Wednesday, November 19, 2025

Study reveals why mysterious structures within Earth’s mantle hold clues to life here

A Rutgers researcher and collaborators link strange anomalies to Earth’s molten beginnings – and its unique habitability

Rutgers University

Early Earth — image:
The illustration shows a cutaway revealing the interior of early Earth with a hot, melted layer above the boundary between the core and mantle. Scientists think some material from the core leaked into this molten layer and mixed in. Over time, that mixing helped create the uneven structure of Earth’s mantle that we see today.
view more
Credit: Illustration by Yoshinori Miyazaki/Rutgers University

For decades, scientists have been baffled by two enormous, enigmatic structures buried deep inside Earth with features so vast and unusual that they defy conventional models of planetary evolution.

Now, a study published in Nature Geoscience by Rutgers geodynamicist Yoshinori Miyazaki in combination with collaborators offers a striking new explanation for these anomalies and their role in shaping Earth’s ability to support life.

The structures, known as large low-shear-velocity provinces and ultra-low-velocity zones, sit at the boundary between Earth’s mantle and its core, nearly 1,800 miles beneath the surface. Large low-shear-velocity provinces are continent-sized blobs of dense, hot rock. One sits beneath Africa; the other is perched under the Pacific Ocean. Ultra-low velocity zones are thin, molten patches clinging to the core like lava puddles. Both types of structures slow seismic waves dramatically, signaling unusual composition.

“These are not random oddities,” said Miyazaki, an assistant professor in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences in the Rutgers School of Arts and Sciences. “They are fingerprints of Earth’s earliest history. If we can understand why they exist, we can understand how our planet formed and why it became habitable.”

Billions of years ago, Earth was covered by a global ocean of magma, Miyazaki said. As it cooled, scientists expected the mantle to form distinct chemical layers, similar to frozen juice separating into sugary concentrate and watery ice. But seismic studies show no such strong layering. Instead, large-low shear velocity provinces and ultra-low velocity zones form irregular piles at the planet’s base.

“That contradiction was the starting point,” Miyazaki said. “If we start from the magma ocean and do the calculations, we don’t get what we see in Earth’s mantle today. Something was missing.”

His collaborators concluded the missing piece is the core itself. Their model suggests that over billions of years, elements such as silicon and magnesium leaked from the core into the mantle, mixing with it and preventing strong chemical layering. This infusion could explain the strange composition of large low-shear-velocity provinces and ultra-low-velocity zones, which can be seen as solidified remnants of what the scientists termed a “basal magma ocean” contaminated by core material.

“What we proposed was that it might be coming from material leaking out from the core,” Miyazaki said. “If you add the core component, it could explain what we see right now.”

The discovery is about more than deep-Earth chemistry, Miyazaki said. Core-mantle interactions may have influenced how Earth cooled, how volcanic activity unfolded and even how the atmosphere evolved. That could help explain why Earth has oceans and life, while Venus is a scorching greenhouse and Mars is a frozen desert.

“Earth has water, life and a relatively stable atmosphere,” Miyazaki said. “Venus’ atmosphere is 100 times thicker than Earth’s and is mostly carbon dioxide, and Mars has a very thin atmosphere. We don’t fully understand why that is. But what happens inside a planet, that is, how it cools, how its layers evolve, could be a big part of the answer.”

By integrating seismic data, mineral physics and geodynamic modeling, the study reconceived large low-shear velocity provinces and ultra-low-velocity zones as vital clues to Earth’s formative processes. The structures may even feed volcanic hotspots such as Hawaii and Iceland, linking the deep Earth to its surface.

“This work is a great example of how combining planetary science, geodynamics and mineral physics can help us solve some of Earth’s oldest mysteries,” said Jie Deng of Princeton University, a co-author of the study. “The idea that the deep mantle could still carry the chemical memory of early core–mantle interactions opens up new ways to understand Earth’s unique evolution.”

Building on that idea, the researchers say each new piece of evidence helps fill in gaps in Earth’s early history, turning scattered clues into a clearer picture of its evolution.

“Even with very few clues, we’re starting to build a story that makes sense,” Miyazaki said. “This study gives us a little more certainty about how Earth evolved, and why it’s so special.”

Explore more of the ways Rutgers research is shaping the future.

Journal

Nature Geoscience

DOI

10.1038/s41561-025-01797-y

Method of Research

Computational simulation/modeling

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

Deep mantle heterogeneities formed through a basal magma ocean contaminated by core exsolution

Gluten sensitivity: It’s not actually about gluten

A landmark study has revealed that gluten sensitivity, which affects approximately 10 per cent of the global population, is not actually about gluten but part of the way the gut and brain interact.

