The world’s leading financial crime watchdog has sounded the alarm over gaps in cryptocurrency regulation, urging governments to take far stronger action against illicit finance in the booming sector.&nbsp;The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), based in Paris, warned on Thursday that shortcomings in policing virtual assets risk creating global financial vulnerabilities, with criminals exploiting loopholes across borders. “Virtual assets are inherently borderless, and regulatory failures in one jurisdiction can have global consequences,” the FATF said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters. The call-to-action underscores mounting concern among global regulators that rapid growth in crypto markets is outpacing efforts to keep them in check.<h2>Patchy compliance despite progress</h2>According to the FATF’s latest assessment, progress on tightening crypto rules remains uneven. As of April 2025, only 40 out of 138 jurisdictions assessed were considered “largely compliant” with its standards, up from 32 the previous year.&nbsp;While that improvement reflects some momentum, it also highlights the vast number of countries lagging behind. FATF officials warn that these regulatory gaps create safe havens for criminals, making it harder to trace illicit financial flows that move seamlessly across national borders.<h2>Surge in illicit crypto activity</h2>The watchdog cited alarming figures pointing to the scale of the problem. Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimates that illicit crypto wallet addresses may have received as much as $51 billion in 2024 alone. Countries, the FATF says, continue to face major difficulties in identifying the real people behind virtual asset transactions, a key challenge in disrupting networks of money launderers, sanctions evaders and terror financiers.&nbsp;FATF also flagged particular concern over the rising role of stablecoins, cryptocurrencies pegged to fiat currencies like the US dollar which it said have become a preferred tool for various illicit actors. “Most illicit crypto activity now involves stablecoins,” the FATF warned, adding that the technology is being misused by groups including terrorist financiers, drug traffickers and state-backed cyber criminals.<h2>Spotlight on North Korea</h2>The report comes amid heightened scrutiny of North Korea’s role in global cybercrime. In February 2025, the FBI blamed North Korean hackers for the theft of around $1.5 billion worth of virtual assets from the crypto exchange ByBit, the largest known crypto heist in history.&nbsp;Pyongyang has repeatedly denied involvement in such attacks, but security agencies in the US and allied countries say North Korea’s regime relies heavily on crypto thefts and ransomware operations to fund its weapons programmes.<h2>Global authorities ramp up warnings</h2>The FATF’s statement is the latest in a series of warnings from international regulators about crypto’s potential to undermine financial stability and security. In April 2025, the European Union’s securities watchdog cautioned that the rapidly expanding crypto sector could pose systemic risks, particularly as its links with traditional financial markets deepen. As governments scramble to finalise regulatory frameworks, FATF urged them to prioritise closing loopholes, increasing oversight, and improving coordination. Without such steps, it warned, the risk of crypto markets being weaponised by criminals and even hostile states will only grow.&nbsp;The message is clear: despite technological innovation and growing mainstream adoption, the crypto industry remains in urgent need of stricter global policing to prevent it from becoming a haven for financial crime.&nbsp;(With inputs from the agencies)

Despite some progress, only 40 of 138 jurisdictions are largely compliant with FATF standards. Regulatory gaps allow criminals to exploit loopholes, particularly with stablecoins, which are increasingly used for illegal activities. 

