Facebook X-twitter Youtube Icon-instagram-1 Tiktok Icon-linkedin
June 21, 2025
Join SAT Community!

Home » Archives for SAT Commentary

All posts by : SAT Commentary

SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Commentary
SAT Commentary

Bishnoi Gang Faces Canadian Scrutiny Over Security Threats

Two Canadian government officials, British Columbia Premier David Eby and Member of Parliament Jenny Kwan have independently written to Prime Minister Mark Carney with a direct request: To designate the India-linked Lawrence Bishnoi gang as a terrorist organization. This push isn’t happening in a vacuum. It follows months of growing concern over transnational repression, rising threats to public safety, and alarming intelligence pointing toward foreign interference in Canada’s domestic affairs. A Gang Beyond Borders Lawrence Bishnoi, a name that has increasingly surfaced in global headlines, is not just an underworld figure operating within India. His criminal network has been accused of orchestrating extortion schemes, targeted killings, and violent threats—including in Canada. In provinces like British Columbia and Ontario, where sizable South Asian communities live, this gang’s footprint has become a source of anxiety—particularly for Sikh Canadians. Premier Eby’s letter calls attention to exactly that. He cites recent extortion campaigns aimed at South Asian business owners in B.C., painting a picture of intimidation that’s no longer limited to whispers, it’s now backed by violence and fear. A Political and Security Flashpoint MP Jenny Kwan’s letter raises the stakes even higher. She demands not only a terror designation for the Bishnoi network, but also a complete suspension of Canada’s security cooperation with India. Kwan references ongoing investigations into the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen and Sikh activist whose murder has been linked by Canadian intelligence services to Indian state actors. Kwan’s letter doesn’t mince words: it calls for India’s cooperation in the investigation and urges a full review of Canada’s Foreign Agents Registry, which oversees the activity of foreign operatives within Canadian borders. She even highlights threats to NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who was reportedly placed under RCMP protection after being tracked by an alleged Indian government-linked agent connected to the Bishnoi gang. What’s Behind the Push? The recent calls come in the wake of new intelligence disclosures from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the RCMP, which allegedly confirm India’s involvement in extrajudicial killings and cross-border political suppression. This includes direct links between Indian state-backed operatives and criminal gangs like Bishnoi’s, which, if true, represent a disturbing use of criminal proxies to silence dissent and suppress activism abroad. For both Kwan and Eby, the central issue is national security. They argue that failure to label the Bishnoi group as a terrorist organization not only undermines Canadian law enforcement but also puts minority communities, especially Sikhs, at risk. Why It Matters This demand for terrorist designation is not merely symbolic. It would allow Canadian authorities to freeze assets, monitor networks more closely, and restrict movement and funding associated with the gang. It would also send a message: that Canada is taking threats to its sovereignty and the safety of its citizens seriously, regardless of where the threats originate or who they’re aligned with. At its core, this isn’t just about one gang or one case, it’s about how democracies respond to covert foreign influence and protect communities vulnerable to transnational threats. As the pressure builds, the ball now rests in Prime Minister Carney’s court.

Read More »
Beyond Boundaries
SAT Commentary

From Role-Model to Role-Reversal: Modi’s Foreign Policy Faces Uncomfortable Questions Amid Trump-Munir Meeting