University of Melbourne

A landmark study has revealed that gluten sensitivity, which affects approximately 10 per cent of the global population, is not actually about gluten but part of the way the gut and brain interact.

The findings are expected to set a new benchmark for how gluten sensitivity is defined, diagnosed and treated.

The research review, published in The Lancet, examined current published evidence for non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) to better understand this highly prevalent condition.

People with NCGS experience symptoms after consuming gluten but do not have coeliac disease, an autoimmune disease triggered by gluten. Common symptoms include bloating, gut pain and fatigue.

Lead researcher, University of Melbourne Associate Professor Jessica Biesiekierski, said the findings overturn long-held assumptions about gluten sensitivity.

“Contrary to popular belief, most people with NCGS aren’t reacting to gluten,” Associate Professor Biesiekierski said.

“Our findings show that symptoms are more often triggered by fermentable carbohydrates, commonly known as FODMAPs, by other wheat components or by people’s expectations and prior experiences with food.”

In the largest combined analysis, only a few tightly controlled trials found any real gluten reaction. Overall, people’s responses were no different from when they were given a placebo.

“Across recent studies, people with IBS who believe they’re gluten-sensitive react similarly to gluten, wheat, and placebo. This suggests that how people anticipate and interpret gut sensations can strongly influence their symptoms,” Associate Professor Biesiekierski said.

“Taken together, this redefines NCGS as part of the gut–brain interaction spectrum, closer to conditions like irritable bowel syndrome, rather than a distinct gluten disorder.”

The research team – from Australia, The Netherlands, Italy and the United Kingdom – say the findings have major implications for people self-managing gut symptoms, for clinicians prescribing restrictive diets, and for policymakers shaping public health messaging.

“Millions of people around the world avoid gluten believing it harms their gut, often after experiencing real symptoms that range from mild discomfort to severe distress. Improving our scientific and clinical understanding of a condition affecting up to 15 per cent of the global population is incredibly important,” Associate Professor Biesiekierski said.

Associate Professor Jason Tye-Din, Director of the Snow Centre for Immune Health and a gastroenterologist at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, said the updated scientific knowledge could help clinicians provide more accurate diagnoses and tailored treatment for patients who present with NCGS.

“Distinguishing NCGS from related gut conditions is essential for clinicians to offer accurate diagnosis and individualised care, as well as treating underlying drivers,” Professor Tye-Din said.

“This review supports a more personalised, evidence-based approach to gut health and avoids unnecessary dietary restriction.”

Associate Professor Biesiekierski added that effective care for people with NCGS should combine dietary modifications with psychological support, while ensuring nutritional adequacy.

“We would like to see public health messaging shift away from the narrative that gluten is inherently harmful, as this research shows that this often isn’t the case,” she said.

“These findings additionally call for better diagnostic tools, more rigorous clinical pathways and research funding in this field, as well as improved public education and food labelling.”

Journal

The Lancet

DOI

10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01533-8

Method of Research

Literature review

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

Non-coeliac gluten sensitivity

Making martyrs

Shahzad Sharjeel

November 19, 2025

DAWN

AS far as the anointed go, saints in the Sufi tradition have it easy. You could be declared one in life and then continue to dispense generosity and blessings from the afterlife. Martyrdom, on the other hand, has a significant drawback: it must be earned with one’s life, as the ‘immortal’ status can only be awarded posthumously, in all traditions. It’s strange, then, that martyrdom, a status considered far higher than any other, can be granted to anyone these days.

The right-wing, MAGA influencer Charlie Kirk, who was shot dead at a rally on the University of Utah campus in September this year, is being fashioned as a martyr. The NYT recently ran a piece on the required ingredients for a good martyr, especially for conscription into an immediate political purpose. It listed public, dramatic, and innocent deaths, a cause attached to them, and a movement to glorify and capitalise on them, as a must for this recipe.

The word ‘shaheed’(martyr) inspires awe, passion, admiration, and absolute respect. Before any competing words, tropes, and honorifics are introduced, consider the context of this piece: the transcendence of this Arabic word into not just the vocabulary of non-Arabic speakers but also into their body politic, narratives, identities and collective conscience. As long as it was attached to an Abu this and a Bin that, it could be hung on the obsession of ‘Islamist fundamentalists’ with the promised afterlife, as opposed to the ‘rationalist fascists’’ rejection of anything beyond the material world. The lines seem to be blurring now.

