For decades, the Strait of Hormuz has been geography’s trump card in the global energy market. Now, the Trump administration is betting that pipelines, ports and political realignment can dramatically weaken that advantage.The idea is audacious: instead of repeatedly fighting to keep Hormuz open, build enough alternative routes that closing it no longer holds the world economy hostage.US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has put an extraordinary timeline on that ambition. He says that within two years, the Strait could become “irrelevant”, predicting that 50 to 70 percent of energy currently moving through it could eventually travel through underground pipelines instead. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has similarly argued that Iran’s use of Hormuz as a strategic chokepoint has strengthened the case for permanently restructuring regional energy routes.And pieces of that alternative map already exist.Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline, or Petroline, carries crude from Abqaiq across the kingdom to Yanbu on the Red Sea. Its capacity has risen to as much as seven million barrels per day, and Riyadh is considering adding another one to two million barrels of capacity. The UAE, meanwhile, has its own route carrying crude from Abu Dhabi to Fujairah, outside Hormuz, and is working to expand that capacity.But perhaps the most geopolitically significant piece of the puzzle runs through Iraq and Syria.Washington is backing plans for new or revived pipeline infrastructure capable of carrying Iraqi crude westwards towards Syria’s Mediterranean coast. A proposed Basra-to-Baniyas corridor could eventually transport around two million barrels per day, giving Iraqi oil a route to global markets without entering Hormuz. Syria, once economically isolated, is consequently pitching itself as a new bridge between Gulf energy producers and the Mediterranean.The strategy would amount to a dramatic rewiring of the Middle East’s energy architecture.Before the Iran war, roughly 15 million barrels of Persian Gulf oil passed through Hormuz every day. Projects now being developed or discussed could provide another 7.3 million barrels per day of bypass capacity by the end of 2028. Analysts estimate that could eventually allow around 60 percent of the Gulf's pre-war oil exports to avoid Hormuz when necessary.Yet making Hormuz less important is very different from making it obsolete.Pipelines cost billions, cross multiple borders and require years of construction. They also create fixed targets vulnerable to missiles, drones and sabotage. Saudi Arabia's Petroline itself was attacked by Houthi drones in 2019. And moving Saudi crude to Yanbu merely introduces another potential chokepoint for Asian-bound cargoes: Bab el-Mandeb, where Houthi attacks have already demonstrated the vulnerability of Red Sea shipping.Then there is LNG.Pipelines carrying crude cannot simply solve Qatar's dependence on maritime LNG exports. Before the war, roughly one-fifth of global LNG trade passed through Hormuz, making natural gas one of the biggest obstacles to any claim that the strait can truly become irrelevant.And therein lies the contradiction in Washington's messaging.President Donald Trump only this week floated renaming the waterway the “Trump Strait”, while declaring it under American control. Yet his own administration is simultaneously championing a future in which the same strait matters dramatically less.One message celebrates controlling Hormuz. The other seeks to escape it.The more realistic objective, therefore, may not be to kill the Strait of Hormuz but to kill its monopoly.Saudi Petroline, Fujairah, Baniyas and potentially new corridors through Turkey and Jordan could give Gulf producers something they have historically lacked: options. That would dilute Tehran's ability to turn geography into economic leverage and fundamentally alter the strategic balance of the Gulf.But there is no risk-free route out of the Middle East.Bypassing Hormuz could simply move the danger — from Iranian waters to vulnerable pipelines, from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea, and from one geopolitical chokepoint to another.Washington may be trying to redraw the world's energy map.Geography, however, has not surrendered yet.

The Trump administration wants to reduce global dependence on the Strait of Hormuz through pipelines and alternative energy routes. Can the strategy work

For decades, the Strait of Hormuz has been geography’s trump card in the global energy market. Now, the Trump administration is betting that pipelines, ports and political realignment can dramatically weaken that advantage. The idea is audacious: instead of repeatedly fighting to keep Hormuz open, build enough alternative routes that closing it no longer holds the world economy hostage. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has put an extraordinary timeline on that ambition. He says that within two years, the Strait could become “irrelevant”, predicting that 50 to 70 percent of energy currently moving through it could eventually travel through underground pipelines instead. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has similarly argued that Iran’s use of Hormuz as a strategic chokepoint has strengthened the case for permanently restructuring regional energy routes. And pieces of that alternative map already exist. Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline, or Petroline, carries crude from Abqaiq across the kingdom to Yanbu on the Red Sea. Its capacity has risen to as much as seven million barrels per day, and Riyadh is considering adding another one to two million barrels of capacity. The UAE, meanwhile, has its own route carrying crude from Abu Dhabi to Fujairah, outside Hormuz, and is working to expand that capacity. But perhaps the most geopolitically significant piece of the puzzle runs through Iraq and Syria. Washington is backing plans for new or revived pipeline infrastructure capable of carrying Iraqi crude westwards towards Syria’s Mediterranean coast. A proposed Basra-to-Baniyas corridor could eventually transport around two million barrels per day, giving Iraqi oil a route to global markets without entering Hormuz. Syria, once economically isolated, is consequently pitching itself as a new bridge between Gulf energy producers and the Mediterranean. The strategy would amount to a dramatic rewiring of the Middle East’s energy architecture. Before the Iran war, roughly 15 million barrels of Persian Gulf oil passed through Hormuz every day. Projects now being developed or discussed could provide another 7.3 million barrels per day of bypass capacity by the end of 2028. Analysts estimate that could eventually allow around 60 percent of the Gulf's pre-war oil exports to avoid Hormuz when necessary. Yet making Hormuz less important is very different from making it obsolete. Pipelines cost billions, cross multiple borders and require years of construction. They also create fixed targets vulnerable to missiles, drones and sabotage. Saudi Arabia's Petroline itself was attacked by Houthi drones in 2019. And moving Saudi crude to Yanbu merely introduces another potential chokepoint for Asian-bound cargoes: Bab el-Mandeb, where Houthi attacks have already demonstrated the vulnerability of Red Sea shipping. Then there is LNG. Pipelines carrying crude cannot simply solve Qatar's dependence on maritime LNG exports. Before the war, roughly one-fifth of global LNG trade passed through Hormuz, making natural gas one of the biggest obstacles to any claim that the strait can truly become irrelevant. And therein lies the contradiction in Washington's messaging. President Donald Trump only this week floated renaming the waterway the “Trump Strait”, while declaring it under American control. Yet his own administration is simultaneously championing a future in which the same strait matters dramatically less. One message celebrates controlling Hormuz. The other seeks to escape it. The more realistic objective, therefore, may not be to kill the Strait of Hormuz but to kill its monopoly. Saudi Petroline, Fujairah, Baniyas and potentially new corridors through Turkey and Jordan could give Gulf producers something they have historically lacked: options. That would dilute Tehran's ability to turn geography into economic leverage and fundamentally alter the strategic balance of the Gulf. But there is no risk-free route out of the Middle East. Bypassing Hormuz could simply move the danger — from Iranian waters to vulnerable pipelines, from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea, and from one geopolitical chokepoint to another. Washington may be trying to redraw the world's energy map. Geography, however, has not surrendered yet.