The world’s leading financial crime watchdog has sounded the alarm over gaps in cryptocurrency regulation, urging governments to take far stronger action against illicit finance in the booming sector. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), based in Paris, warned on Thursday that shortcomings in policing virtual assets risk creating global financial vulnerabilities, with criminals exploiting loopholes across borders. “Virtual assets are inherently borderless, and regulatory failures in one jurisdiction can have global consequences,” the FATF said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters. The call-to-action underscores mounting concern among global regulators that rapid growth in crypto markets is outpacing efforts to keep them in check. Patchy compliance despite progress According to the FATF’s latest assessment, progress on tightening crypto rules remains uneven. As of April 2025, only 40 out of 138 jurisdictions assessed were considered “largely compliant” with its standards, up from 32 the previous year. While that improvement reflects some momentum, it also highlights the vast number of countries lagging behind. FATF officials warn that these regulatory gaps create safe havens for criminals, making it harder to trace illicit financial flows that move seamlessly across national borders. Surge in illicit crypto activity The watchdog cited alarming figures pointing to the scale of the problem. Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimates that illicit crypto wallet addresses may have received as much as $51 billion in 2024 alone. Countries, the FATF says, continue to face major difficulties in identifying the real people behind virtual asset transactions, a key challenge in disrupting networks of money launderers, sanctions evaders and terror financiers. FATF also flagged particular concern over the rising role of stablecoins, cryptocurrencies pegged to fiat currencies like the US dollar which it said have become a preferred tool for various illicit actors. “Most illicit crypto activity now involves stablecoins,” the FATF warned, adding that the technology is being misused by groups including terrorist financiers, drug traffickers and state-backed cyber criminals. Spotlight on North Korea The report comes amid heightened scrutiny of North Korea’s role in global cybercrime. In February 2025, the FBI blamed North Korean hackers for the theft of around $1.5 billion worth of virtual assets from the crypto exchange ByBit, the largest known crypto heist in history. Pyongyang has repeatedly denied involvement in such attacks, but security agencies in the US and allied countries say North Korea’s regime relies heavily on crypto thefts and ransomware operations to fund its weapons programmes. Global authorities ramp up warnings The FATF’s statement is the latest in a series of warnings from international regulators about crypto’s potential to undermine financial stability and security. In April 2025, the European Union’s securities watchdog cautioned that the rapidly expanding crypto sector could pose systemic risks, particularly as its links with traditional financial markets deepen. As governments scramble to finalise regulatory frameworks, FATF urged them to prioritise closing loopholes, increasing oversight, and improving coordination. Without such steps, it warned, the risk of crypto markets being weaponised by criminals and even hostile states will only grow. The message is clear: despite technological innovation and growing mainstream adoption, the crypto industry remains in urgent need of stricter global policing to prevent it from becoming a haven for financial crime. (With inputs from the agencies)

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has raised concerns about inadequate cryptocurrency regulation, urging governments to strengthen measures against illicit finance.

Global watchdog urges crackdown on crypto crime as risks grow

Global terror watchdog FATF requested more information and data from Pakistan on actions taken against madrassas belonging to proscribed groups after Islamabad submitted a report outlining the government's actions to curb terrorism and money laundering. #FATF #Pakistan #FAFTQuestionPakistan

WION Dispatch: FATF poses 150 questions to Pakistan, inquires on actions against madrassas

Pakistan has failed to "significantly limit" major terror outfits like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) from funding, recruiting and training their fighters on its soil and has allowed candidates "overtly" affiliated with their front organisations to contest the general elections in July last year, according to a report released by the US State Department.