As Pakistan’s Army Chief General Asim Munir met former U.S. President Donald Trump at the height of the Iran-Israel crisis, a quiet but telling shift is unfolding in South Asia’s geopolitical theatre. What was once India’s boastful perch as the West’s “strategic darling” is being questioned even within its own domestic circles. In May, a series of sharp critiques in Indian media and think-tank spaces reflected something unprecedented: a role-reversal in the regional optics of leadership and diplomatic relevance. The diplomatic shift subtly indicates a silent stint and that is, India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi is no longer the uncontested player in the strategic equation it once dominated. Instead, Pakistan appears to be gradually positioning itself with renewed diplomatic confidence, just as India struggles with foreign policy optics that are beginning to fall short. The Question of Geopolitical Relevance Today General Munir’s high-stakes meeting with Donald Trump during a moment when the Middle East teeters on the brink of regional conflagration has turned global attention more toward Islamabad, and not much to New Delhi. And the world have reason to it: India’s cautious silence on Israel’s preemptive strikes on Iran and its abstention from SCO statements condemning Tel Aviv’s aggression have raised eyebrows. Far from taking a moral or strategic stand, New Delhi has chosen hedging over leadership. Its foreign policy appears more concerned with not offending its various western partners-who largely supports its economy-than offering coherent strategic foresight. India in this conflict is to loose more than it anticipated, what is at stake is its long established relationship with Iran and its multiple projects inside Iran. It’s huge stakes in ports of Iran and Israel- Chabahar and Haifa are already sinking. In contrast, Pakistan, despite immense internal challenges—has tried to take clear positions: condemning Israeli attacks, advocating for non-proliferation, and calling for maritime security in the Gulf. While India’s strategic ambiguity worked in the multipolar scramble of the last decade, today’s polarized world is demanding clarity. And Pakistan, for once, is providing it. Switching Economic Relevance in the New Era For over a decade, New Delhi invested heavily in the narrative of being “indispensable” to the West—a rising economy, a digital powerhouse, a market of 1.4 billion. But global economic flows are shifting in unpredictable ways. Western fatigue with overexposed supply chains and India’s tech protectionism led some investors to explore other avenues including Gulf states, Central Asia, and even a slowly recovering Pakistan. Moreover, Pakistan’s strategic location at the heart of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), its potential role in Middle Eastern energy transit, and improving ties with Central Asia offer fresh geo-economic possibilities. General Munir’s meeting with Trump was not just about military optics; it could serve as a soft-launch for behind-the-scenes trade dialogues, especially in areas like defense manufacturing, energy logistics, minerals and cyber cooperation. The Potential Credibility on Counterterrorism In the wake of the Pahalgam incident, India thundered Pakistan upon no basis with the familiar refrain. But what followed was largely performative. There were arrests, crackdowns, and blame games but rejection of independent investigation signals few regional or global efforts to build credible counterterrorism frameworks or intelligence-sharing platforms respectively. Pakistan has always tried to be rational in its dialogues with regional and Western powers. In recent months, Islamabad has engaged Tehran, Riyadh, Beijing, and Ankara on joint security, regional de-escalation, and border control. More importantly, it has raised concrete concerns about Indian state-sponsored terrorism in Balochistan concerns that have begun to resonate in some Western policy circles. India’s approach remains nationalist and narrative-driven; Pakistan, for a change, is building a case—and slowly, an audience. May’s Confrontation Was a Role-Reversal The most telling shift came not from international capitals but within India. In May 2025, Indian commentators, normally in sync with the government’s chest-thumping began questioning whether Modi’s foreign policy had become too optics-centric, too reactive, and dangerously stagnant. This marked a profound role-reversal. For years, India had lectured Pakistan on isolation and irrelevance. Now, India is the one playing catch-up in a region realigned by conflict, energy politics, and great-power recalibration and all of this is a result of its diplomatic arrogance towards Pakistan whether it be on Kashmir, water, economy or diplomacy. Conclusion: A Narrative in Flux Nobody can call General Munir’s meeting with Trump just a bilateral gesture, it is an explicit signal of Pakistan’s repositioning on the global chessboard. And in doing so, it inadvertently exposes the hollowness of India’s self-declared status as the “new vishwaguru” (world teacher). Pakistan for a fact must respond with diplomatic mastery and shall require to strengthen and align its internal and external policy fronts to best maneuver through this recalibrating regional overture. Likewise, if New Delhi doesn’t recalibrate, soon it may find that the story it so carefully crafted for the West no longer fits the script, the global geopolitics is writing.