The Trump administration wants to reduce global dependence on the Strait of Hormuz through pipelines and alternative energy routes. Can the strategy work

Race To Power | Trump’s Hormuz gambit: Can America make the world’s most important oil route obsolete?

For years, the West has pursued a simple strategy toward Vladimir Putin: punish Russia economically, isolate Moscow diplomatically and force the Kremlin to pay a price for its war in Ukraine.But is that strategy still working?Putin may be isolated from much of the Western political establishment. Yet the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit tells a very different story.Russia remains deeply engaged with China, India and much of the non-Western world. Putin can still sit at the table with major powers — and that makes the claim that Russia is simply “isolated” increasingly difficult to sustain.But there is a catch.At the SCO summit, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi delivered a message that Moscow cannot easily dismiss: the world must move from endless wars toward an end to war. Modi's appeal reflects India's increasingly independent diplomatic position — maintaining its strategic relationship with Russia while simultaneously deepening ties with the United States.China presents another complicated equation.Beijing has become crucial to Moscow economically and strategically, but that does not necessarily make Russia the senior partner. The longer the war continues, the greater Russia's dependence on China could become.Meanwhile, Europe is moving in the opposite direction.<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/putin-may-be-isolated-but-sco-showed-russia-is-not-cut-off-1788420897346/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/putin-may-be-isolated-but-sco-showed-russia-is-not-cut-off-1788420897346/embed</a>The EU continues sanctions against Russia and is preparing further measures targeting individuals, Moscow's military-industrial complex and its ability to sustain the war.Britain is also helping Ukraine expand its long-range strike capability. Moscow has warned that British military targets could face retaliation if British-made missiles continue being used against Russian territory.And NATO is increasingly focused on what comes after Ukraine — with European governments concerned about alleged Russian hybrid attacks, airspace incidents and the possibility of wider confrontation.So the old definition of isolation no longer fits.Russia is economically constrained, militarily challenged and politically estranged from much of Europe.But it is not diplomatically alone.The Verdict? Putin has not broken out of Western isolation — he has learned to operate around it.And perhaps that is the bigger story.The world is no longer divided neatly between Moscow and the West.India wants strategic autonomy. China wants greater global influence. Europe wants security. Washington wants leverage.And Putin is trying to turn those competing interests into diplomatic space for Russia.Is he isolated? In the West, increasingly yes.In the world? Not even close.&nbsp;

The EU continues sanctions against Russia and is preparing further measures targeting individuals, Moscow's military-industrial complex and its ability to sustain the war.

For years, the West has pursued a simple strategy toward Vladimir Putin: punish Russia economically, isolate Moscow diplomatically and force the Kremlin to pay a price for its war in Ukraine. But is that strategy still working? Putin may be isolated from much of the Western political establishment. Yet the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit tells a very different story. Russia remains deeply engaged with China, India and much of the non-Western world. Putin can still sit at the table with major powers — and that makes the claim that Russia is simply “isolated” increasingly difficult to sustain. But there is a catch. At the SCO summit, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi delivered a message that Moscow cannot easily dismiss: the world must move from endless wars toward an end to war. Modi's appeal reflects India's increasingly independent diplomatic position — maintaining its strategic relationship with Russia while simultaneously deepening ties with the United States. China presents another complicated equation. Beijing has become crucial to Moscow economically and strategically, but that does not necessarily make Russia the senior partner. The longer the war continues, the greater Russia's dependence on China could become. Meanwhile, Europe is moving in the opposite direction. https://www.wionews.com/videos/putin-may-be-isolated-but-sco-showed-russia-is-not-cut-off-1788420897346/embed The EU continues sanctions against Russia and is preparing further measures targeting individuals, Moscow's military-industrial complex and its ability to sustain the war. Britain is also helping Ukraine expand its long-range strike capability. Moscow has warned that British military targets could face retaliation if British-made missiles continue being used against Russian territory. And NATO is increasingly focused on what comes after Ukraine — with European governments concerned about alleged Russian hybrid attacks, airspace incidents and the possibility of wider confrontation. So the old definition of isolation no longer fits. Russia is economically constrained, militarily challenged and politically estranged from much of Europe. But it is not diplomatically alone. The Verdict? Putin has not broken out of Western isolation — he has learned to operate around it. And perhaps that is the bigger story. The world is no longer divided neatly between Moscow and the West. India wants strategic autonomy. China wants greater global influence. Europe wants security. Washington wants leverage. And Putin is trying to turn those competing interests into diplomatic space for Russia. Is he isolated? In the West, increasingly yes. In the world? Not even close.

The EU continues sanctions against Russia and is preparing further measures targeting individuals, Moscow's military-industrial complex and its ability to sustain the war.

The Verdict | Putin is isolated — but not alone

Donald Trump has mastered the politics of attention. Give him a controversy, a camera and a social-media account, and he can turn almost anything into a Trump headline. Now, even Lake Ontario has become part of the brand. Trump has formally ordered the US government to rename it Lake America, despite Canada making clear it will continue calling it Lake Ontario. The move comes amid an escalating trade fight with Ottawa.&nbsp;But here is the uncomfortable question: Is this governing, or marketing? Because Americans are not standing in grocery aisles wondering what the next landmark will be called. They are wondering why everything costs so much. They want affordability. They want stability. They want results. Instead, they are getting a presidency increasingly consumed by personal branding, confrontation and spectacle.&nbsp;Look at the Kennedy Center. Trump’s name has been placed at the center of another political and cultural battle, while fresh reporting suggests the institution’s finances deteriorated sharply following the takeover and name change. And that is the danger of making yourself the story. When every institution becomes a battlefield and every disagreement becomes personal, the presidency risks becoming less about governing and more about maintaining the Trump brand.