Pakistan has failed to "significantly limit" major terror outfits like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) from funding, recruiting and training their fighters on its soil and has allowed candidates "overtly" affiliated with their front organisations to contest the general elections in July last year, according to a report released by the US State Department. According to the `Country Reports on Terrorism 2018`, Pakistan has failed to restrict the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani Network from operating in safe havens on its soil, despite Islamabad`s open support for a political reconciliation between the Afghan Taliban and Afghan government.While the report noted Pakistan`s efforts in connection to the implementation of conditions laid down by Financial Action Task Force (FATF), it slammed the country for failing to uniformly implement UN sanctions against outfits like LeT and its affiliates. "Although the Pakistani government voiced support for political reconciliation between the Afghan government and the Afghan Taliban, it did not restrict the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani Network (HQN) from operating in Pakistan-based safe havens and threatening the US and Afghan forces in Afghanistan," it said. "The government failed to significantly limit Lashkar e- Tayyiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) from raising money, recruiting, and training in Pakistan and allowed candidates overtly affiliated with LeT front organisations to contest the July general elections," the report said, referring to the Milli Muslim League (MML) founded by global terrorist Hafiz Saeed, which fielded candidates in the 2018 polls. The document highlighted significant terror attacks in Pakistan in 2018, which was conducted by several outfits like Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Jamaat-ul-Ahrar (JuA), Islamic State`s Khorasan Province (ISIS-K), and the sectarian group Lashkar-e- Jhangvi al-Alami (LJA). "Pakistan experienced significant terrorist threats in 2018, although the number of attacks and casualties has continued to decrease from previous years. The major terrorist groups that focused on conducting attacks in Pakistan included Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Jamaat-ul- Ahrar (JuA), Islamic State`s Khorasan Province (ISIS-K), and the sectarian group Lashkar-e- Jhangvi al-Alami (LJA). ISIS-K claimed several major attacks against Pakistani targets, some of which may have been conducted in collaboration with other terrorist groups," the report said. Terror groups conducted attacks against governmental, non-governmental, and diplomatic targets in Balochistan and Sindh provinces, it continued."Groups located in Pakistan, but focused on conducting attacks outside the country, included the Afghan Taliban, HQN, LeT and its affiliated front organisations, and JeM. Terrorists used a range of tactics to attack individuals, schools, markets, government institutions, and places of worship, including IEDs, VBIEDs, suicide bombings, targeted assassinations, and rocket-propelled grenades," the report underlined. The terror outfits targetted civilians, journalists, community leaders, security forces, law enforcement agents, and schools killing and injuring hundreds in 2018, the report noted adding, that religious minorities faced significant threats from the terror groups. The report said that Pakistan, being a member of the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG), a FATF-style regional body, agreed to implement international standards to combat money laundering, terrorism finance, and proliferation finance. While the country "criminalises terrorist financing through the Antiterrorism Act, the implementation remains uneven"."In June 2018, the FATF placed Pakistan on its `grey list` for deficiencies across its AML/CFT regimes, specifically citing concerns over Pakistan`s failure to fully implement the UN Security Council ISIL (Daesh) and al-Qaeda sanctions regime. FATF noted that UN-listed entities, including LeT and its affiliates, were not effectively prohibited from raising funds in Pakistan, or being denied financial services," it said."Although Pakistan`s laws technically comply with international AML/CFT standards, authorities failed to uniformly implement UN sanctions related to designated entities and individuals such as LeT and its affiliates, which continued to make use of economic resources and raise funds," the report noted.

Pak failed to 'significantly limit' funding, recruitment by LeT, JeM on its soil: US Report

The talks of extension of Chinese president Xi Jinping&rsquo;s tenure beyond the stipulated limit of two terms as per their 1982 constitution is generating reasonable interest in the diplomatic circles. We Indians, from an open democracy with no such restrictions, have no case to comment on the political philosophies, structures and processes that China wants to adopt. It is purely their call, albeit it has exposed an inherent flaw in their constitutional design.

The sensibility of this proposed change is under scrutiny as President Xi is currently the head of all three apex level decision making bodies, including the communist party, national people&rsquo;s congress and the military commission. In absence of political opposition in the one-party political system, a division of power amongst these three institutions has some modicum of conceptual debate on national issues, if not an elbow space for a &nbsp;dissent in a communist structure. With the proposed changes, however, the possibility of prompting by the all-powerful president himself cannot be ruled out. The change is symbolic of giving higher credence to a perceived successful personality over the proven institutional strength of existing governance structures.

What concerns the international community most are the political connotations; China is seen as transitioning to quasi-dictatorial political structures. There are fair chances of enhanced political hubris of China in the absence of internal political opposition. This can get worse with President Xi&rsquo;s penchant for the conduct of aggressive diplomacy as observed so far.&nbsp;

Closer home, one cannot forget the Chinese duplicity and high handedness in orchestrating a major incursion across the Line of Actual Control (LAC) into Indian territory while President Xi was on a state visit to India, conveying a coercive politico- military message. Soon, thereafter, the Doklam happened as a sequel. The timings of the Doklam face-off was apparently linked to the domestic political compulsion of President Xi who intended to showcase his firm handling of territorial issues with an aim of enhancing his central position in Chinese polity in the forthcoming 19th Congress meet and the 90th anniversary of PLA.&nbsp;

