Blog

Donald Trump has won another election … for the centre-left. First came Canada, where Prime Minister Mark Carney’s centre-left Liberal Party secured victory, and now Australia has returned Anthony Albanese’s Labor government with a commanding second-term majority, sweeping across the country from coast to coast, from Darwin to the southern tip of Tasmania.

Remarkably, both the Canadian Liberals and Australian Labor were, just a year ago, staring down the barrel of electoral defeat. In Canada, fortunes were reversed by switching leaders from Justin Trudeau to Mark Carney. In Australia, Labor simply slogged it out. But the re-election of Donald Trump in the US and his revived trade war gave both Carney and Albanese the opportunity to present themselves as providers of stable leadership in an increasingly volatile global environment. Carney leveraged Canadian patriotism, presenting himself as a level-headed economist and former central banker. Albanese campaigned on core Australian values: openness to the world, national security, and the preservation of Medicare and strong labour protections.

In both countries, conservative opposition parties had led comfortably in the polls – by more than 20 points in Canada. But the Trump factor unsettled them. Unsure whether to embrace MAGA-style tactics or distance themselves from Trump’s unpredictability, they floundered. Trump’s controversial treatment of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy – alongside Vice President JD Vance – shocked even conservative voters. Canadian Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, once riding high against the unpopular Trudeau, tried to brand Carney as a remote “globalist”, but the Liberal campaign – with help from Mike Myers and other celebrities – turned patriotic and punchy. In Australia, Peter Dutton was also gaining ground, but faltered badly after the election was called. His campaign was hampered by news that Trump operatives were advising the Liberal-National Coalition. In a historic blow, Dutton even lost his own seat and will exit politics.

While Carney secured only a minority, Albanese achieved a significantly increased majority – an historic feat, considering Labor only narrowly defeated Scott Morrison in 2022.

Albanese’s win is significant for several reasons:

1. First Labor PM in Decades to Win a Second Term: Albanese becomes the first Labor Prime Minister to win a second term since Bob Hawke in 1984.
2. First to Increase a Majority After First Election: He is the first Labor PM to increase his majority after winning government-John Curtin achieved a similar result in 1946, but was initially appointed PM by Parliament, not elected.
3. Decimation of the LNP in Urban Areas: The Liberal-National Coalition was nearly wiped out in metropolitan Australia, now clinging mainly to rural seats. They failed to reclaim any urban strongholds from the ‘Teals’-wealthy, climate-focused independents funded by Simon Holmes à Court.
4. Collapse of the Greens: The Greens saw a sharp decline after framing the election around Gaza rather than environmental policy. Their stance alienated Jewish voters in Sydney and Melbourne. Party leader Adam Bandt may even lose his long-held seat of Melbourne to Labor.
5. A Surge in Female, Community-Driven Candidates: Labor had success with grassroots female candidates, particularly in Queensland, resonating strongly with younger voters.

What’s Next for the Albanese Government?

There’s reason for optimism:

• Trade Policy Clarity: The end of Trump’s and Xi Jinping’s failed tariff wars frees Labor to focus on innovation and skills, without being boxed in by populist demands.
• Global Partnerships: Australia can deepen ties with ASEAN, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the EU-plus its close allies in the UK, New Zealand, Canada, and the Pacific.
• Productivity with a Human Touch: Re-elected Treasurer Dr Jim “Sunny Jim” Chalmers emphasised improving productivity through investment in skills, exports, and innovation-rejecting the harsh rhetoric of past reformers. Dutton’s attacks on working from home backfired, with flexible work now seen as potentially boosting both productivity and quality of life.
• Independence from Greens: Labor can now legislate on housing, climate innovation, and immigration without needing Green support, enabling more pragmatic policymaking.

As for the LNP, an internal review is already underway. With Dutton out, leadership contenders include Andrew Hastie, Angus Taylor, Dan Tehan, Jane Hume, and Sussan Ley. But they’ll need to move quickly – Australia votes again in 2028.

In the meantime, Anthony Albanese joins the pantheon of Labor greats – Curtin, Chifley, Whitlam, Hawke, Keating. He now has a rare opportunity to drive sustained economic prosperity and fairness in Australia.