&nbsp;&nbsp;Yes, pandering works. It can energize a base. It can dominate the news cycle. It can turn frustration into political loyalty. But eventually, voters ask a more brutal question: What did all that noise actually deliver? And perhaps the clearest warning sign is coming from Corporate America. Companies that once cozied up to Trump are now cultivating relationships with Democrats ahead of the midterms, preparing for the possibility of a Democratic-controlled House, and the investigations and subpoenas that could follow.&nbsp;That is not necessarily ideological conversion. It is political insurance. And when corporate America starts hedging its bets, it suggests even Trump's most powerful allies understand that political power can change very quickly. So, Mr President, the question is no longer whether you can command attention. You clearly can.&nbsp;The question is whether attention is enough. Because America does not need a president who is constantly marketing himself. It needs a president who can make life better for the people being marketed to. The midterms may provide the answer. The brand is Trump. But the bill is America's.&nbsp;Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

Trump’s Lake America controversy raises questions about branding, governance, affordability, the Kennedy Center and shifting corporate support ahead of the midterms

Donald Trump has mastered the politics of attention. Give him a controversy, a camera and a social-media account, and he can turn almost anything into a Trump headline. Now, even Lake Ontario has become part of the brand. Trump has formally ordered the US government to rename it Lake America, despite Canada making clear it will continue calling it Lake Ontario. The move comes amid an escalating trade fight with Ottawa. But here is the uncomfortable question: Is this governing, or marketing? Because Americans are not standing in grocery aisles wondering what the next landmark will be called. They are wondering why everything costs so much. They want affordability. They want stability. They want results. Instead, they are getting a presidency increasingly consumed by personal branding, confrontation and spectacle. Look at the Kennedy Center. Trump’s name has been placed at the center of another political and cultural battle, while fresh reporting suggests the institution’s finances deteriorated sharply following the takeover and name change. And that is the danger of making yourself the story. When every institution becomes a battlefield and every disagreement becomes personal, the presidency risks becoming less about governing and more about maintaining the Trump brand.

Trump turns Lake Ontario into ‘Lake America’ as critics question whether his presidency is more about branding, controversy and spectacle than results

The Verdict: When the president becomes the brand

For decades, America has marketed itself as the land of opportunity—a destination where the world's brightest students and skilled professionals could study, work and build their futures. But under President Donald Trump, that promise is facing a major rethink. The Trump administration has proposed a $103,265 fee for new H-1B petitions, a dramatic jump from the fees historically charged for the programme. The proposal is still subject to the rule-making process and legal challenges.&nbsp;Washington says the objective is to protect American workers and prevent companies from using foreign labour to undercut domestic wages. But the policy could have consequences far beyond America's borders. India stands at the centre of this debate. Indian professionals accounted for about 71 percent of approved H-1B beneficiaries in FY2024, making them by far the largest group using the programme.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/short-videos/india-china-border-talks-nsa-doval-wang-yi-hold-talks-in-beijing-1787659831107">India-China border talks: NSA Doval, Wang Yi hold talks in Beijing</a>&nbsp;Add stricter vetting, increased scrutiny of applicants and uncertainty surrounding the broader student-to-work pipeline, and America's message to global talent is becoming increasingly complicated. For technology companies, the equation is changing too. If hiring foreign specialists in America becomes prohibitively expensive, companies can shift jobs overseas, expand their operations in countries such as India, or simply hire locally.That raises the bigger question: is America risking its position in the global race for talent?&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/anil-chauhan-china-intelligence-pakistan-operation-sindoor-1787742439190">China’s real-time intelligence support to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor cannot be established: Former CDS Anil Chauhan</a>&nbsp;Trump is betting that putting American workers first will strengthen the domestic economy—and politically, that message resonates with voters who believe immigration has taken jobs away from Americans. But protectionism has a price. America has every right to enforce its immigration laws and protect its workforce. But it must also recognise that global talent has choices. If America becomes too expensive, too uncertain and too difficult, the world's brightest minds may simply stop choosing America.<h2>The Verdict?</h2>Protect American workers, Mr Trump. But don't protect them so aggressively that you push American innovation out the door.

President Donald Trump's proposed $103,265 H-1B visa fee threatens to disrupt the pipeline for foreign skilled talent 71% of which comes from India raising concerns that strict protectionism could drive tech jobs and global innovation away from the United States.

For decades, America has marketed itself as the land of opportunity—a destination where the world's brightest students and skilled professionals could study, work and build their futures. But under President Donald Trump, that promise is facing a major rethink. The Trump administration has proposed a $103,265 fee for new H-1B petitions, a dramatic jump from the fees historically charged for the programme. The proposal is still subject to the rule-making process and legal challenges. Washington says the objective is to protect American workers and prevent companies from using foreign labour to undercut domestic wages. But the policy could have consequences far beyond America's borders. India stands at the centre of this debate. Indian professionals accounted for about 71 percent of approved H-1B beneficiaries in FY2024, making them by far the largest group using the programme. Also read: India-China border talks: NSA Doval, Wang Yi hold talks in Beijing Add stricter vetting, increased scrutiny of applicants and uncertainty surrounding the broader student-to-work pipeline, and America's message to global talent is becoming increasingly complicated. For technology companies, the equation is changing too. If hiring foreign specialists in America becomes prohibitively expensive, companies can shift jobs overseas, expand their operations in countries such as India, or simply hire locally. That raises the bigger question: is America risking its position in the global race for talent? Also read: China’s real-time intelligence support to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor cannot be established: Former CDS Anil Chauhan Trump is betting that putting American workers first will strengthen the domestic economy—and politically, that message resonates with voters who believe immigration has taken jobs away from Americans. But protectionism has a price. America has every right to enforce its immigration laws and protect its workforce. But it must also recognise that global talent has choices. If America becomes too expensive, too uncertain and too difficult, the world's brightest minds may simply stop choosing America. The Verdict? Protect American workers, Mr Trump. But don't protect them so aggressively that you push American innovation out the door.

President Donald Trump's proposed $103,265 H-1B visa fee threatens to disrupt the pipeline for foreign skilled talent 71% of which comes from India raising concerns that strict protectionism could drive tech jobs and global innovation away from the United States.