However, the Chinese bluff was exposed with firm political handling and Indian military resolve. A repeat of such military incursions cannot be ruled out in the future once Xi is firmly in the saddle for a longer tenure. Open threats of using military force and anti-India rhetoric from their foreign office on trivial issues are part of Chinese psychological warfare to keep India on the back foot.&nbsp;

Looking at the pattern of political aggressiveness during his tenure so far, Xi seems to have used anti-India quotient in a deft manner, thereby, rallying national sentiments in his favour besides similar other international politically significant initiatives with military signatures.&nbsp;

It also appears that China is getting worried due to the refusal of India to join CPEC bandwagon which is the key to its success, their biggest political investment in recent times. Fearing an adverse impact on their politico-economic ambitions, they seem to be desperate to tame India through a show of force, a sure shot recipe in their medieval mindset. &nbsp;Whereas, with the increased political clout and strategic pull of India as well as with the help from the US has put the Chinese under pressure to introspect their conduct. &nbsp;

Chinese stand down from supporting Pakistan in FAFT and their reported outreach to the ASEAN countries in working out a code of conduct in the South China Sea are indicative of scaling down of their obstinate political posturing. These changes are due to their political compulsions to push through their national agenda as of now. However, their underlying confrontationist tendencies are likely to continue under Xi in order to retain Chinese political position of strength.

Xi happens to be the tallest Chinese leader in the current strategically transitory situation. Moreover, he has developed a working equation and personal rapport with the current world political leaders who are going to be around for some time. From the Chinese perspective, it certainly is a sensible idea to perpetuate the vision of president Xi instead of bringing in a new incumbent in order to ensure political stability. Hence, a case for his continuation as an exception in the Chinese national interests.

While the Chinese proposal has its merits, it is also fraught with negatives that are detrimental not only to China but also to the world in general. Given the current Chinese politico-economic outreach and subtle military signatures beyond their borders. Since human mind has limited cognitive capabilities, depending on one individual as an ultimate arbitrator becomes counterproductive in the longer run.&nbsp;

Moreover, anti-incumbency is a known phenomenon in any political system which would have no room for catharsis in a single point closed Chinese system, unlike a democracy where there is an option for change. One man show at times may fail to keep pace with the contemporary geopolitical changes due to a rigidity of perceptions, thereby, losing out on political flexibility to adapt to requisite environmental synergies. In the proposed system perception of an individual would have the power to overrule the institutional decision-making mechanism which may manifest into inappropriate synergies.

Now that President Xi is likely to continue in the office beyond the stipulated two terms, he would serve the Chinese interests better if he accords priority to cooperation instead of confrontation. It is &nbsp;President Xi, who has to take a call with added faith and concomitant responsibilities bestowed upon him by the Chinese people.

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Xi Jinping would serve the Chinese interests better if he accords priority to Cooperation instead of confrontation.

