On International Plastic Free Day, @BNULahore reiterates its commitment to becoming a certified Green university. Sustainability is not only a goal but a way of life for us. We have already made substantial progress and are working towards becoming a single-use plastic free.

In my two years as head of Beaconhouse National University (@BNULahore), the one thing I am most proud of is our unwavering commitment to creating a best practice model for SUPPORTING OUR STUDENTS in every way possible. Ultimately, that is why we (or any university) exist. At.

Hilarious. Telling the person whose team mediated the crisis that no mediation took place!! Must have been an amusing conversation. The Indian media and government have set new standards for faking stuff. They continue to deny plain facts about the recent crisis. It's been bad

Thank you for reminding everyone, @zfrmrza. I believe work has continued on the NSP. But you are right that ownership among decision-makers needs to be re-energized. No policy is any particular government’s policy; it is the State’s. Umbrella policies with strategic intent must.

Deepest condolences to the victims of the Air India plane crash. My thoughts are with the families and loved ones affected by this tragic incident. In moments like these, one is reminded that nothing is more important than humanity.

The third party helping with de-escalation is also necessary till bilateral mechanisms become trustworthy. The real problem is that we have failed to create bilateral mechanisms that work. I hope this crisis will offer a lesson and we'll get to talking to create that. (5/5).

This crisis was no different. India initiated the most serious outreach. I don't understand why Indian govts don't accept this reality. Nothing is embarrassing about reaching out to a third party if we don't have good bilateral escalation control mechanisms in South Asia. (4/5).

There are various reasons for it - not identical in each crisis - but it has consistently been the case. Sometimes it has worked for India, other times not. Pakistan too has looked to the third party consistently. Both have the third party built into their crisis calculus. (3/5).

India does not like to have third party involvement in peacetime dialogues between itself and Pakistan but the fact is that it has been eager and proactive in soliciting third party support during crisis moments ever since Kargil. (2/5).

I do not understand this Indian allergy to third party mediation specifically in crises. I have probably studied this matter more closely than anyone and covered a lot of it in my book, Brokering Peace. (1/5).

No better feeling for a scholar to know that an original theory and concept they produce holds up in real life consistently. Ultimately de-escalation and crisis termination in the crisis were all about “Brokered Bargaining”.

Third parties must understand they cannot disappear after every crisis, leaving the underlying problems unaddressed if they want to avoid future crises. (15/15).

The playbook almost didn't hold this time – could it disappoint them even more next time? And most importantly, how do they muster the courage to pursue the commonsensical next step: talk, talk, and talk to find mutually acceptable, sustainable solutions to the disputes? (14/15).

Can a rational actor truly threaten to wrest another nuclear country’s territory without ensuring a kinetic response from the other? Both antagonists would also need to go back to the drawing board on how to do escalation control. Must they rely on third parties? (13/15).

What was India after? Did its ideology and misreading of Pakistan’s challenges force it to get carried away? Can nuclear countries truly attack another country on such a flimsy pretext and expect to get away with it? (12/15).

Both sides then announced they wouldn’t escalate unless the other did. This was part of the brokered deal. Both stuck to it. But now that this is all over, a number of questions remain: (11/15).

The US would probably have told them that they would try to ensure India doesn’t launch an attack thereafter. The U.S. may have asked Pakistan to hold back in anticipation of Washington ensuring India’s climb down. (10/15).

Facts don’t matter beyond a point. At least to de-escalate, buoyant narratives at home help. What would the U.S. have suggested? Probably asked Pakistan for restraint; Pakistan would have said they must complete their military response, ongoing at that time. (9/15).

Pakistan believed its job of responding this morning was well done. India denied major damage. Indian media has had no problems creating a fictional world in reporting its war with Pakistan over the past week so they continued to run with this narrative to declare victory. (8/15).

Pakistan responded, likely also with the comfort that the U.S. was there to prevent things from getting out of hand. Now it was about making sure that the gains were recorded and narratives explained successes on either side. (7/15).