The Verdict | H-1B visa crackdown: Is America still worth it?

Pakistan’s military has ruled from behind the curtain for decades. But under Field Marshal Asim Munir, that curtain is disappearing, and the backlash is growing. For nearly eight decades, Pakistan’s military has been more than an army. It has been the institution that could make governments, break governments, and, at times, become the government. But something is changing. The aura of untouchability is being challenged, and increasingly, the voices doing it are coming from within Pakistan itself. Maulana Fazlur Rehman, one of Pakistan’s most influential religious-political figures, has openly challenged Asim Munir, telling the army chief that if he wants to do politics, he should take off his uniform and face the voters.&nbsp;And just this week, Fazlur Rehman invoked the trauma of 1971, warning against repeating the mistakes that preceded the breakup of Pakistan. That is significant. Because Pakistan has seen this story before. Ayub Khan seized power. Yahya Khan inherited military rule, and presided over the catastrophe of 1971 and the creation of Bangladesh. Zia-ul-Haq turned another coup into more than a decade of military dictatorship.&nbsp;And Pervez Musharraf once again brought the army directly into politics after his 1999 coup. Different generals. Different eras.But the same fundamental problem: when the military stops protecting the state and starts defining the state. Today, Asim Munir occupies an extraordinary position. Constitutional changes have made him Chief of Defence Forces, placing the army, navy and air force under a unified command. New legislation has further expanded his authority over military operations and senior personnel. Critics say Pakistan is moving closer to a system where military power is no longer simply influential, it is constitutionally entrenched.&nbsp;And that is precisely why the backlash matters. From political opposition to regional grievances, challenges are emerging against an establishment that has spent decades presenting itself as the ultimate guardian of Pakistan. The irony is difficult to ignore.Pakistan has long portrayed India as its existential enemy. Yet India, despite its own enormous political, ethnic and security challenges, has maintained civilian political supremacy over its armed forces.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/is-pakistan-s-military-aura-finally-cracking-1787676968788/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/is-pakistan-s-military-aura-finally-cracking-1787676968788/embed</a>&nbsp;For many Pakistanis, that contrast raises an uncomfortable question: If the “enemy state” can preserve its constitutional order without generals ruling the country, why must Pakistan repeatedly return to military dominance? Perhaps this is why the current moment matters beyond Asim Munir himself. Because the real battle is not simply between one General and his critics.It is over whether Pakistan can finally separate the power of the military from the identity of the nation.&nbsp;So, the verdict: Asim Munir may command Pakistan’s most powerful institution. He may have more formal authority than any recent army chief. But history offers a warning: Generals can command soldiers. They can influence governments. They can even rewrite institutions. What they cannot manufacture indefinitely is public consent. And if Pakistan’s most powerful voices are finally beginning to challenge the uniform, the real question is no longer whether Munir controls Pakistan. It is how long Pakistan will allow the uniform to define it.&nbsp;Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

Asim Munir’s expanding military authority faces growing opposition in Pakistan, reviving fears of military dominance, civilian unrest, and a repeat of history

Pakistan’s military has ruled from behind the curtain for decades. But under Field Marshal Asim Munir, that curtain is disappearing, and the backlash is growing. For nearly eight decades, Pakistan’s military has been more than an army. It has been the institution that could make governments, break governments, and, at times, become the government. But something is changing. The aura of untouchability is being challenged, and increasingly, the voices doing it are coming from within Pakistan itself. Maulana Fazlur Rehman, one of Pakistan’s most influential religious-political figures, has openly challenged Asim Munir, telling the army chief that if he wants to do politics, he should take off his uniform and face the voters. And just this week, Fazlur Rehman invoked the trauma of 1971, warning against repeating the mistakes that preceded the breakup of Pakistan. That is significant. Because Pakistan has seen this story before. Ayub Khan seized power. Yahya Khan inherited military rule, and presided over the catastrophe of 1971 and the creation of Bangladesh. Zia-ul-Haq turned another coup into more than a decade of military dictatorship. And Pervez Musharraf once again brought the army directly into politics after his 1999 coup. Different generals. Different eras. But the same fundamental problem: when the military stops protecting the state and starts defining the state. Today, Asim Munir occupies an extraordinary position. Constitutional changes have made him Chief of Defence Forces, placing the army, navy and air force under a unified command. New legislation has further expanded his authority over military operations and senior personnel. Critics say Pakistan is moving closer to a system where military power is no longer simply influential, it is constitutionally entrenched. And that is precisely why the backlash matters. From political opposition to regional grievances, challenges are emerging against an establishment that has spent decades presenting itself as the ultimate guardian of Pakistan. The irony is difficult to ignore. Pakistan has long portrayed India as its existential enemy. Yet India, despite its own enormous political, ethnic and security challenges, has maintained civilian political supremacy over its armed forces. https://www.wionews.com/videos/is-pakistan-s-military-aura-finally-cracking-1787676968788/embed For many Pakistanis, that contrast raises an uncomfortable question: If the “enemy state” can preserve its constitutional order without generals ruling the country, why must Pakistan repeatedly return to military dominance? Perhaps this is why the current moment matters beyond Asim Munir himself. Because the real battle is not simply between one General and his critics. It is over whether Pakistan can finally separate the power of the military from the identity of the nation. So, the verdict: Asim Munir may command Pakistan’s most powerful institution. He may have more formal authority than any recent army chief. But history offers a warning: Generals can command soldiers. They can influence governments. They can even rewrite institutions. What they cannot manufacture indefinitely is public consent. And if Pakistan’s most powerful voices are finally beginning to challenge the uniform, the real question is no longer whether Munir controls Pakistan. It is how long Pakistan will allow the uniform to define it. Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

Pakistan’s military power faces growing backlash as Asim Munir expands his authority, raising questions about civilian rule, democracy, and the country’s future

The Verdict | When generals rule: Why Asim Munir’s rise has Pakistan asking hard questions