The talks of extension of Chinese president Xi Jinping’s tenure beyond the stipulated limit of two terms as per their 1982 constitution is generating reasonable interest in the diplomatic circles. We Indians, from an open democracy with no such restrictions, have no case to comment on the political philosophies, structures and processes that China wants to adopt. It is purely their call, albeit it has exposed an inherent flaw in their constitutional design. The sensibility of this proposed change is under scrutiny as President Xi is currently the head of all three apex level decision making bodies, including the communist party, national people’s congress and the military commission. In absence of political opposition in the one-party political system, a division of power amongst these three institutions has some modicum of conceptual debate on national issues, if not an elbow space for a dissent in a communist structure. With the proposed changes, however, the possibility of prompting by the all-powerful president himself cannot be ruled out. The change is symbolic of giving higher credence to a perceived successful personality over the proven institutional strength of existing governance structures. What concerns the international community most are the political connotations; China is seen as transitioning to quasi-dictatorial political structures. There are fair chances of enhanced political hubris of China in the absence of internal political opposition. This can get worse with President Xi’s penchant for the conduct of aggressive diplomacy as observed so far. Closer home, one cannot forget the Chinese duplicity and high handedness in orchestrating a major incursion across the Line of Actual Control (LAC) into Indian territory while President Xi was on a state visit to India, conveying a coercive politico- military message. Soon, thereafter, the Doklam happened as a sequel. The timings of the Doklam face-off was apparently linked to the domestic political compulsion of President Xi who intended to showcase his firm handling of territorial issues with an aim of enhancing his central position in Chinese polity in the forthcoming 19th Congress meet and the 90th anniversary of PLA. However, the Chinese bluff was exposed with firm political handling and Indian military resolve. A repeat of such military incursions cannot be ruled out in the future once Xi is firmly in the saddle for a longer tenure. Open threats of using military force and anti-India rhetoric from their foreign office on trivial issues are part of Chinese psychological warfare to keep India on the back foot. Looking at the pattern of political aggressiveness during his tenure so far, Xi seems to have used anti-India quotient in a deft manner, thereby, rallying national sentiments in his favour besides similar other international politically significant initiatives with military signatures. It also appears that China is getting worried due to the refusal of India to join CPEC bandwagon which is the key to its success, their biggest political investment in recent times. Fearing an adverse impact on their politico-economic ambitions, they seem to be desperate to tame India through a show of force, a sure shot recipe in their medieval mindset. Whereas, with the increased political clout and strategic pull of India as well as with the help from the US has put the Chinese under pressure to introspect their conduct. Chinese stand down from supporting Pakistan in FAFT and their reported outreach to the ASEAN countries in working out a code of conduct in the South China Sea are indicative of scaling down of their obstinate political posturing. These changes are due to their political compulsions to push through their national agenda as of now. However, their underlying confrontationist tendencies are likely to continue under Xi in order to retain Chinese political position of strength. Xi happens to be the tallest Chinese leader in the current strategically transitory situation. Moreover, he has developed a working equation and personal rapport with the current world political leaders who are going to be around for some time. From the Chinese perspective, it certainly is a sensible idea to perpetuate the vision of president Xi instead of bringing in a new incumbent in order to ensure political stability. Hence, a case for his continuation as an exception in the Chinese national interests. While the Chinese proposal has its merits, it is also fraught with negatives that are detrimental not only to China but also to the world in general. Given the current Chinese politico-economic outreach and subtle military signatures beyond their borders. Since human mind has limited cognitive capabilities, depending on one individual as an ultimate arbitrator becomes counterproductive in the longer run. Moreover, anti-incumbency is a known phenomenon in any political system which would have no room for catharsis in a single point closed Chinese system, unlike a democracy where there is an option for change. One man show at times may fail to keep pace with the contemporary geopolitical changes due to a rigidity of perceptions, thereby, losing out on political flexibility to adapt to requisite environmental synergies. In the proposed system perception of an individual would have the power to overrule the institutional decision-making mechanism which may manifest into inappropriate synergies. Now that President Xi is likely to continue in the office beyond the stipulated two terms, he would serve the Chinese interests better if he accords priority to cooperation instead of confrontation. It is President Xi, who has to take a call with added faith and concomitant responsibilities bestowed upon him by the Chinese people. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: China is giving Xi Jinping unprecedented power

There seems a euphoria amongst Indians on the reported indications of Pakistan being put on the watch list on terror financing by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) at Paris on February 23. The Pakistani establishment in their typical deceit and denial mode has rubbished the report with a caveat that let it come officially. The significance of this report does not lie in what India or Pakistan are saying, but it distinctly reflects the hard geopolitics of external players in the South Asian region and signs of shifting strategic paradigms. &nbsp;What happened in Paris was waiting to come sooner or later as Pakistan refuses to see reason in the futility of their policies to use terrorism as a strategic weapon.

