Since its inception in 1901, the Nobel Peace Prize has primarily recognised contributions to four broad areas: arms control and disarmament, peace negotiations, the advancement of democracy and human rights, and efforts to build a more orderly and peaceful international system. In the 21st century, the Nobel Committee has also expanded its scope to include initiatives addressing climate change and environmental threats, viewing them as integral to global peace and stability.

I grew up in Guwahati (Assam), where questions of identity were never theoretical. They surfaced in school registers, land records, police verifications, and anxious family conversations. Some people carried documents with them like talismans. Others lived in fear that a single missing paper could erase their place in the only country they had ever known. Long before I understood the politics of migration, I witnessed its emotional cost.

On September 12, 2025, 142 nations voted in favor of a two-state solution, 10 against, and 12 abstained — within 24 hours of the Israeli prime minister declaring that Palestine would never be a state. Major countries, including Saudi Arabia, France, and India, have endorsed the resolution, acknowledging Palestinian suffering. This raises a critical question: Will the adoption of the two-state resolution change the Israel–Palestine conflict, or will the cycle of violence continue?

The May 2025 India-Pakistan conflict offered a sobering demonstration of how modern wars are no longer confined to physical battlefields alone. Alongside precision strikes and conventional military operations, both countries engaged in a fierce struggle for control over public perception, media narratives, and psychological advantage. The widespread use of misinformation and disinformation across platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), Telegram, Facebook, WhatsApp, and YouTube transformed the conflict into a full-spectrum hybrid war.

It has been one month since the brutal Islamist terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir (April 22, 2025), where civilians were deliberately targeted and killed after being asked their religion — a cold-blooded and calculated act of violence. The incident stands as yet another grim reminder of the enduring and well-orchestrated threat posed by Pakistan-based Islamist terror networks.

On April 1, 2025, Finland’s Prime Minister announced the country’s intention to withdraw from the international treaty banning anti-personnel land mines. Contrary to the date’s association with pranks, this declaration is no April Fool’s joke. Historically, wars have compelled states to suspend, derogate from, or even terminate treaty obligations. In many cases, the erosion of treaty commitments becomes visible first on the battlefield before formal withdrawals are announced.

Since the Taliban's return to power in August 2021, Afghanistan has faced a sharp decline in human rights, with women and minorities bearing the brunt of repression. The Taliban’s enforcement of moral policing, public floggings, and the systematic dismantling of girls' education reflects their rigid interpretation of Sharia law despite global condemnation. This article examines the impact of these policies on Afghan society, particularly women and girls while highlighting the Taliban’s justification through religious edicts.