Street-corner banners could be seen in Surrey, British Columbia, proclaiming ‘Shaheed Jathedar Hardeep Singh Nijjar’. Singh was a Sikh separatist shot dead in Canada in front of the Guru Nanak Gurdwara in June 2023. The Indian government claimed that lax policing and appeasement of domestic votes had made Canada a safe space for ‘jihadists’. Some may see it as cultural appropriation, and others as their handlers’ stamp on Sikh separatist movements for invoking shahadat. It’s important to remember, however, that in Sikh history, the fifth Guru, Arjun, is considered the first shaheed. He was tortured to death during the Mughal emperor Jehangir’s reign for refusing to renounce his faith.

The origin of the word ‘shaheed’ comes from ‘shahadat’, which means to bear witness. In the context of martyrdom, it is closely tied to monotheistic faith and, by extension, the concept of the afterlife. Sacrificing one’s life to fulfil duties stemming from the verbal shahadat grants the individual the status of Shaheed — the highest a believer can aim for — promising eternal life and companionship of the holiest on the Day of Judgement. While this idea has inspired some who believe they are fighting for a just cause to face unimaginable challenges, its misuse has also led to the rise of suicide bombers.

It’s strange that martyrdom can be granted to anyone these days.

Invoking martyrdom turns victims into heroes whose reward is hoped to be in the afterlife, making current calls for justice seem petty. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s execution in 1979, although widely regarded as a judicial murder, has not been overturned by a court of law. In the court of public opinion, at least among his supporters, he has long been considered a shaheed. A university established to honour his legacy includes the suffix ‘Shaheed’ in its name, as does a political party founded by his son after he broke ties with his sister, Benazir. Yet, his most notable creation, the Pakistan Peoples Party, recently sought to have a resolution passed by the National Assembly declaring ZAB a ‘national martyr’. Strangely, his nemesis and tormentor, Ziaul Haq, the military dictator under whom Bhutto was executed, is also portrayed as a shaheed. The MQM has designated a graveyard in Karachi as Shuhuda Qabristan (martyrs’ cemetery), where party workers and leaders, particularly those who suffered violence, are buried.

As we consider the idea of supreme sacrifice and eternal redemption in the afterlife, it’s natural to think about the exemption from prosecution in this life that beneficiaries of immunity might enjoy. While our parliament has currently limited such exemptions to a few individuals, the Israeli Knesset, in March 2023, debated a bill from far-right factions calling for immunity from prosecution for all soldiers. The reason behind this proposed exemption is that all soldiers risk their lives, and the fear of legal action and consequences might prevent them from performing their duties without fear. The bill was put on hold. Opponents of the proposal, including the attorney general, pointed out that such legislation could leave exempted individuals vulnerable to international prosecution, including at the International Court of Justice.

The writer is a poet. His latest publication is a collection of satire essays titled Rindana.

shahzadsharjeel1@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, November 19th, 2025

BANGLADESH

OP-ED

Crime and punishment

Zahid Hussain

Published November 19, 2025

DAWN

THE trial and conviction of Sheikh Hasina Wajed must come as a lesson to all authoritarian rulers who see themselves as ‘god on earth’. The once all-powerful leader who governed Bangladesh with an iron fist for 15 long years — in the second stretch of her rule — and eliminated opposition with brute force, was driven out of power last year by a people’s movement. The disgraced leader who fled the country has now been convicted and sentenced to death for committing “crimes against humanity” though the sentence may never be implemented.

Such is the irony of history that the deposed leader was convicted by the same special tribunal which she had created to persecute her rivals. Some half a dozen political leaders, many of whom had served in previous administrations, were executed after dubious trials. Thousands of people were disappeared or thrown into dungeons for years. She retained power through controversial elections and had virtually established a one-party state.

But ultimately, the coercive power of the state could not withstand the power of the people. The ending was steeped in blood. A UN report said up to 1,400 people may have been killed during the 2024 protests, most from gunfire by security forces; it cited evidence that it was official policy to attack and violently repress anti-government protesters and sympathisers. But even such a display of repression could not save her from losing power.

Ultimately, the coercive power of the state could not withstand the power of the people.

She might have saved her life by fleeing the country but could not escape the criminal proceedings conducted in her absence. After months of being tried in absentia, a three-member International Crimes Tribunal pronounced her guilty on several charges including incitement, orders to kill and inaction to prevent atrocities as she oversaw a crackdown on anti-government protesters last year.

Announcing the verdict in a courtroom packed with the relatives of the victims, the tribunal said the “accused prime minister committed crimes against humanity by her order to use drones, helicopters and lethal weapons” against the people. Sheikh Hasina said that the tribunal was a “politically motivated charade”. Her former home minister has also been convicted.

