SQU expands partnerships with Russian prestigious varsities
During the visit, the SQU signed cooperation programmes with the Higher School of Economics (HSE) and the Institute of Science and Technology (Skoltech); and fostered existing agreements with Moscow State University and Kazan Federal University. Cooperation opportunities in the fields of medicine, biotechnology, agriculture, engineering, innovation and entrepreneurship were explored, as well. Student exchange programmes, joint research training and partnerships in technology development and entrepreneurship were also discussed.
SQU expands partnerships with Russian prestigious varsities
The SQU's delegation also met with the heads of universities and research centres in Kazan and Moscow, including Kazan Federal University, Kazan State Agrarian University, Sechenov Moscow Medical University, Lomonosov Moscow State University, the Higher School of Economics (HSE), Skoltech Institute of Science and Technology, Skolkovo Innovation Center, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology; and the Russian Academy of Sciences.
HH Sayyid Dr Fahd bin Al Julanda al Said, Vice-Chancellor of SQU, indicated that the visit sought to enhance academic cooperation, learn about best international practices and create effective partnerships in various scientific fields.
The visit comes as part of SQU's commitment to strengthening its international presence and establishing effective strategic partnerships thereby maintaining its pioneering role in building international partnerships and enhancing its position as an academic institution striving for excellence and innovation at the global level. — ONA
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
13 hours ago
- Observer
Russia losing grip on the South Caucasus amid regional shifts
The writer is a former Azerbaijani secy of state, and leader of the country's united political opposition The peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, announced recently at the US White House, is perhaps the clearest sign yet that Russian President Vladimir Putin's heavy-handed interventions in the South Caucasus have loosened and in some cases eliminated, Russia's stranglehold over the region. Given Putin's zero-sum view of world affairs, this loss of influence may lead him to take an even harder line in the Ukraine-Russia peace talks that US President Donald Trump is trying to kick-start. America's role in facilitating the Armenia-Azerbaijan deal comes as a stunning surprise in the region. It was not so long ago that Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia all seemed to be returning to the Russian fold. But the Kremlin is not relinquishing control easily and assumes that the surest way to maintain influence among its neighbours is to have them at each other's throats and reliant on Russia as a mediator. In Armenia, where Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has sought to move towards integration with the European Union, the Kremlin is believed to have hatched a recent plot to install a pro-Russia puppet who would reignite the war with Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. Putin and his circle seem to have believed that they had the wherewithal to affect the regime. The Armenian opposition is pro-Russian and revanchist towards Azerbaijan and Russia also has the means to strengthen the anti-Pashinyan camp through pro-Russian Armenian religious leaders and Armenian-origin Russian billionaires. But their attempt at subterfuge failed. The situation differed substantially in Azerbaijan, where it is the main opposition forces — the Popular Front Party of Azerbaijan (PFPA, which I lead) and its ally, the National Council — that advocate integration into the Euro-Atlantic theatre and reject cooperation with Russian authorities. The Kremlin, like the government, appears deeply afraid of the pro-Western opposition's growing strength and therefore likely supports the government's repressive tactics. Unlike Pashinyan, Azerbaijan's president, Ilham Aliyev, opposes Euro-Atlantic integration and remains open to a continued alliance with the Kremlin, provided that it respects his personal interests and refrains from humiliating or undermining him domestically or internationally. So, even after the peace deal with Armenia, Russia probably will not try to topple Aliyev, but rather to pressure him into renewed subordination. Armenia and Azerbaijan have signed a peace deal at the White House that aims to end decades of armed conflict that killed tens of thousands Georgia presents another difficulty. The Kremlin is undoubtedly pleased with the current Georgian Dream government, given its repressive internal policies and anti-Western rhetoric. But since Russia has long occupied 20 per cent of Georgia's territory, the government must reckon with vehemently anti-Russian public opinion. Prior to the Armenia-Azerbaijan agreement, dealing definitively with Georgia was likely to be Putin's final act of revanchism in the South Caucasus. As long as Georgia's government remained under the thumb of Bidzina Ivanishvili, an oligarch who made his fortune in Russia, it could be counted on to cooperate. If the Kremlin could achieve unquestioned dominance over both Armenia and Azerbaijan, such a demonstration of regional hegemony would empower the Georgian government to present a stark choice to its citizens: submit to Russia or risk further occupation. But now that the Armenia/Azerbaijan domino has fallen, Putin will have to reassess his plans. There is strong evidence that the Kremlin had mobilised the leaders of the pro-Russian opposition in Armenia in the weeks before the deal with Azerbaijan was reached. This fifth column against Pashinyan — composed of