Following the brutal terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India launched Operation Sindoor last week, which culminated in a ceasefire on Saturday. However, Pakistan did not refrain from its mischief, and even on Saturday evening, sporadic attacks continued, which were appropriately responded to by India. Broadly speaking, India’s three-day military operation succeeded in achieving its objectives. Earlier too, India had taken several steps on the civilian front to cripple Pakistan. The pressure created by these efforts led Pakistan to plead with global powers, and with the intervention of the US and some Gulf nations, progress was made toward a ceasefire on Saturday.

Who Planned The Pahalgam Attack?

Through Operation Sindoor, India thwarted the intentions of Pakistan’s jihadist General, Asim Munir. There is good reason to believe that the Pahalgam terror attack was entirely Munir’s brainchild. Just days before the attack, he had delivered a venomous speech, talking about Hindu-Muslim division, the two-nation theory, and calling Kashmir the “jugular vein” of Pakistan. The growing peace and prosperity of the Kashmir Valley, gradually joining the mainstream, was becoming intolerable to Munir and the Pakistani army. 

Given how the Modi government had responded to the Uri and Pulwama attacks, it was considered certain that Pakistan would have to pay a heavy price for Pahalgam. In fact, Pakistan itself was uncertain, with speculations rife about when and how India would retaliate. Under Operation Sindoor, India destroyed nine terrorist camps deep inside Pakistan, putting an end to all speculation. The heavy blow dealt to Pakistan through the destruction of terrorists and their infrastructure triggered a response from India that Pakistan will not forget. This will further shake the already struggling Pakistani army, weaken Munir’s position, and potentially crush his dreams of service extension.

India’s Measured Approach

After the horrific terrorist attack on its innocent civilians, India also altered its strategy. The weak state of Pakistan’s civilian government is no secret, nor is the fact that the real reins of power lie with the army. With this in mind, India completely revised its Pakistan strategy. Steps included suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, imposing visa bans, halting trade, and restricting port access. These moves signalled clearly that Pakistan would be answered in the only language it understands. Precise military operations completed the job. First, terrorist camps and infrastructure were destroyed. In retaliation, Indian forces not only thwarted Pakistani drone and missile attacks but also inflicted such damage on Pakistan’s military installations that the army found it hard to save face.

In this series of actions, Indian strikes near Pakistani military headquarters and airbases proved that India can accurately strike deep within Pakistan. India’s response demonstrates that it will not hesitate to take any risk necessary to crush any operation against it. Previously, New Delhi had held back from strong responses to Pakistan on the grounds that India was a responsible nation and it was best to avoid entanglements. Under the Modi government, this approach has changed fundamentally.

Why A Ceasefire Was Important

India has consistently maintained that it does not seek war, and even in its retaliatory actions, it targeted only terrorist infrastructure. Initially, military installations were kept off-limits. But due to Pakistan’s continued provocations, India had to revise its approach. During the conflict, Pakistan used its civilians as human shields, hoping to exploit Indian retaliation for its own propaganda. Still, India displayed utmost restraint. In contrast, Pakistan cowardly targeted civilians and their property from Samba to Jammu. India’s comprehensive pressure eventually forced Pakistan to appeal to major powers for a ceasefire.

Despite India’s upper hand, some people within the country have expressed discontent over agreeing to a ceasefire, arguing that Pakistan should not have been spared this time. On the surface, such frustration is understandable, but a deeper analysis shows that such decisions are made by considering all broader aspects. India achieved its intended goals through the operation – it inflicted significant damage on Pakistan and sent a strong message that any future terror attack would be treated as an act of war. Extending this conflict any further would not serve India’s interests. India’s growing stature in the world and its respected voice on global platforms are largely due to its rising economic power. With that strength, India has managed to push Pakistan to the margins of international relevance. Pakistan’s goal is to drag India into a confrontation so that the world starts viewing them as equals again. But India today has far greater goals – economic development and self-reliance. An endless military confrontation would only distract from these priorities.