The UN human rights office described the sentencing as “an important moment for victims” but said Sheikh Hasina should not have been sentenced to death. “We have been calling for perpetrators — including individuals in positions of command and leadership — to be held accountable in accordance with international standards,” said a UN spokesperson, adding: “We … regret the imposition of the death penalty, which we oppose in all circumstances.

But Muhammad Yunus, the head of the provisional government of Bangladesh has defended the convictions saying it reaffirmed the principle that “no one, regardless of power, is above the law”. He called the verdict “vital, if insufficient, justice” to the thousands affected during the crackdown, including the families of those killed during the uprising.

This is the first time in Bangladesh that a former prime minister has been sentenced to death by the court though the country has seen some leaders meeting a violent end while in power. Among them was Sheikh Hasina’s father and Bangladesh’s founder Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. He was assassinated along with most of his family members on Aug 15, 1975, by a group of Bangladesh Army personnel who invaded his residence as part of a coup d’état. Sheikh Hasina escaped death as she was out of the country at that time. She lived in India for some years before returning to Bangladesh in the 1980s after being elected to head the Awami League. She was elected as prime minister for the first time in 1996 after the ouster of Gen Ershad’s government. But after the end of her first stint, she had to wait for almost a decade to return to power and then she stayed put for 15 long years.

One of the major reasons for her dictatorial control was the remarkable economic progress achieved by Bangladesh during that period. From a basket case, Bangladesh became an international success story with the fastest economic growth rate in South Asia. In the Human Development Index too, Bangladesh did very well as compared to other underdeveloped countries. This new prosperity and economic potential encouraged Sheikh Hasina to consolidate her authoritarian stranglehold, as she stocked state institutions with party loyalists.

But she failed to see the growing political unrest that was simmering beneath the surface. Her government crushed all voices of protest. Protests broke out in 2013 against the execution of some political leaders for alleged collaboration with the Pakistan military during the 1971 war. The protest was crushed with the full power of the state. The protest was a warning to her authoritarian rule but instead of heeding it, she consolidated more power and started building a personality cult around her father. Life-size portraits and sculptures of herself and Sheikh Mujibur Rehman adorned the capital’s streets and city squares.

The rigged elections of January 2024, when Sheikh Hasina won her fifth consecutive term in office, heightened political discontent in the country. The Awami League claimed a two-thirds majority in the elections, which had been boycotted by the opposition. Many of the remaining seats had also been won by ruling party members standing as independent candidates. The seething political discontent turned into a mass movement in July 2024 when students took to the streets to demand the removal of government job quotas for the descendants of those who participated in the 1971 independence movement. Soon, the movement brought down the government, with Sheikh Hasina fleeing the country.

The conviction and death sentence for the fugitive leader has once again brought Bangladesh into the spotlight. The tribunal’s judgement has heightened the prevailing tension in the country, which has not yet fully recovered from last year’s political upheaval. It is unlikely that India will extradite its trusted ally. Sheikh Hasina had virtually turned Bangladesh into a satellite state of India. Her ouster came as a huge geopolitical setback to New Delhi. The growing relations between Bangladesh and Pakistan under the new administration in Dhaka have added to the ire of the Narendra Modi government in New Delhi. Any Indian attempt to destabilise Bangladesh can have far-reaching geopolitical consequences.

The writer is an author and journalist.
zhussain100@yahoo.com
X: @hidhussain

Published in Dawn, November 19th, 2025

PAKISTAN

GB’s rare earth potential

Afzal Ali Shigri

November 19, 2025

DAWN

IN the mountains of Gilgit-Baltistan lies a treasure that could transform Pakistan’s technological and economic future. Beneath its glaciers and granite are traces of rare earth elements. At a time when nations are racing to secure supplies of lithium, cobalt and rare earths, the northern frontier could emerge as a regional hub for high-value mineral processing. With its road link to China, developing internal network, new international airport, hydropower generation potential and a growing pool of educated, enterprising youth, GB is well-positioned for investment.

Processing rare earth elements, however, is capital intensive. Challenges ranging from technology to environmental management can only be overcome via extensive investment, expertise and regulation. But opaque governance hinders the attempt and GB continues to exist under a colonial-style legal order that denies investors protection and local communities their rights — made worse due to the region’s unsettled status.

GB does not enjoy constitutional status in Pakistan and is governed through executive orders that can be changed through bureaucratic rules of business. The current law, the Gilgit-Baltistan Governance Order 2018, was notified and proclaimed as a step towards empowerment, but in reality, as noted by the Supreme Court, it was designed to roll back the limited powers that were granted through 2009 Order to enhance federal control.