Meta is facing growing scrutiny over a question that goes far beyond social media: when a technology company becomes powerful enough to shape childhood, how much responsibility should it bear for the consequences?&nbsp;Facebook was launched in 2004, while Meta became the parent-company brand in 2021. Since then, the digital landscape has transformed dramatically. Smartphones, algorithms, influencers and artificial intelligence have become central to how a new generation communicates, learns and sees the world.Now, Meta is facing multiple legal battles in the United States over child safety, alleged social-media addiction and its business practices.&nbsp;In one major case, 29 U.S. states accuse Meta of designing Facebook and Instagram in ways that allegedly encouraged young users to remain engaged, exposed children to harmful content and contributed to youth-related harms. Meta denies the allegations.&nbsp;The controversy raises a fundamental question: are the guardrails protecting today's children strong enough for the digital world they inhabit?&nbsp;Meta says it has invested heavily in safety, including parental controls, age protections and technology designed to detect child exploitation. But critics argue that removing harmful content after it appears is not enough. They want platforms to take greater responsibility for preventing foreseeable harm through the way their products are designed.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-says-tougher-iran-sanctions-make-large-scale-war-less-likely-tehran-condemns-economic-terrorism-1787242779961">US says tougher Iran sanctions make large-scale war less likely; Tehran condemns 'economic terrorism'</a>&nbsp;Social media is unlikely to disappear. The challenge is ensuring that commercial success does not come at the expense of vulnerable users.&nbsp;Parents have a role. Governments have a role. Schools have a role.&nbsp;And Big Tech has a role too.&nbsp;Because children are more than clicks, engagement metrics or advertising audiences.They are the next generation.&nbsp;And perhaps the real question is not whether Big Tech can operate with stronger guardrails, but whether our children can thrive without them.&nbsp;And that's The Verdict.

Meta faces growing legal and public scrutiny over whether its social media platforms do enough to protect children from harmful content, addiction risks and other potential online harms.

Meta is facing growing scrutiny over a question that goes far beyond social media: when a technology company becomes powerful enough to shape childhood, how much responsibility should it bear for the consequences? Facebook was launched in 2004, while Meta became the parent-company brand in 2021. Since then, the digital landscape has transformed dramatically. Smartphones, algorithms, influencers and artificial intelligence have become central to how a new generation communicates, learns and sees the world. Now, Meta is facing multiple legal battles in the United States over child safety, alleged social-media addiction and its business practices. In one major case, 29 U.S. states accuse Meta of designing Facebook and Instagram in ways that allegedly encouraged young users to remain engaged, exposed children to harmful content and contributed to youth-related harms. Meta denies the allegations. The controversy raises a fundamental question: are the guardrails protecting today's children strong enough for the digital world they inhabit? Meta says it has invested heavily in safety, including parental controls, age protections and technology designed to detect child exploitation. But critics argue that removing harmful content after it appears is not enough. They want platforms to take greater responsibility for preventing foreseeable harm through the way their products are designed. Also Read: US says tougher Iran sanctions make large-scale war less likely; Tehran condemns 'economic terrorism' Social media is unlikely to disappear. The challenge is ensuring that commercial success does not come at the expense of vulnerable users. Parents have a role. Governments have a role. Schools have a role. And Big Tech has a role too. Because children are more than clicks, engagement metrics or advertising audiences. They are the next generation. And perhaps the real question is not whether Big Tech can operate with stronger guardrails, but whether our children can thrive without them. And that's The Verdict.

Meta faces growing legal and public scrutiny over whether its social media platforms do enough to protect children from harmful content, addiction risks and other potential online harms.

Meta under scrutiny: Big Tech, bigger responsibility

Sanctions were once Washington’s economic weapon of last resort. Under Donald Trump, they are becoming a recurring instrument of pressure, against adversaries, trading partners and countries accused of helping them. The latest test is Iran, where Washington is betting that unprecedented economic pressure can succeed where military and diplomatic pressure have struggled. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says the United States is preparing measures unlike anything imposed before, while Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says the naval blockade can be sustained indefinitely.&nbsp;The objective is simple: squeeze Iran until the cost of defiance becomes unbearable. But there is a fundamental weakness in the strategy: economic pain does not automatically produce political surrender. Iran has endured years of sanctions and is now adapting again, even as the pressure damages its economy. Trump’s broader approach increasingly places tariffs and sanctions in the same coercive toolbox: raise the cost of access to American markets, finance and trade, then use that pain to force concessions. But that strategy carries a paradox. The more Washington weaponises economic power, the greater the incentive for others to build alternatives.&nbsp;India is expanding trade relationships and seeking greater resilience in payments and supply chains. Europe, meanwhile, is increasingly looking at ways to reduce its vulnerability to American economic pressure. The point is not that these countries can simply replace the United States. They cannot. The point is that dependence creates leverage, and repeated coercion creates an incentive to reduce that dependence.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-war-is-trump-weakening-america-s-most-powerful-economic-weapon-1786727736520/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-war-is-trump-weakening-america-s-most-powerful-economic-weapon-1786727736520/embed</a>&nbsp;That is where the credibility of sanctions becomes critical. Sanctions work best when governments believe the rules are predictable, the coalition imposing them is durable and the cost of defiance outweighs the cost of compliance. If tariffs and sanctions are deployed too frequently, their shock can diminish, and countries have more reason to find workarounds. There is another problem: America itself pays a price. The Iran conflict has disrupted energy markets and pushed fuel costs higher, creating domestic pressure on Trump to deliver a result Americans can see as a win.&nbsp;So, will sanctions bring relief to the United States? They can hurt adversaries. They can restrict trade, raise costs and squeeze governments. But if they fail to change behaviour while encouraging the world to diversify away from American economic power, Washington may win the battle and weaken its leverage for the next one.&nbsp;The real question is not whether America can impose sanctions. It is whether America can keep weaponising economic power without making the world less dependent on America. Because when a weapon is used too often, the target eventually learns how to dodge the blow. That is the verdict.