Read More »
Trump-Munir Meeting
Commentary
SAT Commentary

Crypto, CT, Kashmir: Inside the Broader Scope of Trump-Munir Meeting

Amid an erratic global and regional geopolitical landscape, a high-stakes meeting planned well before the ongoing Iran-Isreal crisis is on the horizon between Pakistan’s Army Chief today on 18th June 2025, General Asim Munir, and US President Donald Trump who is potentially enjoying the last term of his presidency. With the Israel-Iran war dominating headlines, many will assume the conversation is only about Middle East tensions. As Pakistan, by now has strongly distinguished its stance on Israel’s preemptive strikes on Iran and the escalation between both Iran and Israel on multiple global platforms including the UN and through clear statements from Pakistan’s defense and deputy PM. Having said that, this conflict is only one piece of a much bigger and complex puzzle in which Pakistan is trying its best to maneuver diplomatically. Modern diplomacy requires constant engagement and Pakistan understands the prospects very well. In this backdrop, this closed door lunch between Gen Asim Munir and president Trump  signals something deeper, a possible diplomatic breakthrough between Pakistan-US with broader discussions quietly underway on critical minerals, digital currency, counterterrorism, and importantly Kashmir. Why Trump, Why Now? Unlike many previous leaders, Trump is known to take a personal interest in areas like economic disruption, technology, energy resources, and security deals. He’s not afraid to think outside the box and that makes this meeting significant. General Munir, representing both Pakistan’s military and strategic vision, isn’t just visiting to talk about the Iran crisis. He’s significantly expected to bring ideas that serve Pakistan’s long-term interests. Critical Minerals: A New Frontier Pakistan has untapped reserves of copper, lithium, and rare earth elements REEs and minerals — essential for global technologies, especially in electric vehicles, mobile devices, and clean energy. With the US looking to reduce its dependence on China for these resources and to avoid rising extraction costs in Australia and Canada, Pakistan is suddenly very relevant to US. General Munir may propose joint mining ventures, secure transport routes, or frameworks to attract Western investment in this space. Digital Currency & Innovation Surprisingly, crypto and digital currency “Central Bank Digital Currency” CBDC, could also come up. Pakistan with 20 million people already using crypto currency, has the potential pf a digital transformation. Likely, Trump has shown interest in alternative financial systems, and with Pakistan’s growing youth population exploring digital assets, this could be a new area of cooperation. There’s early talk of creating pilot zones for crypto or fintech innovation, possibly with US support, if it brings economic opportunity and stability. Counterterrorism: A Shared Concern India and Afghanistan remains a concern for both countries with Afghanistan already displaying strong condemnation and rejecting the ideological grounds of these terror groups, India has been exposed to be the terror sponsoring state for the most part lately. The threat of terrorist groups and proxy elements like ISIS-K and BLA has not disappeared, and with America now outside Afghanistan and India diplomatically, Pakistan’s intelligence and security cooperation is even more valuable. General Munir could discuss new ways to jointly manage regional threats without repeating past mistakes. Kashmir: Pakistan’s Frontline One issue Pakistanis care about deeply is Kashmir. Trump who has most recently offered to mediate upon Kashmir makes headlines because the world acknowledges his abilities to bring the parties to the table. Therefore, General Munir might take the opportunity to highlight the ongoing situation in Indian-held Kashmir, especially under Modi’s hardline policies. While it’s unlikely to become a central US concern, any discussion of Kashmir in such meetings can turn the issue into global diplomatic concerns. What This Meeting Really Means This isn’t just a photo-op or a one-topic discussion. It’s part of a broader effort by Pakistan to rebuild strategic space, especially as global power shifts and new alliances emerge. The visit depicts Pakistan’s role in broader regional concerns including the fuming new crisis in Middle East . The meeting ranges not just from South Asia to Middle East, but in conversations about the future of energy, technology, and security. With Trump’s returns to the White House in November 2024, early engagement like this could shape how Washington views Pakistan moving forward. Moreover, the meeting signals to the wider US policy circles that Pakistan is thinking beyond aid and crisis — it’s looking for economic partnerships, trade, and strategic balance. In short, this meeting is not just about the war in the Middle East — it’s about Pakistan positioning itself for the future.