The 2018 Order concentrates decision-making in a single office, the Pakistani prime minister who chairs the Gilgit-Baltistan Council. Article 60 of the Order gives the PM exclusive power to legislate on all major subjects, including specific minerals, industries, electricity and investment policy. He can appoint and remove judges of the superior judiciary. For minerals like rare earths — linked directly to defence and high-technology supply chains — clarity of law and jurisdiction is vital. No serious investor will risk capital in a region where rights are undefined, courts are powerless, and laws can be changed at whim.

The Council has been reduced to an advisory body with no binding authority. Article 118 states that GB’s courts cannot question the validity of the Order. The local judiciary is mostly nominated, which turns it into an arm of the executive. In practice, the PM can override the GB Assembly, issue new regulations, or amend the Order at will, enjoying blanket immunity while doing so. This is hardly self-government; it is a continuation of the colonial model.

For the mining industry, the red flags are obvious: the governing law can be repealed or replaced without warning; contracts have no guarantee by empowered judicial protection; community compensation and environmental standards depend entirely on federal discretion; residents have no enforceable claim to royalties or employment; and no credible global company will invest in an area with such legal flaws.

By clinging to this defective system designed to control, Pakistan is sabotaging its own strategic interest. Instead of inviting investment through transparency and rule of law, an image of centralised control and uncertainty is projected. The Supreme Court saw this coming, and in January 2019, it delivered a landmark judgement directing that the 2018 Order be replaced with the consensus draft Gilgit-Baltistan Governance Reforms Order, 2019, that provides the very framework that both investors and citizens need.

It introduces a full chapter on fundamental rights: equality before law, freedom of speech and movement, property protection, and access to justice. Any law inconsistent with these rights is void. It defines a citizen of GB as someone domiciled or resident there, ensuring that only locals benefit from land and employment rights. Most importantly, it gives the Supreme Court final oversight. No amendment or repeal can take effect until it is placed before the court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution for review. This safeguard creates permanence and predictability for the investors.

The 2019 draft also establishes an independent higher judiciary and strengthens the GB Assembly’s role in social and economic legislation. It is not full provincial status, but it is a meaningful step towards rule-based governance. It grants GB full equality with Pakistani citizens, an independent judiciary with recourse to the Supreme Court and strong local governance.

A legal trap blocks the promise of prosperity that lies in the mountains of Gilgit-Baltistan.

Rare earth exploration and processing are capital-intensive ventures with long payback periods. Investors demand stable laws and independent courts. Without these, Pakistan risks losing billions in potential investment to other countries that offer legal security and transparency. At the same time, GB’s people risk repeating the history of extraction without benefit, their environment degraded, and their youth left unemployed. The 2018 Order denies them a share in their own resources. It denies Pakistan, too, the credibility it needs to partner with global technology and energy firms. The Supreme Court’s 2019 framework offers a practical and lawful way out for both investors and the residents of GB.

The court made it clear that adopting this Order does not prejudice the Kashmir dispute; it simply ensures justice and good governance. The only obstacle now is political hesitation and an inherited mindset of control.

GB’s mountains hold the minerals that could propel Pakistan into a high-tech future, yet its governance is reminiscent of a colonial past. The 2018 Order is legally weak, politically outdated, and economically self-defeating. If Pakistan truly wants to unlock its rare earth potential, it must replace this relic with the Supreme Court-approved 2019 Governance Reforms Order. Only then will investors see a predictable legal environment and the people of GB the justice they have long been denied. The world is racing towards clean energy and advanced technology. Pakistan cannot afford to stand aside. The choice is stark: bury the colonial order or bury the region’s promise.

It is time for the country’s major political parties each governing provinces, and some sharing power at the centre to act. The people of GB have waited too long for dignity and inclusion. The 2019 draft is already approved by the Supreme Court; what remains is the will to implement it. Ignoring it would not only betray the region but also squander Pakistan’s strategic and economic future.

The writer, a former IGP Sindh, belongs to Gilgit-Baltistan.

Published in Dawn, November 19th, 2025

Pakistan to build island to boost oil exploration: report

News Desk

Published November 19, 2025

DAWN

State-owned energy company Pakistan Petroleum Ltd (PPL) is reclaiming land from the sea to create a launchpad to ramp up oil and gas exploration, US outlet Bloomberg reported on Wednesday.

Citing PPL’s General Manager Exploration and Core Business Development, Arshad Palekar, Bloomberg reported that the artificial island will be created about 30 kilometres off the coast of Sindh, near Sujawal. He said this on the sidelines of an oil and gas conference in Islamabad.

“Planned with a height of six feet, the platform will prevent high tides from interrupting round-the-clock exploration work,” he said.

Pakistan’s drilling efforts are gaining fresh momentum after United States President Donald Trump indicated an interest in the country’s “massive oil reserves” in a social media post in July.

