delegation was expected to meet Wednesday with Egyptian and Qatari mediators in Cairo to discuss the proposal, according to an Egyptian official. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, because he wasn't authorized to discuss the talks with the media. Disagreement on how the war should end Throughout the nearly 21-month-long war, ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas have repeatedly faltered over whether the war should end as part of any deal. Hamas said in a brief statement Wednesday that it had received a proposal from the mediators and was holding talks with them to 'bridge gaps' to return to the negotiating table. Hamas has said it's willing to free the remaining 50 hostages, less than half of whom are said to be alive, in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the war. Israel says it will only agree to end the war if Hamas surrenders, disarms and exiles itself, something the group refuses to do. 'I am announcing to you — there will be no Hamas,' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a speech Wednesday. An Israeli official said the latest proposal calls for a 60-day deal that would include a partial Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and a surge in humanitarian aid to the territory. The mediators and the U.S. would provide assurances about talks to end the war, but Israel isn't committing to that as part of the latest proposal, the official said. The official wasn't authorized to discuss the details of the proposed deal with the media and spoke on condition of anonymity. It wasn't clear how many hostages would be freed as part of the agreement, but previous proposals have called for the release of about 10. 'I'm holding my hands and praying that this will come about,' said Idit Ohel, mother of Israeli hostage Alon Ohel. 'I hope the world will help this happen, will put pressure on whoever they need to, so the war will stop and the hostages will return.' On Monday, Trump is set to host Netanyahu at the White House, days after Ron Dermer, a senior Netanyahu adviser, held discussions with top U.S. officials about Gaza, Iran and other matters. Trump issues another warning On Tuesday, Trump wrote on social media that Israel had 'agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize' the 60-day ceasefire, 'during which time we will work with all parties to end the War.' 'I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,' he said. Trump's warning may find a skeptical audience with Hamas. Even before the expiration of the war's longest ceasefire in March, Trump had repeatedly issued dramatic ultimatums to pressure Hamas to agree to longer pauses in the fighting that would see the release of more hostages and a return of more aid for Gaza's civilians. Still, Trump views the current moment as a potential turning point in the brutal conflict that has left more than 57,000 dead in the Palestinian territory. Gaza's Health Ministry said the death toll passed the 57,000 mark Tuesday into Wednesday, after hospitals received 142 bodies overnight. The ministry does not differentiate between civilians and combatants in its death count, but says that more than half of the dead are women and children. Since dawn Wednesday, Israeli strikes killed a total of 40 people across the Gaza Strip, the ministry said. Hospital officials said four children and seven women were among the dead. The Israeli military, which blames Hamas for the civilian casualties because it operates from populated areas, was looking into the reports. The war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking roughly 250 hostages. The fighting has left the coastal Palestinian territory in ruins, with much of the urban landscape flattened in the fighting. More than 90% of Gaza's 2.3 million population has been displaced, often multiple times. And the war has sparked a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, pushing hundreds of thousands of people toward hunger. Hospital director killed The director of the Indonesian Hospital, Dr. Marwan al-Sultan, was killed in an apartment in an Israeli strike west of Gaza City, a hospital statement said. The hospital is the Palestinian enclave's largest medical facility north of Gaza City and has been a critical lifeline since the start of the war. The hospital was surrounded by Israeli troops last month and evacuated alongside the other two primary hospitals in northern Gaza. The bodies of the doctor, his wife, daughter and son-in-law, arrived at Shifa Hospital torn into pieces, according to Issam Nabhan, head of the nursing department at the Indonesian Hospital. 'Gaza lost a great man and doctor,' Nabhan said. 'He never left the hospital one moment since the war began and urged us to stay and provide humanitarian assistance. We don't know what he did to deserve getting killed.' In central Gaza, the Al Awda Hospital said an Israeli strike near the entrance of a school housing displaced Palestinians killed eight people, including three children, and wounded 30 others. The hospital also said Israel struck a group of Palestinians who gathered near the entrance of the hospital's administration building in Nuseirat refugee camp. In other developments, Israel said an airstrike last week killed two Hamas members who allegedly took part in a June 24 attack in which seven Israeli soldiers were killed when a Palestinian attacker attached a bomb to their armored vehicle.