Read More »
Commentary
SAT Commentary

Pakistan, 19 Nations Urge Ceasefire, Denounce Israeli Strikes on Iran

On June 17, 2025, Pakistan joined 19 other countries in a joint diplomatic appeal calling for a comprehensive ceasefire between Israel and Iran, following days of escalating military strikes. The joint statement called the Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear and military sites as a violation of international law and urged a return to diplomacy to avert broader regional conflict. The signatories included Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Türkiye, Qatar, Oman, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Kuwait, Algeria, Tunisia, Sudan, Morocco, and Palestine. Together, they issued a “categorical rejection” of Israel’s military action and demanded its immediate halt. Nuclear Disarmament at the Heart of the Statement A central theme of the joint statement was the call for a nuclear-free Middle East. The countries emphasized “the urgent necessity of establishing a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction,” noting that such a framework must apply to “all States in the region without exception” and be grounded in existing international resolutions. The statement also urged all countries in the Middle East to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) pointing towards Israel, thereby reaffirming global disarmament norms and calling for a potential “De-nuclearisation” of Israel. See Also: Layered Defense vs Layered Attack: The Iran-Israel Missile Contest Warning Against Targeting IAEA-Monitored Facilities Another critical point was the explicit condemnation of military actions near or against nuclear infrastructure monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The statement warned that attacks on such facilities “constitute a grave violation of international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions of 1949,” underscoring the potentially catastrophic risks of any miscalculated escalation. This warning follows Israeli strikes on Iranian sites reportedly engaged in nuclear activity, even as Tehran remained engaged in nuclear negotiations with Washington at the time. Focus on Maritime Security and Global Trade Routes The joint declaration also pointed to growing concerns over maritime instability. With global trade heavily reliant on Middle Eastern sea lanes, the countries stressed that “freedom of navigation and maritime security must be preserved in accordance with international law.” As the Israel-Iran crisis risks spilling into surrounding waterways, including the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, the statement highlighted the fragility of these critical arteries and the dangers posed to international shipping. See Also: Oil, War, and the Hormuz Strait: South Asia and China’s Fragile Link to the Gulf Diplomacy as the Only Sustainable Path In its concluding sections, the statement rejected military solutions, asserting that “diplomacy, dialogue, and adherence to the principles of good neighborliness, in accordance with international law and the UN Charter, remain the only viable path to resolving crises in the region.” This emphasis on political engagement, rather than armed confrontation, aligned with Pakistan’s longstanding stance on peaceful conflict resolution, strategic restraint, and non-interventionism. Pakistan’s Position: Strategic Alignment, Not Escalation While the joint statement follows speculation about Pakistan’s possible strategic commitments to Iran, Pakistani officials have strongly denied any such arrangements. Finance Minister Ishaq Dar recently reiterated that Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is purely deterrent in nature, stating that “our nuclear assets are meant for national defense only, not external conflict.” By aligning itself with a broad coalition of regional actors, Pakistan underscored its diplomatic approach: supporting peace-building initiatives, international norms, and collective regional stability without being drawn into bilateral hostilities. Broader Regional Message by Pakistan The joint declaration signals a growing regional alignment around the principle that escalation between Israel and Iran serves no one’s interests. The inclusion of countries from South Asia, the Gulf, North Africa, and the Levant reflects widespread concern that a continued cycle of retaliation could spiral into a multi-theater conflict. As the United States deploys additional military assets to the region and countries like China issue evacuation orders for their nationals in Israel, the urgency behind this statement is clear. Whether it shifts strategic calculations remains to be seen—but it does mark a rare and unified regional call for restraint, disarmament, and diplomacy at a moment of heightened uncertainty.