Trump’s sanctions strategy against Iran could deliver economic pressure, but repeated coercion may weaken US leverage and accelerate global diversification

Sanctions were once Washington’s economic weapon of last resort. Under Donald Trump, they are becoming a recurring instrument of pressure, against adversaries, trading partners and countries accused of helping them. The latest test is Iran, where Washington is betting that unprecedented economic pressure can succeed where military and diplomatic pressure have struggled. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says the United States is preparing measures unlike anything imposed before, while Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says the naval blockade can be sustained indefinitely. The objective is simple: squeeze Iran until the cost of defiance becomes unbearable. But there is a fundamental weakness in the strategy: economic pain does not automatically produce political surrender. Iran has endured years of sanctions and is now adapting again, even as the pressure damages its economy. Trump’s broader approach increasingly places tariffs and sanctions in the same coercive toolbox: raise the cost of access to American markets, finance and trade, then use that pain to force concessions. But that strategy carries a paradox. The more Washington weaponises economic power, the greater the incentive for others to build alternatives. India is expanding trade relationships and seeking greater resilience in payments and supply chains. Europe, meanwhile, is increasingly looking at ways to reduce its vulnerability to American economic pressure. The point is not that these countries can simply replace the United States. They cannot. The point is that dependence creates leverage, and repeated coercion creates an incentive to reduce that dependence. https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-war-is-trump-weakening-america-s-most-powerful-economic-weapon-1786727736520/embed That is where the credibility of sanctions becomes critical. Sanctions work best when governments believe the rules are predictable, the coalition imposing them is durable and the cost of defiance outweighs the cost of compliance. If tariffs and sanctions are deployed too frequently, their shock can diminish, and countries have more reason to find workarounds. There is another problem: America itself pays a price. The Iran conflict has disrupted energy markets and pushed fuel costs higher, creating domestic pressure on Trump to deliver a result Americans can see as a win. So, will sanctions bring relief to the United States? They can hurt adversaries. They can restrict trade, raise costs and squeeze governments. But if they fail to change behaviour while encouraging the world to diversify away from American economic power, Washington may win the battle and weaken its leverage for the next one. The real question is not whether America can impose sanctions. It is whether America can keep weaponising economic power without making the world less dependent on America. Because when a weapon is used too often, the target eventually learns how to dodge the blow. That is the verdict.

Trump’s expanding sanctions strategy may pressure Iran, but repeated economic coercion could weaken US leverage by pushing countries toward alternatives

The Verdict: America's sanctions are losing their bite

Balochistan covers 43.6 per cent of Pakistan’s landmass — almost half the country. It is also rich in natural gas, copper, gold, coal and other minerals, while its coastline and Gwadar give Pakistan enormous strategic value. &nbsp;Yet the province remains Pakistan’s least populated and among its most economically disadvantaged regions. The contradiction is glaring: extraordinary resources, but persistent grievances over who controls them, who benefits from them and how much comes back to the people who live above them.Balochistan is also a cultural asset — Baloch, Brahui, Pashtun and other communities contributing to a diversity that cannot be reduced to statistics.But today, it is increasingly defined by unrest. Insurgency, attacks, enforced disappearances and allegations of extrajudicial killings have deepened a crisis of trust. Human-rights groups continue to document disappearances and killings, while families demanding answers have remained at the centre of the struggle. And women have become the faces of resistance and separation in the face of oppression.That should concern Islamabad. Because when mothers, sisters and daughters become the most visible voices demanding justice for missing men, the crisis stops being merely about security. It becomes about legitimacy. Then there is geography. Balochistan borders Iran, Afghanistan and the Arabian Sea, placing Pakistan at a critical crossroads between South Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia.<h2>So what is Pakistan without Balochistan?</h2>A country stripped of territory, resources, strategic depth and a vital part of its identity. But the deeper question is what Pakistan has become with Balochistan. A nation cannot be sustained by borders alone. It must earn the loyalty of its people. And if Pakistan has failed anywhere, it has failed at the most fundamental role of a nation: to be a nation for its people.&nbsp;

Balochistan holds vast mineral resources and strategic importance, yet remains economically disadvantaged amid a long-running insurgency and human rights crisis.

Balochistan covers 43.6 per cent of Pakistan’s landmass — almost half the country. It is also rich in natural gas, copper, gold, coal and other minerals, while its coastline and Gwadar give Pakistan enormous strategic value. Yet the province remains Pakistan’s least populated and among its most economically disadvantaged regions. The contradiction is glaring: extraordinary resources, but persistent grievances over who controls them, who benefits from them and how much comes back to the people who live above them. Balochistan is also a cultural asset — Baloch, Brahui, Pashtun and other communities contributing to a diversity that cannot be reduced to statistics. But today, it is increasingly defined by unrest. Insurgency, attacks, enforced disappearances and allegations of extrajudicial killings have deepened a crisis of trust. Human-rights groups continue to document disappearances and killings, while families demanding answers have remained at the centre of the struggle. And women have become the faces of resistance and separation in the face of oppression. That should concern Islamabad. Because when mothers, sisters and daughters become the most visible voices demanding justice for missing men, the crisis stops being merely about security. It becomes about legitimacy. Then there is geography. Balochistan borders Iran, Afghanistan and the Arabian Sea, placing Pakistan at a critical crossroads between South Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia. So what is Pakistan without Balochistan? A country stripped of territory, resources, strategic depth and a vital part of its identity. But the deeper question is what Pakistan has become with Balochistan. A nation cannot be sustained by borders alone. It must earn the loyalty of its people. And if Pakistan has failed anywhere, it has failed at the most fundamental role of a nation: to be a nation for its people.

Balochistan holds vast mineral resources and strategic importance, yet remains economically disadvantaged amid a long-running insurgency and human rights crisis.

The verdict: What is Pakistan without Balochistan? A nation losing its own soul

The Gen-z are in an emergency, they have foreseen how bigger of a problem they are addressing could be for their younger brothers, sisters, cousins, relatives known as the Gen alpha, that's why they are brushing you off when you try to quell their anger by using their lingo and expressions, they don't get it and they won't get it, to them talk is cheap, they need action.&nbsp;Once the system acknowledges these grievances, noises, chants, the messaging on the placards, the emotional pleas, the feeble faces that have sacrificed their souls in endless hunger strikes, it means you are listening; that's all they want, nothing more, nothing less.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bjp-calls-for-statewide-shutdown-over-police-action-in-jharkhand-cm-hemant-soren-says-students-misled-for-political-gain-1786420365620">BJP calls for statewide shutdown over police action in Jharkhand, CM Hemant Soren says ‘students misled for political gain’</a>&nbsp;Even though actions may take time to actuate, you better start working on that now, and please stop making promises that you know may be broken or never achieved at all, because this generation doesn't take their hearts being broken lightly.&nbsp;And to the police, your job is to protect and serve, not maim and hurt. There is a constitutional provision that gives everyone the right to picket; students are not breaking the law by peaceful protesting; you are breaking the law instead by provoking, baton charging and spraying water on them. Think of them as your sons and daughters; serve and protect them.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-s-80th-independence-day-from-1947-to-2026-how-the-country-s-map-changed-over-80-years-1786422165717">India’s 80th Independence Day: From 1947 to 2026 - How the country's map changed</a>&nbsp;And to the students, act responsibly, be aware of your surroundings, of any miscreant elements seeping through and pretending to champion your cause, make it easier for you and the police, and say no to violence. Once you give in to that distraction, the message is lost.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/jharkhand-students-protest-jpsc-jssc-aspirants-march-to-assembly-heavy-security-deployed-1786361416140/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/jharkhand-students-protest-jpsc-jssc-aspirants-march-to-assembly-heavy-security-deployed-1786361416140/embed</a>