Since then, Islamabad has awarded offshore exploration licenses to local companies PPL, Mari Energies Ltd and Prime International Oil and Gas Company.

“The project, a first for Pakistan, builds on Abu Dhabi’s experience, where artificial islands for drilling have been successfully built,” Palekar said.

Construction of the island will be completed in February, and operation will start immediately after, according to Palekar. The company aims to drill around 25 wells.

Vitol and Cnergyico, Pakistan’s largest oil refiner, delivered the country’s biggest single shipment of very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) for ship refuelling, the global trading firm said in a statement late Monday.

This shipment came from Cnergyico’s first large-scale batch of fuel that meets International Maritime Organisation (IMO) low-sulphur rules. The company began producing it after importing its first US crude oil cargoes earlier this year.

The move will enable large vessels refuelling in Pakistan to now sail longer routes from east to west without needing to stop elsewhere, while also giving the country a stronger local supply of environmentally compliant marine fuel.Follow Dawn Business on X, LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook for insights on business, finance and tech from Pakistan and across the world.

Report submitted to US Congress mentions Pakistan’s ‘military success’ over India during May conflict

News Desk

Published November 19, 2025

DAWN

A report submitted to the US Congress has mentioned Pakistan’s “military success” over India during the four-day conflict in May this year.

“Pakistan’s military success over India in its four-day clash showcased Chinese weaponry,” said a report submitted to the US Congress on Tuesday by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, formed to report on the national security implications of the bilateral trade and economic relationship between the US and China.

Pakistan initially said it downed five Indian planes in air-to-air combat during the conflict, but later raised the tally to seven. Islamabad has denied any losses of its planes and says it hit 26 Indian targets after three air bases were targeted. US President Donald Trump, who continues to comment on the conflict, most recently said that eight planes were “essentially” shot down.

In its annual report, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission referred to the May conflict and said that China used it to “test and promote its own defence capabilities”.

The report submitted to Congress also highlighted China’s role in the conflict, saying that it drew global attention as “Pakistan’s military relied upon Chinese weaponry and reportedly leveraged Chinese intelligence”.

It also cited New Delhi’s claims of China helping Pakistan with “live inputs on Indian military positions throughout the crisis”, adding that “Pakistan denied these allegations, and China neither confirmed nor denied its degree of involvement”.

According to the report, China expanded its military cooperation with Pakistan in 2025, “compounding its own security tensions with India”.

In November and December 2024, China and Pakistan held the three-week Warrior-VIII counter-terrorism drills, and in February this year, China’s navy participated in Pakistan’s multinational AMAN drills, the report recalled, adding that these exercises highlighted “growing defence cooperation” between the two countries.

“India’s commentators viewed the drills as losses in their relationship with China and as direct security threats to its territorial positions,” the report said.

Referring to the May conflict, the report said, “While [the] characterisation of this conflict as a ‘proxy war’ may overstate China’s role as an instigator, Beijing opportunistically leveraged the conflict to test and advertise the sophistication of its weapons, useful in the context of its ongoing border tensions with India and its expanding defence industry goals.”

The report also mentioned that as Pakistan’s largest defence supplier, China provided approximately 82 per cent of the country’s arms imports from 2019 to 2023.

The May clash was the first time China’s modern weapons systems, including the HQ-9 air defence system, PL-15 air-to-air missiles and J-10 fighter aircraft, were used in active combat, serving as a real-world field experiment, the report added.

It also stated that China reportedly offered to sell 40 J-35 fifth-generation fighter jets, KJ-500 aircraft and ballistic missile defence systems to Pakistan in June. “That same month, Pakistan announced a 20pc increase in its 2025–2026 defence budget, raising planned expenditures to $9 billion despite an overall budget decrease.”

“In the weeks after the conflict, Chinese embassies hailed the successes of its systems in the India-Pakistan clash, seeking to bolster weapons sales,” the report alleged.

It also mentioned allegations by the French intelligence of China initiating a “disinformation campaign to hinder sales of French Rafales in favour of its own J-35s” and using “fake social media accounts to propagate AI and video game images of supposed ‘debris’ from the planes China’s weaponry destroyed”.

The conflict between Pakistan and India was sparked by an attack on tourists in occupied Kashmir, which New Delhi, without evidence, linked with Pakistan. Islamabad strongly denied responsibility while calling for a neutral investigation.

But, New Delhi launched deadly air strikes in Punjab and Azad Kashmir on May 7, marking the beginning of the four-day clash. After tit-for-tat strikes on each other’s airbases by the two sides, it took American intervention on May 10 for both sides to finally reach a ceasefire.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY

PAKISTAN

A State Betrayed

by Syed Salman Mehdi / November 17th, 2025

The 27th Amendment rewrites Pakistan’s rules and hands its courts and army to the powerful few.