China, for the first time, has not supported Pakistan which is the biggest strategic take in the entire episode.&nbsp;Assertive prompting by the Trump administration has probably done the trick as they obviously are not happy with the double game being played by Pakistan when it comes to affairs in Afghanistan. Currently, China&nbsp;is primarily concerned about the success of their CPEC scheme, their biggest political investment in recent times. If Pakistan is not bailed out of the situation, then the&nbsp;politico-economic dreams of China would be doomed forever. Hence, Chinese were compelled to review the consistent support it has given to Pakistan all these years despite Pakistani political irrationalities.&nbsp;

The US needs Pakistan for sustaining their forces in Afghanistan. Accordingly, substantial financial grants have been given to Pakistan since the 1980s when Afghanistan came under US strategic radar to push out Russians and, now, for control of the Central Asian Region. Pakistan has been indulging in duplicity; on the one hand, giving support to the US in their GWOT and, at the same time, continuing with their complicity in propping up Taliban affiliates in Afghanistan and ferment insurgency in Kashmir. Trump administration has seen through the Pakistani bluff and suspended financial aid till Pakistan shows improvement. US warning to Pakistan is, No More- Do More.

Improvement in the security situation in Afghanistan is a common compulsion both for the US as well as China, &nbsp;albeit for different reasons. The US is looking at bringing about national reconciliation to evolve a political dispensation which would be loyal to them and take care of their strategic interests. While it has not happened despite their 15 years of politico-military investment and financial incentives to proponents of violence in Afghanistan, hence, there is a need for tougher alternate measures. As regards to China, they are looking at the safe passage of goods and services of Central Asian and landlocked Eurasian countries who want to be part of CPEC bandwagon. Unless Afghanistan is politically stable there would be no economies of scale for Chinese plans. Therefore, it is a strategic call for China.

Besides above, the US and China are the biggest trade partners and their prosperity and national powers are dependent on their mutual support. The Chinese economy is also dependent on outsourcing the manufacturings of the western world which they, obviously, cannot afford to ignore. Hence, US and China seem to be on the same page in FATF confabulations and an apparent shift in Chinese stance in their strategic interests.

One can understand the compulsion of China in adopting a neutral stance instead of voting against Pakistan in FATF. This policy deviation is symbiotic of Chinese concern as regards to Pakistani complicity in terrorism in the areas of their geopolitical interests. China also realises that Pakistan has nuisance value to jeopardise the CPEC scheme with their jihadi mechanism at their time and place of choosing. It may well include the start point of CPEC at Xinjiang itself, &nbsp;or anywhere else astride the envisaged economic corridor. Therefore, they have chosen to be neutral, a diplomatic stance with elbow space to revert, thereby, retaining their political flexibility.

China, with their surplus funds, is also aspiring to play a dominant role in global financial institutions and control mechanisms. FATF is one such body which has influence over fund allocations by IMF, World Bank and other such international financial institutions.The US and India are reported to have assured support to China for the higher slot in FATF in return for showing their neutrality to Pakistan on the issue of terrorism. China obviously has taken the bait, signalling their intentions to contribute towards neutralising terrorism.

The other traditional supporters of Pakistan from the Islamic world also seem to be changing their political tracks with emerging threat to West Asian economies in the face of changing the geopolitics of oil and gas world over. Saudi Arabia, GCC members and Turkey were persuaded to stand down on the issue of continuation of their support to Pakistani dispensation. They have seen the reason lest they are isolated in emerging opportunities with the economic centre of gravity shifting to Asia.

The writing on the walls is quite clear, the world is concerned over Pakistani involvement in the spread of terrorism. In that, even the longtime confidants of Pakistan seem to be prompting Pakistan to mend their ways and review political priorities. These are signs of changing strategic paradigms probably a step towards an emerging world order in which China is trying to be a significant contributor. Politics of strategic compulsions is in play which is projecting new possibilities of political synergies in the region. A positive beginning has been made which needs to be encouraged and nurtured.&nbsp;

 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The writing on the walls is quite clear, the world is concerned over Pakistani involvement in the spread of terrorism.