Today, WION's Eric Njoka is addressing the Jharkhand government or the so-called system. It's time to listen, change and implement your promises, because these protests by students or the Gen-z is not about agitation and rebellion; it's about showing you. 

The Gen-z are in an emergency, they have foreseen how bigger of a problem they are addressing could be for their younger brothers, sisters, cousins, relatives known as the Gen alpha, that's why they are brushing you off when you try to quell their anger by using their lingo and expressions, they don't get it and they won't get it, to them talk is cheap, they need action. Once the system acknowledges these grievances, noises, chants, the messaging on the placards, the emotional pleas, the feeble faces that have sacrificed their souls in endless hunger strikes, it means you are listening; that's all they want, nothing more, nothing less. Also read: BJP calls for statewide shutdown over police action in Jharkhand, CM Hemant Soren says ‘students misled for political gain’ Even though actions may take time to actuate, you better start working on that now, and please stop making promises that you know may be broken or never achieved at all, because this generation doesn't take their hearts being broken lightly. And to the police, your job is to protect and serve, not maim and hurt. There is a constitutional provision that gives everyone the right to picket; students are not breaking the law by peaceful protesting; you are breaking the law instead by provoking, baton charging and spraying water on them. Think of them as your sons and daughters; serve and protect them. Also read: India’s 80th Independence Day: From 1947 to 2026 - How the country's map changed And to the students, act responsibly, be aware of your surroundings, of any miscreant elements seeping through and pretending to champion your cause, make it easier for you and the police, and say no to violence. Once you give in to that distraction, the message is lost. https://www.wionews.com/videos/jharkhand-students-protest-jpsc-jssc-aspirants-march-to-assembly-heavy-security-deployed-1786361416140/embed

Today, WION's Eric Njoka is addressing the Jharkhand government or the so-called system. It's time to listen, change and implement your promises, because these protests by students or the Gen-z is not about agitation and rebellion; it's about showing you.&nbsp;

The verdict: Indian politicians need to stop mimicking Gen Zs; it won't work

New Delhi is hosting legendary athlete Haile Gebrselassie. The Ethiopian won the 10,000m gold in successive Olympics and eight World Championships in his 25-year storied career. The now-retired great distance runner was named the international event ambassador of the Vedanta Delhi Half Marathon which was held on October 16.

Haile sat down with WION's Eric Njoka on the sidelines of the event, for an exclusive TV interview where he spoke about a range of topics from both on and off the track.

Scouting for Talent

"I know India is famed for cricket, but with its huge population, I'm certain my role as an ambassador I will be able to spot talent that can be emboldened and nurtured. The geography in some parts of this vast nation, like the high altitudes are a great basket of potential," said Gebreselassie.

Haile added that India can become world-class in athletics when the country finds its first role model. "I always think of the Himalayas, the lifestyle and the climb...just think for a moment the strength of those lungs, the sweat and how fast their hearts pump...believe me, a champion from India will happen, just wait."

From the tracks to the office

At 42, Haile announced his retirement from competitive running in 2015. Gebrselassie became a household name in 1993 when, at the age of 20, he won the first of four consecutive world championship titles in the 10,000 metres.

He has broken 61 Ethiopian national records — ranging from 800 metres to the marathon — and set numerous world records, including the 5,000m, the fastest 10-mile run, and the longest distance competed in one-hour.

Using the winnings from his athletics career, he set out to create his business empire including cinema, real estate, hotels and buying land for a coffee plantation.

"The transition was not easy... my passion for running is still there, I wake up every morning and do my routine exercise...I believe I am young at heart, I just miss competitive sport. I decided to venture into business so that I can uplift my people and my country, and that is my dream to date. I want to do more".

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/explained-what-sri-lankas-shock-defeat-against-namibia-could-mean-for-india-in-t20-world-cup-2022-525850">Explained: What Sri Lanka's shock defeat against Namibia could mean for India in T20 World Cup 2022?</a>

It's a healthy, peaceful rivalry between Kenya and Ethiopia

Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes have always been considered to have a tiff on the track. However, Haile says the differences are healthy for the sport.

"It's funny that we have fights with some of the countries that neighbor Ethiopia, but never with Kenya... Infact we consider Kenyans to be our friends... But, it's a competition after all, so let the rivalry live on because it is healthy and peaceful," Gebrselassie told Eric with a slight giggle.

One of the greatest rivals during Haile's era was Kenyan athlete Paul Tergat, who ironically enjoys more fame in Ethiopia than Gebrselassie.

"Paul is a great man... He is my friend. Every time we meet, we often laugh while looking at the pictures from yesteryears. That's the bond that I call healthy and should continue. We are all humans and this is just a game."

There will be peace in Tigray 'some day'

A battle for political power, waged between PM Abiy Ahmed's government and the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), turned into a bloody contest, a war which is now spreading through large parts of the country.

TPLF fighters have pushed south into the neighbouring region of Amhara, seizing territory just 220km from the capital Addis Ababa. Foreign embassies have told their citizens to get out of Ethiopia.

For Gebrselaisse, however, that feels like a betrayal: "I feel really very sad. The atrocities are in Tigray, but some of these so-called leaders rush to the United Nations and say Ethiopia is a dangerous country. Why? That is very wrong."