The US-China Dynamic

This India-Pakistan conflict can also be analysed through the lens of the US-China power balance. The American efforts toward the ceasefire should be viewed in the context that the US sees India not only as a strategic partner in the Indo-Pacific but also as a vital trade partner. Therefore, the US would not want India to waste its energy, resources, and time on Pakistan. Meanwhile, China appeared to support Pakistan. Not only did Pakistan use Chinese weapons, but China also backed it through public statements. 

Finally, those who are comparing this conflict to the 1971 war or to Russian or Israeli responses should understand that the South Asian context of today is vastly different.

It’s surreal to think that Virat Kohli will not be donning the baggy blue of India anymore. The end of an era in Indian Test cricket? Yes, absolutely.

A man who became synonymous with ceaseless energy has decided that he won’t play the longest format, which really separates the wheat from the chaff, anymore. But why now? Why not after the England tour or in a years’ time perhaps? Virat is definitely fit enough, and despite many speculating about his red ball future, his sheer presence on the field is a factor that the selectors must still rate highly. Also, his trademark consistency in the IPL is once again on full display. He must be feeling good about his cricket.

A Retirement Had Been In Discussion

Most credible news reports have claimed that Virat had been discussing Test retirement with the BCCI for at least a month, and that he had been asked to reconsider, with the very important 5-Test series of England coming up. In other words, he was going to be a shoo-in for a spot in the squad for that tour. So, it’s not what Rohit Sharma reportedly had to face. Other reports have claimed that Virat wanted Test captaincy, something that former England captain Michael Vaughan felt was the best course of action after Rohit retired from the format, but also something that the Indian Board, management and selectors weren’t realistically going to agree on, with the entire mindset in Indian cricket now being one of looking to the future. Shubman Gill is already being tagged as the frontrunner to take over from Rohit as the new India Test captain (one must spare a thought for Jasprit Bumrah here), and Head coach Gautam Gambhir has a point or two to prove after India’s shambolic Test performances against the Kiwis at home, and then in Australia.

If we are to believe that Virat wanted to become Test captain again, was this then his way of saying, ‘if you don’t give me what I want, then I won’t stay?’. That really doesn’t sound like the man. Would someone who is playing under Rajat Patidar’s captaincy in the IPL, really find it that difficult to play under Shubman’s stewardship for India? No, this feels like a completely personal call. One taken after much consideration. We already know that he spoke to multiple teammates – both past and present about his decision.

Being The Best, Is All

The fact of the matter is that Virat is an athlete who is not satisfied unless he is at his very best, in his absolute prime, in every format, in every tournament. He doesn’t just want to compete, he wants to be the best, every single time, in everything, for his team. For him, his prime is not dependent on his age or his form, it’s a mindset. In the annals of international cricket, it would be hard to find too many cricketers who have had so much self-belief.

In February 2022, India blanked the West Indies 3-0 in an ODI series at home. It was also a series in which Virat scored 26 runs in three  innings. Calls for him to be dropped were echoing loudly. After the third ODI, a reporter asked Rohit Sharma whether he thought Virat was feeling under-confident. Rohit looked surprised for a bit, but couldn’t hide his amusement for long as he laughed and replied, “Virat Kohli ko confidence ki zaroorat hai? Kya baat kar rahe ho yaar.” (Virat Kohli needs confidence? Are you serious?) Rohit’s response has become a part of cricketing folklore.

Were There Doubts?

But at the end of the day, Virat is also human. He may not show it on the outside, but there might be a doubt or two racing through his mind. Combine these two things and you might just have the answer to the question as to why Virat retired from Tests now. The answer might just be India’s next Test opponents – England – and, more specifically, the conditions for Test cricket in the UK. Virat toured England thrice in his Test career, from 2014 to 2021-22, and his average in the 15 Tests he played on those tours combined was 33.65. That is well below his overall career Test average of 46.85. The moving ball in England and James Anderson in particular challenged him greatly on his first tour in 2014, where he finished with 134 runs in 10 innings. But Virat being Virat, vowed to conquer the demons that hid in the seaming conditions.

On his next tour, he emerged as the highest run-getter overall, with 593 runs, at an average of 59.30. He smashed two centuries and three half-centuries. But then again, on his last England tour, in the 2021-22 Pataudi Trophy, his bat fell silent as he managed to score just 249 runs in nine innings, at an average of 27.66, with no centuries. 