There seems a euphoria amongst Indians on the reported indications of Pakistan being put on the watch list on terror financing by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) at Paris on February 23. The Pakistani establishment in their typical deceit and denial mode has rubbished the report with a caveat that let it come officially. The significance of this report does not lie in what India or Pakistan are saying, but it distinctly reflects the hard geopolitics of external players in the South Asian region and signs of shifting strategic paradigms. What happened in Paris was waiting to come sooner or later as Pakistan refuses to see reason in the futility of their policies to use terrorism as a strategic weapon. China, for the first time, has not supported Pakistan which is the biggest strategic take in the entire episode. Assertive prompting by the Trump administration has probably done the trick as they obviously are not happy with the double game being played by Pakistan when it comes to affairs in Afghanistan. Currently, China is primarily concerned about the success of their CPEC scheme, their biggest political investment in recent times. If Pakistan is not bailed out of the situation, then the politico-economic dreams of China would be doomed forever. Hence, Chinese were compelled to review the consistent support it has given to Pakistan all these years despite Pakistani political irrationalities. The US needs Pakistan for sustaining their forces in Afghanistan. Accordingly, substantial financial grants have been given to Pakistan since the 1980s when Afghanistan came under US strategic radar to push out Russians and, now, for control of the Central Asian Region. Pakistan has been indulging in duplicity; on the one hand, giving support to the US in their GWOT and, at the same time, continuing with their complicity in propping up Taliban affiliates in Afghanistan and ferment insurgency in Kashmir. Trump administration has seen through the Pakistani bluff and suspended financial aid till Pakistan shows improvement. US warning to Pakistan is, No More- Do More. Improvement in the security situation in Afghanistan is a common compulsion both for the US as well as China, albeit for different reasons. The US is looking at bringing about national reconciliation to evolve a political dispensation which would be loyal to them and take care of their strategic interests. While it has not happened despite their 15 years of politico-military investment and financial incentives to proponents of violence in Afghanistan, hence, there is a need for tougher alternate measures. As regards to China, they are looking at the safe passage of goods and services of Central Asian and landlocked Eurasian countries who want to be part of CPEC bandwagon. Unless Afghanistan is politically stable there would be no economies of scale for Chinese plans. Therefore, it is a strategic call for China. Besides above, the US and China are the biggest trade partners and their prosperity and national powers are dependent on their mutual support. The Chinese economy is also dependent on outsourcing the manufacturings of the western world which they, obviously, cannot afford to ignore. Hence, US and China seem to be on the same page in FATF confabulations and an apparent shift in Chinese stance in their strategic interests. One can understand the compulsion of China in adopting a neutral stance instead of voting against Pakistan in FATF. This policy deviation is symbiotic of Chinese concern as regards to Pakistani complicity in terrorism in the areas of their geopolitical interests. China also realises that Pakistan has nuisance value to jeopardise the CPEC scheme with their jihadi mechanism at their time and place of choosing. It may well include the start point of CPEC at Xinjiang itself, or anywhere else astride the envisaged economic corridor. Therefore, they have chosen to be neutral, a diplomatic stance with elbow space to revert, thereby, retaining their political flexibility. China, with their surplus funds, is also aspiring to play a dominant role in global financial institutions and control mechanisms. FATF is one such body which has influence over fund allocations by IMF, World Bank and other such international financial institutions.The US and India are reported to have assured support to China for the higher slot in FATF in return for showing their neutrality to Pakistan on the issue of terrorism. China obviously has taken the bait, signalling their intentions to contribute towards neutralising terrorism. The other traditional supporters of Pakistan from the Islamic world also seem to be changing their political tracks with emerging threat to West Asian economies in the face of changing the geopolitics of oil and gas world over. Saudi Arabia, GCC members and Turkey were persuaded to stand down on the issue of continuation of their support to Pakistani dispensation. They have seen the reason lest they are isolated in emerging opportunities with the economic centre of gravity shifting to Asia. The writing on the walls is quite clear, the world is concerned over Pakistani involvement in the spread of terrorism. In that, even the longtime confidants of Pakistan seem to be prompting Pakistan to mend their ways and review political priorities. These are signs of changing strategic paradigms probably a step towards an emerging world order in which China is trying to be a significant contributor. Politics of strategic compulsions is in play which is projecting new possibilities of political synergies in the region. A positive beginning has been made which needs to be encouraged and nurtured. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Why China did not support Pakistan on terror financing list

faft

Faft, News on Faft, stories on Faft, articles on Faft, Faft stories at Wion, Faft news, Faft latest news