Did Pakistan Just Overhaul Its Nuclear Doctrine? | The Rise of the Persian Gulf Is Reshaping the World | Lockdowns Are Useless, and more

Who Will Win the War in Ukraine? The 4 Counteroffensive Scenarios  (Misha Glenny, The Times)
There are too many “known unknowns” on the battlefield and in the wider theatre of politics to have any confidence in what the long-term geostrategic implications of the conflict will be. In simple terms, we do not know who is going to win.
Nonetheless, there are four possible outcomes: a decisive win for Ukraine; a decisive win for Russia; a stalemate that could flare dramatically at any time but might also lead to negotiations; or an escalation — this might mean Russia deploying battlefield nuclear weapons and an ever-deepening NATO involvement in the conflict, President Biden’s worst nightmare.

Lockdowns Are Useless. But You Won’t Hear That from the Inquiry  (Rod Liddle, The Times)
Other countries, such as Sweden, have already had their Covid inquiries. Over and done with. The Swedes concluded that their government had been “fundamentally right” not to impose lockdown restrictions — and given that Sweden’s death rate from the virus was well down the European table and miles below our own, one can understand how they came to that verdict.
Indeed, scientists from Johns Hopkins University reported two weeks ago that lockdown in England and Wales may have saved as few as 1,700 deaths overall and concluded: “The science of lockdowns is clear; the data are in: the deaths saved were a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs imposed.”
Those staggering collateral costs are not merely financial. They include the serious illnesses that were not detected, and the suffering of those who were unable to receive treatment for serious illnesses during the pandemic. In the end, I would contend, the lives lost as a consequence of lockdown will easily outnumber those saved by it. And that’s before we examine the impact on the education of our children and the effects on our economy.
However, neither the Swedes nor those scientists from Johns Hopkins will be invited to provide the U.K. inquiry with their evidence. 

What Can Joe Biden Do About Benjamin Netanyahu?  (Bernard Avishai, New Yorker)
Since 1977, when Menachem Begin, a founder of the Likud party, became Prime Minister, Israeli leaders liberal enough to entertain a peace process with the Palestinians that could end the conflict have controlled the government for just eight years. But they always had a not-exactly-stealth weapon: Israelis across the spectrum feared alienating Washington—its military technology, its diplomatic shield, its annual billions in aid, and what has been loosely called its “values.” By tradition, of course, U.S. Presidents don’t (openly) interfere with the domestic policies of America’s allies, but not all allies benefit from such largesse, and Israeli Prime Ministers have all been rated on how they’ve cultivated bipartisan U.S. concern for Israel’s security. Civil-rights groups have sought to stop human-rights violations, such as in the occupied territories, by shaming expansionist governments in the U.S. media and before American élites more generally.
So, now that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition, led by his Likud bloc and its allies in far-right and ultra-Orthodox parties, has openly menaced Israel’s democratic structures—demanding, for example, that the governing coalition be given decisive influence over the selection of judges—liberals are reflexively seeking a lifeline from Joe Biden’s Administration. And what seems increasingly clear is that President Biden is loath to throw it. “There are plenty of reasons for Americans to care” about what Netanyahu’s coalition is doing, but “there just aren’t that many reasons for the Administration to do anything,” Steven Simon, a former Middle East adviser in the Obama White House and the author of the recently published Grand Delusion: The Rise and Fall of American Ambition in the Middle East, told me. “The U.S. relationship with Israel lives or dies by domestic U.S. political dynamics,” and though thirty-eight billion dollars—the ten-year military-aid package signed under Barack Obama—“could become a lever, no Democratic Administration would want to deploy it.” There would be “noise.”

The Rise of the Persian Gulf Is Reshaping the World (Fareed Zakaria, Washington Post)
The rise of the Persian Gulf, and Saudi Arabia in particular, is already reshaping the Middle East. But it will also have powerful consequences across the world.
A quick quiz: What was the world’s fastest-growing large economy last year? If you guessed India or China, or any of the Asian tigers, you are wrong. The answer is Saudi Arabia, which clocked in at 8.7 percent. Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates registered heady growth as well.
What explains the boom? Despite what many hope for, the world continues to depend heavily on fossil fuels. The Ukraine war and sanctions against Russia have reduced Moscow’s importance in global oil and gas markets. In addition, two of the world’s other major oil-producing countries, Iran and Venezuela, are also under sanctions and have old and decaying oil infrastructure. The United States produces lots of oil and gas but still imports large quantities. As a result, the world is now reliant on a handful of countries in the Persian Gulf for steady supplies of oil and gas.
These conditions will likely continue over the next decade, and if they do, the gulf will see one of the largest inflows of wealth in history.

‘Drought Is on the Verge of Becoming the Next Pandemic’  (Tim Smedley, Guardian)
Freshwater shortages, once considered a local issue, are increasingly a global risk. In every annual risk report since 2012, the World Economic Forum has included water crisis as one of the top-five risks to the global economy. Half of the global population – almost 4 billion people – live in areas with severe water scarcity for at least one month of the year, while half a billion people face severe water scarcity all year round.
From the Yellow River in China to the Colorado River in the United States, many rivers no longer reach the sea. Often artificially straightened and dammed, water is sucked out and channelled off to supply farms, industries and households.Great lakes, from the Aral Sea in central Asia to Lake Urmia in Iran, have nearly disappeared. Groundwater aquifers, from the Ogallala and Central Valley in the US to India’s Upper Ganges and Pakistan’s Lower Indus, are being depleted faster than they can refill. The remaining freshwater is increasingly polluted with sewage and fertilisers, causing algal blooms that smother and choke ecosystems.
There’s only ever the same, finite amount of water churning around in our water cycle. Every drop of water on Earth has been here since the beginning of time, constantly recycled.
The good and bad news is that water crises are usually caused by human mismanagement, not climate. The world isn’t running out of water – people are.

End of the Road for AI Advisers ‘Blindsided’ by Latest Tech  (Mark Sellman, The Times)
The AI Council, a committee of experts that advised ministers and The Alan Turing Institute (ATI), the national institute for data science and AI, have been accused of being blindsided by the importance of the technology. Both bodies deny the claims.
The government has now appointed Ian Hogarth, the tech entrepreneur, as chairman of the new foundation model taskforce, which will spearhead the adoption and regulation of the technology in the UK.
The taskforce will be the central forum of outside advice for the government, replacing the AI Council, and there will be a rotating panel of experts ministers can call on ad hoc.