Consider that along with the last Test series Virat played, which was also an away series – the 2024-25 Border Gavaskar Trophy, in Australia – where he began with a fantastic century in Perth, but then finished the series with a total of just 190 runs, at an average of 23. Maybe, just maybe, he would have thought that there is a possibility of another below-par outing in England this summer, and with that would have come the inevitable barrage of criticism and calls to drop him.

For a man who has given Indian cricket so much, scoring 30 Test centuries, 51 ODI tons and over 27K international runs, despite the crippling expectations, to go through something like that again was perhaps just not acceptable. It would have also dented the legacy, no doubt.

Perfect Timing?

Also, the upcoming tour will mark the beginning of a new WTC cycle for Team India. What better time to hand over the baton? Remember the song he chose for his retirement post on Instagram? Frank Sinatra’s evergreen classic, ‘My way’. That’s the way he played his cricket, and that’s the way he chose to ride off into the Test sunset. If that indeed is what Virat was thinking, then it is a very pragmatic decision. No one knows when it’s best to leave better than the individual himself or herself. With his fitness levels, he would have, in all probability, made the cut for the Tests series against the West Indies in October and then against South Africa in November-December – an opponent against whom he has his highest Test score of 254* (2019), which is also the highest Test score ever by an Indian captain. But Virat had made up his mind. 

A Lesson In Selflessness 

Let us also not forget the selflessness of the man. The most successful Indian Test captain (won 40 of 68 Tests as skipper), he chose to hang up his Test boots when he could have very easily played on for at least another year, maybe completed 10K Test runs and even got a farewell Test. But he chose against a final roll of the dice. If you think the fans always want to see only ‘King’ Kohli, imagine how Virat, who gives the game everything he has every time he steps onto a cricket field, wants to see himself. Nothing short of excellence will make him happy. That’s the mantra he has followed in everything – his training, his fitness, his game. He became a legend a long time ago. He stamped his authority on the game a long time ago. He might not have completed 10k Test runs, but numbers don’t define his legacy. The sheer impact he had on the game as a batter, a captain and a competitor is what people will always remember. Like every other cricketer, he, too, had his challenges, his lows and his lean patches. But realistically, his achievements far outweighed any of that. There was nothing left to prove.

Over the last few years, Virat has also sought a more private life. He has wanted to give more time to his family, away from the constant media glare. The move to London with his family was prompted by that. At this stage of his life and career, he might still be that fierce competitor who is not willing to give an inch on the field, but off it, he seeks calmness. Now, with his Test commitments over and with only ODIs and the IPL to play, the ‘King’ will find a lot more space where he can be just Virat.

The fortnight that will end this Saturday will perhaps go down in history as one of those short periods when the world’s future, as anticipated even a few days ago, was rewritten in a burst of diplomacy that might seem cringe to purists.

US President Donald Trump’s signature Sharpie was in action in a series of geopolitical shifts, although the weight of his role is disputed. To be sure, despite all the derision he has drawn and the fact that he was the one who first lit the trade fire, Trump has managed to steer the world away from war. That the leader of the world’s preeminent superpower is allergic to conflict may not be a bad thing when the Doomsday Clock is just 89 seconds away from midnight. This is not to say that all his moves have been stellar or even constructive, but he has certainly helped bring down the global political temperature, for now. He demonstrated in the past two weeks that he will court anyone willing to give him a deal, even arch rivals and a designated terrorist who spent five years in a US-run jail.

Perhaps for the first time ever, a US President shook hands with a person who is designated as a global terrorist by his country and even carried a bounty of $10 million on his head until last December. President Donald Trump not only met with the person-Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa-but also lifted sanctions on Syria at the behest of the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or ‘MBS’, on his first visit to West Asia after assuming office. Reports suggest the deal brokered by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and MBS has something for everyone, including a Trump Tower in Damascus.

The process to end the three-year-old war between Russia and Ukraine is underway in Istanbul. Trump had offered to attend it if Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would too, but Putin decided not to go. President Erdogan, who will host them, has also successfully negotiated a deal with Kurdish separatists who have agreed to join mainstream politics, ending a 40-year militancy.