pro-Kremlin religious figures and supported by the Armenian-born Russian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan — even called on Armenia's military to overthrow the government. But Pashinyan proved more decisive and vigilant than many (including the Kremlin) expected. Not only did he thwart the coup attempt, but anti-Russian sentiment in Armenia intensified, helping to push the deal with Azerbaijan forward. Meanwhile, the Kremlin had been pressuring Azerbaijanis within Russia with mass arrests, torture and deportations. The likely goal was to threaten Aliyev with heightened social unrest from a flood of repatriations. But these machinations also failed to yield the desired outcome. Azerbaijan responded by detaining Russian citizens in Baku and elsewhere; and public opinion shifted sharply against Russia. Kremlin strategists probably hoped that Aliyev's ideological affinity to Putin — both oppose democracy and Western influence — would facilitate an agreement. But Aliyev recognised that Putin was seeking a lever that he could pull at any time to weaken Aliyev's grip on power. Aliyev has no intention of sharing control of Azerbaijan, even with Putin. Consequently, agreeing to a US-brokered peace deal with Armenia and welcoming Washington's influence in the region, looked like a far safer bet compared to relying more on Putin. Still, given Azerbaijan's vast mineral and energy wealth, Russia is unlikely simply to accept these setbacks. It will look for new ways to apply pressure. Project Syndicate 2025
Observer
15 hours ago
- Observer
Trump and Putin end summit without Ukraine deal
Anchorage - Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on Friday made no breakthrough on Ukraine at their high-stakes summit, pointing to areas of agreement and rekindling a friendship but offering no news on a ceasefire. Trump, fond of calling himself a master deal-maker, rolled out the red carpet for Putin at an Alaska air base for the first time the Russian leader was allowed on Western soil since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. After an abrupt ending to three hours of talks with aides, Trump and Putin offered warm words but took no questions from reporters -- highly unusual for the media-savvy US president. "We're not there yet, but we've made progress. There's no deal until there's a deal," Trump said. He called the meeting "extremely productive" with "many points" agreed, although he did not offer specifics. "There are just a very few that are left; some are not that significant, one is probably the most significant," Trump said without elaborating. Putin also spoke in general terms of cooperation in a joint press appearance that lasted just 12 minutes. "We hope that the understanding we have reached will... pave the way for peace in Ukraine," Putin said. As Trump mused about a second meeting, Putin smiled and said in English: "Next time in Moscow." The former KGB agent quickly tried to flatter Trump, who has voiced admiration for the Russian leader in the past. Putin told Trump he agreed with him that the Ukraine war, which Putin ordered, would not have happened if Trump were president instead of Joe Biden. Trump, for his part, again complained of a "hoax" that Russia intervened to help him in the 2016 election -- a finding backed by US intelligence. The friendly reception was a stark contrast to Trump's berating of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky when he met him at the White House in February. Trump earlier said he sought a three-way meeting with Zelensky but did not announce one at the summit. Trump said he would now consult Zelensky as well as NATO leaders, who have voiced unease about the US leader's outreach to Putin. "Now it's really up to President Zelensky to get it done," Trump said in a Fox News interview after the summit. Putin warned Ukraine and European countries to "not create any obstacles" and not "make attempts to disrupt this emerging progress through provocation or behind-the-scenes intrigues." Trump invited Putin just a week ago and ensured there was some carefully choreographed drama for their first in-person meeting since 2019. The two leaders arrived in their respective presidential jets and descended on the tarmac of an air base, with Trump clapping as Putin appeared. US military might was on display with a B-2 stealth bomber flying overhead, as a reporter shouted audibly to Putin, "Will you stop killing civilians?" Putin, undaunted, grinned widely as Trump took the unusual step of escorting him into "The Beast," the secure US presidential limousine, before a meeting in a room before a screen that said -- in English only -- "Pursuing Peace." Putin smiled and joked with Russian reporters on the visit, a landmark for a leader who is facing an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court related to the Ukraine war, which has killed tens of thousands of people. - Battlefield gains - Russia, in recent days, has made battlefield gains that could strengthen Putin's hand in any ceasefire negotiations, although Ukraine announced as Putin was flying in that it had retaken several villages. Trump had insisted he would be firm with Putin, after coming under heated criticism for appearing cowed during a 2018 summit in Helsinki. While he was traveling to Alaska, the White House announced that Trump had scrapped a plan to see Putin alone, and he instead held the talks alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his roving envoy Steve Witkoff. Zelensky was not included and has refused pressure from Trump to surrender territory seized by Russia. "It is time to end the war, and the necessary steps must be taken by Russia. We are counting on America," Zelensky said in a social media post.