Read More »
Commentary
SAT Commentary

Optics vs. Opportunism: PTI’s Protest and the Strategic Cost of Symbolism

On June 14, 2025, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff, Field Marshal Asim Munir, will attend the U.S. Army’s National Day ceremony, an invitation that signifies Pakistan’s reemergence as a key partner in global and regional geopolitics. This invitation is a notable acknowledgement of Pakistan’s resurgent strategic relevance post Pak-Indo conflict. Only a day earlier, on 11th June 2025 the Commander of U.S. CENTCOM lauded Pakistan’s contributions to regional counterterrorism by calling “Phenomenal Parter” on terrorism, highlighting the professionalism and operational credibility of Pakistan’s armed forces. This recognition marks a critical moment for Pakistan’s global image, reaffirming the country’s role as a stabilizing force in a vulnerable South Asian region and underscoring the institutional discipline of its military leadership. When Protest Becomes a Strategic Distraction Coinciding with this moment of institutional recognition, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s U.S. chapter announced to stage a protest outside the Pakistan Embassy in Washington. The similar abject actions have been witnessed previously by PTI including the case of writing a letter to US congress aimed to seek intervention in Pakistan’s domestic politics. While protest remains a constitutional right in democratic traditions, this specific one’s timing is significant and problematic. Rather than enhancing democratic discourse, this protest risks diminishing Pakistan’s image at a time of renewed international engagement. The optics of political agitation during a high-level military representation abroad unintentionally undermines a narrative of national unity, just when Pakistan seeks to project coherence and credibility on the global stage. Digital Echoes of Adversarial Narratives Accompanying the protest has been a surge of online commentary from PTI-aligned influencers, many of whom are circulating content that veeres sharply from democratic criticism into the territory of institutional sabotage. Verified and semi-official accounts mocked the Army Chief’s visit, cast doubts on the military’s intentions, and circulated unverified claims of a rift between the Army and the Air Force. These narratives bear a concerning resemblance to the disinformation themes commonly seen in hostile digital ecosystems—especially those propagated by Indian media and troll networks. When domestic political messaging becomes indistinguishable from adversarial propaganda, it raises serious questions about strategic awareness and narrative responsibility. The Manufactured Myth of an Army–PAF Divide One of the more persistent themes circulating within PTI-affiliated spaces is the suggestion of a division between the Pakistan Army and the Air Force—portraying the PAF as the sole credible defender of national security, while casting aspersions on the Army’s leadership. This notion is not just misleading; it is strategically dangerous. Pakistan’s operational readiness, including its response after the Balakot strikes and in subsequent deterrence postures, is built on inter-service synergy. These operations reflect joint planning and execution and not institutional rivalry. Promoting an artificial divide between services undermines the very concept of a unified command structure and serves no interest other than that of those seeking to sow internal discord. Sabotaging Strategic Momentum At a time when Pakistan is making deliberate efforts to reassert its strategic voice, whether through counterterrorism cooperation, economic diplomacy, or defense recognition—disruptive political acts such as this protest risk derailing that momentum. The protest outside the embassy, accompanied by digital amplification, doesn’t exist in isolation. It sends mixed signals to allies and detractors alike. At best, it portrays internal fragmentation; at worst, it suggests political opportunism at the cost of national coherence. Responsibility in Diaspora Politics PTI’s international affiliates, particularly in North America, must grapple with a difficult but necessary question: What role should overseas chapters play during moments of national diplomatic importance? Political activism abroad is valid. But when it converges with moments of national honor, the implications stretch far beyond party lines. Whether knowingly or not, such actions can dent Pakistan’s image, shift focus from constructive engagement to domestic contention, and provide ammunition to hostile narratives. The burden, therefore, lies in differentiating between legitimate political dissent and what increasingly resembles strategic disruption. Conclusion: Democratic Rights vs. National Responsibility The protest announced by PTI’s U.S. wing on the eve of a landmark moment for Pakistan’s armed forces sends an uncomfortable message—that political gain is being prioritized over national unity. Criticism of policy and power is healthy in any democracy. But when that criticism begins to mimic the rhetorical playbooks of Pakistan’s adversaries, it risks becoming counterproductive—if not outright harmful. PTI now finds itself at a crossroads: it can choose to act as a responsible democratic actor committed to principled dissent within the bounds of national interest—or continue to blur the line between domestic politics and strategic sabotage. In today’s interconnected world, political messaging doesn’t just resonate at home—it reverberates across global capitals. And when national institutions are on the world stage, political expression must rise to meet the moment with maturity and foresight.

Read More »
Pakistan Global
Commentary
SAT Commentary

Recognition and Resolve: Pakistan’s Emerging Role in Global Affairs

Amid persistent efforts to undermine its global standing, Pakistan has secured notable diplomatic victories that affirm its relevance on the world stage. U.S. endorsements of Pakistan’s counterterrorism role and its evolving stance on the Kashmir dispute mark a significant shift in international narratives. These developments not only debunk claims of isolation but also highlight Pakistan’s growing influence in shaping regional stability and global security.