Abrupt Moves In Middle East And China

Last week, Trump abruptly ended the US’ war on Iran-backed Yemeni rebel militia, the Houthis, in exchange for leaving US ships passing through the Red Sea alone. He even called them bravehearts. The US also directly negotiated the freedom of one of the American hostages held by the Palestinian Hamas. More importantly, he cut Israel out from the deals, effectively allowing the Houthis and Hamas to continue their fight against Israel. Meanwhile, a report suggests that Iran has offered an unusual nuclear deal, in which it has proposed joint uranium enrichment for civil use with the US, the UAE and Saudi Arabia. That’s arch rivals collaborating to develop an explosive technology.

In another surprise move, the US and China agreed to roll back their tariff war after secret talks between them in Geneva appear to have found common ground.

Trump’s most important intervention, however, came in Asia, when he jumped in to calm India and Pakistan, which were in an intense military engagement that threatened to blow up into a full-scale war between two nuclear powers.

Trump’s unconventional leadership has disrupted global diplomatic norms and ushered in a style of deal-making that is personal and non-consultative, bordering on the whimsical. It should be underscored that most of the countries Trump is dealing with are not democracies. Even countries such as Turkey and Russia, which hold regular elections with questionable fairness, are led by autocratic leaders.

India On A Tightrope

This is where India might find itself in a spot. The war with Pakistan has created a rift in many of its bilateral relationships, carefully nurtured and transformed over the past two decades. Pakistan has managed to garner international support from several countries with which India had built friendly relations. The Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) issued a statement backing it. Despite war historians and defence experts coming around to the view that India had a firm upper hand by the time the missiles stopped flying, India has not been able to live down the murmur around the alleged downing of its aircraft and the US intervention on ​​a ceasefire.

It has cracked a key element of warfare: the ability to develop and manufacture its own weapon systems, which are technologically advanced and effective on the battlefield. India is a much bigger economic power than Pakistan, with an economy 12 times larger than its neighbour’s. Just one state, Tamil Nadu, equals Pakistan in terms of output. India’s most industrialised state, Maharashtra, has a state GDP of $490 billion, compared to Pakistan’s $338 billion. That should ideally have given India better heft on the global negotiating table.

Yet, its pursuit of an independent foreign policy just became harder. Pakistan’s army chief, Asim Munir, appears to have succeeded in sowing deep doubts in the minds of many Islamic countries –  that India is a Hindu nation that cannot coexist with Muslim nations.

The Uneasy Claims About India-Pak

Meanwhile, Trump’s impromptu statements have projected him as having undue influence over India. The US President claimed, first on social media, and then twice again on his West Asian visit, that he had brokered a deal between the two inimical nations by asking them to get on with trade instead of war. While India has refuted that trade was discussed, it has also indicated that it was deeply unhappy with the way Trump portrayed it. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who considers Trump his friend, did not mention him even once in his address to the nation, even though Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif thanked the US President profusely. The foreign ministry also rejected Trump’s offer to mediate the Kashmir issue.

While India does not want to link trade with war and terrorism in talks, dealmaker Trump seems to see them as a composite issue. He said he told Apple chief Tim Cook in Qatar not to make iPhones in India. Although he did not link it to the Indo-Pak issue and posed it as returning manufacturing to the US, the timing and the language suggest it might be his way of leaning on India on multiple issues. Meanwhile, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt hinted that the President was not getting enough credit for stopping the war.

It seems the dust has settled over a limited war between India and Pakistan, even as Pakistan is getting ready to take full advantage of US President Donald Trump’s statements by calling for “comprehensive” dialogue on Kashmir. The Ministry of External Affairs has categorically said that no such dialogue would take place, unless it was on terrorism or Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir. That’s that, though these are all opening shots. 

Meanwhile, there is a worrying development that few have taken note of. The so-called Al Qaeda in the Indian subcontinent (AQIS) declared in English and Urdu that all Muslims were obliged to launch a ‘holy war’ against the ‘Bhagwa’ regime in India for targeting mosques and ‘settlements’ in Pakistan. That’s worrying. After all, the group, after virtually disappearing from the terrorist scene, now seems to have decided to make a comeback, entirely in support of Pakistan.