Observer
20 hours ago
- Observer
Why Russia sold Alaska to the US
President Vladimir Putin of Russia was scheduled to meet with President Donald Trump in Alaska on Friday to discuss the war in Ukraine. If they talk about Ukrainian land concessions as part of peace negotiations, as Trump has suggested, they will be doing so on land that Russia sold to the United States in 1867. That won't be the only historical irony. Russia was moved to sell Alaska partly because of a war in Crimea, a peninsula that the Russian Empire annexed in 1783 under Catherine the Great. Crimea became part of an independent Ukraine in 1991, and Russia seized it in 2014 in a preview of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. As ironies go, 'it doesn't get much better than that on a grand historical scale,' said Pierce Bateman, a historian at the University of Alaska Anchorage, referring to the location of the Trump-Putin summit. The $7.2 million purchase of Alaska now looks like a very good deal for the United States. Though it made sense for the Russian Empire at the time, some Russian nationalists see the sale as a historic blunder. Here's what to know about the forces and people that shaped it, and why its legacy matters: Russia acquired Alaska during an era of colonial expansion. Russian explorers reached present-day Alaska in the 18th century by crossing a narrow strait separating Asia and North America. The strait was named after Vitus Bering, the Danish-born mariner sent abroad by Czar Peter the Great in the 1720s to claim new Russian territory. Bateman said there was a 'wild west' feeling in the territory as early Russian explorers rushed to harvest sea otter furs — a prized commodity in China at the time — in and around the Aleutian Islands. There was also brutality against Indigenous people, including abductions of the children of local leaders and the destruction of boats and hunting equipment, according to William L. Iggiagruk Hensley, a historian and former Democratic state senator in Alaska. Alaska's economic appeal for Russia faded over time. In 1799, the Russian Empire chartered the Russian-American Company to streamline the fur trade and formalize Russian settlements in the territory that would become known as Alaska. 'Russian America' would eventually stretch as far south as California. But overharvesting was making the fur trade far less profitable. There were also tensions among Russian, British and American fur traders, partly because the limits of their territories and hunting grounds were not well defined. And Russia's sparsely populated settlements and assets were poorly defended. Geopolitics were a factor in the sale. The challenges of holding Alaska were complicated by developments on other continents. One was trade: Russia increasingly wanted to focus on imperial expansion in its Far East. Another was war. When Russia began fighting Britain, France, and the Ottoman Empire in Crimea in 1853, Russian officials worried that British forces might try to invade the Russian Far East through North America, according to a 2016 book about the purchase of Alaska by historian Lee Farrow. Even after that threat subsided, they continued to worry about the British presence in the Pacific. They also wondered if 'Russian America' would survive U.S. expansionism. By the 1850s, the United States had acquired California, annexed Texas, and fought a war with Mexico. There was talk of 'Manifest Destiny,' the idea that the United States was destined to expand across North America. Russian officials, including the commander of its Pacific fleet, urged the ailing empire to offload Alaska while it could. The deal made sense for both sides. The diplomatic conditions for a sale were good, according to Farrow, a professor at Auburn University at Montgomery. Trade between Russia and the United States was blossoming, and both were increasingly distrustful of Britain, America's former colonial master. In March 1867, Secretary of State William Henry Seward opened the negotiations by offering $5 million for the territory to Eduard Stoeckl, the Russian minister to the United States. Two weeks later, they agreed on $7.2 million, or less than 2 cents an acre. A treaty was signed in Seward's office at 4 a.m. after an all-night negotiating session, and later approved by Congress and Czar Alexander II. The deal led to some tension and scandal: The U.S. government was late to pay Russia, and there were accusations that American politicians and journalists had taken cuts of the payment as bribes. Some critics did not see the strategic advantage of adding a frozen territory more than twice the size of France, and called the purchase 'Seward's folly.' But the resistance was largely driven by a minority of American newspapers, according to a 2019 study by historian Michael A. Hill. Many Americans were excited about Alaska's rumored natural resources, he wrote. Some Russians have seller's remorse. Alaska turned out to have plenty of resources, including gold, timber, and petroleum, and the purchase was increasingly seen as a good deal for the United States. Alaska became the 49th state in 1959. In Russia, there was some relief after the deal. But by the Soviet era, it was seen as an embarrassment, said Julia Davis, founder of the Russian Media Monitor, a project that tracks Kremlin propaganda. Putin, who often talks about the need to restore Russian power, equivocated in 2014 when asked if Russia planned to annex Alaska. But a sense of seller's remorse over the lost territory seems to be a feature of his rule, Davis said, and calls to take Alaska back have grown louder as relations with the United States have worsened. 'Alaska is ours' billboards popped up in Russia after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and the message was amplified by some politicians and television pundits. In that sense, holding a Trump-Putin summit in Alaska is a victory for hard-right Russian nationalists. 'Across the board, it's considered a major win,' Davis said. This article originally appeared in