According to Santiago Canton, the ICJ Secretary General, the 27th amendment introduces changes that raise serious concern. He warns that these shifts could weaken the courts’ role in checking executive power and compromise the basic rights of people in Pakistan.

Parliament has created a new Federal Constitutional Court and moved many core powers from the Supreme Court to that new body, including original jurisdiction over constitutional disputes and the transfer of all pending constitutional appeals and suo motu cases to the FCC.

Pakistan is already facing deep political strain, and any move that reduces judicial independence will only intensify public mistrust. Legal experts warn that once constitutional checks grow weak, governments tend to stretch their authority further, often at the cost of civil liberties. This amendment also arrives at a time when civic space is shrinking and voices questioning state decisions face growing pressure. If these trends continue, ordinary citizens will lose their last reliable shield against abuse of power, leaving the justice system unable to protect those who need it most.

That change is not a technical tweak. The FCC will be staffed by judges chosen under an altered appointments regime that gives the executive far greater control. High court judges can be shifted between provinces on presidential orders after a JCP recommendation, and a judge who refuses transfer may be deemed retired. These rules strip judges of institutional independence and make transfers a political tool rather than an administrative measure.

Parliament also removed the Supreme Court’s suo motu powers by deleting Articles 184, 186 and 191A. That change closes a potent front of public accountability that ordinary citizens and bar bodies used to reach the top bench quickly. The new arrangement reorders courts so that constitutional review sits behind a court whose judges are more directly tied to the executive.

Article 243 of the Constitution has been rewritten to create a post of Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) to be held by the army chief. The amendment abolishes the Chairman Joint Chiefs (CJCSC) slot and concentrates command over the army, navy and air force under one figure. The move also creates a National Strategic Command for nuclear oversight, but crucially it locks the head of that command to appointments made in consultation with the army chief.

The bill grants five-star officers constitutional protections that are almost absolute. These officers keep rank and privileges for life and enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution that cannot be removed except by a two thirds parliamentary vote. That raises a stark inequality. Elected leaders remain removable by simple majority. The amendment gives permanent legal shelter to the uniformed elite and places civilian politicians at a structural disadvantage.

The personal fallout has been dramatic. Senior jurists reacted within hours. Two Supreme Court judges Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah tendered resignations in protest, calling the amendment a grave assault on the Constitution and saying they could not sit on a court reduced to a shadow of its former role. A senior member of the Law and Justice Commission and former Attorney General Advocate Makhdoom Ali Khan also resigned. These departures are not routine. They mark a collapse of faith inside institutions meant to protect rights and law.

The manner of passage deepens the injury. The amendment moved through the cabinet and both houses in fast and contested sittings. The Senate vote came amid an opposition boycott and the National Assembly approved the bill by the numbers the ruling coalition mustered. Critics point to a lack of sincere debate, to rushed drafting and to last minute textual changes that favour continuity of political control rather than consensus rebuilding.

A particularly alarming detail in the file is the clause that secures the army chief’s position for an extended period. The record notes that Field Marshal Asim Munir will remain army chief and Chief of Defence Forces until 2030, a change that would make him the longest serving army chief without formal martial law. That is not symbolism. It is constitutional entrenchment of a single person’s dominance.

The political and social reaction has been mixed, but a strong current of alarm runs through lawyers civil society and parts of the public. International commentators and regional observers described the move as a major erosion of civilian control. Grassroots hashtags and street protests capture a sense of betrayal and fear that the formal rules of the republic have been rewritten to favour the khaki order.

Defenders argue the amendment unclogs court backlogs and modernises military coordination. They say a specialised FCC will speed constitutional adjudication and that a single defence chief can improve strategic command. Those arguments matter on paper, but they do not explain or justify the permanent legal shields and the transfer of appointment power from neutral bodies to political ones. The speed and balance of the reforms matter as much as their technical claims.

So where does Pakistan go from here? The amendment alters the field but it does not erase civic memory or legal debate. Courts that survive the political pressure can still interpret the text. Bar associations and civil rights groups can press cases that test the limits of immunity and transfer powers. Political parties and citizens can use every lawful tool to restore balance. The road will be long and fraught, but institutions are not dead unless everyone gives up.

In conclusion the 27th Amendment is a turning point. It rewrites the balance between people courts and the uniform. It makes impunity structural and places lasting authority in hands that answer first to the uniform not the ballot. That is the substance of the grievance judges lawyers and citizens now voice. If Pakistan is to survive as a republic governed by law the response must be calm smart and constitutional, not only loud. The work of repair must begin now.