Gebrselassie seemed agitated to speak about the topic, but he added, "The problem is egoistic leaders, who are hell-bent on winning. The history of Ethiopia began in Tigray, and without that region, you don't see the full picture of Ethiopia. The problem is that the World doesn't know this. We just need to calm down and peace will prevail someday." He takes a long pause, faces down and smiles to show that he wants to move on from that conversation.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/manchester-uniteds-greenwood-charged-with-attempted-rape-assault-525749">Manchester United's Mason Greenwood charged with attempted rape, assault</a>

IOC, FIFA should&nbsp;'stop with the discrimination'

The war in Ukraine has had various ramifications even in sports. The International Olympic Committee's decision to ban Russian and Belarussian athletes and teams from international competitions, has been widely criticised.

The IOC said it made the decision "in order to protect the integrity of global sports competitions and for the safety of all the participants".

Gebreselassie disagreed with the sporting organisations including FIFA (Federation of International Football Association) for blatantly taking away the rights of athletes and sportspersons.

"I think these organisations are a failure... Just stop it, stop discriminating...It does not matter whether one is Russian or Belarusian...They are there for the sport, don't mix politics with sports, it is dangerous and such a shame".

My Legacy, in my own monument

The Global icon, and a father of four, has run marathons in Tokyo and Dubai, New York and Vienna, competed at the top level for more than two decades, and been one of the sport's great ambassadors.

When asked how he would want to be remembered and his legacy...

Gebrselassie said "Before my time on earth is up, I want to build my own monument in Ethiopia or somewhere in the world... and see it flourish. I want to tell my own story when I'm still alive and touch people's hearts especially the younger generation... and just live Life, that is my driving force".

WATCH | Excerpts of the interview on World of Africa and WION Sports.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

New Delhi is hosting legendary athlete Haile Gebrselassie. The Ethiopian won the 10,000m gold in successive Olympics and eight World Championships in his 25-year storied career.

New Delhi is hosting legendary athlete Haile Gebrselassie. The Ethiopian won the 10,000m gold in successive Olympics and eight World Championships in his 25-year storied career. The now-retired great distance runner was named the international event ambassador of the Vedanta Delhi Half Marathon which was held on October 16. Haile sat down with WION's Eric Njoka on the sidelines of the event, for an exclusive TV interview where he spoke about a range of topics from both on and off the track. Scouting for Talent "I know India is famed for cricket, but with its huge population, I'm certain my role as an ambassador I will be able to spot talent that can be emboldened and nurtured. The geography in some parts of this vast nation, like the high altitudes are a great basket of potential," said Gebreselassie. Haile added that India can become world-class in athletics when the country finds its first role model. "I always think of the Himalayas, the lifestyle and the climb...just think for a moment the strength of those lungs, the sweat and how fast their hearts pump...believe me, a champion from India will happen, just wait." From the tracks to the office At 42, Haile announced his retirement from competitive running in 2015. Gebrselassie became a household name in 1993 when, at the age of 20, he won the first of four consecutive world championship titles in the 10,000 metres. He has broken 61 Ethiopian national records — ranging from 800 metres to the marathon — and set numerous world records, including the 5,000m, the fastest 10-mile run, and the longest distance competed in one-hour. Using the winnings from his athletics career, he set out to create his business empire including cinema, real estate, hotels and buying land for a coffee plantation. "The transition was not easy... my passion for running is still there, I wake up every morning and do my routine exercise...I believe I am young at heart, I just miss competitive sport. I decided to venture into business so that I can uplift my people and my country, and that is my dream to date. I want to do more". Also Read: Explained: What Sri Lanka's shock defeat against Namibia could mean for India in T20 World Cup 2022? It's a healthy, peaceful rivalry between Kenya and Ethiopia Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes have always been considered to have a tiff on the track. However, Haile says the differences are healthy for the sport. "It's funny that we have fights with some of the countries that neighbor Ethiopia, but never with Kenya... Infact we consider Kenyans to be our friends... But, it's a competition after all, so let the rivalry live on because it is healthy and peaceful," Gebrselassie told Eric with a slight giggle. One of the greatest rivals during Haile's era was Kenyan athlete Paul Tergat, who ironically enjoys more fame in Ethiopia than Gebrselassie. "Paul is a great man... He is my friend. Every time we meet, we often laugh while looking at the pictures from yesteryears. That's the bond that I call healthy and should continue. We are all humans and this is just a game." There will be peace in Tigray 'some day' A battle for political power, waged between PM Abiy Ahmed's government and the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), turned into a bloody contest, a war which is now spreading through large parts of the country. TPLF fighters have pushed south into the neighbouring region of Amhara, seizing territory just 220km from the capital Addis Ababa. Foreign embassies have told their citizens to get out of Ethiopia. For Gebrselaisse, however, that feels like a betrayal: "I feel really very sad. The atrocities are in Tigray, but some of these so-called leaders rush to the United Nations and say Ethiopia is a dangerous country. Why? That is very wrong." Gebrselassie seemed agitated to speak about the topic, but he added, "The problem is egoistic leaders, who are hell-bent on winning. The history of Ethiopia began in Tigray, and without that region, you don't see the full picture of Ethiopia. The problem is that the World doesn't know this. We just need to calm down and peace will prevail someday." He takes a long pause, faces down and smiles to show that he wants to move on from that conversation. Also Read: Manchester United's Mason Greenwood charged with attempted rape, assault IOC, FIFA should 'stop with the discrimination' The war in Ukraine has had various ramifications even in sports. The International Olympic Committee's decision to ban Russian and Belarussian athletes and teams from international competitions, has been widely criticised. The IOC said it made the decision "in order to protect the integrity of global sports competitions and for the safety of all the participants". Gebreselassie disagreed with the sporting organisations including FIFA (Federation of International Football Association) for blatantly taking away the rights of athletes and sportspersons. "I think these organisations are a failure... Just stop it, stop discriminating...It does not matter whether one is Russian or Belarusian...They are there for the sport, don't mix politics with sports, it is dangerous and such a shame". My Legacy, in my own monument The Global icon, and a father of four, has run marathons in Tokyo and Dubai, New York and Vienna, competed at the top level for more than two decades, and been one of the sport's great ambassadors. When asked how he would want to be remembered and his legacy... Gebrselassie said "Before my time on earth is up, I want to build my own monument in Ethiopia or somewhere in the world... and see it flourish. I want to tell my own story when I'm still alive and touch people's hearts especially the younger generation... and just live Life, that is my driving force". WATCH | Excerpts of the interview on World of Africa and WION Sports. ×

India has great potential in athletics, a champion from the country will come soon: Haile Gebrselassie

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Erick Njoka

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.