Al Qaeda in the Indian subcontinent (AQIS) is a curious group. It was formed in 2014, apparently on the command of the then Al Qaeda leader Ayman Al Zawahiri, and was led by Asim Umar. Its clear objectives were to hit American and Pakistani forces. However, after Umar was killed in a joint operation with the US in 2019, the group turned mysteriously against India, and away from Pakistan. It even launched a new magazine, the Nawa- Ghazwatul – Hind (Voice of the Battle for India). 

That was puzzling. Nothing much was heard about the group or its activities, until the National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrested some 53 people from Assam – some of them Bangladeshis –  in 2022. A whole network was unearthed, including madrassas and several teachers, apart from specific modules, all of which pointed to a long-term plan to raise insurrection in the east of India. This was linked to the Ansarullah Bangla group in Bangladesh.

In July 2024, the UN Sanctions Committee report observed close proximity between the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the AQIS, sharing camps and training, and carrying out attacks under the name of Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan. It also added that the Taliban was another supporting body. 

Now consider how UN reports after the Pahalgam attack last month have completely dropped any reference to the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), and refused to make any reference to the Terrorist Resistance Front (TRF), all due to Pakistani pressure, as India’s Foreign Secretary, Vikram Misri, said in his presser. So, it seems that UN reports are not entirely to be relied upon, given that it is made up of inputs from member states, which includes Pakistan. 

Pakistan has its script ready about the imminent threat from TTP. But here’s also the reality: the TTP is made up of some 40 groups, and though most are indeed targeting Pakistan, there are groups that have been co-opted by the agencies, particularly opposite the Kurram Agency. It has also long had links with sections of the Islamic State. This is the classic Pakistani method of influencing operations. This manipulation of designated terrorist groups and their allies has been going on for years.  

The Unholy Alliance

That an unholy alliance exists between Pakistan’s intelligence agencies and various jihadi groups in Afghanistan is a reality. Consider the torture and killing of Saleem Shehzad, a courageous journalist who exposed links between ‘rogue’ army officers, including Illyas Kashmiri, and Al Qaeda. That last aspect has since come out vividly in the interrogation of David Headley, who dealt with both serving and retired Pakistani army officers during the planning for the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai in 2008. There’s more: an honourable Pakistani officer, Major General Faisal Alavi, was shot dead in broad daylight in Islamabad in the same year months after he had sent a letter with names of officers tied to Al Qaeda to the then army chief, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, and even exposed a deal with Baitullah Mehsud, a militant who was dreaded by the Pakistani forces. Wheels within wheels.

To bring all these threads together, it is necessary to note Pakistani objectives. One is to force India to come to the negotiating table, something it has already begun to act on. The second is to ​a deep Hindu-Muslim divide, which was more than apparent in Asim Munir’s speech and in the terrorist attack at Pahalgam. A third goal is apparent in the various Track-2 events in which the Pakistanis try their best to get the US back into Pakistan, even going to the extent of warning of another 9/11-like attack. That ensures some balance against China, which has been pushing the Pakistanis hard by way of intrusion into intelligence circles and physical presence of troops, and, importantly, with that a lot of money in terms of ‘reimbursements’ during counter-terror operations, along with, much more importantly, a diplomatic heave-up in international circles. 

What India Must Be Careful About

There is much that is possible if Pakistan decides to use the AQIS either against US assets in Afghanistan or against them in India – the latter being a far more attractive option to it. In addition, given the group’s established presence in Assam, the AQIS statement comes at a time when Pakistani intelligence is deep within Bangladesh. Any massive attack by it would technically be completely denied by Pakistan, but it could goad the Indian army into further eroding its relationship with Dhaka. 

There are multiple motives here, and much that India needs to do. The first thing is to take the US agencies and others into a consultation mode, where available intelligence is shared to estimate the group’s potential capabilities. Trump may ignore the terrorist history of the Pakistan army, but US intel circles are well aware of it. It’s time to take an intel huddle. However, the focus of our intel thrust should be on improving the monitoring within the country, using the best technology available – facial recognition, big data, AI, et al – especially in sensitive areas. 

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!