Syed Salman Mehdi is a freelance writer and researcher with a keen interest in social, political, and human rights issues. He has written extensively on topics related to sectarian violence, governance, and minority rights, with a particular focus on South Asia. His work has been published in various media outlets, and he is passionate about raising awareness on critical human rights concerns. Read other articles by Syed.

State and its pillars

Arifa Noor

Published November 18, 2025

DAWN

NOW that the 27th Amendment has been passed, some in the legal profession and others are mourning the new subservience of the judiciary, going as far as to say that the third pillar of government has come crashing down.

Of course, what is less mourned, perhaps, is that the second pillar, parliament, is no longer standing upright either. Having been weakened over the years, it no longer functions as an independent branch either. It sits, stands and runs around in circles on cue — from the leadership of the political parties and the known unknowns. There were hints of it during the passage of the 18th Amendment but the slide began in earnest later — from the lightening-fast approval given to Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa’s extension to the present when constitutional amendments are passed within days. The ‘public representatives’ are led by the Pied Piper to the ‘ayes’ gallery when the vote is needed and there is little choice in the matter. And it doesn’t matter if they are sitting on the treasury benches or are in the opposition.

The executive may have had its hand strengthened by the recent legislation, but simply on paper. But its ability to make decisions is now a thing of the past. The only reason it is perhaps not discussed much is that its helplessness is hidden behind closed doors. In private rooms, it is hard to say who is chairing meetings or making the decisions. The capitulation is just not as public as in the case of the legislature even though the results are visible to all.

Indeed, there is little hope that any of the three pillars of the state are intact.

There is little hope that any of the three pillars of the state are intact.

But in the land of the pure, political theories remain just that — theories. Here, the pillars of the state weaken and crumble, straining just to stay upright but in our everyday lingo, the word ‘state’ is used to denote our respect and our acknowledgement of the power and influence of one institution. At times, we use the word also to concede our own vulnerability. But that is another story.

The state hasn’t been left untouched either. The 27th Amendment has brought sweeping reforms to the structure of the armed forces as well. Among other things, the new legislation has discontinued the joint chief position and introduced a new CDF, a position which will be held by the chief of army staff, who now appears to be far more than the ‘first among equals’. At the same time, the tenure of all services chiefs has been increased from three to five years. The head — COAS/CDF — has also been given lifetime immunity, like the president.

It is being said this will help prepare the armed forces for modern warfare and allow for the kind of coordination that was perhaps not possible earlier. Time and again, those who claim to understand how warfare works argue this, but their language explains little to those of us not in the know. These new changes will bring or improve combat readiness, synergy, multi-domain integration — though what this means in practical terms remains unclear to those of us who have never worn a uniform.

It is easier, however, to understand the far simpler concerns or worries that are being put forward.

There are fears that these changes may allow for centralisation of power in a single post/individual that is also above the law. Of course, some can argue that strong men who claimed to speak for or on behalf of the state were always above the law — the trial of Musharraf is a case in point — but now this has been put down on paper. But in a country such as Pakistan where checks on the ruling elite have always remained weak, the precedent being set by offering immunity to any government official is worrying. Others will want to follow suit in the future, as it will encourage decision-making without any fear of accountability.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, questions have been raised about what this will mean for the other two forces and their ability to make decisions or have their views heard if the perception of equality between all three forces is not acknowledged on paper. This, it is feared, will impact not just the morale but also decision-making.

How will it impact decisions about resource allocation, or decisions taken during times of conflict? Will the other services chiefs still be able to make their voice heard, ask some? Here, some insiders have mentioned the 2019 skirmish with India where they claim the then chief of army staff was outvoted when deciding the response to India. This account has been questioned, but as an anecdote it does urge more clarity on how decisions will be made. Will collegial decision-making, which some say has been at work till now, continue once the new structures are in place?

These questions are being asked partly because there is no transparent debate on the changes. If the discussions were open, such questions would not fester.

But beyond the powers, in Pakistan, there is always the worry about how the politics of any changes will play out. A case in point is the frenzied politicking over key non-political appointments as we have seen in the recent past. And one wonders that if powers are further centralised in new positions, whether it will encourage newcomers and aspirants to lobby in new and more aggressive ways for key positions as well as exceptional promotions. The long-term impact of this will not just weaken civilian actors and institutions; this is not one-way traffic.

In a fast-fragmenting state and society where legislation is being used to hollow out institutions such as the judiciary, any new factors that can further add to centralisation of power and increased politicking should worry us all — till some solid answers are provided.

The writer is a journalist.

Published in Dawn, November 18th, 2025