Read More »
Indian Media
Commentary
SAT Commentary

India’s Deepening Global Isolation: A Media-Fuelled Crisis

India stands at a precarious moment on the world stage, facing growing diplomatic isolation fueled by internal political shifts and inflammatory media narratives. As BJP-aligned outlets target even close allies like the U.S. with baseless conspiracies, the country’s global credibility and long-held democratic image are rapidly eroding.

Read More »
Commentary
SAT Commentary

Outsourcing Dissent: PTI’s Letter to U.S. Congress and the Geopolitical Cost for Pakistan

In a troubling development that raises serious concerns for Pakistan’s sovereignty and national security, 59 members of the U.S. On 30th May 2025, US Congress have signed a letter addressed to President Donald J. Trump, voicing allegations about Pakistan’s internal political affairs. What makes this letter particularly concerning is not just its content—but the context and forces behind its orchestration. At a time when Pakistan’s high-level diplomatic delegation is engaging U.S. policymakers to safeguard vital national interests, the some voices inside Pakistan have actively worked to undermine this effort by facilitating a document that calls for punitive action against its own state. This letter openly seeks U.S. intervention in Pakistan’s domestic politics, including imposing visa bans on Pakistani officials, cutting down security cooperation, and questioning the country’s democratic institutions. Historically, the crisis which such interventions have caused in Middle East has still kept the region in turmoil. But the covert actors behind such interventions,  In effect, has chosen to internationalize internal political grievances by aligning with foreign lobbies—a move that cannot be justified under any democratic principle. Who Are the Signatories? The makeup of the signatories itself reveals the political and ideological undercurrents behind this campaign: Two Indian-origin lawmakers who have repeatedly promoted a pro-India narrative and shown hostility toward Pakistan’s core interests, particularly on Kashmir and regional diplomacy. Over 50 members who voted in favor of Israel during its brutal aggression in Gaza, ignoring thousands of civilian casualties and the principles of international humanitarian law. Their sudden concern for human rights in Pakistan reeks of selective morality. Five vocal critics of Pakistan’s nuclear program and Kashmir stance, individuals who have consistently opposed Pakistan’s strategic autonomy and deterrence posture. That PTI’s actively seeking support from such actors—whose voting records and public positions clearly run counter to Pakistan’s national interest in the ongoing regional crisis—reflects a disturbing willingness to prioritize political vendettas over national integrity. A Violation of Democratic Norms and Strategic Prudence What is being framed as a plea for democratic restoration is, in fact, a strategic attempt to delegitimize the state, pressurize its institutions, and weaken its negotiating hand on the global stage. The letter seriously undermines Pakistan’s legal and judicial processes, misrepresents its security challenges, and seeks to instrumentalize human rights discourse for political point-scoring. Furthermore, calling for a re-evaluation of U.S.-Pakistan security ties in the face of regional threats—ranging from cross-border terrorism to hybrid warfare—serves no one but those who wish to destabilize Pakistan internally and isolate it internationally. Bill’s Alignment with Anti-Pakistan Voice Bill’s reliance seems to be largely on voices hostile to Pakistan’s sovereignty betrays a broader pattern of politicizing foreign policy for short-term political gains. Whether it’s lobbying in Western capitals or staging protests abroad, the such actions appears to have crossed a line between legitimate political activism and strategic sabotage. By enabling actors historically critical of Pakistan to position themselves as defenders of Pakistani democracy, PTI has effectively handed them the tools to intervene in the country’s internal affairs. Sovereignty is Not a Partisan Issue Conclusively, Pakistan’s democracy, like any other, might have room for debate and dissent—but that debate must remain within constitutional and sovereign boundaries. No political party should have the license to invite foreign sanctions against its own state, especially through actors with a known history of opposing Pakistan’s nuclear capability, territorial integrity, and geopolitical positioning. At a time when Pakistan needs a unified front to navigate complex global and regional dynamics, seemingly, PTI’s attempt to leverage foreign pressure undermines not just the very foundation of Pakistan’s sovereign decision-making but also its international standing. Because, this is not a matter of party politics, it is a matter of national survival.

Read More »

A premier research and media lab, where every story counts, every data point matters!

Facebook X-twitter Icon-instagram-1 Youtube Linkedin Tiktok

Latest

Resources

Connect

COPYRIGHT 2024 – SOUTH ASIA TIMES

Shopping Basket